US Election Thread 2016

[Strontium]

No, you don't create change by voting for the lesser evil each time. At some point you have to look for another solution.

 

On the contrary, history shows that that is exactly how you bring about change.

[Jairzinho]

History shows that very little change comes via the ballot box.

[Strontium]

Tell it to the millions of Americans who now have health insurance coverage because Obama was elected President. You will be laughed at.

[TheHowieLama]

Sanders had no other real option. Sanders and Clinton are as different as chalk and cheese.

 

Even if much of their social policy matches, which I seriously question-that small percentile of difference is still a vast gulf.

 

 

 

 

I would say the gulf between Trump and Cruz may be greater.

[Red Phoenix]

On the contrary, history shows that that is exactly how you bring about change.

 

Yeah, the snailed paced change that we've had for so much of our history under the rule of corrupt elites. People shouldn't have to settle for that when they can have something better. I don't think real change throughout history happened that much by voting for people like Shillary either.

[Red Phoenix]

Tell it to the millions of Americans who now have health insurance coverage because Obama was elected President. You will be laughed at.

 

Yeah and it's all about America folks. Vote for Hillary and get some more change. Forget about Pakistan, Yemen, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Somalia, who've all had Obama's bombs going off in their countries. And don't mention the Ukraine either. And when it comes to Hillary don't mention fracking. Or TPP. Or Palestine. Or emails. All aboard the Goldman Sachs Shillary bus, we're in for a fun ride.

[Red Phoenix]

A new one from CounterPunch :

 

Good as Goldman: Hillary and Wall Street

by Jeffrey St. Clair

July 22, 2016

 

Nothing seems to rattle Hillary Clinton quite so much as pointed questions about her personal finances. How much she’s made. How she made it. Where it all came from. From her miraculous adventures in the cattle futures market to the Whitewater real estate scam, many of the most venal Clinton scandals down the decades have involved Hillary’s financial entanglements and the serpentine measures she has taken to conceal them from public scrutiny.

 

Hillary is both driven to acquire money and emits a faint whiff of guilt about having hoarded so much of it. One might be tempted to ascribe her squeamishness about wealth to her rigid Methodism, but her friends say that Hillary’s covetousness derives from a deep obsession with feeling secure, which makes a kind of sense given Bill’s free-wheeling proclivities. She’s not, after all, a child of the Depression, but a baby boomer. Hillary was raised in comfortable circumstances in the Chicago suburbs and, unlike her husband, has never in her life felt the sting of want.

 

Mrs. Clinton’s stubborn refusal to disclose the text of her three speeches to Goldman Sachs executives in the fall of 2013 fits this self-destructive pattern of greed and guilt. She was fortunate that Bernie Sanders proved too feeble a candidate to seize the advantage. Each time Sanders was asked to show a nexus between the $675,000 she was paid and any political favors to the financial vultures at Goldman, the senator froze, proving strangely incapable of driving a stake into the heart of her campaign.

 

A less paranoid politician would have simply released the tedious transcripts of the speeches on a Friday evening to bore insomniac readers to sleep. The real question, of course, was never about the content of the speeches, but about why Goldman was paying her $225,000 an hour to give them. Goldman executives weren’t huddling around Mrs. Clinton to listen to her recite the obscurantist mish-mash ghost-dictated by her top economic advisor Alan Blinder. Blinder, a well-known Wall Street commodity himself, is a former vice-chair of the Federal Reserve and co-founder of Promontory Interfinancial Network, a regulatory arbitrage outfit whose top executives pocket $30 million a year. Blinder has publicly assured his Wall Street pals that Clinton will not under any circumstances break up the big banks and neither will she seek to reanimate Glass-Steagall, the Depression-era regulatory measure whose exsanguination by her husband enabled the financial looting by firms like Goldman and Lehman Brothers that spurred the global economic collapse of 2008.

 

The lavish fee from Goldman for Hillary’s speeches was both a gratuity for past loyalty and a down payment on future services. Goldman’s ties to the Clintons date back at least to 1985, when Goldman executives began pumping money into the newly formed Democratic Leadership Council, a kind of proto-SuperPac for the advancement of neoliberalism. Behind its “third-way” politics smokescreen, the DLC was shaking down corporations and Wall Street financiers to fund the campaigns of business-friendly “New” Democrats such as Al Gore and Bill Clinton.

 

The DLC served as the political launching pad for the Clintons, boosting them out of the obscurity of the Arkansas dog-patch into the rarified orbit of the Georgetown cocktail circuit and the Wall Street money movers. By the time Bill rambled through his interminable keynote speech at the 1988 Democratic Convention in Atlanta, the Clintons’ Faustian pact with Goldman had already been inked, their political souls cleansed of any vestiges of the primitive southern populism Clinton had exploited so effortlessly during his first term as governor.

 

In 1991, the Clintons traveled to Manhattan, where they tested the waters for Bill’s then rather improbable presidential bid. At a dinner meeting with Goldman’s co-chair Robert Rubin, Clinton made his case as a more pliant political vessel than George H.W. Bush, who many of the younger Wall Street raiders had soured on. Rubin emerged from the dinner so impressed that he agreed to serve as one of the campaign’s top economic advisors. More crucially, Rubin soon began orchestrating a riptide of Wall Street money into Clinton’s campaign war chest, not only from Goldman but also from other banking and investment titans, such as Lehman Brothers and Citibank, who were eager to see the loosening of federal financial regulations. With Rubin priming the pump, Clinton’s campaign coffers soon dwarfed his rivals and enabled him to survive the sex scandals that detonated on the eve of the New Hampshire primary.

 

After his election, Clinton swiftly returned the favor checking off one item after another on Rubin’s wish list, often at the expense of the few morsels he’d tossed to the progressive base of the party. In a rare fit of pique, Clinton erupted during one meeting of his National Economic Council, which Rubin chaired, in the first fraught year of his presidency by yelling: “You mean my entire agenda has been turned over to the fucking bond market?” Surely, Bill meant this as a rhetorical question.

 

When the time came to do the serious business of deregulating the financial sector, Rubin migrated from the shadows of the NEC to become Treasury Secretary, where he oversaw the implementation of NAFTA, the immiseration of the Mexican economy, imposed shock therapy on the struggling Russian economy, blocked the regulation of credit derivatives and gutted Glass-Steagall. When Rubin left the Treasury to cash in on his work at Citigroup, Clinton called him “the greatest secretary of the Treasury since Alexander Hamilton.” Nine years later, following the greatest upward transfer of wealth in history, the global economy was in ruins, with Clinton, Rubin and Goldman Sachs’ fingerprints all over the carnage.

 

In mid-May, Hillary announced her intention to make Bill the “economic czar” for her administration. This served to quell any anxiety that she might have been infected during the primary campaign by the Sanders virus. For Wall Street, the Clintons are still as good as Goldman. Quid pro quo.

 

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/07/22/good-as-goldman-hillary-and-wall-street/

[Strontium]

Yeah, the snailed paced change that we've had for so much of our history under the rule of corrupt elites.

 

Well, at least we've moved on from "you don't create change by voting for a lesser evil" to "okay, you do get change by voting for a lesser evil, but it's slower than I'd like". I'm going to call that progress in itself.

 

Yeah and it's all about America folks.

 

It does happen to be an American election.

[Boss]

Tell it to the millions of Americans who now have health insurance coverage because Obama was elected President. You will be laughed at.

 

Most of them don't want it, they've all got medicare.

[Strontium]

That is completely untrue.

[Red Phoenix]

Sorry I meant snail paced back up there, not "snailed paced."
 

Well, at least we've moved on from "you don't create change by voting for a lesser evil" to "okay, you do get change by voting for a lesser evil, but it's slower than I'd like". I'm going to call that progress in itself.

 
There's no point in voting for a lesser evil from two choices that the media are obsessed with if there's better choices. And the change you get is going to be offset by the evil unleashed, or completely negated. No point choosing it if you don't have to.

 

It does happen to be an American election.

 
But it's not all about America when they're trying to influence so many things overseas. That's why I listed the seven countries that have been bombed since Obama was made president. And even that is just part of the problem when you add in other issues, like the IMF which the US has a huge influence on (only country with veto power.)
 
And even if it was just about America, Clinton will screw over most Americans anyway in favour of the corporations that fund her. That's what the CounterPunch article above was also pointing out.

[Boss]

That is completely untrue.

 

It's completely true. Medicare covers all the American seniors and Medicaid covers people on the poverty line and has done since the 1980's. Most Americans get health insurance through their employer, there's also military health insurance for ex military personnel. The vast majority have some form of insurance and Medicaid covers people living below the poverty line. All Obama did was open up the pre requisite requirements for medicaid.

[SasaS]

What was all the fuss about then?

[Boss]

What was all the fuss about then?

 

Don't know. All he did was increase the threshold of people eligible for Medicaid from 100% of the poverty line to 133% of the poverty line. Which roughly translates to people earning below $15,000 a year. The irony of the whole thing was the Supreme court made it so each state could decide for themselves whether they wanted to expand medicaid or not and 19 of them rejected the proposals. So 19 states operate on the old (pre Obama) Medicaid system. 

[Red Phoenix]

Two short extracts (from 4 articles going into the same argument) on "lesser evil" voting, or "LEV" :

 

It’s an intellectually dishonest position and a morally indefensible one. According to the specious argument of their Tractatus Illogico-Politicus, Halle and Chomsky would not bear any responsibility for the deaths caused by the candidate (HRC) they support. But Greens, anarchists, socialists and anti-war libertarians who recoil from the Queen of Chaos would bear responsibility for the carnage caused by the candidate (Trump) they did not support. That’s a textbook case of moral hypocrisy.

 

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/06/29/noam-chomsky-john-halle-and-henry-the-first-a-note-on-lesser-evil-voting/

 

One basic fact undermines all the lesser of two evil arguments. There is no scarcity of voters. Why does the vote of a small percentage of activists and dissidents matter so much when 70-90 million people do not vote in America? Why doesn’t Clinton go get them? Why doesn’t Clinton’s supporters or Halle and Chomsky go and get them? Bernie did and many others helped.

 

The answer I am afraid is simple. Mobilizing the 70-90 million non-voters, as Sanders and Stein have started to do, demands a program directed at their interests. This the Clinton machine cannot do and serve the 1% at the same time. Instead the social control discourse of the lesser of two evils, the spoiler, and the horserace are deployed to attack dissent.

 

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/07/22/actions-express-priorities-40-years-of-failed-lesser-evil-voting/

 

If you want the other two articles they're here and here.

[Cardie]

I miss Jon Stewart

 

Yep, Trevor Noah is improving but he's a long way from having the gravitas or impact Stewart does, if he ever get's to that level.

[KopOut]

Sorry I meant snail paced back up there, not "snailed paced."

 

 

There's no point in voting for a lesser evil from two choices that the media are obsessed with if there's better choices. And the change you get is going to be offset by the evil unleashed, or completely negated. No point choosing it if you don't have to.

 

 

 

But it's not all about America when they're trying to influence so many things overseas. That's why I listed the seven countries that have been bombed since Obama was made president. And even that is just part of the problem when you add in other issues, like the IMF which the US has a huge influence on (only country with veto power.)

 

And even if it was just about America, Clinton will screw over most Americans anyway in favour of the corporations that fund her. That's what the CounterPunch article above was also pointing out.

You wont get a debate from me on corrupt corporate america; however:

 

If the US played out an 'isolationist' policy from the White House, it would still be 'business as usual' for global arms dealers and THAT is the core issue.

 

Every arms deal gets counted in the global GDP. It's part of 'growth' don't you know, and we've collectively ratified it by accepting the bank debt on all those arms deals, and spending it.

 

We're part of the problem.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Red Phoenix]

You wont get a debate from me on corrupt corporate america; however:

 

If the US played out an 'isolationist' policy from the White House, it would still be 'business as usual' for global arms dealers and THAT is the core issue.

 

Every arms deal gets counted in the global GDP. It's part of 'growth' don't you know, and we've collectively ratified it by accepting the bank debt on all those arms deals, and spending it.

 

We're part of the problem.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Thanks, and yeah it's a complete mess on so many levels. I usually end up remembering or finding a few of the main issues and mentioning or going into them a little but also knowing there's so many others, like the one you're mentioning at the same time. I think it's also one of the reasons why hoping for dems to sort this out isn't really going to happen, because the party is now so entrenched in that system. It's probably natural though when there's been no real opposition from the left.

[Red Phoenix]

And also :

 

@wikileaks 6 hours ago

RELEASE: 19,252 emails from the US Democratic National Committee https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/  #Hillary2016 #FeelTheBern

 

 

 

Here's a few things that have already surfaced :

DNC Staffers Mocked the Bernie Sanders Campaign, Leaked Emails Show : https://theintercept.com/2016/07/22/dnc-staffers-mocked-the-bernie-sanders-campaign-leaked-emails-show/

New Leak: Top DNC Official Wanted to Use Bernie Sanders’s Religious Beliefs Against Him : https://theintercept.com/2016/07/22/new-leak-top-dnc-official-wanted-to-use-bernie-sanderss-religious-beliefs-against-him/

Leaked emails reveal Politico reporter made 'agreement' to send advanced Clinton story to DNC : http://uk.businessinsider.com/leaked-dnc-emails-wikileaks-2016-7


Looks like the dems might be in some serious trouble this year after all.

 

 

 

[Jose Jones]

Of course she's polling at 4%. Hardly anyone even knew who she was until the media started reporting that she'd offered Sanders her place in the Green Party if he wanted to leave the dems. But a week from now that could change in quite a big way if Sanders supporters, after seeing what happens at the dem convention, decide to join her. A lot of them seem to be waiting for the convention before doing anything, which is probably wise if they're focused on making their voices heard there after months of supporting Sanders.

 

Anyway, it's not as if I have loads invested in the idea of Stein becoming president, that'd be insane. But to think it's impossible that she could do well is also off.

No it's completely impossible.

What will happen at the democratic convention is a lot of left of centre politicians standing up and talking about stuff. Acknowledging the breadth of the party, in order to tap into the support that Sanders got, pointing out how Hillary has similar beliefs and slagging off Trump in order to rally everyone around.

 

It's in Clinton's interests to get Sanders voters on board so that is the way it will be played. There will obviously be a few true believers who'll not have any bar of it, but not too many considering the man himself has also endorsed her.

[Nunavut Patrick]

I actually hope Trump wins.

 

We could use a global reset. It's like Brexit, Trump, this Turkish guy, Putin, the 300lb- er running North Korea all coing together tomoverload the system. Throw in some good old fashioned lunatic fringe terrorism, a country full of guns, other countries full of restless disenfranchised youth, a cabal of powerful media wankers trying to pull the strings...

 

I feel quite comfortable that the bastards wont get me in the million square miles of tundra and boreal forest.

[Nunavut Patrick]

Hilary is a bad egg. Things will get worse under her.

[KopOut]

Thanks, and yeah it's a complete mess on so many levels. I usually end up remembering or finding a few of the main issues and mentioning or going into them a little but also knowing there's so many others, like the one you're mentioning at the same time. I think it's also one of the reasons why hoping for dems to sort this out isn't really going to happen, because the party is now so entrenched in that system. It's probably natural though when there's been no real opposition from the left.

This is why I'm so disappointed in Bernie. His grass movement primary campaign went beyond party politics in my eyes and I wanted 'last chance' Sanders to go independently into the US presidential election. YES it will split the vote, but he still had a lot of steam to pick up - his support was getting stronger and stronger, but, he was nobbled in California by The Bitch, with those dirty tactics.

 

It's so depressing to see entrenchment, because it seems to prove the old add-age: power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Anubis]

Hilary is a bad egg. Things will get worse under her.

 

 

[Red Phoenix]

What will happen at the democratic convention is a lot of left of centre politicians standing up and talking about stuff. Acknowledging the breadth of the party, in order to tap into the support that Sanders got, pointing out how Hillary has similar beliefs and slagging off Trump in order to rally everyone around.

 

It's in Clinton's interests to get Sanders voters on board so that is the way it will be played. There will obviously be a few true believers who'll not have any bar of it, but not too many considering the man himself has also endorsed her.

 

I think you're really missing the point here. It no longer matters so much that politicians at the dem convention are going to be standing up and talking about stuff, or what Clinton's interests are. The dems and Clinton have been outed as frauds time and time again, and the DNC Leaks are now confirming what a lot of people believed. It's highly unlikely that things are just going to go back to normal after all of this.

 

So I'll go for it and make a prediction : the Green Party will become at least the third main party, and the two party system will be over in the coming months. If I'm wrong, no big deal (despite some of you that'll probably try to make it into one.) I really think the dems have made a huge mess now though, and that many on the left in the US are just sick of the same old shit being played out every four years.