By the way, a Super-Pac is an off shoot of Citizen's United.
Hillary has Super-Pacs.
So Hillary is benefiting from Citizens United.
I though you understood the big picture.
It's mainly the ultra rich oligarch masters-of-the-univers* who are benefiting.
Politician have been pushed over the edge to having to spend most all their time as donation whores.
Not sure if the serious ones like that much.
*Oh yeah, Hillary would be in that crowd, now wouldn't she. ;-P
Before I comment on this I would like clarification as to sarcasm CC...Thank you.
It's mainly the ultra rich oligarch masters-of-the-univers* who are benefiting.
It doesn't have to be couched in these conspiratorial words. It's just politics like it has always been.
Bureaucracies, corporations, military etc..
Politician have been pushed over the edge to having to spend most all their time as donation whores.
I don't know if pushed is the right word. More like enticed. Or ready and willing to be bought by anyone or anything.
*Oh yeah, Hillary would be in that crowd, now wouldn't she. ;-P
No she would be the other thing. The unlady like word. Flat-out.
The donation "hound".
Trump and Sanders are proving that politicians don't have to be donation hounds. It's really remarkable actually.
If there wasn't so much sturm and drang over the whole cycle, more astute scribes would be remarking on it quite heavily.
It's kind of a first. Historic.
Frankly it makes me wonder why we haven't heard more about it.
Given the dynamics of this election cycle, what could HR Clinton's mandate possibly be if she becomes President?
Has anyone asked themselves that?
After the Bernie supporters are crushed out, and the Trump supporters are quelled, and the Congress being what it is,
from what position is Clinton going to govern? What possible ground is she going to have?
Luke warm milk?
Lukewarm milk is easier to swallow than gasoline.
Another thing. Congress won't be "what it is".
What too many people are overlooking is that 2016 isn't only only a presidential election year. A total of 469 seats in the U.S. Congress (34 Senate seats and all 435 House seats) are up for election on November 8.
The Congressional election is almost as importamt as the Presidential election, but hardly anyone is talking about it.
"The big story of the 2016 congressional election cycle is whether or not the Democratic Party will be able to regain control of the Senate. In order to take the chamber back, Democrats will need to gain five seats in 2016, a difficult but not impossible task. The majority of vulnerable seats are held by Republican incumbents, many of whom are freshmen who were swept into office in the Republican wave of 2010. Additionally, Democrats only have 10 seats to defend in 2016, while 24 Republican incumbents are up for re-election."
https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_Congress_elections,_2016
As for Hillary's "mandate" the actual election cycle has not yet begun. It will probably include preserving and strengthening the ACA and Social Security, and diplomacy to keep us out of war, which she has experience in, keeping abortion safe and legal and available and equal rights for everyone--every race, sex and sexual orientation. What is Trump's mandate? For one thing, it's impossible to tell because he changes his mind and contradicts himself on an hourly basis, though he wants to build a wall to keep Mexicans out--otherwise known as Trump's folly. He's a loose cannon and would be an extremely dangerous president.
Hillary is not my choice, but I'd vote for her over Trump in a heartbeat. I expect most other Democrats and independents will, too--at least the ones with any sense at all. This won't be the first or last time we don't have someone to vote for, only to vote against. Intelligent voters this year should have no trouble voting against the clown, even if the alternative is not our choice. Sometimes we just have to hold our noses and vote for the best of a bad lot. Not voting or voting for a minor candidate is a vote for Trump. It's a sad fact of life that we must do this. But we have to save the country from certain disaster.
Lois
It's mainly the ultra rich oligarch masters-of-the-univers* who are benefiting.
It doesn't have to be couched in these conspiratorial words. It's just politics like it has always been.
Bureaucracies, corporations, military etc..
Politician have been pushed over the edge to having to spend most all their time as donation whores.
I don't know if pushed is the right word. More like enticed. Or ready and willing to be bought by anyone or anything.
*Oh yeah, Hillary would be in that crowd, now wouldn't she. ;-P
No she would be the other thing. The unlady like word. Flat-out.
The donation "hound".
Trump and Sanders are proving that politicians don't have to be donation hounds. It's really remarkable actually.
If there wasn't so much sturm and drang over the whole cycle, more astute scribes would be remarking on it quite heavily.
It's kind of a first. Historic.
Frankly it makes me wonder why we haven't heard more about it.
I would have to say, I trust what Trump says over what Clinton says. And like most Americans understand, Trump knows that he has to say things to be in the political game. Like the Mexican wall for example. It is not a physical wall for everybody, it is the idealist wall that Washington has to change that people understand. And like the donations, the messages people are understanding are being missed by the scribes.
All I have to do is look at the source of the story, New York Times for example and I can tell you the direction the story is going before reading it. I also found that I could just read the headlines and guess what news source the story was coming from. I bet I am not the only one damn tired of this type of dirty hype coverage.
What are your thoughts on this idea? We got no good answer from the press on why Trump got such a high Mexican vote in Las Vegas. Trump says that it is because the Mexicans love him. I don’t think anyone loves Trump, except maybe Trump himself. Here’s what I think is happening.
As America has been becoming more socialist over the last several decades, a caste system has been growing. And what we saw in Nevada was nothing more than people voting in line with the caste system. If this is true then Trump will do well in the areas where the caste system is most prevalent. And if the caste system is big enough, he will win the office.
It's mainly the ultra rich oligarch masters-of-the-univers* who are benefiting.
It doesn't have to be couched in these conspiratorial words. It's just politics like it has always been.
Bureaucracies, corporations, military etc..
Politician have been pushed over the edge to having to spend most all their time as donation whores.
I don't know if pushed is the right word. More like enticed. Or ready and willing to be bought by anyone or anything.
*Oh yeah, Hillary would be in that crowd, now wouldn't she. ;-P
No she would be the other thing. The unlady like word. Flat-out.
The donation "hound".
Trump and Sanders are proving that politicians don't have to be donation hounds. It's really remarkable actually.
If there wasn't so much sturm and drang over the whole cycle, more astute scribes would be remarking on it quite heavily.
It's kind of a first. Historic.
Frankly it makes me wonder why we haven't heard more about it.
I would have to say, I trust what Trump says over what Clinton says. And like most Americans understand, Trump knows that he has to say things to be in the political game. Like the Mexican wall for example. It is not a physical wall for everybody, it is the idealist wall that Washington has to change that people understand. And like the donations, the messages people are understanding are being missed by the scribes.
All I have to do is look at the source of the story, New York Times for example and I can tell you the direction the story is going before reading it. I also found that I could just read the headlines and guess what news source the story was coming from. I bet I am not the only one damn tired of this type of dirty hype coverage.
What are your thoughts on this idea? We got no good answer from the press on why Trump got such a high Mexican vote in Las Vegas. Trump says that it is because the Mexicans love him. I don’t think anyone loves Trump, except maybe Trump himself. Here’s what I think is happening.
As America has been becoming more socialist over the last several decades, a caste system has been growing. And what we saw in Nevada was nothing more than people voting in line with the caste system. If this is true then Trump will do well in the areas where the caste system is most prevalent. And if the caste system is big enough, he will win the office.
What it proves is that Mexican Republicans are just as stupid as other Republicans--they will vote against their own interests. Republicans have a history of doing that. They apparently can't help themslves. But there is a faction of Mexicans who don't want any more Mexicans coming in. It's another example of, "We've got ours, now close the door on everyone else." A typical Republican refrain.
Lois