US Election: 2016

[Altair]

If they were disinterested I would imagine they would just say I don't know/don't care.

 

[Journeyman]

.... I would imagine ....

It's been ages since I was sufficiently naïve to put that much stock in polling data.....

Regardless, I'm going to return this to it's usual...  :deadhorse:

Enjoy.

 

[George Wallace]

And to remind people that despite the consistent bashing he gets on here, the greater Canadian electorate seems satisfied with what trudeau is doing.

[

You obviously frequent different FaceBook pages than I do. 

 

[Altair]

[

You obviously frequent different FaceBook pages than I do.

I don't.

Very vocal CPC members being very angry that Trudeau continues to draw breath. Again, very out of touch with what the pollsters seem to be getting.

Vocal minority deluding themselves into thinking they are the majority.

 

[Kilo_302]

I don't.

Very vocal CPC members being very angry that Trudeau continues to draw breath. Again, very out of touch with what the pollsters seem to be getting.

Vocal minority deluding themselves into thinking they are the majority.

Agreed. He's more in line with most Canadians than Harper ever was. However, I disagree with his neo-liberal approach and would have preferred to see the NDP mount a campaign more in the style of Bernie Sanders.

The simple fact is, most Canadians agree that with science that climate change is an issue, they believe in equality (whatever that means under a neo-liberal government like Trudeau's), they like universal healthcare, and they're quite embarrassed over the Harper years. Just over 60% of Canadian voted for a "progressive party" in 2015.

Bringing it back to the US, Trudeau is I believe, more progressive than Hillary Clinton, but not by much. I agree with Thuc that if Canada continues down a similar path as the US (and this is where we disagree), that is, more privatization, less social spending, more corporate cronyism, the backlash could be severe.

Unfortunately, the backlash will just as misdirected as it is in the US on the right end of the spectrum. Progressivism isn't the problem, neo-liberalism is. That is, an emphasis on "free" market solutions.  What we need is TRUE progressivism, ala Bernie Sanders. A real critique of structural problems.

 

[Altair]

Agreed. He's more in line with most Canadians than Harper ever was. However, I disagree with his neo-liberal approach and would have preferred to see the NDP mount a campaign more in the style of Bernie Sanders.

The simple fact is, most Canadians agree that with science that climate change is an issue, they believe in equality (whatever that means under a neo-liberal government like Trudeau's), they like universal healthcare, and they're quite embarrassed over the Harper years. Just over 60% of Canadian voted for a "progressive party" in 2015.

Bringing it back to the US, Trudeau is I believe, more progressive than Hillary Clinton, but not by much. I agree with Thuc that if Canada continues down a similar path as the US (and this is where we disagree), that is, more privatization, less social spending, more corporate cronyism, the backlash could be severe.

Unfortunately, the backlash will just as misdirected as it is in the US on the right end of the spectrum. Progressivism isn't the problem, neo-liberalism is. That is, an emphasis on "free" market solutions.  What we need is TRUE progressivism, ala Bernie Sanders. A real critique of structural problems.

Is this ignoring that fact that income disparity in Canada is far less than in the usa, money in politics is mostly under control and that, at least from my point of view, there hasn't been a increase in privatization?

 

[a_majoor]

People are not reacting yet because there hasn't been much to react to. Until the budget comes down and the full extent of carbon taxing and other costly virtue signalling becomes apparent to the Canadian taxpayer, then people's tunes will change.

Of course the economic uncertainty that the failure of the Victoria meeting to set some sort of standard tax regime is one of Frédéric Bastiat's "things unseen", it is difficult to quantify investments that never happen as business reacts to an economically uncertain environment. The negative effects of removing wealth generation and savings tools like the $10,000 limit for TFSA's also will take time to become apparent, since people will not be getting as much money to save and invest, their compound interest returns will be lower since the effects of compound interest become most apparent at the end of the period of compounding, rather than the beginning.

Costly and generally useless "infrastructure" spending will keep voters in Liberal ridings happy as they do busy make work projects and people get hockey arenas, performing arts centres and bike paths at the expense of Canadian taxpayers and "real" infrastructure like pipelines, sewers, roads and power lines, so the localized short term gain will mask the long term overall decline.

Really all we are seeing is the 2008-present economic regime in the United States transferred here in slower motion. You can ask many Americans how they feel about that, or if you don't know any, look at the numbers of fed up voters supporting Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders.

 

[Kilo_302]

Is this ignoring that fact that income disparity in Canada is far less than in the usa, money in politics is mostly under control and that, at least from my point of view, there hasn't been a increase in privatization?

It isn't, my point is that we have avoided a problem like Trump thus far precisely for the reasons you've listed, though I would say that privatization has been on the rise for some time. We've had several major waves of de-nationalization.

On another front, more evidence that Hillary represents the status quo on the foreign policy side of things as well. Last night's Democratic Debate in Miami would have been a good opportunity for Sanders to attack her on her role in the Honduras coup.

Ironically, many Americans who are against immigration from Latin America are some of the most interventionist. Why do they think so many people from Nicaragua, Guatemala, Honduras etc etc want to flee their countries and enter the US? Might it have something to do with the intentional destabilization of their governments by US backed right-wing groups?

https://theintercept.com/2015/07/06/clinton-honduras-coup/

Excellent doc on the subject, "Harvest of Empire."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6AQ2mOaG7Q

 

[CougarKing]

Trump as a possible threat to the TPP agreement Canada recently became a signatory of?

Canadian Press

Trump's positions on trade, alliances could roil Asia ties

Matthew Pennington, The Associated Press
The Canadian Press
March 10, 2016

WASHINGTON - China is ripping off America in trade and should be slapped with a fat import tax. U.S. military allies Japan and South Korea are freeloading and need to pull their weight. The pan-Pacific trade pact negotiated by the Obama administration is a "total disaster."

With characteristic brashness, Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump has staked out uncompromising positions on Asia policy that could potentially roil U.S. relations with the region if he won the White House.

That's already prompted some sharp commentary from usually friendly countries in Asia, and expressions of contempt from Republican foreign policy hands who have vowed to oppose Trump.

(...SNIPPED)

 

[a_majoor]

This should get out the vote..... >

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/228763/

YEAH, “IT’S MY TURN, DAMMIT!” AND “LOOK, I HAVE A VAGINA!” AREN’T GREAT ONES: Clinton’s shaky campaign has the math, but lacks the message.

Related: Four reasons Hillary Clinton lost the Democratic debate.“During their two-hour debate in Miami last night, Hillary Clinton attacked Bernie Sanders for siding with both the Castro brothers and the Koch brothers.”

You really can believe in six impossible things before breakfast!

 

[Kilo_302]

This should get out the vote..... >

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/228763/

You really can believe in six impossible things before breakfast!

The attack on Sanders for his "support" for Castro was despicable. Sanders was part of a wider liberal movement in the 80s and 90s that was against further US intervention in Latin America, because you know, death squads.

[urlhttps://theintercept.com/2016/03/10/hillary-clinton-stalwart-friend-of-worlds-worst-despots-attacks-sanders-latin-american-activism/][/url]

I am excited to see her lose the nomination.

 

[CougarKing]

Trump's latest "fans" in the Middle East...

Canadian Press

Dubai official warns of 'clash of civilizations' over Trump

Jon Gambrell, The Associated Press
The Canadian Press
March 11, 2016


DUBAI, United Arab Emirates - A top security official in Dubai warned Friday of a "clash of civilizations" if U.S. Republican candidate Donald Trump becomes president, the latest sign of disquiet across the Middle East over the businessman's comments about Muslims.

Trump refused to back away from his recent statement that "Islam hates the West" during a Republican debate Thursday night in Miami, which came after he called in December for a ban on Muslims entering the United States.

(...SNIPPED)

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Trump's latest "fans" in the Middle East...

Canadian Press

There already is a clash of civilizations going on. Especially over there. Slow news day.

Perhaps they are worried that if President Trump draws a line in the sand, it won't move all over the map like Obama's.

And I think it's hilarious that a bunch of Arabs are trying to tell the US how to run their country. Something about tending your own backyard before complaining the neighbours are planting the wrong flowers.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

I was going to use the "people living in glass houses ..." analogy, but it doesn't apply here: It's a dictatorship (Dubai) trying to tell a democracy who to vote in".

 

[CougarKing]

It seems Chris Christie has competition to becoming Trump's VP:

CNN

Ben Carson endorses Donald Trump

By MJ Lee and Eugene Scott, CNN

Updated 12:09 PM ET, Fri March 11, 2016

Palm Beach, Florida (CNN)Ben Carson threw his support behind Donald Trump Friday morning, saying the two men had "buried the hatchet" and praising the Republican Party's front-runner as a "the voice of the people to be heard."

Speaking at a news conference here at Trump's private club, Mar-a-Lago, the retired neurosurgeon echoed Trump's recent calls for party unity and pleaded with the GOP to allow the "political process to play out."

(...SNIPPED)

 

[cupper]

Trump was forced to postpone a rally event in Chicago tonight because of a large number of protesters and supporters congregated at the venue, tensions were running high, and there was some conflict between the two groups.

Trump cancels Chicago rally over security concerns

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/03/11/trump-cancels-chicago-rally-over-security-concerns/?hpid=hp_rhp-top-table-main_pp-trumprally-842pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

CHICAGO -- Donald Trump postponed his Friday night rally in Chicago because of "growing safety concerns" created by thousands of protesters inside and outside of the University of Illinois arena hosting the event.

The Republican front-runner's rallies have become increasingly violent in the past two weeks, and Trump's remarks are often interrupted by protesters denouncing his controversial stances, especially those on immigration and the treatment of Muslims. But Trump has never had to cancel a rally because of the threat of protesters.

At about 6:35 p.m. Central time, an announcer told the crowd of at least 9,000 that Trump had arrived in Chicago but decided to postpone the event because of security concerns. The protesters burst into cheers and chants of: "We stopped Trump!" Others chanted the first name of Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders.

The Trump campaign released a statement that said: "Mr. Trump just arrived in Chicago and after meeting with law enforcement has determined that for the safety of all of the tens of thousands of people that have gathered in and around the arena, tonight’s rally will be postponed to another date."

Several of the celebrating protesters clashed with Trump supporters who were disappointed that the event was canceled. Shoving matches broke out, and security struggled to break up one altercation before another started. After the event, the crowds moved outside the arena.

Even before Trump's rally in Chicago started on Friday night, numerous nasty verbal altercations broke out throughout the crowd. An entire section of the arena appeared to be filled with protesters but police and security working the event only removed protesters who were disruptive, like a black man and a young Latino man who screamed at Trump supporters and flipped them off. Others ripped up signs.

A spokesman for the Chicago police said that there were no reported arrests as of shortly before 7:30 p.m. local time.

The spokesman said the department would not release the number of officers who were deployed to the speech or responding to the crowds of people gathered on the street after. Live footage from the scene showed numerous police officers inside the arena as well as lining the streets outside among the protesters who remained after the event was canceled, crowding streets and sidewalks.

Trump later called into MSNBC and said on the air that he did "the right thing" by canceling his rally in Chicago.

"You can't even have a rally in a major city in this country anymore without violence or potential violence," Trump said. "I didn't want to see the real violence, and that's why I decided to call it off."

Trump added, "You have so much anger in the country -- it's just anger in the country, and I don't think it's directed at me or anything. It's just directed at what's been going on for years."

In an interview with anchor Chris Matthews, Trump was defensive and argued that the anger boiling over at his rallies had been building for years and was not spurred by his campaign alone.

"We have a very divided country," Trump said. "We have a country that's so divided that maybe even you don't understand it. I've never seen anything like it."

When Matthews asked whether he would tell his supporters not to engage with protesters, Trump said he wanted them to leave the Chicago arena peacefully.

"I don't want to see people hurt or worse," he said.

Sanders, en route from Toledo, Ohio, to Chicago to address a rally of his own, expressed concern over the incident.

“I hope that we are not in a moment in American history where people are going to be intimidated and roughed up and frightened about going to a political rally. … I hope Mr. Trump speaks out forcefully and tells his supporters that that is not what the American political process is about.”

Reports are coming out that both university police and Chicago PD are denying that they advised postponing the event.

 

[ModlrMike]

Another nail driven into democracy's coffin.

 

[cupper]

WANT TO KNOW WHO WILL WIN THE PRESIDENCY? ASK THE POPE

http://www.ozy.com/2016/want-to-know-who-will-win-the-presidency-ask-the-pope/67313?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=US

WHY YOU SHOULD CARE? Because this demographic has predicted the presidency for four straight decades.

The beef between the Don and the pontiff — Pope Francis suggesting that it’s not very Christian to build a wall, Donald J. Trump responding that ISIS will attack the Vatican if he’s not in the Oval Office — has quelled, for now. But if Trump is serious about becoming President Trump, it may behoove him to show a bit more reverence to the man in white. After all …

The candidate who wins the Catholic vote has also won the popular vote in every election since 1972.

That’s four decades of picking the winner, according to exit poll estimates, from Nixon to Obama. What makes the Catholic vote unique is its ability to mimic the trends of the American populace as a whole, says Robert P. Jones of the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute. Add that to the the fact that Catholics make up almost a quarter of the U.S. population — and have a solid history of actually showing up at the polls — and you can understand why the demographic is highly sought by campaigners.

But does the correlation between the Catholic vote and the presidency suggest that papacy can sway an American election?

Yes and no. That record “is a little bit illusory,” Jones says, because the Catholic vote isn’t monolithic, even if its leadership appears to be. The church’s political divide runs along ethnic lines, which, by the way, holds true for the nation, too. In 2012, that split meant white laypeople supported Romney, while their brown brothers in faith overwhelmingly voted for Obama. Catholics might be good predictors because their demographics reflect the general population almost perfectly:

On race: In 2014, 41 percent of Catholics were Hispanic, compared to 38 percent generally.

On education: 26 percent of Catholics held a bachelor’s degree or higher, versus 27 percent overall.

On earnings: 47 percent of Catholics reported income levels under $50,000, compared to 55 percent overall.

The vote has changed — and become less associated with a single party — as Catholics have “become more assimilated into the overall population,” says Steve Krueger, president of the Catholic Democrats advocacy organization. Plus, as the Pew Research Center reported this year, millennials as a whole are less religious than any previous generation, and that reality affects young Catholics, too. (While neither Trump’s campaign nor the Vatican responded to a request for comment, the Pope’s spokesman released a statement after the wall remark, saying that building bridges versus walls is “his generic view, coherent with the nature of solidarity from the gospel.”)

The party gap will only get wider, especially if you’re a Catholic, thanks to a particularly divisive election year. “This is the church that cares about defending life in the womb and immigrants,” says the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Jonathan Reyes, director of the justice, peace and human development department. “Just in those two issues, there is no easy home.” In its official election-year reflection on voting faithfully, the church agrees that its vision isn’t contained in any one candidate or party. Adherents are free to decide — based on their conscience — which priorities most closely align with their faith, which is why it’s hard to round up Catholics, as a whole, into any one party’s back corner.

 

[muskrat89]

So as someone who has lived in the US for almost 25 years, is right of center, but doesn't vote (still a Canadian citizen) - here are some observations in no particular order:

* I think Trump's popularity is the flip side of the exact same coin that got President Obama elected twice
*I'm not a Trump supporter but seeing the Republican establishment trying to subvert the process in place simply reinforces the notion that "The left wing and the right wing are on the same bird"
*I wish the GOP had fought against Obama as heartily as they are fighting against Trump
*Depending on the mood I am in, the vehement reaction of some Canadians to Trump (speaking mostly of friends and relatives on Facebook) is either amusing or irritating. At the end of the day, what difference does it make to them? Other than killing a pipeline, how much did President Obama's actions (or inactions) affect Canadians?
*Again, speaking of Canadian friends and relatives on Social Media, when did Canadians become so smug and condescending? Growing up, all I heard is that's the way Americans act
*There are days I honestly don't think we will see another Republican President for decades...

Some food for thought:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/12/12/the-four-basic-reasons-that-explain-why-donald-trump-actually-is-so-popular/

http://triblive.com/opinion/salena/8759861-74/americans-government-president#axzz3j6t3VNBO

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/presidential-campaign/251463-why-is-trump-so-popular

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/08/donald-trump-voters/401408/

 

[Kirkhill]

:goodpost:

Particularly the social media points.