The 2016 General Election Thread

[ATM]

This. If you have a (mathematical) shot at winning, let's hear what you have to say

How would a non-famous person not affiliated with either of the establishment parties achieve any shot at winning prior to people hearing what they have to say?

How would one overcome the roadblocks erected by the establishment and their MSM to break their fiercely defended monopoly on the entire process of who gets to have a shot at winning?

 

[T.Lex]

How would a non-famous person not affiliated with either of the establishment parties achieve any shot at winning prior to people hearing what they have to say?

How would one overcome the roadblocks erected by the establishment and their MSM to break their fiercely defended monopoly on the entire process of who gets to have a shot at winning?

Pretty much the same stuff you need to run an actual campaign. Most states have signature requirements, so you get people to help you. I've always thought that a blogger with a decent following could probably get a state chair, who could then recruit county chairs, etc.

It does take infrastructure, but isn't overly burdensome. Heck - the Libertarians do it.

 

[ATM]

Pretty much the same stuff you need to run an actual campaign. Most states have signature requirements, so you get people to help you. I've always thought that a blogger with a decent following could probably get a state chair, who could then recruit county chairs, etc.

It does take infrastructure, but isn't overly burdensome. Heck - the Libertarians do it.

Sure, Deez Nuts could easily get on a few ballots, but we' still wouldn't hear what they have to say before they were dismissed as having no chance of winning.

The system is working as enjoyed by the few who own it.

 

[T.Lex]

The system is working as enjoyed by the few who own it.

This year, I totally disagree. "The system" did not work as intended (moreso on the R side, but to an extent for the Ds as well). Whether that nets out positive or negative remains to be seen.

 

[ATM]

This year, I totally disagree. "The system" did not work as intended (moreso on the R side, but to an extent for the Ds as well). Whether that nets out positive or negative remains to be seen.

Surely you don't believe that if Trump wasn't already a celebrity, we'd have ever heard what he had to say.

 

[indiucky]

For ATM, GP, PaulF, Tlex, GFGT, Jamil and the rest......Dolly Parton agrees with you all!!!!

[video=youtube;v0NXKAq0w_4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0NXKAq0w_4[/video]

 

[T.Lex]

Surely you don't believe that if Trump wasn't already a celebrity, we'd have ever heard what he had to say.

But doesn't that cut against your notion that The System controls all?

And don't call me Shirley.

 

[indiucky]

And don't call me Shirley.

For the youngsters...

[video=youtube;KM2K7sV-K74]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM2K7sV-K74[/video]

 

[ATM]

But doesn't that cut against your notion that The System controls all?

Not really. As I noted, it is accessible to celebrities and those affiliated with the Repulican/Democrat party

And don't call me Shirley.

Oh, Kay.

 

[mrjarrell]

[video=youtube_share;GLAh3pui-CI]http://youtu.be/GLAh3pui-CI[/video]

 

[mrjarrell]

Former Rand Paul PAC drops a million dollars on national TV ads for Johnson.

Former Rand Paul Super PAC Makes $1 Million Ad Buy for Libertarian Gary Johnson | I Agree To See

[video=youtube_share;BPw7iu5S_e4]http://youtu.be/BPw7iu5S_e4[/video]

[video=youtube_share;EROFXbGaBF4]http://youtu.be/EROFXbGaBF4[/video]

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Former Rand Paul PAC drops a million dollars on national TV ads for Johnson.

Former Rand Paul Super PAC Makes $1 Million Ad Buy for Libertarian Gary Johnson | I Agree To See

Good. While it ultimately may end up fruitless... anything to showcase the viability of a 3rd party is a move in the right direction. I think 2016 is going to bring a lot of attention to the Libertarian options.

Hopefully it makes the current two parties feel a bit of heat going forward.

 

[foszoe]

Money would have went a lot further in soup kitchens

 

[BugI02]

Lavit Manus party forming up now

 

[T.Lex]

Lavit Manus party forming up now

The good news is that OCD people will be quite comfortable.

Weekend polling says FL may still be within the MOE. I guess that's sorta good. It may help avoid the "landslide" label if Trump can win there.

 

[pudly]

I'd bet this is only the tip of the iceberg:

FBI says foreign hackers penetrated state election systems

Election systems are high priority targets and many infosec researchers have been pointing to their pitiful security measures.

 

[dusty88]

Penalties on employers... as in legit jail time, would end it. Most illegals aren't drug dealing violent people. They're good folks who did what probably most people, even INGO members, would do. Deny them opportunities, and give them to the people who should have them, Americans, and they'll stop coming here.

I agree with you about the "people looking for opportunities".

Completely disagree on penalizing employers. That idea is about like gun control: great intention, impossible to enforce on the real criminals, and a burden on the law-abiding.

Employers are not law enforcement agents. It's not their job to determine someone's citizenship status. They are hiring someone to perform a service. If that employer is actually taking action to entice illegals to come into the US or helping them enter illegally, that is already a crime.

When I hire someone I fill out an I-9 form but that's just another useless piece of paperwork that I can be penalized for not having properly completed or kept. It also means every employer has another location where they are storing your sensitive information, thus one more possible outlet for identity theft.

All you can do as an employer is fill out the paperwork. If you actually suspect someone of being an illegal, you are likely to be sued for discrimination by saying so.

More importantly, every little requirement you add to the word "employer", the larger the step you create for someone to reach that definition. If you want people to be business owners (something which is decreasing rapidly) you need to stop with the foolish penalties on business owners.

 

[dusty88]

Oh believe me I don't begrudging him or anybody else buying one but I do enjoy the hypocrisy of a self-acclaimed 99%er living and now maybe wheeling and dealing like a 1%er.

AIUI, his wife long ago inherited a home elsewhere (Maine) which they can't get to easily. They sold it to buy the new one.
One could say that if he were fully sincere in his wealth distribution ideas, he should sell everything but a shack and give it to charity. But I nonetheless think owning this home doesn't isn't evidence that he's wheeling and dealing as a politician.
I don't support his ideas at all, but so far he seems an honest guy.

Who wrote that for him? I thought Hillary had been a wonderful public servant?

These politicians forget we don't forget.

I don't see those as contraindicated, at least not in the context. He was asked to provide 1 word or phrase, if I recall. At that time, he also said there was no evidence of criminal activity. He changed his stance to "pay to play looks likely" after the FBI report. As for disagreeing with her policies, he always has.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Monmouth U poll, likely voters national:

Clinton 46%
Trump 39%
Johnson 7%
Stein 2%


Check out that "Neither Candidate" column. Yikes.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I agree with you about the "people looking for opportunities".

Completely disagree on penalizing employers. That idea is about like gun control: great intention, impossible to enforce on the real criminals, and a burden on the law-abiding.

Employers are not law enforcement agents. It's not their job to determine someone's citizenship status. They are hiring someone to perform a service. If that employer is actually taking action to entice illegals to come into the US or helping them enter illegally, that is already a crime.

When I hire someone I fill out an I-9 form but that's just another useless piece of paperwork that I can be penalized for not having properly completed or kept. It also means every employer has another location where they are storing your sensitive information, thus one more possible outlet for identity theft.

All you can do as an employer is fill out the paperwork. If you actually suspect someone of being an illegal, you are likely to be sued for discrimination by saying so.

More importantly, every little requirement you add to the word "employer", the larger the step you create for someone to reach that definition. If you want people to be business owners (something which is decreasing rapidly) you need to stop with the foolish penalties on business owners.

When I say "employer," I mean those persons who knowingly hire illegals. I'm clear there are already penalties, but obviously the penalties aren't persuasive enough. There needs to be some teeth in those laws. Let me put it this way, while there are certainly many (of used to be) many illegals that use identity theft to obtain identification, I run into tons illegals without a state or federal issued ID. As far as Mexicans go, they have Mexican consulate issued identification cards, which are provided to undocumented persons. These persons are working, in a variety of fields. If there are so many these persons, then it's obvious employers aren't doing their jobs.