The 2016 Elections

Manwë was known for many things, but wisdom and power are two that lead the rest of his attributes. Join the Councils and discuss the more weighty matters of Tolkien Fandom.

The 2016 Elections

Postby portia » Thu Mar 12, 2015 4:50 pm

I do not think it is too early to have comments on these.

Is there any other issue involved in the Clinton emails besides he fact that some people choose not to believe her?
I believe that the officeholder is normally the one asked to sort the emails from a private account between personal and private. Why is Mrs. Clinton not allowed to do that, according to some people? Is there any basis for this?

Of course the overall questions is WHO THE ---- CARES?
User avatar
portia
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 10841
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:57 pm
Location: Lost in the forest
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby Jnyusa » Fri Mar 13, 2015 8:34 pm

The inadequacy of security in government communications continues to amaze me. We have better security than that in a university and the only thing we have to protect is the privacy of student grades. Although mistakes do get made, no matter the system.

Aol.com ... LOL ... what sort of dweeb sends sensitive intelligence communications over a public carrier?
User avatar
Jnyusa
Mariner

 
Posts: 5934
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2003 8:24 pm
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby RoseMorninStar » Sat Mar 14, 2015 9:24 pm

I always bemoan the lack of good candidates for our highest office. Corruption & money don't help. I will say Scott Walker.. just.. no. ugh.
User avatar
RoseMorninStar
Ringbearer


 
Posts: 12795
Joined: Sun May 30, 2004 10:34 pm
Location: North Shire
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby Billobob » Thu Mar 26, 2015 2:51 pm

I think that most likely Hillary Clinton will be the one who wins the election, for the same basic reason as Obama. People like the idea of a female, black, etc. President. I'm not against presidents who are old white men, but when the only reason they're elected is that they're not white men and they're not elected for their ability that's not cool.
Last edited by Billobob on Fri Mar 27, 2015 8:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Billobob
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 8:50 am
Location: Greenwood the Great.
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby Jnyusa » Thu Mar 26, 2015 5:14 pm

Yes, it makes a lot more sense to elect them only because they are old white men.
User avatar
Jnyusa
Mariner

 
Posts: 5934
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2003 8:24 pm
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby Billobob » Fri Mar 27, 2015 8:51 am

Sorry I think you misunderstood me, I'm sorry if it sounded like I was against anyone who isn't white as president what I meant is that voters shouldn't think about anything of the candidate except their integrity and ability. Also I mesnt to say who are'nt old white men, sorry for the confusion.
User avatar
Billobob
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 8:50 am
Location: Greenwood the Great.
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby Jnyusa » Fri Mar 27, 2015 7:30 pm

I was just pulling your chain. ;)
User avatar
Jnyusa
Mariner

 
Posts: 5934
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2003 8:24 pm
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby Billobob » Mon Mar 30, 2015 10:57 am

:) Yeah sometimes it's hard to tell if someone's joking with you on the Internet unless they put smiley face stuff. But I did mess that post up in a significant way :lol:.
User avatar
Billobob
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 8:50 am
Location: Greenwood the Great.
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby Portia1 » Fri Apr 03, 2015 8:47 am

Actually, I think there can be a virtue in NOT being an old, white man. We have been governed by that group for a long time, and I think that a mixture of points of view is a good idea. (Omitting, on purpose, any discussion of the effect of Obama's non-conformist appearance on some people's ideas of his performance.)
We are not going to get two candidates who are equal, except for gender or race, etc., but if we could, I might be in favor of the unconventional person, just because of the new point of view.


(Mods: is anyone trying to correct my status. I feel like my own ghost around here?)
Portia1
Petitioner to the Council
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2015 9:24 am
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby Billobob » Fri Apr 03, 2015 8:51 am

Well just because they're not old white men does not necessarily mean that they have a different viewpoint, but I do see that it is more likely to get more viewpoints with more diverse candidates.
User avatar
Billobob
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 8:50 am
Location: Greenwood the Great.
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby White Shadow » Sat Apr 04, 2015 2:24 am

Portia1 wrote:(Mods: is anyone trying to correct my status. I feel like my own ghost around here?)


I shall raise the issue in the mod forum. Unfortunately, I don't have the special powers to help you.

~*~*~*~*~
White Shadow
White Council Moderator
User avatar
White Shadow
Shield Bearer
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2000 1:00 am
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby Storyteller » Sat Apr 04, 2015 3:33 am

portia wrote:I do not think it is too early to have comments on these.

Is there any other issue involved in the Clinton emails besides he fact that some people choose not to believe her?


I believe that the officeholder is normally the one asked to sort the emails from a private account between personal and private. Why is Mrs. Clinton not allowed to do that, according to some people? Is there any basis for this?

Of course the overall questions is WHO THE ---- CARES?[/quote]
Had I been American, I would've cared.

Imagine that a Republican Secretary of State ran his work email exchanges entirely from his private server, for convenience, not using the government email intended for it at all. When asked to turn over the record of communications, that Secretary of State prints out about half of the emails, then scrubs the server to erase the rest - thereby precluding any independent verification that he has, in fact, turned over ALL the relevant communications. Would you choose to trust them, or would the whole thing be too fishy for your taste?

And would you vote for a Presidential candidate who is apparently incapable of managing two email accounts at once?
"...Their aim in war with Germany is nothing more, nothing less than extermination of Hitlerism... There is absolutely no justification for this kind of war. The ideology of Hitlerism, just like any other ideological system, can be accepted or rejected, this is a matter of political views. But everyone grasps, that an ideology can not be exterminated by force, must not be finished off with a war.” - Vyacheslav Molotov, ""On the Foreign Policy of the Soviet Union", 31 October 1939
User avatar
Storyteller
Mariner
 
Posts: 7056
Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2002 7:46 am
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby Portia1 » Sat Apr 04, 2015 12:10 pm

Well, Story, you have a point. It is an odd--to say the least--point of view for her to take. But I suspect that they are barking up a tree that has no squirrel in it.

I suspect that if there were something inappropriate in the emails, she would have been more careful to follow the rules about them. At least that is how most people would behave.
Portia1
Petitioner to the Council
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2015 9:24 am
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby Storyteller » Sat Apr 04, 2015 12:27 pm

Portia1 wrote:Well, Story, you have a point. It is an odd--to say the least--point of view for her to take. But I suspect that they are barking up a tree that has no squirrel in it.

I suspect that if there were something inappropriate in the emails, she would have been more careful to follow the rules about them. At least that is how most people would behave.

Or not.

My understanding is that she would not have been able to wipe a [i]government[/u] server. And there may possibly be some sort of supervision, at least after the fact, So had there been inappropriate emails, it would've been perfectly logical to send them from a private address.

I wonder if the company who ran the server for Clinton had backups. And what happened to them.
"...Their aim in war with Germany is nothing more, nothing less than extermination of Hitlerism... There is absolutely no justification for this kind of war. The ideology of Hitlerism, just like any other ideological system, can be accepted or rejected, this is a matter of political views. But everyone grasps, that an ideology can not be exterminated by force, must not be finished off with a war.” - Vyacheslav Molotov, ""On the Foreign Policy of the Soviet Union", 31 October 1939
User avatar
Storyteller
Mariner
 
Posts: 7056
Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2002 7:46 am
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby portia » Tue Apr 14, 2015 8:20 am

It looks like a time to revive one of my favorite "hobby horses".

Politicians who rely too much on glittering--meaningless---phrases.

Marco Rubio, for example, cast Hillary Clinton as a leader from the past, and himself as a leader for the future. Does that mean that he thinks the unresolved issues (Iran; employment; climate change; Terrorism) have disappeared in a cloud of smoke and do not have to be discussed anymore? What does he think today's issues are, if not those same ones?
That sort of statement is content free. If it has any function, it is to induce people to fill in the blanks with what they want to hear. No wonder that people are disappointed in candidates after the election: they filled in the blanks in speeches with material that the candidates wouldn't even recognize so, of course, the candidates didn't deliver.
User avatar
portia
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 10841
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:57 pm
Location: Lost in the forest
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby Billobob » Tue Apr 14, 2015 9:28 am

Politicians often depend on ignorance and Rhetoric to get to Office and it almost always works because most people don't bother to research their politician's histories and views/goals. It is the same with this election and will stay that way until people decide to become educated or America falls/turns totalitarian.
User avatar
Billobob
Ranger of the North

 
Posts: 1040
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 8:50 am
Location: Greenwood the Great.
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby Cerin » Tue Jun 30, 2015 10:59 am

Arvegil from 'Will California deny, etc.' thread wrote:
One thing that the GOP is very good at, is finding issues that they can't- or won't- do anything about, and whinge about them as a way of bringing out the religious right vote.

However, and while I consider 2016 the GOP's race to lose, the GOP's "religious right problem" is just going to get worse. The crazier the religious right gets ("teach the controversy," anti-vaccine, definitely on the wrong side of the center's opinion on SSM and marijuana legalization, re-criminalizing abortion), the less electable anyone kissing religious right tail becomes. On the other hand, in the short run, the GOP believes, with some justification, that it is DOA without the religious right votes. Hence, the conundrum.

Because of the way things are shaping up, the GOP may be able to avoid dealing with this problem in 2016, but I don't see them managing to go much further with this baggage.


It's interesting that you view the religious right issues as baggage for the GOP, which will have to be jettisoned. What do you think might replace those votes for Republicans after 2016? And what about the fact that extremists tend to win the primaries; or is that changing? It seems to me that extremists have pretty well taken over the party, yet you think the Presidency is the GOPs to lose. That would seem to imply that you think the public at large is receptive to these views this year, but won't be in the near future? (I'm going to post this in the election thread also, as it seems more in line with that topic.)
User avatar
Cerin
Mariner

 
Posts: 7350
Joined: Tue May 02, 2000 12:52 am
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby portia » Tue Jul 07, 2015 8:27 am

I keep thinking that there MUSTY be some Conservative options for the solving of our problems, but the GOP still insists on saying "NO", rather than putting them forward.
I repeatedly bend the ear of my Congressperson on this subject.

He is a veteran and spends a lot of effort on Veterans' affairs. That actually seems to be a good idea on his part, as he is pretty junior and there are a lot of Vets in his district.
User avatar
portia
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 10841
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:57 pm
Location: Lost in the forest
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby portia » Fri Jul 24, 2015 9:11 am

Is it some form of penance that we have to suffer through a couple of months of Donald Trump at the beginning of every election cycle?
I suppose there are two benefits:

He is bringing a focus on immigration, which NO ONE else was willing to go near;
and he will delay the real start of the campaign to a little bit closer to the actual voting.
User avatar
portia
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 10841
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:57 pm
Location: Lost in the forest
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby Minardil » Sat Jul 25, 2015 8:07 am

The only subject the Donald is bringing any "focus" to is the Donald. I don't think he has brought any serious attention to the issue of illegal immigration at all. Not SERIOUS, thoughtful, real attention.
User avatar
Minardil
Mariner


 
Posts: 9943
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2001 8:06 am
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby portia » Sun Jul 26, 2015 3:55 pm

Even non-serious attention is better than everyone avoiding the subject like the plague.

National popularity polls are fine, but what effect is there in the states that actually have early primaries? Not much effect, I guess. When people actually have to vote, we shall see if there is any effect.

In the meantime, I'd put him on the Entertainment page, not the political page.
User avatar
portia
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 10841
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:57 pm
Location: Lost in the forest
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby portia » Sat Aug 01, 2015 9:44 am

He is saying just the same stuff as candidates have always said. "grow the economy" "stop the illegal immigration" "Putin will respect me." just the same old hooey.
I think I will polish my shoes instead of watching. Why bother?
User avatar
portia
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 10841
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:57 pm
Location: Lost in the forest
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby portia » Wed Aug 19, 2015 8:21 am

I think I need some help, here. I have been moving and I apparently missed something substantial in the Clinton/email issue. Has anything been shown, other than the fact of maintaining one's own equipment, that she has done? I am sure that I would have seen something other than speculation from the media and the other candidates, had anything been shown?
Maybe if the candidates start to talk more about the issues, the 24 hour news cycle will have something substantial.
User avatar
portia
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 10841
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:57 pm
Location: Lost in the forest
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby Minardil » Wed Aug 19, 2015 4:12 pm

I am watching Trump give a press conference live from New Hampshire at the moment, an event he scheduled specifically to draw focus from a Jeb Bush press conference which is happening about ten miles away at the same time. Anyhoo, he just claimed that he has a secret plan to defeat ISIS in a matter of days. I guess he'll tell us about it if he gets elected?

Portia, I think the "new" development on the Clinton emails is that the FBI is reviewing her server? I agree that there is SOME substance to this matter, but not as much as some make it out to be. I mean, her server wasn't breached the way that the government's IRS databank was, so it seems to me that the CONSERVATIVE position here should be that "private enterprise" is better than government work. Also, it strikes me that the entire issue misses the point that any emails she sent or received from government email addresses would be archived on the GOVERNMENT server, yes?

Oh well. Maybe I just have Clinton Scandal Fatigue, but I'm sure the Republicans will keep trying to find something to stick on her. They've been trying for decades, they can't stop now.
User avatar
Minardil
Mariner


 
Posts: 9943
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2001 8:06 am
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby Storyteller » Thu Aug 20, 2015 11:24 am

Clinton aides' BlackBerry phones likely destroyed

Washington (CNN)The State Department acknowledged that top Hillary Clinton aides Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin had government-issued BlackBerry phones during their tenure at the department, but said those devices could not be located, in a court filing Wednesday.

Responding to a request by the conservative group Judicial Watch, which is suing the State Department for information related to Abedin's employment situation, government attorneys said the department "did not locate any such devices that may contain records responsive to plaintiff's FOIA requests," which includes a request for the department to "identify any and all servers, accounts, hard drives or other devices currently in the possession or control of the State Department or otherwise that may contain responsive information."

In its filing Wednesday, attorneys representing the State Department submitted a statement by executive secretary Joseph E. Macmanus, in which he states that his team "does not believe that any personal computing device was issued by the department to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and has not located any such devise at the department."

BlackBerry phones were issued to Abedin and Mills, he said, but those devises would have been cleared through a factory reset once they were returned to the department.

"Because the devices issued to Ms. Mills and Ms. Abedin would have been outdated models," he said, "in accordance with standard operating procedures those devices would have been destroyed or excessed."

And while the State Department is not able to locate those two phones, spokesman John Kirby insisted on Wednesday that they were turned in.

"Obviously they were turned in, and according to protocol they would have been reset and re-issued," said Kirby, later adding, "Where they are now, I couldn't begin to tell you."

Judicial Watch, however, is not satisfied by this latest update.

"The questions just keep popping up," the group's president, Tom Fitton, said in a statement. "Every time the State Department tries to justify its stonewalling, one more bit of information arises."

"If the State Department was not providing secure email devices to Mrs. Clinton, who was?" he asks. "Best Buy? Target? Mrs. Clinton clearly did whatever she wanted, without regard to national security or federal records keeping laws."

There will be a hearing in the Judicial Watch case on Thursday afternoon, during which these issues may be raised.

And the State Department does appear to be expanding its review into the Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act request to include the state.gov email accounts of two former officials besides Abedin and Mills, after "potentially responsive emails" from those officials were found in Abedin's inbox.

Those officials were not named in the court filing, but are described as an Administrative Officer in the Office of the Executive Secretariat and a Senior Advisor in the Office of the Undersecretary for Management's White House Liaison Office.
"...Their aim in war with Germany is nothing more, nothing less than extermination of Hitlerism... There is absolutely no justification for this kind of war. The ideology of Hitlerism, just like any other ideological system, can be accepted or rejected, this is a matter of political views. But everyone grasps, that an ideology can not be exterminated by force, must not be finished off with a war.” - Vyacheslav Molotov, ""On the Foreign Policy of the Soviet Union", 31 October 1939
User avatar
Storyteller
Mariner
 
Posts: 7056
Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2002 7:46 am
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby portia » Fri Aug 21, 2015 6:08 pm

As I pointed out: just more speculation.

I am still waiting for something other than "___Is investigating." or "___suspects. . . "

So far, a tempest in an invisible teacup. The irony is that she did it to herself.
User avatar
portia
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 10841
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:57 pm
Location: Lost in the forest
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby Minardil » Sat Aug 22, 2015 9:41 am

portia wrote:As I pointed out: just more speculation.

I am still waiting for something other than "___Is investigating." or "___suspects. . . "

So far, a tempest in an invisible teacup. The irony is that she did it to herself.



I think the email server scandal certainly says something about Hillary's judgement and arrogance, but I can't see anything "criminal" about it.

Meanwhile, I watched The Donald bluster his way through another interview the other day. As usual, he refused to actually answer questions, and was visibly angered at the "insult" of even being asked to provide details on how he might execute some of his policies. For instance, on his plan to mass-deport 11 million people and force Mexico to build a giant wall along the border, his reply to the question "how would you go about achieving that" was a very irritated "you just MANAGE it", as if good "management" is all that would be needed. Now I agree that good management woukd be required, but you need a plan first. You need something to manage. "Manage it" can't be your whole plan!

Also, Jeb Bush, who previously helped author a paper urging Confederates - sorry, I mean Republicans - to stop using pejorative terms like "anchor baby" and "wetback" when talking about Hispanics, loudly defended his repeated recent usages of the term "anchor baby" and said HE didn't think it was offensive and he couldn't think of any other word to use to describe a child born in the U.S. to non-American parents. I might suggest "American Citizen" or just "baby", but then I'm not a racist asshat - sorry, I meant Republican again.
User avatar
Minardil
Mariner


 
Posts: 9943
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2001 8:06 am
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby portia » Sat Aug 22, 2015 6:35 pm

Concerning Trump, he just waives away any difficulties with his policies as if ignoring them solves them.

Well, I still am not concerned with Trump. No one has voted, yet, and will not for some months. If, after one or two primaries, he is still leading, then I will pay attention.
User avatar
portia
Ringbearer

 
Posts: 10841
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:57 pm
Location: Lost in the forest
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby Minardil » Sun Aug 23, 2015 1:37 pm

As someone who intends to vote Democrat this year, my only "concern" about Trump is that Republican primary voters might suddenly start demonstrating a level of wisdom they've been lacking lately, and pick someone OTHER than Trump to be their nominee in the general election. Not that most of the rest of the field is much better, but he would definitely be the most entertaining to watch!
User avatar
Minardil
Mariner


 
Posts: 9943
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2001 8:06 am
Top

Re: The 2016 Elections

Postby Voronwe_the_Faithful » Mon Aug 24, 2015 7:56 am

Minardil wrote:I think the email server scandal certainly says something about Hillary's judgement and arrogance, but I can't see anything "criminal" about it.


If it fact it turns out that there was classified information stored on her private server, she could be charged with the same law that Gen. Petreous was convicted of violating. And in the unlikely event that it could be proven that she ordered the server wiped in order to avoid discovery of potentially unlawful material, she could face a more serious charge of obstruction of justice. Unlike many others, I am not convinced that there is no there there, or that this is nothing more than a scandal manufactured by the "vast right-wing conspiracy".

As someone who intends to vote Democrat this year, my only "concern" about Trump is that Republican primary voters might suddenly start demonstrating a level of wisdom they've been lacking lately, and pick someone OTHER than Trump to be their nominee in the general election.


That could be the best thing to happen to the Democrats, if Trump then goes forward with his threat to run as an Independent.
User avatar
Voronwe_the_Faithful
Mariner
 
Posts: 5553
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2002 7:53 pm
Top

Next

Return to Philosophy: Councils of Manwë

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron