Election 2016 Thread

[piscator]

This is the thread.

For such a no-brainer, this is going to be one of the most interesting and entertaining American elections ever!

[piscator]

...ing He's Done

We should heed closely what Donald Trump has been saying about U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel of San Diego—perhaps more so than anything else he has said or done to date. The prospect that a President Trump might defy the judiciary and the rule of law, together with his vows to violate international treaties and his disrespect for domestic laws, may make him the most dangerous candidate in American history.
There are so many things to deplore about Trump's recent attacks on Curiel it is difficult to know where to begin. Trump has asserted that Curiel is unfit to hear two lawsuits against the now-defunct Trump University because "he's a Mexican" (false—Curiel was born in Indiana)—and thus probably biased against Trump's plan to "build a wall" on the Mexican border. Trump has also suggested that any judge of Mexican, or of Muslim, heritage would be biased against him. He has declared that he’s "getting railroaded" by a "rigged" legal system and suggested he “will come back in November” to change things.

This is racism and ethnic and religious bias. It is a deplorable elevation of Trump’s raw financial and political self-interest above the law and the national interest. But mostly what we should deplore—and fear—is this: Such a brazen presidential attack on the rule of law, by a man of such a belligerent temperament and crude sensibility, could portend defiance of court orders by a President Trump.
And that in turn would be a long step toward authoritarian rule.

I write this not as an anti-Republican partisan but as a longtime critic of Hillary Clinton's dishonesty and of the judicial system's drift toward politicization—and as one who would much rather see more divided government than the blowout of congressional Republicans that they will deserve if they stick with Trump.
There is no avoiding the truth: Trump has become ever more contemptuous of our constitutional traditions, especially the separation of powers and the freedom of speech. He has been more demagogic in trashing the judicial system than any president or major-party nominee in history. He has called Curiel "a hater of Donald Trump," without evidence, other than garden-variety rulings by the judge against Trump's side, including a May 27 release of embarrassing internal documents on marketing practices at Trump's "university."

Americans who value the independence of the judiciary should wake up to this threat. Republicans who have held their noses and endorsed Trump should see this as the last straw and dump him. Senator Lindsey Graham suggested as much after the exposure of Trump's megalomaniacal conference call on Monday urging political surrogates to defend his repeated attacks on the judge in his case—a flagrant mixing of his personal interests with the public interest—and blasting his own campaign staff for "stupid" advice to avoid the issue.

If a President Trump defies the judiciary outright, he would be the first president in recent memory to do so. Our nation has long depended on the executive branch to enforce the legal rulings of a judicial branch with no enforcement power of its own.
Trump has said, with menacing ambiguity: “They ought to look into Judge Curiel, because what Judge Curiel is doing is a total disgrace. OK? But we will come back in November. Wouldn’t that be wild if I am president and come back and do a civil case? Where everybody likes it. OK. This is called life, folks.”
Was this a hint that Trump would retaliate in unspecified ways against any judge who crosses him—in this case, a judge who risked his life as a federal prosecutor going after violent drug dealers from a Mexican cartel?

These attacks on the rule of law cross a more dangerous line than did Trump's crude attacks on news outlets whose reporting he dislikes; or his long history of filing bogus libel suits to silence critics; or his threats to use such suits as weapons if he becomes president; or his trashing of President George W. Bush as a liar who deceived the nation into invading Iraq; or his disparaging John McCain and other former prisoners of war for being captured alive; or even his near-incitements of mob violence against anti-Trump protesters, his astonishing call for a ban on all Muslims seeking to enter the country for an undetermined period, and his vow to deport en masse more than 11 million illegal immigrants—men, women, and children.

Trump's claims that Curiel's Mexican heritage alone should disqualify him from hearing lawsuits against Trump University—or, Trump implies, any case in which the mogul has an interest—also mix breathtaking ignorance of the law with racism.
Judges, like other people, have rights not to be disqualified from anything on account of traits including race, ethnicity, sex, or religion. This is not to deny that judges have their biases, political and otherwise. Of course they do. Judges are human. But we depend on their oaths to put aside biases, and on litigants' appeal rights, to do equal justice.
We have little choice but to do so, because otherwise the judicial system would grind to a halt. If every judge suspected of having a strong, race-based—or non-race-based—disagreement with a litigant's politics, or a strong dislike of the litigant, were disqualified, there would be few left to decide the most important cases.

African-American judges and white judges alike would be barred from hearing racial-discrimination lawsuits brought by blacks, or by whites, because the parties could always speculate that the judges' decisions would be skewed by sympathy for members of their own groups. Neither Roman Catholic judges nor female judges could sit in abortion cases. Jewish judges would be disqualified from lawsuits adverse to Israel. And so on.

Why do I call Trump racist for asserting that ethnic heritage alone can disqualify a judge? Because it's so obvious that he is using a race-based double standard. Would Trump say that all white, Anglo, Republican-appointed judges and prosecutors should be disqualified from cases charging African-Americans with racially motivated murders of white persons? Or from cases involving, or investigations of, Hillary Clinton? Of course not.

...

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... z4B0wcjcQq

[JimC]

Given that the thread title does not include the US, perhaps rEv and I can rant in this thread about the upcoming Australian Federal Election, with the candidates being the usual collection of morons, hypocrites and wankers...

[Forty Two]

Can't be. Aussie politicians are wicked smart.

[JimC]

Leave out the smart part, and you'd be on the right track...

[pErvinalia]

I so want to say that Trump is going to get absolutely smashed in the election, but all predictions from everyone regarding Trump so far have been wrong. Hillary Clinton is just going to be a continuation of the same irrational policies that you've been stuck with for decades, but I still think it would be better if she beat Trump. Trump is just too much of a loose cannon. There's just no telling what fuckwittery he might get up to if he snared the top job.

edit: I should add, the supreme court judge pick should be enough reason for Mercan's to pick Hillary over Trump.

[Tero]

If Trump wins, bad bews for the world. We in the US will be safe.

[JimC]

Unless you're Hispanic...

Or women...

[piscator]

...Or Hillary or any of her crew...

[pErvinalia]

If Trump wins, bad bews for the world. We in the US will be safe.

I'd think it would be more the other way around. He seems to be isolationist. The rest of us will benefit from less US meddling in world affairs, although, if Russia goes postal Europe will need the US to save their arses*. I guess the major effect he will have on the world will be pulling US support for global action on climate change. But 4 more years of fucking the atmosphere isn't going to percentage-wise make the situation that much worse.

* - actually, on thinking about this more (fuck, thinking is hard, you know?) Japan, Phillipines and Taiwan need the US to stop China moving into their backyard and taking a dump all over the place. And Sth Korea needs them to stop Kim Jong Whatshisname from going postal. Anyway, they aren't Straya, so I don't really give a fuck.

[Tyrannical]

If Trump looks like he's going to win, I'd say invest heavily in defense / military industrial complex stocks. As the US pulls out of Europe / Nato and SE Asia, those countries will be forced the build up their own militaries to compensate. Expect the draft to be instituted with longer minimum military service contracts

[Forty Two]

Unless you're Hispanic...

Or women...

Hillary has a history of being great for women and hispanics, though....?

Trump's record on women appears to be to treat them as equals, hire them just as readily as males, place them in positions of great power and authority in his organization, and not patronize them.

With hispanics, Trump has never suggested that spanish speaking people are in any way bad or undesirable. He has only spoken out against illegal aliens. Sure, illegal aliens will, hopefully, have a bad time of it. But, I am really sick and tired of Euros and Ozzie/NZ-ers on this point -- you folks don't tolerate illegal immigration into your countries. When an illegal is caught in the UK or France, for example, they are put on a plane and flown home. In the US, they are released, given a notice to appear months later for a hearing, have a right to an attorney (often at government expense), have appeal rights, and are eventually sent a notice to voluntarily depart. Fuck, France even makes it a crime to aid illegal immigrants - http://www.nbcnews.com/id/29899231/ns/w ... me-france/

The reality here is that on the illegal immigration front, what Trump talks about doing is not even as far as what most of the first world actually does with their illegal immigrants. What do people think happens in non-US countries? That it's the norm for people to enter the country illegally, without a visa, permission or even inspection at the border, and then be welcomed with open arms into the country permanently?

It's so ridiculous. An American says "you know, we have too many ILLEGAL immigrants, entering the country without visas, permission, inspection, or proper authority, so we should do something about that and the people who sneaked in illegally should for the most part be sent packing" it's racist and xenophobic. But, there is not a fucking first, second or for the most part third world country on the plane that just says "oh, you entered illegally -- sure, here you go -- here's government assistance, free college, a work permit, and free medical care.... and welcome!"

[Forty Two]

I so want to say that Trump is going to get absolutely smashed in the election, but all predictions from everyone regarding Trump so far have been wrong.

I suspect he will be smashed in the election, due to the media salivating for Hillary now. They creamed their pants over Obama 8 years ago, but now the narrative of "it's about time for a woman president" has begun. Rachel Maddow just had a show yesterday where she listed a bunch of female world leaders and asked, with her snarky delivery, "what's wrong with us? Why are we - the US - so far behind the times?" And, they've already started on the "every criticism of Hillary is sexist" line. Nothing anyone says about Hillary is something ever said about a man -- male politicians are always treated with respect and dignity, but women are treated much more harshly....

Hillary Clinton is just going to be a continuation of the same irrational policies that you've been stuck with for decades, but I still think it would be better if she beat Trump. Trump is just too much of a loose cannon. There's just no telling what fuckwittery he might get up to if he snared the top job.

edit: I should add, the supreme court judge pick should be enough reason for Mercan's to pick Hillary over Trump.

He's making a bed for himself with his promises. He's very clear on what he wants to do, so when he gets elected, he better fix the trade deals, and fix the immigration system, and add industrial jobs to the economy, rebuild the military, and disentangle us from unnecessary overseas meddling. What "fuckwttery" are you worried about? He doesn't give a fuck about abortion policy, he is in favor LBGTQ rights and doesn't want to limit what they can do, he is very pro-equality of the sexes. What would be the worst bit of fuckwittery he might do?

The usual answer I hear is that he might start a war. However, clearly, starting and supporting wars is something Hillary appears guaranteed to do. She hasn't opposed a single military action since Vietnam, and it's not even clear that she ever really opposed that (except when it was fashionable to do so). She is in favor of battlefield nukes, NSA spying and drone warfare. How can Trump be worse than her?

[Forty Two]

Leave out the smart part, and you'd be on the right track...

Can't be.... Oz is a civilized country, with sensible rules and laws. Not like filthy Merka.

[pErvinalia]

Hillary Clinton is just going to be a continuation of the same irrational policies that you've been stuck with for decades, but I still think it would be better if she beat Trump. Trump is just too much of a loose cannon. There's just no telling what fuckwittery he might get up to if he snared the top job.

edit: I should add, the supreme court judge pick should be enough reason for Mercan's to pick Hillary over Trump.

He's making a bed for himself with his promises. He's very clear on what he wants to do, so when he gets elected, he better fix the trade deals, and fix the immigration system, and add industrial jobs to the economy, rebuild the military, and disentangle us from unnecessary overseas meddling. What "fuckwttery" are you worried about? He doesn't give a fuck about abortion policy, he is in favor LBGTQ rights and doesn't want to limit what they can do, he is very pro-equality of the sexes. What would be the worst bit of fuckwittery he might do?

Well his advocacy of war crimes is an obvious bit of fuckwittery. But to be honest, I'm more concerned about what he might randomly come up with. The guy has the maturity of a teenager. He seems totally reactionary and unstable.