2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

Brian? wrote: »

You just don't get it. Obama is wrong. All of the time, about everything.

Including Obamacare, until a Republican is in office when all of a sudden it's not so bad.

This guy did a quick summation of what happened just yesterday in for Trump's transition team:


https://twitter.com/awprokop/status/798708532493381633/photo/1

State of play in various government departments:


https://twitter.com/Taniel/status/798688983131754496/photo/1

This is normal, right?

https://twitter.com/mitchellreports/status/798675613733109760?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Note on Jared Kushner, he's apparently leading a purge on anyone still in the trump team that is linked to Chris Christie , if you wonder why, this might have something to do with it:

In the summer of 2004 Kushner was fined $508,900 by the Federal Election Commission for mishandling of campaign contributions.[9] In 2005, following an investigation by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of New Jersey,[10] Kushner was convicted of making illegal campaign contributions, tax evasion and witness tampering.[11] The U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey, Chris Christie, negotiated a plea agreement and Kushner was sentenced to two years in prison and released after one year. [12][13][14][15] As a result of his convictions, Kushner was suspended and disbarred from the practice of law in New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania.[7][16][17][18]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Kushner

Payback for his Dad.


But according to Donald it's All Fine and we'll get to find out who'll be running the U.S. on next weeks episode of The Apprentice: Whitehouse 2016:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/798721142525665280?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Suryavarman wrote: »

Just came across this article from Newsweek which demolishes the conspiracy theory that the DNC rigged the primary and the adorably naive idea that Sanders could have bet Trump.

I'm sorry but the ignorance here makes my blood boil. This article has weak man fallacy written all over it.

It focuses on four things - super delegates, the debate schedule, emails from May onwards and the "Russian hackers" angle.

To quickly debunk these 4 ideas.

1. The issue Sanders supporters had with the super delegates was more so how the media reported it. They claimed Clinton had an insurmountable lead from the very beginning and not once did they mentioned these delegates would switch to the popular vote winner.

2. The debate schedule - see this email https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5688#efmASYAcT

Through internal discussions, we concluded that it was in our interest to: 1) limit the number of debates (and the number in each state); 2) start the debates as late as possible; 3) keep debates out of the busy window between February 1 and February 27, 2016 (Iowa to South Carolina); 4) create a schedule that would allow the later debates to be cancelled if the race is for practical purposes over; 5) encourage an emphasis on local issues and local media participants in the debate formats; and 6) ensure a format that provides equal time for all candidates and does not give the moderator any discretion to focus on one candidate.

3. Emails - The fact that the article tries to deny the DNC's clear and early bias towards Clinton and ignores the fact that the DNC chair was forced to resign for coordinating against the Sanders campaign says it all really. There's a lot more damaging emails from much earlier than May. Oh, did I mention that the DNC also supplied all debate questions to Clinton ahead of time? There's too much in the emails to mention it all but I'll leave it at that. Start here if you want to find out more.

4. Russian Hackers - Ugh. First of all there's no evidence it was the Russians, just baseless accusations. If you want to go down that rabbit hole start with Seth Rich. Otherwise here's what former UK Ambassador Craig Murray had to say. "I can tell you with 100% certainty that it is not any Russian state actor or proxy that gave the Democratic National Committee and Podesta material to WikiLeaks."

Also, FBI investigated the Russia - Trump link and found nothing. -> http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html?_r=0

But let's imagine it was the Russians. So what? That doesn't excuse the wrongs the DNC & the Clintons have committed, who cares who the source of the leak was?


Finally, let me get onto the real bones of the Sanders camp argument. Election & Voter fraud.

http://mattforney.com/dnc-leak-voter-fraud/



Here's the motherlode though, compiled by Election Justice USA.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6J1ecILnk3UUy1KZ2FUT29iQ1E/view?pref=2&pli=1

Here's their conclusion, fully backed up in the 100 page linked document.

We have aimed to provide an overview of the evidence for various types of fraud and targeted voter suppression impacting the outcomes of the 2016 Democratic presidential primaries. After covering the legal background and the history of Election Justice USA’s legal actions, our best efforts to combat election fraud and voter suppression, we gave a thorough treatment of:
1)Targeted voter suppression 2) Registration tampering 3) Illegal voter purges 4) Exit polling discrepancies 5) Evidence for voting machine tampering 6) The security (or lack thereof) of various voting machine types
Finally, we gave a date-by-date, state-by-state overview of each of these fraud or suppression types at work throughout the course of the 2016 Democratic presidential primaries. Based on this work, Election Justice USA has established an upper estimate of 184 pledged delegates lost by Senator Bernie Sanders as a consequence of specific irregularities and instances of fraud. Adding these delegates to Senator Sanders’ pledged delegate total and subtracting the same number from Hillary Clinton’s total would more than erase the 359 pledged delegate gap between the two candidates. EJUSA established the upper estimate through exit polling data, statistical analysis by precinct size, and attention to the details of Democratic proportional awarding of national delegates. Even small changes in vote shares in critical states like Massachusetts and New York could have substantially changed the media narrative surrounding the primaries in ways that would likely have had far reaching consequences for Senator Sanders’ campaign."

A brief compilation of additional video evidence and testimonies:

Chicago Audit Witnesses describe discrepancy between hand counted totals and machine totals: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y30EUNvrIjU

Arizona Public Testimonies on Purging/fraud: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2togSItA77E

AZ SoS confirming Purges: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1P6t9BXms2o

More AZ testimony on fraud: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rtlOk5E4eA

California Poll Worker and Voter Testimonies: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxaKJP5FaDlndXpuSmVvSGM3dmc/view?pref=2&pli=1

San Diego Public Testimony: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBNcpyEsefc

California Audit Bernie Ballots Whited Out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTPmZsCXHng&feature=youtu.be

California Poll Irregularities: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3rFZ9cAXmA

New York Public Testimonies on Fraud: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5S1penT9Nc

Election Activist describes problems with NY Primary: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1obwHf6QvMM

NY Audit Witness prevented from Witnessing Audit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6x8Z4NLUAA&feature=youtu.be&t=17m36s

Postcards with improper dates being sent to newly registered NY voters: https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/49w61x/i_received_a_notice_in_the_mail_saying_that_the/?st=ir40cat0&sh=fdd9b524

Voter Suppression in Puerto Rico: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9Df-Poz3Eo

NY (brooklyn) voters vanish from database day before primary http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/officials-investigating-why-126000-voters-were-purged-from-ny-rolls/

THIS is what the Bernie Or Bust Movement is up in arms about. Fraud. Not some stupid debate scheduling or the fact that super delegates exist.

But hey, Trump won. Now the public's finally getting a chance to see the bias the media showed towards Clinton in the General, don't for a second believe it wasn't the same in the primary. The polls weren't "wrong" - they were intentionally skewed, emails confirm this. Internal polling was right all along. Hillary cancelled her fireworks celebration days before the election.

I'll leave you with this. https://www.quora.com/With-all-the-resources-available-supercomputers-genius-mathematicians-etc-how-did-all-the-polls-get-the-election-result-so-wrong/answer/James-Compton-6

If I've learned anything this year, it's that the mainstream media can't be trusted. Do your own research and form your own conclusions, check the sources for everything. The level of propaganda in this election cycle was mind blowing and terrifying. It's true what they say, an uninformed public is the greatest threat to democracy.

alastair wrote: »

It really doesn't.

Even if you buy into the notion that there was the degree of electoral fraud you suggest (and there wasn't - time and time again these claims are proven to be without foundation), the problem for Bernie was that he just don't get the votes (adding in all those 'stolen' votes). Pretending that the DNC emails, or Hillary getting questions ahead of time actually swayed the outcome is pretty implausible. Bernie's podium work was good, and he articulated his platform very well - but the punters simply didn't prefer him to Hillary. Time to move on.

I'm not going to bother arguing with someone who just dismisses evidence without backing up their argument.

alastair wrote: »

but the punters simply didn't prefer him to Hillary.

Ha. Please don't tell me you actually believe that.

marienbad wrote: »

Magnate - might I ask you who won the California Democratic Primary ?

Clinton of course

marienbad wrote: »

What happened to all the Bernie voters at those rallies ?

A combination of some or all of the following.

1)Targeted voter suppression 2) Registration tampering 3) Illegal voter purges 4) Exit polling discrepancies 5) Evidence for voting machine tampering 6) The security (or lack thereof) of various voting machine types.

It's honestly worth your time reading through this. Please give it your time. -> https://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2016/07/10/confirmation-bernie-won-california-by-at-least-100000-votes/

“Election Justice USA asserts that a Capitol Weekly early-voter exit poll conducted across the state of California yielded a 23 percent discrepancy in Los Angeles vote-by-mail ballots compared to the actual results. During the polling of the early round of mail-in voters, Hillary Clinton had a lead over Bernie Sanders in the Los Angeles area that was less than 10 percent. Election Justice USA, a voter advocacy non-profit organization, says that the discrepancy is significant enough to demand a hand audit of the early mail-in ballots.

“The discrepancy cannot be easily explained by demographic factors: the results of the Capitol Weekly exit poll were weighted by age and race. Moreover, the exit poll had 21,000 respondents, and was praised–prior to election night–by mainstream elections journalists, including Nate Cohn of the New York Times. While no exit poll can prove fraud, a significant exit polling discrepancy such as this constitutes cause for alarm, especially one of this magnitude. It’s also sufficient cause for immediate action: voters should bring pressure to bear on officials and demand an expanded hand audit.”
Cumulative Vote Share (CVS) analysis

When California county votes are sorted and cumulated from smallest to largest counties, they confirm the likelihood of fraud. In virtually every CVS analysis, the establishment candidate (Clinton) gains vote share in the larger counties . One would intuitively expect that the progressive candidate (Sanders) would gain share in the vote-rich urban and suburban counties. The fact that Sanders does well in small (conservative) counties but not as well in large counties is further indication of voter suppression, ballot destruction and vote flipping.