TRUMP 2016

He's been fired for his mishandling of the Clinton email investigation. . .
Bannon's got chutzpah, you gotta give him that.

edit: Ok, more seriously recent testimony is being falsely interpreted to justify demands that he should have prosecuted members of the Clinton campaign and his failure to do so is the reason he's been fired. So this actually plays into the unhappiness from last summer where lots of rank-and-file FBI were upset he wasn't doing so. Trump has "just now" noticed that discontent and has concluded Comey can't effectively lead the FBI.

Whether it actually is the reason or not, it will have a chilling effect on the Russia investigation and I think it's likely the GOP will let him give it to a toady which means things will go absolutely nowhere. I hate saying it since establishing one is guaranteed to go off the rails but we now need a special prosecutor.

Disconcerting to see the executive fire the head of a key part of the criminal justice system for not having arrested his political opponent. WTF America?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

Disconcerting to see the executive fire the head of a key part of the criminal justice system, in charge of running an investigation on him, for not having arrested his political opponent. WTF America?

---

FTFY

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C_VlgRbW0AA2gKC.jpg:large

Classic Fox News there.

Twitter Link

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/09/politi...sia/index.html

Not suspecious, not at all.

I wonder if we'll ever get to the point where Trump resigns. Not saying it is very likely right now but a Pence presidency would likely be far more effective in getting things done.

Observe Lewk trying his best to subdue the screams of horror trying to rise up from the depths of his withered and tainted soul.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

I wonder if we'll ever get to the point where Trump resigns.

---

I honestly don't think Trump is going to resign, at least not without some form of coercion (as in, 'resign now or you'll be impeached and then criminal proceedings will follow shortly afterwards')

Quote:

---

Not saying it is very likely right now but a Pence presidency would likely be far more effective in getting things done.

---

Yes, it's a little like the dilemma the allies face when they were trying to decide whether or not to kill Hitler.

Comey fired days after asking for more money for the Russia investigation: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/10/u...ation-fbi.html

Sean Spicer hides in bushes: http://www.businessinsider.com/sean-...-firing-2017-5

Russia accuses US of punking them:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUyijC8JT9E&t=0m12s

"It's probably better to have him inside the tent pissing out, than outside the tent pissing in."

-Lyndon Johnson

In a Private Dinner, Trump Demanded Loyalty. Comey Demurred.

Acting FBI Director: y'all lying

So here is the President of the United States publicly threatening a private American citizen. While admitting the FBI has information that, if leaked, would be damaging. On Twitter.

Twitter Link

You can be as delusional as you wish but if Obama had done this the nation would have burned.

This is ridiculous enough without hyperbole, the nation would not have have burned.

Seriously America what have you done? How could you allow this lunatic to take over the nation?

It was all Hillary's fault, her message wasn't fun enough.

It is Hillary's fault indeed, she should never have lost to this clown. Same if Corbyn somehow became PM then there would be a special circle of hell reserved for Theresa May for losing to him in my eyes. Ditto if Macron had lost to Le Pen.

So why are you blaming America?

America elected this idiot. I'd blame the UK/France if Corbyn/Le Pen is/was elected too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

It is Hillary's fault indeed, she should never have lost to this clown.

---

Hillary's failure to campaign in the rust belt likely cost her the White House, but to blame the entire thing on Hillary is myopic. While her campaign made mistakes (as every campaign does) Donald Trump should never have been in a position to profit from them. He shouldn't have been the GOP candidate in the first place. He shouldn't have been close enough to Hillary for her mistakes to matter. As well as the Clinton campaign would blame, in no particular order:

* Republicans for their failure to stop him in the primary, and not uniting around one candidate
* Republicans for spending decades stirring up the sort of right wing populist forces that took Trump into office
* The media for their ridiculous coverage of him in the GOP primary and then the election: giving him wall to wall free coverage in the GOP, and grading him on a curve in the general
* Misogyny both aimed at Clinton specifically and in general in that no country that respects or cares about woman would even consider a man like that for office in the first place
* America's ridiculous hate boner for Hillary Clinton
* Racism, because obviously
* 'but her e-mails'
* The Comey letter
* "Both sides are bad!" fuckwittery, mostly in the media
* the stupid twats who voted for him

voter suppression and gerrymandering could slide in under racism, but they certainly deserve their own mention.

and a not insignificant number of middle of the isle people voted for Clinton then Republican candidates for balance. Which also contributes for why congress hasn't done jack shit about any of this.

Even users like Lewk have recently said its been worth it just to get their idea of conservatism advanced.

Doesn't gerrymandering only affect Congress?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steely Glint

Hillary's failure to campaign in the rust belt likely cost her the White House, but to blame the entire thing on Hillary is myopic. While her campaign made mistakes (as every campaign does) Donald Trump should never have been in a position to profit from them. He shouldn't have been the GOP candidate in the first place. He shouldn't have been close enough to Hillary for her mistakes to matter. As well as the Clinton campaign would blame, in no particular order:

* Republicans for their failure to stop him in the primary, and not uniting around one candidate
* Republicans for spending decades stirring up the sort of right wing populist forces that took Trump into office
* The media for their ridiculous coverage of him in the GOP primary and then the election: giving him wall to wall free coverage in the GOP, and grading him on a curve in the general
* Misogyny both aimed at Clinton specifically and in general in that no country that respects or cares about woman would even consider a man like that for office in the first place
* America's ridiculous hate boner for Hillary Clinton
* Racism, because obviously
* 'but her e-mails'
* The Comey letter
* "Both sides are bad!" fuckwittery, mostly in the media
* the stupid twats who voted for him

---

I never said it was only Hillary's fault, in fact I've already said its also America's fault as a whole before you even replied. However Hillary has a large portion of the blame, especially for deliberately not campaigning in the rust belt that cost her the White House. A mistake that should be ingrained on the psyche of all future campaigns.

I agree with all of your points and add:
Donald J Trump for being a complete and utter twat himself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steely Glint

Doesn't gerrymandering only affect Congress?

---

It effects state seats as well, and they decide how electors are assigned. either with winner take all or by congressional district.

I don't understand how it affects winner take all states. Surely only the number of seats in a state affect that and that isn't affected by gerrymandering its calculated according to the Constitution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

Sean Spicer hides in bushes: http://www.businessinsider.com/sean-...-firing-2017-5

---

https://www.facebook.com/lisa.kadona...10450624714179

Very trendy gift, appropriate for birthdays and holidays.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

I don't understand how it affects winner take all states. Surely only the number of seats in a state affect that and that isn't affected by gerrymandering its calculated according to the Constitution.

---

Surely it's possible for the state legislature to decide to not be a winner-takes-all state any longer?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

I don't understand how it affects winner take all states. Surely only the number of seats in a state affect that and that isn't affected by gerrymandering its calculated according to the Constitution.

---

Its decides if a state wants to be winner take all or use a system like Maine or Nebraska. One of the projected outcomes before the last election was that one of Maine's bloc electoral votes could have become the deciding factor. Nebraska's system has been under attack from republicans for a while cause you can't risk state that red showing a stain of blue.

EDIT: What Aimless said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer

Its decides if a state wants to be winner take all or use a system like Maine or Nebraska. One of the projected outcomes before the last election was that one of Maine's bloc electoral votes could have become the deciding factor. Nebraska's system has been under attack from republicans for a while cause you can't risk state that red showing a stain of blue.

EDIT: What Aimless said.

---

Pshaw, this is at best a marginal issue. Gerrymandering has everything to do with the house and state legislatures and precious little to do with the presidency.

Couldn't say it better myself. It perfectly explains the Lewks of the world: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/12/o...ing-right.html