Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016
- This topic has 69 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Some info from Wikipedia on the Republican process for selecting a candidate
Quote:The Republican Party presidential primaries and caucuses are indirect elections in which voters cast ballots for a slate of delegates to the 2016 Republican National Convention. These delegates in turn directly elect the Republican Party's presidential nominee. Depending on each state's law and each state's party rules, when voters cast ballots for a candidate, they may be voting to directly award delegates bound to vote for a particular candidate at the state or national convention (binding primary or caucus), or they may simply be expressing an opinion that the state party is not bound to follow in selecting delegates to the national convention (non-binding primary or caucus).and
Quote:A state or territory may then either use a winner-take-all system, wherein the candidate that wins a plurality of votes wins all of that state's allocated pledged delegates; or use a proportional representation system, where the delegates are awarded proportionally to the election results. Many of the states using a proportional system require candidates to meet a certain threshold before receiving delegates; for example, a candidate receiving less than 20 percent of the vote in Texas would receive no delegates.[89][90] Unpledged delegates will include three top party officials from each state and territory.[89] The Republican National Committee has imposed strict new rules for states wishing to hold early contests in 2016.[91] Under these rules, no state will be permitted to hold a primary or caucus in January; and only Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada are entitled to February contests. States with early-March primaries or caucuses must award their delegates proportionally. Any state that violates these rules will have their delegation to the 2016 convention severely cutmore
Quote:Both major political parties of the U.S.—the Democratic Party and the Republican Party—officially nominate their candidate for President at their respective national conventions. Each of these conventions is attended by a number of delegates selected in accordance with the given party's bylaws. Both parties operate with two types of delegates: pledged and unpledged. The group of unpledged delegates, also known as superdelegates, generally comprising current and former elected officeholders and party leaders, are free to vote for any candidate they wish at the convention. The group of pledged delegates, comprising delegates representing the party committee of each state, are expected to vote in accordance with the rules of their state party. Depending on state law and state party rules, when voters cast ballots for a candidate in a presidential caucus or primary, they may be voting to actually award delegates bound to vote for a particular candidate at the state or national convention, or they may simply be expressing an opinion that the state party is not bound to follow in selecting delegates to the national convention.Ruling class fall outhttp://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/267766-koch-brothers-network-ready-to-oppose-trump
Isn't Trump more the Ross Perot of this election rather than really a Republican candidate ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Perot
"The case not the face" is a phrase sometimes used but this article might instead popularise the term "Backpfeifengesicht" or at least amuse youhttp://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/01/ted-cruz-jerk-hated
A section of US capital has backed Marco Rubio or as Trump puts it'Little Marco Rubio, the lightweight no show Senator from Florida, is set to be the "puppet" of the special interest Koch brothers.'https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/703974892237135873
As Mcolome points out, the history of American politics is littered with demagogue populism, of which some have been Third Party or independent candidates, other times, as members of the duopoly. I think this is the main difference between Debs and Sanders. Regardless of the fact that we have crticisms of the reformism of the SPA at the time, Debs stood as a socialist candidate of a socialist party, selected by that party and accountable to it and its voters.Sanders is a self-appointed candidate for the Democratic Party deciding campaign issues from the top-down as an enlightened leader.More damning is his pledge to endorse and assist Hilarity Clinton, the Wall St candidate if he loses the nomination.Well worth reading is this article on Clinton's Wall St support…They are there standing on the sidelines, waiting for their opportunity to enter the White Househttps://theintercept.com/2016/03/02/larry-fink-and-his-blackrock-team-poised-to-take-over-hillary-clintons-treasury-department/
Donald Trump is not a new phenomenon within the American society, that problem has existed for more than 500 years, the new scapegoat are the Muslims or the peoples from the Middle east, they have always needed an enemy in order to maintain their economical system, and massacres, and racism have been justifiedThe first enemy of the US were the Indians, and thousands of them were killed, and they still continue living in poverty, isolated and discriminated. Donald Trump is just a product of the Republican party, Richard Nixon, Goldwater and many orders took power by inciting racism and discriminations, and the pride of great nation, the same tactic used by the Nazis in Germany.Roosevelt himself declared that a system similar to the one that existed in Germany should have been established in the US because many American companies such as IBM, GM,. GE, were making huge profits during the Nazis regimes.During the 1930, or during the Great Depression more than 2 millions Mexican were deported,( they called it repatriation ) and the majority of them were citizens, or residents of the US, and then, cities and towns became empties, and landlords and farmers were complaining about their financial losses.Many peoples that were descendent of Japanese were placed in concentration camps, and most of them were citizens of the US, and they suffered discrimination, hungers, and isolation, and for many years Asian were not allowed to own any properties within a society based on the private propertyRoosevelt had to give an apology to the Mexican government, but the reality was that they needed Mexicans workers to produce foods for the soldiers, and they needed more peoples to become part of the armed forces. Many of them did not return.If the US workers had political education and courage they would not vote for any of the candidates of the political parties of the rich, they would not support their own exploiters and oppressors, and they would have formed their own political party, and they could expropriate all the capitalists and run the society for themselves
alanjjohnstone wrote:As Mcolome points out, the history of American politics is littered with demagogue populism, of which some have been Third Party or independent candidates, other times, as members of the duopoly. I think this is the main difference between Debs and Sanders. Regardless of the fact that we have crticisms of the reformism of the SPA at the time, Debs stood as a socialist candidate of a socialist party, selected by that party and accountable to it and its voters.Sanders is a self-appointed candidate for the Democratic Party deciding campaign issues from the top-down as an enlightened leader.More damning is his pledge to endorse and assist Hilarity Clinton, the Wall St candidate if he loses the nomination.Well worth reading is this article on Clinton's Wall St support…They are there standing on the sidelines, waiting for their opportunity to enter the White Househttps://theintercept.com/2016/03/02/larry-fink-and-his-blackrock-team-poised-to-take-over-hillary-clintons-treasury-department/The so called Republican candidates have also indicated that they will support Donald Trump if he wins the presidential nomination, that indicates that they are only a bunch of liars, fast talker, and bullshiters, and they do not care about the neo- Fascists/Nazis principles of Trump, there is not any essential difference between Ted Cruz and Donald Trump, and the candidates of the Democratic Party The ironic thing is that Ted Cruz comes from a family of immigrant, and he is Canadian, and he is against the immigrants, specially the Latinos, and against the black peoples. During the 60 there were signs in publics places in Miami which said: No Dogs, No Cubans, No Blacks, and No Mexicans, and the same signs were displayed in Texas and ArizonaThe so called Journalists ( which I call cardboard readers ) want to indicate that Donald Trump is an anti-American phenomenon, but in reality is the opposite way, most of those journalists are just pure defenders of the interests of the US ruling class, the last emails of Hillary Clinton that have been published, show that many news about Libya, Iraq and Syria had to be censored first by the CIA, the FBI and the State Department directed by Hillary Clinton, and they also show that she is also a war criminal, a warmonger, therefore, the difference between Trump and Clinton is that he has not killed anybody yet. There is not any difference either between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, and her pledge about women rights is just hypocrisy because many women, and little girls and children have been killed in Libya and Syria in a war among the superpowers trying to steal the natural resources of the Middle east, and now in Afghanistan they have discovered large quantity of minerals that can be used to produce better war machinesIn more than 200 years of capitalist domination, the US workers have not been able to form a genuine socialist-communist political party, or a strong socialist movement, even more, the so called Communist Party of the US have always supported the candidates of the ruling class, specially the candidates of the Democratic Party.My grand father was an old man who did not have any formal education, and he knew that the Soviet Union was not a socialist country, and he knew that the WWII was just a fight between thieves and land robbers, and he never supported or vote for any governmentThe vast majority of the US workers will not understand at the present time that the situation in Libya, and Syria is more than the use of unsecured internet servers, because that is what the newsmen are selling to the public, that situation shows that most of officials of the government support killings and murdering in others countries, and they have made alliance with terrorists, criminals and dictators, and that most of them can be processed as criminals in the so called Justice system, it would be another Nuremberg.The government of Argentina placed on jail several high officials, ex-presidents and military that committed criminals when they were in power, and workers have taking control and management of factories, even that they have been run under capitalists conceptions to produce profits, and in Venezuela workers were able to reverse a military coup d'tat.In the US frequent they use the expression Conservatives when they refer to the Republican candidates and officials, in others countries they are called reactionaries, backward, anti-workers, and counter revolutionaries, it is like the expression Liberal and liberalism, it is been used without knowing the proper meanings. Liberalism did not even exist in its purity in France and Great Britain, and it does not exists at the present time, specially in a country where the state participates in most of the economical affairs of the nation, and also the expression liberal-socialist is not appropriate either, it is like mixing oil and vinegar, they are two opposite conceptions
What is more frightening if Trump wins , is Trump losing to Ted Cruzhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0_KKg6Wh3QSOYMB blog has posted on Cruzhttp://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2016/03/cruzing-for-bruising.html
alanjjohnstone wrote:What is more frightening if Trump wins , is Trump losing to Ted Cruzhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0_KKg6Wh3QSOYMB blog has posted on Cruzhttp://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2016/03/cruzing-for-bruising.htmlTed Cruz is a reactionary like all the presidential candidates of the USA including the saint Jimmy Carter, Ted Cruz, is the son of a Cuban right winger, and fundamentalist Christian pastor, he is the person behind his religious crusadeHis father and others so called Christian pastors have indicated that Ted Cruz has been chosen by the Holy spirit to guide the American society, the same thing that they said about George Bush, and the holy spirit killed 1.5 millions peoples in Iraq.http://www.insidesources.com/ted-cruz-father-right-wing-celebrity-in-his-own-right/It is the continuation of George Bush's Christian and religion crusade used to carry the policies of world capitalism, and the economical interest of the US ruling class. Nothing is new at the present timehttp://www.insidesources.com/ted-cruz-father-right-wing-celebrity-in-his-own-right/Only within the US a guy like Donald Trump can have that kind of popularity, not even Adolf Hitler was so popular in Germany. What Donald Trump is saying at the present time, it has existed for more than 5 centuries, and thousands of peoples have supported it, and now it have appeared in the surface of the society. Just check the history since the first day that the Puritans, and land robbers placed their foot on the land, they were also saying that the land was given to them by God. They can fool the fool, but not the peoples who understand the historical processhttp://www.amazon.com/Francis-Jennings/e/B001HMQ07M This US historian is not a myth teller, and apologist of the so called American dream. His books are not used as text in the school system because they will unmask the lies taught by several decades
mcolome1 wrote:alanjjohnstone wrote:What is more frightening if Trump wins , is Trump losing to Ted Cruzhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0_KKg6Wh3QSOYMB blog has posted on Cruzhttp://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2016/03/cruzing-for-bruising.htmlTed Cruz is a reactionary like all the presidential candidates of the USA including the saint Jimmy Carter, Ted Cruz, is the son of a Cuban right winger, and fundamentalist Christian pastor, he is the person behind his religious crusadeHis father and others so called Christian pastors have indicated that Ted Cruz has been chosen by the Holy spirit to guide the American society, the same thing that they said about George Bush, and the holy spirit killed 1.5 millions peoples in Iraq.http://www.insidesources.com/ted-cruz-father-right-wing-celebrity-in-his-own-right/It is the continuation of George Bush's Christian and religion crusade used to carry the policies of world capitalism, and the economical interest of the US ruling class. Nothing is new at the present time Only within the US a guy like Donald Trump can have that kind of popularity, not even Adolf Hitler was so popular in Germany. What Donald Trump is saying at the present time, it has existed for more than 5 centuries, and thousands of peoples have supported it, and now it have appeared in the surface of the society. Just check the history since the first day that the Puritans, and land robbers placed their foot on the land, they were also saying that the land was given to them by God. They can fool the fool, but not the peoples who understand the historical processhttp://www.amazon.com/Francis-Jennings/e/B001HMQ07M This US historian is not a myth teller, and apologist of the so called American dream. His books are not used as text in the school system because they will unmask the lies taught by several decades
Someone has sent us this. Apparently John Pilger sees Trump as the lesser evil — because of his isolationist position on foreign policy:
Quote:Donald Trump is a symptom of this, but he is also a maverick. He says the invasion of Iraq was a crime; he doesn’t want to go to war with Russia and China. The danger to the rest of us is not Trump, but Hillary Clinton. She is no maverick. She embodies the resilience and violence of a system whose vaunted “exceptionalism” is totalitarian with an occasional liberal face.The same might be said of Farage and UKIP in this country as they too are opposed to overeseas military adventures.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.