The 2016 Presidential Election Trainwreck

[Omaha 680]

I'm wondering about the granting of immunity to Hillary's IT guy. The former US Attorney for DC seems to think that it means they're getting a grand jury ready for Hillary.

Normally, I would expect someone who did things that Hillary did to plead things down like Petraeus. But Hillary can't back down because of the campaign.

The former US Attorney also thinks the FBI has recovered the deleted emails. If something indicates that Hillary is compromised (e.g.a quid pro quo arrangement where's Hillary uses SOS office to give favor to someone in a rogue state, like Russia) then I don't think the Justice Department can sit on it. Also, I would imagine that Obama couldn't care less what happens to the Democratic nomination if Donald Trump gets the GOP nomination. The Democrats could roll out Dukakis or Mondale and win going away.

Two things:

1. I can't imagine Hillary being indicted on any charge that would make her base abandon her in any significant numbers. They just don't care.

2. If there were a significant charge like you allude to above that forces her withdrawal from the campaign and Trump is the R nominee, there would never be a better chance for a successful independent run. I don't think an independent could win the electoral vote, but could push it to the House and get elected there. If an independent couldn't win under those circumstances they never could.

[Maximus]

Two things:

1. I can't imagine Hillary being indicted on any charge that would make her base abandon her in any significant numbers. They just don't care.

2. If there were a significant charge like you allude to above that forces her withdrawal from the campaign and Trump is the R nominee, there would never be a better chance for a successful independent run. I don't think an independent could win the electoral vote, but could push it to the House and get elected there. If an independent couldn't win under those circumstances they never could.

Romney 2016

[Color Me Badd Fan]

Two things:

1. I can't imagine Hillary being indicted on any charge that would make her base abandon her in any significant numbers. They just don't care.

2. If there were a significant charge like you allude to above that forces her withdrawal from the campaign and Trump is the R nominee, there would never be a better chance for a successful independent run. I don't think an independent could win the electoral vote, but could push it to the House and get elected there. If an independent couldn't win under those circumstances they never could.

There has to be something worse in the emails and Clinton Foundation dealings that makes it worse for Obama not to prosecute Hillary. Hillary might know where the bodies are buried, but that could be outweighed by something that would make Obama look worse if he chose to look the other way.

Anyone from the Democratic side will beat Trump, as long as there's still time to get a different nominee in there.

[jay santos]

Trump's saving grace is that he won't be able to accomplish any of the ugly things he says he'll do. He can't build the wall. There are a zillion natural impediments. He's not going to make Apple build all of its devices here and the American public pay double for them.

But BS has that stench of brain dead leftist economics that left hundreds of millions of dead and homeless in the last century.

We think we've got problems now! The world has never been safer, cleaner, more liberated or educated, and people have never had so much to eat as today--all because capitalism is the prevailing ethos or aspiration. Bring back the old dogmas that we thought were dead and the 20th centuries horrors will certainly rise from the grave and follow.

I can't believe how much I agree with SU when he talks politics.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I can't believe how much I agree with SU when he talks politics.

So you believe that Trump will not be able to implement any of his dangerous ideas, but for some reason Bernie Sanders will? Sheesh...

[Uncle Ted]

I'm wondering about the granting of immunity to Hillary's IT guy. The former US Attorney for DC seems to think that it means they're getting a grand jury ready for Hillary.

Normally, I would expect someone who did things that Hillary did to plead things down like Petraeus. But Hillary can't back down because of the campaign.

The former US Attorney also thinks the FBI has recovered the deleted emails. If something indicates that Hillary is compromised (e.g.a quid pro quo arrangement where's Hillary uses SOS office to give favor to someone in a rogue state, like Russia) then I don't think the Justice Department can sit on it. Also, I would imagine that Obama couldn't care less what happens to the Democratic nomination if Donald Trump gets the GOP nomination. The Democrats could roll out Dukakis or Mondale and win going away.

Watching the Univision debate last night was interesting. First, it helped me brush up on my texan spanglish. Second, it seemed the mods had no problem asking Hillary the tough questions about her emails and Benghazi. Clinton was asked if she would step down from the race if this FBI investigation turned up an indictment. On that she refused to even entertain the question.

Anyway she sucked in the debate last night and the Clinton camp might have something to worry about. Bernie was putting her on the defensive, it seems, on every question.

Edit: Also, I thought Clinton's response about her predecessors doing the same thing was pretty funny: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...did-same-thin/

[Omaha 680]

So you believe that Trump will not be able to implement any of his dangerous ideas, but for some reason Bernie Sanders will? Sheesh...

Both scenarios are far-fetched, but I do believe Sanders would have a better chance (better meaning greater than 0%). The reason is a win for either candidate would likely be accompanied by down-ballot success, which would theoretically translate to more congressional support for their agenda. In reality I think this would work better for Sanders instead of Trump because:

1. A large percentage of congressional republicans publicly don't support Trump's crazy ideas
2. The democrat party in general is more aligned with Bernie's crazy ideas than the Republicans are with Trump's. On the D side, everyone is in agreement that more government is the solution to all the problems the candidates discuss, it's only a question of how much more. The R side is divided between crazies that support Trump's weird ideas and those of us who are appalled by them.
3. As stated by others, there are more natural (regulatory and foreign policy) barriers to Trump's schemes like a wall that are not easily legislated or ordered away.
4. The courts would be much more likely to uphold any challenges to Bernie's crazy ideas that passed than they would to uphold Trump's.

Please don't misconstrue that I think Trump is "better" than Bernie. I think they both suck and would probably be equally horrible as president.

[frank ryan]

Trump's saving grace is that he won't be able to accomplish any of the ugly things he says he'll do. He can't build the wall. There are a zillion natural impediments. He's not going to make Apple build all of its devices here and the American public pay double for them.

But BS has that stench of brain dead leftist economics that left hundreds of millions of dead and homeless in the last century.

We think we've got problems now! The world has never been safer, cleaner, more liberated or educated, and people have never had so much to eat as today--all because capitalism is the prevailing ethos or aspiration. Bring back the old dogmas that we thought were dead and the 20th century's horrors will certainly rise from the grave and follow.

I expect better from you than red scare crap. Social Democracy is not communism or marxist socialism. It is capitalism without the all social darwin stuff. Canada did not have millions of dead due to their economic policies.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I expect better from you than red scare crap. Social Democracy is not communism or marxist socialism. It is capitalism without the all social darwin stuff. Canada did not have millions of dead due to their economic policies.

Yeah, but you should see all the corpses in Scandinavia!

[creekster]

I expect better from you than red scare crap. Social Democracy is not communism or marxist socialism. It is capitalism without the all social darwin stuff. Canada did not have millions of dead due to their economic policies.

Canada's economy only works because they are adjacent to the United States. Which is not to say SU isn't engaging in hyperbole.

[Uncle Ted]

I expect better from you than red scare crap. Social Democracy is not communism or marxist socialism. It is capitalism without the all social darwin stuff. Canada did not have millions of dead due to their economic policies.

Does anyone (besides draft dodgers and hippies) live in Canada?

[Color Me Badd Fan]

Sanders is merely a Trotskyist, not a full blown Stalinist. I'm glad that Frank is clearing the record here.

[jay santos]

So you believe that Trump will not be able to implement any of his dangerous ideas, but for some reason Bernie Sanders will? Sheesh...

Kind of. I view Sanders as a Socialist and complete enemy to US Capitalism. I view Trump more of a raving lunatic who doesn't seem to have a consistent, coherent plan. And the random stuff he says like building the wall probably is never going to fly. I would choose Trump over Sanders. Sanders is much bigger threat to the economy, IMHO. I don't know how much either one would be able to implement, but Obama got Obamacare through and that's been a disaster. Sanders could probably do far worse.

[Northwestcoug]

Canada's economy only works because they are adjacent to the United States. Which is not to say SU isn't engaging in hyperbole.

Speaking of hyperbole...

[SeattleUte]

I expect better from you than red scare crap. Social Democracy is not communism or marxist socialism. It is capitalism without the all social darwin stuff. Canada did not have millions of dead due to their economic policies.

I don't want to be Canada or Norway. Canada is not a panacea; on the contrary, it's a very screwed up country that frankly isn't as economically balanced or tolerant as its pieties suggest. Our way is better for us--if not Canada.

Creekster is right; Canada is essentially a producer of commoditized natural resources like Brazil and the best thing it's got going for it is that it's next to us. In private moments Canadians have revealed to me that they are like Mexicans in this sense--they'd rather be in the U.S. job market and economy than Canada's.

Anyway, we have our way, they have theirs. Our economy is the most productive in the word and recovers faster from downturns because of our particular economic system. I don't know why these self-loathing sophists like Sanders or the economists I hear on NPR don't just live with what we are.

I live in Seattle and I have yet to hear anyone say they are going to go to Canada to get a medical procedure done because their health care is better.