Yes, The Real The New Awesome Primary Thread

Washington: 81% reporting -Sanders 72%
Clinton 28%Alaska: 100% reporting -Sanders 81%
Clinton 19% source OK - CA, NY follow their lead, do your duty, and send that DINO warmonger back to the fossil bed along with all neoliberals.

All of them believe in taking earned money from the poor and middle class and giving it to their trust fund parasite supporters via "entitlement" reform. All of them believe all problems are caused by increasing melanin count and the solution is more bombing. All believe Black Loves don't matter and neither does their vote.The only perceivable difference is how much they admit to having no solutions other than an appeal to fear and hate.Trump is just saying what they all believe.Cruz is just believing his delusional daddy when he thinks he is the next John the Baptist.They all suck at being human, period.Edited by anglagard, : add last two sentences.

Maybe.I understand what you are getting at. But the rules are a lot more flexible than you allow. The hypothesis is that the corporation officers are behaving according to the interest of the corporation when they lobby and curry favor, particularly if such things improve the bottom line. Accordingly, the shareholders need not be immediately consulted. After all, the CEO does not check in with the shareholders when he elects to spend similar sums of money on a bunch of new engineers, or when buying a fleet of company automobiles for the sales force. The officers run all of the day to day business answering to the shareholders. They cannot be involved in self dealing, but their business decisions are subject only to a basic rationality test as long as they are not illegal.Would the shareholders be more free if they got the money that was going to politicians? Maybe, but theoretically they've left some of the decisions about where the money goes, and what is a profitable expenditure to the company officers.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Well dont worry we basically have the same problem. The right with their leader the lord of darkness Janez Jana have their 10 % of the population so brainwashed that if they say the sky is pink they will believe it. And they all or a vast majority go to vote so they are always a major player in our politics. The left usually makes a new party before the elections and the people always fall for it.The debates basically boil down to who is a worse communist and a worse crook. Then they all go in to a pub the left and the right and plan what to steal from the people next.

The use of the term "DINO" is highly appropriate. Besides Wall Street, I didn't realize she also accepts large sums from the fossil fuel industry.It seems Hillary is 'somewhat' pro-fracking? Accepted/promoted "limited" fracking in america?

quote:

---

A college student asked Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton a simple question at the Flint, Mich., debate on Sunday night: "Do you support fracking?"

​

And Bernie Sanders had a simple answer: "No, I do not support fracking."

​

Hillary Clinton, though, needed more time to outline three conditions in a more nuanced answer on fracking. She's against it "when any locality or any state is against it," "when the release of methane or contamination of water is present," and "unless we can require that anybody who fracks has to tell us exactly what chemicals they are using."

---

As SOS she supported fracking in Africa?

quote:

---

As secretary of state in 2010, Clinton argued in favor of gas as "the cleanest fossil fuel available for power generation today," and said that "if developed, shale gas could make an important contribution to our region's energy supply, just as it does now for the United States." Her office, meanwhile, promoted fracking in developing nations.

---

Hillary IS a vast bowl of pus.Edited by dronestar, : Hillary Clinton’s Big Shift on Fracking – Mother Jones

So I guess she can't count on your vote, huh?

No, I guess not.And I guess she won't count on the 4500 amerikan soldiers who died in completely meaningless deaths in Iraq, because of Hillary's hawkish and enthusiastic support for lies, for her vote either.I guess that would be considered funny too?Edited by dronestar, : of

The dead only vote in Cook County but there they get to vote in more than one precinct.

Hi, Dronester. If you're going for style points, use this next time.

Hi Blue Jay, You'll have to forgive me, when I think of the MILLIONS of lives around the world who are so much worse off because Hillary was born, and the MILLIONS of lives that will soon get much worse if she should win the presidency, I don't exactly have the extra incentive for 'style points.'

Or much of any point it seems.

Hi, Dronester. If it's the cost in terms of human lives that you're concerned about, I would like to point out that Hillary is among the 60% of current presidential candidates who have not openly advocated war crimes. So, may I humbly suggest that your anit-people-dying anxieties have bigger fish to fry than Hillary Clinton?

Today's news reports that fracking has placed 7 million Americans at risk of man-made earthquakes, USGS says. Here's a nice USGS map from the article: Lot's of good information in that article, worth reading.There are no excellent candidates out there, only satisfactory ones, terrible ones, and unthinkable ones. Concerning fracking, a good deal of any country's wealth depends upon its natural resources and its ability to take advantage of them, but the fracking industry is pooping on the rug. If fracking were properly regulated to reduce its environmental impact to an acceptable level then it's cost would soar and we would no longer be energy independent, but such is life. If environmentally safe fracked oil and gas is prohibitively expensive at today's prices then let it sit in the ground until it's economical. We don't want to shit where we live, something the Republicans don't seem to care about.Bernie's, "No, I do not support fracking," is not a reasonable statement. Vermont banned fracking, as big a sacrifice as Tahiti banning snow - there have never been any producing wells in Vermont. Try banning fracking in Texas.Hillary's "more nuanced answer" is a good one, indicating a willingness for more regulation, but even that would likely face a big fight, first in Congress, and then later in court. Even if she takes an Obama-like regulatory route, that would likely be challenged in court, too. Did everyone already know that there are many exemptions for hydraulic fracturing under United States federal law? Fracking is exempt from from parts of the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and others.Attempts to increase oversight of the fracking industry would be a big fight, and with the Republicans in control of Congress there is no chance of reining it in, no matter who is elected. Let's hope that residents in the new earthquake zones take note and begin voting in their own best interests.--Percy

If the republicans in NC are any indication, then yes. The state legislature here has shown no interest in any kind of balance when it comes to fracking. They have essentially given the industry everything they have asked for no regard for any environmental concerns, and certainly no regards for the effect of methane as a green house gas. Under current processing, so much methane leaks into the atmosphere that erg for erg, mining and using shell gas is worse than burning coal, at least for its immediate effect on greenhouse warming.That said, I would not reduce the importance of Vermont's ban on fracking given the path North Carolina has taken. We don't have fracking yet, but we are going to have it. As you indicated, maybe a complete ban is not the answer, but I suspect that Vermont's law was a reaction to companies indicating that they wanted to start fracking there. And of course there is always New York as an example of a state with sizeable reserves that has also banned fracking.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

quote:

---

In a statement, the Trump campaign insisted that Lewandowski "was not arrested" despite a police report distributed to news outlets that listed his arrest at 8:10 a.m.

​

"Mr. Lewandowski is absolutely innocent of this charge," the campaign statement said. "He will enter a plea of not guilty and looks forward to his day in court. He is completely confident that he will be exonerated."

---

How can they continue to get away with such nonsense.Now Trump says he might withdraw US Troops from Japan and South Korea. That should certainly make the world safer (can't say it would make Japan or South Korea feel safer).Edited by jar, : fix quote box