billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
|
Post by billisonboard on Jul 8, 2016 10:57:09 GMT -5
Obama will be POTUS until January 20, 2017. She could be President-Elect Clinton. I wondered who the Vice-president Elect was when I first read it. Well, even if it was Kermit the Frog, I think that would be a better choice than Trump. ... Not sure myself. I would want to know who has their hand up Kermit's ...
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,931
|
Post by happyhoix on Jul 8, 2016 10:57:49 GMT -5
I'm with ->Hil liary! Is it just me or does Trey Gowdy look like a Malfoy?
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,512
|
Post by billisonboard on Jul 8, 2016 11:12:36 GMT -5
I would think that per Section 3 of the 20th Amendment the VP Elect would be voted for in the stead of the PE. Therefore the Electors would be bound to vote the ticket with the new PE, and that the Electoral Votes counted in Congress would have to honor that decision, as they always do.
Of course I am not a high priced slick team of lawyers hired by political operatives to muddy the waters and bend the laws to their will either. (Okay, I admit I love this minutiae way too much) I agree that most if not all Electors would honor the ticket their state voted for but would they vote for the deceased person for president and then the person they vote in as VP Elect would then be sworn in? Or would they vote in the VP as President Elect and then someone else (maybe if there were time for the VP to name someone?). Would they leave the VP choice to the Senate?
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,345
|
Post by swamp on Jul 8, 2016 11:35:09 GMT -5
I don't know about anywhere else, but the county owns them here.
You put your ballot in, it reads it, tallies the votes, and they the old lady poll watchers call the numbers into the Board of Elections.
Well, you know who all those old lady poll watchers are in league with.
Wink wink, nudge nudge.
No, I really don't!!!!!
I really need to go buy ALCOA stock.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,931
|
Post by happyhoix on Jul 8, 2016 13:05:04 GMT -5
Well, you know who all those old lady poll watchers are in league with.
Wink wink, nudge nudge.
No, I really don't!!!!!
I really need to go buy ALCOA stock.
(I don't either. That was a combination of a dig at people being paranoid and a Monty Python reference).
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 8, 2016 13:24:21 GMT -5
aluminum is very energy intensive. not a good long play right now, imo.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,779
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Jul 8, 2016 14:03:53 GMT -5
No, I really don't!!!!!
I really need to go buy ALCOA stock.
(I don't either. That was a combination of a dig at people being paranoid and a Monty Python reference).
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 6:59:19 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2016 14:25:22 GMT -5
I don't know about anywhere else, but the county owns them here.
You put your ballot in, it reads it, tallies the votes, and they the old lady poll watchers call the numbers into the Board of Elections.
Well, you know who all those old lady poll watchers are in league with.
Wink wink, nudge nudge.
I do. For about 2-3 years every time I went to vote I had to do things like dispose of the republican literature ... LEFT in each booth!! Or take down illegal signs, etc... Call in complaints.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,612
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jul 8, 2016 15:54:42 GMT -5
I'm with ->Hil liary! That's not how Clinton's first name is spelled. But this would work and it's spelled right: You're with -> T rump!
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,612
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jul 8, 2016 15:57:50 GMT -5
Wow. We are so clean and innocent up here...... That's because Ann LePage is now busing tables.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jul 8, 2016 18:14:14 GMT -5
I saw the name "Hillbilly" used to refer to Hillary and Bill Clinton on a site the other day. In all the years I've heard about the two of them, "Hillbilly" as a portmanteau of their names never occurred to me. It seems so obvious, though. (As a collective name, not as a descriptor.)
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Jul 8, 2016 18:54:02 GMT -5
That's the first time I have seen Hillbilly and portmanteau used in the same sentence.
|
|
grits
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 17, 2012 13:43:33 GMT -5
Posts: 3,185
|
Post by grits on Jul 8, 2016 20:39:21 GMT -5
The economic policies of the 90's...sure. Like balancing budgets. The crash was solely on the policies of Greenspan and Bush beginning in 2001. The stock market correction began in March of 2000. The trade agreement with China was signed in 2000. Bush wasn't even president at that time. The so-called balanced budget was achieved in part by funneling Social Security surpluses into the general fund. It didn't matter who was elected president, it still would have happened. Being a political independent, I don't play blame the other party game. George Washington warned the nation in his farewell address to avoid being overly involved in party politics. The nation did not listen, and has suffered for it.
|
|
grits
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 17, 2012 13:43:33 GMT -5
Posts: 3,185
|
Post by grits on Jul 8, 2016 20:46:50 GMT -5
Due to the fraud that existed with voting machines, the county where I live went back to paper ballots. The ballots are kept for years.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Jul 8, 2016 21:18:44 GMT -5
So....how do those who support Mrs. Clinton's run for the Presidency feel about this statement recently issued by the FBI? Is it just no big deal? Something you can overlook? It is just an attempt to sully her rep? How do you feel? Discard the comparison to Watergate and take it for what it is. How do you feel about it? Does it give you any pause that, at the least, she was careless with the security of our nation? i don't support her candidacy, but i like to think i am a keen political observer. i think that only a small fraction of the US public actually cares about this issue. of those that care, about half see it as a fishing expedition, designed to ensnare Clinton and damage her reputation. those will see this as a victory for her. the other half will see the dark spots in the rebuke, and seize on them- which was precisely how it was before. in short, i think this changes nothing. it only removes the uncertainty. Unfortunately, I think you are correct. Most people outside the government security apparatus have no concept of classified information, why it's important, how it affects national security, and the lengths we go to in order to protect it. Put simply, most people just don't give a shit, which in and of itself is unfortunate. Most Clinton supporters will view this as some sort of victory/vindication (it isn't). Most Clinton detractors will believe the system is rigged. And at least 80% of the general population won't give a shit one way or the other.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Jul 8, 2016 21:22:58 GMT -5
Look, here's what we know for sure. These are facts, not open to interpretation. I'd be interested to hear from Clinton supporters as to why they think these things aren't a big deal.
1. Clinton has lied about the e-mails since March 2015. She stated that no classified e-mails were sent, when we know now that they were.
2. Regardless of the issue of classified or unclassified, Hillary Clinton's lawyers deleted thousands of e-mails that were federal records. This was in direct violation of the freedom of information act.
3. Furthermore, doesn't the fact that Clinton set out to circumvent the freedom of information act from the outset bother anyone? She did this specifically to avoid public disclosure of her e-mails. Are Clinton supporters opposed to an open and honest government?
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Jul 8, 2016 21:28:02 GMT -5
I'm a DOD employee with an active federal security clearance.
I can say that the decision about Hillary has impacted morale.
We all know that if any one of us had done anything approaching that, we, at a minimum, would have been fired.
Most people outside the government security apparatus have no concept of all the work that goes into safeguarding even confidential information.
|
|
grits
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 17, 2012 13:43:33 GMT -5
Posts: 3,185
|
Post by grits on Jul 8, 2016 21:53:44 GMT -5
Hillary is now denying the FBI's claim that she was careless. The soap opera continues.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,779
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Jul 8, 2016 21:59:27 GMT -5
I'm a DOD employee with an active federal security clearance. I can say that the decision about Hillary has impacted morale. We all know that if any one of us had done anything approaching that, we, at a minimum, would have been fired. Most people outside the government security apparatus have no concept of all the work that goes into safeguarding even confidential information. I understand it impacts morale, but unlike WH staff, the President, Sec of State, etc. you probably have a relatively well-defined government work life that is easy to keep separate from your personal life. When you can be on indefinitely in any 24 hour or week period, I think lines blur more. The Sec of State and the President have to react quickly. All their emails and correspondence is not free of personal crap. There is no good reason really, they should have to reveal such stuff.
Comparing your work and your work day with hers is not a valid comparison. You aren't flying all over the globe on a moments notice. You probably don't get woken up or interrupted for breaking crises in various countries.
I do have an idea of how safeguarding confidential information works. I've never had a security clearance and I chose not to work on an IT project in my beginning years that would have required one. But in that company there were lots of documents we classified at internal levels. And when I was in Pharma, I had some nice training about all the many ways a UNIX systems administrator might go jail if they did X, Y, or Z eve if the boss told you to do X,Y, or Z. So I get it. You don't have to work in government to have a clue. Depending on where you are in coporate land there's more than a few confidential docs and other classes that pass through your hands and you might label as such.
What some people forget, is if it isn't labeled as Confidential, Secret, etc. its not always obvious to the casual observer that it should be. I think, but do not know for certain, this is mostly the case the emails on Hillary's server fell into. I worked as a UNIX admin for a number of years being subject to doing on call work for more than three companies. The one that was global could be a royal bitch. I'm still carrying excess pounds from my on call from hell, where every time I got something done and went back to sleep, I got called & woken up for yet another problem. Almost couldn't see straight by the end of the week. So yeah, being woken up 6 to 7 times a night for more than several days in a row, I feel I have at least some insight as to how tough life might be as Sec of State or as President. Made programming long hours seem positively blissful.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,779
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Jul 8, 2016 22:03:35 GMT -5
Hillary is now denying the FBI's claim that she was careless. The soap opera continues. The soap opera continues because Congress and FBI dumbasses won't let it be. She should stop saying anything. The FBI can claim whatever it wants. Laws define what careless is, what the consequences are for certain kinds of carelessness.
Gah. Why are these people so hopelessly stupid? I deny claims people decide are true all the time. Mainly because I believe they are wrong. Why is that confusing?
ETA: Round one million and the post has inspired me to send some emails tomorrow to complain about the constant madness and cost. You'd think there was proof that classified info was used from the server and nowhere else and caused death & mayhem.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,779
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Jul 8, 2016 22:12:38 GMT -5
I think it remains true that she did not send any email that was marked classified. Nor that she forwarded any email that was marked classified.
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Jul 8, 2016 23:05:22 GMT -5
The economic policies of the 90's...sure. Like balancing budgets. The crash was solely on the policies of Greenspan and Bush beginning in 2001.
The stock market correction began in March of 2000. The trade agreement with China was signed in 2000. Bush wasn't even president at that time. The so-called balanced budget was achieved in part by funneling Social Security surpluses into the general fund. It didn't matter who was elected president, it still would have happened. Being a political independent, I don't play blame the other party game.
I just can't recall what "economic policies of the 90's" caused the "stock market correction in March 2000". The dot.bomb crash was simply an overreach of capitalists pursuing hi-tech opportunities using funds generated from earlier gains. It didn't pan out for all concerned. No economic policy had a damn thing to do with that.
No, the SS surpluses, already used by Reagan to disguise the tragic deficit spending in the 80's, did not impact the balancing budgets in the latter Clinton years. Those were due to the, ahem, economic policies of the 90's. Considering all the shrieking we have heard about government deficits, one would think a person such as yourself would be praising this period of Clinton fiscal sanity. Instead you are blame laying yet claim to be non partisan. The non partisans I know loved that. As far as non partisans go, you know, people like yourself, most of them are intelligent enough to know that the Greenspan/Bush easy money policies beginning in 2001, with numerous bones such as the Zero Down Payment Act and loosening of mortgage credit guidelines and easy access to sub-prime loans for the next 5-6 years, were what lead directly to the crash that began in 2007. As non partisan as you are it should be easy for you to embrace that reality. I'll wait here while you get around to it.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Jul 8, 2016 23:13:49 GMT -5
Colin Powel and Condelizza Rice used personal emails. No one cares about that any more than how many embassies were attacked and people killed in those attackes under Bush. There was no evidence she had intent to trade secrets or leak information. She cooperated with the process... Ie they have said there is zero evidence of cover up for all the speculation here. There is no evidence that her emails were hacked in any way. There are just so many more important things to me than this. It it does bode badly because just like her husband, if she is pres, we are going to be privy to constant investigations of every possible little thing anyone can think of.... I just love it, love it, love it, If someone had done,It's OK the next does it!!!! No, it was wrong allllllllll the way.
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Jul 8, 2016 23:19:53 GMT -5
You've had ~16 years to wail about it. Seems you are a bit late to the party.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,233
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 8, 2016 23:25:11 GMT -5
Look, here's what we know for sure. These are facts, not open to interpretation. I'd be interested to hear from Clinton supporters as to why they think these things aren't a big deal. 1. Clinton has lied about the e-mails since March 2015. She stated that no classified e-mails were sent, when we know now that they were. 2. Regardless of the issue of classified or unclassified, Hillary Clinton's lawyers deleted thousands of e-mails that were federal records. This was in direct violation of the freedom of information act. 3. Furthermore, doesn't the fact that Clinton set out to circumvent the freedom of information act from the outset bother anyone? She did this specifically to avoid public disclosure of her e-mails. Are Clinton supporters opposed to an open and honest government? the way you phrased the proposition, you will find few takers. i am not a Clinton supporter, therefore, you are not interested in my response?
|
|
grits
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 17, 2012 13:43:33 GMT -5
Posts: 3,185
|
Post by grits on Jul 9, 2016 4:13:13 GMT -5
The economic policies of the 90's...sure. Like balancing budgets. The crash was solely on the policies of Greenspan and Bush beginning in 2001.
The stock market correction began in March of 2000. The trade agreement with China was signed in 2000. Bush wasn't even president at that time. The so-called balanced budget was achieved in part by funneling Social Security surpluses into the general fund. It didn't matter who was elected president, it still would have happened. Being a political independent, I don't play blame the other party game.
I just can't recall what "economic policies of the 90's" caused the "stock market correction in March 2000". The dot.bomb crash was simply an overreach of capitalists pursuing hi-tech opportunities using funds generated from earlier gains. It didn't pan out for all concerned. No economic policy had a damn thing to do with that.
No, the SS surpluses, already used by Reagan to disguise the tragic deficit spending in the 80's, did not impact the balancing budgets in the latter Clinton years. Those were due to the, ahem, economic policies of the 90's. Considering all the shrieking we have heard about government deficits, one would think a person such as yourself would be praising this period of Clinton fiscal sanity. Instead you are blame laying yet claim to be non partisan. The non partisans I know loved that. As far as non partisans go, you know, people like yourself, most of them are intelligent enough to know that the Greenspan/Bush easy money policies beginning in 2001, with numerous bones such as the Zero Down Payment Act and loosening of mortgage credit guidelines and easy access to sub-prime loans for the next 5-6 years, were what lead directly to the crash that began in 2007. As non partisan as you are it should be easy for you to embrace that reality. I'll wait here while you get around to it.
The irresponsible economic policies of the 90's led to the stock market reaching dizzying heights. Alan Greenspan repeatedly commented on irrational exhuberance of investors driving the market to dizzying heights. The Federal Reserve could have prevented it but chose not too. Bill Clinton asked for the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act and the idiots in Congress gave it to him. The is what allowed depository banks to become investment banks. The out of control lending by banks, the corrupt mortgage policies, and the predatory lending all went out of control with that one simple repeal. The Glass-Steagall act had been passed in 1933 to prevent such practices. Reaching back to Reagan and his irresponsible behavior does not change what transpired during the 90's. Yes, Reagan era spending was out of control. Yes Social Security surpluses were wasted. It happened again in the 90's. If they had actually balanced the budget, and not used Social Security funds in the general treasury, we might not be at the spending levels we have today. Yes, I am a political independent but you are not. People who worship political parties, and politicians are like sports fans who worship their favorite team.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 6:59:19 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2016 7:13:48 GMT -5
Lmao... Clinton asked for the Gramm (Republican of Texas) Leach (R-Iowa) Bliley (R-Virginia) Act...
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,612
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jul 9, 2016 7:55:00 GMT -5
Colin Powel and Condelizza Rice used personal emails. No one cares about that any more than how many embassies were attacked and people killed in those attackes under Bush. There was no evidence she had intent to trade secrets or leak information. She cooperated with the process... Ie they have said there is zero evidence of cover up for all the speculation here. There is no evidence that her emails were hacked in any way. There are just so many more important things to me than this. It it does bode badly because just like her husband, if she is pres, we are going to be privy to constant investigations of every possible little thing anyone can think of.... I just love it, love it, love it, If someone had done,It's OK the next does it!!!! No, it was wrong allllllllll the way. If the republican-controlled congress had gone after Clinton while she was still SoS, that would be one thing. But Clinton was no longer SoS when the republican-controlled congress decided to go after her. So yes, it is fair to compare her treatment to Powell and Rice as all of them were no longer in office at the time of discovery.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,193
|
Post by tallguy on Jul 9, 2016 8:40:47 GMT -5
Lmao... Clinton asked for the Gramm (Republican of Texas) Leach (R-Iowa) Bliley (R-Virginia) Act... Yeah, he kind of blew his argument right there, didn't he?
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Jul 9, 2016 10:29:14 GMT -5
Yes, I am a political independent but you are not. People who worship political parties, and politicians are like sports fans who worship their favorite team.
Now if only grits could tell me what politicians or party I worship...
In the meantime I will be voting non R/D for potus for the 6th time this fall.
|
|