Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I think I said before, but I will say it again. Trump is great, because he is going to destroy the Republican Party as we now know it. If he gets the nomination, lots of Republicans won't vote for him. If he doesn't, his supporters will be pissed that it was stolen from him and will walk. He has exposed fundamental rifts that the party had successfully papered over. And he won't win. He cannot possibly turn out enough whites to make up for the blacks and Hispanics who will turn out to vote against him, and he is going to damage the GOP with many voters for a long, long time.

Look, I'm with you. But anything can happen before the election. If there is a large terrorist attack the week before the election, there would be a real danger of us suffering through 4 years of President Trump. Jesus. My stomach just churned at the thought.

TM

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

I find it difficult to believe that six women have wanted to have sex with Ted Cruz, but I suppose everyone has a fetish.

Without any doubt this is the greatest sentence that I will read all day. I might as well go home and play Halo for the next 14 hours.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

What is wrong with a cashless system? Now you're just trying to get me riled up.

Seriously? Are you fucking nuts?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

I find it difficult to believe that six women have wanted to have sex with Ted Cruz, but I suppose everyone has a fetish.

why do you see choice? I don't want to vote for Hilary but it's starting to look like I might have to.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

I'm really not sure why people think Hillary's foreign policy will deviate that much from Obama's. She had a major influence on his, after all, and Bill's was not all that different.

Maybe she's marginally more likely to bomb someplace than Barack, but she's not going to bring us another Iraq war.

http://www.salon.com/2015/09/10/what...as_a_war_hawk/

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

In twenty seconds on Google -- no, less than that, I can find a page with the columns Summers has written on the FT recently. Don't be an idiot. Whoops! Too late. (See? You got me riled.)

I meant Summers' most recent influential policy suggestion. But thank you for making my point: This man never never stops inflicting his views on the world. Which is, of course, his right. Hopefully, as typically happens with saturation, policymakers will grow fatigued and he'll fade into the pantheon of endless chattering annoyances, with Newt, Norquist, Kristol, Krugman, Lindsey Graham, Tom Friedman, etc.

These people make some decent points, but the best of those points are all known already, and are made better by fresher voices. These people need to shut the fuck up and go away. They should take a page from Volcker. Fade into the woodwork and only speak when asked, or when a dire situation in need of a true expert viewpoint is needed.

And speaking of these stale voices... Dear Mitt Romney -- go away forever. You are correct, Trump is loathed. However, you are loathed more. This seems impossible, I know. But somehow, it's true. The nation would rather elect a dishonest career politician or a buffoonish real estate developer than you. You probably don't understand this, most likely because you're a freak with not even the slightest tether to normal America, but you are "charisma anti-matter." The term "stuffed shirt" barely describes your indefatigable vacancy. You wouldn't have a drink with anyone because you can't, but even if you could, no one alive would choose to have one with you. You suck, Mitt. And if you go to the GOP convention and run your mouth off, unlike all the others, you will deserve the tooth-scattering beating you're likely to get from the Trumpkins in the hotel lobby. ...One can only hope it will prevent you from ever appearing publicly again, but this is probably unrealistic. You can't help thinking you deserved to win in 2012. And you couldn't be more wrong. Outside a small cabal of yes men in your campaign, the entirety of the nation understood from before the first vote was cast, Obama was going to beat you like a pinata.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Seriously? Are you fucking nuts?

FWIW, that was one of the funniest things I read all day yesterday.

[Not Bob]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Look, I'm with you. But anything can happen before the election. If there is a large terrorist attack the week before the election, there would be a real danger of us suffering through 4 years of President Trump. Jesus. My stomach just churned at the thought.

TM

Exactly. I'd prefer it if he destroyed the GOP be Not Getting the nomination at a contested conversation. Or even a Not Contested convention. The risk is just too great.

[Not Bob]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Seriously? Are you fucking nuts?

Oh, sure, amigo, to the typical minivan driving, cautiously reliable Ernest out there, plastic is soooo convenient and quick. Well, fine. Heck, when I need to put some petrol in the Deutschmobile, I'll let Hayden's jackboots know that I paid Big Ed's Fina station $47.50 for some high octane, a Cherry Coke Slushy, and a Slim Jim.

But to cats like me and Sebby, swinging free and easy in our Hickey Freeman suits while surrendering to the soft alcoholism that is our genetic lot in life (thanks, Great-Grandpa Seamus, you spud-digging evil bastard!) by swilling Woodford at the Brigham Young Atrium Downtown Omaha with a few divorcees after yet another meaningless corp rep deposition ... uh, where was I? Oh. Yes, Comrade Slothrop, to cats like us, cash is king sometimes.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

Without any doubt this is the greatest sentence that I will read all day. I might as well go home and play Halo for the next 14 hours.

This day is awesome. http://gawker.com/a-trump-supporter-...lee-1767089421

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

This day is awesome. http://gawker.com/a-trump-supporter-...lee-1767089421

I doubt this is true, but I hope somehow it is. If Cruz were knocked out, he'd give his delegates to Kasich. Rubio would then do the same. Kasich would get the nomination and we'd have a sane person sunning against a sane person. Imagine fucking that!

Of course, this all assumes Comey doesn't resign. Yep. That's a risk. Hillary will not be indicted, but there is talk Comey is fuming and may resign if she's not indicted. This sort of scandal, along with a still technically viable and resilient Sanders campaign could leave us with Bernie v. Kasich. Still, sane v. sane.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Not Bob

Oh, sure, amigo, to the typical minivan driving, cautiously reliable Ernest out there, plastic is soooo convenient and quick. Well, fine. Heck, when I need to put some petrol in the Deutschmobile, I'll let Hayden's jackboots know that I paid Big Ed's Fina station $47.50 for some high octane, a Cherry Coke Slushy, and a Slim Jim.

But to cats like me and Sebby, swinging free and easy in our Hickey Freeman suits while surrendering to the soft alcoholism that is our genetic lot in life (thanks, Great-Grandpa Seamus, you spud-digging evil bastard!) by swilling Woodford at the Brigham Young Atrium Downtown Omaha with a few divorcees after yet another meaningless corp rep deposition ... uh, where was I? Oh. Yes, Comrade Slothrop, to cats like us, cash is king sometimes.

It's the simplest logic. Anyone wishing to erode your privacy or further monitor you, in even the smallest fashion, is taking something significant from you, which makes him an enemy (or at least adverse to your interests). The best advantage you have with any enemy or person acting adversely toward you is what he doesn't know about you. We all rarely use cash, but in what circumstance is there ever any benefit to conceding a possible advantage? You never know when you might need it, or benefit from it. Options = Strength. Giving them away is illogical.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I doubt this is true, but I hope somehow it is. If Cruz were knocked out, he'd give his delegates to Kasich. Rubio would then do the same. Kasich would get the nomination and we'd have a sane person sunning against a sane person. Imagine fucking that!

Of course, this all assumes Comey doesn't resign. Yep. That's a risk. Hillary will not be indicted, but there is talk Comey is fuming and may resign if she's not indicted. This sort of scandal, along with a still technically viable and resilient Sanders campaign could leave us with Bernie v. Kasich. Still, sane v. sane.

Kasich is only sane in relative terms in that party, but yeah. Delegates for Cruz+Rubio+Kasich would lead Trump 777-754. But I'm not sure the two drop outs can bind their delegates to Kasich (don't know) and not sure that Trump couldn't overcome that lead in the remaining primaries, where he would likely pummel Kasich.

Also: the email thing is a non-scandal. As usual.

But it did get me reading this, which is sort of fun. Let's look at some bits:

Ken Cuccinelli, the former attorney general of Virginia, knows the laws regarding classified information firsthand. ...He says Clinton’s actions in the e-mail scandal clearly satisfy all five requirements necessary to sustain charges of mishandling classified material

Oh really? Well, if Cucc, who is clearly an unbiased expert commentator says so...

Clinton obtained and created “documents and materials containing classified information” through her work at the State Department.

Or, obtained materials that were not marked as such and only became deemed to be years later as they were reviewed for release amidst controversy.

Clinton “knowingly removed such documents or materials.” Cuccinelli points out that she actually committed this crime on a significant scale three separate times: First, by setting up her e-mail system to route messages to and through her unsecured server, then by moving the server to Platte River Networks, a private company, in June of 2013, and then by transferring the server’s contents to her private lawyers in 2014.

It's pretty hard to "knowingly" remove classified materials that are not yet classified, which none of these were as of the time of any of those actions.

ETA: Okay, I moved through this too fast. So, Cucc, that first time, that can't be "knowing" because there aren't yet any materials, much less classified ones. I'm not expert in this area of law, but I'm pretty confident that "knowing" does not mean having perfect foresight of the future. The second and third, what I said before.

[Not Bob]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

It's the simplest logic. Anyone wishing to erode your privacy or further monitor you, in even the smallest fashion, is taking something significant from you, which makes him an enemy (or at least adverse to your interests). The best advantage you have with any enemy or person acting adversely toward you is what he doesn't know about you. We all rarely use cash, but in what circumstance is there ever any benefit to conceding a possible advantage? You never know when you might need it, or benefit from it. Options = Strength. Giving them away is illogical.

Despite my riff, I actually agree with you that getting rid of cash is a ridiculously bad idea. Although I admit to a little paranoia, my major reason is that it would just lead to the poor being screwed even more than they are now. I'm too lazy to google, but some scummy employers are already paying their workers with prepaid debit cards that - shocker! - charge the employees a fee that in part - shocker redux! - gets paid to the employer. And most banks have fees and costs that disproportionately hit the poor. (I'm looking at you, BoA, and the way you game your overdraft policies to bounce checks that don't need to be bounced in order to create a profit center.) The unbanked will be even further screwed in the Brave New Cashless World.

To the ramparts!

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Kasich would get the nomination and we'd have a sane person sunning against a sane person.

Relatively speaking.

TM