Politics and stuff

[DRWebs]

Those Nasa shots from the 3rd to the 4th are just unreal, shitty situation

[dakshdar]

Something else I read that with 30 some odd states that have voted for the same party in the past 4 presidential elections Hillary only needs to win 29 more votes to clinch. wow.

All she needs is the democrat states to stay blue plus Florida is what I read. How does a Republican ever get elected with the odds against you like that

You stop sucking

A Republican gets elected when people get tired of the same old thing and think a change is good or when the Democrats field a very so-so candidate.

In fact, many times it feels like the election isn't picking who you want to be President, it's picking who you don't want to be President the least. Feels that way this year. I'm not so sure I really want Hillary as President, but I know for sure I don't want Trump as President.

[nick]

in 2016, why the fuck would u want to be president? The stress/the money (250k is good/yr but is it? you can make more privately). the grey hairs that come. Constantly scrutinized by people who think they know everything. ugh, fuck that.

[BFiVL]

in 2016, why the fuck would u want to be president? The stress/the money (250k is good/yr but is it? you can make more privately). the grey hairs that come. Constantly scrutinized by people who think they know everything. ugh, fuck that.

People want to be former presidents. The money after is where it's at.

[dakshdar]

They want power. Money is secondary.

[Crowes]

It seems that the states Sanders has won lately, there's only been a 5-10 gain in delegates so he essentially has to dominate in California and New Jersey to make up the 300 or so delegate difference between him and Hillary. Regardless of that, is it looking likely that neither candidate could meet the required number of delegates and it go to an electoral college?

Also, don't know much about Gary Johnson but apparently he's not too fond of Trump

The party nominating process doesn't use the electoral college. It will come down to the superdelegates on the democratic side at the convention.

[DRWebs]

Thanks for clearing that up, so in that case do they just wipe out the regular delegates and say okay super delegates your final vote must be in by a certain deadline? To my understanding they can still switch correct?

[nick]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodm ... 56196.html

Hacker gonna get Hillary in shit lol

[Crowes]

Thanks for clearing that up, so in that case do they just wipe out the regular delegates and say okay super delegates your final vote must be in by a certain deadline? To my understanding they can still switch correct?

All the delegates will vote but super delegates are unbound no matter how their state voted. So when the super delegates cast their vote they will put one of them over the required total they must have to receive the nomination. Before votes were even being cast by the people nearly all of them lined up behind Hillary.

[Seeitsaveit13]

youre closer in Iraq

Is it just a very dry winter? Usually don't see that type of thing at this time of year...

[DRWebs]

If the Super Delegates don't lock in their votes until the National Convention, why do we show their current status the entire primary season? Seems it would sway voters one way if they aren't paying much attention to the race... Or do you think it doesn't have an effect on voters minds at all?

[autiger730]

If the Super Delegates don't lock in their votes until the National Convention, why do we show their current status the entire primary season? Seems it would sway voters one way if they aren't paying much attention to the race... Or do you think it doesn't have an effect on voters minds at all?

I think that's the point. Why do you think tons of stories have come out saying Hillary has clinched it the day before/of the most important primaries? If you see that and don't know it's bullshit, are you more or less likely to stay home if she isn't your candidate?

[shel311]

So what just happened here?

The FBI director just crushed Hilary Clinton, talked at length about all kinds of evidence against her basically stating why she should be indicted...then just said, "hey, but ya know, we're not going to indict her...just cause"


Am I understanding it correctly?

[BFiVL]

So what just happened here?

The FBI director just crushed Hilary Clinton, talked at length about all kinds of evidence against her basically stating why she should be indicted...then just said, "hey, but ya know, we're not going to indict her...just cause"


Am I understanding it correctly?

What I got from it was she was really stupid (which we knew) for having emails on a personal server which is illegal. However it seems like she did not do so with illegal intent, she was honest and turned over all access to the investigators. No cover up by her or her people.

[shel311]

she was really stupid (which we knew) for having emails on a personal server which is illegal. However it seems like she did not do so with illegal intent

Sean Payton said he didn't know about the Bounty, and Goodell said that was no excuse!!!!



But seriously, it would be one thing if they lied to us and said she didn't do anything worthy of indictment. It just takes it to an entire new level to actually admit she did illegal shit, present all the evidence of the illegal stuff, then just for what seems like no good reason other than she's a presidential candidate, we'll just let it slide.

A quote from the statement by the FBI director:

To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.

[GeorgesGoons]

Dealing with classified information you are held to a higher standard where ignorance is not an excuse, at least that's what they told us when we signed our paperwork to deal with classified information when I was in the Army. She should have been charged. But we all know that wasn't happening! Nothing to see here, lets move on. Really hoping Gary Johnson gains some steam against these two asshats

[shel311]

Dealing with classified information you are held to a higher standard where ignorance is not an excuse, at least that's what they told us when we signed our paperwork to deal with classified information when I was in the Army. She should have been charged. But we all know that wasn't happening! Nothing to see here, lets move on. Really hoping Gary Johnson gains some steam against these two asshats

Yea, it's one of those where it's not in the least surprising, but it's the way he delivered it, it's just crazy.

How anyone could vote for Trump or Hilary, much less millions, is beyond me. Cue up my "never vote for a republican or democrat" spiel.

[dakshdar]

Some of it had to do with the fact that a huge majority of the emails she received on that server were improperly marked. This means the person that first sent them to her did not mark them with the right security level. Now, perhaps she should have known they should have been marked and reported that, but that isn't always obvious with sensitive information. I've worked with that kind of material before and you'd be surprised what counts as classified.

As an example (that I can give) you can have a completely unclassified email that divulges nothing but that is sent on or from a classified server. And, if that email happens to contain two words in it that when put side by side represent the name of a classified program, even if the words don't appear side by side in that particular email the email may be considered classified and may be required to be marked as such. Even more confusing is that an email can be sent with no classified information, and that information may be classified at a later date. Classification of material or data after the fact makes it hard to know whether anyone should have known at the time that the data was classified.

There is even information that we can view at work that is "classified" which remains classified for very little time because it ends up on the news two weeks later. Oddly, that doesn't change the fact that the information, when referred to at work, is still classified and must be marked as so, even though it was on CNN last night...

They stated there were ~30,000 emails released. What isn't clear is how many were incoming vs outgoing (hard to hold her responsible for receiving an incoming email that should have been marked in some way when the person sending it is ultimately responsible for that). Of the 30,000 they said ~2,000 were later deemed to be at a "confidential" level which is the lowest level of security and 65 were "secret". Of those 65, we again don't know if they were 65 that she or someone on her staff drafted and sent out or if some/many/all were received and not marked when received. And we don't know how many of them were considered classified at the time they were sent, or how many would only be considered classified now due to changes in material classification.

[GeorgesGoons]

Some of it had to do with the fact that a huge majority of the emails she received on that server were improperly marked. This means the person that first sent them to her did not mark them with the right security level. Now, perhaps she should have known they should have been marked and reported that, but that isn't always obvious with sensitive information. I've worked with that kind of material before and you'd be surprised what counts as classified.

It is pretty obvious if you have been "read on" for a security clearance. I was a Classification Manager in Hawaii when I was working with national level SIGINT. Just the mention of a country in an official manner could be classified as FOUO but if you add a city to that official email could bump up the classification to Confidential, and so on.

The FBI guy said she "should have known" in the position she held and that she was "extremely careless." This isn't someone I want with our nation's secrets when Americans lives could be at risk.

[GeorgesGoons]

The one thing that pissed me off the most about this is that General Patreus did less and was charged. I think this is politically motivated and just drives the wedge in even more that politicians are above the law of us ordinary citizens