USA Izbori

[Lord Protector]

http://time.com/4514350/david-duke-donald-trump-senate-louisiana/

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/donald-trump-wins-kkk-david-duke-leader-we-did-it-a7406966.html

 

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/305912-kkk-american-nazi-party-praise-trumps-hiring-of-bannon

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/11/14/politics/white-nationalists-on-bannon/

 

Jel vidis sad?

 

Podmetanja onih koji su izgubili izbore. David Duke se trpa nepozvan među Trampove pristalice. Dobro se zna šta mu je poručio Donaldov sin:

 

Eric Trump: David Duke 'deserves a bullet'

Eric Trump said on Thursday that former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke deserves "a bullet."

"Ross, it's disgusting and by the way, if I said exactly what you said, I'd get killed for it but I think I'll say it anyway," the Republican nominee's son said after host Ross Kaminsky of 630 KHOW Denver radio suggested Duke deserves a bullet to the head. "The guy does deserve a bullet. I mean, these aren't good people. These are horrible people. In fact, I commend my father. My father's the first Republican who's gone out and said, 'Listen, what's happened to the African-American community is horrible and I'm going to take care of it.'"

 

 

 

Što se tiče Benona, on je konzervativac kome je životni uzor Ronald Regan, nije ni nacista ni antisemita. Uostalom, jevrejske organizacije su se oglasile povodom ti lažnih optužbi:

 

 

 

Republican Jewish Coalition, Home Depot Founder Back Stephen K. Bannon

 

 

 

EXCLUSIVE – Alan Dershowitz Defends Steve Bannon: ‘Not Legitimate To Call Somebody An Anti-Semite Because You Disagree With Their Policies’

Edited November 17, 2016 by slow

[MNE]

ObiW zna za to ne brini, al i dalje tjera svoju :)

 

 

Pa budale su ti rasisti, nema drugog objašnjenja. Sve vreme navijaju za Trumpa ne shvatajući da su im Demokrate mnogo bliže po uverenjima. A tek kolike su budale većina crnaca i latinosa to da ne pričam. Nije bilo nikog tamo da im otvori oči i jednima i drugima. 

Trampa je glasalo 30% latinosa i 14% crnaca, sigurno ga ne bi glasalo toliko da je rasista.

 

 

 

Trece, Tramp je igovorio stvari koje su cist rasizam. Jednu od njih, za meksikance silovatelje smo ovde citirali. Druga je zabrana ulaska u zemlju muslimanima itd.

 

aman sve i da jeste meksikanci i muslimani nisu druga rasa već bijelci (uglavnom)

[Toni Sumaher]

Не, него си ти цитирао Чомског као одговор на конкретну ситуацију да нелегални имигранти крше закон и да због тога треба да сносе последице, а не да имају бенефиције.

 

Ama, ne da mi se da vise cepam dlaku nadesetoro, ko hoce da cita ima sve lepo na prethodnim stranama. 

 

Opcija Hillary je najvjerovatnije nudila WWIII koji bi se ubrzo i desio nakon najavljene NFZ. Baba je pokazala da nema sluha ni za neke najosnovnije stvari a kamoli za tako kompleksne, pa pogledaj samo od koga je izgubila na izborima.

 

Zato se druge strane 1 Bolton vodi svepomiriteljsku politiku sa najavom prekrajanja Sirije i Iraka, isticanjem Irana kao arhineprijatelja kojem se moraju pokazati zubi i najavom da se i Kurdima izadje u susret cime bi se demonstriralo upozerenje Teheranu i Ankari. 

 

Ako ovi neokonski magovi stvarno budu u situaciji da kreiraju spoljnu politiku, napravice jos veci cirkus nego sa postsadamovskim Irakom sa velikim sansama da zapale Bliski istok prema cemu ce ISIS epizoda delovati kao paljenje prskalica. Mozda je u neku ruku vlada u Bagdadu iranski puppet, ali...ko je za to odgovoran, ko je stavio tepih pred Solejmanija i Quds? Obama? Pa, nece biti. Odgovorni su Bolton i njegovi drugari iz vremena GWB. 

 

http://nypost.com/2016/11/13/trump-needs-to-reverse-the-iran-deal-and-assert-our-interests/

Edited November 17, 2016 by Toni Sumaher

[MancMellow]

ObiW zna za to ne brini, al i dalje tjera svoju :)

 

 

Trampa je glasalo 30% latinosa i 14% crnaca, sigurno ga ne bi glasalo toliko da je rasista.

 

 

aman sve i da jeste meksikanci i muslimani nisu druga rasa već bijelci (uglavnom)

Nisam rekao da je rasista, nego da 86% crnaca i 70 i kusur posto latino zna zasto nije glasalo za njega. Kao sto i neki drugi znaju zasto su ga podrzali. Alternativa je da ti bolje znas od njih i jednih i drugih sta im je u interesu i zasto

[Toni Sumaher]

Podmetanja onih koji su izgubili izbore. David Duke se trpa nepozvan među Trampove pristalice. Dobro se zna šta mu je poručio Donaldov sin:

 

 

Što se tiče Benona, on je konzervativac kome je životni uzor Ronald Regan, nije ni nacista ni antisemita. Uostalom, jevrejske organizacije su se oglasile povodom ti lažnih optužbi:

 

Oko Benona je direktna konfrontacija cionista i liberala medju americkim Jevrejima. Drugi su svakako brojniji i uticajniji u SAD. 

[Prospero]

Ama, ne da mi se da vise cepam dlaku nadesetoro, ko hoce da cita ima sve lepo na prethodnim stranama. 

 

 

Zato se druge strane 1 Bolton vodi svepomiriteljsku politiku sa najavom prekrajanja Sirije i Iraka, isticanjem Irana kao arhineprijatelja kojem se moraju pokazati zubi i najavom da se i Kurdima izadje u susret cime bi se demonstriralo upozerenje Teheranu i Ankari. 

 

Ako ovi neokonski magovi stvarno budu u situaciji da kreiraju spoljnu politiku, napravice jos veci cirkus nego sa postsadamovskim Irakom sa velikim sansama da zapale Bliski istok prema cemu ce ISIS epizoda delovati kao paljenje prskalica. Mozda je u neku ruku vlada u Bagdadu iranski puppet, ali...ko je za to odgovoran, ko je stavio tepih pred Solejmanija i Quds? Obama? Pa, nece biti. Odgovorni su Bolton i njegovi drugari iz vremena GWB. 

 

http://nypost.com/2016/11/13/trump-needs-to-reverse-the-iran-deal-and-assert-our-interests/

 

 

peacemakers piecemakers

[bigvlada]

Why people don’t vote, and what to do about it

 

U.S. voter turnout is low compared to other developed countries. Here are some reasons why

 

 BY BETHANY BROOKSHIRE 10:00AM, NOVEMBER 4, 2016

 

 

On November 8, millions of voters will turn out to decide whether Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump will be the next president of the United States. And millions of eligible voters will just stay home.

 

Voter turnout in the United States is incredibly low compared to other modern democracies. In the 2012 presidential election, 53.6 percent of the voting-age population turned out to vote. This puts the United States well behind countries such as Turkey (84.3 percent turnout in 2015) and Belgium (87.2 percent in 2014), where voting is compulsory. But the U.S. also lags behind other countries with voluntary voting, such as Sweden (82.6 percent turnout in 2014), France (71.6 percent in 2012) and many others. In fact, the U.S. ranks 31st out of 35 developed countries in voter turnout, according to a recent Pew Research Center study.

 

It’s a little surprising that Americans are such unenthusiastic voters because they are fairly interested in politics, notes Mert Moral, a political scientist at the State University of New York at Binghamton. “If you look at survey data you find more Americans are equally if not more engaged than their counterparts [in other countries],” he says. “They have bumper stickers, they talk about politics [and] they are interested in political topics at the local level.”

 

Why don’t people vote? Below are four well-studied reasons why people may not head to the polls on November 8, followed by four tactics to get more people to go to the ballot box.

 

Voter registration takes work.

In many countries, people are automatically registered to vote. Not so in the United States. “The U.S. system puts the burden on the voter,” says Barry Burden, a political scientist at the University of Wisconsin–Madison. A 2012 Pew Research Center study reported that 51 million eligible citizens aren’t registered to vote. Easier registration could bring that number down and, hopefully, boost the number of people who vote. In a 2013 study in the American Journal of Political Science, Burden and his colleagues showed that over the 2004 and 2008 presidential elections, allowing people to register to vote at the polls on Election Day increased voter turnout.

 

Lack of a college education — and all that comes with it.

The single biggest predictor of whether or not people will vote, Burden says, is education level, which has direct and indirect effects on voting. “People are more likely to vote if they have information about the candidates and the process of voting, higher levels of income and education, find themselves living and working in networks of other people who vote,” he says. “Other people who are disadvantaged in those ways are much less likely.”

 

Two parties may not be enough.

In a two-party system, people might not be able to find someone who represents their views. And if they don’t, Moral says, they might just stay home. “A third-party candidate can’t win an election here,” he says. “This makes people vote for major party candidates or they don’t turn out at all.”

 

People get burned out, and sometimes just don’t care.

There are some people who just don’t care about politics. Some people who don’t vote are people “in social groups [that don’t] really regard politics as an important issue,” explains Eyal Winter, an economist at the University of Leicester in England and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in Israel.  And strictly rationally, he notes, “it makes no sense to vote.” It’s very rare for a single vote to change the outcome of an election, and most cases are limited to small, local races. Most of the time, your personal vote just isn’t going to make a difference. Why bother?

 

And too many elections might make voters face burnout. “One of the things that makes the U.S. strange is that there [are] a lot of elections,” says Burden. “We ask voters to make a lot of decisions.” Getting out to the polls can be a hassle, and learning about every single issue takes time. “We have a complicated system and I think that produces fatigue.”

 

What works in getting people to the polls

No matter what the party, politicians and many citizens want to see their side turn out as much as possible. Facebook users plead with their friends. Politicians hire phone banks to call thousands of people in battleground states. Celebrities beg over YouTube. But four main methods seem to stand out.

 

Educate early and often, and make voting mandatory.

The messages people receive early in life have a strong impact on whether people vote, says Donald Green, a political scientist at Columbia University in New York City. It helps if parents and teachers let kids know “voting is important — it’s what makes you a functioning adult.” This message may come through in civics and government classes.

 

More education increases the likelihood of voter turnout. But one does not simply send everyone to college to boost voting. Another way to increase turnout is to make it required. Using data from 28 advanced countries, Aina Gallego, a political scientist at the Institute of Public Goods and Policies at the University of Barcelona in Spain, showed in a 2010 study that compulsory voting reduced inequalities in education and voter turnout — simply because everyone had to go do it.

 

Unfortunately, you can lead voters to the polls, but you can’t make them have an opinion on the candidates. Moral examined 18 European party systems and found that compulsory voting goes hand in hand with increased numbers of spoiled and invalid ballots — slashing through them, turning them in blank, or writing in a candidate like “Mickey Mouse.” Not voting may result in a fine, but it’s also costly to get informed on the issues, he says. The net result is that politically uninformed people may “go out to vote, they don’t know who to vote for and they spoil their ballot.” Moral published his results August 9 in Political Research Quarterly.

 

Peer pressure people to the polls.

A healthy dose of name-and-shame can have a big effect on Election Day. In a 2008 study in American Political Science Review, Green and his colleagues applied a little social pressure to voters. They sent 180,000 people in Michigan (where voting records are publicly available) a series of mailings before the August 2006 Republican primary for the state elections.

 

Simply asking people to vote resulted in a 1.8 percentage point increase in turnout. Asking people to vote and notifying them that they were being studied — and that their votes were a matter of public record — increased turnout by 2.5 percentage points.  But when the mailings also displayed the voter’s previous voting behavior to the voter and other people in their household, there was a 4.9 percentage point increase in voter turnout compared with people who didn’t get a mailing. If the voters were then also shown their neighbors’ voting records, there was an 8.1 percentage point bump in voter turnout.

 

But while shame may get out the vote, Green cautions that it probably also burns bridges. “I think it produces backlash,” he says, the most heavy-handed naming and shaming especially. In their study, Green and his colleagues noticed that people who received the most shame-heavy mailings also tended to call the number on the mailings — and demand to be left alone.

 

More positive peer pressure might prove effective without the dose of shame, Green notes. Get people to pledge that they’ll show up, and remind them that voting is a matter of public record. “Maybe the most effective is a close friend or coworker who says ‘let’s walk to the polls together,’” he says.

 

A little healthy competition never hurt.

They don’t call elections “races” for nothing. In a 2006 study looking at U.S. gubernatorial races from 1990 to 2005, Winter and his colleague Esteban Klor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem looked at differences between who was leading in the polls prior to elections and the voting results for those races. They found that when polling numbers are close, voter turnout increases, especially for the side with the slight majority in the poll. “It’s nicer to support your team when you’re expected to win,” Winter explains. Close races, while nail-biting for candidates and voters alike, might make people turn out in higher numbers.

 

But of course, if you want to have healthy competition, it’s best to have likeable candidates. When it comes to the upcoming presidential race, Burden says he would not be surprised if turnout is even lower than usual. “That’s where things are pushing,” he says. “We know surveys have shown these two nominees have lower favorability ratings than any two other nominees in the history of polling.”  Those low favorability ratings may keep people away on Election Day.

 

The personal touch is best.

Hundreds of nonpartisan, bipartisan and partisan studies have been done on how to win campaigns and influence people, looking at everything from the cost per vote of robo-calls to how to craft the perfect email subject line. But the most effective message is face-to-face and one-on-one, says Green, who, along with colleague Alan Gerber of Yale University, wrote the book, Get out the Vote: How to increase voter turnout.

 

For politicians, this means getting out and canvassing the streets. But maybe someone just wants to get their sister, friend or spouse to vote. In that case, he says “the most effective message would be to express your own interest in the election, your own desire to vote and your own desire to see them vote.” Getting them to vote the way you want them to, however? That’s a different matter.

 

https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/scicurious/why-people-dont-vote-and-what-do-about-it

[iDemo]

 

Why people don’t vote, and what to do about it

 

U.S. voter turnout is low compared to other developed countries. Here are some reasons why

 

 BY BETHANY BROOKSHIRE 10:00AM, NOVEMBER 4, 2016

 

 

On November 8, millions of voters will turn out to decide whether Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump will be the next president of the United States. And millions of eligible voters will just stay home.

 

Voter turnout in the United States is incredibly low compared to other modern democracies. 

 

https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/scicurious/why-people-dont-vote-and-what-do-about-it

 

Kazu - na google-u otprilike 58% ovaj put.

 

Nisam rekao da je rasista, nego da 86% crnaca i 70 i kusur posto latino zna zasto nije glasalo za njega. Kao sto i neki drugi znaju zasto su ga podrzali. Alternativa je da ti bolje znas od njih i jednih i drugih sta im je u interesu i zasto

Ovo je greshka - osim, naravno, ako nije nameran faul. Jery - ono - matematika se ne slaze - 58% izlaznost - znaci (u proseku, moja ograda) bar 40ak posto glasaca nije marilo da li je ili nije ovaj rasista a baba lakoma na pare - nisu izasli, Od izaslih™ mozemo dalje da se cenkamo - k'o i deca u vishim razredima srednje na debatnom klubu sta je bilo a sta nije bilo... Ono sto se p®ovlaci godinama - od sedamdesetih - je da je neizlaznost 40ak% - ljudi iskusno znaju ono sto cemo mi da vidimo i ovog puta kao i proslu put sa yes I can polucrnim nobelovcem - da nema znacaja ko je na vlasti - jer ono - vrana vrani oci ne vadi... Al' dobro - ono - ko nije u mladosti bio komunista i to... 

[iDemo]

Imao je rahmetli salonski fashista™ u svoje vreme jak clanak na tu temu = neke godine kad je izlaznost bila ispod 50%... 

[Meazza]

Meni je najveći i najnegativniji utisak jako loše i agresivno usmerenje prema Iranu

 

Slazem se, to je svakako veoma, veoma lose.

[Eraserhead]

Slazem se, to je svakako veoma, veoma lose.

 

Razlog ovom iscudjavanju je sto ste 50% naivni a 50% nemate pojma. Tramp je jako blizak sa Bibijem i ta bliskost ce imati uticaja na njegovu spoljnu politiku na bliskom istoku. Zapravo Tramp je mnogo vise kontinuitet tradicionalne Americke spoljne politike nego sto je to Obama bio. Bush je bio super s Putinom i u isto vreme je napravio haos u Iraku. Obama je taj ko je zahladnio odnose i sa Izraelom i sa Saudima, napravio dogovor sa Iranom, otvorio odnose sa Kubom, imao nula intervencija za 8 godina itd. Sad cete dobiti staru dobru spoljnu politiku baziranu cisto na interesima. Taman kako i zasluzujete.

Edited November 17, 2016 by Eraserhead

[gone fishing]

kako 0 intervencija pa obama je zapalio celu severnu afriku i bliski istok, buš je stajao pred ruskim vratima, obama je ušao u njihovo dvorište i rešio da tu napravi svoje igralište, uz časnu pionirsku reč da sutra neće ući i u samu kuću ^_^ 

- taj poziv ukraini da se približi eu i nato paktu je i doveo do ponovnog otvaranja hladnog rata    

[Eraserhead]

kako 0 intervencija pa obama je zapalio celu severnu afriku i bliski istok, buš je stajao pred ruskim vratima, obama je ušao u njihovo dvorište i rešio da tu napravi svoje igralište, uz časnu pionirsku reč da sutra neće ući i u samu kuću ^_^

- taj poziv ukraini da se približi eu i nato paktu je i doveo do ponovnog otvaranja hladnog rata    

 

Hteo je Ukrajinsku naftu kao i svaku reptilijanac.

[Lord Protector]

McCain to Trump: Don't You Dare Make Peace with Russia!

 

written by daniel mcadams

 

 

Sit down. This is going to shock you. (Not). We reported yesterday on the telephone call between US president-elect Trump and Russian president Putin, where the current and future presidents discussed the need to set aside differences and look to more constructive future relations. With serious observers of this past year's increasing tensions between US and Russia openly worrying about a nuclear war breaking out, with some 300,000 NATO troops placed on Russia's border, with sanctions hurting average businesspersons on both sides, a normal person might look at the slight thaw in Cold War 2.0 as an early positive indicator of the end of the Obama Era.

 

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) begs to differ. 

 

In a blistering statement he released today responding to the Trump/Putin telephone call, Sen. McCain condemned any efforts by President-elect Trump to find common ground with Putin. 

 

Any claim by Putin that he wants to improve relations with the US must be vigorously opposed, writes McCain. He explains:

We should place as much faith in such statements as any other made by a former KGB agent who has plunged his country into tyranny, murdered his political opponents, invaded his neighbors, threatened America’s allies, and attempted to undermine America’s elections.

 

Interesting that Republican McCain has taken to using the Hillary Clinton campaign line (the one that lost her the election) that somehow the Russians were manipulating the US electoral process. The claim was never backed up by facts and Hillary's claim that some 17 US intelligence agencies agreed with her was shown to be a dangerous and foolish lie.

 

Why is Putin not to be trusted, according to McCain?

Vladimir Putin has rejoined Bashar Assad in his barbaric war against the Syrian people with the resumption of large-scale Russian air and missile strikes in Idlib and Homs. Another brutal assault on the city of Aleppo could soon follow.

 

 

What McCain doesn't say is that unlike US troops in Syria, the Russians are invited by the Syrian government and operate according to international law. Oh yes, and they are also fighting al-Qaeda and ISIS, which has sought to overthrow Assad for the past five years.

 

Maybe McCain is just really sensitive after meeting with al-Qaeda and ISIS in Syria?

 

As rumors swirl from Washington about neocons sniffing out top jobs in the incoming administration, it would serve president-elect Trump well to reflect on he true nature of the neocon beast...

Copyright © 2016 by RonPaul Institute.

 

Edited November 17, 2016 by slow

[gone fishing]

^^ kao odskočnu dasku za neku buduću invaziju ili u defanzivne svrhe da tamo instalira raketni štit, zapitajte se zašto eu ne samo da nikada nije poslala poziv rusiji da uđe u eu, već to od prve odbacuju kao nemoguće, čak i kada putin nije bio u kremlju

- zar bi bilo loše zajedničko tržište od dublina do vladivostoka