I 'left it out' because that's an advantage for Sanders over Obama. In 2008, if a delegate didn't like Hillary, they could choose from several candidates, this time around, they have one choice. Therefore, all democratic delegates that don't want to back Hillary can only vote for Sanders, which means he gets all such votes whereas Obama had to compete with several others to get the 'anti-Hillary' vote. Yet, despite that advantage, I just don't think Sanders will get the nomination.
All that plus Obama ran a ground game that election cycle that everyone since has tried to replicate.
For the Apple vs FBI thing - If the government wants to have access to a device, they get can get a warrant from a judge and work with Apple through the legal means. As far as an available back door, Apple is doing the right thing in standing up to them. This kind of thing is going to become more and more prevalent as time goes on. All hail our technology overlords. The more unnerving aspect is how many companies probably capitulated to the government, unbeknownst to the public. Never thought Tim Cook was much of an innovator, but the guy has balls to stand up for the right thing. I would have loved to see Steve Jobs' reaction.
What's the over/under that Hillary names Sanders as VP? That would win me, a staunch liberal, over quickly. The scariest thing about Trump is that his message is getting across to everyone like it or not. He's getting twice the coverage of Hillary. With that much attention it's not hard to find something in his "platform" to like. For example, his idea of granting Medicaid to vets and scrapping the nightmare of the VA. That makes sense to me, even if he had no fucking clue how to pull it off. That's the part the money is supposed to buy: media attention, and he's getting it for free by being an asshole. It's also the only thing the other candidates cannot replicate. This guy might not win (dear God no), but we are seeing the collective rage expressed via this guy who is essentially bulletproof and who is winning the "trending" game every ducking day.
Plus, he had a reality show on TV that a major network constantly plugged, so for the past few years, most of his media coverage was lighthearted and entertainment driven, instead of Hillary's coverage that was about policy or divisive issues.
I have so many hot takes. FBI vs Apple: The issue here is that if you open a backdoor to one iPhone, you do it to all of them. Maybe people are okay with living in a glass house where everything you do on your phone is visible to everybody, but I'm not. Say Apple does unlock this phone. Then law enforcement suddenly has precedent to get ANY phone unlocked. Now that black hat crackers know that such a tool exists, and NO security is completely unhackable, it would only be a matter of time before it gets leaked online. Once it's online, ALL iDevices are compromised. BLM: I'm not going to regurgitate everything I've posted on race relations, but there seems to be a consensus that black people should stop doing things to themselves and black people should be held to the same standard of behavior as the rest of us. All I have to say is that it's interesting that cops, the group of people that black people have a beef with, are the ones responsible for reporting black on black crime. Seems easy to point to those stats and say "Fix your shit, black people!". Why not ask instead "Why are cops, who have a history of racism, arresting more minorities than white people?" I would also ask why black people should hold themselves to the same behavioral standard as white people when they're still being discriminated against? If you were being asked to act like a white person by a white person, while receiving none of the benefits of being white, you'd probably either punch that white person in the face, or at the very least, tell them to fuck themselves. Elections: I think superdelegates are the biggest load of horseshit in politics. That is the only reason why Hillary's got such a commanding delegate lead. These superdelegates are people that are entrenched in the party. They are there to protect the party, damn what the people want. It's fucked up that Sanders has to run as a Democrat to even be considered as a candidate, but then he has to deal with them yanking the rug out from under him because he's threatening to upend the anointed nominee.
That was quick: Sandoval takes self out of US Supreme Court consideration http://www.fox5vegas.com/story/31305017/report-sandoval-being-vetted-for-supreme-court
It's about damn time. Missouri professor Melissa Click fired http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/02/25/melissa-click-fired-by-university-missouri.html?intcmp=hplnws
You do understand that this is the whole purpose of the primary, right? Take a look at the Republican party right now. It is unlikely they will get a candidate in the White House in the current incarnation of the party. Why? Because the candidates have to take such extreme positions to get the Rep. nomination that by the time they get to the general election, they get their ass kicked. Look at Romney and McCain. Both were somewhat moderate (by today's standards in the Republican party), but ended up getting their asses handed to them by an opposing candidate that was in power during the worst economic time since the Great Depression. That almost never happens, as Americans talk social but vote economic. The purpose of the primary isn't to have some great battle of ideas, it is to field the candidate that has the best chance to win for the party. Now you can bemoan the party system, and Americans do, but when push comes to shove, despite all the whining, almost everyone in Congress has an 'R' or a 'D' next to their name. Until Americans actually educate themselves on government then they will continue to pay for their ignorance. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Americans don't get the politicians they need, but they certainly get the ones they deserve.
Upstate N.Y. students who claimed bias attack face criminal charges http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/25/us/new-york-albany-assaults/index.html Previous story Black students at SUNY Albany say they were attacked on a bus http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/01/us/new-york-albany/
This Scalia thing is getting interesting. I'm not an Illuminati conspiracy guy or anything, but I don't think it's kosher to have a member of the Supreme Court being a member of a secret society to the extent we only know about it after he dies. Turns out he was at that ranch for some kind of meeting, and the owner of the ranch is a prominent DC lawyer. Makes you shudder to think what would happen if a case connected to the group came before the SCOTUS. It's a reach, but I still don't think questions like that should surround judges in that position. Isn't that what the vetting process is for?
Anybody pay attention to this Marco Muzzo case? Sickens me in the worst way. Asshole drives drunk, kills three little kids and their grandfather, maximum sentence 10-12 years. Let me be the first to tell you that isn't fucking happening. I'll be suprised if he gets a year. Maybe time served because he's just so fucking sad about it. Oh, and he's the heir to 1.5 billion dollars. To help my point: http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/the-real-reason-marco-muzzo-could-get-off-easy/ My crash was almost 15 years ago. The driver was drunk, killed my date and his best friend, and got six months house arrest. That's all. That's Canada. It's not right.
Culling to Conserve: A Hard Truth for Lion Conservation http://voices.nationalgeographic.co...h-for-lion-conservation/#.VtBcvRVuNrd.twitter Just to touch a bit on this again, albeit in a less-related fashion. Bolding is mine.
Awesome. We really need to see more of this: "WICHITA, Kan. -- A woman has been charged with providing guns to the man who killed three people and injured several others at a factory in Kansas. U.S. Attorney Barry Grissom said Friday that 28-year-old Sarah T. Hopkins is charged with one count of knowingly transferring a firearm to a convicted felon. An affidavit says the Newton woman gave Cedric Ford two guns: a Zastava Serbia, which is an AK-47-type semi-automatic rifle, and a Glock Model 22 40-caliber handgun. Prosecutors say Hopkins knew Ford wasn't allowed to have a firearm because he was a convicted felon." http://fox4kc.com/2016/02/26/kansas-woman-charged-with-providing-guns-to-hesston-shooter/ If convicted, Hopkins faces a maximum penalty of 10 years in federal prison and a fine up to $250,000.
Goddamn right throw her in prison. That's the type of cracking down on a gun crime that nobody can argue with. Do people really believe they're off the hook the second they hand a weapon over or somebody who requested it?
Truthfully, I would have no problem with charging her with 3 counts of murder and 13 counts of attempted murder. All this because she wanted to make her boyfriend happy? Fuck her.
Trump wants to change First Amendment to make it easier to sue the media. I'll just leave that there.
As someone who reads a shit load of news every day trying to figure out exactly what the real story is, I have no problem with that. Think about it: Someone, somewhere anonymously says "Revengeofthenerds kills and eats babies to prevent alien attacks." This is picked up on by major news outlets and now you have 37 news vans parked on your front lawn wanting to ask you about your peculiar baby eating habits. Along with that you also have all sorts of journalists now digging holes on your property to find evidence of your baby eating, and asking your employer about you to the point that they have to let you go because it's a disruption to their business. Should you have recourse against the journalist, who refuses to name their sources, or just suck it up and deal with being slandered?