Vote for President

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Vote for President

  • Hillary Clinton

    Votes: 150 52.1%
  • Donald Trump

    Votes: 138 47.9%

  • Total voters
    288
Status
Not open for further replies.
The problem is Trump is not really a republican. Show me a fiscally conservative, small-government but socially tolerant (i could care less about gay marriage, abortion etc) candidate and I'd vote for them in a heartbeat.

Hate speech, arrogant ridiculous statements, lack of thought from Trump makes me vote 3rd party or hold my nose and vote for Clinton.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

He doesn't have "hate speech". That is simply an exaggerated, silly argument perpetuated by media pundits whose votes will be going to Hillary.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Listen, I am not your average brainwashed Joe Sixpack. I don't belong to the left or the right; I belong to the center, like many other people who call themselves independents in this country. There is stuff I agree with the Republicans about, and there is stuff I agree with the Democrats about. My beliefs and votes tend to parallel libertarian values, based on social and economic freedoms, so I actually agree with Republicans more frequently.

I am just not a big enough jerk to be able to overlook major social issues and character flaws for the sake of lower taxes or other economic promises. I just can't be bought like that. I will be doing what my conscience says is best for the country, despite the fact that Democrats in the White House tend to destroy the medical system more every time.

P.S. @doctalaughs said it so much better, in the previous post.

You can't overlook social flaws like corruption, bribery, cronyism, and in general having zero ethics that bind you to being a good human being? There is enough data and literature out there about Clinton corruption that you could fill your house to the brim. Take your pick of decade, topic, location, or whatever category you want.

I would just encourage you to read both sides of Trump. He has many people out there who will give you a different narrative than pompous Hillary voters do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I love the left speaking about tolerance. The same side that has hate groups calling for the open assassination of cops (ex: "pigs in a blanket, fry like bacon", "let's burn this place down", "what do we want? Dead cops! When do we want it? Now!") and has seen widespread violence against law enforcement with their publicity, unlawfully obstructs roads and interstates, stalks and assaults Trump supporters outside of rallies and sends agitators inside, burns the American flag, and in general has zero respect for the laws and values of this country.

And that is on top of the Democratic Party throughout their whole history being a party of unbridled self-victimization that continuously resulted in oppression and violence towards their adversaries. See women's suffrage, the Civil War, and the Civil Rights Movement, and the intolerant left of today.

But yes, it's the Republican nominee who is the problem. Sure, bud.
I'm not sure what planet you live on...

But keep telling yourself that Trump and company is not the party of xenophobia, racism, homophobia, etc.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
You can't overlook social flaws like corruption, bribery, cronyism, and in general having zero ethics that bind you to being a good human being? There is enough data and literature out there about Clinton corruption that you could fill your house to the brim. Take your pick of decade, topic, location, or whatever category you want.

I would just encourage you to read both sides of Trump. He has many people out there who will give you a different narrative than pompous Hillary voters do.

I'm no liberal and have formed my own opinion of Trump by reading both sides. I agree he is probably not an outright racist as the liberal media makes him out to be. I actually agree with some of his positions (negotiating better trade deals with china, making some nato nations pay more for their own defense etc, in principle making illegal immigration more difficult although not his methods, lower taxes etc). However there is no doubt in my mind he puts little thought into what he says, that he will change positions quickly to get elected and most of all that he's an arrogant narcissistic jerk.

Clinton has her own issues and if we had 10 choices she'd likely be my #9 pick but have you ever considered that everything the conservative talk shows say is also not 100% true?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile
 
I'm no liberal and have formed my own opinion of Trump by reading both sides. I agree he is probably not an outright racist as the liberal media makes him out to be. I actually agree with some of his positions (negotiating better trade deals with china, making some nato nations pay more for their own defense etc, in principle making illegal immigration more difficult although not his methods, lower taxes etc). However there is no doubt in my mind he puts little thought into what he says, that he will change positions quickly to get elected and most of all that he's an arrogant narcissistic jerk.

Clinton has her own issues and if we had 10 choices she'd likely be my #9 pick but have you ever considered that everything the conservative talk shows say is also not 100% true?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Absolutely. I read every bit I can. I became convinced early on that he was not a seasoned politician and doesn't have a well-ingrained filter that most politicians have, but also doesn't necessarily make them any different just because they have a mechanism to pull the wool over people's eyes better.

I think Trump is a decisive, bold decision-maker and a great manager of talent, and he has shown that in his business ventures. Even in his bankruptcy proceedings within his conglomerate he structured them advantageously for him and his company. The average S&P 500 Corporation has a 13 year lifespan. He has run his private conglomerate for almost 4 decades. That is very impressive.

He is not wreckless and temperamental like they make him out to be. He wouldn't have survived one year in NY real estate if he was.
 
He went bankrupt four times. Four! That's not the mark of a great manager. That's the mark of a person who lacks judgment and prudence. That's not the person who I want with his finger on the button. And while the average lifespan of an S&P 500 company is 15 years, those are public companies which are much bigger than the Trump organization (the smallest is like $7.5B in market cap), and play by completely different rules than a private company.

And the fact that he refuses to publish his tax returns, on top of a 75% lying rate, makes me believe that he's not as rich and successful as he claims. He's not a great anything, except salesman, and that's because he lies a lot. It's like appreciating a used car salesman for telling you lies that you want to hear, instead of true facts about the junk he's trying to sell you. It's just incredible that people would even consider voting for somebody who obviously has the conscience of a psychopath. This on top of everything else already mentioned.

I tend not to judge people based on their political opinions, especially when voting against people like Clinton. But there is a huge difference between knowingly voting for the lesser of two evils and being so friggin stupid as to believe most of what Trump says. His electorate has convinced me once again that "two things are infinite, the Universe and human stupidity, and I am not sure about the former" (Einstein). There is a reason he loves poorly educated people.

I am just going to leave this conversation again, because it pisses me off, and I don't want to insult people. I just can't take so much stupid. Common sense is not common.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
The guy can't even say a full sentence without mentioning himself or deamonizing another person. Every time somebody ask for details in regards to his plans, he changes the conversation. All you have to do is read a transcript of his interviews to understand how unstable he is mentally.

He is strictly about himself and his brand and could give a rats ass about America. The guy is not only incapable but extremely dangerous.

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/05/tru...-theories-the-republican-leader-has-promoted/
 
Last edited:
He is not wreckless and temperamental like they make him out to be. He wouldn't have survived one year in NY real estate if he was.

He has said that he makes decisions mostly with his gut in lieu of seriously studying or reading about an issue, or consulting experts in the field. That is essentially the definition of wreckless and temperamental.
 
He has said that he makes decisions mostly with his gut in lieu of seriously studying or reading about an issue, or consulting experts in the field. That is essentially the definition of wreckless and temperamental.

That's taken a little out of context. He was essentially saying that he takes responsibility as the final decision-maker and will do what he thinks is right. He has advisors out the wazoo in his business and always had. Again- wreckless and temperamental don't allow you to survive in private real estate for 40 years. It is a completely false narrative.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
That's taken a little out of context. He was essentially saying that he takes responsibility as the final decision-maker and will do what he thinks is right. He has advisors out the wazoo in his business and always had. Again- wreckless and temperamental don't allow you to survive in private real estate for 40 years. It is a completely false narrative.

Whatever everyones opinion is here, can we all please stop spelling reckless with a W?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 users
That's taken a little out of context. He was essentially saying that he takes responsibility as the final decision-maker and will do what he thinks is right. He has advisors out the wazoo in his business and always had. Again- wreckless and temperamental don't allow you to survive in private real estate for 40 years. It is a completely false narrative.

The problem with your comment is when they are not taken out of context. Regarding Brexit, Trump (clearly not in the foreign policy realm) said about hardly talking to his foreign policy advisers "I've been in touch with them, but there's nothing to talk about. They're advisers, they're like everybody else. You know, they probably know less. Every one of these advisers" Brexit was the biggest international news of the day of his Make Turnberry Great Again (yes, his hats said that. Short sighted much?) speech and there's "nothing to talk about."

Again, let me just put this here: "But my primary consultant is myself." You and I have a different interpretation of this quote. But I stand by that hints that he doesn't listen to others well. Cause if he did, he probably make a few less speaking gaffs, not talk over/interrupt his VP pick in interviews, nor play "you can't always get what you want" in the RNC.

Or it's all out of context. Kinda like Pence can vote for the Iraq war (cause he can make a mistake) but HRC can't make a mistake. Yup, from the same interview where he kept talking over Pence. But I'm sure that mispeak is out of context.
 
Side-note--why are we electing septuagenarians? Cognitive speed and physical health are not the hallmarks of this age group. I am genuinely concerned both Clinton and Trump may be experiencing early-onset dementia which would explain a great deal about their behavior.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Side-note--why are we electing septuagenarians? Cognitive speed and physical health are not the hallmarks of this age group. I am genuinely concerned both Clinton and Trump may be experiencing early-onset dementia which would explain a great deal about their behavior.

Wasn't that an argument to not voting for McCain when he ran? Very interesting that no big media has harped on it this this time around.
 
The problem is Trump is not really a republican. Show me a fiscally conservative, small-government but socially tolerant (i could care less about gay marriage, abortion etc) candidate and I'd vote for them in a heartbeat.

Hate speech, arrogant ridiculous statements, lack of thought from Trump makes me vote 3rd party or hold my nose and vote for Clinton.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

You mean Gary Johnson?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I know it's been brought up before, but the parallel to "Idiocracy" is amazing.

I'm not sure what's going to happen in the debates, but it will be very interesting seeing one of the most knowledgable, experienced officials we currently have going against a guy that hasn't read a book in 20 years and refuses to learn/study. I know the people who ignore his stupidity/lying won't be moved, but I've gotta think it will effect some undecideds.
 
That's taken a little out of context. He was essentially saying that he takes responsibility as the final decision-maker and will do what he thinks is right. He has advisors out the wazoo in his business and always had. Again- wreckless and temperamental don't allow you to survive in private real estate for 40 years. It is a completely false narrative.




Kind of like allowing Japan and Korea to get nukes, kinda like saying that we will not defend the Baltic from the Russians, kinda like saying he will order us forces to kill the families of terrorists? Really?
 
Kind of like allowing Japan and Korea to get nukes, kinda like saying that we will not defend the Baltic from the Russians, kinda like saying he will order us forces to kill the families of terrorists? Really?

Again, taken out of context.

The context was a conversation about how we supplement Japanese defense with our own taxpayers' money and how we lose money because of it. That is silly in this day and age on a lot of levels, number one being a lame duck administration that doesn't use this geographic location as a tactical advantage as China continues to make gains at will in the South China Sea, and a post-WW2 Japan that still doesn't even have a dang military.

By the way, Biden suggested the other day that if the US didn't take action against N Korea that Japan and S. Korea could get nukes "overnight." No one said anything. And on top of that, it was basically a veiled threat to the Chinese President Xi! I love double standards.
 
Last edited:
The average S&P 500 Corporation has a 13 year lifespan. He has run his private conglomerate for almost 4 decades. That is very impressive.

He is not wreckless and temperamental like they make him out to be. He wouldn't have survived one year in NY real estate if he was.

This is like that old ****ty CRNA we all know talking about how good they are because they've been doing anesthesia for 40 years. Yeah, well, hate to break it to you, but just because you've been doing it for 40 years doesn't mean you've been doing it well for 40 years.

I can only see 2 reasons for not wanting to release his tax returns. 1) It shows he's not as successful as he's claimed and one of his major selling points (business acumen) is weakened. 2) It shows he pays some absurdly low tax rate, running the risk of pissing off the poor, angry, uneducated masses that form the backbone of his voting bloc.
 
This is like that old ****ty CRNA we all know talking about how good they are because they've been doing anesthesia for 40 years. Yeah, well, hate to break it to you, but just because you've been doing it for 40 years doesn't mean you've been doing it well for 40 years.

I can only see 2 reasons for not wanting to release his tax returns. 1) It shows he's not as successful as he's claimed and one of his major selling points (business acumen) is weakened. 2) It shows he pays some absurdly low tax rate, running the risk of pissing off the poor, angry, uneducated masses that form the backbone of his voting bloc.

Haha. Sure. Yeah, he is a billionaire and worldwide name in one of the most cutthroat industries. But he just survived for 4 decades by accident. Your lack of logical, cohesive, evidence-based thinking is more cRNA-ish than anything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
By the way, Biden suggested the other day that if the US didn't take action against N Korea that Japan and S. Korea could get nukes "overnight." No one said anything. And on top of that, it was basically a veiled threat to the Chinese President Xi! I love double standards.
To the other people reading this guy's Trump defenses: I think you already know that his arguments about "double standards" are lacking in including the details that clearly make them NOT double standards. A quick read about the details of each of these stories clears things up pretty easily.
 
Haha. Sure. Yeah, he is a billionaire and worldwide name in one of the most cutthroat industries. But he just survived for 4 decades by accident. Your lack of logical, cohesive, evidence-based thinking is more cRNA-ish than anything.

The Kardashians could make a case and point in your argument (except for the longevity, but I'm sure they will be doing fine in 20-30 years from now).

It doesn't take much talent or skill to be rich and it doesn't hurt to have wealthy parents.
 
The Kardashians could make a case and point in your argument (except for the longevity, but I'm sure they will be doing fine in 20-30 years from now).

It doesn't take much talent or skill to be rich and it doesn't hurt to have wealthy parents.

There is hardly any similarity between the Kardashians and Trump and I am slightly insulted that you expect me to buy that ridiculous analogy. They're both rich? Is that what is the common theme there? Another silly comparison, data point, and overall message.
 
To the other people reading this guy's Trump defenses: I think you already know that his arguments about "double standards" are lacking in including the details that clearly make them NOT double standards. A quick read about the details of each of these stories clears things up pretty easily.

Interesting that you urge context for my rebuttals but not for the original quotes.
 
There is hardly any similarity between the Kardashians and Trump and I am slightly insulted that you expect me to buy that ridiculous analogy. They're both rich? Is that what is the common theme there? Another silly comparison, data point, and overall message.

I apologize and you're right. I actually have greater respect for the Kardashians.
 
Haha. Sure. Yeah, he is a billionaire and worldwide name in one of the most cutthroat industries. But he just survived for 4 decades by accident. Your lack of logical, cohesive, evidence-based thinking is more cRNA-ish than anything.

You're right. Ad hominem attacks are much more logical, cohesive, and evidence-based. Certainly more than actually rebutting my arguments.

But sure, if you want to believe that he's successful because he tells you he is, go right ahead. He probably is, but I'm more interested in seeing objective data to support that rather than his "surviving for 4 decades."

Do you also think that nurse anesthetists in general must be really good because, as the AANA argues, they've "survived for 150 years?"
 
How is this o
Again, taken out of context.

The context was a conversation about how we supplement Japanese defense with our own taxpayers' money and how we lose money because of it. That is silly in this day and age on a lot of levels, number one being a lame duck administration that doesn't use this geographic location as a tactical advantage as China continues to make gains at will in the South China Sea, and a post-WW2 Japan that still doesn't even have a dang military.

By the way, Biden suggested the other day that if the US didn't take action against N Korea that Japan and S. Korea could get nukes "overnight." No one said anything. And on top of that, it was basically a veiled threat to the Chinese President Xi! I love double standards.




Not out of context,he was saying it in reference to our defence treaty with Japan. Biden's statement is an acknowledgement of the countries technical abilities related to a north Korean threat, not the same as Mr. Trumps remark. Look it up Japan is one of the world's biggest spender on defence and has been pushing the envelope on its constitution on self defense and is one of the few countries that could field 2 to 3 carriers nearly overnight.
 
There is hardly any similarity between the Kardashians and Trump and I am slightly insulted that you expect me to buy that ridiculous analogy. They're both rich? Is that what is the common theme there? Another silly comparison, data point, and overall message.

I think the point people are trying to get across to you is:
- Trump started out rich, from a rich family and got millions from his family to start his businesses
- most economists estimate if he invested his original family wealth in an index fund, he'd have MORE net worth than he has now
- his own estimate of net worth is likely overinflated given his refusal to release tax returns like every other previous presidential candidate.

So despite your claims, its understandable some doubt his amazing business acumen. He's certainly no Warren Buffet. He obviously has some business sense since he didn't lose his initial wealth but that seems based on his bombastic, aggressive, media-seeking personality which many do not think are good presidential traits.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
@Ignatius J - more quotes out of context?

Trump, in a New York Times interview, appeared to dismiss a foundational principal of US national security policy, when he said if Russia attacked the Baltic states he would decide to come to their aid based on whether those countries “have fulfilled their obligations to us.”
"We will come to their defense of they are attacked, just as they came to [our] defense after 9/11,” Sullivan said. “Donald Trump was asked if he would honor that guarantee. He said … 'maybe, maybe not.' ”

http://www.militarytimes.com/story/...ent-conditional-support-nato-allies/87386836/

How can you give someone your loyalty/vote when he has no loyalty to give back? Seems like Paul Ryan is plagued by this very problem each time he apologizes for Trump and has to give luke-warm support for him in hopes of keeping the party united.
 
I think the point people are trying to get across to you is:
- Trump started out rich, from a rich family and got millions from his family to start his businesses
- most economists estimate if he invested his original family wealth in an index fund, he'd have MORE net worth than he has now
- his own estimate of net worth is likely overinflated given his refusal to release tax returns like every other previous presidential candidate.

So despite your claims, its understandable some doubt his amazing business acumen. He's certainly no Warren Buffet. He obviously has some business sense since he didn't lose his initial wealth but that seems based on his bombastic, aggressive, media-seeking personality which many do not think are good presidential traits.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Indeed, any idiot who inherited millions of dollars from his dad and developed real estate in nyc starting in the 70's made money

US_Real_Estate_Index_Trend_Historical_chart_Comp.png


Trump probably inherited somewhere between 40-100 million when he took over as CEO in 1974. $40 million invested in berkshire in 1974 would be worth ~$120 billion today.
 
Last edited:
@Ignatius J - more quotes out of context?

Trump, in a New York Times interview, appeared to dismiss a foundational principal of US national security policy, when he said if Russia attacked the Baltic states he would decide to come to their aid based on whether those countries “have fulfilled their obligations to us.”
"We will come to their defense of they are attacked, just as they came to [our] defense after 9/11,” Sullivan said. “Donald Trump was asked if he would honor that guarantee. He said … 'maybe, maybe not.' ”

http://www.militarytimes.com/story/...ent-conditional-support-nato-allies/87386836/

How can you give someone your loyalty/vote when he has no loyalty to give back? Seems like Paul Ryan is plagued by this very problem each time he apologizes for Trump and has to give luke-warm support for him in hopes of keeping the party united.

To make a long answer short, countries within NATO have repeatedly, again and again, failed to live up to their agreement in defense spending. So if we have an agreement within NATO to spend money on defense, one country lapses in it's duty and gets invaded, we have to foot the bill AND the American lives? That is fair?
 
Indeed, any idiot who inherited millions of dollars from his dad and developed real estate in nyc starting in the 70's made money

US_Real_Estate_Index_Trend_Historical_chart_Comp.png


Trump probably inherited somewhere between 40-100 million when he took over as CEO in 1974. $40 million invested in berkshire in 1974 would be worth ~$120 billion today.

So we are talking about Trump's detrimental failure by comparing him to perhaps the most ingenious stock investor of all time? Is this correct?
 
I think the point people are trying to get across to you is:
- Trump started out rich, from a rich family and got millions from his family to start his businesses
- most economists estimate if he invested his original family wealth in an index fund, he'd have MORE net worth than he has now
- his own estimate of net worth is likely overinflated given his refusal to release tax returns like every other previous presidential candidate.

So despite your claims, its understandable some doubt his amazing business acumen. He's certainly no Warren Buffet. He obviously has some business sense since he didn't lose his initial wealth but that seems based on his bombastic, aggressive, media-seeking personality which many do not think are good presidential traits.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

I love this. Perhaps the most well-known real estate developer in the world. But hey, we are not sure about his business accumen. By the way, much of his wealth is invested in stock. And among financial investors, almost no one continuously beats the market. A good real estate business would demonstrate the growth that Trump has seen with his business. It's a poor comparison for many, many reasons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
How is this o





Not out of context,he was saying it in reference to our defence treaty with Japan. Biden's statement is an acknowledgement of the countries technical abilities related to a north Korean threat, not the same as Mr. Trumps remark. Look it up Japan is one of the world's biggest spender on defence and has been pushing the envelope on its constitution on self defense and is one of the few countries that could field 2 to 3 carriers nearly overnight.

So let me ask you. Are you of the opinion that we should continue to divest American taxpayers' money to defend Japan? The one-way relationship is fair to you?

The bottom line is that it is a reality. North Korea is a solitary, rogue country, and it is a very real possibility that nuclear armament may become necessary in the region.

I'm sorry that is inconvenient for you. It was inconvenient in the Cold War too. But you know what, North Korea shows no signs of willingness to negotiate or back down. And not sure if you have paid attention to the South China Sea lately, but there will come a time when Chinese actions hit a head down there too. It's a scary time on that side of the world. Continuing to skip along and ignore grave problems there would be a mistake. Yes, nuclear weapons as a means of deterrent may become necessary. Sucks and no one wants it. But it is true.
 
So we are talking about Trump's detrimental failure by comparing him to perhaps the most ingenious stock investor of all time? Is this correct?

Trump claimed he was worth $500 million in 1982. If he would've simply liquidated his expertly run real estate business at that time and parked his money in an s&p index fund he'd be worth >$20 billion today, or more than double his current claimed net worth.
 
Trump claimed he was worth $500 million in 1982. If he would've simply liquidated his expertly run real estate business at that time and parked his money in an s&p index fund he'd be worth >$20 billion today, or more than double his current claimed net worth.

Dude is drunk on the Trump juice. No use trying to rationalize with an irrational person.
 
So let me ask you. Are you of the opinion that we should continue to divest American taxpayers' money to defend Japan? The one-way relationship is fair to you?

The bottom line is that it is a reality. North Korea is a solitary, rogue country, and it is a very real possibility that nuclear armament may become necessary in the region.

I'm sorry that is inconvenient for you. It was inconvenient in the Cold War too. But you know what, North Korea shows no signs of willingness to negotiate or back down. And not sure if you have paid attention to the South China Sea lately, but there will come a time when Chinese actions hit a head down there too. It's a scary time on that side of the world. Continuing to skip along and ignore grave problems there would be a mistake. Yes, nuclear weapons as a means of deterrent may become necessary. Sucks and no one wants it. But it is true.


The problem is that it is not a one way relationship. We WANT Japan to depend on us, because if they do not then they would be free to follow their own national interests more.....aggressively. last time that happened it was called WW 2. Less disastrously there efforts to follow their own policy could conflict with our other allies, or opponents, do you want a well armed independent Japan squaring off against China over those tiny islands? What do you think that would do to our trade? Our capital flows? Mr. Trump looks at things in a one dimensional way that ignores multiple necessities. As you do as well.
 
Trump claimed he was worth $500 million in 1982. If he would've simply liquidated his expertly run real estate business at that time and parked his money in an s&p index fund he'd be worth >$20 billion today, or more than double his current claimed net worth.

It's easy to say that in 2016. Even Warren Buffett has had his bad investments.
 
It's easy to say that in 2016. Even Warren Buffett has had his bad investments.

Jack Bogle started the first index fund in 1975...passive index investing with reinvested dividends isn't exactly a new concept. But I suppose learning about the wisdom of such an investment strategy would involve actually reading more about it and consulting experts.
 
Jack Bogle started the first index fund in 1975...passive index investing with reinvested dividends isn't exactly a new concept. But I suppose learning about the wisdom of such an investment strategy would involve actually reading more about it and consulting experts.

It sounds like you are criticizing trump for not acting on future knowledge.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top