Vote for President

[deepstate2016]

I challenge anyone to show me something Trump has done worse than approving the Russians buying US uranium after 150 million dollars made it's way into the Clinton Foundation from associated actors in the deal. I welcome it.

If someone can find something 1/10 as corrupt as that, I'll listen. It makes Trump University look like a church retreat.

How about lying about financing and taking out 675 million in junk bond resulting in a bankruptcy?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[deleted171991]

Truly presidential:

 

[RadOncDoc21]

Truly presidential:

Sounds presidential to me (if I was still in 1st grade).

 

[deepstate2016]

Of course mine is proven fact while yours is innuendo, and twisted hope.

 

[Pooh & Annie]

He is an embarrassment as an American and a person, much less a f@ckin presidential candidate. I still CANNOT GET OVER half this country's COMPLETE lack of standards of decency and intelligence or demands for the info on his taxes.

 

[deleted171991]

My tolerance for Trump voters is decreasing exponentially as time passes. I can take people who dislike Hillary; I just can't respect Trump fans anymore. There is no excuse for defending this kind of person; zero, zilch, nada. Love trumps hate.

 

[vector2]

 

[RadOncDoc21]

Just imagine that guy with nuclear weapons!

 

[Mad Jack]

 

[deleted171991]

Not according to the latest polls:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/

 

[Pooh & Annie]

I'm interested to see what childish response Trump will have after his National Security briefings. Will he brag about the info he now has that everyone else doesn't? Will he say it's terrifying stuff and only he has the answers? Will he say there's something terrible and disqualifying in there about Hillary Clinton that he's not allowed to talk about? Maybe all of the above?

 

[Ignatius J]

How about lying about financing and taking out 675 million in junk bond resulting in a bankruptcy?

Do you have a link?

 

[Onefellswoop87]

I'm interested to see what childish response Trump will have after his National Security briefings. Will he brag about the info he now has that everyone else doesn't? Will he say it's terrifying stuff and only he has the answers? Will he say there's something terrible and disqualifying in there about Hillary Clinton that he's not allowed to talk about? Maybe all of the above?

He'll probably get annoyed in a brief, tweet that he wants to hit someone, then after called on it say he was joking or that he never said that.

 

[Ignatius J]

He'll probably get annoyed in a brief, tweet that he wants to hit someone, then after called on it say he was joking or that he never said that.

That is an embellishment. He has used "hit" repeatedly throughout his campaign as a verbal counterattack. It was funny seeing that misleading headline on CNN this morning. As if it wasn't enough seeing Wolf Blitzer drinking champagne and dancing around like a fanboy last night. But hey, it is Fox News that is biased.

 

[deepstate2016]

Do you have a link?

The Atlantic, June 2016. It has a list of his activities. Great read.

 

[Ignatius J]

The Atlantic, June 2016. It has a list of his activities. Great read.

That is not a link.

 

[Onefellswoop87]

That is an embellishment. He has used "hit" repeatedly throughout his campaign as a verbal counterattack. It was funny seeing that misleading headline on CNN this morning. As if it wasn't enough seeing Wolf Blitzer drinking champagne and dancing around like a fanboy last night. But hey, it is Fox News that is biased.

I don't buy that. Words have meaning. He's been pretty consistent using physical attack verbs/phrases: punch, hit, carry out in a stretcher. In no dialect of English that I know of does "hit" refer to using a series of words to verbally berate someone.

 

[Ignatius J]

I don't buy that. Words have meaning. He's been pretty consistent using physical attack verbs/phrases: punch, hit, carry out in a stretcher. In no dialect of English that I know of does "hit" refer to using a series of words to verbally berate someone.

Trump re: Scott Walker for VP: “I hit him very hard…But I’ve always liked him. There are people I like, but I don’t think they like me because I have hit them hard..."

Did I miss a physical assault of Trump on Walker?

 

[deepstate2016]

The Atlantic, June 2016. It has a list of his activities. Great read.

No it is not. You have Google I assume

 

[gotname]

I challenge anyone to show me something Trump has done worse than approving the Russians buying US uranium after 150 million dollars made it's way into the Clinton Foundation from associated actors in the deal. I welcome it.

If someone can find something 1/10 as corrupt as that, I'll listen. It makes Trump University look like a church retreat.

They both suck but besides what has been done or may have been done by either candidate, I think what also matters to many is what they could do as president. In that scenario, Hillary could engage in corruption as usual, perhaps even overlook some emails. Trump could...who knows wtf Trump could do? As he has proven over and over again, the possibilities are endless and range from sane to absolutely nuts. That's a problem.

As checkered as Hillary's past is, the country is better off with her than in Trump's unpredicable, unexperienced hands.​

 

[Ignatius J]

They both suck but besides what has been done or may have been done by either candidate, I think what also matters to many is what they could do as president. In that scenario, Hillary could engage in corruption as usual, perhaps even overlook some emails. Trump could...who knows wtf Trump could do? As he has proven over and over again, the possibilities are endless and range from sane to absolutely nuts. That's a problem.

As checkered as Hillary's past is, the country is better off with her than in Trump's unpredicable, unexperienced hands.​

I don't disagree with your premise, but I'll take a jerk over a criminal any day.

 

[Ignatius J]

No it is not. You have Google I assume

I'm not the one who issued an indictment, but it is par for the course for Hillary supporters. A microcosm of the ironic universe they seem to live in.

They will disagree with you in the face of a comprehensive assessment of factual data points with Hillary but then make a statement against Trump with a shoddy reference and assessment at the drop of a hat.

As it were, I have supplied quotes and references for each point I've made on Hillary. I would expect you to return the same favor. I strongly suspect you are slanting the narrative and are about as reliable to be objective as Wolf Blitzer at a Democratic rally.

 

[Onefellswoop87]

Trump re: Scott Walker for VP: “I hit him very hard…But I’ve always liked him. There are people I like, but I don’t think they like me because I have hit them hard..."

Did I miss a physical assault of Trump on Walker?

Fair enough. I'll concede on that quote. But I don't this it's unreasonable to assume, with a past of encouraging violence, to use hit in the future tense is to again condone violence.

 

[Ignatius J]

Fair enough. I'll concede on that quote. But I don't this it's unreasonable to assume, with a past of encouraging violence, to use hit in the future tense is to again condone violence.

Fair enough. I think we all know what he meant. He has used that in a metaphorical sense many times. It's definitely no worse than Obama telling Philly people that he brings guns to knife fights because Philly fans "like a good brawl". Both are understood metaphors. Trump just has a reputation that precedes him, especially among liberal media elites that salivate at the chance to snipe him from their ivory towers.

Just like when Hillary says she is going to fight for women's rights, I doubt she is actually going to assault anyone. Trump does say outlandish things. This week has not had those circumstances.

 

[deepstate2016]

I'm not the one who issued an indictment, but it is par for the course for Hillary supporters. A microcosm of the ironic universe they seem to live in.

They will disagree with you in the face of a comprehensive assessment of factual data points with Hillary but then make a statement against Trump with a shoddy reference and assessment at the drop of a hat.

As it were, I have supplied quotes and references for each point I've made on Hillary. I would expect you to return the same favor. I strongly suspect you are slanting the narrative and are about as reliable to be objective as Wolf Blitzer at a Democratic rally.

I have quite comprehensively explained the geopolitics to you several times. Sorry if I do not feel the need to spoon feed you a single link. It shows how little you really know about your candidate that this minor fact that takes 10 seconds to Google has escaped you.

 

[deleted59964]

it amazes me how much passion americans have for their politicians.
we recently had a federal election - the lead story the day before the election was which voting centre (mostly primary schools) would have the best sausage sizzle.

http://www.news.com.au/national/fed...s/news-story/5f18c3a8c620fb047e425d303f5e9b8d

 

[deepstate2016]

I challenge anyone to show me something Trump has done worse than approving the Russians buying US uranium after 150 million dollars made it's way into the Clinton Foundation from associated actors in the deal. I welcome it.

If someone can find something 1/10 as corrupt as that, I'll listen. It makes Trump University look like a church retreat.

a little spoon feeding for you
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/06/donald-trump-scandals/474726/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/inve...7cedc2-9ac8-11e5-8917-653b65c809eb_story.html

 

[RadOncDoc21]

a little spoon feeding for you
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/06/donald-trump-scandals/474726/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/inve...7cedc2-9ac8-11e5-8917-653b65c809eb_story.html

I don't think it matters. I realize the Trump supporters could care less about being rational, logical people. It's more about childish behavior and resorting back to the Stone Age mentality.

Fact: The majority of Trump's supporters are uneducated, there is no use arguing with them!

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-really/471714/

 

[Ignatius J]

a little spoon feeding for you
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/06/donald-trump-scandals/474726/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/inve...7cedc2-9ac8-11e5-8917-653b65c809eb_story.html

Okay. So no, financing his business with high interest rate bonds is not as bad as raking in hundreds of millions in bribes in exchange for selling Russia uranium or diverting tens of millions of relief fund money away from Haiti and into your cronies' pockets.

What else do you have?

 

[Ignatius J]

I don't think it matters. I realize the Trump supporters could care less about being rational, logical people. It's more about childish behavior and resorting back to the Stone Age mentality.

Fact: The majority of Trump's supporters are uneducated, there is no use arguing with them!

Same could be said of Hillary. Being able to look past bribes for selling Russia uranium and stealing Haitian relief funds from the government is a morally bankrupt trait. Or money laundering in cattle future trades in exchange for favorable treatment from Tyson Foods. Or jeapordizing national security on a non-approved, non-secured email server not even as secure as Gmail.

And I am supposed to care more that Trump used illegal Polish workers to build something? That is funny.

 

[deepstate2016]

Okay. So no, financing his business with high interest rate bonds is not as bad as raking in hundreds of millions in bribes in exchange for selling Russia uranium or diverting tens of millions of relief fund money away from Haiti and into your cronies' pockets.

What else do you have?

Talk about not reading the articles. Look it makes no difference. You are a trumpet through and through. I cod present video of him roasting a baby and your response would be "Hillary did.......". I am not as concerned with their moral clarity but for what they will do. Trump has promised to do so many things that will significantly hurt this country.

 

[Ignatius J]

Talk about not reading the articles. Look it makes no difference. You are a trumpet through and through. I cod present video of him roasting a baby and your response would be "Hillary did.......". I am not as concerned with their moral clarity but for what they will do. Trump has promised to do so many things that will significantly hurt this country.

Again- you provided a narrative as to what was worse than Hillary taking bribes for uranium and made a feeble effort. Trump basically took out high interest debt to finance his casino. This was a very feeble and unsuccessful attempt. Like many Hillary supporters, you can't look past how she is on an island all her own regarding unethical and immoral behavior. Unfortunate that the American people don't see past it, but this crony capitalism isn't going to build itself I guess.

Likewise, Hillary could carry around a severed head and take a dump on stage and the narrative from the Clinton News Network to the sheeple would be "did you see what Trump said?"

 

[deleted171991]

Ignatius J,

You don't get it. It's about not electing another Putin or Hitler to lead the United States. That's all. It just dwarfs anything you bring up about the Clintons, which is not news for most educated people.

Anybody who's educated has seen these angry narcissistic authoritarian paranoid demagogues in the past, and knows that NONE of them has ever done anything good for their country. None. Look where Russia is under Putin: full of stupid nationalistic pride, almost zero real democracy, economically underdeveloped, hated and despised by the entire Europe, if not world.

These people cling to power like fly to flypaper, at all price. These are the people who destroy democracies, who see themselves as kings, not stewards, of their countries. And if you think our Constitution would defend us, you're fooling yourself. He'd swamp us in authoritarian executive orders like there is no tomorrow, and he would have the support of his plebes, which seems to be 50% of the country, for his witch hunts. Haven't we learned anything from our Japanese internment camps in World War 2, or from McCarthyism? Or at least from the Salem witch trials?

And if you think the witch hunts would never touch you, or your family, or people you care about, it's just a matter of time. I frequently quote Martin Niemoller, so I won't do it again. The essence of his famous poem/speech is that evil happens when good people do nothing, thinking it will never happen to them.

In a democracy, the various minorities are the canaries in the mine. When they suffer, it's a good sign that democracy is going in the toilet. Today it's the Muslims, tomorrow the Latinos, then the Blacks, then the Jews, then the anarchists, then the libertarians, then the left, then the protesters, then anybody who's pissing against the wind even by looking at the brown shirts the wrong way, which are usually the educated people, like us, like you (if we are still around). We've already had our liberties curtailed after 9/11, but this is still nothing like an authoritarian dictatorship, even if it were the dictatorship of the 51%, and not of just one person. That's what communism was, too, by the way, a dictatorship of the uneducated working class (Trump's electorate, also known as the proletariat), disguised as a one-party pseudo democracy.

Do yourself a favor, and go read Orwell's Animal Farm, and maybe then you'll figure out why almost anybody is better than Trump.

 

[Ignatius J]

Ignatius J,

You don't get it. It's about not electing another Putin or Hitler to lead the United States. That's all. It just dwarfs anything you bring up about the Clintons, which is not news for most educated people.

Anybody who's educated has seen these narcissistic authoritarian paranoid demagogues in the past, and knows that NONE of them has ever done anything good for their country. None. Look wher Russia is under Putin: full of stupid nationalistic pride, zero democracy, economically underdeveloped, hated and despised by the entire Europe, if not world.

These people cling to power like fly to flypaper, at all price. These are the people who destroy democracies, who see themselves as kings, not stewards, of a country. And if you think our Constitution would defend us, you're fooling yourselves. He'd swamp us in authoritarian executive orders like there is no tomorrow, and he would have the support of his plebes, which seems to be 50% of the country, for his witch hunts.

The fact that people throw out Hitler and Stalin and whoever is an insult to all of their millions of victims and the United States in general. This is a republic with an extensive system of checks and balances within our government and anyone who hints at a claim otherwise should not be taken seriously.

 

[Ignatius J]

It's interesting if you look at what makes a dictator or authoritarian. One may think it is someone who rigs the system to give them unbridled access to lead the country over an extended period of time. Bill Clinton took office after 1992. What year is it again?

 

[deleted171991]

Dude, you're talking about stuff you don't understand. My family and I have lived it. So I do know how authoritarianism begins. And I don't want even the shadow of it.

I am done wasting my time. Go read Animal Farm. It's about communism, but it applies to every stupid authoritarian movement.

 

[Ignatius J]

Dude, you're talking about stuff you don't understand. My family and I have lived it. So I do know how authoritarianism begins. And I don't want even the shadow of it.

I am done wasting my time. Go read Animal Farm. It's about communism, but it applies to every stupid authoritarian movement.

You clearly have much to learn about the American system of governance then, which was methodically created in defiance of the problem you describe.

 

[Onefellswoop87]

You clearly have much to learn about the American system of governance then, which was methodically created in defiance of the problem you describe.

One thing @FFP did mention was a prediction that Trump would use executive orders to create action. A common frustration against Obama that he used this authority (although in less number of orders than previous presidents), his executive orders were more lengthy and arguably had a greater effect on action and outcome. I don't see this trend slowing down with either Trump or HRC.

 

[Ignatius J]

One thing @FFP did mention was a prediction that Trump would use executive orders to create action. A common frustration against Obama that he used this authority (although in less number of orders than previous presidents), his executive orders were more lengthy and arguably had a greater effect on action and outcome. I don't see this trend slowing down with either Trump or HRC.

I think you are quite correct. I think Obama exercised way too much authority in these actions. No dictator or authoritarian ever comes to power talking about how evil and corrupt they will be. The road to hell is always paved with good intentions. They get followers by telling the "oppressed" how much better off they will be and get echo chambers like the media, academia, and elites (Hollywood) to propagate their message.

That is why most liberals are completely off the mark when discussing authoritarianism. Obama has probably been the most authoritarian President we have had in some time. It's just the reality.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton-obama-trump-and-the-abuse-of-power-1466548914

 

[deepstate2016]

One thing @FFP did mention was a prediction that Trump would use executive orders to create action. A common frustration against Obama that he used this authority (although in less number of orders than previous presidents), his executive orders were more lengthy and arguably had a greater effect on action and outcome. I don't see this trend slowing down with either Trump or HRC.

Could you please substantiate this assertion?

 

[deepstate2016]

I think you are quite correct. I think Obama exercised way too much authority in these actions. No dictator or authoritarian ever comes to power talking about how evil and corrupt they will be. The road to hell is always paved with good intentions. They get followers by telling the "oppressed" how much better off they will be and get echo chambers like the media, academia, and elites (Hollywood) to propagate their message.

That is why most liberals are completely off the mark when discussing authoritarianism. Obama has probably been the most authoritarian President we have had in some time. It's just the reality.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton-obama-trump-and-the-abuse-of-power-1466548914

It is not liberals who are off the mark nor is it most conservatives, it is the extremes at both ends. Your use of liberal is a blanketing can easily cover the majority of the population. If you would exercise the least used muscle in your body (one between the ears) you would be able to recognize trumps movement as one clearly based on authoritarianism ideals and goals.

 

[deepstate2016]

Authoritarianism and polarization of American politics by Hetherington
Fascism why not here by Fogarty
Arendt theory of totalitarianism

These as just a few to read. If you cannot see trump and his movement for what it is after this then I do not know what will until the knock comes at your door.

 

[Ignatius J]

It is not liberals who are off the mark nor is it most conservatives, it is the extremes at both ends. Your use of liberal is a blanketing can easily cover the majority of the population. If you would exercise the least used muscle in your body (one between the ears) you would be able to recognize trumps movement as one clearly based on authoritarianism ideals and goals.

Being loud and saying stupid things doesn't make you an authoritarian. Abusing your power at the people's expense does. These authoritarians you speak of come as wolves in sheep's clothing, not as just wolves. For example, they may wear a white pantsuit to make themselves seem more well-intentioned than they really are anything but with their past history of bribery, cronyism, corruption, and outright lies and scandals that would land ordinary people in jail. They stick around. A while. Their power spans decades. Their sheeple defend them at all costs, allowing them to maintain the power grasp over the ignorant folks. They parlay that into riches for themselves and their cronies, covering it all up along the way. Sure, they may get criticized. But that is quickly swept under the rug and the critics are quick to be discredited by a strongly entrenched PR team. Elections are rigged (sorry Bernie), power is maintained, and opponents "just don't get it".

Enjoy your "revolution". I know those Cubans and Venezuelans sure did.

 

[Ignatius J]

Could you please substantiate this assertion?

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: I've got legal authority to make improvements on the system. I'd prefer and still prefer to see it done through Congress, but every day that I wait, we're misallocating resources. We're deporting people that shouldn't be deported. We're not deporting folks that are dangerous and need to be deported. So John, I'm going to give you some time. But if you can't get it done before the end of the year, I'm going to have to take the steps that I can to improve the system.

BOB SCHIEFFER, HOST, ''FACE THE NATION'': So are you saying here today their time has run out?

OBAMA: What I'm saying to them-- actually, their time hasn't run out. I'm going to do what I can do through executive action.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/01/05/obamas-legacy-will-be-executive-abuse/

"But more consequentially — and this may be the most destructive legacy of the Obama presidency — is the mainstreaming of the idea that if Congress “fails to act” it’s okay for the president to figure out a way to make law himself. Hillary’s already applauded Obama’s actions because, as she put it, “Congress won’t act; we have to do something.”

 

[ProfMD]

And the list of people who despise Trump enough to cross party lines and vote for Clinton grows:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-name-republicans-supporting-hillary-clinton/

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-fg-trump-foreign-policy-20160731-snap-story.html

I guess, like me, they are all just "sheeple."

 

[deepstate2016]

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: I've got legal authority to make improvements on the system. I'd prefer and still prefer to see it done through Congress, but every day that I wait, we're misallocating resources. We're deporting people that shouldn't be deported. We're not deporting folks that are dangerous and need to be deported. So John, I'm going to give you some time. But if you can't get it done before the end of the year, I'm going to have to take the steps that I can to improve the system.

BOB SCHIEFFER, HOST, ''FACE THE NATION'': So are you saying here today their time has run out?

OBAMA: What I'm saying to them-- actually, their time hasn't run out. I'm going to do what I can do through executive action.

http://thefederalist.com/2016/01/05/obamas-legacy-will-be-executive-abuse/

"But more consequentially — and this may be the most destructive legacy of the Obama presidency — is the mainstreaming of the idea that if Congress “fails to act” it’s okay for the president to figure out a way to make law himself. Hillary’s already applauded Obama’s actions because, as she put it, “Congress won’t act; we have to do something.”

So an interview with the president asserting his legal authority and a blurb from a on line publication (which is pure opinion as well), is proof of the overarching reach of the presidents executive orders and how much greater it is then other presidents executive orders? Really? .......bwhahahahahaah really hysterical, works well with your general ignorance and willful mis understanding of the world.

 

[deepstate2016]

Being loud and saying stupid things doesn't make you an authoritarian. Abusing your power at the people's expense does. These authoritarians you speak of come as wolves in sheep's clothing, not as just wolves. For example, they may wear a white pantsuit to make themselves seem more well-intentioned than they really are anything but with their past history of bribery, cronyism, corruption, and outright lies and scandals that would land ordinary people in jail. They stick around. A while. Their power spans decades. Their sheeple defend them at all costs, allowing them to maintain the power grasp over the ignorant folks. They parlay that into riches for themselves and their cronies, covering it all up along the way. Sure, they may get criticized. But that is quickly swept under the rug and the critics are quick to be discredited by a strongly entrenched PR team. Elections are rigged (sorry Bernie), power is maintained, and opponents "just don't get it".

Enjoy your "revolution". I know those Cubans and Venezuelans sure did.

Seeing as a vote for Mrs Clinton is one for the status quo not sure of the revolution. Or the applicability of Venezuela or Cuba. I am willing to bet you have not read a single thing about political movements and their history, unless it comes from a blog that echos your beliefs. You are funny. Ignorant and funny.

 

[deepstate2016]

Look the majority of the arguments come down to a dislike of Mrs. Clinton. I get that wish had a better choice. But least try to turn this around a little. Many of us have listed a number of real world consequences if Mr trumps policies were enacted, thus our willingness to support her. Can anyone please tell me the dangerous consequences of Mrs Clinton's presidency/policies. Without trotting out the crazies. I mean real ones like Mr trumps trade war. His willingness to abandon the geopolitical order that protects us, the attempt to increase the power of the state by deporting 11 million illegal immigrants. Please I would love to know.

 

[Ignatius J]

Seeing as a vote for Mrs Clinton is one for the status quo not sure of the revolution. Or the applicability of Venezuela or Cuba. I am willing to bet you have not read a single thing about political movements and their history, unless it comes from a blog that echos your beliefs. You are funny. Ignorant and funny.

I am a history major. I have studied a little history in my day. And Hillary can't decide whether she is status quo or an agent of change. She talks out of both sides of her mouth on that one. I assume you watched the DNC and saw her hitch her wagon to Obama and then talk about free college tuition, increased taxes on the rich, and all sorts of ideas and goals that pandered to just about every group there.

 

[Ignatius J]

Look the majority of the arguments come down to a dislike of Mrs. Clinton. I get that wish had a better choice. But least try to turn this around a little. Many of us have listed a number of real world consequences if Mr trumps policies were enacted, thus our willingness to support her. Can anyone please tell me the dangerous consequences of Mrs Clinton's presidency/policies. Without trotting out the crazies. I mean real ones like Mr trumps trade war. His willingness to abandon the geopolitical order that protects us, the attempt to increase the power of the state by deporting 11 million illegal immigrants. Please I would love to know.

There is a trade war already, and you are hopelessly naive if you don't understand this, because this is something that is very simple. Look throughout the Midwest and tell me there isn't a trade war.

Do you really think we have free trade when the US is one of the only nations that doesn't impose a value-added tax on imports and sees countries like China actively devalue their currency to make it easier to buy their goods and harder for us to sell ours?

Open your eyes, my man! This isn't free trade if you have 500 billion dollar trade deficits and regions of the country that were once manufacturing powerhouses that have lost hundreds of thousands of jobs. We are in the middle of a trade war, and sadly, not enough people seem to grasp this. The United States was once a preeminent manufacturing powerhouse beast, and that might helped us win some very big wars, most notably WW2 where we simply outhustled the rest of the world with that might.

Sadly, that day is gone.