Presidential Race 2016

[newtogolf]

48 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

But do you really NEED that much ketchup? ;)

Ketchup is like cow bell, you can never have too much 

[Chilli Dipper]

6 hours ago, newtogolf said:

Ketchup is like cow bell, you can never have too much 

If I'm going to buy ketchup in bulk, it's going to be a crate of those glass bottles they serve at restaurants: the ones where nothing comes out until you pound the "57" on the rim, then half the bottle pours out at once.

[Elmer]

On 5/13/2016 at 3:14 PM, newtogolf said:

I didn't say I condone anything.  I can't stand Obama but I don't agree with anything that Trumps EX butler said.  

Trump is calling out Bill because Hillary has constantly played the "woman card" and made statements against Trumps position on women.  

Reality is we are all willing to look past our candidates short comings because we agree more with their politics.  You choose to ignore Hillary's mishandling of Benghazi, her misuse of her personal email server and her and Bills foundation which is under investigation.  

12 congressional benghazi investigations later and the republicans could not hang her out to dry on this and yet you are still putting all the blame on her shoulders.
As far as her "email server" goes, why none of the outcry when Colin Powell did the same thing?
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/05/us/politics/state-dept-classified-data-found-ex-secretaries-personal-email-john-kerry-condeleezza-rice-colin-powell.html?_r=0 

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/03/07/state-dept-concludes-past-secretaries-of-state/209044 

On 5/13/2016 at 3:43 PM, rehmwa said:

I'd agree that Trump is hypocritical to call out Bill for philandering. 

As far as calling out Hillary on her actions concerning Bill's philandering - I'm not sure if Trump has threatened to ruin the lives of any men that Ivana raped

It is not like Trump has threatened to sue people for voicing their opinion of him, or for righting articles about him that he did not like!
 

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2016/03/14/youre-sued-donald-trumps-long-history-of-litigation/ 
http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/290787/trump-tried-to-sue-the-onion/

On 5/14/2016 at 11:19 AM, 9wood said:

I personally believe that everyone who voted twice for Obama should be sitting this one out

I feel the same way for those who voted for GWB, twice!

[newtogolf]

1 minute ago, Elmer said:

12 congressional benghazi investigations later and the republicans could not hang her out to dry on this and yet you are still putting all the blame on her shoulders.
As far as her "email server" goes, why none of the outcry when Colin Powell did the same thing?
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/05/us/politics/state-dept-classified-data-found-ex-secretaries-personal-email-john-kerry-condeleezza-rice-colin-powell.html?_r=0 

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/03/07/state-dept-concludes-past-secretaries-of-state/209044 

It is not like Trump has threatened to sue people for voicing their opinion of him, or for righting articles about him that he did not like!
 

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2016/03/14/youre-sued-donald-trumps-long-history-of-litigation/ 
http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/290787/trump-tried-to-sue-the-onion/

I feel the same way for those who voted for GWB, twice!

OJ didn't get convicted of murdering Ron and Nicole but that doesn't mean he didn't do it.  Hillary knowingly mishandled Benghazi and lied about it being a protest (about a stupid movie) when she knew damn well it was a terrorist attack.  

As for her e-mail server, again it's not just that she violated the and security policy of an acting Secretary of State but that she lied and did everything she could to impede the investigation.  http://hotair.com/archives/2016/05/14/video-jake-tapper-fact-checks-hillary-clinton-on-her-email-server-claims-brutally/

I noticed you ignored the investigation into her and Bills Foundation, no retort for that or like the liberal media you're ignoring it and hoping no one notices.  How about all the reports about how poorly Hillary treated the military when Bill was POTUS?  

You're willing to overlook all these things about Hillary did but want to condemn Trump because of things an ex-butler in one of his residences said.  

[9wood]

13 minutes ago, Elmer said:

I feel the same way for those who voted for GWB, twice!

At least GWB was as twisted as the current POTUS who mandates that you can choose which bathroom you use and put our children in harms way. That's what you voted for.

[rehmwa]

46 minutes ago, Elmer said:

On 5/13/2016 at 2:43 PM, rehmwa said:

I'd agree that Trump is hypocritical to call out Bill for philandering. 

As far as calling out Hillary on her actions concerning Bill's philandering - I'm not sure if Trump has threatened to ruin the lives of any men that Ivana raped

 

It is not like Trump has threatened to sue people for voicing their opinion of him, or for righting articles about him that he did not like!

You make a good point.  I'm guessing that Hillary did not like that these women might want justice for being molested by her husband.  It could possibly hurt Bill or Hillary's political careers.  Or she didn't think that these women had the right to an opinion that they were molested.

I guess threatening to ruin a woman is  equivalent to suing people for perceived (Donald's skin is a bit too thin and narcissistic for politics IMO)  slander and liable.  Probably Hillary perceived that these women had no right to stand up for themselves.

Seems we continue to make great cases to vote 3rd party or recommend that we just leave the office vacant for 4 years and try again.  (as bad as the last few presidents were, I'd take any of them BHO all the way back to Reagan - I draw the line at Carter nice guy, smart, clueless but at least his intentions were good, he didn't go crazy until the last decade - over Hill or Don)

[StevenR84]

38 minutes ago, 9wood said:

At least GWB was as twisted as the current POTUS who mandates that you can choose which bathroom you use and put our children in harms way. That's what you voted for.

You realize that most of these adults who identify as a different gender were probably already using the bathroom that corresponds to that different identity? All this has done is distract us from something else and bring up a pointless argument. Children are more likely to be harmed by their parents than someone who is dealing with some person stuff that those who aren't going through it can't understand. And if pedophiles want to get into a different bathroom to harm a child *SPOILER ALERT* they are going to do it regardless. This is such an invalid argument/law on all accounts. The issue became when North Carolina also decided to throw in that local governments could not pass anti lgbt laws, but again states need more power * sarcasm*.

Edited May 16, 2016 by StevenR84

[rehmwa]

12 minutes ago, StevenR84 said:

And if pedophiles want to get into a different bathroom to harm a child *SPOILER ALERT* they are going to do it regardless. This is such an invalid argument/law on all accounts.

I agree it's a weak/invalid argument also. 

I understand the concern of the people that want to stay "traditional".  I don't agree with it, but I won't belittle their intentions by accusing EVERYBODY on that side to just be squeamish church ladies - not that there isn't only a small percentage of biased buttinskies, but assume the rest have better (if misled) intentions.

However, I think they are blowing it out of proportion and their legislation is intrusive, won't address the concerns they are stating, and they need to stay out of it.  Of course, I also think legislation to explicitly support rights is redundant also and unnecessary, though.  These are redundant with the general philosophy and, thus, are just feel good impotent laws if the other branches would do their jobs correctly.  (as for the Feds sticking their noses into it? I think it's more appropriate that the courts would come in and just shut down the law rather than the Feds casting another law, or, infinitely worse, the execs passing executive orders)

I have to assume this is just about public facilities too and this doesn't touch private businesses in any way - because that would completely cross the line - private businesses should be able to have whatever rules they want on their private property.  Their customer base will speak if they are doing stupid or unfair things

[iacas]

This topic is not about gender or which restroom to use.

[StevenR84]

Then to guide it back, I see Bernie as the only one genuinely interested in protecting the right of the LGBT people, and all people for that matter. He has spent his whole life fighting for equality for all. And before you write him off he isn't done and this will go to a contested convention. Love him or hate him, he is the only viable candidate that produces a slam dunk win over Trump.

[Braivo]

15 minutes ago, iacas said:

This topic is not about gender or which restroom to use.

Exactly. I look away for the weekend and come back to posts about ketchup and bathrooms. 

Who's up for honest debate/discussion about the 2016 Presidential race? Anyone?

I will say it again, and again, and again. Everyone hates on Trump for all of his loose remarks and they think he will be a terrible POTUS because of that. I disagree. We should be in a relative quiet period from now to the convention, but everyone is still talking about Trump. NY Times hit pieces, GMA interviews, etc, etc. He is still the topic of most political conversation.

We should want a POTUS that can single handedly shift the entire political and media landscape. This is a guy that knows how to get things done. His entire life is a story or action and results. Sure, he's had a few failures. Who doesn't? If you aren't failing you aren't doing anything worthwhile. 

He will end up with the most GOP primary votes in history while spending far less money that any other major candidate. Think about that for a minute. Don't we want someone in office who can get things done efficiently? Isn't that what we've been missing all of this time. 

Trump is the smartest man in the room. He has been planning this run his entire life, he is patient and methodical, far from a loose cannon as many like to describe him. None of what he is saying or doing is irrational in any way, it is all part of a much larger plan that lands him a massive victory in November. 

Who do we want to be our POTUS, the person who gets played? Or the person who can play everyone? I know what when it comes down to dealing with a corrupt congress or dictators of other nations I want the guy that knows how to get people to do what he wants. I want that guy on our team. 

[Dave2512]

11 minutes ago, Braivo said:

Who do we want to be our POTUS, the person who gets played? Or the person who can play everyone? I know what when it comes down to dealing with a corrupt congress or dictators of other nations I want the guy that knows how to get people to do what he wants. I want that guy on our team. 

I think you overestimate his ability to influence people in the political realm. He hasn't even been capable of getting many sitting GOP leaders on his side yet. His remarks do turn people off and that's a valid concern.

[phillyk]

5 minutes ago, Braivo said:

Exactly. I look away for the weekend and come back to posts about ketchup and bathrooms. 

Who's up for honest debate/discussion about the 2016 Presidential race? Anyone?

I will say it again, and again, and again. Everyone hates on Trump for all of his loose remarks and they think he will be a terrible POTUS because of that. I disagree. We should be in a relative quiet period from now to the convention, but everyone is still talking about Trump. NY Times hit pieces, GMA interviews, etc, etc. He is still the topic of most political conversation.

We should want a POTUS that can single handedly shift the entire political and media landscape. This is a guy that knows how to get things done. His entire life is a story or action and results. Sure, he's had a few failures. Who doesn't? If you aren't failing you aren't doing anything worthwhile. 

He will end up with the most GOP primary votes in history while spending far less money that any other major candidate. Think about that for a minute. Don't we want someone in office who can get things done efficiently? Isn't that what we've been missing all of this time. 

Trump is the smartest man in the room. He has been planning this run his entire life, he is patient and methodical, far from a loose cannon as many like to describe him. None of what he is saying or doing is irrational in any way, it is all part of a much larger plan that lands him a massive victory in November. 

Who do we want to be our POTUS, the person who gets played? Or the person who can play everyone? I know what when it comes down to dealing with a corrupt congress or dictators of other nations I want the guy that knows how to get people to do what he wants. I want that guy on our team. 

Oh so you want the guy that will lie to you at every turn to bend your will.  Trump is sounding more like Darth Sidious.  I don't want a candidate that doesn't know what he wants.  Clinton has been around for a while, we all know where she'll stand regardless.  Trump, we don't know as well.  It's hard for me to trust him when he can't stay on one side of an issue.  Don't say he is just learning more about these topics.  He's a presidential candidate, he should've known all about these topics long before starting to run for president.  He should've known where he stands on every issue a year ago. 

You think he'll play everyone and yet the GOP is hesitant still to use him and the democrats definitely don't like him.  How exactly will he bend congress when nobody likes him?

I guess bottom line for me is I don't trust Trump and I don't trust Clinton, but Clinton I feel better about her intentions.

[Braivo]

17 minutes ago, Dave2512 said:

I think you overestimate his ability to influence people in the political realm. He hasn't even been capable of getting many sitting GOP leaders on his side yet. His remarks do turn people off and that's a valid concern.

Please show me where there is a lack of GOP leaders endorsing him? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Donald_Trump_presidential_campaign_endorsements,_2016

Paul Ryan? That's it. 

11 minutes ago, phillyk said:

Oh so you want the guy that will lie to you at every turn to bend your will.  Trump is sounding more like Darth Sidious.  I don't want a candidate that doesn't know what he wants.  Clinton has been around for a while, we all know where she'll stand regardless.  Trump, we don't know as well.  It's hard for me to trust him when he can't stay on one side of an issue.  Don't say he is just learning more about these topics.  He's a presidential candidate, he should've known all about these topics long before starting to run for president.  He should've known where he stands on every issue a year ago. 

You think he'll play everyone and yet the GOP is hesitant still to use him and the democrats definitely don't like him.  How exactly will he bend congress when nobody likes him?

I guess bottom line for me is I don't trust Trump and I don't trust Clinton, but Clinton I feel better about her intentions.

This is where most people miss the point. Being likable has very little to do with actually getting results. We have all been led to believe this to be true, but it is not. 

Trump is abrasive, but he gets things done. Perhaps we all need to toughen up a bit and quit being so offended by "abrasive" language. 

[Lihu]

17 minutes ago, phillyk said:

Oh so you want the guy that will lie to you at every turn to bend your will.  Trump is sounding more like Darth Sidious.  I don't want a candidate that doesn't know what he wants.  Clinton has been around for a while, we all know where she'll stand regardless.  Trump, we don't know as well.  It's hard for me to trust him when he can't stay on one side of an issue.  Don't say he is just learning more about these topics.  He's a presidential candidate, he should've known all about these topics long before starting to run for president.  He should've known where he stands on every issue a year ago. 

You think he'll play everyone and yet the GOP is hesitant still to use him and the democrats definitely don't like him.  How exactly will he bend congress when nobody likes him?

I guess bottom line for me is I don't trust Trump and I don't trust Clinton, but Clinton I feel better about her intentions.

Truth be told, I don't think Trump ever thought he would make it this far so easily. I truly believe he was just making a statement and expected to come in a close second or something. He didn't really spend a lot of money on his campaign. He's made his statement and it resonates with a large number of Americans. Trump and the rest of us are all sick of our corrupt government. Clinton and all others than Sanders are all part of this political royalty.

They're good at getting re-elected and good at convincing people that they are "pure and honest" and everyone else is "unknown and untrustworthy".

Trump and everyone else underestimated how many intelligent Americans would side with him. Yes, he has fringe racists who side with him, but he also has a large number of industry leaders siding with him. He's not "in their pockets" but they are starting to understand that he is going to do what is good for them and everyone else regardless of having a strong lobby.

We'll see where we go with this, but one thing is for sure. We need to reduce or eliminate the corrupt American Royalty.

[Dave2512]

3 minutes ago, Braivo said:

Please show me where there is a lack of GOP leaders endorsing him? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Donald_Trump_presidential_campaign_endorsements,_2016

Paul Ryan? That's it. 

This is where most people miss the point. Being likable has very little to do with actually getting results. We have all been led to believe this to be true, but it is not. 

Trump is abrasive, but he gets things done. Perhaps we all need to toughen up a bit and quit being so offended by "abrasive" language. 

If you think Paul Ryan is the only GOP leader not endorsing him you are seeing what you want to see. Even Fox News is vocal about his inability to unify the party as of now.

But you're not the best filter for this. You're not a Trump supporter you are a Trump superfan. Your posts resonate with the excitement of a tween at a Bieber concert. If Trump burned a bag of poo on your porch you'd gather the ashes put them in a silk bag and stick it under your pillow.

 

 

[Lihu]

4 minutes ago, Dave2512 said:

If you think Paul Ryan is the only GOP leader not endorsing him you are seeing what you want to see. Even Fox News is vocal about his inability to unify the party as of now.

But you're not the best filter for this. You're not a Trump supporter you are a Trump superfan. Your posts resonate with the excitement of a tween at a Bieber concert. If Trump burned a bag of poo on your porch you'd gather the ashes put them in a silk bag and stick it under your pillow.

Don't you think this is a little over the top?

[saevel25]

13 minutes ago, Braivo said:

Trump is abrasive, but he gets things done. Perhaps we all need to toughen up a bit and quit being so offended by "abrasive" language. 

Not at the cost of burning bridges with our long time allies. Good leaders know when to be tactful and know when to be brash. He has no off switch. He likes to wield social media like a caveman with a club. That might appeal to some people, but it's a big turn off to others. 

2 minutes ago, Dave2512 said:

If you think Paul Ryan is the only GOP leader not endorsing him you are seeing what you want to see. Even Fox News is vocal about his inability to unify the party as of now.

He better watch for the evangelical vote. They are threatening to boycott the election if he doesn't pick a VP that supports their views.  White Evangelicals makes up about 20% of the entire voting base, and about 60% of them vote for Republican. That's 12% of the popular vote!

He also needs to watch out for the independent vote. Gary Johnson is polling pretty solid numbers with out being mentioned much in the media. If he gets some momentum then he might cause some havoc in those swing states. 

If Trump was smart he would pick Cruz to be his VP.