Presidential Race 2016

[Lihu]

Just now, newtogolf said:

Cristie is a risk because as a NY'er who lived in Virginia for 10 years I can tell you that there isn't much love for NJ and NY in the south.  Both of them come off as bullies which won't play well outside of the north east.  I think Kasich or Cruz (in that order) would be better options for Trump.  

I agree with Kasich. Not too keen on Cruz, but he makes the most sense delegate wise.

[Dave2512]

1 minute ago, Lihu said:

Yeah, not sure that would work very well?

It probably wouldn't and I heard some interesting views on Fox about it this AM. Speculation is it isn't the offensive remarks he's made about women that offends them but his demeanor in general. What excites people like super-punch guy doesn't resonate with women.

I swear some of it seems like a hint to Trump, like Fox is trying to communicate to him via reporting what they perceive as not working. It's not a bad idea since he's graduated to mixing it up with the likes of David Cameron.

[Lihu]

3 minutes ago, Dave2512 said:

It probably wouldn't and I heard some interesting views on Fox about it this AM. Speculation is it isn't the offensive remarks he's made about women that offends them but his demeanor in general. What excites people like super-punch guy doesn't resonate with women.

I swear some of it seems like a hint to Trump, like Fox is trying to communicate to him via reporting what they perceive as not working. It's not a bad idea since he's graduated to mixing it up with the likes of David Cameron.

What's funny is that John F Kennedy (actually most of the male Kennedys) and Bill Clinton appealed to many women voters and were very successful womanizers.

It's very strange that many women trust the very men that put them through so much emotional agony on a one to one basis? Very strange.

[newtogolf]

1 minute ago, Lihu said:

What's funny is that John F Kennedy (actually most of the male Kennedys) and Bill Clinton appealed to many women voters and were very successful womanizers.

It's very strange that many women trust the very men that put them through so much emotional agony on a one to one basis? Very strange.

I don't believe Bill Clinton was known as a womanizer (or rapist) until he was voted into office and after he left.  There was definitely an advantage to being POTUS pre-internet.  

[Dave2512]

2 minutes ago, Lihu said:

What's funny is that John F Kennedy (actually most of the male Kennedys) and Bill Clinton appealed to many women voters and were very successful womanizers.

It's very strange that many women trust the very men that put them through so much emotional agony on a one to one basis? Very strange.

Bill's biggest problems came post taking office and the 60's were a different time. JFK had a movie star like persona and his affairs had a glamorous appearance. Trump is a different animal. He's not well spoken or debonair and his trophy wives kind of add to his ickiness. He's less a womanizer than a creeper.

[Elmer]

24 minutes ago, Gunther said:

I heard few times over the weekend that Newt has the inside track on VP.  I love me some Newt but I don't believe that would be a good choice, either strategically or tactically.

I'm still convinced he needs to pick a woman.  I love Sarah Palin too, but the media has caricatured her to the point where she's pretty non-effective to all but the most ardent of conservatives.  

Don't know much about Susana Martinez but if she's in any way for illegal immmigration, that's a non-starter.  If not, she could be viable, provided she could withstand the smear campaign the left would wage on her.  No need for Washington chops for this role, he'll have plenty of people in his administration that will fill the void in his own political experience.

As I've mentioned, Condi would be great but I doubt she'd take it.  Carly too, but not sure they can reconcile.  Nikki Haley is weak on immigration.  The governor of OK seems pretty reasonable but I don't know much about her.

We'll see where he goes but I do hope he picks a woman.

You will never win over the women vote with Newt. The guy has cheated on each wife before divorcing them to marry his mistress. This would take the whole Bill cheating discussion off the table.

Palin will not win over any votes that Trump has not already brought to the ticket! She will not win over Moderate democrates or even conservative Democrates. She will not help win California or New York.
And her lack of knowledge regarding the duties of the VP are scary considering she was a half term Governor, and that alone should have provided a simple Civics lesson!

Condi would have been a better choice for Potus. However I dont know that she would be a good VP. She had the whole "WMD" issue over her head. Her aides have been found to have classified information on personal emails, which takes out the clinton email scandal.

Trump needs to pick a VP which will satisfy the Conservative Christian agenda. Otherwise they have no one to push their agenda in this race.

[Lihu]

7 minutes ago, Dave2512 said:

Bill's biggest problems came post taking office and the 60's were a different time. JFK had a movie star like persona and his affairs had a glamorous appearance. Trump is a different animal. He's not well spoken or debonair and his trophy wives kind of add to his ickiness. He's less a womanizer than a creeper.

Yeah, that's kind of true. This is more or less how all male golfers appear to the general public, though.

 

 

 

 

[Elmer]

9 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

I don't believe Bill Clinton was known as a womanizer (or rapist) until he was voted into office and after he left.  There was definitely an advantage to being POTUS pre-internet.  

Can you imagine Jefferson in the internet age?
or what about Buchanan, Wilson, Harding or FDR????
And that is just the tip of what the press chose to ignore regarding POTUS and personal lives/affairs!

Can you imagine in this day & Age a President in a wheelchair and the press abiding by the request not to photograph POTUS being lifted into a car or on carried onto stage?

[Braivo]

1 hour 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.

So long as it was from Obama's dog it would be perfect. 

1 hour ago, phillyk said:

A real leader doesn't use abrasive language.  Respect! Respect is very important.  I'm not a weeny baby, I don't take offense to insults.  But I shouldn't have to take that from a presidential candidate.  Trump does not respect his opponents.  That's what I have most issue with.  Someone bites at him, and he can't take it.  He bites back even harder.  Maybe Trump needs to toughen up and quite being offended.

Ha, if he didn't use abrasive language he wouldn't be here. Period. He disposed of 16 other candidates who didn't use abrasive language. Notice a pattern? Nice guys don't finish first. We don't live in a utopia where the nicest people rise to the top. We live in a world where the nice guys get torn apart. 

1 hour ago, Lihu said:

Just a wild guess, but I'd think that the evangelical vote would still prefer Trump in office than Clinton?

1 hour ago, rehmwa said:

I think it balance out from the other side when they equate a poster to Darth Sideous.

Get used to it

We'll get a lot of posts that mention Hitler, Satan, etc etc - this election will bring that out

I've heard it all. You may be shocked to learn that I am actually a very reasonable person. Us Trump supporters recognize he is not perfect, but the second we give an inch to that point the moral signaling police jump all over it. This is why Trump doesn't cave to criticism, it only invites more of it. 

52 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

 

If the rumor is true he's actually considering Sarah Palin for V.P. or if he actually selects her then I'll stay home on election day and vote for no one.  

Never going to happen. But guess what? It got him in the news and got people talking about him. Hmmm, you guys noticing a pattern here yet? 

10 minutes ago, Lihu said:

What's funny is that John F Kennedy (actually most of the male Kennedys) and Bill Clinton appealed to many women voters and were very successful womanizers.

It's very strange that many women trust the very men that put them through so much emotional agony on a one to one basis? Very strange.

Not strange at all. Basic human biology. Strength. Women respect strength. For millions of years they relied on strong men to protect them and provide them with genetically strong children. JFK and Trump are strong figures. Clinton is still viewed favorably despite his well-known past. Trump will be no different, he will swing a large part of the female vote by November. 

[newtogolf]

5 minutes ago, Elmer said:

Can you imagine Jefferson in the internet age?
or what about Buchanan, Wilson, Harding or FDR????
And that is just the tip of what the press chose to ignore regarding POTUS and personal lives/affairs!

Can you imagine in this day & Age a President in a wheelchair and the press abiding by the request not to photograph POTUS being lifted into a car or on carried onto stage?

No I can't, I think it's a large reason why there are so few quality candidates.  Running for POTUS today places your and your families every move under an electron microscope for all to see.  Most people can't pass that level of scrutiny and even fewer want to take the chance.  

[Dave2512]

I'd like to see it restricted. Won't happen but much of what is being reported is firmly in who gives a shit territory. Everything can't be viable news.

[bplewis24]

5 hours 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.

Nobody's children are in harm's way anymore so than they were last year or last decade.  Stop deluding yourself for the sake of your party.

3 hours 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. 

He gets what done?  And what does that have to do with being President?  You think real estate development deals and investment decisions prepare him for that office?  If you do, you'll have to do better than using logical fallacies to explain why.  Because virtually every aspect of his personality, his history and his campaigning (policy proposals and knowledge of political issues) has tended to show otherwise.  He's a political neophyte with no discernible ability to handle both the influence and prominent stature of the office nor the delicate relationships with both domestic and foreign leaders that comes with it.

3 hours ago, Lihu said:

Just a wild guess, but I'd think that the evangelical vote would still prefer Trump in office than Clinton?

They have been strange bedfellows with the conservative right for decades, so there's no reason to think otherwise.  And it's pretty easy for the religious right to hypocritically rationalize that decision because there is plenty of recent and long-standing precedent for it.  This isn't new.  Trump is just the unharnessed culmination of all of the rhetoric the party has employed to keep their coalition together.  Trump lacks the discipline and temperament of a politician, but that has only helped him as he has tapped into the same fear and nationalist/authoritarian angst while appearing to not appease party leaders and media outlets.  For the base, that is refreshing.

The big problem the party has, though, is a messaging problem.  Their policies are objectively bad, sure, but the base believes in them and continues to vote for them.  However, Trump is a manifestation of the rallying cries of republican party leaders of the past several campaigns and even decades.  Yet they're now trying to disavow him without disowning their contribution to it.  That's a pretty difficult task to accomplish without alienating the base built around it.

 

2 hours ago, Gunther said:

I love Sarah Palin too, but the media has caricatured her to the point where she's pretty non-effective to all but the most ardent of conservatives.

She's also completely unqualified, delusional and unhinged.  So there's that.

[Dave2512]

I long for a Trump-Palin card it would be high comedy for the ages.

My guess is Trump's choice comes down to a few things, improving his standing with certain groups, a fail-safe for his political inexperience and countering Hillary's choice. Trump wants the nation to think he is brimming with confidence but him saying stuff like Bernie should make a 3rd party run says otherwise. He is going to have a tough time finding one person that does everything for him.

[Lihu]

3 hours ago, newtogolf said:

No I can't, I think it's a large reason why there are so few quality candidates.  Running for POTUS today places your and your families every move under an electron microscope for all to see.  Most people can't pass that level of scrutiny and even fewer want to take the chance.  

Most people who are not running for office can easily pass that level of scrutiny, you are likely referring to the career politicians who can't. Trump and Sanders could both pass this test.

Keep in mind that Trump is probably the most transparent of any of the people running for office. He earned his way to being part of the American nobility, and his 5 children are themselves public figures. You don't hear too much about them because they are pretty much quite people.

Trump was interviewed recently and asked about his taxes, he simply stated "None of you business." This is fine for a businessman, and once he is POTUS he simply will open up his personal finances to the public.

There's nothing to discuss about Sanders, he's pretty much open as well.

6 minutes ago, Dave2512 said:

I long for a Trump-Palin card it would be high comedy for the ages.

My guess is Trump's choice comes down to a few things, improving his standing with certain groups, a fail-safe for his political inexperience and countering Hillary's choice. Trump wants the nation to think he is brimming with confidence but him saying stuff like Bernie should make a 3rd party run says otherwise. He is going to have a tough time finding one person that does everything for him.

I think he's just telling Bernie to flee from the criminals that infest the Democratic party. Not that the Republican party is any better.

[Dave2512]

7 minutes ago, Lihu said:

I think he's just telling Bernie to flee from the criminals that infest the Democratic party. Not that the Republican party is any better.

No he wants Bernie to be a fly in the ointment for Hillary.

[Lihu]

Just now, Dave2512 said:

No he wants Bernie to be a fly in the ointment for Hillary.

I really don't want to know what kind of ointment. . .

 

[Dave2512]

One thing for sure Bernie needs to make peace with the reality it's not going to be him and start rallying his supporters to move towards Clinton. He's already said the most important thing is defeating Trump so my guess is he will be able to sell it to his supporters. Trump seems convinced they share an audience but I'm not seeing that here.

[Golfingdad]

24 minutes ago, Lihu said:

...you are likely referring to the career politicians who can't. Trump and Sanders could both pass this test.

Bernie Sanders has been in Congress since 1990, in public office since 1981, and attempting to be in public office since the "early to mid 1970's."