View Poll Results: Who is your favorite?

Voters
35. You may not vote on this poll
  • Hillary Clinton

    22 62.86%
  • Jeb Bush

    13 37.14%
Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 107

Thread: 2016: Bush vs Clinton

  1. #51
    Sage
    Chagos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    in expatria
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    11,019

    Re: 2016: Bush vs Clinton

    Cannot vote since a third option is missing.

    I've had enough of both names and I don't cotton much to the concept of dynasties. It's not the United Kingdom of America, is it?

  2. #52
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 10:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: 2016: Bush vs Clinton

    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl View Post
    Well it doesn't seem to happen to the Democrats as they don't seem to expect anything of their candidates other than they are reasonable leftwing and have a D after their name. Character, track record, accomplishments, demonstrated ability to get things done etc. don't seem to matter much.

    But until the people who vote GOP, regardless of how they self-identify, develop a backbone and are willing to demonstrate strength of character and conviction by standing up and speaking out for what they want and expect from those we entrust with leadership, I fear we will continue to 'settle' for a vanilla flavor that gives everybody just a little of what they say they want but can't or won't deliver on the campaign rhetoric. And that means holding our noses when we vote.
    To the bolded. That's far too hyperbolic and too broadly critical to even respond to. To the rest, make the republicans and the democrats sit one out. Vote third party.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  3. #53
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    14,659
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 2016: Bush vs Clinton

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    To the bolded. That's far too hyperbolic and too broadly critical to even respond to. To the rest, make the republicans and the democrats sit one out. Vote third party.
    I can appreciate how it looks that way, but the statement was more objective than you give credit. You can look at the candidates that the Democrats nominate and elect President. People with little or no credentials and/or track record, people of questionable character, dubious background, etc. Obama was such a candidate but he was nominated and elected. And despite his miserable track record in his first term nevertheless was re-elected in 2012. And now Hillary with similar lack of any kind of admirable track record and definitely of dubious character is the presumed nominee and winner in 2016. All this points to the Democrats setting the bar very very low for their chosen leaders and the D after the name seems to be all that is really important.

    The GOP has its own problems with fecklessness. It is just somewhat different from that of the Democrats.
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

  4. #54
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    14,659
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 2016: Bush vs Clinton

    Quote Originally Posted by Chagos View Post
    Cannot vote since a third option is missing.

    I've had enough of both names and I don't cotton much to the concept of dynasties. It's not the United Kingdom of America, is it?
    I think a lot of us would prefer different names to choose from. But if those are the names we do have to choose from and therefore one or the other will be President, wouldn't the honorable thing be to vote for the one who would be less damaging to the country ?
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

  5. #55
    Sage
    Chagos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    in expatria
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    11,019

    Re: 2016: Bush vs Clinton

    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl View Post
    I think a lot of us would prefer different names to choose from. But if those are the names we do have to choose from and therefore one or the other will be President, wouldn't the honorable thing be to vote for the one who would be less damaging to the country ?
    It certainly would.

    Problem being that discernment is somewhat difficult still.

  6. #56
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    14,659
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 2016: Bush vs Clinton

    Quote Originally Posted by Chagos View Post
    It certainly would.

    Problem being that discernment is somewhat difficult still.
    Not for me. There is no question that the one who chooses the least government interference and meddling is the one who will do the least damage.
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

  7. #57
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 10:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: 2016: Bush vs Clinton

    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl View Post
    I can appreciate how it looks that way, but the statement was more objective than you give credit. You can look at the candidates that the Democrats nominate and elect President. People with little or no credentials and/or track record, people of questionable character, dubious background, etc. Obama was such a candidate but he was nominated and elected. And despite his miserable track record in his first term nevertheless was re-elected in 2012. And now Hillary with similar lack of any kind of admirable track record and definitely of dubious character is the presumed nominee and winner in 2016. All this points to the Democrats setting the bar very very low for their chosen leaders and the D after the name seems to be all that is really important.

    The GOP has its own problems with fecklessness. It is just somewhat different from that of the Democrats.
    Ok, thanks AlbqOwl. So that's just too partisan for me. There's good people and bad people in both parties, there's fair and decent people in both parties, there's scalawags in both parties, people of dubious character in both parties. There's a long list of Washington elites/politicians from both parties that have been convicted of crimes. The only thing that differs in the two parties is ideologies. Other than that, one is not superior to the other. What would actually be nice is for American voters to hold there own accountable. If we are concerned about what's good for America as paramount to what's good for our party (ideological) affiliation, we might get this right some day.

    And criticize Obama all you wish, he didn't arrive in Washington of questionable character or dubious background.
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

  8. #58
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:16 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    14,659
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: 2016: Bush vs Clinton

    Quote Originally Posted by Montecresto View Post
    Ok, thanks AlbqOwl. So that's just too partisan for me. There's good people and bad people in both parties, there's fair and decent people in both parties, there's scalawags in both parties, people of dubious character in both parties. There's a long list of Washington elites/politicians from both parties that have been convicted of crimes. The only thing that differs in the two parties is ideologies. Other than that, one is not superior to the other. What would actually be nice is for American voters to hold there own accountable. If we are concerned about what's good for America as paramount to what's good for our party (ideological) affiliation, we might get this right some day.

    And criticize Obama all you wish, he didn't arrive in Washington of questionable character or dubious background.
    If you see my post as partisan, there isn't much left to say. Because it absolutely is not.

    And perhaps you can show what Barack and Michelle Obama, both claiming to come from humble backgrounds of limited means and saddled with oppressive student loans, did to allow them to bid $1.65 million for their Chicago home? How does an obscure and unknown community organizer vault to the board chairmanship at Annenburg? And even Factcheck.org can't remove the smell from the subsequent Rezko deal. The murky relationship with Bill Ayers. Barack Obama and William Ayers-Truth! The 20 year association with Rev. Wright of the Trinity UCC who Obama said was his mentor and father figure until that scandal broke and then it seems the President never heard a single sermon Wright ever preached as he never heard the anti-American, liberation theology regularly preached in that church. Perhaps you can point to a single noteworthy accomplishment Obama can point to in his entire adult life.

    I think questionable character and dubious background is being pretty charitable as it does allow for some benefit of the doubt.

    I would like all Americans to demand a whole lot more transparency and honesty and expect a whole lot more from those we entrust with leadership positions.
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

  9. #59
    Guru
    PIPEWRENCH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    2,684

    Re: 2016: Bush vs Clinton

    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl View Post
    If you see my post as partisan, there isn't much left to say. Because it absolutely is not.

    And perhaps you can show what Barack and Michelle Obama, both claiming to come from humble backgrounds of limited means and saddled with oppressive student loans, did to allow them to bid $1.65 million for their Chicago home? How does an obscure and unknown community organizer vault to the board chairmanship at Annenburg? And even Factcheck.org can't remove the smell from the subsequent Rezko deal. The murky relationship with Bill Ayers. Barack Obama and William Ayers-Truth! The 20 year association with Rev. Wright of the Trinity UCC who Obama said was his mentor and father figure until that scandal broke and then it seems the President never heard a single sermon Wright ever preached as he never heard the anti-American, liberation theology regularly preached in that church. Perhaps you can point to a single noteworthy accomplishment Obama can point to in his entire adult life.

    I think questionable character and dubious background is being pretty charitable as it does allow for some benefit of the doubt.

    I would like all Americans to demand a whole lot more transparency and honesty and expect a whole lot more from those we entrust with leadership positions.
    Birds of a feather.

  10. #60
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 10:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: 2016: Bush vs Clinton

    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl View Post
    If you see my post as partisan, there isn't much left to say. Because it absolutely is not.

    And perhaps you can show what Barack and Michelle Obama, both claiming to come from humble backgrounds of limited means and saddled with oppressive student loans, did to allow them to bid $1.65 million for their Chicago home? How does an obscure and unknown community organizer vault to the board chairmanship at Annenburg? And even Factcheck.org can't remove the smell from the subsequent Rezko deal. The murky relationship with Bill Ayers. Barack Obama and William Ayers-Truth! The 20 year association with Rev. Wright of the Trinity UCC who Obama said was his mentor and father figure until that scandal broke and then it seems the President never heard a single sermon Wright ever preached as he never heard the anti-American, liberation theology regularly preached in that church. Perhaps you can point to a single noteworthy accomplishment Obama can point to in his entire adult life.

    I think questionable character and dubious background is being pretty charitable as it does allow for some benefit of the doubt.

    I would like all Americans to demand a whole lot more transparency and honesty and expect a whole lot more from those we entrust with leadership positions.
    What???!!! It's as partisan as the day is long. You broad brushed an entire party, presumably all liberal progressive voters as questionable and dubious of character only interested in sending the like to Washington. How am I suppose to deal with that. And presumably, in contrast, conservatives are only interested in voting in ethical and moral politicians that execute their duties in strict adherence to the constitution. That's terribly patronizing. Otherwise, perhaps you can point me to a clean politician, ANYWHERE!
    Killing one person is murder, killing 100,000 is foreign policy

Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •