• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Would you vote for Vladimir Putin?

Choose all that apply. Who would you vote for in these situations?

  • I'd take Putin over Hillary Clinton

    Votes: 4 8.2%

  • I'd take Putin over Obama

    Votes: 5 10.2%

  • I'd take Putin over Biden

    Votes: 3 6.1%

  • I'd take Putin over Bernie

    Votes: 2 4.1%

  • I'd take Putin over Warren

    Votes: 2 4.1%

  • I'd take Putin over Joe Manchin

    Votes: 2 4.1%

  • I did not vote for Trump.

    Votes: 34 69.4%

  • I would vote third party if these were my choices

    Votes: 24 49.0%
  • Total voters
    49
AtlantaAdonis said:
Normally I wouldn't even consider a guy like Putin, but we may be getting to a place where we need progressive strongman leader to take our country back in the direction of justice and away from white supremacy.
Click to expand...

Do you have any idea what a progressive is? No you don't.
 
Common Sense 1 said:
The choice was Trump or Clinton for us last election. The better man won! President Trump. :cool:
The Russian crap over and over is going to hurt the dems this November.
Click to expand...

I really fail to see how Trump was the better candidate. He is exactly like Hillary Clinton, except he's also mentally challenged.

The only reason I would prefer (but not vote) Putin to Trump is that Putin at least knows what the President's job is.
 
jimbo said:
Putin's not running for anything in the US, so the question is pointless and mute.

I would, however, vote for another Donald Trump over another Hillary Clinton for any office. And I did.
Click to expand...

No need for Putin to run for anything. He already owns the place.
 
if-you-were-wondering-why-republicans-dont-want-tolnvestigate-the-14564478.png


;)
 
haymarket said:
The reality is that far too many on the right would and have taken a Putin controlled Trump over Clinton.

And they would do so again.
Click to expand...

GOP is now officially party before country....sad
 
upsideguy said:
No need for Putin to run for anything. He already owns the place.
Click to expand...

How did he get that? Is one of the Trumps being paid 2 or 3 times the regular rate for a couple speeches?
 
jimbo said:
How did he get that? Is one of the Trumps being paid 2 or 3 times the regular rate for a couple speeches?
Click to expand...

Putin has Trump's infamous pee pee tapes..He owns the orange nightmare
 
lurchadams said:
They voted overwhelmingly for a disgusting, lying, bigoted birther in 2016 for president and a birther/pedophile in Alabama just last year. Would voting for a murderous thug be that much of a stretch for them over an "evil" Democrat?
Click to expand...

The problem was the match up. Almost any other Democrat other than Hillary would have beaten Trump. Also any other Republican outside of Trump would probably have trounced Hillary. You had two choices from the major parties the majority of Americans didn't want, but were forced to choose one.

38% of Americans had a positive or favorable view of Hillary, 58% had a negative view of her.
36% had a positive or favorable view of Trump, 60% negative or unfavorable.

Those were the choices. Let's face it, the Republicans tried to hand the Oval Office on a silver platter to the democrats by nominating Trump. The Democrats threw that silver platter right back into the GOP's face by nominating someone as disliked and unwanted by America as a whole as Trump was. So the people choose the candidate they least wanted to lose, not win, but least wanted to lose.
 
jimbo said:
Seriously? That's your best shot?
Click to expand...

NOPE....but it's one of my favorites because it reminds his supporters what an immoral pervert he is.....not that his supporters give a hoot about his sexual deviancy,infidelity,or bottom feeder morality.
 
Perotista said:
The problem was the match up. Almost any other Democrat other than Hillary would have beaten Trump. Also any other Republican outside of Trump would probably have trounced Hillary. You had two choices from the major parties the majority of Americans didn't want, but were forced to choose one.

38% of Americans had a positive or favorable view of Hillary, 58% had a negative view of her.
36% had a positive or favorable view of Trump, 60% negative or unfavorable.

Those were the choices. Let's face it, the Republicans tried to hand the Oval Office on a silver platter to the democrats by nominating Trump. The Democrats threw that silver platter right back into the GOP's face by nominating someone as disliked and unwanted by America as a whole as Trump was. So the people choose the candidate they least wanted to lose, not win, but least wanted to lose.
Click to expand...

As a liberal,as difficult as it is to admit,there is a lot of truth in your post.I would add Team Trump simply did a better job at looking at the electoral college,worked harder overall during the campaign,and figured out better when,where,and how to use their resources....I think Bannon gets the mother lode of credit for that.
 
Last edited:
MrWonka said:
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...k&utm_source=main_fb&utm_campaign=hp_fb_pages

Ronald Regan's son claims that Trump's supporters would vote for Vladimir Putin over any Democrat. Let's find out.
Click to expand...

Silly little poll, but I'll bit and give you my serious answers.

Putin vs. Hillary Clinton, I’d vote third party
Putin vs. Obama, Obama hands down
Putin vs. Biden, I always like Joe, 100% for Biden
Putin vs. Bernie, I always had a lot of respect for Sanders. I disagree with most of his political stances, but I trust Bernie. Bernie for sure.
Putin vs. Warren, Tough one, 50-50 on voting third party or Warren. I really don’t like her much. I'd never vote for Putin, but voting for Warren is iffy at best. Maybe, maybe not. Almost any third party candidate would be better than these two.
Putin vs. Joe Manchin, Manchin a thousand times. He reminds me of the old fashioned big tent democrats that were around in the early days of my life. I was actually a big tent Democrat for quite a few years. Then a Reagan Republican until Perot. Now both major parties disgust me.
I did not vote for Trump, I didn’t vote for Hillary either, I voted third party, against both Trump and Clinton.

The only thing Hillary and Trump have in common is my disdain for both.
 
Logician Man said:
As a liberal,as difficult as it is to admit,there is a lot of truth in your post.I would add Team Trump simply did a better job at looking at the electoral college,worked harder overall during the campaign,and figured out better when,where,and how to use their resources....I think Bannon gets the mother lode of credit for that.
Click to expand...

Exactly.Talking about being out worked and out campaigned by Trump. I think I will always wonder if there wasn't something physically wrong with Hillary. Why? From 1 Sep 2016 through 8 Nov 2016, Trump made 116 campaign visits/stops to Hillary's 71. That's quite a difference. I know of no other candidate, regardless of party that would have let their opponent both out work and out campaign them by that much. Amid this Russia controversy, this fact get overlooked.

This Hillary could control herself. Either she lacked the fire in the belly that it takes to win a national election or perhaps, I don't know, something was wrong with her. I've been following politics for a long, long time. But Hillary's campaign, I call it inept and ho hum was the worst I'd seen since G.H.W. Bush back in 1992. Bush spent of his campaign acting like he didn't care if he won or lost. It wasn't until his last two weeks, Bush actually came out of his shell and began campaigning like he should have from the beginning.
 
I would either not vote or go 3rd party.
 
Perotista said:
Exactly.Talking about being out worked and out campaigned by Trump. I think I will always wonder if there wasn't something physically wrong with Hillary. Why? From 1 Sep 2016 through 8 Nov 2016, Trump made 116 campaign visits/stops to Hillary's 71. That's quite a difference. I know of no other candidate, regardless of party that would have let their opponent both out work and out campaign them by that much. Amid this Russia controversy, this fact get overlooked.

This Hillary could control herself. Either she lacked the fire in the belly that it takes to win a national election or perhaps, I don't know, something was wrong with her. I've been following politics for a long, long time. But Hillary's campaign, I call it inept and ho hum was the worst I'd seen since G.H.W. Bush back in 1992. Bush spent of his campaign acting like he didn't care if he won or lost. It wasn't until his last two weeks, Bush actually came out of his shell and began campaigning like he should have from the beginning.
Click to expand...

I would say it was likely she simply believed Trump had no chance and would walk away with it. I think arrogance rather than some physical ailment that prevented her from campaigning as hard as Trump.
 
Nap said:
I would say it was likely she simply believed Trump had no chance and would walk away with it. I think arrogance rather than some physical ailment that prevented her from campaigning as hard as Trump.
Click to expand...

I went back over the polls, Clinton seem to always have the lead. But never what I would call a comfortable lead especially when one considers the margin of error. Trump vs. Clinton is the last one in the historical polling. It covers all historical polling from 1936 to 2016.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histo...ons#United_States_presidential_election,_2016

There's nothing there to get arrogant, over confident about anything. But yes, there were times I thought Hillary was taking her election for granted. After all, the DNC and state Democratic Party leaders rigged the Democratic primaries in her favor. Perhaps she just got used to that knowing she would win in the end. I don't know.

One thing is for certain, her campaign was flat, ho hum is the term I used. Trump's was full of energy and enthusiasm. He didn't have the supporters Hillary did, but Trump's supporters were willing to go to the four corners of the earth for him. Hillary's was more laid back waiting on the four corners to come to her.

Say what one will, there is absolutely no excuse to let your political opponent both out work and out campaign you by the numbers Hillary did. There isn't much in a campaign one can control, but campaign visits/stops is one that you can control. Getting before the people is another. Trump was on almost every daily talk show he could get on or called into them. Hillary wasn't, kind of like she was hiding until The View or some other show that she knew was 100% behind her before she would go on. No tough questions.
 
Perotista said:
I went back over the polls, Clinton seem to always have the lead. But never what I would call a comfortable lead especially when one considers the margin of error. Trump vs. Clinton is the last one in the historical polling. It covers all historical polling from 1936 to 2016.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histo...ons#United_States_presidential_election,_2016

There's nothing there to get arrogant, over confident about anything. But yes, there were times I thought Hillary was taking her election for granted. After all, the DNC and state Democratic Party leaders rigged the Democratic primaries in her favor. Perhaps she just got used to that knowing she would win in the end. I don't know.

One thing is for certain, her campaign was flat, ho hum is the term I used. Trump's was full of energy and enthusiasm. He didn't have the supporters Hillary did, but Trump's supporters were willing to go to the four corners of the earth for him. Hillary's was more laid back waiting on the four corners to come to her.

Say what one will, there is absolutely no excuse to let your political opponent both out work and out campaign you by the numbers Hillary did. There isn't much in a campaign one can control, but campaign visits/stops is one that you can control. Getting before the people is another. Trump was on almost every daily talk show he could get on or called into them. Hillary wasn't, kind of like she was hiding until The View or some other show that she knew was 100% behind her before she would go on. No tough questions.
Click to expand...

This is ultimately the great irony that is lost in all of the collusion talk. The same people saying they are outraged over Russia gloss over the fact that Russia's alleged involvement is exposing the collusion in the DNC primary. It seems rather disingenuous to say your interest is in maintaining the integrity of our elections while ignoring that fact. It seems less about protecting our "democracy" and more about deflection and revenge for exposing the corruption within the DNC.
 
Nap said:
This is ultimately the great irony that is lost in all of the collusion talk. The same people saying they are outraged over Russia gloss over the fact that Russia's alleged involvement is exposing the collusion in the DNC primary. It seems rather disingenuous to say your interest is in maintaining the integrity of our elections while ignoring that fact. It seems less about protecting our "democracy" and more about deflection and revenge for exposing the corruption within the DNC.
Click to expand...

There was no collusion in the Democratic primaries. The super delegate rules were in place years before Bernie decided to run let alone as a Democrat.

If Bernie wants our nomination he should join our party.
 
Howard the Duck said:
There was no collusion in the Democratic primaries. The super delegate rules were in place years before Bernie decided to run let alone as a Democrat.

If Bernie wants our nomination he should join our party.
Click to expand...

I guess technically collusion was the wrong choice, more like Hillary owned the DNC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom