Gary Johnson’s Aleppo gaffe was bad. But Trump’s consistent ignorance is worse.

[Abbazorkzog]

Gary Johnson’s Aleppo gaffe was bad. But Trump’s consistent ignorance is worse.

But let’s be fair to Mr. Johnson: In the context of the 2016 presidential campaign, he’s far from winning the cluelessness contest. Following his gaffe, the former New Mexico governor offered a relatively cogent summary of U.S. support for various Syrian factions. Later, he apologized, saying that he thought “Aleppo” was an acronym. “I feel horrible,” he said to Bloomberg Politics. “I have to get smarter, and that’s just part of the process.”

It’s refreshing, at least, to hear a national candidate acknowledge error and vow to do better. Contrast that with Donald Trump, who in a televised national security forum Wednesday offered a staggering array of ignorant and mendacious assertions — and acknowledged no regrets about any of them. In addition to repeating his false claims to having opposed the U.S. interventions in Iraq and Libya, Mr. Trump defended a tweet saying that military sexual assault was the result of men and women serving together, and he suggested the solution was to “set up a court system within the military” because “right now, the court system practically doesn’t exist.” Does he really mean to replace the U.S. military justice system?​

In a choice between Trump and Johnson as alternatives to Clinton, the choice is obvious.

 

[azgreg]

Can you make the headline a little larger please?




:mrgreen:

 

[poweRob]

I don't think Gary Johnson's slip was that bad of a gaffe. I think it was a gotcha moment so the interviewer could make "point and laugh" situation rather than actually do any digging on issues.

This whole election thus far I've seen little to no actual reporting on issues and platforms. They instead spend all their time creating non-issues to bitch about.

They should stick with "How will you handle ______________?" so that the electorate just might get to be become informed voters.

 

[joG]

Gary Johnson’s Aleppo gaffe was bad. But Trump’s consistent ignorance is worse.

But let’s be fair to Mr. Johnson: In the context of the 2016 presidential campaign, he’s far from winning the cluelessness contest. Following his gaffe, the former New Mexico governor offered a relatively cogent summary of U.S. support for various Syrian factions. Later, he apologized, saying that he thought “Aleppo” was an acronym. “I feel horrible,” he said to Bloomberg Politics. “I have to get smarter, and that’s just part of the process.”

It’s refreshing, at least, to hear a national candidate acknowledge error and vow to do better. Contrast that with Donald Trump, who in a televised national security forum Wednesday offered a staggering array of ignorant and mendacious assertions — and acknowledged no regrets about any of them. In addition to repeating his false claims to having opposed the U.S. interventions in Iraq and Libya, Mr. Trump defended a tweet saying that military sexual assault was the result of men and women serving together, and he suggested the solution was to “set up a court system within the military” because “right now, the court system practically doesn’t exist.” Does he really mean to replace the U.S. military justice system?​

In a choice between Trump and Johnson as alternatives to Clinton, the choice is obvious.

But are those things worse than almost certain criminality and a lack of respect for security?

 

[Ikari]

This whole election thus far I've seen little to no actual reporting on issues and platforms. They instead spend all their time creating non-issues to bitch about.

This has been true of the last few election cycles, I'd say, and the general trend in Republocrat politics.

 

[Abbazorkzog]

But are those things worse than almost certain criminality and a lack of respect for security?

Not worse. Just as bad.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Gary Johnson’s Aleppo gaffe was bad. But Trump’s consistent ignorance is worse.

But let’s be fair to Mr. Johnson: In the context of the 2016 presidential campaign, he’s far from winning the cluelessness contest. Following his gaffe, the former New Mexico governor offered a relatively cogent summary of U.S. support for various Syrian factions. Later, he apologized, saying that he thought “Aleppo” was an acronym. “I feel horrible,” he said to Bloomberg Politics. “I have to get smarter, and that’s just part of the process.”

It’s refreshing, at least, to hear a national candidate acknowledge error and vow to do better. Contrast that with Donald Trump, who in a televised national security forum Wednesday offered a staggering array of ignorant and mendacious assertions — and acknowledged no regrets about any of them. In addition to repeating his false claims to having opposed the U.S. interventions in Iraq and Libya, Mr. Trump defended a tweet saying that military sexual assault was the result of men and women serving together, and he suggested the solution was to “set up a court system within the military” because “right now, the court system practically doesn’t exist.” Does he really mean to replace the U.S. military justice system?​

In a choice between Trump and Johnson as alternatives to Clinton, the choice is obvious.

Right, obviously Trump is the one.

 

[joG]

Not worse. Just as bad.

It is a trilemma of the worst kind!

 

[Hawkeye10]

I don't think Gary Johnson's slip was that bad of a gaffe. I think it was a gotcha moment so the interviewer could make "point and laugh" situation rather than actually do any digging on issues.

This whole election thus far I've seen little to no actual reporting on issues and platforms. They instead spend all their time creating non-issues to bitch about.

They should stick with "How will you handle ______________?" so that the electorate just might get to be become informed voters.

I see very little evidence that the voters want to pick based upon policy proposals, if we did JEB! would have gotten some interest, Trump would not get away with having no serious proposals, and the D's would be able to talk about something more than what candy they want to pass out next on the kids and grand kids charge card and who gets it.

 

[poweRob]

But are those things worse than almost certain criminality and a lack of respect for security?

And this doesn't help either.

Can't find out how policies will be handled because we have to point and laugh about Allepo or make hyperbolistic false claims of "but... but... but she's a criminal".

 

[Lutherf]

When the general theme of an election has devolved to the point where every candidate is being evaluated based on how they aren't as bad as the other candidates it's a sure sign that the electorate needs to begin some serious soul searching.

 

[joG]

And this doesn't help either.

Can't find out how policies will be handled because we have to point and laugh about Allepo or make hyperbolistic false claims of "but... but... but she's a criminal".

What do you mean by "hyperbolistic false claims of "but... but... but she's a criminal"? You do not even have to believe she is a criminal to exclude her from electability. It is enough to be relatively probable. This is not a court and makes quite different demands on the standard of proof. Applying the standards of criminal court is to misunderstand the logic of this vote. It is the decision to lend someone enormous power over you and your future. Suspicion is enough to block the candidate. Only an idiot would happily take the chance.

 

[poweRob]

What do you mean by "hyperbolistic false claims of "but... but... but she's a criminal"? You do not even have to believe she is a criminal to exclude her from electability. It is enough to be relatively probable. This is not a court and makes quite different demands on the standard of proof. Applying the standards of criminal court is to misunderstand the logic of this vote. It is the decision to lend someone enormous power over you and your future. Suspicion is enough to block the candidate. Only an idiot would happily take the chance.

You are making claims of criminality where there is none. It is a red herring away from talking policy because you are simply trying to emote your feelings and make it a personal issue.

 

[joG]

When the general theme of an election has devolved to the point where every candidate is being evaluated based on how they aren't as bad as the other candidates it's a sure sign that the electorate needs to begin some serious soul searching.

That is true. But we have already lost the point at which the souls searching should have gone on. We are now at the point of carrying through with the results of utter stupidity and emotional instability.

 

[joG]

You are making claims of criminality where there is none. It is a red herring away from talking policy because you are simply trying to emote your feelings and make it a personal issue.

If you don't see the probability of corruption at a number of levels and spread over three decades as well as cover-up etc, you must be blind.

 

[poweRob]

If you don't see the probability of corruption at a number of levels and spread over three decades as well as cover-up etc, you must be blind.

Still emoting instead of dealing with hard facts. When she's arrested, get back to me. Until then I'd like to know how she'll handle healthcare, foreign policies, economy, etc... etc... etc...

 

[Hawkeye10]

Still emoting instead of dealing with hard facts. When she's arrested, get back to me. Until then I'd like to know how she'll handle healthcare, foreign policies, economy, etc... etc... etc...

What difference could her ideas possibly make, she will not be able to get any of her "plans" past Congress, with Hillary as POTUS gridlock continues for the forseeable future.

Your demands for policy planks is just a touch too precious given the reality of the situation.

In my not very humble opinion.

Your mileage may vary.

 

[poweRob]

What difference could her ideas possibly make, she will not be able to get any of her "plans" past Congress, with Hillary as POTUS gridlock continues for the forseeable future.

Your demands for policy planks is just a touch too precious given the reality of the situation.

In my not very humble opinion.

Your mileage may vary.

Well then just sit on your couch then instead of voting if you are going to take that quitter's notion. I'll be at the polls.

Policies matter.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Well then just sit on your couch then instead of voting if you are going to take that quitter's notion. I'll be at the polls.

Policies matter.

Not so long as the nation continues to not trust the DC ELITE.

Something that has been very well earned.

 

[Mason66]

Gary Johnson’s Aleppo gaffe was bad. But Trump’s consistent ignorance is worse.

But let’s be fair to Mr. Johnson: In the context of the 2016 presidential campaign, he’s far from winning the cluelessness contest. Following his gaffe, the former New Mexico governor offered a relatively cogent summary of U.S. support for various Syrian factions. Later, he apologized, saying that he thought “Aleppo” was an acronym. “I feel horrible,” he said to Bloomberg Politics. “I have to get smarter, and that’s just part of the process.”

It’s refreshing, at least, to hear a national candidate acknowledge error and vow to do better. Contrast that with Donald Trump, who in a televised national security forum Wednesday offered a staggering array of ignorant and mendacious assertions — and acknowledged no regrets about any of them. In addition to repeating his false claims to having opposed the U.S. interventions in Iraq and Libya, Mr. Trump defended a tweet saying that military sexual assault was the result of men and women serving together, and he suggested the solution was to “set up a court system within the military” because “right now, the court system practically doesn’t exist.” Does he really mean to replace the U.S. military justice system?​

In a choice between Trump and Johnson as alternatives to Clinton, the choice is obvious.

Trump's ignorance is bad but Clinton's lying and her not caring about national security is worse.

 

[Mason66]

Not worse. Just as bad.

Trump says something stupid and Hillary puts people's lives in danger.

Yes they are the same.

 

[Mason66]

Still emoting instead of dealing with hard facts. When she's arrested, get back to me. Until then I'd like to know how she'll handle healthcare, foreign policies, economy, etc... etc... etc...

So because she has the powers that be either bought and paid for or scared, then she is innocent?

You need to use your brain and look at the evidence for yourself.

 

[Mason66]

What difference could her ideas possibly make, she will not be able to get any of her "plans" past Congress, with Hillary as POTUS gridlock continues for the forseeable future.

Your demands for policy planks is just a touch too precious given the reality of the situation.

In my not very humble opinion.

Your mileage may vary.

Anything she wants to do Obama can do right now. They are no different, both of them.

Why isn't he doing anything about anything right now?

 

[Abbazorkzog]

Trump says something stupid and Hillary puts people's lives in danger.

Yes they are the same.

Indeed. The lesser of two evils is Gary Johnson.

 

[Mason66]

Indeed. The lesser of two evils is Gary Johnson.

Sure he is.

Nobody knows what he stands for other than legalizing drugs.

Why would you think this man can be President?