So Republicans, got a big decision to make...

[jghiretire]

Really? Did he? Or has he spent nearly his entire administration throwing temper tantrums, fighting off scandal, and shutting down government, all the while thanking his lucky stars that the previous administration left him a great trajectory to ride?

Gee isn't that what we asked for??

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Yeah, I'm not a New Deal Liberal Democrat. That is because I understand economics (my background is in Financial Mathematics). There are better ways of stimulating economic growth that are more monetary in nature.

You're kidding...I know who you are and what you are, LOL.
And you aren't a liberal, unless you say you're a "classical liberal" which in this day and age is a misnomer, because today, so called classical liberals are right leaning libertarians.

You don't know my views.

Okay, give me some examples of something "liberal" that you support. And I am not talking about pot legalization. Plenty of new age libertarians, even those on the right, support legalizing pot.

If I am wrong about your liberal views, I will publicly admit it AND apologize.

 

[haymarket]

He has half assed on all of it, barely half competently. There is ZERO evidence he could win re election, it's laughable. :lamo

No no no... under Trump it has been fully assed.

 

[ecofarm]

I think what's wrong with the GOP has more to do with the "so-called christians" than any actual candidate.

Most Christians are good people. I agree that what's wrong with the GOP is social policy (with exceptions). Also, it could use a few more hawks but most people (even Republicans) disagree with me there.

For women, they have gone way too far to the right and don't seem to care about the deficit.

You mean in regard to the former? Then I agree.

 

[Pedestrian]

Hillary Clinton, by most standards of American conventional politics

Not by my standards, however. I don't know why anyone would consider her an authority on anything practical.

While trump is an authority on bankruptcy, screwing his contractors, adultery, whoremongering and ignorance.

Sounds more and more everytime I think of it, the perfect candidate to finish off the GOP for good, if he hasn't already.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

ALEX FREAKIN" JONES BABY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I mean it's good as any winger thery usually.....

You need to throw some random ones in with the exclamation points...like this:

!!!!!!1!!!!!!!!!!11!!!!!!!

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

For you, maybe. Not for me; I want Trump to win.

Wait, and you just ragged on me for saying you're not a liberal?

 

[jghiretire]

Irrelevant. Under her leadership, millions of people suffered.



You're mistaken. I don't care if Trump says mean things and acts incivil.



If your typo spotting was as good as your arguments, I'd take you more seriously.

But I can't, so I won't.

It was your typo genius. Cutting funding was very relevant. But yeah these pesky facts.

ROFLMAO - How imperious of you. Yeah good luck with that.

 

[ecofarm]

So, no Jeb love out there? He was a good Governor (FL).

 

[markjs]

You need to throw some random ones in with the exclamation points...like this:

!!!!!!1!!!!!!!!!!11!!!!!!!

Well if I wanna go for authenticity I prolly need to put a dipp in and be smashing my fists on the keyboard and spittle all over the screen too, but, well home sick with neverneding flu The absrdity of the Trump defenders is reaching critical mass within me

 

[Pedestrian]

Hillary Clinton was an AWFUL candidate...TWICE (also awful in 2008) so never mind her "qualifications".
By any standard she was terribly unqualified because, as good as she was at being a policy wonk, her arrogance was Nixonian, her bedside manner approached Calvin Coolidge tendencies and her entitlement attitude had assumed Uncle Miltie proportions.

By conventional standards, she appeared as she truly is: MEDIOCRE - - despite her policy bonafides.
And that IS why she lost....TWICE. Had she not been such a horrible candidate, she would have gotten TEN million more than Trump, not three million, and we would be living under her mediocre presidency.

I would view it as "survivable" at the worst, not the end of the world, but you can bet she would have found new ways to alienate even her own base somewhere along the way.

And yes, I am a liberal Democrat who DID vote for her, but that's because as bad as she was, she was still better than Trump.

I don't care what party affiliation you profess, to talk of personality and manners after this clown and after W ?

Not even a nice try because Clinton was as qualified on all fronts as any pres. candidate since Kennedy/Nixon for sure. (1960)

 

[haymarket]

You're kidding...I know who you are and what you are, LOL.
And you aren't a liberal, unless you say you're a "classical liberal" which in this day and age is a misnomer, because today, so called classical liberals are right leaning libertarians.



Okay, give me some examples of something "liberal" that you support. And I am not talking about pot legalization. Plenty of new age libertarians, even those on the right, support legalizing pot.

If I am wrong about your liberal views, I will publicly admit it AND apologize.

I love it when these right wingers use a political standard that was around in the 1700's and think they are being clever and special.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I don't care what party affiliation you profess, to talk of personality and manners after this clown and after W ?

Not even a nice try because Clinton was as qualified on all fronts as any pres. candidate since Kennedy/Nixon for sure. (1960)

Sorry but if you're an arrogant entitled ass in a dress, people won't like you.
The people who liked Trump liked reality TV and think it's actually reality, but thinking people were turned off by Hillary's sense of entitlement. She was the exact same way in 2008, which is why Obama beat her in the primaries. People just don't like her.

Don't blame me, I think that, as a policy wonk, she might be one of the best in the business but she repels independents.
And that's the crucial part of the electorate that she lost in big enough numbers to lose the electoral college.

 

[Hedgology]

Her emails? Oh boy...but okay...
Her use of a private email server, which is something almost everybody on Trump's staff is now doing (almost as if to rub everyone's faces in it, it would seem) harkens back to TWO things:

You gotten the part where Clinton used her personal email, and not the US State Department emails.

1. Her ARROGANCE. For all her excellent qualifications as a policy wonk, she was an awful candidate. She was an awful candidate TWICE and she lost TWICE BECAUSE of her arrogance. No one is going to tell Hillary Clinton how to run her office, or so it would seem. So, when she was told to move everything over to a federally certified dot.gov server, she basically muttered something like, "Yeah, I'll get around to it....whenever"...which is something like "maybe when it gets to be so difficult to do otherwise that I HAVE to", because of the famous Hillary Clinton arrogance.

2. And this might be the most IMPORTANT reason why she stubbornly clung to her private email server:
---Just like Trump, Hillary Clinton DOES NOT KNOW HOW to use a computer.

Oh, she can hunt and peck on a word program maybe, but when it comes to advanced office use of a computer, Hillary is almost exactly like Trump. She "has people for that". Hillary knows how to use her "Blackberry" and the one she was fond of stopped being approved for federal use many years ago, but she has stubbornly clung to it, and the email server that it requires in order to function.

The main reason why, the REAL reason why she refused to move off her private server is because she could not get it qualified and approved to be moved to a dot.gov domain with federally approved security. Her server and the antique smartphone she loves so much aren't secure enough.
But she didn't care because she did not want to LEARN HOW to use a new piece of technology. Hillary, Trump, all these old dinosaurs, are all the last of a breed - OLD FARTS who cannot grasp how to master new technology.

My oldest brother is exactly like her and Trump in fact - HE TOO, stubbornly clung to HIS Blackberry until it just plain stopped working properly. And now he complains 24/7 about his new phone, and he CANNOT use even the simplest computer...not a Windows machine OR EVEN a Mac. He can't even master how to use a Mac, which is in reality a bit simpler to use than a Windows machine.

That is the real reason why the whole email thing happened, laziness, arrogance, dislike of new technology.

This is an honest question: how exactly does this make up for anything? How does this make anything better? Are you implying that she couldn't (or shouldn't) be expected to know what the rules are, this was excusable?

Also, is that the type of leader you thought was better for the country? Someone who could/refused to adapt; someone who couldn't move Forward? Wasn't her ****ing campaign slogan "Forward/Progress?" We must move forward (not backward) as a country, but learning how to use a different phone, a bridge too far?

And I can buy the fact that she is old. I don't really expect anyone born before the year 1970 to be great with technology. Here is the thing (since we are getting involved with ancedotes): I work with people twice my age who just as good as me, and I grew up building my own computers. I would expect someone like my mother to be terrible at technology (especially email); not someone whose job it is to use email.

But that is ultimately the difference between working in the public sector and working in thethe private sector. If someone pays you to do a job YOU DO A JOB.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I love it when these right wingers use a political standard that was around in the 1700's and think they are being clever and special.

The guy read me the riot act about how I was wrong on his liberalism and then in the same breath, says he hopes Trump wins again.

Smells like a First Class POE if you ask me.

 

[jghiretire]

Most Christians are good people. I agree that what's wrong with the GOP is social policy (with exceptions). Also, it could use a few more hawks but most people (even Republicans) disagree with me there.



You mean in regard to the former? Then I agree.

There's some very whacky people out there calling themselves "christians" who have completely bassakward views on what God or Jesus intended. They use their "christian" bs. to mock poor people - hate all sinners and unless you subscribe to their version of christianity, you're also a sinner. Some of the GOP congress critters are either horribly misinformed about anatomy and how things work or batsh*t crazy.

 

[Hedgology]

It was your typo genius. Cutting funding was very relevant. But yeah these pesky facts.

Explain.

ROFLMAO - How imperious of you. Yeah good luck with that.

Good luck with not taking you seriously? Why, are you special?

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

You gotten the part where Clinton used her personal email, and not the US State Department emails.



This is an honest question: how exactly does this make up for anything? How does this make anything better? Are you implying that she couldn't (or shouldn't) be expected to know what the rules are, this was excusable?

Also, is that the type of leader you thought was better for the country? Someone who could/refused to adapt; someone who couldn't move Forward? Wasn't her ****ing campaign slogan "Forward/Progress?" We must move forward (not backward) as a country, but learning how to use a different phone, a bridge too far?

And I can buy the fact that she is old. I don't really expect anyone born before the year 1970 to be great with technology. Here is the thing (since we are getting involved with ancedotes): I work with people twice my age who just as good as me, and I grew up building my own computers. I would expect someone like my mother to be terrible at technology (especially email); not someone whose job it is to use email.

But that is ultimately the difference between working in the public sector and working in thethe private sector. If someone pays you to do a job YOU DO A JOB.

Did I say it made up for anything?
Nope, I sure didn't.

I simply laid out the facts behind the scandal. She could have avoided it all if she had just bothered to get used to the new technology and adapt. But she didn't...and wouldn't, and if her past behavior is any indication, she probably STILL hasn't even now.

It's like the thousands of people who are still using Windows XP machines and then they turn around and bitch about how horrible and insecure Windows is, when everyone else migrated to Win7, Win8.1 and Win10 years ago.

YES, learning a new phone WAS "a bridge too far" for Hillary, that is it in a nutshell.

 

[jghiretire]

Sorry but if you're an arrogant entitled ass in a dress, people won't like you.
The people who liked Trump liked reality TV and think it's actually reality, but thinking people were turned off by Hillary's sense of entitlement. She was the exact same way in 2008, which is why Obama beat her in the primaries. People just don't like her.

Don't blame me, I think that, as a policy wonk, she might be one of the best in the business but she repels independents.
And that's the crucial part of the electorate that she lost in big enough numbers to lose the electoral college.

She's very smart but not articulate enough for regular people. She was boring. She didn't connect with people very well. The right hates her - just like they hated Obama. They hate a woman and a black man. Both with great ideas. But they aren't racist or misogynist right??

 

[ecofarm]

There's some very whacky people out there calling themselves "christians" who have completely bassakward views on what God or Jesus intended. They use their "christian" bs. to mock poor people - hate all sinners and unless you subscribe to their version of christianity, you're also a sinner. Some of the GOP congress critters are either horribly misinformed about anatomy and how things work or batsh*t crazy.

Every group or movement has those. Environmentalists, feminists, Republicans, Democrats, Muslims, atheists...

 

[Lutherf]

National morale
Market stability
Respect at the global negotiating table
Continuous bad behavior is a distraction from real issues
And like it or not, the President IS a roll model to the nation’s children.

I’m not saying policy isn’t important, but that can always be undone by the next President and any lasting policies need legislation and Congress carries the bulk of that burden. Also, Congress and the Judiciary can keep any overly reckless Presidential actions and policies in check (with the exception of his C-in-C actions).

Again, in nonleadership rolls, like a regular member of Congress, saying all that matters is policy positions makes sense. All they really do is vote Yes or No. But in leadership rolls, like Speaker of the House or maybe even committee chairman, behavior matters more. And the biggest leadership roll of all, of course, is POTUS.

I agree that it would be nice and possibly even helpful for the president to be, for lack of a better term, "presidential" in his demeanor but I really don't see that as being more important than his policy. One thing that we've seen time and again in politics is well spoken, polished politicians who promote and pass legislation that totally screws the people. We've seen highly polished, well spoken and "strong" politicians that forced stuff through "for the benefit of the people" and, subsequently, did more to serve the interests of government than of the people. It's even been a joke pretty much since the world began that every time a politician opens his mouth another citizen/subject gets screwed. That isn't something that started with Trump.

 

[Hedgology]

You're kidding...I know who you are and what you are, LOL.

You know who I am? I gotta get a better VPN.

And you aren't a liberal, unless you say you're a "classical liberal" which in this day and age is a misnomer, because today, so called classical liberals are right leaning libertarians.

Classical liberals ARE right learning libterarians. It's not a misnomer.

Okay, give me some examples of something "liberal" that you support. And I am not talking about pot legalization. Plenty of new age libertarians, even those on the right, support legalizing pot.


If I am wrong about your liberal views, I will publicly admit it AND apologize.

If people on the right are capable of supporting liberal things; how do you differential who is liberal and who is not?

Unless you're so far left that everyone to the right of you is literally Hitler.

It doesn't take a genius to see where this is going; it might understand that the term liberal hasn't changed; you have, which is why your ideas are being rejected roundly.

 

[Hedgology]

Did I say it made up for anything?
Nope, I sure didn't.

I simply laid out the facts behind the scandal. She could have avoided it all if she had just bothered to get used to the new technology and adapt. But she didn't...and wouldn't, and if her past behavior is any indication, she probably STILL hasn't even now.

That's nice, but I don't care...

It's like the thousands of people who are still using Windows XP machines and then they turn around and bitch about how horrible and insecure Windows is, when everyone else migrated to Win7, Win8.1 and Win10 years ago.

Thousands of people don't work for the State Department.

YES, learning a new phone WAS "a bridge too far" for Hillary, that is it in a nutshell.

There are easier ways of admitting that she was above the law.

 

[Hedgology]

While trump is an authority on bankruptcy, screwing his contractors, adultery, whoremongering and ignorance.

Sounds more and more everytime I think of it, the perfect candidate to finish off the GOP for good, if he hasn't already.

How is Trump an authority on bankruptcy when he is literally a billionaire?

 

[OlNate]

Gee isn't that what we asked for??

Not sure if you're being serious or not... But maybe? hehe