2016 US Presidential Election Thread IX

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
NONE of this speaks to how she's an embarrassment though. "Establishment" does not necessarily = "embarrassment".

What plan does dickhead Donald have to increase your salary? How does a man who's been handed everything in his life, and when he did fail walk away from his responsibilities by filing bankruptcy, qualify as someone who is a champion for the middle class? Can you see how that makes absolutely no sense to anyone outside of the world of Breitbart.

This.

He got 1 million $ to start up his real estate businesses from his dad. Some champion! :|
 
If I talk about misogyny, will people respond the same way they do when someone brings up race and Obama? (STOP SAYING I'M RACIST IF I DISAGREE WITH OBAMA)

Because it's an issue (not the only issue, but it is present) here.

Gender is more complex than even race, and there may be something about the power of the presidency -- it's not like being PM, there are real differences -- that makes men (and many women) upset when envisioning a woman in that position.

I know, I know. HRC has been around for 25 years. She's as establishment as they come. She's "unlikeable." She's shrill. Earlier we talked about how much of a bitch she was or wasn't. Remember that?

Is the presidency so inherently alpha that any female candidate would be "unlikeable"?

Did someone call u racist for disagreeing w Obama ( sorry, I just got a hotspot from the library for the next 4 months [ trial program for closing he digital divide] so I' only been able to follow this thread closely vs the infrequent drop in, in one of these previous threads?

I knew from listening to Air America at the time that he was not going to be as liberal on certain things as people were projecting.

So I disagree w him on some things and really like other things he's done. And was very glad that I was able to go to the Inauguration both times as a gift from my sis to go w her.

As for Hillary are you saying she's that OR that other people are saying that. I can renember waaaay back in a Mad Magazine where cartoon -
if man does ,______ it's considered [insert positive description], if a woman does the same thing she's co sidered [insert negative description].
 
Last edited:
I t

Hillary is uniquely unlikeable in my opinion. She has a tendency to come across as really, really smug, which is interesting because I see Obama as more professorial and intellectual which a certain segment of society hates, but he (mostly) manages to not come across like he is irritated to be explaining something to the masses yet again. She also comes across as a liar in the sense that she would be willing to do or say whatever it takes - plenty of examples of male politicians who also change their votes whichever way the wind blows. Hell Trump is a much bigger liar and has been branded so.

None of this in any way justifies voting for Trump, but I think that we're really trying to twist ourselves into a pretzel here to explain away Hillary's faults as somehow being the inherent fault of a sexist electorate. Sorry, there is plenty there to dislike without any misogyny. I have many, many highly educated feminist (some even ultra-feminist) friends, not a single one of them thinks much of her, though would all vote for her given the alternative.

I'm a serious feminist and I like Hillary. I don't agree with some of her policies- I'm more liberal/progressive.

Maybe I've not caught her sounding "smug".
She's not a natural politician like her husband. So she often sounds stilted etc.

Maybe because on occasion through the decades I've heard her in one to one interviews on public radio, she doesn't sound that way. And she's a policy wonk which I lije

I definitely like Warren!
 
Last edited:
I think BigMacPhisto has a point about Trump, honestly. Watch this clip from Kimmel. I don't think he would be nearly as dangerous as people think. It's just a big ego trip.





And I can't deal with Trump not winning. It would be so entertaining all the time.
 
most likely a 4 year stagnation or set back, and then 8+ years of a progressive agenda moving the country ahead

A"set back"?

Tell that (if trump would go along with the more radical right-wing policies) to people of color, the poor, the disabled , the somewhat-near-to-retirenent when they they try to reduce future Social Security payments, IR to the elderly, or disabled or poor when they go after Social Security Disability, Medicare, or Medicare. :| Or if they don't get rid of some of the entitlements totally turn some of them into partly , or fully privatized.
 
Last edited:
In fairness to Nader voters, it's not as if 9/11 and what followed in terms of the Bush presidency was foreseeable. Yes, you could have thought at the time that he'd be a worse president than Gore because of certain of his policies and the way he used the religious right at the polls, but nobody could have predicted the depth of his administration's incomp.

that's not all true r in the sense that certain people in Clinton's Administration were trying to get the incoming W adnin to watch out for Bin Laden. To which they paid little heed

Then there was the memo in ? August 6 2001 saying that "Bin Laden determined to strike in US" Sex Rice said itvwas past tense not present possible , which I think us bukkshit

And on other thing either G8 meeting in either 2000 or 2001(pre 9-11) the building was surrounded by Antiaircraft Missie launchers.
 
Sorry my Kindle doesn't have a Multi-quote option.

And yeah womnen,'s rights and choice.

While most likely under a Cruz, Rubio or Kaisik ( been said he's a closet Christian Dominist)
( but woulkdn't say not possible w Trump)/.. they're filming "The Handmaiden's Tale".

Now I'm way more caught up
 

In some parts , it seems, in Australia you get these incredible masses of tumbleweeds. There were these photos of a home with tws like 3 feet high or more but more loose in formation. They said when it gets this bad they call it "Hairy Panic" .

Going to look for ny screen grabs , see if the town was mentioned.

OK the town is called Wangaratta.
Looks like it is in NE Victoria not too far from NSW .
I loves te Internetz!
 
Last edited:
Of course Trump will not give an honest answer on the transgender bathroom issue because he's screwed either way and if he were to actually question Clinton on it in a debate, I don't think she would give an answer either. Not that Clinton has a problem standing up for transgender rights but it's the sort of issue that can quickly galvanize the stupid into thinking "man in the women's room. omg!" and such nonsense. I would guarantee in a debate if Trump tried to attack her and say "it's men using the women's room trying to assault them" that she would cave not directly give an answer and that's a shame.
 
that's not all true r in the sense that certain people in Clinton's Administration were trying to get the incoming W adnin to watch out for Bin Laden. To which they paid little heed

Then there was the memo in ? August 6 2001 saying that "Bin Laden determined to strike in US" Sex Rice said itvwas past tense not present possible , which I think us bukkshit

This is totally irrelevant to what I posted.

The PUBLIC who went to vote is not privy to national security briefings, memos, etc and it isn't as if it was common knowledge that Bush would, in the future, ignore past warnings. How on earth was any person voting in November 1999 supposed to foresee that?
 
I really don't see anything being different if Gore had won through the invasion of Afghanistan. We know Clinton had already ignored warnings of how dangerous Bin Laden was for most of his time in office. Both sides of the aisle had their heads in the sand when it came to an attack of that magnitude actually taking place here on our soil.

And the initial response in the first few months after 9/11 by Bush was actually tremendous, both in action, in patience, and in the way he spoke of not being in a war with Islam, rather just the radical elements who bastardize the religion to fit their own radical ideology. At least publicly, it was. In hindsight we know that they were already spinning the conversation towards Iraq, and that is when the Bush administration turned into the historic clusterfuck we now know.
 
Last edited:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/...s-he-knows-virtually-nothing-about-the-issue/

If elected president, he promised to lift restrictions on natural gas production using fracking, offshore oil drilling, and oil and gas production on federal lands. He would immediately cut off all U.S. funding for United Nations climate programs and cancel U.S. agreements under the Paris accord. Trump claimed his plan would eliminate America’s reliance on foreign sources of energy, restore the coal industry to its former glory, and avoid the loss of “millions of jobs and trillions of dollars” of wealth that would be destroyed under the climate change policies of his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton.

:doh:

Science sucks! Keep my base poorly educated :up:

But no, he couldn't be worse than Bush...
 
Last edited:
This is totally irrelevant to what I posted.

The PUBLIC who went to vote is not privy to national security briefings, memos, etc and it isn't as if it was common knowledge that Bush would, in the future, ignore past warnings. How on earth was any person voting in November 1999 supposed to foresee that?

Yeah, i got it, you're right.
 
as for the other presumed nominee, how can anyone say this person is not a lying worthless excuse for a candidate

Clinton: I Was Worried That Individuals Who Used Their State.gov Address Weren't Receiving My Emails | Video | RealClearPolitics

Jesus H Christ, she is the worst liar ever. People weren't receiving e-mails from her because the clintonemail.com messages were being sent to their spam boxes. She's trying to infer that she set up the private e-mail server because the government server wasn't working (of which their is no evidence)...and at the same time the initial e-mail about worrying about the "personal becoming public" was talking about why she wanted to set up the server in the first place and happened before these issues arose with e-mails not arriving because, again, it was because of her private server. Fucking hell.

Essentially, she's using issues that arose because of her private e-mail server that have been mentioned in the news a lot lately (i.e. people not receiving the clintonemail.com e-mails) to try and distort history entirely. It's so fucking irritating. :doh:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom