The Next American President Thread (2016)

1156157159161162198

Comments

  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
  • Posts: 2,341
    With a week before the election day, Trump has stepped up his critical attacks on Clinton.
    WTF is up with American politics?
    No one says, "vote for me because I walk on water" or "I crap bigger than Billy Crystal" Hell no, all they say is "Vote for me because the other person is worst than I am"
    I'm sick and tired of the negative campaigning and its never going to go away.
    Help us.
  • ?!?!?!

    "You Know My Name, Look Up the Number..."

  • Posts: 7,500
    ???


    You are surprisingly childish for an old man, old man.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Big Brother loves you.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    OHMSS69 wrote: »
    With a week before the election day, Trump has stepped up his critical attacks on Clinton.
    WTF is up with American politics?
    No one says, "vote for me because I walk on water" or "I crap bigger than Billy Crystal" Hell no, all they say is "Vote for me because the other person is worst than I am"
    I'm sick and tired of the negative campaigning and its never going to go away.
    Help us.

    I'm not entirely certain I'd actually vote for anybody who walked on water or crapped bigger than Billy Crystal. I'm actually quite confused why crapping bigger than Billy Crystal would be an asset to a President, but to each their own.
  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    jobo wrote: »
    ???


    You are surprisingly childish for an old man, old man.

    @jobo, you've garrote a point there.
  • jobo wrote: »
    ???


    You are surprisingly childish for an old man, old man.

    @jobo, you've garrote a point there.

    And just like that, we're back to the question of whether or not Trump knows what wine to drink with his fish.

    "The answer my friend, is blowin' in the wind
    The answer is Blowin' in the Wind."
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    A lot of answers here blow.
  • edited November 2016 Posts: 3,564
    A lot of answers here blow.

    It's the only way I know of to play the harmonica.

    Okay Trumpistas, how 'bout this? Please recognize that when you lay down with dogs you get up with fleas: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/mississippi-church-burned-vandalized-trump_us_5819ef95e4b01f610e393372

    "When dogs run free then what must be
    Must be, and that is all.
    True love can make a blade of grass grow straight and tall."
  • And if you don't like the dogs & fleas comparison, how do you feel about getting into the trough with pigs? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-white-nationalists_us_581a103be4b0a76e174c51bb

    "While preachers preach of evil fates
    Teachers teach that knowledge waits
    Can lead to hundred-dollar plates
    Goodness hides behind its gates
    But even the president of the United States
    Sometimes must have to stand naked"
  • edited November 2016 Posts: 11,425
    jobo wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    If you think having the American President under the thumb of the Russian dictator is a good idea, go ahead and vote for Trump. Otherwise...........

    I have to say I think this is one area where Trump may be right. Are the Russians really our deadliest enemies? Hardly. In the post Cold War world we have taken Russia's acquiescence for granted and pushed them around.

    There are a litany of Western foreign policy provocations that explain Russia's current antagonism towards the West: expansion of the EU; expansion of NATO; Kosovo; George W's missile defence shield; Western interference in Ukraine; the Iraq War; Western interference in and support for Islamist extremists in Syria and related attempts to overthrow the Syrian government.

    We have acted aggressively and often illegally on a range of foreign policy areas. It's no wonder Russia has given up on seeing the West as any kind of partner and has instead started throwing it's weight around a bit more.

    We need to look at outselves a lot harder and think more about how we are perceived by the rest of the world. For many people the West just stands for double standards and hypocrisy.



    That is all true. However it does not justify the actions of the Russian government today. What they have done in the Ukraine and Syria should be condemned regardless of who has commited the most sins in a historical context. Russia is showing more and more imperialistic semi fascist tendencies. It is inauspicious to say the least.

    I sort of accept what your saying, but can't you see that the illegal partition of Serbia/Kosovo and catastrophic and also essentially illegal invasion of Iraq make us appear parodies of hypocritical westerners when we start criticising Russia for seizing Crimea or propping up their clients in Syria.

    We have no moral authority on which to base our criticisms of Russia. And besides, their actions are not just aggression for the sake of it - what Russia is doing is a direct response to decades of Western foreign policy arrogance and stupidity.

    When we tried to topple the democratically elected president of Ukraine, we were engaging in highly aggressive and provocative behaviour. Russia's response was largely in self defence and not entirely unpredictable.

    Ditto in Syria, we've been messing around, trying to invent a 'moderate' opposition, when most of those fighting the Syrian government are just shades of crazy Islamist nutjob. Russia is sick and tired of watching as we screw up the Middle East, one country at a time. Their assessment is that someone needs to end this horrific war, and that on balance the majority of people of Syria are better off under the ruthless but secular Assad regime than they are under ISIS, Al Quaeda or any other bunch of extremist loons.

    Sadly it has to be acknowledged that Clinton is heavily implicated in the largely disastrous US foreign policy of the last couple of decades. She supported the invasion of Kosovo, Iraq, Libya and has been an advocate of toppling the government in Syria. Her track record does not actually bode well for the future if she is president - we can expect more reckless and arrogant foreign policy blunders.

    I don't want to see a Trump presidency, and think it would be tragic for the US in terms of its domestic politics. Trimp would sow division and hate within the US itself, as he's already been doing. However, for the wider world, I wonder if Clinton isn't actually the bigger threat.
  • SuperintendentSuperintendent A separate pool. For sharks, no less.
    Posts: 871
    @Getafix, spot on.
  • Posts: 7,500
    @Getafix

    I don't really disagree with anything you just posten... apart from the fact that I think Trump is as big a threat internationaly. With Hillary you at least get the impression she is coldblooded, reflected and would think twice before launching full scale war, not to mention the fact that she at least understands the mechanisms of what's going on in the middle east. Trump on the other hand is clueless, likely to act on instinct and impulse, and those are the instincts of a violent bigot.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    @Getafix

    What a great assessment of things.
    Yes, Hillary is the greater threat for outside the US. Very much so.
    I fear the worst in terms of future US foreign policy politics.

    It's almost grotesque how Trump gets painted in blackest of black pictures with possible nuclear war and such, when it is Clinton we should be afraid of in that regard.

    Having said this, I am not endorsing Trump in any way. For the US itself he would be much worse than Clinton.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,691
    Yes, Hillary is the greater threat for outside the US. Very much so.

    ... he said before Trump was elected & decided to drop a nuke on Iran & the cloud drifted north to Switzerland... :-O
  • Posts: 6,601
    Getafix wrote: »
    If you think having the American President under the thumb of the Russian dictator is a good idea, go ahead and vote for Trump. Otherwise...........

    I have to say I think this is one area where Trump may be right. Are the Russians really our deadliest enemies? Hardly. In the post Cold War world we have taken Russia's acquiescence for granted and pushed them around.

    There are a litany of Western foreign policy provocations that explain Russia's current antagonism towards the West: expansion of the EU; expansion of NATO; Kosovo; George W's missile defence shield; Western interference in Ukraine; the Iraq War; Western interference in and support for Islamist extremists in Syria and related attempts to overthrow the Syrian government.

    We have acted aggressively and often illegally on a range of foreign policy areas. It's no wonder Russia has given up on seeing the West as any kind of partner and has instead started throwing it's weight around a bit more.

    We need to look at outselves a lot harder and think more about how we are perceived by the rest of the world. For many people the West just stands for double standards and hypocrisy.

    =D> And there is a lot more to it and America Looks Bad in all of it. Its so far Remonde from the white Knight some still See it, its scary.
  • Agent007391Agent007391 Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, Start
    Posts: 7,854
    @Getafix

    What a great assessment of things.
    Yes, Hillary is the greater threat for outside the US. Very much so.
    I fear the worst in terms of future US foreign policy politics.

    It's almost grotesque how Trump gets painted in blackest of black pictures with possible nuclear war and such, when it is Clinton we should be afraid of in that regard.

    Having said this, I am not endorsing Trump in any way. For the US itself he would be much worse than Clinton.

    Trump would go to war because somebody insulted him on Twitter. Clinton would go to war if she saw no other option to solve a problem. He's not any better for those outside the US than he is for those inside the US.
  • BondJasonBond006BondJasonBond006 on fb and ajb
    Posts: 9,020
    @Agent007391

    You really believe this would be a realistic scenario. Because of a tweet the US going to war. Have you so little faith in congress and the politicians that will surround a President Trump?
    It's not like in the movies where a President just has to push a red button....

    Clinton on the other hand can be very manipulative and therefore persuading. She actually reminds me more and more of Dick Cheney.
  • Posts: 11,425
    @Getafix

    What a great assessment of things.
    Yes, Hillary is the greater threat for outside the US. Very much so.
    I fear the worst in terms of future US foreign policy politics.

    It's almost grotesque how Trump gets painted in blackest of black pictures with possible nuclear war and such, when it is Clinton we should be afraid of in that regard.

    Having said this, I am not endorsing Trump in any way. For the US itself he would be much worse than Clinton.

    Trump would go to war because somebody insulted him on Twitter. Clinton would go to war if she saw no other option to solve a problem. He's not any better for those outside the US than he is for those inside the US.

    But Clinton's track record clearly shows us that she is one of the major global advocates of war as a foreign policy tool. She backed the wars in Iraq, Libya and helped arm extremist rebels in Syria. Her fingerprints are all over the wreckage of the Middle East. She has repeatedly advocated and supported the use of military power when diplomatic or peaceful alternatives were available. To this day can anyone really say that the Iraq war was necessary of justified in any way? No, but Hillary backed George W to the hilt.

    By contrast the accusations that Trump is a trigger happy warmonger are based on little or no evidence at all. That's mainly because he's not a politician and has never had to make any life or death decisions, but still...

  • Posts: 6,601
    @Getafix

    What a great assessment of things.
    Yes, Hillary is the greater threat for outside the US. Very much so.
    I fear the worst in terms of future US foreign policy politics.

    It's almost grotesque how Trump gets painted in blackest of black pictures with possible nuclear war and such, when it is Clinton we should be afraid of in that regard.

    Having said this, I am not endorsing Trump in any way. For the US itself he would be much worse than Clinton.

    Trump would go to war because somebody insulted him on Twitter. Clinton would go to war if she saw no other option to solve a problem. He's not any better for those outside the US than he is for those inside the US.

    Of all the Posts of recent, this is the saddest in its naivite. Clinton is continuing what Obama is doing, which means she will Continue to destabilize the East and threaten Russia, which is doing everything Right now to get Peace. Syria is as much the US playing their Game. Its all about Gas, for Christs Sake. If it wasnt for that, Peace would have eben allowed there for a Long Time or war Even Never started. Sometimes I am really scared by how Little People here Seem to know the backgrounds. Bondjames, Thunder and Getafix Seem to get it though. Dont you guys EVER try to Look behind the curtain? You Follow the Media like nice Little sheep and take in what they Tell you. And yes, Trump is right. The election is gonna be rigged, als the Elite needs Clinton in the saddle. If you Follow their rules, all is good, If Not, you get Shot. You could say, they sell their souls for the power, they imagine, they still have. Even though its an illusion, but a nice one in their eyes. They only Follow orders.
  • Posts: 7,500
    Getafix wrote: »
    @Getafix

    What a great assessment of things.
    Yes, Hillary is the greater threat for outside the US. Very much so.
    I fear the worst in terms of future US foreign policy politics.

    It's almost grotesque how Trump gets painted in blackest of black pictures with possible nuclear war and such, when it is Clinton we should be afraid of in that regard.

    Having said this, I am not endorsing Trump in any way. For the US itself he would be much worse than Clinton.

    Trump would go to war because somebody insulted him on Twitter. Clinton would go to war if she saw no other option to solve a problem. He's not any better for those outside the US than he is for those inside the US.

    But Clinton's track record clearly shows us that she is one of the major global advocates of war as a foreign policy tool. She backed the wars in Iraq, Libya and helped arm extremist rebels in Syria. Her fingerprints are all over the wreckage of the Middle East. She has repeatedly advocated and supported the use of military power when diplomatic or peaceful alternatives were available. To this day can anyone really say that the Iraq war was necessary of justified in any way? No, but Hillary backed George W to the hilt.

    By contrast the accusations that Trump is a trigger happy warmonger are based on little or no evidence at all. That's mainly because he's not a politician and has never had to make any life or death decisions, but still...


    Trump supported and advocated the wars in both Iraq and Libya. No difference there.
  • chrisisallchrisisall Brosnan Defender Of The Realm
    Posts: 17,691
    Clinton is a paid lackey of the MIC, whereas Trump wants to use nukes. YES, they both like war, but (like I've said before) intelligent evil can sometimes be reasoned with. Trump is FAR from intelligent.
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    Posts: 23,883
    @Getafix, great points. I'm in complete agreement on Syria and the Russian conundrum. We've had these discussions before on other threads, and the issues remain the same.

    There is a big difference between bluster, a few off the cuff remarks on Howard Stern and election sloganeering vs. actual deeds (in the form of politically expedient and yet disastrous Senate votes and actual catastrophic decisions made as Secretary of State).
  • SuperintendentSuperintendent A separate pool. For sharks, no less.
    Posts: 871
    Why the Hillary Clinton consensus is a threat to democracy—and the Left.
    BY Slavoj Žižek

    "The popular rage that gave birth to Trump also gave birth to Sanders. Both express widespread social and political discontent, but they do it in opposite ways—one engaging in rightist populism and the other opting for the leftist call for justice. And here’s the trick: The leftist call for justice tends to be combined with struggles for women’s and gay rights, for multiculturalism and against racism. The strategic aim of the Clinton consensus is clearly to dissociate all these struggles from the leftist call for justice, which is why the living symbol of this consensus is Tim Cook. Cook, the CEO of Apple, proudly signed a pro-LGBT letter to North Carolina Gov. Pat McCrory and can now easily forget about hundreds of thousands of Foxconn workers in China assembling Apple products in slave conditions. He made his big gesture of solidarity with the underprivileged by demanding the abolition of gender-segregated bathrooms.

    If Cook is one living symbol of this consensus, Madeleine Albright, the first woman to be U.S. secretary of state, is another embodiment. On CBS’s 60 Minutes (May 12, 1996), Albright was asked about the Iraq War: “We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?”

    Albright calmly replied: “I think this is a very hard choice, but the price—we think the price is worth it.”


    Let’s ignore most of the questions this reply raises (including the interesting shift from “I” to “we:” I think it’s a hard choice but we think the price is worth it) and focus on just one aspect: Can we imagine all the hell that would break out if the same answer were said by somebody like Vladimir Putin or Chinese President Xi Jinping or the Iranian president? Would they not be denounced immediately in all our headlines as cold and ruthless monsters? Campaigning for Clinton, Albright said: “There’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other.” (Meaning: women who vote for Sanders instead of Clinton.) Maybe we should amend this statement. There is a special place in hell for women—and men—who think half a million dead children is an affordable price for a military intervention that ruins a country, while wholeheartedly supporting women’s and gay rights at home."
  • bondjamesbondjames You were expecting someone else?
    edited November 2016 Posts: 23,883
    For those interested, here is an interview that Charlie Rose did with Tom Barrack, who is a long time friend and business associate of Trump's. He introduced Ivanka at the convention. The interview was conducted during the convention. It sheds a lot of light on Trump and his philosophy.

    If you don't want to watch all of it then I encourage you to at least watch from 5:00 to 14:00. I am in complete agreement with Barrack on the issues and have mentioned them here earlier. He is on the money with his assessment.

    https://charlierose.com/videos/28484
  • edited November 2016 Posts: 3,564
    So the woman who's accusing Trump of raping her back in the '90s when she was only 13 was planning a press conference this afternoon...but she cancelled it due to a barrage of threats she's been receiving. Couldn't be true, of course...we'll have to wait until the court dates scheduled for December to learn more... http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/donald-trump-rape-accuser-lawsuits-230647

    "How does it feel? Aw, how does it feel?
    To be on your own? With no direction home? A complete unknown...
    Like a rolling stone....."
  • TripAcesTripAces Universal Exports
    Posts: 4,554
    bondjames wrote: »
    Even Alan Dershowitz told Megan Kelly that it should have been reported, but he said that Comey should have given an explanatory statement to the public not to interpret the investigation in any way. Eg. it was not the reporting that was the problem per se, but rather the vague nature of his statement.

    Keep in mind also that all emails & devices were supposed to have been handed over to the FBI already. So if they found another device (and they did) then the onus is to disclose imho, because this is a matter of public record due to the previous Congressional testimony.

    Moreover, as mentioned, the Justice Dept. is compromised, due to Clinton's statement that she would reappoint Lynch if she becomes president, due to the secret back of plane meeting with Bill ostensibly about family prior to the conclusion of the prior investigation, and also because of Obama's active campaigning on behalf of Clinton and his potential involvement in the server scenario (he is reported to have communicated on it under a pseudonym) which could possibly be a violation of Federal Records Retention laws. It's really one big mess all round and the possible internal leaks from the FBI would have been terribly damaging.

    Dershowitz has lost all credibility. He defended OJ, for crying out loud. The man has lost it.

    As for turning over all devices, we're not talking about a device that belonged to HRC. Right? So that doesn't apply to her.

    My guess is that almost all, if not ALL, of the emails the FBI finds will be ones they have reviewed already.


  • 0BradyM0Bondfanatic70BradyM0Bondfanatic7 Quantum Floral Arrangements: "We Have Petals Everywhere"
    Posts: 28,694
    @BeatlesSansEarmuffs, you know you've gone mad when you start quoting random Dylan lyrics in every post. I would be lying, however, if I didn't admit that this has been the theme song of this election for me:

  • echoecho 007 in New York
    edited November 2016 Posts: 5,979
    JamesStock wrote: »
    Also to those of you who are wanting there to be some sort of ties of Trump to Putin/Russia...you do realize there's a hypocrisy with claiming this and denying any wrongdoings of Clinton's email scandal.

    Whether the manner in which information was leaked was right or wrong, I'd rather have information released than it hide in the shadows. Things like Hillary being given debate questions in advance of the debates need to be put in the spotlight. Otherwise the integrity of the political system might as well be deemed "rigged."

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/clinton-debate-question_us_5817a3b7e4b064e1b4b4367a

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/31/hacked-emails-suggest-trump-was-right-after-all-clinton-got-previews-of-some-debate-questions/

    http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/hillary-clinton-donna-brazile-cnn-political-commentator-spring-debate-question-wikileaks-john-a7389886.html

    A false equivalency.
    Germanlady wrote: »
    Getafix wrote: »
    If you think having the American President under the thumb of the Russian dictator is a good idea, go ahead and vote for Trump. Otherwise...........

    I have to say I think this is one area where Trump may be right. Are the Russians really our deadliest enemies? Hardly. In the post Cold War world we have taken Russia's acquiescence for granted and pushed them around.

    There are a litany of Western foreign policy provocations that explain Russia's current antagonism towards the West: expansion of the EU; expansion of NATO; Kosovo; George W's missile defence shield; Western interference in Ukraine; the Iraq War; Western interference in and support for Islamist extremists in Syria and related attempts to overthrow the Syrian government.

    We have acted aggressively and often illegally on a range of foreign policy areas. It's no wonder Russia has given up on seeing the West as any kind of partner and has instead started throwing it's weight around a bit more.

    We need to look at outselves a lot harder and think more about how we are perceived by the rest of the world. For many people the West just stands for double standards and hypocrisy.

    =D> And there is a lot more to it and America Looks Bad in all of it. Its so far Remonde from the white Knight some still See it, its scary.

    What is your view on Petry, I wonder?
    @Getafix

    What a great assessment of things.
    Yes, Hillary is the greater threat for outside the US. Very much so.
    I fear the worst in terms of future US foreign policy politics.

    It's almost grotesque how Trump gets painted in blackest of black pictures with possible nuclear war and such, when it is Clinton we should be afraid of in that regard.

    Having said this, I am not endorsing Trump in any way. For the US itself he would be much worse than Clinton.

    For the world, Trump is a bigger threat than he is within the US (although he can do plenty of damage here--appointing theocratic judges to appease the religious right, for one). Do you really think Trump has the attention span or intelligence to engage in multiparty talks with North Korea, or Iran, or China, or any country? No.

    Trump is basically an overgrown child. Not a "successful businessman" nor "master of the deal." He and his siblings inherited half a billion dollars from their father--it's pretty hard to **** that up, although he's done a pretty good job of doing just that (cf. his tax return losses).
This discussion has been closed.