Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by SurfDoctor, Dec 2, 2015.
Many people don't like either one, but if they were your two choices, who would you vote for?
Clinton. They have both lied somewhere along the line, but Trump? Seriously? A guy who flails around imitating a disabled guy (then he denies knowing him)? Yeah, that's presidential material right there. Can you picture the beloved Ronald Reagan doing such a thing? There is simply no comparison between Clinton and Trump. Trump is merely a carnival barker/reality show host vying for attention. When the rubber meets the road, Trump will crumble.
I doubt Trump wil be the GOP nominee (can I bet on that?).
Colorado is an important swing state in the 2016 presidential elections. Yet the GOP cancelled its caucus in 2016. Why? One quoted reason is because GOP leaders were afraid that an outsider (Trump et al.) might win the caucus and delegates are obligated to vote for that person at the GOP convention.
Now the Colorado delegates will be able to help select the presidential nominee at the GOP convention.
I used to think that of most presidential contenders but since watching the recent PBS series on the brain (Episodes | The Brain with David Eagleman) I learned that memory is imperfect and studies have shown that memories change with time.
At least Carson withdrew one of his recollections.
If that happens, I am going to get my hundred acres, build a little homestead; and leave me alone. See you during summer break, Thanksgiving and Christmas. Otherwise, send me a letter. As in, postal, hand written letter.
Clinton, without a doubt.
That being said, I'd pick Clinton over anyone in the field because she's my first choice.
My view on lying in politics is to expect it. Lying (to some degree) is something all candidates eventually do, but the question then becomes a matter of the reason they lied, the topic of the lie, etc.
Trump just seems to make up arguably racist, xenophobic lies for the sake of getting attention. He also is such a narcissist that he can't stop talking about himself in grandiose terms (which are lies, really), no matter what evidence is presented. He basically lies for no reason at all.
Carson is the same way, minus the grandiose narcissism. He seems to be making things up without any real benefit to him.
At least with Clinton, I can feel reasonably confident that if she's lying, she knows why she's lying, and that reason is probably a pretty good one. For instance, with the Benghazi investigation, the GOP was trying to catch her in some sort of "gotcha" lie, and it backfired.
For me, I didn't really care about what was said. It's likely that the administration wanted to set a certain public tone for national security purposes. Even so, no administration will be 100% transparent in the aftermath of an attack, and neither should they. The reality is that unless the government chooses to reveal information for some strategic advantage, all we will know about anything is a sliver of the truth, sometimes mixed in a bowl of misinformation.
This is one reason why I support Clinton. Trump thinks he can just bully other countries into doing what he wants them to do, but he doesn't seem to realize (or won't admit) that international relations do not work like business deals.
I can't even imagine what he would be like against Vladimir Putin. I know Putin would have the advantage--former KGB officer vs. a reality show figure---no contest. Trump wouldn't even have his stand-by options for just about everything---threatened lawsuits and bankruptcies.
If it comes down to Clinton and Trump, my choice would be whoever is running for the Independent. I know the third party will not win the election, but at least I do not approve him or her in the office. The reason I choose another party because I don't want people blame me for voting the 2017 - 2020 President.
Yeah, it boils down to two things. Trump is either a plain old PROLIFIC garden variety liar, or he is a pathological liar. It is ironic that he accuses Ben Carson of being a "pathological" liar.
On a lighter note. I have to admit Trump is quite the entertainer. I don't know how many times I have seen the youtube video of him doing that belt buckle skit. The one where Carson supposedly stabbed a kid, but his knife hit the kids belt buckle and broke the knife, thus deflecting tragedy. He he! You can't make this stuff up. :smile:
You've got to admit he has made this campaign for the presidency fun and interesting. I admire the way he's come back from bankruptcy and turned his father's business into a recognizable brand nationwide, and had to do this in one of the toughest cities in America for real estate. But would I vote for him? No. He lacks the unifying political leadership that we need now in this country. And this is from a conservative Republican, since I was able to vote many moons ago, that has always supported his party. Regardless of who is nominated, I am frustrated with the Republicans and really don't like any of the candidates, regardless of party. This may be the first time ever that I abstain from voting.
"Well, who you gonna believe, me or your own eyes?" --Chico Marx
Trump lies about something that is so bald-face people can't believe he said it, then he continues to stick with it despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Why? Why does he do it?
Because it works.
"There's nothing so absurd that if you repeat it often enough, people will believe it." (William James)
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."--Joseph Goebbels
Gary Johnson got over a million votes last cycle as the Libertarian candidate, and will almost certainly be their nominee again. As a Republican two term governor of a border state, who succeeded in cooperating with the Democrats who controlled his state legislature, he's far more qualified to be president than either Clinton or Trump, or most of the other candidates running for major party nominations for that matter.
Voting for a third party candidate may seem quixotic, but it's no more so than voting for a major party candidate and expecting real change.
It's a very good point. The reason why voting for a third party candidate seems like a waste is simply that not enough people vote for third party candidates. We're stuck on a Democrat v. Republican mindset. It doesn't have to be that way. In the earlier days of this nation we saw other political parties rise and fall. Perhaps it is time for the GOP, as it exists today, to be replaced by something that can better represent the broader interests of conservatives. Right now, if you're not a conservative Christian, there is very little the GOP can offer you.
Libertarian? Well, if a Libertarian got into office and actually put some of those theories into practice, I think the potential for those meeting the needs of a broad spectrum of conservatives would be met.
As for me, if that's the final choice I am probably going to examine the possibility of relocating to Canada a bit more.
The U.S. has not had this much divisive polarization since Bill Clinton was elected. It keeps getting more interesting watching history unfold.
The needs of left-liberals also, though, on issues like civil liberties, civil forfeiture, police brutality, immigration, the drug war, military policy, and other areas where the current administration has been dreadful.
I completely understand where a libertarian stance would help further a liberal agenda in all but one of those; police brutality. Can you elucidate?
I'm genuinely surprised it's not obvious, as it's actually a hot button issue for a lot of libertarians. Many in the movement have long called for stricter oversight, exposure and prosecution of cops who violate rights, demilitarization of police, and an end to rubber stamp warrants for no knock raids. For example, Radley Balko, now at the Washington Post but formerly at Reason and the Cato Institute, quite literally wrote the book on it.
It isn't obvious because I don't follow "the movement." And, sadly, the closest thing the public really gets to hearing about "libertarian" ideas is when a GOP candidate does something silly and labels it "libertarian." For example, the GOP candidates I have followed don't support any of the things you list but they support "shrinking the government" by outsourcing police departments to for-profit police companies.
Separate names with a comma.