Page 11 of 109 FirstFirst ... 9101112132161 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 330 of 3269

Thread: TRUMP 2016

  1. #301
    SEÑOR Member Aimless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    11,313
    Would you vote for Clinton over Cruz, Rubio or Carson?
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  2. #302
    All Worship Ragnarök Loki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    15,572
    Rubio over Clinton - maybe. Trump, Cruz and Carson - definitely not. Bush and Kasich over Clinton - very likely, but their campaigns are all but dead.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  3. #303
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,804
    Blocking the work of the senate/congress that repeatedly votes to fund Obamacare, planned parenthood, deficits etc is one of the platforms Republicans ran on. So far they have refused to stop funding the things they promised to so I don't see this as a bad thing. Taking 'extreme' positions on immigration is troublesome however Republicans have been burned over and over by this all the way back to the 80s so it is understandable. Carpet bombing cities? Carpet bombing the enemy positions sure but I don't think he's pushing for a coherent plan to carpet bomb specific cities.

    As far as Carson - again political novice setting up his first campaign. You're going to get some folks wrong, it happens. I care more about the character of the man and the positions he actually does support.

    Rubio's path of victory comes in some individuals dropping out and endorsing him. Jeb Bush for example who doesn't have a lot of love in the polls still has backers and influence in terms of providing $$ and ground game. Frankly I think Cruz and Trump are BOTH anti-establishment candidates who will likely split the vote in NH giving Rubio his first victory there. Then the avalanche of Republicans will come out in support of Rubio over Cruz and Trump. Trump being the egotistical asshole he is won't actually drop even when it becomes clear he won't win, pulling support from Cruz. I'm not at all certain of my analysis and it is optimistic thinking on my part but that's the path of victory I see for Rubio. Once it gets to the wider states a more serious look can be made and folks will realize he has the best shot of beating Clinton.

  4. #304
    All Worship Ragnarök Loki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    15,572
    How long has Cruz been in the Senate? What has he accomplished other than blocking its work on every topic? Which relationships has he built? You're not naive enough to believe Cruz's and Trump's rhetoric that one can rule a country through willpower alone, do you? No one will work with Cruz and Cruz won't work with anyone.

    He's not knowledgeable enough to hold any positions, and he doesn't have the right advisors to make him informed. Just how easy do you think being president is? You need to know how politics works. You need to have experience running a political system. You need to have the ability to build and maintain relationships. You need to know how the government functions, how people function within the government, and how to get things done. This isn't enough you magically learn on the job. Look at Obama's mistake. Half of them are a result of political inexperience. And you'd replace him with someone who has no experience at all?

    Bush and Christie are polling at under 10% combined. Trump is up by a good 25% over Rubio.

    Edit: compare Cruz to someone like Paul Ryan, someone who's about as right-wing as Cruz. And yet the guy has the respect of his colleagues, both Democratic and Republican, and manages to get things done. That is what being a politician is about. Promoting one's agenda, but also getting things done. Empty rhetoric doesn't help anyone.
    Last edited by Loki; 12-26-2015 at 02:03 AM.
    Hope is the denial of reality

  5. #305
    Administrator Dreadnaught's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    9,054
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    Would you vote for Clinton over Cruz, Rubio or Carson?
    Rubio is a dreamboat compared to Clinton, despite his somewhat Obama-esque place within the Republican party.

    I have been trying to block out thoughts of whether I would vote for Clinton over Trump.

  6. #306
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,804
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    Rubio is a dreamboat compared to Clinton, despite his somewhat Obama-esque place within the Republican party.

    I have been trying to block out thoughts of whether I would vote for Clinton over Trump.
    I'd vote for neither and just go for whatever schmuck is the Libertarian candidate.

  7. #307
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,804
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    How long has Cruz been in the Senate? What has he accomplished other than blocking its work on every topic? Which relationships has he built? You're not naive enough to believe Cruz's and Trump's rhetoric that one can rule a country through willpower alone, do you? No one will work with Cruz and Cruz won't work with anyone.

    He's not knowledgeable enough to hold any positions, and he doesn't have the right advisors to make him informed. Just how easy do you think being president is? You need to know how politics works. You need to have experience running a political system. You need to have the ability to build and maintain relationships. You need to know how the government functions, how people function within the government, and how to get things done. This isn't enough you magically learn on the job. Look at Obama's mistake. Half of them are a result of political inexperience. And you'd replace him with someone who has no experience at all?

    Bush and Christie are polling at under 10% combined. Trump is up by a good 25% over Rubio.

    Edit: compare Cruz to someone like Paul Ryan, someone who's about as right-wing as Cruz. And yet the guy has the respect of his colleagues, both Democratic and Republican, and manages to get things done. That is what being a politician is about. Promoting one's agenda, but also getting things done. Empty rhetoric doesn't help anyone.
    I'm not going to take time to defend Cruz since he's not my first (or 2nd) pick. However I'll maintain he is significantly better than Trump, I could see myself voting for him but I could NEVER see myself voting for that egotistical ass.

    Trump may be 25% over Rubio but how many of those voters will go to the primaries? In later states how many folks will be left? You either love Trump (why??? WHY???) or hate him, there isn't any in between. So as the field narrows it plays to the advantage of EVERYONE else. Cruz has a good shot of winning Iowa. Trump isn't dropping. If some more of the no chance folks drop out there support will gravitate toward Rubio. Again... that's my hope.

  8. #308
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,804
    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/matthews-...zergnet_825764

    Not a fan of Matthews but it was a legit question. Trump however is scared to answer because if he says Obama isn't legitimate because he wasn't a US citizen he looks like a birther. If he says he is legitimate he loses with the people currently in his camp (the idiotic faction of the Republican party). So much for the tough guy with the straight talk. Guy can't even answer a simple and legitimate question.

  9. #309
    All Worship Ragnarök Loki's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    15,572
    Hope is the denial of reality

  10. #310
    Senior Member earthJoker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Gone
    Posts
    3,653
    So are we going to rename the thread to TRUMP PALIN 2016 any time soon? Would be so much fun.
    "Wer Visionen hat, sollte zum Arzt gehen." - Helmut Schmidt

  11. #311
    Administrator Dreadnaught's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    9,054
    Kasich is in second-place in New Hampshire across multiple polls. What's surprising, actually, is Trump is polling first. Which makes me think the polling is garbage.

    Let us all pray Trumpites don't vote. Because I kinda think and hope they don't.

  12. #312
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,804
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreadnaught View Post
    Kasich is in second-place in New Hampshire across multiple polls. What's surprising, actually, is Trump is polling first. Which makes me think the polling is garbage.

    Let us all pray Trumpites don't vote. Because I kinda think and hope they don't.
    In NH I think we'll get a bunch of liberals voting for Trump. Iowa due to the way the caucus works I don't see that happening. Trump is no one's 2nd choice so the Caucus will be very interesting to watch.

  13. #313
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    5,628
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    In NH I think we'll get a bunch of liberals voting for Trump. Iowa due to the way the caucus works I don't see that happening. Trump is no one's 2nd choice so the Caucus will be very interesting to watch.
    Your primary system is still weird to me especially since it's different per state.
    Keep on keepin' the beat alive!

  14. #314
    SEÑOR Member Aimless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    11,313
    Okay, boys, what are the odds on

    1. Trump vs. Sanders

    2. Trump vs. Clinton

    3. Trump has an "accident"
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  15. #315
    Senior Member GGT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    17,868
    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    How long has Cruz been in the Senate? What has he accomplished other than blocking its work on every topic? Which relationships has he built? You're not naive enough to believe Cruz's and Trump's rhetoric that one can rule a country through willpower alone, do you? No one will work with Cruz and Cruz won't work with anyone.

    He's not knowledgeable enough to hold any positions, and he doesn't have the right advisors to make him informed. Just how easy do you think being president is? You need to know how politics works. You need to have experience running a political system. You need to have the ability to build and maintain relationships. You need to know how the government functions, how people function within the government, and how to get things done. This isn't enough you magically learn on the job. Look at Obama's mistake. Half of them are a result of political inexperience. And you'd replace him with someone who has no experience at all?

    Bush and Christie are polling at under 10% combined. Trump is up by a good 25% over Rubio.

    Edit: compare Cruz to someone like Paul Ryan, someone who's about as right-wing as Cruz. And yet the guy has the respect of his colleagues, both Democratic and Republican, and manages to get things done. That is what being a politician is about. Promoting one's agenda, but also getting things done. Empty rhetoric doesn't help anyone.

    In other words.....it's no wonder that 'establishment' party politics, and the voting electorate that's mostly sick of politics-as usual, are butting heads. It would be interesting if both (R) and (D) "anti-establishment" candidates are nominated, and the general election is Trump vs Sanders.

  16. #316
    SEÑOR Member Aimless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    11,313
    I believe this is an expression of what psychiatrists call "the orange triad":

    http://thinkprogress.org/politics/20...clear-weapons/
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  17. #317
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,804
    Quote Originally Posted by GGT View Post
    In other words.....it's no wonder that 'establishment' party politics, and the voting electorate that's mostly sick of politics-as usual, are butting heads. It would be interesting if both (R) and (D) "anti-establishment" candidates are nominated, and the general election is Trump vs Sanders.
    That would be such a depressing general election. Awful, juts awful.

  18. #318
    SEÑOR Member Aimless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    11,313
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    That would be such a depressing general election. Awful, juts awful.
    Who would you vote for in that scenario?
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  19. #319
    Local talking head LittleFuzzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,101
    Quote Originally Posted by GGT View Post
    In other words.....it's no wonder that 'establishment' party politics, and the voting electorate that's mostly sick of politics-as usual, are butting heads. It would be interesting if both (R) and (D) "anti-establishment" candidates are nominated, and the general election is Trump vs Sanders.
    Watch that happen, and then see GGT post a year later whining about how this "anti-establishment" President is being anti-establishment and not working with anyone to get things done.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  20. #320
    . Being's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    3,263
    Bloomberg = Wreck of Trump vs Clinton.
    .

  21. #321
    . Being's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    3,263
    Or is it Bloomberg vs Trump vs Clinton...
    .

  22. #322
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    5,628
    If, god forbid, Trump actually gets the GOP nomination, do you reckon one of the others will join as a third party nominee?
    Keep on keepin' the beat alive!

  23. #323
    Senior Member RandBlade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    12,480
    None of the other candidates would (They've all signed not to anyway) but Bloomberg might.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  24. #324
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    5,628
    Signed not to only goes so far when reality sets in. It's not like it's a binding contract is it? I imagine a number of prominent GOP members would prefer a more.. presidential candidate. Let's face it, that promise was meant to prevent right wing candidates ruining the election for them with tea party candidates, not to keep them in.
    Keep on keepin' the beat alive!

  25. #325
    Local talking head LittleFuzzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,101
    Quote Originally Posted by Flixy View Post
    Signed not to only goes so far when reality sets in. It's not like it's a binding contract is it? I imagine a number of prominent GOP members would prefer a more.. presidential candidate. Let's face it, that promise was meant to prevent right wing candidates ruining the election for them with tea party candidates, not to keep them in.

    True but at the same time, none of them really have the heft to successfully run as a third-party candidate, not after losing to Trump. So it would end up being a deliberate attack on the GOP voters and nomination process, deliberately trying to hand the election to the Democrats, and would sink the person's career. It can be pulled off in lesser races, particularly by incumbents, but not this general presidential election.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  26. #326
    Senior Member Flixy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    5,628
    Quote Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy View Post
    True but at the same time, none of them really have the heft to successfully run as a third-party candidate, not after losing to Trump. So it would end up being a deliberate attack on the GOP voters and nomination process, deliberately trying to hand the election to the Democrats, and would sink the person's career. It can be pulled off in lesser races, particularly by incumbents, but not this general presidential election.
    Fair enough. Though losing a primary doesn't mean you don't have a better shot in a general election (if the center doesn't vote as much in the primary). And if, say, Sanders wins the other nomination there'd be a lot of votes up for grabs in the center, right? (Not that he's expected to win the nomination anyway)

    On a side note, if a party's nominee is someone the party doesn't want.. what are that candidate and those who voted for him doing in that party in the first place. A two party system never ceases to amaze me
    Keep on keepin' the beat alive!

  27. #327
    Senior Member RandBlade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    12,480
    A lot of states also have laws banning those who stood in primaries from standing or appearing on ballot papers as independents I believe. So good look winning a campaign without your party backing and not even being on every ballot paper.

    At least with a two party system you know what you're getting before the election and we're normally good at weeding out the Trumps and Corbyn's before they reach office, either in the party stage or the general election stage. With a plethora party system its harder to sift out those undesirables. To win in the US you have to win both the primary and the national election, winning the first one without the other achieves nothing.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  28. #328
    Senior Member RandBlade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    12,480
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  29. #329
    Local talking head LittleFuzzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    5,101
    [QUOTE=Flixy;169620]Fair enough. Though losing a primary doesn't mean you don't have a better shot in a general election (if the center doesn't vote as much in the primary).

    Running without the formal support of the party pretty much does mean that though. You'd need to build your own nation-spanning GOTV effort, for instance, and in not all that much time. There are a whole lot of obstacles. In many respects someone who didn't participate in the primary stands a better chance because they wouldn't have been expecting to have this established support system from the party to draw on for the general election. Anyone who decides to continue campaigning despite losing the primary would be a lot further behind, trying to expand and prolong the network built from their primary bid in ways they hadn't anticipated. And no one in the GOP primary now is exactly a screaming centrist either. "At least I'm not Trump" is not the best motivational message to get a large moderate bloc to participate rather than just stay home.

    On a side note, if a party's nominee is someone the party doesn't want.. what are that candidate and those who voted for him doing in that party in the first place. A two party system never ceases to amaze me
    The parties aren't exactly centralized monoliths. They're aggregations of state parties and even many of those are more collections of county lists than a central organization. US political parties are coordinators and facilitators. The candidate is in that party because they can use it. And the party would have no problem with Trump or anyone else out there just being members, people making donations, proferring their vote, etc. which means they don't have much of a leg to stand on for objecting when the person turns things around and uses them in turn.

    Quote Originally Posted by RandBlade View Post
    A lot of states also have laws banning those who stood in primaries from standing or appearing on ballot papers as independents I believe. So good look winning a campaign without your party backing and not even being on every ballot paper.
    I'm not aware of any state that has such a law and I can't see it being enforceable if they do. The parties have ZERO official standing and cannot restrict who may run for general election. You can maybe have a law that FORCES them to run as an Independent and without any label indicating they're in the party whose primary they ran in, but that's as far as I think it can go.
    Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"

  30. #330
    Senior Member RandBlade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    12,480
    "Sore loser laws" do exist Fuzzy, though how easily they could be enforced would likely be a matter for the courts. Gary Johnson was prevented by Michigan law in 2012 from appearing on the ballot paper due to running in the Republic primary. EDIT: Although that was due to him wanting to use another parties label, Ohio has other laws and so on.

    Though it looks like it is "some states" and not "a lot" that have sore loser laws for Presidential elections.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    Being upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •