2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nobby style said:
Show me a democratic Denny Hastert or Dick Cheney. It´s much more likely in their nature. The Republican party attracts the douchiest of Americans. White supremacists, the greediest cuntz, sneakiest slime and the biggest moral hypocrites ever. I´ve been banging on about this theory for years on here, and the fact that the two leading Republican candidates are Donald Trump and Ted Cruz . . . the prophet hath spoken
Click to expand...

Great Republicans like Robert Byrd, George Wallace, Jesse Jackson Jr, John Edwards etc.
 
Are we really arguing that Republicans are sexually deviant than Democrats? feck's sake :lol:

Shouldn't we argue that Democrats are cooler with presidents like Kennedy and Clinton getting blowjobs while keeping the economy in good shape? :D
 
fishfingers15 said:
Are we really arguing that Republicans are sexually deviant than Democrats? feck's sake :lol:

Shouldn't we argue that Democrats are cooler with presidents like Kennedy and Clinton getting blowjobs while keeping the economy in good shape? :D
Click to expand...

Yes we actually are. In the same tradition as leftists are more morally righteous than those on the right.
 
Raoul said:
Great Republicans like Robert Byrd, George Wallace, Jesse Jackson Jr, John Edwards etc.
Click to expand...

Oh please, taking old dixiecrats like Byrd (who honestly repented of his republican sized douche factor) and Wallace and comparing them to now, is so totally disingenuous that I can´t take you serious. Again, Jackson and Edwards could´t keep their dicks in their pants. Ok. Dicks.

Look I get not all republicans are douche and there are some noble idealists, but seriously, which party attracts the KKK, which party attracts the militias and gun freaks, which party attracts the greediest individuals in society, which party attracts the angriest old testament style revenge seekers, which party attracts the sexists, the anti LGBT grouches, in sum, the most socially intolerant folks of society. Which party attracts the Oklahoma bomber and pretty much all of our domestic terrorists? Which party attracts the "ugly Americans?" Which party attracts science deniers and anti intellectuals? It´s not always the rule, there are exceptions of course, but it´s certainly a fair generalization. These are not the Republicans of my father´s times.

Let me give you an example and put this to rest.

In which party would an individual with the qualities of Donald Trump float to the top?

In which party would an individual with the qualities of Bernie Sanders float to the top?

I rest my case.
 
Raoul said:
Yes we actually are. In the same tradition as leftists are more morally righteous than those on the right.
Click to expand...

Oh jesus, this again? Are you trolling? The moral majority, the christian right, the "family values" party, the patriots, the not accepting LGBT rights, the sanctity of marriage people??? . . . you´re joking, right?

Ok, I´m finished.
 
Red Dreams said:
tbf Nobby, Bernie is not a Democrat. He is running as one. And Trump is not really a Republican, though he is running as one.

I think both parties are rubbish. Though the GOP is worse.
Click to expand...

The point being, one of those floated to the top for republicans, one floated to the top for democrats. I wonder which one. Doh!

The GOP is worse, much worse. That is my argument
 
We should also debunk the perceived disparity in experience between Hillary and Bernie, it's actually the other way around.

CfcSaihWQAE2Anj.jpg
 
Red-Jeff said:
A rebuttal to the oft cited pro-Hillary argument that she is the most experienced of the pair and therefore she would make a better president.
Click to expand...

You can either run as an 'outsider' who will reform Washington politics after years of mismanagement or you can run as an experienced Senator. I don't think you can have it both ways to be fair.
 
Red-Jeff said:
A rebuttal to the oft cited pro-Hillary argument that she is the most experienced of the pair and therefore she would make a better president.
Click to expand...

The argument actually runs that she's got experience all across the spectrum, as a lawyer, an investor, public speaker, FLOTUS, Senator, Sec State. It certainly makes her more qualified than most candidates since Bill Clinton, but it's an arbitrary argument anyway. GHWB was infinitely more experienced than her, so did Nixon, Johnson etc...
 
fishfingers15 said:
You can either run as an 'outsider' who will reform Washington politics after years of mismanagement or you can run as an experienced Senator. I don't think you can have it both ways to be fair.
Click to expand...

I think you can, he has a ton of experience in terms of policy making and implementation but has still worked to reform our political process for decades.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
The argument actually runs that she's got experience all across the spectrum, as a lawyer, an investor, public speaker, FLOTUS, Senator, Sec State. It certainly makes her more qualified than most candidates since Bill Clinton, but it's an arbitrary argument anyway. GHWB was infinitely more experienced than her, so did Nixon, Johnson etc...
Click to expand...

You love you some Hillary :lol:
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
The argument actually runs that she's got experience all across the spectrum, as a lawyer, an investor, public speaker, FLOTUS, Senator, Sec State. It certainly makes her more qualified than most candidates since Bill Clinton, but it's an arbitrary argument anyway. GHWB was infinitely more experienced than her, so did Nixon, Johnson etc...
Click to expand...

I'd say at least in terms of past experience, she is more qualified than any other person around at the moment. The diversity of having been an active first lady who was involved with policy for 8 years in the WH, 8 years as a US Senator, and 4 as Sec State, is about as qualified as it gets. That said, past experience isn't usually as well received as likeability, which is an area she seems to be sorely lacking.
 
Red-Jeff said:
You love you some Hillary :lol:
Click to expand...
Eh no, if there's a Clinton that I love, it's Slick Willie.

I'm just laying out the fact as I see it. That graphic you posted is misleading. Someone can say Bernie Sanders has never held a private sector job, as opposed to someone who was on the board of Walmart. Was mayor of a town with less than 30k people, got one bill through the House in 20 years and on the whole being a more ineffective lawmaker than Hillary (WaPo did an article on this).

Now you compare either of them to Bush Snr., who was Congressman from Texas, Chair of the RNC, Chief liason to the PRC, US ambassador to the UN, CIA director and Vice President. None of them is fit to lace his boots if we go by experience in public office. Or Johnson's, who was a highly successful President of the Senate.

This is a meaningless dick measuring contest. Suffice to say they both are sane enough for the office. Obama is a better president than Bush Snr. was despite the chasm in qualifications between the two.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
Eh no, if there's a Clinton that I love, it's Slick Willie.

I'm just laying out the fact as I see it. That graphic you posted is misleading. Someone can say Bernie Sanders has never held a private sector job, as opposed to someone who was on the board of Walmart. Was mayor of a town with less than 30k people, got one bill through the House in 20 years and on the whole being a more ineffective lawmaker than Hillary (WaPo did an article on this).

Now you compare either of them to Bush Snr., who was Congressman from Texas, Chair of the RNC, Chief liason to the PRC, US ambassador to the UN, CIA director and Vice President. None of them is fit to lace his boots if we go by experience in public office. Or Johnson's, who was a highly successful President of the Senate.

This is a meaningless dick measuring contest. Suffice to say they both are sane enough for the office. Obama is a better president than Bush Snr. was despite the chasm in qualifications between the two.
Click to expand...

Can't quite shake the suspicion that these three are up to something.....

related_clinton-trump_gd_151229_0.jpg
 
Red-Jeff said:
Wow would have never thought you would be the two that would respond to that! :lol:
Click to expand...
There are so many things to like Bernie for over Hillary. That one was awful!

MAYOR for the sake of genuine feck.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
Eh no, if there's a Clinton that I love, it's Slick Willie.

I'm just laying out the fact as I see it. That graphic you posted is misleading. Someone can say Bernie Sanders has never held a private sector job, as opposed to someone who was on the board of Walmart. Was mayor of a town with less than 30k people, got one bill through the House in 20 years and on the whole being a more ineffective lawmaker than Hillary (WaPo did an article on this).

Now you compare either of them to Bush Snr., who was Congressman from Texas, Chair of the RNC, Chief liason to the PRC, US ambassador to the UN, CIA director and Vice President. None of them is fit to lace his boots if we go by experience in public office. Or Johnson's, who was a highly successful President of the Senate.

This is a meaningless dick measuring contest. Suffice to say they both are sane enough for the office. Obama is a better president than Bush Snr. was despite the chasm in qualifications between the two.
Click to expand...

I'm comparing them in terms of experience in elected office because people continually criticize Bernie for his experience despite the fact that he has held electex office longer than Hillary.

Why are you bringing Bush into it? I am comparing Bernie and Hillary to each other not Bush. I am not saying he will definitely be a better president because of that experience (he would be a better president because he is a much more honest person that actually represents his constituents to the best of his ability), just that the criticism of his experience within politics is entirely unfounded.
 
Ubik said:
There are so many things to like Bernie for over Hillary. That one was awful!

MAYOR for the sake of genuine feck.
Click to expand...

If you read my (very short) post and proceeding posts you would realize that I was just posting that as a rebuttal to the continual and inaccurate denigration of Bernie's experience.
 
Red-Jeff said:
I'm comparing them in terms of experience in elected office because people continually criticize Bernie for his experience despitethe fact that he has held electex office longer than Hillary.

Why are you bringing Bush into it? I am comparing Bernie and Hillary to each other not Bush. I am not saying he will definitely be a better president because of that experience (he would be a better president because he is a much more honest person that actually represents his constituents to the best of his ability), just that the criticism of his experience within politics is entirely unfounded.
Click to expand...


It's really not. He's been on the whole an ineffective lawmaker due to his rigid ideology. I know the Berners don't like Barney Frank but he's consistently criticized Sanders for it since the 90s. And Frank himself was the co author of the most significant financial reforms bill in decades, someone who did the hard work on getting out the details.

Posting a graphic comparing the number of years both spent in public office to draw conclusion on experience is just frankly ridiculous.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
It's really not. He's been on the whole an ineffective lawmaker due to his rigid ideology. I know the Berners don't like Barney Frank but he's consistently criticized Sanders for it since the 90s. And Frank himself was the co author of the most significant financial reforms bill in decades, someone who did the hard work on getting out the details.

Posting a graphic comparing the number of years both spent in public office to draw conclusion on experience is just frankly ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Experience in elected office=number of years in elected office?
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
It's really not. He's been on the whole an ineffective lawmaker due to his rigid ideology. I know the Berners don't like Barney Frank but he's consistently criticized Sanders for it since the 90s. And Frank himself was the co author of the most significant financial reforms bill in decades, someone who did the hard work on getting out the details.

Posting a graphic comparing the number of years both spent in public office to draw conclusion on experience is just frankly ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Ineffective lawmaker? During their time as senators Bernie has sponsored two bills that became law and Hillary has sponsored three BUT while Sanders chaired the VA committee, 13 of the committees bills became law. Hillary did not chair any senate committees.

Looks to me like Bernie is a more effective lawmaker than Hillary.
 
Red-Jeff said:
Experience in elected office=number of years in elected office?
Click to expand...

I like Bernie but am not interested in his work as Mayor of Burlington, just as i wasn't remotely interested in Obama's community organizing. At this point, its really all about ideas and attitude that will connect with people.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.