2016 POTUS Election Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Kbrown

Not So New Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
2,155
She does not have the party behind her Like Obama did or most democrats this far into the election and she would have even less if it was somebody other than Trump or Johnson would stop putting his foot in his mouth.

You act like everybody is falling in line when I hear democrats everyday on TV saying they begrudgingly back her.

Anyway lets agree to disagree on the party moving to any type of neo conservatism.
FYI, the Administration just launched a cruise missile attack into Yemen in response to a few insurgent missiles that missed one of our warships.

And Clinton is basically promising escalation in Syria, and using the words "Russian aggression" to propose no-fly zones we would presumably have to enforce somehow.

And so I'm supposed to believe that a groundswell of progressive fervor is going to deny a sitting President the party's nomination in 2020, for the first time since the 1850s.

Yeah, agree to disagree. Good idea.
 

BipolarFuk

Demoted
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
11,464
But, but.......Bill Clinton's a RAPIST!!!!! :panic
 

2233boys

Not So New Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
2,793
FYI, the Administration just launched a cruise missile attack into Yemen in response to a few insurgent missiles that missed one of our warships.

And Clinton is basically promising escalation in Syria, and using the words "Russian aggression" to propose no-fly zones we would presumably have to enforce somehow.

And so I'm supposed to believe that a groundswell of progressive fervor is going to deny a sitting President the party's nomination in 2020, for the first time since the 1850s.

Yeah, agree to disagree. Good idea.
I have my issues with that and its part of the reason why I didn't support her in the primary, and won't vote for her in the general. I still think we can get her out if she does go all Rambo on us like I fear.

LBJ didn't win the nomination, he quit, because of his performance in the first primary. Saw the writing on the wall.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
FYI, the Administration just launched a cruise missile attack into Yemen in response to a few insurgent missiles that missed one of our warships.

And Clinton is basically promising escalation in Syria, and using the words "Russian aggression" to propose no-fly zones we would presumably have to enforce somehow.

And so I'm supposed to believe that a groundswell of progressive fervor is going to deny a sitting President the party's nomination in 2020, for the first time since the 1850s.

Yeah, agree to disagree. Good idea.
To tell the truth I would love to have a drawn out discusion on this but I think we have 2 very definitions of what should be considered following the lead of neo conservatives.

You seem to be saying any military action should be considered following that path.

Do you think firing on a U.S.military ship should be ignored?

Or that nothing should be done in Syria?

I am not agreeing with any of this but I do think military action is needed at times and I think in both cases you just noted the options used and are being talked about are legitimate and still do not fit the republican blueprint.

It's not like Democrats have been against any types of military actions, what past democratic administration are you basing this on?
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
I have my issues with that and its part of the reason why I didn't support her in the primary, and won't vote for her in the general. I still think we can get her out if she does go all Rambo on us like I fear.

LBJ didn't win the nomination, he quit, because of his performance in the first primary. Saw the writing on the wall.
So you think we should stay out of Syria all together or what?

And what should be done when an enemy fires on U.S. warship?

Not saying you are wrong just want to hear what your particular issues with this and ideas about U.S. military going forward.
 

Kbrown

Not So New Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
2,155
So you think we should stay out of Syria all together or what?

And what should be done when an enemy fires on U.S. warship?

Not saying you are wrong just want to hear what your particular issues with this and ideas about U.S. military going forward.
I am at work, so I can't go into a lot of detail right now, but what makes the Houthi insurgents in Yemen our enemy, besides our being beholden to Saudi Arabia?

Could they fire on our warships if our warships weren't there, constantly?
 

Kbrown

Not So New Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
2,155
As an aside, I do think a coalition of anti-interventionist liberals and anti-interventionist conservatives (see The American Conservative magazine) could work together to topple the globalist status quo, but the two major parties right now have us convinced that the wedge social issues are priority one.
 

2233boys

Not So New Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
2,793
So you think we should stay out of Syria all together or what?

And what should be done when an enemy fires on U.S. warship?

Not saying you are wrong just want to hear what your particular issues with this and ideas about U.S. military going forward.
We intervene in other peoples governments and situations in the middle east far to often, in my opinion. So my first question would be why did they fire at our warships? What was the outcome? Where their other alternatives to shooting missiles into a sovereign country.

My other issue with out foreign policy is we allow Israel to do whatever they want to the Palestinians and reward them by investing billions.

I would stay out of Syria, completely and think it is a mistake to try and set a no fly zone. Are we really going to shoot down a Russian aircraft and risk war with Russia?
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,463
We intervene in other peoples governments and situations in the middle east far to often, in my opinion. So my first question would be why did they fire at our warships? What was the outcome? Where their other alternatives to shooting missiles into a sovereign country.

My other issue with out foreign policy is we allow Israel to do whatever they want to the Palestinians and reward them by investing billions.

I would stay out of Syria, completely and think it is a mistake to try and set a no fly zone. Are we really going to shoot down a Russian aircraft and risk war with Russia?
I'm tired of being the world police. And we sure as shit shouldn't get into a situation where we are arming any rebel forces either. We have gone down that road and know exactly what happens. I wish American would worry more about taking care of itself honestly and less about taking care of other countries. And I've always held that opinion no matter who is in office. And yes I feel for Syria but we have our own shit going on here at home.
 

Angrymesscan

DCC 4Life
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
3,796
I'm tired of being the world police. And we sure as shit shouldn't get into a situation where we are arming any rebel forces either. We have gone down that road and know exactly what happens. I wish American would worry more about taking care of itself honestly and less about taking care of other countries. And I've always held that opinion no matter who is in office. And yes I feel for Syria but we have our own shit going on here at home.
The problem is war is very good for business...
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
I am at work, so I can't go into a lot of detail right now, but what makes the Houthi insurgents in Yemen our enemy, besides our being beholden to Saudi Arabia?

Could they fire on our warships if our warships weren't there, constantly?
Fair points all around but unless you withdraw from the middle east all together you have to a side.

I am not saying we are choosing right or even if we should be there at all but in this instance I think you have to respond in kind.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
We intervene in other peoples governments and situations in the middle east far to often, in my opinion. So my first question would be why did they fire at our warships? What was the outcome? Where their other alternatives to shooting missiles into a sovereign country.

My other issue with out foreign policy is we allow Israel to do whatever they want to the Palestinians and reward them by investing billions.

I would stay out of Syria, completely and think it is a mistake to try and set a no fly zone. Are we really going to shoot down a Russian aircraft and risk war with Russia?
All good questions and I agree that we have intervened far too much but I don't think taking a totally isolationist position is right move either.

I am just glad that it seems there is a ground swell of people from both sides asking these type of questions.
 

Kbrown

Not So New Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
2,155
Fair points all around but unless you withdraw from the middle east all together you have to a side.

I am not saying we are choosing right or even if we should be there at all but in this instance I think you have to respond in kind.
That's the problem. There's not that side and this side. There's a giant cluster. The Houthis are enemies of ISIS as well.

There's middle ground between total isolationism and standing behind Saudi war crimes. There's middle ground between ignoring the threat of ISIS completely and trying to fight them while also trying to overthrow others who are fighting them and antagonizing Russia in the process.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
That's the problem. There's not that side and this side. There's a giant cluster. The Houthis are enemies of ISIS as well.

There's middle ground between total isolationism and standing behind Saudi war crimes. There's middle ground between ignoring the threat of ISIS completely and trying to fight them while also trying to overthrow others who are fighting them and antagonizing Russia in the process.
I admit to not having anything other than headline knowledge of this, so I can't really comment.

But I do not really have an issue with anything you say here.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
Jerry Falwell Jr. believes GOP establishment is behind Trump tape leak

By Seth McLaughlin - The Washington Times - Monday, October 10, 2016
A top surrogate for Donald Trump said he is convinced the GOP establishment is behind the leaked the lewd audio and video recordings that have shaken up the presidential race.

Jerry Falwell Jr., president of Liberty University, which bills itself as the largest Christian University in the world, told WABC radio host Rita Cosby that Mr. Trump’s caught-on-tape comments are indefensible, but said that he thinks the release of the tape was planned to give Republicans an excuse to “slither out” of supporting the GOP presidential nominee.

“I think it was timed,” Mr. Falwell said. “I think it might have even been a conspiracy among establishment Republicans who have known about it for weeks and who tried to time it to do the maximum damage to Donald Trump, and I just … I just think it just backfired on them.”

Mr. Falwell said his charge is based on “some independent information” he has received, but he refused to name names.


“But I think some of the establishment folks who reluctantly endorsed him had this planned all along as a way to slither out of the endorsement, and I think it backfired on them, and I’m glad to see that,” Mr. Falwell said.
He also said that he is not surprised that the recordings were leaked ahead of Mr. Trump’s scheduled appearance with House Speaker Paul Ryan, who has tepidly embraced the brash businessman.


“It wasn’t a coincidence that it came out right before Trump was supposed to appear with Paul Ryan at a rally, and it conveniently gave Paul Ryan a way to disinvite Trump,” Mr. Falwell said.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
Update, Thursday, Oct. 13, 12:54 p.m.: Falwell responded to student objections with a statement:

I am proud of these few students for speaking their minds but I’m afraid the statement is incoherent and false. I am not ‘touring the country’ or associating Liberty University with any candidate. I am only fulfilling my obligation as a citizen to ‘render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s’ by expressing my personal opinion about who I believe is best suited to lead our nation in a time of crisis. This student statement seems to ignore the teachings of Jesus not to judge others but they are young and still learning.
:shrug
 

2233boys

Not So New Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
2,793
Update, Thursday, Oct. 13, 12:54 p.m.: Falwell responded to student objections with a statement:



:shrug
Talk about twisting the words of Christ to fit your argument. This guy gives Christians a bad name, just like his fat Daddy!
 

Kbrown

Not So New Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
2,155
There is a fair point to be made about media bias in this scandal, I think. But it's not that Trump is being treated unfairly. It's the fact that these things are being dug up now, in the home stretch of the election. I am supposed to believe that CNN couldn't be bothered to go through a bunch of Howard Stern appearances until after Trump beats out several guys who would all be smoking Hillary right about now? The New York Times couldn't find a gaggle of Trump sex assault victims until just this minute, when there's no chance of a replacement candidate?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom