2016 POTUS Election Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

skidadl

El Presidente'
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Messages
11,888
Waco is just a strange place. The branch Davidian thing was not the only word thing they've had.

That place truly is messed up.

The town wreaks of racism as well.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
I would love to see that statement. Please post it.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/14/politics/hillary-clinton-benghazi-committee/

Rep. Richard Hanna, R-New York, said Wednesday on New York's' WIBX 950, "Sometimes the biggest sin you can commit in D.C. is to tell the truth."

"This may not be politically correct, but I think that there was a big part of this investigation that was designed to go after people and an individual, Hillary Clinton," said Hanna, who is not a member of the committee. "After what Kevin McCarthy said, it's difficult to accept at least a part of it was not. I think that's the way Washington works. But you'd like to expect more from a committee that's spent millions of dollars and tons of time."
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/kevin-mccarthy-grades-john-boehner-214253

“Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable right? But we put together a Benghazi Special Committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping," McCarthy said. "Why? Cause she’s untrustable. But no one would have known any of that had happened had we not fought and made that happen,”
-House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
Townsend seems to make a lot of statements that apparently only he and the liberal wing believe to be unrefutably true.
I'm not part of a wing. If Kasich gets the nomination I vote for him over Hillary 10 times out of 10, if someone wanted my criticisms of her as a politician, I could write an essay. But that doesn't make trumped up nonsense by a republican party (who got to skate after the Bush administration and a republican majority caused a multitrillion dollar war on false assertions) doesn't deserve to get called on it.

Clinton gets to play fast and lose with her feminist card, even though she helped bury all those women who likely had some kind of fair sexual harassment complaints (and possibly rape allegations) against her husband. She has a poor temperament for a president, she seems too high strung and secretive. Even though Hillary's staff will be light years ahead of Bush's, it'll still be a lot of retreads from the old Clinton administration. She knows foreign policy, but John Kerry seems like he's doing laps around her as a secretary of state, even though he has a lot more on his plate than she did. Her husband's economic boom was the result of him cow towing to the republican super majority, and there is literally no way she can duplicate it since she's not at all amiable and the Republicans aren't at all conservative. She has not thrived under pressure. BS or not all these investigations get to her, compare the way she's had to struggle when basically innocent, compared to how her husband demolished investigators when he was guilty as sin. No way Hillary pulls of the "Depends on what the definition of is is" with a straight face. There's a dozen more fair criticisms I can make with out having to depend on buzzwords like "server" "Benghazi" or "Vince Foster".
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
Waco is just a strange place. The branch Davidian thing was not the only word thing they've had.

That place truly is messed up.

The town wreaks of racism as well.
The way I understand it, there's a class structure there that goes: Baylor alum on top, and everything else is garbage. A guy I knew would have conversations end immediately when he mentioned that he was going to the Technical college there. Might as well have said he was a member of the Bandidos.
 

skidadl

El Presidente'
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Messages
11,888
The way I understand it, there's a class structure there that goes: Baylor alum on top, and everything else is garbage. A guy I knew would have conversations end immediately when he mentioned that he was going to the Technical college there. Might as well have said he was a member of the Bandidos.
No doubt about it. It amazes me how snooty the students and graduates of the school are. It is like brainwash or something. Just a strange culture.

It reminds me of my grandma. Sweetest baptist lady you will ever meet but has an inner racist ready to boil over at any moment. Also, extremely well versed in pretending that there are no problems or blemishes in the family. Just smile and sweep it under the rug. Baylor is good at this.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
if they're paying attention. The republicans have been relatively upfront about these investigations being conducted solely for the purpose of damaging her politically. She's had to deal with 3 times as many hearings over Bengazi as Bush did with 9-11. The email thing was also done by Condy Rice before her. I wonder why the Republicans haven't held Bush and Rice to the same standard.
I don't really care about the emails and Benghazi, it's her amassing a personal fortune selling political favors to lobbying interests legally that bothers me. She'll "only release the speeches she was paid for once everyone else does". So, she wants to be the last person to do the right thing. Pretty obvious she said some things in those speeches about the things she was going to do to repay all that generosity that she doesn't want people to hear.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
I don't really care about the emails and Benghazi, it's her amassing a personal fortune selling political favors to lobbying interests legally that bothers me. She'll "only release the speeches she was paid for once everyone else does". So, she wants to be the last person to do the right thing. Pretty obvious she said some things in those speeches about the things she was going to do to repay all that generosity that she doesn't want people to hear.
Like I said, she's about as crooked as any run of the mill politician. Everyone who spends time in DC (apart from Ron Paul) ends up taking as much money as they can, and owing a proportional number of favors. She's just been inside the beltway longer than most. I bet you Kasich would walk into the white house owing as many, if not more favors, if the party set him up to win.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
Like I said, she's about as crooked as any run of the mill politician. Everyone who spends time in DC (apart from Ron Paul) ends up taking as much money as they can, and owing a proportional number of favors. She's just been inside the beltway longer than most. I bet you Kasich would walk into the white house owing as many, if not more favors, if the party set him up to win.
I draw a line between taking campaign funds from a Super Pac, and amassing a 45 million dollar personal fortune. The big donors came up with 200 million for Jeb, but he didn't get to pocket the cash when he fell on his ass. The money the Clinton's have made since Bill left office is way way way more than run of the mill. It's not like they've hidden it either. Bill's speaking fees doubled when Hillary became SoS. They'll probably add on another zero if she makes it to the white house. Sure, it's legal, can't stop Bill from making money, but it's Agnew-level unethical.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
I draw a line between taking campaign funds from a Super Pac, and amassing a 45 million dollar personal fortune. The big donors came up with 200 million for Jeb, but he didn't get to pocket the cash when he fell on his ass. The money the Clinton's have made since Bill left office is way way way more than run of the mill. It's not like they've hidden it either. Bill's speaking fees doubled when Hillary became SoS. They'll probably add on another zero if she makes it to the white house. Sure, it's legal, can't stop Bill from making money, but it's Agnew-level unethical.
Speaking for cash is a thing political big wigs do. Gingrich did it, Bush did it. Any run of the mill politician who could get away with charging 6 figs for "speaking fee" will do it. It just so happens the Democrat's former and future first family was in high demand, probably for the same reason that Hillary has been the presumptive 2016 nominee for 8 years.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/on-talk-circuit-george-bush-makes-millions-but-few-waves-118697

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/want-gingrich-to-speak-he-needs-first-class-expenses-and-2-bathrooms/2011/12/07/gIQAVZzFdO_story.html

As it so happens Donald Trump makes 1.5 Million (7.5 times as much as either Clinton)
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/washingtons-highest-lowest-speaking-fees/story?id=24551590#1

Even my BAE Ron Paul takes 50k per speaking engagement, to spread the gospel of libertarianism.
 
Last edited:

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
Speaking for cash is a thing political big wigs do. Gingrich did it, Bush did it. Any run of the mill politician who could get away with charging 6 figs for "speaking fee" will do it. It just so happens the Democrat's former and future first family was in high demand, probably for the same reason that Hillary has been the presumptive 2016 nominee for 8 years.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/on-talk-circuit-george-bush-makes-millions-but-few-waves-118697

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/want-gingrich-to-speak-he-needs-first-class-expenses-and-2-bathrooms/2011/12/07/gIQAVZzFdO_story.html
I guess it's all right if you don't mind that voting for her you're going to get a politician that will move heaven and earth to keep wages depressed and further rarify the 1%. Not sure why anyone leaning liberal would bother voting for that.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
I guess it's all right if you don't mind that voting for her you're going to get a politician that will move heaven and earth to keep wages depressed and further rarify the 1%. Not sure why anyone leaning liberal would bother voting for that.
Can you show me one that won't? Hillary is the best choice out of two shitty choices. She's just way less shitty than Trump, for every reason I've already illustrated. If Kasich's on the ballot I'll vote for him, but you're a fool if you think he doesn't dance for all the same people.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/paul-ryan-trump-riot-220928
Ryan admonishes Trump for 'riot' remark
The House speaker also says a contested convention 'could very well become a reality.'


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/paul-ryan-trump-riot-220928#ixzz43CDGTRlw
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

It's becoming more and more clear: Donald Trump and Paul Ryan simply don't see eye to eye.
Ryan on Thursday criticized Trump for saying that riots would erupt if the New York billionaire doesn't become the party's presidential nominee. At the same news conference, Ryan said it "could very well become a reality" that the 2016 GOP convention in Cleveland is contested.
Story Continued Below

If you're keeping count at home, Ryan has now criticized Trump for his apparent hesitance in distancing himself from former David Duke, a former Ku Klux Klan grand wizard; said the candidate's call to temporarily ban Muslims from entering the United States was wrong; and said Trump should do more to control violent outbursts at his political events.
On Thursday, Ryan put more space between Trump and himself.
"Nobody should say such things, in my opinion, because to even address or hint to violence is unacceptable," Ryan said, when asked about Trump's prediction of rioting if someone else becomes the nominee.
When asked about the possibility of a contested convention, Ryan said there is a "perception that this is more likely to become an open convention than we thought before."
"So we're getting our minds around the idea that this could very well become a reality, and therefore, those of us who are involved in the convention need to respect that," Ryan said.
The speaker has been clear that he is unafraid to speak out against Trump when he believes the candidate is distorting conservative or American principles. It appears that Ryan believes Trump is doing that quite frequently.
"If anybody — not just Donald Trump — if anybody is out there representing the Republican Party in ways that we believe disfigure conservatism or do not portray what our views and principles are, I, as a party leader — and others, I assume, as well — have an obligation to defend our principles from being distorted. We're going to continue doing that.
"Look. I am who I am," he continued. "I'm a conservative who believes in specific principles and specific policies, and I'm going to speak out on those all the time."
Ryan did say he did not believe that he would need to disown Trump as a candidate. He also said he, himself, will not be the candidate. Ryan said he asked former Speaker John Boehner to stop mentioning him as a potential nominee.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
Can you show me one that won't? Hillary is the best choice out of two shitty choices. She's just way less shitty than Trump, for every reason I've already illustrated. If Kasich's on the ballot I'll vote for him, but you're a fool if you think he doesn't dance for all the same people.
I don't see how she's the better choice, I think the results are likely exactly equal. The only thing really at stake is whether or not we reward the Clintons for building a political dynasty that's the mirror image of the Bush Clan. I'd rather we didn't.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
I don't see how she's the better choice, I think the results are likely exactly equal. The only thing really at stake is whether or not we reward the Clintons for building a political dynasty that's the mirror image of the Bush Clan. I'd rather we didn't.
But the Clinton's aren't a dynasty, Hillary was there from day 1, more to the point, Bill never makes it to the governorship of Arkansas, much less the white house without her. If we're talking about Chelsea's viability for office, I'd have quite a few more reservations.
Now the whether or not, is if you want someone qualified for the job, who has the capability of acting at the position of the supreme executive officer, who's been preparing for this job for decades, and has never criticized for her lack of intelligence or work ethic, or do you want to trust a guy who says shit like: “I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things.” a guy who gets huffy and goes on twitter tirades because Megan Kelly hurt his feelings. Do you trust a shit bird like Donald Trump, who I promise, you can not say as many nice things about, as I can say about Hillary, with the Nuclear Fucking Football? Are you okay with the fate of the world in the tiny hands of a guy who has the impulsiveness, demeanor, and vocabulary of a pouting 3rd grader?
 
Last edited:

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
But the Clinton's aren't a dynasty, Hillary was there from day 1, more to the point, Bill never makes it to the governorship of Arkansas, much less the white house without her. If we're talking about Chelsea's viability for office, I'd have quite a few more reservations.
Now the whether or not, is if you want someone qualified for the job, who has the capability of acting at the position of the supreme executive officer, who's been preparing for this job for decades, and has never criticized for her lack of intelligence or work ethic, or do you want to trust a guy who says shit like: “I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things.” a guy who gets huffy and goes on twitter tirades because Megan Kelly hurt his feelings. Do you trust a shit bird like Donald Trump, who I promise, you can not say as many nice things about, as I can say about Hillary, with the Nuclear Fucking Football? Are you okay with the fate of the world in the tiny hands of a guy who has the impulsiveness, demeanor, and vocabulary of a 3rd grader?
I think we're probably headed for 4 years of gridlock with either one, and I don't buy the idea that Trump is liable to try to unilaterally launch nuclear weapons and kick off WW3. I'm not even sure he could manage it if he wanted to.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
I think we're probably headed for 4 years of gridlock with either one, and I don't buy the idea that Trump is liable to try to unilaterally launch nuclear weapons and kick off WW3. I'm not even sure he could manage it if he wanted to.
Even still, there's a lot of damage Trump can do at that position. Obama had a majority against him for the last couple of years, and he's still been dominating the republicans. You can't think that the commander in chief of the largest military in world history, and supreme executive of the federal branch isn't going to have influence. God knows what the economic toll that kind of power struggle could have. Do you think a guy like Trump, who's as petty and vindictive as anyone would be muzzled easily? Don't you think he might be tempted to test the limits of executive authority in spite of a combative legislature? When you hear about his "plans" don't you think it's a little scary that he could put them on a piece of paper and try and force them into existence? We're talking about a guy who's used to being sued non stop his whole life, there's no way he would wait for congressional approval to do a damn thing.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
Even still, there's a lot of damage Trump can do at that position. Obama had a majority against him for the last couple of years, and he's still been dominating the republicans. You can't think that the commander in chief of the largest military in world history, and supreme executive of the federal branch isn't going to have influence. God knows what the economic toll that kind of power struggle could have. Do you think a guy like Trump, who's as petty and vindictive as anyone would be muzzled easily? Don't you think he might be tempted to test the limits of executive authority in spite of a combative legislature? When you hear about his "plans" don't you think it's a little scary that he could put them on a piece of paper and try and force them into existence? We're talking about a guy who's used to being sued non stop his whole life, there's no way he would wait for congressional approval to do a damn thing.
Such an imagination. Your conjecture is really running away with itself.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
Even still, there's a lot of damage Trump can do at that position. Obama had a majority against him for the last couple of years, and he's still been dominating the republicans. You can't think that the commander in chief of the largest military in world history, and supreme executive of the federal branch isn't going to have influence. God knows what the economic toll that kind of power struggle could have. Do you think a guy like Trump, who's as petty and vindictive as anyone would be muzzled easily? Don't you think he might be tempted to test the limits of executive authority in spite of a combative legislature? When you hear about his "plans" don't you think it's a little scary that he could put them on a piece of paper and try and force them into existence? We're talking about a guy who's used to being sued non stop his whole life, there's no way he would wait for congressional approval to do a damn thing.
I've heard RNC strategists saying they'll run Kasich as a 3rd party candidate to oppose Trump if they can't stop him with a Brokered convention, so that's probably enough to sink him either way. Personally I think they will stop him short of 1253. It's a shame that the one chance we had for an anti-establishment candidate to blow up the RNC's culture of mega donors and dynasties was wasted on Trump. Some part of me wants him to win just to punish both political parties for the shit they've tried to pawn off on us for the last 28 years, but I admit I can't bring myself to vote for him. If he does end up as the nominee I probably roll my eyes and vote for Gary Johnson.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
I don't support Trump in any way, and at this point I'm rooting for a brokered convention so I don't have to make the choice. I'll still vote for Trump over Hillary. I know Trump is one of the biggest assholes on the planet and a practical joke of a human being. I'll vote for him against Hillary because she's tried to set a record for total legal bribe money accepted. It doesn't matter what she stands for because I believe she would do literally anything if someone came up with a big enough speaking fee for Bill or donation to the "Clinton Foundation".
And why don't you think Trump would do the same?

He was fleecing people with Trump University just a couple of years ago, I can understand why peoples aversion to Hillary but how does Trump come off so much better?
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
Such an imagination. Your conjecture is really running away with itself.
I'm sure plenty of terrible leaders, had people who "imagined" they'd do what they did. If Trump tries to institute half of the ideas he's proposed, it could be catastrophic.

It seems to me that it's crazier not to assume he might actually try to do the things he says, rather than be immediately neutered by the legislature.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom