US Election 2016
Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None |
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Jezza 
2023 PREMIERS!
Joined: 06 Sep 2010
Location: Ponsford End
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
No, I'm not a supporter of Trump, but I see him as the lesser of two evils between him and Clinton. I could easily say the same thing about Clinton supporters who seemed to have lost their minds to think independently if we're going to play a game of tit-for-tat. Even Greens leader Jill Stein thinks she's a more dangerous prospect than Trump and she's no fan of him as candidate either.
Seems as though Clinton's supporters gloss over her past actions involving such things as her involvement with Benghazi, deleting 33,000 emails, referring to African American youth in the 1990s as "super predators" amongst many other issues, and the DNC sabotaged Bernie Sanders' campaign to ensure that she obtained the presidential nomination for the Democrat Party, yet no one seems to bat an eyelid over it.
Both candidates are fair game, but it seems like only one is being targeted by the mainstream media, while the other is almost immune to criticism. Both are poor candidates for the US, but one will be president in January 2017 whether we like it or not.
_________________
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 | |
|
|
|
 |
Pies4shaw 
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Distaste for Trump need not be party-political. Anyone with a frontal lobe can join in. |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Jezza wrote: | No, I'm not a supporter of Trump, but I see him as the lesser of two evils between him and Clinton. I could easily say the same thing about Clinton supporters who seemed to have lost their minds to think independently if we're going to play a game of tit-for-tat. Even Greens leader Jill Stein thinks she's a more dangerous prospect than Trump and she's no fan of him as candidate either.
Seems as though Clinton's supporters gloss over her past actions involving such things as her involvement with Benghazi, deleting 33,000 emails, referring to African American youth in the 1990s as "super predators" amongst many other issues, and the DNC sabotaged Bernie Sanders' campaign to ensure that she obtained the presidential nomination for the Democrat Party, yet no one seems to bat an eyelid over it.
Both candidates are fair game, but it seems like only one is being targeted by the mainstream media, while the other is almost immune to criticism. Both are poor candidates for the US, but one will be president in January 2017 whether we like it or not. |
If you can explain, with non-partisan sources, the nature of her "Benghazi involvement", show that the 33,000 (sic) emails were significant to the US state, and show that her manoeuvres against Sanders were more than normal dirty politics as usual, I'll be in a better position to appreciate how this makes her a "lesser of two evils" candidate than the a man who implies (to the NRA, no less) support for assassination of his rival, who treats women as pussies of convenience, who thinks it is good sport to threaten to put his opponents in jail and implies that he will not accept the electoral process. A man who insults the bereaved parents of America's war dead. A draft evader who tells torture survivor veteran John McCain that he prefers soldiers who didnt get captured. A man who thinks waterboarding is good practice.
As Michelle Obama said, this is not normal. It is nothing like normal. The man's utterances are more than bad behaviour within the system, though they are that too - They threaten to subvert the system and all reasonable decencies.
As for your contention that "no-one bats an eyelid over Clinton's failings" .... blimey - you can see from a minute's review of the press that the statement is simply untrue. It's been front page news on many occasions when i have picked up mainstream papers while in the US. Maybe that does not qualify as an eyelid if you think Trump is the lesser of two evils. Perhaps an FBI investigation and report bats no eyelids either.
Rodham-Clinton is a stinker of a candidate, but she has done big difficult jobs in government without ever threatening the democratic process. She has made mistakes and not always been as transparent about them as she should have. However, if you think Trump is a superior ("lesser of two evils") candidate to Clinton, with all her executive experience and her record and her clear intellect, then i believe you have lost your bearings on this issue, and you need to read more history, Jezza.
The system and the world order we have today matters. It is also more fragile than it has been since 1945. US democracy will certainly survive HR Clinton more-or-less unchanged. It is far from clear, from his published statements, that it would so survive the degenerate, dictatorial and demagogic Trump. And the ordered, non-despotic world and life that you and I take for granted depends upon US democracy. Support for Clinton is not the absence of independent thought. It is recognition that these two candidates represent a very different level of historic risk.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
David 
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
As someone who has probably kept a closer eye on these things than most of us, Mugwump, how would you compare the politics of Hillary Clinton and Theresa May? Clinton is notionally of the 'left' and May is notionally of the 'right', but, like many people, I suspect there's a substantial crossover between the American Democratic Party and the British Tories a crossover that Clinton, if not May, probably falls into.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Mugwump
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Between London and Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
David, I see relatively few similarities between the Tories and the Democrats, not least because British Toryism has two quite distinct strands, neither of which really has an analogue within the Democratic Party.
It grossly oversimplifies the complex reality, but in the British Conservative Party there is the libertarian strand, represented by Thatcherism and in many ways quite close to the views of the saner type of American Republican. Then there is the strand I most identify with, which is somewhat at bay today. It used to be called Burkean conservatism - the belief that tradition, continuity, restraint and stability are paramount, based on a rather pessimistic view of human nature. That has never been a popular view in American life.
If those are the two basic ideologies battling for control inside the skin of a British Conservative intellectual, then David Cameron, the previous PM, belonged to neither very clearly. He is/was a kind of light-touch Libertarian, with a large dose of early-Blairite pragmatism - more like a Labour right-winger than a Tory in many ways, though with a basic good humour, magnanimity and charm alien to the modern British Labour Party.
The early signs are that May is closer to the Burkean model, with a more authoritarian streak, and a strong desire for "grip". However, Maggie came in quoting St francis of Assisi before she worked out what she was about, so one never knows. Some Prime Ministerships are defined by their reaction to large external events, others by the way they bring events into being. Given Brexit, May's is clearly the former.
Clinton seems to be largely a careerist politican who will say pretty much anything (within respectable bounds) to get elected, and once elected, I expect her to exert much energy in steering the boat to where it was more-or-less drifting anyway. Her virtue is that careerist politicans of her type are rational and fairly predictable. Like any Democrat, however, she will be torn apart by the debilitating effects of liberal bien-pensant identity politics, and the vicious hate machine of right-wing populism, both agitating an anxious and fretful suburban America. Add to all of that, the likelihood of a global debt-crisis in the next five years, and good luck to her. I would not want that job at fifty, let alone at her advanced age.
In answer to your question, then, very different individuals, very different contexts, and probably very little in common apart from a basic competence and rationality.
_________________
Two more flags before I die! |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully 
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | So heard on the radio trump is back to within 4%,. 44 to 40.
Guy wont stay down |
Enjoy your holidays Stui. Must be the sunshine. You were probably listening to Radio George Christiansen.
Trump is polling exceptionally well, except in the US 
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
Culprit 
Joined: 06 Feb 2003
Location: Port Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Saturday Night Live is getting so much material from both camps. It's hard to this election seriously when I watch their skits. |
|
|
|
|
Wokko 
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
rationalwiki.org/wiki/The_Gateway_Pundit
Sep 22, 2016 - The Gatewood Pundit is a hard-right website that spends most of the day complaining about Barack Obama and liberals, and the occasional ...
Just a cursory search of google to see the source
OMG alleged dirty tricks in an election campaign  Must only be the democrats
Now about deduction, please explain 
Who are rational wiki I hear people ask?
"..Refutation and analysis of anti-science and crank ideas; essays on right wing authoritarianism and religious fundamentalism..."
Must be truth & justice 
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Read the sourced wikileaks emails.
Also the point is that the media polls are rigged and the media are colluding with the DNC. You'll scream conspiracy theory but the evidence is in the public domain, straight from the horses mouth.
The only crazy conspiracy theory is Hillary's crap about Russians hacking and passing information onto wikileaks. Never does she deny the veracity of the information, just screeches about Russians.
Last edited by Wokko on Mon Oct 24, 2016 7:29 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Donald Trump interview from 2000 when he was considering a Presidential Run.
| Quote: | Back in 2000 Donald Trump was interviewed by the gay Advocate magazine. This was after eight years of Bill and Hillary Clinton in the White House.
Donald Trump in 2000 defended gays from the Clintons.
Here is the Advocate interview from 2000, via Prntly:
Last fall Donald Trump shook up the political world by announcing he was joining the Reform Party, a major step in exploring a run for president. The pundits laughed, claiming that the real estate mogul knew more about glamour than politics, but Trump made a number of television and personal appearances that showed his proposed candidacy was no joke. Privately, friends speculated he was bored with the real estate business. In January Trump published The America We Deserve, which outlines his vision for the nation. Anyone who thinks his candidacy is a joke, he says, should read the book. For moderates in the Reform Party, Trump has emerged as their best hope of stopping Pat Buchanan from winning the partys presidential nomination. With his name recognition and record in business, Trump could prove a wild card in the presidential race, appealing to people tired of politics as usual. Recently I put a wide-ranging set of questions to Trump concerning gay issues, to which Trump responded in writing. His answers might surprise some pundits, both for their thoroughness and for their bluntness.
Are you serious about running?
Yes, Im quite serious. Washington is in gridlock, and nothing is getting done. No health care reform, no tax relief, no campaign finance reform. The special interests run the country. I think it will take a nonpolitician to break the logjam. Somebody with a big-picture outlook. Im someone who has built a billion-dollar business enterprise and created hundreds of thousands of jobs. I have made the tough decisions, always with an eye toward the bottom line. Perhaps its time America was run like a business.
Why should gays and lesbians be interested in you as a presidential candidate?
I grew up in New York City, a town with different races, religions, and peoples. It breeds tolerance. In all truth, I dont care whether or not a person is gay. I judge people based on their capability, honesty, and merit. Being in the entertainment business that is, owning casinos and several large beauty pageants Ive worked with many gay people. I have met some tough, talented, capable, terrific people. Their lifestyle is of no interest to me.
Would we see gay people in a Trump administration?
I would want the best and brightest. Sexual orientation would be meaningless. Im looking for brains and experience. If the best person for the job happens to be gay, I would certainly appoint them. One of the key problems today is that politics is such a disgrace, good people dont go into government. Id want to change that.
What would you do to combat antigay prejudice?
I like the idea of amending the 1964 Civil Rights Act to include a ban of discrimination based on sexual orientation. It would be simple. It would be straightforward. We dont need to rewrite the laws currently on the books, although I do think we need to address hate-crimes legislation. But amending the Civil Rights Act would grant the same protection to gay people that we give to other Americans its only fair. I actually suggested this first, and now I see [Democratic presidential candidate] Bill Bradley has jumped on the bandwagon and is claiming the idea as his own. [A bill to amend the Civil Rights Act that would have included protections on the basis of sexual orientation was first introduced in the 1970s. Ed.] Let me tell you something. Bradley is as phony as a $20 Rolex. He says the president ought to have big ideas. His last big idea the 1986 [Tax Reform Act] caused a recession and cost thousands of people their jobs. This guy destroyed the real estate industry, and he tanked the S&Ls. It was a disaster. Bradley walked out of the Senate like he was some kind of statesman declaring that politics is broken. The truth is, the voters were going to dump him in New Jersey. He walked away. Now he poses as some kind of outsider. What a joke. Bradley was a member of the Senate Finance Committee and a longtime part of Washington establishment. When I was $900 million and my companies were $9 billion in debt, I didnt walk away. While others were declaring bankruptcy, I clawed my way back. My businesses are now bigger and better than ever.
Are your gay employees allowed to be out?
Everyone makes a personal choice. Look, it just doesnt matter to me. I try to treat everybody equal and fairly. Maybe thats why I can count men like Muhammad Ali, Joe Frazier, and Sammy Sosa as my friends. When you hang with people who are different from you, you get an appreciation for other cultures.
|
Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton continues to take donations from regimes where they lash and murder gays. |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Wokko wrote: | Read the sourced wikileaks emails.
Also the point is that the media polls are rigged and the media are colluding with the DNC. You'll scream conspiracy theory but the evidence is in the public domain, straight from the horses mouth.
The only crazy conspiracy theory is Hillary's crap about Russians hacking and passing information onto wikileaks. Never does she deny the veracity of the information, just screeches about Russians. |
 Just need the tin foil hats....
I don't need to scream Wokko they're your straw man words.
It's startin' to get ridiculous though. Ballarat must be going through a prolonged cold spell.
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Denial aint just a river in Egypt. It's Clinton and her zombie followers like your good self with all the crazy, no evidence conspiracy theories. Those coming from the Trump camp are ALL backed up by evidence sourced from the emails of Democrat insiders. Nothing published by wikileaks has EVER been proven false, you're welcome to have a go. |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Wokko wrote: | Donald Trump interview from 2000 when he was considering a Presidential Run.
| Quote: | Back in 2000 Donald Trump was interviewed by the gay Advocate magazine. This was after eight years of Bill and Hillary Clinton in the White House.
.......
|
Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton continues to take donations from regimes where they lash and murder gays. |
No Hilary Clinton did not take any donations from her charities / foundations nor did she have any extra marital affairs.
If you are talking about the Clinton foundation from which the former & future president Clinton's do not personally profit but have donated millions to:
1. Sustainable growth
2. Health matters
3. Disaster relief
4. No celings project (one I'm sure you'll really like )
5. Dealing with root causes of poverty in Africa
6. Healthy heart & healthy schools funding
7. Climate change initiatives
8. Global citizen awards (such as a labour activist in Pakistan)
9. The distribution of anti malarial drugs etc
Lets compare the with Donald Trumps charities: no wait,
http://newsexaminer.net/politics/donald-trump-the-least-charitable-billionaire/
So stop rehashing loony right rubbish Wokko, your better than that silly nonsense.
Let's compare & contrast the Clintons charities with honest Donald's charity giving:
Oh dear:
http://www.newyorker.com/news/john-cassidy/trump-and-the-truth-his-charitable-giving
Must be rigged. Crooked Donald.
_________________
“I even went as far as becoming a Southern Baptist until I realised they didn’t keep ‘em under long enough” Kinky Friedman |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Oh you poor deluded fool.
Watch Clinton Cash, it's on Youtube it's been fact checked and free. Then get back to us.
Also check out the Podesta emails released by Wikileaks. Plenty of "Too long; didn't read" versions out there. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
