Post by: Jim Logajan on October 09, 2016, 04:02:29 PM
http://www.politics1.com/p2016.htm (http://www.politics1.com/p2016.htm)
I've sorted the options by the last name of the presidential candidates. I've also set the poll to close on, if I did the math right, about election day. Lastly, I've set it so users should be able to change their vote up till that time.
Oh yeah - first post. Hello all!
Post by: nddons on October 09, 2016, 04:06:36 PM
Post by: Jim Logajan on October 09, 2016, 04:15:43 PM
Welcome, Jim! What took you so long? 😄
I don't have time to bore people with my personal opinions. Threads about politics, religion, or philosophy just take too much time for me to compose what I hope are intelligent replies. Starting a poll seems a safe way to get lightly involved that shouldn't steal too much of my time. Didn't see that anyone had yet posted such a poll, so thought I'd give it a shot.
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on October 09, 2016, 04:20:09 PM
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on October 09, 2016, 04:20:59 PM
Post by: Jim Logajan on October 09, 2016, 04:35:55 PM
I don't think we require intelligent replies here. ;D
Except when I'm goofing off, the "intelligent reply" is a self-imposed hell. ;D
Post by: Becky (My pronouns are Assigned/By/God) on October 09, 2016, 04:55:54 PM
Post by: Anthony on October 09, 2016, 04:58:37 PM
Post by: asechrest on October 09, 2016, 05:31:32 PM
Post by: Jim Logajan on October 12, 2016, 05:01:50 PM
I'm assuming that the three who so far said their choice isn't listed probably lean to the left, but would be curious to know who their choices are (assuming they've decided yet.)
Post by: Number7 on October 12, 2016, 05:06:31 PM
I'm assuming that the three who so far said their choice isn't listed probably lean to the left, but would be curious to know who their choices are (assuming they've decided yet.)
I am one of the three and I can assure you that I don't lean left. I can't bring myself to pull the lever for Trump either and I certainly wouldn't give a vote to Johnson.
Maybe I will figure it out when I enter the voting booth.
Maybe not.
Post by: asechrest on October 12, 2016, 06:09:24 PM
Post by: President-Elect Bob Noel on October 12, 2016, 06:24:59 PM
I'm assuming that the three who so far said their choice isn't listed probably lean to the left, but would be curious to know who their choices are (assuming they've decided yet.)
Don't bet on it.
Post by: bflynn on October 13, 2016, 12:06:58 AM
Interesting results, so far. Figured a skew away from the left, but more so than I expected. The down side of that kind of skew is that it may support self-confirmation bias.
I'm assuming that the three who so far said their choice isn't listed probably lean to the left, but would be curious to know who their choices are (assuming they've decided yet.)
Nope. Moderate in the middle with a slight right lean. I don't know who I will vote for but it will NOT be the lying piece of trash democrat. I will probably have to vote for Trump out of self protection for the Supreme Court appointments, but there isn't anyone that is my choice.
Post by: Anthony on October 13, 2016, 05:13:08 AM
Post by: Joe-KansasCity on October 13, 2016, 05:26:49 AM
I am writing in Nixon.
Compared to the lying, criminal oxygen-wasters running for office today, Nixon was a choirboy. Progress indeed....
Post by: Mr Pou on October 13, 2016, 05:50:31 AM
I am writing in Nixon.
I talked to a few friends yesterday who are registered republicans, and it went something like this.
Person 1: I'm voting Johnson
P2: I'm writing in Kasich
P3: Don't know, but it won't be Trump
I tell them their choices won't win, and will almost endure a Hillary victory. They said they didn't care, that she's going to likely win anyway, so they're going to vote their conscience. I tried to discuss the implications of a Hillary win, and why we need to keep her out at all costs, but it fell on deaf ears.
I believe this is how it's going to roll at large, the R vote will be diluted by people doing write ins thinking it's going to change the world, when all it really does is ensure a Hillary win.
Eight years of Hillary will surely finish off what eight years of Obama has started.
Post by: Anthony on October 13, 2016, 05:55:26 AM
Eight years of Hillary will surely finish off what eight years of Obama has started.
This is the darkest time in American history since we had our backs were against the wall by the British at Valley Forge, but at least that was a foreign enemy. We now have an internal, Marxist enemy that is like a virus within us. Much more destructive than any enemy we've faced before. The Bolsheviks have won.
Post by: nddons on October 13, 2016, 10:44:48 AM
The liberal lawyer said that his wife is a canvasser for Hillary Clinton in Racine/Kenosha area of Wisconsin, going door to door for Hillary.
The lawyer said that his wife noted that virtually every Hispanic can't wait to vote for Hillary, but she has not had a single black voter say that they would vote for anyone other than Donald Trump. Not a single one.
That gives me hope that perhaps they are agreeing with Trump's question of "What do you have to lose?" by voting for Trump. The condition of inner city blacks has fallen under Obama, and Hillary offers nothing to reverse that trend.
Post by: Jim Logajan on October 13, 2016, 01:51:59 PM
I talked to a few friends yesterday who are registered republicans, and it went something like this.
Person 1: I'm voting Johnson
P2: I'm writing in Kasich
P3: Don't know, but it won't be Trump
I tell them their choices won't win, and will almost endure a Hillary victory. They said they didn't care, that she's going to likely win anyway, so they're going to vote their conscience. I tried to discuss the implications of a Hillary win, and why we need to keep her out at all costs, but it fell on deaf ears.
I believe this is how it's going to roll at large, the R vote will be diluted by people doing write ins thinking it's going to change the world, when all it really does is ensure a Hillary win.
Eight years of Hillary will surely finish off what eight years of Obama has started.
I've been thinking of adopting the signature "Throwing away my vote since 1976(tm)" since that is the first presidential election I could vote in and my vote was for the Libertarian candidate - and has been in all subsequent presidential elections. That history tends to make me less inclined to apocalyptic forecasts if my choices don't make it into office. In my early teens and still had much to learn, when I was not old enough to vote in 1972, I would have voted for Nixon.
Just make sure your Republican friends still vote in the House and Senate (if applicable) races.
Post by: WildEye on October 16, 2016, 04:01:45 PM
Post by: Little Joe on October 16, 2016, 06:01:03 PM
I'll vote for HRC for one simple reason, a win for her will keep the stock market calm, priority is my retirement fund and a Trump win could cause the markets to react negatively and tank everyone's 401k.I considered that too. But it is short sighted.
HRC's anti business and socialist leanings will destroy the economy like every socialist regime in history has done.
A Trump victory may put a short term drag on the economy, but if he reduces taxes and encourages more investment in America, the market will get over their fear and uncertainty and rebound with much better than the 1 to 2 % growth we have been seeing under the current socialist.
Post by: bflynn on October 16, 2016, 07:28:55 PM
I'll vote for HRC for one simple reason, a win for her will keep the stock market calm, priority is my retirement fund and a Trump win could cause the markets to react negatively and tank everyone's 401k.
Interesting that you believe that. Do you have more than your guy feeling which says it?
I agree that Hillary's anti-business policies will do more to harm businesses than we know. Household income is just recovering to 2007 levels, I fear that she will push it lower again.
Post by: Little Joe on October 17, 2016, 06:04:04 AM
Interesting that you believe that. Do you have more than your guy feeling which says it?"Guy feeling" or "Gut feeling"?
I agree that Hillary's anti-business policies will do more to harm businesses than we know. Household income is just recovering to 2007 levels, I fear that she will push it lower again.
You weren't quoting me, but I will give you my answer.
Yes, there is more than just my "gu?" feeling. I hear MSM talking heads saying it and I see it in editorial comments all the time. So much so that I almost believe it. But as I said before, if it happens, I think it will be temporary. As Clinton's policies take effect, the economy will surely suffer. And as the uncertainty of Trump dissipates, well, I don't know what will happen. But it can't be any worse that Clinton's long term effects, and it MAY turn out better.
Post by: nddons on October 17, 2016, 07:45:41 AM
"Guy feeling" or "Gut feeling"?Economic growth is everything. Without it, there will be no real growth in wealth, and any growth in the market will be illusory.
You weren't quoting me, but I will give you my answer.
Yes, there is more than just my "gu?" feeling. I hear MSM talking heads saying it and I see it in editorial comments all the time. So much so that I almost believe it. But as I said before, if it happens, I think it will be temporary. As Clinton's policies take effect, the economy will surely suffer. And as the uncertainty of Trump dissipates, well, I don't know what will happen. But it can't be any worse that Clinton's long term effects, and it MAY turn out better.
I have yet to see anything from Hillary that would promote economic growth. This is Trump's biggest strength. Unfortunately, he'd rather have a slap fight with Paul Ryan than talk about his good economic plans.
Post by: Anthony on October 17, 2016, 08:16:13 AM
Economic growth is everything. Without it, there will be no real growth in wealth, and any growth in the market will be illusory.
I have yet to see anything from Hillary that would promote economic growth. This is Trump's biggest strength. Unfortunately, he'd rather have a slap fight with Paul Ryan than talk about his good economic plans.
We have had eight years of practically no growth, sometimes negative growth. Job creation has been almost non-existent, and many jobs are only part time to avoid Obamacare. Trump at least has addressed this in his platform. Hillary just wants to bankrupt the fossil fuel industry, or at least penalize it heavily which will cause energy prices to skyrocket.
Post by: bflynn on October 17, 2016, 11:21:21 AM
"Guy feeling" or "Gut feeling"?
You weren't quoting me, but I will give you my answer.
Yes, there is more than just my "gu?" feeling. I hear MSM talking heads saying it and I see it in editorial comments all the time. So much so that I almost believe it. But as I said before, if it happens, I think it will be temporary. As Clinton's policies take effect, the economy will surely suffer. And as the uncertainty of Trump dissipates, well, I don't know what will happen. But it can't be any worse that Clinton's long term effects, and it MAY turn out better.
Gut.
As they say, this is why there is a market...because people disagree.
Personally, I don't use GDP as a measure of the economy and only use stock market indexes because they impact most people's retirements. Over the past 15 years, when they wanted to "stimulate" the economy, they gave everyone a check. Well, if you buy into that and you want the economy to take off then cut taxes. It's like a stimulus bill every month then. I assure you that if I had an extra $500 every month, I would be spending like crazy because I'd be able to relax a little. As is, I have to hold back and save money every month because I'm worried about the future.
Post by: bflynn on October 17, 2016, 11:23:25 AM
We have had eight years of practically no growth, sometimes negative growth. Job creation has been almost non-existent, and many jobs are only part time to avoid Obamacare. Trump at least has addressed this in his platform. Hillary just wants to bankrupt the fossil fuel industry, or at least penalize it heavily which will cause energy prices to skyrocket.
Please provide the metrics that you are using for this. Gut feelings are great, but if you can't show the data about growth and jobs then you're really just whining to want to whine.
Post by: Anthony on October 18, 2016, 01:42:18 AM
Please provide the metrics that you are using for this. Gut feelings are great, but if you can't show the data about growth and jobs then you're really just whining to want to whine.
You can look it up. You just don't want to acknowledge it smart guy.
Post by: Jim Logajan on October 28, 2016, 07:21:08 PM
Post by: President in Exile YOLT on October 28, 2016, 07:31:18 PM
I'll vote for HRC for one simple reason, a win for her will keep the stock market calm, priority is my retirement fund and a Trump win could cause the markets to react negatively and tank everyone's 401k.
What a statesman. The Founders are spinning in their graves.
Post by: LevelWing on October 29, 2016, 01:26:20 AM
I'll vote for HRC for one simple reason, a win for her will keep the stock market calm, priority is my retirement fund and a Trump win could cause the markets to react negatively and tank everyone's 401k.There was a lot of panic before the Brexit vote and people were claiming how bad it was going to be for the European and world economies. Brexit happened and the markets are fine. I don't think either candidate will send the markets spiraling out of control.
Post by: Anthony on October 29, 2016, 03:17:10 AM
I'll vote for HRC for one simple reason, a win for her will keep the stock market calm, priority is my retirement fund and a Trump win could cause the markets to react negatively and tank everyone's 401k.
If you are in stocks, you are not being very wise right now, no matter who is president.
Post by: Little Joe on October 29, 2016, 08:22:06 AM
There was a lot of panic before the Brexit vote and people were claiming how bad it was going to be for the European and world economies. Brexit happened and the markets are fine. I don't think either candidate will send the markets spiraling out of control."Brexit" hasn't happened yet. They only voted on it, but it won't happen for some time. So any market changes so far are on speculation. Once it actually happens, and the results are known and measured, the real effects can be determined. It will probably be a few years. Companies don't pick up and move out overnight. Unless you are the Baltimore Colts.
Same goes for our election. You are right that there will probably be a short term bump in the market if Hillary wins. But after a year or so, when her policies kick in, you will see more economic stagnation. On the other hand, if Trump wins, there may be a temporary drop in the market. But if you believe in the power of fair trade and low taxes and a business friendly environment, then you will see the economy begin to bounce back relatively soon.
Post by: Anthony on October 29, 2016, 08:25:25 AM
Post by: Becky (My pronouns are Assigned/By/God) on October 29, 2016, 08:40:55 AM
Wow, five people throwing away their vote for Johnson? That surprises me.Interesting. I'm throwing away some of my principles to vote for Trump while others stick with theirs to vote their conscience. It's a weird year. I love America with all my heart.
Post by: President-Elect Bob Noel on October 29, 2016, 08:43:08 AM
Wow, five people throwing away their vote for Johnson? That surprises me.
what's more disappointing is that 2 people would vote for the corrupt doormat.
Post by: Anthony on October 29, 2016, 08:49:08 AM
what's more disappointing is that 2 people would vote for the corrupt doormat.
I would expect our liberal/progressive members to vote for anyone if they are a Democrat. That doesn't surprise me as much as a vote for Johnson who has no shot.
Post by: Lucifer on October 29, 2016, 08:54:32 AM
I would expect our liberal/progressive members to vote for anyone if they are a Democrat. That doesn't surprise me as much as a vote for Johnson who has no shot.
(http://i1077.photobucket.com/albums/w464/flybywire1959/hillary%20vs%20trump_zpswhrexsmy.jpg)
Post by: JeffDG on October 29, 2016, 09:23:31 AM
Wow, five people throwing away their vote for Johnson? That surprises me.Wow, sixteen people throwing away their principles to vote for a New York Democrat Hillary Donor.
Post by: asechrest on October 29, 2016, 09:24:19 AM
My message this election is to the two major parties: your candidates fucking suck, and they won't get my vote.
A principled vote is not a wasted vote. Period.
Post by: Anthony on October 29, 2016, 09:26:06 AM
I vote for a person who I sincerely believe can lead our great country in a general direction of which I am comfortable. My vote is sacred. My vote is powerful. With it I can help effect change. With it I can send a message.
Your vote is meaningless.
Post by: JeffDG on October 29, 2016, 09:52:01 AM
Your vote is meaningless.Sticking with the idea that you must vote for Hillary or her donor still?
Post by: Jim Logajan on October 29, 2016, 10:40:27 AM
Wow, five people throwing away their vote for Johnson? That surprises me.
The Libertarian party needs at least 5% of the vote to qualify for public funding (whether they would or should accept it is another debate.)
Also, the higher the percentage they get the more psychological "Social Proof" they get (see Robert Cialdini's principles of persuasion.)
So each vote for Johnson actually does help the long term prospects of libertarianism.
Lastly "Social Proof" is the bedrock on which the current system resides - a person is expected to choose based on what other people are choosing, not on any other criteria. It is a classic Catch-22 system. Ironically, if publicly reported poll results don't exist when a person who buys into "social proof" is asked to decide, all their options could potentially throw away their vote. Pity them.
Post by: Becky (My pronouns are Assigned/By/God) on October 29, 2016, 10:46:09 AM
The Libertarian party needs at least 5% of the vote to qualify for public funding (whether they would or should accept it is another debate.)All true. I wish there were no polls!
Also, the higher the percentage they get the more psychological "Social Proof" they get (see Robert Cialdini's principles of persuasion.)
So each vote for Johnson actually does help the long term prospects of libertarianism.
Lastly "Social Proof" is the bedrock on which the current system resides - a person is expected to choose based on what other people are choosing, not on any other criteria. It is a classic Catch-22 system. Ironically, if publicly reported poll results don't exist when a person who buys into "social proof" is asked to decide, all their options could potentially throw away their vote. Pity them.
When you see the race as an existential battle, though, your principles shift into combat mode. Which candidate do you think will do the most damage? The most good? You realize neither is perfect, and perhaps neither substantively reflects your ideals, but you realize also that your vote will (barring fraud) hopefully install the person in the White House that you believe will do the most good and the least damage to America and American interests.
You can still sleep at night because you believe that you voted in America's best interests, and in the best interests of human flourishing, if not entirely in alignment with your own principles. You tried. You fought back with the ammunition available to you. You spent your one vote in the best way you know how, in the system as it exists, not how you wish it were.
Changing the system is going to have be done by changing the culture. And back-ranks voting every four years isn't going to change the culture or the system.
Post by: President in Exile YOLT on October 29, 2016, 11:35:27 AM
Still that schtick, eh? I don't know about you, but I don't vote to simply pick a winner. I vote for a person who I sincerely believe can lead our great country in a general direction of which I am comfortable. My vote is sacred. My vote is powerful. With it I can help effect change. With it I can send a message.
My message this election is to the two major parties: your candidates fucking suck, and they won't get my vote.
A principled vote is not a wasted vote. Period.
I'm reminded of the headstone with the epithet "He had the right-of-way."
Post by: LevelWing on October 29, 2016, 12:31:54 PM
Wow, five people throwing away their vote for Johnson? That surprises me.You are taught to look at each candidate and choose the one that best represents you. If those 5 people believe that Johnson is the person who best represents them, then it is not a wasted vote no matter what you say.
I am still undecided. This is a very difficult choice to make.
Post by: Lucifer on October 29, 2016, 12:53:49 PM
I am still undecided. This is a very difficult choice to make.
Let's see, a woman under criminal investigation that has created more scandals than any other politician in modern history, a couple of candidates that have no chance of winning or even getting one electoral vote, or a non politician businessman who is willing to fight the corruption of DC and at least give us a chance of saving the SC from the Progressive Agenda...........
Hard choice huh?
Post by: SoonerAviator on October 29, 2016, 12:58:14 PM
Sent from my iPhone . Squirrel!!
Post by: LevelWing on October 29, 2016, 01:00:35 PM
Let's see, a woman under criminal investigation that has created more scandals than any other politician in modern history, a couple of candidates that have no chance of winning or even getting one electoral vote, or a non politician businessman who is willing to fight the corruption of DC and at least give us a chance of saving the SC from the Progressive Agenda...........I've stated multiple times that I will not vote for Hillary and that I'm conservative. It's also been made clear that you should choose the candidate that best represents your positions and vote for him/her. Trump has a lot of progressive business proposals that he's put forward and has openly talked about changing or flat out destroying the first, second and fifth amendments. Saving the Supreme Court? Perhaps, he did release a list of candidates which I took to mean either one of those or those who are very similar in principles though he gave himself an out on that just like everything else.
Hard choice huh?
My choices are Trump or write-in because I won't vote for Johnson. So yes, it is a hard choice. The hard part of the choice is whether or not I want to support someone who doesn't represent all of my positions in favor of stopping Hillary. There is a legitimate argument to be made by those who say they are voting for Trump to stop Hillary. But let's not kid ourselves into think that by voting for Trump we are voting for a conservative. Conservatism will be damaged for the foreseeable future if Trump wins (unless he somehow turns out to be ultra conservative once elected, but all signs point to that not being the case).
Post by: Lucifer on October 29, 2016, 01:09:47 PM
I've stated multiple times that I will not vote for Hillary and that I'm conservative. It's also been made clear that you should choose the candidate that best represents your positions and vote for him/her. Trump has a lot of progressive business proposals that he's put forward and has openly talked about changing or flat out destroying the first, second and fifth amendments. Saving the Supreme Court? Perhaps, he did release a list of candidates which I took to mean either one of those or those who are very similar in principles though he gave himself an out on that just like everything else.
My choices are Trump or write-in because I won't vote for Johnson. So yes, it is a hard choice. The hard part of the choice is whether or not I want to support someone who doesn't represent all of my positions in favor of stopping Hillary. There is a legitimate argument to be made by those who say they are voting for Trump to stop Hillary. But let's not kid ourselves into think that by voting for Trump we are voting for a conservative. Conservatism will be damaged for the foreseeable future if Trump wins (unless he somehow turns out to be ultra conservative once elected, but all signs point to that not being the case).
Conservatism has already been damaged. That was done by the GOP over the past several years. Trump is the result of the GOP shitting on it's very base.
Letting a criminal such as the Clintons get back into the White House will only insure that conservatism gets kicked so far down the road no one reading here will ever recognize it again in their life times.
An election of the Clinton Crime Family will eventually result in a single party system here in the US. Don't kid yourself.
Post by: LevelWing on October 29, 2016, 01:20:17 PM
Conservatism has already been damaged. That was done by the GOP over the past several years. Trump is the result of the GOP shitting on it's very base.True that Republicans have done themselves no favors, however we still have elected conservatives in both houses of Congress. Electing Trump will mean that he becomes the leader of the Republican party (he's already the de facto leader because he's the Republican nominee) and changing the landscape of conservatism in the future. It will be much more difficult for a conservative to get elected as president in the future because Trump will have changed what it is conservatives/Republicans stand for.
Letting a criminal such as the Clintons get back into the White House will only insure that conservatism gets kicked so far down the road no one reading here will ever recognize it again in their life times.Invalid comparison. Whether or not Hillary is elected has no bearing on the conservative movement. In fact, it may actually help it in 2020 because of how sick of her everyone will be. That said, I don't know that I'm willing to take that risk.
Post by: asechrest on October 29, 2016, 01:22:04 PM
Your vote is meaningless.
This is transparently inaccurate at a fundamental level. But I don't mind that you believe it.
Post by: Lucifer on October 29, 2016, 01:27:07 PM
Invalid comparison. Whether or not Hillary is elected has no bearing on the conservative movement. In fact, it may actually help it in 2020 because of how sick of her everyone will be. That said, I don't know that I'm willing to take that risk.
Hillary gets in now the Republicans (or any other party) won't have a chance in 2020 no matter how bad it gets. Why do you think the progressives are fighting tooth and nail to win now? A win in 2016 for the progressives will reshape politics beyond our lifetimes.
BHO started the "fundamental transformation" and a Hillary win will complete it.
Post by: Anthony on October 29, 2016, 02:21:01 PM
Post by: ShamaLamaDingDong on October 29, 2016, 02:50:09 PM
(http://www.otisdayandtheknights.com/2.0/bio-otis-animalhouse.jpg)
Post by: Little Joe on October 29, 2016, 04:58:40 PM
However, at least Trump is SAYING the right thing regarding the economy, and the SCOTUS.This is very important. Also, add in his reforms to the tax code, and his dedication to enforcing "FAIR" trade.
Post by: JeffDG on October 29, 2016, 05:23:14 PM
However, at least Trump is SAYING the right thing regarding the economy, and the SCOTUS.Hillary says that she doesn't want to take guns, and will appoint moderates to SCOTUS. So, she is "SAYING" the right things.
Why do you believe Trump, who has said the exact opposite in the past, but not Hillary, who has also said the exact opposite in the past?
Neither Hillary, nor her erstwhile supporter and donor, have earned a lick of trust.
Post by: Little Joe on October 30, 2016, 08:24:58 AM
Hillary says that she doesn't want to take guns, and will appoint moderates to SCOTUS. So, she is "SAYING" the right things.Every time I heard Hillary say she supported the 2nd amendment, including the right to bear arms, it was ALWAYS followed with a "But . . ." and included something about "sensible regulations and restrictions".
Why do you believe Trump, who has said the exact opposite in the past, but not Hillary, who has also said the exact opposite in the past?
Neither Hillary, nor her erstwhile supporter and donor, have earned a lick of trust.
Post by: Anthony on October 30, 2016, 08:29:19 AM
Every time I heard Hillary say she supported the 2nd amendment, including the right to bear arms, it was ALWAYS followed with a "But . . ." and included something about "sensible regulations and restrictions".
She respects the 2A as a GOVERNMENT only right, not an individual right. Of course she has armed guards 24/7 so her rights are guaranteed.
Post by: nddons on October 30, 2016, 08:55:54 AM
She respects the 2A as a GOVERNMENT only right, not an individual right. Of course she has armed guards 24/7 so her rights are guaranteed.Her SECURITY is guaranteed. She would gladly waive her rights because of it, even though the rest of us have no such option.
She believes no rights exist unless government grants them.
Post by: JeffDG on October 30, 2016, 09:23:29 AM
She respects the 2A as a GOVERNMENT only right, not an individual right. Of course she has armed guards 24/7 so her rights are guaranteed.Again, she says differently now. Just like Trump said differently before, but you believe one, but not the other.
Neither has earned any trust whatsoever.
Post by: LevelWing on October 30, 2016, 10:30:57 AM
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/10/rough-week-hillary-clinton-campaigns-miami-bar-mid-morning-sunday/
Post by: Lucifer on October 30, 2016, 10:36:49 AM
This is ironic: Hillary is campaigning at a bar in Florida today:
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/10/rough-week-hillary-clinton-campaigns-miami-bar-mid-morning-sunday/
If they're drunk enough.....ya know, maybe?.......just maybe they'll still be drunk when they vote.....
Post by: Mase on October 30, 2016, 11:48:27 AM
Post by: Becky (My pronouns are Assigned/By/God) on October 30, 2016, 12:12:56 PM
Post by: LevelWing on October 30, 2016, 03:07:16 PM
http://www.wsj.com/articles/laptop-may-include-thousands-of-emails-linked-to-hillary-clintons-private-server-1477854957
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3886942/Resignation-letters-piling-disaffected-FBI-agents-wife-urging-admit-wrong-Director-Comey-jumped-chance-reopen-Hillary-investigation.html
Post by: Anthony on October 30, 2016, 03:11:19 PM
That is beyond awesome.
Yes it is. A lot of truth in that video. The Democrats have ruled cities for over sixty years, and have had the Presidency, and Congress at times, and yet get NOTHING done but talk. They are talkers, and promisers, yet nothing improves. In fact, the Obama Admin has PURPOSELY divided us, and made us weaker domestically, and internationally. That has been his goal from the beginning. That is Fundamental Transformation.
Post by: Becky (My pronouns are Assigned/By/God) on October 30, 2016, 03:23:24 PM
https://youtu.be/QAPgh2V_mGQ
Post by: Becky (My pronouns are Assigned/By/God) on October 30, 2016, 03:25:20 PM
Post by: Becky (My pronouns are Assigned/By/God) on October 30, 2016, 03:30:37 PM
Apparently the FBI found 650,000 emails on Wiener's computer and now there are resignations coming in at the FBI over this, and have been since July. It would appear, at least right now, that Lynch tried to block this from happening and Comey decided to send the letter to Congress anyway.I'm still concerned that this is all a setup. Comey announces, HRC demands he release the emails, he doesn't until after the election (still working on it, you know!) But he's off the hook for keeping them entirely secret, and she's off the hook for urging secrecy.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/laptop-may-include-thousands-of-emails-linked-to-hillary-clintons-private-server-1477854957
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3886942/Resignation-letters-piling-disaffected-FBI-agents-wife-urging-admit-wrong-Director-Comey-jumped-chance-reopen-Hillary-investigation.html
Haha, spell correct thought Comey should be Comedy. Too true.
Post by: LevelWing on October 30, 2016, 03:32:45 PM
I'm still concerned that this is all a setup. Comey announces, HRC demands he release the emails, he doesn't until after the election (still working on it, you know!) But he's off the hook for keeping them entirely secret, and she's off the hook for urging secrecy.The FBI was just given a warrant to review the emails. They had to get that warrant from a federal judge on a Sunday, after the Attorney General tried to prevent Comey from sending that letter to Congress. Drudge has other articles that discuss how Comey's wife has been urging him to go to Congress and was disappointed that he gave into pressure and didn't recommend charges back in July. I'm not sure this is a setup by Comey at this point.
Haha, spell correct thought Comey should be Comedy. Too true.
Post by: nddons on October 31, 2016, 05:07:06 AM
Also:Yea but, Trump has said mean things.....
https://youtu.be/QAPgh2V_mGQ
Post by: nddons on October 31, 2016, 05:08:37 AM
The FBI was just given a warrant to review the emails. They had to get that warrant from a federal judge on a Sunday, after the Attorney General tried to prevent Comey from sending that letter to Congress. Drudge has other articles that discuss how Comey's wife has been urging him to go to Congress and was disappointed that he gave into pressure and didn't recommend charges back in July. I'm not sure this is a setup by Comey at this point.Happy wife, happy life!
Post by: nddons on October 31, 2016, 05:09:18 AM
I'm still concerned that this is all a setup. Comey announces, HRC demands he release the emails, he doesn't until after the election (still working on it, you know!) But he's off the hook for keeping them entirely secret, and she's off the hook for urging secrecy.I worry about that too. This ain't our first rodeo.
Haha, spell correct thought Comey should be Comedy. Too true.
Post by: Jim Logajan on November 08, 2016, 09:45:50 PM
The bar is open.
Post by: Mase on November 08, 2016, 09:46:50 PM
Post by: Anthony on November 09, 2016, 02:12:30 AM
Post by: Joe-KansasCity on November 09, 2016, 03:15:37 AM
Wow, Just, Wow! Maybe we can keep our country after all!
My thoughts exactly Anthony.... If nothing else, the demise has been postponed for awhile. Shaping the Supreme Court with Scalia-like justices is the only long-term hope for maintaining the United States as we know it. We now have the opportunity to ensure our founding documents survive.
Post by: Anthony on November 09, 2016, 07:06:41 AM
My thoughts exactly Anthony.... If nothing else, the demise has been postponed for awhile. Shaping the Supreme Court with Scalia-like justices is the only long-term hope for maintaining the United States as we know it. We now have the opportunity to ensure our founding documents survive.
Trump has promised to appoint justices in the Scalia mold. That is our only hope. This is a major hit to the anti American, PC, Progressive movement.
Post by: President in Exile YOLT on November 09, 2016, 07:15:17 AM
And a slam of the blatantly biased media.
Trump has promised to appoint justices in the Scalia mold. That is our only hope. This is a major hit to the anti American, PC, Progressive movement.
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on November 09, 2016, 07:52:16 AM
Post by: LevelWing on November 09, 2016, 08:11:38 AM
I think that, at this point, I'd prefer we take the "let's work with everyone" approach and not the "we won, suck it" kind of approach. Obama did that and I think we can be a lot better than Obama.I agree. Trump already started that last night with his gracious words towards Clinton and his appeal to everyone to work together.
That being said, we are still a country of laws and nobody is above the law. Congress should move forward with the Clinton investigation and hopefully they'll recommend charges once Trump is elected with a new Attorney General. Trump can avoid the mess by not saying anything and letting Congress and the Justice Department do their thing.
Post by: nddons on November 09, 2016, 08:45:43 AM
Ted Cruz should sail through a nomination for SCOTUS. The rest of the Senate can't wait to get rid of him.
Trump has promised to appoint justices in the Scalia mold. That is our only hope. This is a major hit to the anti American, PC, Progressive movement.
Post by: LevelWing on November 09, 2016, 09:59:10 AM
Ted Cruz should sail through a nomination for SCOTUS. The rest of the Senate can't wait to get rid of him.I read something last night that said he shouldn't be Scalia'a replacement, he should be the replacement for the next liberal seat to be vacated.
I also heard this morning that Senator Mike Lee may be Scalia's replacement.
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on November 09, 2016, 07:29:32 PM
Post by: LevelWing on November 09, 2016, 07:32:07 PM
Gotta be careful taking Senators that leave an open seat the could upset the balance in the Senate.I would assume that anybody worth considering for the SCOTUS from the Senate would likely come from a state where it wouldn't risk losing that seat to begin with.
Post by: ShamaLamaDingDong on November 10, 2016, 08:45:42 AM
(http://www.otisdayandtheknights.com/2.0/bio-otis-animalhouse.jpg)
ShamaLama 2020.
Post by: Lucifer on November 30, 2016, 07:46:34 PM
I'll vote for HRC for one simple reason, a win for her will keep the stock market calm, priority is my retirement fund and a Trump win could cause the markets to react negatively and tank everyone's 401k.
Curious, how's your 401k been doing lately?
Post by: President-Elect Bob Noel on December 01, 2016, 12:15:11 AM
Curious, how's your 401k been doing lately?
it would have been sooooo much better if Trump didn't win the election!
Post by: Little Joe on December 01, 2016, 05:34:34 AM
it would have been sooooo much better if Trump didn't win the election!If it hadn't been for the lying liberal media telling everyone that the stock market would crash if Trump was elected, he would have won the popular vote by millions.
I have to admit, I almost voted for Clinton out of fear that I would lose a big chunk my retirement nest egg. Your attitude does sometimes change when you retire and have no opportunity to replenish your savings. But in spite of what I was told to expect, I just couldn't vote for HRC. I'm glad the media was so wrong.
Post by: Lucifer on December 01, 2016, 06:07:13 AM
If it hadn't been for the lying liberal media telling everyone that the stock market would crash if Trump was elected, he would have won the popular vote by millions.
I have to admit, I almost voted for Clinton out of fear that I would lose a big chunk my retirement nest egg. Your attitude does sometimes change when you retire and have no opportunity to replenish your savings. But in spite of what I was told to expect, I just couldn't vote for HRC. I'm glad the media was so wrong.
It was all of those fake news sites.... ;D
Post by: Little Joe on December 01, 2016, 06:08:53 AM
It was all of those fake news sites.... ;DYeah, like CNN, ABC, NBC, Washington Post, New York Times, etc . ..
Post by: Lucifer on December 01, 2016, 06:10:29 AM
Yeah, like CNN, ABC, NBC, Washington Post, New York Times, etc . ..
Whaaaaaaaaaattttttt???
Post by: Lucifer on December 30, 2016, 06:51:54 PM
I'll vote for HRC for one simple reason, a win for her will keep the stock market calm, priority is my retirement fund and a Trump win could cause the markets to react negatively and tank everyone's 401k.
So how's your 401k doing lately?
Post by: Little Joe on January 02, 2017, 07:41:47 AM
So how's your 401k doing lately?Thanks for reminding us about that post. One of the worst and most effective pieces of "fake news" was all the media saying that the stock market would tank if Trump won. I'm sure that contributed to an awful lot of that popular vote that Clinton got. Without that lie permeating the news, Trump's win would have been even bigger.
Post by: EppyGA - White Christian Domestic Terrorist on January 02, 2017, 08:47:38 AM
Post by: Mase on January 02, 2017, 09:04:18 AM
Didn't Krugman, left's defacto economics guy, tell us the market would tank if Trump got elected? Does he get anything right?
Krugman's Nobel is quite as justified as Obama's.
Post by: Anthony on January 02, 2017, 09:05:29 AM
Quote
Gruber discusses how those pushing the bill took part in an "exploitation of the lack of economic understanding of the American voter," taking advantage of voters' "stupidity" to create a law that would ultimately be good for them
http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/14/politics/gruber-update-friday-white-house-obamacare/index.html
Post by: Anthony on January 02, 2017, 09:06:09 AM
Post by: bflynn on January 02, 2017, 10:57:52 AM
Krugman's Nobel is quite as justified as Obama's.
Yes, well the Nobel committee now regrets giving Obama the award. Wonder if it's the same for Krugman?
Post by: Jim Logajan on January 02, 2017, 11:34:36 AM
Krugman's Nobel is quite as justified as Obama's.
There is no Nobel Prize for economics from the Nobel Foundation. So Krugman doesn't have one.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Economic_Sciences (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Economic_Sciences)
Post by: Mase on January 02, 2017, 11:50:16 AM
Paul Krugman Nobel Prize (http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/2008/krugman-facts.html)
Post by: Lucifer on January 02, 2017, 11:54:02 AM
There is no Nobel Prize for economics from the Nobel Foundation. So Krugman doesn't have one.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Economic_Sciences (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Economic_Sciences)
Quote
Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences
American Paul Krugman wins Nobel prize for economics
Krugman was awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences (informally the Nobel Prize in Economics), the sole recipient for 2008. This prize includes an award of about $1.4 million and was given to Krugman for his work associated with New Trade Theory and the New Economic Geography.[86] In the words of the prize committee, "By having integrated economies of scale into explicit general equilibrium models, Paul Krugman has deepened our understanding of the determinants of trade and the location of economic activity."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Krugman
Splitting hairs?
Post by: Becky (My pronouns are Assigned/By/God) on January 04, 2017, 12:51:22 PM
Glanced through a book at Barnes and Noble the other day, and read that Obama went through a sleepless and awful period this year because he did not want to endorse Hillary and was "hoping" for a stronger Democratic candidate to emerge. He finally endorsed her but hated doing it.
To me, that sums up our gamma president. A strong leader trains up people to carry on after him/her. He did nothing, apparently, along those lines.
Post by: Lucifer on July 26, 2017, 03:51:05 PM
I'll vote for HRC for one simple reason, a win for her will keep the stock market calm, priority is my retirement fund and a Trump win could cause the markets to react negatively and tank everyone's 401k.
Today the DJIA closed at 21711 and the S&P at 2477. That's 9.86% since the first of the year.
So you were saying?
Post by: Anthony on July 26, 2017, 03:56:00 PM