American Presidential candidates GoP/Dems

[Likes Fast Cars]

unrepentant said:

Whitewater? Seriously? Bill? What the fk does that mean?

.

It's all in the public domain

[unrepentant]

Likes Fast Cars said:

unrepentant said:

Whitewater? Seriously? Bill? What the fk does that mean?

.

It's all in the public domain

What is? Bill? WTF does that mean? President Clinton remains the best loved of all recent presidents with a very high approval rating across the board. Rightly so, he left the economy in great shape and with a surplus that Dubya promptly turned into a massive deficit. He was a great asset as an endorser of Obama and is for his wife. So what are you referring to? 25 year old stories of infidelity? Who cares? Nobody at all. Stacked up against an asshole of a man who has been married 3 times (as well as carrying on many adulterous affirs that render any criticism of WJC as moot), was accused of marital rape by the mother of 3 of his children, has been bankrupt on more than one occasion, refers to women in the most derogatory terms, has presided over Trump University which is a Ponzi scheme for which he is being sued in a class action by 5000 victims, who is an avowed racist and whose ludicrous outpourings have disenfranchised half his party to the point where most senior members including the most senior will not endorse him? Against all that you say Bill? That's what you have? The word Bill? Do you have any clue about what you are talking about?

[scherzkeks]

I love this thread. It is as entertaining as being back home and watching MSNBC and Fox blowhards shout their version of fantasy at one another. Here is hoping to further degeneration

[whoami]

unrepentant said:

Likes Fast Cars said:

unrepentant said:

Whitewater? Seriously? Bill? What the fk does that mean?

.

It's all in the public domain

What is? Bill? WTF does that mean? President Clinton remains the best loved of all recent presidents with a very high approval rating across the board. Rightly so, he left the economy in great shape and with a surplus that Dubya promptly turned into a massive deficit. He was a great asset as an endorser of Obama and is for his wife. So what are you referring to? 25 year old stories of infidelity? Who cares? Nobody at all. Stacked up against an asshole of a man who has been married 3 times (as well as carrying on many adulterous affirs that render any criticism of WJC as moot), was accused of marital rape by the mother of 3 of his children, has been bankrupt on more than one occasion, refers to women in the most derogatory terms, has presided over Trump University which is a Ponzi scheme for which he is being sued in a class action by 5000 victims, who is an avowed racist and whose ludicrous outpourings have disenfranchised half his party to the point where most senior members including the most senior will not endorse him? Against all that you say Bill? That's what you have? The word Bill? Do you have any clue about what you are talking about?

Yeah, but what about the FBI investigation?

Has it really concluded as you assert?

[turbobloke]

scherzkeks said:

I love this thread. It is as entertaining as being back home and watching MSNBC and Fox blowhards shout their version of fantasy at one another. Here is hoping to further degeneration

You seem to think you're part of the audience but you're in the cast cheering for the grundies to follow. Nice.

[stuckmojo]

unrepentant said:

Secretary Clinton is immensely qualified. As well as her time in congress she was secretary of state and you cannot discount the experience of being a first lady for 8 years. She's probably more prepared to be president than any candidate in recent memory. The fact that she's female is irrelevant to everyone except the historians and, apparently, Donald Trump.

is this blind faith or am I missing a whoosh parrot here?

HRC more prepared than any candidate in recent memory? Wow.

Gender is obviously irrelevant.

[Truckosaurus]

stuckmojo said:

...HRC more prepared than any candidate in recent memory? Wow...

If 'recent' only means as far back as George HW Bush who was Vice President at the time of his campaign.

[Esseesse]

Countdown said:

rscott said:

Interesting polling here - http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2016/05/go... .
Highlights that both Trump & Clinton have similar levels of support from their own party members.
The biggest worry to me is the high numbers of Trump supporters who believe in the various conspiracy theories he's pushed - Obama is a Muslim, vaccines cause autism, etc.

There seems to be a strong correlation between "voting for Trump" and "Being a moron".

http://gawker.com/donald-trump-believes-his-suppor...

Didn't Hillary start the Obama Muslim one?

[rscott]

Esseesse said:

Countdown said:

rscott said:

Interesting polling here - http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2016/05/go... .
Highlights that both Trump & Clinton have similar levels of support from their own party members.
The biggest worry to me is the high numbers of Trump supporters who believe in the various conspiracy theories he's pushed - Obama is a Muslim, vaccines cause autism, etc.

There seems to be a strong correlation between "voting for Trump" and "Being a moron".

http://gawker.com/donald-trump-believes-his-suppor...

Didn't Hillary start the Obama Muslim one?

Don't think so? She's certainly not mentioned it at all in this campaign.

[unrepentant]

stuckmojo said:

unrepentant said:

Secretary Clinton is immensely qualified. As well as her time in congress she was secretary of state and you cannot discount the experience of being a first lady for 8 years. She's probably more prepared to be president than any candidate in recent memory. The fact that she's female is irrelevant to everyone except the historians and, apparently, Donald Trump.

is this blind faith or am I missing a whoosh parrot here?

HRC more prepared than any candidate in recent memory? Wow.

Gender is obviously irrelevant.

Go on then. Name a recent candidate (say the past 40 years) with a greater breadth of experience than Hillary Clinton? Who you got in mind? Dubya? Dukakis? Bob Dole? Romney? Gerry Ford? Rick Santorum? Bush Snr I would concede as he had 8 years as VP, was an ambassador, a congressman and was head of the CIA. Most of the others had either congressional or gubernatorial experience but little else.

As well as being Sec of State (second most important job in government), US Senator, 8 years as first lady of the USA and 10 years as first lady of Arkansas she also worked on the children's defense fund as an attorney, advised the house committee during Watergate and taught law at the University of Arkansas. She is incredibly well rounded and experienced and will be an excellent president.

[Pesty]

Somebody who didn't give all the secrets in her emails to the Chinese breaking federal laws?




Supporters of Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders clashed in Las Vegas on Saturday and it got so out of hand, cops descended on the ballroom and threatened arrests.

Convention attendee and YouTube user Anie H. posted several photos of the action, as announcements were made over the loud speaker to leave the Paris Hotel or risk being arrested.


When they arnt denying trump supporters their rights or assaulting them they attack their own.


[url]|http://thumbsnap.com/khqJuMxP[/ur]

http://www.theamericanmirror.com/chaos-police-thre...

Edited by Pesty on Sunday 15th May 15:59

[stuckmojo]

unrepentant said:

Go on then. Name a recent candidate (say the past 40 years) with a greater breadth of experience than Hillary Clinton? Who you got in mind? Dubya? Dukakis? Bob Dole? Romney? Gerry Ford? Rick Santorum? Bush Snr I would concede as he had 8 years as VP, was an ambassador, a congressman and was head of the CIA. Most of the others had either congressional or gubernatorial experience but little else.

As well as being Sec of State (second most important job in government), US Senator, 8 years as first lady of the USA and 10 years as first lady of Arkansas she also worked on the children's defense fund as an attorney, advised the house committee during Watergate and taught law at the University of Arkansas. She is incredibly well rounded and experienced and will be an excellent president.

before I get dragged into debating with a fanatic, two points:

- What's being a First Lady got to do with governing?
- Under her stewardship as secretary of state the US sunk to their lowest point since the war in Vietnam. The Middle East flared up everywhere and they even managed to get their own ambassador murdered.

This little nugget of diplomacy makes me really worry about trigger-happy Donald Trump, yeah:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yn6yktWU5qA

some CV.

But fear not, she'll win as her sponsors (banks, pharma, powers that be, government leeches) have too much invested in the status quo and she is perfect to continue the great work done in the last 10/15 years.

Ah, and as for the great Obama economy: http://www.businessinsider.com/pew-research-center...

[Pesty]

Kicked off the watergate trial for being dishonest and not respecting the constitution


Only candidate under investigation by the fbi

[Countdown]

stuckmojo said:

- Under her stewardship as secretary of state the US sunk to their lowest point since the war in Vietnam. The Middle East flared up everywhere and they even managed to get their own ambassador murdered.

You think the current situation is worse than starting two wars which resulted in circa 8000 US military deaths?

[stuckmojo]

Countdown said:

You think the current situation is worse than starting two wars which resulted in circa 8000 US military deaths?

it depends on perspective. I'd agree that starting the wars was a despicable act. Thanks Bush/Blair. The point I'm making is that her track record is grim. It's there for everyone to see.

[Countdown]

stuckmojo said:

Countdown said:

You think the current situation is worse than starting two wars which resulted in circa 8000 US military deaths?

it depends on perspective. I'd agree that starting the wars was a despicable act. Thanks Bush/Blair. The point I'm making is that her track record is grim. It's there for everyone to see.

I agree about your point on perspective. To me, Obama's presidency has been light years ahead of his predecessor's, in terms of the economy, in terms of national security and in terms of the US standing internationally. He could have easily become sucked into Egypt, Libya, Syria, the Ukraine, and the Yemen but he didn't. Despite all the pressure on him from the US/Israeli neocons he managed to stop Iran from further developing its military capability, again without getting involved in a military conflict.

As a President whose job (you would think) was to look out for his country he's done pretty damn well. And during that time the contribution of the Fukkwit-in-Chief has been to pander to the Birther Bigot Brigade who have accused (and still accuse) him of being non-American and muslim. THAT has been spunktrumpet's main contribution over the last 8 years and he's been rewarded by the votes of the scum who still loathe the fact that their president is a black man.

[stuckmojo]

Countdown said:

I agree about your point on perspective. To me, Obama's presidency has been light years ahead of his predecessor's, in terms of the economy, in terms of national security and in terms of the US standing internationally. He could have easily become sucked into Egypt, Libya, Syria, the Ukraine, and the Yemen but he didn't. Despite all the pressure on him from the US/Israeli neocons he managed to stop Iran from further developing its military capability, again without getting involved in a military conflict.

As a President whose job (you would think) was to look out for his country he's done pretty damn well. And during that time the contribution of the Fukkwit-in-Chief has been to pander to the Birther Bigot Brigade who have accused (and still accuse) him of being non-American and muslim. THAT has been spunktrumpet's main contribution over the last 8 years and he's been rewarded by the votes of the scum who still loathe the fact that their president is a black man.

Yes, picking on Obama for anything other than track record is unfair and basically bo ll ocks. As for the Middle East (I write from Riyadh today), whilst I agree that he has not deployed many more ground forces, the US have been fueling all the "Arab spring" fires and massively helped overthrowing governments and almost causing civil war in multiple countries, de facto succeeding in Syria (after no longer liking their own puppet Assad), Lybia (Ditto, sponsored by the French and KSA) and Egypt - bar the civil war there due to the strong influence the Army still has (bit like in Pakistan).

No question on the improved relationship with Iran. The economy I'm not so sure. Nothing structural has been resolved since 2005. I despair when I see average Joe looking at the performance of the Dow Jones instead of the GDP per capita as proxy for a healthy economy. Same in the UK.

I'm a fan of the man (Obama) but not of his presidency. I feel the favours he owed once elected stopped him from doing what he would have wanted. So my stance is non partisan. I don't care much for democrats or republicans but look at programmes, policies and context.

Back to the current crop, it's a matter of picking one's poison. As an outsider, and believing to be nonbiased, I see Hillary as bad a candidate as they come. She doesn't even look healthy enough to work to me. This doesn't mean I'm pro-Trump either.

[Sam All]

Countdown said:

I agree about your point on perspective. To me, Obama's presidency has been light years ahead of his predecessor's, in terms of the economy, in terms of national security and in terms of the US standing internationally. He could have easily become sucked into Egypt, Libya, Syria, the Ukraine, and the Yemen but he didn't. Despite all the pressure on him from the US/Israeli neocons he managed to stop Iran from further developing its military capability, again without getting involved in a military conflict.

As a President whose job (you would think) was to look out for his country he's done pretty damn well. And during that time the contribution of the Fukkwit-in-Chief has been to pander to the Birther Bigot Brigade who have accused (and still accuse) him of being non-American and muslim. THAT has been spunktrumpet's main contribution over the last 8 years and he's been rewarded by the votes of the scum who still loathe the fact that their president is a black man.

Wow - we have covered a lot here.

Blacks, Muslims, bro-cons, Israel, Shia Iran. And swearing too + name calling.

This is not about Obama - it is about Clinton. Do you really consider her the best America has to offer, never mind your view on Trump who was 500-1 about a year ago.

[unrepentant]

stuckmojo said:

- What's being a First Lady got to do with governing?
- Under her stewardship as secretary of state the US sunk to their lowest point since the war in Vietnam. The Middle East flared up everywhere and they even managed to get their own ambassador murdered.

Seriously? She was a very engaged first lady and her work helped to lay the groundwork for Obamacare. She was also confidant in chief to the president for 8 years.

Your second point is just ludicrous as Countdown has pointed out. One of the great successes of the Obama presidency has been in restoring the position of America in the world and she played a huge part in that, as has John Kerry who is also an excellent sec of state. Benghazi? Seriously? What was she supposed to do? Stevens was in the city against advice, she was in Washington. It was a tragedy but the sec of state is not responsible for monitoring the every action of the tens of thousands of state employee around the world FFS. Republicans used it to try and prove wrongdoing, just like the email issue, because they knew she would run in 2016 and their complete raison d'etre for the past eight years has been to block Obama and try to knobble whoever succeeds him. Unfortunately in doing that they pissed off their own supporters as well as the dems and indy's to the point where every single 2016 nominee with republican values was rejected and they were left with the cluster fk of a candidate they now have.

As for me being a fanatic, you are completely clueless. I've supported republicans on a local level and have said repeatedly on here that she's not an ideal candidate given her (mainly perceived) baggage. She is however by far the best on offer and compared to the lunatic on the other side she's light years ahead.

[Sam All]

unrepentant said:

I've supported republicans on a local level and have said repeatedly on here that she's not an ideal candidate given her (mainly perceived) baggage. She is however by far the best on offer and compared to the lunatic on the other side she's light years ahead.

The best on offer - "God" help America.

Trump is not a lunatic but I can see why some think you are a lunatic - you are just passionate.