- 4,464
- Azle, TX
- supermanfromazle
- SanjiHimura
Most conservative media is still carrying the story. The Blaze in particular broke the story that the FBI was interviewing Clinton top aids and Clinton herself.
[POLL] United States Presidential Elections 2016
- Thread starter Sanji Himura
- 10,343 comments
- 402,330 views
- Status
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
Fair enough, like @Dotini I couldn't see it elsewhere. Lots on "Guccifer", nothing oabout the Russians though.
- 86,670
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
I have decided that I want Donald Trump to win.
He's a horrifying human being who will do nothing but act like a total arsequiche and say mean-spirited things about everyone but...
* He'll be constitutionally limited from doing anything too stupid
* He'll invoke a dramatic change in voter behaviour to ensure no-one like that can get in ever again
* He'll instantly reveal everything in the Book of Secrets and we'll finally learn who killed JFK and whether there's any aliens
Whereas Hillary is just awful.
He's a horrifying human being who will do nothing but act like a total arsequiche and say mean-spirited things about everyone but...
* He'll be constitutionally limited from doing anything too stupid
* He'll invoke a dramatic change in voter behaviour to ensure no-one like that can get in ever again
* He'll instantly reveal everything in the Book of Secrets and we'll finally learn who killed JFK and whether there's any aliens
Whereas Hillary is just awful.
- 6,425
- KCCO
- 19,623
- Alabamamania
The problem is that there's no very strong third-party candidate. It's not from a lack of trying, it's because they've gotten infinitesimal mainstream and second-stream press. At that point, the door is thrown a bit more open to more than the Libertarian Party. There's going to be a dispersal effect where some folks are going to diffuse their votes to what ever third-party catches their eye...wonderful in theory towards the roots of our democratic process, but if the votes scatter towards too many outliers, there's not going to be much change for the future.
I don't even think most voters are stupid, per se. They probably see their party leaders as having lots of faults, ambivalence in many less-exciting policies, can only hope certain ideas come to fruition after dealing with Congress, and probably winnow down their choices based on a handful of tiny planks they've chosen as important to them.
What happens with our two-party system is that people feel forced into Game Theory or a Prisoner's Dilemma; and when faced with just a handful of sub-optimal choices, humans tend to choose the option which potentially does the lesser of two harms. And I think adults tend to realize that life doesn't always let you pick out anything from the store, you usually have a handful of sub-optimal choices, and one makes the best opportunity out of it.
It's this kind of thing which makes me totally understand (even if I don't agree with) how someone just votes on whatever little thing they promise or how they said something silly or wore that Cheesehead hat to get some support. There's always been a lot of ambivalent voters that see politics as an imperfect system of typically minor irritations, with voting being as glamorous as cleaning one's bathroom...you have to do it even though you don't really want to.
Last edited:
dylansan
Premium
- 4,985
- Massachusetts
- GTP_dylansan
- MINICOOPER120
FBI Director James Comey says it's not a "security inquiry", it's an investigation. Also says he prefers to do the job well rather than quickly.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/hillary-clinton-email-investigation-fbi-james-comey-223071
I refuse to get my hopes up, but I really hope this isn't all for nothing.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/hillary-clinton-email-investigation-fbi-james-comey-223071
I refuse to get my hopes up, but I really hope this isn't all for nothing.
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
dylansan
Premium
- 4,985
- Massachusetts
- GTP_dylansan
- MINICOOPER120
I've seen so much analysis on reddit (yeah, I know), and at this point I just can't fathom that she hasn't broken the law. And that's just based on what's publicly available.
I won't pretend I know anything for sure, but I'll just say that if she really didn't do anything wrong, then it's a strange decision to keep changing her story, using phrases like "nothing marked classified" or "sent or received by me". That stuff might satisfy the average person but it's not like the FBI isn't going to push harder.
I won't pretend I know anything for sure, but I'll just say that if she really didn't do anything wrong, then it's a strange decision to keep changing her story, using phrases like "nothing marked classified" or "sent or received by me". That stuff might satisfy the average person but it's not like the FBI isn't going to push harder.
- 4,464
- Azle, TX
- supermanfromazle
- SanjiHimura
OP Update: New Electoral College Map (this time from Real Clear Politics) is uploaded, and we have our first generic House poll available. That particular poll will be updated weekly on Friday (with the exception of this week obviously) as with all of the other polling.
- 2,175
- Maryland
- GTP_Patrick1
Now up to 100 dollars in bets with friends that Trump beats Hillary or Bernie. I think in the end he will beat her rather easily.
- 5,398
- Buenos Aires
I understand what you are getting at.
We had a ballotage here in Argentina last year. It was either a leftist who many people believed was going to continue with the corruption of the former office (since he belonged to the same party), or a right-wing business man (may I add, friend of Donald Trump and a person who Trump himself said "you should vote, he is a great guy").
It's a ballotage. You don't necessary like either of the two. But you either make a choice, or let other people choose for you, and later on you may regret it. I voted for the guy who ended up losing (the leftist), and now the right-wing business man is tearing us a new one with his excuse of "oh I'm just fixing up the country". Not only did he said right before the elections that he was not going to do the things he is doing right now, but he also said they were lies coming from the leftist guy's party.
Of course, the people who voted him think he is nothing less than a guy, and when the rest of us point out he is doing EVERYTHING they criticized of the former government, their response is, more or less, "the former office did it as well". They just don't give two 🤬 about it. So yes, I'd rather choose between two people I don't like (and hopefully choose the lesser evil) than let some other 🤬 make a decision for me.
Bonus track: one of his colleagues literally said in one interview "when you are running for office, don't say anything about what you are going to, people won't like it, so just talk about something else, and when you are in charge, do whatever you want". That same guy went on to do exactly that in a debate. People didn't care at all, they just voted based on hate for the former government and voted a guy who clearly didn't care about the people who voted him.
So yeah, America. Choose whoever you like, and if you don't like anybody, I urge you to still vote for someone you think is going to keep the country mostly intact for the next election.
EDIT: Oh, and there were around 6 main candidates for that election. The candidates that were at least invited to the televised debate. Anyone of those other 4 candidates that didn't make it to the ballotage were far more deserving of a spot there than the guy who ended up winning. That's democracy for you.
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-vp-shortlist-cruz-palin-152539923.html
Ben Carson says Donald Trump’s list of possible running mates includes some awfully familiar names for anyone who’s followed the 2016 presidential race: New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, Ohio Gov. John Kasich, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.
Ben Carson says Donald Trump’s list of possible running mates includes some awfully familiar names for anyone who’s followed the 2016 presidential race: New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, Ohio Gov. John Kasich, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.
- 6,425
- KCCO
allyourjazzz
(Banned)
- 49
- United States
Trump's choices seem to all hurt him in one way or another, I'ld like to see Palin in the news again, I'm a dirty old man 
All of those choices will hurt him in the general election. Christy would be my guess.
All of those choices will hurt him in the general election. Christy would be my guess.
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
- 4,221
- Louisville, KY
- ukfan758
- 6,425
- KCCO
- 6,054
- Simcoeace
There's no way he would be stupid enough to pick Palin. Palin fans would likely support him in the GE anyway.
Cruz & Rubio would be potentially committing political suicide by aligning their fortunes with Trump. If Trump loses, especially if he loses big-time, it will destroy their reputations & their future prospects. This is aside from the fact that he has repeatedly insulted them personally.
Kasich would seem like a decent choice for Trump, as he has "executive experience", as well as foreign policy "experience" (so-called). Can't really see Kasich jumping on the Trump bandwagon though.
Christie would do it - he's got no dignity left to lose anyway. However, two candidates with "New York values" (so-called), doesn't seem like the best idea.
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
Perhaps Trump considers sex appeal to be a legitimate tool to help appropriate the presidency? The female former governor could conceivably go a long way in reclaiming currently alienated female voters, and those shapely legs make a lot of men entertain warm feelings. But she's such a ditz!Never, ever say that about The Big Eggy.
- Status
Similar threads
