[POLL] United States Presidential Elections 2016
- Thread starter Sanji Himura
- 10,343 comments
- 406,288 views
- Status
- 14,045
- Ireland
- driftking18594
- CiaranGTR94
Donald Trump has come under fire for not correcting a supporter who claimed that Obama was a non-American Muslim. Then again, this is the guy who in 2011 was sceptical of the fact that Obama was born in the USA.
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
Sounds like the same Mike Huckabee that Fox hired after he failed the first time around to be the Republican Candidate in 08. I'd say anyone that follows politics or is subjected to his show in passing, shouldn't be too surprised and really if people were smart (candidates that is) they'd leave gay marriage the hell alone and move on to topics that aren't well accepted by Federal and State laws.
But this will blow up into a conversation that is easily covered in a well known thread and I really don't want to talk about it on the off chance that someone reads this and disagrees with me.
Anyways R1600...Huckabee today or Huckabee yesterday is an ass backwards crazy old man. That is all, sorry for my tangent.
Ross Perot wasn't crazy enough for you?
CodeRedR51
Premium
- 55,307
- United States
I may actually actually vote this year (first time!) and Bernie Sanders may earn my vote.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
Does he not remember what happened the last time he did this? He was on the receiving end of what will almost inevitability be remembered as history's greatest come-uppance.
I hope he's paying his campaign manager more, because he's clearly got his work cut out for him. Although "the media are making a storm in a teacup (because they don't like him)" is hardly the most imaginitive excuse.
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
According to an unofficial Time poll, Trump won the recent 2nd debates by 55% to Fiorina's 20%, with all other candidates in the low single digits.
http://time.com/4037510/poll-second-republican-presidential-debate/
In a 3 hour marathon of endurance, the candidates were mainly questioned on foreign policy.
In my view, the only candidates who are not outright war hawks are Trump, Carson, Paul and Christie.
http://time.com/4037510/poll-second-republican-presidential-debate/
In a 3 hour marathon of endurance, the candidates were mainly questioned on foreign policy.
In my view, the only candidates who are not outright war hawks are Trump, Carson, Paul and Christie.
- 4,464
- Azle, TX
- supermanfromazle
- SanjiHimura
Care to elaborate? As far as I see it, most of who you DON'T single out as doves only see one enemy - ISIS - and their abuse of human rights in the name of religion. I have cited in multiple posts in multiple threads that ISIS has turned into a global threat if they are not stopped, something a candidate like a Ted Cruz would show a decided understanding of.
It also doesn't help when you have our current president who did cripple our presence in the region by not doing his job as commander in chief and reading his intelligence briefings on the subject and focus, poorly might I add, on domestic issues.
- 904
- orlando,FL,USA
Another great indictment of Clinton
http://tomwoods.com/podcast/ep-491-queen-of-chaos-the-misadventures-of-hillary-clinton/
http://tomwoods.com/podcast/ep-491-queen-of-chaos-the-misadventures-of-hillary-clinton/
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
Without going into extensive detail, I will summarize by saying those other than Trump, Carson, Paul and Christie are war hawks in general, not just against ISIS, because they have neocons on staff, are orthodox interventionists, and/or are extremely against working with Russia to solve the world's problems. This column by the libertarian website elaborates much as I would. http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2015/09/17/the-gop-debate-outsiders-versus-warmongers/
- 4,464
- Azle, TX
- supermanfromazle
- SanjiHimura
I would like to point your attention here:
Based on this assessment, and what the constitution actually says, Jindal is absolutely right. It was Trapper that painted the others like hawks when the real hawk in the room is Trump. Remember, there is more than one way to conduct a war, and economically is one of them. We had a whole thread dedicated as to why China devalued the Yuan more than 40% in about a month.
Going after trade is something, that as a business man, Trump has shown a decided understanding of, and if he can keep his message on point about forcing American businesses to stay in the US, we already have our GOP nominee sad to say. The issue with that is if you don't lower the corporate tax rate to keep them there, you have essentially have pulled off a communist action. Don't believe me? Take a look at what Hugo Chavez did in Venezuela for years - Seize private business operations, primarily in oil, and make them state run. By declaring that he would replace CEOs of private firms and companies, he is saying that he will do the same thing that Chavez will do, and over 20,000 people in nearby Dallas ate it up (and that is one of the few counties in Texas that turns blue every election.)
Based on this assessment, and what the constitution actually says, Jindal is absolutely right. It was Trapper that painted the others like hawks when the real hawk in the room is Trump. Remember, there is more than one way to conduct a war, and economically is one of them. We had a whole thread dedicated as to why China devalued the Yuan more than 40% in about a month.
Going after trade is something, that as a business man, Trump has shown a decided understanding of, and if he can keep his message on point about forcing American businesses to stay in the US, we already have our GOP nominee sad to say. The issue with that is if you don't lower the corporate tax rate to keep them there, you have essentially have pulled off a communist action. Don't believe me? Take a look at what Hugo Chavez did in Venezuela for years - Seize private business operations, primarily in oil, and make them state run. By declaring that he would replace CEOs of private firms and companies, he is saying that he will do the same thing that Chavez will do, and over 20,000 people in nearby Dallas ate it up (and that is one of the few counties in Texas that turns blue every election.)
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
Trump is clearly unimpressed by the brainfart excuse of "it's all the media's fault" by his campaign manager, because he's clearly decided to out-stupid him, claiming that he has "no moral responsibility to defend Obama" when someone says something slanderous:
http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-20/donald-trump-not-obliged-to-defend-barack-obama/6789572
http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2015-09-20/donald-trump-not-obliged-to-defend-barack-obama/6789572
- 14,045
- Ireland
- driftking18594
- CiaranGTR94
Scott Walker's retirement from the GOP nomination race seems to be imminent: http://www.nytimes.com/politics/fir...r-said-to-be-quitting-presidential-race/?_r=0.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
How is it slanderous to call someone a Muslim?
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
When it's clearly intended as an insult, unsupported by any evidence, and being used as an ad hominem attack.
- 6,425
- KCCO
And what about Carson's remarks??
- 40,821
And when Trump himself was a heavy contributor to that idiocy 4 years ago.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
They suggest that he's bigoted, but they do not qualify as slander because they're not directed at a specific individual. Carson passed an opinion; the Trump supporter claimed something was fact.
- 29,302
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
He led the Iowa polls in July!! No rock ever dropped faster.
In the debates, he lacked energy and his face was covered in sweat. I guess the country didn't really need a union-buster at this time.
Last edited:
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
It's only slanderous if it might harm the reputation of the person in question. I hardly think a random question from an audience member is going to change Obama's reputation. It's stupid, but it's not slanderous.
- 29,302
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
I just hope his supporters don't also have stocks in VW.
Walker's demise does at least illustrate that leading in the polls this early in the campaign can turn out to mean absolutely nothing, so there is still hope that Trump suffers a similar decline.
I agree with the idea that Bush and Rubio will see an up-swing in their fortunes... for some reason I just don't get Carson, and his remarks earlier this week didn't help. Trump will continue to be seen as a 'protest' candidate, a non-serious contender that is getting his chance to stick one to the 'establishment', but when the going gets tough, I expect the GOP to put their full weight behind one candidate - probably Jeb Bush - and Trump, having already declared that he will not run as an independent, will be left in No Man's Land.
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
This is the rational, probably realistic and establishment view. The wild card is the voter, the bane of democracy. Every so often we undergo a political prairie fire which burns fiercely then flames out.
- 6,425
- KCCO
What difference does it make if it's towards an individual or towards the most populous religion?
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
Don't count out Fiorina just yet
- 2,620
- Lincoln, NE
- huskeR_32
In a country where gun shops deny service to Muslims, where lawsuits are filed attempting to strip Islam of its religious status (and therefore its protection under the first amendment), where art shows are held displaying pictures of Mohammad for no other reason than to mock the beliefs of Muslims, and where tens of millions of dollars are spent supporting dozens of anti-Islam hate groups; it's pretty naive to say that calling somebody a Muslim will have no effect at all on their reputation.
I'd also like to point out the irony in your lauding Kim Davis for her "good Christian" behavior, while simultaneously shrugging at the fact that Obama is essentially not even allowed to say what he believes without half the country shouting that he's a liar. I would think that giving a person the right to declare their own beliefs would be the cornerstone of the religious "freedom" that many of Obama's detractors advocate for.
- Status
Similar threads
