The 2016 Presidential Candidates Thread

CarolKing

CarolKing

Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
It was money that Iran had spent for weapons from back in 1979 when the Shah was the dictator. The Shah was overthrown and all of Iran's money was eventually frozen. I remember hearing about all this back in January. I didn't think it was a good idea then. It was tied to the Iran Deal.

It still looks as though we paid money for hostages, even if we actually didn't. It makes it look bad for democrats. A good thing it's been a bad week for the Trump circus.

Fixed spelling. Who uses the word Shah anymore? Probably plenty places, I guess. The Middle East.
 
Last edited:
Bdubbdiblets

Bdubbdiblets

Well-Known Member
Fox released a poll saying that trump is more trusted with fixing the economy than Clinton...its polls like these that make me think the Don man ain't gone yet! Wake up peeps!!

I am no economic expert but not only has a Moody's rep come out and said that trumps plan could put us in a long extended recession but just his "great business man" history is enough to make me think otherwise..

People just hear billionaire business man and think "by George he's the answer!" I wonder is he going to stiff the world when he thinks China or Europe or anywhere we do business with did "substandard work"? If so would this not immediately tank the world economy...this is craziness. Econ 101, consumer confidence is "yuge" and the threat of a trump presidency doesn't make me feel very confidant...US has never defaulted..(yet) and the Don man has a history of not paying up on his contracts!! Do we suppose this will change as president? He is NOT the economies answer in fact he is not even a decent business man...

This man is taking hours off my life...I must counteract the negative effects with my loaded hopper....stat!!:rockon:

And again I'm not even a dem..(although he's making me fell more and more like one everyday:wave:)

Yeesh:mental:

Random thought:

Perhaps the Don man is just setting his base up to be pleased with the bare minimum. He has been soooo absurd for lack of a stronger word that I read something somewhere today that said how his advisors seemed pleased that he stayed on subject during a speech for like 10 mins..actually kind of smart. Next time i get a new job I'm going to do as little as possible in order to not get fired and then start doing really simple things in order to get a pat on the back from my manager.."good job Bdubb, you have been hired as a cook and you finally turned the oven on!! After a week! Hooray!! Take the rest of the day off!"

Crud-double post:doh:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ReggieB

ReggieB

Well-Known Member
I have nothing against coleslaw
spicy-cole-slaw-3.jpg
 
Gunky

Gunky

Well-Known Member
By George F. Will Opinion writer August 3 at 7:05 PM
In the 1870s, when Boss Tweed’s Tammany Hall controlled New York City, and in the 1950s and 1960s, when Chicago’s Democratic machine was especially rampant, there was a phenomenon that can be called immunity through profusion: Fresh scandals arrived with metronomic regularity, so there was no time to concentrate on any of them. The public, bewildered by blitzkriegs of bad behavior, was enervated.

What Winston Churchill said about an adversary — “He spoke without a note, and almost without a point” — can be said of Donald Trump, but this might be unfair to him. His speeches are, of course, syntactical train wrecks, but there might be method to his madness. He rarely finishes a sentence (“Believe me!” does not count), but perhaps he is not the scatterbrain he has so successfully contrived to appear. Maybe he actually is a sly rascal, cunningly in pursuit of immunity through profusion.

He seems to understand that if you produce a steady stream of sufficiently stupefying statements, there will be no time to dwell on any one of them, and the net effect on the public will be numbness and ennui. So, for example, while the nation has been considering his interesting decision to try to expand his appeal by attacking Gold Star parents, little attention has been paid to this: Vladimir Putin’s occupation of Crimea has escaped Trump’s notice.

It is, surely, somewhat noteworthy that someone aspiring to be this nation’s commander in chief has somehow not noticed the fact that for two years now a sovereign European nation has been being dismembered. But a thoroughly jaded American public, bemused by the depths of Trump’s shallowness, might have missed the following from Trump’s appearance Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.”

When host George Stephanopoulos asked, “Why did you soften the GOP platform on Ukraine?” — removing the call for providing lethal weapons for Ukraine to defend itself — Trump said: “[Putin’s] not going into Ukraine, okay? Just so you understand. He’s not going to go into Ukraine, all right? You can mark it down and you can put it down, you can take it anywhere you want.”


Stephanopoulos: “Well, he’s already there, isn’t he?”

Trump: “Okay, well, he’s there in a certain way, but I’m not there yet. You have [President] Obama there. And frankly, that whole part of the world is a mess under Obama, with all the strength that you’re talking about and all of the power of NATO and all of this, in the meantime, he’s going where — he takes — takes Crimea, he’s sort of — I mean . . . ”

What Trump, in that word salad, calls the “certain way” that Putin is in Crimea is called annexation, enforced by the Russian army. But Trump — channeling his inner Woodrow Wilson and his principle of ethnic self-determination — says what has happened to Crimea is sort of democratic because “from what I’ve heard” the people of Crimea “would rather be with Russia than where they were.”

Before the interview ended, Trump expressed his displeasure with the schedule for presidential debates, two of which are on nights with nationally televised NFL games. (There are such games three nights each autumn week.) “I got a letter from the NFL,” Trump claimed, “saying this is ridiculous.” The NFL says it sent no such letter. But before this Trump fib/figment of his imagination/hallucination can be properly savored, it will be washed away by a riptide of others. Immunity through profusion.

The nation, however, is not immune to the lasting damage that is being done to it by Trump’s success in normalizing post-factual politics. It is being poisoned by the injection into its bloodstream of the cynicism required of those Republicans who persist in pretending that although Trump lies constantly and knows nothing, these blemishes do not disqualify him from being president.

As when, last week, Mike Pence reproved Obama for deploring, obviously with Trump in mind, “homegrown demagogues.” Pence, doing his well-practiced imitation of a country vicar saddened by the discovery of sin in his parish, said with sorrowful solemnity: “I don’t think name-calling has any place in public life.” As in “Lyin’ Ted” Cruz and “Little Marco” Rubio and “Crooked Hillary” Clinton?

Pence is just the most recent example of how the rubble of ruined reputations will become deeper before Nov. 8. It has been well said that “sooner or later, we all sit down to a banquet of consequences.” The Republican Party’s multicourse banquet has begun.
Click to expand...
Hard to believe I am agreeing with George Will!
 
ReggieB

ReggieB

Well-Known Member
But this stuff hasn't been missed, it might've been missed 20-30 years ago but with video on demand of everything, anytime, you can see it all, again and again and again, in this millenium, people make bulleted lists and post them in forums and public places \o/
 
Silat

Silat

When the Facts Change, I Change My Mind.
cybrguy

cybrguy

Putin is a War Criminal
Gunky

Gunky

Well-Known Member
There is some suggestion now that republican office-holders may un-endorse Trump en masse. One or two big guys cut him loose and then the herd follows kind of thing. It's possible, though I rather doubt they have the courage of their convictions, or for that matter if they even have any convictions save get elected and funnel wealth to the 1%... I am guessing if that happened Trump would use it as an excuse to back out.

Apparently if Trump backs out, the Republican National Committee chooses a candidate. Who do you think they would put up? Bound to be some ferocious, amusing squabbles over that one!

The whole thing is a shambles. Those vids of Trump's rallies make him look even more fascist than I thought. How long before Trump starts sending bully boys to rough up reporters he doesn't like?
 
Last edited:
Gunky

Gunky

Well-Known Member
cybrguy said:
Romney or Kasich
Click to expand...
Yeah, maybe, because Romney repudiated Trump and Kasich failed to endorse. All the rest have more or less fallen in line behind the Trump train wreck and thus can't escape the taint of Trump. Cruz, I suppose too but everyone hates him.

At this point they are probably less concerned with winning the presidency than losing their majorities in congress and possibly in some statehouses.
 
Bdubbdiblets

Bdubbdiblets

Well-Known Member
"There's no quicker way to fix a mistake than to first acknowledge it."
-Gary Johnson

Just randomly flipped to cnn and heard him say this..I know nothing about him but this was a really cool thing to say...wouldn't it be nice if this tude was more the political norm! Also heard him talking about how we need to legalize herb so that we can test and learn more about it...amen brotha!!
:rockon::clap::rockon:
...too bad he's never getting elected, although it's nice someone's out there saying these things at the least.:shrug:
 
grokit

grokit

well-worn member
"Trump has the potential to be the first Republican nominee whose campaign could be financed chiefly by grass-roots supporters" From the nyt. Now he's a "populist". Harrumpf :disgust:


Fueled by Small Donations, Donald Trump Makes Up Major Financial Ground

04fd-trump-master768.jpg

Supporters reciting the Pledge of Allegiance at a Donald J. Trump rally in Ashburn, Va., on Tuesday.

Donald J. Trump all but erased his enormous fund-raising disadvantage against Hillary Clinton in the span of just two months, according to figures released by his campaign on Wednesday, converting the passion of his core followers into a flood of small donations on a scale rarely seen in national politics.

Mr. Trump and the Republican National Committee raised $64 million through a joint digital and mail effort in July, according to his campaign, the bulk of it from small donations. All told, Mr. Trump and his party brought in $82 million last month, only slightly behind Mrs. Clinton’s $90 million, and ended with $74 million on hand, suggesting he might now have the resources to compete with Mrs. Clinton in the closing stretch of the campaign.

“She’s been doing this for 20 years,” said Steven Mnuchin, a New York investor who is Mr. Trump’s finance chairman. “We’ve been doing it for two months.” More than two-thirds of the $64 million had come online, Mr. Mnuchin said.

The new figures indicate a major shift in Mr. Trump’s campaign, which until recent months was largely funded by hat and T-shirt sales and by Mr. Trump’s wallet. And they suggest that Mr. Trump has the potential to be the first Republican nominee whose campaign could be financed chiefly by grass-roots supporters pitching in $10 or $25 apiece, echoing the success of Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont during the Democratic primary.

more:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/04/us/politics/trump-fundraising.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

:myday:
 
Last edited:
CarolKing

CarolKing

Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
The republicans could have a Romney/ Kasich ticket.

I was watching the libertarian town hall meeting. I fell a sleep through half of it. I will have to watch it again. I wasn't being sarcastic either. I really fell asleep. They seemed like bright, smart men with integrity.

Too bad Trump isn't a Bernie Sanders @grokit .
 
Bdubbdiblets

Bdubbdiblets

Well-Known Member
Gunky

Gunky

Well-Known Member
Eventually the whole flimsy, fantasy edifice of Trump as domesticate-able will crumble and I predict he will lose in an historic landslide (providing he even stays in as far as the election). It's already crumbling because of all the little people Trump is consistently willing to victimize so Trump can win. People like the Khans, all the workmen Trump has stiffed with his bankruptcies and sharp-elbow deals, members of the numerous minorities he has scapegoated, women, reporters, people he got fired, students he ripped off, repubs he humiliated, etc., etc. When you screw over as many people as Trump has, eventually it comes back to bite.

Clinton, by contrast, frequently evinces a real interest in the little guy, the people who get left behind, children with no health insurance, the unemployed, disadvantaged and dispossessed.
 
Last edited:
gangababa

gangababa

Well-Known Member
Bdubbdiblets said:
...
"Fuck political correctness"
???
What that guy means to say is "let me be a racist bigot...publicly."
Click to expand...

Actually the anti-polite conduct (PC) people ask for more than letting them speak their unfiltered putrid-core, inner-child tantrums; they expect society to accept such without pushing back.

The potty-mouthed conservatives are always surprised when they are publicly chastised.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom