The 2016 Presidential Candidates Thread

KimDracula

Well-Known Member
I know several conservatives who are voting for Sanders. I don't consider myself far left either, and I support Sanders. I think it's dishonest for Clinton supporters to write him off as "too far Left" while at the same time attacking him for not being far left enough on gun control, women's rights, and minority rights (which isn't even true).

And certainly he's less partisan than Clinton. Just look at how the Republicans talk about her in the debates.

You were claiming Sanders is somehow a non-partisan candidate and that's simply not true despite knowing a few Conservatives who say they support him. Voting for someone like Sanders would be anathema to most Conservatives and Libertarians. I didn't write him off, but the man is a Democratic Socialist. That is the far Left (where I live so I don't consider this necessarily a bad thing). I don't really have any bad things to say about Bernie. I'm not a Clinton surrogate, after all. You're being rather needlessly defensive, I think.
 
KimDracula,
  • Like
Reactions: cybrguy

cybrguy

Putin is a War Criminal
I think it's dishonest for Clinton supporters to write him off as "too far Left"
He claims the mantel of "Democratic Socialist" for gods sake. How much further left do YOU think one can get?
 
cybrguy,

Farid

Well-Known Member
He claims the mantel of "Democratic Socialist" for gods sake. How much further left do YOU think one can get?
He could be going after guns. He could be attacking the Republicans for being too far right. He could be claiming his opponent isn't tough enough on women's issues or minority issues...

But wait that's what Hillary is doing.

Also, you cut me off when quoting me. I said it's dishonest to accuse him of being too far left while also criticizing him for being too far right on the issues of guns and women's health. It's the double standard I was pointing out.
 
Last edited:
Farid,
  • Like
Reactions: grokit

KimDracula

Well-Known Member
He could be going after guns. He could be attacking the Republicans for being too far right. He could be claiming his opponent isn't tough enough on women's issues or minority issues...

But wait that's what Hillary is doing.

He does go after guns, especially after being criticized by Hillary. He also attacks Republicans for their horrible policies. He also knows he needs to do better with women and minorities to beat Clinton. You do realize this man is also a lifelong politician, right? The differences between Sanders and Hillary on policy aren't even that great for the most part, but just a matter of degree.

If you support Sanders so wholeheartedly then you should definitely be a lot more scared of a Republican presidency than you should be of a Clinton presidency. This is my biggest point. If Bernie gets the nomination I will be voting for him. I just hope Sanders supporters in battleground states turn out for Clinton so we can avoid the cataclysm of a Trump presidency (or any Republican, for that matter).
 
KimDracula,
  • Like
Reactions: Gunky

Farid

Well-Known Member
He doesn't attack them personally, he attacks the policy. Hillary says Republicans are her proudest adversaries, that's about as partisan as you get.

And I will never vote for Hillary because of her vote for the Iraq War. I will never vote for a criminal. And she can't just write that off as her being fed bad intel as she supported regime change in Libya and Syria in recent times.
 
Farid,
  • Like
Reactions: grokit

Farid

Well-Known Member
I hope I don't have to make the difficult decision between voting for an independent, and not voting at all. I hope Sanders gets the nomination and I can vote for him. You're not going to convince an anti war centrist to vote for a Clinton, I know her voting record, and she shows no desire to change.
 
Farid,
  • Like
Reactions: grokit

KimDracula

Well-Known Member
Well, it does make me happy that a self-described centrist is willing to support someone like Bernie. I know where you're coming from. My fear of another Republican president (especially now that the party has descended into an even worse madness than both Presidents Bush, which is saying an awful lot) just always outweighs my distrust of even the most entrenched establishment Democrat.
 
KimDracula,

cybrguy

Putin is a War Criminal
I am an anti-war centrist (tho not compulsively so) and I realize that Hillary is far and away the best candidate in this race. What you seem to miss is that you aren't a centrist at all.
 

cybrguy

Putin is a War Criminal
You can thank the Tea Party and folks like Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, and Sarah Palin (and their enablers) for this...

Young Voters Begin to Doubt Democracy

Young voters turned out in big numbers in 2008 and then stayed home in record numbers in 2014. There are many explanations for this, but one that’s not talked about is their attitude toward democracy itself.

Research recently presented by Roberto Foa and Yascha Mounk shows growing disillusionment with democracy—not just with politics or campaigns, but with democracy itself.

This growth is worldwide, but it is especially strong among young Americans. Fewer than 30 percent of Americans born since 1980 say that living in a democracy is essential. For those born since 1970, more than one in five describe our democratic system as “bad or very bad.” That’s almost twice is the rate for people born between 1950 and 1970.
This is hopefully a transient phenomenon. The failure of the Arab Spring and struggles in the European Union probably explain the global downtick, but here at home it’s probably related to the dysfunction, gridlock and non-responsiveness of the federal government, especially Congress.

It’s not clear what young folks think is the better alternative to representative government, but who can blame them for not being enamored with their representation?

So, when we see the outlines of fascism forming on the right, is that really surprising? If you give the people Weimar, someone will step into the breach.
 
cybrguy,

lwien

Well-Known Member
The question was which enemy that you made during your political career are you most proud of?

She answered the Republicans along with Iran the NRA and health insurance companies:


I saw that awhile ago but don't you think that it was said kind of tongue in cheek as if to state the obvious and to get a few laughs in the process?

Also it must be stated that what transpires in the primaries as well as the general elections are usually put aside once the elections are over. I mean, hell, the primaries were brutal between Hillary and Obama yet she was appointed as Sec. of State, eh?
 

CarolKing

Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
APNewsBreak: US declares 22 Clinton emails 'top secret'

Jan. 29, 2016 7:41 PM EST
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration confirmed for the first time Friday that Hillary Clinton's home server contained closely guarded government secrets, censoring 22 emails that contained material requiring one of the highest levels of classification. The revelation comes three days before Clinton competes in the Iowa presidential caucuses.

State Department officials also said the agency's Diplomatic Security and Intelligence and Research bureaus are investigating if any of the information was classified at the time of transmission, going to the heart of Clinton's defense of her email practices.

The department published its latest batch of emails from her time as secretary of state Friday evening.
 

cybrguy

Putin is a War Criminal
Hold Your Benghazm, None of Those 22 New Hillary Emails Were Classified When They Were Sent

by Tommy Christopher | 5:02 pm, January 29th, 2016
video 1347
Screen-Shot-2016-01-29-at-4.50.46-PM-300x189.jpg
The right-wing media is going absolutely Caligula over Friday’s revelation that 22 emails from the State Department’s most recent dump of Hillary Clinton communications “Were Top Secret,” and she’s obviously headed to jail. Over at Redstate, they’re so excited they’ve actually had to call their doctor already, and it hasn’t even been four hours:
Hillary Clinton used a private server for her entire term as Secretary of State. She transmitted classified and top secret information to and from that address. 22 of the e-mails that the government does have are clearly top secret. This will have big implications for Clinton, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for president.​
Not so fast, there. I know that since the email “scandal” began, it has become a mainstream media pastime not to ever mention this, but these 22 emails, and every other email that journalists mainstream and conservative have gotten all sweaty over, were not marked classified when they were sent or received. If only some sort of talk-guy from the government thingy that Hillary worked for would just come out and say that, so people could prominently report that highly relevant fact that means Hillary won’t be going anywhere near a courtroom:
I can confirm that as part of this monthly production of Hillary Clinton’s e-mails, the State Department will be denying in full seven e-mail chains found in 22 documents representing 37 pages. The documents are being upgraded at the request of the intelligence community because they contain a category of top secret information. These documents were not marked classified at the time that they were sent.”​
That was U.S. State Department Spokesman John Kirby, for those of you playing along at home. Watch below, via MSNBC
You can certainly think the email server was a bad idea, and you can also hope against hope that something somehow turns up, but what you really shouldn’t do, especially if you’re a mainstream news organization, is say that the emails “were top secret” when they weren’t. It confuses the right-wingers.
 

CarolKing

Singer of songs and a vapor connoisseur
It's too bad the the Democrats only have 2 choices. I think Hillary Clinton made some bad choices and that is baggage she does need. I do wonder about the timing with this info about her emails right before the first caucuses.

I'm worried that Donald Trump may get the Relublicans nomination.
 

grokit

well-worn member
Only ~20% of america even identifies with the gop anymore...

I believe one big reason for this is because americans overwhelmingly support the affordable care act, and the republicans are doing everything they can to sabotage it. And one of these asshats in particular, rubio, has had some pretty stealthy success. He's already financially undermined quite a few insurance companies, and as a result has forced ~700,000 americans to go back to being uninsured. He's making the government welsh on its risk corridor payments, which were factored into the aca in advance to keep these companies afloat while they go about repairing the built-up health problems that the uninsured tend to accumulate (if they don't die from them first). Evidently death is preferable to these asshats, and they are terming these factored-in-advance by law payments as "bail-outs". Of course we can't have bail-outs for health care, that would be too christian; bail-outs are just for deep-pocketed corporations with high-paid lobbyists.

If something doesn't come along to fix this travesty, the aca, and obama's legacy, could be doomed.

:disgust: I'm particularly upset with this because the only affordable company in my state is now on the ropes. The risk-corridor payments are for just that, risk corridors (like the one I live in). Obama should have vetoed it but rubio held the entire 2014 spending bill hostage with this amendment. Obama still should've vetoed it:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/10/us/politics/marco-rubio-obamacare-affordable-care-act.html?_r=0

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...06849a-a275-11e5-b53d-972e2751f433_story.html

http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/263396-spending-bill-includes-rubio-ban-on-obamacare-bailout

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/12/opinions/potarazu-obama-legacy-obamacare/

http://www.kgw.com/money/business/s...-market-requires-it-to-raise-capital/24314743

https://www.adn.com/article/2016012...ividual-insurance-market-leaving-only-premera

This last^ one is what just made me aware of the extent of rubio's treason.
:horse:
 
Last edited:

howie105

Well-Known Member
It's too bad the the Democrats only have 2 choices. I think Hillary Clinton made some bad choices and that is baggage she does need. I do wonder about the timing with this info about her emails right before the first caucuses.

I'm worried that Donald Trump may get the Relublicans nomination.

Politicians are humans too, and all people have baggage. Politicians however live in a spotlight world where people getting a look at ones baggage can be a career killer. That is one of the reasons why campaigns can be so calculated, orchestrated and phoney. Is Clinton any better or worse then the other contenders for the office? Probably better then some and worse then others, but we will never know for sure because we seldom see below the veneer and smoke they all employ.
 
Last edited:

lwien

Well-Known Member
It's too bad the the Democrats only have 2 choices.

Joe is waiting in the wings just in case but if I were a bettin' man, as of right now, I'd still put my money on Hillary to win the general. Of course, things can change. She could have a stroke. She could also get indicted which again, if I were a bettin' man, I'd say that that's not going to happen.

As far as Trump winning the GOP primaries, I'd put my money on Trump.

Of course, who I'd put my money on has no bearing on who I think should be our next president, just who I think will win.
 

lwien

Well-Known Member
Biden would take significantly more votes from Hillary than Sanders I think. I really really doubt he will enter this election, especially at this point.

Like I said, I think he's waiting in the wings if something should happen to Hillary like a medical condition or an indictment but sans those two issues, she's the Democratic nominee and our next Prez...........imho of course.
 
lwien,
  • Like
Reactions: cybrguy

Gunky

Well-Known Member
It's too bad the the Democrats only have 2 choices. I think Hillary Clinton made some bad choices and that is baggage she does need. I do wonder about the timing with this info about her emails right before the first caucuses.

I'm worried that Donald Trump may get the Relublicans nomination.

I look at this somewhat differently. I am very pleased that both candidates for the democratic nomination have well-known records, are good and reliable people who are well qualified to be president and who would select Supreme Court justices I could live with. I prefer Hillary, think she could be more effective and believe she has a better chance in the general, but I would be delighted if either one became prez.

On the other side we have some major league right wing douche bags. For the most part, far from condemning the xenophobia, bigotry, misogyny, Christian chauvinism, cruelty, stupidity etc of the front runners, these guys have all scrambled be preeminent in their me-too-ism. It would be very depressing and scary to wake up one day to a president Hairmageddon Trump, or Carpet Bomb Cruz, or Doze Off Carson, Chameleon Rubio, etc.
 

cybrguy

Putin is a War Criminal
It's too bad the the Democrats only have 2 choices. I think Hillary Clinton made some bad choices and that is baggage she does need. I do wonder about the timing with this info about her emails right before the first caucuses.
Actually, they have three. But not many seem to like the third choice.

I'm worried that Donald Trump may get the Relublicans nomination.
I'm hoping for it. I think it guarantees a Dem win and makes it slightly possible for the Dems to get the House back. Not that it wouldn't be a little scary, but I refuse to believe America elects a clearly bigoted carnival barker for President.
 

Chill Dude

Well-Known Member
Chill Dude,
  • Like
Reactions: grokit
Top Bottom