The 2016 Presidential Candidates Thread

[grokit]

You want to tell me what that article has to do with approving the President's pick for the FDA?

“Dr. Califf’s extensive ties to the pharmaceutical industry give me no reason to believe that he would make the FDA work for ordinary Americans, rather than just the CEOs of pharmaceutical companies.”

 

[cybrguy]

His comments about Jebs brother "may" have pushed him off the GOP cliff. He's also threatening a law suit against Cruz and is challenging the RNC on the validity of the last primary. He very well still could end up going independent.

One can only hope.

 

[CarolKing]

Trump also said the the RNC was supporting the republican base and that didn't include him. (trump)

I'm really curious how Trump will do in South Carolina.

Today Jeb has George W. with him campaigning. What will Trump say about that.

 

[cybrguy]

“Dr. Califf’s extensive ties to the pharmaceutical industry give me no reason to believe that he would make the FDA work for ordinary Americans, rather than just the CEOs of pharmaceutical companies.”

That isn't from the article you quoted. But I will reply to this as I did above:

Does he have reason to believe he wouldn't? He doesn't say. So, where does Bernie think FDA executives should come from? The clothing industry? The auto industry? God forbid you pick someone who works and has an outstanding reputation in the industry you want him to oversee...

 

[lwien]

A long time ago, even before the primaries started, I stated that the GOP was self-destructing in slo-mo. Well, considering how the GOP candidates behaved in the last debate and considering that they will again cement their reputation of being obstructionists by stating that they will not approve ANY nominee to the SC bench even before knowing who that nominee will be, that GOP self-destruction has just left the slo-mo lane.

For those who like to watch train-wrecks, this is train-wreck heaven.

 

[cybrguy]

What is not clear, however, in this time of unexpected and surprising results, is whether crashing and burning will actually result in losses for the GOP as they should, or if folks will just move on to the next guy down the list...

 

[CuckFumbustion]

@grokit was the first to bring this to my attention at Cannibis news. TX. I was unaware of any senator who was looking ahead of the curve for once on the subject of cannibis. Usually they need to be prodded or have it nested within a larger issue, like the war on drugs.
The war on ___. Meaning the first casualty of any war being truth.. Like say the Painkiller epidemic being the rational for some politicians to block newer medical MJ legislation. Like say Christie's earlier position.

Essentially Warren's position is Cannibis as an aid to take care of the opioid addiction problems. MJ as exit drug. How refreshing!

Some people here think she might be the VP pick for Sanders. Why I brought it here.
Elizabeth Warren asks CDC to consider legal marijuana as alternative painkiller

http://nationalpainreport.com/cdc-p...arijuana-as-an-opioid-substitute-8829577.html

I would prefer a candidate with prior political experience that doesn't cause my skin to crawl or the hairs on the back of my neck to stand straight up. Not asking for much here.

If I can't have the experience qualification ..... I'll settle for not causing my skin to crawl, the hairs on the back of my neck not raising in alarm and COMMON SENSE.

I think I just whittled the field down considerably.

Trying to watch the debates leave me with a nausea or the heebee geebee's. A few of the candidates are already giving me a rash and I've already mentioned my exhaustion brought on by Donald fatigue. Need to stock up on more COMMEN SENSE and echinacea tea. Seriously, It's like 1-5 degrees where I'm at. Once I build up a resistance, I'll take on the debate again.

From the moderator at the RNC debate. 'If a candidate attacks you. You have a 30 second rebuttal.' Interesting way to phrase it. 'Attacks you' not disagree or argues, refutes you or your points. No. ATTACKS YOU.

Celebrated Presidents Day today. Went to the bank with my paycheck and cursed myself for forgetting it being a bank holiday. Its kind of a tradition. Happy Presidents day everyone.

 

[KimDracula]

It is fun to watch the train wreck but it's not really satisfying because they're still doing so well at a state level and also because the beginning of the end of the GOP doesn't seem to mean anything good for the rest of us, or at least not yet. Being reasonable or standing up for anything other than obstruction and pure ideology is anathema to the current Republican base which guarantees the current trend of Congressional inactivity and impotence won't be easily overcome even if they continue to fail to field successful nominees for President.

Elizabeth Warren is wonderful. I don't think we should want her to be VP, though. I like her in the Senate unless she wants to go for the big chair herself. She already has a springboard and VP seems like a bit of a waste of her talents and experience.

 

[Snappo]

There is NOTHING about Trump that I feel qualifies him for the Oval Office... IMO, he's a low class chump! Sorry... no intellectual debate offered in this respect - it doesn't require any.

 

[CuckFumbustion]

It is fun to watch the train wreck but it's not really satisfying because they're still doing so well at a state level and also because the beginning of the end of the GOP doesn't seem to mean anything good for the rest of us, or at least not yet. Being reasonable or standing up for anything other than obstruction and pure ideology is anathema to the current Republican base which guarantees the current trend of Congressional inactivity and impotence won't be easily overcome even if they continue to fail to field successful nominees for President.

Elizabeth Warren is wonderful. I don't think we should want her to be VP, though. I like her in the Senate unless she wants to go for the big chair herself. She already has a springboard and VP seems like a bit of a waste of her talents and experience.

I've entertained the idea of Bernie handing over the office to her mid-term for a first female president. You believe she is perhaps a higher caliber than Sanders? I don't have a solid outline of either. But her willingness to approach the subject of Medical MJ to the CDC impressed me on it's own merits.

Going from a two party system to a uni-party system isn't any way to further the on going debate.

 

[KimDracula]

It's not so much that I think she's more of a heavyweight than Bernie Sanders. In fact, I think I would probably say the same thing about Bernie if the positions were reversed. Vice-President just seems so boring and rarely consequential, unless as a stepping-stone to the Presidency itself.

 

[CarolKing]

There's been a huge cost increase in generic drugs this past year. Something needs to be done, when Canada pays a lot less. That is one of the things that I thought would be helped with Obamacare.

 

[Snappo]

I think the Office of Presidency should be shared by THREE individual parties at once, in the form of three individuals at once. They will either reach a consensus for every decision, or die trying... no hung jury. The position of VP will be rendered obsolete and molded into the three.

 

[CuckFumbustion]

It's not so much that I think she's more of a heavyweight than Bernie Sanders. In fact, I think I would probably say the same thing about Bernie if the positions were reversed. Vice-President just seems so boring and rarely consequential, unless as a stepping-stone to the Presidency itself.

Oh well, Actually was hoping there was more to her than Sanders. Used to share your opinion about the VP. Now it's more like how much power a sitting VP can have and be allowed by a sitting president, is where I now frame that question. Some ran the show like Cheney where other administrations have other dynamics besides the attending of funerals and mid level diplomatic functions. What is Biden doing these days anyway?

Speaking of, Should we be asking more about Obama <---> Clinton and their professional relationship and how much power was handled by her and utilized below her?

 

[KimDracula]

Oh well, Actually was hoping there was more to her than Sanders. Used to share your opinion about the VP. Now it's more like how much power a sitting VP can have and be allowed by a sitting president, is where I now frame that question. Some ran the show like Cheney where other administrations have other dynamics besides the attending of funerals and mid level diplomatic functions. What is Biden doing these days anyway?

Speaking of, Should we be asking more about Obama <---> Clinton and their professional relationship and how much power was handled by her and utilized below her?

I was trying to avoid disparaging Sanders more than I was minimizing Warren. I think she's a great leader for the Democrats going forward and I think she's got a lot of substance to her. I'd vote for her.

 

[Snappo]

I was trying to avoid disparaging Sanders more than I was minimizing Warren. I think she's a great leader for the Democrats going forward and I think she's got a lot of substance to her. I'd vote for her.

I'm not contradicting, but just want to make sure that she isn't alluring only because the others are so revolting... ?

 

[KimDracula]

No, she's pretty great in any context.

 

[Snappo]

No, she's pretty great in any context.

Thanks for the reply! I'm intrigued... can you cite a few upstanding positions and accomplishments relevant to today's most pressing national concerns?

 

[CuckFumbustion]

I think the Office of Presidency should be shared by THREE individual parties at once, in the form of three individuals at once. They will either reach a consensus for every decision, or die trying... no hung jury. The position of VP will be rendered obsolete and molded into the three.

Once upon a time they had something similar to that to filter and expedite these types of decisions. I believe they used to call it congress. Sorry, Had to go for the cheap joke. Used the same joke when there was a discussion of using a Super-congress for the budget of 2011.

Three reps. one from each party. I do see the King Soloman type dynamic of decision making that would occur if 3 people were 'forced to share the decision' in such a manner. So perhaps Left, Centrist, Right?

I was trying to avoid disparaging Sanders more than I was minimizing Warren. I think she's a great leader for the Democrats going forward and I think she's got a lot of substance to her. I'd vote for her.

Wasn't getting into the disparaging aspect either. Understood. My question was towards her qualifications and substance or anything notable. Which for me stemmed from my VP question and the CBC. She was on Jon Stewart enough times. Still wasn't prepared for that article.

When a politician or representative can side with a rationale and move on it, when it would be normally be considered politically disadvantageous or categorical to no other advantage other than siding with fact based reality. It did make my day. And, yes. I want prove it does exist as a thing to point to cynics. Not every issue is necessarily driven by external/internal influences.

Edit
+1 on being intrigued. @KimDracula Yes, I would like to hear more from you and from anybody about her they would like to share. TX

 

[TelFiRE]

I don't know what you're talking about. Violent extremist rhetoric? I was just pointing out that IMO electing Trump, Cruz or Rubio would be bad for our country and would lead to a decline in American society. I don't think we should actually kill them LOL.

Look, there are many people who think any of the three above mentioned candidates would make an outstanding commander and chief...I'm just not one of them. Everyone is free to have their own opinion in this thread. If you want to voice your political opinion.. Then that's great, but to jump in the thread and accuse me of spewing " Violent Extremist Rhetoric" actually makes no sense and is really not cool

So, let me get this straight. You think that when Trump speaks in extremes, it is hyperbolic, disgusting, and unbecoming of a leader. But when you do it, it is okay and totally acceptable? You don't see the hypocrisy here?

I'm sorry, but "they must be stopped at all costs" is violent, extreme rhetoric and it does nothing to raise the level of dialog. I dislike all the Republicans on stage very much, but I refrain from using hateful, violence-based rhetoric to express my distaste for them. If you truly find it "really not cool" that I would simply point out that even though I agree with you, you are lowering the level of dialog, well I'm terribly sorry that's how you view the world.

 

[CarolKing]

@TelFiRE Chill Dude isn't running for president so it's a non issue. He's only commenting on an Internet website/message board.

Edit
I'm not sure if you are looking for an argument because I'm not.

 

[TelFiRE]

@TelFiRE Chill Dude isn't running for president so it's a none issue.

I don't understand this comment. Only people who are running for president should be civil? I legitimately don't understand where you're coming from, help me here.

I feel like what I'm pointing out here isn't that controversial. Maybe I'm just not communicating well. I'm saying that we don't raise the level of political dialog in this country by fighting fire with fire when it comes to rhetoric. Many on the left are extremely upset with the hyperbole going on during the debates on the right, but go on to use their own hyperbole extensively against the right. I don't think making statements like "they must be stopped at all costs" brings the country closer together, I think it very clearly brings it further apart. And I just don't even see what the alternative line of thinking would be. If you have one, please share, I am interested in dialog, not reading paragraphs about how I am wrong to be posting my opinion.

 

[cybrguy]

Thanks for the reply! I'm intrigued... can you cite a few upstanding positions and accomplishments relevant to today's most pressing national concerns?

The CFPB (Consumer Financial Protection Bureau) is her baby. She was supposed to run it, but the rethugs got nasty about it and did everything they could to kill it. Then when Obama chose someone else to run it they backed off. Warren said FU to them and ran for the senate and won. She is now in a better position to make a difference and to effect change than from on the bureau.

I really don't think she has any interest in the White House, whichever job.

 

[CarolKing]

If the republicans gets into office there's s lot of society's gains over the years could be taken away. Many here are worried about that.

They talked about the other night of having a women's right to have an abortion taken away. Rubio and Cruz spoke several times regarding that. Also what about the right to marry who you please. What about legal and medical cannabis. We are on the cusp of many wonderful things in our country. I would hate any gains that we have made as a society to be lost.

 

[cybrguy]

If the republicans gets into office there's s lot of society's gains over the years could be taken away. They talked about the other night of having a women's right to have an abortion taken away. Rubio and Cruz spoke several times regarding that. Also what about the right to marry who you please.

If this is of great concern to you (as it is to me) than who replaces Scalia is critical. A more liberal judge replacing him will likely eliminate the concern over Roe v Wade for the near future. It may also allow American to be less afraid of losing their ability to vote as well.