Great article from Jared Kushner

[mjr]

My turn to roll my eyes in amusement.

Certainly your prerogative.

[mjr]

But for fark sakes at least she's competent

Except when it comes to top secret emails.

I wish there were more options on the table but this is your two party system at work. But you can complain about the brakes not working properly after you steer the car away from the cliff.

How many times must I say it? I'm not voting for either of the two Yahoos.

That does not, however, mean I can't call you out on your shit.

And I can certainly roll my eyes at yours.

[s_stabeler]

To answer mjr's statement about Hilary:
Hilary Clinton is no saint. She probably shouldn't have used a private email server. however, even if she really was using her email server to avoid scrutiny of her email, it pales in comparison to how bad Trump would be.
to give examples of what a quick look a wikipedia gives:
1. New York Times article on Trump- This article has conservative scholars saying Trump doesn't even care about limits on executive authority.including those opposed to Obama. That is dangerous since a president willing to utterly ignore the Constitution could do a lot of damage.(even if Obama has exceeded his authority at times, Trump has outright said he would exceed it further.
2. conservatives are saying that his tax plan would cut taxes for the top 1%- and would increase debt by 80% of GDP, completely offsetting the incentive effect of the tax cuts. So, he would run up the national debt to give money to the rich. Enough said.(Tax Policy Center(they're conservative, by the way)
3. his position on tarriffs would- and again, this is from people across the spectrum- hurt lower-income people the most.
4.he has called for the arrest of protesters as a tool to prevent protests

all in all, Trump would be a massive disaster as a President, while Clinton would at worst be slightly bad. that is why people oppose Trump.

[mjr]

To answer mjr's statement about Hilary:
Hilary Clinton is no saint. She probably shouldn't have used a private email server. however, even if she really was using her email server to avoid scrutiny of her email, it pales in comparison to how bad Trump would be.
to give examples of what a quick look a wikipedia gives:
1. New York Times article on Trump- This article has conservative scholars saying Trump doesn't even care about limits on executive authority.including those opposed to Obama. That is dangerous since a president willing to utterly ignore the Constitution could do a lot of damage.(even if Obama has exceeded his authority at times, Trump has outright said he would exceed it further.
2. conservatives are saying that his tax plan would cut taxes for the top 1%- and would increase debt by 80% of GDP, completely offsetting the incentive effect of the tax cuts. So, he would run up the national debt to give money to the rich. Enough said.(Tax Policy Center(they're conservative, by the way)
3. his position on tarriffs would- and again, this is from people across the spectrum- hurt lower-income people the most.
4.he has called for the arrest of protesters as a tool to prevent protests

all in all, Trump would be a massive disaster as a President, while Clinton would at worst be slightly bad. that is why people oppose Trump.

Now we're getting somewhere. Thanks for this. Those are reasonable points, and I shan't argue them, because I really can't disagree with your take.

Which is another reason I'm not voting Trump.

[TheHuckster]

s_stabeler, I would also add that he has flip-flopped on just about every issue. He started off with a very rich-friendly tax plan, and then at some other point he talked about a progressive income tax. And now I'm sure he's back to talking about tax breaks for the 1% again. He's made anti-war and isolationist statements while at the same time vowing to go out to the mideast and defeat ISIS. A lot of what he says is likely hyperbole, but he knows it riles up the supporters so he will continue to say it.

And his rhetoric has among the worst Politifact ratings for anyone who ran for president. And whether or not Politifact has any sort of bias (I've found them to at least try to be bipartisan, but every publication has its flaws) doesn't detract from the fact that Trump has been blowing hot air that could melt the poles... on Mars.

Granted, I'm not a fan of Hillary either, but this thread isn't about her. It's about a blowhard who's made an ass circus out of an already dismal political climate which is going to further polarize the country and foster an even greater aura of hate and distain between political lines.

To be honest, I can't even say what will happen if Trump becomes president. On one hand, he might declare war on Mexico after its president refuses to pay for the wall, and manage to get us nuked by the UK after he taunts them for becoming "consumed by Islam". On the other hand, we might find that everything he said during his candidacy was simply a ploy to get the stupidest voters to believe everything he says and do something completely different, like declare Atlantic City the new capital and rename it Trumptown.

[Gravekeeper]

Except when it comes to top secret emails.

Which, again, is a drop in the bucket compared to the other option.

How many times must I say it? I'm not voting for either of the two Yahoos.

Which doesn't help. Staging a protest vote and/or taking your ball and going home just helps this lunacy ( look what it got the UK ). If Trump is not resoundingly rejected we're going to see the same or even worse of a fucking circus from the GOP in another 4 years.

They need a kick in the nuts. For the sake of both sides. This bullshit where they're wandering around just trying to pretend Trump doesn't exist or supporting him despite condemning him in the same breath? All for the sake of partisanship? That has got to stop.

The GOP is very much at a crossroads right now. They're dealing with the monster they themselves created and is eating the party from the inside out. If Trump loses it'll be a long time before they get anywhere near the White House again. If Trump wins it will be an even longer time.

And either way they need to rein it in and stop sticking their dick in crazy for votes before it completely destroys the party.

To be honest, I can't even say what will happen if Trump becomes president.

Honestly? I doubt his presidency would last overly long. He's a complete narcissist. He doesn't want to be the president he wants to win the presidency. Once he accomplishes that the novelty will either wear off or he'll make it 6 months tops before being impeached.

Either way he'll leave the American political machine a smoldering wreck along with America's global reputation. It'll take decades to recover. Obama is the only reason the US even salvaged any of its global reputation to begin with. Replacing Obama with a cartoon character that walked off the pages of a kid's comic in North Korea would be the final nail in the coffin.

[Talon]

Once [Trump] accomplishes that the novelty will either wear off or he'll make it 6 months tops before being impeached.

Never figured you'd be an optimist regarding American politics

As I see it President Trump would be no more than a figurehead. He would continue his phoney macho man posturing in office, while the real power and decision-making would rest with other barely-accountable people. Remember George Bush and Dick "I'm not a member of the Executive Branch" Cheney?

[mjr]

Which, again, is a drop in the bucket compared to the other option.

Right...because being incompetent with classified emails won't do anything except potentially give up secrets and/or put our national security at risk.

Other than that...

Which doesn't help. Staging a protest vote and/or taking your ball and going home just helps this lunacy ( look what it got the UK ). If Trump is not resoundingly rejected we're going to see the same or even worse of a fucking circus from the GOP in another 4 years.

Regardless of who I vote for, it's not going to matter. Texas is going Republican, and Hillary's probably gonna win the Presidency anyway. The "Clinton Machine" will see to it. Because, you know, it's "Her turn". She'll be a 1-termer, though.

The current political state is why I bought the t-shirt that says "Choose the Form of the Destructor" and has a picture of the Donkey and the Elephant. It pretty much sums up my feeling about the whole thing. Honestly, if I had my way, I'd boot all 535 out and have the US elect an entirely new crop.

I've also got my eye on a t-shirt that says, "Vote Whig. They couldn't possibly be worse."

The GOP is very much at a crossroads right now. They're dealing with the monster they themselves created and is eating the party from the inside out. If Trump loses it'll be a long time before they get anywhere near the White House again. If Trump wins it will be an even longer time.

Disagree. If Trump loses (which he probably will -- see above), that might be the kick in the ass the GOP needs. One of their big problems is that they're not necessarily as "effective" as getting their positive messages out, so everything looks like a negative.

And either way they need to rein it in and stop sticking their dick in crazy for votes before it completely destroys the party.

Maybe the party needs to be destroyed. Maybe that will open the doors for a viable 3rd party to really shake things up.

Honestly? I doubt his presidency would last overly long. He's a complete narcissist. He doesn't want to be the president he wants to win the presidency. Once he accomplishes that the novelty will either wear off or he'll make it 6 months tops before being impeached.

To this point, I saw something today that said he might just win and then just kinda resign the Presidency. Don't know if it's true, as it was someone speculating, but thought that was interesting.

[Gravekeeper]

Right...because being incompetent with classified emails won't do anything except potentially give up secrets and/or put our national security at risk.

Other than that...

If nothing else Clinton doesn't make the same mistake twice. As for national security....in the hands of Trump? My god.

Regardless of who I vote for, it's not going to matter. Texas is going Republican, and Hillary's probably gonna win the Presidency anyway.

Like I said though, margins matter when you need to send a message.

Honestly, if I had my way, I'd boot all 535 out and have the US elect an entirely new crop.

I wish.

Disagree. If Trump loses (which he probably will -- see above), that might be the kick in the ass the GOP needs. One of their big problems is that they're not necessarily as "effective" as getting their positive messages out, so everything looks like a negative.

They have doubled down so many times on the crazy and the obstructionism they don't have any positive messages left to send out. That's precisely the problem. The only messages they send out these days are coded directly at specific groups that they've been courting the last decade. Its reached a point where they have no message to send out to anyone else.

Trump essentially just beat them at their own game by dispensing with the dog whistles and the subtleties.

Maybe the party needs to be destroyed. Maybe that will open the doors for a viable 3rd party to really shake things up.

It does need to be destroyed, yes. Its the only way the right is ever going to find its way back to the road. The current crop of GOP leaders has a pathological inability to admit fault or responsibility for anything. Even in the face of impending orange doom they can't seem to admit they have screwed the pooch and need to stop this before its too late.

The entire problem behind the GOP's clown car primary is that the party as a whole isn't set up to produce leaders anymore. It produces hyper-partisan lockstep followers. Its been ever more feverishly applying No True Scotsman to itself till everyone has the same script and is just competing to see who can yell it the loudest.

Any who veers off script is branded a traitor and tossed to the sidelines.

[HYHYBT]

The worst Hillary will do is give you a third term of Obama without any of the charm or charisma while compulsively hiding office memos under her mattress.

Gotta save that one!

[s_stabeler]

s_stabeler, I would also add that he has flip-flopped on just about every issue. He started off with a very rich-friendly tax plan, and then at some other point he talked about a progressive income tax. And now I'm sure he's back to talking about tax breaks for the 1% again. He's made anti-war and isolationist statements while at the same time vowing to go out to the mideast and defeat ISIS. A lot of what he says is likely hyperbole, but he knows it riles up the supporters so he will continue to say it.

I don't disagree, but my post was a reaction to mjr's claiming Hilary was no better than trump, so I was giving a laundry-list of ways Trump is far worse than Hilary. (hence why I used primarily conservative sources- I wanted to use sources that mjr couldn't claim were subject to liberal bias. If even Obama's opponents are saying you would be worse than Obama... ( I'm not saying I believe Obama was a bad president as such (I think he's had to struggle against opponents who at first took advantage of his desire to be bipartisan, then by the time Obama had enough of their shenanigans, they had sufficient support in Congress to be a pain in the backside without needing to play on Obama's good nature.(the various abuses of filibustering ( and yes, filibustering is abused by both sides- it doesn't make it right. It badly needs reform ( off the top of my head, a filibuster should need to be sustained by an actual congressman actually speaking on-topic, rather than the current system, whereby you just need to declare you're filibustering the bill. It used to be an important check on filibustering that you actually did have to speak on the bill without a break to maintain the filibuster, since the idea was that it became a test of the determination of the person speaking against the determination of those that wanted the bill to proceed. (basically, Cloture was never intended as the sole mechanism for defeating a filibuster. It was intended as a "OK, I think we all know which way we are going to vote, lets get on with it" measure. The intended mechanism for defeating a filibuster was waiting until the congressman holding the floor either runs out of things to say, or otherwise has to stop talking for long enough for the floor to be given to someone else.)