2016 US Presidential election thread - Page 171

Reece · 08-14-16, 07:55 PM

Quote:

I prefer an outsider a bit less, well Trump, but if he disrupts the system I could live with his personal failings.

Although I'm not a US citizen I agree, I think Hilary would be a total disaster, Trump, well you have to admit, it would be interesting!!

Oberon · 08-15-16, 06:50 AM

There's interesting...and then there's 'interesting'.

Remember that old curse.

Commander Wallace · 08-15-16, 07:04 AM

The election between Clinton and Trump rolls around in a few months. If there were a third candidate on the ballot named " None of the Above ", Clinton and Trump would lose by a landslide.

STEED · 08-15-16, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Commander Wallace

The election between Clinton and Trump rolls around in a few months. If there were a third candidate on the ballot named " None of the Above ", Clinton and Trump would lose by a landslide.

We could do with that option here.

vienna · 08-15-16, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus

The Founding Dudes warned us about political parties. Seems like they knew what they were writing about.

...

Founding Dudes? You mean these cool and crazy cats?:

What is interesting is how the same people who are supposedly so upset with duplicity, ethical deficiencies, lying, incompetence, and all the other flaws and faults they see in government have chosen to support Trump as a panacea for those woes when he is the poster child for what is wrong in the US. On top of all his legion of faults, he is the epitome of the much reviled One-Percenters they say they oppose and want to see brought to account. If you were to list out all the cons of the One-Percenters, Trump would score a solid 100% all down the list. It would seem their solution to the excesses on the 1% is to place one of the very worst into the highest office of the land and the most powerful in the world. Basically, what the situation seems to be is this: let's have the asylum run by the biggest Bull Goose Looney of the bunch...

I'm all for the "None Of The Above" option, particularly, if the NOTA vote is the majority, another election would be held forbidding any of the candidates in the first go-round to run. Come November, I'm still either going to write-in a name or just skip voting for President on the ballot...

<O>

Platapus · 08-15-16, 04:41 PM

Unfortunately, in the US, our elections are decided on a plurality not a majority. The exception is the Electoral College.

With only about 60% of voters caring about who is and ain't president, it is probably a good thing that our elections are based on a plurality of votes and not a majority. No one would get elected if they needed a majority.

Perhaps if we made voting mandatory and made election day a holiday we might get a majority. But even mandatory voting does not ensure a majority as a lot of people might cast a null vote.

vienna · 08-15-16, 05:27 PM

The Presidential/Vice-Presidential debates are still to come; has anyone else noticed that Trump may be laying the groundwork for a bailout on the debates? He has quite recently made noises about the scheduling of the debates, saying they are scheduled opposite some NFL games and arguing the schedules would cut into the viewership of the debates; he even went so far as to claim he had received a letter from the NFL expressing the same concerns; however, in true Trump fashion, the existence of any such letter or concern from the NFL was denied by the NFL, catching Trump in yet another baldfaced lie. Failing on this tack, he shifted to making complaints about the organizing of the debates, claiming the organizers were unfairly conspiring against his campaign; the main problem with this claim is the governing body for the debates, the Commission On Presidential Debates, is a non-profit, non-partisan commission whose leadership and membership is made up of equal numbers from both the GOP and the DEMs (in fact, the chairmanship of the Commission is dual-held simultaneously by one GOP and one DEM Chairman) and the Commission itself is a joint effort by the parties; the possibility of one party or the other to exert undue influence or control is rather farfetched...

What seems to be occurring with Trump's complaints is he may be using a well-worn tactic to either avoid the debates entirely or exculpate any possible shortcomings he may experience if he actually does go through with the debates. It is akin to an athlete or team going into a game or match, fearing they may suffer a loss or embarrassment, and preempting possible repercussions by trying to blame the field or the organizers before the match even starts. Watching and listening to Trump over the past couple of weeks or so, in regard to the upcoming debates, gives a sense he is not very keen on the idea. It may be interesting to see what his next moves may be as the debate time near and, if he does show up at the first debates and does less than well, if he will find some way to discontinue...

<O>

vienna · 08-15-16, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus

Unfortunately, in the US, our elections are decided on a plurality not a majority. The exception is the Electoral College.

With only about 60% of voters caring about who is and ain't president, it is probably a good thing that our elections are based on a plurality of votes and not a majority. No one would get elected if they needed a majority.

Perhaps if we made voting mandatory and made election day a holiday we might get a majority. But even mandatory voting does not ensure a majority as a lot of people might cast a null vote.

What you say is, sadly, true. When the seasonal debate about abandoning the Electoral College comes up, situations such as we are facing now tend to favor the retention of the EC. The old saying goes: "People get the government they deserve". I don't think we have done anything to really deserve the mess this election will spit out as a government for the next four years...

<O>

Mr Quatro · 08-15-16, 09:01 PM

Looking forward to these debates more than any others ...

should be quite a show especially the last one in Las Vegas on a non-football night.

Monday September 26, 2016
First presidential debate
Location: Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY

Sunday, October 9, 2016
Second presidential debate
Location: Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO

Wednesday, October 19, 2016
Third presidential debate
Location: University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV

Time – The debates will air from 9pm to 10:30pm ET
(8pm – 9:30pm CT, 7pm – 8:30pm MT, 6pm – 7:30pm PT

Mr Quatro · 08-15-16, 09:05 PM

Note for the first debate to include:

Quote:

Superdome Anniversary (Sept. 26) – Falcons vs. Saints on MNF reopened the Louisiana Superdome in 2006 following Hurricane Katrina. The same teams meet again at the Dome for the event’s 10-year anniversary.

AVGWarhawk · 08-16-16, 11:31 AM

My gut is screaming, "Trump is not interested in be POTUS."

vienna · 08-16-16, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

My gut is screaming, "Trump is not interested in be POTUS."

He certainly is acting as if he doesn't really want the office; he has given very, very little to no attention to the 'battleground' states, instead going to DEM states the GOP has very little to no chance of ever winning and, in the process, solidified the DEM vote against him; he has not spent any money on TV ads in the battleground states or, apparently, in any other states, letting the DEMs get a big leg up on their efforts; add to this his many, many public statements seemingly flying in the face of what would be expected of a serious Presidential candidate and his failure to seriously address the issues, and his campaign come across as almost a parody of an actual campaign; sometimes I wonder if the GOP and the whole US is being punked on a massive scale; right now I'm leaning towards writing in Pat Paulson's name; yeah, I know he's dead, but he's a much more viable candidate than the stiffs the GOP and DEMs have put up...

<O>

Commander Wallace · 08-16-16, 03:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vienna

He certainly is acting as if he doesn't really want the office; he has given very, very little to no attention to the 'battleground' states, instead going to DEM states the GOP has very little to no chance of ever winning and, in the process, solidified the DEM vote against him; he has no spent any money on TV ads in the battleground states or, apparently, in any other states, letting the DEMs get a big leg up on their efforts; add to this his many, many public statements seemingly flying in the face of what would be expected of a serious Presidential candidate and his failure to seriously address the issues, and his campaign come across as almost a parody of an actual campaign; sometimes I wonder if the GOP and the whole US is being punked on a massive scale; right now I'm leaning towards writing in Pat Paulson's name; yeah, I know he's dead, but he's a much more viable candidate than the stiffs the GOP and DEMs have put up...

<O>

With everything you, AVGWarhawk and others have said, I'm wondering if Trump was never intended to be anything more than a plant to wreak havoc in the Republican party and cause a divide and rifts and thus hand the presidency to Clinton.

I'm sure " Wild Bill " is singing happy days are here again, thinking he may be back in the White House. I'm sure he's going crazy looking for monica's phone number too. At least, Cuban cigars are much cheaper these days.

Mr Quatro · 08-16-16, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Commander Wallace

With everything you, AVGWarhawk and others have said, I'm wondering if Trump was never intended to be anything more than a plant to wreak havoc in the Republican party and cause a divide and rifts and thus hand the presidency to Clinton.

I'm sure " Wild Bill " is singing happy days are here again, thinking he may be back in the White House. I'm sure he's going crazy looking for monica's phone number too. At least, Cuban cigars are much cheaper these days.

Nope! It's not a rigged deal ... the GOP downfall started with John McCain, choosing a women for VP didn't help, and then four more years for Mr rich man Romney to try and fail and now it's Trumps turn which would be a real hoot if he wins and snubs the GOP for being against him.

Time will tell ... he still has a chance don't turn out the lights till the fat lady (Hillary Clinton) sings

mapuc · 08-16-16, 06:34 PM

@ Commander Wallace

this sentence in you last post

"I'm wondering if Trump was never intended to be anything more than a plant to wreak havoc in the Republican party"

Made me remember what some Danish expert on American politics and a former Minister of Foreign affairs said in a program which are about politics abroad

The GOP has them self to blame it is their 4-8 years of anti-democrat poltics, where they have almost voted against everything Obama put up in Senat and in Congress, they have so to say by doing this created Trump and now they are where they are and they should look into them self instead of pointing finger at their own creation
(I can't remember every word what had been said among the debaters in that program, I have tried to remember as much as I could)

Markus

08-15-16, 04:41 PM	#2556
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,101 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	Unfortunately, in the US, our elections are decided on a plurality not a majority. The exception is the Electoral College. With only about 60% of voters caring about who is and ain't president, it is probably a good thing that our elections are based on a plurality of votes and not a majority. No one would get elected if they needed a majority. Perhaps if we made voting mandatory and made election day a holiday we might get a majority. But even mandatory voting does not ensure a majority as a lot of people might cast a null vote. __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.

08-15-16, 05:27 PM	#2557
vienna Navy Seal Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Anywhere but the here & now... Posts: 7,555 Downloads: 85 Uploads: 0	The Presidential/Vice-Presidential debates are still to come; has anyone else noticed that Trump may be laying the groundwork for a bailout on the debates? He has quite recently made noises about the scheduling of the debates, saying they are scheduled opposite some NFL games and arguing the schedules would cut into the viewership of the debates; he even went so far as to claim he had received a letter from the NFL expressing the same concerns; however, in true Trump fashion, the existence of any such letter or concern from the NFL was denied by the NFL, catching Trump in yet another baldfaced lie. Failing on this tack, he shifted to making complaints about the organizing of the debates, claiming the organizers were unfairly conspiring against his campaign; the main problem with this claim is the governing body for the debates, the Commission On Presidential Debates, is a non-profit, non-partisan commission whose leadership and membership is made up of equal numbers from both the GOP and the DEMs (in fact, the chairmanship of the Commission is dual-held simultaneously by one GOP and one DEM Chairman) and the Commission itself is a joint effort by the parties; the possibility of one party or the other to exert undue influence or control is rather farfetched... What seems to be occurring with Trump's complaints is he may be using a well-worn tactic to either avoid the debates entirely or exculpate any possible shortcomings he may experience if he actually does go through with the debates. It is akin to an athlete or team going into a game or match, fearing they may suffer a loss or embarrassment, and preempting possible repercussions by trying to blame the field or the organizers before the match even starts. Watching and listening to Trump over the past couple of weeks or so, in regard to the upcoming debates, gives a sense he is not very keen on the idea. It may be interesting to see what his next moves may be as the debate time near and, if he does show up at the first debates and does less than well, if he will find some way to discontinue... <O> __________________ __________________________________________________ __

08-15-16, 09:01 PM	#2559
Mr Quatro Navy Seal Join Date: May 2013 Posts: 6,772 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Looking forward to these debates more than any others ... should be quite a show especially the last one in Las Vegas on a non-football night. Monday September 26, 2016 First presidential debate Location: Hofstra University, Hempstead, NY Sunday, October 9, 2016 Second presidential debate Location: Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO Wednesday, October 19, 2016 Third presidential debate Location: University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV Time – The debates will air from 9pm to 10:30pm ET (8pm – 9:30pm CT, 7pm – 8:30pm MT, 6pm – 7:30pm PT __________________ pla•teau noun a relatively stable level, period, or condition a level of attainment or achievement Lord help me get to the next plateau ..

08-16-16, 11:31 AM	#2561
AVGWarhawk Lucky Jack Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: In a 1954 Buick. Posts: 27,818 Downloads: 90 Uploads: 0	My gut is screaming, "Trump is not interested in be POTUS." __________________ “You're painfully alive in a drugged and dying culture.” ― Richard Yates, Revolutionary Road

08-15-16, 06:50 AM	#2552
Oberon Lucky Jack Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 25,976 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 20	There's interesting...and then there's 'interesting'. Remember that old curse.

08-15-16, 07:04 AM	#2553
Commander Wallace Silent Hunter Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Under the sea in an Octupus garden in the shade Posts: 4,978 Downloads: 360 Uploads: 0	The election between Clinton and Trump rolls around in a few months. If there were a third candidate on the ballot named " None of the Above ", Clinton and Trump would lose by a landslide.

08-16-16, 06:34 PM	#2565
mapuc Fleet Admiral Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Denmark Posts: 19,211 Downloads: 37 Uploads: 0	@ Commander Wallace this sentence in you last post "I'm wondering if Trump was never intended to be anything more than a plant to wreak havoc in the Republican party" Made me remember what some Danish expert on American politics and a former Minister of Foreign affairs said in a program which are about politics abroad The GOP has them self to blame it is their 4-8 years of anti-democrat poltics, where they have almost voted against everything Obama put up in Senat and in Congress, they have so to say by doing this created Trump and now they are where they are and they should look into them self instead of pointing finger at their own creation (I can't remember every word what had been said among the debaters in that program, I have tried to remember as much as I could) Markus