2016 Election Thread Part Deux

[DC_Vol]

"the stage is already set for some fierce debates between jeb and hillary in october 2016"

-carlos86, june 2015

lol

 

[PKT_VOL]

Not going to happen.

If it does, some folks should re-think the whole conspiracy theory folks.

It wouldn't be a conspiracy. It would be a mix of the self-inflicted mortification of the GOP and the stupidity of the American electorate.

I read today that Bernie is part of her plan to get new folks to register as democrats then bow out and Hillary get the votes.

A lot if Bernie people despise Hillary.

 

[Obsessed]

It wouldn't be a conspiracy. It would be a mix of the self-inflicted mortification of the GOP and the stupidity of the American electorate.



A lot if Bernie people despise Hillary.

You are naive

It is all part of the plan. They may hate her... But if it comes down to Hillary or Trump??

I'll go on record: if Hillary wins, the NWO exists. The Illuminati is real.

Period...

 

[PKT_VOL]

You are naive

It is all part of the plan. They may hate her... But if it comes down to Hillary or Trump??

I'll go on record: if Hillary wins, the NWO exists. The Illuminati is real.

Period...

You have way too much faith in your fellow citizens. They really are as dumb as they appear. Often times, even more than you could imagine.

 

[roosterjbh]

You are naive

It is all part of the plan. They may hate her... But if it comes down to Hillary or Trump??

I'll go on record: if Hillary wins, the NWO exists. The Illuminati is real.

Period...

Lolololol

 

[AM64]

When I talking about the electoral demographic shift since 1984 this is what I mean. This is the electoral shift from 1980 to 2012. All the so called " Reagan Democrats" went on to vote fro H.W. Bush one last time in 1988, vote and voted Dem from that day forward. This election depends on white college grads, woman, and the turnout of minorities for Clinton. All three of those demographics favor Clinton dramatically.

Why would a white college grad be a demographic supporting Clinton? I can understand a liberal arts major being liberal and supporting Clinton or Sanders, but certainly not most STEM graduates. Free lunches, the Easter bunny, and socialistic ideas tend to rapidly lose credibility when one deals in fact.

 

[roosterjbh]

.

 

[roosterjbh]

Why would a white college grad be a demographic supporting Clinton? I can understand a liberal arts major being liberal and supporting Clinton or Sanders, but certainly not most STEM graduates. Free lunches, the Easter bunny, and socialistic ideas tend to rapidly lose credibility when one deals in fact.

In a study done by Pew Research Group only 6% of scientists surveyed identified as Republican, compared to 55% Democrat.

Section 4: Scientists, Politics and Religion | Pew Research Center

 

[Sin City Vol]

She will drop like a rock the longer she talks, and when all the Clinton Foundation pay for play at the State Dept comes out.

People won't care about any of that. Look when W got re-elected, people everywhere talked about him being a good Christian man, men wanted to have a beer with him.... No one gave a $$$$ about his policies

 

[AM64]

In a study done by Pew Research Group only 6% of scientists surveyed identified as Republican, compared to 55% Democrat.

Section 4: Scientists, Politics and Religion | Pew Research Center

Interesting numbers! But this, "About three-quarters of scientists (77%) believe the claims about the Bush administration are true, while just 6% say they are false" really makes me wonder. If you start off a survey in a biased manner like rubbing salt in the wounds (such as the science/religion debacle during the Bush administration), then you can easily poison the entire survey. Throughout an engineering career, I can't say I've ever heard many engineers supporting liberal ideas, but then research scientists supported by government funding might see things differently - particularly if their ability to conduct research was controlled by the religious bias of the administration. Maybe, too, quite a few of us are just outliers, or maybe there aren't as many neat little categories as pollsters would like to believe.

 

[Gramps]

You are naive

It is all part of the plan. They may hate her... But if it comes down to Hillary or Trump??

I'll go on record: if Hillary wins, the NWO exists. The Illuminati is real.

Period...

Dear Lord,

Please give OB the knowledge to realize these conspiracy theory articles he has been reading are simply theories, not reality.

Amen

 

[volprof]

Do you fellers realize that a major American political party is about to be forced to nominate a candidate who thinks nuclear weapons can be used in conflict like a common grunt uses his M4 carbine?

This is uncharted territory. No American president has ever been so loose with discussion about nuclear weapons use.

Forget about trusting this guy with the 3 AM phone call; I don't even trust the person that trusts a person who trusts Trump with a 3 AM phone call.

It's high past time we, as a nation, started treating this character's performance less like one befitting a reality TV show and more like what it truly is: a presidential campaign. A serious presidential campaign.

 

[Grand Vol]

It's high past time we, as a nation, started treating this character's performance less like one befitting a reality TV show and more like what it truly is: a presidential campaign. A serious presidential campaign.

That point is long since passed VP. Early on it might have worked, but let's face facts here, Trump has run a wonderful campaign that's invoked all sorts of feelings in voters with little to no substance to back them up. But the anger of the voters won't be swept aside by simple facts like that. They're angry at the "establishment," they're pissed at the PC culture and they're heading to the polls for something different just like they did in 2008.

And they won't be denied.

 

[Grand Vol]

Want to know why this election is so important?

Queen 'refuses' to come back to London to meet President Obama

THE Queen is refusing to return to Buckingham Palace to meet President Obama next month, it is claimed. Instead he’ll travel the 22 mile journey from London to Windsor Castle in his armoured seven-ton limo, accompanied by his massive security team.

And more:

Queen refuses to return to London to meet Barack Obama, EPHRAIM HARDCASTLE writes  | Daily Mail Online

He’s [Obama] due to stand alongside the PM and urge Britain to stay in the EU.
‘But he’d be well advised not to give a pro-EU sermon over lunch after the row about the Queen supporting Brexit,’ says my source.

Because when things like this happen with America's strongest ally, one has to wonder just how far the rift has gotten with other nations.

 

[Obsessed]

Dear Lord,

Please give OB the knowledge to realize these conspiracy theory articles he has been reading are simply theories, not reality.

Amen

You honestly believe the super rich don't pull the strings in DC and around the world?

90% of what we discuss as "politics" is some form of manipulation by the super rich to to get a desired result. Wether it's a war or simply policy change.

I don't think it's all that far fetched to believe that there are puppet masters....

 

[volprof]

That point is long since passed VP. Early on it might have worked, but let's face facts here, Trump has run a wonderful campaign that's invoked all sorts of feelings in voters with little to no substance to back them up. But the anger of the voters won't be swept aside by simple facts like that. They're angry at the "establishment," they're pissed at the PC culture and they're heading to the polls for something different just like they did in 2008.

And they won't be denied.

I've never heard a (soon to be) major presidential candidate reference the use of nuclear weapons as if they're merely things used for special effects on an action film set or something. Hell, even the Russians don't speak that glibly about the use of nuclear weapons, outside of Little Nikita. That's some Kim Jung-Un stupid crap right there, and it is unbecoming at best and most disturbing at worst for a potential American president to suggest.

I don't want to see it, because I don't want to see M1-Abrams rolling down Pennsylvania Ave. as T-72s did down Red Square during the Russian Constitutional Crisis, but, if this clown actually attempts at least half of the stupid **** he has suggested he will do, I sincerely hope our military acts upon its oaths to this nation above any loony individual who just happens to be Commander-in-Chief.

I have heard several well-established military/intelligence people suggest that, if Trump is actually dumb enough to have military personnel do the things he has said (and you can now safely add the use of nuclear weapons in the War on Terror to the list of the inanity) that they will refuse. If he is that dumb, I sincerely hope they do, and I hope that we then can him without the military having to get involved.

And if anyone thinks I'm overreacting, then they need to actually listen to what this guy has been saying. And I would counter them with the question: why do you not take him seriously if you're going to vote for him?

 

[Grand Vol]

I've never heard a (soon to be) major presidential candidate reference the use of nuclear weapons as if they're merely things used for special effects on an action film set or something. Hell, even the Russians don't speak that glibly about the use of nuclear weapons, outside of Little Nikita. That's some Kim Jung-Un stupid crap right there, and it is unbecoming at best and most disturbing at worst for a potential American president to suggest.

I don't want to see it, because I don't want to see M1-Abrams rolling down Pennsylvania Ave. as T-72s did down Red Square during the Russian Constitutional Crisis, but, if this clown actually attempts at least half of the stupid **** he has suggested he will do, I sincerely hope our military acts upon its oaths to this nation above any loony individual who just happens to be Commander-in-Chief.

I have heard several well-established military/intelligence people suggest that, if Trump is actually dumb enough to have military personnel do the things he has said (and you can now safely add the use of nuclear weapons in the War on Terror to the list of the inanity) that they will refuse. If he is that dumb, I sincerely hope they do, and I hope that we then can him without the military having to get involved.

And if anyone thinks I'm overreacting, then they need to actually listen to what this guy has been saying. And I would counter them with the question: why do you not take him seriously if you're going to vote for him?

I guess I missed the spot where he advocated the use of nuclear weapons as a first option.

 

[volprof]

I guess I missed the spot where he advocated the use of nuclear weapons as a first option.

My language was poorly worded, but my point remains the same nonetheless.

Like with so many things Trump, I mostly write them off as just lip service to the common man's craving for strength, power, and "winning." That he's simply just saying these things because that's what his supporters want to hear and that he won't actually do them.

The problem is that I'm finding myself having to make this rationalization far too much. Where does it end? Where do we put aside the antics, draw a line, and then take this guy seriously? How do we decipher fact from fiction?

 

[Gramps]

You honestly believe the super rich don't pull the strings in DC and around the world?

90% of what we discuss as "politics" is some form of manipulation by the super rich to to get a desired result. Wether it's a war or simply policy change.

I don't think it's all that far fetched to believe that there are puppet masters....

That is a far cry than New World Order is coming if HC is elected BS.

I'll go on record: if Hillary wins, the NWO exists. The Illuminati is real.

Period...

 

[AirVol]

Haha.

I hope that my buddy Airvol finally comes out as a bigot. His first step is admitting he has a problem.

I do have a problem with all politicians. Guess I'm a bigot, there I said it. 😀

 

[carlos86]

"President Obama and John Kerry were a dream team for Vladimir Putin and Russia, but now they have an even better option. Donald Trump."

From Russia with love: why the Kremlin backs Trump | Reuters

 

[hog88]

My language was poorly worded, but my point remains the same nonetheless.

Like with so many things Trump, I mostly write them off as just lip service to the common man's craving for strength, power, and "winning." That he's simply just saying these things because that's what his supporters want to hear and that he won't actually do them.

The problem is that I'm finding myself having to make this rationalization far too much. Where does it end? Where do we put aside the antics, draw a line, and then take this guy seriously? How do we decipher fact from fiction?

Where do we do that with any of these candidates?

 

[2ez2dv8]

That point is long since passed VP. Early on it might have worked, but let's face facts here, Trump has run a wonderful campaign that's invoked all sorts of feelings in voters with little to no substance to back them up. But the anger of the voters won't be swept aside by simple facts like that. They're angry at the "establishment," they're pissed at the PC culture and they're heading to the polls for something different just like they did in 2008.

And they won't be denied.

Yep.

GOP take a good, long look into the mirror

 

[Grand Vol]

My language was poorly worded, but my point remains the same nonetheless.

Like with so many things Trump, I mostly write them off as just lip service to the common man's craving for strength, power, and "winning." That he's simply just saying these things because that's what his supporters want to hear and that he won't actually do them.

The problem is that I'm finding myself having to make this rationalization far too much. Where does it end? Where do we put aside the antics, draw a line, and then take this guy seriously? How do we decipher fact from fiction?

2016 Trump voter = 2008 Obama voter

Ever try a rational argument with an Obama voter around that timeframe?

 

[hog88]

"President Obama and John Kerry were a dream team for Vladimir Putin and Russia, but now they have an even better option. Donald Trump."

From Russia with love: why the Kremlin backs Trump | Reuters

If you half this much effort into attacking the truly dangerous candidate you might have some credibility.