2020 Presidential Race

#28,253
#28,253
LouderVol said:
Trump is your standard. You want "not Trump". Your entire admited political existence right now circles around "not Trump" to the point that getting you not to talk about Trump is a near impossibility.

Instead you could be aiming for the next Carter, Obama, Clinton, or whoever. But you arent. You have repeated ad nauseam you will be voting for whoever is not Trump, not who is the most closely aligned with your stances. By stepping away from any stance you might hold into "not Trump" territory you have abandoned your previously held standards, again lowering to them to Trump.

You need to consider it one big primary, which candidate do you actually want.
Click to expand...
I haven't even voted in the primary yet. Who are my choices?
And what is it you are suggesting I do?
 
#28,254
#28,254
hog88 said:
No, I'm just just saying she doesn't have the experience to be POTUS.

With her work history would you hire her to run a 100 mil corporation?
Click to expand...
She’s likely get an interview, depending on the specifics of the company.

What you said was that she would be a bad role model for young women, as VP, because she only got where she is because of her husband. Her career arc doesn’t support that. At all.

Her career prior to becoming First Lady shows that something about her has caught the attention of everyone she has worked for since leaving law school. She has been promoted into increasingly expanded administrative roles by at least three different organization and she has remained for extended periods of time in those roles, which could be evidence of competent performance.

Also, she has already been a salaried member of a board of directors for a 2 billion dollar corporation, so the suggestion that she isn’t qualified to run a 100 million dollar corporation isn’t really supported, either.

The idea that she just rode Barrack’s coattails may apply to her fame and name recognition, so maybe there’s some meat on the bone with regard to that, but I doubt demands for a president with a more proven record of competence are going to hold up to the revolutionary war era aerial dogfight of an election we’re about to witness.
 
#28,256
#28,256
luthervol said:
You create a bigger set of your own problems when you do not acknowledge that he belongs on the top of that list.
Talk about lowering your standards, that's the very definition.
We will just obviously continue to disagree. It will come as no great shock, but I'm not about to change my mind.
Click to expand...
How can you change anything you have obviously lost?
 
#28,259
#28,259
luthervol said:
It's less about experience and more about philosophy and priorities as far as I am concerned.
Click to expand...
In other words, they need to be a liberal. That's obviously your philosophy and where your priorities lie. Not in morals or character, but in politics. For all that you harp on Trump's character, what you really oppose is his politics. And that's fine. Just admit to it rather than deflecting. You can accept questionable morals and character as long as the person aligns with your political beliefs. Honestly, I'd guess there are plenty of conservative posters on here who are the same way.
 
#28,260
#28,260
Weezer said:
In other words, they need to be a liberal. That's obviously your philosophy and where your priorities lie. Not in morals or character, but in politics. For all that you harp on Trump's character, what you really oppose is his politics. And that's fine. Just admit to it rather than deflecting. You can accept questionable morals and character as long as the person aligns with your political beliefs. Honestly, I'd guess there are plenty of conservative posters on here who are the same way.
Click to expand...
There were 3 things listed: experience, which I said was secondary to me; and philosophy and priorities, which I listed as my criteria.
I think character and morals are encompassed in both philosophy and priorities, at least to a degree.
Now is it possible that a person could have high character and morals but differing philosophies and priorities than mine? possible
Now is it possible that a person could have weak character and morals but the same philosophies and priorities as mine? possilbe
Both are partially possible but highly unlikely.
Is it possible that a person from scenario one runs against a person from scenario two? possible, but extremely unlikely.
(The possibility of two highly unlikely events both occurring - is approaching that 300 year anomaly status)
Now if that next to impossible event did happen, what would I do? I would have to consider multiple variables.
If a Carter-like republican was running against a Trump-like dem, I would vote republican.
Luckily, that is a definitional impossibility.
 
Last edited:
#28,262
#28,262
Orange_Vol1321 said:
Click to expand...


That is so ridiculous. How naive and gullible is the intended audience?
Over the past four presidential elections, democrats will have had one white male candidate (25%). Read......diversity
Over the past four presidential elections, repubs will have had four white male candidates (100%). Read.......party of white males
 
#28,264
#28,264
luthervol said:
That is so ridiculous. How naive and gullible is the intended audience?
Over the past four presidential elections, democrats will have had one white male candidate (25%). Read......diversity
Over the past four presidential elections, repubs will have had four white male candidates (100%). Read.......party of white males
Click to expand...
Probably true, but this routine where Democrats get out of the race and then lecture the electorate for being racist and/or misogynist is dumb.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0nelilreb and MG1968
#28,265
#28,265
afb030520dAPR20200305064531.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#28,267
#28,267
luthervol said:
There were 3 things listed: experience, which I said was secondary to me; and philosophy and priorities, which I listed as my criteria.
I think character and morals are encompassed in both philosophy and priorities, at least to a degree.
Now is it possible that a person could have high character and morals but differing philosophies and priorities than mine? possible
Now is it possible that a person could have weak character and morals but the same philosophies and priorities as mine? possilbe
Both are partially possible but highly unlikely.
Is it possible that a person from scenario one runs against a person from scenario two? possible, but extremely unlikely.
(The possibility of two highly unlikely events both occurring - is approaching that 300 year anomaly status)
Now if that next to impossible event did happen, what would I do? I would have to consider multiple variables.
If a Carter-like republican was running against a Trump-like dem, I would vote republican.
Luckily, that is a definitional impossibility.
Click to expand...
So, IYO, most Republicans are immoral while most Democrats are pillars of virtue. Certainly seems to be what you're saying. You may be even more delusional than I give you credit for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbwhhs, Sea Ray and SpaceCoastVol
#28,268
#28,268
Weezer said:
So, IYO, most Republicans are immoral while most Democrats are pillars of virtue. Certainly seems to be what you're saying. You may be even more delusional than I give you credit for.
Click to expand...
I'm saying there is a relatively strong correlation between morals, character, philosophies, and priorities.
Not direct, but strong.
 
#28,275
#28,275
And Joe Biden's economy killer middle class punishing tax plan has been released.

Biden Tax Plan Would Raise $4 Trillion, With High Earners Paying the Most: Analysis

Who would pay more:

  • The top 1% of households would pay 74% of the increased taxes.
  • More broadly, the top 20% of households — those making more than $170,000 per year — would pay 93% of increased taxes.
  • Income taxes on the top 1% of earners would increase by 17%, or an average of $299,000 per year.
  • The very wealthiest taxpayers — the top 10th of the top 1% — would see their tax bills increase by an average of $1.8 million.
  • Individuals would account for about $2 trillion of the tax increase, with the other $2 trillion coming from higher taxes on businesses.
Click to expand...
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top