2016 Presidential Horse Race

[ulukinatme]

I'll say this...this election is already more entertaining than most of the previous ones. The only downside is...one of these two is going to be president, and that's scary.

 

[BGIF]

I'll say this...this election is already more entertaining than most of the previous ones. The only downside is...one of these two is going to be president, and that's scary.

Post of the tread!

 

[phgreek]

Hillary and Co better strap in because I have a feeling this is going to get much worse before it's over. This is day 1 lol.

that tactic certainly has had a chilling affect on discourse...

When you shut down the ideas of half the country, DO YOU REALLY CARE about those for whom you claim to speak? Or are they simply a puzzle piece for an agenda?

If I were a minority, I would ask myself some serious questions. What do my opportunities look like today? Do the people who can and want to change things really hate me? Am I merely a pawn for those who claim to care about me? What have I got to lose for trying to change things? Do I move myself forward with a third Obama term?

 

[wizards8507]

I'll say this...this election is already more entertaining than most of the previous ones. The only downside is...one of these two is going to be president, and that's scary.

I don't know, this feels different. This is empirical proof of a Vast Left Wing Conspiracy. You have the chair of the DNC colluding with the host of Meet the Press to deny the nomination contest to Bernie Sanders in the Year of the Outsider. That's unbelievably huge. The thing holding #NeverTrump back is fear of splitting the base and electing Hillary. If the Democrats split first, that fear is alleviated. Get Cruz to run and win in Texas, then get Kasich to run and win Ohio and Pennsylvania. Nobody gets to 270 and the Congress names Kasich POTUS.

 

[NorthDakota]

I don't know, this feels different. This is empirical proof of a Vast Left Wing Conspiracy. You have the chair of the DNC colluding with the host of Meet the Press to deny the nomination contest to Bernie Sanders in the Year of the Outsider. That's unbelievably huge. The thing holding #NeverTrump back is fear of splitting the base and electing Hillary. If the Democrats split first, that fear is alleviated. Get Cruz to run and win in Texas, then get Kasich to run and win Ohio and Pennsylvania. Nobody gets to 270 and the Congress names Kasich POTUS.

That sounds terrible. Underhanded way to steal what the Donald won fair and square.

 

[wizards8507]

That sounds terrible. Underhanded way to steal what the Donald won fair and square.

Classic Trump line. When he wins with less than a majority in accordance with party rules, that's winning fair and square. If he loses according to the Constitutional rules for a general election, that's underhanded theft.

 

[NorthDakota]

Classic Trump line. When he wins with less than a majority in accordance with party rules, that's winning fair and square. If he loses according to the Constitutional rules for a general election, that's underhanded theft.

Accept that he's the Republican candidate.

 

[woolybug25]

That sounds terrible. Underhanded way to steal what the Donald won fair and square.

As Wiz said, there is nothing underhanded or unfair about the scenario he laid out (albeit extremely unlikely). There are rules laid out by our constitution on how we elect leaders. Just because you don't like the outcome, doesn't mean it's not by the book.

 

[woolybug25]

Accept that he's the Republican candidate.

What does this even mean?

 

[wizards8507]

Accept that he's the Republican candidate.

I do. But there's nothing written anywhere that the POTUS must be either the Democrat nominee or the Republican nominee. People act like it's a basketball tournament where Trump and Clinton are in the final and everyone else has been eliminated. That's not how it works even if it's tended to play out that way in recent history.

 

[GATTACA!]

I don't know, this feels different. This is empirical proof of a Vast Left Wing Conspiracy. You have the chair of the DNC colluding with the host of Meet the Press to deny the nomination contest to Bernie Sanders in the Year of the Outsider. That's unbelievably huge. The thing holding #NeverTrump back is fear of splitting the base and electing Hillary. If the Democrats split first, that fear is alleviated. Get Cruz to run and win in Texas, then get Kasich to run and win Ohio and Pennsylvania. Nobody gets to 270 and the Congress names Kasich POTUS.

Best case scenario IMO.

 

[yankeehater]

CNN getting approval from the DNC before running a story.

I laugh that the Sanders supporters are upset. Welcome to the world of being on the Right. It is either Rush or Hannity who has someone on the inside that obtains these types of emails. On their radio shows, they will divulge the email and then play the montage of the news shows using the same "Dem catch phrases" as their lead-ins to stories against Republicans or other news stories that might make Dems looks bad. I guess the public believed this to be strange coincidences that writers for 10+ "news shows" had the same ideas and words in mind. The "message" even goes to the morning shows like The View and Good Morning America that are tied into this $hit.

And we thought only China and Soviet Russia controlled their media.

 

[kmoose]

1. You know jack shit about me. "All-encompassing hate" - dude, grow a pair. What I say here offends softies like you (who, incidentally, rail against PC people LOL) but has zero to do with what I do with my family on my own time. I'm happy pretty much all the time, except when a racist demogogue tries to take over this great country, and when the Irish lose. Do better.

I don't know much about you, that's true. But I DO know that you have been whining and bitching about being called a beaner or a wetback or something, and you are accusing ME of being "soft"?

I never mentioned what you do with your family on your own time, so I'm not sure why you would even mention that?

2. Typical partisan BS. Do just an ounce of research and you'll see how absolutely ridiculous his superficial "plan" to stop ISIS "quickly" is. And LOL at "I don't want to say my plan" - he doesn't have a plan. I can't believe you call that an actual strategy and defend that it might in fact work, as if it is that easy. Holy crap.

I have never defended that his strategy for fighting ISIS might work. But you shouldn't let that little fact get in the way of your nonsensical, hate-filled ranting about Trump and his supporters.

It's a pretty partisan strategy, to mischaracterize people's words to fit your own narrative.

3. Really? That was only one of many articles and studies. It really isn't that hard to see what an awful economic plan he has. And they come from both conservatives and liberals. Increase spending all over the place, AND cut taxes majorly across the board? Like I said, you've been had.

Well it was the article that YOU chose to make your point with. That's how debate works........ you make a claim and use evidence to support it; the other side tries to refute the logic and/or evidence that you provide. I don't know what specific loopholes Trump intends to close, to raise enough tax revenue to make his plan revenue neutral; but I do know that he has probably used enough loopholes to know which ones will pay for his cuts in middle and lower class taxes.

4. It doesn't matter whether it can pass or not. The fact is that he goes on and on about the Constitution, something that he has little regard for, as proven by the fact that he wants to change the First Amendment. He has effectively threatened the 1st, 4th, 5th, and 14th amendments as well. How people believe his BS about him loving the Constitution (and all "12 Articles") is beyond me. He wouldn't know the Constitution if it bit him in the arse.

You were the one who said that his ban on Muslims was "Strike 1" against his claim to care about the Constitution. So are you now conceding that his idea is NOT related to his views on the Constitution?

5. Look it up. He has said it several times. Just because you know jack shit about it, doesn't mean it didn't happen.

I never said it didn't happen. I said that I was unaware of the particulars of the part about "from countries with a history of terrorism".

6. Ummm, you do realize his "plan" is illegal and he won't be able to do that to pay for the wall. Do better. Here's a hint: A third world country will not pay for a wall.

The legality of it is up for debate. There are respected, qualified people on both sides of the argument. Why do you think it IS illegal?

7. LOL - I know "jack shit", but you admit you knew nothing of 2 of my last 3 points, and pointed to a now debunked "plan" that can't work on my 3rd point. If I know jack shit, well, that makes you look REALLY bad lol.

I didn't think that I had to hold your hand and explain it, because you have always come across as a reasonably well educated, intelligent guy. But my comment about you "know" jack shit was in direct response to your comment about "I know you don't have any answers.", not your overall intelligence level. But there's another instance of you taking something impersonal and making it personal. I suppose you will whine about me saying racist things to you now, too?

For someone who keeps saying you don't support Trump, you sure do support Trump. And it's funny, this debate has turned out the same way every debate has when I talk with Trump supporters - bad for them lol. The guy is a quite simply a mess and a POS.

Trump is for a strong defense; better paying (and more of them) jobs; lower taxes on the middle and lower incomes, paid for by increased taxes on the highest incomes; more secure borders; lower crime; and pride in being America again.

All of those things are things that people have been clamoring about for the last............. ever, since the dawn of civilization.

That's not enough to convince me to vote for him. I don't think he has the right personality for the job, and I think that's a big part of the job.

But some people sound like children when they talk about his policy proposals. They sound like children who have been whining and crying for ice cream, and then complain when the ice cream they get is "just vanilla".

 

[wizards8507]

This is my favorite day.

 

[Bishop2b5]

I don't know, this feels different. This is empirical proof of a Vast Left Wing Conspiracy. You have the chair of the DNC colluding with the host of Meet the Press to deny the nomination contest to Bernie Sanders in the Year of the Outsider. That's unbelievably huge. The thing holding #NeverTrump back is fear of splitting the base and electing Hillary. If the Democrats split first, that fear is alleviated. Get Cruz to run and win in Texas, then get Kasich to run and win Ohio and Pennsylvania. Nobody gets to 270 and the Congress names Kasich POTUS.

This is one of my biggest issues. The press is supposed to serve as an honest, accurate, impartial purveyor of information to the citizenry, be an unbiased watchdog for us, and speak for us all. They're not supposed to take sides, be a shill for one party or one candidate, or be in collusion with anyone to misrepresent the news in order to favor any side. They're supposed to be our trustworthy eyes, ears, and voice. They're not.

Just like in sports, we want to trust that the officiating is honest and unbiased. If all the officials in a game are fans of one of the teams doing all they can to make sure their team wins, we lose all faith in the system and any sense of fairness, integrity, or honesty.

What we're learning about the DNC's collusion with MSM outlets to feed stories to us and damage one candidate's rivals is certainly not surprising, but it's definitely disturbing and disgusting now that the proof is evident for even the biggest deniers of it happening.

 

[IrishLax]

This is my favorite day.

What's so funny is how the left would lose their fucking minds and this would be front page news if it was an RNC person who made a "homophobic" remark like that.

Instead, no one is going to give a single shit.

Remember when Roy Hibbert... a freaking basketball player... got drug through the mud for a similar comment?

 

[NorthDakota]

As Wiz said, there is nothing underhanded or unfair about the scenario he laid out (albeit extremely unlikely). There are rules laid out by our constitution on how we elect leaders. Just because you don't like the outcome, doesn't mean it's not by the book.

Hack a Shaq is by the book too.

What does this even mean?

This is him vs. Clinton.

I do. But there's nothing written anywhere that the POTUS must be either the Democrat nominee or the Republican nominee. People act like it's a basketball tournament where Trump and Clinton are in the final and everyone else has been eliminated. That's not how it works even if it's tended to play out that way in recent history.

Didn't all those Republicans take a pledge?

 

[EddytoNow]

I don't know much about you, that's true. But I DO know that you have been whining and bitching about being called a beaner or a wetback or something, and you are accusing ME of being "soft"?

I never mentioned what you do with your family on your own time, so I'm not sure why you would even mention that?



I have never defended that his strategy for fighting ISIS might work. But you shouldn't let that little fact get in the way of your nonsensical, hate-filled ranting about Trump and his supporters.

It's a pretty partisan strategy, to mischaracterize people's words to fit your own narrative.



Well it was the article that YOU chose to make your point with. That's how debate works........ you make a claim and use evidence to support it; the other side tries to refute the logic and/or evidence that you provide. I don't know what specific loopholes Trump intends to close, to raise enough tax revenue to make his plan revenue neutral; but I do know that he has probably used enough loopholes to know which ones will pay for his cuts in middle and lower class taxes.



You were the one who said that his ban on Muslims was "Strike 1" against his claim to care about the Constitution. So are you now conceding that his idea is NOT related to his views on the Constitution?



I never said it didn't happen. I said that I was unaware of the particulars of the part about "from countries with a history of terrorism".



The legality of it is up for debate. There are respected, qualified people on both sides of the argument. Why do you think it IS illegal?



I didn't think that I had to hold your hand and explain it, because you have always come across as a reasonably well educated, intelligent guy. But my comment about you "know" jack shit was in direct response to your comment about "I know you don't have any answers.", not your overall intelligence level. But there's another instance of you taking something impersonal and making it personal. I suppose you will whine about me saying racist things to you now, too?



Trump is for a strong defense; better paying (and more of them) jobs; lower taxes on the middle and lower incomes, paid for by increased taxes on the highest incomes; more secure borders; lower crime; and pride in being America again.

All of those things are things that people have been clamoring about for the last............. ever, since the dawn of civilization.

That's not enough to convince me to vote for him. I don't think he has the right personality for the job, and I think that's a big part of the job.

But some people sound like children when they talk about his policy proposals. They sound like children who have been whining and crying for ice cream, and then complain when the ice cream they get is "just vanilla".

Calling out a racist and pointing out that he has no substance is hardly whining and complaining. Trump is 70 years old. There's nothing in those 70 years to suggest that he cares about the poor or the unemployed. He is defined by his actions and his own words over those 70 years.

 

[IrishLax]

Calling out a racist and pointing out that he has no substance is hardly whining and complaining. Trump is 70 years old. There's nothing in those 70 years to suggest that he cares about the poor or the unemployed. He is defined by his actions and his own words over those 70 years.

Curious, what part of Hillary's 70 years of "helping" the poor is it that you like?

Was it her crime bill that is one of the most overtly racist pieces of legislation ever, that specifically targeted poor black people? Or was it her dismantling of the welfare system which left many poor even more destitute? Or was it when she put a lifetime ban on food stamps for anyone convicted of a drug offense?

 

[kmoose]

Calling out a racist and pointing out that he has no substance is hardly whining and complaining. Trump is 70 years old. There's nothing in those 70 years to suggest that he cares about the poor or the unemployed. He is defined by his actions and his own words over those 70 years.

You mean other than creating 34,000 jobs? I doubt that helped the unemployed at all, right? And you keep throwing out that word "racist" as if it were a fact. Most of the "racist" things attributed to him are false narratives to begin with.

 

[wizards8507]

Didn't all those Republicans take a pledge?

Educate yourself. The Orange God King voided the pledge in March.

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/03/30/trump-the-pledge-is-null-and-void/

 

[Corry]

Watching Tim Kaine's speach, man this dude should've ran for the top of ticket. He's super impressive.

 

[nsisk157]

Watching Tim Kaine's speach, man this dude should've ran for the top of ticket. He's super impressive.

Only one narrative in the Dem Party for 2016. Alleged reports that many in the dem party were anti-Bern and only sought Hill as the nominee and went out of their way to ensure the outcome (of course, alleged reports, blah blah).

I try not to associate to a specific party, but this term's process has been....um, uninspiring, to put it very politely.

Surely, they're all taking the piss and will say, "Gotcha," soon...right?

 

[Ultimate Penn St. Hater]

Watching Tim Kaine's speach, man this dude should've ran for the top of ticket. He's super impressive.

I agree. Guy gave an outstanding speech.

 

[IrishLax]

Watching Tim Kaine's speach, man this dude should've ran for the top of ticket. He's super impressive.

Tim Kaine is the man. So is Mark Warner. Both (allegedly) got bullied out of running against Clinton in the primary by the DNC.

 

[wizards8507]

Tim Kaine is the man. So is Mark Warner. Both (allegedly) got bullied out of running against Clinton in the primary by the DNC.

Naturally the Bernie people hate him.

 

[ACamp1900]

Naturally the Bernie people hate him.

What don't they hate, aside from Bernie?

 

[wizards8507]

What don't they hate, aside from Bernie?

Sweden. Bernie people LOVE Sweden.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

What don't they hate, aside from Bernie?

Elizabeth Warren...until she endorsed Hillary.

 

[ACamp1900]

Sweden. Bernie people LOVE Sweden.

Elizabeth Warren...until she endorsed Hillary.

I was two off... Lol... It's sad how fragmented and tribalistic we've gotten... While pick on Bernie supporters, rightfully IMO, this is not exclusive to them...