2016 Presidential Horse Race

[EddytoNow]

I've granted that the comment about Mrs. Khan not speaking appears to be an attack. But the media keeps talking about Trump's attackS, plural. And the Progressives have yet to show me where Trump spoke unkindly of the Khan family, other than the comment about his wife, let alone "attacked" them. It's not a defense of Trump; it's a call for people not to allow the mainstream media to dictate what is truth and what is not. For the love of God, the DNC email leaks should be enough to prove that the media is not only NOT unbiased, but they are knee deep involved in putting forth the preferred narrative of their "friends". This go round it was HRC vs Bernie Sanders. Who knows what it was in the past, or what it will be in the future?

The implication of Trump's charges was that her Muslim faith did not allow her to speak or that her husband would not allow her to speak. Trump compounded his first mistake when he was unable to show any empathy or compassion to a mother who had lost her son. Then, he just couldn't let it go.

He should have ignored the Khan's completely or better yet contacted them to offer sympathy for the death of their son. Mr. Tough Guy couldn't show the class one would expect from a potential Commander-in-Chief. He chose confrontation rather than reconciliation.

 

[Domina Nostra]

The implication of Trump's charges was that her Muslim faith did not allow her to speak or that her husband would not allow her to speak. Trump compounded his first mistake when he was unable to show any empathy or compassion to a mother who had lost her son. Then, he just couldn't let it go.

He should have ignored the Khan's completely or better yet contacted them to offer sympathy for the death of their son. Mr. Tough Guy couldn't show the class one would expect from a potential Commander-in-Chief. He chose confrontation rather than reconciliation.

If you had said "restraint," rather than reconciliation, you'd be closer to the truth. Mr. Khan is a very well educated and connected attorney and got up on stage at a national convention to trash Trump. He was hardly reaching out for reconciliation.

Also, I'm not sure how fair it is to day he showed "no" empathy. He thanked them for their sacrifices and said their son was a hero.

Her certainly showed a lack of class and a tendency to verbal retaliation akin to his his endless public feuds in the past.

 

[pkt77242]

I agree with you on this.

I was not for Trump during the primaries but ended up defending him a lot because its pretty silly to call a New York liberal with a daughter rising up the ranks of his company and a Jewish son-in-law running his campaign, married to an immigrant, etc., etc., a racist, anti-semetic, sexist .... Just because that is the script democrats apply to "every Republican ever" (remember when Romney was sexist for assembling a binder full of highly-qualified women he might call on) doesn't mean the description fits Trump, who is not a Republican.

I just think its helpful to try to set everything out from both sides, so the argument can get re-focused on the issues.

What? I am confused by the bold. Trump gets called sexist for some of the comments he has made. Trump gets called a racist for some of the comments that he made. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/24/opinion/sunday/is-donald-trump-a-racist.html. While these comments are old, they definitely raise questions about his views and beliefs. As far as sexist comments, just google all of the crazy ass shit he has said about women.

I am not sure if Trump is sexist or racist, but there is definitely reasons to call him that, lets not pretend that the media or Democrats are creating this out of thin air.

 

[kmoose]

The implication of Trump's charges was that her Muslim faith did not allow her to speak or that her husband would not allow her to speak.

The implication is a very fair one. That's not an attack. Many sects of Muslim women are not even allowed to shake the hand of a man that they do not have a relationship with (i.e.: father, brother, son, husband, uncle, nephew, boss, etc.) That's not an attack. It may be a little classless, but it's not an attack on the family, nor is it an attack on Muslims. Not any more than it would be an attack on Catholics to say, "Well, maybe they didn't wear a condom."

Trump compounded his first mistake when he was unable to show any empathy or compassion to a mother who had lost her son.

What did he say to her that was compassionless?

He should have ignored the Khan's completely or better yet contacted them to offer sympathy for the death of their son. Mr. Tough Guy couldn't show the class one would expect from a potential Commander-in-Chief. He chose confrontation rather than reconciliation.

Ignored it? He did. Until Snuffleupagus repeated Khan's question, and asked Trump how he would respond to the question. Trump answered a question during an interview; it's not like he initiated the conversation about the Khan family.

 

[connor_in]

I was 8 when that was happening. Can you expand on that?

FILM STRIP TIME

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

or

 

[Domina Nostra]

What? I am confused by the bold. Trump gets called sexist for some of the comments he has made. Trump gets called a racist for some of the comments that he made. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/24/opinion/sunday/is-donald-trump-a-racist.html. While these comments are old, they definitely raise questions about his views and beliefs. As far as sexist comments, just google all of the crazy ass shit he has said about women.

I am not sure if Trump is sexist or racist, but there is definitely reasons to call him that, lets not pretend that the media or Democrats are creating this out of thin air.

Right. You can point to his off-and comments and conclude that he is sexist, just like you could point to Bill Clinton's decades of womanizing and declare him sexist.

But putting your daughter in charge of your company, and hiring tons of other women in important roles certainly indicates that he thinks women are just as capable as men, and does not think there is any reason to deny them their place in society. That is the heart of sexism and that is something he has taken a lot of concrete actions to prove that he is not.

Does he treat some women like sex objects? Yes. But that is kind just kind of him being a vulgarian.

For Bill, the idea is that he is a politician and supports women's rights and liberal feminist causes, so that proves he is not sexist.

Does he treat some women like sex objects? Yes. But that is kind just kind of him being a horn-dog.

 

[pkt77242]

Right. You can point to his off-and comments and conclude that he is sexist, just like you could point to Bill Clinton's decades of womanizing and declare him sexist.

But putting your daughter in charge of your company, and hiring tons of other women in important roles certainly indicates that he thinks women are just as capable as men, and does not think there is any reason to deny them their place in society. That is the heart of sexism and that is something he has taken a lot of concrete actions to prove that he is not.

Does he treat some women like sex objects? Yes. But that is kind just kind of him being a vulgarian.

For Bill, the idea is that he is a politician and supports women's rights and liberal feminist causes, so that proves he is not sexist.

Does he treat some women like sex objects? Yes. But that is kind just kind of him being a horn-dog.

So you defend Trump by criticizing Clinton? Nice.

Why didn't you respond to the part about racist comments/actions?

 

[EddytoNow]

Right. You can point to his off-and comments and conclude that he is sexist, just like you could point to Bill Clinton's decades of womanizing and declare him sexist.

But putting your daughter in charge of your company, and hiring tons of other women in important roles certainly indicates that he thinks women are just as capable as men, and does not think there is any reason to deny them their place in society. That is the heart of sexism and that is something he has taken a lot of concrete actions to prove that he is not.

Does he treat some women like sex objects? Yes. But that is kind just kind of him being a vulgarian.

For Bill, the idea is that he is a politician and supports women's rights and liberal feminist causes, so that proves he is not sexist.

Does he treat some women like sex objects? Yes. But that is kind just kind of him being a horn-dog.

Sexist - Bill Clinton - Check
Sexist - Donald Trump - Check

Racist - Bill Clinton - Not
Racist - Donald Trump - Check

Bully - Bill Clinton - Not
Bully - Donald Trump - Check

Donald Trump wins 3 to 1.

 

[kmoose]

Sexist - Bill Clinton - Check
Sexist - Donald Trump - Check

Racist - Bill Clinton - Not
Racist - Donald Trump - Check

Bully - Bill Clinton - Not
Bully - Donald Trump - Check

Donald Trump wins 3 to 1.

Opinion- Check
Fact- Not

 

[gkIrish]

Sexist - Bill Clinton - Check
Sexist - Donald Trump - Check

Racist - Bill Clinton - Not
Racist - Donald Trump - Check

Bully - Bill Clinton - Not
Bully - Donald Trump - Check

Donald Trump wins 3 to 1.

You don't think taking advantage of an intern is a form of "Bullying?"

 

[kmoose]

You don't think taking advantage of an intern is a form of "Bullying?"

I wonder what he would consider killing Vince Foster to be?

 

[EddytoNow]

You don't think taking advantage of an intern is a form of "Bullying?"

Included it under Sexist. I suppose I could add a fourth character trait for Sexual Harassment, but it wouldn't help Donald. He's guilty of that too.

 

[EddytoNow]

I wonder what he would consider killing Vince Foster to be?

I'd call it murder, but there's no evidence the Clintons had anything to do with it. Ruled a suicide if I remember correctly.

I know you'd like to blame every crime ever committed on the Clintons, but after awhile the accusations get so ridiculous it just makes you look foolish.

 

[kmoose]

I'd call it murder, but there's no evidence the Clintons had anything to do with it. Ruled a suicide if I remember correctly.

That's why I put it in italics, genius.

 

[Domina Nostra]

I'd call it murder, but there's no evidence the Clintons had anything to do with it. Ruled a suicide if I remember correctly.

I know you'd like to blame every crime ever committed on the Clintons, but after awhile the accusations get so ridiculous it just makes you look foolish.

The thing with the Clintons is not that they kill people, its just that they are associated with just tons of questionable financial deals and shady characters. Is just really unique.

Maureen Dowd of the NYTimes recently noted how many people go down around the Clintons as they keep climbing up.

You can chalk it all up to a right wing conspiracy, but the Clintons are unique in the amount of investigations they've either spawned or been implicated in. Carter gets accused of being alot of things, but there aren't endless weird scandals floating around him. Obama gets accused of being a socialist or a foreigner or a Muslim, but there is not a crazy trail of personal/financial scandals. Gore gets accused of profiting off of global warming hysteria, but all his transactions have been pretty out in the open.

That's my impression. The FBI investigation was par for the course. Lots of irregularities, improprieties, shady behavior, and then they walk away... You can say it proves they've never done anything, but that just isn't the impression most are left with.

 

[Domina Nostra]

Sexist - Bill Clinton - Check
Sexist - Donald Trump - Check

Racist - Bill Clinton - Not
Racist - Donald Trump - Check

Bully - Bill Clinton - Not
Bully - Donald Trump - Check

Donald Trump wins 3 to 1.

Islam is not a race, its a religion/belief system, so what are we talking about?

Once again, I find it a hard sell. But we may have different beliefs on what racism is. I think racism means that you think another race is inferior and should be treated as such. Is that what we're talking about?

Not sure about bullying. I'm not sure I've ever met anyone who was trying to climb the latter into finance, law, or politics that didn't feel bullied. Some people might chalk it up to sexism, but at some point its just the nature of the beast.

 

[Irish Insanity]

Opinion- Check
Fact- Not

You forgot:

Opinion wins 1-0

 

[phgreek]

I just caught Trump's Tri endorsement speech (Ryan, Mccain, Ayotte)... watched him read off a paper for a half hour...I think he is trying to have a stump speech...that everyone else wrote for him.

Methinks he got taken to the woodshed a little bit...

He looked like my kids when I make them apologize to someone...

Relax oh supporters of the Felon...he'll be back next week.

 

[GoIrish41]

You assigning meaning to his words, to suit your own purposes and viewpoint, makes you appear to be not only delusionally biased, but pretty fvcking stupid as well. I submit the following:


Trump tweet:



How the holy fvck do you get that Trump is calling the Khans radical Islamic terrorists, from his tweet? You're bordering on pathetic, these days. Polls show that your criminal is leading in the polls. Just relax and enjoy it. Oh, and go back to finding racism in places like the writings of Desmond Tutu.

That is one tweet. He was blathering on for five days about this. His whole immigration schtick insinuates that ALL Muslims are terrorists .... that's why we can't let any of them into the country. What are you missing here? Every time he talks about the Khans, he immediately pivots to talking about terrorism ... like there is some kind of intuitive flow of logic from one idea to the other. There isn't. His ideas are abrupt, I imagine especially so if you are a Muslim. The Khans are American citizens and his ideas are frightening them enough for them to speak out about it and he insulted them -- why can't you acknowledge what is patently obvious? You are in a rapidly shrinking percentage of the population who does not believe that Trump treated this family with disrespect. It very well could be like Romneys 47% comment last election. Even Republicans have roundly rejected Trump for his statements. Some are considering trying to pick a new less repugnant candidate.

 

[connor_in]

I just caught Trump's Tri endorsement speech (Ryan, Mccain, Ayotte)... watched him read off a paper for a half hour...I think he is trying to have a stump speech...that everyone else wrote for him.

Methinks he got taken to the woodshed a little bit...

He looked like my kids when I make them apologize to someone...

Relax oh supporters of the Felon...he'll be back next week.

‘Like a hostage video’: Donald Trump endorses Paul Ryan, John McCain and Kelly Ayotte – twitchy.com

 

[connor_in]

 

[NDinL.A.]

I agree with you on this.

I was not for Trump during the primaries but ended up defending him a lot because its pretty silly to call a New York liberal with a daughter rising up the ranks of his company and a Jewish son-in-law running his campaign, married to an immigrant, etc., etc., a racist, anti-semetic, sexist .... Just because that is the script democrats apply to "every Republican ever" (remember when Romney was sexist for assembling a binder full of highly-qualified women he might call on) doesn't mean the description fits Trump, who is not a Republican.

I just think its helpful to try to set everything out from both sides, so the argument can get re-focused on the issues.

See, that's just a false narrative, saying that the Democrats are reading from a script on Trump talking points. I'm a (now former) Republican and I've been saying those things about him for over a year (not the anti-Semitic part - with that I just think he's completely tone deaf and a moron). Prominent Republicans are jumping ship left and right, and not just for political reasons. They see Trump for who he clearly is.

And it's not the media bias that's making me believe those things, it's the buffoon himself doing it. If his followers didn't want people to believe his is racist or sexist or just a complete clown, he should stop saying racist, sexist, and idiotic things - the latest being that a woman should switch jobs or change careers if a man sexually harasses her at work (I mean, really???).

 

[kmoose]

That is one tweet. He was blathering on for five days about this. His whole immigration schtick insinuates that ALL Muslims are terrorists .... that's why we can't let any of them into the country. What are you missing here? Every time he talks about the Khans, he immediately pivots to talking about terrorism ... like there is some kind of intuitive flow of logic from one idea to the other. There isn't. His ideas are abrupt, I imagine especially so if you are a Muslim. The Khans are American citizens and his ideas are frightening them enough for them to speak out about it and he insulted them -- why can't you acknowledge what is patently obvious? You are in a rapidly shrinking percentage of the population who does not believe that Trump treated this family with disrespect. It very well could be like Romneys 47% comment last election. Even Republicans have roundly rejected Trump for his statements. Some are considering trying to pick a new less repugnant candidate.

He was blathering on for five days, but you can't show me ONE thing that he said, that was attacking the Khan family? Interesting. Just because YOU take away that his temporary ban on Muslims insinuates that ALL Muslims are terrorists, that doesn't make it a fact! To steal a phrase, "That's like, your opinion, man." And it's an at best shaky opinion. The temporary ban does NOT assume that all Muslims are terrorists. It assumes that there will be real terrorists hiding amongst the refugees, and that these real terrorists will get into the country because we are so eager to show the world what good people we are that we will only do a bare minimum of checking on these people who claim to be refugees. What an insane, completely unfounded way of thinking, right?

Paris attack terrorists used refugee chaos to enter France, says PM Valls - France 24

Paris bomber had Syria refugee passport, official says - CNN.com

ISIS Members Posing as Refugees Planned Paris-Style Attack on Düsseldorf - The American Interest

Mr Khan gave a speech challenging a key component of Trump's policy towards combating terrorism. But racism is the only reason you can come up with, why the discussion turns to terrorism every time the subject of the Khan family comes up? Mr. Khan fired the first shots: "have you even read the constitution?", "what sacrifices have YOU made?"; and now people are whining and crying because Trump is defending himself. He hasn't "attacked" the family. And he hasn't said anything insulting to them, that I am aware of, other than MAYBE saying that the wife was not allowed to speak.

 

[EddytoNow]

I doubt that Trump has read the constitution. Of course, he will never admit it, but he has no depth of knowledge on anything. He didn't realize that Crimea was in the Ukraine. He's stated he will get rid of the Affordable Care Act on day one. He wants to drop nuclear bombs on the enemy killing millions of innocent victims in the process. He has publicly stated he will be appointing partisan judges to the Supreme Court. The man speaks in one sentence sound bites and can't think any deeper than that. He gets his military information from Sean Hannity and the like. He thinks he knows more about the military and military operations than the generals. Does he not realize that the constitution does not give him the power to unilaterally eliminate legislation passed by both the House and Senate? Does he even understand the three branches of government and the separation of powers? Did Trump attend college. Let's see his transcripts. I don't think Trump has even read the Cliff Notes version of the US Constitution.

 

[potownhero]

One of my co-workers sent this to me after a conversation we were having yesterday about the ages of both Trump and Clinton.

I didn't realize that she's had so many health issues...fainting and head trauma?

I understand that this is from last year, but my friend suggested that this was why she was so "low energy".

Has this been addressed? Do we know why she's fainted and apparently had memory issues?

Why Hillary Clinton Is Too Old And Sick To Be President | RedState

 

[Ultimate Penn St. Hater]

One of my co-workers sent this to me after a conversation we were having yesterday about the ages of both Trump and Clinton.

I didn't realize that she's had so many health issues...fainting and head trauma?

I understand that this is from last year, but my friend suggested that this was why she was so "low energy".

Has this been addressed? Do we know why she's fainted and apparently had memory issues?

Why Hillary Clinton Is Too Old And Sick To Be President | RedState

Yeah, that's a great source.

 

[Polish Leppy 22]

I doubt that Trump has read the constitution. Of course, he will never admit it, but he has no depth of knowledge on anything. He didn't realize that Crimea was in the Ukraine. He's stated he will get rid of the Affordable Care Act on day one. He wants to drop nuclear bombs on the enemy killing millions of innocent victims in the process. He has publicly stated he will be appointing partisan judges to the Supreme Court. The man speaks in one sentence sound bites and can't think any deeper than that. He gets his military information from Sean Hannity and the like. He thinks he knows more about the military and military operations than the generals. Does he not realize that the constitution does not give him the power to unilaterally eliminate legislation passed by both the House and Senate? Does he even understand the three branches of government and the separation of powers? Did Trump attend college. Let's see his transcripts. I don't think Trump has even read the Cliff Notes version of the US Constitution.

The majority of your posts are mind numbing, but everyone agrees that Trump is short/ light on the Constitution and that's what upsets many conservatives.

1. He wants to drop nuclear bombs? When did he say that?

2. He gets his information from Sean Hannity? How do you know this?

3. Perhaps he thinks he has all this executive power (ignoring House and Senate) after watching Obama for the past 8 years.

4. Trump's transcripts? We still haven't seen Obama's.

The standards to which you hold Trump and the free passes you give our current president are laughable. I'll remind you I'm a right leaning registered Libertarian.

 

[IrishLax]

I doubt that Trump has read the constitution. Of course, he will never admit it, but he has no depth of knowledge on anything. He didn't realize that Crimea was in the Ukraine. He's stated he will get rid of the Affordable Care Act on day one. He wants to drop nuclear bombs on the enemy killing millions of innocent victims in the process. He has publicly stated he will be appointing partisan judges to the Supreme Court. The man speaks in one sentence sound bites and can't think any deeper than that. He gets his military information from Sean Hannity and the like. He thinks he knows more about the military and military operations than the generals. Does he not realize that the constitution does not give him the power to unilaterally eliminate legislation passed by both the House and Senate? Does he even understand the three branches of government and the separation of powers? Did Trump attend college. Let's see his transcripts. I don't think Trump has even read the Cliff Notes version of the US Constitution.

With all the legitimate stuff to criticize Trump on, why are you reaching?

1. With the ACA, the Republican-controlled congress has voted multiple times to repeal the law. Every time it's vetoed by Obama, and every time they can't successfully override the veto. It is completely reasonable that Trump could repeal the ACA on "day 1"... because all he'd have to do is not veto the bill like Obama has.

2. He absolutely has the power to use the nuclear arsenal. Why would you think he doesn't? If President Trump decided to use nukes, he could do it easily - Vox

This raises some very, very scary questions about Trump’s judgment. It suggests that he doesn’t know the basic way nuclear weapons are supposed to work — deterring attacks on the United States — and that he might be the first president since Harry Truman to order the use of nuclear weapons.

The natural question to ask, then, is whether he could actually do that. The answer is deceptively simple: Yes, he can. No matter what.

The president has basically unconstrained authority to use nuclear weapons, a seemingly insane system that flows pretty logically from America’s strategic doctrine on nuclear weapons. The US needs a system to launch weapons fast for deterrence to work properly, which means one person needs to be able to order the use of nukes basically unencumbered. The president is the only possible choice.

3. He has the right to nominate whoever the hell he wants to the supreme court. And Hillary Clinton and Trump have both campaigned on the importance of getting "their guy" on the supreme court... and there have been many editorials to the importance of this election for that effect maybe above everything else.

So what do any of your points have to do with "reading the Constitution?"

 

[kmoose]

I doubt that Trump has read the constitution.

I haven't. And I doubt many Americans have.

Of course, he will never admit it, but he has no depth of knowledge on anything.

He seems to have a pretty good handle on negotiating, now doesn't he? He's pretty knowledgeable about taxes. And he seems to be pretty good at reading people.

He didn't realize that Crimea was in the Ukraine.

What part of the Constitution is that?

He's stated he will get rid of the Affordable Care Act on day one.

And Obama, who taught constitutional law, stated that the first thing he would do in office was close Guantanamo Bay.

He wants to drop nuclear bombs on the enemy killing millions of innocent victims in the process.

This is where you really go off the rails. No, he doesn't. He said that he would not rule out the use of them. And he made a point to say that he would not rule it out because to do so might weaken the US position. But people like you perpetuate this myth that he WANTS to nuke people. Saying I will not rule it out is not the same as WANTING to do it. I know it, you know it, hell, even GoIrish41 probably knows it. But you state it as if it is a fact, which tells me that you are negotiating in bad faith. Unless you just want to admit that you were speaking in hyperbole? Do you want me to explain to you what that means, or would you need to see my college transcripts first?

He has publicly stated he will be appointing partisan judges to the Supreme Court.

Maybe YOU should read the Constitution. The President cannot just arbitrarily appoint a Justice to the Supreme Court. They have to nominate someone, first. Once that nomination has been confirmed by the Senate, THEN they become an appointee.

The man speaks in one sentence sound bites and can't think any deeper than that.

OR.............. the man is a genius at PR, having become the nominee despite reported record disapproval ratings.

He gets his military information from Sean Hannity and the like.

I seriously doubt that Sean Hannity is going to be put forth as SecDef, or any other position within the Pentagon.

He thinks he knows more about the military and military operations than the generals.

How un-Presidential of him:

Obama ignores generals on troop levels for unprecedented 6th time in Afghanistan, Iraq - Washington Times

JFK vs. the Military - The Atlantic

https://www.trumanlibrary.org/trivia/macarth.htm

Does he not realize that the constitution does not give him the power to unilaterally eliminate legislation passed by both the House and Senate?

Can't he?

Obama: I’m Ignoring Immigration Laws Passed by Congress – But Congress Must Pass a Law to solve Illegal Immigration |

Does he even understand the three branches of government and the separation of powers?

Apparently better than you, who seems to think that you can find geographic information on Ukraine in the Constitution....

Did Trump attend college. Let's see his transcripts.

See now you're just being an elitist prick. Abraham Lincoln didn't attend college, and he turned out to be pretty smart, huh? I hope that THIS doesn't end up being your fate, should Trump get elected:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-O4Ag4L2yQc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[potownhero]

Yeah, that's a great source.

Put aside the opinion of the source stating that she's too sick and old to have the stamina needed to be president. I don't want to argue their opinion. I want to know about what they say about her health.

Is it true that Hillary has had several fainting spells since 2005?
Do we know if that's true?

Did she have head trauma?

Does she have memory or cognitive impairment?