British Expats

British Expats (https://britishexpats.com/forum/)
-   The Trailer Park (https://britishexpats.com/forum/trailer-park-96/)
-   -   2016 Election (https://britishexpats.com/forum/trailer-park-96/2016-election-855107/)

RoadWarriorFromLP Aug 16th 2016 6:43 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by Leslie (Post 12028006)
Still, it's a little ridiculous to suggest that Paul Ryan will suddenly become president or that we will rewrite the constitution to make Obama's last term 5 years long.

People on the interwebs tend to offer all kinds of "theories" that have zero basis in the law and that otherwise make no sense.

And honestly, the protestations against Clinton are largely based upon hysteria. I'm not her biggest fan, but she is obviously intelligent, capable of leading a staff and a competent administrator. She's not exactly a charismatic figure and her public speaking voice is a bit painful, but elections are not supposed to be beauty contests.

morpeth Aug 16th 2016 6:55 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by dc koop (Post 12027981)
The Speaker would have to assume the Presidency if both candidates were disqualified. There's no way Obama could extend his term and he probably wouldn't want to either.

A date for a new election would have to be set and all parties start to work choosing candidates. Meanwhile Paul Ryan would be running the show.

I don't like Paul Ryan. I don't like or trust anyone who would want to privatize social programs that have worked for decades. Privatization is a way to eventually get rid of them altogether.

As a strong believer in labour unions which unfortunately many working Americans today don't have much use for, I see anti labour President Ryan set about breaking up what's left of them

Better we leave things as they are. Let the billionaire dolt lose by a landslide and the lady with a lot of shady baggage in tow do her time in the White House and then most likely end up as a one term President

I may not approve of all of a candidate's stated policies, but still can like them or trust them. My own opinion is compared to the current Presidential candidates, both Ryan and Sanders are more likeable and more trustworthy.

Just day dreaming about unworkable solution of re-starting the primaries as it seems to me quite ridiculous the choice is between two candidates that the majority of people think are both untrustworthy.

RoadWarriorFromLP Aug 16th 2016 7:00 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by morpeth (Post 12028024)
My own opinion is compared to the current Presidential candidates, both Ryan and Sanders are more likeable and more trustworthy.

Ryan failed miserably, Sanders came in a distant second.

Again, I find the anti-Clinton rhetoric to be shrill and absurd, and I don't even care much for her myself. I haven't heard one substantive reason why she's supposedly the devil incarnate (and no, "I don't trust her" without anything factual to back it up really doesn't count as an answer.) Some people are just whingers.

dc koop Aug 16th 2016 7:08 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by Leslie (Post 12028006)
Yeah, I know. They could distance themselves from him but couldn't stop him from continuing to run.

Still, it's a little ridiculous to suggest that Paul Ryan will suddenly become president or that we will rewrite the constitution to make Obama's last term 5 years long.

If I were Obama I'd tell them where to shove an extra year as President but the Speaker does in fact become President if the President and Vice-President were to die or both become incapacitated to the extent they could no longer function

morpeth Aug 16th 2016 7:09 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP (Post 12028014)
People on the interwebs tend to offer all kinds of "theories" that have zero basis in the law and that otherwise make no sense.

And honestly, the protestations against Clinton are largely based upon hysteria. I'm not her biggest fan, but she is obviously intelligent, capable of leading a staff and a competent administrator. She's not exactly a charismatic figure and her public speaking voice is a bit painful, but elections are not supposed to be beauty contests.

I agree that Clinton is intelligent, has had experience leading a staff, and as far as I know competent as an administrator. That does not mean she has the philosophy and strategic sense to lead the country. I do not believe she has the slightest clue about economics. Plus there is the trustworthy issue.

Trump obviously has experience running a business, and as such has experiencing in managing people, and I doubt his public persona expresses how he ran his businesses. However even the rabid supporter or never-Clinton voter must be troubled whether he has the knowledge to establish and implement his "stated" policies.

Two very poor choices.

Giantaxe Aug 16th 2016 7:11 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by dc koop (Post 12028031)
If I were Obama I'd tell them where to shove an extra year as President but the Speaker does in fact become President if the President and Vice-President were to die or both become incapacitated to the extent they could no longer function

And this has precisely what to do with replacing the current candidates for president:confused:

RoadWarriorFromLP Aug 16th 2016 7:14 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by morpeth (Post 12028032)
I do not believe she has the slightest clue about economics.

I have no idea what that actually means. And I'm frankly not confident that you are in a position to judge, given your own comments about economics.


Originally Posted by morpeth (Post 12028032)
Plus there is the trustworthy issue.

That's what it comes down to. You have this gut feeling about her that is visceral and based upon nothing. You've been told for 20+ years that she's terrible, so it just "feels right" not to trust her even though you don't have a logical reason for it.

If disliking her feels good, then do it. Unbelievable.

RoadWarriorFromLP Aug 16th 2016 7:17 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by dc koop (Post 12028031)
If I were Obama I'd tell them where to shove an extra year as President

So you want the president to violate the constitution.

Come on, folks, these are just not reasonable ideas. This is mental masturbation with an anti-climax. Enough already.

Giantaxe Aug 16th 2016 7:17 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by morpeth (Post 12028032)
I agree that Clinton is intelligent, has had experience leading a staff, and as far as I know competent as an administrator. That does not mean she has the philosophy and strategic sense to lead the country. I do not believe she has the slightest clue about economics. Plus there is the trustworthy issue.

Two-term senator and Secretary of State. I'd say she's better qualified than recent presidents have been, including her husband and Obama.

morpeth Aug 16th 2016 7:19 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP (Post 12028026)
Ryan failed miserably, Sanders came in a distant second.

Again, I find the anti-Clinton rhetoric to be shrill and absurd, and I don't even care much for her myself. I haven't heard one substantive reason why she's supposedly the devil incarnate (and no, "I don't trust her" without anything factual to back it up really doesn't count as an answer.) Some people are just whingers.

How Ryan or Sanders did in the primaries doesn't for me influence whether they were likeable or sincere. I believe they are both sincere in their beliefs compared to Clinton or Trump.

As far as Clinton her handling of the emails I believe is sufficient to determine whether one can trust her. But Nixon could often be brilliant and decisive, and we know how trustworthy he was. I wish we could stop hearing about the damn emails.

Lots of shrill and absurd rhetoric about both candidates.

amideislas Aug 16th 2016 7:23 am

Re: 2016 Election
 
No that's not it roadwarrior.

It's politics. I have no doubt that the Clintons both have feces under their fingernails. I also don't doubt that any president, prime minister, head if state anywhere is entirely free of dirt.

It comes down to this. There are some pretty self serving forces in this world. There are also forces which actually aspire to do good. I'd put Obama and Clinton in the latter category. I'd put the likes of Trump and Putin in the former.

If you want to win a rugby match, don't bring the badminton team.

We should always aspire to adhere to our values. But in the nasty global world of politics, to achieve a specific goal often requires playing a little dirty. Getting your hands dirty. Taking personal or professional risks. Certainly our adversaries couldn't give a flying dynamic fark about ethics. And you just can't counter that with perfectly ethical weapons.

The big question is, which candidate(s) exhibit a historical passion for the goals you'd want to achieve? Which of them is committed to solving problems rather than simply personal gain? Bear in mind, that after the fight, none of them will come home with clean hands, so that metric is rather irrelevant, at least in a practical sense.

??

sir_eccles Aug 16th 2016 7:39 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP (Post 12028026)
Again, I find the anti-Clinton rhetoric to be shrill and absurd, and I don't even care much for her myself. I haven't heard one substantive reason why she's supposedly the devil incarnate (and no, "I don't trust her" without anything factual to back it up really doesn't count as an answer.) Some people are just whingers.

What it probably comes down to is that they don't want to take orders from a woman, in just the same way that they didn't want to take orders from a black man.

anotherlimey Aug 16th 2016 7:57 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by morpeth (Post 12027886)
I agree this is a very crazy election. While I am not an Obama supporter, I almost feel it is a pity he cant extend his presidency for a year and have both parties disqualify their candidates and start over the primary season.

Literally everyone in my office wants this to happen.

Anian Aug 16th 2016 8:22 am

Re: 2016 Election
 
Hillary against Trump is like the Mafia against a baboon. As self-serving as the Mafia are they are ultimately good at running things, but the baboon just makes a lot of noise and insists you should be impressed by his butt.

morpeth Aug 16th 2016 8:44 am

Re: 2016 Election
 

Originally Posted by RoadWarriorFromLP (Post 12028035)
I have no idea what that actually means. And I'm frankly not confident that you are in a position to judge, given your own comments about economics.



That's what it comes down to. You have this gut feeling about her that is visceral and based upon nothing. You've been told for 20+ years that she's terrible, so it just "feels right" not to trust her even though you don't have a logical reason for it.

If disliking her feels good, then do it. Unbelievable.

Poll after poll have shown the majority of people do not feel she is trustworthy, and to some a reason not to vote for her, and you may be completely correct that 20 plus years of coverage of the issue certainly has influenced people.

Considering his aggressive business record, and inability to articulate clear policies on many issues, I do not think it would be unreasonable to question the trustworthiness of Trump. In fact, and I am unqualified to determine this from any medical knowledge, I have wondered whether Trump may have some early signs of dementia.

I couldn't care less about Clinton's emails in terms of evaluating whether she has policies that I believe will be successful.

This demonization by the right of the left, by the left of the right, has contributed to this silly election season.


All times are GMT -12. The time now is 10:44 pm.

Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.