Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
2016 Presidential Election Thread: TRUMP vs. Hillary SMACKDOWN 2016 Presidential Election Thread: TRUMP vs. Hillary SMACKDOWN
View Poll Results: The 45th President of the United States of America will be
Hillary
332 46.63%
TRUMP
190 26.69%
In to watch it burn
161 22.61%
Bastard
73 10.25%
im tryin to tell you about ****in my wife in the *** and youre asking me these personal questions
57 8.01%

09-01-2016 , 01:29 PM
He mention Cruz's birthplace a lot actually.
09-01-2016 , 01:34 PM
It's probably not real high on their agendas, but I would like McCain, Rubio, Paul Ryan, et al. to go on tv today to tell us again how they support the party nominee.
09-01-2016 , 01:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorKeeed
I mean not if the alternative is Ted Cruz. It is possible he would do even worse than TRUMP.
Its really, really hard to do worse than Trump. Cruz has obvious issues but I think he does way better alot of the time. Rubio/Kasich look like George Washington compared to those 2. Jeb is impossible to judge because it seems like we're in a different universe from where he could have won the nomination.
09-01-2016 , 01:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Legend
It's weird to think of how scared I was for the prospect of Romney winning in 2012. He seems dreamy now compared to trump...
While one may disagree with his overall philosophy, only a non thinking closed minded political hack could be "scared" about Mr. Milquetoast Mitt Romney being president.

Mr Tin-eared Spreadsheet would have been about the last person in the country to do something truly damaging or impulsively stupid.

The worst thing possibly Mr. Excitement could have done was bore the country to tears. Please mention the "dangerous" positions he espoused?

Only a true partisan could equate Romney with scary.
09-01-2016 , 01:56 PM
Can we make Tiger Woods great again
09-01-2016 , 02:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Legend
It's weird to think of how scared I was for the prospect of Romney winning in 2012. He seems dreamy now compared to trump...
Yeah, Romney was obv pandering to the mouth breathers like he had to, but I don't think he became truly terrifying until after the election when it became widely known how incompetent his campaign was. He really thought he was going to win easily because of groupthink and plain idiocy. That's what destroyed GWB as POTUS and Romney might have been even worse. People are gonna just assume a boring white guy is smart enough for the job, but I don't think Romney was.
09-01-2016 , 02:05 PM
I was in Berlin recently and saw the infamous graffiti painting of Brezhnev and Erich Honecker (head of the GDR) kissing each other on the lips and thought to myself, "Wouldn't a picture of Trump and Putin doing that be awesome?"

Apparently, this was fulfilled months before I even thought of it. Hell, it might have already been posted here.

Spoiler:
09-01-2016 , 02:05 PM
Reagan ran a great campaign which obviously meant he was a genius and a great potus.
09-01-2016 , 02:13 PM
I imagine even Reagan and Romney knew the difference between necessary and sufficient.
09-01-2016 , 02:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by np1235711
While one may disagree with his overall philosophy, only a non thinking closed minded political hack could be "scared" about Mr. Milquetoast Mitt Romney being president.

Mr Tin-eared Spreadsheet would have been about the last person in the country to do something truly damaging or impulsively stupid.

The worst thing possibly Mr. Excitement could have done was bore the country to tears. Please mention the "dangerous" positions he espoused?

Only a true partisan could equate Romney with scary.
Getting rid of Obamacare without replacing it on federal level (he advocated waiting for states to implement their own versions one by one), even a monster like Trump isn't down for that
09-01-2016 , 02:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
Yeah, I get that. But, it's one of your big issues and it's really shallow.
Color me a skeptic on you getting that.

But avoiding groupthink and outright stupidity among your closest advisors is absolutely one of the most important things a POTUS needs to do. Effective presidents like Clinton and Obama have talked about how difficult it can be to avoid the presidential bubble. Ignoring that reduces people to your kind of shallow "Reagan sucks he's not on my team" football style politics.
09-01-2016 , 02:46 PM
we've found out that trump's "policies" are literally whatever the last person he talked to said to him

that's why he seems to change his mind so much on every issue. Not because he has beliefs or cares about policy, but because he's parroting the last thing he heard, quite like a small child
09-01-2016 , 02:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dessin d'enfant
Color me a skeptic on you getting that.

But avoiding groupthink and outright stupidity among your closest advisors is absolutely one of the most important things a POTUS needs to do. Effective presidents like Clinton and Obama have talked about how difficult it can be to avoid the presidential bubble. Ignoring that reduces people to your kind of shallow "Reagan sucks he's not on my team" football style politics.
I think it is pretty generous to call Clinton and Obama "effective". Good presidents sure, but they struggled to really get much of anything done.
09-01-2016 , 02:49 PM
and what was the makeup of congress for the majority of their terms?
09-01-2016 , 02:54 PM
I recall Clinton being fairly productive in getting things through Congress.
09-01-2016 , 02:56 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dessin d'enfant
Color me a skeptic on you getting that.

But avoiding groupthink and outright stupidity among your closest advisors is absolutely one of the most important things a POTUS needs to do. Effective presidents like Clinton and Obama have talked about how difficult it can be to avoid the presidential bubble. Ignoring that reduces people to your kind of shallow "Reagan sucks he's not on my team" football style politics.
Reagan was a horrible President and that had nothing to do with not being on my team. I wouldn't be shocked if you think he was a good president though.

I have voted for one or two Republicans (not for POTUS). I'm not a huge team player.
09-01-2016 , 03:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by seattlelou
I recall Clinton being fairly productive in getting things through Congress.
She had a fair number of amendments and things she was a cosponsor on (some of those have dozens of cosponsors), but only three bills she sponsored. (naming a post office and a highway and establishing a house as a historic site)
09-01-2016 , 03:06 PM
The Clinton in question is Billy Jeffs, not Hilldawg.
09-01-2016 , 03:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
Reagan was a horrible President and that had nothing to do with not being on my team. I wouldn't be shocked if you think he was a good president though.

I have voted for one or two Republicans (not for POTUS). I'm not a huge team player.
Fair enough. I perhaps gave you too much credit in your assessment criteria.
09-01-2016 , 03:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by otatop
The Clinton in question is Billy Jeffs, not Hilldawg.
Ah. He did get some things through congress, but some of the things he wanted had more Republican than Democratic support.

To be fair he did get the tax increase on the wealthy through before the Contract with America swept into congress.
09-01-2016 , 03:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefinchster22
Can you explain where you got this idea? There are plenty of things the President can do more or less unilaterally, including commanding the military. Plus if he won he would probably have two Republican houses of Congress to work with.
Dems are taking the house and have a shot at senate. Trump has never held a political position in his life/ has no shot imo.. His "policies" are unconstitutional.. Both sides of the party have already said they won't work with him etc etc. He is drawing dead.

Again I would rather take a lame duck president for 4 years (regardless if he's a racist, sexist, homophobic pig), than I would give a sociopathic, very corrupt/ criminal, capable, career politician the keys to the kingdom so to speak.

What people are afraid trump could do.. Well Hillary has already done or said during her career.
09-01-2016 , 03:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by dessin d'enfant
Fair enough. I perhaps gave you too much credit in your assessment criteria.
Feel free to not give me credit for understanding what you're talking about here.
09-01-2016 , 03:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by WichitaDM
I think it is pretty generous to call Clinton and Obama "effective". Good presidents sure, but they struggled to really get much of anything done.
I was using effective as pretty close to a synonym for good and not just doing stuff.
09-01-2016 , 03:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siculamente
Dems are taking the house and have a shot at senate. Trump has never held a political position in his life/ has no shot imo.. His "policies" are unconstitutional.. Both sides of the party have already said they won't work with him etc etc. He is drawing dead.

Again I would rather take a lame duck president for 4 years (regardless if he's a racist, sexist, homophobic pig), than I would give a sociopathic, very corrupt/ criminal, capable, career politician the keys to the kingdom so to speak.

What people are afraid trump could do.. Well Hillary has already done or said during her career.
No
09-01-2016 , 03:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
Feel free to not give me credit for understanding what you're talking about here.
I was giving you credit for partisan hackery, a massive step up from siculamete/steelhouse/shuffle style pure nonsense.

      
m