Which is Worse?

[Lovebug]

How does Gary Johnson feel to you?

Fox news was talking about third parties the other day.

If Fox were to broadcast that G. J. was polling ten percent in a three way match up he would run away with it.

If a third party ever had a chance, it is now. Sadly, most are partisan voters, and one of the two _______ (I'll be polite and let everyone fill in the blank to their liking) will be Prez. I never felt this discouraged ever, not even when Obama ran against McCain or Romney.

 

[Conservative]

The GOP is already pretty broken.

There are some things that will never change the mind of a leftwing partisan. Different thread same people and same tired argument. The Republican Party will come together to unite behind Trump and the Democrat Party will unite behind Clinton. The question is are the people stupid enough to elect Hillary, one of the most incompetent candidates to run but the left elected and re-elected someone just as bad, Obama. It does seem that ideology does indeed trump actual results in the leftwing world

Go ahead, lefties, vote for Hillary

Why Hillary Clinton is sinking faster than the Titanic | Fox News

 

[Exquisitor]

There are some things that will never change the mind of a leftwing partisan. Different thread same people and same tired argument. The Republican Party will come together to unite behind Trump and the Democrat Party will unite behind Clinton. The question is are the people stupid enough to elect Hillary, one of the most incompetent candidates to run but the left elected and re-elected someone just as bad, Obama. It does seem that ideology does indeed trump actual results in the leftwing world

Go ahead, lefties, vote for Hillary

Why Hillary Clinton is sinking faster than the Titanic | Fox News

Just because someone is across the aisle from you does not prove their incompetence or terror.

Neither of these Candidates should make a bad President and they are actually perfect for the times which is why we have them.

Whether we sink or swim is our collective responsibility and the Presidency has little to do with it alone.

 

[Conservative]

Well, we can't give Trump the opportunity to please his party with Conservative SCOTUS appointments.

We don't want to reward the Republicans with a President even if in name only.

Even though they hurt America for their political ends we don't want to hurt ourselves too much punishing them so if elected we want Trump to be successful and have a second Term.

Just the presence of Hillary Clinton in the Oval Office should chagrin them plenty.

Thus I can remain consistent and keep pulling for Hillary.

Right, we need liberals to re-write the Constitution and legislate through the Courts overturning the will of the people. It really is too bad you don't have higher standards when it comes to the Oval Office and would support one of the most incompetent, immoral, and unqualified individuals to take the office from someone with equal qualifications, Obama.

 

[Conservative]

Just because someone is across the aisle from you does not prove their incompetence or terror.

Neither of these Candidates should make a bad President and they are actually perfect for the times which is why we have them.

Whether we sink or swim is our collective responsibility and the Presidency has little to do with it alone.

You are right, it doesn't matter whether someone is across the aisle but it does matter the accomplishments or in this case the lack of positive meaningful accomplishments of that person across the aisle. When you list those Hillary accomplishments notice the first words that accompany those accomplishments

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/feed/seven-hillary-clintons-biggest-accomplishments/

Fought for
Helped
Told
Stood up for

Are those really accomplishments or simply words that mean nothing significant?

 

[Exquisitor]

You are right, it doesn't matter whether someone is across the aisle but it does matter the accomplishments or in this case the lack of positive meaningful accomplishments of that person across the aisle. When you list those Hillary accomplishments notice the first words that accompany those accomplishments

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/feed/seven-hillary-clintons-biggest-accomplishments/

Fought for
Helped
Told
Stood up for

Are those really accomplishments or simply words that mean nothing significant?

What would you consider an "accomplishment?"

Reagan gave a speech but I can say he had nothing to do with the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Bill Clinton? He vetoed a bill and shut down the Government but what did he have to do with his Boom? Academically he may have been pretty smart but what is this but an ability to regurgitate information?

Bush II? He ordered an invasion and brave American soldiers went to war to depose the Iraqi leader.

Bush I? Nixon? Carter? What have any of your lawmakers "accomplished?"

Right, we need liberals to re-write the Constitution and legislate through the Courts overturning the will of the people. It really is too bad you don't have higher standards when it comes to the Oval Office and would support one of the most incompetent, immoral, and unqualified individuals to take the office from someone with equal qualifications, Obama.

If I could think SCOTUS Conservatives were a good idea I could almost support Trump but I feel they have gone crazy.

 

[Conservative]

Exquisitor;1065887150]What would you consider an "accomplishment?"

Actual results not a verb of trying to do something

Reagan gave a speech but I can say he had nothing to do with the collapse of the Soviet Union.

that is your opinion but Reagan did a lot more than that, he did destroy the Soviet Union as told by Gorbachev. He allowed the American people to keep more of what they earned and that led to the strong economic growth, job creation, and a peace dividend. He restored the American spirit and respect around the world. You call that nothing, I call it results

Bill Clinton? He vetoed a bill and shut down the Government but what did he have to do with his Boom? Academically he may have been pretty smart but what is this but an ability to regurgitate information?

Bill Clinton abused women and you don't have a problem with that. Clinton was smart enough to sign GOP legislation and most of the Contract with America.

Bush II? He ordered an invasion and brave American soldiers went to war to depose the Iraqi leader.

Yes, Bush did what had to be done and would have been done in the future by another US President. Bush won the war in Iraq, Obama lost the peace. Watch the documentary the "Islamic State" and get back to us

Bush I? Nixon? Carter? What have any of your lawmakers "accomplished?"

If I could think SCOTUS Conservatives were a good idea I could almost support Trump but I feel they have gone crazy.[/QUOTE]

All had actual economic and foreign policy accomplishments that can be measured, both good and bad. Fighting for, helping, telling aren't accomplishments they are verbs that don't show any leadership skills at all because the results cannot be tied to anything specific Hillary did.

 

[Conservative]

Actual results not a verb of trying to do something



that is your opinion but Reagan did a lot more than that, he did destroy the Soviet Union as told by Gorbachev. He allowed the American people to keep more of what they earned and that led to the strong economic growth, job creation, and a peace dividend. He restored the American spirit and respect around the world. You call that nothing, I call it results



Bill Clinton abused women and you don't have a problem with that. Clinton was smart enough to sign GOP legislation and most of the Contract with America.



Yes, Bush did what had to be done and would have been done in the future by another US President. Bush won the war in Iraq, Obama lost the peace. Watch the documentary the "Islamic State" and get back to us



All had actual economic and foreign policy accomplishments that can be measured, both good and bad. Fighting for, helping, telling aren't accomplishments they are verbs that don't show any leadership skills at all because the results cannot be tied to anything specific Hillary did.[/QUOTE]

If I could think SCOTUS Conservatives were a good idea I could almost support Trump but I feel they have gone crazy.

Only a radical leftist would take Kagan and Sotomayor over Roberts and Alito. Apparently the Constitution means nothing to you or your ideology

 

[Exquisitor]

Actual results not a verb of trying to do something



that is your opinion but Reagan did a lot more than that, he did destroy the Soviet Union as told by Gorbachev. He allowed the American people to keep more of what they earned and that led to the strong economic growth, job creation, and a peace dividend. He restored the American spirit and respect around the world. You call that nothing, I call it results



Bill Clinton abused women and you don't have a problem with that. Clinton was smart enough to sign GOP legislation and most of the Contract with America.



Yes, Bush did what had to be done and would have been done in the future by another US President. Bush won the war in Iraq, Obama lost the peace. Watch the documentary the "Islamic State" and get back to us



All had actual economic and foreign policy accomplishments that can be measured, both good and bad. Fighting for, helping, telling aren't accomplishments they are verbs that don't show any leadership skills at all because the results cannot be tied to anything specific Hillary did.

Actual results not a verb of trying to do something



that is your opinion but Reagan did a lot more than that, he did destroy the Soviet Union as told by Gorbachev. He allowed the American people to keep more of what they earned and that led to the strong economic growth, job creation, and a peace dividend. He restored the American spirit and respect around the world. You call that nothing, I call it results



Bill Clinton abused women and you don't have a problem with that. Clinton was smart enough to sign GOP legislation and most of the Contract with America.



Yes, Bush did what had to be done and would have been done in the future by another US President. Bush won the war in Iraq, Obama lost the peace. Watch the documentary the "Islamic State" and get back to us



If I could think SCOTUS Conservatives were a good idea I could almost support Trump but I feel they have gone crazy.

All had actual economic and foreign policy accomplishments that can be measured, both good and bad. Fighting for, helping, telling aren't accomplishments they are verbs that don't show any leadership skills at all because the results cannot be tied to anything specific Hillary did.[/QUOTE]

What does Clinton abusing women have to do with his accomplishments unless you consider this an accomplishment? I've already said Bill accomplished nothing and you sound like you think I promoting him.

You totally fail to address my point.

 

[Conservative]

Exquisitor;1065887219]
You totally fail to address my point.

I am not a Bill Clinton supporter at all BUT Bill Clinton was a Governor with budget responsibilities. What has Hillary done to deal with a budget as well as management responsibilities

 

[Exquisitor]

I am not a Bill Clinton supporter at all BUT Bill Clinton was a Governor with budget responsibilities. What has Hillary done to deal with a budget as well as management responsibilities

She's managed successful Campaigns for Presidential Nomination and Senate.

 

[Conservative]

She's managed successful Campaigns for Presidential Nomination and Senate.

All she did was fool a lot of people most of the time and had a campaign manager to spend the money. You call that managing anything? Guess you are one of those who are easily fooled all of the time but based upon your posts I am not at all surprised.

 

[Riveroaks]

Which is worse?

Which is worse for the Republican Party Clinton or Trump?

Never mind who is worse for the Country.

Some of you may have already recognized my vendetta against Congressional Republicans for trying to ruin Obama at our cost just for their deluded political ambition, fear, weakness and racist programing.

So I want to know who is worse for (elected) Republicans so I can make my decision.

Please refrain from never Trump or never Clinton discussion; just the facts and clear understanding please.

First I want to salute your candor about BHO.

Not to worry, he will go down as a great president with LBJ, FDR, Lincoln, and Washington due to his heartfelt care for the needy.

BHO is currently a lame duck and not a threat to the GOP anymore although lots of their minions love still to attack him.

As far as who is worse for the GOP -- Clinton or Trump -- in the short term or in the long term --

Hillary will be a formidable foe in November. If she can rally all her female supporters to turn out, then she may have coattails and this may displace the GOP out of the Senate as well. This would be very bad for the GOP and for the SCOTUS. So in the short term Hillary is clearly worse for the GOP.

In the short term Donald gives the GOP someone to rally around. He is a RINO and that is a good thing because a RINO is normally a moderate, and moderation is good, according to Hesiod the ancient philosopher and poet.

In the long term Donald is not an issue unless he gets elected. If he does, he will stack the court with strict constructionist justices which is a good thing -- that was the whole idea by the Founding Freemasons to begin with. He will also support all the Federal Amendments and not ignore any like Hillary and her activist nominations to the SCOTUS would. So in the long term Donald would be good for the GOP but only IF he can get elected.

It will all depend on the swing states.

Most of the swing states voted for BHO the last 2 times because Romney was so foul and McCain was so inept.

Before that the swing states voted for GWB because he and his wife were such a beautiful couple with their two beautiful miscreant daughters.

Before that the swing states voted for Clinton because he and Hillary and their little liberal angel Chelsea were such a beautiful family -- this was before Monica's cigars which probably turned the swing states against the DEMs and against Al Gore. They were sending a message -- no blowjobs allowed in the Oval Office.

Before that the swing states voted for GHWB on coattails from Reagan.

Before that they all voted for Reagan because Carter's mismanagement was out of control.

Elections are for those in commanding positions to be lost or won.

Hillary is in a commanding position now and Donald is the outsider. In that short term sense Hillary is worse for the GOP than is Donald.

The black and Latino voters for Hillary versus the tv audience of Trump will decide the swing states.

We'll all find out in November who wins.

If I had to bet money I would be compelled by logic and caution to bet on Hillary.

I would have preferred Christie or Jeb myself.

 

[Riveroaks]

All she did was fool a lot of people most of the time and had a campaign manager to spend the money. You call that managing anything? Guess you are one of those who are easily fooled all of the time but based upon your posts I am not at all surprised.

Ad hominem.

Fools use ad hominem's.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

 

[Riveroaks]

I am not a Bill Clinton supporter at all BUT Bill Clinton was a Governor with budget responsibilities. What has Hillary done to deal with a budget as well as management responsibilities

Straw man fallacy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

 

[Riveroaks]

All had actual economic and foreign policy accomplishments that can be measured, both good and bad. Fighting for, helping, telling aren't accomplishments they are verbs that don't show any leadership skills at all because the results cannot be tied to anything specific Hillary did...

What does Clinton abusing women have to do with his accomplishments unless you consider this an accomplishment? I've already said Bill accomplished nothing and you sound like you think I promoting him.

You totally fail to address my point.

Trump is using ad hominem. This tells you something about Trump and Trump's supporters.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

 

[Riveroaks]

Trump of course. Clinton sets the Democrats up for a Nixonesc debacle. Trump would prevent it. Cannot have that.

I don't believe Trump will be responsible for this.

I think Hillary can bring this down on the GOP herself no matter whom she is opposing.

It all depends if all the female voters turn out on election day and vote for Hillary or not.

The day the USA gave women the power of voting it gave them power over men in the USA and probably over the rest of the world too.

Hillary's election will be proof enough of that.

Whereas I would have preferred Madeline Albright to Hillary Clinton as far as the first female chief executive goes, Hillary worked hard to get into position for this.

She deserves it more than Madeline then.

 

[Conservative]

Straw man fallacy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

Independent

: not dependent: as

a (1) : not subject to control by others : self-governing (2) : not affiliated with a larger controlling unit <an independent bookstore>

b (1) : not requiring or relying on something else : not contingent <an independent conclusion> (2) : not looking to others for one's opinions or for guidance in conduct (3) : not bound by or committed to a political party

That leaves you out as you believe what you are told and the marketing of the leftwing leadership. There is nothing in your statement accurate but you do spout the DNC talking points quite well. BHO's record is a disaster and shows his incompetence and Hillary has gained every position held on the coattails of her popular husband. There are no special positive results generated by Hillary and in fact her term in those positions can be characterized as a disaster by every measurable standard.

 

[Riveroaks]

Trump would definitely hurt the Republicans in the short run, possibly even fracturing the party. Whatever comes after him will hopefully learn from the past, and be more... functional. Responsible. Opposed to pandering to fear and anger for quick, easy, and short-lived political gain. You pick your own descriptor.

Your analysis is weak and unsupported.

For example, Trump has brought in a lot of new voters to the GOP -- his own tv audience.

Trump had changed the GOP from an old rich white man's club to more moderate and eclectic.

Trump has brought awareness of the issue of stacking the SCOTUS to the voters. Most of them do not understand however. 55% of Americans do not have guns nor do they care about them and they fear them. The 2nd Amendment will not resonate with more than 45%.

Trump has to hope his 45% of gun enthusiasts will turn out and vote for him.

Still there are more women than gun enthusiasts.

Maybe if the female gun enthusiasts all vote for Trump instead of Hillary then Trump will have a chance.

This would obviously make the NRA the most powerful political organization in the world. Even more powerful than the Jewish support for Israel in the USA.

We'll see in November.

 

[Riveroaks]

Independent



That leaves you out as you believe what you are told and the marketing of the leftwing leadership. There is nothing in your statement accurate but you do spout the DNC talking points quite well. BHO's record is a disaster and shows his incompetence and Hillary has gained every position held on the coattails of her popular husband. There are no special positive results generated by Hillary and in fact her term in those positions can be characterized as a disaster by every measurable standard.

I am not left-ist.

I am "nonpartisan" (officially -- that is what my California primary ballot says -- as proof).

I am also "moderate" -- I would not in good conscience decry Hesiod the ancient philosopher and poet regarding moderation in all things.

YOU are a one trick pony and your only trick is "ad hominem".

Sorry, you lose.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

 

[legalimmigrant]

Lol !!

Yea austerity sux ! Only 8 Trillion in new debt over the last 8 years, should've been 20 Trillion

...and the minimum wage raised to 100 per hour, and, poof, poverty is gone. Why didn't I think about that idea sooner?

 

[legalimmigrant]

You are right, it doesn't matter whether someone is across the aisle but it does matter the accomplishments or in this case the lack of positive meaningful accomplishments of that person across the aisle. When you list those Hillary accomplishments notice the first words that accompany those accomplishments

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/feed/seven-hillary-clintons-biggest-accomplishments/

Fought for
Helped
Told
Stood up for

Are those really accomplishments or simply words that mean nothing significant?

words that mean nothing

 

[Fenton]

I don't believe Trump will be responsible for this.

I think Hillary can bring this down on the GOP herself no matter whom she is opposing.

It all depends if all the female voters turn out on election day and vote for Hillary or not.

The day the USA gave women the power of voting it gave them power over men in the USA and probably over the rest of the world too.

Hillary's election will be proof enough of that.

Whereas I would have preferred Madeline Albright to Hillary Clinton as far as the first female chief executive goes, Hillary worked hard to get into position for this.

She deserves it more than Madeline then.

What Hillary deserves is to be treated like any other American who just got busted running classified data through a private email server

She nor any other Politician deserves to be above the law and if you think the lack of a DOJ indictment equates to a guaranteed win in November then your bias towards a Hillary presidency is clouding your judgment

Hillary is already untrustworthy......
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...oters_dont_trust_hillary_clinton_127567.hband

unlikable.....
I Despise Hillary Clinton, And It Has Nothing To Do With Her Gender

And Trump has caught up with her in key swing states.....
Dead heat: Trump, Clinton tied in 3 swing-state polls - POLITICO

As if those aren't bad enough, add establishment and above the law and corrupt

Voters aren't going to be impressed with her getting away with something that would have landed the average American in prison for years, maybe even decades plus Trump will exploit the lack of indictment to remind voters just how corrupt Washington has become.

She's almost better off being indicted

 

[Riveroaks]

What Hillary deserves is to be treated like any other American who just got busted running classified data through a private email server

She nor any other Politician deserves to be above the law and if you think the lack of a DOJ indictment equates to a guaranteed win in November then your bias towards a Hillary presidency is clouding your judgment

Hillary is already untrustworthy......
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...oters_dont_trust_hillary_clinton_127567.hband

unlikable.....
I Despise Hillary Clinton, And It Has Nothing To Do With Her Gender

And Trump has caught up with her in key swing states.....
Dead heat: Trump, Clinton tied in 3 swing-state polls - POLITICO

As if those aren't bad enough, add establishment and above the law and corrupt

Voters aren't going to be impressed with her getting away with something that would have landed the average American in prison for years, maybe even decades plus Trump will exploit the lack of indictment to remind voters just how corrupt Washington has become.

She's almost better off being indicted

Hillary's emails are old news.

Get up to speed currently.

 

[Conservative]

Hillary's emails are old news.

Get up to speed currently.

What exactly is new news with a so called INDEPENDENT? By definition an independent isn't swayed by rhetoric which obviously doesn't define you. Which Hillary do you believe?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dY77j6uBHI

Too many years of telling people what they want to hear and worrying about being liked vs. doing what is right thus earning respect. Hillary uses words and people like you buy the words ignoring the results. Why is that?