Jump to content

[RESULTS ARE FINAL] 2016 Election for President of the United States | Donald Trump Victory

cr47t

By cr47t
in Debates

Recommended Posts

Aerion Brightflame Newbie

Aerion Brightflame

Posted
Posted

Since Green's are now relevant, here are some quotes by Jill Stein;

 

https://twitter.com/DrJillStein/status/715230945679380481

 

This is in part damming evidence because it's almost impossible to want to promote clean energy and want to shut down Nuclear Power over something insanely naive as the fear they can be weaponised. Yes, they can be turned into weapons, but the nations with Nuclear Power already have Nuclear Weapons for the most part. The plants themselves are the best source of clean energy we have access too right now, and produce less waste than existing plants iirc. 

 

http://gp.org/cgi-bin/vote/propdetail?pid=496

 

Additionally as a member of the Green part she's obligied to support homeopathy as an alternative medical treatment. Which is a little crazy once again. 

 

Finally she supports admiriable things lke free college education and abolishing student debt... Whilst also eliminating all carbon emissions by 2030, and proposing a New Deal that will spend 20k per green job in an effort to get everyone employeed. All of them are wonderful policies and I support them whole-heartedly. You just can't afford them. I don't think there's a fisical plan on earth that could cover all of the things Green's set out to do - It's arguably true of all parties, but it's more damming for Green's because there's usually cost more, and they have to stand on the princaple of being able to achieve it more than most parties. 

 

Greens, as ever remain one of the best places to invest a vote to into to feel good, I just don't think they are ever the party you want to have executive control. Relatively large stake within a parliament? Sure, that's wonderful, but never ever given actual power. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
bury the year Newbie

bury the year

Posted
Posted

Nothing changes unless Hilary gets a formal charge over the emails. Which would make almost the entire party look like morons.

About that...

 

tl;dr - The whole FBI probe was regarding a series of correspondences from diplomats in Pakistan to their counterparts in the US re: drone strikes, which are open secrets in Pakistan but above top clearance stateside. The "violation of email procedure" came when diplomats didn't have access to weigh on whether to attempt a drone strike or not, and they wouldn't have access to secured equipment in time so they had to use smartphones or less-secure methods (aka "low-side communication"). Clinton herself and her server were (as expected) a red herring stirred up by rivals: the true focus was against individual State Dept diplomats and their low-side correspondence. Multiple Washington legal experts have stated many times already that she will not receive criminal charges due to lack of mens rea, so I hope this disclosure finally puts this nonsense to rest.

 

EDIT: Full article text for those on the other side of the paywall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ryusei the Morning Star Community Regular

Ryusei the Morning Star

Posted
Posted

I suggest you tell us what you mean instead of making us guess, please.

Well I blame the media too, but this judge crap is really getting old. Apologize and move on. He's slipping in polls and it's not good

 

I don't buy the "racist" sheet, but he's being incompetent ATM and that's not good.

 

I'll explain in detail after I get my computer, driving atm

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ryusei the Morning Star Community Regular

Ryusei the Morning Star

Posted
Posted

I suggest you tell us what you mean instead of making us guess, please.

 

Ok

 

Trump is not fit to be President. He has shown a decisive lack of ability to prioritize and is overly arrogant

 

While I find many of his policies appealing, he cannot win a race by just winging it constantly. He has a gem in that he got saddled with an opponent with plenty of flaws of her own, but instead he's squandering everything he gained. Trump had a six week head start after his strong finish, and he just shat all over that. How?

 

He got four golden opportunities recently, and he blew every damn one

 

1) Consolidation: Everyone from Lindsey Graham to Paul Ryan were falling in line between him. He was moving forward in talks, and he secured a staggering 25% of Bernie's supporters from his strong position on Trade and Jobs. But what is he now? Not a job bringer, but a "racist"

 

I don't agree with his critique of the Judge, but I don't think that condones him to being a racist. It does however show how impulsive and ignorant he is. Trump doesn't need much of the Hispanic Vote. If he can secure Romney's share he's gold, but instead he goes after an American Judge based on his parents.

 

Fine. The Judge did break precedence with his unsealing of the documents. File for a recusement. There is no funking reason to air your civil case in a federal election. And the way he did it was dumb. 

 

What has it gotten him? Unendorsements. funking Unendorsements. 

 

2) Hillary's "Foreign Policy" Speech

 

This was so easy to do away with. It wasn't a FP speech at all, it was an Anti-Donald Speech. He could have attacked her using her own words or on lybia again. But nope. He even told he staff to go back to the Judge over it. 

 

Even a simple statement like sarcastically asking Hillary if she was giving a Trump Speech or a FP speech would have been crippling. But no.

 

3) The Jobs Report

 

Obama is a huge weakpoint for Hillary actually. Unemployment is "down" because unemployment doesn't count people who just call it quits and leave the labor force. We have more than a half a million of those this quarter. That is funking abysmal. Guess who said this was true in December. Donald Trump. Guess who isn't talking about it at all now. Donald Dimwit Trump

 

Then there is the recession forecast. Literally nobody, economist or politician took Trump seriously when he said one was coming. But now it seems like there is one. This is a recurring trend that started with Brussels. Trump has good intuition. But is he hammering on that? Hell funking no.

 

4) Tom already pretty much cleaned this out, but the Emails. The state department report is damning to Hillary. If Bernie, who "doesn't wanna hear about her damn emails" realizes this, why can't funking Trump?

 

I'm starting to feel despite his policies being exactly what this country needs, and him showing a lot of intuition, the man is too impulsive and ignorant of his own potential to be the POTUS 

 

I give Trump 2-3 weeks to clean sheet up, as Sen. Corker suggested, otherwise this is over. 

 

As of now, I'm with her

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aerion Brightflame Newbie

Aerion Brightflame

Posted
Posted

But Rinne what she and her staff used the server for pales compared to the fact it existed in the first place. They don't need to prove mens rea - Negligence is enough of a motivation if she violated the espionage act. Because the crux of the matter as an outsider isn't 'What were her intentions when she endangered national security', it's 'Did she endanger national security'. Mens rea should be irrelevant here - Or at least only affecting the severity of the sentance, not whether or not she gets one. 

 

Like the existence of the server and some of Hilary's behaviour should be enough to get a charge of some kind. If any regular person ended up in Hilary's position they'd be crucified over that alone. She should not get an escape from these actions just because the investigation is looking at something else. If they can verify Hilary's private server caused a threat to national security, she should be punished for it regardless of her motivations. Because negligence of that kind from the Secretary of State is insane. 

 

A lack of conviction or punishment will be incredibly disappointing. She should not get a pass on the virtue of being Clinton. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
epicmemesbro Newbie

epicmemesbro

Posted
Posted

To be honest I thought Hillary was not eligible to run for office because title 18 section 2071 of the United States code states:

 

 

 

(a)Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. (b)Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.
 
 
 
 
Regardless if this would be enforced for not, If I had to choose I would be slightly more inclined towards Hillary, other than several policy changes that I wouldn't agree with it wouldn't drastically affect me. I mean, what could possibly go wrong? Another Benghazi scandal? doubt it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathanael D. Striker Apprentice

Nathanael D. Striker

Posted
Posted

I'm concerned. I have Persian and Russian blood. And neither of those two countries are currently on great terms with Trump. Am I tainted cause my ancestors happened to live in Iran? Or Russia?

 

You are not tainted, partner. No one can be tainted by their lineage. If one thinks that, then they think wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bury the year Newbie

bury the year

Posted
Posted

Last Democratic primary in Washington DC has closed, and my predictions were correct. Clinton sweeps Sanders, 14-2.

 

So as his media window is closing, Sanders has announced his "demands" for DNC reform. My thoughts are as follows:

 

New leadership in the DNC: Debbie Wasserman Schultz has already stated she has no intentions of stepping down from her position, even though she's consistently regarded as unpopular by DNC higher ups and a lot of others in the party. Not gonna happen, though a lot of people may want otherwise.

 

Elimination of superdelegates: If this were any other year I could see this having a better chance, but the rise of Trump proves that major parties need some sort of safety valve to prevent an outsider candidate from derailing the whole process. (A/N: Gee, that sounds familiar...) Even though I think proportional delegate systems are what would have truly helped the GOP instead of winner-take-all, I don't think public optics would make this the right time for this change to happen.

 

Same-day registration for voting: DNC doesn't have control over this: individual states set registration rules. It could be adopted as part of DNC guidelines, particularly since most Democrats I know are in favor of this.

 

Eliminate open primaries: See above. Also, why doesn't Bernie try to get rid of caucuses at the same time? I personally think it's because he was more favored in caucus states this year, which smacks of pettiness to me.

 

This list doesn't bode well for Sanders imho: he's wasted his leverage here. Instead of trying to reform the party platform, which I think DNC leaders would've been more amenable to, it just look like to me that he's crying foul and trying to upset a process that he believes "stole" the nomination from him. Not impressed. Let's hope this chicanery ends before the convention and we can start unifying to prevent Trump 2016.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cr47t Proficient

cr47t

Posted
  • Author
Posted

It's funny how Trump lost most of the caucuses though iirc 

 

And he's a populist too

Well, caucuses ARE less democratic than primaries after all.

 

Also, why hasn't this moved to Debates after the creation of the subforum?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vla1ne Newbie

vla1ne

Posted
Posted

Democracy sucks anyway.

maybe so, but if we could at least get honest politicians (yes i know it's a contradiction) then it would suck a lot less. it's one of the better models assuming those in charge have commons sense and the people's best interests at heart. but seeing as they currently are demonstrating that they don't, well, it sucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
vla1ne Newbie

vla1ne

Posted
Posted

so essentially trumps switching the peeson in charge of his campaign? only time will tell how good that goes over, on another note...

 

 

Revolution in trump world

TRUMP WORLD

Field spell

When this card is activated, send all "illegal" monsters on the field back to their original countries. As long as you control a face-up "Donald Trump" monster, neither player can Illegally Special Summon monsters from outside the United States. Mexico must pay 500 life points each turn to build your wall, if they do not, this card is destroyed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brinolovania Newbie

Brinolovania

Posted
Posted

TRUMP WORLD

Field spell

When this card is activated, send all "illegal" monsters on the field back to their original countries. As long as you control a face-up "Donald Trump" monster, neither player can Illegally Special Summon monsters from outside the United States. Mexico must pay 500 life points each turn to build your wall, if they do not, this card is destroyed.

We need a full set of this sheet, right now. Someone get on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...