ppaw1999;1813104 wrote:With so many legislators in the Republican party coming out against Trump I can see Trump having a hard time trying to getting anything done.

True as well.

However, when Congress is in grid lock the President still has to represent the country and make executive decisions. I have no faith Trump will handle foreign affairs in a reasonable manner. At least HRC knows the game.

sleeper;1813107 wrote:True as well.

However, when Congress is in grid lock the President still has to represent the country and make executive decisions. I have no faith Trump will handle foreign affairs in a reasonable manner. At least HRC knows the game.

I agree.

sleeper;1813107 wrote:True as well.

However, when Congress is in grid lock the President still has to represent the country and make executive decisions. I have no faith Trump will handle foreign affairs in a reasonable manner. At least HRC knows the game.

I'm not so sure he doesn't know the game. Granted, some of the things he's said have been terribly problematic from a foreign policy standpoint, but I think those have been for the purpose of pandering to the blind nationalism of a portion of the voting base.

Given how long he's apparently been involved in making deals with politicians to business-related ends, I'm betting he at least knows the game side of politics. Doesn't make him competent, really, but it makes him informed on the "how to get stuff done" side of politicking, even potentially at the international level.

I would also say that hardly makes him a "Washington outsider," though. I think so many of the Washington politicians are opposing him because they think he's unfit and untrustworthy. Not because he's not an insider.

sleeper;1813107 wrote:True as well.

However, when Congress is in grid lock the President still has to represent the country and make executive decisions. I have no faith Trump will handle foreign affairs in a reasonable manner. At least HRC knows the game.

Does she ever; she has taken the politics of personal enrichment to historic levels with foreign donations.

But you have every right to support the most corrupt, serial lying, money-launderer in political history.

Why the hell do we have to pander to the rest of the world? The union ways have ruined industry we don't need them ruining our diplomacy.

Automatik;1813047 wrote:You nailed it and you don't even realize it. I'm not worried or concerned about it. The GOP should follow suit. Let them focus on the more important issues.

I suppose that speaking of religions bothers you in its redundancy much the same way that social causes screamed by SJW's bother me. I'm ok with that.

Not sure how you're missing my point. I'm referring to the GOP pushing policies based on religion.

To simplify it: get religion out of government and public education.

O-Trap;1813114 wrote:I'm not so sure he doesn't know the game. Granted, some of the things he's said have been terribly problematic from a foreign policy standpoint, but I think those have been for the purpose of pandering to the blind nationalism of a portion of the voting base.

Given how long he's apparently been involved in making deals with politicians to business-related ends, I'm betting he at least knows the game side of politics. Doesn't make him competent, really, but it makes him informed on the "how to get stuff done" side of politicking, even potentially at the international level.

I would also say that hardly makes him a "Washington outsider," though. I think so many of the Washington politicians are opposing him because they think he's unfit and untrustworthy. Not because he's not an insider.

He said, in context, that he wants Japan and South Korea to get their own nuclear weapons. He said, in context, that he would not defend NATO states unless they satisfied his conditions.

Either of these should automatically disqualify anyone from holding public office much less the POTUS. He has no business going anywhere near the White House.

QuakerOats;1813115 wrote:Does she ever; she has taken the politics of personal enrichment to historic levels with foreign donations.

But you have every right to support the most corrupt, serial lying, money-launderer in political history.

I don't support her; she has my vote because the alternative is that bad.

GOP owns it!

sleeper;1813126 wrote:I don't support her; she has my vote because the alternative is that bad.

I appreciate your candor; supporting a criminal at the ballot box and publicly acknowledging same is a rarity.

Automatik;1813124 wrote:Not sure how you're missing my point. I'm referring to the GOP pushing policies based on religion.

To simplify it: get religion out of government and public education.

I assume this includes the radicals in government and education whose religion is earth worship.

Oh yes, I love this topic.

Science is wrong, ammirite?

sleeper;1813125 wrote:He said, in context, that he wants Japan and South Korea to get their own nuclear weapons. He said, in context, that he would not defend NATO states unless they satisfied his conditions.

Either of these should automatically disqualify anyone from holding public office much less the POTUS. He has no business going anywhere near the White House.

I think I mentioned this before here, but I think things like that are him pandering to the voter base.

Make no mistake, I agree that he's unfit to hold office. I'm just not sure that all the outrageous things he says are without calculation. When it comes to things like branding, posturing, and promoting, Trump seems like a savant. Dude isn't good at much, but that's one area in which he seems very competent.

Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson had another tough night on the campaign trail when he couldn't come up with the name of a foreign leader during an interview Wednesday.
"Who's your favorite foreign leader," MSNBC's Chris Matthews asked Johnson, who sat beside his running mate, former Massachusetts governor Bill Weld.
Matthews pushed Johson to pick anyone, from any continent or country, after an apparently confused Johnson repeated the question.
"Name one foreign leader that you respect and look up to," Matthews said. "Anybody," he added as Johnson searched for an answer.

Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson had another tough night on the campaign trail when he couldn't come up with the name of a foreign leader during an interview Wednesday.
"Who's your favorite foreign leader," MSNBC's Chris Matthews asked Johnson, who sat beside his running mate, former Massachusetts governor Bill Weld.
Matthews pushed Johson to pick anyone, from any continent or country, after an apparently confused Johnson repeated the question.
"Name one foreign leader that you respect and look up to," Matthews said. "Anybody," he added as Johnson searched for an answer.
I guess I'm having an Aleppo moment," Johnson said
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/09/28/gary-johnson-another-aleppo-moment/91249582/

Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson had another tough night on the campaign trail when he couldn't come up with the name of a foreign leader during an interview Wednesday

It would be nice if they would invite Johnson to the debate stage where his "incompetence" could be on display for all to see. that would settle it once and for all the democrats who worry about him taking votes from Hillary....you know, the candidate that seems to have lapses in memory when convienient.

Hillary down 5 to end September. No bump yet :RpS_razz:

The media FTW

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/09/30/ohio-new-york-times-declare-no-longer-bellwether-trump-pulls-ahead/

bases_loaded;1813193 wrote:Hillary down 5 to end September. No bump yet :RpS_razz:

Where are you getting that? From what I've read, post-debate polls (even Rasmussen) all have Clinton picking up a noticeable bump from the debate. While there haven't been many major ones released since them, the ones I've seen all have her in front.

HitsRus;1813175 wrote:It would be nice if they would invite Johnson to the debate stage where his "incompetence" could be on display for all to see. that would settle it once and for all the democrats who worry about him taking votes from Hillary....you know, the candidate that seems to have lapses in memory when convienient.

There's a difference between just picking a world leader and picking a world leader that you admire. There aren't exactly a lot of countries that exhibit Libertarian principles.

Heretic;1813199 wrote:Where are you getting that? From what I've read, post-debate polls (even Rasmussen) all have Clinton picking up a noticeable bump from the debate. While there haven't been many major ones released since them, the ones I've seen all have her in front.

This.

The only time I hear "good" news in favor of Trump, is on the OC. Lol

SportsAndLady;1813203 wrote:This.

The only time I hear "good" news in favor of Trump, is on the OC. Lol

Well, I guess after noticing his link in his other post, he could have been using Breitbart, as they have an article about a LA Times poll having Trump up by about 6 points. The Times was easily the first poll to have Trump tied/in front when he made his last surge and Breitbart's president is on Trump's staff (so they make HuffPo look unbiased), but you gotta take whatever you get, I guess.

The polls don't matter unless Trump is up by 10-15 points. He has no ground game and HRC is going to absolutely stomp on election day. Trump has no clue how to compete against the get out the vote DNC infrastructure that will quite literally bus people to the polls to vote for HRC.

I'm ready for our first female President. Thanks GOP!

sleeper;1813212 wrote:The polls don't matter unless Trump is up by 10-15 points. He has no ground game and HRC is going to absolutely stomp on election day. Trump has no clue how to compete against the get out the vote DNC infrastructure that will quite literally bus people to the polls to vote for HRC.

I wouldn't say 10-15 points....But I think Trump +4 would be basically a dead heat due to his poor ground game.

Polls will be even more useless this year because both candidates are so disliked that a large number of voters might very well change their mind in the booth, not to mention the 10% or so of people saying they'll vote 3rd party.

My guess is that Trump is up 8-10% and the media doesnt cover it that way

SportsAndLady;1813203 wrote:This.

The only time I hear "good" news in favor of Trump, is on the OC. Lol

Spock;1813220 wrote:My guess is that Trump is up 8-10% and the media doesnt cover it that way

And right on cue!