Let's be honest, in this election you have a turd who tells you he's a turd and a turd who tries to cover herself in sugary glaze to look like a chocolate donut. In the end its just a polished turd.

Anyone who tells you that EITHER of these two will be a good President or they are SO much better than the other candidate is truly a partisan hack. They are the two worst candidates since I have had the ability to vote (1996 election).

And yet Ronald Reagan's Secretary of State George Schultz says "God Help Us" if Trump is elected but not Hillary.

Robert Costa (@costareports) tweeted at 11:12 AM on Mon, Aug 15, 2016:
"God help us." That's how fmr. Reagan Sec. of State George Shultz referred to the prospect of a Trump administration, today at @HooverInst
(https://twitter.com/costareports/status/765204633048354816?s=03)

Enjoy.

BoatShoes;1807525 wrote:And yet Ronald Reagan's Secretary of State George Schultz says "God Help Us" if Trump is elected but not Hillary.

Robert Costa (@costareports) tweeted at 11:12 AM on Mon, Aug 15, 2016:
"God help us." That's how fmr. Reagan Sec. of State George Shultz referred to the prospect of a Trump administration, today at @HooverInst
(https://twitter.com/costareports/status/765204633048354816?s=03)

Enjoy.

So you are saying Republicans are willing to admit Trump is a turd but yet Democrats are not willing to get their head out of the rabbit hole and do the same?


You also added information that wasn't there. He stated his opinion on a Trump administration, he said nothing about Hillary.

O-Trap;1807041 wrote:The phrasing of the start of this comment was ironic, I think. "What difference does it make ..."

It wasn't ironic .....

Anyone else find it ironic that Russia is a focus of this election? I remember quite a few people jerking off to Obama mocking Romney by telling him this isn't the 80's, there is no Cold War. I am willing to bet those same people won't admit they or their deity Obama were wrong.

like_that;1807546 wrote:Anyone else find it ironic that Russia is a focus of this election? I remember quite a few people jerking off to Obama mocking Romney by telling him this isn't the 80's, there is no Cold War. I am willing to bet those same people won't admit they or their deity Obama were wrong.

Yeah, I've been thinking the same thing. Along with ISIS being the jv team. I don't think Obama wins that election with an objective and critical media.

Russia, the focus? That's a stretch IMO. This election is all over the place regarding topics, views, etc. It changes daily.

I do recall ISIS being downplayed though. I bought into it. They were originially thought to be a ragtag crew unable to get much accomplished. That was wrong...very wrong.

Automatik;1807553 wrote:Russia, the focus? That's a stretch IMO. This election is all over the place regarding topics, views, etc. It changes daily.

I do recall ISIS being downplayed though. I bought into it. They were originially thought to be a ragtag crew unable to get much accomplished. That was wrong...very wrong.

Don't kid yourself. Russia is becoming a bigger player by day.

Russia, ISIS indirectly (obama mocked the idea of troops in Iraq), and Iran were all downplayed or mocked by Obama during that debate. Romney hit on all three of them. Read the debate transcript if you don't believe me.

I won't hold my breath waiting for any Obama supporters to admit he was wrong. (Edit: I am not referring to you specifically here)

jmog;1807528 wrote:So you are saying Republicans are willing to admit Trump is a turd but yet Democrats are not willing to get their head out of the rabbit hole and do the same?


You also added information that wasn't there. He stated his opinion on a Trump administration, he said nothing about Hillary.

George Schultz doesn't think the dem nominee is a turd. This is what he had to say when,Obama nominated her as Secretary of State.

George Shultz, Ronald Reagan's secretary of state, also lauds the Clinton appointment. "I think she could be a very good secretary of state," he says. "She is well-informed, she's got lots of energy--intellectual energy and physical energy--to do the job. She's curious. She reads. She works very hard. She can listen. And she's known around the world, so she has standing. All those things would stand her in good stead."

A bit different from "God Help Us."

Hope that helps.

like_that;1807556 wrote:Don't kid yourself. Russia is becoming a bigger player by day.

Russia, ISIS indirectly (obama mocked the idea of troops in Iraq), and Iran were all downplayed or mocked by Obama during that debate. Romney hit on all three of them. Read the debate transcript if you don't believe me.

I won't hold my breath waiting for any Obama supporters to admit he was wrong. (Edit: I am not referring to you specifically here)

No it isn't. Russia is flailing since the collapse of ooil prices. Equivalent to Trump alt-right trolls who think they have a movement or something when they have nothing.

like_that;1807546 wrote:Anyone else find it ironic that Russia is a focus of this election? I remember quite a few people jerking off to Obama mocking Romney by telling him this isn't the 80's, there is no Cold War. I am willing to bet those same people won't admit they or their deity Obama were wrong.

like_that;1807556 wrote:Don't kid yourself. Russia is becoming a bigger player by day.

Russia, ISIS indirectly (obama mocked the idea of troops in Iraq), and Iran were all downplayed or mocked by Obama during that debate. Romney hit on all three of them. Read the debate transcript if you don't believe me.

I won't hold my breath waiting for any Obama supporters to admit he was wrong. (Edit: I am not referring to you specifically here)

Correct. Romney did state Russia was the bigger geopolitical threat. I disagreed with it then and do now.
It isn't Russia, it is China. Russia is more in the headlines, but China has the better army, navy, cyber systems, better economy, and is creating havoc in the south China sea.
The only thing Russia has are nukes over China.


Was Obama wrong in 12, ehh, sure why not. I will agree though that Obama has misplayed Putin and Russia since he retook office 2012.
Then again, I'm not sure Romney would have fared much better.

I do agree with you oddly that Russia is somehow becoming part of this election and to me it is intriguing. The news stories and hacks are really interesting and the fact that it is not a bigger national security threat/ story is odd. Shouldn't the fact that a foreign government hacked a political party be a bigger deal?

I don't think it is the main focus, that seems to be more a sense of America's stance in the world (Trump's: We are losing and I will make us strong v. Clinton's: Together we will continue to be great)

BoatShoes;1807558 wrote:No it isn't. Russia is flailing since the collapse of ooil prices. Equivalent to Trump alt-right trolls who think they have a movement or something when they have nothing.

LOL I would expect nothing less from our resident Obama apologist. Even Ptown is willing to partially admit Obama was wrong.

BoatShoes;1807557 wrote:George Schultz doesn't think the dem nominee is a turd. This is what he had to say when,Obama nominated her as Secretary of State.



A bit different from "God Help Us."

Hope that helps.

Do you even read what you post before you copy/paste it?

We are talking about the current POTUS election, not 2009 when she was appointed SoS. Your quote would have been informative and supportive to your post if it had been from Schultz you know, since maybe 2015 and talking about her becoming POTUS (maybe he does support her, I have no clue).

I venture to bet that a LOT more damning evidence of her character has come to light since 2009 providing more evidence to consider.

Instead, all your post does is keep your normal shtick of moving the goal posts. You get shown an error and copy/paste something else to distract from the error or ask for something else to be "proven".

BoatShoes;1807557 wrote:George Schultz doesn't think the dem nominee is a turd. This is what he had to say when,Obama nominated her as Secretary of State.

A bit different from "God Help Us."

Hope that helps.

BoatShoes;1807525 wrote:And yet Ronald Reagan's Secretary of State George Schultz says "God Help Us" if Trump is elected but not Hillary.

Robert Costa (@costareports) tweeted at 11:12 AM on Mon, Aug 15, 2016:
"God help us." That's how fmr. Reagan Sec. of State George Shultz referred to the prospect of a Trump administration, today at @HooverInst
(https://twitter.com/costareports/status/765204633048354816?s=03)

Enjoy.

LOL, as if anybody here thinks that Shultz is relevant today.

jmog;1807561 wrote:Do you even read what you post before you copy/paste it?

We are talking about the current POTUS election, not 2009 when she was appointed SoS. Your quote would have been informative and supportive to your post if it had been from Schultz you know, since maybe 2015 and talking about her becoming POTUS (maybe he does support her, I have no clue).

I venture to bet that a LOT more damning evidence of her character has come to light since 2009 providing more evidence to consider.

Instead, all your post does is keep your normal shtick of moving the goal posts. You get shown an error and copy/paste something else to distract from the error or ask for something else to be "proven".

This is what he does all the time. You should have learned by now just to ignore him.

like_that;1807560 wrote:LOL I would expect nothing less from our resident Obama apologist. Even Ptown is willing to partially admit Obama was wrong.

Yep!

BoatShoes;1807505 wrote:CcRunner/Spock didn't even say he is voting for Trump because he thinks he will be a good president?

I'm guessing CCRunner, Spock, Dr.Pizza, and QuakerOats have all abstained from voting.

Using a common argument that floats around every election, their abstaining from a vote here means they automatically voted in support of Clinton for this poll.

jmog;1807510 wrote:... tries to cover herself in sugary glaze to look like a chocolate donut.

I mean, this could have been at Bill's behest. Maybe he's into the sugary glaze.

QuakerOats;1807530 wrote:It wasn't ironic .....

A well-publicized phrase used in defense of her actions now being used in an indictment of her actions? That seems to fit even the more strict definition of irony.

O-Trap;1807581 wrote: Using a common argument that floats around every election, their abstaining from a vote here means they automatically voted in support of Clinton for this poll.

No, it pretty clearly means they chose not to have their vote matter.

O-Trap;1807581 wrote:


I mean, this could have been at Bill's behest. Maybe he's into the sugary glaze.

It does sound like something he would be into, glazed covered piece of shit.

gut;1807582 wrote:No, it pretty clearly means they chose not to have their vote matter.

Apologies. That was tongue-in-cheek. There is a fairly prevalent notion (I've been told it at least a dozen times so far this election cycle.) that unless one votes for Candidate A, they're voting for Candidate B.

"A vote for anyone but Trump is a vote for Clinton."
"A vote for anyone but Clinton is a vote for Trump."

That sort of thing.

jmog;1807585 wrote:It does sound like something he would be into, glazed covered piece of shit.

Maybe, but that's his business.

Johnson is in

http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2016/08/libertarians_can_swap_in_gary.html

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

jmog;1807561 wrote:Do you even read what you post before you copy/paste it?

We are talking about the current POTUS election, not 2009 when she was appointed SoS. Your quote would have been informative and supportive to your post if it had been from Schultz you know, since maybe 2015 and talking about her becoming POTUS (maybe he does support her, I have no clue).

I venture to bet that a LOT more damning evidence of her character has come to light since 2009 providing more evidence to consider.

Instead, all your post does is keep your normal shtick of moving the goal posts. You get shown an error and copy/paste something else to distract from the error or ask for something else to be "proven".

You showed no error and made no point. Guaranteed his opinion about Hillary like old school GOPers in normal-land has not changed.

But the whole point of course was to laugh at your derp. You suggested that because Schultz says God Help Us about Trump "well...golly gee,boatshoes you added that last bit about him not saying that about Hillary! Jeepers how do you know he didn't say that about Hillary in secret later on!"

Farking lol. Keep bringing the laughs and enjoy voting for Trump. George Schultz and Condi Rice will be voting for Hillary.

CenterBHSFan;1807562 wrote:LOL, as if anybody here thinks that Shultz is relevant today.



This is what he does all the time. You should have learned by now just to ignore him.



Yep!

Ha you are absolutely right. Normal, thoughtful GOPers are sadly irrelevant today.

Making Washington's intellectual elites and insiders irrelevant is the goal. Trump may be the last best hope for that to ever occur. Just another of the many reasons to back him.

QuakerOats;1807653 wrote:Making Washington's intellectual elites and insiders irrelevant is the goal. Trump may be the last best hope for that to ever occur. Just another of the many reasons to back him.

So, hiring someone who openly admits to having played that "insider" game and knowing how it's played ... that's the guy you think it going to be oh-so opposed to it?

Praytell, did you vote for Obama in his first term? He had the same level of experience. He wasn't a "Washington insider" then. Most Republicans I knew were criticizing his lack of experience, but apparently that's a good thing now? I'm okay with a case made either way. I just would like some damn consistency.

QuakerOats;1807653 wrote:Making Washington's intellectual elites and insiders irrelevant is the goal. Trump may be the last best hope for that to ever occur. Just another of the many reasons to back him.

Perhaps you can get a job spinning on his communications team right next to Katrina Pierson (who believes Catholics aren't real christians) HAHAHAHA

Saw today that Manafort...the Russian paid thug...was demoted (and that is why we are talking about Russia because Trump is so utterly incompetent he has made himself,an,unwitting agent of the Russian Federation).

And, now Brietbart News' Steve Bannon is the chair of his campaign HAHAHAHA