rrfan;1784644 wrote:So because she had a public office in the west wing that makes her qualified. She completely sucked at her job and should be in jail. There is no way I would trust her with anything. The "pile of shit" comment could be considered better than what many think of her experience. Let her be the D's choice and then she can get arrested on her campaign.

BoatShoes;1784647 wrote:I didn't say that makes her qualified. I'm just saying it is silly to suggest her experience is a pile of shit. Experience alone does not make one qualified to be president IMHO.

BoatShoes;1784637 wrote:It is very strange. Kasich is considered a RINO and permanently scarred by things like accepting the federal medicaid money while Trump can say anything and not lose support.

BoatShoes;1784641 wrote:I can totally understand if you don't like Hillary but it seems pretty cray to say her experience is a "pile of shit" - At the very least she was the first first lady to have an office in the west wing and was essentially another chief of staff for two presidential terms and was instrumental in passing at least two major pieces of legislation with a Republican congress.

Hillary has plenty of warts but I wouldn't say experience is one of them. It's like saying Dick Cheney experience was shit.

like_that;1784652 wrote:I'm referring to the performance. Anybody can have a nice resume, but how well did they actually perform?

ptown_trojans_1;1784598 wrote:So many lies and false statements by Trump...sigh.....

ptown_trojans_1;1784617 wrote:Trump is too much of an idiot and a liar.
Give me what I know.
Again, the devil I know, rather than the devil I don't.

QuakerOats;1784660 wrote:When democrats flip/flop it is termed 'evolving'; when R's do it, it is a gotcha lie.

Funny how that works.

Belly35;1784662 wrote:This is known as “motivated reasoning.” Whether or not the consistent information is accurate, we might accept it as fact, as confirmation of our beliefs. This makes us more confident in said beliefs, and even less likely to entertain facts that contradict them. –

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/?page=2#sthash.nexv55Vm.dpuf


Get some big people pants on and start listening to facts about the Hillary...
PT1 be the Patriot you wanted to be not a nose ring Democrat you've become.

As an American I'm not proud of any of the front runner canidates ... but should it come to Hillary vs Trump
I"ll take to one without the blood of American Soldiers left behind to die .... Warrior Ethos

ptown_trojans_1;1784671 wrote:So if a complete idiot, buffoon, and guy who said he would want to kill the families of terrorists, and wants to start trade wars gets elected over someone who, sadly, oversaw the death of 4 Americans, that's ok to you?

With Clinton, we know want we get.
With Trump, we all be dead in 2 years from a nuclear winter, we don't know.
He is so unpredictable, so brash, so insane, that honestly, he is more a threat than Clinton.

You say Warrior Ethos, but look man, if Trump is elected, Hayden even said, some in the military may not follow his orders.
The dude is straight crazy. And everything he said about foreign policy last night was wrong. Everything. He says false statements and lies.

That is more a threat than Hilliary.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1784658 wrote:But by calling him incompetent, these people only reinforce the low regard they have for voters. They insult people by telling them they're being bamboozeled by Trump. People are smarter than that.

gut;1784677 wrote:I disagree. Trump is pandering to the lowest common denominator. Just because you are unhappy with your choices or the establishment doesn't mean you throw support behind a bozo likely to be a disaster.

IMO, Rand Paul is the closest to "the guy" most people want, at least the ones voting for Trump. Or Gary Johnson who can't even get on a stage.

And I cringe, somewhat, at all the bashing of the "establishment". There are plenty of "establishment" characters with a history of getting things done. In a diverse country, no one gets everything they want. Compromise is both necessary and fair in that regard...but "compromising" is now derided as "establishment". Yeah, the voters are pretty dumb.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1784681 wrote: Thinking voters are dumb is arrogant and costly. Romney did it in 2008, Hillary did it in 2008, McCain did it in 2004, etc. When you start thinking everyone is stupid, you've lost the plot.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1784681 wrote:Rand Paul's libertarian angle doesn't work - at least not for him. Like it or not, he doesn't have any appeal. Selective compromise in pursuit of ideals is one thing, compromising on every single thing of the purposes of keeping the party line and one's own kiester in DC is another. People like McCain and Boehner and Harry Reid - great compromisers of our time - stand for nothing, accomplish nothing that forwards our country or makes it great.

Thinking voters are dumb is arrogant and costly. Romney did it in 2008, Hillary did it in 2008, McCain did it in 2004, etc. When you start thinking everyone is stupid, you've lost the plot.

Fab4Runner;1784685 wrote:But if you support Trump, you are dumb and stupid.

gut;1784687 wrote:I mean, if its' just an anti-establishment movement, why did Trump get so much more support than Fiorina or Carson? It's purely "charisma", because it certainly isn't more detailed policy or crazier or less crazy ideas. So it's not based on substance, and it's not purely anti-establishment. I really think it comes down to being a bully - which many people mistake for strength and leadership - and being a celebrity.

Unless these backers are going to disappear in the general, I think it's highly irresponsible to take a protest vote all the way to electing a clown with 3rd grade insults.

Fab4Runner;1784689 wrote:I have no idea why anyone would support him. I do not know anyone in my actual, real life who does. My large family is fairly conservative, and I come from a conservative town/area. I do not personally know a single person who is voting for Trump. I see people on Facebook who seem to like him, but they are the same ones who share Onion articles because they think they are real. So in my experience, if you support Trump, you are dumb and stupid.

Fab4Runner;1784689 wrote:I have no idea why anyone would support him. I do not know anyone in my actual, real life who does. My large family is fairly conservative, and I come from a conservative town/area. I do not personally know a single person who is voting for Trump. I see people on Facebook who seem to like him, but they are the same ones who share Onion articles because they think they are real. So in my experience, if you support Trump, you are dumb and stupid.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1784703 wrote:If this is what you think, I don't believe you will understand his appeal.

Dr Winston O'Boogie;1784703 wrote:If this is what you think, I don't believe you will understand his appeal.

gut;1784710 wrote:His appeal is to the lowest common denominator. Fiorina was just as tough in the debates, and isn't low-brow or crude. Never sniffed even 1/3 of his support at her peak.

A good chunk of America still loves a bully...always has. And a bully is kind of the opposite of a statesman. There is absolutely no substance behind Trump or his policies. He responds to every tough question with a juvenile personal attack. How does an intelligent person see that and think "THAT's my guy!"?

sleeper;1784712 wrote:No one I know supports Trump so that correlates well since I don't know or care about trash/poor people.

gut;1784718 wrote:Maybe if it's Trump vs. Hillary the Koch brothers (libertarians) get behind Gary Johnson and things get interesting.