On the R side: 2008, McCain. And he blew it by picking an idiot running mate.queencitybuckeye;1798263 wrote:
When is the last time a decent human being ran for this office?
like_that;1798179 wrote:Anyone else find it ironic the majority of people who bring up race are liberals/democrats? In the libtard world, only republicans and conservatives are capable of being racist or prejudice. Anytime somebody says something that can be slightly construed as "racist" (98% a reach), liberals/dems blow a gasket playing the race card. It is intellectually lazy and pathetic. It's the biggest cop out/security blanket tactic we see day to day.
It's also sad how a lot of people eat that shit up and vote based on it. Apparently the dems got another victim in ptown. I am sure ptown will come on here and let us know how much smarter he is than anyone else on this site and why he is right and everyone else is wrong though. All this while eating his own shit, since he is so full of himself.
Not even close. Keep telling yourself that though while scores of rational republicans disavow the buffoon and lavish praise on Crooked Hillary. And, for that matter...the last time a non-decent human being overall occupied the office was probably Warren Harding or Woodrow Wilson.queencitybuckeye;1798263 wrote:On the ludicrous scale, if he's 10.0, she's easily a 9.7, 9.8.
When is the last time a decent human being ran for this office?
Liberal cry babies like Paul Ryan, Jeff Flake, Mark Kirk and Hugh Hewitt. George W. Bush is going to vote for Hillary. You should too.QuakerOats;1798165 wrote:The law firm bringing the suit and the judge appear to be one-and-the-same; gee, how convenient. So the judge gets called out for a potential glaring bias, and all the liberal crybabies can do is play the racist card. To be expected.
Did you mean to say this or the opposite?BoatShoes;1798268 wrote:the last time a non-decent human being overall occupied the office was probably Warren Harding or Woodrow Wilson.
I actually think Obama is a decent human being, just don't agree with his politics.ptown_trojans_1;1798264 wrote:On the R side: 2008, McCain. And he blew it by picking an idiot running mate.
I would say Obama is a decent human being, but I know most on here do not think that.
On the ludicrous scale if Trump is a 10 (and I don't disagree with this), then Hillary is most definitely a 9. Of course, I count corruption and outright lying for no good reason (we were under sniper fire!) being ludicrous.BoatShoes;1798268 wrote:Not even
Not even close. Keep telling yourself that though while scores of rational republicans disavow the buffoon and lavish praise on Crooked Hillary. And, for that matter...the last time a non-decent human being overall occupied the office was probably Warren Harding or Woodrow Wilson.
Uhh... John Edwards? No?queencitybuckeye;1798263 wrote:When is the last time a decent human being ran for this office?
BoatShoes;1798269 wrote:Liberal cry babies like Paul Ryan, Jeff Flake, Mark Kirk and Hugh Hewitt. George W. Bush is going to vote for Hillary. You should too.
It's hilarious that people like you and ptown are still too blind to understand why people would vote AGAINST Hillary. You all must smoke the good shit in the libtard world [emoji23].BoatShoes;1798265 wrote:Ptown was pointing out how GOP leader Paul Ryan was the one who intimated Trump was a racist and isadore is a troll account. I will have to say the "I am not a hardcore conservative but I hate shitlibs and SJW's so damn much that I will tacitly support a buffoon over the dems who r teh real racists" is my favorite type of GOP voter.
Can't argue with that. Personally, I didn't agree with his war, but he just exuded a certain natural vibe that made him seem like the perfect guy to have a burger and beer with while chatting informally about stuff. Obama kind of had that, but it feels a bit more manufactured and less natural to me. Neither Hillary nor Trump are remotely even on the radar as far as that goes. To the level of "would rather die than be seen with either of them".jmog;1798272 wrote:I actually think Obama is a decent human being, just don't agree with his politics.
I also thought Romney was as well. The best human being we have had as actual POTUS in a long time, as much as the liberals don't want to believe it, was GWBush. Disagree with the war or his politics, the man was/is a good man.
The best human being of the 3 left in this election is by far Sanders, he just is almost as clueless as to how the world works as Palin was.
For me it is easy.like_that;1798282 wrote:It's hilarious that people like you and ptown are still too blind to understand why people would vote AGAINST Hillary. You all must smoke the good shit in the libtard world [emoji23].
Completely agree. I actually forgot about Romney. He is a very good guy.jmog;1798272 wrote:I actually think Obama is a decent human being, just don't agree with his politics.
I also thought Romney was as well. The best human being we have had as actual POTUS in a long time, as much as the liberals don't want to believe it, was GWBush. Disagree with the war or his politics, the man was/is a good man.
The best human being of the 3 left in this election is by far Sanders, he just is almost as clueless as to how the world works as Palin was.
Again, that's not the point. You keep giving us the reason why you are voting for Hillary over trump. We already know your reasons since you have repeated them over 100 times. 95% of us here agree with all the shit you have said about trump. We still don't think those red flags out weigh the red flags that come with Hillary.ptown_trojans_1;1798289 wrote:For me it is easy.
To me, I do not believe anything Trump says or does. He has not concept of Government, he is an empty suit., Everything he has ever stood for is a facade and he actually has no idea how to govern and would be a disaster.
He has no Government experience, has no ideology, does not understand anything regarding to how to govern, how to change or run a bureaucracy, how American power works, and most importantly how foreign affairs operates and the international economic order works.
He has the potential to absolutely destroy the U.S. economy with his trade wars, start wars for no reason, tick off allies, and completely undo everything we have established since 1945.
Again, if you vote for him, you are voting to radically alter the American foreign policy system that has kept world peace since 1945.
That, to me, is why I will vote and accept Clinton over Trump. He is an actual threat to the security of this country.
I am not alone either. That is why the national security field of Rs have revolted against Trump.
Sigh. I get why people may not vote for Hillary. On pure lesser of two evils analysis the choice is Hillary if you have to choose between the two even,for a,co,servative, But millions will vote for a ludicrous buffoon who would embarass the United States instead.like_that;1798282 wrote:It's hilarious that people like you and ptown are still too blind to understand why people would vote AGAINST Hillary. You all must smoke the good shit in the libtard world [emoji23].
I think the majority of presidents and candidates for president have been onthe whole decent men and women who love their country. I would say that Warren Harding and Woodrow Wilson, probably, onthe whole were not so decent. I would say Noxon and LBJ for their apparent flaws, were on the whole decent men.queencitybuckeye;1798270 wrote:Did you mean to say this or the opposite?
Regardless of political views, G. Bush was absolutely the right man to be our POTUS in the days/weeks following 9/11.ptown_trojans_1;1798290 wrote:Completely agree. I actually forgot about Romney. He is a very good guy.
Also agree on W. His work on Africa and the way he carried himself, especially his 2nd term, was great.
I agree, this would also be the year, if the US wasn't so entrenched in a 2 party system, that a Libertarian would win I believe. A more moderate libertarian, not a "abolish the Federal Reserve" type libertarian.BoatShoes;1798296 wrote:As an aside, would be interesting if there were a voting system that could incorporate votes against specific candidates
BoatShoes;1798293 wrote:Sigh. I get why people may not vote for Hillary. On pure lesser of two evils analysis the choice is Hillary if you have to choose between the two even,for a,co,servative, But millions will vote for a ludicrous buffoon who would embarass the United States instead.
jmog;1798299 wrote:I agree, this would also be the year, if the US wasn't so entrenched in a 2 party system, that a Libertarian would win I believe. A more moderate libertarian, not a "abolish the Federal Reserve" type libertarian.
Unfortunately we are so deep in the 2 party system that a libertarian like Paul has to run as an R, and the "strong defense" side of the Republican voters kill him in the primaries.
A libertarian, conservative on taxes and liberal on social/defense policies is really the true middle ground between both sides and would whip the pants off both Hillary and Trump...except everyone in the US is too "R vs D" instead of voting the best real candidate.
Just to be clear, are you rank and,file GOP apparatchiks now against free trade since Trump has taken the reigns in contrast to the Reaganomics orthodoxy?QuakerOats;1798300 wrote:I know; just think how terrible it would be to have a couple decent conservatives added to the supreme court; or to actually correct our ridiculous corporate tax situation; or to put a halt to radical executive orders that assault business on a daily basis; or to actually negotiate trade deals that will not injure American workers; or to support our military and have the backs of the police; or halt illegal aliens from pouring in and receiving taxpayer paid benefits; or signing the bill to repeal obamaKare.
Please, give me the buffoon.
