"A nasty woman"

[Warlord23]

So you are getting out again and shifting to cash.
When?

Ive made money in 2016 against your prior prediction.

If you really play this game you know how tough it is. From any stand point. So you are too old to dollar cost average. I would just get into cash and turtle up I guess.

As the saying goes, CC has successfully predicted 7 of the last 3 downturns, and the next one is underway all the time.

[Pelicans78]

I don't buy it, the Bush name is toxic as . Kasich would have beaten Clinton. So would Romney. Rubio I'd probably bet on over Clinton, but I doubt he'd be the slam dunk Kasich or Romney would have been. I think Ryan would be a coin flip because of his Medicare plan. Christie would have lost because of his weight. Cruz and Bush would have gotten destroyed.

No way Jeb or Cruz would have gotten destroyed by Hillary especially compared to Trump who was the worst candidate to beat Hillary. Jeb would have gotten alot of mainstream/moderate Republicans plus has a really good record with Hispanics. Don't forget his brother won two terms as well and Jeb would have a had a ton of money to spend on against Hillary. Cruz would have had a tougher time, but he still had better a higher favorable opinion compared to Hillary. Hillary is such a bad candidate that it took the worst candidate ever for her to win.

[Pelicans78]

Kasich's record in OH would have blocked him.

Rubio is just a zero, no accomplishments, horrible record of absenteeism in Senate, and he may not win back his Senate seat in slave state FL.

Romney lost badly once, and his record plus his p/e predations would have brought him down again, plus he probably wouldn't release all his tax returns, again, because he got caught criminally evading tax.


t

But none of those candidates are disliked as much as Hillary or have nearly the baggage. The only reason Hillary is winning is due to beating the worst candidate since Goldwater.

[UNT Eagles 2016]

Hitlery would NOT have lost to Jeb... but Cruz would have had a better than even shot, and Rubio definitely would have beat her (and still might in 2020)...


Rubio was my and my family's pet cat all along and he should have won...

[florige]

I don't buy it, the Bush name is toxic as . Kasich would have beaten Clinton. So would Romney. Rubio I'd probably bet on over Clinton, but I doubt he'd be the slam dunk Kasich or Romney would have been. I think Ryan would be a coin flip because of his Medicare plan. Christie would have lost because of his weight. Cruz and Bush would have gotten destroyed.

^^^That^^^ If he had another last name he would be our next President.

[hater]

And the Clintler name is not toxic?

[Pelicans78]

And the Clintler name is not toxic?

Apparently not as bad as Comrade Trump's.

But Bill Clinton's presidency wasn't horrible compared to GW's.

[Wild Cobra]

Trump had something lie 310 stories about him, and the next highest spotlight guy was Jeb with 180 or something like that. It's about media coverage. You might not win by that, but Hillary has been in the press for 30 years or so. Sure people knew who Trump was but he's portrayed himself as an arrogant asshole for ratings on TV. He probably is an arrogant asshole. Regardless, you cannot get the toothpaste back into the tube.

It's going to be hard to have any real candidates for the next 20 years. I don't see any on the horizon unless the Speaker of the House becomes popular. I'd bet on Chelsea or Mic e Obama before that. Bush, his son, his other son, Clinton, his wife, and you watch, Hillary will appoint Mic e with a post.

Yes, he is an asshole. Arrogant? Maybe...

Hillary however is an absolute piece of s , and for the life of my, I can't see anyone actually wanting to vote for her, unless they like Trump less.

[Wild Cobra]

I actually think Trump "won" this debate, in a weird way. Not because he distinguished himself as anything presidential (he didn't). But he was more on point in terms of showing the nasty parts of Hillary (deleted emails, Wikileaks, etc ...). Although that may have more to do with Wallace being a good moderator as opposed to Trump being competent.

He is also realistic about situation, doesn't say he can fix the unfixable problems, doesn't sugar coat or try to by the election with promises he can't keep.

Election after election, we have candidates promise things that they never deliver. Do people really think Trump lost because he isn't trying to buy votes with lies?

[Wild Cobra]

I don't think people really looked at Bush 41 as having a failed presidency like they did W. Bush 41's Gulf War was wildly popular and he lost the election mostly because he raised taxes after claiming "No New Taxes!", not because he drove the country off a cliff multiple times like his son.

The reneging on the "no new taxes" was a smaller factor I think than Ross Perot taking his votes.

[Wild Cobra]

At least the presidency isn't as important as congress. The economy tanked starting in late 2006 when it was obvious the democrats were going to take congress.

[clambake]

At least the presidency isn't as important as congress. The economy tanked starting in late 2006 when it was obvious the democrats were going to take congress.

good dope or what?

[Th'Pusher]

He is also realistic about situation, doesn't say he can fix the unfixable problems, doesn't sugar coat or try to by the election with promises he can't keep.

Election after election, we have candidates promise things that they never deliver. Do people really think Trump lost because he isn't trying to buy votes with lies?

you think in the unlikely event he wins he is going to deliver on the wall and that ridiculous tax plan. He may be able to get that through the house, but not the senate...unless of course they change the filibuster rules.

[Warlord23]

Yes, he is an asshole. Arrogant? Maybe...

Hillary however is an absolute piece of s , and for the life of my, I can't see anyone actually wanting to vote for her, unless they like Trump less.

Turns out people prefer a corrupt, status-quo politician who knows how the world works than an uninformed moron who can't control his mouth or his ego.

[DMC]

I feel like a lot of people have no idea what the candidate is running on, their platform. They instead vote for things like skin color, gender, age, fashion sense, physical appearance, speaking prowess... charisma and such. I cannot count the number of people who say they voted for X because they just seemed like a better person.

[DMC]

Turns out people prefer a corrupt, status-quo politician who knows how the world works than an uninformed moron who can't control his mouth or his ego.

I've always said if Bill could have run again he'd win in a landslide. Those guys from those days would destroy these guys, mostly. Never was a fan of Bill, but either Bill or Obama would have mopped the floor up with Trump.

[Xevious]

At least the presidency isn't as important as congress. The economy tanked starting in late 2006 when it was obvious the democrats were going to take congress.

That's a gross oversimplification. The crash was already an inevitably by 2006 regardless of who was in congress at the time.

[Splits]

He is also realistic about situation, doesn't say he can fix the unfixable problems, doesn't sugar coat or try to by the election with promises he can't keep.

Election after election, we have candidates promise things that they never deliver. Do people really think Trump lost because he isn't trying to buy votes with lies?

Obummer's governance tracked pretty closely to his campaign, sans closing Gitmo

[Splits]

you think in the unlikely event he wins he is going to deliver on the wall and that ridiculous tax plan. He may be able to get that through the house, but not the senate...unless of course they change the filibuster rules.

No matter the outcome of the Senate this year, the fillibuster is dead, tbh.


And rightfully so. the Dakotas, Idaho, and other sucking holes overriding NY, Cali, and Texas.

[Spurminator]

I don't buy it, the Bush name is toxic as . Kasich would have beaten Clinton. So would Romney. Rubio I'd probably bet on over Clinton, but I doubt he'd be the slam dunk Kasich or Romney would have been. I think Ryan would be a coin flip because of his Medicare plan. Christie would have lost because of his weight. Cruz and Bush would have gotten destroyed.

I think Cruz would have won, which is why I was happy Trump beat him. He would have invigorated much more of the evangelical vote that has been put off by Trump, and I think he would have done a better job of making Clinton's scandals a problem for her.

[DarrinS]

Rubio is just a zero, no accomplishments, horrible record of absenteeism in Senate...

So, pretty much just like Obama in 2008.

[Sportcamper]

I am going to miss looking at Melania and Ivanka...But IMO what did Trump in was his sons killing a Triceratops...PETA did not like that...

Trump's Sons Kill a Triceratops on Hunting Safari

[pgardn]

Nasty....

Cunning and evil are better.
Now Trump is nasty.

[pgardn]

I am going to miss looking at Melania and Ivanka...But IMO what did Trump in was his sons killing a Triceratops...PETA did not like that...

Trump's Sons Kill a Triceratops on Hunting Safari

Thats funny.

Did you get the video with the conservatives claiming the animal never existed, fossils are fake, and God's way of testing us on creation? The conservatives were all over that scam, can't fool them.

[Spurminator]

I didn't watch the video but isn't that Triceratops hoax older than Trump's presidential campaign? Did it just get repackaged?