Reply With Quote
look, you guys can on each other later.
tell me why in you'd vote for her.
there are those here that are voting for hillary. why on earth would you do that?
look, you guys can on each other later.
tell me why in you'd vote for her.
Least shiity of two ty candidates?
This is a forum. Most people who post on forums are against thing, rarely for things.
good luck with that one.
The federal courts (not just the Supreme Court). Hillary is far more likely to appoint people to the federal benches who see the world the way that I do (or would prefer for it to be seen) than Trump is.
I also think Trump is a de able and absolutely unprincipled candidate. I might have actually considered a Republican vote for President if it had been anyone other than this guy.
thanks. sensible.
^Philo
Hillary does not believe in the 2 amendment I do
I would never vote for her
I have no problems with any of the people trump says he would pick for the court
he gives a list unlike Clinton who is afraid to tell people 20 people who she would appoint
To act as a check and balance against the teabagger house
1) I think Clinton would appoint SCOTUS justices that align more in my views moreso that Trump. Specifically CU and er.
2) I think Trump is low intelligence, short fused and narcissistic which would make him easy to manipulate by our enemies and anyone else as well as increasingly the likelihood of dangerous scenarios.
3) I think Trump's mercantile trade policies would start a trade war that would set us back from a century of progress.
4) I think Trump's trickle down economic policies would be a fiscal nightmare. He has more wishful thinking than Reagan ever did.
5) I think in the era of race relations and a police state that he would worsen the problem and lead to more of an authoritarian Orwellian dystopia.
6) I think Texas needs to get rid of the one party hegemony that we have had throughout my lifetime. Polls are within the margin of error.
Neither candidate says anything about election reform and neither candidate seems to have any an rust initiatives.
Wow HRC's attributes are a mile long. How can you choose just these?
Because Trump sucks.
so......i guess every vote for hillary is trumps fault.
Pretty much. She's only electable ...because Trump.
bulll . Repugs have been executing "politics of personal destruction" on Bill, Hillary, Obama, rather campaigning on Repug policies.
NOT one of the Repug house of this year's wannabe-Pres had a chance.
The race would have been closer than the impending landslide, but Hillary would have won.
Any other Repug would run on exactly the same issues as Trash, but with dog-whistling xenophobia, LGBT hate, bigotry, racism, Muslim-hating rather than Trash's megaphone. They would have had to appeal to their beloved base, cultivated (and Repug-screwed) for decades, just like Trash has been doing.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 10-24-2016 at 07:23 PM.
Hillary sucks much worse
The idea that Clinton would only beat Trump and not the other GOP candidates that couldn't even beat Trump is oft repeated but doesn't come close to being reality. Polling prior to the end of the GOP primary showed her beating GOP candidates left and right. The democrats have a built in electoral advantage. Who among them was going to move the needle in the states that Romney lost? There is a sizeable portion of the GOP that is the alt right and that fraction is why Trump won to begin with. You think they would be running to the polls to support Rubio? You think Jeb Bush was going to beat her? Or Kaisich who couldn't beat out the terrible primary campaigns of Rubio and Cruz to come in second? Was the GOP all of a sudden going to develop opposition research on the scale of Clintons? Because if they had then the bad data come out on Trump (IE Machado ) would have come out then. Did the GOP even RUN oppo on Trump? Because it sure doesn't seem like it.
So far, the biggest hurdle to Clinton's candidacy has been stuff related to wikileaks. And would Russia have been so eager to leak that if they were doing so to help a GOP member like Cruz or Kaisich? That's laughable. Romney's biggest hurdle to winning in 2012 was his poorly run data campaign. The GOP hasn't learned from what Obama did in 2008 and its almost a decade later. When is a GOP presidential candidate going to run a 21st century data driven presidential campaign? 2020? We'll see.
Even now, with all of what's been said about her in this campaign, Hilary is down 1 in polling to a generic GOP candidate. 1 whole point. Against a fictional candidate that she doesn't get to campaign against.
In any event, I choose to vote for Clinton because she has a long history of working well with members on the other side of the aisle. She's got the best - by far - climate change approach which includes fracking away but doing it in a more responsible well regulated manner. She's got a history of working for children's rights. And because its an opportunity to get a woman in the white house. Much like 2008 was an opportunity to get a black man in the white house (and many studies have spoken to the positive effect that's had on its own in the black community), half of our country deserves to have someone to look to as a role model for achieving that major goal. I agree with her on the vast majority of domestic politics (not a fan of the free college plan and there are some other disagreements I have) and although I have serious foreign policy questions, the other 3 "major" candidates are all demonstrably worse in this field.
well, thats pretty good. but she's made of snake oil.
"poling"
When are you folks going to learn that these polls are not good representations of the country as a whole?
Pretty sure the DNC was worried about Bernie, since they back doored his ass. If Hillary had problems getting through her own convention without collusion, what makes you think they weren't worried about anyone EXCEPT Trump?
Jesus, the slimy you folks are supporting has a trail of dead bodies from here to Shanghai. Can't say Trump is any better, but at least we don't know. We know Hillary is a sleazeball.
And lol at "get a woman in the WH". That's about like blacks voting for Obama because he's half black. What qualification is having a vagina? Might as well say "getting a blonde in the Whitehouse".
What people mean is 'anyone but a white man".
HRC has been a failure at Sec of State, at Senator, at wife (see Monica), and now she will be at POTUS. Oh but you'll get your "woman in the WH".
Yay. what's the cliffhanger going to be this season?
abc poll 27 republicans wow what a fair poll
leaders of both major parties with no better alternative to vote for....democracy? lmao more like voting dunce clowns for leadership...
lol, DMC, no misogyny in your post. None. Its hilarious to read posts on here claiming conspiracy theories and dead bodies. I'm not going to engage people in a debate over whether or not conspiracy theories are true. Its an exercise in futility.
CB, she sells so much snake oil that she ended up with a progressive voting record in the senate on par with Sanders. She's unlikable like many women who have the audacity to be ambitious are. The question on whether or not she's qualified and whether she'll do a good job advancing the agenda I want in the WH are both an easy yes. Isn't that the bottom line?
Only one candidate has secretly had an email server and divulged classified info and lied about it. One candidate caused the mess in Lybia and risked our ambassador who was killed, only one candidate is in it with wall street and has 2 personnas, the public and the private where she makes backroom deals. One candidate wants to put our pilots at risk by enforcing an impossible no fly zone over areas infested with russian s300 and s400 anti aircraft systems. Only one candidate accepted millions in donations to her foundation while secretary of state. Only one candidate cheated in the primaries
Only one candidate is that de able. And that candidate is not Trump
Last edited by hater; 10-24-2016 at 08:29 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
