The OFFICIAL Trump/HRC/2016 General Election Thread...

[dusty88]

After 4 years of hillary, so much of the government will be controlled by outside forces that there will be no way to take it back in any capacity. It's already close, just start reading up on defense contractors and various "charitable" foundations.

Unless we get someone in office willing to dismantle these things at all costs, we're going to become 1 gigantic corporation sold out to the highest bidder.

People usually don't like chemotherapy because it comes close to killing you, but it's far better than dying.

We are already on that path, Hillary or no. And Trump has no capability to change it (even if he cared, which I doubt). You don't get change by disillusioning yourself and then alienating the people you need.

That's not principle. It's narcissim.

Anyway, central banks all over the world are buying corporate bonds and ETFs. No president is going to stop the trainwreck. It would be nice to have one that might walk us through some sort of peaceful recovery.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

The CRFB (a bipartisan panel) says that Trump's plans would increase the National Debt by 26 times more than Clinton.

But I guess he never claimed to be Conservative.

Trump plans would increase debt 26 TIMES more than Hillary Clinton, CRFB study says

Cue the "national debt doesn't matter" crowd.

 

[dusty88]

I get where you Trump voters are coming from. I loathe Hillary as well.

Most of you didn't see Trump as your main candidate, but you stuck by a plan you thought fit you best. Your party let you down, so you stuck with Trump anyway. Now Trump is letting you down.

The guy is unelectable and keeps making it worse every day.

I'm not trying to be smug. The candidate I am supporting is more of a long shot than Trump is.

I'm just saying it's not your fault. The turning wheels that got us here started 100 years ago. We're just witnesses.

 

[Tombs]

We are already on that path, Hillary or no. And Trump has no capability to change it (even if he cared, which I doubt). You don't get change by disillusioning yourself and then alienating the people you need.

That's not principle. It's narcissim.

Anyway, central banks all over the world are buying corporate bonds and ETFs. No president is going to stop the trainwreck. It would be nice to have one that might walk us through some sort of peaceful recovery.

I think there's more angles to it than simply what Trump may or may not accomplish.

When Bush was in office, liberals were paying attention to government and actually offering some push back. Quite a few republicans were getting fed up and starting to make a stink as well. Since obama has been in office, seemingly everyone has decided to ignore everything government does and pretend everything is okay. Perfectly okay that we have someone in office getting the nobel peace prize while bombing civilian weddings in foreign countries.

Sure, a bunch of conservatives who refuse to do much about it make a stink, and nothing ever comes of it. The left is much better at that game since they own the media.

Do you think the left would allow executive powers to grow under Trump? Hahaha, no, they'll be fighting for their lives to scale it back. Every single thing government does will be under a microscope. Even a lot of the GOP clearly take issue with him and will be looking to limit him.

What do you think will happen with hillary, since she writes half the paychecks for individuals across all offices of government, and the media refuses to ever put her in a negative light? They'll push for granting her anything she wants, and polarize the issue around hating women, forcing conservatives to fold on the issue to hold office.

 

[dusty88]

Tombs, yes I think either Trump or Hillary would try to work with executive powers because neither will get along with their Congress. And HRC will do it quietly and get away with more of it whereas Trump will bluster and reveal himself.

And I'm not saying anything positive about Hillary. At all.

I'm not going to vote for either of them anyway. I'm just stunned that Trump is either this weak in terms of judgment, or in terms of self-control.

 

[foszoe]

Your first 2 questions are irrelevant if the principle at issue is not empowering HRC.

Well, I am not Tombs but I feel like I can answer for him in regards to this post

I see this often in this thread and others. The idea of being principled. What confuses me is the use of the language. In my last post to you, I saw your principles as conclusions. In my understanding, a principle is not something that is attainable but is rather something that guides one in how to achieve attainable outcomes over the course of their lives.

In this post, at least in my understanding, not empowering HRC is a goal not a principle.

In your original post,

Here in Indiana, in the presidential context, the most important down ballot vote is for Senate.All of us in Indiana can vote in that race. To disavow Young, yet vote for Trump, is unprincipled, IMHO. At least, I can't think of a principled reason to support such a split.

my reply

I think we are getting ahead of ourselves though. Has Young disavowed Trump? Have INGO Trump supporters suggested disavowing Todd Young? Has Trump commented on or disavowed Todd Young? If not i don't see the relevancy.


What I have seen is a reaction mostly again party leadership and the old guard of the GOP if you will. John McCain, Paul Ryan etc.

Now you concluded my 1st 2 questions are irrelevant "IF", I am however denying the IF because for me it is neither a goal or a principle. You made a statement, which I bolded above, that unless someone is doing it, seemed to me to be irrelevant to the conversation. My questions were directed precisely to that point. Maybe someone is, I don't know, but if they aren't. Then I see no reason to engage.Maybe I did and just forgot doing so in which case I am sure someone will remind me I would simply put forward that if the statement is irrelevant then so are the 2 questions as their relevancy depends precisely on the relevancy of the statement.

You then continued with

Trump supporters argue that non-Trump supporters are clandestinely (or explicitly) supporting HRC by not supporting Trump. For that principle to be consistently applied, a Trump supporter making that argument would be compelled to support every Republican.

I affirm that some make this argument. Most I see applying it are doing so in the context of a 3rd party vote for president. I think you are expanding the bounds of their argument slightly to include voting for a Dem down ballot over a Rep who disavows Trump because most making this argument seem to believe Trump WILL win thus negating the support of HRC conclusion. However it is not the argument that I have chosen to make. I don't know that I have really chosen any argument to make. However, I can choose not to defend an argument I am not making I would say I don't view it as an argument based on principles but rather unintended consequences.

So when voting for Senate, is a factor that you consider whether the person is of the same party as your vote for POTUS? Or of the same party as the person you expect to be elected POTUS?

Yes, at the tie breaker level of consideration. It would not be of primary importance and I don't remember ever using it as a criterion.

 

[foszoe]

The CRFB (a bipartisan panel) says that Trump's plans would increase the National Debt by 26 times more than Clinton.

But I guess he never claimed to be Conservative.

Trump plans would increase debt 26 TIMES more than Hillary Clinton, CRFB study says

Cue the "national debt doesn't matter" crowd.

The same study in June had Trump at 11 Trillion. The Oct study had Trump at 5 Trillion.

That's called a savings of 6 Trillion in DC!

It also means by the Time Trump takes office it will be down to 3T!


Ok. that was primarily tongue in cheek. You are pretty savvy at stuff. Find me a website that shows how well 5, 10, and 15 year studies accurately reflect reality?

 

[printcraft]

Global warming alarmists have a pretty good record of calling it right..... probably the same people.

 

[foszoe]

Guide to Health Care: The 2008 Presidential Election | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

If I read that right and we use health care as a criteria then its a good thing we elected Obama because McCain's plan would have cost us twice as much!

I will say their estimates on healthcare costs a decade out were pretty dern close though. Closer than I would have thought.

 

[Tombs]

[video=youtube;fmE9Jj-rEVs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmE9Jj-rEVs[/video]

What matters more, your principles or going to war with Russia? (If you're above draft age, remember how selfish you are being. Yes, they will draft as our military is far too small to handle a conflict like this.)

Hillary Clinton calls for no-fly zone in Syria | MSNBC
Presidential candidate Clinton says removing Assad in Syria is No. 1 priority | Reuters

Are you smarter than this general?

The left are beating the war drums for all it's worth. Look at the insane propaganda they're pushing: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/russia-us-want-confrontation-youll-162932320.html

If Trump loses this election, this country is toast, as are tens of millions of lives.

 

[dusty88]

[video=youtube;fmE9Jj-rEVs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmE9Jj-rEVs[/video]

What matters more, your principles or going to war with Russia? (If you're above draft age, remember how selfish you are being. Yes, they will draft as our military is far too small to handle a conflict like this.)

Hillary Clinton calls for no-fly zone in Syria | MSNBC
Presidential candidate Clinton says removing Assad in Syria is No. 1 priority | Reuters

Are you smarter than this general?

The left are beating the war drums for all it's worth. Look at the insane propaganda they're pushing: Russia to the US: If you want a confrontation, 'you'll get one everywhere'

If Trump loses this election, this country is toast, as are tens of millions of lives.

Selfish? I have a 15 year old and a 17 year old. I will not let these imbeciles send them to war over their power games. I mean I absolutely won't. If my kids volunteer for something of course that's different otherwise my response is going to be pretty extreme compared to what I might have imagined in past decades. I simply don't trust our government to be doing the right thing.

That's one of the reasons I'm voting for Johnson. Look at that childish Twitter storm yesterday afternoon and try and convince me that's not a guy that's going to take us to war because somebody offended him.

The only thing we have going for us on that topic, assuming Johnson isn't going to be elected, is that most of the American populace is sick of war as well.

 

[Brad69]

You can go on about DJT twitter battles again just words.

HRC has started wars as a official of the government and is fuming she cannot start one in Syria yet.

The threat from international powers to the US is much greater than publicly thought our oceans no longer protect us as well as they did in the past.

 

[dusty88]

You are still preaching to the choir re hrc.

You're also ignoring the fact that Donald Trump is completely unpredictable.

But it doesn't really matter because he is clearly unelectable. At this point it looks like when more bad things come out about Clinton or Trump people aren't switching between them anymore they're moving to third parties or not voting at all.

Trump isn't going to save us from Hillary not in any way shape or form. Might as well focus hard on the Congress which we should be doing anyway.

And frankly the Republican Congress has been pretty disappointing in recent years.

 

[2A_Tom]

Frankly the Republican Congress has been pretty disappointing in recent years.

Focus hard on the Congress which we should be doing anyway.

Donald Trump is completely unpredictable. But it doesn't really matter third parties clearly unelectable.

I did an MSMBS style edit on your post.

P. T. Barnum said it best.

 

[dusty88]

I did an MSMBS style edit on your post.

P. T. Barnum said it best.

You are completely missing the point.

Third parties are a long shot. Trump is unelectable there's a difference.

I'm not holding my breath waiting for the libertarian candidate to be elected president although if he went up somewhat in the polls people would leave both Clinton and Trump to vote for him. There's also the fact that more votes for the libertarian affect things in the long term.

Trump just has too many negatives. No matter how much some of you guys like him that's the reality. If Hillary dropped over dead right now people are going to move to a third party or to her replacement not to Trump

 

[2A_Tom]

You are completely missing the point.

People are inundated with the MSMBS and they are influenced to believe exactly what you originally stated.

I intentionally did an MSMBS chop job on your statement to show how your own words can be twisted to say whatever is wanted.

Donald Trump is in OPEN WAR. that is ate narrative today. Tomorrow another talking point will be added and pounded for 24 hours and for the next twenty some days the MSMBS will pile on FREE ANTI- TRUMP CAMPAIGN COMMERCIALS.

I hope that the disgust and distrust of the Washington insiders and the MSMBS is rejected by enough to elect Trump.

If I am wrong we all lose.

 

[dusty88]

Okay but I'm not your enemy. I realize that the media is in the tank for Hillary Clinton just like I realize that the polls and the system are set up against the third party.

I'm just saying that within the system Donald Trump is shooting himself in the foot and destroying any opportunity he ever had to win. At this point you'd do better to salvage the Republican Congress for whatever good that will do.

If something happens to make Hillary even less viable then I'll be happy to be wrong.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Okay but I'm not your enemy. I realize that the media is in the tank for Hillary Clinton just like I realize that the polls and the system are set up against the third party.

I'm just saying that within the system Donald Trump is shooting himself in the foot and destroying any opportunity he ever had to win. At this point you'd do better to salvage the Republican Congress for whatever good that will do.

If something happens to make Hillary even less viable then I'll be happy to be wrong.

As T.Lex pointed out in another thread... while Clinton is likely to beat 300 EC votes... if it did somehow get both candidates under 270... the new Democrat majority congress would pick the next President.

Also, here's how well Trump is doing with women:

 

[printcraft]

Yeah we need MOAR of the emotions based voting.
It's close to having SJW deciding college campus rules.
Before anyone gets outraged I'm only talking about the 99% that vote on emotion, Not all.


[video=youtube;IySCPci4TSM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IySCPci4TSM&app=desktop[/video]

 

[T.Lex]

To be clear, it isn't a sure thing that there'll be a Dem majority.

But, in a somewhat ironic (but not unexpected) twist, Trump and his supporters may need the GOPe congressional candidates that they've disparaged over the course of the campaign.