US Politics Thread

[calitennis127]

No, every other member of government is not as qualified as she is. She is extraordinarily qualified, and whether you agree with her politics or not, it's not like she's been "wrong throughout" her political life. She has done an enormous amount of good. In addition, she has political relationships and allies in the Senate and around the world that no one else can claim.

Moxie, I don't know who appointed you the final authority on what constitutes a qualified presidential candidate. If you wish to make the case that she is no less qualified than her male colleagues in Congress and the State Department, that's fine. But what exactly makes her especially qualified? At some point, you have to evaluate her performance and not merely her titles. I doubt that in discussions of Dick Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld you would have rushed to their defense by saying that, with all their years in government, they were supremely qualified people and that we should bow down to their records because of it. Your only retort to any criticism of Hillary is that she has been in government a long time and that this makes her qualified. Well how about you judge the quality of her performance on some critical issues? On foreign policy, which is one of the key duties of the president to handle, she is beloved by neocon hawks and is probably the closest Democrat to George W. Bush.

I would also like to know what the "enormous amount of good" she has done is. Advocating women's rights in Afghanistan and Africa while coddling Islamic groups that enslave women? Does that count?

 

[Billie]

It's obvious Clinton has some powerful friends, who will sabotage a candidate from the same party in her favor. I don't know what that makes him, but it seems Sanders will still support her. On the other hand the republicans don't seem to be united and frankly they are making it a bit easier for HC to win. It doesn't seem that all the wrong decisions, wrong alliances, and her blunders are hurting her that much. Frankly I think she is a disaster for foreign politics, based on her previous experiences, but perhaps it's somebody's design to make this world an unsafe and frightening place.

 

[Moxie]

No one appointed me the final authority. I offer an opinion. You might offer yours in a like-minded spirit of debate, rather than the hide-bound, high-handed answer you often make of yourself, all the while presuming upon other peoples' opinions.

I disagree with your assessment that Hillary is beloved of neocons. Also, if Cheney or Rumsfeld were up on offer, I would debate their merits with you, but since they aren't, I won't bother with a worthless distraction. If you choose to make little of Hillary Clinton's experience, it's your choice, but I'd like to see you make an argument for Trump's.

 

[Moxie]

It's obvious Clinton has some powerful friends, who will sabotage a candidate from the same party in her favor. I don't know what that makes him, but it seems Sanders will still support her. On the other hand the republicans don't seem to be united and frankly they are making it a bit easier for HC to win. It doesn't seem that all the wrong decisions, wrong alliances, and her blunders are hurting her that much. Frankly I think she is a disaster for foreign politics, based on her previous experiences, but perhaps it's somebody's design to make this world an unsafe and frightening place.

What do you really think Hillary has done so wrong, compared to what she has done right? You seem to have a strong opinion against her, so I'd like to know.

 

[Billie]

What do you really think Hillary has done so wrong, compared to what she has done right? You seem to have a strong opinion against her, so I'd like to know.

I am not an American, so I don't really care what she has done internally, but she has been a disaster in everything she touched in foreign politics. Both of Clintons, actually. Yes bombing of Serbia and Kosovo situation plays a big part in that, but even after that (Libya for example) Clintons have not endeared themselves to me. Sorry if I am harsh about your idol, but I don't think they have very good moral values, even for politicians.

 

[Federberg]

I think most people would base their opinions of Hillary on Whitewater, Hillarycare, Benghazi and the email scandal rather than a Tammy Wynette song.

Yes I just mentioned that as an example of how a trivial situation was blown out of proportion. Whitewater would have been a better example to use (not trivial of course) of how the GOP can go on the attack against an opponent they fear. Let's look at some of the things we could really question about Trump, the university, David Duke, tax returns, alleged abuse. Anyone of these things if the shoe was on the other foot would be hammered on by the GOP to show the unworthiness of an opponent. If the democrats would only learn to be as self righteous they might be equally as effective as the Republicans. It's extremely naive to believe the excess that is bandied about Hillary. I am not a fan of hers in the least, but observing from afar this seems so obvious to me

 

[Federberg]

Well, that's your point of view, from far away. She was my Senator, my First Lady, and my Secretary of State, and I think she did a great job. She's a work horse. To me, she cares deeply about working for the people. For sure she's made mistakes, but she's not the only one. And, you know what? She's not afraid to be a friend to Wall Street. I know you're no liberal...you should be enthusiastic about that. The social agenda will be Progressive, but the economic one will be cautious. And the world view will be saavy.

Actually her and her husbands closeness to Wall Street is one of my biggest concerns about the Clintons. Ending Glass-Steagall is a big part of the reason for the global financial crisis. On both sides of the Atlantic the left can be so easily fooled when they cozy up to banks. Their desire to be seen as business friendly can lead to disastrous policies

 

[Federberg]

Thought this was interesting in the FT today...

"What should most concern the anti-Trump forces? Mrs Clinton’s biggest hurdle is the depth of hatred for her across large parts of America. Personally, I have always found Hillaryphobia hard to fathom. As first lady in the 1990s, she was hated for being a creature of the left — her supposed radical feminism and her push to enact leftwing healthcare reform. Nowadays she is reviled for the opposite reasons."

 

[Federberg]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...linton-profile-jill-abramson-us-election-2016

 

[Moxie]

Actually her and her husbands closeness to Wall Street is one of my biggest concerns about the Clintons. Ending Glass-Steagall is a big part of the reason for the global financial crisis. On both sides of the Atlantic the left can be so easily fooled when they cozy up to banks. Their desire to be seen as business friendly can lead to disastrous policies

I get that. I mention it rather cynically for the conservatives hereabouts, as there are a lot. But I don't think it's bad that she has some comfortable relations with the money in this country. However, she has to be cautious and will be checked by Bernie Sanders' message, and the obligation she owes to his followers. Trump has no such governor on him, nor do the Republicans feel any obligation to one.

 

[calitennis127]

No one appointed me the final authority. I offer an opinion. You might offer yours in a like-minded spirit of debate, rather than the hide-bound, high-handed answer you often make of yourself, all the while presuming upon other peoples' opinions.

I disagree with your assessment that Hillary is beloved of neocons. Also, if Cheney or Rumsfeld were up on offer, I would debate their merits with you, but since they aren't, I won't bother with a worthless distraction. If you choose to make little of Hillary Clinton's experience, it's your choice, but I'd like to see you make an argument for Trump's.

In an era of Barack Obama, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, John McCain, and George W. Bush, I don't think much of political experience. I think American leaders as a whole are a shoddy bunch of ignoramuses. It does not impress me that someone has been in government for three decades.

Trump is far from a perfect candidate, but his instincts on many key questions (immigration, trade policy, Islam, NATO, and relations with Russia) are correct, even if he explains himself poorly. The fact that he has been corrupt or nasty to people at some point is irrelevant to me. People in the billionaire class did not get there by being saints. Neither Hillary nor Trump are holy people; both have had their good moments and bad moments on a personal level. Has Trump screwed some people? Yes. On the other hand, he has done kind things like make donations to charities in New York in times of crisis and help a poor man pay off his mortgage. Likewise, Hillary has lied out of her teeth and cost the 4 people their lives in Benghazi, among other ignoble deeds. But then she has had her moments of niceness and compassion on a personal level. You can play this game all day.

The larger point is that frankly no one is "qualified" in a meaningful sense to be a statesman in America, so I hardly care that Trump isn't. Our leaders are terribly educated across the board. The highest level universities promote pot-smoking, video games, gay marriage, and remedial English as their 4 pillars of learning. There is no issue on which prominent American leaders show the slightest competence or seriousness of thought. Why the hell should we hold Trump to a standard that no one else even comes close to meeting?

 

[calitennis127]

Yes I just mentioned that as an example of how a trivial situation was blown out of proportion. Whitewater would have been a better example to use (not trivial of course) of how the GOP can go on the attack against an opponent they fear. Let's look at some of the things we could really question about Trump, the university, David Duke, tax returns, alleged abuse. Anyone of these things if the shoe was on the other foot would be hammered on by the GOP to show the unworthiness of an opponent. If the democrats would only learn to be as self righteous they might be equally as effective as the Republicans. It's extremely naive to believe the excess that is bandied about Hillary. I am not a fan of hers in the least, but observing from afar this seems so obvious to me

Well, as usual, what seems obvious to you is not the case at all. Trump was actually hammered about his university and tax returns by his Republican opponents for months. Were you not paying attention? And the Democrats certainly aren't laying off in bringing those issues up. The idea that they are playing nice or not discussing these issues frequently is utter nonsense.

There is not "excess bandied about Hillary." This is a woman who demeaned Bill's mistresses and lovers in a way that would be deemed backward and vicious if a Republican female was ever to do it. This is someone who handled classified information in the most irresponsible manner possible. There is no exaggeration in any of this.

 

[calitennis127]

It's obvious Clinton has some powerful friends, who will sabotage a candidate from the same party in her favor. I don't know what that makes him, but it seems Sanders will still support her. On the other hand the republicans don't seem to be united and frankly they are making it a bit easier for HC to win. It doesn't seem that all the wrong decisions, wrong alliances, and her blunders are hurting her that much. Frankly I think she is a disaster for foreign politics, based on her previous experiences, but perhaps it's somebody's design to make this world an unsafe and frightening place.

Billie, the reason that Hillary's disastrous judgment in foreign policy does not hurt her as much as it should is that the ignorance of the American middle and upper classes is unprecedented in American history. Never have people known so little about any significant political topic as they do right now. The American people are a dumb, ignorant people, churned out by arguably the most wasteful education system in modern history. They do not about geography, religion, or any other part of the world. It is the result of the left taking over education decades ago. They have dumbed down the American people.

 

[Billie]

Billie, the reason that Hillary's disastrous judgment in foreign policy does not hurt her as much as it should is that the ignorance of the American middle and upper classes is unprecedented in American history. Never have people known so little about any significant political topic as they do right now. The American people are a dumb, ignorant people, churned out by arguably the most wasteful education system in modern history. They do not about geography, religion, or any other part of the world. It is the result of the left taking over education decades ago. They have dumbed down the American people.

Cali, I don't think that it is only the case with the American education system, honestly. I feel that real values in life are being depreciated a lot and we've lived in a state of one sided judgements and opinions for a while, as a whole world. Sadly. There is no morals in dealings with different countries. No 2nd glance at what some decisions can do to million innocent lives. What is honorable in siding with any party that will pay the most and that will provide the most gain, and then turn their back to them in another situation? Frankly what they've done with the Middle East is just that. Somebody messed up with a beehive and now they are alarmed at the stings that those bees are going to make. Insane.

 

[Moxie]

The larger point is that frankly no one is "qualified" in a meaningful sense to be a statesman in America, so I hardly care that Trump isn't. Our leaders are terribly educated across the board. The highest level universities promote pot-smoking, video games, gay marriage, and remedial English as their 4 pillars of learning. There is no issue on which prominent American leaders show the slightest competence or seriousness of thought. Why the hell should we hold Trump to a standard that no one else even comes close to meeting?

Now you really are just making shit up. At least you're honest about Trump not being qualified. Still, it's a lot of fancy dancing to pretend that it doesn't matter that Hillary Clinton is.

 

[calitennis127]

Now you really are just making shit up. At least you're honest about Trump not being qualified. Still, it's a lot of fancy dancing to pretend that it doesn't matter that Hillary Clinton is.

No, I'm not making shit up. I am describing reality exactly as it is and as it was recently described in a great book by a Yale professor:

Excellent Sheep: The Miseducation of the American Elite

Contemporary education is an atrocity. The professors are overwhelmingly pretentious fakers and serious standards have been obliterated. Real education was one of the casualties of the 20th century, as Albert Jay Nock described in his lecture series "The Theory of Education."

You are using the word "qualified" repeatedly as if you have any meat behind it. Your definition is that somebody, no matter how wrong or incompetent, is "qualified" so long as they have held multiple titles that you deem relevant. This is nothing more than your arbitrary definition. My main consideration for whether someone is suited to lead is their positions on important issues. We are not exactly living in an era of history where statesmanship is at an apex, so we have to settle for what little we can find.

Hillary, as the Bernie fans are acknowledging, is a chronic liar and a corrupt fraud. You are ignoring all of her misdeeds simply because you want a woman to be president. You are discriminating based on sex, and that is the definition of sexism! It just so happens that the group you are playing favorites with is allowed to be favored in our current discourse of double standards.

 

[calitennis127]

Cali, I don't think that it is only the case with the American education system, honestly. I feel that real values in life are being depreciated a lot and we've lived in a state of one sided judgements and opinions for a while, as a whole world. Sadly. There is no morals in dealings with different countries. No 2nd glance at what some decisions can do to million innocent lives. What is honorable in siding with any party that will pay the most and that will provide the most gain, and then turn their back to them in another situation? Frankly what they've done with the Middle East is just that. Somebody messed up with a beehive and now they are alarmed at the stings that those bees are going to make. Insane.

Billie you are giving the American people far too much credit. I wish that we were simply talking about a character problem, but we are not. The American people do not learn history, geography, foreign languages, or grammar anymore. They would not even know how to define "America" if they tried. Everything they are taught about American historical questions - to the extent that anyone pays attention in class - is a lie. For all the pretense of worldliness made by the Democrats, they are among the most narrow-minded bigots you could ever find. Every political question must fit their victimology script, and what holds their worldview together is hatred of one specific group. They are brazen hypocrites, and that is a result largely of their invincible ignorance.

 

[Ricardo]

No, I'm not making shit up. I am describing reality exactly as it is and as it was recently described in a great book by a Yale professor:

Excellent Sheep: The Miseducation of the American Elite

Contemporary education is an atrocity. The professors are overwhelmingly pretentious fakers and serious standards have been obliterated. Real education was one of the casualties of the 20th century, as Albert Jay Nock described in his lecture series "The Theory of Education."

You are using the word "qualified" repeatedly as if you have any meat behind it. Your definition is that somebody, no matter how wrong or incompetent, is "qualified" so long as they have held multiple titles that you deem relevant. This is nothing more than your arbitrary definition. My main consideration for whether someone is suited to lead is their positions on important issues. We are not exactly living in an era of history where statesmanship is at an apex, so we have to settle for what little we can find.

Hillary, as the Bernie fans are acknowledging, is a chronic liar and a corrupt fraud. You are ignoring all of her misdeeds simply because you want a woman to be president. You are discriminating based on sex, and that is the definition of sexism! It just so happens that the group you are playing favorites with is allowed to be favored in our current discourse of double standards.

You are absolutely correct that Moxie desarately wants Clinton to be president because she is a woman, and a radical feminist. You can bet that she won't admit it, and she wants to appear smart. Your explanation is actually beyond her comprehension level, so i guess will be a waste time unfortunately. Its clear that her endless preaching serves one purpose, repeat something enough times and some people might actually believe it.

After all, she bases all her thinking on emotional instability and feminist agendas; she'll never be able to think outside of those boxes. And about Hillary Clinton, you are right she has 'titles' while her performance is beyond poor. She's been everywhere and talks loud, but what has she achieved really(during all those years taking up all those positions)? i am not American, but i really want to know why a country needs a president as incompetent as her. Trump is Trump, at least he's made a great fortune for himself and you don't become a billionaire by being an idiot, like some made him out to be. Lets just say, it's fashionable to be Trump-bashing, as the whole world is seeing it. It's just pathetic how low the Hillary supporters sink to.

Hillary Clinton has always been incompetent, self-important, loud talking yet not achieving. The fact that with all the relationships gifted to her (due to her president husband) and she still lost to Barack Obama (who had no such gifts) showed exactly that. If you can't run an election campaign with almost everything to your advantage and beat your opponent who is basically a rookie in politics, you should just find another job. A lot of dumb Americans try to paint her as intelligent and competent and 'qualified', well such attempt at creating delusions can only go so far. They can only hide facts for so long.

 

[Ricardo]

Billie you are giving the American people far too much credit. I wish that we were simply talking about a character problem, but we are not. The American people do not learn history, geography, foreign languages, or grammar anymore. They would not even know how to define "America" if they tried. Everything they are taught about American historical questions - to the extent that anyone pays attention in class - is a lie. For all the pretense of worldliness made by the Democrats, they are among the most narrow-minded bigots you could ever find. Every political question must fit their victimology script, and what holds their worldview together is hatred of one specific group. They are brazen hypocrites, and that is a result largely of their invincible ignorance.

Brazen ignorant hypocrites, nailed it. Exactly what Hillary supporters are, if we cut the BS.

 

[Ricardo]

It's obvious Clinton has some powerful friends, who will sabotage a candidate from the same party in her favor. I don't know what that makes him, but it seems Sanders will still support her. On the other hand the republicans don't seem to be united and frankly they are making it a bit easier for HC to win. It doesn't seem that all the wrong decisions, wrong alliances, and her blunders are hurting her that much. Frankly I think she is a disaster for foreign politics, based on her previous experiences, but perhaps it's somebody's design to make this world an unsafe and frightening place.

She's proven that she does't care whatever disaster she'd cause for her own political gains, even if little.