The Official 2024 Presidential Thread

[Opti]

Dec 29, 2022 7:33:45 GMT -5 scgal said:

Dec 28, 2022 21:41:02 GMT -5 teen persuasion said:

But when weighing a former Senator and Sec. of State vs a 2nd rate businessman (your term), how could you know IN ADVANCE that she would lose to said 2nd rate businessman, making her not-worth-voting-for? 

Because you seem to be saying that Hillary losing to Trump is what MADE her less-qualified in your eyes ...

First off thank you for a civil post. 
The point I am making is if she was good at her job she should have easily beat a Trump who is a second rate businessman. 

I think you are wrong on that point. It is known that a good portion of American voters prefer someone of average intelligence and are against voting for candidates they think are smarter than them. Plus you have the fact that no woman yet has been elected President. The fault lies more with the voters than Hillary, although her campaign did screw up by not hitting Wisconsin and a couple other states in the closing days of the campaign.

I also blame Obama and Eric Holder for pushing too hard on trans rights. I knew that would create a huge desire in some to snap back those rights to less than where they had been. And it was no surprise to me when that happened.

[scgal]

Dec 28, 2022 16:33:32 GMT -5 ken a.k.a OMK said:

Just like the phone call that Trump made to the Ukraine president. A scandal is just that a scandal. Usually pushed by the opposite party it is ok to push Trump for the scandal but not Hillary talk about credibility at least i'm honest

Hillary did nothing wrong so it was a political scandal by the GOP. trump actually broke the law or came close withholding funds authorized by congress as blackmail for his personal interests. You can't seem to see the truth if it doesn't fit your right wing agenda. You are honest and biased. 

I sure do see it differently than you do. I look at it honestly and give him an ok on the conversation. I read the conversation again just now (cnn piece) and I don't see where he did anything wrong. He should have went thru the justice dept but that is about it. Not something that should be impeachable. I think you try to distort the truth to fit your leftist agenda. 

[scgal]

Dec 28, 2022 16:29:15 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

Dec 28, 2022 16:15:42 GMT -5 scgal said:

Just like the phone call that Trump made to the Ukraine president. A scandal is just that a scandal. Usually pushed by the opposite party it is ok to push Trump for the scandal but not Hillary talk about credibility at least i'm honest

No, there is proof that Trump took classified documents. Trump's call with the Ukrainian president was inappropriate. What was the scandal in Benghazi? Numerous hearings were held, and nothing came out of it. It was an unfortunate situation. But scandal? That is a made up issue. Your both sidism is tiresome. You refuse to look at these issues honestly. And the fact that you thi makes Trump is better than anyone leads no one on this board to take you seriously

Both issues was made into a scandal by the opposing political side. I think Hillary could have or should have done more about Benghazi but that doesn't make it illegal just enough for me to put a strike against her. If you think i'm so tiresom and can't take me seriously then please feel free to block me. Trust me my life won't change if you do. 

[Opti]

Dec 29, 2022 7:52:16 GMT -5 scgal said:

Dec 28, 2022 16:33:32 GMT -5 ken a.k.a OMK said:

Hillary did nothing wrong so it was a political scandal by the GOP. trump actually broke the law or came close withholding funds authorized by congress as blackmail for his personal interests. You can't seem to see the truth if it doesn't fit your right wing agenda. You are honest and biased. 

I sure do see it differently than you do. I look at it honestly and give him an ok on the conversation. I read the conversation again just now (cnn piece) and I don't see where he did anything wrong. He should have went thru the justice dept but that is about it. Not something that should be impeachable. I think you try to distort the truth to fit your leftist agenda. 

I think it is the opposite of that. You are so married to your rightist agenda of believing any complaint against Trump is untrue you can't see straight. You may also have a greater tolerance for those on the right committing crimes than you do for those left of the aisle. What I like about many on the left and left leaners is they do not excuse bad behavior or criminal acts based on where one is politically. If it's bad, its bad. 

[scgal]

Dec 29, 2022 7:39:43 GMT -5 Opti said:

Dec 29, 2022 7:33:45 GMT -5 scgal said:

First off thank you for a civil post. 
The point I am making is if she was good at her job she should have easily beat a Trump who is a second rate businessman. 

I think you are wrong on that point. It is known that a good portion of American voters prefer someone of average intelligence and are against voting for candidates they think are smarter than them. Plus you have the fact that no woman yet has been elected President. The fault lies more with the voters than Hillary, although her campaign did screw up by not hitting Wisconsin and a couple other states in the closing days of the campaign.

I also blame Obama and Eric Holder for pushing too hard on trans rights. I knew that would create a huge desire in some to snap back those rights to less than where they had been. And it was no surprise to me when that happened.

I think you are correct as well. The way I see it since Hillary who was in the Senate longer than Obama if she did anything worthwhile she would have beaten him at the primaries on her first run. Even her own party didn't want her then. So she settle for the consolation prize of secretary of state. and try again. Then she Loses to Trump. Trump could learn a lesson from her thou and stay the hell out of the news but he can't. 

[scgal]

Dec 28, 2022 15:43:18 GMT -5 tallguy said:

Dec 28, 2022 15:39:57 GMT -5 scgal said:

in post 79 I stated neither one was qualified. 

And you are both sadly and hilariously wrong on that.  

ETA:  If there had been an impartial panel of 1000 people choosing who would be the best choice for the country and for the world, the vote would have been:
Clinton - 1000
Trump - 0

Yet he was still the one elected president

[ken a.k.a OMK]

I think you try to distort the truth to fit your leftist agenda. 

 I'm more a progressive then left.  There is no distortion.  You can't tell a threat and bribe when you hear it? you can't see the truth on many issues.

[ken a.k.a OMK]

The point I am making is if she was good at her job she should have easily beat a Trump who is a second rate businessman.

trump won because Kellyanne Conway was much better than the Dems in getting the electoral votes needed. Also Comey ignoring established protocol and falsely accusing Hillary at the end was devastating to her run.

[NomoreDramaQ1015]

Also A LOT of voters stayed home thinking no way in hell would Trump win.  They didn't take into account history shows that when you have several bedrock changing events such as legalizing gay marriage, a black man being president twice and a woman making it to be the democratic nominee there is a direct correlated backlash against it by those who currently hold all the privilege to ensure those people remember their place.

Trump showed up during the right point in history.  He wasn't a better candidate he was the candidate that is the epitome of white male power.    I LOVE how conservatives bashed Obama for being inexperienced and now apparently Hillary despite both their resumes of public service and having held office but TRUMP was experienced enough to vote in?  

Uh huh yeah that is TOTALLY what got him elected.

We seemed to have remembered that fact in 2020 and people came out to vote in record numbers.  Here is hoping that happens in 2024.

[thyme4change]

Dec 29, 2022 7:33:45 GMT -5 scgal said:

Dec 28, 2022 21:41:02 GMT -5 teen persuasion said:

But when weighing a former Senator and Sec. of State vs a 2nd rate businessman (your term), how could you know IN ADVANCE that she would lose to said 2nd rate businessman, making her not-worth-voting-for? 

Because you seem to be saying that Hillary losing to Trump is what MADE her less-qualified in your eyes ...

First off thank you for a civil post. 
The point I am making is if she was good at her job she should have easily beat a Trump who is a second rate businessman. 

This would be contingent on people voting based on actual merit - which very few do. Some vote on policies, some vote on party, some vote on personality, some vote on rumor, some vote on a single issue, some vote on peer pressure, etc.

[billisonboard]

I think it is time we just be honest. We all know that the reason Tanya, I mean Hillary lost is because she reminded us of Little Miss Goody Two Shoes we all had to deal with in elementary school, Mrs. Jones' perfect pet that we were told a million times we should be like. We still hate that bitch and took our revenge out on Clinton.

Okay, maybe I am projecting.

[Tennesseer]

Dec 29, 2022 8:14:59 GMT -5 scgal said:

Dec 28, 2022 15:43:18 GMT -5 tallguy said:

And you are both sadly and hilariously wrong on that.  

ETA:  If there had been an impartial panel of 1000 people choosing who would be the best choice for the country and for the world, the vote would have been:
Clinton - 1000
Trump - 0

Yet he was still the one elected president

Little children will pick a shiny penny up off the ground versus an old dollar bill.

[dondub]

If I am reading this correctly, scgal didn’t vote for Hillary in 2016 because she didn’t win! Makes sense to me.🤪

[billisonboard]

Dec 29, 2022 12:22:23 GMT -5 dondub said:

If I am reading this correctly, scgal didn’t vote for Hillary in 2016 because she didn’t win! Makes sense to me.🤪

I have been following the bouncing ball. She didn't vote for her because having only been first lady and SOS she wasn't qualified (post 79). Then when it was pointed out she had also been a US Senator, she didn't vote for her because she wasn't any more qualified than others (84). Then it was she didn't vote for her because she was investigated (107). Then she dint vote for her because, as you say, she didn't win.

[hurley1980]

If Hilary and Trump had to submit resumes and do rounds of interviews for the position of president, rather than be elected for it, Hilary would have been the one hired, based on her qualifications.  

Also, to say she lost is technically true, but she also got nearly 3 million more votes than Trump.  So the public indeed thought she was more qualified, but the EC doesn't actually work for the will of the people.  

[djAdvocate]

Dec 28, 2022 15:33:26 GMT -5 tallguy said:

Dec 28, 2022 15:15:50 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

by far.  but apparently we are more sexist than racist in the US.
(actually, there is a very neat historical proof of this, if you think about it)

I would guess it was the 50-year wait between the passing of the 15th and 19th Amendments. 


How'd I do? 

precisely.  given that those movements emerged AT THE SAME TIME, it is astonishing that it took two EXTRA generations to get women the vote.

let's hope we are not looking at 2058 for our first woman president.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 28, 2022 15:57:01 GMT -5 scgal said:

Dec 28, 2022 15:46:57 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

Curious- whose resume, in your opinion, qualifies them? (Perhaps a past president's or current potential one)

Hillary being SOS or Senator would qualify her if not for the scandals while in office. Benghazi, emails etc. Basically the same way I feel about Trump the scandals is not good for the country 

except for neither of those were scandals.  if they were, she would have been tried, convicted, and likely removed for them.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 28, 2022 15:43:18 GMT -5 tallguy said:

Dec 28, 2022 15:39:57 GMT -5 scgal said:

in post 79 I stated neither one was qualified. 

And you are both sadly and hilariously wrong on that.  

ETA:  If there had been an impartial panel of 1000 people choosing who would be the best choice for the country and for the world, the vote would have been:
Clinton - 1000
Trump - 0

i am not sure it would have been that lopsided.
when i was looking at Real Estate in Malta in 2016,
my realtor was a big Trump fan.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 28, 2022 16:03:37 GMT -5 scgal said:

Dec 28, 2022 15:56:00 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

Didn't answer the other questions. Who, in your mind is qualified? What makes someone qualified? Can you answer the question

Simply put someone who has been in office and actually done something not just some accolades from their party. Along with, while in office no major scandals. Hillary received a lot of ass kissing from liberal (Obama too). Make her look like she was all that but in the end she lost to a 2nd rate businessman. If she was all that she should have blown Trump away. 

the link i put up had praise from either McConnel or Graham.  can't remember which.

she lost to a 2nd rate businessman for a lot of reasons, only half of which were HER.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 28, 2022 16:09:07 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

Dec 28, 2022 16:03:37 GMT -5 scgal said:

Simply put someone who has been in office and actually done something not just some accolades from their party. Along with, while in office no major scandals. Hillary received a lot of ass kissing from liberal (Obama too). Make her look like she was all that but in the end she lost to a 2nd rate businessman. If she was all that she should have blown Trump away. 

More right wing nonsense. Benghazi was a made up scandal. The e mails were more republican nonsense, especially since you seem too have no issue with Trump's handling of classified documents. She had 20 years of vilification from the republicans that gave her such a negative rating. 

this nails it squarely.  but it was more like 25 years.

[djAdvocate]

Dec 29, 2022 13:59:10 GMT -5 hurley1980 said:

If Hilary and Trump had to submit resumes and do rounds of interviews for the position of president, rather than be elected for it, Hilary would have been the one hired, based on her qualifications.  

Also, to say she lost is technically true, but she also got nearly 3 million more votes than Trump.  So the public indeed thought she was more qualified, but the EC doesn't actually work for the will of the people.  

but they DID do that, and 60M people, who have never read a resume other than their own, voted for Trump.

we really should be teaching civics and logic in public school.

[djAdvocate]

another lesson, which would be valuable for people to learn, is that public service (like the presidency) requires a whole different skill set than private service (like running a business).  once in a great while, you get a good businessman who makes a good president.  more often you get the opposite.  no joke.

[tallguy]

Dec 29, 2022 14:29:36 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Dec 28, 2022 15:43:18 GMT -5 tallguy said:

And you are both sadly and hilariously wrong on that.  

ETA:  If there had been an impartial panel of 1000 people choosing who would be the best choice for the country and for the world, the vote would have been:
Clinton - 1000
Trump - 0

i am not sure it would have been that lopsided.
when i was looking at Real Estate in Malta in 2016,
my realtor was a big Trump fan.

I did say "impartial."  

[tallguy]

Dec 29, 2022 8:14:59 GMT -5 scgal said:

Dec 28, 2022 15:43:18 GMT -5 tallguy said:

And you are both sadly and hilariously wrong on that.  

ETA:  If there had been an impartial panel of 1000 people choosing who would be the best choice for the country and for the world, the vote would have been:
Clinton - 1000
Trump - 0

Yet he was still the one elected president

Yes, in one of the failings of liberalism, they actually believe that everybody should be allowed to vote, no matter how stupid, prejudiced, or uninformed they are.  In addition, we remain saddled with a ridiculously anachronistic system that should have been abolished many decades (if not over a century) ago.  That system is not only inherently unfair and antithetical to the "one person, one vote" ideal, but leads directly to people being "elected" after losing the actual vote.  Not having the Electoral College would have prevented us from being cursed with the worst president in three generations (George W. Bush) and the worst president in this country's history (Donald Trump.)  But sure, hang your hat on that.   

[NomoreDramaQ1015]

I have never understood the devoted attachment to the Electoral College.  It didn't make sense to me back in HS and it makes even less sense now.  

People go "Well I don't want California deciding my president!" 

But you're okay with Ohio holding enough power they decide the president based on their electoral vote? 


The idea the Electoral College makes anything fair and equal is a joke.  The president is still decided by a handful of states.  Trump didn't win the popular vote he won three states worth of electoral votes that outweighed the other 47.  HOW is that fair?

It's a leftover relic of white dudes who recognized their privilege was threatened if everyone's vote counted as much as theirs so they padded the system in their favor.  It's an outdated racist, sexist, elitest system.

It also gives candidates no incentive to actually stump for the people.  They know they only got to focus on a couple states and they are golden.  Screw the rest of the country.  Maybe we'd see some  national policy that benefits everyone if candidates knew they would have to actually court the votes of all 50 states to win.

[thyme4change]

Only 11 million people in CA voted for Biden. If the national turn out was the same, the vote in CA would only be as big of a factor as it is in the electoral college. Plus, finally, the CA Republicans would have some say in who is President.

[hurley1980]

Dec 29, 2022 16:58:11 GMT -5 thyme4change said:

Only 11 million people in CA voted for Biden. If the national turn out was the same, the vote in CA would only be as big of a factor as it is in the electoral college. Plus, finally, the CA Republicans would have some say in who is President.

11 million out of the 17.5 million that voted. Trump only got 6 million.  The rest went to 3rd party candidates. 

[billisonboard]

Dec 29, 2022 16:09:28 GMT -5 NomoreDramaQ1015 said:

I have never understood the devoted attachment to the Electoral College.  It didn't make sense to me back in HS and it makes even less sense now.  

People go "Well I don't want California deciding my president!" 

But you're okay with Ohio holding enough power they decide the president based on their electoral vote? 


The idea the Electoral College makes anything fair and equal is a joke.  The president is still decided by a handful of states.  Trump didn't win the popular vote he won three states worth of electoral votes that outweighed the other 47.  HOW is that fair?

It's a leftover relic of white dudes who recognized their privilege was threatened if everyone's vote counted as much as theirs so they padded the system in their favor. It's an outdated racist, sexist, elitest system.

It also gives candidates no incentive to actually stump for the people.  They know they only got to focus on a couple states and they are golden.  Screw the rest of the country.  Maybe we'd see some  national policy that benefits everyone if candidates knew they would have to actually court the votes of all 50 states to win.

When the Electoral College was adopted, only white dudes were allowed to vote in any state, large-small-inbetween. So removing pronouns makes it "a leftover relic of white dudes who recognized white dude privilege was threatened if every white dude's vote counted as much as other white dudes so white dudes padded the system in white dudes favor." I don't like the Electoral College but that particular argument against doesn't make sense.

[dondub]

Read this book in November and passed it on to Dubette #2, the leading social justice warrior in the family. I highly recommend, not only for it’s comments on the Electoral College, but the general reveal on our, ahem, sainted document,

www.thenation.com/events/elie-mystal-book-black-guys-guide-to-constitution/

[saveinla]

Dec 29, 2022 17:37:48 GMT -5 dondub said:

Read this book in November and passed it on to Dubette #2, the leading social justice warrior in the family. I highly recommend, not only for it’s comments on the Electoral College, but the general reveal on our, ahem, sainted document,

www.thenation.com/events/elie-mystal-book-black-guys-guide-to-constitution/

Just started this - like how it's going