Posted by moy23 on 5/11/2016 3:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 5/11/2016 3:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 5/11/2016 2:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/11/2016 1:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 5/11/2016 12:33:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 5/11/2016 11:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/11/2016 11:02:00 AM (view original):
Non-participation in electing someone worse than Obama is always an option.

Lil Marco and I agree that's as good as a vote for Hillary. It's an option, just understand it's implications.

The implication of people voting for Trump is that Trump might get elected.

That's certainly not a good option.

Exactly. After I vote, I have to live with my conscience. Now, I could vote for Trump and, should he win, watch 4 years of disaster. I could vote for Hillary, and should she win, watch 4 years of disaster. Either way, I made a conscience decision to vote for 4 years of disaster. I could abstain and watch 4 years of disaster with a clear conscience and be able to say "The general public is so stupid. How could anyone vote for this fucktard?"

Good rationalization but that's all that is. It would be true if a no vote wasn't the equivalent of a vote for Hillary. In essence you may trick yourself to 'think' you have a clear mind but your actions would have in fact contributed to getting Hillary in office. You CHOSE 4 years of disaster with Hillary by your actions/inactions.

You're somehow under the delusion that, despite the fact that Hillary is a horrible choice for President, that Trump would be a better choice.

He's not. Trump is a far more horrible choice for President than Hillary.

I can't stand Hillary Clinton. A year ago, there was no possible scenario in which I would prefer to see President Hillary over anybody the GOP would put up.

Then along came presumptive GOP nominee Donald J. Trump.

Nice work, Republicans.

How can you say that?. I'm a Trump supporter and I don't even know what Trump will do in office. I do however know what a Hillary presidency wuld look like.

Honestly, all rhetoric aside, although I don't like Obama or his policies, after eight years, America is still standing and in decent shape. Not as good as it could have been with better or more competent leadership, but we're still strong.

I expect 4-8 years of Hillary will be more like the past eight years of Obama. Not as good as it could be with better and more honest and trustworthy leadership, but America will likely still be here and in decent shape.

I don't feel that I can say the same thing about a potential Trump presidency. He's too much of a wildcard with too much potential to do something disastrous to America's standing on the world stage.

If you're OK with taking a chance on that, that's your business. But for me . . . no thanks.

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/11/2016 4:18:00 PM (view original):
I am a right-leaning individual. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find someone who says otherwise. But that's beside the point.

Nonetheless, your last post indicates that Trump COULD be worse than Hillary. So why are you so sure he's a good choice?

I know what Hillary will do. Based on that I'm willing to gamble on Trump.

I've always wanted to see what a businessman would do in office. I've seen what politicians can do.

Posted by tecwrg on 5/11/2016 6:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 5/11/2016 3:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 5/11/2016 3:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 5/11/2016 2:04:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/11/2016 1:14:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 5/11/2016 12:33:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 5/11/2016 11:59:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/11/2016 11:02:00 AM (view original):
Non-participation in electing someone worse than Obama is always an option.

Lil Marco and I agree that's as good as a vote for Hillary. It's an option, just understand it's implications.

The implication of people voting for Trump is that Trump might get elected.

That's certainly not a good option.

Exactly. After I vote, I have to live with my conscience. Now, I could vote for Trump and, should he win, watch 4 years of disaster. I could vote for Hillary, and should she win, watch 4 years of disaster. Either way, I made a conscience decision to vote for 4 years of disaster. I could abstain and watch 4 years of disaster with a clear conscience and be able to say "The general public is so stupid. How could anyone vote for this fucktard?"

Good rationalization but that's all that is. It would be true if a no vote wasn't the equivalent of a vote for Hillary. In essence you may trick yourself to 'think' you have a clear mind but your actions would have in fact contributed to getting Hillary in office. You CHOSE 4 years of disaster with Hillary by your actions/inactions.

You're somehow under the delusion that, despite the fact that Hillary is a horrible choice for President, that Trump would be a better choice.

He's not. Trump is a far more horrible choice for President than Hillary.

I can't stand Hillary Clinton. A year ago, there was no possible scenario in which I would prefer to see President Hillary over anybody the GOP would put up.

Then along came presumptive GOP nominee Donald J. Trump.

Nice work, Republicans.

How can you say that?. I'm a Trump supporter and I don't even know what Trump will do in office. I do however know what a Hillary presidency wuld look like.

Honestly, all rhetoric aside, although I don't like Obama or his policies, after eight years, America is still standing and in decent shape. Not as good as it could have been with better or more competent leadership, but we're still strong.

I expect 4-8 years of Hillary will be more like the past eight years of Obama. Not as good as it could be with better and more honest and trustworthy leadership, but America will likely still be here and in decent shape.

I don't feel that I can say the same thing about a potential Trump presidency. He's too much of a wildcard with too much potential to do something disastrous to America's standing on the world stage.

If you're OK with taking a chance on that, that's your business. But for me . . . no thanks.

What's more disastrous on the world stage than withdrawals of troops leading to the rise of isis, new allies in Iran and Cuba and the loss of old allies like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Israel..... Hillary and Libya = disaster (to steal a word from Trump)

It's been like bizarro world on foreign policy the last 8 years.


What specifically do you think Trump can do that'll be worse?

The retard said: "What specifically do you think Trump can do that'll be worse?"

Oh, I don't know. War? Condemnation from the international community? Loss of respect, support and cooperation from our allies?

Trump's potential for foreign policy might make Obama actually look like he deserved the Nobel Peace Prize he received 7 years ago.

Posted by tecwrg on 5/11/2016 7:09:00 PM (view original):
The retard said: "What specifically do you think Trump can do that'll be worse?"

Oh, I don't know. War? Condemnation from the international community? Loss of respect, support and cooperation from our allies?

Trump's potential for foreign policy might make Obama actually look like he deserved the Nobel Peace Prize he received 7 years ago.

Right, because Obama hasn't lost respect or support from our allies, or competitors. Hillary has done a great job on that count, as Secretary of State. And it's clear she'll really improve relations with Russia if elected. After all, they've merely banned her from visiting.

People made similarly alarmist predictions about Goldwater, but it was LBJ who escalated Vietnam. People said similar things about Reagan; Reagan left the details to George Schultz and James Baker III, and they did a great job.

You're presuming that Trump will make policy all by himself! His company clearly doesn't run that way -- otherwise he wouldn't be successful. (And spare me the garbage about how the only thing he's built is his brand.)

Posted by bad_luck on 5/11/2016 7:29:00 PM (view original):
The whole "nuking Europe" thing may be a problem.

You're an idiot. He was talking about the removal of the Missile Shield in Poland. That was a defensive weapon, not offensive. Removing it was Obama's naive initiative to make friends with Russia -- he received nothing in exchange. Many, many people opposed this at the time, and not just Republicans.

Your characterization is the height of stupidity.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_missile_defense_complex_in_Poland

Posted by tecwrg on 5/11/2016 7:09:00 PM (view original):
The retard said: "What specifically do you think Trump can do that'll be worse?"

Oh, I don't know. War? Condemnation from the international community? Loss of respect, support and cooperation from our allies?

Trump's potential for foreign policy might make Obama actually look like he deserved the Nobel Peace Prize he received 7 years ago.

Lol. That's what's happening under Obama.


Foreign leaders don't want trump to be President because they know they can't fleece him like they fleeced oblunder. Trump is a negotiator.

Hillary Clinton continues to lose ground to Donald Trump in national polling, as the latest survey from Reuters/Ipsos shows the two candidates running neck-and-neck.

The poll released Wednesday found 41 percent of likely voters supported Democratic frontrunner Clinton, and 40 percent backed Trump, with 19 percent not decided on either yet. Clinton led Trump by around 13 points in the same poll just one week ago, and thus the results represent a big jump for Trumpsince GOP hopefuls Ted Cruz and John Kasich withdrew from the race.

^^^Moy the Soothsayer

^^^Moy the moron

Posted by tecwrg on 5/11/2016 9:40:00 PM (view original):
^^^Moy the moron

Says the guy who's been wrong since last July......


Sounds like Tec is a sore loser :(