Jump to content
GBR0988

The Democrat Utopia

Recommended Posts

Just now, QMany said:

 

Donald Trump is 3 years older, almost to the day.

That may be true - (and he is too ... in everything else) but I think both parties need younger faces to lead them ahead. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

I'm willing to give G.H.W. Bush a slight edge in relevant Presidential experience. But can you name me one other candidate who could hit the White House running better than Hillary Clinton? 

Here is a link that quantified this issue.

 

LINK

 

Here's an article from VOX on this.

 

VOX

 

In other words, there have been many Presidents more qualified that Clinton would have been had she moved into the Whitehouse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Here is a link that quantified this issue.

 

LINK

 

Here's an article from VOX on this.

 

VOX

 

In other words, there have been many Presidents more qualified that Clinton would have been had she moved into the Whitehouse.

 

Interesting tidbit at the end of the first link:

 

Quote

Funfact: If Joe Biden had run in 2016, he would have 44 years total experience with a weighted XP of 48. He actually would have been the most qualified candidate ever, if you still think “qualified” ought to mean “experienced”.

and good ending to the Vox article:

 

Quote

 

It’s hard to say. But it might not really matter: There doesn’t seem to be much correlation between the strength of a presidential candidate’s résumé and how history judges them after they’ve served in the White House.

In 1857, James Buchanan became president with a résumé just as impressive as Clinton’s (terms in the House and Senate, ambassador to Russia and the United Kingdom, secretary of state). After four years, he was succeeded by a man with remarkably thin qualifications — Abraham Lincoln had only served one term in the US House of Representatives before famously losing a Senate election.

But all that experience meant little. Buchanan went down in history as the man who couldn’t stop the impending Civil War, and Lincoln ended up with the giant memorial on the National Mall for saving the Union.

Similarly, Herbert Hoover, the last member of the Cabinet to become president, had a sterling reputation as an effective crisis manager and humanitarian before he moved into the White House, and as a world traveler who had lived in several countries. He’d managed food relief in Europe during and after World War I, helping save millions of people from starvation; as secretary of commerce, he directed relief after Mississippi River floods left more than 600,000 people homeless.

Then he became president in 1928 and oversaw the beginning of the Great Depression. "A great crisis manager and humanitarian" was not his legacy.

Many of the most effective presidents, on the other hand, had résumés that were perfectly adequate at best. Obama had served four years in the Senate; he ended up passing historic legislation and redefining the Democratic Party. Reagan had been governor of California and an actor. Franklin D. Roosevelt was governor of New York.

Qualifications are a fine thing to have. But history suggests they’re far from the most important thing when it comes to effective presidential leadership.

 

 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Preet had a great interview this week with a behavior psychologist.  Re: Presidential candidates they found that the most narcisistic candidate usually wins.  With respect to leaders, they also get the least amount done.  He also got into the confidence vs. narcissism vs competence.  Good stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

Here is a link that quantified this issue.

 

LINK

 

Here's an article from VOX on this.

 

VOX

 

In other words, there have been many Presidents more qualified that Clinton would have been had she moved into the Whitehouse.

 

Eh, even the article admits "experience" is open to interpretation, and Hillary Clinton would still probably fit into the "in our lifetime" category.

 

It's interesting how much weight they throw to a Governorship, which certainly has relevance in terms of administrative skill, but doesn't cover the experience of working in Washington, often a very different animal and a notorious frustration to outsiders. Interesting, too, that they hail Presidents who held multiple ambassadorships, as that would be a fraction of the experience a former Secretary of State brings to the table. The difference between being a businessman and a corporate lawyer depends on the business and the perspective, but Hillary Clinton is far from naive about how money works in this country.

 

Again, I don't know how you could possibly overlook the unprecedented 8 years of living in the White House as the closest advisor to the President as the most relevant experience imaginable --- unless you simply want to diminish her as a woman and a wife.  

 

You know what Donald Trump calls "the biggest witch hunt of all time?"  That's what Hillary Clinton calls "Tuesday." 

 

And again, I ended up holding Hillary Clinton's experience against her. I wanted someone a lot fresher.

  • Plus1 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

Eh, even the article admits "experience" is open to interpretation, and Hillary Clinton would still probably fit into the "in our lifetime" category.

 

It's interesting how much weight they throw to a Governorship, which certainly has relevance in terms of administrative skill, but doesn't cover the experience of working in Washington, often a very different animal and a notorious frustration to outsiders. Interesting, too, that they hail Presidents who held multiple ambassadorships, as that would be a fraction of the experience a former Secretary of State brings to the table. The difference between being a businessman and a corporate lawyer depends on the business and the perspective, but Hillary Clinton is far from naive about how money works in this country.

 

Again, I don't know how you could possibly overlook the unprecedented 8 years of living in the White House as the closest advisor to the President as the most relevant experience imaginable --- unless you simply want to diminish her as a woman and a wife.  

 

You know what Donald Trump calls "the biggest witch hunt of all time?"  That's what Hillary Clinton calls "Tuesday." 

 

And again, I ended up holding Hillary Clinton's experience against her. I wanted someone a lot fresher.

 

I feel like anything I throw out you will not accept. 

 

There were Presidents with many more years in government even if you count her First Lady years. 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, TGHusker said:

 

Interesting tidbit at the end of the first link:

 

and good ending to the Vox article:
 

Quote

But all that experience meant little. Buchanan went down in history as the man who couldn’t stop the impending Civil War, and Lincoln ended up with the giant memorial on the National Mall for saving the Union.

 

 

Time will tell...

 

But somehow I don't think we wind up with any monuments to Trump gracing Washington. Also, to much irony, I don't think he ever winds up on any currency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

Sure....this eeems like a well run organization. 

 

 

Clintons and greed - go hand in hand  - She isn't much diff than Trump in that regard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TGHusker said:

Clintons and greed - go hand in hand  - She isn't much diff than Trump in that regard.

This is a pretty bad look....

 

 

Edit: sorry, I meant a bad look for Clinton; not your post :thumbs

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh boy.

 

I'm not going to quote anything from this story because it's extremely graphic. Frankly it was hard to finish. But it's important to digest fully and it's important to make clear no one is above the law, no matter their position or how much we agree or disagree with their politics. 

 

This is the guy who led the charge on the Trump University lawsuit. He was also presumably working hand in hand with Mueller to coordinate state level charges should Trump try to pardon away the federal crimes of any of his cronies. But none of that really matters. He's resigned, as he damn well should have. I'm not sure what the proper remedy is for this. I hope for this guy's sake, he gets the help he needs with his drinking & drug abuse problems. I seriously hope he can get clean & start working his way back towards healthy relationships with people again. This story depicts him as an absolute monster.

 

I feel so bad for these women & what they've been through. Unspeakable abuses.

 

 

  • Plus1 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Clifford Franklin said:

Oh boy.

 

I'm not going to quote anything from this story because it's extremely graphic. Frankly it was hard to finish. But it's important to digest fully and it's important to make clear no one is above the law, no matter their position or how much we agree or disagree with their politics. 

 

This is the guy who led the charge on the Trump University lawsuit. He was also presumably working hand in hand with Mueller to coordinate state level charges should Trump try to pardon away the federal crimes of any of his cronies. But none of that really matters. He's resigned, as he damn well should have. I'm not sure what the proper remedy is for this. I hope for this guy's sake, he gets the help he needs with his drinking & drug abuse problems. I seriously hope he can get clean & start working his way back towards healthy relationships with people again. This story depicts him as an absolute monster.

 

I feel so bad for these women & what they've been through. Unspeakable abuses.

 

 

Trump hinted at secrets of Russian investigators coming out over the weekend.  I wonder if he knew this was coming and are there more?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, funhusker said:

Trump hinted at secrets of Russian investigators coming out over the weekend.  I wonder if he knew this was coming and are there more?

 

It's pretty gross but I read that Trump views this as a win for him since Schneiderman had been someone that had publicly taken him on. Another one of his enemies vanquished, I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

 

 

Trying to decide if a cardboard cutout is sexual harassment. I suppose if it said the C word I wouldn’t be too happy to receive it but if it was just a penis I’d probably laugh.

 

I’m not sure what he’s talking about with sexual violence but I wouldn’t be shocked to hear he’s exaggerating. Also, it’s funny seeing a GOP senator (especially Hatch) act like he has the high ground, condemning random constituents instead of actual politicians/leaders of the GOP who are supposed to be better than the average Joe.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

Trying to decide if a cardboard cutout is sexual harassment. I suppose if it said the C word I wouldn’t be too happy to receive it but if it was just a penis I’d probably laugh.

 

I’m not sure what he’s talking about with sexual violence but I wouldn’t be shocked to hear he’s exaggerating. Also, it’s funny seeing a GOP senator (especially Hatch) act like he has the high ground, condemning random constituents instead of actual politicians/leaders of the GOP who are supposed to be better than the average Joe.

 

It's harassment, either way, he's right on that and he's right it should be condemned, but... then he's using it as a soapbox to assign blame and condemn the entire left, like we all collectively chipped in to send her a huge dick (when lets be honest, she's got a few hundred of them already in the building with her everyday, including him).  It should be referred to law enforcement and the individual responsible should be dealt with that way, same as any other threats or inappropriate harassment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, methodical said:

 

It's harassment, either way, he's right on that and he's right it should be condemned, but... then he's using it as a soapbox to assign blame and condemn the entire left, like we all collectively chipped in to send her a huge dick (when lets be honest, she's got a few hundred of them already in the building with her everyday, including him).  It should be referred to law enforcement and the individual responsible should be dealt with that way, same as any other threats or inappropriate harassment.

 

 

I think I'm having trouble getting past how funny I think it'd be to get a giant cardboard dick. I'd probably put it on display except when my mom visited me.

  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sen. Orrin Hatch calls Obamacare supporters 'stupidest, dumbass people'

Yep, the math checks out. This guy is a dick.

 

He's right in this instance, he's just a huge hypocrite. It must be easy for another rich old white dude that's been a Senator to tell women to hush down and be quiet when they're trying to install the guy that's going to overturn Roe and take their bodily autonomy away from them, but it's not like Hatch probably cares anyway. I imagine he thinks its the morally correct thing to do.

  • Plus1 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/25/2018 at 5:31 PM, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

Eh, even the article admits "experience" is open to interpretation, and Hillary Clinton would still probably fit into the "in our lifetime" category.

 

It's interesting how much weight they throw to a Governorship, which certainly has relevance in terms of administrative skill, but doesn't cover the experience of working in Washington, often a very different animal and a notorious frustration to outsiders. Interesting, too, that they hail Presidents who held multiple ambassadorships, as that would be a fraction of the experience a former Secretary of State brings to the table. The difference between being a businessman and a corporate lawyer depends on the business and the perspective, but Hillary Clinton is far from naive about how money works in this country.

 

Again, I don't know how you could possibly overlook the unprecedented 8 years of living in the White House as the closest advisor to the President as the most relevant experience imaginable --- unless you simply want to diminish her as a woman and a wife.  

 

You know what Donald Trump calls "the biggest witch hunt of all time?"  That's what Hillary Clinton calls "Tuesday." 

 

And again, I ended up holding Hillary Clinton's experience against her. I wanted someone a lot fresher.

 

Hillary was an abject failure as a First Wife, Senator, and Secretary of State. It’s very tough for her defenders to find anything she actually accomplished. But then, it’s awfully tough to find any of those roles that she earned on merit to begin with.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/14/2018 at 7:26 PM, Ric Flair said:

 

Hillary was an abject failure as a First Wife, Senator, and Secretary of State. It’s very tough for her defenders to find anything she actually accomplished. But then, it’s awfully tough to find any of those roles that she earned on merit to begin with.

 

So, instead we vote in an incompetent blubbering idiot with absolutely ZERO governmental experience and has since proven that he has no clue how to do the job and try to say he is better.

  • Plus1 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×