The General Election

[Saunders]

 

 

On the 2nd amendment topic, no, Clinton does not want to repeal it. Nor does/did Obama, nor do the vast majority of Democrats/Independents. This is crazy uber-conservative propaganda.

For the record, Hillary has stated she's intrigued by an Australia type of gun ban, which in order to be feasible, would require the abolishment of the 2nd amendment.

She was asked about it at an event and off the cuff said she's consider it. There'd be no way to make it mandatory, it would have to be voluntary much like the buyback programs we already have locally.

 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/10/25/hillary_clinton_and_gun_buybacks_128539.html

 

As for the housing bubble, Trump was cheering on a market crash so he could profit because he was rich enough to be insulated from its effect. Clinton got paid to give an address at a bank. I've never understood the speech complaint. If I had the resume she does, and some bank threw stupid amounts of money at me as a private citizen to come talk, I'd do it 10 times out of 10.

 

So, she wants to do something that's not effective, but gains political capital. I'm surprised...

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/12/gun-buybacks-popular-but-ineffective/1829165/

 

And as for being in wall street's pocket: https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cid=N00000019&cycle=Career

 

It's not just about being paid to give an address at a bank.

[knapplc]

You commented earlier that you long for day when we look back and realize how good it actually was under Obama. I actually look forward to the time things are much better, when we have a more competent President and congress, and we realize that things could've been much better. Sure, it hasn't been as bad as many partisans have been playing it but, really it hasn't been anything to write home about either. I think we both want things to get better. Unfortunately this election cycle sure doesn't seem to have us headed in the right direction. You'll probably get your wish of thinking the Obama years were grand compared to the likely next 4 or 8.

I think you misinterpreted my comment. I don't want us to look back at the Obama presidency as "the good years." I hope much better years are ahead.

 

What I was saying was, Obama's detractors unfairly paint a portrait of an incompetent president, which he most certainly has not been. This narrative has been pushed since before he took office and has remained in place, and is now believed (because the lie has been repeated enough) by too many people.

 

The fact is that Obama is a more-than-competent person to be president. Because of party politics and latent racism, he's been hamstrung during his time in office. He's had a congress that has opposed his every move out of sheer self-serving spite, and then lied about or misconstrued their goals. Their adherents, and those who listen to their mouthpiece Fox News, believe their reasons and think they're just. They are not just, and history will show us how poorly represented we've been during these past eight years by our Republican leaders. I don't look forward to the day when misguided Americans come to that realization - it'll be a sad day, a "what might have been" day.

 

This election cycle most certainly doesn't have us headed in the right direction. Too many uninformed voters are casting ballots for the worst set of presidential candidates we've had in my lifetime. Too many people with nice houses, two cars, food on the table and jobs are angry about all the things life is taking from them, never realizing that the people taking from them are the very people they keep voting for, that their anger is comically misplaced at "the immigrants." America has become stupid, and we need look no further than the adoring crowds currently hoping to elect a game show host as President of the United States.

 

And yet, those are the very people who are most angry with, and most vocal about their disdain for, a decent president (Obama).

 

Even if Trump isn't elected this cycle, we've set the precedent for buffoonery in elections. I'm as worried about who comes after Trump, in his footsteps, as I am about a Trump presidency. There's a market for demagoguery in America, Trump is showing that very clearly. When you elect demagogues, you get dictators. History is rife with examples of that.

 

That's why I think we'll be looking back fondly on the past eight years. Not hoping so, but fearful that this will be.

[Danny Bateman]

 

 

 

On the 2nd amendment topic, no, Clinton does not want to repeal it. Nor does/did Obama, nor do the vast majority of Democrats/Independents. This is crazy uber-conservative propaganda.

For the record, Hillary has stated she's intrigued by an Australia type of gun ban, which in order to be feasible, would require the abolishment of the 2nd amendment.

She was asked about it at an event and off the cuff said she's consider it. There'd be no way to make it mandatory, it would have to be voluntary much like the buyback programs we already have locally.

 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/10/25/hillary_clinton_and_gun_buybacks_128539.html

 

As for the housing bubble, Trump was cheering on a market crash so he could profit because he was rich enough to be insulated from its effect. Clinton got paid to give an address at a bank. I've never understood the speech complaint. If I had the resume she does, and some bank threw stupid amounts of money at me as a private citizen to come talk, I'd do it 10 times out of 10.

 

So, she wants to do something that's not effective, but gains political capital. I'm surprised...

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/12/gun-buybacks-popular-but-ineffective/1829165/

 

And as for being in wall street's pocket: https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cid=N00000019&cycle=Career

 

It's not just about being paid to give an address at a bank.

 

 

We were talking earlier about gun control being a wedge issue that both parties use for political support but rarely has anything serious come out regarding it one way or the other. That's how I view her comment on a buy-back. She doesn't want to do it, she was just asked about it and said it at least warranted looking into, probably to placate the asker. It's much the same way Trump said he "wouldn't take nukes off the table" against Europe, albeit less idiotic. It's just a way to hedge bets and not be concrete about something.

 

Obama took a crapload of money from Wall Street: https://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cid=N00009638

 

He went on to pass Dodd-Frank, and Clinton wants to strengthen that bad boy up. She was a Senator from New York and had to work closely with Wall Street, what do you expect? It's a non-issue for me, though I understand others may feel differently. I just don't think it's really warranted.

[JJ Husker]

 

You commented earlier that you long for day when we look back and realize how good it actually was under Obama. I actually look forward to the time things are much better, when we have a more competent President and congress, and we realize that things could've been much better. Sure, it hasn't been as bad as many partisans have been playing it but, really it hasn't been anything to write home about either. I think we both want things to get better. Unfortunately this election cycle sure doesn't seem to have us headed in the right direction. You'll probably get your wish of thinking the Obama years were grand compared to the likely next 4 or 8.

I think you misinterpreted my comment. I don't want us to look back at the Obama presidency as "the good years." I hope much better years are ahead.What I was saying was, Obama's detractors unfairly paint a portrait of an incompetent president, which he most certainly has not been. This narrative has been pushed since before he took office and has remained in place, and is now believed (because the lie has been repeated enough) by too many people.The fact is that Obama is a more-than-competent person to be president. Because of party politics and latent racism, he's been hamstrung during his time in office. He's had a congress that has opposed his every move out of sheer self-serving spite, and then lied about or misconstrued their goals. Their adherents, and those who listen to their mouthpiece Fox News, believe their reasons and think they're just. They are not just, and history will show us how poorly represented we've been during these past eight years by our Republican leaders. I don't look forward to the day when misguided Americans come to that realization - it'll be a sad day, a "what might have been" day.This election cycle most certainly doesn't have us headed in the right direction. Too many uninformed voters are casting ballots for the worst set of presidential candidates we've had in my lifetime. Too many people with nice houses, two cars, food on the table and jobs are angry about all the things life is taking from them, never realizing that the people taking from them are the very people they keep voting for, that their anger is comically misplaced at "the immigrants." America has become stupid, and we need look no further than the adoring crowds currently hoping to elect a game show host as President of the United States.And yet, those are the very people who are most angry with, and most vocal about their disdain for, a decent president (Obama).Even if Trump isn't elected this cycle, we've set the precedent for buffoonery in elections. I'm as worried about who comes after Trump, in his footsteps, as I am about a Trump presidency. There's a market for demagoguery in America, Trump is showing that very clearly. When you elect demagogues, you get dictators. History is rife with examples of that.That's why I think we'll be looking back fondly on the past eight years. Not hoping so, but fearful that this will be.

Believe it or not, I pretty much understood your position on all this before you explained it further. I know you want things to be better. And you're right, the Republican congress has been a bigger problem than the Dem in the WH, regardless what some believe. I probably place a bit more blame on Obama than you do for the inability of anything meaningful being accomplished but we're really probably not very far apart. Obama may be competent enough but I just would hope that we can identify and elect better people for the Presidency and all executive and legislative positions than we have had recently and that are currently propspects. We can and should do better than Obama and we sure as hell have to do better than those being considered this cycle. If not, the Obama years may sadly be the best we realize for a long time. sh#t has to change.

[knapplc]

I'll just reiterate that Obama is not, and has not been, the problem.

[TGHusker]

criticism of Trump being happy he can buy cheaper realestate because of the housing market is just stupid. There were millions of Americans across the country doing the same thing only on a smaller scale and we're just as happy.

 

Hell, I remember wishing I had some cash interbank to buy some. I would have been very happy.

 

Also, criticism of Hillary giving a speech at wall street is just as idiotic.

 

Like it or not, Wall Street is an important part of our economy. Of course she is going to give a speech to them if they throw that kind of money at her. Anyone who says they wouldn't must have one hell of a lot of stage fright giving speeches.

 

It is called House Flipping. I bet there are a few on this forum who have done it. In fact, ckout Elizabeth Warren, the pure as driven snow liberal, she was a house flipper in Oklahoma back in the 90s and also loaned money to relatives to do the same.

We have to also remember that the housing crisis had it origins in sub-prime loans pushed by Jimmy Carter and wt the program revised by ..... Bill Clinton. Bankers told to give out loans to unqualified people. Of course bankers also gained from this handy govt/bank deal - as people could no longer afford the home - who got the property? The banks. Nice big gov't and big bank arrangement. The Dems got a social program and appearance of looking out for the small guy and the banks got homes repo when buyers could not meet their obligations.

[Lil' Red]

What I was saying was, Obama's detractors unfairly paint a portrait of an incompetent president, which he most certainly has not been. This narrative has been pushed since before he took office and has remained in place, and is now believed (because the lie has been repeated enough) by too many people.

 

Rubio agrees

[QMany]

I actually look forward to the time things are much better, when we have a more competent President and congress, and we realize that things could've been much better.

 

Is competent really the word you were looking for regarding Obama?

[JJ Husker]

I'll just reiterate that Obama is not, and has not been, the problem.

We agree that the congress, particularly obstructionist republicans have been THE problem with tackling any real issues. But, are you claiming that Obama is totally blameless and has had absolutely no hand in lack of cooperation or partisan gamesmanship? Because that would be a little "out there" IMO.

 

I'm not saying there is probably much he could've done with this congress but there sure were times where it seemed he purposely antagonized the situation and was unwilling to work across the aisle towards any kind of compromise. I mean it did happen on more than one occasion....

[JJ Husker]

 

I actually look forward to the time things are much better, when we have a more competent President and congress, and we realize that things could've been much better.

 

Is competent really the word you were looking for regarding Obama?

 

Well, maybe competent wasn't the exact right word. Possibly could have used "better" or "capable" or any number of descriptors. I just believe we can and should expect more from the POTUS. But yeah, compared to this cycle, he may look like the best thing since sliced bread.

[teachercd]

 

Yeah, I know, everybody was in love with the thought of "the first black President" at the time, so he was destined to get elected. But you get my point. Maybe I should have used 19th attempt for 2012. Point is we haven't had sh#t for candidates and we have been especially lacking anyone worthy in the political arenafor quite some time.

Someday, probably in my lifetime, people are going to realize Obama was a pretty decent president. Not great, sometimes not good, but overall a good president.They're going to realize that, while some people did vote for him because he's Black, more people voted against him because he was Black - meaning he wasn't elected "because he was Black." He was elected because he was the best choice available.Twice.I'm ready for that day when we realize how good we had it under Obama, and for the day we finally start to wonder how much better it could have been had Congress not knee-jerk responded to every single thing he did with "NO!" instead of compromise.I'm just hoping that when people look back at this time with a softer heart, it isn't with regret based on the awfulness of the current president.

Your are right but pretty much ever president is remembered better and better as time goes on.

[HuskerNation1]

I'll just reiterate that Obama is not, and has not been, the problem.

 

Somehow it doesn't suprise me that you don't feel Obama has been the problem. While he is not the sole cause, he's a big reason for the rise of both Trump and Sanders. First, with Sanders, Obama has made many Americans believe it's ok to expand the size and scope of government while weakening our position militarily and as a strategic world player. This has led to the notion that a self-described socialist is now running neck and neck with Hillary. On the flip side, Obama's confrontational in your face approach to anyone that disagrees with him (Obama's a bully too) has led to the GOP nominating an even bigger bully as many voters want to throw it back in the face of Obama and undo all of his silly policies and executive orders. A Trump victory in November would all but seal the failed legacy that Obama will leave behind.

[HuskerNation1]

It looks like the bad news continues for Hillary, and I'm not talking about her lies about her email server. In the past month alone, there has been a 36% swing in millennial voters toward Trump. I'm guessing some of these voters are frustrated Sanders supporters, but I think the shock factor about Trump being President has worn off for many, and now that they are seriously considering a race between him and Hillary, more are opting to go for the outsider.

 

http://redalertpolitics.com/2016/05/23/abc-poll-trump-surge-due-massive-36-millennial-swing/

[Lil' Red]

 

I'll just reiterate that Obama is not, and has not been, the problem.

 

Somehow it doesn't suprise me that you don't feel Obama has been the problem. While he is not the sole cause, he's a big reason for the rise of both Trump and Sanders. First, with Sanders, Obama has made many Americans believe it's ok to expand the size and scope of government while weakening our position militarily and as a strategic world player. This has led to the notion that a self-described socialist is now running neck and neck with Hillary. On the flip side, Obama's confrontational in your face approach to anyone that disagrees with him (Obama's a bully too) has led to the GOP nominating an even bigger bully as many voters want to throw it back in the face of Obama and undo all of his silly policies and executive orders. A Trump victory in November would all but seal the failed legacy that Obama will leave behind.

 

 

Obama probably is partially responsible for both Sanders and Trump but I disagree with the reasons you listed. I think with Sanders, the far-left was disappointed that Obama did not provide all the change they originally thought he would and now believe only a candidate like Sanders can provide real change. With Trump, I think his supporters are tired of Obama's boring speeches where he contemplates the ramifications of every word he says and instead prefer an entertainer who isn't afraid of making flippant remarks.

[knapplc]

Somehow it doesn't suprise me that you don't feel Obama has been the problem. While he is not the sole cause, he's a big reason for the rise of both Trump and Sanders. First, with Sanders, Obama has made many Americans believe it's ok to expand the size and scope of government while weakening our position militarily and as a strategic world player. This has led to the notion that a self-described socialist is now running neck and neck with Hillary. On the flip side, Obama's confrontational in your face approach to anyone that disagrees with him (Obama's a bully too) has led to the GOP nominating an even bigger bully as many voters want to throw it back in the face of Obama and undo all of his silly policies and executive orders. A Trump victory in November would all but seal the failed legacy that Obama will leave behind.

 

 

"Expanded government."

 

"Bully"

 

"Weaken the military"

 

"Executive Orders"

 

Are there any more conservative buzzwords to throw around, or did I miss any?

 

Trump is entirely a Republican invention. He is running on Republican ideas, his supporters are overwhelmingly Republican, and the planks in his platform "BUILD THE WALL" are extremely right-wing. They have NOTHING to do with Obama.

 

The concept of Obama being a "bully" is laughable. He's tried time and time again to reason and work with the Republicans. How easily we forget that the Republican leaders met the very night Obama was being inaugurated and pledged to obstruct every single thing he did. Every. Single. Thing. He's a "bully" because he didn't bow down to this crap.

 

Bush II ramrodded the Patriot Act through congress on the heels of the greatest national tragedy America has seen since Pearl Harbor. That's a bully for you, by the way. The Patriot Act is the single biggest expansion of government in the last thirty years. But no Republican will even mention it. They just mouth "expanded government" whenever they run out of anything else to say.

 

Here's your military spending under Obama. Show us how he's "weakened the military."

 

 

 

Here are the Executive Orders issued by the last several presidents. Show me again how Obama has abused this power.

 

 

 

Blaming Trump on Obama is like blaming Iraq on Obama. The Republicans create the mess, and rather than take responsibility, they try to foist it off on Obama. Obama has become the boogie man for everything the Republicans have a problem with.

 

You can sell all this stuff to the idiots on Facebook. You can't expect people who can think for themselves to buy it.