Moiraine Posted August 2, 2016 Share Posted August 2, 2016 Found the liberal. Don't be silly. The REAL liberal was the Creighton Duke who voted for Nader in 2000 I voted for him in 2004 2004 seemed like too important of an election to vote third party...seems funny that I thought that back then... I did it at the last minute. If I hadn't been living in Nebraska I would've voted for Kerry. Link to comment
TGHusker Posted August 2, 2016 Share Posted August 2, 2016 Found the liberal. Don't be silly. The REAL liberal was the Creighton Duke who voted for Nader in 2000 I voted for him in 2004 Hate to quote/post twice, but this raises a very interesting question. Looking at the HB poll (which I doubt is representative of the U.S. voting population, but I digress), many want to vote third party. That being said, what would the breakdown be for Trump-Clinton-Third Party Candidates if Nader was involved and in 2000 mode? Probably wouldn't be Perot-esque, but I could see him taking A LOT of the Bernie vote and ending up with ~15-18% of the GE vote. Sorry to derail...once again. I think he would get a lot of the Bernie vote but one would expect Stein to be higher in the polls than what she is. Maybe it is too early to see a Stein bump - waiting on a misstep by Hillary. Trump's missteps push voters towards Johnson's 3rd party as reflected in many comments on this board. Link to comment
HuskerNation1 Posted August 10, 2016 Author Share Posted August 10, 2016 It looks like the DOJ is blocking a probe of the Clinton Foundation...something new and totally unrelated to Benghazi which Hillary supporters argue has been studied too much. I'm sure Hillary will keep claiming its a vast right-wing conspiracy. http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/09/politics/hillary-clinton-emails-judicial-watch/index.html Link to comment
knapplc Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 I told you this was rigged. I've been saying it for months. Link to comment
HuskerNation1 Posted August 10, 2016 Author Share Posted August 10, 2016 More news on the Clinton foundation showing hinting at more shady dealings. http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/291006-critics-seen-signs-of-improper-ties-in-new-clinton-emails We are left with one candidate that says a lot of dumb and offensive things (Trump) and another candidate that has done a lot of bad things (Hillary). The voters will decide the lesser of 2 evils. I'm not a big fan of some of Johnson's positions on marijuana, immigration, and allowing the drinking age to be lowered to age 18, and given this country needs a strong leader, he's not going to win but may play a role in determining who wins. Now if Romney had gotten the libertarian party nomination I think you would have a very tight 3-way race right now. Maybe Johnson could agree to be VP and let Romney at the top. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted August 10, 2016 Share Posted August 10, 2016 Trump hasn't done any bad things? Link to comment
HuskerNation1 Posted August 10, 2016 Author Share Posted August 10, 2016 Trump hasn't done any bad things? In the course of his long career, sure, there is Trump University and I'm sure some complaints from some of his employees. But when you take away all the dumb statements and look at the results on paper (like a resume of what was actually delivered), he has a much stronger track record than she does. She has held many positions in government, but what has Hillary actually made better. The world is far less stable since she was SOS. ISIS is far more powerful now than in 2009. As Senator she promised to bring 200,000 jobs to upstate New York and that did not happen. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 The only reason for that is because he hadn't been in the public eye like her. If creditors, Suppliers, contractors, employees and wives can't trust him, why should I? Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 Trump hasn't done any bad things? In the course of his long career, sure, there is Trump University and I'm sure some complaints from some of his employees. But when you take away all the dumb statements and look at the results on paper (like a resume of what was actually delivered), he has a much stronger track record than she does. She has held many positions in government, but what has Hillary actually made better. The world is far less stable since she was SOS. ISIS is far more powerful now than in 2009. As Senator she promised to bring 200,000 jobs to upstate New York and that did not happen. As for the McCain election, just like this year, I would need to see the articles and make s judgment. His VP selection was horrible and she was almost up there with trump as far as dumb things said. And....I was someone who was excited about her when she was selected. I was wrong and she was horrible. So, in sure there were a lot of appropriately bad articles about her. Link to comment
Danny Bateman Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 Trump hasn't done any bad things? In the course of his long career, sure, there is Trump University and I'm sure some complaints from some of his employees. But when you take away all the dumb statements and look at the results on paper (like a resume of what was actually delivered), he has a much stronger track record than she does. She has held many positions in government, but what has Hillary actually made better. The world is far less stable since she was SOS. ISIS is far more powerful now than in 2009. As Senator she promised to bring 200,000 jobs to upstate New York and that did not happen. It is misguided to attribute major world dynamics to one person. Even the Secretary of State. They are our chief diplomat, but the proliferation of terrorist groups and the stability of the world in general don't fall solely on the doorstep of Hillary Clinton. Surely we recognize that there are many other players on the world stage as well. That'd be like saying the housing crash in 2008 happened because of Trump's crappy business practices. 2 Link to comment
HuskerNation1 Posted August 11, 2016 Author Share Posted August 11, 2016 The only reason for that is because he hadn't been in the public eye like her. If creditors, Suppliers, contractors, employees and wives can't trust him, why should I? Out of years of business dealings, I have not seen tons of suppliers, contractors, and employees speaking out against him. All the GOP opponents tried this angle and struggled to find a few. Stop trying to dismiss her corruption and imply there is an equivalency. Link to comment
HuskerNation1 Posted August 11, 2016 Author Share Posted August 11, 2016 Trump hasn't done any bad things? In the course of his long career, sure, there is Trump University and I'm sure some complaints from some of his employees. But when you take away all the dumb statements and look at the results on paper (like a resume of what was actually delivered), he has a much stronger track record than she does. She has held many positions in government, but what has Hillary actually made better. The world is far less stable since she was SOS. ISIS is far more powerful now than in 2009. As Senator she promised to bring 200,000 jobs to upstate New York and that did not happen. It is misguided to attribute major world dynamics to one person. Even the Secretary of State. They are our chief diplomat, but the proliferation of terrorist groups and the stability of the world in general don't fall solely on the doorstep of Hillary Clinton. Surely we recognize that there are many other players on the world stage as well. That'd be like saying the housing crash in 2008 happened because of Trump's crappy business practices. This argument was just had in another forum (not with you), but many on the left try to attribute the Iraq war and the 2008 financial downturn to Bush. Lord knows Obama spent his entire first term blaming Bush for everything. So you are on record for not attributing the Iraq war or the 2008 meltdown to Bush? Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 The only reason for that is because he hadn't been in the public eye like her. If creditors, Suppliers, contractors, employees and wives can't trust him, why should I? Out of years of business dealings, I have not seen tons of suppliers, contractors, and employees speaking out against him. All the GOP opponents tried this angle and struggled to find a few. Stop trying to dismiss her corruption and imply there is an equivalency. He brags about borrowing money he knows he isn't going to completely pay back. I personally know contractors in New York he's screwed. He's cheated on his wives. He's been sued by employees that haven't been paid. I don't give a rip if a lot of followers in the primaries were so Googlie eyed at the loud mouth that they didn't care. I care and I'm the one deciding who I vote for. 2 Link to comment
zoogs Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 I usually see the 2008 meltdown attributed to, among other things, lack of regulation. I say this without precise knowledge of party or candidate platforms in this area, but who are the guys who favor more deregulation? Less? As for the Iraq war, I wonder who in the world could have started that one? Link to comment
Moiraine Posted August 11, 2016 Share Posted August 11, 2016 As for the Iraq war, I wonder who in the world could have started that one? Ya, I'm a bit dumbfounded here. Who else would we attribute the Iraq war to? Saying Bush isn't responsible for the Iraq war isn't the same as saying Clinton isn't solely responsible for ISIS getting more powerful. It's the same thing as saying Bin Laden isn't solely responsible for the attacks on the twin towers. Link to comment
Recommended Posts