Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
RedSoxUK

USA 2016 Presidential Election Thread

POTUS  

152 members have voted

  1. 1. Who do you want as POTUS?

    • Donald Trump
    • Ben Carson
    • Hilary Clinton
    • Bernie Sanders
    • Marco Rubio
      0
    • Jeb Bush
    • Ted Cruz
    • Carly Fiorina
      0
    • Rand Paul
    • Martin O'Malley
    • Jim Webb
      0


Recommended Posts

Guest MattP
Posted
30 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Really not been a fantastic week for Trump. Hillary now at better odds to win than at any time since before he closed out the primaries.

Never seen a divebomb like it, he was on 33% in one poll, that's getting towards Jeremy Corbyn levels territory in terms of popularity.

 

Interesting that Johnson has shot up, 13%-14% in a couple, if he can get a consistent 15% vote he gets a place in the TV debates and anything could happen from there.

Posted
1 minute ago, MattP said:

Never seen a divebomb like it, he was on 33% in one poll, that's getting towards Jeremy Corbyn levels territory in terms of popularity.

 

Interesting that Johnson has shot up, 13%-14% in a couple, if he can get a consistent 15% vote he gets a place in the TV debates and anything could happen from there.

I'd like to see Gazza in the debates, sure he'd put across some interesting points and there's a lot he says that I agree with - New Hampshire libertarian in me showing! lol

 

Given the two candidates for the main parties a leading third-party candidate could at least make an impression on folks. Don't think he'll do much in the big show but it'd be good to see him alongside the two big guns.

Guest MattP
Posted
29 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I'd like to see Gazza in the debates, sure he'd put across some interesting points and there's a lot he says that I agree with - New Hampshire libertarian in me showing! lol

 

Given the two candidates for the main parties a leading third-party candidate could at least make an impression on folks. Don't think he'll do much in the big show but it'd be good to see him alongside the two big guns.

Having a read of them and they are almost my perfect political party.....social liberalism with freedom and responsibility.

 

The party has generally promoted a classical liberal platform, in contrast to the modern liberal and progressive platform of the Democrats and the more conservative platform of the Republicans. Gary Johnson, the party's presidential nominee in 2012 and 2016, states that the LP is more culturally liberal than the Democrats, but more fiscally conservative than the Republicans.[10]Current fiscal policy positions include lowering taxes,[11] decreasing the national debt,[12] allowing people to opt out of Social Security,[13] and eliminating the welfare state, in part by utilizing private charities;[14] current cultural policy positions include ending the prohibition of illegal drugs,[15] supporting same-sex marriage,[16] ending capital punishment,[17] and supporting gun ownership rights.[18]

Posted
38 minutes ago, MattP said:

Having a read of them and they are almost my perfect political party.....social liberalism with freedom and responsibility.

 

The party has generally promoted a classical liberal platform, in contrast to the modern liberal and progressive platform of the Democrats and the more conservative platform of the Republicans. Gary Johnson, the party's presidential nominee in 2012 and 2016, states that the LP is more culturally liberal than the Democrats, but more fiscally conservative than the Republicans.[10]Current fiscal policy positions include lowering taxes,[11] decreasing the national debt,[12] allowing people to opt out of Social Security,[13] and eliminating the welfare state, in part by utilizing private charities;[14] current cultural policy positions include ending the prohibition of illegal drugs,[15] supporting same-sex marriage,[16] ending capital punishment,[17] and supporting gun ownership rights.[18]

Education and healthcare are the only areas where I'd disagree with the Libertarians regarding state intervention, mostly because I think those two things are beyond value and so shouldn't be subject to market forces. When it comes to social issues in particular I'm totally with them.

Posted

Oh go on then, I'll take this opportunity to promote the best candidate in the race again. 

 

Having listened to Johnson speak a fair bit I've seen what a good character he has, certainly compared to the other two. I've rarely been given the impression he's taken a position to appease anyone, he seems to be a man who has a philosophy that matters to him.

 

I've liked his honesty and that he tries to deal with questions in a straightforward manner. You don't feel like you're being given a polished, unhelpful answer that's designed to sound inoffensive rather than to inform. Although he perhaps hasn't been challenged as much as he would be if he made it to the presidential debates.

 

In the absence of many other appealing characteristics, Clinton's campaign has made an effort to portray her as a highly experienced candidate (which she is) but the same thing can also be said for Johnson, and his running mate Bill Weld, who have both served two terms each as governors. It's rare for a political outsider to have those kind of qualifications to present to the electorate.

 

Americans who agree with, or even partly agree with, what the Libertarians are proposing at this election have one of the best third party options they're ever likely to get IMO.

Posted

Trump probably doesn't want to win and will feel like has has already won with how much sold merchandise $$$$

Posted

now the republicans are trying to jettisun trump even they know he will be a complete disaster, the only reason trump is running for president is because he has money. he has no experience in politics, all he is is a successful businessman and a multi millionaire who thinks money can get him whatever he wants

Posted
7 minutes ago, foxy boxing said:

now the republicans are trying to jettisun trump even they know he will be a complete disaster, the only reason trump is running for president is because he has money. he has no experience in politics, all he is is a successful businessman and a multi millionaire who thinks money can get him whatever he wants

 

Exactly.

 

The republican establishment is in the same position as the Labour one, they have a candidate elected by the people that any experiences politicians knows could destroy the party for a long long time.

Posted
2 hours ago, The Railway Man said:

 

Exactly.

 

The republican establishment is in the same position as the Labour one, they have a candidate elected by the people that any experiences politicians knows could destroy the party for a long long time.

 

That's about the size of it.

 

As the threat of him winning recedes, it's actually becoming amusing to see the Bible-thumping social conservatives within the party panic at all the damage he's done and might well do before he's done.

Posted
10 hours ago, foxy boxing said:

now the republicans are trying to jettisun trump even they know he will be a complete disaster, the only reason trump is running for president is because he has money. he has no experience in politics, all he is is a successful businessman and a multi millionaire who thinks money can get him whatever he wants

You downplay that, but do you not think some of our politicians would benefit from more first hand experience of the sectors for which they are in charge?

Posted
1 hour ago, ajthefox said:

You downplay that, but do you not think some of our politicians would benefit from more first hand experience of the sectors for which they are in charge?

If they didn't have a few of their companies go bankrupt and a better reputation in the business community, absolutely.

 

Also, people who tend to see a country as a business also tend to see the people in it as just more assets to be spent and saved. Not sure that's a good thing.

 

Oh, and in semi related news, Ted Cruz visited the Johnson space centre recently.

Definition of irony... Guy who thinks the world is 6000 years old and has 1950's belief systems touring a state of the art science facility run by wholly competent females which uses facts and science to advance humanity instead of fear and superstition.

Posted
13 hours ago, leicsmac said:

If they didn't have a few of their companies go bankrupt and a better reputation in the business community, absolutely.

 

Also, people who tend to see a country as a business also tend to see the people in it as just more assets to be spent and saved. Not sure that's a good thing.

 

Oh, and in semi related news, Ted Cruz visited the Johnson space centre recently.

Definition of irony... Guy who thinks the world is 6000 years old and has 1950's belief systems touring a state of the art science facility run by wholly competent females which uses facts and science to advance humanity instead of fear and superstition.

You think a Christian visiting a space centre is the definition of irony? Did you listen to a lot of Alanis Morissette growing up? 

Posted
1 hour ago, purpleronnie said:

Sorry to the 22% of idiots who actually want Trump as the president, it's all over.

22% of idiots? Who are the other idiots voting for?

Posted
1 hour ago, purpleronnie said:

Sorry to the 22% of idiots who actually want Trump as the president, it's all over.

On 5/15/2016 at 15:09, purpleronnie said:

Oh dear, leavers now down to 39% in the polls with remain well over 50% in some polls.

 

Unlucky Farage you've blown it.

 

You really should learn by now ;)

 

Plenty of time to go, although I don't think Trump actually wants to be president anymore, I think the enormity of it might just have hit him.

Posted
39 minutes ago, GazzinderFox said:

You think a Christian visiting a space centre is the definition of irony? Did you listen to a lot of Alanis Morissette growing up? 

lol

 

But yes, I think the idea of a committed fundamentalist (that's important in this case) Christian visiting an organisation who's remit it is in part to render key areas of his belief structure an utter farce is a little ironic.

Posted
2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

lol

 

But yes, I think the idea of a committed fundamentalist (that's important in this case) Christian visiting an organisation who's remit it is in part to render key areas of his belief structure an utter farce is a little ironic.

But how can he attain to your level of enlightenment if he were to spend all of his days sitting at home reading his bible in a non ironic way?

Posted
19 minutes ago, GazzinderFox said:

But how can he attain to your level of enlightenment if he were to spend all of his days sitting at home reading his bible in a non ironic way?

I'm not enlightened, I'm just damn sure the Universe is somewhere around 14 billion years old.

 

And you've hit something of the crux (excuse the pun) there too. If Cruz did indeed just sit at home reading his Bible there wouldn't be an issue. It's what happens when such people put down their holy texts of choice and start using the words in them (words written and interpreted by men, I hasten to add) as an excuse to control, dominate and oppress others - and then actually doing it - is where the issue arises. I guess visiting a place that challenges his belief structure in that way is something, though I doubt being wrong about faith and how it is involved in the Universe is something that has ever occurred to him.

 

Sorry if you're putting some humour across here that I'm not getting, btw.

Posted
15 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I'm not enlightened, I'm just damn sure the Universe is somewhere around 14 billion years old.

 

And you've hit something of the crux (excuse the pun) there too. If Cruz did indeed just sit at home reading his Bible there wouldn't be an issue. It's what happens when such people put down their holy texts of choice and start using the words in them (words written and interpreted by men, I hasten to add) as an excuse to control, dominate and oppress others - and then actually doing it - is where the issue arises. I guess visiting a place that challenges his belief structure in that way is something, though I doubt being wrong about faith and how it is involved in the Universe is something that has ever occurred to him.

 

Sorry if you're putting some humour across here that I'm not getting, btw.

So hypothetically, if you were running for smug atheist president of the US, would you attempt to control, dominate and oppress religious minorities if they dared to voice their opinions in public? Because it seems to me that there have been far more despotic atheist leaders murdering their citizens by the million and oppressing all dissenting voices in the last 100 years than there has been men like Ted Cruz doing it.

 

 

Posted
4 minutes ago, GazzinderFox said:

So hypothetically, if you were running for smug atheist president of the US, would you attempt to control, dominate and oppress religious minorities if they dared to voice their opinions in public? Because it seems to me that there have been far more despotic atheist leaders murdering their citizens by the million and oppressing all dissenting voices in the last 100 years than there has been men like Ted Cruz doing it.

 

 

Ah, and so we get to the bottom of it - you don't like my view on organised religion. I'm sorry to hear that.

 

But in answer to your question, I have zero problem with religious belief as a whole, but I also think it should have no part in the operation of a state at the legal or political level. Many others think differently, and fair enough.

 

You're right in that there have been many mass-murdering despots that didn't believe in the deity or deities that the major religions portray, but the ideology is the same - they just believe in a different kind of divinity. That of themselves or (sometimes) the Party. Lust for power and exercising that power over others is the same, no matter what name it is done in.

Posted
14 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Ah, and so we get to the bottom of it - you don't like my view on organised religion. I'm sorry to hear that.

 

But in answer to your question, I have zero problem with religious belief as a whole, but I also think it should have no part in the operation of a state at the legal or political level. Many others think differently, and fair enough.

 

You're right in that there have been many mass-murdering despots that didn't believe in the deity or deities that the major religions portray, but the ideology is the same - they just believe in a different kind of divinity. That of themselves or (sometimes) the Party. Lust for power and exercising that power over others is the same, no matter what name it is done in.

 

Grand, that's a relief. I can put an ironic visit to a science museum back on my agenda, even though science is evil and wants to destroy everything I hold dear. If that's OK with you and the irony police? 

 

On a serious note I'm glad I don't have to choose between these two clowns to be the leader of my country. I'd genuinely rather have Corbyn and that's saying something... What a dreadful state of affairs US politics is in. 

Posted
3 minutes ago, GazzinderFox said:

 

Grand, that's a relief. I can put an ironic visit to a science museum back on my agenda, even though science is evil and wants to destroy everything I hold dear. If that's OK with you and the irony police? 

 

On a serious note I'm glad I don't have to choose between these two clowns to be the leader of my country. I'd genuinely rather have Corbyn and that's saying something... What a dreadful state of affairs US politics is in. 

You're bloody right science is evil! Think about Mengele and Unit 731. :ph34r:

 

But as you say, totally agree with you about the choice or lack thereof for November. Reckon Johnson is going to get a fair few votes.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...