News 2016 U.S. Presidential election - the highs and lows

Spang said:
Gary Johnson is a big fan of the free market and privatized everything. If you like austerity, you'll love Gary Johnson.
Click to expand...

I know where he stands. I've been following him for years and voted for him in 2012 as well. Our government does nothing but waste money but as soon as someone comes along who wants to reduce government meddling everyone loses their mind. People don't like change I guess. I do realize his chances this year are slim, but the more support he gets now, the better for the Libertarian party (and other alternate parties) in the future. I voted lesser of 2 evils for years. I've never really been excited about any candidate before except maybe Obama in 2008 and he didn't live up to my expectations. (Yes, I realize I will probably get stoned here for saying that. :p) Anyway, done voting for the lesser of 2 evils. We need third and fourth parties on the ballot that have a legitimate chance. I believe the excitement over Gary Johnson this time around will pave the way for that eventually.
 
Mischief said:
I see that Trump's penchant for failing to see a need to be consistent from one day to another is contagious....

Hillary supporters are starry eyed true believers and only voting for her because they hate Trump, all at the same time. Do we have other diametrically opposed personalities as part 0f our dissociative personality disorder, or are we limited to these two?
Click to expand...

Wow, grasping at straws here... First, I never said "true believer". Second it's not inconsistent for a starry eyed person to support someone just because they are not someone else...note that I said "savior". They are starry eyed because in their view only Hillary can save them from Trump. Perhaps I should enlist Mr. Rogers to explain this as well?
 
Ok, I've read up some on Jill Stein and I love her spunk and interest in environmental issues. Now on to Gary Johnson, lol.
 
Gary Johnson and the Libertarian Party are full of real special snowflakes... It's quite an achievement of sorts to be both too liberal for most people and too conservative at the same damn time... Rather than breaking the mold of voting the lesser of two evils, adding a Libertarian to the mix is simply adding a third evil, nothing more nothing less.
 
Wolfie said:
Did you watch the Q&A session he and Weld did before the debate? Since they weren't allowed at the debate and all. I don't expect you to like the guy since you're a Hillary fan but his track record shows he's not brain dead like Sarah Palin. And no dog would mate with Sarah Palin so we have no idea what a cross between the two would turn out like anyway.
Click to expand...

I try to keep myself educated about all of the parties and their candidates, so no, I'm not basing my evaluation on just a few soundbites.

Libertarianism encompasses the kind of survival of the fittest ideology that is antithetical to my core values. I do feral rescue, and I really don't support policies that would treat human beings considerably worse than what I believe is due feral cats.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Amy SF
Jeremy said:
Gary Johnson and the Libertarian Party are full of real special snowflakes... It's quite an achievement of sorts to be both too liberal for most people and too conservative at the same damn time... Rather than breaking the mold of voting the lesser of two evils, adding a Libertarian to the mix is simply adding a third evil, nothing more nothing less.
Click to expand...

Socially liberal, fiscally conservative. So I guess the far right Republicans and far left Democrats won't like him, but he's a good fit for the many in the middle.
 
Mischief said:
Libertarianism encompasses the kind of survival of the fittest ideology that is antithetical to my core values. I do feral rescue, and I really don't support policies that would treat human beings considerably worse than what I believe is due feral cats.
Click to expand...

Well you might say it's survival of the fittest right now. The social programs that Democrats love don't help a huge segment of the population.

I am a member of a local group that started to help those who fall through the cracks. It's not a political group and no one in it ever even discusses politics or who they are voting for. That's not one of the rules or anything, it just never comes up. And personally I think you'd see a lot more of people helping people if we weren't taxed so damn much we can barely make ends meet ourselves. The government wastes/mismanages so much ******* money it's disgusting. I think the private sector could do a better job.
 
Wolfie said:
Well you might say it's survival of the fittest right now. The social programs that Democrats love don't help a huge segment of the population.

I am a member of a local group that started to help those who fall through the cracks. It's not a political group and no one in it ever even discusses politics or who they are voting for. That's not one of the rules or anything, it just never comes up. And personally I think you'd see a lot more of people helping people if we weren't taxed so damn much we can barely make ends meet ourselves. The government wastes/mismanages so much ******* money it's disgusting. I think the private sector could do a better job.
Click to expand...

I applaud what you're doing.

The problem is that it's been established by numerous studies that people who don't have a lot of money do a lot more to help the neediest than the wealthy do. That means that if you're going to rely solely on the private sector, those who are already strapped are going to have to up their contribution many times over (which they can't afford), and even then needs aren't going to be met.

Are you going to be able to do twenty times what you're doing now? Are you able to do even double? I know I'm not.
 
Mischief said:
Strange.

I listened to part of the debate online, and part on three different broadcast channels. I didn't hear anything wrong with the mic, other than that it broadcast the words coming out of his mouth.

Would you care to share how you listened to/watched the debate? I'm sure it's still available, and I'd be interested to hear what I apparently missed.
Click to expand...


So, I wasn't the only person that had noticed the mic issue.

Debate Commission Says There Were ‘Issues’ With Trump Audio Inside Hall
 
You couldn't tell from what I saw on my television. I had taped it on my VCR as well and playback was fine. It does sound like it was an issue for those hearing it live. I could see how it could be distracting for him.
 
KLS52 said:
You couldn't tell from what I saw on my television. I had taped it on my VCR as well and playback was fine. It does sound like it was an issue for those hearing it live. I could see how it could be distracting for him.
Click to expand...

I recorded it and could hear that something was wrong. I have kept the recording but have no time to watch it again atm. I will try and view it later on during the week.

I agree that it must have contributed to some stress and as usual nobody seemed to believe him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KLS52
KLS52 said:
A little bit of both, maybe, but I think it's mostly politics. Kind of sad. I could never play that game. It has to be grueling.
Click to expand...

Yes, one day it's ' I like You' tomorrow ' I hate you'. It's all about power and manipulation.

Perhaps we should follow Switzerland's example as they don't have a president.;)
 
shyvas said:

Two faced or just politics ?
Click to expand...
"And my views is, if you can't run your own house, you certainly can't run the White House. Can't do it!"

Interesting quote! Not one I agree with, at all, but I can see how this argument would resonate with a lot of US voters, who seem to put so much importance on the candidates' families. European voters and media generally put less importance on the families of candidates for political office. Off the top of my head, I don't know the names of a single husband or wife of an elected leader in Europe. We also don't tend to have quite so many and powerful political family dynasties, like the Bushes, Kennedys, Clintons.

(Sorry for digressing, I just think these differences are interesting.)
 
They touched on the microphone issue a bit today on the news. The deal is, the audio was 100% fine broadcasted on Network TV across the US... No one watching live on Fox, ABC, NBC, CBS, etc could possibly hear that there was anything wrong with that microphone. Actually being in the debate hall was a completely different story. The sound level live in the room was problematic. I would say that anyone that has watched the debate with mic problems that recording came from a network that was not prevy to the sound board that the major networks were jacked into.
 
Top Bottom