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

Last edited:
Dedalus said:
I admire your optimism. That is what I told myself when I voted for Ralph Nader 16 long years ago. A protest vote is a protest vote - if it makes you feel best, by all means do it. But IMHO the ripple effect will be akin to throwing a pebble into the ocean.

Edit: I know Ralph was Green Party, btw - I am just using that example as a reference to any third party candidate.

Edit #2: My protest vote in 2000 felt good for about an hour. My optimism for a third party was crushed as post election two-party politics got under way as usual and all the third party momentum was buried by the political quagmires that followed in no small part as a result of the elected president's agenda. Yeah! High fives. :(
Click to expand...

It's not a protest vote. I think he is the most qualified of the three. I voted for him in 2012 as well even though it was a given my state would go to Obama.

As for Trump (too lazy to go back and find the the posts to quote) I don't really think he's in it with HRC. But I do think this is a game for him that he doesn't really want to win. Why? Maybe he's bored? I think he just wanted to see how far he could get despite his outrageous comments. I felt that from when it first started. In fact I think I made a similar comment here a few months back. (Again, too lazy to go look).
 
Wolfie said:
It's not a protest vote. I think he is the most qualified of the three.
Click to expand...

As far as qualifications are concerned, I think Johnson is roughly on par with Trump. He does have the advantage over Trump of being apparently sane.

The Libertarians would have done so much better if Weld had been at the top of the ticket. He's a much better, and a much more appealing, candidate.
 
So what he did as governor doesn't count at all? I mean I don't expect anyone here to like the guy but he has more brains than Trump by a long shot. :p

I wouldn't mind seeing the Johnson/Weld ticket reversed myself.
 
Wolfie said:
So what he did as governor doesn't count at all? I mean I don't expect anyone here to like the guy but he has more brains than Trump by a long shot. :p

I wouldn't mind seeing the Johnson/Weld ticket reversed myself.
Click to expand...

If you do a bit more reading, you will find that he wasn't the success as governor that you think he was. He's widely considered to be an idiot who had to be worked around.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Poppy
Mischief said:
If you do a bit more reading, you will find that he wasn't the success as governor that you think he was. He's widely considered to be an idiot who had to be worked around.
Click to expand...

I've done plenty, thanks. You seem to assume people who don't agree with your views just haven't researched enough.
 
Mischief said:
Do you really believe that it's unusual for campaigns to foster relationships with certain journalists and/or media outlets?! If so, wow.
Click to expand...
Honest politicians don't have paid shills on cable news programs, or hold "completely off-record" cocktail parties with big numbers of mainstream journalists. Do you believe that perhaps Johnson or Stein also employ such methods?
 
Indian Summer said:
Honest politicians don't have paid shills on cable news programs, or hold "completely off-record" cocktail parties with big numbers of mainstream journalists. Do you believe that perhaps Johnson or Stein also employ such methods?
Click to expand...
I think that if they ever get within range of having an actual shot at being a possible contender, they will. Right now, they're playing at making a run, and still Stein, a medical professional, is willing to compromise her ethics in an attempt to attract anti vaxxers.
 
Mischief said:
I think that if they ever get within range of having an actual shot at being a possible contender, they will.
Click to expand...
So, if they've not engaged in corruption yet, they surely will, if they ever become serious contenders? Corruption is the mark of a serious contender, so clearly Clinton is doing well. Gotcha :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wolfie
Indian Summer said:
So, if they've not engaged in corruption yet, they surely will, if they ever become serious contenders? Corruption is the mark of a serious contender, so clearly Clinton is doing well. Gotcha :)
Click to expand...

Does your black and white view of things extend to all aspects of your life?

Do you, for example, treat a co-worker who is willing to go out of his way to help you out when you're in a bind on one of your projects exactly the same as a co-worker who leaves you to stew in your own deadlines, or are you more willing to go the extra mile for the person who does the same for you?

Do you help the friend move who isn't willing to help you when you move? Or are you more likely to help the friends who go out of their way to help you?

It's called compromise and negotiation in business and politics. It's also called realpolitik. It's how things get done, absent universal agreement.

Basically, someone who doesn't understand that isn't going to be an effective leader (other than as an autocrat or dictator, or as a gadfly on the legislative level), even if s/he manages to get elected.
 
Last edited:
Mischief said:
Does your black and white view of things extend to all aspects of your life?

Do you, for example, treat a co-worker who is willing to go out of his way to help you out when you're in a bind on one of your projects exactly the same as a co-worker who leaves you to stew in your own deadlines, or are you more willing to go the extra mile for the person who does the same for you?

Do you help the friend move who isn't willing to help you when you move? Or are you more likely to help the friends who fo out of their way to help you?

It's called compromise and negotiation in business and politics. It's also called realpolitik. It's how things get done, absent universal agreement.

Basically, someone who doesn't understand that isn't going to be an effective leader (other than as an autocrat or dictator, or as a gadfly on the legislative level), even if s/he manages to get elected.
Click to expand...

+1. It is fine to be idealistic, but that isn't how the economy and politics work, you have to work within the parameters available to you. Change usually happens incrementally, rather than in huge leaps.
 
Mischief said:
It's called compromise and negotiation in business and politics. It's also called realpolitik. It's how things get done, absent universal agreement.
Click to expand...

That's a very interesting spin on then issue.

So from your perspective, such things as having "paid shills on cable news programs, or holding "completely off-record" cocktail parties with big numbers of mainstream journalists." is just a matter of compromise and negotiation?

I get the feeling that you are more than just an enthusiastic Clinton supporter...
 
I don't think I ever said this on VV, but the main reason I think that DT isn't being serious about becoming president is that I watched the interview DT did with Piers Morgan. I'm positive that I heard Piers Morgan say at some point on TV that he and DT are good friends in real life. When I watched Piers interview DT I thought that Piers looked like he was trying not to laugh at the things DT was saying. It doesn't seem like many (or any) people agree with me when I have said that, but whatever, lol.:p Maybe we will never know. I really think DT will benefit from irritating the angry, white men in America and if the TV channel happens that they will be the main people who watch it.
 
Top Bottom