Nov 8, 2016 - The lesser of two evils?
- Thread starter TX Redman
- Start date
- Status
beast of the east
Active member
Fuchsia, I know you are a lot smarter than buying the left wing spin on that comment. They compared Trump to Hitler or other totalitarian regimes that jail and kill political opponents once they come to power. What I interpreted Trump as saying was that the Obama administration conspired not to charge her and put pressure on Comey, who listed all the criminal offenses Hillary committed, but stopped way short of a criminal indictment. Comey went so far as to say that this should not give anyone the impression that if they committed similar infraction that they wouldn't be charged criminally.
What Trump was saying was that Hillary was let off the hook by a corrupt government, President and attorney general. I do not believe for a second that if it were the Republican nominee for President that committed these infractions that he/she would not have been treated under the law. Trump wasn't threatening to jail her as President, but to appoint a special outside prosecutor to reopen the investigation and come to an independent decision as to whether any crimes were committed. There were certainly numerous, including lying under oath, destroying government subpoenaed evidence (emails and blackberry devices of which there were 123 not one), and mishandling confidential government communications. Whether her server was hacked or not was irrelevant. Clinton broke the law, tampered with evidence, and should be held accountable. Every involved part was given immunity under the law, yet multiple parties too the 5th on advice of counsel. They would have been held in contempt if this were a trial.
If that's what sways you irrevocably against Trump, think again. He was only stating the obvious - that Hillary Clinton is a despicable public servant who has violated the law many times in her career and always escaped being brought to justice.
Negative Trump rhetoric is rampant here and elsewhere and man, does he make an easy target, no argument here. However, In 2012 when many of the same people ripped Mitt Romney as the second coming of the Anti-Christ, I asked repeatedly for reasons why they were voting for Obama rather than just knocking Romney. I got virtually no response. I ask the same thing here about Clinton, why are you voting for her, what positives do people think she brings? Me, as I have stated before, I am voting for Trump simply because I fear we are getting very close to a one party system and have slowly been "getting there" over the last 50+ years, or since LBJ's Great Society. I don't think there was any doubt many Republicans were happy to get a reason this weekend to run away from Trump because that left "business in usual" in DC and what do they really care who's President as long as they can still "wet their beaks."
Anyway, from my view, in addition to creating and exploiting a welfare dependent sub-culture and conning them every election that they "care", the liberal party now controls the media and has a willing and active partner to steamroll any opposition by whatever means necessary. That, my friends, is the beginning of the end for an open and democratic society. So all you Trump haters (and he makes it easy), please share with me what you see in Hillary that excites you and makes you want to vote for her. In my mind, she is by far the worst of the two available evils. More than anything power must be wrested from the "lifers" in Washington and Trump is at least a start.
Anyway, from my view, in addition to creating and exploiting a welfare dependent sub-culture and conning them every election that they "care", the liberal party now controls the media and has a willing and active partner to steamroll any opposition by whatever means necessary. That, my friends, is the beginning of the end for an open and democratic society. So all you Trump haters (and he makes it easy), please share with me what you see in Hillary that excites you and makes you want to vote for her. In my mind, she is by far the worst of the two available evils. More than anything power must be wrested from the "lifers" in Washington and Trump is at least a start.
8- in 16 years ago a lot of my fellow republicans friends were claiming the media was biased ( I argued they weren't because GWB was such a horrible president I don't even know how fox news could defend him ) but now I'm positive most of the media is biased but in fairness Trump deserves a lot of what he brings on himself with idiotic comments. My problem is more with the media not calling out Hillary more
beast of the east
Active member
At least since 2008, and possibly 2000, the Democratic party has intensified its efforts to demonize Republican candidates. While flawed as candidates (meaning running for higher and not fitness for the position) both McCain and Romney IMO were successful moderates who demonstrated an ability to work with others, reach across the aisle, and break from party ranks when necessary. Both are incredibly good men - McCain from a military family that has served our nation in battle since the Civil War or before, Romney a successful businessman, red Governor in a blue state, saved the Olympics from fiscal ruin, and has tithed 10% of his income since starting his career without the aid of his father's money. You can like their politics or not, but both were continually personally attacked and excoriated. I didn't vote for Mondale, but thought he was a good, decent man. If I were old enough, could have voted for Humphrey, and I may have voted for Carter. The need to engage in character assassination is troubling - no it is despicable, and when appropriate should be absent from American politics. This election cycle, though, is open hunting season - most shots fired are legitimate based on the actions of others. But unlike any other campaign, those throwing rocks had better not live in glass houses.
I liked both of them even though I liked the McCain of 2000 in the primaries better. I'm convinced if McCain won the primaries in 2000 and would have beaten Gore our country would be in a much better place right now. Heck I think if Gore won we would be too but McCain was the 1st politician I got really excited about
beast of the east
Active member
I think 50 years from now when the Bush Presidency can be evaluated with objectivity without the vitriol that accompanied the 2000 hanging chad election, it will be correctly viewed as America's response to the scourge of radical Islamic terrorism. I couldn't conceive of Al Gore standing on a pile of rubble to support families of victims and first responders, and assuring Americans and the rest of the world that America will respond and bring terrorists to justice.
Harry Truman left office as a failed President who made many bad and unpopular decisions. Today, viewed with more objectivity, he is often viewed as one of the best 5 Presidents in US history. Not proclaiming Bush will be, but Carter has tarnished the image of a very good man and a very bad President who was hated by every successor to the office. I believe Bush has a better character than Carter, and unlike Carter has largely kept his mouth shut and not criticized his successors the way Carter did to his.
In my lifetime (including Nixon who was a lamb compared to Clinton but did some good things too) the only truly horrible president was Jimmy Carter. That he was trotted out during the last election as esteemed and wise was chilling in terms of where our media is. What a complete disaster in every way that matters as a POTUS - but he was a decent orator and somehow his forward puritanism seemed to hold some moral value to democrats. Only thing I liked about him was his brother.
Mcain failed in the same way Dole did. Got coddled by the media and weakened his position on issues pandering which instead of helping him, did the opposite.
Mcain failed in the same way Dole did. Got coddled by the media and weakened his position on issues pandering which instead of helping him, did the opposite.
That we have a campaign based on who is more aggrieved with little real analysis of how we get from where we are to where we want to be is sad commentary on our political now and yes Hillary's main asset is that she is not Trump. The only other Republican she could have beaten is Cruz and no, Trump is not channeling Hitler, Cruz is. Trump is channeling Mussolini.
My mother co-led Jimmy Carter's 1976 primary campaign in Queens County and I admire the man, if not his function as President. The Burt Lance scandal deprived Carter of the only really skilled player in his inside circle of advisers. But in the "you could look it up department" Carter, and Papa Bush, and Obama are in my eyes responsible for three little known acts of Presidential courage,
[ul]
[/ul]Carter for military restraint in the hostage crisis, against his own political interests, not for not endangering the hostages, but for recognizing that the two operatives fronting the Iranian regime at the time (BaniSadr and Ghotzbadeh) were in fact Moscow trained KGB operatives and that full bore military action against Iran would have led to confrontation of American and Soviet blue water fleets in the Gulf of Oman with a very high risk of real war,
[ul]
[li]Bush for keeping a weakened Saddam Hussein in power after the first Gulf War as the only significant military force that wasn't Israeli between the Iranians and the Mediterranean[/li], and
[li] Obama, for keeping his mouth shut for six years (until after the 2014 election) about the true depth of the financial crisis he encountered upon entering office so that we came through the great recession instead of another depression[/li]
[/ul]
For the record, I have memories of not liking Marian Wright Edelman (Hillary's mentor) because she advocated tirelessly on behalf of vulnerable children, and never addressed the systems that perpetuated the vulnerability (a la Pat Moynihan). If we can get past the political whores sucking up all the oxygen we can get back to a solution-centered approach where the balance between letting markets decide everything (which doesn't work in the real world because some risks are too great for private capital and some capital is managed to thwart competition in ways that impede progress) and social engineering (where the rights and capacities of people get forgotten by engineers fascinated by their toys) is restored in the context of checks and balances and maximizing local decision-making that respects the constitution.
Hillary won't get us there but at least the anxiety that Trump raises in me that there won't be an us, won't be quite as high.
My mother co-led Jimmy Carter's 1976 primary campaign in Queens County and I admire the man, if not his function as President. The Burt Lance scandal deprived Carter of the only really skilled player in his inside circle of advisers. But in the "you could look it up department" Carter, and Papa Bush, and Obama are in my eyes responsible for three little known acts of Presidential courage,
[ul]
[/ul]Carter for military restraint in the hostage crisis, against his own political interests, not for not endangering the hostages, but for recognizing that the two operatives fronting the Iranian regime at the time (BaniSadr and Ghotzbadeh) were in fact Moscow trained KGB operatives and that full bore military action against Iran would have led to confrontation of American and Soviet blue water fleets in the Gulf of Oman with a very high risk of real war,
[ul]
[li]Bush for keeping a weakened Saddam Hussein in power after the first Gulf War as the only significant military force that wasn't Israeli between the Iranians and the Mediterranean[/li], and
[li] Obama, for keeping his mouth shut for six years (until after the 2014 election) about the true depth of the financial crisis he encountered upon entering office so that we came through the great recession instead of another depression[/li]
[/ul]
For the record, I have memories of not liking Marian Wright Edelman (Hillary's mentor) because she advocated tirelessly on behalf of vulnerable children, and never addressed the systems that perpetuated the vulnerability (a la Pat Moynihan). If we can get past the political whores sucking up all the oxygen we can get back to a solution-centered approach where the balance between letting markets decide everything (which doesn't work in the real world because some risks are too great for private capital and some capital is managed to thwart competition in ways that impede progress) and social engineering (where the rights and capacities of people get forgotten by engineers fascinated by their toys) is restored in the context of checks and balances and maximizing local decision-making that respects the constitution.
Hillary won't get us there but at least the anxiety that Trump raises in me that there won't be an us, won't be quite as high.
good stuff fuchsia but the problem with your conclusion is that an unelectable candidate is going to be elected by masterful manipulation and complete disregard for anything other than successfully grabbing that power. Makes me wonder what she had on Giuliani when he dropped out of the Senate race when he would have beaten her handily. To me that is so un-American that I can see why there are a growing number of people in this country that are preppers and talking about martial law and thing like that.
In getting further entrenched the people that are seriously considering Trump see Hillary as the final downfall of any possibility of getting back to solution-centered approach. You also fail to mention the problem of advocacy. The fact that there is no real journalism (another problem Syracuse has helped create in this country) that should be an integral part of those checks and balances is a mortal wound to our system.
And realistically, the opinions that we've shaped about both candidates has been largely formed by this advocacy so how much of your anxiety is a result of that so how far can you trust it...?
In getting further entrenched the people that are seriously considering Trump see Hillary as the final downfall of any possibility of getting back to solution-centered approach. You also fail to mention the problem of advocacy. The fact that there is no real journalism (another problem Syracuse has helped create in this country) that should be an integral part of those checks and balances is a mortal wound to our system.
And realistically, the opinions that we've shaped about both candidates has been largely formed by this advocacy so how much of your anxiety is a result of that so how far can you trust it...?
beast of the east
Active member
For the record, there are a few guys here that I often have opposing political views - Fuchsia and Tom in Salem, and I like both immensely as good guys.
beast of the east
Active member
Without a lot of eloquence, Carter had no stomach for a military confrontation with Iraq. World totalitarian regimes , especially Russia, do not respect relationships, nor diplomacy. They do respect military might, and when Iran sensed reticence on Carter's part, acted with impunity. Only with the prospect of President- elect Reagan promising to bring military wrath upon Iran did they release the hostages.
Great conversation to be had about how to lift marginalized populations within our country, whether those afflicted with multi-generational poverty, or wracked with physical or mental afflictions. I have a heart for this, but fled the Democratic party when I began to understand that to placate those who can help themselves by advocating that the opposition party was intentionally keeping them down was a blatant lie. In fact, if the opposition party if filled with wealthy businessman, there isn't a market sector around that wouldn't want populations to afford better clothes, cars, jewelry, vacations, etc. But again, that discussion is for another day.
Maybe GHWB should have vanquished Saddam when he had the chance in the Persian Gulf War, but then again, maybe who criticize W have blamed the instability in the middle east on deposing brutal dictators because of what follows.
Obama is by all means a Chicago politician. HE will keep his mouth shut when politically convenient, and lie when that is expeditious. He inherited a mess, but his economic stimulus was largely a waste of money, mimicking the Bush bailouts that prevented a worldwide collapse of financial markets. If GM couldn't compete, they should have been shuttered. However, if some of the large financial institutions failed, it would have caused a cascading effect of many financial sector corporations to also go under. The catalyst, though were subprime mortgages given to those who couldn't afford homes. Dodd-Frank in a Democratic majority Congress led that charge, and the housing bubble bursting lit the fuse to this near collapse, and not GWB.
So when you say Obama kept his mouth shut, boy, he did the opposite. He's been proclaiming a strong recovery when the growth of our economy has been minimal, reduced unemployment, when those numbers are manipulated by the over 50 crowd dropping off when they stop looking for jobs that aren't there, and neglects underemployed recent college grads. Other than that, things are fine. Take the lid off low interest rates, and the stock market gains crumble also.
So, while I am politically not aligned with Obama or Clinton policy, I am most disgusted by their utter lack of decency and integrity. Rewind to 2008, and see all the horrible personal attacks on each other, and then magically this hope and change becomes old Washington retreads. Bill Clinton, who hates Obama, trots out to help in 2012, but I'm certain he wanted Obama to campaign for Hillary in 2016. Obama hates Hillary, and was behind the initiation of the email scandal. When it failed to gain tracks, I believe he made another deal with the Clintons for the crown jewel he wants - a Supreme Court nomination. That last part is pure speculation, the rest of the paragraph isn't.
I don't really mind leaders of the opposite party that are good, decent people. Bill Bradley would have made a find Democratic President. Joe Lieberman led with his conscience, and got drummed out of the Democratic Party for supporting the war in Iraq, but won my respect in doing so. Of course many Dems, including Kerry and Clinton voted for the war against their conscience when they felt it was politically expedient.
So I cannot tolerate the ever lying, ever cheating, ever criminal Hillary Clinton. Trump may say horrific things, but saying horrible things hasn't stopped Putin from being an effective leader. At least Trump has has incredible success in hundreds of business ventures. If it makes you happy to cherry pick his failures, go ahead. at the end of the day he is far wealthier than any of us, and he didn't do it buying tax liens (like Elizabeth Warren) or entering into shady real estate or stock transactions (like Clinton).
I am voting for potentially real hope and change from someone beholden to no one, including his own party. And despite all the caveats, THAT is refreshing.
You know what they say about 'being sorry for what you wished for'?!? I'll give you a medium 'pro Hillary' post. She wasn't my first choice. The only Republican I would've entertained supporting was Christie. Jeb Bush a stumbling younger bro to W and more conservative and more out-of-touch with the country's pain than his brother. Rubio a pretty boy in an empty suit. Cruz a fanatical 'Christian' impostor and half-deranged on social issues. Kasich wasn't what he was perceived to be. No moderate. Carson the dumbest-sounding surgeon I've ever encountered. Fiorina a light-weight and not very successful CEO. Alexander, Paul, Huckabee all marginal candidates.
Hillary, compared to those people and to Bernie Sanders, is very qualified to be POTUS--recognizing nobody is ever sufficiently prepared for that Office. She knows the issues better than anybody on the political stage. I think she'll make a very credible President, will be able to work with obstructionist Republicans to get some stuff done, like needed infrastructure spending, and will lead us in the sensible direction on climate change, and nuclear proliferation. Perhaps even mild compromise on modest tax reform. Who knows? And she'll work to improve Obamacare and provides clear-headed knowledge of the landmines ahead on foreign policy. And she won't fire as many Generals as Trump would have. There you have it.
Hillary, compared to those people and to Bernie Sanders, is very qualified to be POTUS--recognizing nobody is ever sufficiently prepared for that Office. She knows the issues better than anybody on the political stage. I think she'll make a very credible President, will be able to work with obstructionist Republicans to get some stuff done, like needed infrastructure spending, and will lead us in the sensible direction on climate change, and nuclear proliferation. Perhaps even mild compromise on modest tax reform. Who knows? And she'll work to improve Obamacare and provides clear-headed knowledge of the landmines ahead on foreign policy. And she won't fire as many Generals as Trump would have. There you have it.
Class of 72
Active member
And if by some miracle he was elected president he would either be forced to resign or the United States would have its first military coup. Besides, he has no intention of EVER EVER releasing his tax returns which he must disclose if elected.
Class of 72
Active member
Beast, you had me going for a while until the highlighted sentence above. Now I demand a urine sample!!!
Agree to disagree because when I see him I see the biggest disaster here who turned surpluses into ridiculous deficits only to be outdone by Obama except bush started Iraq and the economy was a horror show. ( we can get into debates all day on the causes and I agree he wasn't the cause of the housing crisis but he benefited greatly for many years from said housing bubble )
I'll give you talking on the pile after 9/11 and agree I can't see Gore doing that as effectively but I think history is going to look at his tenure as the downfall of living standards for us because with the looming ss and healthcare crisis his tenure was the turning point and the fact that he was the longest serving president to finally veto a bill or something like that since Milliard Filmore in my eyes made him even worse and flat out lazy. ( I actually credit him with tarp which others don't ). Heck this all happened back in the R&P forum on this board ( and I was literally against him since the debates against Gore ) which the old R&P guys here can verify and I even gave the answer to what the govt should do before the bailouts happened which would have worked out even better for the govt ( buying ton of distressed debt from the banks for way under face value ) which hedge funds actually did after that and made a killing. But Tarp wasn't a bad stopgap for him then Obama ( and I'm a free market person but that was a time seen like no other in history ) at least my life
But I actually like Jeb more but agree with you on Carter
Good points but what exactly wasn't known about the financial crisis because I can assure you everything was already known way before then.
If anything maybe the average person at that time didnt understand the true scope of what was happening but the markets knew it was near catastrophe otherwise the market wouldn't have sold off to historic levels up until march of 09.
McCain ran as a moderate but have the Republican right wing red meat in Sarah Palin.
Romney was a 'moderate' running far to the right and have the R right wing Paul Ryan, their boy. Truth is, the last moderate Republican 'nominee' was George the First.
Presently, the Party is a rabble of right wing ideologues, one more incoherent than the other.
Play the videotape.
Romney was a 'moderate' running far to the right and have the R right wing Paul Ryan, their boy. Truth is, the last moderate Republican 'nominee' was George the First.
Presently, the Party is a rabble of right wing ideologues, one more incoherent than the other.
Play the videotape.
- Status