The 2016 US Presidential Election

[Ad Lib]

Clinton is without doubt the most qualified and experienced non-incumbent ever to run for the Presidency of the United States of America.

That she isn't winning 70% of the vote is a more damning indictment of democracy and humanity than it is of her.

[EdgarusQPFC]

24 minutes ago, Ad Lib said:

Or, you know, you could use reputable internationally renowned sources, like the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, MSNBC, CNN etc.

You are a lunatic. America would literally be better off with a cat for President than Donald Trump.

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2016/09/06/gop-congressman-jason-chaffetz-requests-new-investigation-into-clinton-email-deletion/
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/03/27/politics/hillary-clinton-personal-email-server/
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/09/us/politics/hillary-clinton-emails-investigation.html

Regardless of the source, the facts remain the same,

Trump will accomplish nothing as President, he is barely supported by his own party and hated by the Democrats, any motions he put forth wont go anywhere. He would get very little done during his time and have little chance of a second term. id much rather have a ineffective President than a corrupt one

[Sooky]

43 minutes ago, Ad Lib said:

Clinton is without doubt the most qualified and experienced non-incumbent ever to run for the Presidency of the United States of America.

That she isn't winning 70% of the vote is a more damning indictment of democracy and humanity than it is of her.

Is she really without doubt, though? Sure, she's qualified and you can make a case for her. However, there's a fair few others who have had vast political experience before becoming President.

Thomas Jefferson was a founding father, wrote the deceleration of independence, was a governor, secretary of state and the US ambassador to France. John Quincy Adams was secretary of state, ambassador to 3 major nations, a member of the house and a senator. James Monreo was secretary of state, ambassador to the UK and France, secretary of state for war, a governor and a senator. Martin Van Buren was secretary of state, NY AG, governor and senator. Even George H.W. Bush was a member of the house, the director of the CIA and the US ambassador to the UN. And Dwight Eisenhower may not have held elected office before, but he was the Supreme Leader of all Allied Forces in Europe during World War 2. That's some pretty good foreign policy experience right there.

[EdgarusQPFC]

Ad Lib fancies Hildawg, he wants to be the Snuke in her Snizz

[Paco]

Clinton is an absolutely awful candidate. Surprised to find anyone in the UK not recognising that. Even Democrat voters know it, she could barely win a one-horse race in the primary - and even then, it took DNC and media bias to haul her over the line.

That she's a better option than Trump is irrelevant. If either party had put out someone entirely uninspiring but safe enough - let's say a John McCain or a Martin O'Malley - this election would be over.

At least there's the strong possibility either one of them will get themselves indicted within their first year.

[Sooky]

3 minutes ago, Paco said:

Clinton is an absolutely awful candidate. Surprised to find anyone in the UK not recognising that. Even Democrat voters know it, she could barely win a one-horse race in the primary - and even then, it took DNC and media bias to haul her over the line.

That she's a better option than Trump is irrelevant. If either party had put out someone entirely uninspiring but safe enough - let's say a John McCain or a Martin O'Malley - this election would be over.

At least there's the strong possibility either one of them will get themselves indicted within their first year.
 

Someone like John Kasich would be strolling this, I reckon. I recall him beating Clinton in all the swings states when polls were done during the Republican race. Any other Democrat would benefit from the anti-Trump brigade, any other Republican would benefit from the anti-Clinton brigade. It just so happens that both parties have completely fucked up!

[Paco]

Kasich would've been a better example than McCain. I couldn't think of a safe candidate from the abomination that was the Republican primaries - Kasich is so forgettable that I, er, forgot him.

He'd have walked it. 'Little Marco' might even have done better as he could appeal to all bases.

[banana]

8 hours ago, Ad Lib said:

It was wrong to ask those questions of John McCain.

The slurs on Hillary's health clearly are sexist. That was exactly what Trump was doing when he was calling her physically weak.

[EdgarusQPFC]

Class act from Huffington Post

[banana]

13 minutes ago, EdgarusQPFC said:

Class act from Huffington Post

Holy shit, the fearmongering. HuffPo gonna HuffPo

Article in question: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christian-gabriel/if-you-dont-vote-democrat_b_10425968.html

[Ad Lib]

11 hours ago, Sooky said:

Is she really without doubt, though? Sure, she's qualified and you can make a case for her. However, there's a fair few others who have had vast political experience before becoming President.

Thomas Jefferson was a founding father, wrote the deceleration of independence, was a governor, secretary of state and the US ambassador to France. John Quincy Adams was secretary of state, ambassador to 3 major nations, a member of the house and a senator. James Monreo was secretary of state, ambassador to the UK and France, secretary of state for war, a governor and a senator. Martin Van Buren was secretary of state, NY AG, governor and senator. Even George H.W. Bush was a member of the house, the director of the CIA and the US ambassador to the UN. And Dwight Eisenhower may not have held elected office before, but he was the Supreme Leader of all Allied Forces in Europe during World War 2. That's some pretty good foreign policy experience right there.

Firstly, I said "non incumbent" so as very clearly to exclude those who ran from VP. That knocks out Bush and Van Buren.

Look at her actual record:

Two-term US First Lady

Five Term FL of Arkansas

Senior Senator for New York

Former Secretary of State

Clinton has inhabited these offices at a time where the role of government (both levels but especially federal government) was far far far more complex than when all the 18th century's white men took turns to argue in the Federalist Papers about the electoral college while fighting each other about slaves.

 

[beermonkey]

21 hours ago, Ad Lib said:

Or, you know, you could use reputable internationally renowned sources, like the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, MSNBC, CNN etc.

You are a lunatic. America would literally be better off with a cat for President than Donald Trump.

MSM are a joke at the best of times, there's more truth on here for christ sake.

[Jacksgranda]

21 hours ago, Sooky said:

Is she really without doubt, though? Sure, she's qualified and you can make a case for her. However, there's a fair few others who have had vast political experience before becoming President.

Thomas Jefferson was a founding father, wrote the deceleration of independence, was a governor, secretary of state and the US ambassador to France. John Quincy Adams was secretary of state, ambassador to 3 major nations, a member of the house and a senator. James Monreo was secretary of state, ambassador to the UK and France, secretary of state for war, a governor and a senator. Martin Van Buren was secretary of state, NY AG, governor and senator. Even George H.W. Bush was a member of the house, the director of the CIA and the US ambassador to the UN. And Dwight Eisenhower may not have held elected office before, but he was the Supreme Leader of all Allied Forces in Europe during World War 2. That's some pretty good foreign policy experience right there.

If only...

[John Lambies Doos]

I see ad lib is being a fanny again. Asked him reasonable question on another thread... got wide; and being a twat on this.

[jmothecat]

Really struggle to understand a lot of the criticisms about Hillary. She seems like a great candidate, and considering the alternative it seems slightly unbelievable that this could actually be close.

[Bishop Briggs]

10 hours ago, Ad Lib said:

Firstly, I said "non incumbent" so as very clearly to exclude those who ran from VP. That knocks out Bush and Van Buren.

Look at her actual record:

Two-term US First Lady

Five Term FL of Arkansas

Senior Senator for New York

Former Secretary of State

Clinton has inhabited these offices at a time where the role of government (both levels but especially federal government) was far far far more complex than when all the 18th century's white men took turns to argue in the Federalist Papers about the electoral college while fighting each other about slaves.

 

And who elected her to those "offices"? What were her exact responsibilities? The fact is that they are not offices at all. 

The Clintons are a typical example of the corrupt political classes who sell "access" in office line their pockets after leaving office.

[pandarilla]

And who elected her to those "offices"? What were her exact responsibilities? The fact is that they are not offices at all. 

The Clintons are a typical example of the corrupt political classes who sell "access" in office line their pockets after leaving office.

Not elected offices no but incredibly political in their duties. She was a big part of policy making as first lady.

Was the point not about experience?

[DeeTillEhDeh]

You are completely blind. She is a first rate liar and her go to response to any situation is to lie through her teeth. Or have evidence destroyed to protect herself...

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/doj-gave-immunity-to-person-who-destroyed-clinton-emails/
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/from-fbi-fragments-a-question-did-team-clinton-destroy-evidence-under-subpoena/article/2600969
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2016/09/06/oversight-committee-clinton-obstruction-n2214383
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/jason-chaffetz-clinton-destroy-evidence-227767
http://nypost.com/2016/09/08/how-the-fbi-went-easy-on-hillary-clinton/

"According to the FBI investigation summary, Combetta appears to be the individual who deleted Clinton’s email archives from the PRN systems in late March 2015.  The FBI also uncovered evidence of a work ticket referencing a conference call between PRN and Clinton’s attorneys on March 31, 2015, but Combetta was advised by PRN lawyers not to answer questions about the conference call, citing attorney-client privilege.

During his second interview with the FBI in May 2016, Combetta told investigators that he deleted the emails in late March 2015 after recalling an order from Clinton’s team in December 2014 to delete all of the emails that may still exist.  He referred to this recollection as an “oh shit” moment and decided to delete the emails, all the while knowing the preservation order existed.  Combetta also told investigators he used the BleachBit program tool, ensuring the emails could not be recovered by investigators or anyone else."

“In reviewing those files, the Committee identified a sequence of events that may amount to obstruction of justice and destruction of evidence by Secretary Clinton and her employees and contractors, including her attorneys, employees of Platte River Networks, and employees of Clinton Executive Services Corporation," a letter sent Tuesday to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia by House Oversight Chairman Jason Chaffetz states. 
“In light of this information, the Department should investigate and determine whether Secretary Clinton or her employees and contractors violated statutes that prohibit destruction of records, obstruction of congressional inquiries, and concealment or cover up of evidence material to a congressional investigation.” 

This is straw-clutching of the worst kind.

An email non-story and exaggerated health scares.

It's fucking shocking if that is all they have on her.

[jmothecat]

This is straw-clutching of the worst kind.

An email non-story and exaggerated health scares.

It's fucking shocking if that is all they have on her.

That, and that she's a woman. Which as far as I can tell is the undertone of half the attacks.

[Zetterlund]

1 hour ago, jmothecat said:

Really struggle to understand a lot of the criticisms about Hillary. She seems like a great candidate, and considering the alternative it seems slightly unbelievable that this could actually be close.

People see her as untrustworthy and a pathological liar. She's also completely in the pocket of Wall St and to many is the epitome of a corrupt politician. Add in her warmongering foreign policy tendencies and she's really not an attractive proposition.  If Trump was anyone else she'd be nowhere and vice versa. They're both as bad as each other for different reasons, hence the polls and similarly unfavourable personal ratings.