Skip to main content

US 2016 Presidential Election

If Hillary wasn't a Clinton I think I would like her more. I mean compared to Trump she is a god damn angel.

I think it's hard to compare the two. They are both bad choices for different reasons.

I personally think Hillary's darker side is worse than Trumps, because she knows what she is doing and is calculated working the system. She kind of represents all that is bad of the US, besides being socially liberal on some issues. Trump is just an idiotic showman who has no idea what he is doing. He's like a kid, "When I'm class president we'll have recess all day!" He won't have the power to do much with out support from congress and the senate.

There are systems of checks and balances. Obama just had a veto over ruled for instance. The US is a robust democracy and if they had a president with dementia in the 80s, I think they'll survive Trump.

The one positive a Trump win would have is that there is some kind of chance of being good and shaking up the system, but most likely he'll get in there and be able to do nothing and the system continues on pretty much as it is. The machine of US government and Policy which Hillary represents will just go on. Then he'll be booted out.

Downside is, he is an unknown quantity and we don't know how bad that could be.

I personally don't have a preference because I don't need to have one as I am not American.

Based on nothing Trump maybe has a small chance of actually being what America needs. Even if it's just to shake off the idiotic lunacy of the far right. That's a small chance. Hillary, we know she'll be bad but we don't know if that'd be worse than Trump. It's all a big, "what if."

FYI, if I lived in the USA I would support Hillary over Trump. Globally, I think Trump may be better as he doesn't seem to want wars with China and Russia. He isn't also into the Kissinger type interference, toppling governments and nation building like Hillary. However once again, there's an unknown quantity to how Trump would be. So he could be worse.
 
I think it's hard to compare the two. They are both bad choices for different reasons.

I personally think Hillary's darker side is worse than Trumps, because she knows what she is doing and is calculated working the system. She kind of represents all that is bad of the US, besides being socially liberal on some issues. Trump is just an idiotic showman who has no idea what he is doing. He's like a kid, "When I'm class president we'll have recess all day!" He won't have the power to do much with out support from congress and the senate.

There are systems of checks and balances. Obama just had a veto over ruled for instance. The US is a robust democracy and if they had a president with dementia in the 80s, I think they'll survive Trump.

The one positive a Trump win would have is that there is some kind of chance of being good and shaking up the system, but most likely he'll get in there and be able to do nothing and the system continues on pretty much as it is. The machine of US government and Policy which Hillary represents will just go on. Then he'll be booted out.

Downside is, he is an unknown quantity and we don't know how bad that could be.

I personally don't have a preference because I don't need to have one as I am not American.

Based on nothing Trump maybe has a small chance of actually being what America needs. Even if it's just to shake off the idiotic lunacy of the far right. That's a small chance. Hillary, we know she'll be bad but we don't know if that'd be worse than Trump. It's all a big, "what if."

FYI, if I lived in the USA I would support Hillary over Trump. Globally, I think Trump may be better as he doesn't seem to want wars with China and Russia. He isn't also into the Kissinger type interference, toppling governments and nation building like Hillary. However once again, there's an unknown quantity to how Trump would be. So he could be worse.

Wasn't that veto overruled something about letting families of the victims of 9/11 sue Saudia Arabia?
 
White House press secretary mocks Trump's call for drug tests before third debate, saying the Republican 'snorted his way through the first two'
  • The White House's press secretary mocked Donald Trump for suggesting he and Hillary Clinton should be drug-tested before their third debate
  • 'The candidate who snorted his way through the first two debates is now accusing the other candidate of taking drugs?' Josh Earnest jabbed
  • A reporter had asked him about Trump's suggestion on Saturday that Clinton was 'pumped up' during debate no. 2
  • Earnest walked his comment back later, claiming it was a joke
  • Former Democratic Party chairman Howard Dean made the same claim about Trump snorting coke after the first debate, and later withdrew it
By DAVID MARTOSKO, US POLITICAL EDITOR FOR DAILYMAIL.COM

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...Republican-snorted-way-two.html#ixzz4NP4QKMKD
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
 
3rd Presidential Debate - 2016

SBS, 12:00pm, Thu, 20 Oct 2016, 90 minutes



Live coverage of the third US presidential debate between presidential candidates Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, which will be moderated by Fox News Sunday Anchor Chris Wallace at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Nevada.



2016, United States, English, News, Live, Special
 
3rd Presidential Debate - 2016

SBS, 12:00pm, Thu, 20 Oct 2016, 90 minutes



Live coverage of the third US presidential debate between presidential candidates Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, which will be moderated by Fox News Sunday Anchor Chris Wallace at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Nevada.



2016, United States, English, News, Live, Special
Yeah, I'm gonna try and stay up for it. 3:00 am here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kxk
3rd Presidential Debate - 2016

SBS, 12:00pm, Thu, 20 Oct 2016, 90 minutes



Live coverage of the third US presidential debate between presidential candidates Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, which will be moderated by Fox News Sunday Anchor Chris Wallace at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Nevada.



2016, United States, English, News, Live, Special

Can't wait to hear what kind of dazzling wit and intelligence that cretenious buffoon Trump provides.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kxk
Hillary just wooped fuckface on abortion.
So far, Hillary 1, fuckface 0

He's talking the WALL
 
Well that was boring.
Same old dribbling orange orangutan, how the hell is he rich?
And same Hillary, smarter than most

Why doesn't somebody restyle stupid Trump? IE he might do better if he was not orange with squirrel fluff on his head.

At least this takes any residual mockery of our politics to dark forgotten corners.

How embarrassing he is. Imagine if we had Hanson in a serious election run for PM? At least we can say the majority of Aussie's hate her when we are shamed by her.
 
Well that was boring.
Same old dribbling orange orangutan, how the hell is he rich?
And same Hillary, smarter than most

Why doesn't somebody restyle stupid Trump? IE he might do better if he was not orange with squirrel fluff on his head.

At least this takes any residual mockery of our politics to dark forgotten corners.

How embarrassing he is. Imagine if we had Hanson in a serious election run for PM? At least we can say the majority of Aussie's hate her when we are shamed by her.

Family money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kxk
The most impressive person in this unholy mess...

b13db4e988ef1f08cb89039777ef2efa


Michelle has no desire to be president.

MICHELLE Obama may be the only US political figure to appear more likeable now than when she emerged on the scene.

A mid-October WSJ/NBC poll found Americans look more favourably upon the First Lady than any major politician in the country right now.

She scored the highest positive rating at 59 per cent, and the lowest negative rating at 25 per cent.

Her husband Barack came in second place, at 51 per cent positive and 39 per cent negative. Hillary Clinton was further down the list with a 40 per cent positive and 50 per cent negative vote.

Donald Trump scored the lowest on the poll, at 29 per cent positive and 62 per cent negative.

Of course, the big difference is Michelle is not an elected official, and therefore she’s not inherently subject to the criticism and constant scrutiny that politicians are.

But it goes without saying that she’s one of the most popular First Ladies of all time, with growing calls on social media for her to run for President.

WHY MICHELLE OBAMA IS SO POPULAR

A 2014 survey of 242 historians and political scientists ranked Michelle Obama the fifth greatest First Lady in US history. Eleanor Roosevelt ranked in first place, with Hillary Clinton coming in sixth.


Reuters summarised her ranking saying: “Current first lady Michelle Obama scored particularly high in the categories of “being her own woman” and “value to the president.” Her weakest area was seen to be in her capacity of “being the White House steward.”

Throughout her time in the White House, she’s remained distant enough from politics to avoid being associated with the establishment, while addressing social issues — from healthy eating to girls’ education — that have shown her as a strong and likeable figure.
4e355d3c992c5da0236313ffd82d750d


Throughout the presidential campaign, Michelle Obama has been seen as having a unique role to play for the Democrats, in keeping women, minority groups and young people engaged.

She resonates with the American public in a lot of ways that Hillary Clinton does not — with the latter figure associated with scandal, mistrust and, above all, the Washington establishment.

In an opinion piece published earlier this month, the Washington Post said Michelle Obama is the “perfect foil” for Donald Trump, because she’s one high-profile woman he’ll never go after in response.

The First Lady has been credited with giving the two best speeches of the 2016 presidential campaign — both of which hit out at the Republican candidate.

Her address at the Democratic National Convention, in which she gave a personal reflection on life raising two African-American girls in the White House, was touted by the media as the “speech of a lifetime”.

Most notably, she drew widespread praise for condemning hateful language from public figures, saying: “Our motto is, when they go low, we go high”.

Last week, Michelle launched a direct attack on the Republican candidate in response to the now-infamous 2005 recording of his lewd comments about women.

“I can’t stop thinking about this. It has shaken to me to my core in a way that I couldn’t have predicted,” she told a campaign rally in New Hampshire.

“So while I would love nothing more than pretend that this isn’t happening and come out here and do my normal campaign speech, it would be dishonest and disingenuous to just move onto the next thing like this was all a bad dream. This is not something we can ignore.”

Even Trump supporters were singing her praises for her words, with radio show Glenn Beck said Michelle’s speech was “the most effective ‘political speech’ (he has) seen since perhaps Reagan”.

“Whether you like her or not, whether you even believe her or not, the words she spoke were true and this is what happens when the truth based deep eternal principles is spoken,” he wrote on Facebook.

Despite the enormous public reaction to both speeches, Trump did not hit back. To the contrary, he told The Hollywood Reporter: “I thought her delivery was excellent. I thought she did a very good job. I liked her speech.”

WOULD MICHELLE EVER RUN FOR PRESIDENT?

The short answer is no. Not likely.

The speculation over whether Michelle would go for the top job dates back at least four years, but she has said several times she has no desire to run for the position.

In April 2012, Obama was asked by a child whether she plans to run for president, during a White House event.

“Absolutely not,” she said. “Being president is a really hard job and it’s an important job. And when my husband is running for president, we’re right in there; we’re serving, too. And I think that once his terms are over, we’ll go on to do other important things because there are so many ways that you can help this country and the world, even if you’re not president of the United States.”

In March this year, she reiterated that statement. “I will not run for president. No, nope, not going to do it,” she told a crowd at the South by Southwest festival in Austin, Texas.

7a6cf36cad9320c939ffe11c7e7c2ed9


Officials close to the First Lady — including her husband — have similarly said it would never happen.

“There are three things that are certain in life … death, taxes, and Michelle is not running for president,” Barack Obama said earlier this year.

According to Kate Andersen Brower, a former White House correspondent and author of First Women: The Grace and Power of America’s Modern First Ladies, it’s just not one of Michelle’s ambitions.

“She doesn’t want to,” she told Fortune. “She is a reluctant First Lady.

“She doesn’t like politics in general. She doesn’t like the games that are played in Washington.”

Instead, Bowers suggested it’s likely Michelle will end up releasing a best-selling book. She suggested the First Lady will be more likely to speak out about signature issues like gun control and women’s education.

Two years ago, Michelle said her plans post-White House “definitely will not be” political, but will be “mission-based” and “service-focused”.

Whatever it is, she’ll no doubt be missed.

Gavin Fernandonews.com.au@GavinDFernando
http://www.news.com.au/finance/work...t/news-story/de245f5b9fc5505f6d7a9c51008dbb77
 
Well I listened/watched a bit of it live. Seemed a bit like a rerun of the first debate with marginally more actual discussion. I'm a bit obsessed. I have read virtually every article I can find on him in the Internet. I guess I'm gonna have more spare time come mid November. How long do you think he will be able to drag out the aftermath before someone poisons him or something...
 
They had lunch years and years ago. Donald invited him. And apparently what he wanted to talk about was that he had asked people for financial help after one of his bankruptcies and five people had declined and now he was on a mission to destroy their lives as revenge. Richard suggested that may not be e most productive thing for Donald to do....
 
They had lunch years and years ago. Donald invited him. And apparently what he wanted to talk about was that he had asked people for financial help after one of his bankruptcies and five people had declined and now he was on a mission to destroy their lives as revenge. Richard suggested that may not be e most productive thing for Donald to do....

Trump seems consumed by revenge.
 
Back
Top