OMG Politics, I'm over it already.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Experience isn't as important as thoughtfulness, being open minded, and having vision.

We have in South Bend Indiana one of the youngest Mayors ever to hold the office (the youngest to ever hold office in a city of more than 100,000).... he was in the military and after becoming Mayor, came out as openly gay. Indiana is known for being a red state, but most everyone has embraced Mayor Pete and welcomed how much he has accomplished for our city. His vision has helped turn this "dying" city's economy around and people have started moving back into the city instead of out of it. Downtown is finally thriving after years of failed attempts at "revitalizing" it.



 
Last edited:
jelloman said:
Andy, much earlier in this thread I asked if she was the best the Democrats had to offer and you responded with something akin to "no, but Elizabeth Warren won't run"...unless you're changing your stance even you admit that there are better and more desirable candidates available for the job...

It's not sour grapes, Andy...I sincerely do not believe she is a good fit for the position...I hope I'm wrong, I really do...but I cannot support her or vote for her...
Click to expand...

She isn't the best the Democrats have to offer, but that still doesn't mean she's not the most qualified.

In a perfect world, the politicians that gives us warm fuzzies and delivers are the best choice, but this is not a perfect world. In 2008 and in the 2016 primaries, I voted for Barack Obama and Bernie Sanders, because I felt their vision for America resonated the most for me, but that doesn't mean I thought that Hillary Clinton was incompetent, or a criminal, or any of the other descriptors she is often hit with. She's an incredibly capable, intelligent, and determined candidate, but my personal politics lean much further to the left, and my primary votes reflect that.

Clinton has had to move her policies further to the left, because that's what the Democratic Party has decided we want. Clinton is far more of a centrist than I would like, but in light of how far afield the GOP has moved on their issues, she's painted a socialist or worse.

I respect you a lot, and don't begrudge your criticism of her, or not wanting to vote for her. But the reality is we are a two party system and only a constitutional overhaul will change that. There is a lot to like about Stein, precious little to like (again, from solely my perspective) about Pence, and I find Trump the personification of every ugly American stereotype that exists. He's a bully, he's unstable, and he has no qualifications to enter the government, much less he highest office in the land.

There are other would-be candidates that I would prefer, but that doesn't mean I can't vote for Clinton with a clean conscience. I can't say the same for several people I know that are voting for Trump.
 
I voted for Barry in '08 in the primaries and for Prez. Hillary's experience level grew massively since then. Her four year stint as SoS is a big part of her being one of if not the most qualified candidate for POTUS in the history of our nation.

Trust as it relates to these candidates is a bullshit notion. If you don't trust Hillary, you CANNOT trust Trump. So let's take that subjective notion out of the mix because it's bullshit given her opponent.

I'm disgusted that people lump HRC and Trump together. She's actually great candidate if you look at her resume and remove her name and gender from the equation. Her transgressions should remain. You put the same comprehensive list of details about Trump and "de-identify" them and a rational person shouldn't even have to think twice.

It is inarguable that the republicans and conservatives have gone after Hillary from at least Bill's first year in the White House. The conservative pundits and even folks like Newt and his cronies made tearing down the Clintons a priority from day 1 of his first administration. And since they weren't able to get him kicked out of office or stop her ascendancy to the Senate and beyond, they've never let up. It's almost OCD and certainly stalker-like behavior.

The time and millions spent on failing to prove the wrong doing of the Clintons could and should have been put to much better use. The GOP's focus on stopping liberals has gotten in the way of their ability to contribute to the advancement of our nation and its people. And then they went and let Trump defile anything that might have been worth salvaging of the "brand". Nice job.
 
baimun said:
Experience isn't as important as thoughtfulness, being open minded, and having vision.
Click to expand...

That depends a great deal on the job. It’s much easier to understand how policy will affect people if you can just drive across town and talk to them about it. It’s easier to take risks knowing that they only affect one town. It’s easier to communicate with a small city government than with 535 members of congress. And so on.
 
Since replying or quoting doesn't show us everything I wanted to post these wise words from a wise man:

"She isn't the best the Democrats have to offer, but that still doesn't mean she's not the most qualified.

In a perfect world, the politicians that gives us warm fuzzies and delivers are the best choice, but this is not a perfect world. In 2008 and in the 2016 primaries, I voted for Barack Obama and Bernie Sanders, because I felt their vision for America resonated the most for me, but that doesn't mean I thought that Hillary Clinton was incompetent, or a criminal, or any of the other descriptors she is often hit with. She's an incredibly capable, intelligent, and determined candidate, but my personal politics lean much further to the left, and my primary votes reflect that.

Clinton has had to move her policies further to the left, because that's what the Democratic Party has decided we want. Clinton is far more of a centrist than I would like, but in light of how far afield the GOP has moved on their issues, she's painted a socialist or worse.

I respect you a lot, and don't begrudge your criticism of her, or not wanting to vote for her. But the reality is we are a two party system and only a constitutional overhaul will change that. There is a lot to like about Stein, precious little to like (again, from solely my perspective) about Pence, and I find Trump the personification of every ugly American stereotype that exists. He's a bully, he's unstable, and he has no qualifications to enter the government, much less he highest office in the land.

There are other would-be candidates that I would prefer, but that doesn't mean I can't vote for Clinton with a clean conscience. I can't say the same for several people I know that are voting for Trump."
 
jp_nyc said:
That depends a great deal on the job. It’s much easier to understand how policy will affect people if you can just drive across town and talk to them about it. It’s easier to take risks knowing that they only affect one town. It’s easier to communicate with a small city government than with 535 members of congress. And so on.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but most of our fellow U.S. citizens don't realize this and don't vote when there's not a Presidential election. Our masses be asses, so sayeth Alexander Hamilton...the man was and remains correct.
 
jp_nyc said:
That depends a great deal on the job. It’s much easier to understand how policy will affect people if you can just drive across town and talk to them about it. It’s easier to take risks knowing that they only affect one town. It’s easier to communicate with a small city government than with 535 members of congress. And so on.
Click to expand...

I do vote at every election, and every primary... and I'd vote for a third term of an even handed communicator like Obama over Hillary, but that's not an option. If a more moderate Republican had been chosen, I would have much more homework and inner debate going on, but Trump (or Pence) aren't even viable candidates IMO. Jill Stein discredits science so she's a pass for me, and Johnson doesn't communicate much vision or authority to me either.
 
baimun said:
I do vote at every election, and every primary... and I'd vote for a third term of an even handed communicator like Obama over Hillary, but that's not an option. If a more moderate Republican had been chosen, I would have much more homework and inner debate going on, but Trump (or Pence) aren't even viable candidates IMO. Jill Stein discredits science so she's a pass for me, and Johnson doesn't communicate much vision or authority to me either.
Click to expand...

True dat.
 
I for one think the election is over and Hill won. There will be more fireworks and stuff but the hole Trump has dug is just too deep.
The Senate will flip but the House will remain in the hands of the GOP.
So let it be written, so let it be done.
 
smurfco said:
The "it's over, she won" thing scares the hell out of me because if enough people think that she's got this in the bag, and they don't go out and vote, it may not wind up being true.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think that was a significant part of how Dubya got a second term. The news was reporting that Kerry was looking super strong on exit polls which made a bunch of dems/libs stay home and had reps/cons running out to vote.
 
Kerouac said:
She isn't the best the Democrats have to offer, but that still doesn't mean she's not the most qualified.

In a perfect world, the politicians that gives us warm fuzzies and delivers are the best choice, but this is not a perfect world. In 2008 and in the 2016 primaries, I voted for Barack Obama and Bernie Sanders, because I felt their vision for America resonated the most for me, but that doesn't mean I thought that Hillary Clinton was incompetent, or a criminal, or any of the other descriptors she is often hit with. She's an incredibly capable, intelligent, and determined candidate, but my personal politics lean much further to the left, and my primary votes reflect that.

Clinton has had to move her policies further to the left, because that's what the Democratic Party has decided we want. Clinton is far more of a centrist than I would like, but in light of how far afield the GOP has moved on their issues, she's painted a socialist or worse.

I respect you a lot, and don't begrudge your criticism of her, or not wanting to vote for her. But the reality is we are a two party system and only a constitutional overhaul will change that. There is a lot to like about Stein, precious little to like (again, from solely my perspective) about Pence, and I find Trump the personification of every ugly American stereotype that exists. He's a bully, he's unstable, and he has no qualifications to enter the government, much less he highest office in the land.

There are other would-be candidates that I would prefer, but that doesn't mean I can't vote for Clinton with a clean conscience. I can't say the same for several people I know that are voting for Trump.
Click to expand...
It's funny, but when I was a lot younger (I'm not sure of your age, but I know you're quite a bit younger than my 51 years) I was as for me or farther left than you...I would have been a Bernie guy, no question...as I've gotten older I've moved into the middle, finding common ground with both parties and some of the independents as well...

The last candidate that gave me the warm fuzzies was Clinton in '92...by '96 I was off that bandwagon...I lived the Clintoncy, and do not have fond memories of it...I was severely disappointed by the man he turned out to be...that's not to say he did a good job, he did...

I don't know, maybe I'm asking too much of the people who wish to lead me...but I would like my president to be among the best of us, and not just one of us...

I don't think anyone here has a lower opinion of Trump than I do...on his fitness to lead we are almost all in complete agreement...I like Bernie Sanders...even though his politics do not come close to mine I would probably still have voted for him over Trump...

Andy, I have all the respect for you as well, and I admire your passion, and your commitment to your beliefs...no matter what else you and I will always be brothers...
 
jelloman said:
It's funny, but when I was a lot younger (I'm not sure of your age, but I know you're quite a bit younger than my 51 years) I was as for me or farther left than you...I would have been a Bernie guy, no question...as I've gotten older I've moved into the middle, finding common ground with both parties and some of the independents as well...

The last candidate that gave me the warm fuzzies was Clinton in '92...by '96 I was off that bandwagon...I lived the Clintoncy, and do not have fond memories of it...I was severely disappointed by the man he turned out to be...that's not to say he did a good job, he did...

I don't know, maybe I'm asking too much of the people who wish to lead me...but I would like my president to be among the best of us, and not just one of us...

I don't think anyone here has a lower opinion of Trump than I do...on his fitness to lead we are almost all in complete agreement...I like Bernie Sanders...even though his politics do not come close to mine I would probably still have voted for him over Trump...

Andy, I have all the respect for you as well, and I admire your passion, and your commitment to your beliefs...no matter what else you and I will always be brothers...
Click to expand...

I'm 33, so I remember the Clinton years well and was interested in politics even as a child; in grade school I always wrote to the President, although only "Bush #1" ever "wrote me" back. Truth be told, I would love to run for office, but I find my temperament AND my stamina would not allow for it. :embarrassed:

My father and I disagree on almost every aspect of politics, but when we were talking about the election two weeks ago he rightfully pointed out that the people that are the best of us have no interest in getting into politics, because it's an ugly arena and it takes resilience , confidence, and cash to even get to the show; the best of us might have some of those attributes - even all of them - but they find politics distasteful or would rather have impact behind the scenes. Leading from the front is very different than directing from behind.
 
Kerouac said:
I'm 33, so I remember the Clinton years well and was interested in politics even as a child; in grade school I always wrote to the President, although only "Bush #1" ever "wrote me" back. Truth be told, I would love to run for office, but I find my temperament AND my stamina would not allow for it. :embarrassed:

My father and I disagree on almost every aspect of politics, but when we were talking about the election two weeks ago he rightfully pointed out that the people that are the best of us have no interest in getting into politics, because it's an ugly arena and it takes resilience , confidence, and cash to even get to the show; the best of us might have some of those attributes - even all of them - but they find politics distasteful or would rather have impact behind the scenes. Leading from the front is very different than directing from behind.
Click to expand...
And it is that very thing that I hate most about our political system...

I always come back to the preamble of the constitution..."In order to form a more perfect union"...perfection, while never achievable, is to be striven for...

The corrupt, broken political system we have today, beholden not to the people it's supposed to represent but rather the special interests that control it, is most certainly not what was intended...

You should run, temperament and stone be damned...at least you actually stand for something more than the guys lining your pockets...
 
For anyone who doesn't think the Republicans have been working hard to destroy the Clintons, go read the history of the Kenneth Star special committee on Bill, then watch this YouTube video of Trey Gowdy admit that there was nothing Clinton could have done to save the lives of the US personnel in Benghazi



The Republicans spent $30 million dollars of OUR money and that was their end conclusion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top