General Election Thread: Two Weeks Out

[ChrisL68]

Not I who needs to rationalize as my candidate is neither of those two. You, on the other hand, live in complete denial about how bad of a candidate you will be pulling the lever for.

Whatever helps to get you through the night.

I guess I am living in denial with every editorial board in the u.s. liberal and conservative and every past living president liberal and conservative. On the other side is the nonsense that you sailor and BSF throw out on a regular basis. I feel quite comfortable with my choice.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

 

[deacvision7]

I guess I am living in denial with every editorial board in the u.s. liberal and conservative and every past living president liberal and conservative. On the other side is the nonsense that you sailor and BSF throw out on a regular basis. I feel quite comfortable with my choice.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

/discussion

 

[knowell]

I guess I am living in denial with every editorial board in the u.s. liberal and conservative and every past living president liberal and conservative. On the other side is the nonsense that you sailor and BSF throw out on a regular basis. I feel quite comfortable with my choice.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk

We know you do. You have been riding that Hillary train for a long time now. I will try not to make assumptions about your character and will just assume you prefer her policies and are not a fan of the corruption.

 

[knowell]

I love the "but I'm not voting for Trump" canard. Vote for whomever you like. Your posting makes it clear who you support.

Just a bit tired of the self righteousness of Hillary Supporters. No one voting for Hillary is in a position to throw stones.

Both sides are holding their noses or they should be. If you are actually pleased with your candidate, that says a lot about you as a person.

I typically vote Libertarian and I am not all that happy about my candidate either.

 

[DeaconSig]

Just a bit tired of the self righteousness of Hillary Supporters. No one voting for Hillary is in a position to throw stones.

Both sides are holding their noses or they should be. If you are actually pleased with your candidate, that says a lot about you as a person.

I typically vote Libertarian and I am not all that happy about my candidate either.

I'm holding my nose to vote for Clinton. That doesn't mean all the bullshit "she's just as bad as him" arguments have any merit whatsoever.

 

[BobStackFan4Life]

I'm holding my nose to vote for Clinton. That doesn't mean all the bullshit "she's just as bad as him" arguments have any merit whatsoever.

Simply expressing an opinion, even one shared by most of the people on this board, as if it's self-evident, does not make something true. I happen to think most of you are ignorant about Clinton and in denial. Both are horrendous candidates and are likely to be terrible presidents, but I feel Hillary will be worse.

 

[BobStackFan4Life]

We had round the clock coverage for days of Trump calling a Ms Universe winner Ms Piggy, but Hillary wanting to drone strike Julian Assange gets virtually no coverage in comparison. And you people remain beholden to the establishment press, regularly defend it, and think you're informed.

 

[Deacsfan27]

Quite frankly, I don't have any bad feelings about voting for Hillary.

Of course she has done corrupt things, of course she has dirty hands, of course she is part of a political machine. She's been involved in politics for like 30 years. I don't like this about her, nor does anybody who is being open-minded about all the candidates.

She also has legitimate policy ideas, knows how Washington works, knows foreign leaders/the relationships that are involved there, has seen first hand what it takes to be the POTUS, and has the most experience of almost anybody who has ever run for POTUS.

Those are all positives before we even move to looking at the opponent.

This isn't an election where she is running against somebody who is equally qualified to be leader of the free world. If it were Paul Ryan running then it would be a different story altogether. As it is, Clinton is, without a doubt, the more qualified candidate, and I think if you are equating the odds that both "run America into the ground", then it is extremely disingenuous.

 

[myDeaconmyhand]

Simply expressing an opinion, even one shared by most of the people on this board, as if it's self-evident, does not make something true. I happen to think most of you are ignorant about Clinton and in denial. Both are horrendous candidates and are likely to be terrible presidents, but I feel Hillary will be worse.

You continually confuse "ignorant" with "unconvinced". 90% of the knowledge you have about Hillary, that you consider damning, is alleged, unproven, or already formally dismissed. You choose to place full faith in that data based on your gut feeling. We don't need to make that leap with Trump, we don't need to believe in a theory or unproven accusations. He publicly sabotages his own character every week.

 

[BobStackFan4Life]

Quite frankly, I don't have any bad feelings about voting for Hillary.

Of course she has done corrupt things, of course she has dirty hands, of course she is part of a political machine. She's been involved in politics for like 30 years. I don't like this about her, nor does anybody who is being open-minded about all the candidates.

She also has legitimate policy ideas, knows how Washington works, knows foreign leaders/the relationships that are involved there, has seen first hand what it takes to be the POTUS, and has the most experience of almost anybody who has ever run for POTUS.

Those are all positives before we even move to looking at the opponent.

This isn't an election where she is running against somebody who is equally qualified to be leader of the free world. If it were Paul Ryan running then it would be a different story altogether. As it is, Clinton is, without a doubt, the more qualified candidate, and I think if you are equating the odds that both "run America into the ground", then it is extremely disingenuous.

She's shown she's far more qualified to run the country into the ground. That is my sincere belief. Nothing disingenuous about it.

 

[WakeandBake]

Quite frankly, I don't have any bad feelings about voting for Hillary.

Of course she has done corrupt things, of course she has dirty hands, of course she is part of a political machine. She's been involved in politics for like 30 years. I don't like this about her, nor does anybody who is being open-minded about all the candidates.

She also has legitimate policy ideas, knows how Washington works, knows foreign leaders/the relationships that are involved there, has seen first hand what it takes to be the POTUS, and has the most experience of almost anybody who has ever run for POTUS.

Those are all positives before we even move to looking at the opponent.

This isn't an election where she is running against somebody who is equally qualified to be leader of the free world. If it were Paul Ryan running then it would be a different story altogether. As it is, Clinton is, without a doubt, the more qualified candidate, and I think if you are equating the odds that both "run America into the ground", then it is extremely disingenuous.

Paul Ryan is the name you pulled out of the Pub hat? That guy is not equal to Clinton experience-wise at all.

 

[deacdiggler]

Disingenuous? Perhaps not. Uninformed? For sure.

 

[ImTheCaptain]

She's shown she's far more qualified to run the country into the ground. That is my sincere belief. Nothing disingenuous about it.

hm, of the two candidates, which has actually run organizations into the ground?

 

[BobStackFan4Life]

You continually confuse "ignorant" with "unconvinced". 90% of the knowledge you have about Hillary, that you consider damning, is alleged, unproven, or already formally dismissed. You choose to place full faith in that data based on your gut feeling. We don't need to make that leap with Trump, we don't need to believe in a theory or unproven accusations. He publicly sabotages his own character every week.

This is just untrue. All of it. Sure, I post the more salacious stuff as well. But there is no shortage of well documented facts that should disqualify Hillary. But I also realize you people are immune to facts- ultimately it comes down to your feelings.

 

[BobStackFan4Life]

Disingenuous? Perhaps not. Uninformed? For sure.

Insults aren't proof of your assertion.

 

[BobStackFan4Life]

hm, of the two candidates, which has actually run organizations into the ground?

While it's still standing, I would consider her time as SOS to represent one of the low points for the State Department. Trump has had ups and downs in his life as a businessman, nothing unusual about that- clearly more ups than downs though.

 

[RJKarl]

Machado, Rosie, Megyn Kelly, Carly, etc.,etc.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...1d32f0-893a-11e6-8cdc-4fbb1973b506_story.html

Did he really not expect this to come out during a presidential candidate?

 

[CantStandYa]

Quite frankly, I don't have any bad feelings about voting for Hillary.

Of course she has done corrupt things, of course she has dirty hands, of course she is part of a political machine. She's been involved in politics for like 30 years. I don't like this about her, nor does anybody who is being open-minded about all the candidates.

She also has legitimate policy ideas, knows how Washington works, knows foreign leaders/the relationships that are involved there, has seen first hand what it takes to be the POTUS, and has the most experience of almost anybody who has ever run for POTUS.

Those are all positives before we even move to looking at the opponent.

This isn't an election where she is running against somebody who is equally qualified to be leader of the free world. If it were Paul Ryan running then it would be a different story altogether. As it is, Clinton is, without a doubt, the more qualified candidate, and I think if you are equating the odds that both "run America into the ground", then it is extremely disingenuous.

Well said.

 

[myDeaconmyhand]

This is just untrue. All of it. Sure, I post the more salacious stuff as well. But there is no shortage of well documented facts that should disqualify Hillary. But I also realize you people are immune to facts- ultimately it comes down to your feelings.

Those "disqualifying" facts aren't disqualifying. The term "disqualifying" is not subjective in this context. She is not disqualified, therefore those facts are not disqualifying. You have chosen to believe in conspiratorial accusations based on overblown or misunderstood data and events.

 

[CantStandYa]

Paul Ryan is the name you pulled out of the Pub hat? That guy is not equal to Clinton experience-wise at all.

If it were someone like Colin Powell, he'd probably sweep the EC. He'd never get out of the GOP Primary though, which is how Trump slipped through in the first place.