General Election Thread: Two Weeks Out

[BarcaDeac]

I've helped write a section that was included in this year's defense spending bill. And I worked for a nonprofit that didn't contribute anything to the members who sponsored that piece. Very common for people not working for the government to write policy.

 

[DistrictDeacon]

Nowhere do I say that, so why do you assume that? You clearly didn't even read the email. That's who the letter is addressed to. First name basis. Not even "Madame Secretary".

I assume that when people post something, it's because they find it notable or out of the ordinary.

One person emailing something to someone they've had a relationship with for years hardly rises to the level of outrage.

But Bob thinks and does what Breitbart tells him.

 

[BobStackFan4Life]

I've helped a section that was included in this year's defense spending bill. And I worked for a nonprofit that didn't contribute anything to the members who sponsored that piece. Very common for people not working for the government to write policy.

If you think you can write Hillary about what our foreign policy should be and your email will get passed up the chain to her and given the same consideration as something from George Soros I think you are unbelievably naive.

 

[BobStackFan4Life]

I assume that when people post something, it's because they find it notable or out of the ordinary.

One person emailing something to someone they've had a relationship with for years hardly rises to the level of outrage.

But Bob thinks and does what Breitbart tells him.

And this is why I call you people shills. Just completely dishonest and a waste of time.

 

[ThinkingWithMyDeac]

Well back to someone more influential, ReturnMF with Gary Johnson I feel like you just dismissed his policies by saying well obviously he won't pass them but you can say that about any candidate so you must judge the candidate by the policies that in the perfect world they would pass. So how do you defend the gold standard?

 

[birdman]

Well, not every shill is on the level of Chris/rj/Shmoo, but that doesn't mean they're not shills. Look, I'm speaking from personal experience. I know many of the shills claim they're more anti-Trump than pro-Hillary but watch what happens if you criticize Hillary and interrupt the circlejerk- they flip the fuck out. I started off making modest, obvious criticisms of her. They couldn't handle even those.

So much flipping out around here in response to my criticism of Hillary's weak climate change policies. We are all fucked and she doesn't seem to care, but all you people can do is defend her.

 

[DistrictDeacon]

And this is why I call you people shills. Just completely dishonest and a waste of time.

Thanks for your analysis. More original thought from the most vapid poster on the boards.

Please once, post something you came up with on your own. Just once. Some critical thought. Anything.

 

[CantStandYa]

The "Hillshill" question is an interesting one, as are the handful of posters actively campaigning to bring people on board with Johnson.

I'm curious, for those of you that are either hold-your-nose HRC voters, anti-Trump HRC voters, or straight up Johnson voters, what's your isidewith.com score?

I end up as 97% HRC, 95% Stein, and 63% Johnson. That's why I voted for her in the primary and that's why I'm voting for her in November.

 

[FuckmouthedRube]

CGI money is a legit angle for the GOP to pursue, so it's bizarre that Trump hasn't gone after Bubba's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. Every other GOP wannabe would have. Kinda think Epstein has made it clear to both Trump and Bubba to STFU since neither are exactly squeaky clear.

Trump also needs to pipe down on pay for play. Paid ("donated") $25K to Florida AG Pam Bondi to drop the Trump U case. Still had her speak at the convention. Could have silenced Papa Freedom Girls for the same amount, but stiffed him. Shitty since those mini patriots were the best part of his campaign. Also a little dicey to have Christie on board the campaign since one of his mentors squeezed United for a money losing direct flight from Newark to Columbia his (SC vacation house).

 

[BobStackFan4Life]

So much flipping out around here in response to my criticism of Hillary's weak climate change policies. We are all fucked and she doesn't seem to care, but all you people can do is defend her.

Do me a favor- look at your post. What is your IQ? I'm going to guess it's at least average. Did you honestly expect shilling to occur? Look at why you said you were making it and then look at how you framed your criticism, of course adding a strong criticism of Trump, which always warms the hearts of the circlejerkers. You refuse to accept there is shilling and made a disingenuous post to try and prove your conclusion. And then you make this ridiculous post shortly after. I want to believe you're honest and sincere, but after these two posts, nah, you're just trying to score imaginary internet points.

 

[cville deac]

The "Hillshill" question is an interesting one, as are the handful of posters actively campaigning to bring people on board with Johnson.

I'm curious, for those of you that are either hold-your-nose HRC voters, anti-Trump HRC voters, or straight up Johnson voters, what's your isidewith.com score?

I end up as 97% HRC, 95% Stein, and 63% Johnson. That's why I voted for her in the primary and that's why I'm voting for her in November.

I was closest to Clinton in the 2 online tests I did. But I really don't like her and think she'll be a contentious 1 termer, and we'll give back the senate in 2018. So in the theoretical world, I think we'd be best off with Johnson, a Dem senate and Pub house. However in the real world, I doubt Johnson becomes viable (polling in the high 20s to 30s). I think it takes another large Clinton scandal to make Johnson viable.

 

[BarcaDeac]

For someone who is very against being called names, you sure do like to call people Hillshill frequently, bsf.

 

[birdman]

Do me a favor- look at your post. What is your IQ? I'm going to guess it's at least average. Did you honestly expect shilling to occur? Look at why you said you were making it and then look at how you framed your criticism, of course adding a strong criticism of Trump, which always warms the hearts of the circlejerkers. You refuse to accept there is shilling and made a disingenuous post to try and prove your conclusion. And then you make this ridiculous post shortly after. I want to believe you're honest and sincere, but after these two posts, nah, you're just trying to score imaginary internet points.

Fair enough I was definitely hoping for some imaginary internet points. I still don't think your characterization is correct though. It seems to me that most people that are supporting Hillary (here anyway) accept her because she is the least bad option. Her honesty is questionable of course and a lot of her policy positions are half way and weak kneed, but of her two "legitimate" opponents, one is a lunatic with tiny hands and the other has some pretty extreme policy positions. I am really mad that I have to vote for her, honestly, but Trump scares the shit out of me and Johnson, at least for now, really has no chance. I was hoping Jill Stein would be a nice protest vote for me like Nader was in 2000, but she has turn into a bit of a nut job her self. 350 million citizens and these are the 4 choices we have...that is fucked up. I am not trying to personally insult you, but, people flip out when you post because you post some tin-foil-hat-wearing garbage that you have no credibility when you do post a legitimate criticism of her. That's what I think anyway.

 

[RJKarl]

I was closest to Clinton in the 2 online tests I did. But I really don't like her and think she'll be a contentious 1 termer, and we'll give back the senate in 2018. So in the theoretical world, I think we'd be best off with Johnson, a Dem senate and Pub house. However in the real world, I doubt Johnson becomes viable (polling in the high 20s to 30s). I think it takes another large Clinton scandal to make Johnson viable.

If you look at the 2018 Senate list there are really only four that look like contests:

Donnelly (D) IN
Heitkamp (D) ND
VA Open D
Heller (R) NV

Over the past fifty years, only Johnson, Carter and Bush 41 were one term POTUS. Johnson had a highly unpopular war. Carter was handed a terrible economy that didn't improve much and a crisis. Bush 41 had a third party candidate that took tons of votes from him.

Barring something bad happening, the odds are Hillary will get re-elected in 2020.

 

[birdman]

The "Hillshill" question is an interesting one, as are the handful of posters actively campaigning to bring people on board with Johnson.

I'm curious, for those of you that are either hold-your-nose HRC voters, anti-Trump HRC voters, or straight up Johnson voters, what's your isidewith.com score?

I end up as 97% HRC, 95% Stein, and 63% Johnson. That's why I voted for her in the primary and that's why I'm voting for her in November.

97% Stein, 96% Clinton, 57% Johnson, 13% Trump, 8% Castle. When Bernie was included in the results a few months back, he was always my top match.

 

[deacvision7]

The "Hillshill" question is an interesting one, as are the handful of posters actively campaigning to bring people on board with Johnson.

I'm curious, for those of you that are either hold-your-nose HRC voters, anti-Trump HRC voters, or straight up Johnson voters, what's your isidewith.com score?

I end up as 97% HRC, 95% Stein, and 63% Johnson. That's why I voted for her in the primary and that's why I'm voting for her in November.

Candidates you side with...

96%

Hillary Clinton [SUP]Democratic[/SUP]

on foreign policy, economic, domestic policy, social, criminal, environmental, healthcare, science, immigration, education, and electoral issues.
Compare answers

90%

Jill Stein [SUP]Green[/SUP]

on foreign policy, economic, domestic policy, social, criminal, environmental, healthcare, science, and electoral issues.
Compare answers

63%

Gary Johnson [SUP]Libertarian[/SUP]

on foreign policy, social, and electoral issues.
Compare answers

27%

Donald Trump [SUP]Republican[/SUP]

no major issues.
Compare answers

 

[ThinkingWithMyDeac]

Questions birdmans intelligence. If he was a bird he'd be a New Caledonian Crow or the like, not some common finch.

 

[awaken]

There's a bunch of sheeple on this thread: "I'll vote for Johnson if I see enough other people voting for him." Grow a pair.

For your benefit, I am voting for Johnson, too.

 

[ThinkingWithMyDeac]

I tried to discuss Johnson policy and all I got was don't worry it's not crazy it's just what he would do if he could so it won't pass.

 

[ReturnofMf]

Well back to someone more influential, ReturnMF with Gary Johnson I feel like you just dismissed his policies by saying well obviously he won't pass them but you can say that about any candidate so you must judge the candidate by the policies that in the perfect world they would pass. So how do you defend the gold standard?

Good point.

We are committed to putting forth a budget, which will be rejected, but holding the line on a "double penny" cut. 2 cents on every dollar, each department.

For entitlements, 67 at the least 70, ideal, for anyone under 45. I.E. a 44 year old retires at 65. 43, 65, 2 months, 42, 65 and 4, months, 41, 65, 6, 40, 60 and 8 months and up to 67 or 70 if we can agree. Also for home mortgage tax deductions, next year 98 percent, the year after 96, then 94, then 92...