if we need change, then we don't need Hillary
agree about Trump
Four years of status quo is faaaaaar better than 4 years of batshit crazy.
if we need change, then we don't need Hillary
agree about Trump
A Clinton presidency is no less frightening, just in a different way.
Four years of status quo is faaaaaar better than 4 years of batshit crazy.
Been happy w Obama.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk
This is what it comes down to. Obama is going to leave this country in better shape than he got it. Meanwhile, Republicans are showing themselves to be incapable of governing in Congress and states all over the country.
Republicans love to complain about how dysfunctional the government is, and then when they get in power they do everything in their power to make it happen.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk
This is the best (politics related) news that I've heard in awhile.
Not to veer into 923's lane, but the October Atlantic issue has several relevant articles:
-An analysis of political consultants
Cracks on how much money GOP wannabes wasted on political consultants. The only statistically quantifiable ROI on campaign spending is local organizing early. Worked for Obama in 2008 and 2012 and worked for Cruz in IA & WI. Good news for HRC is that GOTV is Robby Mook's strength. Bannon and KAC are all about message and polling.
Brutal chart in the article about $/primary vote. Trump was lowest (~$50K), HRC was second lowest (~$100K), Bernie (~$120K), and Cruz (~$250K). Jeb and Carly were last (~10M+). Ad development/spending is a sink hole.
-Cover story on the debates
Long article reviewing Trump's and HRC's prior debate performance and potential strategies. Over the top passages from Jane Goodell on how chimps establish dominance, Trump's minimal facial expressions, and level of rhetoric. "Optimal" vocabulary level for political messaging is 7th grade: Trump is 4th grade, Cruz is 5th grade, and HRC/Kasich/Huckabee are at 7th grade.
Claim that Trump only got exposed publicly and dropped his guard three times in interviews/debates: Chris Matthews on abortion, Megyn Kelly in her Fox prime time interview, and Carly Fiorina in the debate.
Two options for Trump in debate(s): throw HRC off by attacks on Monica or attempt to appear presidential. HRC will probably bait him about his wealth or try to expose his glaring lack of knowledge. Both have risks since overplaying their baiting may lose moderate voters in swing states.
To be fair, it's their entire strategy when they're not in power.
Excellent article. Sums up exactly how I feel.
Hillary is a known disaster. Trump is a dangerous unknown.
To be fair, it's their entire strategy when they're not in power.
Excellent article. Sums up exactly how I feel.
Hillary is a known disaster. Trump is a dangerous unknown.
I am don't understand how people perceive these two and equally bad choices. Hillary will essentially continue the status of the executive branch that has more or less been in place since Bush 1. Domestically and economically she is marginally more liberal than Bill Clinton, and Bush 2, and more conservative than Obama. Internationally she'll probably a little less as hawkish than Bush/Cheney, but more aggressive than Obama or her husband. Four more years of that is disappointing for sure, but not DISASTROUS. A Clinton win means we are just delaying 4 years until any real change can be implemented. Trump on the other hand brings uncertainty, certainly, but what we do know is that he is open to using nuclear weapons, doesn't see the value in NATO, wants to raise tariffs against China, and he wants to build $12 billion- 40 ft high- 1000 mile long-wall along the border with Mexico. All of his articulated policy positions have disaster written all over them except the wall, which isn't disastrous, but it is wasteful and stupid. So it looks to me like Hillary is a disappointing continuation of the last 30 years and Trump is most likely a disaster.