Trump vs. Sanders

[MillCreek]

I trust there is no way on God's Green Earth that we are going to end up with a Presidential vote between Mr. Trump and Mr. Sanders.  Fate would not be that cruel.

[Fly320s]

It would be fun to watch.

[Sergeant Bob]

Gawd, I hope it doesn't come to that!

[Perd Hapley]

It's a whole sight better than another Bush-Clinton circus.

[Regolith]

It's a whole sight better than another Bush-Clinton circus.

Kind of like a gunshot to the head is better than being burned alive...


*expletive deleted*ck it. CTHULU 2016! Vote Cthulu for president and he'll kill you first!

[charby]

I trust there is no way on God's Green Earth that we are going to end up with a Presidential vote between Mr. Trump and Mr. Sanders.  Fate would not be that cruel.

It is called: "people are fed up with the same old thing".

[RevDisk]

I trust there is no way on God's Green Earth that we are going to end up with a Presidential vote between Mr. Trump and Mr. Sanders.  Fate would not be that cruel.

It's looking very strongly to be that much of a possibility. I weep for the future.

You have an entitled idiot with no financial sense, and a financially challenged idiot that wants more entitlement.

[Ben]

It's looking very strongly to be that much of a possibility. I weep for the future.

Indeed. I think I'd have to do a write-in vote if this scenario, which looks more possible everyday, comes to pass. It would be a wakeup call to the establishment (both sides), but I'm betting they'll hit the snooze alarm again.

[brimic]

As much as I enjoyed the Trump SHow where he ran around and kicked rinos in their shriveled balls, I hope he falls in the polls and Cruz gets the nomination.

[Kingcreek]

As much as I enjoyed the Trump SHow where he ran around and kicked rinos in their shriveled balls, I hope he falls in the polls and Cruz gets the nomination.

I agree. There is still plenty of time for Trump to self destruct with a terminal case of trumpism.

[RoadKingLarry]

I agree. There is still plenty of time for Trump to self destruct with a terminal case of trumpism.

We've been hearing that exact line from the almighty pundits for 6+ months now. Every time he goes full on twitwaffle he goes up in the polls.

 

[Jocassee]

I'll bring the popcorn.

[brimic]

We've been hearing that exact line from the almighty pundits for 6+ months now. Every time he goes full on twitwaffle he goes up in the polls.

 

I'd vote for him just on his stances, but I don't believe him. He's more likely a clinton operative or trolling conservatives than anything approaching a genuine article.

[41magsnub]

I'd vote for him just on his stances, but I don't believe him. He's more likely a clinton operative or trolling conservatives than anything approaching a genuine article.

That's my biggest problem.  I trust Trump about as equally as I trust Clinton.  He says some good things (now), but I just don't believe he is sincere.

[makattak]

I appreciate the honesty of the Democrats to openly support a socialist.

Not, you know, a lot.

[MechAg94]

It still comes down to who gets the votes in the primaries.  The Trump supporters have to show up to vote, not just answer poll questions.  We will see. 

[MillCreek]

You have an entitled idiot with no financial sense, and a financially challenged idiot that wants more entitlement.

The thing I like about this statement is that plausible arguments can be made that both clauses apply to either Trump or Sanders.

[roo_ster]

It still comes down to who gets the votes in the primaries.  The Trump supporters have to show up to vote, not just answer poll questions.  We will see. 

Talked with my folks last night, who will be Iowa Caucus-goers.  They were wavering between Trump and Cruz.  I laid out both as objectively as I could and analyzed it from a couple of directions, given what I know of their predilictions.  In the end, they don't trust Cruz's recent immigration restriction conversion and they place the ethnic composition of America above the other issues where Cruz is an obvious improvement over Trump.  Also, neither has ever been a fan of free trade, since my dad actually read Ricardo in college and minored in econ.  Last, they think that Trump would be more vicious and vigorous in fighting PC in both social and legal realms.

[MechAg94]

Talked with my folks last night, who will be Iowa Caucus-goers.  They were wavering between Trump and Cruz.  I laid out both as objectively as I could and analyzed it from a couple of directions, given what I know of their predilictions.  In the end, they don't trust Cruz's recent immigration restriction conversion and they place the ethnic composition of America above the other issues where Cruz is an obvious improvement over Trump.  Also, neither has ever been a fan of free trade, since my dad actually read Ricardo in college and minored in econ.  Last, they think that Trump would be more vicious and vigorous in fighting PC in both social and legal realms.

You mention recent conversions.  Trump has in the past held some pretty liberal viewpoints and not all that long ago.  Trump gets my vote over just about any of the D.C. establishment Republicans, but he doesn't have a spotless track record.  I do think he would be a pretty good candidate, certainly compared to people like Romney or McCain.  Just the fact that he wouldn't run away from hard questions gets him a lot of advantage even if his answer isn't the best. 

[RevDisk]

The thing I like about this statement is that plausible arguments can be made that both clauses apply to either Trump or Sanders.

 

Sanders believes his bovine excrement, completely. I personally believe Sanders doesn't know he's economically incompetent, socialists rarely do. He's also weak. He got chased off stage by two BLM activists. Against China, Russia or even staring down the G7 or EU reps? Eh. But promising free stuff has ALWAYS been popular with the mob. Problem is, the mob is fickle. And it doesn't last generally beyond the fiscal year. I think he'd be good as a town mayor somewhere. Maybe even state legislature. POTUS would not remotely suit him well.

Trump I believe somewhere in his soul knows that he's incompetent. But he tries to power through it with bluff, bravado, spouting whatever is necessary. Being able to ignore political correctness is one thing, so long as there's actual intelligence and competence behind the scenes. I don't see it in Trump. On the other hand and to his credit, if you ignore the un-PC rhetoric, his positions not as radical or far out there as the media presents. As much as certain folks think he's the savior of culture or whatnot, I doubt it. Expect a lot of talk, little action to back it up. To put things in perspective, if he had put his money into an S&P index fund, he'd be 4-10x richer than he currently is. Possibly a lot more, as he's likely only worth a fraction of his paper wealth in the real world. He made his money the old fashion way, inheritance and amoral lawyers. Another thing is he is vindictive and extremely hostile to free speech.

Cruz I honestly don't know enough about.

Hillery is probably the most competent person running. She's amoral, if not downright evil, at heart. She'll happily sell out anyone or anything in her path. I like her the least personally of all the top tier candidates. But again, probably the most experienced, pragmatic and competent. Which is saying more about her competition than her own abilities, frankly. She'd probably rock the boat the least in the short term and maintain the status quo with an iron fist, with sops through to her base rather than true beliefs (if she actually has any). Long term I don't think that's good for the country, but I don't see any other candidates with pragmatic long term viewpoint. Our form of democracy isn't well geared towards pragmatic long term decision making.

[Ben]

Despite my anti-Trumpiness, I wouldn't have too much of a problem with a domestic president Trump. Given of course, that he doesn't become a political weathervane, as his history, mentioned above, could indicate. It would actually be kinda fun to have a politically incorrect president who makes SJWs cry and stomp their feet.

I do have a great fear of an international president Trump. His lack of awareness on international issues, the military (and when they can and can't be used) and general teenage temperament when somebody says something bad about him (which, internationally, happens to all US presidents) just scares me.

I guess I just hope Cruz gets the nomination. While I don't agree with him on everything, the Venn diagram is closer than any other Republican candidate since Reagan. Otherwise, as  I said earlier, I'll probably go write-in.

Also, most of the stuff Rev wrote while I was posting my reply. :)

[MechAg94]

Hillery is probably the most competent person running.

What exactly has Hilary accomplished in her past that makes you think she is competent?  No joke here.  Really.  What has she done? 

She was married to a US President who only won because Ross Perot sucked away the elder Bush's support.  She was handed a Senate seat on a silver platter.  She lost a Presidential run and then pretty much failed in one term as Secretary of State.  A lot of lofty titles that don't amount to much IMO.

[brimic]

What exactly has Hilary accomplished in her past that makes you think she is competent?  No joke here.  Really.  What has she done?  

She's very competent at being a politician.

edit (for the longer version): She privatized her email server, utilizing much cheaper private sector 1s and 0s. She fingered the person responsible for Ben Ghazi within hours. She faced down congress while suffering from severe brain damage. She's awesome with an iPad, instead of using the stodgy government issued equipment. She proved that its possible to be both pro-rape and pro-women. She got a coveted and very rare endorsement by the leading player in the government-corporate abortion industry.
I'm sure I missed a few things...

[Ben]

What exactly has Hilary accomplished in her past that makes you think she is competent?  No joke here.  Really.  What has she done? 

She was married to a US President who only won because Ross Perot sucked away the elder Bush's support.  She was handed a Senate seat on a silver platter.  She lost a Presidential run and then pretty much failed in one term as Secretary of State.  A lot of lofty titles that don't amount to much IMO.

That would be the one area of Rev's post I disagreed with. She is absolutely shrewd, and she would likely play things close to the establishment status quo. However, who is she? When Bill Clinton was president, she was the wife, that's all. And I would say the same thing if the roles were reversed. The First Lady (or man) should be either in the kitchen or out mowing the lawn.

Had she not gotten the public exposure she did as First Lady, she'd be nowhere to be seen right now. The First lady of Arkansas would have been a footnote. It's only through the exposure she got via her husband's presidency that she was able to use admittedly shrewd business and PR savvy to get herself the other jobs. I don't know that she did well at either of them. At least "well" defined as doing well for the position and for her country versus doing well for herself.

[Perd Hapley]

Sanders believes his bovine excrement, completely. I personally believe Sanders doesn't know he's economically incompetent, socialists rarely do. He's also weak. He got chased off stage by two BLM activists. Against China, Russia or even staring down the G7 or EU reps? Eh. But promising free stuff has ALWAYS been popular with the mob. Problem is, the mob is fickle. And it doesn't last generally beyond the fiscal year. I think he'd be good as a town mayor somewhere. Maybe even state legislature. POTUS would not remotely suit him well.

Trump I believe somewhere in his soul knows that he's incompetent. But he tries to power through it with bluff, bravado, spouting whatever is necessary. Being able to ignore political correctness is one thing, so long as there's actual intelligence and competence behind the scenes. I don't see it in Trump. On the other hand and to his credit, if you ignore the un-PC rhetoric, his positions not as radical or far out there as the media presents. As much as certain folks think he's the savior of culture or whatnot, I doubt it. Expect a lot of talk, little action to back it up. To put things in perspective, if he had put his money into an S&P index fund, he'd be 4-10x richer than he currently is. Possibly a lot more, as he's likely only worth a fraction of his paper wealth in the real world. He made his money the old fashion way, inheritance and amoral lawyers. Another thing is he is vindictive and extremely hostile to free speech.

Pretty much this.


I suspect Mrs. Clinton is competent at something, but I'm not sure what. She's not very good at running a presidential campaign, or a state department, or two phones at the same time. Is she good at running an email server?

I would say she's good at getting elected to a New York Senate seat, but what Democrat isn't? You can't even say that she's good at getting left-wingers to like her. Because they don't.