• Check out the relaunch of our general collection, with classic designs and new ones by our very own Pissog!

Serious US Election Thread (read post #2014)

Status
Not open for further replies.
manodelrey said:
I thought he walked back on having the wall and it was going to be more metaphorical? I am so lost as to what his position is now
Click to expand...
when did he ever walk back on the having the wall? where did you hear this lol. and I'm asking specifically about the wall, not about him walking back on his immigration status ie: letting hardworking families stay if they pay taxes etc
 
Skitty said:
I see where you've heard of it now, but an MSNBC tweet without any sources doesn't scream credibility to me.
Click to expand...
he credited an nbc news anchor so probably a better option. and considering he is going back on everything he said in the primaries it does seem more credible
 
Trump literally tried to pawn off the entirety of his foreign-policy presidential obligations to his VP. The Clintons literally accepted huge donations from foreign policy leaders while in office, likely (?) in exchange for political preference. Someone who has never served in federal government not knowing the geography of a country he's never dealt with is not concerning to me in the slightest, no matter how incriminating the soundbite might sound.
 
Killah said:
Trump literally tried to pawn off the entirety of his foreign-policy presidential obligations to his VP. The Clintons literally accepted huge donations from foreign policy leaders while in office, likely (?) in exchange for political preference. Someone who has never served in federal government not knowing the geography of a country he's never dealt with is not concerning to me in the slightest, no matter how incriminating the soundbite might sound.
Click to expand...
Considering Trump is making it up as he goes along, Hillary can't handle any difficult questions and has now revealed that she doesn't realize that C stands for classified making her the dumbest politician of all time or the biggest liar of all time, Gary Johnson's mistake doesn't seem as big. That being said, if you are trying to get enough support to get into the debates, making these gaffs isn't how you do it. Calling out Hillary and Trump for their stupidity is a much better way, especially Hillary. If he decided to make himself a better alternative to both Trump and Hillary, then he would have massive support but he doesn't seem to be going that way
 
If statisticians and actuaries in my office can know about Aleppo, I expect a presidential candidate to. Now, I don't exactly expect Trump to know what Aleppo is either lmao... Jill Stein frankly probably doesn't either. But Clinton and McMullin definitely do. (McMullin should probably also know who his VP is cough Nathan Johnson cough, but that's a separate issue lmao)

It's the most populous city in Syria, even ahead of the capital Damascus. It's partially held under rebel control and partially under Assad's control. This distinguishes it from the other 2 major Syrian cities (>500,000 population,) Damascus and Homs as both of those are under total control of Assad, aside from random minor skirmishes. Aleppo is the last stand of the rebels for the soul of the civil war. If it falls entirely to Assad, even if minor cities still are under rebel control, they will have lost the backbone of the country. Homs fell after a brutal siege that lasted years where people were literally starving to the point where they agreed to evacuate the city and give control over to Assad's government. This is happening again in Aleppo. The battles mostly focus on cutting each other's supply lines to weaken the opponent, not actually directly killing each other... well except for when the government drops barrel bombs, killing thousands of people, including many civilians. It's a brutal war.

I would be very willing to bet that Gary Johnson doesn't know about Aleppo because his personal opinion is he doesn't need to because it doesn't affect us. Too lazy to check his website to see if a position on Syria is posted. But I doubt it. The problem isn't specifically that he doesn't know what Aleppo is. It's that it's indicative of probably many other basic knowledge gaps he has on foreign policy, since he thinks we basically shouldn't have one.

It's not as bad as Hermain Cain's Ubekibekistanstan moment, but it's bad and it particularly hurts when Johnson's attempted projected image is that of a responsible, intelligent adult.
 
It's ironic that the media is crapping on Johnson about Aleppo when they are uninformed themselves (as multiple media outlets incorrectly identified Aleppo, some claiming it as the capital of Syria and others even as the capital of ISIS). I find this situation to be just another way in which the media is destroying third party attempts. Johnson has had many decently successful interviews and speeches (not by any means saying all of these were perfect) and yet the one time he has a brainfreeze (and actually has the humility to admit to a lack of understanding rather than BS an answer) the media pounces on it to make him seem like he's egregiously uninformed. How many times have Trump and Clinton made equally uninformed comments without this level of backlash?

And it doesn't even seem to be an issue where Johnson didn't know what Aleppo was and was just a momentary lack of understanding of how it was presented with absolutely no context... "What would you do about Aleppo?" as a written and verbal question is rather different, and confusing L-ep-O as an acronym for something else isn't that big of a stretch. Yeah, it was a mistake on his understanding in the heat of the moment, but it was not a reflection of a lack of knowledge of the subject in general, and if this is the worst thing the media can do to pounce on him, then maybe they should just move on and talk about other things (which realistically they will do shortly).

I'm still fairly undecided in this election, but I've been watching Johnson closely, and it bothers me that this minor thing has become partially misconstrued and grown larger than what it really was.
 
Andddd there goes the fourth candidate for president to become completely useless. Is there someone else who is straight down the middle and over the age of 35 who doesn't really want the job but is fine with wasting 4 years of their life? Pretty sure they can win the election better than Reagan in 1984
 
hey there's this. I couldn't find the actual recording of the mini-debate thing, but don't let the title of the video fool you. This video shows that Donald Trump not only isn't qualified to run for President, but he also doesn't know what he'll do if he's elected.

So yeah, it's a comedy/talk show but the information is legit.

Watch from 0:18 to 2:46.

 
Skitty said:
I cant wait for the debates, poor hillary lol
Click to expand...
Yeah she's really gonna get throttled by the guy who hasn't prepped for the debates at all and relies on crowd participation to fuel his debate. Primary debates are nothing like general election debates and Trumps advantages (playing to the crowd and snagging the most soundbites) virtually go away during a debate in the general. Hillary's not a crowd speaker but it's not like Trump can get under her skin as easily as people assume either she survived an 11 hour Benghazi hearing without breaking ffs.
 
Celticpride said:
she survived an 11 hour Benghazi hearing without breaking ffs.
Click to expand...
At this point what difference does it make. Oh yeah why don't you go back and listen to her testimony and listen to her speeches about both Benghazi and her email server. Start from the beginning and then just move in chronological order. Watch as Hillary's story magically change as new evidence emerges that prove she was lying. It's absolutely amazing. My favorites are

Much better explanation than typing out everything.



But it doesn't matter cause she is a clinton and people just ignore everything that more than disqualifies her for the presidency. And it's not like this crap hasn't been going on for years now, she has a career of being the stereotypical corrupt politician who surprisingly has more scandals than accomplishments as a career politician.

But hey
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top