The News Thread

[CiG]

That's why the president doesn't do the job on their own, they don't need to be an expert in every field of politics. No president has ever been like that.

Anything would be better than Hillary and Trump for all his faults (of which he has many) he is that anything.

Unless something crazy about him is uncovered tomorrow I really don't see any argument that puts Hillary over Trump.

 

[Krigloch the Furious]

Yeah, there's no way im voting for Hillary

 

[Internally Deformed]

 

[Dak]

Even if he weren't in actual fact more of an arsehole than Hilary Clinton, it's his stupidity that is the real danger.

An idiot can luck into doing the right thing, or can be smart enough to outsource the job to others (which is what I expect of Trump). I don't have the words to describe how low I rate Hillary Clinton.

 

[Internally Deformed]

An idiot can luck into doing the right thing, or can be smart enough to outsource the job to others (which is what I expect of Trump). I don't have the words to describe how low I rate Hillary Clinton.

He may outsource it to others, but are you really confident enough that his ego won't get in the way to take that risk? And as for lucking into doing the right thing, that's like saying that because there's a statistical possibility that a monkey locked in the cockpit of a plane might just push all the right levers and buttons to bring about a safe landing, we should replace all pilots with monkeys.

It's like people don't get that being head of state of the most powerful country in the world is actually a difficult job.

 

[Dak]

He may outsource it to others, but are you really confident enough that his ego won't get in the way to take that risk? And as for lucking into doing the right thing, that's like saying that because there's a statistical possibility that a monkey locked in the cockpit of a plane might just push all the right levers and buttons to bring about a safe landing, we should replace all pilots with monkeys.

It's like people don't get that being head of state of the most powerful country in the world is actually a difficult job.

An egomaniac like Trump has a better chance of appointing the right people to handle stuff than Hillary Clinton has in doing anything right. She has a multidecade track record of always being wrong, and not only always wrong but a liar and unable to even follow simple protocols like you know, email security. I'm not voting for anyone, but voting for Trump would be infinitely more statistically likely to be the right selection compared to Hillary.

Being head of state of the US is a difficult job, so why trust someone who is entirely, verifiably, untrustworthy?

 

[CiG]

If you care about statistical likelihoods, why would anyone vote Hillary over Trump? Trump is a political enigma, Hillary is a proven hazard.

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

Well there's Gary Johnson as an option. .

You cant be serious. Have you heard that man open his mouth?

 

[Dak]

You cant be serious. Have you heard that man open his mouth?

It's sad isn't it? I'm not saying I would vote for him. He has a pretty good CV if you will, but he inspires absolutely zero confidence via any of his public speaking engagements/ads. I don't think he is capable of handling the pressure of the office, but I would be happy to be wrong about that.

 

[CiG]

Apparently he lost quite a lot of libertarian support for his opinions on borders and the free market, not sure about the facts but I heard some things.

 

[Internally Deformed]

Untrustworthiness is a far lesser sin that incompetency. What would you rather have, an untrustworthy surgeon who might rip you off on your medical bills, or an incompetent one who might lacerate a vital organ?

If you care about statistical likelihoods, why would anyone vote Hillary over Trump? Trump is a political enigma, Hillary is a proven hazard.

If a person literally lacks the intellect to explain what his political views are, that doesn't make him an enigma. It makes him stupid.

 

[Einherjar86]

An egomaniac like Trump has a better chance of appointing the right people to handle stuff than Hillary Clinton has in doing anything right. She has a multidecade track record of always being wrong, and not only always wrong but a liar and unable to even follow simple protocols like you know, email security. I'm not voting for anyone, but voting for Trump would be infinitely more statistically likely to be the right selection compared to Hillary.

Being head of state of the US is a difficult job, so why trust someone who is entirely, verifiably, untrustworthy?

Trump has a multidecade track record of being wrong. Hilary's track record is anything but "always wrong," just fyi.

As far as being a liar goes, there is no protocol of absolute informational transparency between the White House and the public at large. Every president lies, and many presidents have made it standard procedure to augment what they say to the public.

To be honest, the criticism that Hilary is a liar and untrustworthy just doesn't carry much weight for me. She can lie about Benghazi all she wants, and she can lie about what she did with her emails. It's national security, it's information, and it's either available or it's not. These issues are red herrings, in my opinion.

My biggest concern about Hilary is that leaders in other nations won't take her seriously because she's a woman (a legitimate concern). But then, I figure more than a few won't take Trump seriously either.

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

oh yea because hillary is so competent , right?

Uhum, bengazh.Uhum email, etc.

 

[Dak]

Untrustworthiness is a far lesser sin that incompetency. What would you rather have, an untrustworthy surgeon who might rip you off on your medical bills, or an incompetent one who might lacerate a vital organ?

Exposing Top Secret+ information is lacerating a vital organ, as far as it relates to a nation.

If a person literally lacks the intellect to explain what his political views are, that doesn't make him an enigma. It makes him stupid.

He has voiced political views. Build a wall, build infrastructure, reconsider trade agreements, reconsider immigration, etc. If you don't understand the difference between views and plans then maybe you need to reassess who deserves the label of stupid.

 

[CiG]

Untrustworthiness is a far lesser sin that incompetency. What would you rather have, an untrustworthy surgeon who might rip you off on your medical bills, or an incompetent one who might lacerate a vital organ?

Who would you rather, a surgeon with a history of fucking over the patients, covering up the fuck ups and telling patients she's the best surgeon because she's a woman or a surgeon with a rather spotty history in other professions but no record of being a surgeon yet?

We can all create analogies buddy.

My biggest concern about Hilary is that leaders in other nations won't take her seriously because she's a woman (a legitimate concern). But then, I figure more than a few won't take Trump seriously either.

Very stupid concern. Typical identity politics diversion, her track record as a liar is much more important/concerning.

Merkel runs the EU essentially, the days of muh gender in leadership are in the past, except when progressives bring it up for something to grind about.

 

[TechnicalBarbarity]

My biggest concern about Hilary is that leaders in other nations won't take her seriously because she's a woman (a legitimate concern).

Wow, really? Because we all know how much of a laughingstock Merkel was? You know that there are about 20-25 women presidents/primeministers/leaders, right?

I honestly think much less people will take trump seriously if he gets elected.... which he most likely wont.

 

[Dak]

Trump has a multidecade track record of being wrong. Hilary's track record is anything but "always wrong," just fyi.

A serial entrepreneur is going to have business failings. You only need to be right once, and that's business, not politics. List something Hillary has done right other than marry Bill, turn her position into sweet speaking fees, and get votes? Of course odds are we'd disagree on its rightness so probably a waste of time.

As far as being a liar goes, there is no protocol of absolute informational transparency between the White House and the public at large. Every president lies, and many presidents have made it standard procedure to augment what they say to the public.

To be honest, the criticism that Hilary is a liar and untrustworthy just doesn't carry much weight for me. She can lie about Benghazi all she wants, and she can lie about what she did with her emails. It's national security, it's information, and it's either available or it's not. These issues are red herrings, in my opinion.

We aren't talking about sins of omission here. We are talking about federal crimes that would put anyone not so well connected behind bars for years, and has Snowden in hiding - and he didn't even lie about it.

My biggest concern about Hilary is that leaders in other nations won't take her seriously because she's a woman (a legitimate concern). But then, I figure more than a few won't take Trump seriously either.

More likely they won't take her seriously because she's an open book to the world.

 

[Internally Deformed]

Exposing Top Secret+ information is lacerating a vital organ, as far as it relates to a nation.

As Einherjar said, blown out of all proportion. If you want to see what a real, genuine extinction event level fuck up looks like, continue to elect Trump.

He has voiced political views. Build a wall, build infrastructure, reconsider trade agreements, reconsider immigration, etc. If you don't understand the difference between views and plans then maybe you need to reassess who deserves the label of stupid.

The problem is that his "plans" are contradictory, and he has no intention of keeping them. Building an enormous wall and requesting the Mexican government into paying for it is a fantasy. Eliminating the national deficit while enlisting an enormous and costly secret police force to deport 11 million illegal immigrants is beyond insane. Being "unpredictable" on foreign policy is essentially an admission that he hasn't thought about and doesn't know what the fuck he's going to do.

 

[Dak]

As Einherjer said, blown out of all proportion. If you want to see what a real, genuine extinction event level fuck up looks like, continue to elect Trump.

The problem is that his "plans" are contradictory, and he has no intention of keeping them. Building an enormous wall and requesting the Mexican government into paying for it is a fantasy. Eliminating the national deficit while enlisting an enormous and costly secret police force to deport 11 million illegal immigrants is beyond insane. Being "unpredictable" on foreign policy is essentially an admission that he hasn't thought about and doesn't know what the fuck he's going to do.

"Extinction level event". You're obviously far past any sort of intellectual level of discourse. Go ahead and just start spamming Hitler please, it'll save yourself and the rest of us some time.

 

[Internally Deformed]

a surgeon with a rather spotty history in other professions but no record of being a surgeon yet?

So as in, not a surgeon? I'd take the surgeon.