Caroline Kennedy --- 2020

[Saab2000]

He loves to wield power and bully people. What part of being President, don't you get?

Well, I've never been president, so I'm not sure which part of it I don't get.

You are right that his ego needs to be fed and this feeds it. But presidents are also under more scrutiny and subject to criticism more than pretty much anyone else, fair or not. That part he probably didn't count on.

[dgaddis]

If Trump runs again in 2020 (he hasn't officially said he's running yet, has he?) it's not because he wants to be president. It's because he wants to win the fight for president. I don't think he likes the job.

One other point to keep in mind (that others have alluded to) regarding 'Trump voters'. I've lived my whole life in deep red country. Most of the folks I spend most of my time with voted for Trump. Most of those people didn't vote for him because they liked him. They voted for him because they sure as hell weren't voting for another Clinton. Hillary Clinton is likely the most hated woman in America. THAT is why the Dems lost the 2016 election.

The vast majority of 'Trump voters' aren't the vocal rabid fans that go to his rallies and own MAGA hats.

EDIT to add :: I'd love to see a 3rd party centerist candidate win, I'd vote for them. But if I were betting, I'd put all my money on Trump to win again. Then again, last time I kept saying 'he'll never win' so what do I know.

[Saab2000]

If Trump runs again in 2020 (he hasn't officially said he's running yet, has he?) it's not because he wants to be president. It's because he wants to win the fight for president. I don't think he likes the job.

One other point to keep in mind (that others have alluded to) regarding 'Trump voters'. I've lived my whole life in deep red country. Most of the folks I spend most of my time with voted for Trump. Most of those people didn't vote for him because they liked him. They voted for him because they sure as hell weren't voting for another Clinton. Hillary Clinton is likely the most hated woman in America. THAT is why the Dems lost the 2016 election.

The vast majority of 'Trump voters' aren't the vocal rabid fans that go to his rallies and own MAGA hats.

While there was plenty to dislike about Hillary, and I held my nose when I voted for her, much of what has been portrayed as truth about her is misleading or outright false. I don't even know where to begin with the stuff I have heard that is eye-rolling.

But you are correct on people voting against her. She is polarizing and much of it is her own arrogance and sense of presidential destiny. I think she would have been competent but this nation would be just as divided today had she been elected. This country is ready for a woman president (it's unbelievable in 2019 that we use words like that) but we're not ready for a president who refers to large swaths of the country as deplorable. That won't do.

[dgaddis]

While there was plenty to dislike about Hillary, and I held my nose when I voted for her, much of what has been portrayed as truth about her is misleading or outright false. I don't even know where to begin with the stuff I have heard that is eye-rolling.

But you are correct on people voting against her. She is polarizing and much of it is her own arrogance and sense of presidential destiny. I think she would have been competent but this nation would be just as divided today had she been elected. This country is ready for a woman president (it's unbelievable in 2019 that we use words like that) but we're not ready for a president who refers to large swaths of the country as deplorable. That won't do.

I agree a lot of the stuff about her is BS. But she's still a terrible candidate. Rogan (yeah, the comedian) put it best :: She's a corrupt old lady who lies a lot and passes out if she stands up too fast.

[lumpy]

A view from afar...the Democrats need to pick the person who has the best chance to beat Trump.

The Democrats need to pick the person that most Democrats vote for in the democratic primaries, as modified by the delegates who are selected in states with caucuses. That's what they did last time, and the time before that. Candidates run, and the voters choose. Party rules may favor one candidate, but it's voters that make the choice. It is much less top-down than a lot of commentary assumes.

[lumpy]

I agree a lot of the stuff about her is BS. But she's still a terrible candidate. Rogan (yeah, the comedian) put it best :: She's a corrupt old lady who lies a lot and passes out if she stands up too fast.

But where are you getting that? You are not getting it from actually listening to her speeches, looking at her positions, or looking at her record. You might be able to call some things she said untruths, but in a two person race she was not remotely as corrupt or dishonest as her opponent. And she is at least as healthy as her opponent. And she is one year younger than her opponent. So that leaves you with "lady." Huh. Yeah, that might be relevant.

[vertical_doug]

But where are you getting that? You are not getting it from actually listening to her speeches, looking at her positions, or looking at her record. You might be able to call some things she said untruths, but in a two person race she was not remotely as corrupt or dishonest as her opponent. And she is at least as healthy as her opponent. And she is one year younger than her opponent. So that leaves you with "lady." Huh. Yeah, that might be relevant.

I think there was a distinction between Hillary's lying and Trump's lying. Hillary was viewed as a liar, because she knew the truth and chose to conceal it. Trump was by and large viewed as a bullsh!tter. He was unconcerned with the truth. So for rural america, it was grandpa telling a tale about how large that fish was. The media did not help by giving him unprecedented amounts of air time for his rallies. Bullshitters are viewed as entertainment, whereas liars are dishonest. Sounds crazy, so must be true.


I think Trump's true believer base is about 30%. So that is his floor in an election, not his ceiling.

[bigbill]

If Hillary had gotten the nomination in 2008, I would have voted for her. But, she's 2 for 2 when it comes to running poor campaigns. Obama out campaigned her because she was treating the process as a coronation, and Trump beat her because she took her foot off the gas near the finish line. For me personally, I could never get past her mishandling of classified material.

For 2020, I don't see a democrat candidate who can beat an incumbent, especially if he runs on the economy and jobs. I know there's an investigation hanging over Trump's head, but I have to believe that if Mueller had something big on Trump that would end his Presidency, he wouldn't have sat on it this long. Trump and his campaign likely did some shitty things, but not worthy of removal.

[Saab2000]

For me personally, I could never get past her mishandling of classified material.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. If it's classified what and how do we know about how it was mishandled? I fly with guys who were military aviators and they often use the same vague references to this kind of thing but aren't able to give specific examples of what they're talking about.

Specificity is what I look for, not just chants of "Lock Her Up" at junior high-style pep rallies.

During the campaign there was some cockamamie story about how she and her husband were running a child sex ring out of a pizza shop in NW Washington DC. This actually drew a man to the location with an assault rifle and thankfully nothing happened but the lack of specificity and legitimate sourcing of talk about her is where I struggle. The line between truth and conspiracy is blurred and conspiracy websites and papers and videos don't help.

What specific information on her mishandling of classified information can you share? I'm certainly not saying it didn't happen because her own accounts of her trips to the Balkans were full of questionable and overblown stories. But we need to stay away from vague near-conspiracies and stick to verifiable facts, and this applies to all our politics.

[dgaddis]

But where are you getting that? You are not getting it from actually listening to her speeches, looking at her positions, or looking at her record. You might be able to call some things she said untruths, but in a two person race she was not remotely as corrupt or dishonest as her opponent. And she is at least as healthy as her opponent. And she is one year younger than her opponent. So that leaves you with "lady." Huh. Yeah, that might be relevant.

I don't care that she's a woman. But in her speeches she doesn't come across as genuine at all (this is where I get called sexist). She's fainted/almost fainted at least twice. She's a puppet of Wall Street (like most other politicians) - she was paid a $675,000 for a speech to Goldman Sachs, and she refused to release the transcripts of that and other speeches. No one has something so valuable to say as to earn a $675,000 fee for saying it - that's a bribe, they're not trying to learn something from her, they're buying access and favor. She didn't 'believe in' gay marriage until 2013 when it was popular enough to do so, after opposing it for a over a decade. Her campaign took over the DNC where they were allowed to steer the ship so to speak (I'm still surprised there wasn't more uproar over that....it's not a democracy if the people don't get to pick who they're voting for).

Trump is no picture of perfect health obviously, but at least he was able to campaign like crazy, on the go all the time, without getting sick/dehydrated and nearly passing out like Clinton did. I'm not saying he's a better person for the job, I'm saying there's plenty of good reasons to not like Clinton.

I didn't vote for Trump, just an FYI.

[ides1056]

I am liking you more and more Lumpy.

I am not up to riding much at the moment, but will happily come up your way and drink a local beer.

"She's a puppet of Wall Street (like most other politicians) - she was paid a $675,000 for a speech to Goldman Sachs, and she refused to release the transcripts of that and other speeches."

This suggests a misunderstanding of what Wall Street is: a collection of very bright people who were more interested in making money than other opportunities they might have considered upon graduation. She went into politics because she had something approaching a soul, cared for her fellow Americans, and wanted to represent her gender in the toughest arena in the land. Whatever GS paid her, they made exponentially more.

What I did not like about her: Kissinger, Albright, and the other war criminals she stood on various stages with. I did not care for her glee at Gaddafi's demise. Her association with GS and Wall Street is problematic because their fingerprints are all over economic crises around the world, eg Greece. They make out like bandits and are running the table on the country, finding myriad ways to cut a hole in the economy and draining it without adding any value whatsoever.

But she knows how to drive the engine of state and the orange baby does not. Period.

[Saab2000]

I am liking you more and more Lumpy.

I am not up to riding much at the moment, but will happily come up your way and drink a local beer.

I'd pedal my bike or drink beer with anyone here. I might enjoy it and I might even learn something. As a nation we might even learn that people of different origins and stripes aren't bad people and that if we're divided it's because other forces wish us to be divided.

[ides1056]

maybe the period part is overly emphatic

and yes, that's what this place is to me: a pick-up ride where I get to sit at the back and chew the fat

there's nobody here I don't like

period

[dgaddis]

maybe the period part is overly emphatic

and yes, that's what this place is to me: a pick-up ride where I get to sit at the back and chew the fat

there's nobody here I don't like

period

Long live vSalon!

[bigbill]

This is exactly what I'm talking about. If it's classified what and how do we know about how it was mishandled? I fly with guys who were military aviators and they often use the same vague references to this kind of thing but aren't able to give specific examples of what they're talking about.

Information was removed from the SIPR network which contains information up to SECRET. State Department has a SCIF which is a secure facility where the SIPR terminals are located. The SIPR network is not physically connected to any other and there is not wireless connections. Hillary had documents from the SIPR on her personal email which meant that someone was directed to remove data onto a device like a thumb drive, remove the header/footer classification markings, and then send it to her on an unsecure network. What confirmed the origin of the documents was the remaining markings. A page of data is classified based on the highest classification contained on the page. Paragraphs have a letter in parenthesis in the left margin giving the actual classification of the paragraph so a Confidential paragraph would have a (c) next to it and Secret would have a (s) next to it. Whoever removed the header/footer before sending the documents to her neglected to remove the paragraph markings. But Hillary knew classified markings, she'd had high clearances since she was First Lady, and she signed an agreement stating that she would properly control classified material under penalty of fine and jail. When I had all my clearances, if I had done any of the above, I would have gone to jail or been dismissed from service (like a dishonorable discharge) with the equivalent of a felony conviction. She did it and ran for President. And none of this excuses the people who enabled all this, but she was responsible for it all happening.

[lumpy]

I am liking you more and more Lumpy.

I am not up to riding much at the moment, but will happily come up your way and drink a local beer.

"She's a puppet of Wall Street (like most other politicians) - she was paid a $675,000 for a speech to Goldman Sachs, and she refused to release the transcripts of that and other speeches."

This suggests a misunderstanding of what Wall Street is: a collection of very bright people who were more interested in making money than other opportunities they might have considered upon graduation. She went into politics because she had something approaching a soul, cared for her fellow Americans, and wanted to represent her gender in the toughest arena in the land. Whatever GS paid her, they made exponentially more.

What I did not like about her: Kissinger, Albright, and the other war criminals she stood on various stages with. I did not care for her glee at Gaddafi's demise. Her association with GS and Wall Street is problematic because their fingerprints are all over economic crises around the world, eg Greece. They make out like bandits and are running the table on the country, finding myriad ways to cut a hole in the economy and draining it without adding any value whatsoever.

But she knows how to drive the engine of state and the orange baby does not. Period.

We really do need to do this.

As to Wall Street, one one hand, yeah. On the other hand, I'm working on a house closing for a young family buying their first house. Their mortgage interest rate is under four percent. That doesn't happen without capital markets, i.e. Wall Street. A lot of what Wall Street does is really important and makes people's lives better. We all depend on a complicated framework of public and private institutions and investment.

[Bob Ross]

we're not ready for a president who refers to large swaths of the country as deplorable. That won't do.

Oh, but we are ready for a president who refers to Every. Single. Person. who challenges or confronts or disagrees with him in the puerile insulting vernacular of an elementary school bully?!?!

FTS. My vote goes to the first candidate to say "Shut the fuck up, asshole" while punching Donald J. Trump in the nose hard enough to draw blood, on national TV. That'll do.

[dgaddis]

Oh, but we are ready for a president who refers to Every. Single. Person. who challenges or confronts or disagrees with him in the puerile insulting vernacular of an elementary school bully?!?!

FTS. My vote goes to the first candidate to say "Shut the fuck up, asshole" while punching Donald J. Trump in the nose hard enough to draw blood, on national TV. That'll do.

Punching people you don't agree with isn't the way forward.

It's Donald Trump. He shouldn't be hard to beat!!! (in an election)

[choke]

you do what the Republicans have been doing for decades-- hold your nose and vote for the party. There is no place for emotion on election day in a 2 party system.

I'll be voting for Bernie or Warren in the primary, and for the democrat on election day.

This is why politics in this country is so messed up....people put the party above the individual. Once those politicians are elected they do the same thing, put the party line above the good of the country. If, for example, a D President advances an idea all the Ds line up behind it and the Rs oppose, yet if a R President advanced the same idea the Rs would support it and the Ds oppose it. It's all about the party and keeping the other side from 'winning'. As long as that continues to happen this country will continue to be a mess.


“That there cannot be a more certain symptom of the approaching ruin of a State than when a firm adherence to party is fixed upon as the only test of merit, and all the qualifications requisite to a right discharge of every employment, are reduced to that single standard.” ― Edward Wortley Montagu, Reflections on the Rise and Fall of the Ancient Republicks: Adapted to the Present State of Great Britain

[davids]

This is why politics in this country is so messed up....people put the party above the individual. Once those politicians are elected they do the same thing, put the party line above the good of the country. If, for example, a D President advances an idea all the Ds line up behind it and the Rs oppose, yet if a R President advanced the same idea the Rs would support it and the Ds oppose it. It's all about the party and keeping the other side from 'winning'. As long as that continues to happen this country will continue to be a mess.


“That there cannot be a more certain symptom of the approaching ruin of a State than when a firm adherence to party is fixed upon as the only test of merit, and all the qualifications requisite to a right discharge of every employment, are reduced to that single standard.” ― Edward Wortley Montagu, Reflections on the Rise and Fall of the Ancient Republicks: Adapted to the Present State of Great Britain

Ask Montagu this: Who would he rather have as president right now, Trump or Clinton?