piscator wrote:
I can't consider a dictator. Or any other of the Clown Car. Antiscience much?
I can't consider a dictator either, but nothing Trump has said is anything more dictatorial than any other candidate. They are constrained by their office. And, Trump hasn't suggested anything really anti-science. He seems unconcerned with science, and as President that's really not a bad position to be on it. It's not really part of the job description.
He's been neutral on climate change - pretty much he doesn't understand the science, I would guess. And, he has not expressed an opinion on evolution - nobody has asked him.
piscator wrote:
Hillary is not Bill. She's hard as a coffin nail. And yes, she's an elite. One of the people tacky Mr TRUMP can never be no matter how much $$ he makes.
Therein lies the problem -- the establishment -- the elite - tell us they have the answer to the current economic problems, and trade deficits and manufacturing decline and reduced labor force and all the like. But, they aren't motivated to change it - and if they had the solutions, why didn't they implement them, yet?
You seem to be advancing the notion that the bought-and-paid-for elite candidates are better for the country. You sound like a solid conservative.
I don't really care if Trump is allowed in her club. In fact, it's time someone who isn't in the club became President. Bernie wouldn't be invited to the club either.
piscator wrote:
A long time ago I was having a discussion with another captain who fishes another fishery. He referred to another fisherman as "Elite". I'm like, "What do you mean, "Elite"? What's that?"
"OK, this guy, last year, caught more fish than all the rest of the boats in the fishery. That's what I mean by, "Elite"."
He's using elite, in that context, to mean accomplished in a field -- one of the elite fishermen. The term elite when referred to politicians refers to the entrenched power brokers -- the lobbying and consultant class -- the Bushes and the Kennedys and such. It's not a compliment.
piscator wrote:
We all agree it's probably going to be Hillary vs TRUMP
Bottom Line:
Hillary is worthy of the Office. Trump is tacky.
If by worthy of the office, you mean lying opportunist who panders to the people while taking mountains of payola from the moneyed interests and actually serving those moneyed interests, then sure.
And, I don't care about tacky. I care about substance, and Trump is right about many issues. He's right on trade and he's right on foreign policy. And, he's not bought and paid for by Goldman Sachs and the rest of the crooks in the finance industry.
piscator wrote:
And, Trump hasn't said he's going to run the government for profit, nor is anything he proposes suggestive of that.
What other experience does he have than running for-profit enterprises?
Having that experience is extremely valuable, and it is experience that Hillary Clinton does not have at all. Her experience is limited to getting elected to the NY Senate (after living there for a few months) because her name is Clinton. So she knows how to get elected based on her name. And, she knows how to fuck up as Secretary of State, a job which she got through political pressure placed on the Obama Administration (Obama has no love for the Clintons).
Running billion dollar private organizations is quite good experience. Being a career politician and then claiming to have the ability to fix all the problems that have existed for your entire career is not a great selling point.
piscator wrote:
What's this wall thing the good citizens of Matamoros and Juarez are supposed to erect so we can WIN Youugge and bring back the Ford truck plants? That's being sold as a terrific for-profit!!1! enterprise with no money down, a deal we'd be suckas not to take. A Terrific Deal we'd be Suckas not to take.
It's being sold as terrific for the economy, yes. It's vital that the US not lose the rest of its manufacturing base. That's important for the long term survival of the country. Also, jobs, businesses, and factories -- economic activity -- is very important for individuals. It's how people put food on the table, and pay for their living expenses, education, etc. Taking action to improve our position relative to trade deficits is certainly something that can help US businesses -- but helping US businesses is good for the US. That's where people work -- in businesses. That's where the goods and services we need are produced.
piscator wrote:
All your beholds are arguments for Trump, not against him. You're right - the GOP establishment is apoplectic because they do not own him. Their gravy trains are threatened.
Good.
1/3 of the Senate is up for grabs this election cycle. What people are pissed about is the divided quagmired government they sent up the Hill - principally the obstructionist Congress.
TRUMP will be unelectable before September ends. He's got skeeze in his closet. Lots of it.
So does Clinton. We'll see what sticks. Trump has been attacked mercilessly over the last few months.
piscator wrote:
Hillary didn't win a Nobel Prize (yet), so she's not stuck in Syria arming the same motherfuckers we're shooting at in Iraq. Hillary's husband balanced the last fucking budget that was ever balanced.
Oh, you mean the balanced budget that was passed by the Republican Congress at the time? That was a great job, and a testament to both Bill Clinton and the Congress at the time. And, we're not electing her husband, unfortunately. Hillary was the Secretary of State, though, which means she has a ton to do with arming motherfuckers.
piscator wrote:
Hillary has learned a lot about the Pentagon, and she'll earn their grudging respect one way or another.
Rednecks hate Hillary with a phosphorescent fury. That's good for 7/10 right there.
It's a no-brainer.
Looking at who is apoplectic over Trump is the 7/10 for me, actually.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar
