Donald trump leads a new republican presidential nationwide poll

[slurper_la]

Folks let's use the proper:
Past v. Passed

 

[slurper_la]

Joe Seldner: Last Hurrah For The Old, White, Angry Crowd
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joe-seldner/donald-trump-supporters_b_8055186.html

.

 

[Jjz1109]

I'm not saying what we should do in this particular election. But it's indisputable that it's long passed time to have a woman president.

How about we agree to just chose the right person, for the right reasons, regardless of gender or race? Clicking off boxes is NOT how we should decide such an important role.

 

[Trott.lint]

Folks let's use the proper:
Past v. Passed

Yep! At least I haven't seen anyone on these forums using the dreaded your instead of you're. Now that really hacks me off.

 

[vince]

I'm not saying what we should do in this particular election. But it's indisputable that it's long passed time to have a woman president.

So far, when looking at the proposed candidates, I've reached the conclusion that choosing the most competent and experienced, is also compatible with wanting a women to be given the job. Warts and all.

 

[Klingsor]

Folks let's use the proper:
Past v. Passed

The point is, that time in the past when we should have had a first woman president has long since passed.

 

[Klingsor]

How about we agree to just chose the right person, for the right reasons, regardless of gender or race? Clicking off boxes is NOT how we should decide such an important role.

I agree entirely. And if by some slight chance I ever encounter anyone who advocates "clicking off boxes," I'll tell him so.

 

[Jjz1109]

I agree entirely. And if by some slight chance I ever encounter anyone who advocates "clicking off boxes," I'll tell him so.

The concern is when statements and beliefs are a made that "it is time for . . . (fill in the blank) " clearly overshadows thought and logic, and encourages the move to click off the box. We as a nation deserve so much better than merely being politically correct.

My point - we may have to wait patiently for a woman president since the one in the lead for the democrats is not trustworthy, nor worthy, for the office merely based upon her gender.

 

[Klingsor]

The concern is when statements and beliefs are a made that "it is time for . . . (fill in the blank) " clearly overshadows thought and logic, and encourages the move to click off the box. We as a nation deserve so much better than merely being politically correct.

My point - we may have to wait patiently for a woman president since the one in the lead for the democrats is not trustworthy, nor worthy, for the office merely based upon her gender.

Possibly, though I'm not sure how many of the men for the republicans meet those high standards either.

 

[10silverdollars]

Possibly, though I'm not sure how many of the men for the republicans meet those high standards either.

Not fuckin' one of 'em...

 

[Jjz1109]

Possibly, though I'm not sure how many of the men for the republicans meet those high standards either.

Not sure when asking for someone who doesn't blatantly lie to the country, took extensive lengths to hide and cover up her actions, made such egregious choices acknowledging she "wasn't thinking, " and refuses to apologize for it (interview with Andrea Mitchell), as looking for particularly high expectations or high standards. Regardless of the your politics, I don't see others in the race quite in her low category.

 

[rbkwp]

shake my head
this peson seems to gain popularity by his idiocy/a hysteria craze, the amount of that he can espouse
evident with such on this thread, even if its mostly negative

going to be inteestingh as to how many common thinking thousands of Americans actually give him there vote, because of that pseudo popularity hes getting or earnt by perople innocently keeping his profile to the forefront

what makes a US Ptesident'

 

[vince]

Not sure when asking for someone who doesn't blatantly lie to the country, took extensive lengths to hide and cover up her actions, made such egregious choices acknowledging she "wasn't thinking, " and refuses to apologize for it (interview with Andrea Mitchell), as looking for particularly high expectations or high standards. Regardless of the your politics, I don't see others in the race quite in her low category.

Since when does lying and dissembling, or refusing to apologize, disqualify one from high office? Name one President or Prime Minister, Supreme Leader, or whatever, in the US or anywhere for that matter, that has met your high expectations and standards before or after they assumed office.

I didn't think you were so naive Jjz.

Can high ethical standards can realistically be expected from the POTUS in this day and age? Nixon, JFK, LBJ, Reagan, Clinton and the Bushes were all well known, accomplished liars before they took the oath. Some of them were highly effective leaders, while others were not. Is honesty an overrated character trait for people in positions of great power? Jimmy Carter was probably the most honest President in the 20th century. He wasn't a very effective leader though.

The guys running on the Republican side at this time are big liars as well. You think D Trump hasn't told some whoppers in his time? Holding Hillary to some higher ethical standard than expected of others is just politics, or it's sexist. Or both. Don't be fooled by anyone's rhetoric; they are all lying to you about something.

The best you can hope is a good liar that's working for you.

 

[Klingsor]

The best you can hope is a good liar that's working for you.

While I might not put it quite so cynically, I more or less agree. I'll tend to vote for a candidate based more on policy positions than character--in part because I think those positions themselves can say something important about character.

 

[Jjz1109]

Since when does lying and dissembling, or refusing to apologize, disqualify one from high office? Name one President or Prime Minister, Supreme Leader, or whatever, in the US or anywhere for that matter, that has met your high expectations and standards before or after they assumed office.

I didn't think you were so naive Jjz.

Can high ethical standards can realistically be expected from the POTUS in this day and age? Nixon, JFK, LBJ, Reagan, Clinton and the Bushes were all well known, accomplished liars before they took the oath. Some of them were highly effective leaders, while others were not. Is honesty an overrated character trait for people in positions of great power? Jimmy Carter was probably the most honest President in the 20th century. He wasn't a very effective leader though.

The guys running on the Republican side at this time are big liars as well. You think D Trump hasn't told some whoppers in his time? Holding Hillary to some higher ethical standard than expected of others is just politics, or it's sexist. Or both. Don't be fooled by anyone's rhetoric; they are all lying to you about something.

The best you can hope is a good liar that's working for you.

My post was primarily focused on the suggestion by one that it was time to select a woman as a nominee for the sake of her gender. I do not believe we should be selecting our candidates based on the view "it's high time we had X as president." Hilliary has quite a history, and has of late been shown to have done some amazingly unscrupulous things, and lied about them to cover them up. On top of, upon being challenged with these numerous examples, she refuses to take ownership and apologize. This tells me a LOT about her character, and what we should expect from her in the future. And you know what? I wouldn't be surprised if she becomes our first woman president because of (my opinion) this insane need for political correctness to check off a box. Society is putting aside those valued characteristics we should be demanding from our commander in chief. This is why we are getting the poor quality of candidates because we are NOT telling them their actions and behavior are unacceptable. Instead, we have people, like yourself, who make excuses and say things like "they all lie" or "what about the whoppers so-and-so has told'" merely to deflect support to their own party or candidate. I don't know what will happen with Trump, and nowhere have I said that at this time that I support him. It's clear that there are a lot of very strong opinions about him one way or the other, his statements, and probably his biggest issue, his delivery. I am for the most qualified candidate, and the one who is going to support my views. If people can honestly say, when they step into the voting booth, that Hiliary is the most qualified and represents those qualities they value, and are at peace with her actions and character, so be it. Personally and politically, I think our country deserves better.

As for whose lies are the biggest or worst, at the moment I see Hillary as the clear cut front runner.

 

[Jjz1109]

While I might not put it quite so cynically, I more or less agree. I'll tend to vote for a candidate based more on policy positions than character--in part because I think those positions themselves can say something important about character.

Sorry to hear you say that, klingsor. Herein lies the problems we face today. Haven't we chided our politicians for waffling on the issues, all in the name of gaining votes or support? I would respect the candidate who stands strong on an issue based upon his or her beliefs. I'm not saying they should not listen to, or be swayed by, changing society, but would see flip flopping based upon changes in the winds as a clear weakness in character.

 

[deleted15807]

As for whose lies are the biggest or worst, at the moment I see Hillary as the clear cut front runner.

Right and before that:

Obama - he wasn't born here!! He's a Kenyan. We need to see the long-form of his birth certificate!! Michelle whispers "whitey"!!
John Kerry - Swift Boat. Swift Boat. He is no war hero!!
Bill Clinton - Whitewater! Whitewater!! Special prosecutor!!!

Get the picture anyone?

 

[temptotalk]

My post was primarily focused on the suggestion by one that it was time to select a woman as a nominee for the sake of her gender. I do not believe we should be selecting our candidates based on the view "it's high time we had X as president." Hilliary has quite a history, and has of late been shown to have done some amazingly unscrupulous things, and lied about them to cover them up. On top of, upon being challenged with these numerous examples, she refuses to take ownership and apologize. This tells me a LOT about her character, and what we should expect from her in the future. And you know what? I wouldn't be surprised if she becomes our first woman president because of (my opinion) this insane need for political correctness to check off a box. Society is putting aside those valued characteristics we should be demanding from our commander in chief. This is why we are getting the poor quality of candidates because we are NOT telling them their actions and behavior are unacceptable. Instead, we have people, like yourself, who make excuses and say things like "they all lie" or "what about the whoppers so-and-so has told'" merely to deflect support to their own party or candidate. I don't know what will happen with Trump, and nowhere have I said that at this time that I support him. It's clear that there are a lot of very strong opinions about him one way or the other, his statements, and probably his biggest issue, his delivery. I am for the most qualified candidate, and the one who is going to support my views. If people can honestly say, when they step into the voting booth, that Hiliary is the most qualified and represents those qualities they value, and are at peace with her actions and character, so be it. Personally and politically, I think our country deserves better.

As for whose lies are the biggest or worst, at the moment I see Hillary as the clear cut front runner.

You tell'm Jj1983! My man!

 

[vince]

My post was primarily focused on the suggestion by one that it was time to select a woman as a nominee for the sake of her gender. I do not believe we should be selecting our candidates based on the view "it's high time we had X as president." Hilliary has quite a history, and has of late been shown to have done some amazingly unscrupulous things, and lied about them to cover them up. On top of, upon being challenged with these numerous examples, she refuses to take ownership and apologize. This tells me a LOT about her character, and what we should expect from her in the future. And you know what? I wouldn't be surprised if she becomes our first woman president because of (my opinion) this insane need for political correctness to check off a box. Society is putting aside those valued characteristics we should be demanding from our commander in chief. This is why we are getting the poor quality of candidates because we are NOT telling them their actions and behavior are unacceptable. Instead, we have people, like yourself, who make excuses and say things like "they all lie" or "what about the whoppers so-and-so has told'" merely to deflect support to their own party or candidate. I don't know what will happen with Trump, and nowhere have I said that at this time that I support him. It's clear that there are a lot of very strong opinions about him one way or the other, his statements, and probably his biggest issue, his delivery. I am for the most qualified candidate, and the one who is going to support my views. If people can honestly say, when they step into the voting booth, that Hiliary is the most qualified and represents those qualities they value, and are at peace with her actions and character, so be it. Personally and politically, I think our country deserves better.

As for whose lies are the biggest or worst, at the moment I see Hillary as the clear cut front runner.

I can't deny that a lot people vote based on the idea that it's time for a ______ to be in power. There are also many who vote based on the idea that never want to see a _______ in office. This type of decision making is not new in politics. It's similar to voting a straight party ballot and just discounting an office seeker because they are Republican or Democrat. It's very common in US politics and no less silly than voting based on gender or skin colour.

I didn't write that they "all lie" to deflect support to my candidate. I wrote it because it's the reality of politics and getting hung up on weather or not they lie to us is naive.

 

[Jjz1109]

I can't deny that a lot people vote based on the idea that it's time for a ______ to be in power. There are also many who vote based on the idea that never want to see a _______ in office. This type of decision making is not new in politics. It's similar to voting a straight party ballot and just discounting an office seeker because they are Republican or Democrat. It's very common in US politics and no less silly than voting based on gender or skin colour.

I didn't write that they "all lie" to deflect support to my candidate. I wrote it because it's the reality of politics and getting hung up on weather or not they lie to us is naive.

Vince. I get that politicians lie. I get that they will say things and make promises to get votes. However, I am pointing out the unabashed blatancy and clear lack of ownership for her lying as we move towards clicking of the woman president box. My issue is that we shrug our shoulders, accept faults and shortcomings, all in the name of such irresponsible statements such as "it's time." Is this how we will elect our leaders in the future?

That was my point.