Donald Trump Versus Hillary Clinton

[Coreeece 2]

jcd11235

****** Still talking to your imaginary friend?

Funny how you'd ridicule those with a religious "imaginary friend" yet support those with imaginary sexuality.

I've never met (or heard of) anyone with an imaginary sexuality. Are they someone your imaginary friend told you about?

Many people are born men yet imagine they are women. Is there any scientific evidence to support that belief besides their delusions?

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[jcd11235 0]

Coreeece

Many people are born men yet imagine they are women. Is there any scientific evidence to support that belief besides their delusions?

If only there was some magical device to which you could address your questions instead of jumping to conclusions based solely on your ignorance. Or did your imaginary friend tell you how to feel?

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/is-there-something-unique-about-the-transgender-brain/

Science. It's how rational people seek answers to life's great questions.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[Coreeece 2]

This is all really about your hypocrisy - you accept/defend those born with a biological/mental predisposition toward whatever sexuality they may or may not accept, despite physical evidence, yet ridicule those born with a biological/mental predisposition toward the belief in GOD.

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[jcd11235 0]

Coreeece

This is all really about your hypocrisy - you accept/defend those born with a biological/mental predisposition toward whatever sexuality they may or may not accept, despite physical evidence, yet ridicule those born with a biological/mental predisposition toward the belief in GOD.

As I said, in general, I don't mind religious people. I just ridicule those who claim to be religious, but whose hearts are filled with hatred. They are the scourge of civilization, evangelical conservatives.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[Coreeece 2]

jcd11235

***This is all really about your hypocrisy - you accept/defend those born with a biological/mental predisposition toward whatever sexuality they may or may not accept, despite physical evidence, yet ridicule those born with a biological/mental predisposition toward the belief in GOD.

As I said, in general, I don't mind religious people. I just ridicule those who claim to be religious, but whose hearts are filled with hatred.

Oh, my apologies - I stopped reading and missed that part after your initial insult - pardon me - what must have I been thinking?

Besides, you were the one that drifted this thread toward religion when you made unwarranted insults about my faith. . .

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[jakee 1,498]

Coreeece

********* Still talking to your imaginary friend?

Funny how you'd ridicule those with a religious "imaginary friend" yet support those with imaginary sexuality.

I've never met (or heard of) anyone with an imaginary sexuality. Are they someone your imaginary friend told you about?

Many people are born men yet imagine they are women. Is there any scientific evidence to support that belief besides their delusions?

You're better than this dude, so stop playing the idiot.

If transgender people feel a need to be a different gender then that's the only proof that is needed. They're not positing the existence of something that doesn't exist.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[aphid 0]

Coreeece

I just think we'd be better off if we voted for those that we think would be the best president (snip)

And I am stunned that the 2015/16 evolution of presidential hopefuls represented the best that a nation of 350 million people can offer.

I think your country (and our world) would be much better off if y'all chose better candidates across the political spectrum.

[billvon 2,998]

Both of you cut it out.

[yoink 321]

Coreeece

I just think we'd be better off if we voted for those that we think would be the best president, rather than against those we hate, or for those that we think might win regardless of whether or not we agree with their positions. . . How's that for idealism?

I agree.

But for that to happen and have any meaningful impact, the system of voting needs to change.
Until then so-called 'tactical' voting trumps pointless idealism.

I don't particularly like it, but I'm also pragmatic. It's the reality we live in.

[mr2mk1g 10]

Coreeece

I couldn't careless.

Congratulations - you're the first American I've seen use that phrase correctly in a very long time. 10 winning points for you.

[Coreeece 2]

mr2mk1g

***

I couldn't careless.

Congratulations - you're the first American I've seen use that phrase correctly in a very long time. 10 winning points for you.
Actually, I think it should be "I couldn't care less"

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[normiss 801]

How careless of you.

[billvon 2,998]

It's been fun watching politicians squirm when it comes to Trump. They can't not back him, but they can't _really_ back him - especially if they are up for re-election. Ron Johnson took a unique angle - he will support Trump but won't really endorse him. So he can answer voters both ways.

Question from diehard Trump supporter - "Are you going to abandon your party?"
Johnson - "Absolutely not! I've gone on record supporting Trump. You can check."

Question from mainstream conservative - "I can't believe you are supporting Trump!"
Johnson - "Hey, I never said I endorsed him. I have a lot of issues with the guy."

From TPM:

========
Vulnerable GOP Sen. Ron Johnson Retreats On Endorsing Donald Trump

By Caitlin MacNeal
Published May 16, 2016, 2:27 PM EDT 9630 views

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) on Sunday said that he intends to support but not endorse Donald Trump as the nominee, pulling back from a previous comment that he would endorse Trump if he wins the Republican presidential nomination.

"Let me tell you precisely what I’ve said. I intend to support the Republican nominee. That’s what I’ve said. I intend to support the Republican nominee," Johnson said on Big AM 1380's "The Mike Daly Show" when asked if he was concerned about backing Trump

Later, when asked if he was concerned about endorsing a "wild card," Johnson differentiated between supporting and endorsing a candidate. He noted that he purposefully says, "I intend to support."
========

[Coreeece 2]

It's funny how the politicians have to be sooo careful about every word they say and how they say it.

I mean, Obama is so thoughtful that practically every 5th word out of his mouth is "um"

Pretty soon politicians will be speechless. . .

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[billvon 2,998]

>It's funny how the politicians have to be sooo careful about every word they say
>and how they say it.

I know. Next thing you know, we will expect someone's word to mean something. And that will truly be the end times.

[Coreeece 2]

billvon

Next thing you know, we will expect someone's word to mean something.

Given the nominees on either side, I think we're a long way from that.

Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

[JerryBaumchen 1,365]

Hi 434,

Quote

Who is your man or woman in office?

While 42% of the voters in your poll pick Trump, it would seem that many world leaders do not.

Re: 'Let’s hope Donald Trump wasn’t planning on taking his private jet to Europe anytime soon: The number of cities that would welcome him is shrinking by the day.'

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-world-leaders-paris-mayor_us_57345c80e4b077d4d6f22cef

Jerry Baumchen

[wmw999 2,452]

If Donald Trump is elected president, they should receive him with the dignity due the president of the US. Really. That they disagree with him personally wouldn't change that. He is due the respect of the position.

There is no law against protesting in most of those countries, just as there isn't a law against throwing shoes in Iraq. He is due the respect of the position; respect of the person is another matter.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[winsor 236]

wmw999

If Donald Trump is elected president, they should receive him with the dignity due the president of the US. Really. That they disagree with him personally wouldn't change that. He is due the respect of the position.

There is no law against protesting in most of those countries, just as there isn't a law against throwing shoes in Iraq. He is due the respect of the position; respect of the person is another matter.

Wendy P.

You salute the rank, not the man.

[normiss 801]

I fully agree, though it troubles me that some people changed that perspective when our current President was elected.

[TriGirl 319]

aphid

***I just think we'd be better off if we voted for those that we think would be the best president (snip)

And I am stunned that the 2015/16 evolution of presidential hopefuls represented the best that a nation of 350 million people can offer.

I think your country (and our world) would be much better off if y'all chose better candidates across the political spectrum.

If we had a different system, this may be possible. As it stands, in most states, voters must be registered as having chosen the party before they can vote in the primaries. I read in one news report Donald Trump had only received about 5 million votes (I know it will be more than that by today). Five out of 350 is not a huge number. As I understand it, those who subscribe officially to one party or the other are quite the minority.

Additionally, as has been mentioned before, the news organizations go after the sensational stories. Trump said today that he "won" all of the debates he's joined so far, and that he INSISTED that he get the middle lectern every time (if there were an even number of candidates, he "insisted" one be dropped so that only one could be in the center). As I recall, he preceded to monopolize all the time, without penalty by moderators, and therefore without giving the other candidates the opportunity to get their messages out. The next day, Trump's antics (because they were so odd for the setting) got all the coverage.

What other civilized society runs its selection process this way?

So yeah, we need a better system, where more people have their voices heard much earlier in the process.

We need a better system.

See the upside, and always wear your parachute! -- Christopher Titus

Shut Up & Jump!

[quade 4]

TriGirl

So yeah, we need a better system, where more people have their voices heard much earlier in the process.

We need a better system.

True, but as I've said a few times in various threads it's going to require an Amendment to the US Constitution since elections are left up to the individual states.

Maybe something like the election of Trump would show the country the error of its ways and how things need to work with a Federal level of uniformity, but holy smokes I think that would be a difficult thing to get passed and ratified.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rehmwa 2]

quade

True, but as I've said a few times in various threads it's going to require an Amendment to the US Constitution since elections are left up to the individual states.

right...because working within your own state, where you have more influence, and fixing it there isn't good enough. Heck, if even 10 states come up with 10 different better ways of doing it, a couple might even adopt the best one on their own.

Much better to have the feds ram one solution down the throats of 50 states

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[quade 4]

rehmwa

Much better to have the feds ram one solution down the throats of 50 states

In this case, I believe it could be. We wouldn't have a goofy mish-mash of ways with the inherent credibility issues like states with caucuses decided by (and I'm not making this up) the cut of a deck of cards. We could have a single, unified way of voting and not 50+ different ways with 50 different eligibility requirements and local fiefdoms attempting to restrict this or that population from voting with various ID laws or other nonsense.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[jcd11235 0]

rehmwa

right...because working within your own state, where you have more influence, and fixing it there isn't good enough. Heck, if even 10 states come up with 10 different better ways of doing it, a couple might even adopt the best one on their own.

Until we implement ranked voting, instant runoff voting, or a similar alternative that gives third party candidates a real chance at winning an election instead of just a symbolic place on the ballot, nothing changes. Explain how the states can independently accomplish that.

Quade's right.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!