Jump to content
270soft Forum

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 06/07/2020 in all areas

  1. 4 points
    I don’t think that more moderators are required - @admin_270 is enough. At the end of the day, it’s just a by nature political forum and there’s of course going to be some political discussion. I’ll admit though that there might need to be more warnings for personal attacks, though. I can’t imagine it’s too appealing to new users.
  2. 4 points
    I thought this was interesting. Here's the top content providers: @mantis 15,036 (hasn't been active since 2011---9 years reigning champion at the least) @Patine 13,757 (active leader) @vcczar 12,724 (Counting this post. I might have the highest content per day among those on here as I haven't been on as long as Patine and some of the others on this list. ) @Actinguy 8,563 (huge drop off to #4, but he's rising fast with all the GMing he's doing) @HabsFan21 6,437 (inactive since 2014) @admin_270 5,879 @Reagan04 5,653 (Now he ponders how he wasted his youth. Just kidding.) @SaskGuy 5,603 (inactive since 2016) @admin_270 Whatever happened to the Leader Board? That concept seems interesting for a forum.
  3. 4 points
    If a girl "lets" me kiss her because I just go straight to her like a magnet and start kissing her without waiting? We've never met before, we're not in relationship, I've just gone up to this woman without even saying a word and started kissing her? Yes, actually -- it is much more likely that she is afraid of me than to think that she's happy about this. I don't think you are actually stupid, so I can only conclude that you are intentionally being stupid. Why? I am asking you what are the words that Donald Trump would have to be recorded saying, to convince you that he was guilty of sexual assault?
  4. 3 points
    This is kind of a backhanded way of saying @Actinguy and I are not reasonable people, and brushing under the carpet, and even denying, the large number of unreasonable posts and opinions you've made of late, and would not back down from, even when very rational arguments, and even facts were presented.
  5. 3 points
    Part 1 of my notes from The Hardest Job in the World: The American Presidency by John Dickerson that some of you might find interesting: vcczar @Reagan04 @Actinguy @Patine @Conservative Elector 2 @TheMiddlePolitical @WVProgressive @SilentLiberty @pilight @admin_270 @Hestia11 @Herbert Hoover @mlcorcoran @Leuser @upandaway @jvikings1 @Rodja @Edouard @jnewt @Nentomat @Kingthero @Sunnymentoaddict @RFK/JFKfan @Mr.Blood @Zenobiyl @Wiw @MBDemSoc @ThePotatoWalrus @Alxeu @Allyn @Cenzonico @CentristGuy @Ishan @billay @wolves @RI Democrat @lizarraba @lizphairphreak @TheLiberalKitten @MysteryKnight @avatarmushi @servo75 1 - Eisenhower believed the presidency shouldn't be concerned with the trivialities of politics. 2 - Eisenhower believed a president needed self-control to be effective. 3 - Trump is in rebellion against the presidency. Its traditions get in the way of the quick results he wants. 4 - The presidency is set up for failure. 5 - Monroe, after he left office, advised Congress to make the presidency more powerful to deal with emergencies, but Congress did nothing, fearing it would diminish their own power. 6 - T Roosevelt introduced the scientific method into government; however, Congress resisted Roosevelt's suggestions. 7 - Wilson wanted to greatly expand the powers of the presidency, but he opted to avoid fighting with Congress. 8 - Carter is the only president since Hoover who did not have an active military engagement. 9 - Obama's policy regarding ISIS was more effective when he took a hands-on approach, rather than his position of delegation beforehand. 10 - Obama and Bush II both started with delegating the War on Terror, but evolved on the job--both becoming very inquitive with intense questioning. They are both compaed with using the Eisenhower model of handling foreign policy within the executive branch. 11 - LBJ is credited with the shift towards US President as First Responder. Where Cleveland worried about paternalism, LBJ spoke in terms as government as a family. 12 - Federal disaster spending under Eisenhower was 6% of total disaster spending. By the time of Nixon, it was about 50%. 13 - FDR and LBJ are credited with the expectation that the president should have an emotional bond with the country. When FDR died, "No, I did not know President Roosevelt, but he knew me." 14 - The book argued that Trump might have found it personally offensive that he was being used to support a racist cause, such as when David Duke said he and his fellow White Supremacists were going to "fulfill the promises of Donald Trump." 15 - Trump's indifference at Charlottesville broke with custom, duty, and morality of the presidency. 16 - Trump has changed the presidency by speaking for himself. 17 - Trump is unmistakable when he is passionate about something; yet, he lapsed into vagueness regarding Charlottesville. 18 - The book mentions that one Trump strategy is "weaponized uncertainty." 19 - The book credits the 1830s as when the US citizenry by large wanted the government to bring relief. Van Buren's unwillingness to act cost him reelection. 20 - Speaker Tip O'Neill claimed that Reagan worked only 3 1/2 hours a day and didn't read his briefing papers. 21 - The partisan voting for Obamacare is shown as an example of new era of partisan politics, which will result in Congressional food fighting. 22 - Trump stepped up US partisanship by inviting only Republicans to the signing of the bipartisan USMCA update to NAFTA. 23 - The book mentions GHW Bush as the last president of the pre-partisan era. Each president thereafter has gone in a more absolutist direction. 24 - Newt Gingrich was aiming for the Speakership during the Reagan presidency. He set traps for Democratic Speakers and understood that media loves drama. By undermining professionalism, Gingrich was able to gain support, "When you get attention, you can educate." 25 - The book credits Reagan and Speaker O'Neill's agreement on Social Security in 1983 as the trigger for the rise of Gingrich and the end of one-party dominance in Congress. 26 - Pre-Gingrich, bipartisanship was the norm. Thereafter, leaders have had different philosophies. Kevin McCarthy had/has a policy of challenging the Democrats on every bill, even if the GOP is in the minority. Mitch McConnell said his main priority is to keep Democratic presidents as one-term presidents. Democrats will likely respond in kind. 27 - Before Jackson, presidents were expected to only execute policy, while Congress created policy. The Whigs were created primarily for this reason. So much so that Harrison did not utter a single word regarding policy on campaign. 28 - Obama exemplifies the president as interpreter of laws, even if the interpretation differs with the interpretation of Congress. This is a new norm. 29 - Trump exemplifies the dominance of the executive branch over the legislative branch. Trump knew he'd face no GOP opposition when he went around Congress to divert funds to the Border Wall or blocked Congressional money to Ukraine. McConnell frequently stated that he would wait for Pres. Trump before pushing ahead with legislation. 30 -- Trump remade Senate Republicans and the Republican Party. His former inter-party critics now risk their credibility to defend him. 31 -- Mitt Romney is the first US Senator ever to impeach a president of their own party. 32 -- Former Pres. Herbert Hoover once stated that partisan bloc voting, as is now common in 21st century US Congress, was something only Nazis would do in a Parliament. 33 -- In hyper-partisan eras with little bipartisanship, the fillibuster becomes much more likely of an obstacle. Trump has asked McConnell to get rid of it, but McConnell won't do so, knowing that it will be used against them as well in the future. 34 -- McConnell admitted the Obama was smart and funny, but thought Obama's school principal-like attitude towards members of Congress hurt negotiations with Congress more than they helped. On the other hand, Biden never made an attempt to tell GOP members they were wrong on anything, which made negotiations much more popular. 35 -- Obama is compared to JFK in his weakness as a negotiator with Congress. Biden is compared with LBJ in his strength as a negotiator with Congress. 36 -- Prior to Merrick Garlanding of Merrick Garland, the opposition leaders would often help an opposition president get a Supreme Court justice nominated, so long as the justice had integrity and experience. [Note: Whigs Merrick Garlanded several of John Tyler's nominees in the 1840s] 37 - Reagan picked James Baker, who had twice opposed Reagan, as his Chief of Staff, believing it was more important for a Chief of Staff to be competent and loyal, rather than a true believer. 38 - Reagan required experts because he went into office not knowing one missile system from another and couldn't explain the simplest procedures of the Federal Government; however, Reagan knew better than Carter that his success depended on his acceptance in Washington. 39 - Carter knew more than Reagan going into the presidency, but Reagan understood more than Carter did. 40 - Bill Clinton admitted that his disorganized early presidency was due, in part, to his staff having come mostly from Arkansas and had no experience with the Washington political culture. 41 - Lincoln explained his rationale for choosing rivals for his cabinet as "These were the very strongest men. I had no right to deprive the country of their services." 42 - Trump thought it was bad luck to hear about the transition team before winning the presidency. He told Chris Christie he didn't want to hear from him. If the transition ever came up in conversation Trump would "flip out." 43 - After Trump won the election, he immediately threw away the binders of work that Christie had compiled while leading the transition team on the advice of Kushner and Bannon. 44 - Carter saw his campaign team clashing with his governing team as these groups never worked together prior to his presidency. 45 - Trump lost 82% of his A-Team in the first three years of his presidency, an astonishing turn over rate for a president that claimed to have hired "the best" people. 46 - Both Carter and Trump had a policy of firing anyone that spoke critically of the administration, despite this, it never stopped a consistent flow of leaks from coming out of the White House. 47 - Both Nixon and Trump were anti-bureaucracy. Nixon believed 96% of the bureaucracy was out to get him. Trump and Nixon might differ in that Nixon believed there was nothing he could do about it. 48 - Obama was experimental in making government more efficient, mostly through social science; Trump tried to make government more efficient by making it easier for agencies to fire federal workers, but the courts blocked him. 49 -- Early in his presidency, Clinton would have late night cabinet meetings with little organization or purpose. People came in and out when they wanted and any topic could come up. Eventually, Clinton brought in more Washington insiders and he realized he needed to be more on top of things. 50 -- Clinton admits his biggest flaw early in his presidency was that he thought he could always find a way to work things out when he should have just stopped and moved on to something else of priority. 51 -- Carter made it very difficult for the cabinet to have access to him as opposed to Bush II who had early morning hours when the cabinet could come in whenever they wanted to. 52 - Trump's Chief of Staff Kelly wouldn't allow Nikki Haley to see Trump. She called Trump, who let her in. Kelly apparently became irate. 53 - Nixon's Chief of Staff, Haldeman, had a rigorous system for staff or information to get to Nixon in order to reduce wasting Nixon's time. Basically, everything that got to Nixon was vetted and edited by Haldeman to avoid wasting Nixon's time. 54 - Nixon had a hard time telling his cabinet members things they didn't want to hear and didn't like conflict. For instance, he agreed with George Romney's position on Housing even though it contradicted Nixon's policy. Nixon allowed Romney speak and agreed with him on all his points. After Romney left, he had Haldeman call Romney. Haldeman told Romney that they aren't going to use Romney's ideas on Housing and that Nixon doesn't want to have conflict or disagreement so it is better not to come into the office with conflicting ideas. 55 - James Baker and Robert Gates thought the ability to tell a president "no" to ideas that don't make sense is of the highest importance. A good president will be able to know that the staffer is trying to help them and not retaliate. 56 - Former advisor for Eisenhower, Nixon, and Reagan, George Schultz, suggested that Trump should allow his cabinet more power and autonomy until he learned the ropes of the Federal Government. 57 - Carter allowed his cabinet officers more power and autonomy, but this led to the cabinet officers building their own little fiefdoms and rarely working together harmoniously. 58 - Chief of Staff Kelly believed that Trump would be impeached if he hired yes-men to replace his original A-Team. Of Kelly, a former colleague said, "You'll never know the disasters he prevented." 59 - Like Trump, Truman and Nixon often had to be saved from themselves by loyal staffers who were courageous enough to say "no." 60 - The more Populist Conservatives cheered the insubordination of Douglas MacArthur since the Truman was seen as a liberal. When Truman fired MacArthur, they cried for Truman's impeachment, despite no obvious impeachable offense occurring. 61 - Carter marks the period in US history when voters have routinely sought outsiders as presidents. Since Carter, and not including reelected presidents, Bush I is the only insider president. 62 - 13% of Trump supporters had voted for Obama in 2012 and about 1/3 of the counties that voted for Obama twice voted for Trump. 63 - Trump has satisfied many by bringing a wrecking ball to Washington but he has failed to replace the regular order of things with a better alternative. 64 - The book claims Trump was considering pulling Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court, but that his lawyer McGahn purposely refused to answer his phone, giving the Senate the time to confirm Kavanaugh before Trump could pull him. 65 - As Chief of Staff for Ford, Dick Cheney fired most of the middle men and had departments report directly to him so as to streamline the executive process. Cheney suggested that in-coming president Carter do this, but Carter did the reverse. 66 -- Carter was so insulated from cabinet and staff that he pretty much attempt to handle all cabinet and staff himself. He was overburdened for much of his presidency. Ultimately, he realized this, but too little too late. 67 - Trump, like Carter, attempts to be the hub of the whole executive, rather than allowing a Chief of Staff as hub. However, while Carter would attempt to do things himself, Trump would assign the same task to multiple people as if not knowing that he had assigned the task already and without really knowing if the task was within the scope of the staffers area of expertise. Trump and Carter did not have a Chief of Staff in the usual sense of the word. 68 - Cleveland was the last president to answer his own front door. 69 - Bush II was not allowed to eat his preferred Blue Bell Ice Cream since it was believed that any Blue Bell going to the White House would be poisoned. 70 - Prior to Watergate, the media tended to hide anything a president wished to hide -- disability, affair, health issues, etc. Since Watergate, the media has thrived off drama and conflict with the presidency and Washington. 71 - The book states that the greatest presidents had the patience and capacity to allow situations to develop, using FDR and Lincoln as examples.
  6. 3 points
    What I'm curious is "anti-LGBT"? Would marriage rights be counted as something that an "anti-lgbt" person be for? Would job protection be accepted? Federally recognized protection for individuals that choose to change their genders on their ID; is that acceptable? Would someone "anti-lgbt" be ok with the legal defense known as 'gay panic'? You can claim there's a 'moral way to oppose lgbt agenda; but in reality it is nearly aiding the the bigots that want to keep the LGBT community from having rights. And this mindset reminds me 9f this passage from Dr. King's 'Letter from a Birmingham Jail': "Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection. I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and that when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress."
  7. 3 points
    I think something more true to its term would be "MAGA, because we failed the first time around"
  8. 3 points
    Well he has actually admitted he is losing. That's the genesis of this post. Lots of GOP strategisrs are really concerned about his state of mind and willingness to carry on. I've taken to calling him Depression Donnie for this.
  9. 3 points
    @vcczar @pilight @CPE @Actinguy @SilentLiberty @Conservative Elector 2 @Hestia11 A little factoid about Canadian politics that all of you might find amazing shocking - Canadian politicians in elected offices are not actually de facto immune to arrest, trial, conviction, and even incarceration (we haven't had capital punishment here since the mid-70's) while in office, and fair number have been so, including a whole Executive Council (basically, the Government) of a whole Province (the Devine Government in Saskatchewan in the mid '80's for a massive embezzlement scheme) and my own long-term MP, Peter Goldring (whom I never voted for, as he was Reform, then CA, then Conservative, and was a slum landlord owner, and someone I knew who had worked on his electoral campaign team said he was a sleazy man) for impaired driving. There are other incidents of such, as well - including several that involve sex crimes - involving a former Yukon Premier who had apparently sexually assaulted several First Nations women. Even the Prime Minister of Canada could not "shoot someone dead in public on Young Street," (a main artery, thoroughfare, and business centre in Toronto, Canada's largest city - and apparently now bigger than Chicago, but still smaller than LA) or "grab 'em by the *ahem*" like Donald Trump boasted about his ability to get away with freely. Not only is de facto immunity to criminal prosecution not the case, there is ABSOLUTELY NO official in Canada today who can grant pardons by their own discretion and power, and let those granted jump the long, grinding "soup line," the Canadian judicial system demands to qualify for a pardon, if one even qualifies. Wouldn't it be nice if the United States, with the motto, "And Justice for All," on it's Supreme Court building, or the United Kingdom, with a similar pompous, but equally vain, motto on the Old Bailey, or France, with high pretenses, in theory, on justice, lacked de facto untouchable elected political leaders - especially given all three of those nations have governments, and past governments, absolutely chalk full - just seething - with criminals, getting away with vile crimes, Scott free.
  10. 3 points
    Which president is the best president of your lifetime? Obama Why? He expanded protection for sexual, and gender minorities, he helped pass the Credit CARD Act, and though I'm no fan of some of the ACA, the ban denying coverage due to pre-existing conditions is something I'm all for. Which president is the worst president of your lifetime? Bush Jr. Why? Two wars, and he deregulated the economy, which led to the Great Recession, which led to the rise of right leaning populism seen in the Tea Party movement, which gave us Trump. Who do you think is the best president before you were born? FDR Why? From the FDIC Social Security, his New Deal programs continue to affect America, for the better, in my opinion. Who do you think is the worst president before you were born? Andrew Jackson Why? Indian Removal Act. Need I say more? Who is the most overrated president? Reagan Why? Voodoo Economics, Iran-Contra, Funding Third World Death Squads, Star Wars, the list goes on. Who is the most underrated president? LBJ Why? The Vietnam War was awful, but in my opinion, his Great Society overshadows it. Who is your favorite nominee that has ever lost a race for president? George McGovern Why? Who is your favorite candidate that has ever lose a race to be party nominee? Bernie Sanders Why? I can't deny the massive influence Bernie's 2016 run had on my politics, nor would I want to. What current politician do you hope runs in 2024 or 2028? Jeff Merkley Why? He reminds me of Bernie Sanders, in many ways, both stalwart progressives from deep blue states. Who is your favorite international politician of your lifetime? Why? Would Tony Benn count? He left electoral politics in the 90s but only died in 2014, technically putting him in my lifetime. If not him, then probably Jean-Luc Melenchon
  11. 3 points
    He's the goddamn President, calling a country a shithole is racist. He can't be *joking* as President when you're talking about foreign countries. Those are sovereign nations to be treated with respect. Just one example of him tearing down America's place in the world.
  12. 3 points
    This is great because we can show that we've read a post without having to actually respond with a typed comment.
  13. 3 points
    For some reason - it was turned off, probably because of an update along the way. Added Upvote, Thanks, Haha, and Confused reactions. First 3 give +1 to reputation.
  14. 2 points
  15. 2 points
    Man you nailed it and I was kinda hinting at that with my last post. Also I'll say I just watched Trumps Mt. Rushmore speech. Look I dont like the guy and wont vote for him but I think tonight might have been one of his best speeches. I havent looked at the polls of the whole statue thing or renaming the Washington Redskins. I will say the American left had a good damn point on things like criminal justice reform and police reform but they stepped on their dicks with the "defund police" thing. Now theres a small group that is going after Mt. Rushmore? They have taken something (George Floyd) and turned into something that is nothing about that. What I saw tonight was Trump finding his voice and doing what he does best fighting. That paired with the econurarging economic numbers might not be enough to get him re elected but say hes able to continue those two things stated above and covid settles down a bit we are in for a much closer race than what some are forecasting in this thread.
  16. 2 points
    This whole topic is rather absurd, I think, as is reflected in the near unanimity of the thread poll. First, Carville is entertaining, I'll give him that. But so blatantly partisan, one can't take anything he says with anything other than a few pounds of salt. All this talk about "Trump is desperately behind, he'd better drop out now" is, I think preposterous. Say what you want, like him or not, he's not one to quit. And to think that some Republicans will turn on him by Labor Day? First there's no indication of that happening beside rumor. McConnell and company would be better served paying attention to their OWN races. The Republican establishment base in Washington has been against Trump from Day 1, but this is not reflected in his nationwide GOP popularity, and the fact that only three very weak challengers have opposed him. Now let's get to the topic of approval rating. https://news.gallup.com/poll/311825/presidential-job-approval-related-reelection-historically.aspx The last two Presidents not to be re-elected, GHW Bush and Carter, had approval ratings of 37% and 34% respectively at this point during their campaigns. Trump is ranging from about 43% to 47% right now. Bush Jr. and Obama were at 49% and 46% respectively when they won huge re-elections. The worst performance for Trump right now is in the national polls, I'm seeing those range anywhere from -12% to -5%. Not good numbers to be sure. The national polls give some good idea of the trend, but ultimately they're worthless. The national polls did a decent job actually in 2016, but only very close to the election and they only predicted the popular vote. With the blue areas of the country going bluer, and the reddest areas staying about the same, it's certainly possible that as low as 40% popular vote could still mean victory. Also, this far out things are very tough. There are, the way I see it, three factors, assuming that all these polling companies are not playing tricks with the numbers after the fact, or fudging the numbers. Let's assume that's all on the up and up. Let's also assume that the questions are even and not leading in one way or the other. Lesser chance of that but we'll assume that's okay too. 1. Undersampling of Republicans and/or Republican voters refusing to participate. I don't think this is severe, but let's say 1-2% effect. 2. Polling of registered, rather than likely voters. Doesn't seem like a big deal off-hand, but there have been major differences. It's impossible to put a number on this, but polls in elections past have tended to differ by a few percentage points. 3. The biggest factor is Republicans either not responding or, having the fear of social stigma, lying to the pollster. This can be a factor mostly on phone polls but possibly on automated polls. I've actually done the math on this. And some of this is arbitrary, but if we suppose that of every 10 people who are likely or leaning toward Trump, 9 of 10 are honest with the pollster, i.e. 1 out of 10 Trump voters say Biden or undecided. That alone is a potential 4% swing. If it's fewer than 9/10 that can swing things 6% or more. When you combine all this with the traditional 2-3% margin of error, you get a range of 7-9%. Therefore, as far as I'm concerned -4% is statistically a tie. I think Trump supporters shouldn't lose any sleep over polls within -5%. -6% to -8% is an area of concern. But until we see a particular poll where Trump is consistently behind 8% or more (possibly a cutoff of 5 to 6% after the conventions), I think there's no cause for alarm. Being consistently behind by more than 8% would and should spell worry for his campaign. But we're nowhere close to that, and his approval rating, after hitting 40% at the height of the Covid crisis, is now back to where his typical Presidency has lain, that 45-49% mark. Even approval rating doesn't mean everything. Obama and Bush Jr. two people who I did NOT want to see re-elected at that time, had negative approval ratings (mid to upper 40s). But I learned the hard way during both seasons that even more importantly than approval is, "Okay, so would the other guy do better?" I think Americans were fed up with Obama in 2012 but they didn't see Romney as relatable or as a viable alternative. And as has already been discussed in this thread, Romney whatever you think of his recent politics, ran almost as bad a campaign in 2012 as Hillary in 2016. It would have been tough beating an incumbent Obama, but the election was in his grasp after that first debate and he took his foot off the gas pedal. Even more pronounced was 2004. Americans looked at Kerry and didn't trust him to lead us through the war on terror as much as they did Bush. So this really is obviously going to come down to the next few months. The economy is getting back to the level where Trump enjoyed much higher poll numbers earlier in the year. He has to make the case that he's leading us through the Covid crisis, and with an economy like we have (yes it's been dampened by Covid but seems to be rebounding, in spite of the efforts of blue state governors), and at the same time put forth a bold vision for a second term and really make the case why his is better than Biden. It's been my experience that Americans will not vote someone out of office unless they believe the other guy can do a better job. At some point, Biden is going to have to make that case (which will require him to string coherent sentences together). If the economy falters and if Biden can sound articulate and leader-like, it will be very tough for Trump in November. Bottom line: Trump supporters and campaign staff have a right to be concerned with the latest numbers. It won't be the cakewalk we thought we may have had pre-covid. But a) we're a far way off still, lots of things can still happen, b) the election hasn't officially started yet and the big guns haven't yet come out, c) the polls are notoriously unreliable especially this far out, and d) the problems with polling methodology and silent majority I outlined earlier. But back to the original point of the thread: Are things so bad right now that Trump is just going to give up the race and the GOP base will turn on him? Not even close! But the GOP base turned on him from the very beginning anyway so what else is new? He has the overwhelming support of primary voters, and there have been no serious challengers to the nomination, unlike Ford in 1976 and Carter in 1980, both of whom lost, also Buchanan in 1992 was a minor factor. There is no serious competition within the party and the voting base is still with him. So RINO McConnell and Romney can go screw themselves. As for Carville, I suggest he keep dragging that dollar bill through the trailer park, maybe he might get some action.
  17. 2 points
    I will make this one clear for you. This "Canadian political agnosticism on Trump," you hypothesize from @admin_270's intimations has not been at all my experience. Donald Trump has brought out more sharp and clearly defined opinions and solid stances in Canadians than any other U.S. President from across the 49th in my lifetime.
  18. 2 points
    Or maybe @Actinguy @vcczar and I just don't drink copious amounts of the "Orange Kool-Aid."
  19. 2 points
    With an ego that demands he be treated like a king. Like...I don’t know why you keep pretending he’s some benevolent guy doing this out of the goodness of his heart. You are wasting your time defending a monster, and it reflects poorly on you as a person.
  20. 2 points
    Trump gave up much more to run for President than Biden did.
  21. 2 points
    Same as every single day, multiple times per day, since at least 2016. ;c) But we also have: A global pandemic that Trump has completely mismanaged. A struggling economy that Trump has completely mismanaged. A reckoning on matters of race that Trump has completely mismanaged. And those are all just in the past few months, with countless other failures since he was elected. Wasnt he supposed to “hire the best people”? A bunch went to jail for crimes he ordered them to commit, the rest have turned against him. His incompetence is undeniable. I mean, yes, “you” will deny it. But in 2016, there was an attitude that: A) Trump can’t win, so it doesn’t actually matter who you vote for or even if you bother voting. That’s been disproven. B ) If he is elected, Trump will become Presidential and start making more of an effort. That’s been disproven as well.
  22. 2 points
    Uninspiring, sure. But not disliked - and that will be the difference.
  23. 2 points
    Celebrities in politics is a bad idea all around. It doesn't even matter what they believe. I feel the way most of them live, and the limited and filtered way they interact with the world, makes them worse choices than some opinionated "nobody," with bright ideas off the street, to be honest.
  24. 2 points
    But of course, THIS guy's no hero.
  25. 2 points
    I’ve been absolutely convinced that “this is the thing that ends Trump” 8,000 times in the past 4 years. I would have bet my house if I’d found anyone stupid enough to take the bet...and I would have lost every time. I’ll believe he’s losing when he’s actually left the White House. Until then, I’m going to keep fighting like we’re the underdog — because, somehow, we probably still are.
  26. 2 points
    Very true about universities (and I'd argue the entire education sector). Free speech, free thought, due process, etc. are dying in education (and have been for some time).
  27. 2 points
    Plus he has the anti-Trump card. Say what you want about Trump's followers having a cultish mentality, but the reverse (the anti-Trumpers) is just as true.
  28. 2 points
    Agreed but none of this excuses Russian actions which is the intent of the original post.
  29. 2 points
    We never should have gone in to Afghanistan. Unfortunately, Bush and Obama preferred to stay and fight for nothing rather than admit the pointlessness of it. Easy to do when it's somebody else's family doing the actual fighting.
  30. 2 points
    No, in fact I'm saying quite the opposite. It's a "marriage of convenience." The whole point is that they're not endorsing these people, they're only going to them because they'll say bad things about Trump. As for your second paragraph, yes I think you're right about that, in fact it has happened recently. In fact, I'm glad you brought it up. Alan Dershowitz comes to mind and is the perfect counter-example. He came in to defend Trump during the impeachment hearings even though he disagrees with almost all of Trump's policies. He was brave enough to stand up and say, "I may not like the President's policies but fair is fair." And the left-wing media EXCORIATED him for it. He's a liberal Democrat himself but crossed party lines (at least on the issue of impeachment) when he realized what the Democrats were trying to do was a legal sham. Unfortunately people like Dersh are a dying breed. Personally I disagree with his politics but I respect him for coming forward. Sadly there are also folks out there who think that someone must be, as was so eloquently put by another forum member, "drinking the Orange kool aid" if they're not bashing the President every 10 minutes. As in, you say ONE positive thing about the President and be forever branded a hateful, racist "Trumptard." The press doesn't see him (Dershowitz) as a principled person who may disagree with the President but on that one issue looks to the Constitution and tries to be fair. They see him as a turncoat. So what's why I said he's a counterexample - someone who IS on the left's side but they have no problem throwing him to the wolves and declaring him persona non grata the moment he has the nerve to not call Trump a white supremacist Nazi. There's no in-between for that type. But with Dershowitz, Fox News and other stations had him in before the impeachment, too. And he never attacked any Democrats (or Republicans) personally, he merely critiqued their impeachment process. It's not like he wrote a book called, "Bad Stuff About Obama" and overnight the Breitbarts and OANs came breathlessly to him for interviews. He's been consistent the entire time. But the mainstream media's policy seems to be, "If you say nice things about Trump you're bad, if you bash him you're good" regardless of whatever other political or personal inclinations you have. And that's not the job of journalists. That is why they earn the moniker "fake news," because they seem to favor or disfavor guests (or at least fine-tune the toughness of their questions) based on how pro or anti-Trump they are, an even a staunch liberal will get thrown under the bus in an instant if they go against that pre-defined paradigm.
  31. 2 points
    Trump would be insane to drop out now, he has nothing to gain by doing so. For better or worse, he will be the Republican candidate for the 2020 United States Presidential election. I cannot even imagine how the convention would proceed if he theoretically announces that he is dropping out. Thinking back to 2016 even, I recall him booking a much smaller venue than the Romney campaign in case he did in fact lose that election. I think he mentioned not wanting to look as bad as Romney did in 2012 (The Romney campaign apparently had a whole celebration planned with fireworks bought in advance lol). There is still a lot of time until November 3rd, and not many expected his victory in 2016 either. Best option for him would be to hold his cards and wait; Biden has been hiding away from the spotlight for a while, but eventually he will have to say something. Whether it be in the debates, campaign speeches, etc. the Trump campaign team is no doubt waiting for an opportunity to go on the offensive after playing defense for a while now.
  32. 2 points
    Unfortunately, this is the vast majority of most "news" lately. It is somewhat sad that most US-based journalism relies more on sensationalism than on accuracy. On the plus side, I have found myself doing more research and drawing my own conclusions regarding headline news over the past several years. Hopefully there are others out there doing the same.
  33. 2 points
    @vcczar We did it! Bunker baby went on a full on rampage temper tantrum about the Lincoln Project last night on twitter shortly after an LP ad played on, you guessed it, Fox News. Trump literally fell right into the trap of the LP founder whose goal was to target them on Fox News at night so Trump would see them (particularly about how his weakness is making America weaker) and start crying on his favorite platform. Almost too easy.
  34. 2 points
    Ha, wow! I remember when you messaged some of us in a PM saying you had like a dozen various ideas for games, and I immediately seized on this one (the version of it at the time) and demanded you make it immediately because I wanted to play. Haha.
  35. 2 points
    Two. It’s greater than two states. Fewer people live in DC than live in Alaska. I used to work in DC. It is largely a commuter city. People live in Maryland (as I did) or Virginia and commute into DC. Yes, they of course have a local population as well, but it’s just a city with some fancy buildings and statues in it. It is not a state. DC has a total surface of 68 square miles, including water. By comparison, our smallest state Rhode Island has a surface of 1,212 square miles.
  36. 2 points
    They made a fantastic ad about the Confederate Flag but this one, just released yesterday, has to be my favorite: I also really like Meidas touch ads, this one was brutal:
  37. 2 points
    What Trump said on the Access Hollywood tape was obviously a crude joke not intended for public consumption. I wouldn't take it as evidence of anything but Trump being crass and boorish. I'd guess every president has said similarly awful things in private.
  38. 2 points
    Wait for consent. You know that. Come on. If he's attracted to them "like a magnet" and "doesn't even wait" before he "just starts kissing them", he's talking about kissing women without their consent. Seriously, man. You seem like a person who understands words, how did we get here? Key phrase absolutely. He doesn't say they WANT you to do it. He says they LET you do it. That's not consent. That's being afraid -- how do they stop a large man with billions of dollars and his own security team? How do they stop him if he doesn't wait? They can't fend him off, he's 300 pounds. If they accuse him later, they'll be dismissed by people like you. They LET him do it because they've been given no choice in the matter. That is assault. Actually, the key word is "anything." Or maybe "Pussy." Hell, maybe the key word is "Grab." Does grab sound like consent? You're being willfully ignorant as to the actual meaning of the words Donald Trump is using. What would he have to say for you to believe him?
  39. 2 points
    Great. Now be consistent with Biden, and call on him to withdraw as the party's nominee.
  40. 2 points
    1. How am I going to answer this? I was born late 1990s so I couldn't really offer an opinion on anyone. Clinton was technically president while I was alive but I do not remember him (obviously.) I would put forward Clinton in terms of economic growth but he was also a complete creep, thrived more on charismatic and a surging internet bubble than anything so I'll say Obama just because that is probably the best president I remember. I do not like him but he is the best in my lifetime that impacted anything I lived through. 2. George Bush and I will scream that from the roof tops until the day I die. I do not care that Donald Trump has gaffs every week or that he has a divisive rhetoric. I am married to a POC, she is directly impacted by his admin, but you know what admin my family and her family were more impacted by? George Bush invading Afghanistan to capture Osama Bin Laden, using 9/11 to further his 10x worse and more divisive neocon warhawk agenda/rhetoric then using 9/11 to justify invading Iraq for the sole purpose of Saddam playing hardball with other Arab nations and the U.S having enough. My father fought in Iraq, he has PTSD. Her uncle fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, he lost a leg to an IED. There are over a million people disenfranchised by this war, over 300k innocents dead and at home domestically, he pushed his own tax cuts for the rich, immigration reforms that did put children in cages and started the mess we're in right now and destroyed schools. Yeah I'm sorry but Donald Trump is a lame duck compared to this president. 3. FDR. I feel like the way he shifted politics of the era towards the left and on that path until Reagan arrived is legendary and it's sad his legacy has partly been erased. I cannot say much on FDR that hasn't already been said in this thread, I hate internment camps but I can say he is one of the few presidents that made a difference that will be forever lasting. 4. Probably James Buchanan. 5. Most definitely Reagan. Put the USA on a neoliberal slant it will never escape from until there is another left wing revolution (probably soon but yeah), toppled many left wing leaders in the third world and allowed literal dictators take over with the only difference is that they sold stuff to the US and opposed the Soviet Union. He has impacted more people than any US president aside from obviously Washington and I am going to be honest. 6. Lol this is going to be such a weird answer but Nixon. Why? Well it's not like he had his own blaring issues, he was corrupt, horrible with power and felt quite aimless from what I could see but he is always on the list of worst presidents when I feel like that is solely because of Watergate, as a president he very much encompassed the times when the GOP had to play in the Democrat's playing field, as opposed to how it is today. He wanted single-payer healthcare (funnily enough vetoed by Democrats), he opened China to the rest of the world which is the sole reason I am typing this paragraph right here on a computer with parts made in China, the ABMT, established USPS, the EPA, he cared a lot about the environment. He did a lot of bad things too, we all know what he did, war on drugs, trying to veto ending Vietnam, secret carpetbombing, watergate, etc etc but he gets a lot of lack for corruption that is so readily out there in Washington, we just don't read about it. That's the difference with Nixon, we know. 7. Al Gore probably I care a lot about the environment. 8. Jesse Jackson 9. 2024, Illhan, 2028, if Charles Booker does well, him. 10. Tony Benn.
  41. 2 points
    Which president is the best president of your lifetime? Why? Barrack Obama, Character, Personality, Leadership Which president is the worst president of your lifetime? Why? Donald Trump, To many ways to write in a sentence. Who do you think is the best president before you were born? Why? JFK-He is one of the most inspirational political figures to me. Who do you think is the worst president before you were born? Why? I think James Buchanan, however also Andrew Jackson- for the fact he committed genocide with the Indian removal act. Who is the most overrated president? Why? Abraham Lincoln, he gets way to much credit, and is one of the main figures of the "white savior complex", he wasn't an abolitionist, Also Ronald Reagan, for obvious reasons (Though I think Lincoln is more universally overrated, because Reagan isn't liked at all in Democratic circles, compared to maybe Lincoln) Also for Lincoln, he is overrated in the fact that people think he championed to end slavery, and was a savior and abolitionist himself. Who is the most underrated president? Why? Ulysses S. Grant, Though he had a corrupt admin., he was an amazing historical figure, an actual abolitionist, fought for reconstruction, etc. Also LBJ, even though his failure in the Vietnam war. Who is your favorite nominee that has ever lost a race for president? Why? Henry Clay, the man, the myth, the legend. Who is your favorite candidate that has ever lose a race to be party nominee? Why? Bernie Sanders, of course. What current politician do you hope runs in 2024 or 2028? Why? Alexandria-Ocasio Cortez, Just everything from Bernie, and more. Who is your favorite international politician of your lifetime? Why? Jacinda Ardern- I seriously think if she was our president, it would be an absolute perfect combination, and she is somebody we need right now. @vcczar
  42. 2 points
    This!! My country is directly affected by Reagan. He supported a Dictator in my country, which led to many deaths and Human Rights Abuses. Reagan's Support also meant more Corruption in my country. And arguably, his support of the Dictatorship had opposite effects. Communist Party members and New People's Army increased in numbers. Due to this, we still have a strong Communist insurgency. FUCK REAGAN. FUCK CONSERVATIVES.
  43. 2 points
    A vast Majority of Mainlanders are supporters of the CCP. A vast Majority believe that my Countrymen are inferior, are less than them. And a vast majority of them believe that OUR territory is theirs. You wouldn't understand since your country isn't being invaded by LITERAL outsiders. Not Paying taxes, exploiting our Women, Receiving Special Treatment from our President and acting like they own the place. Chinese Media calling the Philippines a province of China is not just a slip of the tounge. By all intents and purposes, we are a Chinese Province. And I fucking despise both the Government and the Vast Majority of People who agree with that.
  44. 2 points
    Barack Obama. There is a plenty to like and plenty to dislike about Obama but I was born in 1998 so I don't have much to go by. When you compare not only the policies, but the integrity and charisma that Obama brought to the office, there's no doubt he is the best. Trump. Both Bush and Trump were awful, and it's really hard to pick, but ultimately the temperament and corruption in Trump and his administration is just a disgrace to the country in ways that beat out Bush. FDR. I've always admired FDR ever since I was in elementary school, learning about all the different policies he had and how many of them have had an everlasting effect and are still in place today. Andrew Jackson. I don't think much needs to be said on what makes him such a terrible President. Ronald Reagan. I guess it will really depend on who you talk to and what you read, but he is definitely usually on the list of most popular Presidents with a very high approval rating. I don't find that to be the case. Reaganomics was a failure. Richard Nixon. Believe it or not. Obviously, watergate was a disaster and there were a lot of other bad things he did too. But I feel that many of his accomplishments go underappreciated. Created the EPA, Clean Air Act, Endangered Species Act, expanded social security and medicare, and was an advocate for universal healthcare. All very important things that are still around and crucial today. Not sure about this, I guess maybe McGovern. His strong opposition to the Vietnam war is admirable for sure. Bernie Sanders. I'll be honest, aside from recent elections I don't know much about candidates who ran for the nomination and didn't get it, but Bernie is the reason I got interested in politics. Back in 2015 when I first heard his name he was just some random old guy running for president, so I read up on his policies and what he would fight for, and was hooked ever since. AOC will make a great President someday. Not in 2024 but maybe 2028. I'd like to see her primary Schumer in 2022 and if successful, could set up a run for President in 2028. In 2024 assuming Biden doesn't win or doesn't run for re-election, Julian Castro, KIrsten Gillibrand, and Jeff Merkley are some people I would like to see run. Any of them would make a good president. I'll be honest that I am not familiar with a whole lot of international politicians that I like, but I have read a lot of great things about the current New Zealand prime minister, so I'll go with her.
  45. 2 points
    Thanks, the situation there affects a large portion of the surrounding area in primarily two ways : 1.) The country is major transshipment point for guns, drugs, human trafficking victims and who knows what else. Anything trafficked through the south-eastern seaboard of the United States has probably passed through Haiti at some point. 2.) The refugee crisis got 10x worse after the earthquake a decade or so ago; there has always been a trend of mass migration out of the country due to the circumstances there, but the earthquake basically poured gasoline on top of that fire. Most end up going to South Florida or the Bahamas without proper authorization/documentation. Cuba is the last place on earth you would want to try to live in illegally (maybe second last to North Korea), the Jamaicans are not really fond of them to put it lightly, and the Dominican Republic is outright hostile. Crossing the border into the DR, for most of them, is signing up for serious problems. There is a certain element of "Balkanization" to Caribbean politics at times, you would have to live in the region for a bit to understand the complexities of it. Point is, the refugees end up placing a large strain on the healthcare and educational systems of the nations where they go to stay. In the Bahamas particularly, the language barrier (Haitian Creole is basically broken French, while the official language of the Bahamas is English (French vs. English colony)), and the sheer number that arrive are particularly pressing problems. The nation as a whole is basically 400-450k people, and public financing just cannot support the multitude that come. Add on top of that the fact that citizenship is derived from blood in the Bahamas (ie. a Bahamian father, not birth, determines whether one is a citizen), many end up being born in the country with no legal rights to stay. Legally they are Haitian citizens by way of parenthood, unless they can claim Bahamian citizenship through a Bahamian parent, and it is a very thorny political issue in the country to discuss repatriating them. The United States certainly has a fair share of problems no doubt, but to describe it as a "failed state" would be pure hyperbole in my opinion. Some crummy aspects of a political system, no doubt, but a "failed state" absolutely not. In my mind, there are three basic factors in determining whether a nation is a "failed state" or not : 1.) Can it provide access to basic utilities, ie. water, electricity, etc. for its residents 2.) Can it secure its territory, domestically and internationally 3.) Is the rule of law effective, ie. can any government issued decrees or legislation effectively be implemented. In simple terms, does the government have the ability to enforce what it proclaims as law. That is my personal list, just my thoughts on observing international matters. The US political system is certainly crummy at time, but it certainly could be worse. The biggest reason why we see the same old recycled candidates so often is due to the fact that you need a fortune to run a presidential campaign. In order to run for President in the United States, you basically have two options when it comes to financing : A.) Sell yourself to special interest and lobbying groups in exchange for campaign funds. B.) Have the f'you kind of money where you can say whatever you want (Think candidates like Ross Perot, or even President Trump himself to a degree) The sheer cost of running a US presidential campaign basically precludes most average citizens from ever hoping to attain the office without selling them and their beliefs out, even before you take into account other issues associated with running for such high an office. Even to run a campaign for a seat in a state legislative body is by no means a cheap affair, and the costs only get higher as you progress upwards in terms of power and authority. I personally do not publicly comment much on the state of American politics due to not having citizenship over there myself, it would be very disrespectful to do so in my opinion at least. If I do, I try to stay as neutral as possible (if that is possible). I do understand the apathy associated with the political system though, it can seem disheartening seeing the same old recycled candidates and policies over and over. One thing certainly is common throughout American political history, many young politicians go in with the hope of changing or "fixing" the system, I have yet to see one ever accomplish their goal. I had a friend use an analogy that getting involved with politics is like stepping into a spider's web, with many just waiting to suck the blood out of you lol.
  46. 2 points
    “President Dodson has seen more cactus than poors” the quirky yet funny quotes continue, I also love that you probably picked the weirdest picture of Rachel Maddow in the entire internet to use,
  47. 2 points
    I know many personally, I have had family who have sponsored their emigration away from their country. Rest assured that I know exactly how passionate they are with regards to their national pride. However, one can love their nation and be critical of it and it's issues at the same time; those two things are not mutually exclusive. I do not know where you may live in the USA, but if you ever take a trip to South Florida (specifically Miami or Ft. Lauderdale), ask around and see how many fled their country due to Papa Doc or any of the other brutal despots who have ruled that part of the island. Trust me, I truly pity their situation as no one ever decides where they are born in life, but there is no denying that they face very critical issues in that part of the world. The truly sad part is that only the Haitian people can ever change their destiny, and many of those that have the skills and ability to effect change in their country all choose to emigrate if they can. I truly do not have an ideal solution to fix the problems that Haiti faces, but I do know that they will not be solved overnight. Regards, CPE (Caribbean Political Enthusiast)
  48. 2 points
    There's such a consistent pattern of quasi-racist statements or actions that it's hard to create a top 5, but here are some I'm thinking of at the moment, off the top of my head: The earliest racist or racist-leaning episode regarding Trump was his reactions to the Central Park Five. He was pushing for their execution, assuming they were guilty without waiting for the whole story. This sort of represents less publicized episodes in which he shows a double-standard regarding crime and actions regard black people vs white people. This isn't unique to Trump, this is sort of just ingrained in many Americans and Trump just says what he thinks. I doubt he would have pushed so eargerly for execution if the Central Park Five were white. His desire to pull the US completely out of Africa is considered by some based off a ingrained racism. He once compared some of the African countries to a "filthy toilet." His leadership in the birther movement--the attempt to orchestrate a narrative that Obama was foreign born--is often considered racist. His nativist immigration policies are often considered racist. Actually, prior to the Central Park Five, he was caught in a bunch of lawsuits and real estate controversies, most famously, he apparently told his employees not to lease to blacks. At some point Trump said something like, "You don't want to live with them either." To one of his legal opponents. His refusal to condemn White Supremacy during Charlottesville and Black Lives Matter protests, except in the situations in which his arm is twisted, "I disavow" (not a terrible condemnation of white supremacy) can be considered racist. Taking the middle ground on a white supremacy vs protestor matchup is at least quasi-racist. There's a way to condemn some on both sides, but you have to make sure the focal point is condemning racism if you don't want to be considered not a racist. There have been rumors of Trump treating blacks differently on the Apprentice. I never saw but two episodes, so I don't know if this is true. His weak response to Hurricane Maria and treatment of Puerto Rican officials critical of the weak response, couple with his stronger response to Hurricanes that hit the mainland, can be considered racist as well. His opening campaign statement, which basically pigeon holed all undocumented immigrants as murderers and rapists, is certainly racist. One could consider Trump's attacks on Kaepernick and black player's kneeling in protest as being racist. I'm sure if Tom Brady kneeled at the anthem as a sort of national protest to something Trump likely wouldn't have said much and possibly would have supported it. However, I think the strongest evidence that Trump might be racist must come from the demographic that is a higher authority on this than you, me, or Trump himself: Black Americans. Apparently, 83% of blacks believe Trump is racist. That probably means he is more likely racist--at least to blacks--than not since slightly more than 8 out of 10 blacks think he's racist. https://www.axios.com/donald-trump-african-american-voters-poll-racist-59f7adcf-776e-4ef1-bfd6-ff3b04ded233.html Considering his history, it is not unreasonable for people to assume his "shit hole" country comment might be racist. What degree of racist is he? Who knows. It might just be typical 74-year-old rich while male racism and Trump maybe just happens to have lost whatever editing mechanism he may have had in his youth. He isn't quite David Duke level. However, he's probably the most racist president towards blacks in the last 100 years. Woodrow Wilson was much more racist than Trump, but Harding-Obama have at least been discreet in whatever sublimal racism they might have had. Nixon might come closest to Trump, but his comments were always in private, and often not as bad as his aides. There's a recording of Nixon talking about "negro spies," noting that there are very few of them. One of his aides makes a racist comment about their intelligence. Nixon doesn't agree with it, but he also doesn't contradict him. However, he seemed at least unwilling to engage on that topic. Imagine how much better Trump would be doing in the polls throughout his presidency if he hadn't this history and didn't express these thoughts. And again, I don't think Trump is unique. I think he's rather typical of man old rich white men. The difference is that Trump is consisently recorded as a public figure, and it doesn't help that he has no internal editing mechanism. A good debater against Trump should learn how to provoke him into saying terrible things. It wouldn't be that hard. Anyway, now I'm rambling. I'll leave it at what black Americans think. 83% say Trump is racist; Trump might be a racist. If Trump is a racist, his comments about shit hole countries might be racist.
  49. 1 point
    The original trilogy is way better than the prequel trilogy and sequel trilogy. It's not even close. The prequel trilogy only has one good movie--the third one. The sequel trilogy is better than the prequel trilogy, but none of their movies are as good as the 3rd episode of the prequels or any of the original trilogy movies. Nevertheless, I enjoyed every movie, and I'm glad they were made.
  50. 1 point
    Which president is the best president of your lifetime? Why? A tie between George W Bush and Barack Obama. Both inherited major disasters that were caused mostly by their predecessors, and both rose to the occasion. Bush was dead wrong on some of his domestic policies, especially trying to prevent gay marriage -- and Obama was dead wrong on some of his foreign policies, especially doing absolutely nothing about Syria (but he does get a lot of bonus points for getting Bin Laden). Give me Obama's domestic efforts with W Bush's foreign policy, and that might be as close to ideal a President as I could find. Which president is the worst president of your lifetime? Why? Donald Trump. Are you kidding me? It's not even close. He's not even TRYING to be the President of the United States. The only good thing about Donald Trump is that his inherently evil nature is matched only by his incompetence. Who do you think is the best president before you were born? Why? I'm a huge fan of Harry Truman. "The Buck Stops Here" wasn't just a motto -- it's who he actually was. He demonstrated actual leadership, which includes modest accountability, every step of the way. Who do you think is the worst president before you were born? Why? Donald Trump is the worst ever, but you said "before I was born." I used to say Nixon, but at least Nixon possessed enough self-shame to resign rather than be evicted. Trump lacks that. Probably a combination of James Buchanan (who did absolutely nothing despite the Civil War clearly about to happen) and Herbert Hoover (who did absolutely nothing despite the Great Depression clearly about to happen). Who is the most overrated president? Why? Donald Trump, because some people have him rated higher than the worst President ever. Who is the most underrated president? Why? George W. Bush. People judge him on the basis of "In a world in which 9/11 was the last real large-scale terrorist attack on our nation, he went way overboard." But that world wasn't guaranteed on September 12th. There hasn't been a real large-scale terrorist attack BECAUSE of George W Bush. Who is your favorite nominee that has ever lost a race for president? Why? I'll say Hillary Clinton because she was absolutely qualified for the job, unlike Trump, and also because other than 2016, every nominee that I ever backed went on to win. Who is your favorite candidate that has ever lose a race to be party nominee? Why? Pete Buttigieg was my favorite by far -- he had that Harry Truman leadership quality. He held himself accountable, and expected others to as well. I'll never forget his response when he was asked about police brutality under his watch as Mayor, during one of the Presidential debates. His response was "It happened because I failed." He continued on with eloquence, to explain what he had tried and why it had failed and what he learned from that. But it was those words: "It happened because I failed" that stood out to me. Over the course of the rest of that entire debate...and every debate before it and every debate after it...nobody ever admitted to having ever failed. Even though they all surely had at one point in their life or another. Only Pete Buttigieg could admit a mistake and learn something from it. What current politician do you hope runs in 2024 or 2028? Why? Pete Buttigieg, largely for the reasons I mentioned above. I also still have respect for JEB! Bush, but I think it's extraordinarily unlikely that we ever see him again. Who is your favorite international politician of your lifetime? Why? Honestly, I don't know enough to say. The one that springs to mind is Tony Blair for standing up and being our ally when we needed one most, even though he took a lot of flack for it at home.
×
×
  • Create New...