Elections 2016 Presidential Election General Discussion v2

[Joe]

 

[Hans Gruber]

The democRat?

Exactly. He is covering for Obama. On the other hand he is complaining that the media has been ignoring the flooding and donations aren't near what they need to be. Obama should be bringing attention to the flood like Trump did.

 

[elmo_1968]

Exactly. He is covering for Obama. On the other hand he is complaining that the media has been ignoring the flooding and donations aren't near what they need to be. Obama should be bringing attention to the flood like Trump did.

I didn't realize Obama controlled the media and donations.

TS, no, I wouldn't vote for someone who engaged in political violence. But I wouldn't vote for Trump, either.

 

[panamaican]

Why did the FBI decline to prosecute?

I know that the premise of this hypo is to question the extent of Dem party loyalism but it seems so strange. We know of a murder but the FBI is ignoring it? I would think that would be extremely relevant information to any voter. I could see if you said that it couldn't be proven but was strongly suspected but this suggests that not only is it true but everyone knows and is just ignoring it?

Is she still the Democratic nominee? Why are they still supporting her?

 

[Jack V Savage]

Why did the FBI decline to prosecute?

I know that the premise of this hypo is to question the extent of Dem party loyalism but it seems so strange. We know of a murder but the FBI is ignoring it? I would think that would be extremely relevant information to any voter. I could see if you said that it couldn't be proven but was strongly suspected but this suggests that not only is it true but everyone knows and is just ignoring it?

Is she still the Democratic nominee? Why are they still supporting her?

If a potential candidate knew that they had that out there, they would never run for office--any office--again, as people know that anything bad they might have ever done in their lives will come out. Nutters don't appreciate just how far removed from actual reality their fantasies are because they lack the necessary baseline knowledge.

Look how much media attention is given to what amounts to someone leaving the door unlocked at work.

 

[Fawlty]

Not at all. This thread is bringing out a disturbing but important truth.

Correct. Trump is such an amazingly terrible candidate that even if his opponent stood in the middle of 5th avenue and shot somebody, they wouldn't lose voters. I do find that disturbing, but funny.

 

[Fawlty]

Kind of like what Obama has done with Louisiana?

I'm still mad at Hillary for what Alexander did to Tyre. Don't even get me started on King Hussein.

 

[Hans Gruber]

I didn't realize Obama controlled the media and donations.

TS, no, I wouldn't vote for someone who engaged in political violence. But I wouldn't vote for Trump, either.

The president bringing attention to the 100,000 people that requested assistance would bring about more media attention which would increase awareness and donations

 

[Hans Gruber]

As sick as it sounds, I would still vote for her. In the end for me it is more about the policies then it is the character of the person.

Her policies that align with Soros who wants to bring down the US and usher in a one world government (Soros's own words) Thanks for being honest.

 

[Philo-Publius]

the problem with this hypothetical is it is completely ridiculous. it is based on the characterization of propaganda from conservatives and republicans, not any real basis of fact. they even tried to say that she deliberately had the people in benghazi killed, that's how fucking psychotic the right has become.

the more interesting hypothetical would be to pose that to trump supporters, because they are the ones with unwavering fuckin loyalty regardless of what that man does. the fact you took what's clearly a characterization of trump people, and tried to turn it back onto hillary, is either an act of mental desperation, or you are just really bored. i dunno, but neither are very interesting since it's not rooted in much reality.

Oh, get over it dude. The sad fact is Hillary has plenty of blind supporters who wouldn't care if she had political opponents knocked off.

All hail Comrade Drumpf!

One thing I know for certain: I would be voting 3rd party if there were anything that surfaced that indicated Trump had someone knocked off.

Correct. Trump is such an amazingly terrible candidate that even if his opponent stood in the middle of 5th avenue and shot somebody, they wouldn't lose voters. I do find that disturbing, but funny.

It has absolutely nothing to do with Trump. You would have the option of voting Green or Libertarian instead.

 

[TheGreatA]

Put her ass in jail, revolt and demand a new election, if that were the case. This is what our ancestors did, it's not so freakin' hard.

 

[elmo_1968]

The president bringing attention to the 100,000 people that requested assistance would bring about more media attention which would increase awareness and donations

It is not POTUS's job to orchestrate the media. They are and should be independent of each other.

Are you forgetting that the media initially paid more attention to Katrina than W did? If POTUS has to push a story for the media to run it, how is this possible?

 

[elmo_1968]

Oh, get over it dude. The sad fact is Hillary has plenty of blind supporters who wouldn't care if she had political opponents knocked off.


One thing I know for certain: I would be voting 3rd party if there were anything that surfaced that indicated Trump had someone knocked off.



It has absolutely nothing to do with Trump. You would have the option of voting Green or Libertarian instead.

And by "plenty" you mean the one person ITT who said so?

 

[Hans Gruber]

It is not POTUS's job to orchestrate the media. They are and should be independent of each other.

Are you forgetting that the media initially paid more attention to Katrina than W did? If POTUS has to push a story for the media to run it, how is this possible?

How could anyone deny that a president would bring more attention to this situation?

 

[Philo-Publius]

And by "plenty" you mean the one person ITT who said so?

There were two, and countless others who did not respond (probably afraid to admit they would).

 

[irish_thug]

It is not POTUS's job to orchestrate the media. They are and should be independent of each other.

Then why does the president hold so many press conferences?

 

[elmo_1968]

Then why does the president hold so many press conferences?

To disseminate info about his positions and plans, mostly.

 

[elmo_1968]

How could anyone deny that a president would bring more attention to this situation?

POTUS can bring attention to some situations, but my point is that the media doesn't need this to do their job.

 

[elmo_1968]

There were two, and countless others who did not respond (probably afraid to admit they would).

Apologies if I failed to count someone who responded, but counting all the people who didn't respond is bogus.

 

[gigantalor]

I would venture to guess that a significant amount of people don't really give a shit about policies, etc. It's all about party, and "my side winning" the election. Like it's some kind of sporting event. Beyond the election, they either don't pay attention, or just ignore the bad stuff, and say "Oh, I think <my guy> is doing a great job as president".