sort by best latest
Scott Bateman says
CJ Kelly says
Excellent observations, CJ. I agree completely.
My son also says he won't vote for either one. But voting for someone with no chance of winning won't change anything, will it? Do you vote your conscience or a chance to put the lesser evil into office?
Kathleen Cochran says
LOL. That's an honest answer!
I assume you think that Clinton won the debate. :)
I think Clinton is going to win this election going away and she is going down in history, not as the first female president, but as one of the most productive.
Hillary may win the election, because that is determined by the Electoral College, and not the voters. But the number of people who have less attention span, less knowledge of economics, world events etc. than Trump far outweigh those who do.
Ken, I think our country's founders were wise in creating a government with the elements of both a republic and democracy. The republic part like the Electoral College keeps the uninformed voters in check.
Scott: "The Electoral College keeps the uninformed voters in check." Yes, it does, so do superdelegates. If Republicans had them, their nominee wouldn't be a reality TV star. I've often criticized the electoral college, if it saves us - thank God.
The Electoral College is a nod to states' rights. If it didn't exist, the most populated states would always control the White House. People get mad when the popular vote favors one candidate and the College favors another. But that's not all bad.
- See all 6 commentsHide extra comments
Dean Traylor says
That's a very interesting point about the Gish Gallop. Honestly, I thought he was just responding the way he usually does. It didn't occur to me that he was using a rhetorical tactic.
I suspect Clinton had the questions in advance. And it was obvious the moderator was biased toward Clinton by "fact checking" only Trump despite her obvious lies and keeping the debate on nonsense like birtherism vs the economy.
Tamara, what makes you think that Clinton had the questions in advance? Is it possible that her staff did a good job of anticipating the questions?
I thought Trump took a much worse beating at the hands of Cruz, Rubio and the moderators all teaming up on him in one debate. I thought that would end him... instead the votes went his way more than ever after that.
I remember one moderator being tough on Trump and got in a lot of trouble with his job as a result. Then again, Trump was very tough on some moderators, such as Megyn Kelly.
- See all 5 commentsHide extra comments
That's great feedback, Paula. Likewise, I'm willing to watch all three debates before I make a final decision. I'm leaning in one direction so far, but as a fellow independent I'm also prepared to change my mind.
Ken Burgess says
Trump; as for the foreign/military point, he won't be afraid to accept help and listen to advisors. I believe that is where Obama failed in that point. Plus, he is no politician, that's a great part about him. My opinion, Greg.
Ken, you make great points about Trump's inability to articulate like a politician and the fact that Washington is dominated by professional politicians. If only the GOP had come up with an articulate outsider who didn't have Trump's temperament...
My concern: If Trump is not taking to heart the advice he needs to get elected, what assurance do any of us have he will take to heart the good advice he must have in the White House?
Demas those are valid concerns... he wasn't well prepared for that debate IMO. He should have expected/handled a lot of the issues better. And he seemed too self centered, too focused on himself, not on what he could do or would do for America.
Demas, I think many people have the same concern. On the other hand, Trump has been known to say that his style is what got him this far, so he doesn't think he needs to change.
- See all 5 commentsHide extra comments
Junk....Don't be so vague. Tell us how you really feel! LOL. It's a shame that I must admit, you have a valid point. Tragic, isn't it? These 2 are what they've given us.
These two are what the people selected to run on both sides.
Greg.....I understand the "people" selected them, I said, "they've given us" in general....There were many R's when it began...but so few D's & I think we all knew she would be the liberal choice from the start.
Junkseller, I am as frustrated as anyone with the choices. But I feel I have a duty to make the best of two bad choices.
The problem isn't the choices. The problem is being surrounded by so many people who accept (or willingly support the choices). We are fricking doomed, so I don't really care. I wouldn't be able to sleep at night with my vote attached to either one.
Greg said "These two are what the people selected to run on both sides."
Well, to be fair, Clinton was chosen for the Dems before it ever began.
Junk....Wow....I just used those same words today when I spoke with my son about the election...
"I want to be able to sleep peacefully so I may need to refrain from voting at all!" I just find this a terrible situation.
Ken, that is a problem in my mind on the side of the dems. They put HRC in there because she is the one to continue the Obama era like a puppet.
I'd say the problem is both the choices and the people who made the choices. Propaganda is skyrocking in this country, and too many people believe the garbage they read or hear without question.
- See all 9 commentsHide extra comments