Find me a Bob Dole.....and make it so Congress isn't a bunch of right wingers, please.....

 

though maybe Clinton really is just Bob Dole in many ways. Maybe I've moved a bit left in the last 20 years. 

 

I wish there was a candidate who was slightly more moderate than Sanders and less distasteful than Hillary. I like Bernie - I like him a lot - but mostly as a senator. He's the left version of Rand Paul; a guy who sticks to his principles whether you agree with them or not and makes a stand on important issues everyone else ignores.

 

Rand Paul-Bernie Sanders ticket.  Let's do this.

 

You get a guy who can be a legit statesman and handle foreign policy (Paul) and you get Sanders as a voice in domestic policy as VP.

 

We should make this happen.

 

Find me a Bob Dole.....and make it so Congress isn't a bunch of right wingers, please.....

 

though maybe Clinton really is just Bob Dole in many ways. Maybe I've moved a bit left in the last 20 years. 

I think everyone has shifted and this isn't far off.

Trump isn't a Democrat, but he isn't a conservative either. If/when he wins the R nom, there's going to be a void for a socially progressive, business minded conservative to step in. Maybe that will finally pull the party towards a focused, 21st century platform in the next election.

 

Trump isn't a Democrat, but he isn't a conservative either. If/when he wins the R nom, there's going to be a void for a socially progressive, business minded conservative to step in. Maybe that will finally pull the party towards a focused, 21st century platform in the next election.

 

Unless that comes with a change in Congress, I can't take the risk of backing it......

As usual, a great article from 538, reinforcing either mikecrimes beliefs, or others beliefs about Trump.....

 

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/sorry-bloomberg-trump-is-already-a-third-party-candidate/

 

Actually, there are lots of great, new, political articles there....

Edited January 28, 201610 yr by Mike Sixel

Not sure why you all wouldn't like Sanders as a President. I mean I get the difference between Senate and the Executive here, but what really is the issue?

 

Alas, I am going to be ranting against the "lesser evil" crowd for the rest of 2016.

 

Not sure why you all wouldn't like Sanders as a President. I mean I get the difference between Senate and the Executive here, but what really is the issue?

 

Alas, I am going to be ranting against the "lesser evil" crowd for the rest of 2016.

 

Foreign policy for me. Same reason I can't support Cruz, Trump or Rubio.

 

Not sure why you all wouldn't like Sanders as a President. I mean I get the difference between Senate and the Executive here, but what really is the issue?

 

Alas, I am going to be ranting against the "lesser evil" crowd for the rest of 2016.

If you want real change ... policy as well as procedural ... that isn't going to happen coming from a president. Sanders will not have much influence at all when it comes to steering Congress towards the passing of any of his more liberal philosophies. And most of his supporters don't understand this. While it's great to stick to your beliefs and support him/her who most aligns with that, good, go for it. But there are pragmatic issues at stake, too. For one, I worry about his defeat in the general election due to his far left approach ... an approach I mostly agree with, btw. All any Republican candidate has to do is hammer away at 'Socialist! Socialist! Socialist!' and the vast majority of centric-party unaffiliated voters will either not vote at all or will vote for the Republican. You can have your ideals, but electing a Republican president with the Congress that we have, that is likely going to go unchanged much, is a very dangerous and scary proposition for me. Very scary. Did I say very? I meant VERY!

 

I wish the majority of the Sanders crowd would put their voices and energy into the Congressional campaigns out there; Senate, too. That might bring about some of the change they want.

I just think his personality is too abrasive.  I simply can't imagine him as a leader on the international stage.

 

Being Grumpy Grandpa with some appealing ideas might drive some support, but it doesn't hash out treaties or improve diplomatic relations.

 

I want him in a position to influence policy.  The last place I want him is as the most influential man in a discussion of international affairs.

 

I just think his personality is too abrasive.  I simply can't imagine him as a leader on the international stage.

 

Being Grumpy Grandpa with some appealing ideas might drive some support, but it doesn't hash out treaties or improve diplomatic relations.

 

I want him in a position to influence policy.  The last place I want him is as the most influential man in a discussion of international affairs.

 

that pretty much leaves Clinton, among the candidates, for you......a proposition I find a bit depressing, but somewhat likely for me also, sigh.

 

that pretty much leaves Clinton, among the candidates, for you......a proposition I find a bit depressing, but somewhat likely for me also, sigh.

 

Rand Paul...but he's basically so far out of it he doesn't count.  So, yeah, I'm depressed too.

 

Rand Paul...but he's basically so far out of it he doesn't count.  So, yeah, I'm depressed too.

 

One of my best friends from HS, who still works in politics some, is a big backer of his. I just don't see the same appeal....but I haven't looked super hard, because it's not happening for him....and my time I'm willing to commit to serious politics is limited.

Rand Paul isn't perfect by any stretch.  He's said and advocated some dumb positions - but he's a reasonable, well-spoken guy who seems to understand the big picture.

 

I think, if he didn't have to try and appeal to the Republican base, you'd see a really fine Presidential candidate.  Alas, with that party, we never get to see that when it matters most.  And anyone that can't throw meat to that base never gets themselves off the ground enough to be of serious consideration.

 

It's really sad and it's hurting the country more than anything else in the process.

 

Not sure why you all wouldn't like Sanders as a President. I mean I get the difference between Senate and the Executive here, but what really is the issue?

 

Alas, I am going to be ranting against the "lesser evil" crowd for the rest of 2016.

Zero Foreign Policy.
I disagree with him raising taxes on basically everyone, and I disagree with his health care and college plans.

 

 

Rand Paul isn't perfect by any stretch.  He's said and advocated some dumb positions - but he's a reasonable, well-spoken guy who seems to understand the big picture.

 

I think, if he didn't have to try and appeal to the Republican base, you'd see a really fine Presidential candidate.  Alas, with that party, we never get to see that when it matters most.  And anyone that can't throw meat to that base never gets themselves off the ground enough to be of serious consideration.

 

It's really sad and it's hurting the country more than anything else in the process.

This is going to sound dumb, but I can't get behind a 5 foot 8 MALE president. Sorry Paul, sorry Cruz.

I don't understand all the hate towards Hildawg, she is basically a clone of what Biden would be running on if he ran for Prez, which is more or less what Obama has been working towards.

I get that she can be a bit flip floppy at times (I don't see this as a huge issue personally) and the whole e-mail scandal (IMO not a big deal), plus she doesn't have that "charisma" factor that Bill and Obama had, but other than that I think she will be a damn fine president.

I'm as guilty of this as anyone but it is interesting to hear, after 79 pages of debate about policy and values and who's right and who's Voldemort, that it comes down to things like age, personality, and height for voters. (Again I consider these things too).

 

I'm as guilty of this as anyone but it is interesting to hear, after 79 pages of debate about policy and values and who's right and who's Voldemort, that it comes down to things like age, personality, and height for voters. (Again I consider these things too).

I just find that short guys in power are never a good thing.

 

Trump is not a life-long Democrat. Why don't you do a little research.

 

That might be my problem I know his stances on issues up to the last presidential election.  It's possible he was both a Democrat and Republican in 2012 as he was thinking about running but it's not possible that he was not a Democrat.

 

I'm as guilty of this as anyone but it is interesting to hear, after 79 pages of debate about policy and values and who's right and who's Voldemort, that it comes down to things like age, personality, and height for voters. (Again I consider these things too).

 

I have two big things for the next President:

1. Will they be extremely hesitant to send ground troops again to the Middle East?

2. Will they avoid the temptation to inflate an asset bubble to jump start the economy (while acknowledging this isn't 100% about the President, but economic priorities will say something)?

 

As of now I only really think Clinton, Bush, Kasich and Christie will qualify, but that list could certainly shrink.

 

Find me a Bob Dole.....and make it so Congress isn't a bunch of right wingers, please.....

 

 

 

At least in the short run nominating Trump does this.  If they Republicans nominate Trump at the convention I won't vote for a single Republican on my ballot come November not even for soil and water board.  I don't want to go back to voting third party as it's pretty useless, but the Republican party seems willing to decide my vote no longer matters to them.

 

At least in the short run nominating Trump does this.  If they Republicans nominate Trump at the convention I won't vote for a single Republican on my ballot come November not even for soil and water board.  I don't want to go back to voting third party as it's pretty useless, but the Republican party seems willing to decide my vote no longer matters to them.

 

There is an interesting article on 538 about the effect down ballot, if you are interested. Due to gerrymandering, it probably won't matter as much as we think.

 

As usual, a great article from 538, reinforcing either mikecrimes beliefs, or others beliefs about Trump.....

 

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/sorry-bloomberg-trump-is-already-a-third-party-candidate/

 

Actually, there are lots of great, new, political articles there....

 

As someone who grew up voting third party this is exactly right.  Just like Jesse Ventura was able to win an election Trump would be to.  Just like Ventura's victory didn't mean anything and in the end his libertarian streak didn't make it's way into policy Trumps wouldn't mean anything, and his conservative streak won't find it's way into policy. 

Bernie presents as a revolutionary...those don't make good diplomats.

 

Like it or not, foreign diplomacy is about the most critical thing the President does and it's by far Bernie's worst quality.

 

I have two big things for the next President:

1. Will they be extremely hesitant to send ground troops again to the Middle East?

2. Will they avoid the temptation to inflate an asset bubble to jump start the economy (while acknowledging this isn't 100% about the President, but economic priorities will say something)?

 

As of now I only really think Clinton, Bush, Kasich and Christie will qualify, but that list could certainly shrink.

OK but watch as I dismantle your reasoning effortlessly:

 

Clinton- botox face

Bush- wrong last name

Kasich- pansy

Christie- someone's cartoon parody of a New Jerseyan. Also too fat.

 

There is an interesting article on 538 about the effect down ballot, if you are interested. Due to gerrymandering, it probably won't matter as much as we think.

 

If it's just this election then the Gerrymandering would make it useless, but if we lose all faith with the Republican party then we will never be back.  I wish the party would just stab him in the back by suspending the rules at the convention if he earns the nomination, but it's a lose lose situation.

 

If it's just this election then the Gerrymandering would make it useless, but if we lose all faith with the Republican party then we will never be back.  I wish the party would just stab him in the back by suspending the rules at the convention if he earns the nomination, but it's a lose lose situation.

 

I don't think we are at the point, yet, where people really abandon the party. "doing the same thing" is kind of the tenant of conservatism (that's a bit of an exaggeration, but I think you get my point).

 

Foreign policy for me. Same reason I can't support Cruz, Trump or Rubio.

 

 

If you want real change ... policy as well as procedural ... that isn't going to happen coming from a president. Sanders will not have much influence at all when it comes to steering Congress towards the passing of any of his more liberal philosophies. And most of his supporters don't understand this. While it's great to stick to your beliefs and support him/her who most aligns with that, good, go for it. But there are pragmatic issues at stake, too. For one, I worry about his defeat in the general election due to his far left approach ... an approach I mostly agree with, btw. All any Republican candidate has to do is hammer away at 'Socialist! Socialist! Socialist!' and the vast majority of centric-party unaffiliated voters will either not vote at all or will vote for the Republican. You can have your ideals, but electing a Republican president with the Congress that we have, that is likely going to go unchanged much, is a very dangerous and scary proposition for me. Very scary. Did I say very? I meant VERY!

 

I wish the majority of the Sanders crowd would put their voices and energy into the Congressional campaigns out there; Senate, too. That might bring about some of the change they want.

 

If Sanders wins it moves the middle.  If I was a Democrat why wouldn't I want to move the middle again especially as likable as Sanders is and as unlikable as Clinton is. 

 

That might be my problem I know his stances on issues up to the last presidential election.  It's possible he was both a Democrat and Republican in 2012 as he was thinking about running but it's not possible that he was not a Democrat.

This from Wiki:

 

Trump's party affiliation has changed over the years. Until 1987, he was a Democrat,[4] then he was a Republican from 1987–99.[3] He then switched to the Reform Party from 1999–2001.[3] From 2001–09 he was a Democrat again,[3] and switched to the Republican Party again from 2009–11.[3] An independent from 2011–12, he returned to the Republican Party where he has remained from 2012–present.[3]