Easy way for any candidate to win:

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by thermodynamic, Apr 30, 2016.

  1. thermodynamic Suspended


    May 3, 2009
    Show actions right now that help Main Street America.

    Promises are nice, but so many having been broken in the past are why "outsiders" like Trump and Sanders were being considered for a while, and has gotten to the point where Clinton is more likely going to win, for the right reasons - but here are some links discussing issues unique to outsiders:



  2. aaronvan Suspended


    Dec 21, 2011
    República Cascadia
    Hillary will win offering naught but platitudes, cliches, and bromides.

    Her errors and inadequacies will be evident on Day One.
  3. LizKat macrumors 68040


    Aug 5, 2004
    Catskill Mountains
    Errors and inadequacies, right. Ted Cruz, bemoaned as "Lucifer" by a member of his own party who happens also to be a former Speaker of the House. Donald Trump, one of the great narcissists of an extremely narcissistic age in America, running for a job that requires selfless dedication to a thankless job. The very fact that Trump even has a Twitter account is an error.

    As for inadequacies, read any of these guys' interviews and look at their track records. Cruz is such a megalomaniac that he thinks he can run the House of Representatives from his seat in the US Senate. Trump is apparently unaware that diplomacy serves an important function in the conduct of foreign affairs, or else he thinks his potential counterparts are deaf, dumb and blind.

    Hillary Clinton is going to win because if you put aside all the hot button issues and concern over left-right-idiot-wing baggage, what's left is experience and ability to respond pragmatically to changing situations based on experience, while still keeping an eye on thoughtfully considered objectives. Clinton has all that in measures and depth exceeding that evidenced by any of her opponents in either major party. It's pretty clear, even if it's difficult for plenty of us to admit.

    I don't look forward to a Hillary Clinton presidency with joy, but on balance I'll take her over any of those remaining in the primary contests of either party. Sanders is a message candidate at this point. Cruz is too extreme. Trump is too unpredictable (and his unfavorables are astronomical for a general election). Kasich is apparently unelectable in the GOP primaries although he might be able to beat her in the general; I'm no longer as inclined to think so as I was back in late winter.

    Since I was a Sanders supporter and since I no longer believe he has any path to the nomination, I'm focused now on whether I can bring myself to vote for Clinton. I certainly don't want Ted Cruz picking the next round of Supreme Court justices. Chief Justice Roberts may bemoan the politicization of the justice-picking process but it seems that trying to pick "conservative" justices is here to stay until it proves a few more times to be as worthless as it was when Roberts himself was picked by Bush fils or when Bush père picked David Souter. Somehow the Republicans of today expect every pick to be as politically reliable as Samuel Alito has appeared to be so far. That's not a realistic or even feasible expectation, fortunately.

    Who knows what Cruz would do about a court pick if the Senate stays in GOP hands. Dig up Scalia? Clinton knows she can't put a truly "liberal" justice on the court so I'd expect more along the lines of Obama's picks from her administration. Any more the qualified aspirants to our highest court are all pretty careful about demonstrating bias, so trying to pick a justice on the basis of his or her past decisions or public comments is more or less like reading tea leaves. Also, in our bipolar regard of the court, we all seem to forget how many decisions are still unanimous, despite our mentally having divided the court up into a right and left wing.

    Court picks are not the only reason I could round up to vote for Clinton, since I've already said I'll grudgingly also admit that she has better experience in being pragmatic about legislative affairs and in the development and negotiation of foreign policy than do any of her opponents. We don't live in a world that sits around waiting for the USA to decide what to do in the morning. Hillary Clinton knows that. The rest of the candidates talk like they'll be playing chess against an AI opponent that was coded by a ten-year-old. No one who leads any of the great powers in the world today is anything but pragmatic, whatever may be the political label of their electorate.

Share This Page