I Wish Obama could do a third term

[Jim2Dokes 3]

Results are in, DD loves Trump.

Edited October 11, 2016 by Jim2Dokes

[Kelly Gruene 26]

Interesting references.

In the 2008 reference you linked, Benghazi hadn't happened yet, Muslims had not over-run Europe, Paris (x2) hadn't happened, Syria hadn't happened, Libya hadn't happened, gay citizens just out having fun hadn't been slaughtered en-masse, citizens in San Bernardino celebrating Christmas hadn't been slaughtered en-masse. So, sure, judgement about a person may have been different in 2008. Trump saying Clinton might make a good president might make sense given the time, place, and general context. And, it's possible she still might make a good president.

However, what has she done over the last 8 years that makes anyone on the planet think she will make America a safer place? Because after all, that really is the President's first and foremost responsibility. All these jihadist type activities have taken place under her and Obama's watch.

Now of course you will reference gun control and non-jihadist killings. But none, none of those other killings were perpetrated by one religious group who repeatedly have said their goal is to kill or convert anyone who does not have the same beliefs as them. Lone acts of violence versus acts of violence planned and committed by groups with one singular religious conviction.

Edited July 23, 2016 by Kelly Gruene

[Kelly Gruene 26]

My portfolio Is great, my job is great, I have way more money and my real estate is up since 8 years ago. The country has never been stronger. I am damn near a millionaire since based on my holdings please tell me, since majority of this board is for Trump, why should I?. Realistically curious.

 

http://youtu.be/mCB6RvRojIQ

 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/12/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-good-president/

In his own words.

 

Congratulations on your apparent good fortune!

With your great job, personal wealth, and real estate improving, I'm sure you are much more sophisticated in your understanding of the economy and how things work in this country than me. I'm just a simple guy really.

It is my understanding that congress creates and passes laws, not the president. The president can give thumbs up or thumbs down to laws created by congress but he(/she) does not actually create laws (presidential decrees being an arguably different circumstance).

Laws are not always interpreted the same by two parties, so disputes often arise. It is the role of the judiciary to mediate those disputes. The President's role here is to recommend individuals to certain judiciary posts, as well as appoint an attorney general. Nothing more than that, really.

The president does have another indirect effect on the economy by who he(/she) chooses to run the Fed.

So, we all hope for conditions where there are favorable laws creating an economic environment in which citizens' fortunes expand, and judges who are ruling in disputed cases in a way that laws are correctly upheld and the economic environment flourishes.

So the question is, how exactly has the current President created and personally upheld the laws that have increased your personal wealth over the last 8 years? And how has the former Secretary of State had any role at all in that? Her personal fortune has certainly increased, a matter of another investigation, but why does one think she can make things better for the average non-millionaire in this country?

[Soko 128]

Muslims had not over-run Europe - this still has not happened

Paris (x2) hadn't happened - I'm perplexed at how this is Obama's fault

Syria hadn't happened - read above

Libya hadn't happened - Libya is a massive **** up. All western governments should hang their heads in shame over this

gay citizens just out having fun hadn't been slaughtered en-masse - Obama's fault again?

citizens in Sacramento celebrating Christmas hadn't been slaughtered en-masse - see above?

 

Because after all, that really is the President's first and foremost responsibility. All these jihadist type activities have taken place under her and Obama's watch.

 

The last acts were American citizens gone rogue. I'd like to see how people suggest tackling this?

 

You get the feeling that people just hate Obama and there is no discussion. He is the devil and anything negative that has happened over the past 8 years is his fault, completely his responsibility. This is how you end up with a buffoon like Trump as the only opposition and the country digging it's own grave.

[Kelly Gruene 26]

The last acts were American citizens gone rogue. I'd like to see how people suggest tackling this?

 

You get the feeling that people just hate Obama and there is no discussion. He is the devil and anything negative that has happened over the past 8 years is his fault, completely his responsibility. This is how you end up with a buffoon like Trump as the only opposition and the country digging it's own grave.

 

I don't hate President Obama. He has some very good qualities and has done some very good things.

The point is about safety. This election in large part will be determined by who people in this country think will make/keep them safest. Is that Mrs. Clinton or Mr. Trump?

 

While it is true that Muslims have not become the majority in any European country, the dramatic increase in Muslim refugees has now forever changed the face of Europe and the culture of European countries. And please do not confuse this discussion to imply that I believe all Muslims are bad. That's simply not the case. However, it is absolutely true that substantial numbers of the refugees who have emigrated to Europe this year alone have no intention of ever adapting to their new countries in any way (see the experience of France, Sweden, Netherlands, Belgium, Germany). They expect those countries to accommodate them and supply them with all things needed for survival. And the Muslim population is one of the populations expanding the quickest on the planet by birthrate, so the current numbers and percentages in Europe will only increase over the coming decades.

People can bury their head in the sand and pretend that these things are not happening. Fine. People can cross their eyes and their toes and their fingers hoping that massive Muslim terrorist acts never happen in their neighborhoods. Fine. People can rail about profiling of groups at airport security lines. Fine. People can rail against our government using electronic means to monitor individuals and groups that are doing questionable activities. Fine. But sooner or later there will be more of this type of activity right here in the good old US of A.

 

Will the policies of the administration from 2008 to 2016 make the US safer, or will policies under different leadership make the US safer? That is the single most important issue on the ballot this year. Without safety, any economy will tank. If the US economy tanks, so will the rest of the world. Those fortunate enough to have seen personal wealth rise over the last 8 years will see changes in that fortune.

Trump or Clinton? Who will make the US safer?

I can't say with certainty. No one can. That's the problem.

[davislove 0]

The point is about safety.

Trump or Clinton? Who will make the US safer?

I can't say with certainty. No one can. That's the problem.

 

My guess is hillary. Donald is an older white guy who was born rich. I don't see him as the racist the media makes him out to be, but he is from a world of private clubs where only rich whites gather and women and minorities serve them. I think he would have problems working with any leader that is not a white male.

 

I think both he and hillary can be bad presidents. His bad scares me more because i feel his ego won't allow him to admit mistakes and change plans.

 

That said, i think both parties will learn from this and have better options in 2020.

 

This looks like a one termer to me.

[Soko 128]

I don't hate President Obama. He has some very good qualities and has done some very good things.

The point is about safety. This election in large part will be determined by who people in this country think will make/keep them safest. Is that Mrs. Clinton or Mr. Trump?

 

While it is true that Muslims have not become the majority in any European country, the dramatic increase in Muslim refugees has now forever changed the face of Europe and the culture of European countries. And please do not confuse this discussion to imply that I believe all Muslims are bad. That's simply not the case. However, it is absolutely true that substantial numbers of the refugees who have emigrated to Europe this year alone have no intention of ever adapting to their new countries in any way (see the experience of France, Sweden, Netherlands, Belgium, Germany). They expect those countries to accommodate them and supply them with all things needed for survival. And the Muslim population is one of the populations expanding the quickest on the planet by birthrate, so the current numbers and percentages in Europe will only increase over the coming decades.

People can bury their head in the sand and pretend that these things are not happening. Fine. People can cross their eyes and their toes and their fingers hoping that massive Muslim terrorist acts never happen in their neighborhoods. Fine. People can rail about profiling of groups at airport security lines. Fine. People can rail against our government using electronic means to monitor individuals and groups that are doing questionable activities. Fine. But sooner or later there will be more of this type of activity right here in the good old US of A.

 

Will the policies of the administration from 2008 to 2016 make the US safer, or will policies under different leadership make the US safer? That is the single most important issue on the ballot this year. Without safety, any economy will tank. If the US economy tanks, so will the rest of the world. Those fortunate enough to have seen personal wealth rise over the last 8 years will see changes in that fortune.

Trump or Clinton? Who will make the US safer?

I can't say with certainty. No one can. That's the problem.

 

I think the US is pretty safe regardless of whichever candidate wins. This is not Kabul and what happens in Europe is of little concern to you and pretty much irrelevant to the safety discussion.

 

The die has been cast with regards to the ME and the catastrophe that is the post Iraq invasion. It is a losing battle there, the Bush and Blair partnership from hell saw to that. I would not be choosing a candidate based on safety concerns alone.

[jessemoore97 1,287]

The last acts were American citizens gone rogue. I'd like to see how people suggest tackling this?

 

You get the feeling that people just hate Obama and there is no discussion. He is the devil and anything negative that has happened over the past 8 years is his fault, completely his responsibility. This is how you end up with a buffoon like Trump as the only opposition and the country digging it's own grave.

 

It's funny because 8 years ago change Obama to Bush and Trump to Obama, ta-da. Quite frankly I am sick of the choices we are given and have been following morons for at least 20 years and it doesn't appear to be resolving itself this election either.

[Soko 128]

It's funny because 8 years ago change Obama to Bush and Trump to Obama, ta-da. Quite frankly I am sick of the choices we are given and have been following morons for at least 20 years and it doesn't appear to be resolving itself this election either.

 

Nobody can challenge Bush for plumbing the depths of despair. His decision to go into Iraq was the single worst policy move of the past 2 centuries.

[jessemoore97 1,287]

My guess is hillary. Donald is an older white guy who was born rich. I don't see him as the racist the media makes him out to be, but he is from a world of private clubs where only rich whites gather and women and minorities serve them. I think he would have problems working with any leader that is not a white male.

 

I think both he and hillary can be bad presidents. His bad scares me more because i feel his ego won't allow him to admit mistakes and change plans.

 

That said, i think both parties will learn from this and have better options in 2020.

 

This looks like a one termer to me.

 

Fully agree that whoever gets elected this year is one and done. Having better options for 2020 is the same thing I've been watching and waiting for going on the last 5 elections. I don't have much faith left and I'm only 41.

[jessemoore97 1,287]

Nobody can challenge Bush for plumbing the depths of despair. His decision to go into Iraq was the single worst policy move of the past 2 centuries.

 

I don't know that I would go that far, there have been some doozies over the past 200 years.

[Soko 128]

I don't know that I would go that far, there have been some doozies over the past 200 years.

 

I'll be happy to reel that back to the last century for arguments sake. Hindsight shows that war to just get worse and worse as time goes on. It makes me angry just thinking about it.

[Jim2Dokes 3]

Interesting references.

In the 2008 reference you linked, Benghazi hadn't happened yet, Muslims had not over-run Europe, Paris (x2) hadn't happened, Syria hadn't happened, Libya hadn't happened, gay citizens just out having fun hadn't been slaughtered en-masse, citizens in San Bernardino celebrating Christmas hadn't been slaughtered en-masse. So, sure, judgement about a person may have been different in 2008. Trump saying Clinton might make a good president might make sense given the time, place, and general context. And, it's possible she still might make a good president.

However, what has she done over the last 8 years that makes anyone on the planet think she will make America a safer place? Because after all, that really is the President's first and foremost responsibility. All these jihadist type activities have taken place under her and Obama's watch.

Now of course you will reference gun control and non-jihadist killings. But none, none of those other killings were perpetrated by one religious group who repeatedly have said their goal is to kill or convert anyone who does not have the same beliefs as them. Lone acts of violence versus acts of violence planned and committed by groups with one singular religious conviction.

 

There were terrorist attacks prior to 2008 and have been as long as religion and want for power have existed. Don't fall for the fear trap, it got the country 4 more years of Bush. And we don't control European policies. The state with the biggest Muslim population has yet been victim of a terrorist attack (Illnois), so your logic doesn't add up. All jihadist killing have happened under Obama? No, 911 rings a bell. Fact is Trump saw an opening in republicans before he viewed democrats more positively was for abortion rights ect ect. Oh and let's not even get into all the wives he has had the open marriages and now all of sudden he is born again. My good fortune is simply a reflection of the economy, real estate is high right now and the stock market is high with plenty of jobs out there. In 2005 I was bankrupt and had no job thanks to the republicans. I only have a very modest income but my 401k and investments have done very well. I still can't get a decent interest rate on a car lol.

Edited July 23, 2016 by Jim2Dokes

[Kelly Gruene 26]

I think the US is pretty safe regardless of whichever candidate wins. This is not Kabul and what happens in Europe is of little concern to you and pretty much irrelevant to the safety discussion.

 

The die has been cast with regards to the ME and the catastrophe that is the post Iraq invasion. It is a losing battle there, the Bush and Blair partnership from hell saw to that. I would not be choosing a candidate based on safety concerns alone.

 

If you were to read/study the history of Arabia, Persia, and other lands in the area commonly now referred to as the Middle East, you would almost certainly come to the conclusion that it was a catastrophe long before the Iraq invasion. Taking out Sadam was, in my opinion, the bigger mistake, much like, in my opinion, taking out Asad will be in Syria without a cogent plan in place regarding what comes next.

And I'd love to understand what it means to say 'the die has been cast'. The future of the Middle East is quite uncertain I think. Will moderate Sunni's finally find a way to cast out radical Sunni's? Will Sunni and Shia ever be able to work together in a unified government anywhere? What will happen to the Kurds? Will they ever have their own country? Not if Turkey, Syria, and Iraq have their way. And all of that without the question of Israel.

No, I don't see the die as cast in that part of the world. And if you ever looked closely at the history of that area before and after World War I, you would see that it was the British and French that set the foundation for the political un-evenness that exists there today, not the US. The US and big oil have played a role too, no doubt, but Arabia was already a huge mess long before Ibn al Saud made his deals with the Wahhabis to take control of Arabia.

[jessemoore97 1,287]

I'll be happy to reel that back to the last century for arguments sake. Hindsight shows that war to just get worse and worse as time goes on. It makes me angry just thinking about it.

 

And not to argue with you but it is eerily similar to Vietnam. This was actually one the comparisons I was shooting for as far as poor policy decisions go in the last 200 years, and the fallout on many levels from it.

[nickman54 0]

No one owes you a plea to vote their way. Libs don't get the chance to think they have better views than anyone else. Your post is pathetic. I'm tired.

[AlabamaDuck 0]

Congratulations on your apparent good fortune!

With your great job, personal wealth, and real estate improving, I'm sure you are much more sophisticated in your understanding of the economy and how things work in this country than me. I'm just a simple guy really.

It is my understanding that congress creates and passes laws, not the president. The president can give thumbs up or thumbs down to laws created by congress but he(/she) does not actually create laws (presidential decrees being an arguably different circumstance).

Laws are not always interpreted the same by two parties, so disputes often arise. It is the role of the judiciary to mediate those disputes. The President's role here is to recommend individuals to certain judiciary posts, as well as appoint an attorney general. Nothing more than that, really.

The president does have another indirect effect on the economy by who he(/she) chooses to run the Fed.

So, we all hope for conditions where there are favorable laws creating an economic environment in which citizens' fortunes expand, and judges who are ruling in disputed cases in a way that laws are correctly upheld and the economic environment flourishes.

So the question is, how exactly has the current President created and personally upheld the laws that have increased your personal wealth over the last 8 years? And how has the former Secretary of State had any role at all in that? Her personal fortune has certainly increased, a matter of another investigation, but why does one think she can make things better for the average non-millionaire in this country?

 

The Federal government can not create jobs unless the grow the government by hiring unneeded federal employees. Private business create jobs.

With the 20,000 plus regulations on small business that Obama installed by executive order, killed the growth in manufacturing. He also did not renew the Bush tax break for companies buying new equipment that created jobs.

[AlabamaDuck 0]

Fully agree that whoever gets elected this year is one and done. Having better options for 2020 is the same thing I've been watching and waiting for going on the last 5 elections. I don't have much faith left and I'm only 41.

 

I don`t see how it could be better when the Democratic Party could only find two candidates to run. Both Socialist.

[AlabamaDuck 0]

My portfolio Is great, my job is great, I have way more money and my real estate is up since 8 years ago. The country has never been stronger. I am damn near a millionaire since based on my holdings please tell me, since majority of this board is for Trump, why should I?. Realistically curious.

 

http://youtu.be/mCB6RvRojIQ

 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/12/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-good-president/

In his own words.

 

It seems the results are in. Republicans love domerdomain.com.

 

I bet the 94 million unemployed would love your post.

[Jim2Dokes 3]

I bet the 94 million unemployed would love your post.

 

Please elaborate on how you got this number. I know where you got it, it's false but I would enjoy your rationale.