Could a President Clinton heal a divided nation?

[Maj. Bill Martin]

No.  She will divide it further, hopefully.  If not then we've all surrendered and there is no hope left.

Yeah, I don't understand this apparently urge that we all "unite".  Our Constitution was specifically designed so that a dissenting minority with sufficient support could impede the will of a temporary majority.  Control either the House, Senate, or Presidency, and you can stonewall whomever controls the other two branches.  That's a feature, not a bug.

We are "divided" because we have vastly different opinions on the course this country should be pursuing, what its policies should be, etc..  "Uniting" requires the minority to abandon those positions, and why the hell should we, or any other political minority, do that?

That being said, we're a very divided minority engaged in a circular firing squad, but that still doesn't mean that we want to unite with her, or what she represents.  She'll likely have her majorities soon enough, but even then, we can still scorn her and the rest of the majority even if we lack the political ability to impede them.

[DiogenesLamp]

Nope.  Neither she nor Trump could - or would want to - heal the nation.  Both are disgusting vile creatures who will further divide and damage this country.

Or have the bleep already forgotten their mutual promise at the Al Smith dinner that they would work together after the election?  Go ask Cardinal Dolan, that is what they said to each other.

Stupid, stupid bleep.

I believe the word you are looking for is "Publicans." 


I wish you people would stop "virtue signaling."   It's annoying and it is now verging on boring. 

[DiogenesLamp]

Let me take the contrarian view here:


I don't view her as liberal as Obama. I watched some of the Dem debates, she was a lot more reasonable than Bernie Sanders (BS) was.


So... maybe? 


I think the emails scandal has left a bad taste in a lot of people's mouths though.

People are always telling me they know what Hillary is.   Then they keep saying stuff like this which demonstrates very clearly that they do not know what Hillary is. 


They tell me they are familiar with her history of corruption,  coercion,   vengeance,  rage fits,  abuse of power,  lying and possibly even murder,   and then they say stuff like "maybe she won't be so bad?" 



WTF is wrong with you people who say these things?   Yes,  she will be that bad.   She will be an evil F***ing dictator,  because that is what her entire history shows to anyone who has been keeping up with it. 


She is from Chicago,  and she is a disciple of Saul Alinsky.   She is concentrated evil.   She even exhibits the symptoms of someone with Demons living in them.   


Yes,  she will be bad.  She will be Whore of Babylon level of bad.  She will be Mark of the Beast level of bad.   

[dfwgator]

F Hillary! She'll never be my President.

[DiogenesLamp]

So yet again you prove that there is no difference between Hillary and Donald.

Both will seek retribution against anyone they feel wronged them. And will do so with tje encouragement and help of their most strident supporters.

Even if what you say is true,  (it isn't.)   I see a great deal of difference in being on the side Hillary hates than being on the side Donald hates.    Hillary hates *US*.   Donald hates *THEM*.   


Anyone wanting a President that viscerally hates the group of which they are a member is a fool.   

[DiogenesLamp]

Same reason the GOP put Trump running against her?

The GOP did not pick Trump.   The media,  and the members of the party base that were tired of "nice"  guys,  picked Trump.   

The GOPe (establishment)  wanted Jeb.   They hated Trump,  they hated Cruz,  and they only halfheartedly threw their tepid support behind Cruz for a little while,  and then to Trump after there were no other choices left.     

The GOP establishment really really really did not want Trump.   They see him as upsetting the crony money spending party in Washington.   

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Yes,  she will be bad.  She will be Whore of Babylon level of bad.  She will be Mark of the Beast level of bad.

@DiogenesLamp

The real problem is that even if she's not "as bad" as Obama, she will be building on/adding to everything he's done.  And she'll be doing it with a judicial system stocked with 8 years worth of Obama's appointments, plus her own.  Most importantly, she'll have the reliable Supreme Court majority that Obama never had.  So even if she's not "as bad" as Obama, her Presidency will be much worse.

I think her election is inevitable at this point, so this is really just an academic exercise as far as I'm concerned.

[txradioguy]

   Hillary hates *US*.   Donald hates *THEM*. 

Actually they both hate the same groups of people.

You're too blind...willfully or otherwise...to see that they are no different.

Anyone wanting a President that viscerally hates the group of which they are a member is a fool.

And yet here you are...shilling for the very thing and type of person you claim you don't want.

[DiogenesLamp]

@DiogenesLamp

The real problem is that even if she's not "as bad" as Obama, she will be building on/adding to everything he's done.  And she'll be doing it with a judicial system stocked with 8 years worth of Obama's appointments, plus her own.  Most importantly, she'll have the reliable Supreme Court majority that Obama never had.  So even if she's not "as bad" as Obama, her Presidency will be much worse.

I think her election is inevitable at this point, so this is really just an academic exercise as far as I'm concerned.

Where are you getting "her election is inevitable at this point"?    I don't see that at all.   If you ignore all the media polls,   the non affiliated polls show Trump ahead.   The media polls consistently oversample Democrats and are part of a campaign to suppress morale for Trump  voters.  (I don't think it is going to work.)   

The media is pulling out all the stops and throwing away any semblance of objectivity.    If they did a single story about Hillary's eyes doing the Jabberwocky dance,   she would be done.   




They won't do such a story because they are Liberal Democrat activists who are trying to manipulate elections to promote their candidates.   

[DiogenesLamp]

Actually they both hate the same groups of people.

You are either lying to yourself or you are attempting to lie to me.     There is no evidence that Trump hates us,  meaning conservatives.   There are mountains of evidence that Hillary detests us with a passion and would use the force of government to attack us were she in a position to do so.   

So why are you trying to sell me this line of crap that Trump hates conservatives?   That is dishonest.  That is incredibly dishonest.   That is Hillary level of dishonest. 


He may not particularly like us,   but he most definitely does not hate us.   An objective position  might be that he does not particularly care about us one way or the other,   but going so far as to say he hates us is just out and out dishonest or delusion.   

[Suppressed]

   Only if she also builds a WALL along the Mason-Dixon Line and Makes the Stoners in Colorado pay for it.

 

Just FYI, that map doesn't illustrate the Mason-Dixon line, which didn't separate free and slave states along a third of its length.  Delaware was a slave state.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Where are you getting "her election is inevitable at this point"?

Too many people whose votes Trump needs aren't going to vote for him.  It's the same crap I saw in 2008.  I'm in Ohio, and he may still win here anyway.  But I've never seen anything like this in terms of Republicans I know that just aren't going to vote for Trump, and friends in other states, etc. report the same thing.  As horrible as the Democrats are, they have a turnout machine, and she'll get her 60-65 million votes.  Trump won't break 60M.

Don't get me wrong, I'm voting anyway.  Just reading the tea leaves....


   

[DiogenesLamp]

Too many people whose votes Trump needs aren't going to vote for him.  It's the same crap I saw in 2008.  I'm in Ohio, and he may still win here anyway.  But I've never seen anything like this in terms of Republicans I know that just aren't going to vote for Trump, and friends in other states, etc. report the same thing.  As horrible as the Democrats are, they have a turnout machine, and she'll get her 60-65 million votes.  Trump won't break 60M.

Don't get me wrong, I'm voting anyway.  Just reading the tea leaves....


   

Subjectivity is often the enemy of objectivity.    I converse with other people from Ohio who say he's doing well there.    My own state will go for Trump big,  and I don't know anyone who is supporting Hillary,  or any other candidate.   


I presume you live in a major city?   They always lean heavily Democrat.  Get outside the borders of the larger cities and the dynamics flip.   


For a very entertaining article on the phenomena, I strongly urge people to read "Pigeons, Rats and Democrats"   by Don R. Melquist.    It is both hilarious and absolutely accurate.   

[txradioguy]

There is no evidence that Trump hates us,  meaning conservatives.

Wanna bet?

There are mountains of evidence that Hillary detests us with a passion and would use the force of government to attack us were she in a position to do so.

Trump has stated he will do the same thing.  He want's to use the force of the Federal government to punish (his words) companies who move production out of the country.  He's going to use the poser of the Federal government to force (again his words) companies like Apple to produce products in this country whether they want to or not.

Trump thinks the current use of ethanol in gasoline isn't enough and would require the EPA to make the percentage of ethanol used in fule to go beyond even the ridiculous levels Obama has mandated.

Trump speaks glowingly of single payer healthcare and how if he's President he's going to have the government make sure everyone get's health care.

No one who believes in little R Republicanism or states rights or free market capitalism talks like that.  No one who is "for" the little people or Conservatives says things like that and then doubles down on what he said when he comes under fire for saying such stupid drivel.

He's to the left of both Sanders and Hillary on trade and foreign policy.

Oh and he said he doesn't want or need Conservatives to support him in this election

So what's the difference between Trump and Hillary again?

So why are you trying to sell me this line of crap that Trump hates conservatives?   That is dishonest.  That is incredibly dishonest.   That is Hillary level of dishonest. 

The only one here that is lying is you...and you're lying to yourself.

He proposes men like Carl Icahn as his prospective secretary of the Treasury. Icahn has been padding his pockets on corporate raids, stockholder suits and self-aggrandizing schemes since he started in business in 1961. If you have ever been in a deal with Icahn, you would know that he is ruthlessly interested in one thing: Carl Icahn. Is this man going to change stripes and become a "public servant"? He knows nothing of American wage earners other than to cut them from jobs and strip assets from the companies they work for. And why does Trump so admire a man like Icahn? Because Icahn is even better at self-aggrandizing deals than The Donald.

It is impossible to understand how millions of American blue-collar workers can support a person who promises to make life for the wealthy even better than it is now. It is particularly frustrating knowing that these are the folks who have been happily deceived by a party that promises them reforms while campaigning, but disdains results when in office and has done so for 30 years. It is most likely that Trump's master stroke will be to serve the public by embracing the interests of the wealthy and bankrupting the country. And don't think it can't happen. You need only look at the disposition of the Senate and House majority to realize that these "small government" conservatives will march us all happily over the fiscal cliff.

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/278171-with-either-trump-or-clinton-average-american-loses

He may not particularly like us,   but he most definitely does not hate us.   An objective position  might be that he does not particularly care about us one way or the other,   but going so far as to say he hates us is just out and out dishonest or delusion.

You have no room to lecture anyone about objectivity.

Trump hates us in the same way Hillary does.  But then that's because they are both Liberal Dems...and only one of the two is being honest about who they are.

[EC]

Subjectivity is often the enemy of objectivity.    I converse with other people from Ohio who say he's doing well there.    My own state will go for Trump big,  and I don't know anyone who is supporting Hillary,  or any other candidate.   

Pro tip: When scolding someone for indulging in subjectivity, do not support your stance with subjective evidence. It makes you look rather ridiculous.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Subjectivity is often the enemy of objectivity.    I converse with other people from Ohio who say he's doing well there.

No, I agree, he is, because this is a swing state that is tailor made for him, and he's going to do really well in SE Ohio that normally goes Democrat.   My point is that I'm seeing a lot of college-educated, reliably Republican votes that aren't voting for him.  And those aren't the kind of voters who are unique to Ohio -- they're the kind in critical suburbs all over the country.  I've got family members who have voted Republican their entire lives who aren't voting for the guy.  I'm not extrapolating that to everyone, obviously.   But to me, those are very worrisome signs of erosion.  And given that I'm starting from the assumption that the demographics favor Democrats anyway, I think we have to come pretty close to pitching a shutout to win.  And I just don't see it.

I presume you live in a major city?   They always lean heavily Democrat.

Outer ring suburb, leans Republican. 

Get outside the borders of the larger cities and the dynamics flip.

Once you get outside the cities and suburbs, you're talking about less than 30% of the population.  We lose the cities, but need to win the 'burbs.

Eh, maybe I've let this place get to me, and there is still a good shot at keeping her out of the office.  Just seems to me that the Democrats are coming home, if grudgingly, while we have fractured.  And I don't see Trump as a good enough campaigner to overcome that.  But I guess there's always a chance.  Like I said, I'm voting nevertheless, if only to stick a fork in the eye of the naysayers.  And because I believe that if Trump is right about anything, it's that this will be the last Presidential election in which we will have a non-negligible chance of not electing a Democrat.

ETA:  I should add that I think the lack of GOP establishment support for Trump is going to make it even easier than usual for Democrats to manufacture votes in some critical areas.  For example, I expect the turnout in Philly to be ridiculously high, and will swamp any chance Trump might otherwise have had to win that state.  I expect we'll see pretty massive vote inflation in some other urban areas as well.  And some GOP officials who might normally be more vigilant about it will either be understaffed due to a lack of party enthusiasm for Trump, or simply not care as much.  While I don't expect to see a lot of Republicans actually voting for Hillary, I think there are a pretty good number who will take some serious satisfaction in her winning.

[DiogenesLamp]

Wanna bet?

Saying "Wanna bet"  does not constitute a rebuttal.   It's more of that child level of debate in which you seem to indulge. 

Trump has stated he will do the same thing.  He want's to use the force of the Federal government to punish (his words) companies who move production out of the country.  He's going to use the poser of the Federal government to force (again his words) companies like Apple to produce products in this country whether they want to or not.

Even if what you say is true,  this is not evidence that he *hates*  conservatives.   

Trump thinks the current use of ethanol in gasoline isn't enough and would require the EPA to make the percentage of ethanol used in fule to go beyond even the ridiculous levels Obama has mandated.

Even if what you say is true,  this is not evidence that he *hates*  conservatives.   

Trump speaks glowingly of single payer healthcare and how if he's President he's going to have the government make sure everyone get's health care.

Even if what you say is true,  this is not evidence that he *hates*  conservatives.   (this is getting old.)   

No one who believes in little R Republicanism or states rights or free market capitalism talks like that.  No one who is "for" the little people or Conservatives says things like that and then doubles down on what he said when he comes under fire for saying such stupid drivel.

If you want to have a debate on why some policy positions are correct and why some are not,  I will indulge you,   but the issue currently under focus is Trump *hating*  conservatives,  and you have provided no evidence in support of your contention that he does.   Everything you've presented so far is a policy dispute.   

He's to the left of both Sanders and Hillary on trade and foreign policy.

Even if what you say is true,  this is not evidence that he *hates*  conservatives.   (still old.)   

Oh and he said he doesn't want or need Conservatives to support him in this election

Even if what you say is true,  this is not evidence that he *hates*  conservatives. 

So what's the difference between Trump and Hillary again?

Hillary detests us.      Hillary hates us as people and hates us as her political opposition.    She will use the power of government to attack us.  She will attack our Churches with her "anti-discrimination"  Legal teams,   she will attack our finances with forced medical care payments,   forced taxes,   forced fines for not complying with her diktats.  She will attack our right to own guns,  and she will work to take them away from us.    Hillary will unleash the IRS on every conservative political group in the nation.  She will unleash the FBI with a mandate to investigate all conservative organizations for "Hate Crimes",  and she will prosecute many of us into bankruptcy.   


Hillary will eat out our substance to feed her corrupt crony allies in various positions in government and industry,  and she will direct every malignant force at her disposal towards the goal of eradicating us as a political threat.   


Hillary would gleefully watch us being sent to camps and executed.   Hillary would not mind slitting our throats personally.   Hillary *HATES*  us.    She really really really *HATES*  us,  in the manner Hitler hated the Jews.   


Donald Trump doesn't hate us.    *THAT*  is the difference.   

Trump hates us in the same way Hillary does.  But then that's because they are both Liberal Dems...and only one of the two is being honest about who they are.

You are out of your mind.   You are ignorant of the threat posed by Hillary,  and you are seemingly proud of being so ignorant.    You have not produced any evidence to support your claim that Trump hates us,   but I have little doubt you will simply keep repeating it.   


At worst,  Trump doesn't care about us.   Hillary *hates*  us.   Viscerally.   

[DiogenesLamp]

Pro tip: When scolding someone for indulging in subjectivity, do not support your stance with subjective evidence. It makes you look rather ridiculous.

I was providing examples of other subjectivity to the contrary of that which he was experiencing.   My objective point was regarding the non-media affiliated polls which I cited earlier.    (Linked for your convenience.)   



Pro tip:   Before correcting someone's point,  it serves you well to read the previous exchange so you have a good grasp on the point being made within the context of previous discussion on the point.   

[DiogenesLamp]

  I've got family members who have voted Republican their entire lives who aren't voting for the guy. 

I guess some people have never grasped the adage that "The perfect is often the enemy of the good. "   Acquiescing to the fire because you don't like the Frying pan is foolish. 

I'm not extrapolating that to everyone, obviously.   But to me, those are very worrisome signs of erosion.  And given that I'm starting from the assumption that the demographics favor Democrats anyway, I think we have to come pretty close to pitching a shutout to win.  And I just don't see it.

It is reasonable to extrapolate that,   but it is also reasonable to extrapolate the additional weight caused by former Democrat constituencies supporting Trump.   There was a story over the weekend about a Black Civil Rights Icon from the 1960s supporting Trump.    I am hearing he is pulling something like 25% of the Black vote,  and without the vast majority of the Black vote,  Hillary cannot possibly win. 

Blue collar Union Democrats are also very worried about Globalism and H1B Visas,  and outsourcing,  and immigrant competition with their labor.   I keep hearing anecdotal evidence that thousands of people who previously voted Democrat,  are now supporting Trump.   

I would think that these two groups would represent more serious gains for Trump than do prissy,  "college educated"  (really indoctrinated) Republicans constitute losses.   

 
The people that Trump has gained,  are also a lot less likely to be around to answer a phone from a pollster,  so they may not be accurately represented insofar as their potential impact on the race is concerned.   

ETA:  I should add that I think the lack of GOP establishment support for Trump is going to make it even easier than usual for Democrats to manufacture votes in some critical areas.  For example, I expect the turnout in Philly to be ridiculously high, and will swamp any chance Trump might otherwise have had to steal that state.  And I expect we'll see pretty massive vote inflation in some other urban areas as well.  And some GOP officials who might normally be more vigilant about it will either be understaffed due to a lack of party enthusiasm for Trump, or simply not care as much.  While I don't expect to see a lot of Republicans actually voting for Hillary, I think there are a pretty good number who will take some serious satisfaction in her winning.

I don't think Democrats are enthusiastic for Hillary.   Even Oprah said "You don't have to like her to vote for her."   


If she has that sort of lukewarm enthusiasm from Oprah,  you can imagine how much less enthusiasm the rank and file has for her.   


More anecdotal evidence are the reports I keep reading about yard signs and bumper stickers.   Numerous people have pointed out that they simply aren't seeing any Hillary Yard signs or bumper stickers.   Some people have said they have driven through several states and didn't see any,  other people in critical areas (such as Florida)  say they aren't seeing any there either. 


I keep reading that the signs they see are all Trump,  and that's even from people who are driving through Los Angeles California.   

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Blue collar Union Democrats are also very worried about Globalism and H1B Visas,  and outsourcing,  and immigrant competition with their labor.   I keep hearing anecdotal evidence that thousands of people who previously voted Democrat,  are now supporting Trump.

That would be primarily in the Midwest/rust belt states.  And I do think he'll probably win Ohio.  But to make up for the suburban losses that will hurt him in some other states, I think he'd need to pick up some other rust belt states, and I just don't see him doing it.  Pennsylvania could have been the key, but I think they'll cheat their way to winning that one.   

I keep reading that the signs they see are all Trump,  and that's even from people who are driving through Los Angeles California.

I agree with all that.  I just think their turnout machine is much, much better than ours.  They'll phone bank, run the busses, bug people, and get them to the polls.   Again, maybe there's still a chance to stop her and I'm being unduly pessimistic.  I just think that whatever he gains with blue collar voters, he'll lose more than that in the suburbs.

[Jazzhead]

Yes,  she will be bad.  She will be Whore of Babylon level of bad.  She will be Mark of the Beast level of bad.

I guess you're saying that it was a bad year for a hostile takeover of the Republican party by racialists and nutjobs.   

[Jazzhead]

In response to the OP,  just about the only thing that gives me comfort is the Wikileaks accounts of the stuff Clinton said in her secret speeches.  Maybe she's more moderate than her party allows her to be in public.  Her husband was certainly able to work with a Congress in opposition to pass needed reforms (e.g., welfare reform).   Can Hillary do the same?  I tend to doubt it,  but then I never thought the racialists and nutjobs would take over the GOP either.   

[LateForLunch]

I keep reading that the signs they see are all Trump,  and that's even from people who are driving through Los Angeles California.

No, I have observed just the opposite and I cover hundreds of miles of a diverse distribution of neighborhoods from ethnic ghettos to affluent bedroom communities and large estates. Trump supporters in California must be prudent and careful because the proclivity to violent acting out of anger based on ideology is far more present with far leftist supporters of Hill-O-Lies in California in general (except perhaps in Riverside County or other outlying suburban/rural communities) than with conservatives / Trump supporters.

If you are concerned about your car, home of business being vandalized you have less reason for worry if you are a supporter of a 'Crat than a Republican candidate.

[DiogenesLamp]

I guess you're saying that it was a bad year for a hostile takeover of the Republican party by racialists and nutjobs.

The nutjobs didn't take over the party.   They seem to be occupying their time ranting about those who did. 


And racialists?   What the h3ll are you talking about?   


http://www.theroot.com/articles/news/2016/03/medgar_ever_s_brother_endorses_donald_trump_for_president/

[DiogenesLamp]

No, I have observed just the opposite and I cover hundreds of miles of a diverse distribution of neighborhoods from ethnic ghettos to affluent bedroom communities and large estates.

I didn't see it myself,  I am only relating what I have read from someone who claims to have seen it.    I think they said they drove from Virginia to Los Angeles and only saw two Hillary signs,   while they had seen hundreds of Trump signs.   

Trump supporters in California must be prudent and careful because the proclivity to violent acting out of anger based on ideology is far more present with far leftist supporters of Hill-O-Lies in California in general (except perhaps in Riverside County or other outlying suburban/rural communities) than with conservatives / Trump supporters.

If you are concerned about your car, home of business being vandalized you have less reason for worry if you are a supporter of a 'Crat than a Republican candidate.

I have read that quite a number of times as well.    I think California has far more than it's fair share of nuts and fruits,   and one would be very prudent not to stir them up.