The 2016 United States Presidential Election Thread. v. 2
- Thread starter yankeessuck
- Start date
- Status
The irony!!!
https://www.engadget.com/2016/04/19/uk-drone-ban-obama-london/
Drone flights will be banned during Obama's visit to London
https://www.engadget.com/2016/04/19/uk-drone-ban-obama-london/
Drone flights will be banned during Obama's visit to London
So that is what morfeeis has been up to
I'm sure that sign would give him a good laugh, hell I laughed too lol.
He seemed like a level headed guy during the debates, I don't know the full details on his record though. It's too bad he didn't gain more traction, DWS made sure the debates were on off nights and that we didn't have enough of them to really get to know the other candidates. Like I said before I can't say Hillary wouldn't have won anyway as she is by far the most well known and was the presumptive Democratic nominee for 2016 the minute Obama won in 2008 but the way the DNC was run by Wasserman Shultz sure makes it obvious that the party leaders didn't want the voters to think anyone else was viable.
There are definitely far far more than 3. Base on national poll, & there is only a factor of memeber posting here (which means we cnnot get a meaningful ratio of support). I expect anywhere from at about (or less) 1/4 to 1/3 (or more) are Trump supporters here.
The thing is they just do not post in this thread. Its not hard to see why. Its silly for any openly Trump supporters to post here due to the hostility. Any neutral observer can see that.
Its not a critic, just observation.
Last edited:
I think this site has far more rational people than a typical social media stomping ground and why I think there's so few here that support him. From what I've seen, those that do support Trump, out in the open or easy to see, except for one person, are not your typical Trump supporters, or what I would consider a typical Trump supporter.There are definitely far far more than 3. Base on national poll, & there is only a factor of memeber posting here (which means we cnnot get a meaningful ratio of support). I expect anywhere from at about (or less) 1/4 to 1/3 (or more) are Trump supporters here.
The thing is they just do not post in this thread. Its not hard to see why. Its silly for any openly Trump supporters to post here due to the hostility. Any neutral observer can see that.
Its not a critic, just observation.
He's go a lot of positives. His biggest negative is what happened to Baltimore when he was there. That probably would have been big fodder for the Republicans, but then again, the fodder that they have against Hildabeast hasn't broken her stride.
I do not think President need to be physically there, but playing Golf in middle of national disaster seem not the morally encouraging thing to do (not wrong though). People expect him to be in briefing room or something.
As for physically being there. If he is there only for photo op & obstruct aid effort, obviously no one wanted that. But do not underestimate the moral boasting a leader brings for being there physically to encourage people & helped a little, even if symbolic.
My opinion any way.
Last edited:
It wasn't a national disaster. It was a natural disaster, that affected a very small portion of the country.
We always see natural disasters every year, whether they are floodings, fires, hurricanes, etc, throughout the year. Saying the president shouldn't golf whenever something happens is nitpicking.
When I said national disaster, I meant a disaster that happen in the nation. Not meaning national level as in affect everyone (or most). Just to clarify.
No, I do not think the president should give up holiday whenever something happen. Thats silly of course, & nipicking like you said.
However, the flood was pretty significant, & I think the president can respond better than holiday. Thats my opinion. leadership is about scrifice also.
No, I do not think he should give up his holidays, but a person of leadship roles, even more so leader of a nation, should be expected to give up or rearrange his/her holiday if needed.
But he did respond. Not playing golf wouldn't have made any difference in his response. People are just nitpicking.
Him being on vacation looks bad. The reality is it doesn't matter as he is still doing everything he would be doing if he was in the White House but the perception of it is bad.
It's not even that. If he was there immediately, the GOP/Fox party reaction would be that it would be "grandstanding" and a "distraction" or an impediment to letting the actual work get done. Likewise, the Democratic/MSNBC reaction would be that he was showing leadership by being there immediately. It's simply the unfortunate truth that, for too many people and media outlets, rather than criticizing or applauding a decision based on the circumstances, they've got a structural policy of supporting or bashing people based on their political affiliation, and then whatever decisions are made, they fit their opinion of said decision to fit their policy. That's why it's so easy for Comedy Central to find clips of people arguing both sides of the exact same situation, depending on who's doing it.
By this logic, I am stupid also. Not that I will lose sleep.
Its not so much on what he can do, but that he can providing moral support. By the same logic, why bother to go to someone's funeral? You are not going to bring him back to life, are you? Waste of time. If your argument is moral support, that people hoping president showing up (or at lest not play golf or swim at beach) is not complete r****d either (unless they think having president will magically make disaster go away faster).
But what do I know. I am stupid because I think its good for president to be present.
Last edited:
Congratulations Black and Hispanic people. Your savior has arrived... "I'll be able to make sure that when you walk down the street in your inner city, or wherever you are, you're not gonna be shot. Your child isn't gonna be shot," Trump said at Wednesday's rally.
You asked if its the governor that do not want the president to go, is it a valid reason not to go? I answered, yes it is. I never contested this
What I am saying is (independently), it is good for a leader to be present, for moral support.
( Disclaimed, I picked the first decent article from google that is not CNN, I am not sure the political alignment of LAtimes)
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-louisiana-flooding-20160819-snap-story.html
As you can read from the article, most people are happy some form of leader are present, & they do lift the spirit of people. I would imagine if actual president Obama is there, they will be even more people that is morally boosted. We can argue if he actually cared or just to boost his campaign, but many people do feel good.
That's my main point. Moral support. Of course, if obstruction to help is greater than benefit of moral support, (if there are sufficient evidence), then for sure, I support him not going there. But he can surely not seen playing Golf. He doesn't have to obviously, but it would be nice not to IMO.
- Status