2016 Presidential Campaign

hillary rodham clinton vs donald john trump who will win?

  • hillary rodham clinton

    Votes: 12 40.0%
  • donald john trump

    Votes: 18 60.0%

  • Total voters
    30

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
Who in the hell is this Dirt fukwad. Hell he's worse than I am.. LOL.


Which raises a question! Who would the people who complain about health cost have pay the bill? I just got hit with a $14 monthly premium increase for health coverage (which is as it should be) On the 4th day of a new year I just had a hospital procedure that probably cost several dozen times that- the results were more or less negative, I got piece of mind, not to mention the possibility of eliminating further costs down the road. If we can't afford our health costs W.T.F. can we afford? Maybe we need more posters like "Dirt F**kwad". :)
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA
There was a palpable sense of dread this morning as I dropped my daughter off at the bus and had to face some of my neighbours.

All of them very good, thoughtful and kind people from various other countries of origin, just like me.


All of us, now extremely grateful to be together this morning, dropping off our children at the bus.


 

Locutus

Adorable Deplorable
Jun 18, 2007
32,230
46
48
66
Americans have seen the last four presidents as illegitimate

A dangerous new trend in political attack.



It’s tempting to see the entirety of Donald Trump’s story as unprecedented, but when he is sworn in today as the nation’s 45th president, he will be our fourth consecutive leader to assume the office with a segment of the electorate questioning his legitimacy. On that score, Trump doesn’t represent a new crisis for American democracy but rather an escalation of one that’s been building — one that we’ve all played a role in creating and that he has deftly exploited to his advantage.

We used to argue over whether new presidents had a “mandate,” which was a more polite way of raising the legitimacy question. After the 1992 election, Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole said President-elect Bill Clinton did not have a mandate to press ahead with any sweeping changes because he’d obtained only 43 percent of the popular vote in a three-way race. Republicans convinced themselves that third-party candidate Ross Perot had cost them the election, taking more votes away from George H.W. Bush than from Clinton. They were quick to accuse Clinton in his first year of liberal overreach for pressing to allow gays in the military, raise energy taxes and take on an ambitious overhaul of the healthcare system. Anger among conservatives that Clinton would illegitimately (in their view) push such an agenda led to the so-called Gingrich Revolution in 1994, fed any number of conspiracy theories and led Republicans to gleefully pursue Clinton’s impeachment during his second term.

Then in 2000 came one of the more contentious presidential elections in U.S. history — not because of the substance of the campaign between Al Gore and George W. Bush, two amiable and seemingly moderate candidates, but because the result was too close to call for weeks. It took a Supreme Court intervention to put an end to the indecision. Compounding the muddled nature of the outcome, Bush obtained half a million fewer votes in the popular count nationwide. Some members of the Congressional Black Caucus (including Rep. John Lewis, who forcefully questioned Trump’s legitimacy this past week) refused to attend the inauguration. I can remember all the debates then among fellow journalists and friends about either the necessity, or the peril, of “normalizing” such an abnormal, unsatisfying result with a “normal” inauguration and all the other trappings afforded an incoming president.

We tend to forget the extent to which #notmypresident could have been a trending hashtag in those early Bush days — if hashtags had been around — because everything would soon change, on Sept. 11, 2001. After the terrorist attacks, Americans rallied around their president, as we always tend to do in wartime, and the grousing about his legitimacy or mandate stopped. But a few years later, with mounting disillusionment over open-ended military campaigns abroad and a sense that the administration had launched the Iraq invasion on false pretenses, millions of Americans once again began to question not only Bush’s judgment but also his legitimacy. None other than New York real estate tycoon Donald Trump called for Bush’s impeachment.


more


https://www.washingtonpost.com/post...llegitimate-heres-why/?utm_term=.2e8c81bc14f6
 

Curious Cdn

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 22, 2015
37,070
8
36
Americans have seen the last four presidents as illegitimate

A dangerous new trend in political attack.



It’s tempting to see the entirety of Donald Trump’s story as unprecedented, but when he is sworn in today as the nation’s 45th president, he will be our fourth consecutive leader to assume the office with a segment of the electorate questioning his legitimacy. On that score, Trump doesn’t represent a new crisis for American democracy but rather an escalation of one that’s been building — one that we’ve all played a role in creating and that he has deftly exploited to his advantage.

We used to argue over whether new presidents had a “mandate,” which was a more polite way of raising the legitimacy question. After the 1992 election, Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole said President-elect Bill Clinton did not have a mandate to press ahead with any sweeping changes because he’d obtained only 43 percent of the popular vote in a three-way race. Republicans convinced themselves that third-party candidate Ross Perot had cost them the election, taking more votes away from George H.W. Bush than from Clinton. They were quick to accuse Clinton in his first year of liberal overreach for pressing to allow gays in the military, raise energy taxes and take on an ambitious overhaul of the healthcare system. Anger among conservatives that Clinton would illegitimately (in their view) push such an agenda led to the so-called Gingrich Revolution in 1994, fed any number of conspiracy theories and led Republicans to gleefully pursue Clinton’s impeachment during his second term.

Then in 2000 came one of the more contentious presidential elections in U.S. history — not because of the substance of the campaign between Al Gore and George W. Bush, two amiable and seemingly moderate candidates, but because the result was too close to call for weeks. It took a Supreme Court intervention to put an end to the indecision. Compounding the muddled nature of the outcome, Bush obtained half a million fewer votes in the popular count nationwide. Some members of the Congressional Black Caucus (including Rep. John Lewis, who forcefully questioned Trump’s legitimacy this past week) refused to attend the inauguration. I can remember all the debates then among fellow journalists and friends about either the necessity, or the peril, of “normalizing” such an abnormal, unsatisfying result with a “normal” inauguration and all the other trappings afforded an incoming president.

We tend to forget the extent to which #notmypresident could have been a trending hashtag in those early Bush days — if hashtags had been around — because everything would soon change, on Sept. 11, 2001. After the terrorist attacks, Americans rallied around their president, as we always tend to do in wartime, and the grousing about his legitimacy or mandate stopped. But a few years later, with mounting disillusionment over open-ended military campaigns abroad and a sense that the administration had launched the Iraq invasion on false pretenses, millions of Americans once again began to question not only Bush’s judgment but also his legitimacy. None other than New York real estate tycoon Donald Trump called for Bush’s impeachment.


more


https://www.washingtonpost.com/post...llegitimate-heres-why/?utm_term=.2e8c81bc14f6

Trump helped lead the "birther" bullshyte about Obama in order to undermine his Presidency.

Karma.

They'll never leave Trump alone.