What Does Everyone Think About the 2020 Presidential Candidates

[slingshot]

It's 2016 all over again-a choice between horrible or the worst imaginable.

If only someone else said that I would have thought that they were not talking politics but about Rob Singer's two books. Out of fairness to Rob, I have not invested in or read those books.

Honestly, the first two books were more about what NOT to do. The VPTruth site and his replies via emails contained many of his strategies, etc. After playing the suggested credits and observing while I played, the "feel" of playing win goals, etc. became second nature and I modified some sessions-like changing machines or games after it seemed futile to continue after it became obvious nothing was improving. In other words common sense. That's why I say it's a very flexible strategy and not a step one then step two approach. As far as Trump, I voted for him- let's just say he exasperates me every time he opens his mouth. But the "worst imaginable" would be the "socialists" giving our great country away- God bless America.

[Bob21]

Pete Buttigieg is moving up in the polls. He is now ranked third in a Monday poll. We don't need any more old men in the White House.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...c-primary-2020

Midwest Player, It’s not gonna matter who the Democrats run against Trump since Trump is going to win a landslide. And all the pollsers and liberal pundents (which is 90% of the press) are going to miss it, just like they did the last election.

Why? Because the public is not honest when they answer the pollster’s questions. Many don’t answer these questions correctly since they don’t want to be seen as a racists, and the mainstream media has labeled anybody who is a Tump supporter a racist. But when they get into the election booth where nobody knows what they’re doing, that’s when they will pull the Trump lever.

I look at my situation at work. When Trump comes up in a discussion, I never express my views since I’ve learned a long time ago the two subjects you never discuss at work are religion and politics. The last thing you want to be seen as supporting Trump in a group because you know there’s always going to be one or two people that are adamantly against him. Brainwashed liberals like you equate support for Trump as a support for racism. But when I’m in that voting booth, you can bet I’m pulling the Trump lever.

That’s why I like these forums. You can express your views openly without worrying about how it’ll affect your job. There is still freedom of speech on some of these forums like this one.

Midwest Player, the good news for you is you can openly express your political views since your views are aligned with the liberals and our PC culture. It appears you’ve bought all the liberals lies.

[Rob.Singer]

Queer Pete B. has zero chance because informed voters know he's not only all flash and no go--he'd never be able to even talk to half the world's leaders because of his stupid sexual choice---he'd be executed if he tried to step foot in several important middle eastern countries.

And enough of this gay agenda being shoved in our faces via the media anyway. You can't watch any new shows these days without homos, lesbians, or transgender freaks being a part of it. They're not even 1.5% of the population, yet they're in virtually every new show on TV spewing their sick nonsense.

[Midwest Player]

And enough of this gay agenda being shoved in our faces via the media anyway. You can't watch any new shows these days without homos, lesbians, or transgender freaks being a part of it. They're not even 1.5% of the population, yet they're in virtually every new show on TV spewing their sick nonsense.

Did you pull that figure out of your ass? They are more like 3.5% of the population. And there are millions, so they definitely can turn the tide of any election.
https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.e...T-Apr-2011.pdf

https://www.hrc.org/blog/turnout-201...eground-states

Don't rule out Pete yet.

[Bob21]

And enough of this gay agenda being shoved in our faces via the media anyway. You can't watch any new shows these days without homos, lesbians, or transgender freaks being a part of it. They're not even 1.5% of the population, yet they're in virtually every new show on TV spewing their sick nonsense.

Did you pull that figure out of your ass? They are more like 3.5% of the population. And there are millions, so they definitely can turn the tide of any election.
https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.e...T-Apr-2011.pdf

https://www.hrc.org/blog/turnout-201...eground-states

Don't rule out Pete yet.

Midwest Player, who cares how many queers and sex perverts there are? That’s not the point. The point is someone should not get special treatment just because they have some sextual perversion.

Are you still upset North Carolina had a law in place that didn’t allow men who put dresses on into the women’s bathrooms? Don’t worry that law has been changed. The NBA players saw to that. They wouldn’t play their All Star Game in Charlotte until men dressing up like women were allowed into women’s restrooms. This is the hill they decided to take a stand on. Lol

So you can rest easy now knowing that if you ever go to North Carolina you can use the women’s restroom without getting arrested. I don’t know how their law reads, but I don’t think you even need to dress like a women to use women’s restrooms.

Now your good friends, the liberals, can move onto their next great cause. I can’t wait to see what it is. It’ll be hard to trump the bathroom one. Lol

[Rob.Singer]

And enough of this gay agenda being shoved in our faces via the media anyway. You can't watch any new shows these days without homos, lesbians, or transgender freaks being a part of it. They're not even 1.5% of the population, yet they're in virtually every new show on TV spewing their sick nonsense.

Did you pull that figure out of your ass? They are more like 3.5% of the population. And there are millions, so they definitely can turn the tide of any election.
https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.e...T-Apr-2011.pdf

https://www.hrc.org/blog/turnout-201...eground-states

Don't rule out Pete yet.

You didn't listen.

Your figure includes every butthead who goes around claiming they're "bisexual". They like to think that moronic revelation impresses everyone. Mine does not.

Imagine a queer squirt like Pete B. trying to get a meeting with Putin or any leader in Saudi Arabia. They may not execute the little fairy, but you'll see them chop his little shit-covered weenie off.

[mickeycrimm]

And enough of this gay agenda being shoved in our faces via the media anyway. You can't watch any new shows these days without homos, lesbians, or transgender freaks being a part of it. They're not even 1.5% of the population, yet they're in virtually every new show on TV spewing their sick nonsense.

Did you pull that figure out of your ass? They are more like 3.5% of the population. And there are millions, so they definitely can turn the tide of any election.
https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.e...T-Apr-2011.pdf

https://www.hrc.org/blog/turnout-201...eground-states

Don't rule out Pete yet.

Pete Boodyfudge ain't going anywhere in the Democrat party. He can't win without the black vote. It's well known the black community don't like gays. And he's got problems with his all white police force in South Bend. How do you like the hypocrisy? Black people don't like being discriminated against but they discriminate against gays. You can't make this shit up.

[mickeycrimm]

Looking forward to Starbucks shutting down for a day and giving their employee's sensitivity training on how to treat cops.

[redietz]

Today I was reminded that even though I am left of Marx, my practical approach to things was partly shaped by Ross Perot. I thought he was the best candidate at the time and made the most sense to me. A large part of my respect for Perot came from his scientific approach. He was an advocate of testing economic, administrative, and infrastructure theories with small scale test runs to get a feel for the unseen problems that always pop up. He wanted formal testing to provide evidence of which direction was best. His first run, he got almost 20% of the vote.

He mixed folksy with class and with sincerity.

[Midwest Player]

And enough of this gay agenda being shoved in our faces via the media anyway. You can't watch any new shows these days without homos, lesbians, or transgender freaks being a part of it. They're not even 1.5% of the population, yet they're in virtually every new show on TV spewing their sick nonsense.

Did you pull that figure out of your ass? They are more like 3.5% of the population. And there are millions, so they definitely can turn the tide of any election.
https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.e...T-Apr-2011.pdf

https://www.hrc.org/blog/turnout-201...eground-states

Don't rule out Pete yet.

Pete Boodyfudge ain't going anywhere in the Democrat party. He can't win without the black vote. It's well known the black community don't like gays. And he's got problems with his all white police force in South Bend. How do you like the hypocrisy? Black people don't like being discriminated against but they discriminate against gays. You can't make this shit up.

Mickey, I just looked up what you said and it appears you are right. Pete B should play down all the hugging and kissing of his spouse until the election is over. It does turn some folks off. He is a very smart guy, and I think he could serve our country well.

Here is my prediction. If Biden wins the nomination he will probably pick a woman as a running mate. Most likely Harris. If Harris or Warren wins, they won't pick an old man like Sanders or Biden. They will probably pick Pete B.

Where the hell is KJ, he should know if the gay community is going to support Pete lock, stock, and barrel.

[seemoreroyals]

I knew Ross Perot was getting old and I supported him as well and was really disappointed when he faded away. Seemingly all we have now to choose from is one party too far to the left and one party too far to the right. Ross Perot will be missed but unfortunately our country is not anywhere close to going in the direction he was hoping he could lead it in if his ideas could have taken hold with enough people. We really do have a desperate need for a 3rd party in the middle but both the r's and d's have such a strangle hold on the political process we may never see a viable third party candidate running for president.

[Rob.Singer]

Perot was goofy and his candidacy was a joke, much like the entirety of the democrat clowns that make fools of themselves in these stupid "debates".

This election won't be nearly as close as the last, and the last one wasn't close. The whiners like to point out how the popular vote went to Hillary, but they ignore how most of those type voters in Calif., NY and Illinois are irrelevant to our democracy.

The only democrat who even LOOKS presidential among that silly group is K. Harris, and if she gets the nomination it'll be by default. But as soon as she faces off against Trump in a debate she'll be exposed as a liberal dunce with crackpot ideas. Trump will tout his economy, tax cuts, deregulations, the market, jobs, minority employment rates, prison reform, foreign policy and on and on. And as soon as she starts in about gun control, it's game over. If she starts spewing one of her denials and lies about any of the Trump successes, the independents will start ordering their MAGA hats.

[redietz]

Reditz, what does it mean to be left of Marx exactly? Communist totalitarianism under Marx isn't enough dead people for you. You lean more towards real killers like Stalin, Mao or the dreaded Hitler maybe?

It means I think that everyone, regardless of status at birth or parents' income/wealth, should have equal access to all levels of education and job training if they have equal grades and aptitudes. That means everybody starts on an equal footing preschool. I have some quirks regarding health care, in that I would want the state picking up the tab only if people follow particular dietary and workout regimens. I guess that would be considered totalitarian. Oh well.

When I talk about equal opportunities in education, I don't mean just to get into particular high schools or colleges. I mean to be able to execute at school. Somebody working 20-30 hours a week at something not related to their area of study is at an enormous disadvantage compared to someone who can devote the hours to the field of study. Malcolm Gladwell would point out that working 20 hours a week per year (most college students take five years these days) means 5000 hours, which is halfway to expertise, according to Gladwell. That 5000 hours is crucial. The U.S. system is woefully slanted to the wealthy, compared to other western democracies.

And let's not go with the mortality tallies. The United States isn't the worst, but it comes close. We're talking two separate genocides and the highest incarceration rate. Plus the first to use a nuclear weapon on a civilian populace. Not lacking in bloodthirstiness, not that there's anything wrong with that.

[quahaug]

Reditz, what does it mean to be left of Marx exactly? Communist totalitarianism under Marx isn't enough dead people for you. You lean more towards real killers like Stalin, Mao or the dreaded Hitler maybe?

It means I think that everyone, regardless of status at birth or parents' income/wealth, should have equal access to all levels of education and job training if they have equal grades and aptitudes. That means everybody starts on an equal footing preschool. I have some quirks regarding health care, in that I would want the state picking up the tab only if people follow particular dietary and workout regimens. I guess that would be considered totalitarian. Oh well.

When I talk about equal opportunities in education, I don't mean just to get into particular high schools or colleges. I mean to be able to execute at school. Somebody working 20-30 hours a week at something not related to their area of study is at an enormous disadvantage compared to someone who can devote the hours to the field of study. Malcolm Gladwell would point out that working 20 hours a week per year (most college students take five years these days) means 5000 hours, which is halfway to expertise, according to Gladwell. That 5000 hours is crucial. The U.S. system is woefully slanted to the wealthy, compared to other western democracies.

And let's not go with the mortality tallies. The United States isn't the worst, but it comes close. We're talking two separate genocides and the highest incarceration rate. Plus the first to use a nuclear weapon on a civilian populace. Not lacking in bloodthirstiness, not that there's anything wrong with that.

What has all that got to do with Karl Marx? He's one of the most heinous and evil men to have ever been born.

[Bob21]

And let's not go with the mortality tallies. The United States isn't the worst, but it comes close. We're talking two separate genocides and the highest incarceration rate. Plus the first to use a nuclear weapon on a civilian populace. Not lacking in bloodthirstiness, not that there's anything wrong with that.

Redietz, are you serious? Are you really trotting out these classic go-to liberal attacks on America? Yes, American was the first country to use a nuclear weapon. Guess what? We were also the first country to develop one. What do you think would have happened if Germany, Japan, or any other country had developed one before us? I’ll give you a clue. They would have used it first.

I don’t know if you remember your history but we were in WWII when we used it. Most historians believe dropping it on Japan saved millions of lives and led to the end of the war. The alternative was to have an conventional mainline assault on Japan, which would have led to many more Japanese and American deaths. Evil (which Japan and Germany were at that time) only understands one thing....and that’s a big stick. And a nuclear bomb is a pretty big stick.

As far as our high prison population this is the result of all the goofball social programs started by the liberals in the 60s. They were designed to break up the family (which is the best way to raise children) and promote laziness and dependency on the government. Basically, the Democates warehoused large parts of our minority population in projects in the inner city and then drove out business through punitive tax policies. The liberals pretty much destroyed the inner cities and created the surge in crime we’ve seen and the mess we’re currently living with.

The conservatives are trying to clean up this mess. But it won’t be easy since the Democates took over 50 years to create it.

[Rob.Singer]

redietz is no different than most other liberals of today: he hates America, he hates what it stands for, and he hates our history.

[mickeycrimm]

Today I was reminded that even though I am left of Marx, my practical approach to things was partly shaped by Ross Perot. I thought he was the best candidate at the time and made the most sense to me. A large part of my respect for Perot came from his scientific approach. He was an advocate of testing economic, administrative, and infrastructure theories with small scale test runs to get a feel for the unseen problems that always pop up. He wanted formal testing to provide evidence of which direction was best. His first run, he got almost 20% of the vote.

He mixed folksy with class and with sincerity.

Bill Clinton would have lost if not for Ross Perot.

[tableplay]

Today I was reminded that even though I am left of Marx, my practical approach to things was partly shaped by Ross Perot. I thought he was the best candidate at the time and made the most sense to me. A large part of my respect for Perot came from his scientific approach. He was an advocate of testing economic, administrative, and infrastructure theories with small scale test runs to get a feel for the unseen problems that always pop up. He wanted formal testing to provide evidence of which direction was best. His first run, he got almost 20% of the vote.

He mixed folksy with class and with sincerity.

IIRC Redietz, Perot was sent an anonymous letter threatening harm to his family if he didn't drop out of the race, so he dropped out of the race. We could of used a pragmatist like him in the WH back then.

[dannyj]

Today I was reminded that even though I am left of Marx, my practical approach to things was partly shaped by Ross Perot. I thought he was the best candidate at the time and made the most sense to me. A large part of my respect for Perot came from his scientific approach. He was an advocate of testing economic, administrative, and infrastructure theories with small scale test runs to get a feel for the unseen problems that always pop up. He wanted formal testing to provide evidence of which direction was best. His first run, he got almost 20% of the vote.

He mixed folksy with class and with sincerity.

IIRC Redietz, Perot was sent an anonymous letter threatening harm to his family if he didn't drop out of the race, so he dropped out of the race. We could of used a pragmatist like him in the WH back then.

I voted for Perot, and admittedly in hindsight, I was naive. Of the three candidates, Bill Clinton had my least amount of support (actually none). By voting for R.P., Clinton won with 43% of the vote.

Rush had an interesting take on that election yesterday. He thinks Perot, who had a personal feud with H.W. Bush, never really wanted or intended to win. He just wanted to screw Bush.

[tableplay]

Today I was reminded that even though I am left of Marx, my practical approach to things was partly shaped by Ross Perot. I thought he was the best candidate at the time and made the most sense to me. A large part of my respect for Perot came from his scientific approach. He was an advocate of testing economic, administrative, and infrastructure theories with small scale test runs to get a feel for the unseen problems that always pop up. He wanted formal testing to provide evidence of which direction was best. His first run, he got almost 20% of the vote.

He mixed folksy with class and with sincerity.

IIRC Redietz, Perot was sent an anonymous letter threatening harm to his family if he didn't drop out of the race, so he dropped out of the race. We could of used a pragmatist like him in the WH back then.

I voted for Perot, and admittedly in hindsight, I was naive. Of the three candidates, Bill Clinton had my least amount of support (actually none). By voting for R.P., Clinton won with 43% of the vote.

Rush had an interesting take on that election yesterday. He thinks Perot, who had a personal feud with H.W. Bush, never really wanted or intended to win. He just wanted to screw Bush.

The damage Clinton caused with NAFTA was immeasurable - I doubt the country will ever recover from it.