Team Bernie releases a new video about Hillary.

And it's right on.
Feel the Bern, establishment Democrats!

There's that thing you've got with wommin.

But Hillary as a person is, at times, shaky. Makes you treasure the man in the office today. He has been a real leader.

You've got to love Anderson Cooper, in the opening question. He doesn't waste any time digging into it.

Know your ABC's for election day:

Anyone
But
Clinton

This is your PSA for the day. And I approve of this message.

Remember when Karl Rove was declaring Mitt Romney the winner on election night, 2012?  Hilarious...which alliterates with Hillary.  Hmmm...  

IndependentThoughts wrote:You've got to love Anderson Cooper, in the opening question.  He doesn't waste any time digging into it.

Know your ABC's for election day:

Anyone
But
Clinton

This is your PSA for the day.  And I approve of this message.

Would you really prefer Trump to Clinton?

Ben_Reilly wrote:

IndependentThoughts wrote:You've got to love Anderson Cooper, in the opening question.  He doesn't waste any time digging into it.

Know your ABC's for election day:

Anyone
But
Clinton

This is your PSA for the day.  And I approve of this message.

Would you really prefer Trump to Clinton?

that is a good question?

Clinton may be very uninspired but she is the status quo in terms of policy.

I've thought about it.  Suppose Trump is merely playing the Republicans for patsys?  What if he really is for abortion, he likes Hispanics, he holds doors open for women and thinks Muslims are highly misunderstood.  Then he deserves a medal.

It's not unprecedented. Remember when President Eisenhower appointed Governor Earl Warren Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Then Warren turns around and drafts Brown v. Board of Education, starting the whole civil rights movement. "Worse damn appointment I ever made," spit Eisenhower.

It could happen.  This time he would have to deal from the elected podium...but he's doing a pretty good job of covering his real sympathies if that is what he is all about. Let's face it, he's waaaay short on details.

Ben wrote:Would you really prefer Trump to Clinton?

Good question...
On one side, we have a liberally biased candidate without much to their track-record insofar as diplomatic international achievements, and is swirled up in constant controversy.
One the other side you have Hillary, who is all the above, with an added dash of FBI investigations and a career peppered with blatant outright lies to her constituents (see video at the top of this thread).

Personally, I would have to hold my nose at the ballot box if it were to come down to these two.  
However, what starkly differentiates Trump from Hillary, and what I believe will sway many voters this election season, are their views on combating ISIS and ensuring national security.
Mark my words: this year’s presidential campaign will focus greatly on ISIS and national security.

Many believe that a vote for Hillary will yield another 4 years of the same foreign policies as past 8, and let’s face it: Americans are tired of the passive responses and lectures that they frustratingly keep receiving from Obama.  

When ISIS began targeting Christians, beheading them, and executing them, Americans were outraged.  In response, Obama tells us that ISIS is a JV team full of amateurs and that climate change was a much greater threat to national security.  Ummm... I’m sorry, but I don’t see Mother Nature detonating bombs around the world or massacring in the name of religion.

On Tuesday, February 3, 2015, ISIS released a video.  It was the burning death of a Jordanian pilot that had been shot down.
The next day, Wednesday, Feb 4, the United Nations issued a report detailing various “mass executions of boys, as well as reports of beheadings, crucifixions of children, and burying children alive” at the hands of ISIS.
Can you guess what President Obama’s response was to all of this news?
The following day, Thursday, Feb 5, he gave a speech at the National Prayer Breakfast… and told Christians to get off their high-horse because of the Crusades.
Wat?  How is that at all relevant to the issue at hand?

Obama wrote:And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obamas-speech-at-prayer-breakfast-called-offensive-to-christians/2015/02/05/6a15a240-ad50-11e4-ad71-7b9eba0f87d6_story.html

And then Paris occurred.  And then San Bernardino.  And then more speeches from Obama, again deflecting from the cause of the attacks and delivering more platitudes of how we shouldn’t harshly judge or castigate those that try to kill us.  
Americans are tired of this… and that’s why they’ve gravitated to Trump in huge numbers.  Even the ultra-liberal ladies on The View echoed this sentiment.  




Obama, himself, had to admit that he was left-field out-of-touch with Americans and their anxiety over recent terrorist attacks.  His “reason” for failing to connect with his constituents?  He doesn’t watch enough cable news.  No, I'm not making this up.  He needs CNN and Fox News to "stay in touch" with how Americans are feeling.  Wat?

CNN wrote:President Obama said in a private meeting this week that he initially failed to understand the level of national anxiety in the wake of the Paris and San Bernardino terrorist attacks, in part, because he didn't watch enough cable news.

http://money.cnn.com/2015/12/18/media/president-obama-off-record-meeting/

I think you see where I'm going with my answer to your question, here...
Do you mind sharing why you believe Hillary would be a better president?

Meh...forget ISIS.  Americans will not sit for another war in the Middle East.  Besides, it's none of our business.

Hire a few mercenaries to go over and lob off a few heads, if it's worth the satisfaction...until they get their heads off'ed. Revenge is never a good reason to go to war.

It's a Sunni-Shi'ite thing.  No sweat off our balls who comes out on top.  Good one to sit out.

The way it shakes down, Hillary's inevitable.  I like Sanders too, but it ain't gonna happen.  Trump will get the delegates, the Party will try to undermine him, leading to a breakup of the Republican Party, either with a third-party movement or a complete implosion due to the Atwater strategy.

The Republicans will be no more.  We'll see some new parties in eight years.

It seems that most people who don't like trump, also don't like Hilary either.
It's like choosing between two of your worst nightmares.

I mean, if it came down to Hilary and Trump, (I hope not for the sake of all of our US cousins!), do you choose Hilary because she's less of a monster???

eddie wrote:It seems that most people who don't like trump, also don't like Hilary either.
It's like choosing between two of your worst nightmares.

I mean, if it came down to Hilary and Trump, (I hope not for the sake of all of our US cousins!), do you choose Hilary because she's less of a monster???  

Yes, there is a lot of 'anti-ism' in the movement behind Donald Trump: anti-immigration, anti-feminism, anti-Muslim, anti-Hispanic, anti-POW, anti-Washington, and a unique kind of anglo-saxon-flavored xenophobia.  His supporters seem to ignore the lack of policy substance in his words, and applaud him most when he is simply being iconoclastic and nonconforming.  

That's why I theorize that Donald Trump is born of the massive disappointment of Republicans from the failures of the Bush administration: lost wars, unrequited dreams, failed prosperity (ie, tax cuts). near economic collapse...and of course, those affronts to humanity itself, rape, kidnapping, torture and murder.  They are saying: Whatever comes along, I don't want to ever see that again!

A part of that era was the anti-pc movement.  That was an era when they thumbed their noses at pc causes.  They flaunted their irreverence.  Of course, one of the greatest pc causes was feminism.  Born in the 70's, it flowered in the 80's and came to fruition in the 90's, with Hillary in the saddle.  She comes into the arena with a big, red target on her back.

Along comes Trump and starts in taunting women for having their periods once a month.  His first act as a politician, practically, was to insult Megyn Kelly, quickly followed by an insult to the facial looks of Carly Fiorina:  "Look at that face!" he cries. "Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president?!"  Anti-feminism was an early fire that he stoked mightily.

Is there any wonder there is a correlation between Trump supporters and rejection of the spokeswoman of political feminism?

IndependentThoughts wrote:

Ben wrote:Would you really prefer Trump to Clinton?

Personally, I would have to hold my nose at the ballot box if it were to come down to these two.  However, what starkly differentiates Trump from Hillary, and what I believe will sway many voters this election season, are their views on combating ISIS and ensuring national security. Mark my words: this year’s presidential campaign will focus greatly on ISIS and national security.

***

I think you see where I'm going with my answer to your question, here...
Do you mind sharing why you believe Hillary would be a better president?

If this election is really going to be about ISIS (it's probably not, unless Trump manages to keep ramping up the fear quotient with exaggerated estimates of the threat ISIS poses to Americans), then I can show you why I think Clinton is the preferable option with just two photographs taken in 2010:

Hillary Clinton:



Donald Trump:

Can't see Clinton in the top pic?

I can see a nice pair of legs though.

eddie wrote:It seems that most people who don't like trump, also don't like Hilary either.
It's like choosing between two of your worst nightmares.

I mean, if it came down to Hilary and Trump, (I hope not for the sake of all of our US cousins!), do you choose Hilary because she's less of a monster???  

yes, that is generally what voting for the lesser evil entails

but it also 'better the devil you know' Hillary is backed by the exact same big businesses that have backed the last half dozen US presidents


she is simply the 'status quo' and the USA is not going so badly where it needs to take the risk of apocalypse that 'President Trump'  implies.

eddie wrote:Can't see Clinton in the top pic?

She's seated on the right, hand over face.

Far right, brown suit, black trim. Adjust your zoom, eds.

We may not have a knight in shining armour, but this year is critical because the Supreme Court will be reappointed for the next generation. A Democrat not only gets to pick his or her own candidates, but we don't have a Republican picking.