Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My attitude may be cynical but, in our current reality, only the votes of swing state/potential swing state voters really matter. The person you are replying to lives in Oklahoma. Trump was going to win Oklahoma no matter how he voted. I live in Texas, and Trump was going to win Texas no matter how I voted. You live in Illinois, and HRC was going to win in Illinois no matter how you voted.
Well, that is largely true, and it's one of the reason some people object to the EC. We would like our votes to matter.
I'm one Democrat who has never cared for Hillary very much.
I have always thought she was very intelligent, had a good understanding of all the fundamental processes that makes our political system work, and has always been someone who can lead an agency very well.
But I have never thought her personality was a good fit for the job of President. In some ways, she is a lot like Donald Trump, I think; she can be vindictive like Trump, and has the same tendency to surround herself with sycophants who who would rather applaud her than tell her a disagreeable truth.
But unlike Trump, Hillary knows when she makes a mistake, and can take the hit if she must from a mistake and then move on. She's thin-skinned, but not like Trump's thin skin; she doesn't have the eternal need to be right all the time, every time, like he does.
She may get defensive when she's wrong, but the defensiveness doesn't last long, and she does learn from her mistakes.
So although she has never been my first choice, I voted for her last year. But I didn't in 2008, when I had more and better choices.
A lot of conservatives still believe she will run again, but she won't. She knows that if she tried again, her party would never nominate her, and no candidate these days gets a third swing of the bat. 2 strikes and you're out now.
More importantly, she and Trump will both be 75 by the next election, a full decade older than anyone who has ever won a first term. That's too old for anyone to do a good job as President in this century, when things are changing so radically and so quickly.
I can say that because I'm the same age as them. While age does bring wisdom, it also brings it at a slower pace than when a mind is younger.
It's apparent that in the 21st century, every President will have to have the ability to think fast and confidently, making decisions that come from both experience and the ability to change one's thoughts from the past to the present and to the future. What happened in the 20th century is becoming increasingly less relevant to the present with every passing year.
The modern Presidency ever since Bush has become more like a fast responder to sudden crisis than anything. An old person simply can't respond quickly time after time reliably.
We who were living then watched Reagan's mind degenerate with age during his second term, and he was 77 when his second term expired.
If Trump is re-elected, he will only a month or two from 80, and so would Clinton.
I don't know any 80-year old who is still as sharp as they were when they were 50 or 60.
And even if the mind is still keen, the body wears out. Most people die in their 70s today, and neither Trump nor Clinton are in anything close to perfect health.
In comparison, Obama won't be Trump's present age until 2033. By then, Clinton and Trump will both be 87.
To me, his age was a much better one for the job he did that what our choices in 2016 gave us. I was faced with voting for the geezer who was the most mentally acute. That's a choice I don't want to ever have to make again.
When it came to Hillary or Obama, I chose Obama. When it came to Hillary or Trump, I chose Hillary. If Hillary were the Democratic nominee (she won't be though) I would vote for Hillary again. I cannot imagine any circumstance where I would vote for Trump. As bad as I thought he would be, he has turned out to be worse in every category. I think he has permanently destroyed the Trump name and the Trump brand.
Would I vote for Hilary again? It depends on who she's running against. It's ridiculous to vote for someone based on the, "anyone but X," idea. Each candidate should be considered based of their own merits or lack thereof, not because they are not the other candidate.
Agreed. hat is exactly why I would never vote for Hillary. No morals, no integrity, refuses to take responsibility for any of her failures, and even now can't accept that she lost to Trump because she really was that bad. That is saying something because Trump is really that bad.
I'm one Democrat who has never cared for Hillary very much.
I have always thought she was very intelligent, had a good understanding of all the fundamental processes that makes our political system work, and has always been someone who can lead an agency very well.
But I have never thought her personality was a good fit for the job of President. In some ways, she is a lot like Donald Trump, I think; she can be vindictive like Trump, and has the same tendency to surround herself with sycophants who who would rather applaud her than tell her a disagreeable truth.
But unlike Trump, Hillary knows when she makes a mistake, and can take the hit if she must from a mistake and then move on. She's thin-skinned, but not like Trump's thin skin; she doesn't have the eternal need to be right all the time, every time, like he does.
She may get defensive when she's wrong, but the defensiveness doesn't last long, and she does learn from her mistakes.
So although she has never been my first choice, I voted for her last year. But I didn't in 2008, when I had more and better choices.
A lot of conservatives still believe she will run again, but she won't. She knows that if she tried again, her party would never nominate her, and no candidate these days gets a third swing of the bat. 2 strikes and you're out now.
More importantly, she and Trump will both be 75 by the next election, a full decade older than anyone who has ever won a first term. That's too old for anyone to do a good job as President in this century, when things are changing so radically and so quickly.
I can say that because I'm the same age as them. While age does bring wisdom, it also brings it at a slower pace than when a mind is younger.
It's apparent that in the 21st century, every President will have to have the ability to think fast and confidently, making decisions that come from both experience and the ability to change one's thoughts from the past to the present and to the future. What happened in the 20th century is becoming increasingly less relevant to the present with every passing year.
The modern Presidency ever since Bush has become more like a fast responder to sudden crisis than anything. An old person simply can't respond quickly time after time reliably.
We who were living then watched Reagan's mind degenerate with age during his second term, and he was 77 when his second term expired.
If Trump is re-elected, he will only a month or two from 80, and so would Clinton.
I don't know any 80-year old who is still as sharp as they were when they were 50 or 60.
And even if the mind is still keen, the body wears out. Most people die in their 70s today, and neither Trump nor Clinton are in anything close to perfect health.
In comparison, Obama won't be Trump's present age until 2033. By then, Clinton and Trump will both be 87.
To me, his age was a much better one for the job he did that what our choices in 2016 gave us. I was faced with voting for the geezer who was the most mentally acute. That's a choice I don't want to ever have to make again.
Interesting. The text of your post #43 (on the thread) stated in the post above...WHEN IT ORIGINALLY HIT THE THREAD... that by 2020, Obama will be 65. I clicked on post #43 to bold that section and reply, because Obama will not be 65 by 2020. He'll turn 59 in 2020. However, I couldn't highlight that section of yours, because it was inexplicably gone.
Edit: Aha. You must still have been logged in and changed it yourself before I could quote it, because that section is now gone in post #43 as well with no edit message.
Every time someone posts a disparaging post on Hillary on here all the Dems post "why do you keep bringing her up?". They seem embarrassed by her and it's their only retort. Well Hillary has been dropping hints that she'll run for office again. If she does would you vote for her again and why?
I don't dislike her as much as I dislike Trump.
But -- I just think it is silly to keep bringing her up -- and for some liberals to bring up Bush, etc.
At some point we have to let it go.
I noticed Trump is still talking about Clinton -- I guess he's still campaigning. I think that if things were really going well why would you bring her up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
