I haven't voted yet but will vote for Clinton. Clinton certainly isn't perfect and has many flaws but as I've said consistently she is the most qualified candidate and the one who can steer things the most cabably. I understand that most people are frustrated with the system but when you look at why they are frustrated you get a wildly differing views. There are those who blame corporations and those who blame immigrants. While many might want to see revolutionary change there is a lot of disagreement about what change they want. I think most people are representing the revolutionary change that Trump is promissing just as if Sanders had won there would be very significant amounts of the population that would reject the change that he would've promissed. Hillary Clinton certainly isn't the candidate of revolutionary change but she is candidate who intimately understands the workings of government and understands that effective change needs to be done incrementally. That's probably not something that is very inspiring but in a time of continued uncertainty where the US continues to faces many challenges domestically and abroad having someone who will seek to make gradual change while minimizing harm is a good thing.
Voted for Clinton and legal mar1juana in Nevada because I was shocked that it wasn't already legal here.
The problem with this is yes, Hillary has experience, however, she has consistently made horrible decisions and failed at every step of her career. It's like saying Matt Schaub has significant experience as an NFL quarterback, therefore let's get him into Houston to take over for Brock Osweiler.
I don't like that Hillary is a horrible decision maker or consistently does or says out of touch things. What's going for her is that she works hard and tries to understand issues. She's also kept most of her promises, which gets her in trouble with the wrong promises but it just means you better get the best deal from the Lannister. A Kasich, warts and all, sounds a lot better right now, but that's not "my people" so too bad there...
That's a good analogy since Brock is literally the worst QB in the NFL. Schaub couldn't do worse than Brock.
I don't agree with this idea that she's a horrible decision maker. Where she has had failings when put in context with many others it isn't that difference. For example regarding her private server it is clear that her predecessors and many others were using private email. For that matter Bush 43 Admin. officials were RNC email servers to conduct government business on. Regarding Benghazi even the committee whose members admintted they were out to get her officially stated they could find no wrong doing. Regarding other major decisions the 1994 Health Care Act wasn't handled well but the idea that health care was reform was needed was widely shared. Going into Libya was one where US Allies were very much pushing the US to act. This idea that she is a horrible decision maker is one like many things is very exagerated. I agree with this and have I've stated before is that I do think she tries to please too many different groups. This though directly contradicts the idea that she is some ideologue.
Foreign policy has been a complete failure for her. "Russian reset"? FAIL. Arab Spring: complete Fail. ISIS' rise? Fail. just a complete disaster. You're the exception if you think she's done a good job there.
What should the US have done differently during the Arab Spring? Or Syria (and before you say maintained a presence in Iraq, please acknowledge that the removal of US troops was negotiated by the Bush administration and no sane politician on either side of the aisle would've taken the politically unpalatable position of leaving troops in Iraq indefinitely. To suggest otherwise is revisionist history). You've been quiet around here recently, would love to see your input.
Funny that you left off Russia! How did that work out for us? Obama/Clinton should have revisited the Iraq presence. That is clear.
Funny that you didn't answer my question about the Arab Spring! What should the United States have done? Quash popular uprisings against dictators? I don't know the best answer regarding Russia. Putin invaded Ukraine and knows that nobody wants to start a full-fledged war, so he calls the West's bluff. I'll leave the Russia problem to people who've studied this persistent issue for years rather than pretend that Puppet Trump wouldn't be Putin's biggest coup of all.
What does "revisited" mean? Would any prominent national Republican supported an indefinite, boots-on-the-ground presence in Iraq around 2008-12? Do you really think the politics of the country and the mood of the electorate would've supported that position?
lol at your pitiful logic. "Indefinite presence" - false choice. Let me ask you this - we now have boots on the ground again, and have let ISIS form into an international terror organization that has executed many, many killings of innocents. Is that the outcome you would have voted for? pwn3d.
Jeb Bush presented Hillary Clinton with an award for having “dedicated her life to serving and engaging people across the world in democracy.” Lindsey Graham: “She’s dedicated to her job. She loves her country. And she understands the issues, and there are a lot of them in her job to understand. But more importantly, I think she is a good role model. […] [She is] one of the most effective secretary of states, greatest ambassadors for the American people that I have known in my lifetime.” Marco Rubio to Secretary Clinton: “I want to share sentiments of my other colleagues of tremendous respect for the hard work and service that you’ve put in on behalf of our country, both as a member of this chamber and then, obviously, now in—in the role you have.” Rick Perry on Hillary Clinton: “Very, very capable public servant. Great Secretary of State, first lady, and she’s very capable.” Condoleezza Rice: “Hillary Clinton is someone I’ve known for a long, long time. She’s a patriot. I think she’s doing a lot of the right things. […] I think she’s doing a fine job. I really do.” Henry Kissinger: “[Hillary Clinton] ran the State Department in the most effective way that I’ve ever seen.” Sen. John McCain (R-AZ): “Secretary Clinton is admired and respected around the world. She and I have been friends for many years. We used to travel together… So, I have – I admire the fact that she is admired throughout the world and a very effective Secretary of State.” Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT): “I happen to like Hillary Clinton; I think she’s done a good job for the… secretary of state’s position, and I have high respect for her and think a great deal of her.” Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-GA): “Thank you, Secretary Clinton, for your words of inspiration and for the magnificent job you do as the Secretary of State for our nation.” Sen. Cory Gardner (R-CO): “[Hillary Clinton] is successful in her own right, no doubt about that, as a senator, successful as Secretary of State.” Fmr. Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) to Hillary Clinton: “You’ve, I think, taken an international leadership role in, I think, raising the pressure levels in Iran.” Fmr. Gov. Jon Huntsman (R-UT): “I have to say she’s a very impressive public servant. […] And I have to say, I haven’t been around too many people as professional; as well-briefed. […] I have to say, she’s a very, very capable person.” pwn3d?
Please answer my question about the Arab Spring, it's the third time I've asked. "Indefinite" doesn't mean forever, but it does mean "unknown" when the goalposts keep getting moved (one of your favorite tactics). When would've been both a good and politically viable time, in America, for US troops to draw down in Iraq? You have no way of knowing that. I know the last few national elections haven't worked out the way you wanted, but they were a clear demonstration that the majority of Americans did not have a desire to remain in Iraq as a full-fledged occupying force. I know we have boots on the ground there now, but I also know you knew exactly what I meant when I said that. ISIS didn't form exclusively because of the US' departure from Iraq. You have to look at the rebellion in Syria and the vacuum that created, which has been filled by a number of groups who hate each other (ISIS, YPG, Assad's regime, rebels, al-Nusra, Russia, etc.). As I've stated in other threads on this topic, because I think it's really interesting, I have no idea what the solution is and pretending that I do on a basketball BBS, while people who spend their lives studying it don't, is naïve. I recommend watching the PBS Frontline documentary Confronting ISIS. Cool your jets with the pwnage, texxxie. I know it's been a rough few years for you around here, and you've gotta get your rocks off any way you can, but it's not about to look up for you here for the foreseeable future.
No one takes you seriously when you use hyperbolic language. That's the problem with you uber-partisans. You're never going to be able to "own" anyone except in rare circumstances because you hype everything up beyond reason. Beware the person who uses "complete disaster," "utter failure," etc. What it indicates, frequently, is that they lack the intellectual rigor to provide a reasoned, non-partisan evaluation. These are the same people who assign 100% blame for Benghazi to Clinton. Besides the fact that she was found to be "innocent" of wrongdoing, anyone who pins full responsibility for an Embassy attack, and response, on the Secretary of State has a lack of understanding of how our government works, and I'd recommend they brush up on their knowledge.
Nope, you're wrong yet again. Anybody who claims that Clinton's Russia policy (reset button, just LOL) wasn't a complete failure simply isn't paying attention. And to let ISIS rise? True incompetence. Hey, let's laugh it up with Russia and PUSH RESET! Very naive on Hillary's part. Now look where we sit.
I don't Don't often feel the need to comment, but man this particular post just smacks of complete ignorance of what has led to the current state of affairs in the ME. "Russian Puppet"? Apparently the MSM has the public well drunk on the spiked Kool-Aid. Beware the Russkie-Bogeyman. Coming soon to a presidency near you...
Let's discuss it, then: what has led to the current state of affairs? Was it the invasion of Iraq that destabilized a delicate secular balance between Sunni and Shia? Was it the Arab Spring, which saw power vacuums created with nobody ready to fill them? Is the funding of Wahhabism by the Saudi government that has spread a violent, poisonous ideology across the region? Was it the US leaving Iraq when it did? Is it the regional battle for control between Saudi Arabia and Iran being fought in various proxy wars? Does it go all the way back to the creation of Islam and the discovery of oil? Please tell me where I'm wrong instead of simply saying "Wrong." I'm interested. The puppet comment was a barb; I don't truly think Trump is Putin's puppet. I do think he has deliberately tried to plead ignorance about Russian cyber attacks on the American government when he has received classified briefings stating that we believe with high confidence that Russia was behind them. I don't know his motivations, but I do believe he has deliberately downplayed what Russia is doing on the world stage and encouraged it by saying he'd renege on NATO treaties.
Trump refuses to even acknowledge that Russia is behind the DNC leaks, which every intelligence agency has concluded to be the case. It's actually weird the lengths he goes to to dodge criticizing Russia. But of course, Trump and his Trumpanzees will keep blaming the MSM for the idiotic things that come out of his mouth, it's like a never-ending cycle of stupid.
