General Presidential Campaign: Trump vs Hillary

Statalyzer said:
I think a Trump election might actually be better for America, because a lot of his stupidity will be stopped because of how much open opposition and contempt he generates
Click to expand...

This couldn't be more dead on about which one could do the most damage.

With HC it will be business as usual and worse. Illegal exec orders, Congressional minority protected vetos, and even heavy resistance to impeachment if further corruption is unmasked.

With Trump we'd actually get to see why our founding fathers created the separation of powers.

Congress was supposed to work together and check the executive branch from overstepping. The gang mentality that has completely infected Congress provides almost instant green lights from a party on every absurd action their leader takes.

I watch votes on CSPAN now and then...it's f'n ridiculous. 95+% of the time it's 98% of each party opposing the other. Even on trivial items. Representatives of the people? :puke:

With the guaranteed veto-proof minority in 2016, HC will do even worse damage than BO did with same setup these last 2 years. Reps owned HOR and Senate...without 60 votes in Senate, didn't matter.

As long as the majority can't override a veto, they're all but impotent. Any new bill HC doesn't like, she'd reject it and an override will fall short of the votes.

Why does Congress get nothing done nowadays? Veto proof minority is top of the list. Majority passes a bill they favor, minority opposes, Prez vetoes it as part of the minority party, vote falls short of override numbers. Bill dies. It's always been the process but no longer works as neither side is remotely willing to compromise.

And let's not even fathom the hell HC would unleash with a Congressional majority rubber stamping her every whim. Then a Lib majority Supreme Court would side against every legal challenge to her actions. Can we say corrupt dictator?

With Trump, regardless of who's in majority, Congress as a whole would be very measured and critical of what they allow. The actual merits of the item would be considered for a change.

Checks and balances...smart men insisted on it for a reason. Then crooks in Washington sold their morals for gang loyalty, gamed the system, and all but defeated the purpose.
 
Last edited:
Not sure how electing Trump would "fix" Congress. You make it sound like slim majorities in either chamber are the bonus of having someone run the executive branch.

Brad Austin said:
With Trump we'd actually get to see why our founding fathers created the separation of powers.
Click to expand...

You mean like the veto power? That's the definition of checks and balances. It's not supposed to be simple to override. Or maybe you thought the founding fathers would make it that way.

Brad Austin said:
And let's not even fathom the hell HC would unleash with a Congressional majority rubber stamping her every whim.
Click to expand...

Please. Replace HC with DT and her with his... it's the same thing.

With Trump, regardless of who's in majority, Congress as a whole would be very measured and critical of what they allow. The actual merits of the item would be considered for a change.
Click to expand...

But why? Because conservatives would somehow circle the wagons around a package of legislation that would be more level-headed and practical? But the same scenario couldn't happen for the blue states?
 
But why? Because conservatives would somehow circle the wagons around a package of legislation that would be more level-headed and practical? But the same scenario couldn't happen for the blue states?
Click to expand...

Because a lot more conservatives dislike Trump than liberals dislike Clinton.
 
Not likely in the HoR. They'll send through every Constitution-violating bill he wants, from birthright citizenship to whatever else. If HC was elected, at least there would be measure of restraint to not pass legislation that has no shot to get past her desk.

I find it laughable that the GOP would suddenly shy from running up the score if Trump had majorities in both chambers. They would quite literally reverse everything that has happened over the past 8 years and then some. But I guess that's what passes for "measured and critical response" for some.
 
Horns11 said:
Not likely in the HoR. They'll send through every Constitution-violating bill he wants, from birthright citizenship to whatever else. If HC was elected, at least there would be measure of restraint to not pass legislation that has no shot to get past her desk.

I find it laughable that the GOP would suddenly shy from running up the score if Trump had majorities in both chambers. They would quite literally reverse everything that has happened over the past 8 years and then some. But I guess that's what passes for "measured and critical response" for some.
Click to expand...
How else to make America great again if you didn't reverse Obama's worst executive actions, regulations and laws?
 
Gotta agree with Horns11. I don't see much logic to the idea that a Republican Congress would moderate Trump but let Hillary Clinton run wild. The opposite is far more likely to be true. Furthermore, I don't see much reason to believe that Trump would restore the separation of powers to what the founders intended. Trump has mostly been able to run his businesses however he chooses. Why should anyone assume that he'd completely reverse his style and show some deep deference to limits on his own power? I don't see it.
 
Furthermore, I don't see much reason to believe that Trump would restore the separation of powers to what the founders intended. Trump has mostly been able to run his businesses however he chooses. Why should anyone assume that he'd completely reverse his style and show some deep deference to limits on his own power?
Click to expand...

Agree with that part 100%. He ran his businesses like Ebenezer Scrooge from what I can tell.

I don't see much logic to the idea that a Republican Congress would moderate Trump but let Hillary Clinton run wild. The opposite is far more likely to be true.
Click to expand...

It's more that Hillary Clinton would face far less opposition from her own party than Trump would.
 
Neither would face opposition from their own majority. That's my point. But it's unlikely that the Democrats will get the House back for a while because of the way districts have been drawn up over the past 10 years and the polarization of partisanship. So it's "safer" in the separation of powers standpoint to elect HC than Trump, which seemed to be Brad's point.

From which GOP members would Trump face opposition? Maybe Susan Collins in the Senate, but there were only 2 GOP members from the last House (Chris Smith from NJ and Chris Gibson from NY) who scored in the "moderate" range with nearly as many liberal votes as conservative ones. Two votes isn't enough to keep Trump's congressional friends from sliding through his little "tests" for the U.S. Constitution.
 
New poll voters on Trump and his immigration positions
https://morningconsult.com/polling/
Here are some of the results --

-- The Wall? -- 46% of voters favor. 45% oppose

-- Decrease legal immigration? -- 52% of voters want to decrease legal immigration, 36% oppose

-- Deport unauthorized immigrants? -- 46% of voters want to deport unauthorized immigrants. 44% oppose

-- Deport criminal illegal immigrants? -- 64% of voters want to deport criminal illegal immigrants. 25% oppose

-- Deportation Task Force? -- 59% of voters support a Deportation Task Force. 28% oppose
 
Statalyzer said:
It's more that Hillary Clinton would face far less opposition from her own party than Trump would.
Click to expand...

She'd face less, but I don't think she'd face far less. If Trump wins, he may not have a strong national mandate, but there's no question that he'll have an intraparty mandate. Arguably, he already does by winning the nomination. Since about 90 percent of congressional are uncompetitive in the general election, an incumbent's biggest fear is going to be a primary challenge from the populist Right. That means that there is going to be enormous pressure for a congressional Republican to fall in line. Furthermore, a President like Trump will have a unique ability (because of his money and showmanship) to go into a congressional district to foment opposition to a congressional Republican who resists his agenda.

And all of that is in addition to the normal pressure on a congressman to support his own president's agenda. Don't forget that during the Bush Administration, virtually every Republican on Capitol Hill voted for huge deficits, entitlement expansion, and increased federal oversight on public education after spending the previous decade preaching the exact opposite agenda.
 
Even though it was yet another Friday afternoon pre-national holiday doc dump, this latest FBI release on Clinton's lies and corruption appear to have been seen by enough voters to cause some effect with voters. This is the rolling USC-Dornsife LA Times poll

trump-leads-hillary-3-points-575x452.jpg
 
uh oh JF
The media will go into hyper overdrive to counter act what the population is now seeing and understanding of the FBI report.

There is nothing Trump could do IMO that is worse than Clinton's lies and disregard for our national security.
 
In an NYT article entitled "Where Has Hillary Clinton Been? Ask the Ultrarich," we learn that the ever generous HRC let children do something she does not let the US media do --
ask her questions.
for $2,700 each

"For a donation of $2,700, the children (under 16) of donors at an event last month at the Sag Harbor, N.Y., estate of the hedge fund magnate Adam Sender could ask Mrs. Clinton a question. A family photo with Mrs. Clinton cost $10,000, according to attendees."
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/04/us/politics/hillary-clinton-fundraising.html?_r=1
 
New IBD/TIPP poll shows 64% of voters want to see a special prosecutor appointed to investigate Hillary Clinton's misdeeds
 
Sources report -- "Hillary couldn't stop coughing on stage in Cleveland just now and barely able to speak."

----------

update -
she should drop out, for the sake of her health
(cant wait for the Snoopes piece that tells us she was not really coughing)




eeeh....
CrkrAU_VIAItqMA.jpg
 
Last edited:
Joe Fan said:
Sources report -- "Hillary couldn't stop coughing on stage in Cleveland just now and barely able to speak."
----------
update -
she should drop out, for the sake of her health
(cant wait for the Snoopes piece that tells us she was not really coughing)
Click to expand...

Annnnnnnd there it is - did not take long -- the media already making excuses
-- Maybe she is allergic to the press? She did spend 89 seconds with them today on ConAir

Crnn-2tWIAADDY6.jpg



-------------
update -- see the actual pollen count for Cleveland today (they lied)

Crns5Z9VIAAfK-z.jpg
 
Last edited:
So after that 4m hack-a-loogie fit at her Cleveland appearance today^^^, Hills returned to her plane, and began to her first ever in history meeting with the media on the plane ("snakes on a plane?"), and you will never guess what happened.

Hillary had another coughing fit and had to adjourn

How will they cover this one up?

 
I think the swing in this one is ~10 points from early August (post-DNC)

CNN/ORC Poll -- Trump now 45%-43% among Likely Voters

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2016/images/09/05/rel13a.-.2016.post-labor.day.pdf

Poll conducted Sept. 1-4 among 786 likely voters; error margin +/- 3.5 ppts

Libertarian Gary Johnson has at 7% among likely voters

Green Party’s Jill Stein 2%

------------------------

"Is more honest and trustworthy" applies more to:
Clinton 35%
Trump 50%

Would better handle the economy:
Clinton 41%
Trump 56%
 
Last edited:
Joe Fan said:
I think the swing in this one is ~10 points from early August (post-DNC)

CNN/ORC Poll -- Trump now 45%-43% among Likely Voters

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2016/images/09/05/rel13a.-.2016.post-labor.day.pdf

Poll conducted Sept. 1-4 among 786 likely voters; error margin +/- 3.5 ppts

Libertarian Gary Johnson has at 7% among likely voters

Green Party’s Jill Stein 2%

------------------------

"Is more honest and trustworthy" applies more to:
Clinton 35%
Trump 50%

Would better handle the economy:
Clinton 41%
Trump 56%
Click to expand...
What a disaster!!! By the say, this a traditional poll for the folks who think Trump has no chance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top