If American - which presidential candidate will you vote for?

[sys]

I have alot of respect for Romney, Mccain, Boehner, Ryan, as high level republicans.

 

i've lost a lot of respect for ryan given the manner in which he has kowtowed to trump.  on the other hand, i've gained a great deal of respect for graham.  i don't agree with his extreme interventionist foreign policy ideas, but i very much respect how stood up to the pressure to fall in line behind his party's candidate, regardless of cost.  the more so since i believe his seat in the senate is not terribly secure.

[Guest Schwab711]

Regardless of your view of his policies (whatever they are), his "F-U" to the establishment, his tough talk on trade and immigration - this is simply not a person who should be representing America to the world.

 

I thought the comments on women and Mexicans were bad.  Then the making fun of the disabled journalist.  Then the racist comments about the judge.  Then the invitation to Russia to hack his competition.  But I'm sorry, the comments about the Khan family - and the refusal to apologize!?!?!?!?! I've sacrificed a lot because I've been very successful????  Shameful and embarrassing.  This is not a person with the temperament and disposition to be the global and public leader of America.  That's not what I want my kids growing up emulating, regardless of policy positions.

 

+1

 

This morning---11 Gold Star  family members penned an open letter to Trump demanding he apologize to the Khans for his "repugnant" remarks made in response to the Khan's appearance at the DNC. Mr. and Mrs. Khan both spoke on CNN this morning about their love of the U.S. and the character of son who made the ultimate sacrifice in service of his country. I invite all of you to watch the interview and attempt to connect with their grief as well as with their love of the U.S.

 

How can any active military person or veteran not be disgusted by Trump's comments. Why would anyone enter any branch of military service in the U.S. if Trump became President knowing that if you die in service that Trump would respond by ridiculing your parents in the time of their ultimate grief.

 

Trump is not fit to be President---I am not sure how any sane person can think or believe otherwise.

 

+ 1

 

Trump is serving as a wake up call for the American political system.  The Republican party needs to be slaughtered in this election and remake itself after the election.  The republicans created this monstrosity. A reasonable moderate republican could easily have beaten Clinton.  But they created such an anti-progressive negative environment, since 2008, that they gave rise to this buffoonism. 

 

At this point the Republican ticket is completely unravelling: Trump is self destructing.  He fired the manager he just hired.  Now he is claiming the system is rigged against him, I guess just like the Republican primaries were rigged against him.  He is thin skinned and cant take criticism.  He operates without a political platfrom, with nothing to say on real issues, because he actually doesn't know or read anything.  I have alot of respect for Romney, Mccain, Boehner, Ryan, as high level republicans.  But Trump is a piece of garbage as a human being. 

 

Why wont Trump issue his tax returns? The answer is so obvious: he is essentially broke.  This is his biggest lie of all.  I am a great businessman, a great deal maker.  If the tax returns were released everyone would see the truth.  He is a lousy businessman, who has relied on bullying to get his way to the extent that no one of business quality will deal with him. 

 

So, we, the world are stuck with Clinton for 4 years, and its all the Republicans fault.

 

+1

 

Completely agree on every point. Especially the first paragraph. I think the democratic party is slowly heading towards the same trap. This was a long time coming for the republican party and it's healthy for the country, in my view. Republicans could have a wealth of quality candidates if the party didn't create so many filters to joining.

 

[rb]

Trump is serving as a wake up call for the American political system.  The Republican party needs to be slaughtered in this election and remake itself after the election.  The republicans created this monstrosity. A reasonable moderate republican could easily have beaten Clinton.  But they created such an anti-progressive negative environment, since 2008, that they gave rise to this buffoonism. 

 

At this point the Republican ticket is completely unravelling: Trump is self destructing.  He fired the manager he just hired.  Now he is claiming the system is rigged against him, I guess just like the Republican primaries were rigged against him.  He is thin skinned and cant take criticism.  He operates without a political platfrom, with nothing to say on real issues, because he actually doesn't know or read anything.  I have alot of respect for Romney, Mccain, Boehner, Ryan, as high level republicans.  But Trump is a piece of garbage as a human being. 

 

Why wont Trump issue his tax returns? The answer is so obvious: he is essentially broke.  This is his biggest lie of all.  I am a great businessman, a great deal maker.  If the tax returns were released everyone would see the truth.  He is a lousy businessman, who has relied on bullying to get his way to the extent that no one of business quality will deal with him. 

 

So, we, the world are stuck with Clinton for 4 years, and its all the Republicans fault.

Uccmal,

 

I agree with a lot of what your wrote, but I think you're only partly right. The Republican party will probably get slaughtered during the election. Though that's far from a certainty. Just a week ago Trump was tied with Hillary, there's a long time to election and they call him teflon don for a reason.

 

I disagree with the idea that the Republican party will remake itself after the election. I think that the party remade itself before the election. The party after will represent its members and based on that the Republican party right now is the party of Trump, not the party of Lincoln. This has been happening for a long time. You can draw a line Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, Tea Party, birtherism, Trump.

 

In order for the party to remake itself the Trump supporters would have to change their views and I don't see that happening. It's comforting for a serious conservative to believe that the party is going through some collective delusion or pharmaceutical mass trip, that they'll wake up after election day with a massive hangover and say never again. But i think that Ann Coulter is correct. This is the Republican party, they've finally found their voice, and Trump is their leader. It is up to the responsible conservatives to decide if the hold their nose and toe the new party line or leave. It'll be interesting to see how is shakes up.

[sys]

i think it is difficult to predict how the republicans might splinter if this election results disastrous for them.  i would like it if the free-trade, fiscal conservatives (probably including foreign policy hawks, although that part i wouldn't necessarily like) joined with conservative democrats to constitute a centrist party in opposition to the trumpian nationalists and progressive democrats.  i don't know if that is likely, however.

[TorontoRaptorsFan]

It's too bad Romney wasn't the nominee on the Republican ticket. I think he would have been a very good President.

[DCG]

I think Bloomberg would've been a good candidate in whichever party he wanted to run in.

[DCG]

I think Bloomberg would've been a good candidate in whichever party he wanted to run in.

 

 

[Cardboard]

"+1. Some people tie themselves into pretzel trying to rationalize their vote. It would be so much easier just to admit: "I am a GOP voter. I *always* vote GOP. It doesn't matter to me who the nominee is." And leave it at that."

 

It is interesting because I believe that many of the posters here do the exact same thing as Democrats. There is zero observation on the current situation, the last 4 or even 8 years. Everything is rosy.

 

Buffett also fits that pattern as he was much more critical of what was going on in the past even during the Clinton years: options not being accounted for properly, pension looming disaster due to unfunded liabilities, stock market bubble in 1999 and ballooning trade deficits during Bush.

 

There was also the same kind of artillery barrage from the left on CoBF when Romney was going against Obama. So I do believe that there are a lot of never GOP candidates on this board.

 

Electing Romney in 2012 would have solved a lot of the current divide. America didn't. So now the choice is between two very poor candidates.

 

Cardboard 

 

 

[rb]

So the Republican Party chose Donald Trump to be its presidential nominee to punish America because it didn't vote for Romney?

[Peregrine]

"+1. Some people tie themselves into pretzel trying to rationalize their vote. It would be so much easier just to admit: "I am a GOP voter. I *always* vote GOP. It doesn't matter to me who the nominee is." And leave it at that."

 

It is interesting because I believe that many of the posters here do the exact same thing as Democrats. There is zero observation on the current situation, the last 4 or even 8 years. Everything is rosy.

 

Buffett also fits that pattern as he was much more critical of what was going on in the past even during the Clinton years: options not being accounted for properly, pension looming disaster due to unfunded liabilities, stock market bubble in 1999 and ballooning trade deficits during Bush.

 

There was also the same kind of artillery barrage from the left on CoBF when Romney was going against Obama. So I do believe that there are a lot of never GOP candidates on this board.

 

Electing Romney in 2012 would have solved a lot of the current divide. America didn't. So now the choice is between two very poor candidates.

 

Cardboard

 

I don't understand why you think Clinton is a poor candidate. Do you?

[Cardboard]

Creation of ISIS following a rapid pull out of Iraq, over 300,000 people dead in Syria, invasion of Crimea and part of Ukraine by Russia following a supported uprising by the administration, civil war in Libya following the ousting of Khadafi, ambassador and Americans dead in Benghazi.

 

Regarding her own: essentially called a liar by the FBI and also grossly negligent, lied multiple times to the American people, she was for TPP, now against, has received large sums of money from various groups and countries.

 

Now guys like you and RB will surely state that I am insane, stupid, whatever and that Hillary and Obama have nothing to do with the above and are great. All of our actions have consequences and while I have no problem blaming Bush for a lot of the problems that we had or are seeing now, I would appreciate the left to also take their share of responsibility after 8 years of managing the business.

 

Cardboard

[TwoCitiesCapital]

Creation of ISIS following a rapid pull out of Iraq, over 300,000 people dead in Syria, invasion of Crimea and part of Ukraine by Russia following a supported uprising by the administration, civil war in Libya following the ousting of Khadafi, ambassador and Americans dead in Benghazi.

 

Regarding her own: essentially called a liar by the FBI and also grossly negligent, lied multiple times to the American people, she was for TPP, now against, has received large sums of money from various groups and countries.

 

Now guys like you and RB will surely state that I am insane, stupid, whatever and that Hillary and Obama have nothing to do with the above and are great. All of our actions have consequences and while I have no problem blaming Bush for a lot of the problems that we had or are seeing now, I would appreciate the left to also take their share of responsibility after 8 years of managing the business.

 

Cardboard

 

+1

 

Invading Iraq may have been the worst foreign policy mistake in decades....and then Democrats took that playbook and continued it.

[Jurgis]

Middle East is a mess where you are dammed if you do and dammed if you don't. It's easy to blame both Republicans and Democrats and pretty much every single administration since what 1970's? for issues there. There are no solutions there pretty much - well maybe there are, but nobody so far found them. There is only thrashing and temporary lulls in issues which then-governing party uses to say "Mission Accomplished" or claim success.

 

I'll admit that I'm guilty too blaming various administrations for Middle East. I should be more careful and not do this anymore.

 

But anyone blaming a single party for Middle East problems is decidedly biased. You know who you are.

[rkbabang]

Middle East is a mess where you are dammed if you do and dammed if you don't.

 

Who was damned because they didn't?  That hasn't been tried in generations.

[vox]

Middle East is a mess where you are dammed if you do and dammed if you don't.

 

Who was damned because they didn't?  That hasn't been tried in generations.

 

The millions of Syrians that object to the Assad dictatorship.

[Jurgis]

Middle East is a mess where you are dammed if you do and dammed if you don't.

 

Who was damned because they didn't?  That hasn't been tried in generations.

 

I'll answer this, but I'll try to not get drawn into the discussion further.

 

Do you really believe that if some party withdrew US bases from Middle East and suspended support for Israel, they would not be damned?

What about Iran? What is the "you don't" with Iran? Maintaining sanctions? Removing sanctions and doing nothing? Look how well that worked for Democrats. I don't have an opinion about the Iran deal and I don't know if you consider it "you don't", but it's not a bad example IMO for being damned if you don't.

What about Iraq's Kuwait invasion in 1990? You really think that USA would have not been damned if they didn't?

Edit: Also in something like Arab spring, there is no "you don't" option. You implicitly support either status quo or the rebels and different groups will definitely damn you for either stance.

[LongHaul]

I enjoyed watching Buffett's speech for Clinton.  Thanks for posting.

 

Here is my prediction for Trump's tax returns:  There is some pretty embarrassing stuff in them and that is why he refuses to release them.  Perhaps very aggressive tax shelters or who knows what.

[Guest longinvestor]

I enjoyed watching Buffett's speech for Clinton.  Thanks for posting.

 

Here is my prediction for Trump's tax returns:  There is some pretty embarrassing stuff in them and that is why he refuses to release them.  Perhaps very aggressive tax shelters or who knows what.

 

It is very possible that many readers of coBf have paid more in taxes than Donald (possibly zero)...so he is

a) rich

b) and paid less than the folks he is appealing to...the middle class. If they paid $1 they'd have paid more

 

That would mess up his core appeal

[rkbabang]

Middle East is a mess where you are dammed if you do and dammed if you don't.

 

Who was damned because they didn't?  That hasn't been tried in generations.

 

I'll answer this, but I'll try to not get drawn into the discussion further.

 

Do you really believe that if some party withdrew US bases from Middle East and suspended support for Israel, they would not be damned?

What about Iran? What is the "you don't" with Iran? Maintaining sanctions? Removing sanctions and doing nothing? Look how well that worked for Democrats. I don't have an opinion about the Iran deal and I don't know if you consider it "you don't", but it's not a bad example IMO for being damned if you don't.

What about Iraq's Kuwait invasion in 1990? You really think that USA would have not been damned if they didn't?

Edit: Also in something like Arab spring, there is no "you don't" option. You implicitly support either status quo or the rebels and different groups will definitely damn you for either stance.

 

If your idea of "damned" is being criticized by someone, then of course you will be criticized no matter what you do.  If your idea of "damned" is filling the world with violence, death, destruction, chaos, and terrorism, and plunging the US into massive amount of debt as $trillions are spent on wars, then yes, the US should have stayed out of the Middle East even after Iraq invaded Kuwait.  And because it is better to be late than never, the US should pull up stakes and come home even now.

 

[tengen]

I enjoyed watching Buffett's speech for Clinton.  Thanks for posting.

 

Here is my prediction for Trump's tax returns:  There is some pretty embarrassing stuff in them and that is why he refuses to release them.  Perhaps very aggressive tax shelters or who knows what.

 

Trump doesn't want people to know that he deducted the cost of his toupee as a business expense.

[John Hjorth]

Fellow board members actively participating in this topic,

 

Please read this straight out, no sarcasm, humor or anything else intended:

 

As a board member living in the Northern Europe it is very educational to read this topic every day, no matter your political orientation and what opinion or argument you post. To me, this topic measures the pulse in USA of what is going on the political scene, discussed in a so-so orderly manner - it is about politics, right? - among intelligent persons.

 

- I have never ever experienced that possible on any message board so far! H/T to you! [Even Sanjeev posted in the "Ohh Wilbur" topic the other day that he did not consider this possible, right?]

 

Thank you, and and keep your posts coming - I learn a lot!

[Peregrine]

 

Now guys like you and RB will surely state that I am insane, stupid, whatever and that Hillary and Obama have nothing to do with the above and are great. All of our actions have consequences and while I have no problem blaming Bush for a lot of the problems that we had or are seeing now, I would appreciate the left to also take their share of responsibility after 8 years of managing the business.

 

Cardboard

 

No, I'm not about to assume that you are insane or stupid. No one is infallible and for people who have been in the political arena for decades, like a Bush or a Clinton, their choices and mistakes are magnified.

 

I am not trying to absolve Clinton for the mistakes she made. You can't. She has made some big mistakes that above all has called into question her integrity. That has already happened and it will probably forever have a mark on her career.

 

However, I do not think anyone reasonable can call into question her competence and perhaps most importantly her desire to help her country. Many say that she's just power-hungry but she has been involved in public service for her entire public life and for much of the last 30 years has endured a microscopic lens on her and strong criticism from both the left and the right and ever-increasing amounts of slander and negative propaganda from the extreme right. I don't know, but I don't find that trade-off particularly envious if you're only out for public prominence and stature.

 

Put it this way: when forced to choose between 1) winning the presidency and 2) the country and its citizens, do you really think she'll choose the former over the latter? For the other candidate, I have a hard time seeing him choosing the latter.

[Cardboard]

You know what? I would have much rather have had Hillary Clinton win in 2008 than Obama. However, once he was elected, I had great hope that he would unite the country since he had charisma and was popular. I have been greatly disappointed.

 

One of the lows, was when he had to make a point to Boehner or in the summer of 2011 and made the U.S. lose its AAA credit rating. I don't think that anyone would consider Boehner to be some extreme right guy. There were some elements in his party that had to be dealt with but, I still think that a deal should have been reached. From that point on, I knew that Obama would be all about my way or the highway and it has been true so far. He has demonstrated zero ability to negotiate or comprise. I do believe that Clinton would have been much better on that standpoint and much less divisive.

 

However, Clinton's involvement as Secretary of State was less than stellar. I have just mentioned some of the horrible things that have happened under her watch. So if we give her a bigger job, what gives us confidence that she will succeed? Were all these mistakes entirely due to her boss or she had a fair share of responsibility?

 

While you are mentioning that Trump is only going after this for ego, I am not sure that I agree. I do sense a genuine desire to help America but, he is talking a terrible route to get there. I would have thought that by now that he would have stopped the comedy or horror show, surrounded himself with a great team and acted more like a statesman. He is Wharton educated after all so what is it that he doesn't get? 

 

Still amazing that these are the two from a population of over 300 million!

 

Cardboard

[adesigar]

 

Still amazing that these are the two from a population of over 300 million!

 

Cardboard

 

Your comment reminded me of this

 

http://imgur.com/gallery/ZZvwcIo

[Mephistopheles]

I'm extremely non-interventionalist in my beliefs. I think the Iraq War was a disaster and criminal. But when we overthrew the government and fired the entire military, we took responsibility for stabilizing the country. That responsibility didn't absolve just because we elected a new President. I think Bush was awful but I give him credit for "the surge" as it was called, when the entire country was against it including Rumsfeld and the rest of his cabinet. And it worked; it helped stabilize the country. He was also a close mentor to Malaki, Iraq's President and worked hard to smooth the transition to a new Govt.

 

Then came Obama, and he wanted nothing to do with Iraq and decided to pull out our troops, our commitment, and his attention from the situation; and now we have ISIS. If Obama was more experienced, he might have recognized that despite it being a needless war, you can't just pull the medication without killing the patient. He was gung-ho about his anti-Iraq War beliefs and let that get to his head. Then he spent hundreds of billions more chasing bin Laden, all while Rome was burning.

 

But blaming Clinton for it a stretch. On the other hand she's a war hawk and I hate that. Trump sucks but at least he's vehemently against interventions, and has the balls to say he's neutral on Israel. If he actually believes this, then I'd consider voting for him. But, who the hell knows what he believes. All I know is that he's a dangerous demagogue.