POTUS Election thread

[Ironside]

"I'm going to win the war quickly" does not translate to "I'm going to start new wars", nor does complaining about chinese trade deals.

He didnt show any opinion on nukes in Hooahguy's article but an ignorance of nuclear strategy, one that is concerning but becomes somewhat less worrying knowing that the president cannot actually launch a nuke without the approval of the Secritary of Defense.

None of these are exclusively hawkish behavior and past actions indicate otherwise. Now I do not think Trump is peaceful but I think he is an isolationist; he is not interested in stepping into another middle east quagmire for no real gain back home. On the other hand Hillary has been straining at the leash to jump in headfirst since Obama appointed her Secritary of State.

So in response I say: do not try to paint him into some villiany he is for once undeserving. In addition Hillary is really, really bad news if she is president.

The Secretary of Defense is chosen by the president. The senate can reject or accept the choice. The Republic senate isn't that healthy right now and would be the majority if Trump wins.

He's not going for a long war with ground troops, true. The problem is that he's going to make America look like his definition of strong, aka a bully (see how he treats NATO or people) and make the army look strong again. That means that he has to win a war. In a way that doesn't creates a new Libya or Iraq. In a way that's threatening to other countries (you don't do a trade deal that threatens your economy, unless the other option is worse).

Nukes solves all those problems (not really, but some... and gives a ton of other problems). Buddy up with Russia and you won't start WWIII (probably, maybe).

Is the Hillary being really, really bad thing a feeling or do you have anything tangible that makes her so much worse than a normal politician?

A tip, if someone has been hiding their Skeletor face for 40 years, with 20 of those with the opposition throwing every dirt they got on that one, without any big result for it, you're probably picking up the dirt throwing, rather than the person behind it.

You haven't thought about this much have you?

Just because Bill Clinton wasn't born with a silver spoon in his mouth like Bush 41, he is suddenly blacker than black. As if a lower class lifestyle is what defines black lives (hint: lower class whites still have privilege).

His presidency is a series of half measures and back room deals to pass politically rewarding but socially devastating polices like War on Drugs, Tough on Crime and Welfare Reform.

Did you read the parts about it also being because he was (still is) popular among the black community? Let me put it this way. Whatever he did, he's still remembered as the second best president for blacks (Obama being the first of course). That might be because of lack being given anything else, but it still means that laws requested at the time and turning sour with time is the best anyone has ever offered them without it being empty platitudes.

Like I said, concerning, hence why I'm hoping to god you "Checks and balances" guys can pull off this check, partially because I dont actually trust Hillary with the nuke either.

She knows the political consequences of using one and has no reason using them. Her hawkishness is very much in the form of intended benign intervention (success rate is another matter).



He's starting to loose his mind by the looks of it. That's some massive incoherent ranting.