Donald Trump Jumps Out To Wide Lead As Republican 2016 Frontrunner

[Redstreak 6,653]

What was the point of dismissing my post as "trolling" instead of making a reasoned response? You truly believe there aren't people opposed to Hillary? "People" meaning 50-plus percent of the American population?

of course she has opposition, doesn't mean she'll lose tho

[Goosey 3,017]

of course she has opposition, doesn't mean she'll lose tho

I'm certain she'll lose. She is in favour of reinstating the failed, illogical, unpopular 1994 "Assault Weapons Ban" Bill's administration first put in place. This is a major issue and in the years since 1994 the public's support for gun rights has only increased, according to polls. 

 

David Saunders, a Democratic strategist based in conservative rural Virginia, warned that Clinton’s focus on guns could taint the entire Democratic ticket, including candidates for state and local offices.

“Never in the history of the Democratic Party have they started a gun debate that didn’t cost them numbers in the general election,” said Saunders, who supports the candidacy of former senator Jim Webb (D-Va.).

“We’ve been down this road before with the Clintons,” ­NRA Executive Vice President Wayne La­Pierre said through a spokesman. “She needs to read her husband’s book.”

In his memoir, “My Life,” former president Bill Clinton suggested that his vice president, Al Gore, lost the 2000 presidential election in part because of backlash in states such as Arkansas and Tennessee over the Clinton administration’s 1995 ban on assault weapons, which has since expired. Many Democratic lawmakers also lost their elections after gun-control votes.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clinton-makes-big-gun-control-pitch-marking-shift-in-presidential-politics/2015/07/09/4309232c-2580-11e5-b72c-2b7d516e1e0e_story.html

[Economy 52,845]

That's actually not a bad idea, but people are scared to vote for a third party here. It "takes away" votes from one of the two primary parties, and it's all about the two primary factions. Plus, most conservative voters put party first. Take this from someone surrounded by them, even if they think the person running is an asshole. However, if you could get such a party established, I imagine they would win virtually every time, since that seems to be how most people in the States lean. 

Technically, I think there are five parties, but you only ever hear of three, and it's really only between the two.

here we have 6 or 7 i believe but 3 dominate everytime

 

And the reason i say it might work is because the "Progressive Conservatives" win everytime. Usually we just call them conservatives for short but they are not the same thing. The "Progressive Conservatives" are right winged economically but liberal in everything else 

 

We have a different name for the Conservative party that is right-winged on everything including social matters. But they never win or are talked about so i dont even remember what we call them

 

Our current Government at the Federal Level is the "PC" party i was talking about and they fully support same-s-x marriage and are pretty progressive even though they are right winged economically

 

although to be fair the "progressive conservatives" are still slightly more conservative on social matters than the Liberals because the liberals support abortion (im personally iffy on that anyway), and they support legalization of pot which the PC party does not.

[LoveandMagic 1,731]

here we have 6 or 7 i believe but 3 dominate everytime

 

And the reason i say it might work is because the "Progressive Conservatives" win everytime. Usually we just call them conservatives for short but they are not the same thing. The "Progressive Conservatives" are right winged economically but liberal in everything else 

 

We have a different name for the Conservative party that is right-winged on everything including social matters. But they never win or are talked about so i dont even remember what we call them

 

Our current Government at the Federal Level is the "PC" party i was talking about and they fully support same-s-x marriage and are pretty progressive even though they are right winged economically

 

although to be fair the "progressive conservatives" are still slightly more conservative on social matters than the Liberals because the liberals support abortion (im personally iffy on that anyway), and they support legalization of pot which the PC party does not.

Interesting. Thanks for sharing. 

I'm pretty liberal myself, but would consider voting for a different party if they shared the same values as myself on the social front, unfortunately we don't have enough power behind the other parties, so under the current system it's just between the two. I think the general consensus is the States is pretty conservative on economics, but is leaning heavier and heavier in the other direction for social issues with each new year and generation. It will be interesting to see where the States are in terms of politics in ten or twenty years. 

[Woolfsmck 2,763]

http://finance.yahoo.com/video/trump-country-being-decimated-illegal-215932307.html

Now he says that the Mexican Government is way smarter than the U.S. government.

[Economy 52,845]

Interesting. Thanks for sharing. 

I'm pretty liberal myself, but would consider voting for a different party if they shared the same values as myself on the social front, unfortunately we don't have enough power behind the other parties, so under the current system it's just between the two. I think the general consensus is the States is pretty conservative on economics, but is leaning heavier and heavier in the other direction for social issues with each new year and generation. It will be interesting to see where the States are in terms of politics in ten or twenty years. 

The Republicans dont seem to get that and its hurting them

 

They cannot be stuck in the past forever they need to adapt... I think if Republicans on social views were willing to be a little more flexible they might actually get more votes... but some Americans who might be right-winged on the economy might be afraid to vote Republican because they are afraid of social decisions they might make

 

Dont get me wrong, i do think the Republicans soemtimes go to a bit of an extreme even on their economic views... But id still lean more towards them than Democrats... I do support Democrats on a minimum wage increase though. Minimum wage too high is harmful but at the National level its too low

 

Here in Canada its not much of an issue because all Provinces have it set above the National minimum anyway

 

Democrats really like increasing size of Government. But taxes in the US have risen to a level thats no longer competitive and your loosing Corporations (for example Burger King Moved its headquarters here to Canada) and running deficits already as it is, wanting to increase spending even more is a bad idea...

 

Both parties need to look in reductions to military spending which is way too high i think

 

 

[destructivelove 565]

Ughhhh and i support Republican economic policies but their choices for candidates sucks everytime with their bad views on social matters

 

I still say USA shoukd follow Canadas example and create a PC party (Progressive Conservative) that way you can pick a party thats right-winged in economy matters without giving up liberal views in social matters  

Otherwise known as the libertarian party which already exists...lol. Not that it matters anyways.  The reps and dems will do everything in their power through propaganda and sneaky state laws to make sure third parties never make a noticeable impact in this country.  Competition is not their friend

[Economy 52,845]

Otherwise known as the libertarian party which already exists...lol. Not that it matters anyways.  The reps and dems will do everything in their power through propaganda and sneaky state laws to make sure third parties never make a noticeable impact in this country.  Competition is not their friend

its not healthy to have to select from only 2 parties tho

 

Although here in Canada we have a simmilar issue but its flipped...

 

We do have plenty of choice on economic matters because the 3 parties that dominate each represent a different specturm on economy

 

NDP: Left Winged Socialists

Liberals: Centre Winged

Progressive Conservatives: Right Winged Capitalists (also known simply as "conservatives")

 

However on social matters, they are all pretty liberal... if people want to vote for a conservative on social matters they have to vote for a party that never gets attention and as such, they dont really have the option to do so

[Whispering 18,865]

the trolling  

Can your O. G. G. powers extend here and we could put the troll out of his misery? Why are we stuck, when everyone else managed to rid themselves of the troll? 

[LoveandMagic 1,731]

The Republicans dont seem to get that and its hurting them

 

They cannot be stuck in the past forever they need to adapt... I think if Republicans on social views were willing to be a little more flexible they might actually get more votes... but some Americans who might be right-winged on the economy might be afraid to vote Republican because they are afraid of social decisions they might make

 

Dont get me wrong, i do think the Republicans soemtimes go to a bit of an extreme even on their economic views... But id still lean more towards them than Democrats... I do support Democrats on a minimum wage increase though. Minimum wage too high is harmful but at the National level its too low

 

Here in Canada its not much of an issue because all Provinces have it set above the National minimum anyway

 

Democrats really like increasing size of Government. But taxes in the US have risen to a level thats no longer competitive and your loosing Corporations (for example Burger King Moved its headquarters here to Canada) and running deficits already as it is, wanting to increase spending even more is a bad idea...

 

Both parties need to look in reductions to military spending which is way too high i think

 

 

I think you've essentially nailed it. Some genuine conservatives or open-minded leftist people like me are afraid to vote for Republicans because of the out-and-proud bigotry and wackiness that they have proudly shown themselves on social policies and in their daily rhetoric. Honestly, I would be more opened to voting for left leaning independents or a truly moderate conservative, if I thought they had a real chance winning and follow through on their policies. But as it is, people like me can't risk having some crazy mysoginist/racist radical dumbass like Perry or Cruz or Bachmann or Trump in the office, saying that though I like some of the Democratic candidates so I won't be "holding my nose" at the poles this time. And this goes for every department in our government, I would like to see more moderation. 

As for the military spending, I agree but you would be hard pressed to find a "serious" candidate to openly say s/he would cut spending in that area. They would be called "unpatriotic" and blamed for any terrorist activities that may occur, then of course you have several politicians that profit from war-time activities, so there's that too.

[Woolfsmck 2,763]

I think you've essentially nailed it. Some genuine conservatives or open-minded leftist people like me are afraid to vote for Republicans because of the out-and-proud bigotry and wackiness that they have proudly shown themselves on social policies and in their daily rhetoric. Honestly, I would be more opened to voting for left leaning independents or a truly moderate conservative, if I thought they had a real chance winning and follow through on their policies. But as it is, people like me can't risk having some crazy mysoginist/racist radical dumbass like Perry or Cruz or Bachmann or Trump in the office, saying that though I like some of the Democratic candidates so I won't be "holding my nose" at the poles this time. And this goes for every department in our government, I would like to see more moderation. 

As for the military spending, I agree but you would be hard pressed to find a "serious" candidate to openly say s/he would cut spending in that area. They would be called "unpatriotic" and blamed for any terrorist activities that may occur, then of course you have several politicians that profit from war-time activities, so there's that too.

The concept of 'progessive' gets lumped in with the liberal's for some reason. 

Progressive should mean advancing towards a better future.   So, having economically conservative social modern would fit into that group for sure.

[LoveandMagic 1,731]

The concept of 'progessive' gets lumped in with the liberal's for some reason. 

Progressive should mean advancing towards a better future.   So, having economically conservative social modern would fit into that group for sure.

Probably because right now the Republican party seems to be about regression. Not to mention too many people in the party (or who are cited as/claim to be the voice of the party, like Limbaugh) treat the word "progressive" like a four-letter word. 

[Melech 9,900]

its not healthy to have to select from only 2 parties tho

 

Although here in Canada we have a simmilar issue but its flipped...

 

We do have plenty of choice on economic matters because the 3 parties that dominate each represent a different specturm on economy

 

NDP: Left Winged Socialists

Liberals: Centre Winged

Progressive Conservatives: Right Winged Capitalists (also known simply as "conservatives")

 

However on social matters, they are all pretty liberal... if people want to vote for a conservative on social matters they have to vote for a party that never gets attention and as such, they dont really have the option to do so

I firstly read NPD  It's the far rightest party in Germany (who doesn't get in parliament anyway)