America lost too many brain cells. It's more about demolishing the opposition than bringing any kind of positive solutions to the table for both parties now. So now we are stuck with 2 of the worst candidates for president in our history most likely.

Nah, Democrats aren't near as bad as Republicans with respect to partisan games. Hillary is about as good of a candidate as you're going to get now. She's much better than, say, Coolidge was. There's been some real stinkers, calling Hillary the worst we've ever had lacks perspective. The argument can be made for trump though...

The republicans are basically just democrats offering slightly fewer handouts. It was high time to shake up the tired old GOP.

Hillary is going to be George Bush without the charm.

This post was edited by general_patton on Dec 3 2015 03:10pm

Sup Patton. Welcome back. How's life?

Doing OK. I'm surprised to see not many new faces here.
It's finals week and I'm bored as shit so just checking in. How are you doing?

Pretty good. Working on the masters still, started taking some Bachelor EE courses because the switch from ME bachelor to EE master is pretty rough. Not much happening otherwise.

I'm back in school fleshing out an ME bachelor's degree. A masters sounds like a pretty good gig if you can hack the credit load. Most employers I heard about doesn't consider anybody for management (i.e; big money) without a masters in engineering.

ME's pretty nice too.

Up here they don't care too much for a bachelor's in engineering. A masters will easily pay you back, but that might have to do with the tuition of 2k/year. 4k is easily earned back when you get paid ~1k more. When I graduate I'll have an estimated salary of about ~3k starting and growing to an average of ~5-6k. Which is ample here.

I'd be interested to hear what makes Clinton the "worst" of any candidate type. Good luck to whoever wants to make that argument, no matter how much they might not like her personally. There's no similarities between the type of campaign she's running and the type of post-policy campaign that Trump is running, where the whole thing is identity politics and massaging resentment culture for political gain. I laugh every time anyone tries to compare any of these candidates to one another, whether it's her to Trump or Trump to Sanders or what have you.

People should be thanking their lucky stars for the type of campaign that Clinton is running, regardless of what they think of her personally. It's easily the deepest campaign in modern history. Most campaigns just don't operate like this because only those with the most absurd amount of resources and talent can rush through the calendar like she has. Most of them just bring in a policy maven to run the policy shop and that person fills out the staff and they draw up enough broad plans with vague pay-fors (if they even do that) to get the press off their back and they wait until the general election to reveal any sort of specifics at all. Some recent campaigns (Bush 2000, McCain, Romney after he got creamed on his tax plan) don't even do that. They don't draw up comprehensive plans for revitalization for rural areas or how to pay for a national infrastructure bank or how to combat hardcore drug addiction in August the year before, because they've already solved immigration, healthcare, and taxes.

Sadly Trump's "I'll be so good on terrorism because I love America" is pretty much what you're gonna get from here on in from most national candidates.

he will never get elected but he's amusing us alot, and help idiots voters understanding what "populism" means.



http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-general-election-trump-vs-sanders
CONFIDENCE OF LEAD The probability that Sanders leads Trump is 97%.

edit:
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-general-election-trump-vs-clinton
CONFIDENCE OF LEAD The probability that Clinton leads Trump is 92%.

This post was edited by Saucisson6000 on Dec 5 2015 10:30am