Hillary Clinton: What happened

RYME

riley540 said:

Go Beavers said:

RYME said:

Ahh shucks, ya got me.
There were two choices on the ballot, it's that simple.

  

But what’s more complicated is how someone decided trump was the better option. 

As an independent, bot options were equally as bad, and then there were he two nutty outliers Johnston and Stein. No option was better than another for me, so I exercised my right to not vote in the election. 

People who picked trump over Hillary simply have more conservative values. There’s also the mass majority of people who are party voters and will vote for who ever is the nominee. 

I have friends in Alaska who rely on the oil industry for a living and they simply thought trump would be a better option for their job security. 

Just a few examples to where trump votes came from 

My First Choice was Carly Fiorina.  She excited me a lot for a number of reasons.  There was no excitement around her campaign so she exited the race early.  I liked Ben Carson a lot.  I thought It might be neat to put a brain surgeon in the White House.  He put up a good fight but fizzled out and had to exit.  I voted for Ted Cruz during the primaries because I felt that he was the best candidate left standing when the Wisconsin primaries came around.  Ted Cruz won the Wisconsin primary in a landslide by the way.  I was very anti Donald Trump at that point in the race. Donald Trump was my last choice of all the Republican candidates.  But by the time the general election came around it was Trump or Hillary.  Easy choice for me.

riley540

RYME said:

riley540 said:

Go Beavers said:

RYME said:

Ahh shucks, ya got me.
There were two choices on the ballot, it's that simple.

  

But what’s more complicated is how someone decided trump was the better option. 

As an independent, bot options were equally as bad, and then there were he two nutty outliers Johnston and Stein. No option was better than another for me, so I exercised my right to not vote in the election. 

People who picked trump over Hillary simply have more conservative values. There’s also the mass majority of people who are party voters and will vote for who ever is the nominee. 

I have friends in Alaska who rely on the oil industry for a living and they simply thought trump would be a better option for their job security. 

Just a few examples to where trump votes came from 

My First Choice was Carly Fiorina.  She excited me a lot for a number of reasons.  There was no excitement behind her campaign so she exited the race early.  I liked Ben Carson a lot.  I thought I might be need to put a brain surgeon in the White House.  He put up a good fight but had to exit.  I voted for Ted Cruz during the primaries because I felt that he was the best candidate left standing when the Wisconsin primaries came around. Donald Trump was my last choice of all the Republican candidates.  But by the time the general election came around it was Trump or Hillary.  Easy choice for me.

As a more centered libertarian thinker, I was bummed that Rand Paul got shut down so quickly. It’s hard to convince the Republican Party to reduce military spending and it shows. Ha!! I liked Rubio, but felt he wasn’t fit after a few of the debates. I was never big on Cruz. The one thing he did that was amazing to me, was show up at trumps convention and not endorse him. Very funny!! 
And yes, as many I am not a socialist. I think people can prosper with less government interference. I always say progression starts in our neighborhoods. Not DC 

RYME

riley540 said:

RYME said:

riley540 said:

Go Beavers said:

RYME said:

Ahh shucks, ya got me.
There were two choices on the ballot, it's that simple.

  

But what’s more complicated is how someone decided trump was the better option. 

As an independent, bot options were equally as bad, and then there were he two nutty outliers Johnston and Stein. No option was better than another for me, so I exercised my right to not vote in the election. 

People who picked trump over Hillary simply have more conservative values. There’s also the mass majority of people who are party voters and will vote for who ever is the nominee. 

I have friends in Alaska who rely on the oil industry for a living and they simply thought trump would be a better option for their job security. 

Just a few examples to where trump votes came from 

My First Choice was Carly Fiorina.  She excited me a lot for a number of reasons.  There was no excitement behind her campaign so she exited the race early.  I liked Ben Carson a lot.  I thought I might be need to put a brain surgeon in the White House.  He put up a good fight but had to exit.  I voted for Ted Cruz during the primaries because I felt that he was the best candidate left standing when the Wisconsin primaries came around. Donald Trump was my last choice of all the Republican candidates.  But by the time the general election came around it was Trump or Hillary.  Easy choice for me.

As a more centered libertarian thinker, I was bummed that Rand Paul got shut down so quickly. It’s hard to convince the Republican Party to reduce military spending and it shows. Ha!! I liked Rubio, but felt he wasn’t fit after a few of the debates. I was never big on Cruz. The one thing he did that was amazing to me, was show up at trumps convention and not endorse him. Very funny!! 
And yes, as many I am not a socialist. I think people can prosper with less government interference. I always say progression starts in our neighborhoods. Not DC 

I like your thread about, are opposing viewpoints welcome here? The answer to that question is yes opposing views are welcome here, so long as as you agree with us lol. I liked Rand Paul a lot too. I would not have had any problem with him either.

Go Beavers

When it comes down to it, people who ideologically want less government eventually side on more government when it comes to actual policy. Johnson was shitty for New Mexico’s economy. I don’t understand support for Ben Carson. He’s might be burning a 3 watt bulb in there and all he proposed was outdated conservative rhetoric. 

riley540

Go Beavers said:

When it comes down to it, people who ideologically want less government eventually side on more government when it comes to actual policy. Johnson was shitty for New Mexico’s economy. I don’t understand support for Ben Carson. He’s might be burning a 3 watt bulb in there and all he proposed was outdated conservative rhetoric. 

Establishment politicians are generally all going to be big government. They have to please their party. I think people were hoping trump would be small government, but he’s not. I believe strongly in state power. I don’t think someone in DC knows what’s best for Idaho, Alaska, and Florida (just examples) I think Idaho, Alaska, and Florida have people that have dedicated their lives to public service and can better dictate the policy for its people. The Paul’s have always been in favor of this, bench my support for Rand. many people think the conservative rhetoric isn’t outdated. It’s apparent that about half the country thinks it isn’t out dated. 
You can honestly look at every candidate in the 2016 line up and pick reasons why they weren’t good. Ben Carson couldn’t speak well, Trump was rude, Rubio lacked experience and it showed, Hillary didn’t seem care, Bernie was too far left. 
So someone’s support for one candidate can’t be discredited due to a flaw or two. Every single person had flaws, and everyone thinks different. I believe Ben Carson is a great man, but I also believe he would have lacked the leadership skills. I understand why people liked him though. 

Go Beavers

Where do you come up with the half the country doesn’t think it’s outdated? Only about a third of the country identifies as republican and there’s 50% or even more than 50% support for policies and programs that often get labelled “big government” by the right. 

RYME

riley540 said:

Go Beavers said:

When it comes down to it, people who ideologically want less government eventually side on more government when it comes to actual policy. Johnson was shitty for New Mexico’s economy. I don’t understand support for Ben Carson. He’s might be burning a 3 watt bulb in there and all he proposed was outdated conservative rhetoric. 

Establishment politicians are generally all going to be big government. They have to please their party. I think people were hoping trump would be small government, but he’s not. I believe strongly in state power. I don’t think someone in DC knows what’s best for Idaho, Alaska, and Florida (just examples) I think Idaho, Alaska, and Florida have people that have dedicated their lives to public service and can better dictate the policy for its people. The Paul’s have always been in favor of this, bench my support for Rand. many people think the conservative rhetoric isn’t outdated. It’s apparent that about half the country thinks it isn’t out dated. 
You can honestly look at every candidate in the 2016 line up and pick reasons why they weren’t good. Ben Carson couldn’t speak well, Trump was rude, Rubio lacked experience and it showed, Hillary didn’t seem care, Bernie was too far left. 
So someone’s support for one candidate can’t be discredited due to a flaw or two. Every single person had flaws, and everyone thinks different. I believe Ben Carson is a great man, but I also believe he would have lacked the leadership skills. I understand why people liked him though. 

See, now we are having a nice conversation, talking it through without personal slams.
And I strongly support your emphasis on state power. What's good for communities in Alaska, is not necessarily good for beach communities in southern California. 
I've seen people complaining about the logging industry. Northern Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Michigan, all have big logging industries.  But it is done well, not carelessly. 
My dad and I own 200 Acres up there which we have designated as Tree Farm. It is Hardwoods,
(Oak, Maple, Black Cherry)- primarily used for furniture)ect. 
Conifers (Norway Pines, White Pines, and Spruce) and some swamp land. Yes there is Timber of value in the swamp.  But there is a timeline they thin it out once and then a decade goes by and then thin it out some more, another decade goes by and then thin it out some more it's not all at once.(cedar and the balsams we have)  You can only harvest swampland in the winter there, when the ground is good and frozen, otherwise you'd sink up to your neck in slop and die, the swamp holds no prisoners.
Selective tree Harvest is good for the environment.  It prevents overcrowding so the remaining trees have more room to sprall out, have more access to nutrients in the ground and sunlight.  Clear-cutting is actually good in some selected areas (not the whole Forest)  It allows reforestation to occur.  There are many many animal species that thrive in young thick forests. Where as a mature Forest hinders some animals ability to thrive.  Most woodland animals(deer,  grouse, turkeys, bear, do not hide in a tall stand of Hardwoods, they might walk through, but any sign of danger and they bolt to the thickest shit possible. There is a much wider range of food sources for woodland animals and creatures in a young thick Forest full of buds, full of seeds, full of shrubs, then there is in a mature forest where there are 100 ft Tall Oaks and Maples and cherries.  So the idea that logging is awful, bad and careless is just wrong. It keeps people employed and it keeps the woods trimmed and it keeps furniture and pencils, & toilet paper accessible to human hands.  (Without someone cutting down trees for toilet paper what would you use? A sharp edged stick to scrape it off, or a rock??)
 I don't know..  These are not fruit bearing cherry trees they're just called black cherry because the wood smells like cherry when you split it open.  (I know I got off of the Hillary topic, but it goes back to States governing States not the Big Government blanket laws telling the whole 50 states what's good for it) 
Some think that logging is wrong and bad, well then don't have any furniture don't build your houses out of wood and don't use pencils, toilet paper, sticky notes, or paper towel.
 You need to have a balance of mature forest and new growth forest, and clear-cut forest.  And until you see it in person you wouldn't believe how fast it grows back.

https://youtu.be/8G2WzH4AKpE
And since I'm in a No Code mood today, One day back in 1996 I was actually working on a logging crew up there in northern Wisconsin very physically demanding job by the way. 
I forced myself to stay awake late one evening because I knew that this was going to be on the David Letterman Show!!  Cheers!!
https://youtu.be/zOAzJFd4KDA

oftenreading

riley540 said:

Go Beavers said:

When it comes down to it, people who ideologically want less government eventually side on more government when it comes to actual policy. Johnson was shitty for New Mexico’s economy. I don’t understand support for Ben Carson. He’s might be burning a 3 watt bulb in there and all he proposed was outdated conservative rhetoric. 

Establishment politicians are generally all going to be big government. They have to please their party. I think people were hoping trump would be small government, but he’s not. I believe strongly in state power. I don’t think someone in DC knows what’s best for Idaho, Alaska, and Florida (just examples) I think Idaho, Alaska, and Florida have people that have dedicated their lives to public service and can better dictate the policy for its people. The Paul’s have always been in favor of this, bench my support for Rand. many people think the conservative rhetoric isn’t outdated. It’s apparent that about half the country thinks it isn’t out dated. 
You can honestly look at every candidate in the 2016 line up and pick reasons why they weren’t good. Ben Carson couldn’t speak well, Trump was rude, Rubio lacked experience and it showed, Hillary didn’t seem care, Bernie was too far left. 
So someone’s support for one candidate can’t be discredited due to a flaw or two. Every single person had flaws, and everyone thinks different. I believe Ben Carson is a great man, but I also believe he would have lacked the leadership skills. I understand why people liked him though. 

Ben Carson is an idiot. He believes that being gay is a choice, that the only racism in the US comes from the left, that the pharoahs built the pyramid to store grain, that there is no such thing as a war crime because you should be able to do anything you want to win a war, and that "Obamacare is really I think the worst thing that has happened in this nation since slavery." Even with all of that, I can't say for sure he would have been worse than Trump, but I can say without question that he isn't a great man. 

Go Beavers

RYME said:

riley540 said:

Go Beavers said:

When it comes down to it, people who ideologically want less government eventually side on more government when it comes to actual policy. Johnson was shitty for New Mexico’s economy. I don’t understand support for Ben Carson. He’s might be burning a 3 watt bulb in there and all he proposed was outdated conservative rhetoric. 

Establishment politicians are generally all going to be big government. They have to please their party. I think people were hoping trump would be small government, but he’s not. I believe strongly in state power. I don’t think someone in DC knows what’s best for Idaho, Alaska, and Florida (just examples) I think Idaho, Alaska, and Florida have people that have dedicated their lives to public service and can better dictate the policy for its people. The Paul’s have always been in favor of this, bench my support for Rand. many people think the conservative rhetoric isn’t outdated. It’s apparent that about half the country thinks it isn’t out dated. 
You can honestly look at every candidate in the 2016 line up and pick reasons why they weren’t good. Ben Carson couldn’t speak well, Trump was rude, Rubio lacked experience and it showed, Hillary didn’t seem care, Bernie was too far left. 
So someone’s support for one candidate can’t be discredited due to a flaw or two. Every single person had flaws, and everyone thinks different. I believe Ben Carson is a great man, but I also believe he would have lacked the leadership skills. I understand why people liked him though. 

See, now we are having a nice conversation, talking it through without personal slams.
And I strongly support your emphasis on state power. What's good for communities in Alaska, is not necessarily good for beach communities in southern California. 
I've seen people complaining about the logging industry. Northern Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Michigan, all have big logging industries.  But it is done well, not carelessly. 
My dad and I own 200 Acres up there which we have designated as Tree Farm. It is Hardwoods,
(Oak, Maple, Black Cherry)- primarily used for furniture)ect. 
Conifers (Norway Pines, White Pines, and Spruce) and some swamp land. Yes there is Timber of value in the swamp.  But there is a timeline they thin it out once and then a decade goes by and then thin it out some more, another decade goes by and then thin it out some more it's not all at once.(cedar and the balsams we have)  You can only harvest swampland in the winter there, when the ground is good and frozen, otherwise you'd sink up to your neck in slop and die, the swamp holds no prisoners.
Selective tree Harvest is good for the environment.  It prevents overcrowding so the remaining trees have more room to sprall out, have more access to nutrients in the ground and sunlight.  Clear-cutting is actually good in some selected areas (not the whole Forest)  It allows reforestation to occur.  There are many many animal species that thrive in young thick forests. Where as a mature Forest hinders some animals ability to thrive.  Most woodland animals(deer,  grouse, turkeys, bear, do not hide in a tall stand of Hardwoods, they might walk through, but any sign of danger and they bolt to the thickest shit possible. There is a much wider range of food sources for woodland animals and creatures in a young thick Forest full of buds, full of seeds, full of shrubs, then there is in a mature forest where there are 100 ft Tall Oaks and Maples and cherries.  So the idea that logging is awful, bad and careless is just wrong. It keeps people employed and it keeps the woods trimmed and it keeps furniture and pencils, & toilet paper accessible to human hands.  (Without someone cutting down trees for toilet paper what would you use? A sharp edged stick to scrape it off, or a rock??)
 I don't know..  These are not fruit bearing cherry trees they're just called black cherry because the wood smells like cherry when you split it open.  (I know I got off of the Hillary topic, but it goes back to States governing States not the Big Government blanket laws telling the whole 50 states what's good for it) 
Some think that logging is wrong and bad, well then don't have any furniture don't build your houses out of wood and don't use pencils, toilet paper, sticky notes, or paper towel.
 You need to have a balance of mature forest and new growth forest, and clear-cut forest.  And until you see it in person you wouldn't believe how fast it grows back.

https://youtu.be/8G2WzH4AKpE
And since I'm in a No Code mood today, One day back in 1996 I was actually working on a logging crew up there in northern Wisconsin very physically demanding job by the way. 
I forced myself to stay awake late one evening because I knew that this was going to be on the David Letterman Show!!  Cheers!!
https://youtu.be/zOAzJFd4KDA

You went full forestry debate here. A debate thet should begin from the starting point that the forest existed for thousands of years prior to dumbass humans got on the scene with saws. Having several thousand acres of federal forest land about a mile and a half from my house that I go in to often, I can tell you that I much prefer it be regulated by the federal government. State run forests are too easily drawn into corporate logging interest. A corporate forest is a clear cut forest. 

RYME

Go Beavers said:

RYME said:

riley540 said:

Go Beavers said:

When it comes down to it, people who ideologically want less government eventually side on more government when it comes to actual policy. Johnson was shitty for New Mexico’s economy. I don’t understand support for Ben Carson. He’s might be burning a 3 watt bulb in there and all he proposed was outdated conservative rhetoric. 

Establishment politicians are generally all going to be big government. They have to please their party. I think people were hoping trump would be small government, but he’s not. I believe strongly in state power. I don’t think someone in DC knows what’s best for Idaho, Alaska, and Florida (just examples) I think Idaho, Alaska, and Florida have people that have dedicated their lives to public service and can better dictate the policy for its people. The Paul’s have always been in favor of this, bench my support for Rand. many people think the conservative rhetoric isn’t outdated. It’s apparent that about half the country thinks it isn’t out dated. 
You can honestly look at every candidate in the 2016 line up and pick reasons why they weren’t good. Ben Carson couldn’t speak well, Trump was rude, Rubio lacked experience and it showed, Hillary didn’t seem care, Bernie was too far left. 
So someone’s support for one candidate can’t be discredited due to a flaw or two. Every single person had flaws, and everyone thinks different. I believe Ben Carson is a great man, but I also believe he would have lacked the leadership skills. I understand why people liked him though. 

See, now we are having a nice conversation, talking it through without personal slams.
And I strongly support your emphasis on state power. What's good for communities in Alaska, is not necessarily good for beach communities in southern California. 
I've seen people complaining about the logging industry. Northern Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Michigan, all have big logging industries.  But it is done well, not carelessly. 
My dad and I own 200 Acres up there which we have designated as Tree Farm. It is Hardwoods,
(Oak, Maple, Black Cherry)- primarily used for furniture)ect. 
Conifers (Norway Pines, White Pines, and Spruce) and some swamp land. Yes there is Timber of value in the swamp.  But there is a timeline they thin it out once and then a decade goes by and then thin it out some more, another decade goes by and then thin it out some more it's not all at once.(cedar and the balsams we have)  You can only harvest swampland in the winter there, when the ground is good and frozen, otherwise you'd sink up to your neck in slop and die, the swamp holds no prisoners.
Selective tree Harvest is good for the environment.  It prevents overcrowding so the remaining trees have more room to sprall out, have more access to nutrients in the ground and sunlight.  Clear-cutting is actually good in some selected areas (not the whole Forest)  It allows reforestation to occur.  There are many many animal species that thrive in young thick forests. Where as a mature Forest hinders some animals ability to thrive.  Most woodland animals(deer,  grouse, turkeys, bear, do not hide in a tall stand of Hardwoods, they might walk through, but any sign of danger and they bolt to the thickest shit possible. There is a much wider range of food sources for woodland animals and creatures in a young thick Forest full of buds, full of seeds, full of shrubs, then there is in a mature forest where there are 100 ft Tall Oaks and Maples and cherries.  So the idea that logging is awful, bad and careless is just wrong. It keeps people employed and it keeps the woods trimmed and it keeps furniture and pencils, & toilet paper accessible to human hands.  (Without someone cutting down trees for toilet paper what would you use? A sharp edged stick to scrape it off, or a rock??)
 I don't know..  These are not fruit bearing cherry trees they're just called black cherry because the wood smells like cherry when you split it open.  (I know I got off of the Hillary topic, but it goes back to States governing States not the Big Government blanket laws telling the whole 50 states what's good for it) 
Some think that logging is wrong and bad, well then don't have any furniture don't build your houses out of wood and don't use pencils, toilet paper, sticky notes, or paper towel.
 You need to have a balance of mature forest and new growth forest, and clear-cut forest.  And until you see it in person you wouldn't believe how fast it grows back.

https://youtu.be/8G2WzH4AKpE
And since I'm in a No Code mood today, One day back in 1996 I was actually working on a logging crew up there in northern Wisconsin very physically demanding job by the way. 
I forced myself to stay awake late one evening because I knew that this was going to be on the David Letterman Show!!  Cheers!!
https://youtu.be/zOAzJFd4KDA

You went full forestry debate here. A debate thet should begin from the starting point that the forest existed for thousands of years prior to dumbass humans got on the scene with saws. Having several thousand acres of federal forest land about a mile and a half from my house that I go in to often, I can tell you that I much prefer it be regulated by the federal government. State run forests are too easily drawn into corporate logging interest. A corporate forest is a clear cut forest. 

I think it was on the (White Lives Matter? Thread) where someone brought up forestry and Mining.
Oddball place for that and this and that subject.  Just popped into my head while I was responding to (Riley 540)
Sorry I have ADHD I guess. . Give a little credit for adding a little pj for dessert anyway.

josevolution

Yes the country voted a total idiot for our president ..
please post one good quality he possesses any of you up above ^^^^
i voted for Clinton If Bernie would got the nod I would of voted for him they both possess better leadership quality then the bafoon that's currently in Asia embarrassing this great country !!

HughFreakingDillon

josevolution said:

Yes the country voted a total idiot for our president ..
please post one good quality he possesses any of you up above ^^^^
i voted for Clinton If Bernie would got the nod I would of voted for him they both possess better leadership quality then the bafoon that's currently in Asia embarrassing this great country !!

they can't. their big plus is "not hillary". 

JimmyV

62,984,824 Americans voted for Donald Trump. They are not all idiots and I would never call them all idiots. However, last November 8th they all did something incredibly stupid.

unsung

Nominate a candidate that doesn't cheat her way to the nom.

CM189191

unsung said:

Nominate a candidate that doesn't cheat her way to the nom.

...still buying into that russian propaganda I see...

unsung

Uh no, Donna Brazile said it.

Well that and how the Clinton campaign made her feel like a slave.

Patsy the slave that is.

HughFreakingDillon

JimmyV said:

62,984,824 Americans voted for Donald Trump. They are not all idiots and I would never call them all idiots. However, last November 8th they all did something incredibly stupid.

you know what, you're right. I shouldn't have said that. and for some reason I halved the amount that voted for him. LOL

Kat

Brazile: I found no evidence Democratic primary was rigged

"I found no evidence, none whatsoever," she told ABC's "This Week."

http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/05/politics/donna-brazile-primary-rigged/index.html

RYME

josevolution said:

Yes the country voted a total idiot for our president ..
please post one good quality he possesses any of you up above ^^^^
i voted for Clinton If Bernie would got the nod I would of voted for him they both possess better leadership quality then the bafoon that's currently in Asia embarrassing this great country !!

1.Neil Gorsuch
2. Unemployment is at a 17-year low.
3. Better than 3% GDP growth.
4. Military spending is back up. So our military can have what I needs to function.
5. We haven't heard much from ISIS lately.
I call that a good start.
6. Took the regulatory burden boot off the neck of American businesses.

JimmyV

RYME said:

josevolution said:

Yes the country voted a total idiot for our president ..
please post one good quality he possesses any of you up above ^^^^
i voted for Clinton If Bernie would got the nod I would of voted for him they both possess better leadership quality then the bafoon that's currently in Asia embarrassing this great country !!

1.Neil Gorsuch
2. Unemployment is at a 17-year low.
3. Better than 3% GDP growth.
4. Military spending is back up. So our military can have what I needs to function.
5. We haven't heard much from ISIS lately.
I call that a good start.
6. Took the regulatory burden boot off the neck of American businesses.

Good God. We had an ISIS inspired attack in NYC a week ago.