Gaining my independence (1 Viewer)

[Coeur de Lion]

Yeah, this is just more nonsense.  Your side declared the conservatives/gop dead back in 2006 when you snagged Congress, yet 4-6 years later we took both houses and most governorship and state legislatures.  You say this type of stuff every time something goes your way, and every time you're proven wrong.  

Sorry, but giving HRC a pass because she's "a typical politician" only exacerbates the problem.  You just don't have the stones to stand up to that stuff - which makes you the perfect progressive lemming.

Oh, and btw, Trump is not my candidate as I've said repeatedly - even despite your side solidifying it's hold on corruption, shadiness and lying.  And because you support HRC, I can only surmise you're okay with all that.  Is Trump a clown?  yes.. Bigoted?  No, not really.  Your side throws out terms like "racist", "sexist" and "bigot" every time someone opposes you that it's lost all meaning.  You use not because it's true, but because you think it will shut down the opposition.  So, like your hero HRC, you're lying as well.  Congratulations!

I'll take a link to me saying the Republican Party was dead before, ever. Trump is a game-changer in that he's managed to completely alienate the fastest growing and most important ethnic voting block in the country; he is to Hispanic-American voters what Goldwater was to African-Americans, but much worse. It's a huge problem for them, considering the rapidly changing ethnic demos in the country.

I'm not giving Hillary a pass. I don't like her, and I didn't vote for her in primary. I'll probably hold my nose and vote for her in November because typical politician >>> idiot with a Napoleon complex with his finger on the red button. All of the attacks on her are typical partisan nonsense, though -- I don't like her because I don't like her on policy. The country will be just fine with her at the wheel for the most part.

And   at Trump not being a bigot. And I'll take a link to me ever calling any politician or anyone on this board for that matter racist or sexist, ever, unless it was Trump or related to Trump. TIA.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

A lot of anger with Obama

Uhhh... no. Most sane people actually realize that he's done a pretty decent job all things considered. I certainly don't fully agree with some of the stuff that he's done, but all things considered, he's going to be considered a solid President. Certainly top half as a whole, maybe just outside the top quarter.

 

[Mitch Robbins]

Conservative opposition won't let us fix it the way it needs to be fixed and you know it. This is hastily and poorly formulated snark on your part. I thought you fixed yourself while you were away?

Wait, what?

 

[Chaka]

I agree with you in principle NC but you live in a battleground state.  Unless you think Drumpf >/= Hillary, and I don't think you do, you cannot risk casting a protest vote.  I live in California so I can comfortably cast my protest vote for Gary Johnson, Ross Perot, Ron Paul or Kermit T. Freaking Frog because Hillary is going to win California no matter what I do.

But in the states that could swing the election, and the alternative is a Drumpf Presidency No, HELL NO, NO ####### WAY!  Hillary sucks but Drumpf is downright dangerous.

 

[eoMMan]

Uhhh... no. Most sane people actually realize that he's done a pretty decent job all things considered. I certainly don't fully agree with some of the stuff that he's done, but all things considered, he's going to be considered a solid President. Certainly top half as a whole, maybe just outside the top quarter.

Yes. This.

 

[The Commish]

Wait - didn't Obama solve the health care thing?

Conservative opposition won't let us fix it the way it needs to be fixed and you know it. This is hastily and poorly formulated snark on your part. I thought you fixed yourself while you were away?

The problem is the hatchet job the Democratic Senate did on ACA in the first place.  When the foundation is faulty, you blame the guy who poured it.  It doesn't matter what was thrown on top of this pile of crap.  It wasn't going to work.

 

[bueno]

Conservative opposition won't let us fix it the way it needs to be fixed and you know it. This is hastily and poorly formulated snark on your part. I thought you fixed yourself while you were away?

Nah - it was a fat pitch, so I swung at it. But Obamacare is not fixable. I'm not sure the system is fixable until we can get lawyers and accountants out of the doctor's offices and let our doctors get back to treating patients rather than fighting to get the insurance companies to pay for that care.

 

[bueno]

Uhhh... no. Most sane people actually realize that he's done a pretty decent job all things considered. I certainly don't fully agree with some of the stuff that he's done, but all things considered, he's going to be considered a solid President. Certainly top half as a whole, maybe just outside the top quarter.

Except for Health care and letting Iran self-inspect their nuclear facilities, he's done damn little.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Except for Health care and letting Iran self-inspect their nuclear facilities, he's done damn little.

Utterly shocking that you feel this way.

 

[bueno]

Utterly shocking that you feel this way.

Enlighten me - list his triumphs.

 

[MaxThreshold]

Enlighten me - list his triumphs.

This ought to be good.  Can't wait.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Enlighten me - list his triumphs.

Sorry to disappoint you, but this isn't a discussion worth having with you. Pretty much everyone not blinded by virulent partisanship knows that it's absolutely true. 

 

[AAABatteries]

A huge chunk of the Republican base actually believes that Obama is a Kenyan Muslim secretly supporting ISIS, and evolution and climate change are Liberal conspiracies, among other absurdities.  Regulating who pisses where is a big priority for them.  Critical thinking isn't exactly a strength for these folks

Sorry to disappoint you, but this isn't a discussion worth having with you. Pretty much everyone not blinded by virulent partisanship knows that it's absolutely true. 

Partisanship works both ways - both sides are corrupt - it's difficult to get people to believe you that Obama did some good when you post the nonsense above.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Partisanship works both ways - both sides are corrupt - it's difficult to get people to believe you that Obama did some good when you post the nonsense above.

I don't really care too much what folks like bueno, Max, and jon_mx believe. Also, unfortunately, everything I mentioned in the post that you quoted is 100% true.

 

[T J]

Uhhh... no. Most sane people actually realize that he's done a pretty decent job all things considered. I certainly don't fully agree with some of the stuff that he's done, but all things considered, he's going to be considered a solid President. Certainly top half as a whole, maybe just outside the top quarter.

Trust me. There are plenty of sane people that are angry with Obama and the job he's done. Plenty. And in reading some of your other responses, I question who the sane one really is. You seem kind of out there to me. 

 

[cstu]

Trust me. There are plenty of sane people that are angry with Obama and the job he's done. Plenty. And in reading some of your other responses, I question who the sane one really is. You seem kind of out there to me. 

Nobody sane  should be 'angry' about the job he's done.  

 

[MaxThreshold]

Nobody sane  should be 'angry' about the job he's done.  

Always glad to hear your opinion regardless of how wrong it is.  Thanks, cstu!

 

[MaxThreshold]

I don't really care too much what folks like bueno, Max, and jon_mx believe. Also, unfortunately, everything I mentioned in the post that you quoted is 100% true.

Gosh, I'm so disappointed that a lefty nut job doesn't care about my beliefs.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Trust me. There are plenty of sane people that are angry with Obama and the job he's done. Plenty. And in reading some of your other responses, I question who the sane one really is. You seem kind of out there to me. 

Yet oddly enough he has a historically high approval rating.

 

[NCCommish]

I agree with you in principle NC but you live in a battleground state.  Unless you think Drumpf >/= Hillary, and I don't think you do, you cannot risk casting a protest vote.  I live in California so I can comfortably cast my protest vote for Gary Johnson, Ross Perot, Ron Paul or Kermit T. Freaking Frog because Hillary is going to win California no matter what I do.

But in the states that could swing the election, and the alternative is a Drumpf Presidency No, HELL NO, NO ####### WAY!  Hillary sucks but Drumpf is downright dangerous.

Someone at the DNC should have considered that. I don't owe her or the DNC ####. I will no longer vote against my conscience. It isn't on me. It's on the people that put this damaged candidate up. The most unpopular candidate the Democrats have ever run. Not just with me but with everyone. They are begging to lose this election. If she was running against any relatively sane GOPer she'd be done already.

You want my vote you earn it. How do you earn it? You could start by not being so fake and devoid of substance that they actually have to remind you to sigh on your teleprompter. You could actually be about more than gaining power. You could try actually giving a #### about the people who can't write you a 6 figure check, of course after you launder it through the state committees. You could not use extremely sensitive and important positions on boards that advise on WMDs as plums to idiots who write you checks. By the way Hillary has failed all those tests. And I haven't even gotten to the real important stuff.

If the Republicans manage put Trump in the WH that is on the idiots looking for a Clinton political handjob that foisted this neo-con, neo-liberal off on us not me or anyone else who refuses to sully themselves with a vote for her. 

 

[NCCommish]

Yet oddly enough he has a historically high approval rating.

He murdered an American citizen and his 16 year old son. He didn't have a trial he just decided they should die and so they were killed. I don't really give a flying rats ### what else he did that makes him a very damaged president. And he is president not emperor. So in our system he doesn't get to murder anyone he wants any time he wants. And if he does then America is over it was a nice run I guess. He should have been impeached for that high crime. You know why he wasn't? The next GOP president might want to murder someone so they let it slide. Bet a lot of democrats will feel quite a bit different about it then. Kind of how drones were terrible until their guy did it. It's so hypocritical it makes me sick to my stomach.

 

[cobalt_27]

Someone at the DNC should have considered that. I don't owe her or the DNC ####. I will no longer vote against my conscience. It isn't on me. It's on the people that put this damaged candidate up. The most unpopular candidate the Democrats have ever run. Not just with me but with everyone. They are begging to lose this election. If she was running against any relatively sane GOPer she'd be done already.

You want my vote you earn it. How do you earn it? You could start by not being so fake and devoid of substance that they actually have to remind you to sigh on your teleprompter. You could actually be about more than gaining power. You could try actually giving a #### about the people who can't write you a 6 figure check, of course after you launder it through the state committees. You could not use extremely sensitive and important positions on boards that advise on WMDs as plums to idiots who write you checks. By the way Hillary has failed all those tests. And I haven't even gotten to the real important stuff.

If the Republicans manage put Trump in the WH that is on the idiots looking for a Clinton political handjob that foisted this neo-con, neo-liberal off on us not me or anyone else who refuses to sully themselves with a vote for her. 

This, this, this and this 1000 more times.

 

[The Commish]

Someone at the DNC should have considered that. I don't owe her or the DNC ####. I will no longer vote against my conscience. It isn't on me. It's on the people that put this damaged candidate up. The most unpopular candidate the Democrats have ever run. Not just with me but with everyone. They are begging to lose this election. If she was running against any relatively sane GOPer she'd be done already.

You want my vote you earn it. How do you earn it? You could start by not being so fake and devoid of substance that they actually have to remind you to sigh on your teleprompter. You could actually be about more than gaining power. You could try actually giving a #### about the people who can't write you a 6 figure check, of course after you launder it through the state committees. You could not use extremely sensitive and important positions on boards that advise on WMDs as plums to idiots who write you checks. By the way Hillary has failed all those tests. And I haven't even gotten to the real important stuff.

If the Republicans manage put Trump in the WH that is on the idiots looking for a Clinton political handjob that foisted this neo-con, neo-liberal off on us not me or anyone else who refuses to sully themselves with a vote for her. 

He murdered an American citizen and his 16 year old son. He didn't have a trial he just decided they should die and so they were killed. I don't really give a flying rats ### what else he did that makes him a very damaged president. And he is president not emperor. So in our system he doesn't get to murder anyone he wants any time he wants. And if he does then America is over it was a nice run I guess. He should have been impeached for that high crime. You know why he wasn't? The next GOP president might want to murder someone so they let it slide. Bet a lot of democrats will feel quite a bit different about it then. Kind of how drones were terrible until their guy did it. It's so hypocritical it makes me sick to my stomach.

 

 

[chet]

Obama in Muslim dress.

 

[roadkill1292]

I KNEW IT!

 

[Apple Jack]

 so ridiculous.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

He murdered an American citizen and his 16 year old son. He didn't have a trial he just decided they should die and so they were killed. I don't really give a flying rats ### what else he did that makes him a very damaged president. And he is president not emperor. So in our system he doesn't get to murder anyone he wants any time he wants. And if he does then America is over it was a nice run I guess. He should have been impeached for that high crime. You know why he wasn't? The next GOP president might want to murder someone so they let it slide. Bet a lot of democrats will feel quite a bit different about it then. Kind of how drones were terrible until their guy did it. It's so hypocritical it makes me sick to my stomach.

Yeah, it bothers me a lot too. But we're also in somewhat of a catch-22 at this point IMO. There is certainly no clean, easy, or even reasonable course of action given the state of the Middle East right now. And overall, I do think that the Obama administration has done a pretty decent job in that area even though I don't agree with everything he's done. I definitely believe that his record overall will be viewed positively over the course of time, driven by his domestic achievements, particularly considering the level of of blind partisan obstructionism he's had to deal with.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

I'm admittedly not as informed on the drone stuff as I probably should be so please correct me if I'm wrong about stuff. 

 It just seems to me that the morality of using drones has to be put in context alongside the other available alternatives.  To me, some use of drones is preferable to constantly putting our military into dangerous situations where there's an even greater risk of bloodshed.  And some use of drones is better than doing nothing at all to disrupt terrorist activities.  So I don't think I'm on board with widespread condemnation of drone attacks.

I'm sure there are ways that we can improve the way we use them to diminish civilian casualties and to make them more humane in general.  I expect that we will do so going forward, it's still a relatively new technology and there are always these sorts of challenges when we're confronted with new situations.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

I'm admittedly not as informed on the drone stuff as I probably should be so please correct me if I'm wrong about stuff. 

 It just seems to me that the morality of using drones has to be put in context alongside the other available alternatives.  To me, some use of drones is preferable to constantly putting our military into dangerous situations where there's an even greater risk of bloodshed.  And some use of drones is better than doing nothing at all to disrupt terrorist activities.  So I don't think I'm on board with widespread condemnation of drone attacks.

I'm sure there are ways that we can improve the way we use them to diminish civilian casualties and to make them more humane in general.  I expect that we will do so going forward, it's still a relatively new technology and there are always these sorts of challenges when we're confronted with new situations.

For me, the problem doesn't lie with the use of drone strikes in and of itself, it's with directly targeting a US citizen, regardless of how bad a guy he is. That's a pretty slippery slope IMO.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki

 

[BowieMercs]

I keep expecting to see the derivative thread "losing my religion" in the FFA, but it has not appeared yet. Where are all the Stipe fans?.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

For me, the problem doesn't lie with the use of drone strikes in and of itself, it's with directly targeting a US citizen, regardless of how bad a guy he is. That's a pretty slippery slope IMO.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki

It doesn't seem to me like that particular slope is all that slippery.  Sure he was an American citizen, but at least from the wiki description it sounds like he was overseas engaging in a bunch of terrorist planning and activity.  Yes it would be preferable to capture him and bring him back here to stand trial, but I'm not sure how practical that would have been in this instance and how many lives it would have but at risk to do some sort of Bin Laden-style raid on him.  

Are people really afraid that the U.S. military is going to start assassinating American citizens for trivial reasons?  If so, I guess I'll need some more evidence than just this guy.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

It doesn't seem to me like that particular slope is all that slippery.  Sure he was an American citizen, but at least from the wiki description it sounds like he was overseas engaging in a bunch of terrorist planning and activity.  Yes it would be preferable to capture him and bring him back here to stand trial, but I'm not sure how practical that would have been in this instance and how many lives it would have but at risk to do some sort of Bin Laden-style raid on him.  

Are people really afraid that the U.S. military is going to start assassinating American citizens for trivial reasons?  If so, I guess I'll need some more evidence than just this guy.

Yeah, I'm somewhat torn on it as well -- along with Gitmo, the Patriot Act, and a slew of other stuff that's been done by members of both parties in the name of the War on Terror. At some point, though, the end doesn't justify the means anymore, and putting American citizens on a kill-on-sight assassination list crosses the line for me personally. I'm not a government-hating / distrusting type at all, but this bothers me quite a bit.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Agreed these aren't easy questions.  

 

[BowieMercs]

Yeah, I'm somewhat torn on it as well -- along with Gitmo, the Patriot Act, and a slew of other stuff that's been done by members of both parties in the name of the War on Terror. At some point, though, the end doesn't justify the means anymore, and putting American citizens on a kill-on-sight assassination list crosses the line for me personally. I'm not a government-hating / distrusting type at all, but this bothers me quite a bit.

The Patriot Act needs to go. It was a bad idea, knee jerk "DO SOMETHING" response to a horrible situation.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

The Patriot Act needs to go. It was a bad idea, knee jerk "DO SOMETHING" response to a horrible situation.

Agreed. But it'll be a cold day in hell before that happens, unfortunately.

 

[The Commish]

It doesn't seem to me like that particular slope is all that slippery.  Sure he was an American citizen, but at least from the wiki description it sounds like he was overseas engaging in a bunch of terrorist planning and activity.  Yes it would be preferable to capture him and bring him back here to stand trial, but I'm not sure how practical that would have been in this instance and how many lives it would have but at risk to do some sort of Bin Laden-style raid on him.  

Are people really afraid that the U.S. military is going to start assassinating American citizens for trivial reasons?  If so, I guess I'll need some more evidence than just this guy.

Yeah, I'm somewhat torn on it as well -- along with Gitmo, the Patriot Act, and a slew of other stuff that's been done by members of both parties in the name of the War on Terror. At some point, though, the end doesn't justify the means anymore, and putting American citizens on a kill-on-sight assassination list crosses the line for me personally. I'm not a government-hating / distrusting type at all, but this bothers me quite a bit.

When this happened, I struggled momentarily.  This doesn't seem all that difficult.  Do your best to bring him back.  If he dies while trying to be detained, oh well.  I don't think executing a drone strike is the way to go ever.  That's not trying to get the person back here to face the judicial system.

 

[NCCommish]

Yeah, it bothers me a lot too. But we're also in somewhat of a catch-22 at this point IMO. There is certainly no clean, easy, or even reasonable course of action given the state of the Middle East right now. And overall, I do think that the Obama administration has done a pretty decent job in that area even though I don't agree with everything he's done. I definitely believe that his record overall will be viewed positively over the course of time, driven by his domestic achievements, particularly considering the level of of blind partisan obstructionism he's had to deal with.

First I think you can make the argument, and do so easily, that his big Acheivement( the one that cost him a ton of political capital and the Congress not to mention many state legislatures) the ACA was essentially a give away to the insurance industry. Pretty easily. You can also pretty easily make the case that his stimulus was way too small ball because he listened to third way retreads who have never gotten anything right and therefore extended the recession unneccesarily. And lastly if the GOP could say yes to a black guy, thank god they couldn't, we'd have seen major cuts to our already tattered social safety net that currently leaves millions of people with no help at all. That is not a HOF domestic record.

Combine all that with a drone program that is terrorizing citizens of other countries to the point children are afraid to go outside in clear weather. A program that routinely commits war crimes by attacking funerals, weddings, people who come to help after an attack and says any male child over the age of 14 is automatically an enemy combatant and I am not sure history will be as kind as you think.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

First I think you can make the argument, and do so easily, that his big Acheivement( the one that cost him a ton of political capital and the Congress not to mention many state legislatures) the ACA was essentially a give away to the insurance industry. Pretty easily. You can also pretty easily make the case that his stimulus was way too small ball because he listened to third way retreads who have never gotten anything right and therefore extended the recession unneccesarily. And lastly if the GOP could say yes to a black guy, thank god they couldn't, we'd have seen major cuts to our already tattered social safety net that currently leaves millions of people with no help at all. That is not a HOF domestic record.

Combine all that with a drone program that is terrorizing citizens of other countries to the point children are afraid to go outside in clear weather. A program that routinely commits war crimes by attacking funerals, weddings, people who come to help after an attack and says any male child over the age of 14 is automatically an enemy combatant and I am not sure history will be as kind as you think.

Yeah, I'm not calling him a HOFer President -- my exact words were "top half, but outside the top quarter." I'll stand on that. The ACA is flawed, absolutely, but IMO it was about the best that was going to reasonably get passed, and it does represent a step in the right direction. Same with the stimulus. Hey, I love the idea of a single payer system as much as you do -- but I also realize that there's no way that the country is ready to enact something like that, so I'll take the incremental steps forward, and trade the slight increase in cost for me personally for slowing down the overall rate of cost increase and for millions of Americans having access to healthcare who didn't prior.

 

[NCCommish]

Yeah, I'm not calling him a HOFer President -- my exact words were "top half, but outside the top quarter." I'll stand on that. The ACA is flawed, absolutely, but IMO it was about the best that was going to reasonably get passed, and it does represent a step in the right direction. Same with the stimulus. Hey, I love the idea of a single payer system as much as you do -- but I also realize that there's no way that the country is ready to enact something like that, so I'll take the incremental steps forward, and trade the slight increase in cost for me personally for slowing down the overall rate of cost increase and for millions of Americans having access to healthcare who didn't prior.

Millions still uninsured.  Ridiculously high deductibles which means a lot more people are essentially uninsured. The reason we got stuck with it is because the Democrats ran Republicans because the be all end all was seat count  and "winning". In the end those blue dogs screwed us all. They screwed us on healthcare, they screwed us on the stimulus and then just to add insult to injury Obama made the Bush tax cuts permanent to appease them for which he got ****.

Obama seems to be pretty dense on some subjects. The big one being starting a negotiation by giving almost everything away so you get some tiny thing out of it, which of course he never even got. The loss of the state houses made the GOP invulnerable once gerrymandering kicked in and that we can lay right on Obama's doorstep. He did nothing to mobilize all those people who came out to vote for him to try to prevent it. Further we can lay a spate of anti-marriage laws on his doorstep as he was a day late and a dollar short. Leadership on his part has been spotty. Sometimes he goes full Clinton waiting for the polls to tell him it's safe. It's not an attractive quality.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Agree to disagree NCC. Obama's post-election pivot toward the center was certainly a disappointment to me personally, but realistically my personal disappointment =/= the guy being a disaster for the country.

 

[T J]

Agree to disagree NCC. Obama's post-election pivot toward the center was certainly a disappointment to me personally, but realistically my personal disappointment =/= the guy being a disaster for the country.

Presidents should be at or near the center. Too far left or too far right is an awful way to govern. I don't think he even sniffed the center though.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Presidents should be at or near the center. Too far left or too far right is an awful way to govern.

That's certainly a viewpoint that has some merit, although I don't necessarily subscribe to it. 

So I can safely assume that you're a staunch voter for the current Democratic Party then?  Because they're firmly entrenched in the center of the overall political spectrum while the other side has swung completely off to the very far right. Not Trump, who the hell knows what he even is, but the Republican Party as a whole.

 

[T J]

That's certainly a viewpoint that has some merit, although I don't necessarily subscribe to it. 

So I can safely assume that you're a staunch voter for the current Democratic Party then?  Because they're firmly entrenched in the center of the overall political spectrum while the other side has swung completely off to the very far right. Not Trump, who the hell knows what he even is, but the Republican Party as a whole.

I do not consider the Democratic Party to be centered. I do not consider the Republican Party to be centered either. But the issues I feel most strongly about are Republican positions so I am a staunch Republican and mostly proud of it. Can't say I'm going for Trump though. What a disaster.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

I do not consider the Democratic Party to be centered. I do not consider the Republican Party to be centered either. But the issues I feel most strongly about are Republican positions so I am a staunch Republican and mostly proud of it. Can't say I'm going for Trump though. What a disaster.

Would you mind unpacking the bolded for me a bit?  Looking at the current generation of Democratic leadership, I don't really see anywhere that they fall too far from the center, unless we're talking about social issues, and even then, it's only when it is politically expedient.  To use Hillary as an example (her record and actions, not what she's saying now since Bernie pulled her left in the primary):

1. On foreign policy, she's a straight neo-con
   
2. Pro-free trade (NAFTA, TPP), anti-financial regulation (Glass-Steagall)
   
3. Pro war on drugs / crime (Violent Crime Control & Law Enforcement Act)
   
4. Not far left on climate change / energy / enviornment
   
5. Welfare reform (PWORA)
   

And she aligns fairly closely with Obama on these issues for the most part.  Granted, I've extrapolated a bit on Hillary based on what her husband did in office, but IMO that's not an unreasonable position at all.  Aside from the social issues, Hillary is basically Ronald Reagan with boobs.  Although Reagan would stand a chance in today's Republican climate based on his stances on gun control and immigration.

 

[T J]

Would you mind unpacking the bolded for me a bit?  Looking at the current generation of Democratic leadership, I don't really see anywhere that they fall too far from the center, unless we're talking about social issues, and even then, it's only when it is politically expedient.  To use Hillary as an example (her record and actions, not what she's saying now since Bernie pulled her left in the primary):

1. On foreign policy, she's a straight neo-con
   
2. Pro-free trade (NAFTA, TPP), anti-financial regulation (Glass-Steagall)
   
3. Pro war on drugs / crime (Violent Crime Control & Law Enforcement Act)
   
4. Not far left on climate change / energy / enviornment
   
5. Welfare reform (PWORA)
   

And she aligns fairly closely with Obama on these issues for the most part.  Granted, I've extrapolated a bit on Hillary based on what her husband did in office, but IMO that's not an unreasonable position at all.  Aside from the social issues, Hillary is basically Ronald Reagan with boobs.  Although Reagan would stand a chance in today's Republican climate based on his stances on gun control and immigration.

First and foremost? Immigration. Second? Affordable Care Act. Gun control. Iran deal. Entitlements is a huge one too.

 

[bueno]

Nobody sane  should be 'angry' about the job he's done.  

The things I think he botched -

1.  health care - yeah I'm angry - I'm putting out more money than ever.

2. The deal with Iran - essentially giving them the right to inspect their nuclear weapons development programs themselves - no outside oversight. Yeah, I'm pissed about that.

3. Libya - waiting until the rebels were practically defeated before rendering assistance - prolonged the conflict, got more people killed. Yeah, I'm pissed about that too.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

First and foremost? Immigration. Second? Affordable Care Act. Gun control. Iran deal. Entitlements is a huge one too.

Thanks for clarifying. Gotta say that putting such a high priority on an issue like immigration is totally foreign to me, but that's OK to disagree on. No way we'll see eye to eye on gun control either, in all likelihood, but take a look at the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act that Bill Clinton signed in 1996 -- granted, again I am extrapolating Hillary's actual positions in part based upon her husband's actions as opposed to what she has said since Bernie forced her to tack hard left in the primary -- Hillary is pretty hugely likely to look to expand any of the social safety nets, and was at least indirectly part of actually hugely reducing them in the mid-90s. The railing about "entitlements" is pretty much just nonsensical red meat for the Republican base at this point. PRWORCA actually gutted welfare, food stamps, etc very effectively.

 

[bueno]

Thanks for clarifying. Gotta say that putting such a high priority on an issue like immigration is totally foreign to me, but that's OK to disagree on. No way we'll see eye to eye on gun control either, in all likelihood, but take a look at the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act that Bill Clinton signed in 1996 -- granted, again I am extrapolating Hillary's actual positions in part based upon her husband's actions as opposed to what she has said since Bernie forced her to tack hard left in the primary -- Hillary is pretty hugely likely to look to expand any of the social safety nets, and was at least indirectly part of actually gutting them in the mid-90s. The railing about "entitlements" is pretty much just nonsensical red meat for the Republican base at this point. PRWORCA actually gutted welfare, food stamps, etc very effectively.

Anything to get elected...

 

[Coeur de Lion]

The things I think he botched -

1.  health care - yeah I'm angry - I'm putting out more money than ever.

2. The deal with Iran - essentially giving them the right to inspect their nuclear weapons development programs themselves - no outside oversight. Yeah, I'm pissed about that.

3. Libya - waiting until the rebels were practically defeated before rendering assistance - prolonged the conflict, got more people killed. Yeah, I'm pissed about that too.

You know that nuclear non-proliferation and foreign policy experts from both sides of the isle almost universally loved the Iran deal? It's only the talking heads on Fox, etc that hate it, and they'd hate virtually anything that Obama could do. The sanctions were doing essentially nothing, and shutting off any type of dialogue with the most advanced and powerful nation in the Middle East would seem to be a pretty awful idea. Like them or not, the Iranians are going to have to be a huge part of the process moving forward in that region, and treating them like a misbehaving 5 year old was accomplishing exactly nothing.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Anything to get elected...

Yeah, I agree. I don't like Hillary, don't trust her, and she's certainly a politician (in the negative sense of the word) and a DINO. Yeah, I'll vote for her, because Supreme Court and "not that other moron," but I won't be happy about it.