• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Who is going to win this election in November?

Who will win the general presidential election?

  • Donald Trump

    Votes: 37 22.7%
  • Hillary Clinton

    Votes: 126 77.3%

  • Total voters
    163
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
I'll vote for Clinton. She is immensely qualified. As far as the scandals go, the GOP has gotten zero to stick to her in twenty-plus years. So, either they're incredibly incompetent or there's nothing really there.

There is a third possibility, They are incredibly incompetent and there is nothing really there.
 
IIRC the polls have generally said that Hillary won all three. I'm inclined to agree. I missed the first 1/3 of last night's debate, but by the time I tuned in Trump was showing his usual lack of composure.
 
The first debate they both won, the second Hillary won slightly, the third they both lost.

Captain%20Kirk%20as%20Dr.%20Janice%20Lester%202269_zpsade9ouym.png
 
I don't get a vote, but I'd like to see Trump win so that I get four years of Alec Baldwin parodying him on SNL.


This is based on the assumption that Baldwin isn't imprisoned by our new Orange Overlord.
 
I still don't understand this bullshit of Trump if he loses he won't concede....

How is that going to play out?
Thank you ABC News for not joining the insane, overwrought hysteria about a "constitutional crisis" if Trump doesn't concede:
ABC News said:
“While we certainly have come to expect the tradition of the election night concession in the television era, especially when the results appear conclusive, it bears repeating that there is no official status to preliminary returns,” said Edward B. Foley, an election law expert and a professor at the Mortiz College of Law at Ohio State University, who has written about the subject.

“In short, we don’t have a constitutional crisis on our hands if we don’t have a gracious concession on election night, even if the result appears a blowout,” he continued.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald-trump-doesnt-concede-election/story?id=42942492

Hillary and others should know better than to be so aghast at the thought of Trump not conceding, as if it were a constitutional crisis - a polite gesture, but completely meaningless to the objective election process. And I think she and all the other politicians who pretend to be so aghast know very well it's not some crisis, and only use it to further their goal of making Trump look worse. He does that all on his own, thank you, and it lowers the maturity level, and my opinion, of those who partake in all this aghastness about something so stupid just to further their own ends. All they need to do is chuckle politely in his face to say "So what?" Instead, he gets more attention. Politicians are stupid people, and the only people who deserve to win political positions are those who don't want them.
 
Last edited:
Hillary and others should know better than to be so aghast at the thought of Trump not conceding, as if it were a constitutional crisis - a polite gesture, but completely meaningless to the objective election process. And I think she and all the other politicians who pretend to be so aghast know very well it's not some crisis, and only use it to further their goal of making Trump look worse. He does that all on his own, thank you, and it lowers the maturity level, and my opinion, of those who partake in all this aghastness about something so stupid just to further their own ends. All they need to do is chuckle politely in his face to say "So what?" Instead, he gets more attention. Politicians are stupid people, and the only people who deserve to win political positions are those who don't want them.

A gracious concession is important, even though it doesn't create a Constitutional crisis. A gracious concession is a nod to those who backed Trump, that the US and our process of electing a leader are important and valid. Millions of folks with guns and a notion that the election is not valid, could be a dangerous mix.
 
Indeed. If you want to be the President of the United States, part of that is proving that you know how to conduct yourself in a presidential manner. I've seen nothing from Trump that suggests he'd be anything other than an angry, petulant tin-pot wanna-be dictator.
 
I still don't understand this bullshit of Trump if he loses he won't concede....

How is that going to play out?
Best case scenario - after some blustering, Trump concedes, hours after the result shows he's been soundly beaten, because he needs time to sulk like a child. He reads a prepared statement by his handlers, and doesn't act like an idiot. He notes the tradition we have here of a peaceful transition of power and wishes President-elect Clinton well after a hard-fought campaign.

Most-likely scenario - Trump delays for a few hours, until his handlers (and most likely Ivanka, who at least seems intelligent and level-headed) finally convince him that he's lost and has to accept gracefully. He'll give a speech in which he says stuff that has a double-meaning, red meat to his supporters. But eventually he will say that the result is to be respected, and hopes President-elect Clinton will be a "strong" leader like he would've been, and says some crap about the number of votes he got shows that his people have a voice, blah blah.

Worst-case scenario - He refuses to concede to her after it shows that he has clearly lost, likely around 11pm or 12am Eastern Time. When he does finally emerge, he gives a speech to his supporters in which he moans and groans, and the "red meat" he throws to them is actually pretty overt, in which he alleges that vote tampering happened, the result is false, and encourages people to protest it. This could cause demonstrations, maybe even a few riots. Trump will say "I told you so," and use it as proof that "law and order" in this country has failed. He will try and contest the election result by asking for a full recount, and maybe even say "We're taking this to the Supreme Court!"

As for the whole "Gore didn't concede in 2000!" thing that his supporters are saying on Facebook and Breitbart...actually, Gore did concede. He just retracted it later when it became clear that Florida was up in the air. And the whole snafu that happened afterwards, which did actually go to the Supreme Court, was well-handled by the Republicans and poorly-handled by Democrats.

If Gore had actually bothered to win his home state of Tennessee, he wouldn't have needed Florida.

If Gore's team had not limited the scope of the recount to so few counties, he would've won Florida.

Regardless of the fact that the whole Florida situation in 2000 seemed rigged, it was avoidable. But I agree with what one of Bush's advisors said in a CNN documentary last year. The people who "voted" in Florida that day elected George W. Bush. The people who intended to vote that day elected Al Gore.

And Gore eventually conceded. Again.
 
This is an absurd and disgusting statement. Maybe democratic countries are not for you, then.
If you listen to all politicians as a whole speak about each other during elections, no politician is fit to serve. It appears they collectively agree with me.

Also, a namesake of yours, John C. Maxwell, and many others say things like this:
In most cases, those who want power probably shouldn't have it, those who enjoy it probably do so for the wrong reasons, and those who want most to hold on to it don't understand that it's only temporary.
or most commonly:
Power should only be given to those who don't want it.
So, really? Absurd and disgusting? Undemocratic? I'd take a look at the people who have said it before making such an edict.
 
Last edited:
If you listen to all politicians as a whole speak about each other during elections, no politician is fit to serve. It appears they collectively agree with me.

Also, a namesake of yours, John C. Maxwell, and many others say things like this:

or most commonly:

So, really? Absurd and disgusting? Undemocratic? I'd take a look at the people who have said it before making such an edict.

I'd love to know what your brilliant solution is, then, since all politicians are terrible and unfit. Or do you just stop at spouting cynical nonsense?
 
Term limits for one. No career politicians. Female empowerment. Science as a rule. Get rid of the Citizens United thing.

I get mailers from politicians saying how bad the other one is. Which one is lying?

There are individual politicians you can meet who are anecdotally honest, bright, and good people. I use the plural and collective. Put them together and they collectively agree that none deserve the job and have proved it.
 
Term limits for one. No career politicians.

Bad idea.

I get mailers from politicians saying how bad the other one is. Which one is lying?

It's not that hard to find independent research on candidates and make a decision for yourself.

There are individual politicians you can meet who are anecdotally honest, bright, and good people. I use the plural and collective. Put them together and they collectively agree that none deserve the job.

And term limits would magically fix this somehow??
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top