The Student Room Group

US Presidential Election 2016 official thread

Scroll to see replies

Original post by skunkboy
Better choice from R? But I don't think homosexuals and feminists like him. They couldn't vote for him.

Posted from TSR Mobile


no,no not at all.I don't think is a better option and i believe homophobic people like him don't really should have a place or chance for presidency.But unfortunately a lot of people think he is a true Christian...I hope i didn't misunderstood...


:frown:
The Republicans need a moderate if they are too win, but they don't really seem to have any. Clinton may win by default.
Reply 22
I hope it won't be Bush v Clinton. :colonhash:
Original post by Josb
I hope it won't be Bush v Clinton. :colonhash:

this will be harsh :P
Reply 24
Original post by Hellen21
this will be harsh :P

I won't watch it in that case.
Original post by Josb
I won't watch it in that case.


who do you believe will win in that case though?
Reply 26
Original post by Hellen21
who do you believe will win in that case though?

I don't know Bush n°3 enough but I can't see Grandma winning. :biggrin:
Original post by Josb
I don't know Bush n°3 enough but I can't see Grandma winning. :biggrin:


Do you have any substantive criticism of Hillary?
Reply 28
Original post by kurofune
Do you have any substantive criticism of Hillary?

Too old, and she's in the government. She will be accused of everything that didn't work under Obama.
Original post by Josb
Too old, and she's in the government. She will be accused of everything that didn't work under Obama.


Ronald Reagan was 69 when he became POTUS. Hillary is currently 67. Why is it okay for Ronald to be old, but not Hillary?

Obama was in the Senate when he announced his candidacy. George Bush was the Governor of Texas. Bill was the Governor of Texas. Almost all of America's recent Presidents have served political office. Given how polarized Congress is, would someone with NO political experience be capable to maneuver the legislative branch's antics?

FYI, Hillary's tenure as Secretary of State was during the first half of Obama's Presidency. Hillary has already been blamed for a vast majority of foreign policy mishaps. People that will blame a Democratic successor (Fox and friends) to Obama will blame that person, regardless of if it's Hillary or not.

So once again, do you have actual criticism of Hillary? Because your erroneously broad statement doesn't have substance.
Reply 30
Original post by kurofune
Ronald Reagan was 69 when he became POTUS. Hillary is currently 67. Why is it okay for Ronald to be old, but not Hillary?

Obama was in the Senate when he announced his candidacy. George Bush was the Governor of Texas. Bill was the Governor of Texas. Almost all of America's recent Presidents have served political office. Given how polarized Congress is, would someone with NO political experience be capable to maneuver the legislative branch's antics?

FYI, Hillary's tenure as Secretary of State was during the first half of Obama's Presidency. Hillary has already been blamed for a vast majority of foreign policy mishaps. People that will blame a Democratic successor (Fox and friends) to Obama will blame that person, regardless of if it's Hillary or not.

So once again, do you have actual criticism of Hillary? Because your erroneously broad statement doesn't have substance.

Chill out.
Reagan was elected 35 years ago, things have changed. Hillary will look like a brontosaur after Obama.

Obama was in the Senate when he announced his candidacy. George Bush was the Governor of Texas. Bill was the Governor of Texas. Almost all of America's recent Presidents have served political office.

I said "in the government." It's too much on the fore and she wasn't great at that job. The Republicans will blame her for the catastrophic situation in the Middle East.
Original post by Josb
Chill out.
Reagan was elected 35 years ago, things have changed. Hillary will look like a brontosaur after Obama.


LOL. I'm very chill, thanks. Maybe you should try to criticize leaders based on their policy mistakes and not their age. Besides, if you truly believe what you say, then you should be able to back it up with substance-that's the point of differing opinions.

How has age changed since Reagan's election? More importantly, why is age bad? If we were to follow your logic of younger is better, than shouldn't Ted Cruz be president?

Original post by Josb
I said "in the government." It's too much on the fore and she wasn't great at that job. The Republicans will blame her for the catastrophic situation in the Middle East.


Im sorry-can you explain to me why the role of governor is not a governmental job? Does that mean issues like balancing a state's budget, passing legislation that affects the state (marijuana legalization, gay marriage, state welfare programs) are just a volunteer's job?

Here's the important part-what did you dislike about Hillary's policies in the Middle East? Name me a specific act she committed that you dislike. So should Democrats somehow conjure a candidate that is completely devoid of any flaws? I'm not trying to diss you or anything-but you seem to be following a completely different line of logic from the average American political commentator.
Original post by Josb
Too old, and she's in the government. She will be accused of everything that didn't work under Obama.


Reagan was older. People would never use the 'too old' argument against a man. Let's not bring the archaic hillbilly sexism to this thread, please.
being active in American Politics, I am very content to see this thread here on TSR. yet, please lets research policy before listening to everything CNN or th s you (they are know for not being reliable sources in politics). Read up a little on US history and a bit on the candidates and then make a wise decision. you will notice that most issues in US politics are seen as not very contentious for any college educated european, but that how it works over here due to heavy religious influence in the country.


also vote Bernie Sander 2016 :biggrin:
Reply 34
Original post by Gabrielxucram
Reagan was older. People would never use the 'too old' argument against a man. Let's not bring the archaic hillbilly sexism to this thread, please.


Did't the age factor work against mcain? I vaguely remember it being brought up a lot. In fact did't it come up against regan too? He had that withering put down about age being a issue and not wanting to use his opponents youthful inexperience against him. I'd say age is an issue. Just one the candidate has to deal with early on, it can certainly be done though.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Aj12
Did't the age factor work against mcain? I vaguely remember it being brought up a lot. In fact did't it come up against regan too? He had that withering put down about age being a issue and not wanting to use his opponents youthful inexperience against him. I'd say age is an issue. Just one the candidate has to deal with early on, it can certainly be done though.


Posted from TSR Mobile


http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-26377477 Mitt Romney is oldee than Hillary and nobody had issues with it

yet there is a value to your statement as seen here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/31/upshot/how-old-is-too-old-for-president-depends-whos-running.html

one may see that the concern can be either partisan or sexist, yet you must draw your own conclusions.

Thus I ask: what do you think? Is it sexist to comment on Hillary's age or just typical party politics?
Reply 36
Original post by Gabrielxucram
http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-26377477 Mitt Romney is oldee than Hillary and nobody had issues with it

yet there is a value to your statement as seen here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/31/upshot/how-old-is-too-old-for-president-depends-whos-running.html

one may see that the concern can be either partisan or sexist, yet you must draw your own conclusions.

Thus I ask: what do you think? Is it sexist to comment on Hillary's age or just typical party politics?


I'm not sure I'd call it sexism. Perhaps men don't get it as heavily, I did find the comment from a 61 year old man about age amusing, but I'm not too convinced.. But I really remember Mccain being beaten heavily over his age, it was a real stick. You had Obama who was young and energetic, whilst Mccain was being asked about dying in office( Funnily enough he is running to retain his senator position at 80). If Clinton deals with it early on it won't matter. Many of the Republicans are just trying to attack her any way they can, I think she scares them. Otherwise why would Bengazi still be coming up despite no evidence of wrong doing?

If anything age should be less an issue now than it was in the past, people are living longer and the sort of candidate who is going to run for president will be wealthy and naturally expected to live longer anyway.
Reply 37
Original post by tengentoppa
The Republicans need a moderate if they are too win, but they don't really seem to have any. Clinton may win by default.


I think the Republicans do have moderates, I think they get thrown so far to the Right by candidates like Cruz and Bachmann that no one believes they are moderate. The Republican primaries seem to be more damaging to any candidate than anything the democrats do.
Original post by Aj12
I'm not sure I'd call it sexism. Perhaps men don't get it as heavily, I did find the comment from a 61 year old man about age amusing, but I'm not too convinced.. But I really remember Mccain being beaten heavily over his age, it was a real stick. You had Obama who was young and energetic, whilst Mccain was being asked about dying in office( Funnily enough he is running to retain his senator position at 80). If Clinton deals with it early on it won't matter. Many of the Republicans are just trying to attack her any way they can, I think she scares them. Otherwise why would Bengazi still be coming up despite no evidence of wrong doing?

If anything age should be less an issue now than it was in the past, people are living longer and the sort of candidate who is going to run for president will be wealthy and naturally expected to live longer anyway.


you raised exactly my point. I understand your views, yet I believe that the fact that men don't get it as bad as women is sexist. I think the reason for Obama's victory was not that McCain was too old(only Dems thought that as seen in the Pew research), but that Obama had charisma. I don't know if age mattered too much because energy trumps it. A good example of the unimportance of age in contrast to charisma is Bernie Sanders. He is old but very charismatic and the only independent in congress. If he was young and not as energetic maybe he wouldn't be as successful as he is now. I believe charisma plays a large role.


Lastly, I agree with you. The Dems are strong because they are all supporting one very moderate candidate vehemently while the GOP is separated by different factions from überright (Ted the Canadian) to economic Republicans(King Bush the Third).



Original post by Aj12
I think the Republicans do have moderates, I think they get thrown so far to the Right by candidates like Cruz and Bachmann that no one believes they are moderate. The Republican primaries seem to be more damaging to any candidate than anything the democrats do.


That is because Republicans need to go to the right during the primaries so they can win the votes of southern fundamentalists that are con-science, abortion, gays, and mostly all things college educated people don't find it even contentious. Yet, after winning the nomination, the candidate is required to go back to the centre so he or she won't alienate many voters. It is much harder for GOPs to juggle between all these different factions because of their voters. Dems have really a much easier time appealing simply to women, minorities, educated, etc.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending