POTUS 2016 General Election Discussion Thread

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by panerd

Anyone planning on voting for Donald Trump is voting only for the "R" and (for the most part) in misogynistic fear of a powerful woman and is without question a sheep.

Not true at all.
I despise the fact that I will vote for Trump, to be honest.
But to me Hillary's history of defense is inexcusable. Benghazi will almost solely dictate my vote. Coupled with the lack of foresight that the internet/email security issue displays its a deal killer.

I fired a 25 year old making $15/hr in 06 for programing his personal blackberry to receive company emails as it was a breach of trust for the customers of my home security monitoring business. I would be the extreme hypocrit if I excused that behavior of the POTUS.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Dola


A few.
I mean immediately coming to mind are: Zuckerber, David Rusenko, Aaron Levie, and Jack Abraham ...though to be fair they are all in the IT space

There is also a big difference between being a CEO at a company you founded versus being hired as a CEO at an existing firm.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

I mean immediately coming to mind are: Zuckerber, David Rusenko, Aaron Levie, and Jack Abraham ...though to be fair they are all in the IT space

IIRC, they started their own companies.

[larrymcg421]

Yes I'm all for Trump discovering his own country and becoming President of it.

[Kodos]

Particularly if that country is on Mars.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Kodos

Particularly if that country is on Mars.

Throw your people under the bus much?

[Kodos]

Hey, we're from Rigel VII.

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Not true at all.
I despise the fact that I will vote for Trump, to be honest.
But to me Hillary's history of defense is inexcusable. Benghazi will almost solely dictate my vote. Coupled with the lack of foresight that the internet/email security issue displays its a deal killer.

I fired a 25 year old making $15/hr in 06 for programing his personal blackberry to receive company emails as it was a breach of trust for the customers of my home security monitoring business. I would be the extreme hypocrit if I excused that behavior of the POTUS.

I can understand reservations about Hillary - but on the other hand to vote for someone who is proud of the fact he respects the position he's apply for so highly that he can't even be bothered to revise and study up before the big job interview for it dumbfounds me ...

If a candidate turned up for a job with your company and had no idea what it entailed or how to do it, would you consider hiring them? ...

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan

If a candidate turned up for a job with your company and had no idea what it entailed or how to do it, would you consider hiring them? ...

Is she hot?

[tarcone]

Let's see, Im sexist (or I hate women) because of how I feel about a particular woman. One woman, not all women. Just the one.

Oh wait, she is your candidate. Defend her to the death. I get it.

I forgot you all label people that don't agree with you. My bad.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan

I can understand reservations about Hillary - but on the other hand to vote for someone who is proud of the fact he respects the position he's apply for so highly that he can't even be bothered to revise and study up before the big job interview for it dumbfounds me ...

If a candidate turned up for a job with your company and had no idea what it entailed or how to do it, would you consider hiring them? ...

I understand your point. I do. And no, to be honest, I would not.
Given the same scenario I wouldn't "hire" either of these 2 losers.

But in order to fully flesh out your analogy, if I was told you MUST hire one of the next two people you interview.
If person A was unprepared, knew nothing of my industry, but had a promising track record and good references.
And Person B had worked in my industry all their life. Had massively screwed up to the point that she nearly destroyed a division of another company and seemed so cavalier as to disregard the entire data security of the company and all its customers causing yet unknown damage.

Given that option....well I'd probably quit rather than work for a company that was willing to accept either, to be honest.
If it was back when I owned my company then Id just do both jobs (mine and the position I was hiring for) rather than hire a bad fit.

But forced to pick between the 2 I think both are foul, vile, deplorable characters. I can somewhat stomach Trump's foul and vile more so than Hillary's ONLY because. I think National Security is the single most important issue facing our country and I think he gets that one closer to right (though still waaaay wrong in my opinion) than she.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Kodos

Is she hot?

Makes not one iota of difference. I am married, happily, and have been for 20 years. Her physical attractiveness is immaterial to her ability to do her job.

In fact, in the work place in every position EXCEPT sales, Ive found unattractive people to be more industrious and productive than classically attractive folks.

[molson]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Let's see, Im sexist (or I hate women) because of how I feel about a particular woman. One woman, not all women. Just the one.

Oh wait, she is your candidate. Defend her to the death. I get it.

I forgot you all label people that don't agree with you. My bad.

If someone used racial slurs to describe a black man, it would be fair to ask if the race of the person had something to do with the anger. You used a sexist slur to describe her, so it's fair to wonder what your rage here is all about - especially since you've been completely unable to backup your attacks.

But just as a though experiment - are there any powerful women you respect? What would be an example of one that you wouldn't compare to a bitch you'd pass around your buddies to bang?

[CU Tiger]

at the risk of a triple dola

Originally Posted by lighthousekeeper

out of curiosity, what's the protocol on those situations. is law enforcement automatically notified? would you be considered aiding a criminal if you didn't notify the authorities?

We use a 3rd party background check and screening company. Not sure what they do. I simply get a red light green light report and if red it states why.
In these 2 cases it said "outstanding or pending warrants for arrest"

Since our application states "do you have any outstanding or pending warrants" they are disqualified for falsifying an application not for their criminal history.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

at the risk of a triple dola

Crisis averted.

[molson]

Glad I could help.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

If person A was unprepared, knew nothing of my industry, but had a promising track record and good references.

And Person B had worked in my industry all their life. Had massively screwed up to the point that she nearly destroyed a division of another company and seemed so cavalier as to disregard the entire data security of the company and all its customers causing yet unknown damage.

Matter of opinion, but I think you're stretching things a bit here.

[Neuqua]

Originally Posted by cuervo72

Matter of opinion, but I think you're stretching things a bit here.

Agreed. In his particular scenario I would go with the same decision. But I don't think that's a reasonable representation of our choices we have.

[Marmel]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Benghazi will almost solely dictate my vote.

You do know this is a witch hunt that even had GOP leaders saying it was done to politically take somebody down (Hillary) and that there is no evidence she did anything wrong, or that she could have done anything more to prevent it (in all likelihood) and that similar things have happened under other presidents/secretaries? But feel free to almost solely dictate your vote on an issue you are wrong about. That is the great thing about a free election and exactly the reason Trump, a childish, sexist buffoon, has the support he does today.

Edited to add: Or maybe Hillary is the greatest criminal mastermind of all time for pulling all the shit she has pulled and never getting prosecuted for any of it.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Marmel

Or maybe Hillary is the greatest criminal mastermind of all time for pulling all the shit she has pulled and never getting prosecuted for any of it.

I'd put her in the U.S. Top 10 easily enough.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by clemsonfan

You're right. This race is showing sexism plain and simple. Yes, I'm a woman. And yes, I am excited about Hillary. Not just because she's a woman either. Among other things, she's smart, experienced and cares about the issues I value.

But if she were a man, a lot of people wouldn't have as big of an issue with her. Just like when someone mentioned they like Bill more. Sexism.

Originally Posted by panerd

Donald Trump has absolutely zero concrete ideas on what he will do as president. Anyone planning on voting for Donald Trump is voting only for the "R" and (for the most part) in misogynistic fear of a powerful woman and is without question a sheep.

Yep, you got it. Despite the fact that almost every supporter in this thread has felt compelled to list their reservations about her, the majority of people opposing Hillary are sexist. Just liked anyone opposing Sarah Palin was doing so because of her gender and not her terrible record or general idiocy. And zero people are planning to vote for HRC due to the historic achievement of being the first female President - that's why she never mentions it on the campaign trail and her gender was never mentioned at the convention. And anyone saying they liked a proven deal maker with massive amounts of charisma who showed an ability to reach across the aisle and work with an opposition-controlled congress over someone who has shown no ability to do so must be sexist.

[AENeuman]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Let's see, Im sexist (or I hate women) because of how I feel about a particular woman. One woman, not all women. Just the one.

Oh wait, she is your candidate. Defend her to the death. I get it.

I forgot you all label people that don't agree with you. My bad.

Yep, i think you are. But it shouldn't matter what I think of you, I don't really know you. Thus, I also shouldn't really care about your vile opinion of someone you don't really know. And I don't really, however, my judgment comes from the improbable likelihood that she is the only female you have said gross things about.

[Marc Vaughan]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

Yep, you got it. Despite the fact that almost every supporter in this thread has felt compelled to list their reservations about her

I expect more peoples reservations are along the lines that they would have preferred a different candidate but that they like a lot of her policies, but would have preferred another candidate to choose from as a serious alternative.

Then again I'm hugely left wing and thought Sanders was somewhat further right than I'd have preferred ... so your milage may vary from mine

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Makes not one iota of difference. I am married, happily, and have been for 20 years. Her physical attractiveness is immaterial to her ability to do her job.

In fact, in the work place in every position EXCEPT sales, Ive found unattractive people to be more industrious and productive than classically attractive folks.

Purely a joke, sir.

[Kodos]

I'd love to have Al Gore to vote for, but Hillary is the only reasonable option that we have, so I'll be voting for her. There are far worse options than Hillary out there.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Marmel

You do know this is a witch hunt that even had GOP leaders saying it was done to politically take somebody down (Hillary) and that there is no evidence she did anything wrong, or that she could have done anything more to prevent it (in all likelihood) and that similar things have happened under other presidents/secretaries? But feel free to almost solely dictate your vote on an issue you are wrong about. That is the great thing about a free election and exactly the reason Trump, a childish, sexist buffoon, has the support he does today.

Edited to add: Or maybe Hillary is the greatest criminal mastermind of all time for pulling all the shit she has pulled and never getting prosecuted for any of it.

We will disagree there and never find common ground. No point in furthering the discussion.

I'm too close to that situation to value your opinion.

[Marmel]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

We will disagree there and never find common ground. No point in furthering the discussion.

I'm too close to that situation to value your opinion.

I was going to say the exact same thing in my original post because I knew you spoke to somebody close to the situation or know somebody close to the situation, but I refrained. I should have known better.

[tarcone]

Powerful Women Ive respected?
Cleopatra, Joan of Arc, Sarah Palin, British PM who Im drawing a blank of her name right now, Merkel in Germany, Some local politicians you wouldnt know, Barbara Bush, Nancy Reagan. Do I need more?

HRC is a horrible, horrible person. I dont understand why you dont see it. If she was a male, Id call him an asshole or a douche bag, probably worse. Does that mean Im sexist towards men? Or is there the double standard that always exists in the land of liberal?

[nol]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Powerful Women Ive respected?
Cleopatra, Joan of Arc, Sarah Palin, British PM who Im drawing a blank of her name right now

Is this parody?

[Subby]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Powerful Women Ive respected?
Cleopatra, Joan of Arc, Sarah Palin, British PM who Im drawing a blank of her name right now, Merkel in Germany, Some local politicians you wouldnt know, Barbara Bush, Nancy Reagan.

lol way to dig deep there, buddy.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Marc Vaughan

I expect more peoples reservations are along the lines that they would have preferred a different candidate but that they like a lot of her policies, but would have preferred another candidate to choose from as a serious alternative.

So you like the message, but would prefer a different messenger? Perhaps a male one?

Now, I don't believe that about you, but that's the same leap clemsonfan and panerd (and many others) are making. Trump & especially tarcone are saying some pretty ridiculous stuff (though HRC "attacking" Trump by saying "he believes women don’t deserve equal pay unless they do as good a job as men." made my head hurt), but there are plenty of non-sexist, non-misogynistic reasons to dislike that one specific person, who yes, is a woman.

[Subby]

non sequitir alert (j/k)

The best book review you will read this year: In ‘Hitler,’ an Ascent From ‘Dunderhead’ to Demagogue

[panerd]

Originally Posted by nol

Is this parody?

I admit I laughed out loud at the list. I feel for Tarcone because I do think the liberal posters on this board tend to pile on sometimes with a "know it all" type attitude. But he dug his own grave with the Clinton stuff and it is just getting worse with every post.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Powerful Women Ive respected?
Cleopatra, Joan of Arc, Sarah Palin, British PM who Im drawing a blank of her name right now,

Delete your account.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Delete your account.

Never heard of her, but she sounds pretty powerful.

[Subby]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Powerful Women Ive respected?
Cleopatra, Joan of Arc, Sarah Palin, British PM who Im drawing a blank of her name right now, Merkel in Germany, Some local politicians you wouldnt know, Barbara Bush, Nancy Reagan. Do I need more?

You forgot Mary Magdalene and Judith Light as Angela Bower in Who's the Boss?!

[Subby]

PIVOT TIME!

source close to Trump tells @KatyTurNBC candidate's children unhappy w/Bannon/Conway/Bossie leadership, think campaign is hurting business

— John Harwood (@JohnJHarwood) September 28, 2016

[ISiddiqui]

LOL at "British PM who Im drawing a blank of her name right now". Of course, we could also ask tarcone which female British PM whose name he can't remember is he thinking about (they've had 2) .

Also going from Cleopatra to Joan of Arc then all the way to the last 30 years is quite funny.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

So you like the message, but would prefer a different messenger? Perhaps a male one?

Now, I don't believe that about you, but that's the same leap clemsonfan and panerd (and many others) are making. Trump & especially tarcone are saying some pretty ridiculous stuff (though HRC "attacking" Trump by saying "he believes women don’t deserve equal pay unless they do as good a job as men." made my head hurt), but there are plenty of non-sexist, non-misogynistic reasons to dislike that one specific person, who yes, is a woman.

You're leaving out some steps in that leap. Tarcone's specific comments make me suspect that about him, especially the one where Hillary can't be trusted, but Bill is a good dude. I do not think all people who have a problem with Hillary are sexist and I don't think anyone else here has claimed that.

[larrymcg421]

Originally Posted by Subby

You forgot Mary Magdalene and Judith Light as Angela Bower in Who's the Boss?!

I'm sure she loses points with him for being on Transparent. (Judith, not Mary.)

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Subby

You forgot Mary Magdalene and Judith Light as Angela Bower in Who's the Boss?!

Xena Warrior Princess.

No wait - she may have been a lesbian.

Wonder Woman.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

I do not think all people who have a problem with Hillary are sexist and I don't think anyone else here has claimed that.

In fact...

Originally Posted by panerd

Anyone planning on voting for Donald Trump is voting only for the "R" and (for the most part) in misogynistic fear of a powerful woman and is without question a sheep.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Marmel

I was going to say the exact same thing in my original post because I knew you spoke to somebody close to the situation or know somebody close to the situation, but I refrained. I should have known better.

I'm not sure where that's coming from. My "closeness" comment should probably have been better stated as emotional attachment.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

You're leaving out some steps in that leap. Tarcone's specific comments make me suspect that about him, especially the one where Hillary can't be trusted, but Bill is a good dude. I do not think all people who have a problem with Hillary are sexist and I don't think anyone else here has claimed that.

Originally Posted by clemsonfan

You're right. This race is showing sexism plain and simple. Yes, I'm a woman. And yes, I am excited about Hillary. Not just because she's a woman either. Among other things, she's smart, experienced and cares about the issues I value.

But if she were a man, a lot of people wouldn't have as big of an issue with her. Just like when someone mentioned they like Bill more. Sexism.

Originally Posted by panerd

Donald Trump has absolutely zero concrete ideas on what he will do as president. Anyone planning on voting for Donald Trump is voting only for the "R" and (for the most part) in misogynistic fear of a powerful woman and is without question a sheep.

tarcone deserves everything he's hearing. (Though that list is epic!) But those were the posts I quoted. YMMV.

[larrymcg421]

I missed panerd's post, but clemsonfan just says "a lot", which I don't think is as strong as you're making it out to be.

[miked]

I have now seen somebody put Joan of Arc and Sarah Palin in the same category and it was not burned at the stake. Epic.

[panerd]

I have been brought up several times and I will definitely stick with my assertion that a majority of Trump supporters hold sexist views of Clinton. The fact that "bitch" seems to be connected to almost any criticism I read or hear (outside of major news where they want to say it but can't) shows she is definitely being held to a different standard and at least in some part because she's a woman. (She's no Joan of Arc but still ). And I'm a Johnson supporter so I feel like I have no vested interest in caring that much about Hillary except for making an observation that seems clear to me.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by panerd

The fact that "bitch" seems to be connected to almost any criticism I read or hear (outside of major news where they want to say it but can't)

It's a word the describes behavior/attitude/deportment, certainly highly connected with gender but at the same time I've called Obama a bitch more than once.

I mean, m.f. is kinda gender specific too ... not technically mutually exclusive I suppose but certainly more common (and more apt) to apply to a single-gender.

At the end of the day this rings like nothing more than a combination of misdirection about the utterly vile characters in question & having too much time on one's hands if they're worried about the word choice instead of the despicable acts of the person/people in question.

And perhaps the true bottom line is that if you don't want to be called a bitch (or a m.f.'er by the same token), don't be one.

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by Subby

PIVOT TIME!

source close to Trump tells @KatyTurNBC candidate's children unhappy w/Bannon/Conway/Bossie leadership, think campaign is hurting business

— John Harwood (@JohnJHarwood) September 28, 2016

wow. they think the campaign is hurting the family business. That's, uh...

Hey, kids? There's a reason most candidates put their business interests in a trust when they run for office or, y'know, at least have some kind of firewall between public and private life so that "running for President" doesn't turn into "buy my steaks. I sell the best steaks."

[SackAttack]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

And perhaps the true bottom line is that if you don't want to be called a bitch (or a m.f.'er by the same token), don't be one.

My takeaway here is that Jon is entirely comfortable with being called a motherfucker.