Trump

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

All I've seen from you on this blog is pretty much non-stop blathering on how bad Trump is (without mentioning that Hillary is, in many ways, just as bad).

Um...

Basically, I despise Hillary

I am undecided who would be worse, Trump or Hillary

If I had to place a bet, I would bet Trump would be a better president than Hillary. “Less terrible” might be a more accurate way to put it.

If I haven't made myself clear already, let me say it again... Hillary is indeed scum. I despise her. Hillary would be a horrible president. I would never vote for Hillary in 1 million years.

There. Feel better now?

All of my comments about Trump take those thoughts about Hillary as a given. In no way am I trying to polish the turd of a Hillary presidency.

Hillary has had questionable dealings and lacks judgment and transparency? My God, Trump might be the worst at those things in the history of presidential candidates. Both candidates are such complete garbage that I feel like yelling at anyone who would vote for either. It just so happens that this board has 10x more people open to voting for Trump than for Hillary, thus the conversation you've seen playing itself out.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

The last few elections have offered a choice to conservative voters between a **** sandwich and a four day old donut. This year, we are choosing between the extra value meal and happy meal versions built around the same **** sandwich.

Perfect analogy.

[shocka khan]

There. Feel better now?

All of my comments about Trump take those thoughts about Hillary as a given. In no way am I trying to polish the turd of a Hillary presidency.

Hillary has had questionable dealings and lacks judgment and transparency? My God, Trump might be the worst at those things in the history of presidential candidates. Both candidates are such complete garbage that I feel like yelling at anyone who would vote for either. It just so happens that this board has 10x more people open to voting for Trump than for Hillary, thus the conversation you've seen playing itself out.

You know what would make me feel better? Having a REAL choice for president this year.

And I get your point. Kansas, being heavily republican, would tend to have more support for the republican candidate. You're playing the devil's advocate here.

I was a heavy lean for Trump until the last few weeks (mostly because I'm going to cancel out some lady's vote for Hillary b/c they were voting for their own self-interest). It started with his unjust criticism of the latino judge and has continued pretty much non-stop until after the Orlando shooting massacre with his humble-brag tweet and the comments regarding people carrying firearms into bars.

Based on what I saw recently about write-ins, I'm thinking I'm going to hold my nose and vote for Gary Johnson or Jill whatever-her-name-is rather than vote for either of the two scoundrels at the top of the list.

Also note that I don't follow this thread very closely, as I get rather busy at times and don't really have time to hover over every comment collectively made.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

I did a little research. The results are interesting. First, let me set the stage with a few comments from @Kung Wu.

@Kung Wu, in response to me saying Trump had the most votes ever against the eventual nominee:

Because two idiots that were mathematically completely ruled out stayed in.

And again a few posts later:

Blah blah blah. (Again, because the losers stayed in WAAAAAY longer than they did against Romney -- that's the only reason

So the argument goes something like this. Trump had record numbers of votes against him in the primaries because his opponents just didn't know when to quit. That is the "only reason". If those losers don't overstay their welcome, Trump doesn't smash the "votes against" record.

A fine theory I suppose. Let's test it.

Romney's competition's withdrawl dates:
Santorum - early April
Gingrich - mid April
Rand Paul - Convention

Trump's competition's withdrawl dates:
Rubio - March 15th
Cruz - May 4th
Kasich - May 4th

2012 Non-Romney votes spanning all 50 states	8.9 million
2016 Non-Trump votes spanning all 50 states	17.1 million
2016 Non-Trump votes spanning first 23 states	8.1 million	Through March 8th (Hawaii, Mississippi, etc)
2016 Non-Trump votes spanning first 29 states	12.8 million	Through March 15th (FL, OH, NC, etc)

So if Cruz and Kasich had dropped out with Rubio the evening of March 15th, Trump would have had the final 21 states uncontested, but would have already blown past the old record.

Let's get even crazier. Back in February and March, many people said either Cruz or Rubio needed to drop out and consolidate support with the other. What if, for some crazy reason, Cruz, Rubio, and Kasich had all 3 dropped out the evening of March 8th, a full week prior to the votes in Florida, Ohio, Illinois, North Carolina, and Missouri? This would have been extremely early in the primaries for Trump to have moved into an uncontested phase, yet he was already at 91% of Romney's total with 27 states to go.

The clear and obvious conclusion here is that Trump was going to blow past the anti-Romney total even if all his competition left the race at an extremely early date. I just got off the phone with Mythbusters. They called regarding @Kung Wu's assertion that the ONLY reason Trump had such a massive, record setting number of votes against was because his competition refused to quit.

They said "Busted"

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

And I get your point. Kansas, being heavily republican, would tend to have more support for the republican candidate. You're playing the devil's advocate here.

Devil's advocate? How so? I'm not pretending to despise Trump just to get a debate going. I do despise him.

[shock]

Who is his lone announcement? According to this article, Trump has talked about making some announcements at the upcoming convention, and the article questions if that is even legal. At this point, I don't think we have any serious clue who he would select for any of the positions.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...egal-questions

Gowdy for Attorney General. I also like Palin for DoE

[shocka khan]

Devil's advocate? How so? I'm not pretending to despise Trump just to get a debate going. I do despise him.

OK, I think I get it now, as I remember, you did put something up about writing in a candidate, which someone else shot down rather quickly because it might invalidate the rest of your ballot. My bad.

Just for clarification, I'm not reading the #Never Hillary thread, either. It doesn't seem to have as much activity as the Trump.

I'm just somewhat sympathetic to Trump, because I believe most of the media (absent Fox) has given both him and Bernie Sanders a raw deal, for the most part.

It's almost like CBS, ABC and NBC got together and drew straws to see who could have the kindest news on Hillary and the best of ambush journalism on Bernie and Trump. I remember a piece on CBS this morning where there was clearly an attempt to set up and ambush Bernie. Charlie Rose and Gayle King were the main perpetrators, but the Latina (Nancy Cordes) who has her nose up Hillary's ass was also part of the cabal.

I think Nancy is a sellout. I bet her 'real' name is Cortez or Cordez and either her or her predecessors changed it back in the day. I know a person who's last name was actually Suarez, but his family changed it to Soares a long time ago.

Same concept.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Gowdy for Attorney General. I also like Palin for DoE

LOLOLOLOLOL

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

OK, I think I get it now, as I remember, you did put something up about writing in a candidate, which someone else shot down rather quickly because it might invalidate the rest of your ballot. My bad.

It doesn't "invalidate the rest of your ballot". It just means voting Rubio might be compiled with voting Mickey Mouse as part of the "other" tally. The fact you voted for someone other than Trump/Hillary is still noted, and the rest of your ballot sure as heck is still valid in terms of senators, house, local elections, etc.

[shocka khan]

Gowdy for Attorney General. I also like Palin for DoE

My initial conclusion was that Trey Gowdy would have been a good AG. However, after his Bengazi fiasco, where Hillary clearly out maneuvered him, my opinion of Gowdy soured. He's just another backwater DA (from Greenville, S.C.) who's a wanna-be.

I cringed when I watched him walk into a number of traps during the hearing.

I will say he's better than Darrell Issa, who should never have had his record expunged and thus would not have been eligible to run for congress. Aside that, I'm not too impressed.

[Kung Wu]

I did a little research. The results are interesting. First, let me set the stage with a few comments from @Kung Wu.

@Kung Wu, in response to me saying Trump had the most votes ever against the eventual nominee:

I didn't read any of your dissertation, so if it was intended for me, please forgive me but I'm not interested. If you are wanting to argue with someone else, please carry on.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

I didn't read any of your dissertation, so if it was intended for me, please forgive me but I'm not interested. If you are wanting to argue with someone else, please carry on.

*Passionately makes dishonest arguments
*Gets proven wrong
*Magically loses interest in the topic

lol

[ShockerEngineer]

*Passionately makes dishonest arguments
*Gets proven wrong
*Magically loses interest in the topic

lol

*Spends free time on here claiming to want honest discussion
*Posts snarky reply to let everyone revel in his intellectual superiority and rub it in
*Either has no self-awareness, whatsoever, or really doesn't care if people think he's an ass

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

*Spends free time on here claiming to want honest discussion
*Posts snarky reply to let everyone revel in his intellectual superiority and rub it in
*Either has no self-awareness, whatsoever, or really doesn't care if people think he's an ass

You say I "claim" to want honest discussion. Are you implying that I don't?

When facts are discovered that definitively settle a longstanding debate, doesn't it make sense to bring them to light?

Of course I added some extra snark. When someone continually makes dishonest comments in order to attempt to purposefully mislead, of course I'm going to find some added enjoyment in having found straightforward factual proof that they were wrong.

[MoValley John]

Works hard and gets great performance reviews.
Doesn't make more coffee when he takes the last cup and wastes time in the shitter.

Turns in co-workers who take long breaks and extra smoke breaks.
Steals pens and other office supplies.

Has a vast collection of Nike performance wear.
Is a non-exercising fat ass.