hillary clinton 4 prez

Key · 07-28-2016, 10:30 AM

^I didn't say he was responsible for it, I said he was in office during those times. Being in office has influence on all of that.

The Batlord · 07-28-2016, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ki

^I didn't say he was responsible for it, I said he was in office during those times. Being in office has influence on all of that.

No that's bull****. If your only "influence" on policy is that you just happened to be in office when it happened then you don't deserve any historical credit for it.

grindy · 07-28-2016, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord

No that's bull****. If your only "influence" on policy is that you just happened to be in office when it happened then you don't deserve any historical credit for it.

What would be outstandingly good things an american president actually could do and be responsible for in your book?
(Not that I necessarily disagree with your view of Obama, just curious.)

The Batlord · 07-28-2016, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frownland

Ok, maybe you should put the crack pipe down.

What exactly did he do besides just give the go ahead? Wasn't it our intelligence services and military who did all the work?

Quote:

Originally Posted by grindy

What would be outstandingly good things an american president actually could do and be responsible for in your book?
(Not that I necessarily disagree with your view of Obama, just curious.)

My big thing about American politics is that our system is so crippled by party infighting that we can't even pass a budget without wrecking our credit rating. Our political climate is simply toxic on both sides, no matter who you think is most responsible, and I want a president who will take a step back and try to encourage less polarization.

I want this in all our politicians, but given just how important the president is to party politics I think it would be a huge first step for an American president to really try to build bridges between the Republicans or Democrats, even if it seems to be a futile gesture at this point. All other considerations are secondary at this point due to our political system's pathological ineffectiveness.

Basically I'm not so much worried about policy as I am leadership.

grindy · 07-28-2016, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord

What exactly did he do besides just give the go ahead? Wasn't it our intelligence services and military who did all the work?

My big thing about American politics is that our system is so crippled by party infighting that we can't even pass a budget without wrecking our credit rating. Our political climate is simply toxic on both sides, no matter who you think is most responsible, and I want a president who will take a step back and try to encourage less polarization.

I want this in all our politicians, but given just how important the president is to party politics I think it would be a huge first step for an American president to really try to build bridges between the Republicans or Democrats, even if it seems to be a futile gesture at this point. All other considerations are secondary at this point due to our political system's pathological ineffectiveness.

Basically I'm not so much worried about policy as I am leadership.

Totally agree, but I really can't imagine anything concrete that could be done in this direction.

The Batlord · 07-28-2016, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by grindy

Totally agree, but I really can't imagine anything concrete that could be done in this direction.

Me neither. This is why I don't care about voting.

FRED HALE SR. · 07-28-2016, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord

Me neither. This is why I don't care about voting.

So basically your opinion amounts to **** then. You don't even value voting in state and local election? That is primarily the reason I vote and effects everyone in their daily lives.

Key · 07-28-2016, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord

No that's bull****. If your only "influence" on policy is that you just happened to be in office when it happened then you don't deserve any historical credit for it.

So then we just shouldn't have anybody in office if that's your point of view.

**Frownland** · 07-28-2016, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ki

So then we just shouldn't have anybody in office if that's your point of view.

I'm not opposed to that.

07-28-2016, 10:30 AM	#1 (permalink)
Key . Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 13,153	^I didn't say he was responsible for it, I said he was in office during those times. Being in office has influence on all of that.