View Poll Results: Choice for 2016 US Presidental Election

Voters
32. You may not vote on this poll
  • Donald J Trump/ Governor Mike Pence

    6 18.75%
  • Secratary Hillary Rodham Clinton/ Senator Tim Kaine

    14 43.75%
  • Undecided

    1 3.13%
  • We are screwed no matter what.

    11 34.38%
  • Governor Gary Johnson/ Governor William Weld

    0 0%
  • Dr. Jill Stein/Unknown VP canidate

    0 0%
Page 10 of 29 FirstFirst ... 6789101112131420 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 289

Thread: US Election 2016 Poll and Disscusion

  1. #91
    Border Desperado SoaringRockyMountainWay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    278

    Default Re: US Election 2016 Poll and Disscusion

    Walshfan88, with the whole House sit in thing I thought the Democrats were being childish in stopping all other legislation and just sitting there until they got their way. But I share in your frustrations of both sides not cooperating to actually get stuff done.

    UtW, the amount of people killed with a gun would depend on the gun. A .22 caliber wouldn't have done that much damage while a shot gun would have been much worse. A shot gun is actually more deadly than an AR-15. As far as the homicide rate goes, it's sad that people have died but I don't think gun control will change it all that much. If there weren't as many gun free zones, people wouldn't be targeted and they could defend themselves. Also, if the government already can't handle the gun laws that are in place, how are they going to enforce new gun laws? In my mind, better use of the current gun laws and less gun free zones would help the problem. It would also be good to give people the mental or emotional help they need so they don't tend to do violent acts. Early release of felons and allowing ISIS to radicalize people is also part of the problem. Getting dangerous people off the streets and arming more good citizens should be the goal.

    In the big picture, more people die from smoking and alcohol abuse than death caused by a gun shot. Yet know one tries to fix that issue. It's all blamed on the guns.
    People talking about us they got nothing else to do. When it all comes down we will still come through in the long run.

  2. #92
    Stuck on the Border WalshFan88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    11,238

    Default Re: US Election 2016 Poll and Disscusion

    I just think that with the no fly list I'm a guilty-until-proven-innocent guy on this. Because, IMO, if we do it the other way, by the time they are proven guilty, it could be too late and lives potentially could already be lost. The goal is to stop it before it happens.

  3. #93
    Moderator Ive always been a dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Cruising down the center of a two-way street in VA
    Posts
    20,198

    Default Re: US Election 2016 Poll and Disscusion

    I believe the gun control issue is one very good example of why our political system is in dire need of reform. In spite of the fact that well over 75% of Americans support stricter gun laws, powerful lobbyist have enough influence over some elected officials so that the will of the people is repeatedly ignored. They also continuously frame the argument as if gun control proponents will repeal the 2nd Amendment and take guns away from those who legally own them. I find it offensive to use to these kind of deceptive scare tactics to misrepresent other’s opinions. Now, I don’t have a lot of knowledge about guns, but I think I certainly understand the problems they can cause. So, as a strong proponent of stricter gun laws, let me set the record straight about what I stand for …

    • Protection of the 2nd Amendment
    • Stronger enforcement of existing gun laws
    • Universal background checks for any purchase of a firearm
    • Universal waiting period for any purchase of a firearm
    • Federal ban on assault style weapons
    • Federal rationing laws to limit ammunition sales to an individual
    • Mandatory requirement for ammunition dealers to report bulk sales
    • Universal federal licensing requirements for all firearms dealers
    • Universal federal licensing requirements for all firearms purchasers
    • Modify mental heath laws to improve restrictions on gun ownership and sales for the mentally ill

    Although my list goes beyond what either President Obama or Hillary Clinton have proposed, there is not one single item on this list that would threaten the 2nd Amendment or legal ownership of most guns. They would indeed make it more inconvenient to purchase a gun, but, to me, that’s a small sacrifice if it helps keep guns out of the hands of deranged individuals. Nothing we do will stop gun violence altogether, but a combination of these proposals will surely make more of a difference than doing nothing. For those who say stricter laws won’t change things that much, try telling that to the loved ones of victims who lost their lives to mass shootings at a school or university campus, a church, a movie theater, a nightclub, or a protest rally as a law enforcement officer there to protect citizens.

    "People don't run out of dreams: People just run out of time ..."
    Glenn Frey 11/06/1948 - 01/18/2016

  4. #94
    Stuck on the Border MaryCalifornia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Posts
    2,025

    Default Re: US Election 2016 Poll and Disscusion

    I'm just really depressed and embarrassed about the whole thing. I can't believe these are our choices. I don't know what went wrong.

    I'm registered as a democrat bc obviously I'm liberal on social issues and abortion, but I would vote for a moderate Republican who believes in equal rights for everyone.

    Cannot envision Bill Clinton and his perverted ways being back in the White House.

    I'm considering exercising my right to not vote this year. I'm not worried about Trump winning, I doubt he'll still be in the race in Nov, he may be out by next month. I actually think the whole thing is a farce and he entered to help Hilary. He can literally say and do anything and the non-college-educated white men still think he's the one for us!! It's like he's playing a trick, and some are actually buying it.

    This entire episode is just mortifying.

  5. #95
    Border Desperado SoaringRockyMountainWay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    278

    Default Re: US Election 2016 Poll and Disscusion

    Dreamer, assault style weapons are already banned for use by civilians. Those that manufacture, import, and sell guns in business already must be licensed. Sorry if you already knew that. I just wanted to make sure that you knew some of the things you support have been done. Also, I feel very sorry for the families of victims of mass shootings. It's a tragic thing that so many people died. I'm not trying to brush it off my shoulder. But look at the places you listed. With the exception of a rally, all those places are gun free zones. Therefore, all those people have a target on their backs because an attacker knows that those people can't defend themselves. They are unarmed and helpless. Let's hypothetically say that there was someone in the nightclub who was carrying a gun. The terrorist had a semiautomatic weapon so he couldn't blow off rounds extremely quickly and he would have to take the time to aim because he doesn't have a shot gun. So the person carrying the gun could have the opportunity to sneak up behind the terrorist and shoot him. That person's gun could have saved many lives. But that's a gun free zone so none of the people inside could have carried out that plan and saved lives. So think about telling the families of the victims that lives could've been saved if it wasn't a gun free zone. As far as the rally goes, that's a people problem not a gun problem. People need to respect the police and listen to what they tell them to do. I find it appalling that some of the people in Black Lives Matter call for death to the police and Hillary supports this group. If violence is promoted, guess what's going to happen. Violence. I don't think gun laws are going to change that. Whether it's at a nightclub or a rally, I think we should work on getting the terrorists out and stopping the promotion of violence toward the police. But I do think as well that existing gun laws should be enforced more strongly and the background check system should be updated. Instead of making everything about guns, let's work on all the problems to save lives.

    Also, I disagree with your proposal of rationing of ammunition. My family goes through a lot of ammo just in target practice. In order to be accurate in shooting a raccoon, possum, or coyote, you have to be familiar with the gun. It can take a lot of target practice to get used to the kick of the gun, find a comfortable position to hold the gun, and know where to aim from different distances and elevations. Whenever you put new sights or a scope on a gun you have to sight it in. You have to find out if you're shooting too high or too low or too far left or too far right and dial the scope accordingly. It can take a lot of rounds to get the gun accurate. Of course when it comes time to defend the farm from wild animals or defend myself from an attacker, I want to make sure I have ammo. I don't want to be in a situation where there's a coyote about to kill my dog and I don't have any ammo. If ammunition was rationed, my family and I wouldn't be good marksmen, our guns wouldn't be accurate, and there would be raccoons running rampant on the farm.
    People talking about us they got nothing else to do. When it all comes down we will still come through in the long run.

  6. #96
    Border Rebel Scarlet Sun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    where we have brought our children
    Posts
    539

    Default Re: US Election 2016 Poll and Disscusion

    Quote Originally Posted by MaryCalifornia View Post
    I actually think the whole thing is a farce and he entered to help Hilary. He can literally say and do anything and the non-college-educated white men still think he's the one for us!! It's like he's playing a trick, and some are actually buying it.
    I wouldn't be at all surprised

  7. #97
    Border Desperado SoaringRockyMountainWay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    278

    Default Re: US Election 2016 Poll and Disscusion

    Quote Originally Posted by MaryCalifornia View Post
    I'm considering exercising my right to not vote this year. I'm not worried about Trump winning, I doubt he'll still be in the race in Nov, he may be out by next month. I actually think the whole thing is a farce and he entered to help Hilary. He can literally say and do anything and the non-college-educated white men still think he's the one for us!! It's like he's playing a trick, and some are actually buying it.
    MaryCalifornia, I'm a female who will be a senior in high school in the fall so I haven't gone to college yet but I've had a 4.0 GPA for the past 3 years, got a 97% in government class, and a 96% in economics and I support Donald Trump. If you didn't see his recent speech about the economy, I encourage you to look it up. Everything he proposed makes sense. He wants to cut business taxes so that businesses will come back to America and therefore create new jobs. He also wants to cut income taxes so that individuals will invest in the economy. Then he wants to renegotiate trade deals so that we don't have trade deficits. With the money saved from not having trade deficits, he will build up the military and the American infrastructure. Hillary wants to raise taxes on the dwindling middle class. This is a disincentive to be successful so people will not want to work hard and do well for themselves when they're going to be penalized for it. Instead, there is an incentive to do nothing and live off the government. With the middle class disappearing, there will be no one left to support those living on welfare and the whole system will implode. Hillary wants to raise minimum wage. She has flipped back and forth on this issue but last I heard she still wants to raise it. If she does this, businesses will no longer be able to support the same amount of employees so they will have to lay off workers. This will make the unemployment rate go up. She also wants to keep Obamacare. Obamacare has caused businesses to lay off employees because they can't support them and it has starved out the middle class. Here's a real life story about Obamacare. My grandma and grandpa's insurance went up 60% for each person because of Obamacare. My grandpa can't even get a new truck even though his current one is literally falling apart because they can't afford it. My grandpa hardly ever gets excited about anything but he is excited about and believes in Donald Trump. He knows that Trump wants to repeal Obamacare and help the middle class that is struggling. Although he is eligible, my grandpa has never voted because he has never believed in a candidate enough to take the time to vote. Because of Trump, my grandpa registered to vote.

    Just remember, by not voting you are giving the presidency to Hillary Clinton.
    People talking about us they got nothing else to do. When it all comes down we will still come through in the long run.

  8. #98
    Stuck on the Border WalshFan88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    11,238

    Default Re: US Election 2016 Poll and Disscusion

    My my, my concerns with Trump keep being more frequent.

    His comments about the second amendment people, regardless of how he meant it (it was in the way he said it) are frightening. I think he's a loose cannon and is a scary, scary person.

    http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/09/politi...ent/index.html

  9. #99
    Moderator Ive always been a dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Cruising down the center of a two-way street in VA
    Posts
    20,198

    Default Re: US Election 2016 Poll and Disscusion

    SRMW – I think we are going to have to agree to disagree about the issue of gun control. In spite of your articulate post, these arguments are not convincing to me. It’s certainly nothing personal, but I’m just a strong believer that we need to take measures to control whose hands guns fall into.

    Quote Originally Posted by SoaringRockyMountainWay View Post
    Instead of making everything about guns, let's work on all the problems to save lives.
    I don’t believe there is any one single answer to the problem, but a combination of all the ideas that have been suggested will help save lives, including gun control reform. As we’ve been saying, there is no cure-all. However, I personally do not want to live in a country where it’s up to individuals to protect themselves in a public setting. We are a country of laws, and I prefer to rely on trained law enforcement professionals to preserve law and order and public safety. I certainly don’t want to live in a police state, but neither do I think armed citizens in a potential shoot out is an acceptable solution. As you said, violence begets violence so volatile situations can easily escalate out of control. So … do away with gun free zones – uh, no thank you.

    Quote Originally Posted by SoaringRockyMountainWay View Post
    Dreamer, assault style weapons are already banned for use by civilians.
    I do not believe that there is any ban of assault style weapons at the federal level. I believe a few states have banned them. To clarify, I am referring to assault weapons as defined by the law enacted in 1994 that expired in 2004.

    Quote Originally Posted by SoaringRockyMountainWay View Post
    Those that manufacture, import, and sell guns in business already must be licensed. Sorry if you already knew that.
    I know there is a federal law that requires sellers of firearms to be licensed, but the law has so many loopholes that almost renders it useless. I believe we have to close those loopholes to include everyone engaged in the business of dealing in firearms.

    Quote Originally Posted by SoaringRockyMountainWay View Post
    Also, I disagree with your proposal of rationing of ammunition.
    My proposals wouldn’t mean that your family couldn’t purchase the ammunition you need. It would mean that you may have to demonstrate a justified reason. It may also mean that you could only purchase so much at a time and/or that the seller would be required to report the purchases to the ATF. So, if you have a legitimate need, then it shouldn’t be a problem other than a minor inconvenience.

    Quote Originally Posted by SoaringRockyMountainWay View Post
    I find it appalling that some of the people in Black Lives Matter call for death to the police and Hillary supports this group.
    Just because Hillary Clinton supports the philosophy that black lives matter, she has also stated that she believes all lives matter. As I said earlier, your posts are well-expressed, but it doesn’t help your case when you distort the views of others. Without being overly critical, your last post does this as well. I won’t address it point-by-point, but just a few examples: Both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are in favor of raising the federal minimum wage. Trump’s idea of cutting income taxes so that individuals will invest in the economy isn’t new. It’s commonly referred to as ‘trickle-down economics’- it’s been tried several times before and the only real result has been an increased national deficit. Hillary Clinton’s tax proposal is to increase taxes on upper income and wealthy individuals, not the struggling middle class. It is admirable that you are so passionate about your opinions, but the most effective and persuasive arguments are usually the ones that accurately and fairly support your position.

    "People don't run out of dreams: People just run out of time ..."
    Glenn Frey 11/06/1948 - 01/18/2016

  10. #100
    Border Rebel RudieCantFail's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    605

    Default Re: US Election 2016 Poll and Disscusion

    Dreamer, I'm afraid that we'll have to agree to disagree on this as well. I hope the quoted material looks alright, since I tried my best to make sure who said what in previous posts.

    Dreamer:
    However, I personally do not want to live in a country where it’s up to individuals to protect themselves in a public setting. We are a country of laws, and I prefer to rely on trained law enforcement professionals to preserve law and order and public safety. I certainly don’t want to live in a police state, but neither do I think armed citizens in a potential shoot out is an acceptable solution.
    Unfortunately, in San Jose, CA, they've been cutting officers as part of their budget cuts. Estimated by June 2016, the SJPD would have "879 street-ready officers." This is short of the "more than 1,200 were in the field [in 2008] at the start of a series of budget cuts and ensuing pension reforms that led to layoffs, early retirements and resignations from the department." Also, police recruits are looking at other PDs b/c they pay better than SJ, so that's not helping the shortage. (http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-cou...r-100-officers) SJ has a little over 1 mil people. I'm afraid that the PD is getting too spread out. They're behind on their reported calls and they take up to 30 min or more for backup to show up if necessary. Plus, cops are only good after the crime has been committed. They can't show up as fast as we would like, so that's why people feel compelled to defend themselves with a firearm. As I've mentioned before, the cops didn't dare to enter South Central LA in the first few days of the riots, so the Korean store owners defended their property with guns. I don't know why my city screwed up their police and fire budgeting, but we'll eventually pay for the ramifications. Open carry is heavily restricted in CA. Because CA is heavily liberal in the most populated areas, even if open carry wasn't as restricted, I doubt that tons of people would even use it. The culture here is very left wing.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SoaringRockyMountainWay
    Dreamer, assault style weapons are already banned for use by civilians.

    Dreamer:
    I do not believe that there is any ban of assault style weapons at the federal level. I believe a few states have banned them. To clarify, I am referring to assault weapons as defined by the law enacted in 1994 that expired in 2004.
    I think SRMW may be referring to Assault Rifles because those are military grade and can go into automatic and burst fire modes, which makes it NOT semi-automatic. The terminology is confusing b/c people in the news interchange assault rifle and assault weapon.

    Originally Posted by SoaringRockyMountainWay
    Also, I disagree with your proposal of rationing of ammunition.

    Dreamer:
    My proposals wouldn’t mean that your family couldn’t purchase the ammunition you need. It would mean that you may have to demonstrate a justified reason. It may also mean that you could only purchase so much at a time and/or that the seller would be required to report the purchases to the ATF. So, if you have a legitimate need, then it shouldn’t be a problem other than a minor inconvenience.
    Personally, I don't think the ATF needs to know how much ammunition each person buys at a point in time. People buy ammo in bulk because buying in small quantities can be expensive and it can be cheaper to buy in much larger quantities. I was shocked to see how much they cost for maybe 30-50 rounds in a box. It was like $25. But if you really wanted to restrict large ammo purchases, then I'd prefer to see a tax on large purchases. I know that this doesn't sound that conservative, but I'd rather see a tax instead of more gov't surveillance of people's activities and restriction of ammo purchases.

    Originally Posted by SoaringRockyMountainWay
    I find it appalling that some of the people in Black Lives Matter call for death to the police and Hillary supports this group.

    Dreamer:
    Just because Hillary Clinton supports the philosophy that black lives matter, she has also stated that she believes all lives matter. As I said earlier, your posts are well-expressed, but it doesn’t help your case when you distort the views of others. ... Trump’s idea of cutting income taxes so that individuals will invest in the economy isn’t new. It’s commonly referred to as ‘trickle-down economics’- it’s been tried several times before and the only real result has been an increased national deficit.
    I think some BLM supporters say, "Of course, all lives matter, but black lives are being ignored." I know that you pointed out that she supports the philosophy of BLM and believes that all lives matter. To me, it doesn't matter if you say "all lives matter" and then support BLM in any degree because their rhetoric has been taken too far. I don't think BLM is a healthy protest group at all, and I think their rhetoric has heavily influenced these recent attacks and deaths of officers. Their intentions are probably not as radical as what's been happening in the last month, but these attacks are hurting their cause. I acknowledge that they have every right to state their cause and protest, but it may eventually reach the tipping point of the imminent lawless action test. I don't remember seeing this much violence inflicted upon the police. All it's going to do is put more people on the side of the officers rather than BLM. I think it's sad that bad things are going on in some of their communities, but they need to be the bigger man in this case.

    To address "trickle-down economics," it's true that the deficits did go up, but Reagan wanted the Democrat majority Congress to cut spending on the social programs. If you're going to do a tax cut, you need to cut gov't spending otherwise, yes, there will be increased deficits. Note: during W. Bush, the deficits went up b/c he did tax cuts and was paying to engage in two overseas wars. Reagan wasn't going to allow the military to be cut b/c of the Cold War, but the social programs could go. As far as I know, social programs weren't cut, but the economy did improve. The economy was in the tank under stagflation during the Jimmy Carter years. Keynesian economics was bad b/c it only solves unemployment or inflation, not both. It's hard to get out of stagflation, unless you implement supply-side economics. The latter requires tax cuts, deregulation, and tightening the money supply. It wasn't successful from the get-go, but in a matter of a few years, it got the economy out of the funk. I acknowledge that tax cuts aren't used wisely in the sense that cutting gov't spending hardly ever comes true. It's easy to cut taxes, but it's harder to cut spending. Trump has said that he wants to cut spending, but I'm not going to address that. I don't follow Trump enough to defend him.

    As mentioned in a previous post, I acknowledge that Bill was alright with a Republican congress that kept him in check. They cut welfare and put a time limit on it, which I think is good. If Hillary is as moderate as he was, then it won't be as bad. However, I don't know what the heck is going on in Congress, so uh, yes, I did vote that we would be screwed either way.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •