2016 Presidential Race

Who is voting for:

  • Bernie Sanders

    Votes: 21 51.2%
  • Hillary Clinton

    Votes: 13 31.7%
  • Donald Trump

    Votes: 2 4.9%
  • Ted Cruz

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • John Kasich

    Votes: 2 4.9%
  • Marco Rubio

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • None of the above

    Votes: 3 7.3%

  • Total voters
    41
Yeah I would absolutely agree with you on that. I just always find it interesting how much more consistently liberal New England is as a region compared to the rest of the country.

Although portrayed in the media as "liberal" it isn't as liberal as one would think. Sure there are ultra liberal bastions like Cambridge, Newton and Brookline, but the real numbers are driven by true traditional democrats - the working class, union members, the elderly, etc.

Moreover, Massachusetts laws in general are hardly reflective of what our liberal moniker would suggest. The misuse of the labels Liberal and Conservative have muddied the waters of their true meaning, and that is unfortunate from a perception standpoint. We have had plenty of leading local pols who are in effect Dino's.
 
I think TRUMP WINS.

Trump vs Hilary (Trump wins) Bernie supporters might vote for Trump.
Trump vs Bernie (Bernie Wins)

Cruz vs Hilary or Bernie (Cruz No shot) Democrats win

Kaisch (NO SHOT) Democrats win

you gotta wonder if the Republican establishment would rather Hilary Clinton in office over all their nominee's.

Gotta love this system full of Hypocrites.
 
I think TRUMP WINS.

Trump vs Hilary (Trump wins) Bernie supporters might vote for Trump.
Trump vs Bernie (Bernie Wins)

Cruz vs Hilary or Bernie (Cruz No shot) Democrats win

Kaisch (NO SHOT) Democrats win

you gotta wonder if the Republican establishment would rather Hilary Clinton in office over all their nominee's.

Gotta love this system full of Hypocrites.

I'm a Bernie supporter and I wouldn't vote for trump if a gun was held to my head. Kaisch is the only republican candidate with any shot at winning the general election imo. Trump does the worst early poles against both Hillary and Bernie. Even Cruz does better than Trump in early polling.
 
I'm a Bernie supporter and I wouldn't vote for trump if a gun was held to my head. Kaisch is the only republican candidate with any shot at winning the general election imo. Trump does the worst early poles against both Hillary and Bernie.

Hilary is backed by every corporate titan on the planet.

I have a better shot than Kaisch for being president. That's a fact.
 
I have a better shot than Kaisch for being president. That's a fact.

Do you know what that string of words means?

I want to bet you $50,000. You get the money if you are elected POTUS. I get the money if Kasich is elected. Nobody wins if neither of you are elected. Deal? PM me, if interested.
 
Hilary is backed by every corporate titan on the planet.

I have a better shot than Kaisch for being president. That's a fact.

Hillary Clinton wants to increase regulation on wall street banks and raise taxes on the highest earning taxpayers. I doubt that would align her with corporate interests. Donald Trump wants to cut taxes on the wealthiest earners and end the inheritance tax. He also proposes instituting a religious test on every foreign tourist and businessman who wants to come into this country. Trump always talks about how his business experience will prepare him for the Presidency however this is a man that inherited hundreds of millions of dollars from his farther and declared bankruptcy four times. While Hillary Clinton is far from perfect she is a much better choice compared to Donald Trump.
 
^

Seriously Obama and Clinton have been in office for 7 years: how many bankers were held accountable for financial terrorism of the US taxpayers money?
Interest rates have risen a 1/4 in 7 years. The fed is basically destroying our currency. (The average joe buying power on everyday good & services)

The country is 20 trillion in debt 400billion dollar budget deficit. They can't raise rates because we can't service the debt.
Add on another 200+ trillion in ss and Medicare.

Not sure if u under basic math but there are only two outcomes to this type of debt.
War or bankruptcy.
Or#3 America loses reserve currency

Please enlighten on the democrats spending policies. Just look at flint, Detroit, chicago
 
^

Seriously Obama and Clinton have been in office for 7 years: how many bankers were held accountable for financial terrorism of the US taxpayers money?
Interest rates have risen a 1/4 in 7 years. The fed is basically destroying our currency. (The average joe buying power on everyday good & services)

The country is 20 trillion in debt 400billion dollar budget deficit. They can't raise rates because we can't service the debt.
Add on another 200+ trillion in ss and Medicare.

Not sure if u under basic math but there are only two outcomes to this type of debt.
War or bankruptcy.
Or#3 America loses reserve currency

Please enlighten on the democrats spending policies. Just look at flint, Detroit, chicago

I totally agree with you that bankers should have been prosecuted. The reason why the fed hasn't raised rates is a lack of inflation and uncertainty in Europe and China. Once the global outlook improves interest rates will rise. The deficit will not affect the fed's ability to raise interest rates.

Trumps tax plan would reduce tax revenue by 10 billion dollars over the next 10 years. He has not come up with any legit plan to offset 100% those losses with spending cuts. Also the deficit was worse during the latter years of the Bush administration than it is under Obama.

I didn't expect a political fight in an architecture forum but debating is fun :)
 
Last edited:
I think TRUMP WINS.

Trump vs Hilary (Trump wins) Bernie supporters might vote for Trump.

Kaisch (NO SHOT) Democrats win

I have a better shot than Kaisch for being president. That's a fact.

Seriously Obama and Clinton have been in office for 7 years

I generally don't bother responding to your ridiculously misinformed nonsense, but I have a serious question: Where do you get your information?
 
I totally agree with you that bankers should have been prosecuted. The reason why the fed hasn't raised rates is a lack of inflation and uncertainty in Europe and China. Once the global outlook improves interest rates will rise. The deficit will not affect the fed's ability to raise interest rates.

Trumps tax plan would reduce tax revenue by 10 billion dollars over the next 10 years. He has not come up with any legit plan to offset 100% those losses with spending cuts. Also the deficit was worse during the latter years of the Bush administration than it is under Obama.

I didn't expect a political fight in an architecture forum but debating is fun :)


I'm actually not too impressed with the hypocrite republican party also. They all suck, Bush, Obama, Clintons republicans, democrats. One giant billion dollar party for Washington D.C. Leaders on the backs of the US Taxpayers.

I would rather they randomly pick somebody out of the yellow pages to represent my best interests at this point.

Bring back Andrew Jackson from the dead.



I generally don't bother responding to your ridiculously misinformed nonsense, but I have a serious question: Where do you get your information?

Seriously, FOX NEWS----

Just kiddin, The media sucks at this point.
Bunch of talking puppets, tough to believe anything they say now.
 
Last edited:
Trump supporters, sometimes they entertain me sometimes i'm horrified by how many of them exist.
 
Trump supporters, sometimes they entertain me sometimes i'm horrified by how many of them exist.

Right? At least he's consistent with the Andrew Jackson comment. One hates Muslims (except his oil-rich friends in power bankrolling him) and the other, Native Americans.
 
Last edited:
I totally agree with you that bankers should have been prosecuted.

Prosecute them for what? All of the shit that led to the housing crisis was completely legal. That's the real crime. Considering that ex post facto laws are not constitutional, what does the government charge Blankfein or Dimon with?
 
I've always been a bit of a political junkie, but this election has really weighed on me. I have become incredibly cynical with the state of affairs in our federal electoral process.

On one hand, with absurdly restrictive ballot access rules, and a very un-democratic nominating process, we as citizens do not actually choose who becomes president of the United States. The powers-that-be give us a coin every four years and we get to decide heads or tails. In that way, I empathize with Trump supporters because the nomination process is a farce. It's pretend democracy.

On the other hand, this election has really opened my eyes to the fact that most voters are ignorant and uninformed. Think of the biggest issues facing our country, whatever you may believe them to be. Climate change? Cyber-terrorism? Government corruption/moneyed interests? Restrictions of freedoms and liberties? Tax burdens? Healthcare? National debt? Whatever you may believe are the most important issues, what percentage of voters are well-informed, and have coherent, well-researched opinions on those issues and also know exactly where the candidates stand and what their proposed policies are? I think it's a shockingly low number. Maybe 10%. Maybe 5%. And I say that for all candidates' supporters (some maybe more so than others) and all parties. So, should we really fight for democracy to exist (it doesn't) in our presidential elections?

On finding Trump voters entertaining: I had a roommate who was a Trump fan. He was an immigrant in pursuit of a work visa. I found his support entertaining and I loved to listen to what he had to say. It was very informative to hear the thought process of an immigrant without citizenship, who was also a Trump fan. "He doesn't actually mean that." "It's funny to hear him troll liberals." "His presidency will be so entertaining. Like a reality show!" While these may all be true to some extent, none are reasons to vote for a presidential candidate. That is the type of ignorance that the majority of our country takes into the ballot box. At the end of the day, though, he couldn't vote, so his uninformed opinions didn't bother me. But there are many people like that, saying exactly those types of things, about all of the candidates. They are not entertaining to me anymore.

It is okay to have a difference of opinion, and it's great when people exchange ideas and change their opinions based on information. But people are not operating with any level of relevant information. Here are things I hear people say all the time. These statements may be true, but they all mean nothing. They are certainly not, by themselves, reasons to vote for the president of the United States:

Trump: He's not a bought politician, so he can stand up to Washington.
Cruz: He's a true Christian with Christian values.
Kasich: He seems like a reasonable, nice guy.
Clinton: It's time for a woman president already.
Sanders: The middle class disappearing.

If your reason for voting for a candidate doesn't get much deeper than that, don't vote. Or research the issues.
I Side With Quiz
Compare 2016 Presidential Candidate Positions
Also, expose yourself to the other side and try to argue from their point of view. Read some literature about an issue you aren't sure about, but keep an open mind. If you can't do that, or don't feel like taking the time (a few hours once every four years), then you are a part of the problem, so please, don't vote.

EDIT: There is a lot of blame to go around on this one, too. I, too, am partially to blame for our state of affairs. I consume free media, rather than funding well-researched journalism. I have engaged in political arguments that have only divided people further rather than thought to exchange ideas like an adult. In general, though, are system is not set up for a well-informed citizenship to take part in the political process and influence change. And I do not see that improving.
 
You keep saying the word democracy, but the US is not a democracy, never has been, and never will be unless we up heave the entire foundations of our government set forth by the Founding Fathers. We are a Representative Republic.

Also, expose yourself to the other side and try to argue from their point of view. Read some literature about an issue you aren't sure about, but keep an open mind. If you can't do that, or don't feel like taking the time (a few hours once every four years), then you are a part of the problem, so please, don't vote.

This statement in the last sentence contradicts your points above and totally undermines any shred of credibility to the rest of the post. You want pure democracy but then advocate for certain people not to vote because they don't meet your "informed" standards. The words "don't" and "vote" should never be next to each other. Ever.
 
I am aware that we are not a direct democracy. The thesis of my rant (albeit incoherent) is that I am turned off to the idea of democracy because most people can not/will not become informed enough.

And no, it does not contradict that point.

EDIT: My point about democracy was simply that the guise of democracy in our federal elections is a farce. At least, before 1968, there was no pretending that voters choose who their party's nominee is. Nowadays, we have millions of people that take part in a pretend process. I sympathize with those who do not like the farce.

Data: You must not have read what I wrote. Search for the word democracy, and you will see that I am very far from advocating for pure democracy.
 
Prosecute them for what? All of the shit that led to the housing crisis was completely legal. That's the real crime. Considering that ex post facto laws are not constitutional, what does the government charge Blankfein or Dimon with?

The people that should be charged are the executives of Fannie & Freddie Mac.
Along with the people in charge of the SEC and the NYSE.

Fannie & Freddie did not file financials for 3 years but was still listed on the major stock exchanges as their executives reaped millions of dollars in bonuses then donating money to Barney Frank & Chris Dodd.

I've never studied criminal justice but seriously this seems like some corruption here.

What about MF Global Scandal they basically stole billions of dollars in cash from there customers cash accounts.
The our Govt makes them pay fines. If somebody robs a 7-elven store they get jail time. Corzine steals billions only has to pay half of it back in fines no jail time.

Don't forget about JPM laundering drug, mob money across the world for these cartels.

The problem is the FBI is probably still looking for Whitey Bulger.
What the bankers & the corrupt politicans have done in the past decade has destroyed and demoralized the American working class families.
 
You keep saying the word democracy...You want pure democracy

I have to respond directly to this. How is this at all close to what I wrote? I posted a critique of the democratic process that contained the word "democracy" twice. Once showing it doesn't exist and once questioning why we would ever want it to exist.
 
I am aware that we are not a direct democracy. But for a republic to be effective, citizens need to be able to influence public policy more than they can at this moment. The thesis of my rant (albeit incoherent) is that I am turned off to the idea of democracy because most people can not/will not become informed enough.

And no, it does not contradict that point.

How very Hamiltonian of you. Literally though, your point is the point of the Federalists going back to 1787. Not that I disagree with you. The structural two-party system contributes to voter disengagement and disinterest in a major way as well.

EDIT: My point about democracy was simply that the guise of democracy in our federal elections is a farce. At least, before 1968, there was no pretending that voters choose who their party's nominee is. Nowadays, we have millions of people that take part in a pretend process. I sympathize with those who do not like the farce.

It's not a farce. The elections are certainly real. The problem is people's perceptions of these elections. A lack of understanding of history and what primaries are for: the party members deciding who will be their figureheads on election day. Our winner-take-all voting system doesn't help matters when there's a huge slate of candidates and the "front-runner" wins with 30-40% of the vote in most states. Legitimacy is in the eye of the beholder.
 

Back
Top