Czernobog
Gold Member
- Thread starter
- #41
Nice to know that the presidential election is a popularity contest for you. Congratulations. You are part of the problem.Ya know, I was listening to "This Week...", and one of the "qualities" that the commentator was suggesting Trump can "work on" is "Do I wanna have a beer with the guy?" I don't really remember when this question first became a thing, but this has got to be one of the stupidest questions I have ever heard asked in American politics. Who cares if I like the candidate enough to have a beer with him. Look, I have a lot of friends I'm willing to go to the bar, and have a beer with, and guess what? Most of them I wouldn't trust to balance my fucking checkbook, let alone run the fucking country!
I don't want a guy I'm "willing to have a beer with". I want a President who demonstrates an understanding of global politics, who has a basic understanding of economics, and understands the principles of a democratic government. None of these things have a gods damned thing to do with whether I'd have a beer with him.
It seems to me that "Would I have a beer with the guy?" transforms the election from a referendum on the Presidency of the United States into a high school popularity contest. What? The? Fuck? Have we really become this vapid, shallow, and stupid as a society?
That's how the gop got millions of stupid people to vote for the bush boy.
That's where this "want to have a beer" idea started. In 2000 with the bush boy.
The funny thing is both men don't drink alcohol. The bush boy is a recovering alcoholic so the last thing anyone would want to do is sit down to drink a beer with him but that is exactly one of the things the gop used in 2000 to get stupid people to vote for the bush boy.
trump will tell anyone who listens that he doesn't drink.
So why use such a stupid thing to get people to vote for someone?
I don't know. Maybe they think it will work.
Damn you regressive are stupid, it's not about what beverage is consumed, it's whether you'd like to spend time with a candidate in a relaxed casual setting. Would it make you poor souls feel better if the question was if you would like to share a meal with them?
Damn you're stupid. I get that's the point of the ridiculous question. I don't care how it's framed, it's vapid, shallow, and stupid. I don't need a president that I feel comfortable spending a relaxing evening with; because I'm well aware that here, in the real world, that's unlikely to ever happen.
I what I do need from my president is the confidence that he, or she has the intelligence, understanding and temperament to comprehend all of the complex intricacies that come with the office, and do the job competently. It is equally important to me that the candidate have these qualities; not that they are going to "surround themselves" with people with these qualities, who will be able to "advise them", as one candidate has suggested they would do. We had a president that did that. He got us into a war of choice, permitted numerous constitutional violations under his administration, and presides over the worst economic disaster since the depression. I'd prefer a president who is intelligent enough, and informed enough to think for themselves, thank you; and could care less whether I felt comfortable spending an evening with them.
Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk
Well guess what hero, there is no one that is prepared to be POTUS, they job is consistently changing. If I wouldn't want to associate with someone I damn well won't vote for them. The hildabitch comes to mind in that respect, she's a pig and has no place in government.
Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk