Is anyone actually excited that Hilary will be next president?

[bshole]

I am not excited about Hillary becoming president. What I worry about most is her policy on the Middle East and Syria. She strikes me as much more of a warmonger than Obama. I have no doubt that the Republicans will back her in attacking Assad. It is my fervent hope that she is stymied in some way from engaging in this fool's errand. I am also interested to see what bones she will throw to the banking industry and Saudi Arabia. From my perspective, I would anticipate her Presidency to loosely follow GW Bush's.

 

[glenn1]

I am not excited about Hillary becoming president. What I worry about most is her policy on the Middle East and Syria. She strikes me as much more of a warmonger than Obama. I have no doubt that the Republicans will back her in attacking Assad. It is my fervent hope that she is stymied in some way from engaging in this fool's errand. I am also interested to see what bones she will throw to the banking industry and Saudi Arabia. From my perspective, I would anticipate her Presidency to loosely follow GW Bush's.

My concerns mostly echo yours. In addition to Syria I'm also concerned she will get involved in one or more peripheral conflicts based on some tribal, ethnic, or religious factor (like Kosovo or who the hell knows where Africa) where there is really no compelling American interest other than trying to back the side which is more circumspect in the atrocities it commits than the other guys who we attack.

 

[MongGrel]

Could the polls be wrong?

That's funny

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/artic...n-november-is-written-in-the-polls?int=a14709

 

[Moonbeam]

I'm thrilled to death. She is going to change the pot laws and in her first month get money out of politics. Soon, doubtlessly, we will know all of this is real. WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

 

[MongGrel]

American citizens should get special treatment because they are american citizens and the president has a sworn obligation to respect their right to due process. The president has no constitutional obligation to Syrian citizens or Iraqi citizens and so far as the execution (har) of his office is concerned he can basically blow them up to his heart's content.

Basically my thoughts are that if the president wants to execute a US citizen without trial he better have a really good reason. In these cases that I've seen it hasn't been one of those ticking bomb scenarios where the government doesn't have the time to take it before a judge, these individuals have been placed on a kill list or whatever some time in advance. If we have such a strong reason to kill someone that we have to do it without giving them due process I feel like that reason should be more than strong enough to be taken before a judge.

An America citizen who travels to a foreign country for the purpose of waging war against America should be stripped of their citizenship to begin with in my eyes. Immigrants are required to pledge allegiance for citizenship.

I'm with werepossum on this one, summary executions for treason in a war zone were pretty far from uncommon in the past.

 

[Thump553]

I fully expect adamant GOP opposition to anything she proposes, so unless the GOP loses their majorities expect 4-8 more years of de facto stalemate.

As far as the Mideast goes, I think she has learned a lot as Obama's Sec of State and her hands-on dealings over there, plus she is an astute politician and realizes that any substantial USA involvement is both going to be a very hard sell and is going to be a lose-lose proposition for her. If it goes badly,, it's her fault for her bad decision. If it goes good then the GOP will treat that as fully expected and anyone could have done it.

I'm hoping she pushes hard on completing the deal in Iran. This would increase the power of the moderate majority there which can only be a good thing.

Personally I think Russian imperialism and China's claiming of the China Sea area are going to be a lot more significant-so long as Saudi Arabia holds together.

 

[BurnItDwn]

Im not pleased she won the democratic nomination, but, honestly, she is not terrible. I do not personally like her, but, she has my vote.

 

[fskimospy]

An America citizen who travels to a foreign country for the purpose of waging war against America should be stripped of their citizenship to begin with in my eyes. Immigrants are required to pledge allegiance for citizenship.

I'm with werepossum on this one, summary executions for treason in a war zone were pretty far from uncommon in the past.

Okay but how do you determine if someone has traveled to a foreign country for the purpose of waging war against America? Does the executive get to decide that on their own?

 

[Jhhnn]

I am not excited about Hillary becoming president. What I worry about most is her policy on the Middle East and Syria. She strikes me as much more of a warmonger than Obama. I have no doubt that the Republicans will back her in attacking Assad. It is my fervent hope that she is stymied in some way from engaging in this fool's errand. I am also interested to see what bones she will throw to the banking industry and Saudi Arabia. From my perspective, I would anticipate her Presidency to loosely follow GW Bush's.

Project often?

I don't think we'll see much difference in foreign policy other than maybe cozying up to Bibi.

I thnk her policy will emphasize domestic issues & attempt to address them constructively for everybody, left & right.

 

[MongGrel]

Okay but how do you determine if someone has traveled to a foreign country for the purpose of waging war against America? Does the executive get to decide that on their own?

The Executive Branch and the President in general has been making decisions along those lines pretty much since the US was founded. It's more interactive and information is passed around much quicker these days of course.

What scenario you're proposing I'm not sure, its not like the Koch Brothers are going to travel to the middle of Afghanistan to meet with a Taliban leader and a Hellfire hits them with Hillary yelling YIPPEE! in the background.

 

[fskimospy]

The Executive Branch and the President in general has been making decisions along those lines pretty much since the US was founded. It's more interactive and information is passed around much quicker these days of course.

What scenario you're proposing I'm not sure, its not like the Koch Brothers are going to travel to the middle of Afghanistan to meet with a Taliban leader and a Hellfire hits them with Hillary yelling YIPPEE! in the background.

Yes but do we know all of the situations this sort of power is employed in? I mean aren't we just taking the executive branch's word for it that they are doing the right thing? I mean one of the primary reasons we have courts, search warrants, etc is that executive branches throughout history have a really really bad record when people just take their word for it.

 

[MongGrel]

Yes but do we know all of the situations this sort of power is employed in? I mean aren't we just taking the executive branch's word for it that they are doing the right thing? I mean one of the primary reasons we have courts, search warrants, etc is that executive branches throughout history have a really really bad record when people just take their word for it.

You have to make a decision one way or another where to vote, and for Commander in Chief, I do not want Trump anywhere that position. There are many other reasons, but that is a big one in my book.

 

[MongGrel]

Yes but do we know all of the situations this sort of power is employed in? I mean aren't we just taking the executive branch's word for it that they are doing the right thing? I mean one of the primary reasons we have courts, search warrants, etc is that executive branches throughout history have a really really bad record when people just take their word for it.

I'm just going to let this one rest at my end, I'm still not sure wtf a search warrant has to do with someone who wet to a foreign country to proactively fight a war against the US and get killed by a drone.

I guess the drones should drop search warrants first.

 

[Jhhnn]

You have to make a decision one way or another where to vote, and for Commander in Chief, I do not want Trump anywhere that position. There are many other reasons, but that is a big one in my book.

Other reasons like not wanting to die of embarrassment for the Country I love...

The Trump candidacy is a cosmic joke & a well deserved comeuppance for the leaders of the Repub party. They've been mind fucking & just plain fucking their base for so long that those poor people are finally losing it.

 

[dainthomas]

Okay but how do you determine if someone has traveled to a foreign country for the purpose of waging war against America? Does the executive get to decide that on their own?

In the case we're referring to, the guy absolutely was beyond any reasonable doubt. The only people upset about that scumbag terrorist getting it are people on the other "team" who want to tear down Obama for anything.

 

[fskimospy]

I'm just going to let this one rest at my end, I'm still not sure wtf a search warrant has to do with someone who wet to a foreign country to proactively fight a war against the US and get killed by a drone.

I guess the drones should drop search warrants first.

The purpose of a search warrant is so that a judge has to verify that what the police/executive branch are saying is true (or at least has a decent factual basis). If the police want to search your house they can't just decide they want to do it, they have to show a third party that they have a good reason for doing it. The reason we have that in place is to prevent the police from abusing their powers. Similarly in this situation I think that if the president wants to blow up a US citizen in violation of their constitutional rights he should have to show a third party that he has a good reason for doing so. Doesn't that seem like a good idea?

My best guess is that all the US citizens Obama has listed on his drone target list abundantly deserve to be blown up. I don't trust that will always be the case though and I certainly wouldn't want to just take the president's word for it.

 

[sportage]

Actually, 10 behind Trump is not that bad for Hillary considering most the people that kernel corn vote are older farm folks in for the state fair from republican farm districts. Farmers most always are and vote republican. The inner city are liberal democrats in higher volume. And the older farm folks are a dying breed.
On the other hand, this kernel corn vote thing was quite accurate for senate candidate Joni Ernst back in 2014.
The liberal Iowan democrats are over at the beer tent getting sauced. They'd rather drink beer than drop corn kernels into a glass gar. And Iowa did go for Obama, twice. And Obama's favorable ratings are very good. So if Obama could take Iowa, twice, I'd bet Hillary can take Iowa as well. And older Iowans really love their Bill Clinton.

State republicans are just pissed off right now at the Iowa republican governor after Gov Terry Branstad declared the state fair a GUN-FREE zone.
Nothing goes together more than heat, crowds, beer, drunks, tempers, screaming kids, an even mix of rednecks and minorities, corndogs, and those guns.

The assumption that Hillary will win the overall is pretty sound bet, and for Iowa too.

 

[bshole]

Project often?

I don't think we'll see much difference in foreign policy other than maybe cozying up to Bibi.

I thnk her policy will emphasize domestic issues & attempt to address them constructively for everybody, left & right.

So Jeremy Bash is lying through his teeth? I hope so. I fervently hope so.

Just leave the Middle East. Quit all the terrorist bombing. Wipe your hands and walk away. It is impossible for America to slaughter it's way to a sycophantic Pro-America Government in the Middle East. Walk away and let the Middle East choose for itself. Quit imposing ourselves on them. Allow them so free will.

Hillary Clinton plans to order a full review of the United States’ strategy in Syria as one of her first priorities if elected President.

One of her foreign policy advisers, Jeremy Bash, said she would seek to end Bashar al-Assad’s “murderous” regime despite waning political will to oust the autocratic Syrian President.

He said dealing with Syria would be Ms Clinton’s “first key task” if elected and she would work to get President Assad “out of there”.

“A Clinton administration will not shrink from making clear to the world exactly what the Assad regime is,” he told The Telegraph.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...egy-syria-isis-bashar-al-assads-a7163831.html

 

[MongGrel]

The purpose of a search warrant is so that a judge has to verify that what the police/executive branch are saying is true (or at least has a decent factual basis). If the police want to search your house they can't just decide they want to do it, they have to show a third party that they have a good reason for doing it. The reason we have that in place is to prevent the police from abusing their powers. Similarly in this situation I think that if the president wants to blow up a US citizen in violation of their constitutional rights he should have to show a third party that he has a good reason for doing so. Doesn't that seem like a good idea?

My best guess is that all the US citizens Obama has listed on his drone target list abundantly deserve to be blown up. I don't trust that will always be the case though and I certainly wouldn't want to just take the president's word for it.

I still have no clue WTF a search warrant has to do with blowing up a terrorist in a foreign country.

Or Police.

Or Domestic Policy regarding drones, they aren't flying over Detroit taking out gangs.

 

[amenx]

Not so much excited if HC becomes prez as much relieved Trump is not.

 

[Texashiker]

:shrug: more of the same shit from the looks of it.

hillary is going to be much worse than obama, much, much, much worse.

 

[fskimospy]

I still have no clue WTF a search warrant has to do with blowing up a terrorist in a foreign country.

Or Police.

Or Domestic Policy regarding drones, they aren't flying over Detroit taking out gangs.

A search warrant has to do with blowing up a US citizen that the executive branch CLAIMS is a terrorist in a foreign country. This US citizen is protected by the Constitution against being deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law no matter where they are on the planet. I'm not arguing that we shouldn't blow up terrorists in foreign countries even if they are US citizens if the situation demands it. What I AM arguing is that no president should be able to execute a US citizen without their evidence against that person being looked over by a third party.

 

[fskimospy]

hillary is going to be much worse than obama, much, much, much worse.

Oh really? Do you want to make some predictions about the horrible things that are going to happen during her presidency? It will be fun to go revisit them in the future, no?

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

hillary is going to be much worse than obama, much, much, much worse.

DOOM! FEAR! FEAR! DOOM!

 

[jman19]

I'll just be happy if Trump isn't in the White House. GOP voters really set the bar pretty low this election cycle.