1 term president?

[seayakin]

Given both candidates of the major parties can be considered flawed, what is the chance that whomever is elected will be a 1 term president?

 

[NoahFence]

Given both candidates of the major parties can be considered flawed, what is the chance that whomever is elected will be a 1 term president?

Zero on both counts.

Hillary will wind up being another Obama, which is to say nothing completely drastic will happen on her watch and she's sail to a 2nd term. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Trump? He'll be assassinated or impeached within the first year.

Pence? Perhaps he'll be coherent enough to be elected proper in 2020.

 

[MikeG]

Given both candidates of the major parties can be considered flawed, what is the chance that whomever is elected will be a 1 term president?

Forgive my ignorance, but what is the justification for this claim? Clinton appeared (from the UK) to be a very solid and competent Secretary of State, and would seem to have survived the picking through her metaphorical dustbins by the conservative wing of American politics with a clean slate. What's the big flaw we over here are missing?

 

[seayakin]

I agree that Hillary, if elected will continue the same policies as Obama but I think the negatives will continue to follow her. Frankly, I do believe if the Republicans fielded almost any other candidate who was more traditional like a Romney or Kasich, Hillary would be facing an uphill climb. I also think Hillary will need to run a squeaky clean operation as president otherwise any ethics question, mistep or outright illegality will be found out and aired. I'm doubtful the republicans would field another candidate like Trump in 2020 also.

 

[seayakin]

Forgive my ignorance, but what is the justification for this claim? Clinton appeared (from the UK) to be a very solid and competent Secretary of State, and would seem to have survived the picking through her metaphorical dustbins by the conservative wing of American politics with a clean slate. What's the big flaw we over here are missing?

Regardless of whether you think of them as a problem or not, her use of an email server has raised serious questions and problems with the campaign as well as her foundation. For instance, if Biden had run and won the nomination, I don't think it is as likely you would be dealing with these issues and it would be more a fight about Obama's record.

 

[MikeG]

That's it? Her big flaw is sending some emails from the wrong computer?

 

[Upchurch]

Regardless of whether you think of them as a problem or not, her use of an email server has raised serious questions and problems with the campaign as well as her foundation.

That's it? Her big flaw is sending some emails from the wrong computer?

Well, George W Bush did the same thing while he was President and he only got one term.

 

[jhunter1163]

The rise of Trumpism will allow the GOP to put off their moment of reckoning for another four years. Eventually, though, they will have to confront the fact that their policies are out of step with 21st-century America. There was an element that tried to point this out after Romney's loss, but the Tea Party shouted them down. I believe that by 2020 the Tea Party will be well on its way to irrelevance, if not actually there. Hopefully, at that time the GOP will be able to reinvent itself.

 

[seayakin]

That's it? Her big flaw is sending some emails from the wrong computer?

Yes, these two items would be a more serious problem if she had a normal opponent. The issue is more than about sending emails from the wrong computer. It is used to present evidence that she is dishonest because of contradictory testimony in Congress. The appearance of pay for play with her foundation also provides room for criticism. I don't want to get in a discussion about the validity of these issues because there are other threads on this forum discussing these issues at great length but suffice it to say, in any other election, these would be having a more significant impact. It is my hypothesis, that in a 2020 reelection campaign with Hillary, a more professionally run and supported campaign by the Republican candidate would make better use of these negatives.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Are we applying the fairness doctrine and pretending that Trump has a chance to win this? That knowledge should have an impact on how people vote in this important poll.

Since Hillary is going to win, the question is really whether the GOP can unseat her after a single term. And then you just have to look at the state of the GOP. This is only the first battle. There will be factions within factions by the end of Hillary's first term. The accusations of selling out and/or of not being loyal to the party will be a thing of beauty. The fundies are still there and they'll be fighting for Cruz or a Cruz look-alike. The New Improved Stupid Wave will probably be supporting Eric Trump or Donald Jr. The "serious conservatives" will have their Paul Ryans, Ben Carson and Mike Huckabee have nothing better to do than run for the nomination, Pence is now in the mix, and don't forget that Teh Donald introduced us to the new all-understand ELLL BEE GEEE TEEE CUE wing. I'm sure they'll be lobbying for a Log Cabin candidate.

Naaah. They won't learn. The clown car will be even more clownish than this year, if that's at all possible. Hell, Delusional Donald could actually run again. There's no reason, even having been trounced, that those fools wouldn't fall for the same shtick.

 

[seayakin]

Are we applying the fairness doctrine and pretending that Trump has a chance to win this? That knowledge should have an impact on how people vote in this important poll.

Since Hillary is going to win, the question is really whether the GOP can unseat her after a single term. And then you just have to look at the state of the GOP. This is only the first battle. There will be factions within factions by the end of Hillary's first term. The accusations of selling out and/or of not being loyal to the party will be a thing of beauty. The fundies are still there and they'll be fighting for Cruz or a Cruz look-alike. The New Improved Stupid Wave will probably be supporting Eric Trump or Donald Jr. The "serious conservatives" will have their Paul Ryans, Ben Carson and Mike Huckabee have nothing better to do than run for the nomination, Pence is now in the mix, and don't forget that Teh Donald introduced us to the new all-understand ELLL BEE GEEE TEEE CUE wing. I'm sure they'll be lobbying for a Log Cabin candidate.

Naaah. They won't learn. The clown car will be even more clownish than this year, if that's at all possible. Hell, Delusional Donald could actually run again. There's no reason, even having been trounced, that those fools wouldn't fall for the same shtick.

If I understand your meaning by the fairness rule, I would say yes. I don't want to assume Hillary wins until we see the final results of the election. In any case, personally I give Trump about a 10% chance of winning.

Regarding the rest, I completely agree that Republicans will have to resolve differences of the factions within their coalition. I also agree with jhunter1163's comments.

 

[MikeG]

Yes.......

Well, if that's "flawed" you folks have an entirely different yardstick for these sort of things than we do in Europe. I'll offer Sylvio Berlusconi and Gerry Adams as examples you may want to consider. If using the wrong computer makes a candidate flawed, could you pick a word or two to describe Richard Nixon, perhaps?

 

[Trebuchet]

Given both candidates of the major parties can be considered flawed, what is the chance that whomever is elected will be a 1 term president?

Forgive my ignorance, but what is the justification for this claim? Clinton appeared (from the UK) to be a very solid and competent Secretary of State, and would seem to have survived the picking through her metaphorical dustbins by the conservative wing of American politics with a clean slate. What's the big flaw we over here are missing?

I'm a lib and consider her flawed as well. Nothing like as flawed as Trump, of course. She's just got some baggage which in a normal year might sink her. This is far from a normal year.

I'd have preferred pretty much any Democrat over Clinton.

 

[Crossbow]

Well if Trump does win the election (which I seriously doubt that he will), then I expect that he would not even survive one term. Before too long he would bitch about everything and then quit in a terrible hissy fit.

If Clinton were to win (which I expect her to do), then she will be a two term President (unless she were to die in office).

 

[acbytesla]

Given both candidates of the major parties can be considered flawed, what is the chance that whomever is elected will be a 1 term president?

1. Trump is not going to be elected.
2. How Hillary is perceived in 4 years could be drastically different.

It's also possible Hillary could serve one term out of choice.

 

[MikeG]

I'm a lib and consider her flawed as well.......

I am being utterly genuine when I say that I doubt many over here would have a clue why she is seen by some as flawed. Flawed implies a weakness, a trait that makes someone unsuited to a particular role. In other words, it isn't about what someone may or may not have done, so much as a pattern of behaviour which shows poor judgement or a personal weakness, or some lack of the necessary abilities and so on. I get the feeling that "Hilary is flawed" is just something that has been repeated so often that it became accepted, but its justification remains a complete mystery to the neutral observer.

 

[Dr. Keith]

Clinton's true measure won't be whether she wins, it will be how many down ticket elections are impacted by her win. If Trump alienates enough voters to allow Hillary to pull some down ticket races along with her, she could ride comfortably to two terms. Especially, if the GOP is so fractured after the Trumpcastrophe that the mid-terms don't offer any correction in their favor.

But, if she has to deal with a GOP house and senate she is going to have a harder time securing a second term. Probably still will, but it will not be as easy.

 

[seayakin]

Well, if that's "flawed" you folks have an entirely different yardstick for these sort of things than we do in Europe. I'll offer Sylvio Berlusconi and Gerry Adams as examples you may want to consider. If using the wrong computer makes a candidate flawed, could you pick a word or two to describe Richard Nixon, perhaps?

I agree. I think there is a big difference yardstick from European politics. It might be an interesting comparison. Of course, the more local you get in America, you might find the differences less. Providence, RI had no qualms in electing a convicted felon for mayor and he had strong support after serving second prison sentence on corruption charges (Buddy Cianci).

 

[Faydra]

I'm a lib and consider her flawed as well. Nothing like as flawed as Trump, of course. She's just got some baggage which in a normal year might sink her. This is far from a normal year.

I'd have preferred pretty much any Democrat over Clinton.

This.


I still have Clinton fatigue from the Lewinski scandal. I'm just sick of hearing about them, and when she wins that's only going to get worse. I SO wish Bernie had won the nomination. But it's a small price to pay to keep the United States from dying in a Trumpster fire.

 

[Dr. Keith]

I am being utterly genuine when I say that I doubt many over here would have a clue why she is seen by some as flawed. Flawed implies a weakness, a trait that makes someone unsuited to a particular role. In other words, it isn't about what someone may or may not have done, so much as a pattern of behaviour which shows poor judgement or a personal weakness, or some lack of the necessary abilities and so on. I get the feeling that "Hilary is flawed" is just something that has been repeated so often that it became accepted, but its justification remains a complete mystery to the neutral observer.

Her biggest flaw is that after decades of attack she has a bit of a hard veneer that comes off as fake. She doesn't connect well with crowds, she lacks her husbands charisma. I hear she is very genuine in person, but I have no measure of that.

The email server is an artifact of that veneer. She knew that she would be under more scrutiny than any SOS before her, so she took what other before her had done to new levels. I hope she has learned the written electronic communications are not worth their convenience at her level.