It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Take the 2016 Presidential Poll: From and

page: 10
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 27 2016 @ 11:04 AM
a reply to: Malynn

What did you not like about it?

I looked at some of the comments. There are lots of one liners that wouldn't be tolerated here. They also allow a few curse words that are automatically censored here.

However, is not really based on a discussion forum paradigm like our beloved ATS. It's mainly a site that publishes alternative news articles. The discussion section is a less important element.

You might also consider as AboveTopSecret's sister site. SO is also part owner and he was heavily involved with a complete redesign of the user interface.


posted on Jan, 27 2016 @ 11:09 AM
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

By "Good Luck" I assume you mean good luck with living with the crappy choices we have for the next president. We are in major trouble as a country. We have allowed the Trojan horse of political correctness to usurp the Constitution and chip away at our liberties to the point where an avowed Socialist will probably be the Democrat nominee. If not then a criminal. And the GOP is barely better; a petulant reality show billionaire promising the world but with no means to deliver.

The Masses are now not used to being accountable; used to having the government as their safety net for bad decisions and irresponsibility in their lives. So whomever can promise more in terms of minimizing life's worries that are absurd wins. Yeah, I would like the new administration to minimize my worry of another war breaking out but that is not what I am talking about. I am talking about things like minimizing my worry of paying my mortgage next month. The candidate who says "if you can't pay your mortgage the government will" will get the vote. If you can't pay your student loans (which you freely accumulated on your own) the government will. That is what is driving this election, at least on the Democrat side. And voters are eating it up. And the more we have this nonsense the more power government gets and the weaker our country gets.

We really must have a true statesman (or woman) to step up, one who puts country first and not their political party. A President who represents all Americans versus, like Obama, one who only represents Democrats, is essential to get our country back on track. And Congress is no better. Our Representatives and Senators represent the desires of only the constituents who voted for them. That must change.

I have seen people who challenged me when I said that WE elected Obama as President. Their response is an incredulous "WE?" as if to say I didn't vote for him therefore he should not be concerned with my government views. Sick stuff.

posted on Jan, 27 2016 @ 11:54 AM

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: Konduit

The members on ATS lean right. (The politically inclined ones, at least.)
Look at all the Trump supporters.

All the Trump threads over the past 6 months have been some of the most toxic discussions I've ever seen on ATS, for obvious reasons.

Hell, even the mods have gotten their licks in.
edit on 27-1-2016 by Konduit because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 27 2016 @ 04:39 PM
a reply to: DexterRiley

I found the comments to be mostly distasteful.

posted on Jan, 27 2016 @ 05:42 PM

originally posted by: anon72
The intro page is there but not the poll. I do not have any adblockers etc. Is there a specific time it starts? Thank you and what a greaet idea!

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

I was wondering the same thing.

posted on Jan, 27 2016 @ 05:56 PM
I'm from England and voted for Sanders in this poll.
If everything written here is correct, then I agree with most of his view points.

posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 01:57 AM

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: seagull

It's not like the system goes out of its way to make voting harder for the poor and elderly.

Oh, wait.

In what way? Washington state has mailed ballots. Not sure whats hard about that. Even when there were polling places, did you, or anyone you know give rides to people to the polling places?

Registering? When I turned 18, it took me ten minutes. If it takes someone longer than that, then a fuss needs to be made, as the law is being broken.

The system goes out of its way to make voting harder? Then work harder to change it. It really is that simple. The sooner we get over this bullshyte notion that we can't change things is the moment that things will begin to change.

posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 01:59 AM
a reply to: seagull

People are thinking about change. Why do you think Sanders has so much support?

posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 02:19 AM
a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

Those are people who are involved. All to the good. That's fantastic...though I"m not too sure about the Sanders part...
. They care enough to actually be involved. Good for them.


How many, in percentage, do you suppose are going to support someone, anyone, this election cycle. I mean enough to actually bother voting.

I'm going to guess less than sixty percent.

Of the forty percent who won't...what percentage do you suppose are going to bitch and moan about how bad things are??? Betcha good money that it'll be a bit more than sixty percent...

posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 02:26 AM

That's fantastic...though I"m not too sure about the Sanders part...

Trump, too, I guess, though that tends to be due to some weird opinion that he's somehow non-establishment.

a reply to: seagull

Wasn't the turnout last time something like 30%?
Regardless, 99% of people should be bitching and moaning about how bad things are... Because things are really that bad. The people who don't vote are part of the problem, but I understand their apathy.

posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 02:28 AM
a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

Trump, me.

I'm actually more likely to vote for Sanders, then I am for that POS.

If I'm recalling correctly the Presidential race was something over 50%. It's the midterms that the turnout plunges even more dramatically to just over, as you pointed out, thirty percent (36%).
edit on 1/28/2016 by seagull because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 02:45 AM
a reply to: seagull

I just find it weird that people think Trump will change things, when he's been one of the puppeteers all along.

My personal voting preference is Sanders >>>>> Trump = Rand Paul > Everyone Else > Ted Cruz >>>>> Hillary.

Trump might make the world burn, but Clinton will make it rot. Besides, every now and then, a fire is good for the forest.
I personally detest the man himself, but as far as I'm concerned the victor depends on the democratic candidate, not the republican one.

I'm hoping that with a Sanders victory the midterm turnout would skyrocket. At the very least, the vast majority of his supporters would go to those as well. (Since his policies are so "out there" that they know he won't get them passed properly without extra support.)
edit on 28/1/2016 by Eilasvaleleyn because: Reasons

posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 02:52 AM
a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

I'm beginning to think you may be right. But there is a wild card that just may change it up a little bit...

Micheal Bloomberg. I think he steals votes from Hillary, rather than Sanders, if I'm reading him correctly. I still know little to nothing about the man just yet...

Don't count Cruz out just yet. Trump is going to, eventually, I hope, stomp on the old crank. I hope he's not as teflon as the Clinton's seem to be...

Though, then again, that E-mail thing just isn't quite going away like we all thought it would...thank God. She needs to go to jail for that one, if even half of what is hypothesized is true.

So, I don't think it's as cut and dried as some might think.

posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 03:08 AM
a reply to: seagull

Right about what?

Bloomberg won't beat Sanders, 'nor will he still his votes. He just won't. Sanders' supporters will likely see him to be the same kind of entity as Trump, just less of an abrasive asshole. I'm not sure how independents affect things, anyway.

The people who support Cruz are probably the same type of fanatics as Trump's hardcore supporters. Any sort of overt attack will just inspire them to support him even more.

Yes, I truly hope Clinton is sent to jail for that, even if it's some cushy special jail. She needs to serve time.
Of course, there's always the possibility of Obama pardoning her. That... Will be interesting to see.

Maybe not, but I also think it's less complicated than some people would want you to believe.

posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 03:18 AM
a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

I don't think he steals any votes from Sanders, I think he hurts Clinton more than Sanders. which helps Sanders, obviously.

No, I don't think that Cruz is a bigot that Trump is. I'm not voting for him, either. Point in fact, I've no clue right now who I'm going to vote for.

I'm probably going to support someone like Gary Johnson, in the end. In fact, he's probably my first choice. My choices are seldom carved in stone 'til just before I fill out my ballot...

I think Reagan was the only President I had my mind made up on well ahead of election Day... though if Gary Hart had won the nomination, the choice would have been a bit harder.

posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 04:00 AM
a reply to: seagull

Pretty much, which is why I hope he runs. Extra options is never a bad thing in a democratic system, and a lot of issues seem to be generated by the two-party duopoly to begin with. I hope for a future where people vote based on individuals, rather than a (D) or (R) sticker.

Really? I would have expected Cruz to be more of a bigot, theocratic tendencies and all. Though to be fair, Trump has never exactly been in a situation where he was anything but powerful/the boss, so a bit of bigotry on his end isn't exactly unprecedented. He may not even realise it.

I... Don't actually know who that is, to be honest. Independent? GOP?

If only his economic policies weren't such a failure... Though you may disagree with that.
Oh, and putting on my extra layer of tinfoil, he may have also been involved with the JFK assassination.

Oh, one advantage I forgot to mention that Bernie has is Jeff Weaver, who is one f*cking master of political jujitsu. Best campaign manager ever.

edit on 28/1/2016 by Eilasvaleleyn because: Reasons

posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 11:53 AM
I'm not american and obviously I cant vote but I just want to say this to Trump supporters. If you think a big pretty wall is going to stop mexicans...think again...and they wont build it either. I think of Trump as a populist. And those who think I or anybody should not interfiere or give opinions on that matter about american policies because you are not american is not right entirely because the decisions of The United States also affect the world therefore my country. Other than that I wish the USA all the best.

posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 01:08 PM
a reply to: nito92

I support John Kasech for president as the most solid and experienced of the republican candidates. He has executive skills and a thorough knowledge of the issues with a moderate approach that would lend itself to governing from the middle.

I'd like to see Chris Christie on the ticket as vice president. He would also provide experience along with a proven record prosecuting terrorists together with his own executive background. As an alternative for vice president, I could also support Marco Rubio on a ticket headed by John Kasech.

Trump would be, without doubt, an unmitigated disaster given his rank bigotry and racism. In addition he is nothing more than an inarticulate bully and would be ultra right wing dictator with intolerance for anyone who opposes him. He would trample our first amendment right to free speech and assembly. Lets "Not Be Nice to Sir Donald."

Ted Cruz would carpet bomb the entire M.E. and impose a disastrous across the board flat income tax that would fail to protect the vital social entitlement programs needed to protect our seniors and disabled citizens.

The democrats have nothing to offer at all unfortunately. Clinton would mean four more years of Obama's failed policies based on leading from behind and she was an awful secretary of state who is untrustworthy given her breach of National Security using a private e-mail server, and her atrocious bungling of the Benghazy Libya terrorist attack that cost an American ambassador and three others their lives.

Bernie Sanders would bring down Wall Street by lifting the income tax ceiling allowing up to a 90 percent tax rate and would spend 19 billion dollars to support his entitlement programs. Massive unemployment would occur when corporate earnings plunge in the face of increased capital gains taxes and a financial transaction tax. Small business would also have to cut back due to over regulation thus adding to the unemployment problem. And finally there would be nothing left to build up our already weakened military. America cannot be governed effectively from the far left by an avowed socialist with an excessive tax and spend approach. A large deep recession or worse would be the result.
edit on 28-1-2016 by kendix1960 because: Punctuation error fixed.

posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 01:41 PM
a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

He's an independant/Libertarian. Has some good ideas, and doesn't seem to have the baggage that some, or even most, of the others have.

Take a look at him, who knows, right?

posted on Jan, 28 2016 @ 01:49 PM
a reply to: seagull

Not sure whether you're referring to Cruz or to Sanders, but I'm against both of these candidates for the reasons stated above.

new topics

top topics

<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in