I don't think we really know anything about how Gore would have handled anything.
You might want to take a step back and think your opinion through a little more. You've left the path of rationality a bit. We can definitely get an idea of how different people would handle different situations.
He definitely said that, his entire speech is about comparing her to Trump and explaining why her positions match his. It's almost entirely based on the viewpoints held, not whether she is competent or not. He said, "there is no doubt in my mind that, as we head into November, Hillary Clinton is far and away the best candidate." Which of course can be true even if you think she is unfit to hold office.
So, Sanders' previous observation about her unfitness for office.......He never meant it in the first place, which makes him a liar.
ok, at the end of his speech, he says, "Hillary Clinton will make an outstanding president and I am proud to stand with her here today." Which definitely makes him seem like a liar when he said she was unfit (or he is lying now).
What I am saying is that it is very possible that a Gore presidency could have been worse. I won't go too far deep into it, but look up the "three mile island effect". It's basically impossible to predict accurately 8 years into the future
Anything is possible, but that's going too far.
We can look at the skills and aptitudes that each candidate has, and reason about who would be better suited to handle a given situation. In this case, it's hands-down in favor of Gore.
She was cleared from indictment in the emails case. Note that this endorsement came shortly after that announcement.
That was Sanders' last chance for the nomination. At this point, an endorsement is just saying "I like her better than Trump" which is not an unreasonable position for Sanders to hold, and is not inconsistent with "She's not fit."
Sure. Gore didn't start any wars from 2000-2008 when he wasn't president, therefore he wouldn't have started any if he was... Makes sense. Also, is it fair to say that 9/11 wouldn't have happened if he was president? And even it did, I'm sure he would have shown as much restraint in using military force as his democratic predecessors
Let's assume that under Gore 9/11 still would have happened. The biggest problem in Bush's response was the horrible incompetence he showed. Part of that was his advisors fault (both their poor ideas and their arrogance), and after four years, with more experience, Bush did improve, but Gore already had quite a bit of experience in 2001, and it's unlikely he would have tried to colonize two countries as a result.
I'll give you an example that clearly shows Bush's incompetence. After 9/11, basically every country in the world supported America, and there was a lot of good will. Within a month, Bush had turned that around and nearly every country in the world was protesting the actions of America, even some of our strong allies. He failed to build on the good will, and turned it into opposition.
For a comparison, consider the actions of Bush Senior in Iraq.......the middle east was horribly divided, yet with careful diplomacy he managed to get every country in the region to accept if not actively aid in the Iraq invasion. The exact opposite of his son.
Now, arguably Gore might not have been as good as Bush Senior, but if you look at presidential skill as a bell curve, then Bush Junior was clearly two standard deviations below the average, and it's unlikely that Gore would have also been that bad.
"(I won't: I've already chosen third party)".. Then you have chosen to support Crooked Hillary.
What, you think I would have preferred Trump over Hillary?
It's more important that third parties become viable than that "the wrong lizard doesn't win," and that's why I vote third party. Better yet if parties die altogether.
The election is starting to solidify between Trump and Clinton, and people realize you have to choose one of them; tribal instinct will kick in and they'll choose a side (I won't: I've already chosen third party). People will forget they ever supported Cruz, and find new reasons to support Trump ("oh, I realized he isn't actually Hitler, and look, he has an R, my preferred party").
That's what I came to say. It's not "heartbreaking," it's completely illegal. It's so illegal in fact, I couldn't believe that she had actually said it, and read the article to make sure. Here's a transcript of the interview. I can't find anywhere she actually said it. As a lawyer, she knows to be more careful in what she says than that.
Do you really think she's so weak-willed that she allowed the Republicans to somehow cause her to lie, repeatedly, about what she did, when, how, and why she did it?
My fiancee encourages me to play on the TV PC instead of my personal PC so she can watch.
Totally unrelated question here......with that kind of setup, how do you comfortably handle a keyboard and mouse? Do you have a really high coffee table or something? A desk on your easy chair?
You don't even need Alienware. A $600 Dell with 1TB hard drive and NVidia GeForce 730 will run most games you want to play fairly nicely. For a lot of games you can get away with something even cheaper.
In the last two months, I've used three different programming languages, maybe more.
The disturbing thing about the question is that it seems to assume you can only program at work. If so, I feel sad for you......you've never caught the enjoyment of programming.
Slashdot Mirror
While you are completely correct, it is also worth mentioning that more recently they failed to predict Trump's victory. Here is his apology after that happened. So he's demonstrably been unable to understand the Trump trend in the past.
My point isn't that he's bad, he's really good. It's that you shouldn't blindly follow what he says: do your own analysis.
I fail to understand how this is relevant to H1B visas?
That's ok, I don't just you because of your failings.
I don't think we really know anything about how Gore would have handled anything.
You might want to take a step back and think your opinion through a little more. You've left the path of rationality a bit. We can definitely get an idea of how different people would handle different situations.
He didn't say, "I like her better than Trump,"
He definitely said that, his entire speech is about comparing her to Trump and explaining why her positions match his. It's almost entirely based on the viewpoints held, not whether she is competent or not. He said, "there is no doubt in my mind that, as we head into November, Hillary Clinton is far and away the best candidate." Which of course can be true even if you think she is unfit to hold office.
So, Sanders' previous observation about her unfitness for office.......He never meant it in the first place, which makes him a liar.
ok, at the end of his speech, he says, "Hillary Clinton will make an outstanding president and I am proud to stand with her here today." Which definitely makes him seem like a liar when he said she was unfit (or he is lying now).
What I am saying is that it is very possible that a Gore presidency could have been worse. I won't go too far deep into it, but look up the "three mile island effect". It's basically impossible to predict accurately 8 years into the future
Anything is possible, but that's going too far.
We can look at the skills and aptitudes that each candidate has, and reason about who would be better suited to handle a given situation. In this case, it's hands-down in favor of Gore.
Actually, she went to jail for insider trading, I think.
She was investigated for insider trading, but cleared of that.
She was convicted of not being entirely forthcoming when she talked to the FBI.
Let that be a lesson: when you talk to the police, say nothing, do nothing, ask for a lawyer.
What happened to "she's not fit" for the office?
She was cleared from indictment in the emails case. Note that this endorsement came shortly after that announcement.
That was Sanders' last chance for the nomination. At this point, an endorsement is just saying "I like her better than Trump" which is not an unreasonable position for Sanders to hold, and is not inconsistent with "She's not fit."
Which state?
Sure. Gore didn't start any wars from 2000-2008 when he wasn't president, therefore he wouldn't have started any if he was... Makes sense. Also, is it fair to say that 9/11 wouldn't have happened if he was president? And even it did, I'm sure he would have shown as much restraint in using military force as his democratic predecessors
Let's assume that under Gore 9/11 still would have happened. The biggest problem in Bush's response was the horrible incompetence he showed. Part of that was his advisors fault (both their poor ideas and their arrogance), and after four years, with more experience, Bush did improve, but Gore already had quite a bit of experience in 2001, and it's unlikely he would have tried to colonize two countries as a result.
I'll give you an example that clearly shows Bush's incompetence. After 9/11, basically every country in the world supported America, and there was a lot of good will. Within a month, Bush had turned that around and nearly every country in the world was protesting the actions of America, even some of our strong allies. He failed to build on the good will, and turned it into opposition.
For a comparison, consider the actions of Bush Senior in Iraq.......the middle east was horribly divided, yet with careful diplomacy he managed to get every country in the region to accept if not actively aid in the Iraq invasion. The exact opposite of his son.
Now, arguably Gore might not have been as good as Bush Senior, but if you look at presidential skill as a bell curve, then Bush Junior was clearly two standard deviations below the average, and it's unlikely that Gore would have also been that bad.
Just exactly how much legislation do you think they should have crammed in to those weeks?
A whole lot if they'd been united and competent.
"(I won't: I've already chosen third party)" .. Then you have chosen to support Crooked Hillary.
What, you think I would have preferred Trump over Hillary?
It's more important that third parties become viable than that "the wrong lizard doesn't win," and that's why I vote third party. Better yet if parties die altogether.
Here is the map in case anyone is interested. Incidentally, a lot of those polls are out of date (some from May), and a lot can change.
The election is starting to solidify between Trump and Clinton, and people realize you have to choose one of them; tribal instinct will kick in and they'll choose a side (I won't: I've already chosen third party). People will forget they ever supported Cruz, and find new reasons to support Trump ("oh, I realized he isn't actually Hitler, and look, he has an R, my preferred party").
I would too if I were him.
That's what I came to say. It's not "heartbreaking," it's completely illegal. It's so illegal in fact, I couldn't believe that she had actually said it, and read the article to make sure. Here's a transcript of the interview. I can't find anywhere she actually said it. As a lawyer, she knows to be more careful in what she says than that.
Do you really think she's so weak-willed that she allowed the Republicans to somehow cause her to lie, repeatedly, about what she did, when, how, and why she did it?
Martha Stewart went to jail for less than that.
The media doesn't matter in physics.
The stock price jumped 13%.......that's far beyond what the S&P did.
That's what everyone's worried about: whether they'll have a job next year.
Are you sure that's what people are worried about? People I know are wondering why we can't get a competent presidential candidate.
those $600 Dells are usually $800.
I don't know, the inspirion "Gamer Edition" is $650
Does a trackball give you enough dexterity for games and such?
the actual Inquisition (which still exists under another name) was actually fairly benign
Lies
So.....you just have the keyboard in your lap?
My fiancee encourages me to play on the TV PC instead of my personal PC so she can watch.
Totally unrelated question here......with that kind of setup, how do you comfortably handle a keyboard and mouse? Do you have a really high coffee table or something? A desk on your easy chair?
You don't even need Alienware. A $600 Dell with 1TB hard drive and NVidia GeForce 730 will run most games you want to play fairly nicely. For a lot of games you can get away with something even cheaper.
In the last two months, I've used three different programming languages, maybe more.
The disturbing thing about the question is that it seems to assume you can only program at work. If so, I feel sad for you......you've never caught the enjoyment of programming.