Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Saturday September 24 2016, @11:02AM   Printer-friendly
from the riddle-me-this-batman dept.

The New York Times has an article asking readers to select (from their list) what questions they'd like to ask the 2016 presidential candidates.

It's clear that both candidates haven't given specific answers to questions about issues which directly affect us. What questions would Soylentils ask the candidates (your choices, not mine as in the NYT article) to identify their positions on issues which matter to you?

Some of the questions I'd like to see answered are:
How would you work with a Congress which isn't aligned with the goals of your administration to actually get something accomplished?
Does money equal speech? If so/not so, why and how?
How will you rein in our intelligence agencies that are unconstitutionally spying on U.S. citizens?
What specific steps would you take (if any) to combat anthropogenic climate change?
Would you allow non-American foods to be cooked in the White House kitchen? If not, what steps will you take to reduce the obesity problem that will inevitably ensue?

What about the rest of you? What questions would you like to see answered by the candidates?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Saturday September 24 2016, @11:58PM

    by Anal Pumpernickel (776) on Saturday September 24 2016, @11:58PM (#406080)

    Why? If your main concern is nation building, I can see why it would be all-important to know about cities like Aleppo in third-world shitholes. Johnson seems more concerned with problems in the US, so this Jeopardy! trivia nonsense matters much less.

    And if something like this disqualifies a candidate, countless other people who have actually been presidents would have been disqualified as well.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by mcgrew on Sunday September 25 2016, @04:03PM

    by mcgrew (701) <publish@mcgrewbooks.com> on Sunday September 25 2016, @04:03PM (#406291) Homepage Journal

    It shows an appalling lack of knowledge of current events. And yes, many of history's bad presidents were as ignorant.

    --
    mcgrewbooks.com mcgrew.info nooze.org
    • (Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Wednesday September 28 2016, @11:05PM

      by Anal Pumpernickel (776) on Wednesday September 28 2016, @11:05PM (#407661)

      I think it's more important that a candidate stops going to war with other countries unnecessarily. I don't really care that he didn't know the name of some third world hellhole.

      If we're talking about candidates being disqualified, maybe advocating the overthrow of our constitutional form of government (as Clinton and Trump do when they advocate for mass surveillance and other unconstitutional policies) should be something that disqualifies a candidate, and it's astronomically more important as well.

      And yes, many of history's bad presidents were as ignorant.

      I can't think of a single good president. The only way a president could be good is by respecting people's liberties, which none of them did or do.