The US Election 2016, Part IX

[Nonek]

 

Pidesco, Bruce, are your seriously asking that question? Do you read nothing that is posted here? Do you ignore the news about her? Nine election discussion threads, some 5k posts, hundreds of linked articles and hours of linked video and you still do not understand why Hillary Clinton is so fatally flawed as a candidate for the highest office in our Country? Bruce I already know you ignore any news story or fact you disagree with. You are the flip side of the same coin as the people you complain about.

 

I'm specifically asking what has she verifiably done that is worse than the Iran-Contra scandal, or the Iraq invasion, or the bombing of Yugoslavia.

 

 

I'm quite sure that in each of these instances there was strong advice given to the president for yay or nay decisions, and then they made an informed decision. To disregard any advice on security, and help a nations enemies would not be advised by anyone, and this is before she has entered office and shouldered the additional responsibility of that post. These seem like red flags to me at least that Mrs Clinton is an unsuitable candidate along with many other flaws, and a lack of basic charisma of course.

 

Arguing that she's just as corrupt/incompetent as everyone else isn't a defense, it's an excuse, the electorate deserve better and that's why I asked what their response is to this, and am wondering whether they are seeking a better way and candidates.

[Malcador]

 

 

Big deal. Demos back heterosexual conversion therapy en masse.

I shudder to think what THAT would be like!

Bioware games.

[redneckdevil]

 

 

 

I'd be interested to know what US posters think the farcical nature of these elections, and the utter unsuitability of either candidate is doing to the long term nature of their countries politics? Do you think that it will reinvigorate interest in the electorate, and spur them to take more of an interest in their governance, or conversely do you think that the unappealing nature of both candidates and campaigns will lead to a generation washing their hands of the whole tarnished business?

Well it's a whole cluster **** TBH. It's driving home to a lot of people that the media is not un-biased and depending on ur party is which news station to watch. It's also a election where 2 people are SOOO bad that people are voting to make sure the other one doesn't win, not that they actually think theirs is a good candidate. The ones who DO think theirs is an actual good candidate for the most part is being selective in what they hear and agree/disagree (aka meaning "it doesn't matter to me that such and such has done this bc the other has done so much worse!" or "what they doing isn't so bad or it's just lies even when it's there in their face"). This whole election has been dirty from both sides and each side doesn't wanna admit that theirs is dirty bc then they'd be "wrong" and not a "winner".

Then people gonna realize that their votes don't actually count and that it's up to the electoral college who wins, not the voters.

 

Also this is basically our national anthem when it's election time.

Red...at least we can still get stoned

 

That never lets us down

Damn right lol

[Meshugger]

A nice, long, and informative article describing populism in the past and in the current day, written by someone not being a Trump supporter: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/11/02/the-populist-explosion-new-book-explains-rise-of-trump-sanders-and-the-populist-future/

[Pidesco]

 

 

Pidesco, Bruce, are your seriously asking that question? Do you read nothing that is posted here? Do you ignore the news about her? Nine election discussion threads, some 5k posts, hundreds of linked articles and hours of linked video and you still do not understand why Hillary Clinton is so fatally flawed as a candidate for the highest office in our Country? Bruce I already know you ignore any news story or fact you disagree with. You are the flip side of the same coin as the people you complain about.

 

I'm specifically asking what has she verifiably done that is worse than the Iran-Contra scandal, or the Iraq invasion, or the bombing of Yugoslavia.

 

 

I'm quite sure that in each of these instances there was strong advice given to the president for yay or nay decisions, and then they made an informed decision. To disregard any advice on security, and help a nations enemies would not be advised by anyone, and this is before she has entered office and shouldered the additional responsibility of that post. These seem like red flags to me at least that Mrs Clinton is an unsuitable candidate along with many other flaws, and a lack of basic charisma of course.

 

Arguing that she's just as corrupt/incompetent as everyone else isn't a defense, it's an excuse, the electorate deserve better and that's why I asked what their response is to this, and am wondering whether they are seeking a better way and candidates.

 

 

 

I'm not saying she is like everyone else therefore she is okay. I'm saying she is like everyone else beforetherefore she is massively better than a screaming incoherent dumpster fire. My beef is specifically with Americans. More specifically with Americans that fall along party lines or Americans that say Trump and Clinton are the same.

 

Americans that, in any other election drew massive distinctions between candidates that were functionally the same or really similar, from Reagan to Mondale to Clinton, to whoever. Now, for the first time in decades, you have a candidate that is demonstrably, verifiably worse than the other in a way that is unprecedented in the lifetimes of everyone voting, and everyone suddenly remembers their principles and say they are all the same, when they couldn't be more different.

 

 

P.S.: This isn't any different anywhere else, I think. On the Portuguese Internet you have comment screaming matches between supporters of the two center parties (right and left), when the parties are peas of the same corrupt pod, and do more or less the same when they are in power.

[Nonek]

Well if its a case of going with the best of a bad bunch then why support Clinton at all, Johnson is the clear winner in that race and deserves your vote.

 

Edit: It's also quite funny to see Trump the clown demonised so vociferously when we all know that politicians are doing business with such people, representing their interests and associating with far worse individuals. Who is worse in that scenario? I'd say it's extremely ambiguous.

Edited November 3, 2016 by Nonek

[Pidesco]

Johnson seems like an incompetent fool to me, but that's just me. He suffers from the same problem as Clinton, in a way: the only positive thing about him is that he isn't Trump or Clinton. A bit of hyperbole, but not that much.

[Nonek]

And yet Mr Johnson has not demonstrably and verifiably disregarded a sensible security policy while in office and leaked iinformation to his nations enemies, Mrs Clinnton has. Going by your own logic supporting him, regardless of personal feelings, is the logical choice as the best of a bad bunch.

[Pidesco]

Except, of course, that he is not really in the running.

[Nonek]

Evasion, ah well.

 

Edit: I'd still like to hear from other Americans whether this election has changed their opinion on the whole process.

Edited November 3, 2016 by Nonek

[Chippy]

How did I shoot myself in the foot?

 

 

 

Because you make this argument (I think) that a logical person sees Alex Jones talking about human>animal splicing by reptillian overlords as just as ridiculous as CNN making an excuse for Hillary Clinton not knowing that 'C' meant classified. That we should see the facts of Alex Jones reporting that the president of Haiti accuses the Clinton foundation of attempting to bribe him, and defrauding the people of Haiti as just as valid as CNN reporting on the 'hot mic'of Trump saying he can grab a woman by the _____

 

So you make the case that people have lost the ability to present and acknowledge facts, that views are discredited that don't align with a persons narrative, that facts should be based on profession/life experience.

 

Then you pivot, and say that Hillary Clinton (is perfectly suited for the role) or just as bad as other presidents, and on her worse day/scandal is leagues above Trump???. 

Do you work for the FBI? Have a way of sifting the facts that support that opinion from those that don't? The real wikileaks and emails that haven't been planted by the Russians?.

 

You seem to be so far to the left, that it doesn't occur to you that people may not see Trump as worse than any other candidate in lifetimes of voting - in fact, take that opinion to any migrants that have come to America from Haiti to vote and see what they think of it.

Edited November 3, 2016 by Chippy

[Longknife]

Yo maybe Clinton's health concerns are brain damage and she thought 'C' meant "Clinton" and that's it's her property to do whatever she wants with.

I mean we dunno man. She might just be special. And isn't that what America needs right now?? The first special ed woman president??

[Wrath of Dagon]

Evasion, ah well.

 

Edit: I'd still like to hear from other Americans whether this election has changed their opinion on the whole process.

Yes, I didn't realize just how corrupt and broken our two party system is until this election. Not so much Trump vs Clinton but that every incumbent Republican congressman in Texas won their primary despite massive voter anger.

[Meshugger]

Yo maybe Clinton's health concerns are brain damage and she thought 'C' meant "Clinton" and that's it's her property to do whatever she wants with.

 

I mean we dunno man. She might just be special. And isn't that what America needs right now?? The first special ed woman president??

 

Don't worry, we will finally know the extent of her medical condition when she has to use it in order to avoid going to jail.

[Leferd]

Had a rough day at work yesterday. Got called to the floor by the suit in the corner office over an ad-hoc field decision I had to make with my lead's concurrence from the day before. We stood by our decision and that we were in the right and made the correct call. Opinions differ. Meh.

 

Driving home, I decided to do my civic duty and stopped to vote before heading back. Chatted with the poll workers and my fellow citizens in the community. Everyone was super friendly --good people --and on the up and up. Saw no signs of fraud or voter intimidation. Walked out with an I VOTED EARLY American flag sticker and left in a good mood with a smile on my face.

 

The Republic is working.

[HoonDing]

[Volourn]

"An example in these very threads is the whole "Clinton has laughed at a rape victim" statement, which is easy to debunk, and has been debunked here, but that doesn't everyone and their mother of rolling out that utterly baseless statement again and again."

 

Truth hurts, huh? The fact is she laughed at 12 year old rape victim, blame the girl for the sexual assault against her because IN HILLARY CLINTOJN'S OWN WORDS: 'She laughed to hang out with older men', and bragged about how she got someone  who she believes is guilty off. How is that in any way defenseible?

 

Alkso, I love how the Demos continue to use scare tatcis with their fearmongering. How low and desperate can you be by claiming your opponent will remake FO in the real world.. That is EVIL and INSANE.

[Pidesco]

"An example in these very threads is the whole "Clinton has laughed at a rape victim" statement, which is easy to debunk, and has been debunked here, but that doesn't everyone and their mother of rolling out that utterly baseless statement again and again."

 

Truth hurts, huh? The fact is she laughed at 12 year old rape victim, blame the girl for the sexual assault against her because IN HILLARY CLINTOJN'S OWN WORDS: 'She laughed to hang out with older men', and bragged about how she got someone  who she believes is guilty off. How is that in any way defenseible?

 

Alkso, I love how the Demos continue to use scare tatcis with their fearmongering. How low and desperate can you be by claiming your opponent will remake FO in the real world.. That is EVIL and INSANE.

 

She didn't do any of that.

[Volourn]

Yeah, she did. People try to spin the recording but EPIC FAIL when they do.

 

FACT: She defended a rapist.

 

FACT: She used the good 'old efense that the young girl 'asked for it' because she hung out with older men and did drugs.

 

FACT: She laughed about it all afterwards cuase she thinks it is HILARIOUS to get a guilty man off by getting the charges down to nothing.

 

FACT:l She damaged that yioung girl so badly that now as a grown woman she wants a man like Trump in the WH because of the evilness of Hillary.

 

PERIOD.

 

 

You should take Hillary's advice: Always believe the victim. Whya re you victim shaming?

[Chippy]

Yo maybe Clinton's health concerns are brain damage and she thought 'C' meant "Clinton" and that's it's her property to do whatever she wants with.

 

I mean we dunno man. She might just be special. And isn't that what America needs right now?? The first special ed woman president??

 

Yeah, if she wins and the world doesn't get nuked all over, and going by what certain other countries are doing in Europe - I wouldn't be suprised if the next presidential candidate her and Obama nominate is this guy: Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

I mean, they'll probably be running out of protected groups to shame people into voting for at that point.

[Zoraptor]

The tendency there is today to discredit any media that doesn't agree with one's views is quite worrying. Basically, the standard position seems to be "why have facts when I have something in writing that agrees with me?". For instance, the need to do something about climate change is being sold down the river, in part due to this mentality.

 

If no one is to be trusted or respected, facts become relative, and Breitbart holds the same level of truthiness as Snopes, regardless of citations or empirical data provided.

 

An example in these very threads is the whole "Clinton has laughed at a rape victim" statement, which is easy to debunk, and has been debunked here, but that doesn't stop everyone and their mother of rolling out that utterly baseless statement again and again.

 

Boo's favourite Youtube video- she laughs at Gaddafi getting raped to death with a bayonet. Why does Mrs Clinton find sexual violence so amusing etc etc?

 

Unfortunately the worst enemies of traditional information sources with regards to 'truthiness' is themselves. Some people will always gravitate towards sources that reinforce their own view and always will; but it's clear that even those who don't do that regard traditional media with scepticism nowadays. People don't expect Breitbart to be 'honest', they do- did- expect that from CNN, WP, NYT, BBC etc. Every time they do thinly disguised puff pieces, thinly disguised hit pieces or give incorrect facts they lose the trust of a few more people. Unlike ye olden times it's now very easy to find out when they are doing so as well and there is an endless supply of alternatives to pick from.

 

Don't get me wrong, i think Clinton is horrible, just not any more horrible than, say, Reagan, who I've seen described in the same breath as Lincoln. I mean you have an entire country serially electing political ratbastards for office, at every level of government for literally decades, suddenly there comes one ratbastard that apparently is just too much, for no apparent reason.

 

It's not for no reason, and the correct point of comparison for Reagan should really be 1980 candidate Reagan not 1989 Reagan, and 2000 candidate GWB, not 2009 GWB. We're looking at candidate HRClinton, not President HRClinton after all. There are multiple reasons for why she's viewed so poorly in comparison, each of which might be small by itself but they all add up.

 

(1) Neither Reagan or GWB had any significant scandal associated with them prior to being elected. Hillary does, multiple ones, and some aren't that minor. Any single one would not be significant but it's the sum that is significant.

(2) There wasn't a tiredness for political dynasties then; that there is now is largely thanks to GWB but there wasn't prior to his election.

(3) Elements of Bill's presidency genuinely stank and Hillary gets tarred by association. Pardoning Mark Rich; and while Kenneth Starr was a puritanical git Bill should never have got involved with a subordinate/ intern as that's just inherently- and obviously- dodgy.

(4) Neither Reagan nor Bush had been in federal government prior to being elected.

(5) Hillary has, effectively, been running for president for more than 8 years. Related to (4), some people have just got sick of her and relate to the newspaper article she's had tons of time and opportunity to get people to distrust her.

(6) Reagan and Bush had a folksy likeability that made them appear genuine. I don't think even Hilalry's greatest supporters would say she has a 'folksy likeability'.

(7) Media propagation. Internet, media 2.0 etc is far more prevalent than when Bush was elected, let alone Reagan, so things aren't seen through the prism of mainstream media.

 

The US system is almost uniquely (well, outside of quasi 'democratic' processes like in Syria/ Iran where you have 'genuine' democracy, just with hand picked candidates picked by one entity instead of two) set up to make sure that either a red or blue ratbastard is up for election each time, in this case they've just managed to get two unlikeable ratbastards.

[Volourn]

") Elements of Bill's presidency genuinely stank and Hillary gets tarred by association."

 

Considering her big brag include her 30 years of experience and that she was the first First Lady to be REALLY hands on. she most cetrianly needs to be tagged along with Bill - both good and bad. No doubt she had his ear.

[Meshugger]

What

 

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/45131

[Chippy]

What

 

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/45131

Probably need to get the haz mat suits out to protect them from STD's so they can drag them back to sex addiction rehab after they relapsed.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3890444/Anthony-Weiner-checked-facility-SEX-ADDICTION-treatment-sexting-relationship-15-year-old-girl-triggered-FBI-investigation-wife-Huma-Abedin-Hillary-Clinton.html

[Malcador]

Yeah. Daily Mail..