There’s nothing to own that I haven’t already owned - I think that we might be better off long-term with Hillary at the helm, but I’m not going to vote for her and help her get there.
And for the thousandth time, I’m not voting for a third party thinking they can win. That isn’t the purpose of my voting the way I plan on voting.
I’ve said it before - I love my country more than I hate Hillary. And I’ll vote accordingly.
And either Trump or Clinton will win, unfortunately, and all we can do is start planning on getting decent candidates from both parties in 2020, assuming both parties even exist. That work begins now, and a step in that direction is to make sure the existing parties know they’ve botched it royally for the American people this time around. If we don’t, we’ll get same the garbage in 2020.
The DEMS got “shellacked” in the last Mid-Terms…and the GOP does this serious “autopsy” of themselves after the last Presidential loss…then end up with a Candidate that does the COMPLETE OPPOSITE of all that they felt they needed to do to move forward…
Will this Presidential year open either Parities eyes this time…or do you think we can expect “business as usual”?
I think it will be business as usual unless they each receive some stuff medicine for their failings. If card-carrying members of each party stumble to the polls like mind-controlled zombies and pull the lever for these disastrous candidates, we won’t see any change.
I think the Democratic Party has the best chance of surviving this. I think there is a real chance the Republicans suffer the fate of of the Whigs.
Except their polls-plus and polls-only forcast still show Hillary winning. You are looking at the election today analysis… directly after the GOP convention.
Nate Silver’s current analysis still shows Hillary winning, as it has since he started forcasting the election.
As it was said above me (can’t be bothered to scroll up and direct quote) but Trump should be doing much better considering all of the bad things happening to Hillary lately. Yet he’s still the underdog. Terrible candidate to the core.
Wow, that didn’t take long. Man if I was a Bernie supporter, I would be pretty fucking pissed. For all the accusations that the Dems make about Republicans and voter disenfranchisement, this takes the not just the cake, but the whole bakery.
IDK, the GOP has been claiming for years they need to be more like the democrats to win presidential elections. They have put up a candidate that is most like a Democrat. I think instead it’s a matter of be careful what you wish for.
And yet when Republicans do what Dems suggest they do (which is nominate someone more modest), he is not a real Republican.
Dems call Trump a bigot and a racist for wanting a wall, but Hillary and Obama voted for the Border Fence in 2006 and we got nothing but crickets from the Democratic Party.
The ones I know will say it’s entirely about being anti-Hillary and protesting the anti-democratic process of this year’s nominating process (being fully exposed by the new email scandal).
It isn’t Bernie - although they like his authenticity - it is a genuine anti-Hillary movement within the party.
One I know was a huge Bernie fan but a retired banker - certainly no socialist.
Just so we’re clear: the available evidence suggests that Vladimir Putin’s government, whose primary aim vis-a-vis American geopolitical interests is to ensure their denial, is actively trying to help install Donald Trump as POTUS. Maybe other evidence comes out. Maybe this really turns out to have been a Romanian who can’t speak like one – and whose work happens to look a whole lot like that of Russian Intel. But for now, the evidence points in one direction (note: it was revealed more than a month ago that the Russians hacked the DNC in search of oppo research on DJT, so this would not be their first act of pro-Trump subterfuge).
So, think on the current alignment of ZEB and Putin’s political interests. Think on it, and tell me who you think is reading Trump wrong – the head of a state, or the guy who copies and pastes fabricated quotations out of the chain emails your weird uncle sends you. Think on it and tell me whether or not your worldview can be adapted to the collected mores of a constellation of Putin’s FSB, Wikileaks with its cabal of hacktivist neckbeards and Neo-Nazi holocaust deniers, far-Left Chomskyite Islamist-apologist stooges like Glenn Greenwald, and the cretinous American scum who delivered us candidate Donald Trump in all his steaming, catastrophic glory.
And why not, from Putin’s perspective? Why not, given all the evidence we’ve gathered here: the conspiracy theories, the nuclear triad, the babbling incoherence on trade (on everything, really), NATO (this alone must make old Vladimir salivate [and residents of Eastern Europe quake]), expanding the list of nuclear weapons states, defaulting on the debt, diplomatic disengagement from Muslim countries and the subsequent decimation of the foundation on which global counterterrorism is predicated, “Article XII” of the Constitution. Why would Putin not want to install at the helm of his country’s great rival (and, for now, great superior) a buffoon whose explicitly stated policy proposals entail the destruction of American hegemony and the inversion of the geopolitical world order. Why not?
I should have used the word ‘moderate’ instead of modest now that I look back at my post. I think it depends the issue. Some issues he is Conservative and others he is Liberal. I think most people are that way.
I make my own views, the media doesn’t it do it for me.
There’s already open evidence the Mexican government is meddling in the US election. The Mexican Consulates In the US are holding citizenship clinics so Immigrants Can Vote against Trump
Gee maybe focus on that over conspiracies of Russian/Putin involvement:
Fair enough, and I agree that people make their own views.
I think the issues the Trump has built his campaign around are all far-right views, except for trade. Some of the other issues where he is more Liberal are not central to his messaging.
To me, there is nothing moderate about Trump. From what I’ve seen, he views the world is black and white, winners/losers, you’re either the greatest or a loser.
As you’ve stated, and I agree with, most people are neither all or nothing. There is grey area and common ground that can be reached.
Exhibit A: Free workshops in naturalization at Mexican consulates
vs.
Russian intelligence agencies engaged in cyber warfare with American electoral sovereignty
And Exhibit B: Mexican interests
vs.
Russian interests.
Now don’t get me wrong: I don’t want Mexico meddling in US elections in even the lightest little way, and I don’t have any particular desire to see the regional/geopolitical interests of Mexico carried to their completion. But to call the above exhibition a comparison of nonidentical phenomena would be to understate the matter catastrophically.
To suggest that an irruption of Kremlin FSB tradecraft into an American election is kind of like free naturalization workshops at Mexican consulates would be to lie like a shit-covered rug.
To mistake Mexico for a Russia-level threat to the world order would be to accept moral and political cretinism as a personal philosophy.
To call your nonsensical, whataboutist non-response to my post a counter-argument would be to inflate your ability to think, argue, and persuade by several orders of magnitude.
As for your use of the term “conspiracies”: unlike the conspiracy theories pushed by the alt-right muppet you and other MRA/ignoramus/“racial realist” losers are trying to install as CIC, this is supported by the best and most specific evidence available.
As I said, maybe that evidence changes. Maybe it gets swept under the rug for diplomatic reasons. But it’s there as of now, and this has already happened once anyway. How does it feel, having been duped so totally by someone so stupid?
