Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[mainiac]

Oh man, mocking an accusation you dont consider legitimate.  Can't think of anyone who has done that recently, on this forum. (that was sarcasm btw).

[Loud Whispers]

Politics should be tribal, we all got the primal D(NA)

[nullBolt]

Oh man, mocking an accusation you dont consider legitimate.  Can't think of anyone who has done that recently, on this forum. (that was sarcasm btw).

Funny how she does it any time someone asks her about one of the many, many, many scandals she's been in.

I'm sure they're all not legitimate questions. All of them.

Including the ones about how she's wiped her servers to hide all her emails when they should have all been provided to the FBI.

But, hey, it's not like Hillary Clinton is lying about supporting gay rights or anything.

[Frumple]

Hey, what can you do? Clinton made Voltaire's Prayer, and God granted it. Blame the GOP or God.

[Bauglir]

You'd vote for someone who brought up 9/11 and being a woman as the reason why campaign contributions wouldn't effect her.

Dude, politics shouldn't be tribal like that.

but it is like that

if the republican field were capable of summoning up somebody better than clinton, i'd consider voting for that person, but their current strategic direction suggests that they will never surmount even that mediocre bar

and if you want to talk tribalism, you will never convince me not to vote for somebody solely on their lack of merits - tell me what they plan to actually do that i hate, instead of why they're a bad person, and tell me why the alternatives are better

[nullBolt]

You'd vote for someone who brought up 9/11 and being a woman as the reason why campaign contributions wouldn't effect her.

Dude, politics shouldn't be tribal like that.

but it is like that

if the republican field were capable of summoning up somebody better than clinton, i'd consider voting for that person, but their current strategic direction suggests that they will never surmount even that mediocre bar

and if you want to talk tribalism, you will never convince me not to vote for somebody solely on their lack of merits - tell me what they plan to actually do that i hate, instead of why they're a bad person, and tell me why the alternatives are better

Clinton is somehow a combination of incompetent, dishonest and corrupt.

There's no way to tell what she's going to do because she's just going to do whatever her corporate overlords want her to do. I mean, Jesus, how much money has she actually got off Goldman Sachs now?

[Bauglir]

so what you're telling me is, you can't think of any particular accusations, so you're going to stick with attacking her character

also, "incompetent" is clearly false, given her professional and political history

and your other two hardly distinguish her from the competition, so once again, i ask you - why should i vote for somebody else, given that i expect her to win the primary even if i do caucus for sanders?

[nullBolt]

so what you're telling me is, you can't think of any particular accusations, so you're going to stick with attacking her character

also, "incompetent" is clearly false, given her professional and political history

and your other two hardly distinguish her from the competition, so once again, i ask you - why should i vote for somebody else, given that i expect her to win the primary even if i do caucus for sanders?

So, essentially, her flip-flopping on gay rights, her copious amounts of campaign contributions from the uber rich, her lying about her past history on gay rights etc etc aren't enough?

Go watch any video on her fucking scandals, man. Don't worry, though, I bet there won't be any more scandals after she gets into office!

It's not my country but if you actually consider voting in one of the most corrupt officials possible in because you think their policies might be positive (what even are her policies? can you even tell me?) then there is something very, very wrong with your system.

[Dorsidwarf]

You'd vote for someone who brought up 9/11 and being a woman as the reason why campaign contributions wouldn't effect her.

Dude, politics shouldn't be tribal like that.

but it is like that

if the republican field were capable of summoning up somebody better than clinton, i'd consider voting for that person, but their current strategic direction suggests that they will never surmount even that mediocre bar

and if you want to talk tribalism, you will never convince me not to vote for somebody solely on their lack of merits - tell me what they plan to actually do that i hate, instead of why they're a bad person, and tell me why the alternatives are better

Clinton is somehow a combination of incompetent, dishonest and corrupt.

There's no way to tell what she's going to do because she's just going to do whatever her corporate overlords want her to do. I mean, Jesus, how much money has she actually got off Goldman Sachs now?

And yet, somehow, it's still preferable to doing what the evil hair-pixie sitting on Trump's head wants him to do.

Plus, Trump fits all those critera, better, and has "racist", "unpleasant", and "liable to start some serious wars" on top.

[Loud Whispers]

If we disqualify all US politicians for being dishonest we disqualify all US politicians

It goes with the job field of trying to satisfy everyone, with people who have self-contradictory beliefs

Doesn't mean they can't do a good job, advertising someone's shit when everyone's shit isn't much more shit than normal

[Frumple]

Null, if you think Clinton is one of the most corrupt politicians possible, you really don't live in the US. As maniac (and others) has noted repeatedly, if clinton's "scandals" are the worst they can (try to) pin on her, she's basically spotless insofar as american politicians go.

[nullBolt]

If we disqualify all US politicians for being dishonest we disqualify all US politicians

It goes with the job field of trying to satisfy everyone, with people who have self-contradictory beliefs

Doesn't mean they can't do a good job, advertising someone's shit when everyone's shit isn't much more shit than normal

It's the blatant dishonesty with Hillary that gets me.

Like "Fuck the public, they're so dumb they won't even notice when I laugh off this very important question."

Null, if you think Clinton is one of the most corrupt politicians possible, you really don't live in the US. As maniac (and others) has noted repeatedly, if clinton's "scandals" are the worst they can (try to) pin on her, she's basically spotless insofar as american politicians go.

We're not talking backwater backroom politician here, though. We're talking presidential candidate. The fact that there's the possibility of a presidential candidate who has been involved in 20+ scandals (all of which she was a central figure in) is unreal.

[Rolan7]

And yet, somehow, it's still preferable to doing what the evil hair-pixie sitting on Trump's head wants him to do.

Plus, Trump fits all those critera, better, and has "racist", "unpleasant", and "liable to start some serious wars" on top.

This.  It isn't "tribal", it's that both choices would be awful and we have to chose the one that sucks least.  We don't get to vote for anyone, we get to vote against someone.  The 2-party system is working perfectly, but not for us.

Unless the primaries go well, that is.  But on the republican side, only Rand Paul was evenly remotely "moderate", and mostly in the sense of not wanting the government to meddle in morality.  And foreign policy, to some extent.  I would have strongly considered voting for him, but *of course* he's not an option.

[nullBolt]

Well, I guess it's not like it matters. Trump seems highly likely to win the election if it comes down to him vs Clinton.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Well, I guess it's not like it matters. Trump seems highly likely to win the election if it comes down to him vs Clinton.

I know I'll be voting for him if it comes to that. The localize campaign slogan will be "Get What You Deserve".