2016 US Presidential Election Thread - VII

[BigMacPhisto]

Originally Posted by Mack_Again

this argument is so futile because we can't get into Hillary's head.

Obviously. We will have our answers when she's likely elected President in a few months.

Funny enough, unless she really does want to "compromise" and sell out the American people with the Republicans, she's probably going to actually present herself as a leftist leader taking strong stands against these morons. After all, it's where Obama basically ended up after five years of actually attempting to work with the other side and getting nowhere. He'd have been better off drawing a line in the sand rather than pissing off the far left by trying to get Republican votes on legislation that would never materialize.

I mean, what does Clinton really have to gain by working with Republicans on anything other than budget negotiations and procedural stuff? Yet I really feel she wants the history books to list off her "accomplishments" and, sadly, the only way to pass significant legislation in her term(s) will be to go along with the neanderthal R-my.

Lord knows where the Democratic party will end up going as they've continually moved to the far left (especially over the last ten years)...yet a lot of their members they had no problem going along with Bill Clinton on legislation that was anathema to what they stood for...time will tell.

[BVS]

Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto

That was to irritate the Clintonistas in here. Glad it worked.

I'm neither, but nice try.

You ARE the stereotype, and you know what, it's a shame. Most in here have expressed that we agree with many of Bernie's views, you could have easily come in here and tried to win over hearts, but the stereotype ends up being a cancer to revolution. Ironically it may end up being his supporters that kill his chances.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[BigMacPhisto]

His supporters have only helped. Most of the ones turned off by it are turned off by the mere fact that someone is challenging Clinton. End of.


In lighter, funnier news:

Shock poll: Clinton neck-and-neck with Trump in deep-red Mississippi | TheHill

[BigMacPhisto]

Originally Posted by BVS

You ARE the stereotype, and you know what, it's a shame.

Stereotype of what, exactly? I said nothing personal about Clinton or her supporters in this thread, just merely stated my opinions. I guess that translates into a tone issue which seems to be a problem for anybody supporting Sanders, I guess.

I'm certainly not holding anybody else's feet to the fire and acting condescending as hell like some people are in this thread.

And BVS, cut the crap, we all know which box you're going to check off. This thread is loaded with people that are trying to pretend like they're objective and open-minded and yet will always come back to the same conclusion that Clinton is the correct choice. It's patronizing and incredibly transparent.

[VintagePunk]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

yeah, see, this is exactly what's wrong with our politics. ossification and an unreasonable demand for purity used to be only for those on the right.

as a homosexual (i love saying that), i totally understood that Obama couldn't take a pro-SSM position because, shock, it would have, at the time, meant that he would be in danger of losing votes that he needed to win the election. i knew, instinctively, that he was pro-SSM, and would one day be pro-SSM, and that if i were patient, and voted for the right people, and continued to make the argument, and if he continued to make incremental change (like DADT), that eventually the time would come. i'm not a child, so i didn't demand to be catered to or that my own individual concerns were so important that they were more important than other concerns, nor do i think that my vote is something rare and precious that must be courted and won, like some maiden's virginity. politics is a zero sum game, and it's a long game, and it's more important to assemble a coalition and run a national party that works together for achievable common goals than to be so sure of our rightness and so intolerant of other viewpoints and ways of life and the fact that, gosh, change *is* hard for some people, that we sacrifice the good for our own self-absorbed ideas of perfection.

Very well said. I have absolutely no doubt that he was pro-SSM well before '08, but it wasn't politically expedient for him to come clean on it, at the time. He's an intellectual, liberal lawyer, for christ's sake, I'm not sure of a hetero stereotype that would be more pro-SSM.

Reading his bios, I also suspected, but was less sure, that he was probably an atheist, or at the very least, agnostic, at least for a time, and that he began attending church in Chicago for the sense of community and connections it offered, rather than for spiritual reasons. I wouldn't be surprised if that hasn't changed and he's more of a secular believer now, but that was the sense I got from his discussion of that time period.

[DaveC]

Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto

His supporters have only helped. Most of the ones turned off by it are turned off by the mere fact that someone is challenging Clinton. End of.

[LuckyNumber7]

Bernarddddddd Sumnerssssss

[BVS]

Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto

Stereotype of what, exactly? I said nothing personal about Clinton or her supporters in this thread, just merely stated my opinions. I guess that translates into a tone issue which seems to be a problem for anybody supporting Sanders, I guess.



I'm certainly not holding anybody else's feet to the fire and acting condescending as hell like some people are in this thread.



And BVS, cut the crap, we all know which box you're going to check off. This thread is loaded with people that are trying to pretend like they're objective and open-minded and yet will always come back to the same conclusion that Clinton is the correct choice. It's patronizing and incredibly transparent.

You've accused women and black people of blindly voting, you've pretended to read minds, and now you're accusing myself and others of not being genuine. But no, never condescending

Bang up job helping your man out


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[PhilsFan]

Originally Posted by BigMacPhisto

His supporters have only helped. Most of the ones turned off by it are turned off by the mere fact that someone is challenging Clinton. End of.

I've been challenging Clinton for months without everyone here thinking I'm a stereotype. I think the reason is because there is a difference in how I am approaching this and how you are approaching this.

I don't think people here are being unfair. I think the views may be skewed for everyone based on the groups of people they interact with on social media, which are hard to adjust for. That's all I've really said beyond weighing the actual issues.

[Oregoropa]

My wet dream is for a pox to befall both establishment houses. We all complain about having a 2 party system why not have 4 candidates in a battle Royale for 270

Hillary Clinton - Democrat Party

Bernie Sanders - Democratic-Socialist Party

Paul Ryan - Republican Party

Donald Trump - America First Party

The Great Schism of 2016 will be talked about in history books for years to come.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[LuckyNumber7]

At least you admit it's a wet dream.

[BVS]

Originally Posted by Oregoropa

My wet dream is for a pox to befall both establishment houses. We all complain about having a 2 party system why not have 4 candidates in a battle Royale for 270

Hillary Clinton - Democrat Party

Bernie Sanders - Democratic-Socialist Party

Paul Ryan - Republican Party

Donald Trump - America First Party

The Great Schism of 2016 will be talked about in history books for years to come.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

This is the weirdest wet dream I've ever heard of If it's a wet dream at least throw in ONE good candidate.

btw, America First Party, that's pretty funny


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[Diemen]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

yeah, see, this is exactly what's wrong with our politics. ossification and an unreasonable demand for purity used to be only for those on the right.



as a homosexual (i love saying that), i totally understood that Obama couldn't take a pro-SSM position because, shock, it would have, at the time, meant that he would be in danger of losing votes that he needed to win the election. i knew, instinctively, that he was pro-SSM, and would one day be pro-SSM, and that if i were patient, and voted for the right people, and continued to make the argument, and if he continued to make incremental change (like DADT), that eventually the time would come. i'm not a child, so i didn't demand to be catered to or that my own individual concerns were so important that they were more important than other concerns, nor do i think that my vote is something rare and precious that must be courted and won, like some maiden's virginity. politics is a zero sum game, and it's a long game, and it's more important to assemble a coalition and run a national party that works together for achievable common goals than to be so sure of our rightness and so intolerant of other viewpoints and ways of life and the fact that, gosh, change *is* hard for some people, that we sacrifice the good for our own self-absorbed ideas of perfection.

[Mack_Again]

Originally Posted by Oregoropa

My wet dream is for a pox to befall both establishment houses. We all complain about having a 2 party system why not have 4 candidates in a battle Royale for 270

Hillary Clinton - Democrat Party

Bernie Sanders - Democratic-Socialist Party

Paul Ryan - Republican Party

Donald Trump - America First Party

The Great Schism of 2016 will be talked about in history books for years to come.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

in a way, it indirectly achieved everyone's goals; Bernie has been saying the need of 3rd party movement in US for years (at least when he was more independent in the 80s). Donald just wants to be a leader, I'm sure. so....i may not be against this if this wet dream of yours actually happens.

[Mack_Again]

and sometimes whenever I see (or am engaging in) arguments here, i have no idea whether I'm attacking someone as a person or I'm arguing about their ideas.


same as presidential candidate; we often confuse cult of personality and liking candidates because of their policies and positions. This personally happens to me, honestly; sometimes I personally catching myself semi-worshipping Bernie as someone who is finally very proud of liberal agenda. or his "purity" or whatever you guys call. But I would say this; I want the leader of the free world to stand for something rather than adjusting according to what's popular. could be because I want security in my life and I have trust issues.

Also, Bernie is against being dependent on nuclear power as "clean energy" and I have to agree him on that considering the disaster happened to my country.

[Hewson]

Originally Posted by PhilsFan

Also, Bill Clinton had a very bad day in Philadelphia.

"Santa Claus, Michael Irvin and Bill Clinton walk into Geno's Steaks..."

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Originally Posted by BVS

Tribute bands are the enemy of art, and compromise is the tribute band of politics.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Originally Posted by Hollow Island

The problem with people who worship the idea of compromise is that they fail to realize that there are some things that cannot be compromised on.

This is the root cause for all war and political strife in the world; the inability to compromise. Well done.

[Headache in a Suitcase]

Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7

https://www.facebook.com/cnn/videos/10154665093861509/

Proof that Hillary Clinton isn't a real New Yorker.

To be fair, this happens to me at least twice a week... because the MTA is the single worst organization in the western world.

I'm a little more disturbed by Bernie thinking that you still need a token to ride the subway...

[Kieran McConville]

The modern conservative movement, now in its degenerate phase, offers an object lesson in what absolute lack of compromise gets you: power. Eventually, ruin, if your ideas are stupid and evil, but in the meantime, power.

Compromise, sure, but bring something to the table, other than 'please, don't hurt me'.