(November 7, 2016 at 5:34 pm)Rhythm Wrote:(November 7, 2016 at 5:28 pm)Aroura Wrote: Also, my husband doesn't vote at all, per his own convictions, so I'm not judging those who don't vote or who vote third party as bad people. But labeling both candidates as equally bad, or all that other hype you hear, shit sandwich and a punch in the face, etc, is just that, hype. None of the third party candidates are better (I've looked), and we have to live in the real world, not an imaginary one. The time to fight for change of the 2 party system isn't now. It's completely ineffective to do so. That fight needs to happened from the state up, not from the top down. Otherwise, it's just a lot of hot air that makes people feel better about themselves, but ultimately has no effect.
They;re not equally bad, they're both bad in their very own ways...like snowflakes made of feces....each individual, no two alike. Sure, they both, sometimes, get up to the same sorts of things...but even then, they give it their own flare. To be completely fair, Hillary has a bit of an advantage, she;s been dong it longer....but I thik if Trump manages to survive this election and somehow stay in the public sector he;s gonna try his best to be every bit her equal when it comes to that sort of thing...and his performance out of the gate has been positively stellar.
Maybe next time one of the two major parties will prop up a candidate that's even remotely electable upon the basis of something other than who the other guy is. I'll be here..I'm not going anywhere. I certainly hope they will, either of them. But...you know what they say, hope in one hand, roll up a shitty snowball in the other...
Is there anyone in the current political scene who you would consider (or would have considered) remotely electable?
