Posts: 8661
Threads: 118
Joined: May 7, 2011
Reputation:
57
RE: The positive case for voting Hillary Clinton for president.
November 5, 2016 at 3:25 pm
(November 5, 2016 at 2:48 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Hillary doesn't have a stellar record on civil rights...and think about how shitty all the other things, we're not thinking about..must have been, to tank her ratings on that built up by her constant, very public and very successful devotion to minorities, women, and children?
Her stance on special interests isn't enough to outweigh the fact that she has been an enemy of the general interest, at a federal level, the entire time. Let that sink in. People think she;s going to support civil liberties..she's not, she's going to say what you want to hear, and then nullify what she's said at the general level, where you're not looking...which is what she's -always- done. That's how she maintains her unearned "centrist" cred. Giving a useful special interest "more rights" within a reduced overall bubble of "all rights" is -not- being a defender or promoter of civil rights. It's the exploitation of civil rights....to destroy them. I'm not talking about Hillary, didn't you read the post? This isn't about how the president personally thinks, but about how they will shape the SCOTUS for the next generation. I don't care if Hillary personally calls people the N word and thinks Mexicans are rapists, as long as shee finds it politically positive for her voter base to appoint a socially liberal or at least moderate judge, then THAT is what matters.
Honestly, the same goes for Trump. His personal opinions matter less than what actions he will take. In this case he's shown he will pander to his base and appoint/ nominate a socially conservative judge. if I thought he'd appoint even a moderate one, I wouldn't be half as worried about the prospect of his presidency.
Stupid autocorrect, I need to fix my original post.
Posts: 66304
Threads: 140
Joined: June 28, 2011
Reputation:
160
RE: The positive case for voting Hillary Clinton for president.
November 5, 2016 at 3:31 pm
(This post was last modified: November 5, 2016 at 3:40 pm by The Grand Nudger.)
You're talking about the things that hillary said. That she -wants- to put in judge x. Why you expect her to do something other than she;s always done, and negotiate that down to the "center" (which, in american parlance, is actually the center right), when the time comes to get work done..is beyond me. Why it would matter if she -did- manage to do what she has no history of doing, when she will still engage in what she -does- have a history of doing at the general level, is also beyond me.
As is the notion that scotus does anything other than what the public at large have made a certainty, as they did with their recent, begrudging, enfranchisement of the lgbt community. I;ve already commented on that as well. On the other end of it, politicians -talk- about repealing roe v wade, or repealing this that or the other..but if you can't recognize that for the stumping it is I can;t help you, with regards to roe v wade, it's not something that the us wants to repeal, not even the christians to whom the notion is floated as pandering.
Scotuspocalypse, from both sides, is fearmongering bullshit. The people that either of these two candidates would -actually- put in the chair are going to be remarkably similar. Both candidates, ultimately, serve similar interests, even if one of them has a better sales pitch. People seem to habitually go into this judge picking thing with incredible hopes, which are..routinely and as a matter of course, brought back down to reality with the uninspiring picks our political system churns out.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Posts: 18544
Threads: 145
Joined: March 18, 2015
Reputation:
100
RE: The positive case for voting Hillary Clinton for president.
November 5, 2016 at 9:09 pm
Got a visit from Hillary campaigners today. I told them they're lucky they weren't with drumph's camp. I would have told them to buzz off.
It was actually good they stopped by. I wasn't exactly sure of where my polling place was this year since I moved last December. Now I know.
Disclaimer: I am only responsible for what I say, not what you choose to understand.
(November 14, 2018 at 8:57 pm)The Valkyrie Wrote: Have a good day at work. If we ever meet in a professional setting, let me answer your question now. Yes, I DO want fries with that.
Posts: 15452
Threads: 147
Joined: June 15, 2015
Reputation:
88
RE: The positive case for voting Hillary Clinton for president.
November 6, 2016 at 1:36 am
(November 4, 2016 at 10:25 am)Faith No More Wrote: (November 4, 2016 at 10:20 am)Bella Morte Wrote: He's a right cunt, isn't he?
Yeah, apparently people that are tired of voting for the lesser of two evils and refuse to participate in a corrupt system are dickheads.
Who knew that keeping the integrity of your principles made you an asshole? That's news to me.
My sentiments entirely. Well said.
Still love you though, Whatevs.
"Of course, everyone will claim they respect someone who tries to speak the truth, but in reality, this is a rare quality. Most respect those who speak truths they agree with, and their respect for the speaking only extends as far as their realm of personal agreement. It is less common, almost to the point of becoming a saintly virtue, that someone truly respects and loves the truth seeker, even when their conclusions differ wildly."
-walsh
Posts: 8731
Threads: 425
Joined: October 7, 2014
Reputation:
37
RE: The positive case for voting Hillary Clinton for president.
November 6, 2016 at 4:40 am
(This post was last modified: November 6, 2016 at 4:43 am by dyresand.)
Thinking things over looking at it form a objective point of view either way were going to get war were going to get fucked up by bad decisions.
She will still continue the pay to play money making scheme. She may be a corrupt piece of shit that lied to congress and the American people but
at the same time if she does at least some of what she is talking about hell ill vote Hillary. But that loud mouth mother fucker Trump is not someone
you would wan't he would violate the fuck out of freedom of speech.
Atheism is a non-prophet organization join today.
Code: <iframe width="100%" height="450" scrolling="no" frameborder="no" src="https://w.soundcloud.com/player/?url=https%3A//api.soundcloud.com/tracks/255506953&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&visual=true"></iframe>
Posts: 18544
Threads: 145
Joined: March 18, 2015
Reputation:
100
RE: The positive case for voting Hillary Clinton for president.
November 6, 2016 at 7:22 am
At the end of the day, bottom line:
Drumph should NOT be allowed access to our nuclear codes. Ever.
Disclaimer: I am only responsible for what I say, not what you choose to understand.
(November 14, 2018 at 8:57 pm)The Valkyrie Wrote: Have a good day at work. If we ever meet in a professional setting, let me answer your question now. Yes, I DO want fries with that.
Posts: 43162
Threads: 720
Joined: September 21, 2008
Reputation:
133
RE: The positive case for voting Hillary Clinton for president.
November 6, 2016 at 7:24 am
(This post was last modified: November 6, 2016 at 6:54 pm by Edwardo Piet.)
(November 6, 2016 at 1:36 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote: (November 4, 2016 at 10:25 am)Faith No More Wrote: Yeah, apparently people that are tired of voting for the lesser of two evils and refuse to participate in a corrupt system are dickheads.
Who knew that keeping the integrity of your principles made you an asshole? That's news to me.
My sentiments entirely. Well said.
Still love you though, Whatevs.
To me it's like the difference between a deontologist and a consequentalist. Both have their hearts in the right place. The former wants to stick to their principles whereas the latter is more concerned with positive consequences regardless of principles.
We're all good people here.
Well, except for those of us who are awful like Drich, but you get the point. The vast majority of us here have good intentions. And in life that's what matters most of all.
Posts: 5983
Threads: 249
Joined: January 2, 2013
Reputation:
30
RE: The positive case for voting Hillary Clinton for president.
November 6, 2016 at 9:50 am
(November 6, 2016 at 7:22 am)Nymphadora Wrote: At the end of the day, bottom line:
Drumph should NOT be allowed access to our nuclear codes. Ever.
I don't really get the scare around Donald Trump and the nuclear codes. It seems to stem from questions he's been asked purposefully to make people scared about whether or not he would use these nukes.
Every leader in every country with nukes is potentially going to use nukes, and there would be a sense of unpredictability about it as there is with any attack on a country in that you don't tell the country what you're going to do when you're attacking them.
So asking Donald Trump would he use nukes is pretty pointless, every country with nukes has them because they will potentially use them, otherwise the cost of their upkeep and the cost of keeping them secure is a total waste.
It's no surprise Donald Trump said he would potentially use them, the only other answer could be no he would never use them and he's going to get rid of them, which would be much more surprising and I don't think any president is going to do that.
Secondly Donald Trump having a brash bold personality doesn't really mean much to me. Tony Blair had the personality of Hugh Grant, a total stereotypical tea drinking soft spoken British guy and he took British troops to war more than any other prime minister. A lot of those wars having been accused of being pointless wars.
Are you ready for the fire? We are firemen. WE ARE FIREMEN! The heat doesn’t bother us. We live in the heat. We train in the heat. It tells us that we’re ready, we’re at home, we’re where we’re supposed to be. Flames don’t intimidate us. What do we do? We control the flame. We control them. We move the flames where we want to. And then we extinguish them.
Impersonation is treason.
Posts: 353
Threads: 12
Joined: March 14, 2016
Reputation:
5
RE: The positive case for voting Hillary Clinton for president.
November 6, 2016 at 1:15 pm
(November 6, 2016 at 9:50 am)paulpablo Wrote: (November 6, 2016 at 7:22 am)Nymphadora Wrote: At the end of the day, bottom line:
Drumph should NOT be allowed access to our nuclear codes. Ever.
I don't really get the scare around Donald Trump and the nuclear codes. It seems to stem from questions he's been asked purposefully to make people scared about whether or not he would use these nukes.
Every leader in every country with nukes is potentially going to use nukes, and there would be a sense of unpredictability about it as there is with any attack on a country in that you don't tell the country what you're going to do when you're attacking them.
So asking Donald Trump would he use nukes is pretty pointless, every country with nukes has them because they will potentially use them, otherwise the cost of their upkeep and the cost of keeping them secure is a total waste.
It's no surprise Donald Trump said he would potentially use them, the only other answer could be no he would never use them and he's going to get rid of them, which would be much more surprising and I don't think any president is going to do that.
Secondly Donald Trump having a brash bold personality doesn't really mean much to me. Tony Blair had the personality of Hugh Grant, a total stereotypical tea drinking soft spoken British guy and he took British troops to war more than any other prime minister. A lot of those wars having been accused of being pointless wars.
When you listen to Donald Trump speak, and your take away is "brash bold personality"
Well.. I got nothing
“Understanding is a three edged sword: your side, their side, and the truth.”
Posts: 23918
Threads: 300
Joined: June 25, 2011
Reputation:
151
RE: The positive case for voting Hillary Clinton for president.
November 6, 2016 at 2:51 pm
(November 6, 2016 at 7:24 am)Alasdair Ham Wrote: (November 6, 2016 at 1:36 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote: My sentiments entirely. Well said.
Still love you though, Whatevs.
To me it's like the difference between a deontologist and a consequentalist. Both have their hearts in thee right place. The former wants to stick to their principles whereas the latter is more concerned with positive consequences regardless of principles.
We're all good people here.
Well, except for those of us who are awful like Drich, but you get the point. The vast majority of us here have good intentions. And in life that's what matters most of all.
That's why I try hard to resist the urge to make fun of Trump's legion of dumbasses. In the end it is really a kind of disability and I don't want to mock those people the way Trump does someone with a real, physical disability.
|
