Hillary V. The Donald, David Duke, and Chris Christie

[Jambalaya]

In some countries, it is the law that you have to vote.

It should be the law here as well. There is absolutely no excuse not to vote. I don't love Hillary, I don't love Bernie, and I think every Republican candidate is a blight on humanity, but our political process is what it is and sticking your head in the sand doesn't change anything - a president will still be elected. I personally would be ashamed not to vote, whether or not my vote "matters." There are so many countries who fight wars and revolt for the RIGHT to choose their leader.

The definition of sticking your head in the sand is to be unwilling to acknowledge a problem. I fully acknowledge that there is a major problem and that's exactly why I might consider not voting. I acknowledge that most of the candidates are an absolute nightmare and that I can't vote for any of them. I vote for someone because it means that I support them. If my choices are Trump & Clinton, I can't support either one.

That's where we differ. I cast a vote based on who I think would be the best person of the choices on the ballot. Who I would PUT on the ballot in the first place would be a vastly different conversation. I can't understand your stance that because you don't support either, you won't vote. There's nothing I can say on an internet forum that will change your mind, but to me there is a very clear choice in the LESSER of two evils (if you see it that way).

And that's what I posted earlier - I do not see a lesser of two evils. Maybe you missed my post above about Hillary & the late Senator Robert Byrd, her good friend & mentor, who also happened to be a member of the KKK in his 20's & 30's....and don't even get me started about Sanders.....
Also, it has been mentioned that people should feel obligated to vote because people have fought and/or died for that right, well people have died for religion, so does that mean we should all feel obligated to go to church? And people have died for our right to bear arms, so does that mean we should all own a gun? I take my right to vote very seriously and I typically enjoy voting, but when you can't even choose a lesser of two evils, what are you supposed to do?

I do think that if someone genuinely feels unable to vote for either candidate in good conscience, sitting it out is an option that should be retained. For anyone with a sense of history and civic duty, I don't think they'd decline to vote without a lot of forethought. Momhappy is an example of that, in my view. She obviously takes her voting duty seriously and genuinely feels she possibly cannot vote for any of the candidates. In my opinion, that makes sense. On a personal level, in this situation, I'd vote for a purple tiger to stop Trump getting in, but what if it was a choice between a character like Hitler and a character like Stalin? I'm only using extreme examples to make my point, but there are potential situations that could also disgust me to the point where I'd decline to vote as a kind of protest.

 

[momhappy]

Thanks jambalaya - I appreciate your post. You hit the nail on the head

 

[Jambalaya]

OK, I'm going to totally show my ignorance of political context and history here. How come quite a few people on here think Hillary is as bad an option as Trump? I'll tell you why I ask:

Hillary's policies seem inoffensive and middle-of-the-road to me. She'd protect access to healthcare for all, including important provisions like the pre-existing conditions clause. She wants to end price-fixing between huge pharmaceutical companies and stop them inflating the price of drugs. She also wants to stop multi-millionaires paying 13% tax via the loopholes. In addition, she has a long, long record of advocating for children's rights going back to the Seventies, I'm told.

She just seems normal and sensible to me. What am I missing? Serious question. I've never been a political animal so perhaps someone can fill in the gaps about Hillary for me.

 

[Dancing Fire]

She just seems normal and sensible to me. What am I missing? Serious question. I've never been a political animal so perhaps someone can fill in the gaps about Hillary for me.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/426289/hillary-clinton-obama-benghazi-lie

 

[Laila619]

OK, I'm going to totally show my ignorance of political context and history here. How come quite a few people on here think Hillary is as bad an option as Trump? I'll tell you why I ask:

Hillary's policies seem inoffensive and middle-of-the-road to me. She'd protect access to healthcare for all, including important provisions like the pre-existing conditions clause. She wants to end price-fixing between huge pharmaceutical companies and stop them inflating the price of drugs. She also wants to stop multi-millionaires paying 13% tax via the loopholes. In addition, she has a long, long record of advocating for children's rights going back to the Seventies, I'm told.

She just seems normal and sensible to me. What am I missing? Serious question. I've never been a political animal so perhaps someone can fill in the gaps about Hillary for me.

She is incredibly shady. She has questionable morals and she is a liar.

 

[Jambalaya]

Thanks, DF. I'm not sure I understand the article but I appreciate you posting it. I'll re-read it again tomorrow when I'm less tired, but I think the gist is that Hillary lied by omission when she did not publicly call the Benghazi attack a terrorist attack?

 

[Jambalaya]

OK, I'm going to totally show my ignorance of political context and history here. How come quite a few people on here think Hillary is as bad an option as Trump? I'll tell you why I ask:

Hillary's policies seem inoffensive and middle-of-the-road to me. She'd protect access to healthcare for all, including important provisions like the pre-existing conditions clause. She wants to end price-fixing between huge pharmaceutical companies and stop them inflating the price of drugs. She also wants to stop multi-millionaires paying 13% tax via the loopholes. In addition, she has a long, long record of advocating for children's rights going back to the Seventies, I'm told.

She just seems normal and sensible to me. What am I missing? Serious question. I've never been a political animal so perhaps someone can fill in the gaps about Hillary for me.

She is incredibly shady. She has questionable morals and she is a liar.

Oh. That's disappointing then. Is the shadiness because of the cattle futures trading and the morals because she stayed with her cheating spouse, or are there other things too?

 

[momhappy]

Since you asked, here's some food for thought:
http://www.hannity.com/articles/election-493995/watch-hillary-clinton-praises-member-of-14435828/

 

[Bonfire]

Her shady ethics go far back. Google Whitewater.

 

[Jambalaya]

Since you asked, here's some food for thought:
http://www.hannity.com/articles/election-493995/watch-hillary-clinton-praises-member-of-14435828/

Thanks for replying and posting a link, Momhappy. I read the article and watched the video. Wow, that's embarrassing. Her tribute was fulsome. Whoa.

OK, I'm speaking in a somewhat hopeful tone here: Did Byrd at some point publicly recant and reject and apologize for his stance on race that he held earlier in his life, and make amends, as far as he could? Is that why Clinton felt OK about releasing that statement? Guess I'm clutching at straws here.

Food for thought indeed. Thanks again, Momhappy.

 

[stracci2000]

This is my opinion. Take it how you will.

Some years ago, on the day the democratic primary was held in my state, the weather was awful.
Wind and sleet. I had worked all day and was tired, and I didn't want to go back out in the bad weather again.

Then I realized that people have fought and died for my right to vote.

I put on my coat and I drove to the polls.

 

[Jambalaya]

Her shady ethics go far back. Google Whitewater.

Thanks, Bonfire. I did google it. Seems like it's hard to know whether the Clintons weren't prosecuted because they didn't do anything wrong or because they are, as you say, shady and operate just close enough to the law not to get caught.

Perhaps this is common with politicians. I seem to remember reading similar stuff about the financial matters of Britain's Blairs - something about an apartment complex there too, in a town named Bristol.

Unless you're someone who deeply studies political science, it just seems impossible to know the truth about so many politicians.

What about Obama? Are there allegations of shadiness surrounding him too?

 

[momhappy]

Since you asked, here's some food for thought:
http://www.hannity.com/articles/election-493995/watch-hillary-clinton-praises-member-of-14435828/

Thanks for replying and posting a link, Momhappy. I read the article and watched the video. Wow, that's embarrassing. Her tribute was fulsome. Whoa.

OK, I'm speaking in a somewhat hopeful tone here: Did Byrd at some point publicly recant and reject and apologize for his stance on race that he held earlier in his life, and make amends, as far as he could? Is that why Clinton felt OK about releasing that statement? Guess I'm clutching at straws here.

Food for thought indeed. Thanks again, Momhappy.

Yes, I believe that you are correct. Byrd went on to say that joining the Klan was his greatest mistake.
In the 40's, he recruited his friends to create a new chapter of the KKK in West Virginia. He supposedly left in 43, but then later wrote a letter the the Klan's Grand Wizard in support of the KKK. In his political career, he voted against both African American Supreme Court nominees and he also filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 46. As recent as 2001, he repeatedly used the term "white n-words" on National tv, so I guess it's up to you to decided if he truly regretted his involvement with the KKK.

 

[Jambalaya]

Since you asked, here's some food for thought:
http://www.hannity.com/articles/election-493995/watch-hillary-clinton-praises-member-of-14435828/

Thanks for replying and posting a link, Momhappy. I read the article and watched the video. Wow, that's embarrassing. Her tribute was fulsome. Whoa.

OK, I'm speaking in a somewhat hopeful tone here: Did Byrd at some point publicly recant and reject and apologize for his stance on race that he held earlier in his life, and make amends, as far as he could? Is that why Clinton felt OK about releasing that statement? Guess I'm clutching at straws here.

Food for thought indeed. Thanks again, Momhappy.

Yes, I believe that you are correct. Byrd went on to say that joining the Klan was his greatest mistake.
In the 40's, he recruited his friends to create a new chapter of the KKK in West Virginia. He supposedly left in 43, but then later wrote a letter the the Klan's Grand Wizard in support of the KKK. In his political career, he voted against both African American Supreme Court nominees and he also filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 46. As recent as 2001, he repeatedly used the term "white n-words" on National tv, so I guess it's up to you to decided if he truly regretted his involvement with the KKK.

Oh, I see. So he recanted but there is reason to be doubtful about his sincerity.

I really don't know how a person ever arrives at the truth about public figures.

Thanks again.

 

[momhappy]

^For what it's worth, I don't think any one of us could ever really know the truth about any one, but you just trust your gut.

 

[Jambalaya]

Yes, very true.

 

[Dancing Fire]

[quote="Jambalaya|

What about Obama? Are there allegations of shadiness surrounding him too?[/quote]


You mean the worst post WWII President?.. Obama and J. Carter is fighting for that title...

Threw Israel/Netanyahu under the bus.
Let Putin poke his finger at his nose whenever he feel like it.
Fighting Mother Nature instead of ISIS.
Releasing dangerous terrorists from Gitmo.
Disastrous Iranian nuclear deal.
His Admin. cover up Benghazi to get re-elected in 2012.

The biggest spending Prez in history.
Median household income down since he became Prez.
Slow job growth only 162K new jobs in Jan.
More Americans on welfare than ever.
Obamacare Disaster. The not so Affordable Care Act.

 

[JDDN]

This isn't very helpful but....it's how I feel sometimes......

 

[AGBF]

and don't even get me started about Sanders.....

Actually, as a Sanders supporter, I'd like to. What has he done that renders him unfit for office? And, remember, we had Bush -The-Younger for eight years. (Also known as Stupid Head.) Who got us into Iraq for no reason, caused its implosion, and created ISIS and thus the migration from Syria to Europe...

AGBF

 

[AGBF]

"The New York Times" has an editorial today pinning Trump's victory on The Republican Party and its steady decline.The front page link to the editorial says "The G.O.P. is reeling from the liar who is hardening the image of the party." Obviously The Times is not afraid of being sued by Trump for openly calling him a liar. So I guess those of you don't like Hillary because "she is a liar" have something to chew over. Trump is a liar as well as having no experience; consorting with white supremacists (which Hillary doesn't do); being a misogynist (which Hillary isn't); a racist; and a buffoon( which Hillary isn't). Here is an excerpt from that editorial.

"The Republicans seem to be reeling, unable or unwilling to comprehend that a shady, bombastic liar is hardening the image of their party as a symbol of intolerance and division.

Last summer, as Mr. Trump began to rise in the polls, party leaders took umbrage at the idea that they’d have to do something to keep the nomination from the likes of him. They stood aside and said, let voters decide. Now voters are deciding. They are leaning, in unbelievable numbers, toward a man whose quest for the presidency revolves around targeting religious and racial minorities and people with disabilities, who flirts with white supremacists and the Ku Klux Klan, who ridicules and slanders those who disagree with him.

His opponents, meanwhile, have rushed to adopt his anger-filled message. It’s small wonder that Republican leaders don’t seem to know quite what to say.

'If a person wants to be the nominee of the Republican Party, there can be no evasion and no games,' House Speaker Paul Ryan said on Tuesday, after months of such games. He sounded naïvely unaware of the darker elements within the Republican Party, present for decades, and now holding sway: 'This party does not prey on people’s prejudices. We appeal to their highest ideals. This is the party of Lincoln.'

The Republican Party is taking a big step toward becoming the party of Trump. Those who could challenge Mr. Trump — Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio — are not only to the right of Mr. Trump on many issues, but are embracing the same game of exclusion, bigotry and character assassination. That Mr. Rubio would make double entendres about the size of Mr. Trump’s hands and talk about Mr. Trump wetting his pants shows how much his influence has permeated this race and how willingly his rivals are copying his tactics."

AGBF

 

[missy]

[quote="Jambalaya|]

What about Obama? Are there allegations of shadiness surrounding him too?

You mean the worst post WWII President?.. Obama and J. Carter is fighting for that title...

Threw Israel/Netanyahu under the bus.
Let Putin poke his finger at his nose whenever he feel like it.
Fighting Mother Nature instead of ISIS.
Releasing dangerous terrorists from Gitmo.
Disastrous Iranian nuclear deal.
His Admin. cover up Benghazi to get re-elected in 2012.

The biggest spending Prez in history.
Median household income down since he became Prez.
Slow job growth only 162K new jobs in Jan.
More Americans on welfare than ever.
Obamacare Disaster. The not so Affordable Care Act.[/quote][/quote][/quote]

I cannot believe I agree with some/much of what you wrote here DF. OMG maybe I am spending too much time on PS.

 

[missy]

and don't even get me started about Sanders.....

Actually, as a Sanders supporter, I'd like to. What has he done that renders him unfit for office? And, remember, we had Bush -The-Younger for eight years. (Also known as Stupid Head.) Who got us into Iraq for no reason, caused its implosion, and created ISIS and thus the migration from Syria to Europe...

AGBF

I am interested too momhappy. I think since I know the least about Sanders he is the most attractive option to me (minus a very important issue for me that is)...familiarity does breed contempt when it comes to politicians.

 

[ksinger]

Well, I will add something to the discussion of Sanders, in the link to a good piece at The Atlantic. This piece is not too long, and is a good primer on socialism/capitalism - what they are and aren't, and has a lot of charts comparing various components of each in different countries. It is only a bit about Sanders, but the takeaway is that Sanders is not a socialist in the pejorative sense that I typically hear all day long.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/03/bernie-sanders-democratic-socialism/471630/

 

[missy]

Thank you for the link Karen. It is informative and no surprises there for me. I think I have a good handle on who Bernie Sanders is as a politician. I stand by my initial thoughts. If only he would redefine certain parameters I would be more onboard with his candidacy. Not that it would matter as I don't think he will be the democratic candidate. I more align with his views than Hillary Clinton's views however. Except his narrow parameters of wealthy vs middle class that is. I believe it was Yssie's posting in another thread discussing this very topic that I agree with regarding that definition of what constitutes wealthy. And as the article states we are taxed quite a bit in the USA.

Thank you for the link.

 

[momhappy]

and don't even get me started about Sanders.....

Actually, as a Sanders supporter, I'd like to. What has he done that renders him unfit for office? And, remember, we had Bush -The-Younger for eight years. (Also known as Stupid Head.) Who got us into Iraq for no reason, caused its implosion, and created ISIS and thus the migration from Syria to Europe...

AGBF

He hasn't "done" anything yet and that's part of the problem actually. He has served in Congress for over two decades without having any major impact, which indicates that he lacks leadership skills. He lacks any sort of clarity when it comes to foreign policy/terrorism, which I find incredibly disturbing. Perhaps the biggest issue (for me) is his fiscal irresponsibility. Most of his ideas are focused on heavy spending and his supporters seem to be caught up in the ideological euphoria, while ignoring the political realities. He is pushing for massive change, but that change has zero chance of getting through Congress, so he'd either have to compromise (therefore giving up the "Sanders Revolution") or stick to his guns and possibly go down as one of the least effective presidents in US history. That's about it in a nutshell and just my .02 cents of course, so take it for what it's worth.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nate-jara/why-bernie-sanders-should_b_8342442.html

 

[AGBF]

and don't even get me started about Sanders.....

Actually, as a Sanders supporter, I'd like to. What has he done that renders him unfit for office? And, remember, we had Bush -The-Younger for eight years. (Also known as Stupid Head.) Who got us into Iraq for no reason, caused its implosion, and created ISIS and thus the migration from Syria to Europe...

AGBF

He hasn't "done" anything yet and that's part of the problem actually. He has served in Congress for over two decades without having any major impact, which indicates that he lacks leadership skills. He lacks any sort of clarity when it comes to foreign policy/terrorism, which I find incredibly disturbing. Perhaps the biggest issue (for me) is his fiscal irresponsibility. Most of his ideas are focused on heavy spending and his supporters seem to be caught up in the ideological euphoria, while ignoring the political realities. He is pushing for massive change, but that change has zero chance of getting through Congress, so he'd either have to compromise (therefore giving up the "Sanders Revolution") or stick to his guns and possibly go down as one of the least effective presidents in US history. That's about it in a nutshell and just my .02 cents of course, so take it for what it's worth.

Fair enough. I will take it at face value for now. Even if it were true, it would make him by far the best candidate running for President today. Isn't that sad? I don't think it is true, but if it were, he would still be a prize compared to everyone else. Especially Trump. At least he protested racism back in 1963 and isn't courting former KKK members now. He doesn't call women "bimbos" and rate them with numbers. Hey, he's looking good to me!!! He even served a few decades in Congress after being a mayor! And, as of yet, no one has dug up a scandal on him.

As someone said about George W. Bush and his experience: he was briefly Governor of Texas then sobered up and said, "I think I'll become President". His IQ was as high as Bernie Sanders' kneecap, but somehow we survived him. Iraq and Syria, not so much.

AGBF

 

[liaerfbv]

Even if all the allegations surrounding HC are 100% true (which I don't believe they are - she's absolutely shady and a liar and doesn't believe the rules apply to her, but I take everything with a grain of salt), I think at worst she's nothing more than a run of the mill corrupt politician. I don't think you can BE a politician without being corrupt in this day and age, unfortunately. So I look at the corrupt actions she's taken and her bad decisions and I weigh them against the good - her support of gay marriage, women's rights, clean energy, paid family leave, campaign finance reform. I think she has a fairly reasonable, moderate plan for the country.

Then I look at Donald Trump who called for committing war crimes (bombing the families of terrorists), incites violence against dissenters at his rallies, his lack of respect for women, the way he behaves towards people who disagree with and criticize him, his call to abandon our principles of separation of church and state by forming a REGISTRY OF MUSLIMS.. and I think, dear lord, we might give this man nuclear codes. THAT'S scary to me. Where's the good that tempers his bad? He has no coherent plan for the country, and he plans to bomb everyone who disagrees with the US.

Hillary Clinton is no saint - I don't like her, I wish she wasn't going to win the nomination... but I 100% cannot understand where her presidency is scarier to anyone that Donald Trump's.

 

[AGBF]

Even if all the allegations surrounding HC are 100% true (which I don't believe they are - she's absolutely shady and a liar and doesn't believe the rules apply to her, but I take everything with a grain of salt), I think at worst she's nothing more than a run of the mill corrupt politician. I don't think you can BE a politician without being corrupt in this day and age, unfortunately. So I look at the corrupt actions she's taken and her bad decisions and I weigh them against the good - her support of gay marriage, women's rights, clean energy, paid family leave, campaign finance reform. I think she has a fairly reasonable, moderate plan for the country.

Then I look at Donald Trump who called for committing war crimes (bombing the families of terrorists), incites violence against dissenters at his rallies, his lack of respect for women, the way he behaves towards people who disagree with and criticize him, his call to abandon our principles of separation of church and state by forming a REGISTRY OF MUSLIMS.. and I think, dear lord, we might give this man nuclear codes. THAT'S scary to me. Where's the good that tempers his bad? He has no coherent plan for the country, and he plans to bomb everyone who disagrees with the US.

Hillary Clinton is no saint - I don't like her, I wish she wasn't going to win the nomination... but I 100% cannot understand where her presidency is scarier to anyone that Donald Trump's.

I completely agree with everything you wrote. One cannot become President of the United States without having been bought 500 times; that is why Bernie Sanders will not become President of the United States. He isn't being bought enough. And also why he is not in the leadership of Congress. He wasn't bought by enough of the special interests.

Hillary is bought as much as the next guy. But she is targeted more as a liar because she is more of a woman. That lack of a penis really makes men mad at her. They think she's uppity.

AGBF

 

[liaerfbv]

and don't even get me started about Sanders.....

Actually, as a Sanders supporter, I'd like to. What has he done that renders him unfit for office? And, remember, we had Bush -The-Younger for eight years. (Also known as Stupid Head.) Who got us into Iraq for no reason, caused its implosion, and created ISIS and thus the migration from Syria to Europe...

AGBF

He hasn't "done" anything yet and that's part of the problem actually. He has served in Congress for over two decades without having any major impact, which indicates that he lacks leadership skills. He lacks any sort of clarity when it comes to foreign policy/terrorism, which I find incredibly disturbing. Perhaps the biggest issue (for me) is his fiscal irresponsibility. Most of his ideas are focused on heavy spending and his supporters seem to be caught up in the ideological euphoria, while ignoring the political realities. He is pushing for massive change, but that change has zero chance of getting through Congress, so he'd either have to compromise (therefore giving up the "Sanders Revolution") or stick to his guns and possibly go down as one of the least effective presidents in US history. That's about it in a nutshell and just my .02 cents of course, so take it for what it's worth.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nate-jara/why-bernie-sanders-should_b_8342442.html

I hate to sound like an idealist here, but if no one ever proposes change, we will never have change. We don't know if his plans would work or if he would gain the support he needed to get changes through Congress. Even if they didn't and he was an "ineffective" president as you say, would the country be worse off than under any other candidate running right now?

I don't look at his plans as fiscal irresponsibility. He wants to allocate tax dollars to issues he finds important. That's not irresponsible, it's a difference of opinion.

 

[MollyMalone]

mom, take a look at these pieces about Senator Sanders' tenure as the mayor of Burlington, VT; you'll see that he was not fiscally irresponsible as an executive & that even Tony Pomerleau, a wealthy Republican real estate developer who also was Burlington's police commissioner & possibly the biggest foe of Mayor Sanders at the outset, grew to respect and like him:
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/local/2015/12/23/sanders-unlikely-alliance-wealthy-developer/77425498/

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/10/31/socialist-even-conservative-could-love-burlington-mayor-sanders-was-able-out-republican-republicans/SCmh2TLifXxXRPFKC8NMjO/story.html