Pali Posted September 22, 2017 Report Share Posted September 22, 2017 I can work with corrupt politicians - they are pragmatic and acting rationally, if not ethically. I can't work with ideologues and narcissists that blatantly ignore reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manual Labour Posted September 22, 2017 Report Share Posted September 22, 2017 1 hour ago, Pali said: The people who actually fact-check politicians and keep track of their lies disagree with you. This is interesting but flawed. For example Trump might have told 100 small lies whereas Hillary might have told 5 huge lies. The importance of the subject of the lies is also somewhat subjective. If they literally fact checked everything these two individuals ever said and Trump lied more times, so be it. It still does not mean he is more or less dishonest. I have heard them both speak and have a rough idea of what they both stand for. To me personally I would take him over her 100/100 times. We are of course free to disagree and that is fine but I really don't think this link you shared proves who is ultimately more or less honest or delusional, a lot of that judgement will always be subjective. 17 minutes ago, Pali said: I can work with corrupt politicians - they are pragmatic and acting rationally, if not ethically. I can't work with ideologues and narcissists that blatantly ignore reality. Again, you are free to have that opinion. I would rather work with a narcissist than an evil sociopath. Obviously people differ greatly on this issue but I think most of it comes down to taking sides. I frankly don't like either of them but I think Trump is a hundred times better than Hillary and if I were religious I would thank God every day that she did not get elected. I do find it particularly Hillarious (see what I did there) that you would elude to Clinton as being ethical especially while calling her corrupt at the same time, but again a lot of these judgments are subjective so we will have to agree to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaerick Posted September 22, 2017 Report Share Posted September 22, 2017 Corruption should not be acceptable any more than the others. Lobbying shouldn't be a thing. Want to know why workers haven't gotten a significant boost in a hundred years? Because the elite pay politicians to make sure that doesn't happen. And a million other things. Fuuuuuuuuuuuck that. Some people are fit to rule and govern and some are not. You can't have a perfect system but you sure as hell can cut them down to the root when you see the bad ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted September 22, 2017 Report Share Posted September 22, 2017 17 minutes ago, Manual Labour said: I do find it particularly Hillarious (see what I did there) that you would elude to Clinton as being ethical especially while calling her corrupt at the same time I called her ethical where now? You guys do understand that Trump is equally corrupt at bare minimum, right? The guy who put together the richest Cabinet in history, and he isn't just as tied to financial elites? Clinton was JUST corrupt - Trump is corrupt AND an egotistical moron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manual Labour Posted September 22, 2017 Report Share Posted September 22, 2017 Ah just realized I misread what you wrote, "rationally, if not ethically". Ok so we both agree she is unethical. I disagree that he is equally corrupt at bare minimum, as far as I am concerned she is WAY more corrupt than Trump. They are incomparable. Sure Trump is a narcissist, but do you disagree that Clinton is an evil sociopath? I find the latter far worse and more dangerous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted September 22, 2017 Report Share Posted September 22, 2017 First, I very rarely call people evil - I find the word clumsy, non-descript, and a way to avoid having to think about someone as a person and needing to consider the reasons for their actions dispassionately. I have not called Trump evil, despite seeing him as very much a danger in just about every way a President can be, who has already caused damage that will take decades to undo as well as damage that will never be undone. Second, it is worth noting that under the general use of the term sociopathy, narcissistic personality disorder (which I suspect Trump suffers from) qualifies one as sociopathic. Hillary was a garbage candidate with no charisma, no ability to relate to people, and an above-average level of corrupt or corrupt-seeming skeletons in her closet. Evil sociopath? No, I'm not willing to call her that, and not only because of how vague those terms are. She's just a mediocre career politician who would've remained fairly obscure had she not married Bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaerick Posted September 22, 2017 Report Share Posted September 22, 2017 My problem with Hillary, aside from her neoliberalism bullshit politics, was her sense of entitlement. The country didn't like her, even if she won the popular vote that was because people held their nose. She cheated Sanders in what she thought was going to be an easy primary and then forced people to vote for her for fear of Trump. Then she loses and goes on blaming everyone but herself, including women who marched and set records ("I can't help but wonder where that sense of solidarity was during the election..."), while maintaining a LOWER rating than Trump. To this day she polls lower. So for however much you hate Trump you can apply that to Hillary because it was her desire to be crowned queen that gave us trump. It wasn't poor whites it wasn't sexism, it wasn't Russia, it was the fact she couldn't turn out the vote. It's the fact that a 70 year old socialist raised her dollar for dollar despite having NO corporate backing or super delegates and she still claiming to bare the banner for the common man. It's her wall street and bankster speeches when people have nothing but debt and chains. If you hate Trump, hate the one who gave us him. Look at the emails he was her NUMBER ONE pied piper candidate. She just underestimated/ignored how much people hated her and then failed to accept it and to this day denies it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted September 22, 2017 Report Share Posted September 22, 2017 Yes, Hillary was terrible. That hasn't stopped Trump from being worse. You may recall from our pre-election discussions that I described myself as essentially a single-issue voter in regards to climate change. I recall people here trying to make the case the two would be equivalent on climate concerns. Is anyone still willing to try to make that case now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaerick Posted September 23, 2017 Report Share Posted September 23, 2017 You ignore that lacking Hillary, had she not forced her way in and helped elevate trump over more traditional republicans trump couldn't have gotten elected in the first place. So anything he does she is responsible for. All the polling warned it. American sentiment warned it. And she pushed ahead because it was her turn. Anything trump does she gave us by cheating to force herself there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted September 23, 2017 Report Share Posted September 23, 2017 Hillary is not the reason Trump won the Republican primaries, not the reason he started becoming a name in politics - Obama is. Specifically, Obama's blackness, and Trump's championing of the Birther issue and general racism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaerick Posted September 23, 2017 Report Share Posted September 23, 2017 Lmao that may have played a part but in the dnc leak emails it showed their plans to focus on him more than the rest so as to elevate him above the rest. Do you not remember his nonstop coverage? Huh and who does the media vastly support? HRC. Coincidence? I think not. lol Now, could the other nominees sucked less? Sure, but her media strategy certainly played to elevating Trump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted September 23, 2017 Report Share Posted September 23, 2017 The media covered Trump because he brings ratings, not as part of some master-level political game to try to make him the candidate. They still cover him for the same reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaerick Posted September 23, 2017 Report Share Posted September 23, 2017 Lol but lets ignore the HRC camp emails saying exactly how they planned to focus on him so as to shake aside the rest haha. The -leaks- show it all plain as black and white. There was a time when journalism and politics was concerned with that. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted September 23, 2017 Report Share Posted September 23, 2017 That's a misreading of the email - the idea was to force the Republicans in general to embrace far right positions in the hope that this would hurt in the general election by focusing on those already at the extreme, including Ted Cruz and Ben Carson as well as Trump. This strategy backfired, no doubt, but it can hardly be blamed as the sole or even a significantly meaningful reason for his selection by Republican primary voters - unless you assume there to be some vast media conspiracy in the DNC's favor, which I do not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaerick Posted September 23, 2017 Report Share Posted September 23, 2017 Well Donna Brazille admitted to her collusion with cnn and camp clinton and Shultz is far from clean in any way shape or form, not to mention all kinds of other shade the MSM cast on Bernie. So I mean, is it conspiratorial when it's literally in front of your face and being admitted by them? lol GG man no one's convincing anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted September 23, 2017 Report Share Posted September 23, 2017 A handful of incidents do not indicate widespread conspiracy - and Donna Braille's involvement had nothing to do with the general election or Trump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Implementor Erelei Posted September 24, 2017 Implementor Report Share Posted September 24, 2017 On 9/22/2017 at 8:05 PM, Pali said: Hillary is not the reason Trump won the Republican primaries, not the reason he started becoming a name in politics - Obama is. Specifically, Obama's blackness, and Trump's championing of the Birther issue and general racism. Hate to break it to you, but Hillary is exactly the reason why Trump became the next President. Not Obama. What a thought though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atticus Posted September 24, 2017 Report Share Posted September 24, 2017 What senpai erelei said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chesta6384 Posted September 24, 2017 Report Share Posted September 24, 2017 I'm just a deplorable that voted for Trump. It's funny to me really. I think Trump has and will continue to do good things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fool_Hardy Posted September 24, 2017 Report Share Posted September 24, 2017 42 minutes ago, Chesta6384 said: I'm just a deplorable that voted for Trump. It's funny to me really. I think Trump has and will continue to do good things. adjective 1. causing or being a subject for grief or regret; lamentable: the deplorable death of a friend. 2. causing or being a subject for censure, reproach, or disapproval; wretched; very bad: This room is in deplorable order. You have deplorable manners! In my opinion, casting such a derogatory label on anyone who shared Trump's conservative views, secured HRC's doom. There are conservative individuals who consider themselves to be leftist. She obviously believed that through nepotism, wealth, and political leverage, she could surmount the need for the overall support of the people. She blames Sanders. She blames Trump. She blames the Deplorable's. A shame she never played FL, or she would have learned to take responsibility for her own short comings, actions, or lack their of. Then she may have had a chance at redemption by getting good, instead she will whine and cry that the administration is OP until we have to ban her from this site. Offered as light hearted opinion. No offense to those of you who may have thought she was the second coming of Gaia herself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mali Posted September 24, 2017 Report Share Posted September 24, 2017 I'm OK with Hillary, voted for her, and stand by it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f0xx Posted September 24, 2017 Author Report Share Posted September 24, 2017 35 minutes ago, Mali said: I'm OK with Hillary, voted for her, and stand by it. That's basically like saying "I'm OK with corruption, lies and war with Russia." Don't get me wrong, Trump might prove to be even worse with time, but at the time of the elections Trump was the better choice, but at the time of the elections, not so much. As usual, people voted for (what they thought to be) the lesser of two evils. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pali Posted September 24, 2017 Report Share Posted September 24, 2017 8 hours ago, Erelei said: Hate to break it to you, but Hillary is exactly the reason why Trump became the next President. Not Obama. What a thought though. Hillary is a large part of why he won the general election, yes - I don't at all know that she can be claimed to be the reason that he won the Republican primaries, which is what I said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fool_Hardy Posted September 24, 2017 Report Share Posted September 24, 2017 I think you are correct @Pali. Trump winning the primaries, in my opinion, was due in large part to the Right making the exact same mistake the Left was making. Trying to tell the people who they were going to vote for, as opposed to listening to their constituents. People do not appreciate dictatorship in a democratic vote, it often is met with rebellion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mali Posted September 25, 2017 Report Share Posted September 25, 2017 10 hours ago, f0xx said: That's basically like saying "I'm OK with corruption, lies and war with Russia." Don't get me wrong, Trump might prove to be even worse with time, but at the time of the elections Trump was the better choice, but at the time of the elections, not so much. As usual, people voted for (what they thought to be) the lesser of two evils. No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.