Clinton Coverup Queen

[BRUTE]

haha true. brute's democrat-until-hell-freezes-over friend from Portland is abstaining from voting this time rather than vote Hillary he said he would've voted for Bernie

[Riggerjack]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Stein

https://www.johnsonweld.com/

Abstaining is to be playing the game by Demopublican rules. Unless you are in a swing state, a vote for HRC or Trump is exercised futility. And can be linked to cancer.

[Dragline]

I do agree however with the premise that people are much more honest when they are anonymous and don't have to suffer criticism for their viewpoints and that is going to be a factor this November.

Why do you agree with that premise? Do people who answer random polls really "suffer criticism for their viewpoints" by somebody recording their preference in a box? And if so, how -- unless they shared what they told the pollster with others on their own?

I think that people with firm viewpoints like to vocalize them and signal to like-minded individuals. And the internet provides even greater opportunities for such signaling.

[BRUTE]

brute completely agrees with ffj. Dragline only need take one look at 4chan to realize anonymity lets out the true self.

[shade-tree]

Any person with ambition and a long resume will have some evidence of failure/bad decisions, etc. Some of it will look wise in the rear view mirror, some decisions won't. Hilary's worst problem seems to be having actually done a lot. Younger candidates, ones who sat on one job for a couple of decades and those with 'outsider' status won't have as much political baggage, obviously.

[Dragline]

Any person with ambition and a long resume will have some evidence of failure/bad decisions, etc. Some of it will look wise in the rear view mirror, some decisions won't. Hilary's worst problem seems to be having actually done a lot. Younger candidates, ones who sat on one job for a couple of decades and those with 'outsider' status won't have as much political baggage, obviously.

Just like Nixon in '68 . . .

[Riggerjack]

"Hilary's worst problem seems to be having actually done a lot"

Of evil.

But seriously, what and who are you talking about? What younger, purer, candidate is she up against? Are you talking about 3rd party candidates? And your argument is that they just haven't been around long enough to get as corrupt?

Did you follow any of the links in this thread?

[Riggerjack]

BTW, my new tenants were Bernie fans. So much so that they didn't install cable when they moved in. Angry about media manipulation. A Boomer and a gen Xer.

Their bumper now sports: "Giant Meteor 2016, just end it."

[BRUTE]

"Giant Meteor 2016, just end it."

now that's a message brute can get behind. brute's short civilization anyway.

[BRUTE]

brute just checked. the youngest candidate by far who's still in the race is Gary Johnson at 63. He entered politics in 1994. the biggest crime brute can detect is that he's called Johnson (hrhr). maybe this young puppy is who shade-tree is referring to?

[jennypenny]

I'm so cynical when it comes to everything related to this election, my first thought when I read that Abedin is separating from Weiner was that she's probably doing it now to garner sympathy and counter some of the negative press she's gotten recently. It was a harsh thought given his colorful history, but it doesn't seem that far-fetched either.

I hate being this cynical.

[shade-tree]

Hey now, Be nice everyone.

Young candidate that was popular= Obama. (past candidate, of course, just an example of how people feel about folks with shorter resume)
Outsider= Trump
Long history/one main job= Bernie

I do stand by my claim that very few people have been all of the following: a first lady, a senator, a secretary of state. Therefore few people have exposure to the high level decision-making situations she has. That we're not all going to agree with her decisions and that some will have had serious consequences seems a given. I just don't see evil motivation.

[Dragline]

brute completely agrees with ffj. Dragline only need take one look at 4chan to realize anonymity lets out the true self.

Are you comparing support for Trump to partaking in misogynist porn? I don't think most Trump supporters would feel that way.

[BRUTE]

Are you comparing support for Trump to partaking in misogynist porn? I don't think most Trump supporters would feel that way.

brute has no idea what most Trump supporters would feel like, but clearly Dragline must have a different taste in 4chan than brute.

[Riggerjack]

"Therefore few people have exposure to the high level decision-making situations she has. That we're not all going to agree with her decisions and that some will have had serious consequences seems a given. I just don't see evil motivation."

OK. For the record, I don't think her motivation for evil is all that unusual in her profession. However, as you say, she has been in power a long, long, long time. Time enough to leave a trail of blood and slime, as BRUTE so eloquently put it.

The last time a politician with this much dirt ran was Huey Long, and he was still a local politician. This, I believe, would be more damaging than anything she did or didn't do in office. Corruption is part of democracy. But here in the USA, we expect our scandalized politicians to disappear from the public eye. Instant, permanent, involuntary, early retirement.

If there is a Hillary standard, it is that no rules, standards, or expectations apply to her. That there are different rules for the rulers is beyond question. But HRC elected, is a blatant statement that even those rules can be thrown out.

[CS]

I am not going to read this whole thread because blood pressure, but I just want to throw this out there - I am more than STOKED to vote for Hillary. As a woman coming near fifty, who has had to deal with sexism, professionally and personally for the 45 years that I can remember, I am beyond impressed with her willingness to keep engaging. She works hard for others.

I've also contributed a ton to her campaign (It's cheaper than a move to Canada). I figure one of the best benefits of keeping my expenses down is that when I have something or someone I want to support, I've got the resources.

Go Hill!

[IlliniDave]

But HRC elected, is a blatant statement that even those rules can be thrown out.

This to me is what's really at stake. It would bring out into the open a popular mandate that following rules, obeying the law, telling the truth in matters related to acting officially in a high-level government office, and ethical behavior while holding a high-level government office, are blatantly/openly no longer required to be elected president. Seems the genie will be out of the bottle for good. The blinders people seem to put on to fully support HRC exceed the blinders people seem to need to fully support DJT.

We'll more-or-less get the government we deserve.

Once this clown show is behind us I intend to be fully transitioned to ER prior to the next time a president is elected. I have now added a very deliberate tune-out of politics to my future lifestyle agenda. And for me, during the open water season at least, Canada is only a moderate day's paddle away.

[RealPerson]

I do agree however with the premise that people are much more honest when they are anonymous and don't have to suffer criticism for their viewpoints and that is going to be a factor this November.

Why do you agree with that premise? Do people who answer random polls really "suffer criticism for their viewpoints" by somebody recording their preference in a box? And if so, how -- unless they shared what they told the pollster with others on their own?

I think that people with firm viewpoints like to vocalize them and signal to like-minded individuals. And the internet provides even greater opportunities for such signaling.

Interesting observation. When you are being polled, someone you don't know took the initiative to contact you. They know who you are, where you live, where you work, whether you own your home, etc.. You have no idea whether what you tell the pollster will be entered in some database and what it might be used for in the future. Actually, I take that back. It will be used for other purposes.

With posting online, you take the initiative. You decide how much to disclose about yourself. The readers of the blog pretty much know what you disclosed, and nothing else. You can stay pretty anonymous if you manage your postings carefully. In other words, you are in the driver's seat.

Polls have been wrong before, especially when it involves a candidate that is perceived as somehow "bad". Trump is perceived by many as a tasteless and racist bully, so you may not want your name attached to him. That may prompt someone to tell a pollster that they are undecided, when they really have decided to vote for Trump. Hillary, for all the scandals surrounding her, is really a very mainstream candidate. She doesn't have that Trump stigma for the most part. Just my 2 c worth.

[Riggerjack]

I am more than STOKED to vote for Hillary. As a woman coming near fifty, who has had to deal with sexism, professionally and personally for the 45 years that I can remember, I am beyond impressed with her willingness to keep engaging.

Excellent! I am glad you found a candidate you can get behind. I knew Somebody had to support her, instead of settling for her. Though such people seem hard to find.

Back to the original question of this thread, "Why?" Or are you a single issue voter?

I am looking forward to voting Johnson. And for the record, I am pretty much a single issue voter over gun rights. So please don't take my question as any kind of attack on your blood pressure.

It would be nice to hear the other side for more than a post or two in this thread.

[BRUTE]

funny, brute is also in the Johnson camp (hrhrhr), but he doesn't care much for firearms (he doesn't own any). brute's "single issue" is the drug war and those other wars in the middle east.