Would we really be better off under President Clinton?

[knapplc]

Just now, TGHusker said:

if the Dem Party hadn't greased the skids for Hillary and made it almost impossible for anyone else to be nominated, we may have a different

president now.

 

Amen. When history has its chance to analyze the 2016 election with a more sober eye, this will go down as one of the greatest miscalculations by a major party in 100 years.

 

Hillary may be better than Trump, but she's an awful, awful candidate that is far too polarizing and far too unlikable to carry the day. 

 

I mean, yeah, it's awful that we have Trump. But the ONLY way we have Trump is if Hillary runs.  I think in the general election, nearly any other Republican beats Hillary in 2016. The Democrats were so enthralled with the idea of it being Hillary's turn and having the first woman president that they ignored the basic fact that we don't like her.

[Cdog923]

Yes. 

[Redux]

48 minutes ago, knapplc said:

It's a good thing nobody is actually thumping their chest or claiming greater patriotism in this thread.

 

17 hours ago, knapplc said:

You didn't have to be happy to vote for Hillary, or even like it. I hated it.  But that was the responsible vote for America, and I made it.  Given the choice again, I'd do it again in a heartbeat.

 

Not far off though, am I right?

[knapplc]

You disagree with me politically, and have been more than vocal about it for more than a year now.

 

Knowing that, it's not surprising you'd make up nefarious intents behind my posts. I have no interest in defending my motives against such allegations.

 

You remain, as you usually are in these discussions, wrong.  But you will believe whatever you want.  So it goes.

[JJ Husker]

There are plenty of countries around the globe where there is only one acceptable candidate to vote for. To be sure, we have plenty of problems here but thank God that isn't one of them.

[Redux]

12 minutes ago, knapplc said:

You disagree with me politically, and have been more than vocal about it for more than a year now.

 

Knowing that, it's not surprising you'd make up nefarious intents behind my posts. I have no interest in defending my motives against such allegations.

 

You remain, as you usually are in these discussions, wrong.  But you will believe whatever you want.  So it goes.

 

Talk about Irony

[Redux]

The silly part is when you actually set aside your political beliefs and voting "beliefs", we actually don't have much to disagree about.  The system as a whole is a broken shell of itself.  The two party system still in place is only their as poplace control to make people ironically believe their voice matters more than it does and that their votes matter more than they do.  That said...

 

-A vote for Gary Johnson was not a vote for Trump

-A vote for Mickey Mouse was not a vote for Trump

-A vote for Donald Trump was a vote for Trump

-A vote for Hillary Clinton wasn't the more "responsible vote for America", the second we start getting into voting for someone else so that a certain person doesn't win is the second you admit that politics and voting in general are a complete farce

 

All in all, it's a smoke and mirror show.  None of it matters except to keep us all distracted and controlable and we have no choice but to play along or ignore and accept it.

[knapplc]

11 minutes ago, Redux said:

The silly part is when you actually set aside your political beliefs and voting "beliefs", we actually don't have much to disagree about.  The system as a whole is a broken shell of itself.  The two party system still in place is only their as poplace control to make people ironically believe their voice matters more than it does and that their votes matter more than they do. 

 

And this I agree with.

 

The middle part... we have a difference of opinion.

 

 

11 minutes ago, Redux said:

None of it matters except to keep us all distracted and controlable and we have no choice but to play along or ignore and accept it.

 

Maybe I'm the crazy one, and if so, I'll wear the crazy hat proudly. But I won't either ignore it or accept it. I'll keep shouting at the storm as it ignores me and rages around me. But in a Democracy, all we have is our voice.  So I'll use it.

[Redux]

And you're welcome to do so, which falls into the playing along category.  The real power behind the government loves that we take politics so seriously, it furthers the ideology that politics are determined by the people.

 

I mean, we live in a country where we had to choose over a non political reality star business mogul and a corrupt female uber politician whose husband was president and got impeached.  The expression "you can't make this s#!t up" does not apply here because I truly believe it HAD to be made up.

[TGHusker]

1 hour ago, knapplc said:

 

Amen. When history has its chance to analyze the 2016 election with a more sober eye, this will go down as one of the greatest miscalculations by a major party in 100 years.

 

Hillary may be better than Trump, but she's an awful, awful candidate that is far too polarizing and far too unlikable to carry the day. 

 

I mean, yeah, it's awful that we have Trump. But the ONLY way we have Trump is if Hillary runs.  I think in the general election, nearly any other Republican beats Hillary in 2016. The Democrats were so enthralled with the idea of it being Hillary's turn and having the first woman president that they ignored the basic fact that we don't like her.

Yep - got that 100% right.  On the flip side to the bold  - I think nearly any other Dem beats Trump in 2016.

[Redux]

Now, would we have been better off under Hillary?  No, not really.  From a populace perspective, yes.  But we would trade the blundering playground kid attitude for the smug and clearly corrput one.  We would trade unease with allies for shady dealings in our borders.  Healthcare would still be a monopoly, gas prices would still rise, government spending as a whole wouldn't be affected that much and the only thing that would truly be different from a big picture is that "Yay, we got a female up in da hizzouse!".

 

Impossible question to answer unless anyone has access to Rick Sanchez's portal gun.  Trading puppet for puppet isn't a hypothetical to give much thought to.

[knapplc]

The continued description of Hillary as "corrupt," which was a theme pushed by Trump all through the election, is baffling.

 

Trump is utterly corrupt. Trump has, quite likely, colluded with a foreign government hostile to America to gain power.  I mean... Hillary is as "corrupt" as any Washington politician, but why would anyone describe her as corrupt and not Trump? 

 

The fact that we wouldn't have a person who is likely beholden to hostile foreigners as president is reason enough to admit we would be better off. And that's not to mention the rank greed, graft, theft, and shenanigans going on in the Trump administration.  It's right out in the open. 

 

Baffling. 

[Redux]

So it's the "I know you are but what am I" argument?  Anyone who achieves the pedestal of being in line for the presidency is going to be corrupt to a certain degree.  And the whole foreign collusion thing is just as comparable to Hillary's FBI investigation cover up shenanigans, and are we so sure that Hillary wasn't colluding with foreigners to gain power?  It's a circle train argument with no real implications or resolution.

[knapplc]

6 minutes ago, Redux said:

So it's the "I know you are but what am I" argument?  Anyone who achieves the pedestal of being in line for the presidency is going to be corrupt to a certain degree.  And the whole foreign collusion thing is just as comparable to Hillary's FBI investigation cover up shenanigans, and are we so sure that Hillary wasn't colluding with foreigners to gain power?  It's a circle train argument with no real implications or resolution.

 

...no

 

We have evidence that people very, very close to Trump were colluding with a foreign government.  We have confessions and convictions in an ongoing investigation.  Prior to the election, we were already looking into Trump's Russia connections. 

 

Take off the partisan blinders.  Maybe it would help if people disliked both Trump & Hillary, not just one or the other, so they could see the problems with either one. 

 

Yes, Hillary is bad. Trump is far, far worse. 

 

If you can't see that... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[NM11046]

53 minutes ago, Redux said:

And you're welcome to do so, which falls into the playing along category.  The real power behind the government loves that we take politics so seriously, it furthers the ideology that politics are determined by the people.

 

I mean, we live in a country where we had to choose over a thrice married, non political, reality star and supposed business mogul whose current spouse immigrated in a way that was at best sketchy and at worst illegal and a corrupt female uber politician whose husband was president and got impeached.  The expression "you can't make this s#!t up" does not apply here because I truly believe it HAD to be made up.

OR

I mean, we live in a country where we had to choose over a non political, reality star and business mogul and an experienced lifelong female politician.  The expression "you can't make this s#!t up" does not apply here because I truly believe it HAD to be made up.

 

FIFY.  If we now define and describe political candidates by their spouses then have to do it for both.  Or be honest on both ends. And when I read the later it doesn't sound like a tough decision.