2016 USA Presidential Elections

Bankruptcy means "if I keep running this ship the way I was running it, it's gonna sink so god oh god help me keep this ship afloat". Either way not a good thing to happen to a country either, look at where I'm from and you'll know my experience in the matter.
 
Bankruptcy means "if I keep running this ship the way I was running it, it's gonna sink so god oh god help me keep this ship afloat". Either way not a good thing to happen to a country either, look at where I'm from and you'll know my experience in the matter.
I don't think the US is at short-term risk of going the way of PIIGS, but that's one of the reasons I'm feeling the Johnson - balancing the budget. Trump may or may balance it but Clinton's plans would run up the deficit even higher and we can't afford to keep doing that indefinitely.
 
Unfortunately, this is the same logic that Trump voters use. This lesser-of-two-evils idiocy is how we end up with horrible politicians, despite the fact that polls show that 2/3rds of Americans would prefer a third party candidate. We are our own worst enemies and you, sir, are part of the problem.


I normally vote third party. How am I the problem again? This time I just see Hilary as more rational and far less dangerous than Trump, who must not win.

The best thing for a real third party would be to vote Trump and him winning. This would galvanize the independents into action and bring the rational people from the two major parties in with them. Sadly though, the new party would be soon influenced by corporate money and twisted in the same way the TEA party was.


I don't think the US is at short-term risk of going the way of PIIGS, but that's one of the reasons I'm feeling the Johnson - balancing the budget. Trump may or may balance it but Clinton's plans would run up the deficit even higher and we can't afford to keep doing that indefinitely.


What was his plan to balance the budget again? Like most politicians running for office, it is mostly a pipe dream plan that won't go anywhere without congress. His plans to deregulate corporations is also not rational, we would soon have pollution problems like China.

But go ahead and keep "feeling the Johnson" if it makes you happy. (Also, why do his followers need to steal Bernie's tag line?)
 
balancing the budget. Trump may or may balance it but Clinton's plans would run up the deficit even higher and we can't afford to keep doing that indefinitely.

It is impossible for a deregulation supporter to balance the budget, because the only way would be to cut it (perhaps to zero). Except, they can't because public money is the only thing that keeps the western economical system from collapsing into more backwards subobtimal unbalanced ecnomic distributions, which reduce, rather than increase, the amount of total wealth.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong but capitalism relies on the concept of wealth being infinite... how long util that backfires even worse than it did in 08?
 
Unfortunately, this is the same logic that Trump voters use. This lesser-of-two-evils idiocy is how we end up with horrible politicians, despite the fact that polls show that 2/3rds of Americans would prefer a third party candidate. We are our own worst enemies and you, sir, are part of the problem.

Isn't voting for the 3rd party candidate just because he's a third party candidate just as cynical as voting "lesser of two evils"? I've watched at least a couple hours of Gary Johnson speeches and interviews I can't say he'd still be my choice is someone else were running on the similar platform. There's a lot to be said about personality and I'm not feeling his...but should I vote for him simply because he's not the other two...and is that actually any better?
 
Isn't voting for the 3rd party candidate just because he's a third party candidate just as cynical as voting "lesser of two evils"? I've watched at least a couple hours of Gary Johnson speeches and interviews I can't say he'd still be my choice is someone else were running on the similar platform. There's a lot to be said about personality and I'm not feeling his...but should I vote for him simply because he's not the other two...and is that actually any better?
Do you disagree with Johnson more than you do with Trump or Clinton? And hey, vote for Jill Stein. Vote for Paul the plumber for all I care. Vote for whoever you think you actually want to vote for.
 
So much this.

For all of Hilary's faults, they are still no worse than Trump's, the only other candidate that has a real chance of winning.

I have said it before but let me say it again, there is no other option than to defeat Trump in my opinion. It is sad and I will do it under protest(will wear a clothes pin on my nose while voting), but I will vote for Hilary. If I thought there was a chance that a reasonable third party candidate could win, I would vote for them. That is not an option this time around.

I feel a similar way about Hillary. I don't buy into this idea that Trump would be "dangerous". We have checks and balances for a reason and I have little faith a buffoon like Trump could work around them. But we already know there are multiple reasons to believe Hillary exploited her power as secretary of state to do favors for those who donated money to her foundation and there are people in our government turning a blind eye to her actions and giving her a free pass on breaking rules and laws, and even weighing things in her favor like the DNC. Would checks and balances stop Hillary from doing something stupid? Probably not, she knows how to work the system and bypass them, and no one seems willing to criticize her or even report on it.

I believe Trump would be on a much shorter leash and be under a microscope of scrutiny, his every move recorded and analyzed for anything that can be used against him. I seriously doubt he would be able to get away with anything.

Plus, I think Hillary is a corrupt criminal who should rightly be in jail, for her to become president at all would be an embarrassment to our nation, but for her to be the first female president would be an absolute disgrace to every woman in our country.
 
Last edited:
The other day my coworker, with a look of utter shock and disbelief, asked me if I can imagine what would happen if Trump had nuclear launch codes. Now, mind you, I didn't bring up politics or Trump at all - this was based on nothing other than my Clinton Foundation mug (used to work there and keep the mug in the office). I just told her I didn't want to discuss politics but the reality is that the President cannot single-handedly launch anything - there are tons of checks and balances before an f-ing NUKE can be shot.


Plus, I think Hillary is a corrupt criminal who should rightly be in jail...
Couldn't agree more.
 
I feel a similar way about Hillary. I don't buy into this idea that Trump would be "dangerous". We have checks and balances for a reason and I have little faith a buffoon like Trump could work around them. But we already know there are multiple reasons to believe Hillary exploited her power as secretary of state to do favors for those who donated money to her foundation and there are people in our government turning a blind eye to her actions and giving her a free pass on breaking rules and laws, and even weighing things in her favor like the DNC.

I think you have to be in the extreme range of naive to think for a second Trump will not do the same or worse. I don't think there's a single person who believes Trump funded his own campaign on his own and doesn't owe a million favors already, and knowing his politics, it's very frightful to think who he owes favors to.
 
I think you have to be in the extreme range of naive to think for a second Trump will not do the same or worse. I don't think there's a single person who believes Trump funded his own campaign on his own and doesn't owe a million favors already, and knowing his politics, it's very frightful to think who he owes favors to.
It's a bit different when a) you know for a fact that this corruption is happening, rather than just speculating, and b) favors are owed to other (often hostile) nations versus companies or individuals. Hell, Saudi Arabia is one of the Clinton Foundation's biggest donors and they helped get us into hot water with Al Qaeda back in the day!
 
You still can't either vote Trump or third party. So I ask you again, what do you do?
Why can't I vote third party? Besides, as I already mentioned, if I wasn't able to vote third party, I'd go Trump over Hillary any day of the week, which says a lot about how much I can't stand her.
 
It's a bit different when a) you know for a fact that this corruption is happening, rather than just speculating, and b) favors are owed to other (often hostile) nations versus companies or individuals. Hell, Saudi Arabia is one of the Clinton Foundation's biggest donors and they helped get us into hot water with Al Qaeda back in the day!

I think a) is true for both of them. We are not speculating that Trump may be corrupt and a liar. It's a fact that he is (just as it is for Clinton). As for b), you have a point there, but I don't think I agree with its implications. Outside of radical terrorist organizations, is there a country that actively seeks to destroy us? Favors owed by Clinton, even in the Saudi Arabia case, are still in terms of business and the economy. Still not cool, but not that different from Trump.

I think it makes sense to vote for Johnson over Trump or Clinton - there are rational reasons to do so. The man has actual experience in governing, while Trump has none and his business acumen has taken a lot of hits in the past 6 months (cue the previous discussion of bankruptcy). I like that Johnson intends to balance the budget, whereas Trump would increase both the deficit and the national debt (after all, he has actively supported borrowing and saying that we can't go bankrupt because "we print the money").
 
Outside of radical terrorist organizations, is there a country that actively seeks to destroy us?
Russia and China would love to undermine our influence and wealth.


I think it makes sense to vote for Johnson over Trump or Clinton - there are rational reasons to do so. The man has actual experience in governing, while Trump has none and his business acumen has taken a lot of hits in the past 6 months (cue the previous discussion of bankruptcy). I like that Johnson intends to balance the budget, whereas Trump would increase both the deficit and the national debt (after all, he has actively supported borrowing and saying that we can't go bankrupt because "we print the money").
:nod: Johnson and Weld both balanced their states' budgets. They also support legalizing pot (thus helping millions of non-violent criminals get back to their lives and families and reducing other crime).
 
Why can't I vote third party? Besides, as I already mentioned, if I wasn't able to vote third party, I'd go Trump over Hillary any day of the week, which says a lot about how much I can't stand her.

Well, you can, but they won't win, so it's gonna be a victory for either of those douchebags and I'm sorry but whatever links Hillary has to Saudi Arabia, it's not as bad as "ban all muslims, kick out all mexicans, build a wall, triple the military spending, act like the world can't do without the US and they'll let us get away with anything".
 
If Hillary wins, the US proves to the world the political class can be as shitty as they want and still get elected, which might be a good start for a change (not gonna go as far as saying revolution, but who knows).
If Trump wins, the US proves to the world they're imbeciles.
 
If Hillary wins, the US proves to the world the political class can be as shitty as they want and still get elected, which might be a good start for a change (not gonna go as far as saying revolution, but who knows).
I've actually heard people say they're voting for Hillary just to speed up the downfall and bring about the next revolution. I can't say that I'm wishing/hoping for an armed revolt but it's certainly an interesting position to think about.
 
I think you have to be in the extreme range of naive to think for a second Trump will not do the same or worse. I don't think there's a single person who believes Trump funded his own campaign on his own and doesn't owe a million favors already, and knowing his politics, it's very frightful to think who he owes favors to.

So it's a choice between someone we know to be corrupt, who acts with impunity, and isn't held accountable, and someone that might possibly be corrupt, who would be held to an infinitely higher standard and level of scrutiny? That doesn't seem like a difficult choice to me.

If Hillary wins, the US proves to the world the political class can be as shitty as they want and still get elected, which might be a good start for a change (not gonna go as far as saying revolution, but who knows).
If Trump wins, the US proves to the world they're imbeciles.

A very simple minded view of things. Trump is the least popular candidate in US history. Hillary is the second least popular candidate. These discussions always revolve around who is worse. I seriously doubt anyone voting is actually supporting a candidate. They are voting against someone. If Hillary wins, it's because Trump hurt too many feelings. If Trump wins, it's because Hillary told too many lies.

Or because the Russians/Julian Assange delivered an October surprise.
 
Top