• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 15:29
CEST 21:29
KST 04:29
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202550RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16
Community News
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams5Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8Team TLMC #5 - Submission re-extension4
StarCraft 2
General
RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025 Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing RSL Season 1 - Final Week
Tourneys
Esports World Cup 2025 Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2) Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava
Brood War
General
BW General Discussion [Update] ShieldBattery: 1v1 Fastest Support! BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams Ginuda's JaeDong Interview Series
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues CSL Xiamen International Invitational [CSLPRO] It's CSLAN Season! - Last Chance [BSL 2v2] ProLeague Season 3 - Friday 21:00 CET
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile CCLP - Command & Conquer League Project
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Post Pic of your Favorite Food! Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread The Games Industry And ATVI
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 838 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4125

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 4123 4124 4125 4126 4127 10093 Next
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.

In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!

NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious.
Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
GGTeMpLaR
Profile Blog Joined June 2009
United States7226 Posts
June 24 2016 18:13 GMT
#82481
On June 25 2016 03:12 farvacola wrote:
Uhh, what? The two parties will not cease to exist....


That is not what I said, try again.
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23221 Posts
June 24 2016 18:13 GMT
#82482
On June 25 2016 03:06 Plansix wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2016 02:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 00:00 Plansix wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:50 LegalLord wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:35 Plansix wrote:
Doubtful. All this brings is instability and that does not play in to the general electorate. Nationalism and global trade work as a talking point, but watching the ramifications of those policies unfold won’t sell the general electorate on them. Trump isn’t trying to win the anti-establishment vote anymore, he has all he can get.

Yeah, I agree that Hillary is the most probable outcome, and it's not like Trump and the Republicans are not without issues of their own. My point is that this "omfg must vote against Trump" line of argument is getting tiresome, and Hillary would do better to make the case for herself than simply hope that anti-Trump will carry the day.

Of course we need good policies and proposals. I would like to see a larger focus on election finance reform and salary stagnation.

But I took that the view that vote should be earned by the candidate during 2000 and 2004 elections and still regret it. And out of those elections my brother got set to two useless wars, lost a few friends and put all of us through hell. I’m not doing that again, even if I am not wild about Clinton.


You supported the wrong candidate if you wanted anything more than some lip service on campaign finance reform. Also if you want to avoid more pointless wars. You picked the biggest supporter of the Iraq war you had to choose from, and the one who is already been a big advocate for sending more soldiers to Afghanistan and keeping more soldiers like your brother in Iraq.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but if that's actually what you wanted, you most certainly backed the wrong candidate.

Its great that you ended that with, “not to be a jerk,” because that really shows you were committed to it.

And your candidate is a curmudgeonly old man who only stayed in office because he was voted in by a tiny state of liberals that are happy to vote in someone who doesn’t accomplish anything in the senate worth writing home about. So yeah, your boy didn’t impress me in the least when it comes to getting things done. Because after this election the moderate democrats and Republican party will still exist, no matter much wishing Bernie did.

So yeah, I voted for the person I was giving me way less lip service.


I'm no going to argue that stuff, my point was based off of your comment about your brother and campaign finance, you picked the wrong candidate. If those were lower on your list than someone's perceived curmudgenosity, than fine. I also presume when you're comparing accomplishments you're not gobbling this nonsense up.

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/feed/seven-hillary-clintons-biggest-accomplishments/
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
Rebs
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
Pakistan10726 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-06-24 18:21:41
June 24 2016 18:15 GMT
#82483
On June 25 2016 03:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2016 02:55 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 00:00 Plansix wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:50 LegalLord wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:35 Plansix wrote:
Doubtful. All this brings is instability and that does not play in to the general electorate. Nationalism and global trade work as a talking point, but watching the ramifications of those policies unfold won’t sell the general electorate on them. Drumpf isn’t trying to win the anti-establishment vote anymore, he has all he can get.

Yeah, I agree that Hillary is the most probable outcome, and it's not like Drumpf and the Republicans are not without issues of their own. My point is that this "omfg must vote against Drumpf" line of argument is getting tiresome, and Hillary would do better to make the case for herself than simply hope that anti-Drumpf will carry the day.

Of course we need good policies and proposals. I would like to see a larger focus on election finance reform and salary stagnation.

But I took that the view that vote should be earned by the candidate during 2000 and 2004 elections and still regret it. And out of those elections my brother got set to two useless wars, lost a few friends and put all of us through hell. I’m not doing that again, even if I am not wild about Clinton.


You supported the wrong candidate if you wanted anything more than some lip service on campaign finance reform. Also if you want to avoid more pointless wars. You picked the biggest supporter of the Iraq war you had to choose from, and the one who is already been a big advocate for sending more soldiers to Afghanistan and keeping more soldiers like your brother in Iraq.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but if that's actually what you wanted, you most certainly backed the wrong candidate.


Its ok, you can get Drumpf and teach America a lesson. The I told you saw is always worth it.


If Drumpf wins, Hillary has no one to blame but herself and her supporters. Trying to put it on others is silly.


yeah, and I didnt say that, I said that you can have that one on your unconscious for NOT supporting her and being complicit in getting a Drumpf.

At the end of the day you still have a choice to make and a do nothing choice is just as bad as voting the bad guy. Or the worse guy whatever floats your boat.

You are confusing being petulant as being principled. I believe they say things to the effect of get your head out of your ass in these sorts of instances.

Hillary and her supporters may blame you if things go south, but that doesnt matter. You should blame yourself.
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
June 24 2016 18:17 GMT
#82484
On June 25 2016 03:13 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2016 03:06 Plansix wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 00:00 Plansix wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:50 LegalLord wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:35 Plansix wrote:
Doubtful. All this brings is instability and that does not play in to the general electorate. Nationalism and global trade work as a talking point, but watching the ramifications of those policies unfold won’t sell the general electorate on them. Trump isn’t trying to win the anti-establishment vote anymore, he has all he can get.

Yeah, I agree that Hillary is the most probable outcome, and it's not like Trump and the Republicans are not without issues of their own. My point is that this "omfg must vote against Trump" line of argument is getting tiresome, and Hillary would do better to make the case for herself than simply hope that anti-Trump will carry the day.

Of course we need good policies and proposals. I would like to see a larger focus on election finance reform and salary stagnation.

But I took that the view that vote should be earned by the candidate during 2000 and 2004 elections and still regret it. And out of those elections my brother got set to two useless wars, lost a few friends and put all of us through hell. I’m not doing that again, even if I am not wild about Clinton.


You supported the wrong candidate if you wanted anything more than some lip service on campaign finance reform. Also if you want to avoid more pointless wars. You picked the biggest supporter of the Iraq war you had to choose from, and the one who is already been a big advocate for sending more soldiers to Afghanistan and keeping more soldiers like your brother in Iraq.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but if that's actually what you wanted, you most certainly backed the wrong candidate.

Its great that you ended that with, “not to be a jerk,” because that really shows you were committed to it.

And your candidate is a curmudgeonly old man who only stayed in office because he was voted in by a tiny state of liberals that are happy to vote in someone who doesn’t accomplish anything in the senate worth writing home about. So yeah, your boy didn’t impress me in the least when it comes to getting things done. Because after this election the moderate democrats and Republican party will still exist, no matter much wishing Bernie did.

So yeah, I voted for the person I was giving me way less lip service.


I'm no going to argue that stuff, my point was based off of your comment about your brother and campaign finance, you picked the wrong candidate. If those were lower on your list than someone's perceived curmudgenosity, than fine. I also presume when you're comparing accomplishments you're not gobbling this nonsense up.

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/feed/seven-hillary-clintons-biggest-accomplishments/

I don't believe Bernie could accomplish any reforms on campaign finance if elected. I have looked at his voting record, it did not impress me for the amount of time he was in office.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23221 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-06-24 18:26:33
June 24 2016 18:21 GMT
#82485
On June 25 2016 03:15 Rebs wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2016 03:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:55 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 00:00 Plansix wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:50 LegalLord wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:35 Plansix wrote:
Doubtful. All this brings is instability and that does not play in to the general electorate. Nationalism and global trade work as a talking point, but watching the ramifications of those policies unfold won’t sell the general electorate on them. Drumpf isn’t trying to win the anti-establishment vote anymore, he has all he can get.

Yeah, I agree that Hillary is the most probable outcome, and it's not like Drumpf and the Republicans are not without issues of their own. My point is that this "omfg must vote against Drumpf" line of argument is getting tiresome, and Hillary would do better to make the case for herself than simply hope that anti-Drumpf will carry the day.

Of course we need good policies and proposals. I would like to see a larger focus on election finance reform and salary stagnation.

But I took that the view that vote should be earned by the candidate during 2000 and 2004 elections and still regret it. And out of those elections my brother got set to two useless wars, lost a few friends and put all of us through hell. I’m not doing that again, even if I am not wild about Clinton.


You supported the wrong candidate if you wanted anything more than some lip service on campaign finance reform. Also if you want to avoid more pointless wars. You picked the biggest supporter of the Iraq war you had to choose from, and the one who is already been a big advocate for sending more soldiers to Afghanistan and keeping more soldiers like your brother in Iraq.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but if that's actually what you wanted, you most certainly backed the wrong candidate.


Its ok, you can get Drumpf and teach America a lesson. The I told you saw is always worth it.


If Drumpf wins, Hillary has no one to blame but herself and her supporters. Trying to put it on others is silly.


yeah, and I didnt say that, I said that you can have that one on your unconscious for NOT supporting her and being complicit in getting a Trump.

At the end of the day you still have a choice to make and a do nothing choice is just as bad as voting the bad guy. Or the worse guy whatever floats your boat.

You are confusing being petulant as being principled. I believe they say things to the effect of get your head out of your ass in these sorts of instances.


The options aren't limited to "vote for Hillary", "vote for Trump", "do nothing". That's just a matter of fact, so if that could be the last time that false argument is put forward that would be great.

On June 25 2016 03:17 Plansix wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2016 03:13 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:06 Plansix wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 00:00 Plansix wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:50 LegalLord wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:35 Plansix wrote:
Doubtful. All this brings is instability and that does not play in to the general electorate. Nationalism and global trade work as a talking point, but watching the ramifications of those policies unfold won’t sell the general electorate on them. Trump isn’t trying to win the anti-establishment vote anymore, he has all he can get.

Yeah, I agree that Hillary is the most probable outcome, and it's not like Trump and the Republicans are not without issues of their own. My point is that this "omfg must vote against Trump" line of argument is getting tiresome, and Hillary would do better to make the case for herself than simply hope that anti-Trump will carry the day.

Of course we need good policies and proposals. I would like to see a larger focus on election finance reform and salary stagnation.

But I took that the view that vote should be earned by the candidate during 2000 and 2004 elections and still regret it. And out of those elections my brother got set to two useless wars, lost a few friends and put all of us through hell. I’m not doing that again, even if I am not wild about Clinton.


You supported the wrong candidate if you wanted anything more than some lip service on campaign finance reform. Also if you want to avoid more pointless wars. You picked the biggest supporter of the Iraq war you had to choose from, and the one who is already been a big advocate for sending more soldiers to Afghanistan and keeping more soldiers like your brother in Iraq.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but if that's actually what you wanted, you most certainly backed the wrong candidate.

Its great that you ended that with, “not to be a jerk,” because that really shows you were committed to it.

And your candidate is a curmudgeonly old man who only stayed in office because he was voted in by a tiny state of liberals that are happy to vote in someone who doesn’t accomplish anything in the senate worth writing home about. So yeah, your boy didn’t impress me in the least when it comes to getting things done. Because after this election the moderate democrats and Republican party will still exist, no matter much wishing Bernie did.

So yeah, I voted for the person I was giving me way less lip service.


I'm no going to argue that stuff, my point was based off of your comment about your brother and campaign finance, you picked the wrong candidate. If those were lower on your list than someone's perceived curmudgenosity, than fine. I also presume when you're comparing accomplishments you're not gobbling this nonsense up.

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/feed/seven-hillary-clintons-biggest-accomplishments/

I don't believe Bernie could accomplish any reforms on campaign finance if elected. I have looked at his voting record, it did not impress me for the amount of time he was in office.


What accomplishments from Hillary gives you the impression she would have been any better? In what way/for what reasons do you think Hillary less likely to send your brother to a warzone than Bernie?
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
Rebs
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
Pakistan10726 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-06-24 18:22:33
June 24 2016 18:22 GMT
#82486
On June 25 2016 03:21 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2016 03:15 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:55 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 00:00 Plansix wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:50 LegalLord wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:35 Plansix wrote:
Doubtful. All this brings is instability and that does not play in to the general electorate. Nationalism and global trade work as a talking point, but watching the ramifications of those policies unfold won’t sell the general electorate on them. Drumpf isn’t trying to win the anti-establishment vote anymore, he has all he can get.

Yeah, I agree that Hillary is the most probable outcome, and it's not like Drumpf and the Republicans are not without issues of their own. My point is that this "omfg must vote against Drumpf" line of argument is getting tiresome, and Hillary would do better to make the case for herself than simply hope that anti-Drumpf will carry the day.

Of course we need good policies and proposals. I would like to see a larger focus on election finance reform and salary stagnation.

But I took that the view that vote should be earned by the candidate during 2000 and 2004 elections and still regret it. And out of those elections my brother got set to two useless wars, lost a few friends and put all of us through hell. I’m not doing that again, even if I am not wild about Clinton.


You supported the wrong candidate if you wanted anything more than some lip service on campaign finance reform. Also if you want to avoid more pointless wars. You picked the biggest supporter of the Iraq war you had to choose from, and the one who is already been a big advocate for sending more soldiers to Afghanistan and keeping more soldiers like your brother in Iraq.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but if that's actually what you wanted, you most certainly backed the wrong candidate.


Its ok, you can get Drumpf and teach America a lesson. The I told you saw is always worth it.


If Drumpf wins, Hillary has no one to blame but herself and her supporters. Trying to put it on others is silly.


yeah, and I didnt say that, I said that you can have that one on your unconscious for NOT supporting her and being complicit in getting a Drumpf.

At the end of the day you still have a choice to make and a do nothing choice is just as bad as voting the bad guy. Or the worse guy whatever floats your boat.

You are confusing being petulant as being principled. I believe they say things to the effect of get your head out of your ass in these sorts of instances.


The options aren't limited to "vote for Hillary", "vote for Drumpf", "do nothing". That's just a matter of fact, so if that could be the last time that false argument is put forward that would be great.


Im sorry, what were the other option's again? For my benefit, if you will please
farvacola
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States18825 Posts
June 24 2016 18:22 GMT
#82487
Vote for Ralph Nader....erm, I mean Jill Stein.
"when the Dead Kennedys found out they had skinhead fans, they literally wrote a song titled 'Nazi Punks Fuck Off'"
GGTeMpLaR
Profile Blog Joined June 2009
United States7226 Posts
June 24 2016 18:23 GMT
#82488
On June 25 2016 03:15 Rebs wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2016 03:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:55 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 00:00 Plansix wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:50 LegalLord wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:35 Plansix wrote:
Doubtful. All this brings is instability and that does not play in to the general electorate. Nationalism and global trade work as a talking point, but watching the ramifications of those policies unfold won’t sell the general electorate on them. Drumpf isn’t trying to win the anti-establishment vote anymore, he has all he can get.

Yeah, I agree that Hillary is the most probable outcome, and it's not like Drumpf and the Republicans are not without issues of their own. My point is that this "omfg must vote against Drumpf" line of argument is getting tiresome, and Hillary would do better to make the case for herself than simply hope that anti-Drumpf will carry the day.

Of course we need good policies and proposals. I would like to see a larger focus on election finance reform and salary stagnation.

But I took that the view that vote should be earned by the candidate during 2000 and 2004 elections and still regret it. And out of those elections my brother got set to two useless wars, lost a few friends and put all of us through hell. I’m not doing that again, even if I am not wild about Clinton.


You supported the wrong candidate if you wanted anything more than some lip service on campaign finance reform. Also if you want to avoid more pointless wars. You picked the biggest supporter of the Iraq war you had to choose from, and the one who is already been a big advocate for sending more soldiers to Afghanistan and keeping more soldiers like your brother in Iraq.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but if that's actually what you wanted, you most certainly backed the wrong candidate.


Its ok, you can get Drumpf and teach America a lesson. The I told you saw is always worth it.


If Drumpf wins, Hillary has no one to blame but herself and her supporters. Trying to put it on others is silly.


yeah, and I didnt say that, I said that you can have that one on your unconscious for NOT supporting her and being complicit in getting a Trump.

At the end of the day you still have a choice to make and a do nothing choice is just as bad as voting the bad guy. Or the worse guy whatever floats your boat.

You are confusing being petulant as being principled. I believe they say things to the effect of get your head out of your ass in these sorts of instances.


This is so pretentious to presume he is wrong for his choice of who to vote for or not vote for and that it's up to you to down-talk him like it's your 'burden' to get his head out of his ass.

Then again you are viewing it from a simplistic 'black/white good vs bad' perspective. I don't agree with Green or Sanders but he's talking policies and facts here and you're just patronizing him with your opinions.
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15686 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-06-24 18:27:13
June 24 2016 18:25 GMT
#82489
On June 25 2016 03:21 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2016 03:15 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:55 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 00:00 Plansix wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:50 LegalLord wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:35 Plansix wrote:
Doubtful. All this brings is instability and that does not play in to the general electorate. Nationalism and global trade work as a talking point, but watching the ramifications of those policies unfold won’t sell the general electorate on them. Drumpf isn’t trying to win the anti-establishment vote anymore, he has all he can get.

Yeah, I agree that Hillary is the most probable outcome, and it's not like Drumpf and the Republicans are not without issues of their own. My point is that this "omfg must vote against Drumpf" line of argument is getting tiresome, and Hillary would do better to make the case for herself than simply hope that anti-Drumpf will carry the day.

Of course we need good policies and proposals. I would like to see a larger focus on election finance reform and salary stagnation.

But I took that the view that vote should be earned by the candidate during 2000 and 2004 elections and still regret it. And out of those elections my brother got set to two useless wars, lost a few friends and put all of us through hell. I’m not doing that again, even if I am not wild about Clinton.


You supported the wrong candidate if you wanted anything more than some lip service on campaign finance reform. Also if you want to avoid more pointless wars. You picked the biggest supporter of the Iraq war you had to choose from, and the one who is already been a big advocate for sending more soldiers to Afghanistan and keeping more soldiers like your brother in Iraq.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but if that's actually what you wanted, you most certainly backed the wrong candidate.


Its ok, you can get Drumpf and teach America a lesson. The I told you saw is always worth it.


If Drumpf wins, Hillary has no one to blame but herself and her supporters. Trying to put it on others is silly.


yeah, and I didnt say that, I said that you can have that one on your unconscious for NOT supporting her and being complicit in getting a Trump.

At the end of the day you still have a choice to make and a do nothing choice is just as bad as voting the bad guy. Or the worse guy whatever floats your boat.

You are confusing being petulant as being principled. I believe they say things to the effect of get your head out of your ass in these sorts of instances.


The options aren't limited to "vote for Hillary", "vote for Trump", "do nothing". That's just a matter of fact, so if that could be the last time that false argument is put forward that would be great.

You live in a Disney fantasy land. Yes, those are the only two options with a remotely viable percent chance of being elected. Nothing else is serious. Sure, it is possible I'll win the lottery every day this week. But that's not even worth putting thought into. You waste your time with these romantic notions of revolution. Bernie isn't MLK. His campaign isn't the civil rights movement.

On June 25 2016 03:22 farvacola wrote:
Vote for Ralph Nader....erm, I mean Jill Stein.

Yeah, the only candidate who refuses to deny the effectiveness of holistic medicine.
GGTeMpLaR
Profile Blog Joined June 2009
United States7226 Posts
June 24 2016 18:28 GMT
#82490
On June 25 2016 03:25 Mohdoo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2016 03:21 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:15 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:55 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 00:00 Plansix wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:50 LegalLord wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:35 Plansix wrote:
Doubtful. All this brings is instability and that does not play in to the general electorate. Nationalism and global trade work as a talking point, but watching the ramifications of those policies unfold won’t sell the general electorate on them. Drumpf isn’t trying to win the anti-establishment vote anymore, he has all he can get.

Yeah, I agree that Hillary is the most probable outcome, and it's not like Drumpf and the Republicans are not without issues of their own. My point is that this "omfg must vote against Drumpf" line of argument is getting tiresome, and Hillary would do better to make the case for herself than simply hope that anti-Drumpf will carry the day.

Of course we need good policies and proposals. I would like to see a larger focus on election finance reform and salary stagnation.

But I took that the view that vote should be earned by the candidate during 2000 and 2004 elections and still regret it. And out of those elections my brother got set to two useless wars, lost a few friends and put all of us through hell. I’m not doing that again, even if I am not wild about Clinton.


You supported the wrong candidate if you wanted anything more than some lip service on campaign finance reform. Also if you want to avoid more pointless wars. You picked the biggest supporter of the Iraq war you had to choose from, and the one who is already been a big advocate for sending more soldiers to Afghanistan and keeping more soldiers like your brother in Iraq.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but if that's actually what you wanted, you most certainly backed the wrong candidate.


Its ok, you can get Drumpf and teach America a lesson. The I told you saw is always worth it.


If Drumpf wins, Hillary has no one to blame but herself and her supporters. Trying to put it on others is silly.


yeah, and I didnt say that, I said that you can have that one on your unconscious for NOT supporting her and being complicit in getting a Trump.

At the end of the day you still have a choice to make and a do nothing choice is just as bad as voting the bad guy. Or the worse guy whatever floats your boat.

You are confusing being petulant as being principled. I believe they say things to the effect of get your head out of your ass in these sorts of instances.


The options aren't limited to "vote for Hillary", "vote for Trump", "do nothing". That's just a matter of fact, so if that could be the last time that false argument is put forward that would be great.

You live in a Disney fantasy land. Yes, those are the only two options with a remotely viable percent chance of being elected. Nothing else is serious. Sure, it is possible I'll win the lottery every day this week. But that's not even worth putting thought into. You waste your time with these romantic notions of revolution. Bernie isn't MLK. His campaign isn't the civil rights movement.

Show nested quote +
On June 25 2016 03:22 farvacola wrote:
Vote for Ralph Nader....erm, I mean Jill Stein.

Yeah, the only candidate who refuses to deny the effectiveness of holistic medicine.


This is a joke. You vote for who you want to represent you in office. If that isn't one of the two major parties then so be it.

Quit advocating party politics.
Rebs
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
Pakistan10726 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-06-24 18:34:56
June 24 2016 18:29 GMT
#82491
On June 25 2016 03:23 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2016 03:15 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:55 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 00:00 Plansix wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:50 LegalLord wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:35 Plansix wrote:
Doubtful. All this brings is instability and that does not play in to the general electorate. Nationalism and global trade work as a talking point, but watching the ramifications of those policies unfold won’t sell the general electorate on them. Drumpf isn’t trying to win the anti-establishment vote anymore, he has all he can get.

Yeah, I agree that Hillary is the most probable outcome, and it's not like Drumpf and the Republicans are not without issues of their own. My point is that this "omfg must vote against Drumpf" line of argument is getting tiresome, and Hillary would do better to make the case for herself than simply hope that anti-Drumpf will carry the day.

Of course we need good policies and proposals. I would like to see a larger focus on election finance reform and salary stagnation.

But I took that the view that vote should be earned by the candidate during 2000 and 2004 elections and still regret it. And out of those elections my brother got set to two useless wars, lost a few friends and put all of us through hell. I’m not doing that again, even if I am not wild about Clinton.


You supported the wrong candidate if you wanted anything more than some lip service on campaign finance reform. Also if you want to avoid more pointless wars. You picked the biggest supporter of the Iraq war you had to choose from, and the one who is already been a big advocate for sending more soldiers to Afghanistan and keeping more soldiers like your brother in Iraq.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but if that's actually what you wanted, you most certainly backed the wrong candidate.


Its ok, you can get Drumpf and teach America a lesson. The I told you saw is always worth it.


If Drumpf wins, Hillary has no one to blame but herself and her supporters. Trying to put it on others is silly.


yeah, and I didnt say that, I said that you can have that one on your unconscious for NOT supporting her and being complicit in getting a Drumpf.

At the end of the day you still have a choice to make and a do nothing choice is just as bad as voting the bad guy. Or the worse guy whatever floats your boat.

You are confusing being petulant as being principled. I believe they say things to the effect of get your head out of your ass in these sorts of instances.


This is so pretentious to presume he is wrong for his choice of who to vote for or not vote for and that it's up to you to down-talk him like it's your 'burden' to get his head out of his ass.

Then again you are viewing it from a simplistic 'black/white good vs bad' perspective. I don't agree with Green or Sanders but he's talking policies and facts here and you're just patronizing him with your opinions.


This is somewhat specific to his case not just generally. So yes there is a pretty black and white situation. Unless you can get him to agree that Drumpf is something he wants.

The way things work out for him specifically considering his positions

He is faced with the choice to get his head chopped, a finger chopped off or he can flip a coin and either get his finger chopped of or his head. He is choosing option 3.

Obviously the example is exaggerated. But thats basically it. Choose bad case, choose worst case or let things be and deal with whatever happens.

Edit: Also Im not the only one telling people how they should have voted out of thin air. I brought up because it was brought up by him.

Beyond that whatever your views vote how you want. I dont care.

On June 25 2016 03:28 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2016 03:25 Mohdoo wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:21 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:15 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:55 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 00:00 Plansix wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:50 LegalLord wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:35 Plansix wrote:
Doubtful. All this brings is instability and that does not play in to the general electorate. Nationalism and global trade work as a talking point, but watching the ramifications of those policies unfold won’t sell the general electorate on them. Drumpf isn’t trying to win the anti-establishment vote anymore, he has all he can get.

Yeah, I agree that Hillary is the most probable outcome, and it's not like Drumpf and the Republicans are not without issues of their own. My point is that this "omfg must vote against Drumpf" line of argument is getting tiresome, and Hillary would do better to make the case for herself than simply hope that anti-Drumpf will carry the day.

Of course we need good policies and proposals. I would like to see a larger focus on election finance reform and salary stagnation.

But I took that the view that vote should be earned by the candidate during 2000 and 2004 elections and still regret it. And out of those elections my brother got set to two useless wars, lost a few friends and put all of us through hell. I’m not doing that again, even if I am not wild about Clinton.


You supported the wrong candidate if you wanted anything more than some lip service on campaign finance reform. Also if you want to avoid more pointless wars. You picked the biggest supporter of the Iraq war you had to choose from, and the one who is already been a big advocate for sending more soldiers to Afghanistan and keeping more soldiers like your brother in Iraq.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but if that's actually what you wanted, you most certainly backed the wrong candidate.


Its ok, you can get Drumpf and teach America a lesson. The I told you saw is always worth it.


If Drumpf wins, Hillary has no one to blame but herself and her supporters. Trying to put it on others is silly.


yeah, and I didnt say that, I said that you can have that one on your unconscious for NOT supporting her and being complicit in getting a Drumpf.

At the end of the day you still have a choice to make and a do nothing choice is just as bad as voting the bad guy. Or the worse guy whatever floats your boat.

You are confusing being petulant as being principled. I believe they say things to the effect of get your head out of your ass in these sorts of instances.


The options aren't limited to "vote for Hillary", "vote for Drumpf", "do nothing". That's just a matter of fact, so if that could be the last time that false argument is put forward that would be great.

You live in a Disney fantasy land. Yes, those are the only two options with a remotely viable percent chance of being elected. Nothing else is serious. Sure, it is possible I'll win the lottery every day this week. But that's not even worth putting thought into. You waste your time with these romantic notions of revolution. Bernie isn't MLK. His campaign isn't the civil rights movement.

On June 25 2016 03:22 farvacola wrote:
Vote for Ralph Nader....erm, I mean Jill Stein.

Yeah, the only candidate who refuses to deny the effectiveness of holistic medicine.


This is a joke. You vote for who you want to represent you in office. If that isn't one of the two major parties then so be it.

Quit advocating party politics.


Canadians did not do this btw, the voted to make sure someone they "didnt want in office" win, so its not like some fantasy idea. And it worked out pretty well so far.

Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
June 24 2016 18:29 GMT
#82492
This debate has already happened with GH and I don't really see a need to have it again. He is entitled to his opinion. But that being said, I would like it if he kept his smug opinion on other peoples voting choices to himself in the future. Or maybe just my voting choice, since we have had this debate already.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23221 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-06-24 18:45:11
June 24 2016 18:40 GMT
#82493
On June 25 2016 03:22 Rebs wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2016 03:21 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:15 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:55 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 00:00 Plansix wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:50 LegalLord wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:35 Plansix wrote:
Doubtful. All this brings is instability and that does not play in to the general electorate. Nationalism and global trade work as a talking point, but watching the ramifications of those policies unfold won’t sell the general electorate on them. Drumpf isn’t trying to win the anti-establishment vote anymore, he has all he can get.

Yeah, I agree that Hillary is the most probable outcome, and it's not like Drumpf and the Republicans are not without issues of their own. My point is that this "omfg must vote against Drumpf" line of argument is getting tiresome, and Hillary would do better to make the case for herself than simply hope that anti-Drumpf will carry the day.

Of course we need good policies and proposals. I would like to see a larger focus on election finance reform and salary stagnation.

But I took that the view that vote should be earned by the candidate during 2000 and 2004 elections and still regret it. And out of those elections my brother got set to two useless wars, lost a few friends and put all of us through hell. I’m not doing that again, even if I am not wild about Clinton.


You supported the wrong candidate if you wanted anything more than some lip service on campaign finance reform. Also if you want to avoid more pointless wars. You picked the biggest supporter of the Iraq war you had to choose from, and the one who is already been a big advocate for sending more soldiers to Afghanistan and keeping more soldiers like your brother in Iraq.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but if that's actually what you wanted, you most certainly backed the wrong candidate.


Its ok, you can get Drumpf and teach America a lesson. The I told you saw is always worth it.


If Drumpf wins, Hillary has no one to blame but herself and her supporters. Trying to put it on others is silly.


yeah, and I didnt say that, I said that you can have that one on your unconscious for NOT supporting her and being complicit in getting a Drumpf.

At the end of the day you still have a choice to make and a do nothing choice is just as bad as voting the bad guy. Or the worse guy whatever floats your boat.

You are confusing being petulant as being principled. I believe they say things to the effect of get your head out of your ass in these sorts of instances.


The options aren't limited to "vote for Hillary", "vote for Drumpf", "do nothing". That's just a matter of fact, so if that could be the last time that false argument is put forward that would be great.


Im sorry, what were the other option's again? For my benefit, if you will please


Support candidates I agree with more than Hillary. That everyone else thinks you have to vote for a Dem or Rep is a problem that doesn't get fixed by perpetuating it. Nader isn't the reason Gore lost (not sure if that myth is still alive here).

Gore was calling for paying down the debt with the social security fund, cutting taxes, and increasing military spending. All things that have all but vanished from the Democratic platform. Acting like supporting someone who doesn't win is "doing nothing" is preposterous.

On June 25 2016 03:29 Plansix wrote:
This debate has already happened with GH and I don't really see a need to have it again. He is entitled to his opinion. But that being said, I would like it if he kept his smug opinion on other peoples voting choices to himself in the future. Or maybe just my voting choice, since we have had this debate already.



You said you wanted to hear more on campaign finance reform and you didn't like your brother going to war, I told you that you picked the wrong candidate if you wanted to change those things. You can refute that premise, or not. Looks like you've chosen not to. No need to whine about it.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
Rebs
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
Pakistan10726 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-06-24 18:41:48
June 24 2016 18:41 GMT
#82494
On June 25 2016 03:40 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2016 03:22 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:21 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:15 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:55 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 00:00 Plansix wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:50 LegalLord wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:35 Plansix wrote:
Doubtful. All this brings is instability and that does not play in to the general electorate. Nationalism and global trade work as a talking point, but watching the ramifications of those policies unfold won’t sell the general electorate on them. Drumpf isn’t trying to win the anti-establishment vote anymore, he has all he can get.

Yeah, I agree that Hillary is the most probable outcome, and it's not like Drumpf and the Republicans are not without issues of their own. My point is that this "omfg must vote against Drumpf" line of argument is getting tiresome, and Hillary would do better to make the case for herself than simply hope that anti-Drumpf will carry the day.

Of course we need good policies and proposals. I would like to see a larger focus on election finance reform and salary stagnation.

But I took that the view that vote should be earned by the candidate during 2000 and 2004 elections and still regret it. And out of those elections my brother got set to two useless wars, lost a few friends and put all of us through hell. I’m not doing that again, even if I am not wild about Clinton.


You supported the wrong candidate if you wanted anything more than some lip service on campaign finance reform. Also if you want to avoid more pointless wars. You picked the biggest supporter of the Iraq war you had to choose from, and the one who is already been a big advocate for sending more soldiers to Afghanistan and keeping more soldiers like your brother in Iraq.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but if that's actually what you wanted, you most certainly backed the wrong candidate.


Its ok, you can get Drumpf and teach America a lesson. The I told you saw is always worth it.


If Drumpf wins, Hillary has no one to blame but herself and her supporters. Trying to put it on others is silly.


yeah, and I didnt say that, I said that you can have that one on your unconscious for NOT supporting her and being complicit in getting a Drumpf.

At the end of the day you still have a choice to make and a do nothing choice is just as bad as voting the bad guy. Or the worse guy whatever floats your boat.

You are confusing being petulant as being principled. I believe they say things to the effect of get your head out of your ass in these sorts of instances.


The options aren't limited to "vote for Hillary", "vote for Drumpf", "do nothing". That's just a matter of fact, so if that could be the last time that false argument is put forward that would be great.


Im sorry, what were the other option's again? For my benefit, if you will please


Support candidates I agree with more than Hillary. That everyone else thinks you have to vote for a Dem or Rep is a problem that doesn't get fixed by perpetuating it. Nader isn't the reason Gore lost (not sure if that myth is still alive here).

Gore was calling for paying down the debt with the social security fund, cutting taxes, and increasing military spending. All things that have all but vanished from the Democratic platform. Acting like supporting someone who doesn't win is "doing nothing" is preposterous.



Ok so option 3 then, thank you. Good luck.
SolaR-
Profile Blog Joined February 2004
United States2685 Posts
June 24 2016 18:47 GMT
#82495
On June 25 2016 03:28 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2016 03:25 Mohdoo wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:21 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:15 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:55 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 00:00 Plansix wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:50 LegalLord wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:35 Plansix wrote:
Doubtful. All this brings is instability and that does not play in to the general electorate. Nationalism and global trade work as a talking point, but watching the ramifications of those policies unfold won’t sell the general electorate on them. Drumpf isn’t trying to win the anti-establishment vote anymore, he has all he can get.

Yeah, I agree that Hillary is the most probable outcome, and it's not like Drumpf and the Republicans are not without issues of their own. My point is that this "omfg must vote against Drumpf" line of argument is getting tiresome, and Hillary would do better to make the case for herself than simply hope that anti-Drumpf will carry the day.

Of course we need good policies and proposals. I would like to see a larger focus on election finance reform and salary stagnation.

But I took that the view that vote should be earned by the candidate during 2000 and 2004 elections and still regret it. And out of those elections my brother got set to two useless wars, lost a few friends and put all of us through hell. I’m not doing that again, even if I am not wild about Clinton.


You supported the wrong candidate if you wanted anything more than some lip service on campaign finance reform. Also if you want to avoid more pointless wars. You picked the biggest supporter of the Iraq war you had to choose from, and the one who is already been a big advocate for sending more soldiers to Afghanistan and keeping more soldiers like your brother in Iraq.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but if that's actually what you wanted, you most certainly backed the wrong candidate.


Its ok, you can get Drumpf and teach America a lesson. The I told you saw is always worth it.


If Drumpf wins, Hillary has no one to blame but herself and her supporters. Trying to put it on others is silly.


yeah, and I didnt say that, I said that you can have that one on your unconscious for NOT supporting her and being complicit in getting a Trump.

At the end of the day you still have a choice to make and a do nothing choice is just as bad as voting the bad guy. Or the worse guy whatever floats your boat.

You are confusing being petulant as being principled. I believe they say things to the effect of get your head out of your ass in these sorts of instances.


The options aren't limited to "vote for Hillary", "vote for Trump", "do nothing". That's just a matter of fact, so if that could be the last time that false argument is put forward that would be great.

You live in a Disney fantasy land. Yes, those are the only two options with a remotely viable percent chance of being elected. Nothing else is serious. Sure, it is possible I'll win the lottery every day this week. But that's not even worth putting thought into. You waste your time with these romantic notions of revolution. Bernie isn't MLK. His campaign isn't the civil rights movement.

On June 25 2016 03:22 farvacola wrote:
Vote for Ralph Nader....erm, I mean Jill Stein.

Yeah, the only candidate who refuses to deny the effectiveness of holistic medicine.


This is a joke. You vote for who you want to represent you in office. If that isn't one of the two major parties then so be it.

Quit advocating party politics.


If that is the case, i would probably vote gary johnson. However, i think it is a fantasy, as i know gary johnson has no shot at winning, and i do not want hillary as president. I'm going to pick the vote that counts.
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23221 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-06-24 18:56:55
June 24 2016 18:49 GMT
#82496
On June 25 2016 03:41 Rebs wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2016 03:40 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:22 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:21 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:15 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:55 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 00:00 Plansix wrote:
On June 24 2016 23:50 LegalLord wrote:
[quote]
Yeah, I agree that Hillary is the most probable outcome, and it's not like Drumpf and the Republicans are not without issues of their own. My point is that this "omfg must vote against Drumpf" line of argument is getting tiresome, and Hillary would do better to make the case for herself than simply hope that anti-Drumpf will carry the day.

Of course we need good policies and proposals. I would like to see a larger focus on election finance reform and salary stagnation.

But I took that the view that vote should be earned by the candidate during 2000 and 2004 elections and still regret it. And out of those elections my brother got set to two useless wars, lost a few friends and put all of us through hell. I’m not doing that again, even if I am not wild about Clinton.


You supported the wrong candidate if you wanted anything more than some lip service on campaign finance reform. Also if you want to avoid more pointless wars. You picked the biggest supporter of the Iraq war you had to choose from, and the one who is already been a big advocate for sending more soldiers to Afghanistan and keeping more soldiers like your brother in Iraq.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but if that's actually what you wanted, you most certainly backed the wrong candidate.


Its ok, you can get Drumpf and teach America a lesson. The I told you saw is always worth it.


If Drumpf wins, Hillary has no one to blame but herself and her supporters. Trying to put it on others is silly.


yeah, and I didnt say that, I said that you can have that one on your unconscious for NOT supporting her and being complicit in getting a Drumpf.

At the end of the day you still have a choice to make and a do nothing choice is just as bad as voting the bad guy. Or the worse guy whatever floats your boat.

You are confusing being petulant as being principled. I believe they say things to the effect of get your head out of your ass in these sorts of instances.


The options aren't limited to "vote for Hillary", "vote for Drumpf", "do nothing". That's just a matter of fact, so if that could be the last time that false argument is put forward that would be great.


Im sorry, what were the other option's again? For my benefit, if you will please


Support candidates I agree with more than Hillary. That everyone else thinks you have to vote for a Dem or Rep is a problem that doesn't get fixed by perpetuating it. Nader isn't the reason Gore lost (not sure if that myth is still alive here).

Gore was calling for paying down the debt with the social security fund, cutting taxes, and increasing military spending. All things that have all but vanished from the Democratic platform. Acting like supporting someone who doesn't win is "doing nothing" is preposterous.



Ok so option 3 then, thank you. Good luck.


I'm not stopping people from realizing they don't have to support Hillary to prevent Trump from winning. That's a choice they make. If Democrats rallied behind Bernie he'd win in a landslide, I tried to get people to see that, and that millions wont support Clinton (rightly or not) so if she loses it's on her, not on people who actually voted for someone/something they believe in instead of being held hostage by the parties.

I honestly can't believe left leaning folks are making the argument that you have to support the party's pick while simultaneously saying the right should stand up for their principles and not support their party's pick. It's laughable.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-06-24 18:50:53
June 24 2016 18:49 GMT
#82497
On June 25 2016 03:08 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
I think both parties will have ceased to exist as we know it after this election. It's been a real game-changer for both of them.


I disagree; while the Republican party may change considerably as it realigns its base, platform, and goals somewhat; the Democrats always had a progressive wing, and Sanders views really aren't that different from say Warren's; so I think the Dems won't change that much.

on voting: I say just let people vote as they deem best; there's plenty of reasonable arguments to support all sorts of votes.
Great read: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/ great book on democracy: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10671.html zlefin is grumpier due to long term illness. Ignoring some users.
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15686 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-06-24 19:00:53
June 24 2016 19:00 GMT
#82498
On June 25 2016 03:49 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2016 03:41 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:40 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:22 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:21 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:15 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:55 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 00:00 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Of course we need good policies and proposals. I would like to see a larger focus on election finance reform and salary stagnation.

But I took that the view that vote should be earned by the candidate during 2000 and 2004 elections and still regret it. And out of those elections my brother got set to two useless wars, lost a few friends and put all of us through hell. I’m not doing that again, even if I am not wild about Clinton.


You supported the wrong candidate if you wanted anything more than some lip service on campaign finance reform. Also if you want to avoid more pointless wars. You picked the biggest supporter of the Iraq war you had to choose from, and the one who is already been a big advocate for sending more soldiers to Afghanistan and keeping more soldiers like your brother in Iraq.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but if that's actually what you wanted, you most certainly backed the wrong candidate.


Its ok, you can get Drumpf and teach America a lesson. The I told you saw is always worth it.


If Drumpf wins, Hillary has no one to blame but herself and her supporters. Trying to put it on others is silly.


yeah, and I didnt say that, I said that you can have that one on your unconscious for NOT supporting her and being complicit in getting a Drumpf.

At the end of the day you still have a choice to make and a do nothing choice is just as bad as voting the bad guy. Or the worse guy whatever floats your boat.

You are confusing being petulant as being principled. I believe they say things to the effect of get your head out of your ass in these sorts of instances.


The options aren't limited to "vote for Hillary", "vote for Drumpf", "do nothing". That's just a matter of fact, so if that could be the last time that false argument is put forward that would be great.


Im sorry, what were the other option's again? For my benefit, if you will please


Support candidates I agree with more than Hillary. That everyone else thinks you have to vote for a Dem or Rep is a problem that doesn't get fixed by perpetuating it. Nader isn't the reason Gore lost (not sure if that myth is still alive here).

Gore was calling for paying down the debt with the social security fund, cutting taxes, and increasing military spending. All things that have all but vanished from the Democratic platform. Acting like supporting someone who doesn't win is "doing nothing" is preposterous.



Ok so option 3 then, thank you. Good luck.


I'm not stopping people from realizing they don't have to support Hillary to prevent Trump from winning. That's a choice they make. If Democrats rallied behind Bernie he'd win in a landslide, I tried to get people to see that, and that millions wont support Clinton (rightly or not) so if she loses it's on her, not on people who actually voted for someone/something they believe in instead of being held hostage by the parties.

I honestly can't believe left leaning folks are making the argument that you have to support the party's pick while simultaneously saying the right should stand up for their principles and not support their party's pick. It's laughable.


How many times do you intend to make this exact same post? Do you need us to quote the other times you've said this so that you can understand we heard you? What can we do to make you feel like we are listening to you?
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23221 Posts
June 24 2016 19:01 GMT
#82499
On June 25 2016 04:00 Mohdoo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2016 03:49 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:41 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:40 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:22 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:21 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:15 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:55 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]

You supported the wrong candidate if you wanted anything more than some lip service on campaign finance reform. Also if you want to avoid more pointless wars. You picked the biggest supporter of the Iraq war you had to choose from, and the one who is already been a big advocate for sending more soldiers to Afghanistan and keeping more soldiers like your brother in Iraq.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but if that's actually what you wanted, you most certainly backed the wrong candidate.


Its ok, you can get Drumpf and teach America a lesson. The I told you saw is always worth it.


If Drumpf wins, Hillary has no one to blame but herself and her supporters. Trying to put it on others is silly.


yeah, and I didnt say that, I said that you can have that one on your unconscious for NOT supporting her and being complicit in getting a Drumpf.

At the end of the day you still have a choice to make and a do nothing choice is just as bad as voting the bad guy. Or the worse guy whatever floats your boat.

You are confusing being petulant as being principled. I believe they say things to the effect of get your head out of your ass in these sorts of instances.


The options aren't limited to "vote for Hillary", "vote for Drumpf", "do nothing". That's just a matter of fact, so if that could be the last time that false argument is put forward that would be great.


Im sorry, what were the other option's again? For my benefit, if you will please


Support candidates I agree with more than Hillary. That everyone else thinks you have to vote for a Dem or Rep is a problem that doesn't get fixed by perpetuating it. Nader isn't the reason Gore lost (not sure if that myth is still alive here).

Gore was calling for paying down the debt with the social security fund, cutting taxes, and increasing military spending. All things that have all but vanished from the Democratic platform. Acting like supporting someone who doesn't win is "doing nothing" is preposterous.



Ok so option 3 then, thank you. Good luck.


I'm not stopping people from realizing they don't have to support Hillary to prevent Trump from winning. That's a choice they make. If Democrats rallied behind Bernie he'd win in a landslide, I tried to get people to see that, and that millions wont support Clinton (rightly or not) so if she loses it's on her, not on people who actually voted for someone/something they believe in instead of being held hostage by the parties.

I honestly can't believe left leaning folks are making the argument that you have to support the party's pick while simultaneously saying the right should stand up for their principles and not support their party's pick. It's laughable.


How many times do you intend to make this exact same post? Do you need us to quote the other times you've said this so that you can understand we heard you? What can we do to make you feel like we are listening to you?


However many times people are going to make the absurd assertion that not voting for Hillary is the equivalent of doing nothing?
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
Rebs
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
Pakistan10726 Posts
Last Edited: 2016-06-24 19:06:18
June 24 2016 19:05 GMT
#82500
On June 25 2016 03:49 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2016 03:41 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:40 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:22 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:21 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:15 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:55 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 00:00 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Of course we need good policies and proposals. I would like to see a larger focus on election finance reform and salary stagnation.

But I took that the view that vote should be earned by the candidate during 2000 and 2004 elections and still regret it. And out of those elections my brother got set to two useless wars, lost a few friends and put all of us through hell. I’m not doing that again, even if I am not wild about Clinton.


You supported the wrong candidate if you wanted anything more than some lip service on campaign finance reform. Also if you want to avoid more pointless wars. You picked the biggest supporter of the Iraq war you had to choose from, and the one who is already been a big advocate for sending more soldiers to Afghanistan and keeping more soldiers like your brother in Iraq.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but if that's actually what you wanted, you most certainly backed the wrong candidate.


Its ok, you can get Drumpf and teach America a lesson. The I told you saw is always worth it.


If Drumpf wins, Hillary has no one to blame but herself and her supporters. Trying to put it on others is silly.


yeah, and I didnt say that, I said that you can have that one on your unconscious for NOT supporting her and being complicit in getting a Drumpf.

At the end of the day you still have a choice to make and a do nothing choice is just as bad as voting the bad guy. Or the worse guy whatever floats your boat.

You are confusing being petulant as being principled. I believe they say things to the effect of get your head out of your ass in these sorts of instances.


The options aren't limited to "vote for Hillary", "vote for Drumpf", "do nothing". That's just a matter of fact, so if that could be the last time that false argument is put forward that would be great.


Im sorry, what were the other option's again? For my benefit, if you will please


Support candidates I agree with more than Hillary. That everyone else thinks you have to vote for a Dem or Rep is a problem that doesn't get fixed by perpetuating it. Nader isn't the reason Gore lost (not sure if that myth is still alive here).

Gore was calling for paying down the debt with the social security fund, cutting taxes, and increasing military spending. All things that have all but vanished from the Democratic platform. Acting like supporting someone who doesn't win is "doing nothing" is preposterous.



Ok so option 3 then, thank you. Good luck.


I'm not stopping people from realizing they don't have to support Hillary to prevent Drumpf from winning. That's a choice they make. If Democrats rallied behind Bernie he'd win in a landslide, I tried to get people to see that, and that millions wont support Clinton (rightly or not) so if she loses it's on her, not on people who actually voted for someone/something they believe in instead of being held hostage by the parties.

I honestly can't believe left leaning folks are making the argument that you have to support the party's pick while simultaneously saying the right should stand up for their principles and not support their party's pick. It's laughable.


Im sorry, at no point have I suggested that the right shouldn't support their party's pick. Please dont ascribe me to said left leaning folks. Thank you

The way I see your point is you are basically saying I didnt get things my way so fuck it based on this ill conceived notion that someone who couldnt even win his parties nomination would win a general election. And its everyones fault for not doing things the way you wanted them to. Again that is petulance not principal.

We get it, you can stop it now I apologize for raising the subject I was not aware that had been beaten to death.

On June 25 2016 04:01 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2016 04:00 Mohdoo wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:49 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:41 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:40 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:22 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:21 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:15 Rebs wrote:
On June 25 2016 03:00 GreenHorizons wrote:
On June 25 2016 02:55 Rebs wrote:
[quote]

Its ok, you can get Drumpf and teach America a lesson. The I told you saw is always worth it.


If Drumpf wins, Hillary has no one to blame but herself and her supporters. Trying to put it on others is silly.


yeah, and I didnt say that, I said that you can have that one on your unconscious for NOT supporting her and being complicit in getting a Drumpf.

At the end of the day you still have a choice to make and a do nothing choice is just as bad as voting the bad guy. Or the worse guy whatever floats your boat.

You are confusing being petulant as being principled. I believe they say things to the effect of get your head out of your ass in these sorts of instances.


The options aren't limited to "vote for Hillary", "vote for Drumpf", "do nothing". That's just a matter of fact, so if that could be the last time that false argument is put forward that would be great.


Im sorry, what were the other option's again? For my benefit, if you will please


Support candidates I agree with more than Hillary. That everyone else thinks you have to vote for a Dem or Rep is a problem that doesn't get fixed by perpetuating it. Nader isn't the reason Gore lost (not sure if that myth is still alive here).

Gore was calling for paying down the debt with the social security fund, cutting taxes, and increasing military spending. All things that have all but vanished from the Democratic platform. Acting like supporting someone who doesn't win is "doing nothing" is preposterous.



Ok so option 3 then, thank you. Good luck.


I'm not stopping people from realizing they don't have to support Hillary to prevent Drumpf from winning. That's a choice they make. If Democrats rallied behind Bernie he'd win in a landslide, I tried to get people to see that, and that millions wont support Clinton (rightly or not) so if she loses it's on her, not on people who actually voted for someone/something they believe in instead of being held hostage by the parties.

I honestly can't believe left leaning folks are making the argument that you have to support the party's pick while simultaneously saying the right should stand up for their principles and not support their party's pick. It's laughable.


How many times do you intend to make this exact same post? Do you need us to quote the other times you've said this so that you can understand we heard you? What can we do to make you feel like we are listening to you?


However many times people are going to make the absurd assertion that not voting for Hillary is the equivalent of doing nothing?


because practically speaking, it is. Clearly you dont feel that way, and it doesnt seem like any form of reasoning will change that so Plansix was right, we can drop this.

Prev 1 4123 4124 4125 4126 4127 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 15h 31m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Hui .293
BRAT_OK 104
ProTech73
ForJumy 36
MindelVK 34
Nathanias 26
StarCraft: Brood War
Mini 624
Mind 129
ivOry 4
Dota 2
420jenkins499
Counter-Strike
fl0m5413
sgares495
Foxcn250
oskar192
Fnx 108
Heroes of the Storm
Liquid`Hasu396
Other Games
FrodaN3312
Gorgc2964
qojqva805
Dendi753
Trikslyr82
QueenE73
ArmadaUGS56
Sick46
Organizations
Other Games
BasetradeTV34
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 17 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• iHatsuTV 10
• Adnapsc2 7
• intothetv
• sooper7s
• Migwel
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• IndyKCrew
• Kozan
StarCraft: Brood War
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• masondota22019
• WagamamaTV517
League of Legends
• Jankos2265
Other Games
• imaqtpie1634
• Shiphtur365
Upcoming Events
Esports World Cup
15h 31m
Serral vs Cure
Solar vs Classic
OSC
18h 31m
CranKy Ducklings
1d 14h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d 18h
CSO Cup
1d 20h
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
1d 22h
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
FEL
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
[ Show More ]
Online Event
4 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
5 days
The PondCast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Xiamen Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #1
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
FEL Cracov 2025
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.