|
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. |
I have a feeling the Clinton speech will be directed at the Rust Belt, and the Rust Belt alone.
|
On July 29 2016 10:54 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2016 10:52 ticklishmusic wrote:
stein panders to the extreme hippie anti vaxx left and avoids saying that shes for them
she also said QE could be used to wipe out student debt
insists nuclear energy is bad
wants to cut military spending 50%
anti gmo lol when I compare that list to my list on Hillary it's a no contest. I hope y'all have better than that. (ignoring the presentation).
k
|
On July 29 2016 08:26 FiWiFaKi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2016 08:21 Nevuk wrote:On July 29 2016 08:11 FiWiFaKi wrote:On July 29 2016 08:05 Plansix wrote:
Side note: normally the call of votes would be stopped once the nominee reached the majority. The next state would pass and move to nominate. Rather than do that this year, every state voted and got to say something until Vermont, which when last. Then Bernie moved to close the vote an nominate Clinton. The DNC and him agreed that it was in the spirit of the convention to allow all the delegates to vote and have their say and his state could close it out.
There are some really nice, uplifting things happening at this event that are being over looked because cynicism and conspiracy theories seem to dominate everything. Come on, this was done purely to get more Bernie supports to like Hillary. It has nothing to do with being uplifting and happy. I wish you didn't try to defend Hillary and the DNC to the bone when she really doesn't deserve it. On July 29 2016 08:10 Nevuk wrote:I still think the arguments for why Guccifer 2.0 is a russian spy are the dumbest things not said by Trump this election cycle On July 29 2016 08:03 zlefin wrote:On July 29 2016 06:25 Slaughter wrote:
Apparently the DNC has been beating the RNC in TV viewers. Is that normal most years? I would have thought Trump would have swept the ratings. i dunno about normal; but Trump wasn't speaking most of the time. Maybe the DNC had better headliners? Much better, mainly due to the entertainment field being much more democrat aligned and due to a bunch of high name GOP-ers skipping out on the RNC A strategy to get eyes off of the things in the emails, and sadly I think it's working a bit. At the end of the day, I don't really think it matters if it was Russia, if it was some guy in his basement, a Trump supporter in the US, etc. We should judge the leaks at face value regardless of the source. @travis I agree. Yes, this election I do support Trump, and yes, the Bernie supporters are hurting Hillary's chances, but it's not a justification to remove them, and find other people and pay them to take their seat... Not to mention, specifically calling out to minorities. It's disgusting and propaganda at it's best. And you oblivious Hillary supporters have little issue with it because you don't like Trump, come on, evaluate what you're doing. Yeah, it's one of the few smart things Hillary's campaign has done this cycle. I just think the arguments are so bad they're kind of funny - it comes down to emoticon usage and grammar, neither of which are things hackers are known for using in a normal manner. I will admit it's a little puzzling that the media is running so hard with it when everyone that asks the FBI receives the "Uh, we're still looking into it, no clue who did it atm" response and no official source is backing the claim. This sort of counter strategy may be why wikileaks didn't dump all the emails at once initially. DWS not having been fired years ago is starting to be as big a mystery as Trump's success for me, personally. Yeah, it is a bit silly, but it's what people will eat up. The Trump message really got to me, and I thought news have always been absolute crap, especially when it was something subjective, but now... I dunno. I'm more likely to believe the opposite when reading the news now. Just seeing how easy it's to place pawns wherever you want to say what you want them to say. I've made my opinion that Trump would be good for America, and just because all media and almost all posters on the internet (recently me too I suppose, since an objective argument became impossible here for quite some time) became people just trying to trick you into voting for their nominee, listening to other people is futile at this point. So there is very little that Trump can do at this point for me to not support him, and likewise for Hillary. I still feel proud of the money I made on a bet with a friend that Trump would win the primaries like three weeks for the primaries began. I wont lie though, I did expect Trump to be beaten in a landslide by Hillary, and at times I was doubting supporting him, but he's really convinced me since the primaries ended. edit: I didn't know much about DWS until this debacle, but I wasn't aware that she was massive disliked or anything?
At least you outright admit that your support for Trump is intertwined with your opinion on the media. It's just amazing to me that people with your mindset are willing to look past his lack of a plan or substance and just roll the dice with the presidency.
|
This is the worst Katy Perry song I've ever heard
|
On July 29 2016 10:57 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2016 08:26 FiWiFaKi wrote:On July 29 2016 08:21 Nevuk wrote:On July 29 2016 08:11 FiWiFaKi wrote:On July 29 2016 08:05 Plansix wrote:
Side note: normally the call of votes would be stopped once the nominee reached the majority. The next state would pass and move to nominate. Rather than do that this year, every state voted and got to say something until Vermont, which when last. Then Bernie moved to close the vote an nominate Clinton. The DNC and him agreed that it was in the spirit of the convention to allow all the delegates to vote and have their say and his state could close it out.
There are some really nice, uplifting things happening at this event that are being over looked because cynicism and conspiracy theories seem to dominate everything. Come on, this was done purely to get more Bernie supports to like Hillary. It has nothing to do with being uplifting and happy. I wish you didn't try to defend Hillary and the DNC to the bone when she really doesn't deserve it. On July 29 2016 08:10 Nevuk wrote:I still think the arguments for why Guccifer 2.0 is a russian spy are the dumbest things not said by Trump this election cycle On July 29 2016 08:03 zlefin wrote:On July 29 2016 06:25 Slaughter wrote:
Apparently the DNC has been beating the RNC in TV viewers. Is that normal most years? I would have thought Trump would have swept the ratings. i dunno about normal; but Trump wasn't speaking most of the time. Maybe the DNC had better headliners? Much better, mainly due to the entertainment field being much more democrat aligned and due to a bunch of high name GOP-ers skipping out on the RNC A strategy to get eyes off of the things in the emails, and sadly I think it's working a bit. At the end of the day, I don't really think it matters if it was Russia, if it was some guy in his basement, a Trump supporter in the US, etc. We should judge the leaks at face value regardless of the source. @travis I agree. Yes, this election I do support Trump, and yes, the Bernie supporters are hurting Hillary's chances, but it's not a justification to remove them, and find other people and pay them to take their seat... Not to mention, specifically calling out to minorities. It's disgusting and propaganda at it's best. And you oblivious Hillary supporters have little issue with it because you don't like Trump, come on, evaluate what you're doing. Yeah, it's one of the few smart things Hillary's campaign has done this cycle. I just think the arguments are so bad they're kind of funny - it comes down to emoticon usage and grammar, neither of which are things hackers are known for using in a normal manner. I will admit it's a little puzzling that the media is running so hard with it when everyone that asks the FBI receives the "Uh, we're still looking into it, no clue who did it atm" response and no official source is backing the claim. This sort of counter strategy may be why wikileaks didn't dump all the emails at once initially. DWS not having been fired years ago is starting to be as big a mystery as Trump's success for me, personally. Yeah, it is a bit silly, but it's what people will eat up. The Trump message really got to me, and I thought news have always been absolute crap, especially when it was something subjective, but now... I dunno. I'm more likely to believe the opposite when reading the news now. Just seeing how easy it's to place pawns wherever you want to say what you want them to say. I've made my opinion that Trump would be good for America, and just because all media and almost all posters on the internet (recently me too I suppose, since an objective argument became impossible here for quite some time) became people just trying to trick you into voting for their nominee, listening to other people is futile at this point. So there is very little that Trump can do at this point for me to not support him, and likewise for Hillary. I still feel proud of the money I made on a bet with a friend that Trump would win the primaries like three weeks for the primaries began. I wont lie though, I did expect Trump to be beaten in a landslide by Hillary, and at times I was doubting supporting him, but he's really convinced me since the primaries ended. edit: I didn't know much about DWS until this debacle, but I wasn't aware that she was massive disliked or anything? At least you outright admit that your support for Trump is intertwined with your opinion on the media. It's just amazing to me that people with your mindset are willing to look past his lack of a plan or substance.
It's because these people don't see the potential to legitimately suffer from it. The united states, as silly as it sounds, is so stable and functional that people feel like it couldn't possibly get worse than it currently is. It's a bizarre paradox. "Anything is better than this, but I'm not worried about how bad it might get"
|
On July 29 2016 10:28 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2016 10:20 Cowboy24 wrote:
This election has been insane.
Republicans went insane with lust for power and their blatant corruption allowed for Trump to sweep in and take the party running on a platform straight out of the internet chat-rooms. Democrats are going insane desperately trying to keep their party together while the entire world just collapses in their lap.
Both parties are completely doubling down on identity politics and a "race to the bottom" strategy. This whole thing has had this surreal feeling like the entire world is riding on this one moment in American history and everyone wants a piece of it. Even the complete low-information have opinions about this. These are the best known and most hated candidates in the history of the nation.
It's unfair to say this, but I really think Democrats needed to go with anyone except Hillary. Republicans were going Trump, there was no way to stop it. Democrats had a decision, and I think they chose wrong. The only way for either of them to win is to destroy the other one. Everyone is slowly being pulled into one side or another, and as soon as they hit dirt on their side they start lobbing bombs. What happens when one side loses, at this point? Both sides have said it's the end of America if the other side wins. So is either side going to back down when all is said and done?
We're on the razor's edge here, boys. razor's edge of what? we're nowhere near the point of civil war.
I don't know.
Is there any common ground between either side?
|
Chelsea Clinton looks a little bit like Tiffany Trump lol
|
On July 29 2016 11:03 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
Chelsea Clinton looks a little bit like Tiffany Trump lol
I wonder which got payed more at their first job and what each did? I suspect it might not match our assumptions.
|
|
|
On July 29 2016 10:57 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2016 08:26 FiWiFaKi wrote:On July 29 2016 08:21 Nevuk wrote:On July 29 2016 08:11 FiWiFaKi wrote:On July 29 2016 08:05 Plansix wrote:
Side note: normally the call of votes would be stopped once the nominee reached the majority. The next state would pass and move to nominate. Rather than do that this year, every state voted and got to say something until Vermont, which when last. Then Bernie moved to close the vote an nominate Clinton. The DNC and him agreed that it was in the spirit of the convention to allow all the delegates to vote and have their say and his state could close it out.
There are some really nice, uplifting things happening at this event that are being over looked because cynicism and conspiracy theories seem to dominate everything. Come on, this was done purely to get more Bernie supports to like Hillary. It has nothing to do with being uplifting and happy. I wish you didn't try to defend Hillary and the DNC to the bone when she really doesn't deserve it. On July 29 2016 08:10 Nevuk wrote:I still think the arguments for why Guccifer 2.0 is a russian spy are the dumbest things not said by Trump this election cycle On July 29 2016 08:03 zlefin wrote:On July 29 2016 06:25 Slaughter wrote:
Apparently the DNC has been beating the RNC in TV viewers. Is that normal most years? I would have thought Trump would have swept the ratings. i dunno about normal; but Trump wasn't speaking most of the time. Maybe the DNC had better headliners? Much better, mainly due to the entertainment field being much more democrat aligned and due to a bunch of high name GOP-ers skipping out on the RNC A strategy to get eyes off of the things in the emails, and sadly I think it's working a bit. At the end of the day, I don't really think it matters if it was Russia, if it was some guy in his basement, a Trump supporter in the US, etc. We should judge the leaks at face value regardless of the source. @travis I agree. Yes, this election I do support Trump, and yes, the Bernie supporters are hurting Hillary's chances, but it's not a justification to remove them, and find other people and pay them to take their seat... Not to mention, specifically calling out to minorities. It's disgusting and propaganda at it's best. And you oblivious Hillary supporters have little issue with it because you don't like Trump, come on, evaluate what you're doing. Yeah, it's one of the few smart things Hillary's campaign has done this cycle. I just think the arguments are so bad they're kind of funny - it comes down to emoticon usage and grammar, neither of which are things hackers are known for using in a normal manner. I will admit it's a little puzzling that the media is running so hard with it when everyone that asks the FBI receives the "Uh, we're still looking into it, no clue who did it atm" response and no official source is backing the claim. This sort of counter strategy may be why wikileaks didn't dump all the emails at once initially. DWS not having been fired years ago is starting to be as big a mystery as Trump's success for me, personally. Yeah, it is a bit silly, but it's what people will eat up. The Trump message really got to me, and I thought news have always been absolute crap, especially when it was something subjective, but now... I dunno. I'm more likely to believe the opposite when reading the news now. Just seeing how easy it's to place pawns wherever you want to say what you want them to say. I've made my opinion that Trump would be good for America, and just because all media and almost all posters on the internet (recently me too I suppose, since an objective argument became impossible here for quite some time) became people just trying to trick you into voting for their nominee, listening to other people is futile at this point. So there is very little that Trump can do at this point for me to not support him, and likewise for Hillary. I still feel proud of the money I made on a bet with a friend that Trump would win the primaries like three weeks for the primaries began. I wont lie though, I did expect Trump to be beaten in a landslide by Hillary, and at times I was doubting supporting him, but he's really convinced me since the primaries ended. edit: I didn't know much about DWS until this debacle, but I wasn't aware that she was massive disliked or anything? At least you outright admit that your support for Trump is intertwined with your opinion on the media. It's just amazing to me that people with your mindset are willing to look past his lack of a plan or substance and just roll the dice with the presidency.
I started writing out a long post to a reply to my post on the last page, but just tired and not in the mood to do it.
I simply don't agree with the direction of the US, the extreme focus on these social issues, and just having a very robot minded society. And the lets all be happy and all our problems will go away mentality is not a good one long term. There's a lot I disagree with Trump, but I stand with that bringing in refugees in from Syria and the like is the most suicidal thing a nation can do, and it's that short term thinking that makes me doubt so many decisions that Hillary makes.
|
On July 29 2016 10:59 Mohdoo wrote:
It's because these people don't see the potential to legitimately suffer from it. The united states, as silly as it sounds, is so stable and functional that people feel like it couldn't possibly get worse than it currently is. It's a bizarre paradox. "Anything is better than this, but I'm not worried about how bad it might get"
People usually underestimate how much shittier things can get.
Granted, I'm pretty risk averse myself, so I'm not the best judge for this, but personally I feel when people say "it can't get any worse than this, so I'll just take a gamble", usually it actually can get a lot worse.
|
Chelsea has her mother's charisma.
|
I feel like Chelsea is reading us a bedtime story about her family instead of a rousing speech to humanize Hillary.
|
On July 29 2016 11:04 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2016 11:03 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
Chelsea Clinton looks a little bit like Tiffany Trump lol I wonder which got payed more at their first job and what each did? I suspect it might not match our assumptions.
you do realize tiffany trump graduated from upenn undergrad like 2 years ago, and chelsea started working after she got a masters from oxford right? and that mckinsey pretty much pays well to everyone
|
On July 29 2016 11:07 FiWiFaKi wrote:
I simply don't agree with the direction of the US, the extreme focus on these social issues, and just having a very robot minded society. And the lets all be happy and all our problems will go away mentality is not a good one long term. There's a lot I disagree with Trump, but I stand with that bringing in refugees in from Syria and the like is the most suicidal thing a nation can do, and it's that short term thinking that makes me doubt so many decisions that Hillary makes.
I can agree with this, I just don't feel that "pick the other guy cuz he's not the mainstream" is actually a good way to approach this kind of a decision.
"Any answer is better than no answer" is really not a reasonable philosophy. A bad answer can be a lot worse than no answer.
|
It's a lot of pressure, and she is clearly not used to it so I'm not gonna critique too hard but this speech is a bit awkward
|
On July 29 2016 11:10 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2016 11:04 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 29 2016 11:03 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
Chelsea Clinton looks a little bit like Tiffany Trump lol I wonder which got payed more at their first job and what each did? I suspect it might not match our assumptions. you do realize tiffany trump graduated from upenn undergrad like 2 years ago, and chelsea started working after she got a masters from oxford right? and that mckinsey pretty much pays well to everyone
Remind me what she did at her first job and how that masters degree was related?
|
On July 29 2016 10:57 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2016 08:26 FiWiFaKi wrote:On July 29 2016 08:21 Nevuk wrote:On July 29 2016 08:11 FiWiFaKi wrote:On July 29 2016 08:05 Plansix wrote:
Side note: normally the call of votes would be stopped once the nominee reached the majority. The next state would pass and move to nominate. Rather than do that this year, every state voted and got to say something until Vermont, which when last. Then Bernie moved to close the vote an nominate Clinton. The DNC and him agreed that it was in the spirit of the convention to allow all the delegates to vote and have their say and his state could close it out.
There are some really nice, uplifting things happening at this event that are being over looked because cynicism and conspiracy theories seem to dominate everything. Come on, this was done purely to get more Bernie supports to like Hillary. It has nothing to do with being uplifting and happy. I wish you didn't try to defend Hillary and the DNC to the bone when she really doesn't deserve it. On July 29 2016 08:10 Nevuk wrote:I still think the arguments for why Guccifer 2.0 is a russian spy are the dumbest things not said by Trump this election cycle On July 29 2016 08:03 zlefin wrote:On July 29 2016 06:25 Slaughter wrote:
Apparently the DNC has been beating the RNC in TV viewers. Is that normal most years? I would have thought Trump would have swept the ratings. i dunno about normal; but Trump wasn't speaking most of the time. Maybe the DNC had better headliners? Much better, mainly due to the entertainment field being much more democrat aligned and due to a bunch of high name GOP-ers skipping out on the RNC A strategy to get eyes off of the things in the emails, and sadly I think it's working a bit. At the end of the day, I don't really think it matters if it was Russia, if it was some guy in his basement, a Trump supporter in the US, etc. We should judge the leaks at face value regardless of the source. @travis I agree. Yes, this election I do support Trump, and yes, the Bernie supporters are hurting Hillary's chances, but it's not a justification to remove them, and find other people and pay them to take their seat... Not to mention, specifically calling out to minorities. It's disgusting and propaganda at it's best. And you oblivious Hillary supporters have little issue with it because you don't like Trump, come on, evaluate what you're doing. Yeah, it's one of the few smart things Hillary's campaign has done this cycle. I just think the arguments are so bad they're kind of funny - it comes down to emoticon usage and grammar, neither of which are things hackers are known for using in a normal manner. I will admit it's a little puzzling that the media is running so hard with it when everyone that asks the FBI receives the "Uh, we're still looking into it, no clue who did it atm" response and no official source is backing the claim. This sort of counter strategy may be why wikileaks didn't dump all the emails at once initially. DWS not having been fired years ago is starting to be as big a mystery as Trump's success for me, personally. Yeah, it is a bit silly, but it's what people will eat up. The Trump message really got to me, and I thought news have always been absolute crap, especially when it was something subjective, but now... I dunno. I'm more likely to believe the opposite when reading the news now. Just seeing how easy it's to place pawns wherever you want to say what you want them to say. I've made my opinion that Trump would be good for America, and just because all media and almost all posters on the internet (recently me too I suppose, since an objective argument became impossible here for quite some time) became people just trying to trick you into voting for their nominee, listening to other people is futile at this point. So there is very little that Trump can do at this point for me to not support him, and likewise for Hillary. I still feel proud of the money I made on a bet with a friend that Trump would win the primaries like three weeks for the primaries began. I wont lie though, I did expect Trump to be beaten in a landslide by Hillary, and at times I was doubting supporting him, but he's really convinced me since the primaries ended. edit: I didn't know much about DWS until this debacle, but I wasn't aware that she was massive disliked or anything? At least you outright admit that your support for Trump is intertwined with your opinion on the media. It's just amazing to me that people with your mindset are willing to look past his lack of a plan or substance and just roll the dice with the presidency.
What do you think Trump doesn't have a plan for that he should?
|
On July 29 2016 11:07 FiWiFaKi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2016 10:57 Doodsmack wrote:On July 29 2016 08:26 FiWiFaKi wrote:On July 29 2016 08:21 Nevuk wrote:On July 29 2016 08:11 FiWiFaKi wrote:On July 29 2016 08:05 Plansix wrote:
Side note: normally the call of votes would be stopped once the nominee reached the majority. The next state would pass and move to nominate. Rather than do that this year, every state voted and got to say something until Vermont, which when last. Then Bernie moved to close the vote an nominate Clinton. The DNC and him agreed that it was in the spirit of the convention to allow all the delegates to vote and have their say and his state could close it out.
There are some really nice, uplifting things happening at this event that are being over looked because cynicism and conspiracy theories seem to dominate everything. Come on, this was done purely to get more Bernie supports to like Hillary. It has nothing to do with being uplifting and happy. I wish you didn't try to defend Hillary and the DNC to the bone when she really doesn't deserve it. On July 29 2016 08:10 Nevuk wrote:I still think the arguments for why Guccifer 2.0 is a russian spy are the dumbest things not said by Trump this election cycle On July 29 2016 08:03 zlefin wrote:On July 29 2016 06:25 Slaughter wrote:
Apparently the DNC has been beating the RNC in TV viewers. Is that normal most years? I would have thought Trump would have swept the ratings. i dunno about normal; but Trump wasn't speaking most of the time. Maybe the DNC had better headliners? Much better, mainly due to the entertainment field being much more democrat aligned and due to a bunch of high name GOP-ers skipping out on the RNC A strategy to get eyes off of the things in the emails, and sadly I think it's working a bit. At the end of the day, I don't really think it matters if it was Russia, if it was some guy in his basement, a Trump supporter in the US, etc. We should judge the leaks at face value regardless of the source. @travis I agree. Yes, this election I do support Trump, and yes, the Bernie supporters are hurting Hillary's chances, but it's not a justification to remove them, and find other people and pay them to take their seat... Not to mention, specifically calling out to minorities. It's disgusting and propaganda at it's best. And you oblivious Hillary supporters have little issue with it because you don't like Trump, come on, evaluate what you're doing. Yeah, it's one of the few smart things Hillary's campaign has done this cycle. I just think the arguments are so bad they're kind of funny - it comes down to emoticon usage and grammar, neither of which are things hackers are known for using in a normal manner. I will admit it's a little puzzling that the media is running so hard with it when everyone that asks the FBI receives the "Uh, we're still looking into it, no clue who did it atm" response and no official source is backing the claim. This sort of counter strategy may be why wikileaks didn't dump all the emails at once initially. DWS not having been fired years ago is starting to be as big a mystery as Trump's success for me, personally. Yeah, it is a bit silly, but it's what people will eat up. The Trump message really got to me, and I thought news have always been absolute crap, especially when it was something subjective, but now... I dunno. I'm more likely to believe the opposite when reading the news now. Just seeing how easy it's to place pawns wherever you want to say what you want them to say. I've made my opinion that Trump would be good for America, and just because all media and almost all posters on the internet (recently me too I suppose, since an objective argument became impossible here for quite some time) became people just trying to trick you into voting for their nominee, listening to other people is futile at this point. So there is very little that Trump can do at this point for me to not support him, and likewise for Hillary. I still feel proud of the money I made on a bet with a friend that Trump would win the primaries like three weeks for the primaries began. I wont lie though, I did expect Trump to be beaten in a landslide by Hillary, and at times I was doubting supporting him, but he's really convinced me since the primaries ended. edit: I didn't know much about DWS until this debacle, but I wasn't aware that she was massive disliked or anything? At least you outright admit that your support for Trump is intertwined with your opinion on the media. It's just amazing to me that people with your mindset are willing to look past his lack of a plan or substance and just roll the dice with the presidency. I started writing out a long post to a reply to my post on the last page, but just tired and not in the mood to do it. I simply don't agree with the direction of the US, the extreme focus on these social issues, and just having a very robot minded society. And the lets all be happy and all our problems will go away mentality is not a good one long term. There's a lot I disagree with Trump, but I stand with that bringing in refugees in from Syria and the like is the most suicidal thing a nation can do, and it's that short term thinking that makes me doubt so many decisions that Hillary makes.
So...immigration. Because banning Muslims and all. "bringing in refugees in from Syria and the like is the most suicidal thing a nation can do". #BelieveMe. #ButDon'tWorryAboutMentallyIllWhiteMales.
|
On July 29 2016 11:00 Cowboy24 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2016 10:28 zlefin wrote:On July 29 2016 10:20 Cowboy24 wrote:
This election has been insane.
Republicans went insane with lust for power and their blatant corruption allowed for Trump to sweep in and take the party running on a platform straight out of the internet chat-rooms. Democrats are going insane desperately trying to keep their party together while the entire world just collapses in their lap.
Both parties are completely doubling down on identity politics and a "race to the bottom" strategy. This whole thing has had this surreal feeling like the entire world is riding on this one moment in American history and everyone wants a piece of it. Even the complete low-information have opinions about this. These are the best known and most hated candidates in the history of the nation.
It's unfair to say this, but I really think Democrats needed to go with anyone except Hillary. Republicans were going Trump, there was no way to stop it. Democrats had a decision, and I think they chose wrong. The only way for either of them to win is to destroy the other one. Everyone is slowly being pulled into one side or another, and as soon as they hit dirt on their side they start lobbing bombs. What happens when one side loses, at this point? Both sides have said it's the end of America if the other side wins. So is either side going to back down when all is said and done?
We're on the razor's edge here, boys. razor's edge of what? we're nowhere near the point of civil war. I don't know. Is there any common ground between either side?
tons; it just gets a lot less press, because it's not interesting. It could also depend on what definition of ground your using, I'm assuming a fairly typical one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
