American Politics

[kkck]

Yeah, i mean, hillary was not really dependend on bill anymore. He was leaving office and if she knew he was a rapist and cheated on her nonstop, why stay together and make a baby? Nah, it makes no sense to me.
I got two possible rough theories:

First: At the time the alleged rape took place, Broadrick cheated on her first husband with her (later) second husband. It was suspected that she possibly either got suspected by her first husband and invented a rape to defelect any thought about her cheating, or in fact had consensual sex with bill clinton but didnt want that to destroy her relationship to both of her lovers. It could be that clinton in fact bit her lip during the encounter, and thus she had a visible mark she had to explain.
She could also simply in fact be mentally ill. Her state right now, in my opinion, is clearly erratic, so possibly at that time that tendency began.

Second: Bill clinton did in fact rape her. He was used to women wanting him and just went at it. Some rapists even don't accept that they are comitting a rape and convince themselve the victim wants it, because no means yes.
After that, Broadrick got haunted by this experience and slowly started going off the rails.
As i said i think that hillary clinton threatening her and bill apologizing is pure fabrication. Both does not make any sense to me, even if he did rape her.

____________________________________

The shot idea might be a bit extreme Maybe i will set up a skype convo with sean hannity?

Wait, didn't the rape thing allegedly happened way back in the 70s? Just checked, it supposedly happened in 1978. I haven't seen her recently but I haven't read anything that suggests she is erratic. Even then, her account of the events seems to be fairly consistent. It's a shame that it is basically breitbart, an all around internet cesspool, that took her story....

What could go wrong? It's not like trump lies eight times per minute or something. The convo might be cool, he could confirm in real time whether trump was against iraq.

 

[shionoro]

Wait, didn't the rape thing allegedly happened way back in the 70s? Just checked, it supposedly happened in 1978. I haven't seen her recently but I haven't read anything that suggests she is erratic. Even then, her account of the events seems to be fairly consistent. It's a shame that it is basically breitbart, an all around internet cesspool, that took her story....

What could go wrong? It's not like trump lies eight times per minute or something. The convo might be cool, he could confirm in real time whether trump was against iraq.

Trump does not lie eight times per minute? <:
I think he lies at least 30 times in a 90 minute show verifyably, and that end up being kinda excessive
If clinton was cool she woulda asked for hannity's number right in the first debate. And since trump would not have it available she could just mock him^^
But i guess she rightfully wanted to be better than that.

About Broadrick: Well, my estimation that she is erratic stems mostly from experience with erratic people, so i might be biased.
But: I mean, in the 2008 election, she did not come forward. There was a tight race in clinton vs obama. And the rape case was used there, don't get me wrong. But she personally did not make any appearances or internet attacks.
So why is it happening now? Either because trump's campaign goes lower than obama's or because she simply is fine with letting the GoP use her for attention.
And it sure looks that way to me now (independently from whether she was raped or not).
Trump called the woman who had allegations against clinton losers and liars several times. So i cannot think of other reasons why she would openly support that man but not openly support obama. She says she voted obama, but it's not like that is verifyable or means a lot.
Then she lets trump use her like a pet to show arround and goes after chelsea clinton on twitter.
That behaviour let's me not trust her judgement at least nowadays.
That rather seems like the behaviour of a person whose life didn't go the way she wanted it to go and now is out for the attention she can get without any regard to the channels.

Naturally, that does not necessarily mean she lied. Could aswell be that the rape destroyed her life and she got worse and worse.
But my judgement of her being not mentally stable right now stands. It's not like i can legitimately judge it, but that is how it appears to me when i think about whether to trust her accounts or not.

 

[M3J]

How did obama back it up? His situation is entirely comparable to hillary's as far as I can tell.

So.... you want to spy on her?

That last sentence of yours is rather contradictory.... Against homosexuality but does good things for them? That sounds like an oxymoron.

Loud and proud about supporting same sex rights and all.

Hmm, dunno.

Well, it's the same concept as Gary Johnson being pro-choice despite his belief being anti-abortion.

I hope Hillary has a plan to prevent these type of homeland security threats from occuring, as the current democratic regime under Obama has failed to keep us safe. Not even our housing establishments are safe from brainwashed individuals.

I'm confused. Shouldn't you be happy people are attacking and killing Muslims in America?

And funnily enough, you can say the same about conservatives as well. I mean, we did see two of our worst terrorist attacks under conservative presidents. Blaming Obama or a president is pretty stupid.

I find it still very problematic to just say 'i don't trust her for reasons' and then when these reasons are rather questionable say 'idk idc' <:

There are legitimate reasons to not want clinton as a president (if we ignore trump), but most of the reasons everyone says are complete fabrication.
There is no 'true feminist'. Every politician uses movements to get elected. It's not like obama made particular pro black politics even if he used the black community to get elected. But clinton's track record is clearly democratic and progressive in most cases. It is hard to see any doubt about her making progressive politics.

Well, I don't know how to put it into words, nor do I care to. From everything I've read, Hillary is a horrible person for the most part, but Trump trumps her in that department. THough, funnily, all he has to do to start winning is be a better person. Apologize and prove he's changed and not a cuntwaffle anymore.

Are they really complete fabrication? What makes you say there's no true feminist? Wouldn't Bernie be considered a feminist?

The birther conspiracy has not died down. Trump claims to have ended it (which is one of the stupider things he has said) but his actual supporters still believe obama was not born in the US, is a muslim and a few things even worst than that (such as michele obama is not a woman). Unfortunately this is an entire generation of people who literally trust nothing and the believes they have are written in stone and they will die this way.

Well, it depends but after the election hillary probably won't have to care much about trump. It's not like trump was a politician beforehand. The biggest threat he could pose is to continue to spread insane conspiracy theories through breibart and other alt right media outlets. Though everything considered that is a real possibility and even a threat. Other than that there is no reason for her to work with him.

Realistically speaking the allegations against bill have about as much merit as the ones against trump. The difference being that there is an audio of trump doing exactly what over dozen women are claiming he did to them. In particular the Juanita broadrick testimony is kinda terrifying to hear.... However it has been too long since it happened and in the end its her work against his so there really is nothing to go on from here as far as I can tell.

No, this is just another generation of people who believe anything that agrees with them. Anti-Muslim wackos like xi0 and Sharkbait believe refugees are very dangerous, and Trump lies about that all the time when a quick fact-check shows that the refugees are vetted stringently and are among the safest groups in the US. But no one who is anti-Muslim will bother to confirm, anything bad about Muslims agree with their viewpoints so that's what they'll believe, while denouncing the actual facts as biased. These people will trust whatever agrees with their views.

No, the biggest threat Trump poses is the violence.

 

[shionoro]

Well, I don't know how to put it into words, nor do I care to. From everything I've read, Hillary is a horrible person for the most part, but Trump trumps her in that department. THough, funnily, all he has to do to start winning is be a better person. Apologize and prove he's changed and not a cuntwaffle anymore.

Are they really complete fabrication? What makes you say there's no true feminist? Wouldn't Bernie be considered a feminist?

There is no such thing as a 'true feminist' like there is no 'true christian' or 'true muslim'.
And yes: They are complete fabrications.
The only remotely homophobe thing clinton has ever done was wanting a legally equal union NOT called marriage for homosexuals (or rather, letting states decide whether they want that or gay marriage).
And that's it, aside from that her history of actions made it clear that equality of homosexuals was a topic for her since forever and she leaned to the progressive side.

And a lot of the things people read and think that 'it makes her a horrible person' are like that.
Either complete lies or exaggeration.

The actual policy reasons why someone should not elect clinton are of no interest for the most people.
Because it is harder to find real issues with her on that department.
A problem i would have with her for example is that she does not want to completely ban death penalty.
But most people do not even know her stance on that or even like it.

The thing is: There is not much left to hate on her when you exclude unproven claims about her being a rape enabler, criminal and general wallstreet pet.
And that is what those are: unproven claims AT BEST and completely made up at worst.

And that kind of upsets me, because i even took the time reading some of the allegedly significant emails and the transkripts of her speeches and actually was more voninced of her not being corrupt after that. If someone sees that otherwise, fine.
But the hordes of people just reading some complete fabrications and still joining the choir, that is really what is wrong about political discourse in the newsmedia.

 

[kkck]

Damn, John Oliver is merciless. Still surprised that Jill Stein was so easily made out to be so incompetent....

 

[Onyx Darkmatter]

Damn, John Oliver is merciless. Still surprised that Jill Stein was so easily made out to be so incompetent....

I knew those 2 candidates had horrible policies, but I never thought it would be this fucking terrible. I thought maybe Gary Johnson would be Presidential material, but it looks like I was dead wrong about that. Jill Stein is Jill Stein: a fucking moron who doesn't know how the Government works.

I wish there are candidates like John Kennedy, Dwight Eisenhower, or even Ronald Reagan (minus his shitty Economic policy).

 

[kkck]

I knew those 2 candidates had horrible policies, but I never thought it would be this fucking terrible. I thought maybe Gary Johnson would be Presidential material, but it looks like I was dead wrong about that. Jill Stein is Jill Stein: a fucking moron who doesn't know how the Government works.

I wish there are candidates like John Kennedy, Dwight Eisenhower, or even Ronald Reagan (minus his shitty Economic policy).

For me it was the opposite, I knew Gary Jhonson as a moron (because that is the unfortunate default setting for libertarians) and in turn there would be more to Jill Stein. And there are things in her platform that would I agree with at least but seeing this it's quite clear she has very little idea of what she is doing. And her pandering to conspiracy theories and anti vaccine people is downright shameful. No wonder why Bernie stuck with democrats over the green party lol.

 

[Onyx Darkmatter]

For me it was the opposite, I knew Gary Jhonson as a moron (because that is the unfortunate default setting for libertarians) and in turn there would be more to Jill Stein. And there are things in her platform that would I agree with at least but seeing this it's quite clear she has very little idea of what she is doing. And her pandering to conspiracy theories and anti vaccine people is downright shameful. No wonder why Bernie stuck with democrats over the green party lol.

Well, Bernie knows that taking the Democratic route is one of the two better route at winning the race (other being Republican route, but I doubt he would've done well running as a RINO), since Third-Parties are just there to steal and ruin the race (not that it's a bad thing to have a third-party, but it is how we've allowed Bush to win the Election back in 2000).
Still, while I do agree with some points those two candidates makes, just watching their clips made me cringe and seriously questions the people about their judgments. Like, if you're running for president, don't you think you're supposed to dress up in a suit to look like a leader instead of wearing jeans? Or how you need to respond? (like did you really need to make a sexual joke about climbing up a mountain, or make a cringiest song that promotes your agenda? It's no wonder why we couldn't find any decent third-party candidate.)
Thank god neither of the candidates are doing well.

 

[shionoro]

Their appearance does not interest me. Let them sind horrible songs and dress strange if they wan tto.
But i could never vote a vaccine 'sceptic'.

 

[kkck]

Well, Bernie knows that taking the Democratic route is one of the two better route at winning the race (other being Republican route, but I doubt he would've done well running as a RINO), since Third-Parties are just there to steal and ruin the race (not that it's a bad thing to have a third-party, but it is how we've allowed Bush to win the Election back in 2000).
Still, while I do agree with some points those two candidates makes, just watching their clips made me cringe and seriously questions the people about their judgments. Like, if you're running for president, don't you think you're supposed to dress up in a suit to look like a leader instead of wearing jeans? Or how you need to respond? (like did you really need to make a sexual joke about climbing up a mountain, or make a cringiest song that promotes your agenda? It's no wonder why we couldn't find any decent third-party candidate.)
Thank god neither of the candidates are doing well.

Well, saying they are just ruining the race is, IMO, wrong. It's not inherently wrong to have more parties that offer more views and whatnot. The issue here is not that they spoil the race, which they don't, but rather their blatant incompetence. Sadly, the only person there who seems to be competent at all would be hillary. The rest of them just seem to parade their ignorance...

 

[shionoro]

I think the real problem is that people only care to think about a third party in the presidential elections, where it basically REALLY just ruins the race, but forget about them in the elections in which they actually have some chances.

 

[kkck]

I think the real problem is that people only care to think about a third party in the presidential elections, where it basically REALLY just ruins the race, but forget about them in the elections in which they actually have some chances.

Well, the big question is why they would even want to run for president. Had johnson or stein made it to the presidency they would have been faced with a very specific issue: Virtually no allies in congress. They would have been completely unable to pass any sort of legislation for the most part. The way I see it the presidential elections should be more like a marketing stunt than an honest attempt at winning on their end. Both would actually be screwed if they made it. A president from a third party would make sense if it had some congress support to begin with. I mean, I could see gary johnson squishing some support for specific legislation from republicans and a few independents... but the opposition from all democrats and the rest of independents would be fierce. The opposite would be true for stein.

 

[Onyx Darkmatter]

Well, saying they are just ruining the race is, IMO, wrong. It's not inherently wrong to have more parties that offer more views and whatnot. The issue here is not that they spoil the race, which they don't, but rather their blatant incompetence. Sadly, the only person there who seems to be competent at all would be hillary. The rest of them just seem to parade their ignorance...

Oh, I don't actually mean it as an insult (I guess I should have reworded my statement better). I've meant to say Third-Parties are great alternatives for different point of views, but the reason why I said that they would harm the race is mainly because it has happened with Al Gore. He could've won had Nader voters actually voted for Al Gore (which was a secondary option for them).
I'm not saying having third-parties are bad nor did I want to say they are. I'm just saying that it's great to have a third-party, but at the end of the day, they will always lose and might harm another candidate like Al Gore. If there's been a reform that eliminates the 2 major parties altogether, then I can see third-parties being relevant; however, I just don't see it happening anytime soon, not as long as Democratic and Republican Parties are still active.

 

[M3J]

We should riot until Bernie becomes president

 

[kkck]

We should riot until Bernie becomes president

Like trump supporters will if trump doesn't win?

--- Double Post Merged, Oct 18, 2016, Original Post Date: Oct 18, 2016 ---

Oh, I don't actually mean it as an insult (I guess I should have reworded my statement better). I've meant to say Third-Parties are great alternatives for different point of views, but the reason why I said that they would harm the race is mainly because it has happened with Al Gore. He could've won had Nader voters actually voted for Al Gore (which was a secondary option for them).
I'm not saying having third-parties are bad nor did I want to say they are. I'm just saying that it's great to have a third-party, but at the end of the day, they will always lose and might harm another candidate like Al Gore. If there's been a reform that eliminates the 2 major parties altogether, then I can see third-parties being relevant; however, I just don't see it happening anytime soon, not as long as Democratic and Republican Parties are still active.

Well, gore would have won assuming he got enough of nader's votes. But I would still argue that the bigger issue in that specific case was the electoral college. Al gore in fact got more votes than bush but due to electoral college shenanigans bush got the election. Nader is at most secondary next to that. I do think third parties need to be more representative in other elected positions before making an honest bid for the presidency.

 

[Aonori]

Like trump supporters will if trump doesn't win?

--- Double Post Merged, Oct 18, 2016, Original Post Date: Oct 18, 2016 ---

Well, gore would have won assuming he got enough of nader's votes. But I would still argue that the bigger issue in that specific case was the electoral college. Al gore in fact got more votes than bush but due to electoral college shenanigans bush got the election. Nader is at most secondary next to that. I do think third parties need to be more representative in other elected positions before making an honest bid for the presidency.

Most of them, think on doing it, because of fear of Hillary winning and starting WW3, or anyother "problems", I assume they´d do the same against trump if there was a atual threat with him winning on the same scale as Hillary right now.

--- Double Post Merged, Oct 18, 2016 ---

I knew those 2 candidates had horrible policies, but I never thought it would be this fucking terrible. I thought maybe Gary Johnson would be Presidential material, but it looks like I was dead wrong about that. Jill Stein is Jill Stein: a fucking moron who doesn't know how the Government works.

I wish there are candidates like John Kennedy, Dwight Eisenhower, or even Ronald Reagan (minus his shitty Economic policy).

And she wants Snowden back free of charges, unlike Trump and Hillary who want him back for some punishment, always found that funny.

 

[Onyx Darkmatter]

And she wants Snowden back free of charges, unlike Trump and Hillary who want him back for some punishment, always found that funny.

And what does that have to do with how she has zero clue about the government and how it works? I mean, if she knows what Quantitative Easing is, then she should have known that a president has no power over that (because that's part of the Monetary Policy, not Fiscal Policy).

 

[kkck]

I wish there are candidates like John Kennedy, Dwight Eisenhower, or even Ronald Reagan (minus his shitty Economic policy).

What do you mean? The only thing reagan had going for him was his shitty economic policy.... Without that myth I am not sure of what exactly is it that you like about him.

--- Double Post Merged, Oct 19, 2016, Original Post Date: Oct 19, 2016 ---

Most of them, think on doing it, because of fear of Hillary winning and starting WW3, or anyother "problems", I assume they´d do the same against trump if there was a atual threat with him winning on the same scale as Hillary right now.

--- Double Post Merged, Oct 18, 2016 ---

And she wants Snowden back free of charges, unlike Trump and Hillary who want him back for some punishment, always found that funny.

WWIII? I am not sure anyone can seriously believe trump supporters would riot over that. The issue here is trump telling his supporters that the election is rigged and them being ignorant enough to believe that. As for the bold part, I don't get what you mean.

 

[Onyx Darkmatter]

What do you mean? The only thing reagan had going for him was his shitty economic policy.... Without that myth I am not sure of what exactly is it that you like about him.

Well, it's more about how the public viewed him. He did inspired people to get into politics, and I did liked how he handled the PATCO strike (granted, it was definitely an extremely risky move he did, but how he managed to resolve this strike to prove a point without casualties is definitely miraculous).
But I guess it's more about his public image. I may not think he's a fantastic president, but at least I can understand why people loved him (If anything, Trump could have been the next Reagan has he not made stupid shits that pisses people off).

 

[M3J]

Like trump supporters will if trump doesn't win?

--- Double Post Merged, Oct 18, 2016, Original Post Date: Oct 18, 2016 ---

Well, gore would have won assuming he got enough of nader's votes. But I would still argue that the bigger issue in that specific case was the electoral college. Al gore in fact got more votes than bush but due to electoral college shenanigans bush got the election. Nader is at most secondary next to that. I do think third parties need to be more representative in other elected positions before making an honest bid for the presidency.

Similar to that, except the primaries were rigged in Hillary's favor.