American Politics

[Philia]

So what would Mr. Trump do if he ends up losing the election? Riot with his supporters? Considering the amount of support he has, he can easily cause some troubles.

 

[Knight of Stalwart Heart]

Iam pretty sure he alienated some of of his supporters with his gross disrespectful talk on women.There might still be some people who'd support him though.I don't think a lot of people will still riot for Trump.Maybe some people,but not a lot.Besides,I don't know what he'll gain by rioting in the streets.It will only make him look worse

 

[xi0]

I would have to believe that a a decent chunk of Trump supporters are #NeverHillary people. Some might have abandoned this course in the last couple of months due to the amount of scandals, but I'd have to think that these people are voting to prevent Clinton from being in office and ignoring the disaster that they're voting for.

 

[M3J]

I would have to believe that a a decent chunk of Trump supporters are #NeverHillary people. Some might have abandoned this course in the last couple of months due to the amount of scandals, but I'd have to think that these people are voting to prevent Clinton from being in office and ignoring the disaster that they're voting for.

I don't think it's as big, but there's certainly enough #NeverHillary voting for Trump. But I see plenty of crazed Trump supporters who'll probably riot and be violent when Trump loses to Killary.

Sucks that we have two shitty choices.

 

[SharkBait]

What? Regulations help ensure safety and unreasonable ones usually go to court. I also dont think regulations are putting people out of work, tax incentives for green energy, bad press, unjust fees put people in the fossil fuel business out of work, all things democrats love to support.

 

[M3J]

Sickening that people consider Trump pro-America when he, at best, doesn't give a shit about America. If he did, then why get his shit made in China? Why incite people to riot and be violent? While I consider Hillary to be slightly better, she at least doesn't tell people to do anything that's against the good of the country or its people.

 

[Doughboy]

Sickening that people consider Trump pro-America when he, at best, doesn't give a shit about America. If he did, then why get his shit made in China? Why incite people to riot and be violent? While I consider Hillary to be slightly better, she at least doesn't tell people to do anything that's against the good of the country or its people.

Ever since Trump said that stuff about the immigrants he fucked himself... and then he tried to recon it smh. Hillary isn't super better but anyone is better than Trump. Plus I think it's time for a female president, the times are changing and we all need to be adapting.

 

[Onyx Darkmatter]

It's not necessary to have a female president; It's necessary to have a president who can lead the nation during a crisis, inspire people, and leave office with a powerful legacy that can be remembered down in history (people like Abraham Lincoln who prevented the nation from breaking apart; John Kennedy who told people to go to the moon, the list goes on).

 

[shionoro]

It's not necessary to have a female president; It's necessary to have a president who can lead the nation during a crisis, inspire people, and leave office with a powerful legacy that can be remembered down in history (people like Abraham Lincoln who prevented the nation from breaking apart; John Kennedy who told people to go to the moon, the list goes on).

MMh, i don't completely agree with that.
First of all: The legacy does not determine how effective a president is. Going to the moon was a propaganda victory, but the use of that can be questioned.
Secondly: On the longterm, it is necessary to establish that every group in a country has chances to become president if they are fit.
While, yes, on the short term always the most effective president should be taken, on the long term, it is a problem in democracy if certain groups basically have no chances to become president.

 

[M3J]

Ever since Trump said that stuff about the immigrants he fucked himself... and then he tried to recon it smh. Hillary isn't super better but anyone is better than Trump. Plus I think it's time for a female president, the times are changing and we all need to be adapting.

We don't need a female president, we need a good president regardless of gender. Hillary isn't a good choice, but she's better than Trump. That's literally her biggest advantage here, and one she could easily lose if more scandals are revealed or if Trump "turns" into a new leaf. I'm pretty sure at least 1/4 of her voters are only voting for her because they see Trump as a disgusting filth, but how quickly would they drop her if Trump acted like a human being? They'd have less reasons to be against Trump, and the undecided and people refusing to vote would be more likely to vote for Trump. I don't get why Trump isn't changing his strategy, literally all he needs to do.

It's not necessary to have a female president; It's necessary to have a president who can lead the nation during a crisis, inspire people, and leave office with a powerful legacy that can be remembered down in history (people like Abraham Lincoln who prevented the nation from breaking apart; John Kennedy who told people to go to the moon, the list goes on).

Actually, Lincoln caused the nation to break apart when he became president. Just so happens the Union kicked the Confederate's ass, so US was made whole again. This election is doing that in a way, breaking apart the country, one side that Trump represents and the other side that 'liberals" represent. It'll be interesting to see the results and consequences regardless of who wins.

 

[shionoro]

We don't need a female president, we need a good president regardless of gender. Hillary isn't a good choice, but she's better than Trump. That's literally her biggest advantage here, and one she could easily lose if more scandals are revealed or if Trump "turns" into a new leaf. I'm pretty sure at least 1/4 of her voters are only voting for her because they see Trump as a disgusting filth, but how quickly would they drop her if Trump acted like a human being? They'd have less reasons to be against Trump, and the undecided and people refusing to vote would be more likely to vote for Trump. I don't get why Trump isn't changing his strategy, literally all he needs to do.

To be fair, lots of people would love hillary if they would not believe in the fake scandals made up a bout her.
If she only got attacked for things she actually did with all the context, there would not be that much left.
In trump's case, there is plenty.

 

[Onyx Darkmatter]

MMh, i don't completely agree with that.
First of all: The legacy does not determine how effective a president is. Going to the moon was a propaganda victory, but the use of that can be questioned.
Secondly: On the longterm, it is necessary to establish that every group in a country has chances to become president if they are fit.
While, yes, on the short term always the most effective president should be taken, on the long term, it is a problem in democracy if certain groups basically have no chances to become president.

Unless we're going with the conspiracy that Neil Armstrong never walked on the moon, him walking on the moon enabled us to believe that space travel was possible for the humans; it was the first step, now we're going to send people to Mars in a few years.

Actually, Lincoln caused the nation to break apart when he became president. Just so happens the Union kicked the Confederate's ass, so US was made whole again. This election is doing that in a way, breaking apart the country, one side that Trump represents and the other side that 'liberals" represent. It'll be interesting to see the results and consequences regardless of who wins.

But there's also the Reconstruction Era, where Abraham wanted to rebuild the south after the devastated war.
It's not necessarily the same thing, but I get where you're coming at. The whole issue about this election is that the nation picked 2 of the most disliked candidates in American Politics (or History for that matter) while the issue about slavery caused a controversy about state rights and violations. If it was something like the Blacks and an enormous division between them and Americans (from Police Brutality and Poverty rate), then I would see the correlation.


In the meantime, it looks like I got my Sample Ballot in the mail today. I should definitely look into the names that I am unfamiliar with.

 

[M3J]

Fake scandals according to whom? You? Hillary supporters?

 

[shionoro]

Unless we're going with the conspiracy that Neil Armstrong never walked on the moon, him walking on the moon enabled us to believe that space travel was possible for the humans; it was the first step, now we're going to send people to Mars in a few years.

Well ya, i mean, on the long run, noone would doubt that space travel is possible.
The americans did it because they wanted to one up the russians and for kind of no other reason (except the guys at nasa of course).
The scientific value of the moonlanding was limited.
Sure, there was lots of knowledge necessary to do it, but same would be true for an unmanned mission.
They manned the mission for propaganda alone, all with the US flag and stuff, and subsequently endangered their pilots.
This was not a big step forward scientifically, it was a show. Which is fair enough, and it was an accomplishment, definitely, but rendering kennedy as an effective president because he spent money on propaganda or eyecandy does not cut it in my opinion.

--- Double Post Merged, Oct 22, 2016, Original Post Date: Oct 22, 2016 ---

Fake scandals according to whom? You? Hillary supporters?

According to 'when you read into it except saying things without reading into them at first'.
We already talked about her being a 'homophobe'.

 

[xi0]

Plus I think it's time for a female president, the times are changing and we all need to be adapting.

It has sort of been said already, but the "it's time" argument means nothing to me. The identity of the candidate shouldn't be a positive or negative, as it's outside of any person's control. Only their character and ethics should matter.

 

[Doughboy]

Should of phrased it better but I more meant Hillary being a woman shoudn't be a factor into her candidacy. Pro or con. Just like some might not vote for Trump cause the dude is a clown some won't vote for Hillary cause she's a woman. Don't think it should be narrowed like that but in politics all this factors in unfortunately. I have no doubt some voted for Obama cause he was black, let's just be real for a minute. Obama broke the color barrier, Hillary breaking the sex barrier after people consider her a fit for president is just icing on the cake for the changing times.

 

[shionoro]

It has sort of been said already, but the "it's time" argument means nothing to me. The identity of the candidate shouldn't be a positive or negative, as it's outside of any person's control. Only their character and ethics should matter.

That is true, however, it DOES matter whether it is a common occurence that a minority group spends a president or not.
I agree in so far that obama has not made it more likely for other black people that they become president, so there was not really a big social change in voting him, but nonetheless it is important that it is at least accepted and possible for a black (or in our case female) person to become president.

Let's have outspoken atheists next.

 

[xi0]

That is true, however, it DOES matter whether it is a common occurence that a minority group spends a president or not.
I agree in so far that obama has not made it more likely for other black people that they become president, so there was not really a big social change in voting him, but nonetheless it is important that it is at least accepted and possible for a black (or in our case female) person to become president.

Well, I have no real disagreement there. I just don't like the tone some feminist-leaning Hillary supporters have with people. Like I've mentioned before, I would gladly vote for someone like Elizabeth Warren. My issue with Hillary has nothing to do with her gender.

--- Double Post Merged, Oct 23, 2016, Original Post Date: Oct 23, 2016 ---

And the occurrence being common or not should be proportional to who is involved in politics, or the population in general. So simply saying that it's time for a female president, or time for a gay president, etc....that is nothing by pandering to me. It should only be about their record and their ethics.

/parrot

 

[shionoro]

Well, I have no real disagreement there. I just don't like the tone some feminist-leaning Hillary supporters have with people. Like I've mentioned before, I would gladly vote for someone like Elizabeth Warren. My issue with Hillary has nothing to do with her gender.

Naturally, the 'you have to vote her because she is a woman' talk is nonsense that is used to fetch some votes.
But we see that in every election, we also saw it with obama. Every candidate uses his heritage in some way.
Trump goes the 'i am a business man' route, lots of reps go with 'i come from a big family who all love each other' and so on.
Some work better than others, but it is just advertising.

Also, call me petty, but the thought that trump is getting defeating (possibly in a landslide) by a woman is amusing to me.

I do not know enough about warren to judge her, but she is popular among leftwingers and so far she said nothing i had an issue with (even if i think she is a rather bad speaker, but that is not important to me).
I do hope that clinton does appoint some prominent leftwing democrats in influential positions. She owes it to them in my opinion, because in the end, sanders and warren both supported her.
I know the 'ye give the bernie bros something' comment that was leaked, but i do think clinton knows by now that she has to lean somewhat more to the left side.

 

[xi0]

But we see that in every election, we also saw it with obama. Every candidate uses his heritage in some way.

I really don't recall Obama's campaign invoking his ethnicity in that way, aside from the whole "change" thing...which is a bit looser than the "I'm with her" stuff.

Also, call me petty, but the thought that trump is getting defeating (possibly in a landslide) by a woman is amusing to me.

Oh, don't get me wrong. It's poetic in a way. I'm just saying that I think Warren has torn him to pieces verbally as is, if she was beating him it would be even sweeter.