US Elections 2016 Part II: The Debates & General Election

[Harbinger]

Originally Posted by Irenicus

You are deluded if you think Clinton is anywhere close to being among the most corrupt and despicable to ever run for office in the long history of the United States. You are without ground to stand on if you think her character is somehow equivalent to Trump, of whom all civilized and ethical people should (and often do) recoil from in abject opposition.

I tolerated this sort of self-absorbed attitude for long enough, thinking it was mere indulgence, a normative cliché as old as politics. No more. No, they are not equally as bad. No, they are not the "lesser of two evils." No, I will not let that accusation stand. This insidious lie has done enough damage to the moral fabric and sanity of my country.

How many people are running for office while being criminally investigated by the FBI?

She lies all the time, even in front of Congress. There is no intent? You use a software to delete emails. There is no intent to hide anything? How many people destroy their own Blackberries with a hammer? Nothing to see here.

How often does the DoJ meet with the husband of someone who is being criminally investigated to have small talk in a private plane/jet?

The microscope is on Clinton and it stinks corruption.

Trump's a moron but Clinton's corrupted to the core.

Yeah, the DNC's "supposedly" values are much closer to mine than the RNC. However, I will never vote for someone as corrupted as she is. If your party offers you garbage, then you walk away from it. If Clinton loses, it's not on your hand. It's on her hands. It's on the DNC's hands for selecting (and cheating in favor of) such a questionable candidate. Naturally, the same applies to the RNC...

[Reckoner]

Originally Posted by Irenicus

I tolerated this sort of self-absorbed attitude for long enough, thinking it was mere indulgence, a normative cliché as old as politics. No more. No, they are not equally as bad. No, they are not the "lesser of two evils." No, I will not let that accusation stand. This insidious lie has done enough damage to the moral fabric and sanity of my country.

This is a media myth that keeps getting perpetuated. The apparent dissatisfaction of the American public with their choices... It's a false equivalency to say they are on the same playing field. There is only one truly serious candidate for the Presidency at the moment, and people who deny that are seriously deluded.

For as much as I disliked the politics of individuals like Romney and Mccain, they were both serious politicians with serious political campaigns. When Mccain had a woman at a rally say she disliked Obama because he's a muslim, he had the sheer decency to take away the microphone and not pay heed to such lunacy. Romney for his worth is also disavowing Trump this election. Trump is letting America's darkest elements fester.

Originally Posted by Harbinger

How many people are running for office while being criminally investigated by the FBI?

Of which they pressed no charges for because it wasn't as big of a deal as you think it is. There was no intent to do harm and the main issue of the FBI was not the private email server, it was how she tagged classified materials in her emails. Something her staffers screwed up on.

Originally Posted by Harbinger

She lies all the time, even in front of Congress. There is no intent? You use a software to delete emails. There is no intent to hide anything? How many people destroy their own Blackberries with a hammer? Nothing to see here.

The Benghazi committee wasted more money than the 9/11 commission (Believe me things were done wrong there) and they found no evidence of wrongdoing. Politicians lying or putting spin on things is nothing new (Find me one who doesn't lie), but Trump lies at an unprecedented rate and quite egregiously so (The impact and severity of his lies carry far more harm). Again, false equivalency to the max.

Despite decades under the scrutiny of false investigation after investigation by the Republicans they have not been able to truly find one damning thing of corruption about the Clintons on a level anywhere near what they proclaim.

Originally Posted by Harbinger

How often does the DoJ meet with the husband of someone who is being criminally investigated to have small talk in a private plane/jet?

It was clumsy as hell to meet during an investigation with so much of the American public on the right stirred up into a frenzy, but if you really think the Clintons are the equivalent of the Underwoods, you would think they would conduct such a meeting more secretly. Corrupt people wouldn't do a meeting like the open for everyone to see like that... Use common sense.

Originally Posted by Harbinger

Trump's a moron but Clinton's corrupted to the core.

You only bring up conspiracies and vague feelings about what you think she is/has done. Try coming up with something concrete.

[Archon_Wing]

I would use a hammer to destroy things that might contain sensitive info; gonna do the same to my soon to be former hard drives. And the FBI isn't investigating me; I'd just do that anyways. I have nothing to hide from them. Well, maybe those doujins...

[Ithekro]

We are now basically 5 weeks away from the election. And it is getting heated in here.

I don't care for either of the two main candidates and will not vote for either of them. I will still vote. I remained officially "Undeclared" so that I would not be forced by a party allegence to pick a side. And this time I disagree with both parties for there choices.

I don't see either of them being good for me as my President. Trump for the anger his running is festering in the nation, and Clinton for the personal despair it will cause me in relation to my conservative (though not Republican) father who went to high school with her and despises her on all grounds. It has been hard enough dealing with political decisions during the Obama administration....I feel this will be worse for me personally if she wins.

I don't think I am cut out for politics, otherwise I'd run myself.

[frivolity]

Originally Posted by Irenicus

As we debate whether race is a scientific concept (hint: we have a word for that kind of thinking, very convenient really: scientific racism), Mr. Trump's -not racism- has very much stirred a new conflict in the American Jewish community.

The author, a Millenial Jewish magazine intern at Politico, wrote this article from an insider's perspective. These young men and women, the author included, grew up in a world where they were nearly indistinguishable from the "white" mainstream. They grew up with AIPAC, et al, fighting to paint the Left as the anti-Semitic side, as they held strong ties to the interests of the Israeli state and aggressively opposed leftist sympathies for the Palestinian cause (even now an increasing political threat with the growing momentum of the BDS movement and Israeli diplomatic isolation). Often caught in-between, they tend to have to deftly navigate identities and cultural concerns, though largely from a position of safety and, more or less, confidence.

Yet when the real Nazis woke up and long-silenced rhetoric of hate spewed out across America -- making real for the first time an experience their grandparents used to tell in old family lore -- the silence of AIPAC and the Jewish Right is creating a new anger: betrayal.

Unless the leaders of the older Jewish Right speak up, and speak up soon, this divide may leave a permanent scar. It will reveal them as nothing more than what the Evangelicals are (excepting those who have made a stand -- with applause to Mr. Romney and the Mormon community) -- without integrity. Politics first.

Trump is not an anti-semite. All of those articles are talking about the conduct by some of his supporters instead of Trump himself. The criticism about Trump Jr retweeting an academic's tweet is an absolute joke since the content of the retweet wasn't even anti-semitic in any way. I'd retweet a quote by anyone if it's a statement whose content I agree with, and that I consider to be somewhat relevant. Even a quote by Hitler.

First, regarding Trump's conduct, his business dealings show that he has nothing against Jews. This is not surprising, since capitalism cares only about one colour, which is green:

Regarding “Pride and affirmative prejudice: Donald Trump and the Jews” (September 19), as a lifelong resident of the New York City area, I am fully cognizant of the role that Trump Towers played in preserving the integrity and stability of the Brooklyn Jewish community in the mid-20th century.

By the early 1960s, Coney Island had experienced a severe case of urban decay – drugs, violent crime and home destruction in the extreme. The Jewish community of that era was literally run out of the area. The middle- income communities of Sea Gate to the west and Brighton Beach, Sheepshead Bay and Manhattan Beach to the east were threatened by this oncoming blight. But for the financial risk taken by the Trump family in building the Trump Towers and recruiting sponsors to construct the neighboring Warbass Houses and Luna Park development, these communities, the bedrock of south Brooklyn Jewish communal life, would have been totally obliterated.

The investment came in the face of much misguided opposition by liberal political leaders who saw the future of this area for low-income projects such as those constructed on Manhattan’s Lower East Side, which resulted in the permanent exclusion of a viable Jewish community in much of the area north of Delancey Street.

Because of the Trumps, both father and, yes, son, this did not become the fate of south Brooklyn.

Also, it should be noted that the Brighton Beach area was to serve as the home to many Russian- Jewish refugees fleeing Communist oppression in the 1970s and ’80s.

ALAN JAY GERBER
Cedarhurst New York
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Letters...-Editor-468846

While we're on that note, neither is Hillary anti-semite, even though she called Paul Fray a "Jew b*****d".

Second, regarding the conduct of Trump's supporters. There will always be a minority "basket of deplorables" on both sides. Just as we shouldn't blame Obama for the damage caused by the minority of BLM supporters who take things to far, neither should we blame Trump for the actions of a minority of his supporters. This is not to say that they aren't part of the problem, but it is to say that the blame falls predominantly, if not solely, on the ones who went too far.

Just because you repeat it with such conviction doesn't mean it's true. Just because you act the disappointed neutral does not mean you stand on morally superior ground. Such false equivalency is moral cowardice, avoiding responsibility in a tantrum of self-absorbed pretensions.

You are deluded if you think Clinton is anywhere close to being among the most corrupt and despicable to ever run for office in the long history of the United States. You are without ground to stand on if you think her character is somehow equivalent to Trump, of whom all civilized and ethical people should (and often do) recoil from in abject opposition.

I tolerated this sort of self-absorbed attitude for long enough, thinking it was mere indulgence, a normative cliché as old as politics. No more. No, they are not equally as bad. No, they are not the "lesser of two evils." No, I will not let that accusation stand. This insidious lie has done enough damage to the moral fabric and sanity of my country.

Read this quote back to yourself but swap Trump and Clinton's names, then marvel at how the quote still applies and could easily be said by someone else with a different opinion.

They're both terrible candidates, and the only way to break the cycle of having to vote for the lesser of two evils is to call both out for all their BS.

[Irenicus]

Originally Posted by Ithrekro

I don't see either of them being good for me as my President. Trump for the anger his running is festering in the nation, and Clinton for the personal despair it will cause me in relation to my conservative (though not Republican) father who went to high school with her and despises her on all grounds. It has been hard enough dealing with political decisions during the Obama administration....I feel this will be worse for me personally if she wins.

I'm going to be brutally honest here: your father's anguish, his anger towards Clinton does not preclude the anguish Trump has already caused and will cause millions more. It ain't you, mate, who will find themselves on the wrong side of a wall or an internment camp.

Originally Posted by frivolity

Trump is not an anti-semite. All of those articles are talking about the conduct by some of his supporters instead of Trump himself. The criticism about Trump Jr retweeting an academic's tweet is an absolute joke since the content of the retweet wasn't even anti-semitic in any way. I'd retweet a quote by anyone if it's a statement whose content I agree with, and that I consider to be somewhat relevant. Even a quote by Hitler.

You downplayed the violence of his and his surrogates' rhetoric, the sheer offense they cause, and the roots of their thinking. In any case, the article was written by a young Jew who spoke from his heart, not from outside excuse-makers trying to downplay an evil for ideological points.

First, regarding Trump's conduct, his business dealings show that he has nothing against Jews. This is not surprising, since capitalism cares only about one colour, which is green:

Hardly green enough that Mr. Trump did not end up in one of the largest anti-discrimination housing lawsuits for not renting to black people...oh wait he did.

Second, regarding the conduct of Trump's supporters. There will always be a minority "basket of deplorables" on both sides. Just as we shouldn't blame Obama for the damage caused by the minority of BLM supporters who take things to far, neither should we blame Trump for the actions of a minority of his supporters. This is not to say that they aren't part of the problem, but it is to say that the blame falls predominantly, if not solely, on the ones who went too far.

Yet another false equivalency and avoidance of responsibilities. It isn't Hillary Clinton that the entire American alt-right, neo-Nazis, and KKK are supporting with horrific fervor.

Read this quote back to yourself but swap Trump and Clinton's names, then marvel at how the quote still applies and could easily be said by someone else with a different opinion.

They're both terrible candidates, and the only way to break the cycle of having to vote for the lesser of two evils is to call both out for all their BS.

They are not the same. The fact that you refuse to see it does not mean I have to play the bullshit false equivalency game. Don't even try, mate.

It is not Hillary Clinton who forced multiple very conservative newspapers to break decades of tradition and denounce Donald Trump in absolute terms. It is not Hillary Clinton who earned the denunciation of USA Today, an organization otherwise utterly devoted to standing for nothing and offending absolutely no one. It is not Hillary Clinton who started her campaign calling Mexicans rapists. It is not Hillary Clinton who denounced the family of a fallen soldier on their race and religion. It is not Hillary Clinton who display a lifelong tendency towards vile misogyny, including double down on calling out a woman on her weight, call out people to watch her (nonexistent) sex tape. It is not Hillary Clinton who publicly insinuated an assassination threat on her rival candidate. It is not Hillary Clinton who backtracked on acknowledging the legitimacy of this election after being publicly forced to do so. It is not Hillary Clinton who called on "poll watchers" to intimidate minority voters. It is not Hillary Clinton whose foundation demonstrably broke the law. It is not Hillary Clinton who attempted to negate on treaty obligations to transform an international alliance into a blackmail racket. It is not Hillary Clinton who embraced the rise of the alt-right and its racial hatred.

It is not Hillary Clinton who continues to ravage the principles of this republic. I can continue this all day. You will not wash away Trump with false equivalency. I will not back down to your intellectual dishonesty.

[frivolity]

Originally Posted by Irenicus

You downplayed the violence of his and his surrogates' rhetoric, the sheer offense they cause, and the roots of their thinking. In any case, the article was written by a young Jew who spoke from his heart, not from outside excuse-makers trying to downplay an evil for ideological points.

Look, if you want to talk about anti-semitism faced by young Jews, why not look at the actual anti-semite problems they face?

A study conducted by AMCHA shows that anti-semitism in schools is highly correlated with groups such as Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP).

BDS activity is the strongest predictor of incidents that target Jewish students for harm, the factor with the most deleterious effect on campus climate.

According to the report, the actions that the Jewish students suffered from include: physical assault; discrimination; destruction of Jewish property; genocidal expression; suppression of speech/movement/assembly; verbal assault; intimidation; harassment; and denigration. If you want to address the issue of anti-semitism, how about looking at these groups instead? Was Trump the one who caused these groups to proliferate?

If you want to play identity politics regarding sources from authors who are Jewish instead of so-called "outsider excuse-makers", then how about this article from the Jerusalem Post, which chronicles a number of Hillary's leaked emails, some of which contain shameful comments about Jewish Americans?

Astoundingly, Berger [Hillary's foreign policy advisor in 2008] seems to accuse the Jews in America of racism toward Obama. He writes, “At a political level, the past year has clearly demonstrated the degree to which the U.S. has been hamstrung by its low ratings in Israel and among important segments of the domestic Jewish constituency....” He then adds, “Domestically, he faces a reservoir of skepticism on this issue which reflects many factors, including inexcusable prejudice.”
...
She [Anne Marie Slaughter, Hillary's director of policy planning from 2009-2011, not in the same emal] adds: “There would also be a certain shaming effect re Israelis who, would be building settlements in the face of a pledge for peace.”

Clinton’s response to this email: “I am very interested- pls flesh out. Thx.”

Call them both out on their BS instead of focusing only on Trump.

Hardly green enough that Mr. Trump did not end up in one of the largest anti-discrimination housing lawsuits for not renting to black people...oh wait he did.

This case I will agree is suspect and I disagree with the policies, such as marking a 'C' for applications by coloured people.

However, Trump also fought to include African Americans and Jews in his Palm Beach Club, and I give him credit for that too.

Yet another false equivalency and avoidance of responsibilities. It isn't Hillary Clinton that the entire American alt-right, neo-Nazis, and KKK are supporting with horrific fervor.

So what? Those groups were in support of McCain and Romney too. I disagree with the principles that these groups stand for, but they are free to support anyone they want.

They are not the same. The fact that you refuse to see it does not mean I have to play the bullshit false equivalency game. Don't even try, mate.

It is not Hillary Clinton who forced multiple very conservative newspapers to break decades of tradition and denounce Donald Trump in absolute terms. It is not Hillary Clinton who earned the denunciation of USA Today, an organization otherwise utterly devoted to standing for nothing and offending absolutely no one. It is not Hillary Clinton who started her campaign calling Mexicans rapists. It is not Hillary Clinton who denounced the family of a fallen soldier on their race and religion. It is not Hillary Clinton who display a lifelong tendency towards vile misogyny, including double down on calling out a woman on her weight, call out people to watch her (nonexistent) sex tape. It is not Hillary Clinton who publicly insinuated an assassination threat on her rival candidate. It is not Hillary Clinton who backtracked on acknowledging the legitimacy of this election after being publicly forced to do so. It is not Hillary Clinton who called on "poll watchers" to intimidate minority voters. It is not Hillary Clinton whose foundation demonstrably broke the law. It is not Hillary Clinton who attempted to negate on treaty obligations to transform an international alliance into a blackmail racket. It is not Hillary Clinton who embraced the rise of the alt-right and its racial hatred.

It is not Hillary Clinton who continues to ravage the principles of this republic. I can continue this all day. You will not wash away Trump with false equivalency. I will not back down to your intellectual dishonesty.

Bolded part contains some truth. The rest of your post is ironic since you talk about intellectual dishonesty when you're only focusing on one candidate. Since you've talked about what is not Hillary Clinton, then how about we also make a list of what is Hillary Clinton too?

It is Hillary Clinton who lied to families of fallen soldiers about the events behind their deaths and manufactured a whole story about a video. It is Hillary Clinton who put national security at risk by not knowing that "C" on documents stands for "Confidential". It is Hillary Clinton who committed perjury by lying to Congress about her email server. It is Hillary Clinton who intimidated women who came forward with stories about harassment or assault by Bill. It is Hillary Clinton who laughed when recounting a rape case in which she defended the alleged rapist of a 12-year-old girl. It is Hillary Clinton who, with her husband, needed to return furniture and property after leaving the White House. It is Hillary Clinton whose foundation is not clearly separated from her state department, causing all kinds of issues relating to conflict of interest. It is Hillary Clinton whose aides rigged the nomination process of her party. It is Hillary Clinton who called the supporters of her opponents a "basket of deplorables". It is Hillary Clinton who wants to impede an individual worker's right to prefer a fixed-rate contract that is not dependent on the company's profit for that year.

Oh, and it is indeed Hillary Clinton who wants to ravage the principles set out in the Constitution concerning 2nd amendment rights. Maybe we should continue this all day, because we're actually doing a good job of criticising both candidates, which was my intention in the first place!

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Oh, and it is indeed Hillary Clinton who wants to ravage the principles set out in the Constitution concerning 2nd amendment rights. Maybe we should continue this all day, because we're actually doing a good job of criticising both candidates, which was my intention in the first place!

Trump wanted cops to be able to confiscate guns without charge. That's more anti-gun than anyone ever.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/ent...b0e28b2b52e4f2

“If they see a person possibly with a gun or they think may have a gun, they will see the person and they’ll look and they’ll take the gun away,” Trump said Thursday on Fox News, laying out his vision of how the practice works. “They’ll stop, they’ll frisk, and they’ll take the gun away and they won’t have anything to shoot with.”

[Ithekro]

I'm going to be brutally honest here: your father's anguish, his anger towards Clinton does not preclude the anguish Trump has already caused and will cause millions more. It ain't you, mate, who will find themselves on the wrong side of a wall or an internment camp.

And when the time comes to need to defend the nation from our own President as classified if a domestic enemy under the Constitution, it will likely be me fighting for the Constitution.

But until that day, I will not vote for Clinton, nor Trump, as I believe both to be unworthy of the office of President of the United States of America. Will I rebel if either win? No. Will I call for Civil War? No. Will I defend the Constitution? Yes.

Whoever is elected will be given a chance to serve their country regardless. We should not be like it was in the years of 1860 and 1861, were a large part of the country did not even give the incoming President Elect a chance to take office before rebelling against the nation. The President will be given due chance to do their duty by law. We may hate their guts, but as long as they don't violate the laws of the land, nor act in a matter of treason, they should continue with their service until the next election. If they do break the law, impeachment it the preferred option instead of rebellion.

[frivolity]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

Trump wanted cops to be able to confiscate guns without charge. That's more anti-gun than anyone ever.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/ent...b0e28b2b52e4f2

My view on this is that his quote is being misinterpreted. I interpret his quote to mean that he will not use federal power to suppress stop-and-frisk policies in cities where they exist. I don't think it means that he intends to have a stop-and-frisk policy nationwide even in states where stop-and-frisk is not in place.

[gocav]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

I don't care for either of the two main candidates and will not vote for either of them. I will still vote. I remained officially "Undeclared" so that I would not be forced by a party allegence to pick a side. And this time I disagree with both parties for there choices.

I don't see either of them being good for me as my President. Trump for the anger his running is festering in the nation, and Clinton for the personal despair it will cause me in relation to my conservative (though not Republican) father who went to high school with her and despises her on all grounds. It has been hard enough dealing with political decisions during the Obama administration....I feel this will be worse for me personally if she wins.

Don't forget, you have a third option: Libertarian Gary Johnson.

Oh, and I've already had three people tell me they will vote for me so feel free to vote for Gocav.

[Eisdrache]

Gary Johnson is literally retarded. He didn't know what Aleppo is, couldn't name a single foreign leader when asked, his opinion about climate change in 2011 was that 'in a few billion years the sun will explode anyway' and not to mention his creepy interview.

[Jaden]

Libertarians are too idealistic to rally behind anyone that's less than perfect. If they wanted their party to become relevant, they'd vote for Gary even if he's retarded...but they won't debase themselves like that.

They're mostly intelligent and upwardly mobile folk anyway, the kind who will be fine in just about any kind of America...they don't feel the need to dive too deep in politics, I guess.

[Dauerlutscher]

If Johnson is retarted, what is Trump then?
I mean, he has no clue about the things he is talking about and has absolutley no clue how he will "Make Amerika great again". He has a big mouth, but I have not seen anything tangible how he will achieve that.
And what should I think about someone who insults imigrants and is against them, but at the same his grandparents are from Germany and Scotland and a couple of his former wifes were not born in the USA? This guy contradicts himself everytime he opens his mouth and I haven't heared one single reasonable thing from him.

Originally Posted by Harbinger

Yeah, you can find a lot of reasons to hate Trump (there is a lot... there's no shortage of it). However, you can find equality as many reason to hate Hillary...

From my point of view, Clinton are some of the most corrupt and despicable human beings running for office.

Clinton is a standard politican.

Trump is a dumb egomaniac hypocrite racist sexist idiot who has absolutely no clue about anything related to politics, ethics, anything related that has nothing to do with himself.

So I absolutely refuse to say theay are equal.

Can someone here explaine to me why you would vote for Trump that has nothing to do with how "evil" Clinton is?
What are his plans? How will he achieve that?

[gocav]

Originally Posted by Eisdrache

Gary Johnson is literally retarded. He didn't know what Aleppo is, couldn't name a single foreign leader when asked, his opinion about climate change in 2011 was that 'in a few billion years the sun will explode anyway' and not to mention his creepy interview.

Originally Posted by Jaden

Libertarians are too idealistic to rally behind anyone that's less than perfect. If they wanted their party to become relevant, they'd vote for Gary even if he's retarded...but they won't debase themselves like that.

They're mostly intelligent and upwardly mobile folk anyway, the kind who will be fine in just about any kind of America...they don't feel the need to dive too deep in politics, I guess.

That whole post of mine should be taken with a grain of salt. It's pretty fun in my small town when me and my friends say that and people reply with "who?" It is true, though, that I've had three teenagers say they will vote for me as a write-in because they can't stand any of the options.

The fact is, I don't consider any of the three as ideal or even worthy of presidency and just hope I can pick one within the next four weeks.

[Harbinger]

Originally Posted by Dauerlutscher

So I absolutely refuse to say theay are equal.

Can someone here explaine to me why you would vote for Trump that has nothing to do with how "evil" Clinton is?
What are his plans? How will he achieve that?

I see Clinton as the "Greater Evil" but it doesn't mean I like Trump... My general feeling towards the current election is that the 2 party dictatorship is failing and people need more legitimate choices.

Open up the debate for third party candidates. Make the rules less chaotic so that third parties are more "able" to get on the ballot in every state.

[Brother Coa]

Originally Posted by Eisdrache

Gary Johnson is literally retarded. his opinion about climate change in 2011 was that 'in a few billion years the sun will explode anyway'

He has a point here. If we don't start colonizing other planet soon we are going to be extinct in the end.

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by Dauerlutscher

If Johnson is retarted, what is Trump then?

Able to name Russia's president, that's what.

[Eisdrache]

The end is some billion years away according to Johnson. That's enough for several million generations to figure that out.

[Brother Coa]

Originally Posted by Eisdrache

The end is some billion years away according to Johnson. That's enough for several million generations to figure that out.

Unless asteroid hit us, or supernova explode somewhere near us, or Yellowstone erupts, or Hilary decided to go ahead with military response to Russia...

And frankly, giving intelligence of modern generations of kids ( millennials ) I doubt they will be able to do anything except to crack nearest WiFi password...