Support NeoGAF

[Cth]

Um, what kind of job do you have that would be somehow so vulnerable to a Democrat in the White House?

It's not. As I said, it's likely paranoia.

It was civil engineering.

But until you've lost your house to foreclosure, and had to rely on food banks, it's kind of hard to understand I'd imagine.

And I have even more of a reason to hate McCrory, since I think he was providing our office with projects and stopped once he went to Raleigh.

Like I said, irrational fear, but losing my job, house and almost my marriage has me a little more nervous.

I mean, if you lost your job in or around 2008 it's mostly on bush w. The financial crisis was not caused by Obama.

Nah, it was a couple of times in the 90s, 2000, 2011.

Anyways, sorry to derail the thread.. if anyone wants to talk, PMs are cool.

 

[Takamura-San]

It's not. As I said, it's likely paranoia.

It was civil engineering.

But until you've lost your house to foreclosure, and had to rely on food banks, it's kind of hard to understand I'd imagine.

And I have even more of a reason to hate McCrory, since I think he was providing our office with projects and stopped once he went to Raleigh.

Like I said, irrational fear, but losing my job, house and almost my marriage has me a little more nervous.

I'm sorry this all happened to you, but you're basing decisions on past causality.

 

[gutter_trash]

I'm not sure you are following what they are saying.

that's bad LOL

it's hard to keep up but eeesh, yeah. It's really dumb and bad

 

[MThanded]

I'm conflicted.

I'm one of those 3rd party/independent voters.

I don't like either candidate. Both have policies that will be destructive. There's checks and balances in place (in theory) to keep things from getting out of hand (provided neither party sweeps all three branches)

So, ultimately it boils down to the supreme court issue. Which I get that there's a chance to impact things for years to come. And yes, there's LGBT rights and other issues that will definitely be decided by the make up of this future court, so I get that importance.

My problem is, every single time there's been a Democrat in office, I've lost my job/got laid off. I finally managed to get a full time job after I 3 and a half years recently. So yes, it's selfish/paranoia but I'm leaning towards throwing my support to a third party candidate. I already lost my house to foreclosure, which put incredible stress on our family. So, I'm (hopefully) understandably nervous with either outcome.

And I'm in North Carolina, which makes things even more conflicting. Things could go either way. And ultimately, the election is decided by the electoral college it's really a matter of how I'm registered.

I know no candidate will ever fit me 100% and I value my vote and feel I have a moral obligation to vote my conscience -- and to me, voting for something as opposed to against something is important.

So I'm conflicted -- do I support my family and friends who are LGBT and risk losing my job again, or do I continue to (in some people's eyes) "throw away my vote" by showing I want more choices?

This is a perplexing post. Also correlation isn't causation.

 

[BluePigGanon]

It's not. As I said, it's likely paranoia.

It was civil engineering.

But until you've lost your house to foreclosure, and had to rely on food banks, it's kind of hard to understand I'd imagine.

And I have even more of a reason to hate McCrory, since I think he was providing our office with projects and stopped once he went to Raleigh.

Like I said, irrational fear, but losing my job, house and almost my marriage has me a little more nervous.

What Lord Audie said. Don't fall victim to magical thinking.

 

[Mattenth]

Clinton's appointment of DWS to "honorary chair" is just fucking baffling. How exactly does this help her beat Trump? It doesn't. Instead, it gives Republicans ammo for attacks: "she and Bill have rigged the system for themselves."

To be honest, I'm pretty fucking terrified.

Wikileaks just reiterated on Twitter that they have more leaks coming. Assange made a promise in June that they would publish emails that would "certainly be enough for an indictment [of HRC]."

I hope they fucking release their shit sooner rather than later. This whole thing could be devastating to the nation.

 

[MThanded]

Let's see. If Clinton wins, little by little corruption will take over the Democratic party, next candidate will be worse than her but people will still vote because the alternative is even worse than Trump.

If Trump wins, he does damage for 4 years, loses next election and a true liberal president will be elected then we live in an utopia ever after.

The choice is clear to me.

Spoiler

jk.

Spoiler

Or not

Since this is a joke post or not.

SCOTUS nominees serve an average of 16 years. Assume that average will increase as life expectancy increases so lets put it at 20. If trump gets to nominate 1 or 2. That's 20 years not 4 years.

 

[BlastProcessing]

I'm conflicted.

I'm one of those 3rd party/independent voters.

I don't like either candidate. Both have policies that will be destructive. There's checks and balances in place (in theory) to keep things from getting out of hand (provided neither party sweeps all three branches)

So, ultimately it boils down to the supreme court issue. Which I get that there's a chance to impact things for years to come. And yes, there's LGBT rights and other issues that will definitely be decided by the make up of this future court, so I get that importance.

My problem is, every single time there's been a Democrat in office, I've lost my job/got laid off. I finally managed to get a full time job after I 3 and a half years recently. So yes, it's selfish/paranoia but I'm leaning towards throwing my support to a third party candidate. I already lost my house to foreclosure, which put incredible stress on our family. So, I'm (hopefully) understandably nervous with either outcome.

And I'm in North Carolina, which makes things even more conflicting. Things could go either way. And ultimately, the election is decided by the electoral college it's really a matter of how I'm registered.

I know no candidate will ever fit me 100% and I value my vote and feel I have a moral obligation to vote my conscience -- and to me, voting for something as opposed to against something is important.

So I'm conflicted -- do I support my family and friends who are LGBT and risk losing my job again, or do I continue to (in some people's eyes) "throw away my vote" by showing I want more choices?

I appreciate your thoughtfulness and honesty about this. One thing I will say is that if you want to signal that you want more choices, there are other, more impactful ways of doing that. You can volunteer your time and money to one of the many liberal organizations that try to affect policy. If more people got involved at that level, it would send a much stronger signal than a single vote.

Also, if your LGBT friends and family are a large part of your decision making, talk with them about it.

 

[Foffy]

Is there any problem with Donna taking her role?

I know she's close to CNN as an analyst, but I don't recall her being in any scandal or even equated to the word "incompetent" like DWS has in the past.

 

[Steel]

It's not. As I said, it's likely paranoia.

It was civil engineering.

But until you've lost your house to foreclosure, and had to rely on food banks, it's kind of hard to understand I'd imagine.

And I have even more of a reason to hate McCrory, since I think he was providing our office with projects and stopped once he went to Raleigh.

Like I said, irrational fear, but losing my job, house and almost my marriage has me a little more nervous.

Oddly enough, as a civil engineer you would've had a lot more work if Obama was allowed to pass his infrastructure stimulus which was repeatedly blocked by the Republicans in congress.

Hillary also has a plan for massive infrastructure investment.

Is there any problem with Donna taking her role?

I know she's close to CNN as an analyst, but I don't recall her being in any scandal or even equated to the word "incompetent" like DWS has in the past.

She had a bit about getting booted off Dukakis's campaign when she hinted at H Bush committing adultery without evidence, and she was a pretty outspoken Hillary advocate before becoming a super-delegate. That being said, Bernie's campaign wanted her to be the chair.

 

[Cth]

Thanks.. again sorry for derailing.

I agree, correlation isn't causation. I just hate how I feel right now, even moreso since no matter how I vote people are going to be affected.

I just wish I could stop feeling that way. It's hard to get a job when all of your former places of employment have gone out of business and/or I've been laid off.

On the plus side, if Clinton gets in, minimum wage will go up presumably and everyone will be making what I'm making (I had to take a 50% cut in pay and work part time at retail jobs at my age)

Oddly enough, as a civil engineer you would've had a lot more work if Obama was allowed to pass his infrastructure stimulus which was repeatedly blocked by the Republicans in congress.

Hillary also has a plan for massive infrastructure investment.

Cool, I've been hoping someone would do another New Deal type to help those of us left behind with the unemployment numbers (which despite what has been reported are off in some places due to reshuffling -- NC is a great example of this)

Anyways I'm back in IT again, so hopefully that'll pan out eventually.

Thanks for all the reasoned, rational responses.. I've been debating on saying some of this stuff in political threads but everyone's so on edge ..

 

[Volimar]

Is there any problem with Donna taking her role?

I know she's close to CNN as an analyst, but I don't recall her being in any scandal or even equated to the word "incompetent" like DWS has in the past.

She's always seemed very capable to me.

 

[clem84]

Outsider looking in. Sorry if my question sounds a bit ignorant. How can the system allow a candidate to go forward when it's becoming increasingly clear that the Democratic primaries were rigged? Is it because there's no time left?

I also don't understand why Wikileaks waited so long to publish those e-mails.

 

[thefro]

Is there any problem with Donna taking her role?

I know she's close to CNN as an analyst, but I don't recall her being in any scandal or even equated to the word "incompetent" like DWS has in the past.

My only problem with Donna is she managed Gore's campaign in 2000, which obviously could and should have went better.

 

[MIMIC]

It must be so nice to be Hillary nowadays.

I mean, whatever mistakes you make you can easily counter it by "But Trump!" and be done with it, people will excuse you and forget about it, lol.

Like this thread, for example; all it takes to completely turn the conversation away from DWS joining Clinton's campaign immediately after she resigned is a single poster saying Trump will burn the whole system down and off you go, a hundred people immediately make the thread suddenly about that, instead of the actual main topic stated on the title's thread, heh

LOL, interesting observation.

 

[LosDaddie]

Good job, abuela.

It's not. As I said, it's likely paranoia.

It was civil engineering.

But until you've lost your house to foreclosure, and had to rely on food banks, it's kind of hard to understand I'd imagine.

And I have even more of a reason to hate McCrory, since I think he was providing our office with projects and stopped once he went to Raleigh.

Like I said, irrational fear, but losing my job, house and almost my marriage has me a little more nervous.



Nah, it was a couple of times in the 90s, 2000, 2011.

Anyways, sorry to derail the thread.. if anyone wants to talk, PMs are cool.

Civil engineering. I'm going to guess you have your PE, right?

If so, then job hunting should be a breeze for you. I'm going for my PE in October and recruiters won't leave me alone. But I'm electrical.

 

[blackw0lf]

Clinton's appointment of DWS to "honorary chair" is just fucking baffling. How exactly does this help her beat Trump? It doesn't. Instead, it gives Republicans ammo for attacks: "she and Bill have rigged the system for themselves."

The alternative probably would have been DWS staying, since those were probably the conditions for her resigning.

Again the Clinton camp didn't want DWS as chair. So I doubt they're happy about giving her this position

 

[Laekon]

Is the Wasserman joining the Clinton campaign news true? It's not on sites like NPR or CNN. I can't believe it's true because how could anyone be idiotic enough to hire someone the same day as they have to resign for suspicion of corruption. Wasserman's disgrace is all over every news site and pushed by respected liberal talkers like Robert Reich.

 

[Blader]

Outsider looking in. Sorry if my question sounds a bit ignorant. How can the system allow a candidate to go forward when it's becoming increasingly clear that the Democratic primaries were rigged? Is it because there's no time left?

I also don't understand why Wikileaks waited so long to publish those e-mails.

The primaries weren't rigged. Bernie lost by millions of votes and hundreds of pledged delegates. This was not a close race where the party establishment handed Hilary the win. She was the democratically chosen nominee.

And Wikileaks is clearly timing the release of the emails for the DNC.

 

[Joeytj]

Actually, the controversy was that she was always an extension of Hillary's campaign.

That she has now, literally, joined the campaign is definitely (to borrow the popular vernacular of political junkies) "not a good look."

Not a good look to some Bernie supporters, but Bernie himself doesn't seem to care much. Nobody is shocked that DWS supported Hillary.

Anything else?

 

[Steel]

Outsider looking in. Sorry if my question sounds a bit ignorant. How can the system allow a candidate to go forward when it's becoming increasingly clear that the Democratic primaries were rigged? Is it because there's no time left?

I also don't understand why Wikileaks waited so long to publish those e-mails.

Because the emails didn't really show the process was actually rigged. None of the emails were acted on, and most of it was just inside gossip. Not to mention there was no collusion.

Hell, Bernies own campaign chair said the delegate lead was so large that it wouldn't have changed the result if the DNC was cleaned out sooner.

Is the Wasserman joining the Clinton campaign news true? It's not on sites like NPR or CNN. I can't believe it's true because how could anyone be idiotic enough to hire someone the same day as they have to resign for suspicion of corruption. Wasserman's disgrace is all over every news site and pushed by respected liberal talkers like Robert Reich.

CNN ran the story live multiple times live, it's true. It seems the reasoning behind it is that she wouldn't have stepped down willingly without some kind of gimme.

 

[Nickle]

Outsider looking in. Sorry if my question sounds a bit ignorant. How can the system allow a candidate to go forward when it's becoming increasingly clear that the Democratic primaries were rigged? Is it because there's no time left?

I also don't understand why Wikileaks waited so long to publish those e-mails.

Wikileaks wants Trump to win, and Bernie does better against Trump (theoretically).

 

[Jonm1010]

Wikileaks wants Trump to win, and Bernie does better against Trump (theoretically).

Excuse my ignorance, but when or how did wikileaks become so pro-Trump?

To me it always seemed like wikileaks was an anti-authority thing.

Guess I assumed wrongly.

 

[gutter_trash]

Excuse my ignorance, but when or how did wikileaks become so pro-Trump?

To me it always seemed like wikileaks was an anti-authority thing.

Guess I assumed wrongly.

it's Pro-Putin, hackers are Russian

Trump is soft on Putin and wants to weaken NATO which would help Putin

 

[USC-fan]

Wow this honestly couldnt have played out worse. Of course she going to give her a position after all she done for her. Just shows you how broken the system is.....

 

[exmachina64]

Excuse my ignorance, but when or how did wikileaks become so pro-Trump?

To me it always seemed like wikileaks was an anti-authority thing.

Guess I assumed wrongly.

Assange is trying to curry favor with Putin to avoid going to prison for rape.

 

[wesleyshark]

Good riddens jerk off

Yes. This. Adios.

 

[Steel]

Excuse my ignorance, but when or how did wikileaks become so pro-Trump?

To me it always seemed like wikileaks was an anti-authority thing.

Guess I assumed wrongly.

Assange is a far right libertarian. I'd imagine he's favorable to the type of chaos that Trump would cause.

 

[Mattenth]

The alternative probably would have been DWS staying, since those were probably the conditions for her resigning.

Again the Clinton camp didn't want DWS as chair. So I doubt they're happy about giving her this position

If they didn't want her as chair, they should have gone on TV and joined Sanders in publicly calling for her resignation.

Instead, she's on CBS saying "well I don't know anything about the DNC email leak. I'm too busy dealing with the convention."

 

[btrboyev]

Clinton needs to distance herself from her as soon as possible.

 

[Spoiled Milk]

Good riddens jerk off

I'm sorry, but we're all out of riddens.

 

[BasicMath]

I feel dirty for this appearing on my youtube feed and for watching it.

https://youtu.be/AkQencnatLI?t=18s

 

[Epsilon-delta]

If they didn't want her as chair, they should have gone on TV and joined Sanders in publicly calling for her resignation.

Instead, she's on CBS saying "well I don't know anything about the DNC email leak. I'm too busy dealing with the convention."

WikiLeaks are trying their best to stir up shit in this election and it's working. I want them to release all their info now and out in the open, but I assume they probably have their leaks on a timed schedule.

 

[Fox Mulder]

Clinton needs to distance herself from her as soon as possible.

Why.

Her supporters will defend her regardless of anything and it'll only give ammo to people that already hold her as corrupt.

 

[Mattenth]

WikiLeaks are trying their best to stir up shit in this election and it's working. I want them to release all their info now and out in the open, but I assume they probably have their leaks on a timed schedule.

Yes, I assume they're going for maximum damage. Though I hope that the damage isn't just debilitating... The worst-case would be crippling HRC to the point where she can't win but can still justify being in the race.

If you do believe it's the Russians behind all this, then headlines like this are pretty scary:

Bloomberg: Clinton Foundation Said To Be Breached By Russian Hackers

Clinton Foundation officials said the organization hadn’t been notified of the breach and declined to comment further. The compromise of the foundation’s computers was first identified by government investigators as recently as last week, the people familiar with the matter said. Agents monitor servers used by hackers to communicate with their targets, giving them a back channel view of attacks, often even before the victims detect them.

It's fucking terrifying.

Assange's promise was "certainly enough for an indictment [of HRC]."

This was a pretty big first release... What's their second release going to be?

 

[gutter_trash]

Yes, I assume they're going for maximum damage. Though I hope that the damage isn't just debilitating... The worst-case would be crippling HRC to the point where she can't win but can still justify being in the race.

If you do believe it's the Russians behind all this, then headlines like this are pretty scary:

Bloomberg: Clinton Foundation Said To Be Breached By Russian Hackers



It's fucking terrifying.

Assange's promise was "certainly enough for an indictment [of HRC]."

This was a pretty big first release... What's their second release going to be?

shit is getting scary,
Putin is fixing it for Trump

 

[Striek]

The Assange/Wikileaks/Trump/Putin/Russia conspiracy theories are quite interesting but just a little tinfoiled and very self-serving.

 

[googleplex]

Outsider looking in. Sorry if my question sounds a bit ignorant. How can the system allow a candidate to go forward when it's becoming increasingly clear that the Democratic primaries were rigged? Is it because there's no time left?

I also don't understand why Wikileaks waited so long to publish those e-mails.

The Democratic primarily was in no way shape or format rigged against Bernie. Not to say Bernie wasn't at a disadvantage. But that natural and Logical seeing as he didn't have the Long Democratic Party ties that Hillary had. But the primary was not rigged.

 

[Loudninja]

The Assange/Wikileaks/Trump/Putin/Russia conspiracy theories are quite interesting but just a little tinfoiled and very self-serving.

Not really.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=211260927&postcount=8840

 

[Future PhaZe]

Unsettling as fuck

I'm conflicted

 

[Sub_Level]

OH SHIT BROS

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

I wish Sanders had gotten the nomination, this excruciating nightmare may have been avoided. Now we're just stuck staring down the barrel of a madman because all of his opponents were never able to unify against him, not in the GOP and not here.

 

[Freshmaker]

What was so bad about her? I keep hearing she was terrible, but I don't know much.

All the DNC stuff just now aside, she's also apparently willing to do whatever Satan wants as long as he contributes enough money.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jun/6/debbie-wasserman-schultz-flips-backs-payday-loan-c/

 

[Geg]

This was a pretty big first release... What's their second release going to be?

Well from everything we've seen the first release wasn't really all that big, other than a few notable emails that still weren't enough to be any kind of smoking gun. Hopefully whatever else they have is just more nothing

 

[Future PhaZe]

How in the fuck does Clinton think bringing DWS on in even a figure head capacity is a good idea?

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Well from everything we've seen the first release wasn't really all that big, other than a few notable emails that still weren't enough to be any kind of smoking gun. Hopefully whatever else they have is just more nothing

I learned back during the "big banking revelation" releases to just wait and react to stuff they actually put out. They like to hype up their releases.

How in the fuck does Clinton think bringing DWS on in even a figure head capacity is a good idea?

Probably the only way she would resign quickly and easily.

 

[SnakeXs]

This is a perplexing post. Also correlation isn't causation.

I dunno man, this year isn't going my way, and it's the Chinese Year of the Monkey. I'm pretty sure they're related.

 

[8 X 11 Printer Paper]

How in the fuck does Clinton think bringing DWS on in even a figure head capacity is a good idea?

Likely wasn't a choice but a "demand" for DWS to save face for her resigning.

 

[Epsilon-delta]

Yes, I assume they're going for maximum damage. Though I hope that the damage isn't just debilitating... The worst-case would be crippling HRC to the point where she can't win but can still justify being in the race.

If you do believe it's the Russians behind all this, then headlines like this are pretty scary:

Bloomberg: Clinton Foundation Said To Be Breached By Russian Hackers



It's fucking terrifying.

Assange's promise was "certainly enough for an indictment [of HRC]."

This was a pretty big first release... What's their second release going to be?

It is terrifying and all signs of the WikiLeaks dumps point to state-sponsored hacking by Russians.

Like another poster said, hopefully the rest of the leaks are nothing.

 

[Future PhaZe]

Likely wasn't a choice but a "demand" for DWS to save face for her resigning.

It would be better if she had just stayed instead of this