AlfonzoPalutena
Member
Evidently I'm in way too deep. I honestly didn't think my original comment would attract so many replies. I can't keep up. I'm a political idiot. Sorry for bothering you guys.
Why does everyone assume I'm voting for Trump? We have other candidates outside the two party system and I didnt explicitly rule anyone out.
Evidently I'm in way too deep. I honestly didn't think my original comment would attract so many replies. I can't keep up. I'm a political idiot. Sorry for bothering you guys.
Evidently I'm in way too deep. I honestly didn't think my original comment would attract so many replies. I can't keep up. I'm a political idiot. Sorry for bothering you guys.
One email appears to show DNC staffers asking how they can reference Bernie Sanders' faith to weaken him in the eyes of Southern voters.
Some of these are merely embarrassing, but this:
if true, should frankly get people fired.
It might may no difference, but for KY and WVA can we get someone to ask his belief. Does he believe in a God. He had skated on saying he has a Jewish heritage. I think I read he is an atheist. This could make several points difference with my peeps. My Southern Baptist peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and an atheist.
Some of these are merely embarrassing, but this:
if true, should frankly get people fired.
Someone that actually thinks about what the party is fighting for over getting emotional over Russian fed hacked/leaked emails.
Some of these are merely embarrassing, but this:
if true, should frankly get people fired.
Someone that actually thinks about what the party is fighting for over getting emotional over Russian fed hacked/leaked emails.
More power too you man, but vote for marijuana legalization if you live in CaliforniaAnd these emails just basically reinforce why I won't be voting for either party this election cycle. Fill in candidateit is. This whole election makes me sick
Oh yes.An unintended benefit of the leaks.
I've lost a lot of respect for the Democratic Party. I don't know who I'm voting for come November
Why does everyone assume I'm voting for Trump? We have other candidates outside the two party system and I didnt explicitly rule anyone out.
I've lost a lot of respect for the Democratic Party. I don't know who I'm voting for come November
And these emails just basically reinforce why I won't be voting for either party this election cycle. Fill in candidateit is. This whole election makes me sick
There was a lot of pretty dumb stuff in the leaked mails which justifies more than just "getting emotional".
But using "...but Trump" as somekind of boogeyman to wave all kinds of bullshit about the Democrats and Clinton through is quite silly at best.
This was the entire purpose of stealing those emails and handing them over to Wikileaks to be "leaked". Don't let yourself be played.
I mean, in context, it's thousands of emails from dozens of individuals and there's a few dozen bad ones that talk about attacking Bernie, which they then don't actually act on, but sure, it's a bastion of corruption. Honestly, I'd expect a little more than what they found.
It seriously boggles my mind how people can equate the misgivings of Hilary's campaign to the misgivings (which is extremely generous a term) of Trump's campaign.
It is a shame that he failed..
After the initial dust settled, he knew exactly who the two final candidates would be. Look at him passing legislation as a 'failure'. Dude has a lot of experience and a lot of fire in his old age and knows exactly what he is doing. I was taken aback with him a couple years before he decided to go for the presidential run. He knows politics.
You're on the cusp of the most liberal supreme court in like 50 years. I can't believe liberals are going to defeat themselves yet again and to a fascist nutjob like Trump of all people. I wish I could just spend the next 4 months going around personally begging people to reconsider, this election is the tipping point between 30 years of liberal or conservative judicial dominance. The left has some legitimate gripes but to see them willfully throw this opportunity away is going to be physical agony.
I wish Bernie had just won now, it's easier to get the less ideological wing of the party in line than it is to get the ideologues, I should have known this.
This analogy only works if those office people, one of whom is particularly high up on the food chain, 'gossip' about using the fact that Alice is a woman (which many people may respond negitively too) against her. To make Bob the CEO of the company.Imagine you work at a construction company of about 250 people. after 30 years, a vacancy in the ceo position opens up. Bob and Alice are the top two options to fill the vacancy. Bob has been a lower level manager and vice president for about 25 years of being employed with the company. Alice has been a manager at another construction firm for roughly the same amount of time - they're not really competitors, since the two firms typically colaborate on projects together and refer clients to each other. Alice joined your firm about a year ago after those 25-30 years with the other firm.
Don't you think most people in the company would probably lean towards Bob instead of Alice simply by virtue of being more closely associated with Bob over the last several decades? Some office gossip about whether Alice is really qualified compared to Bob might pop up?
Same principle.
I think he has shifted this country slightly to the left, so definitely his candidacy was not a total failure, I agree.
Also, it is good to see Hillary moving her own policies closer to his. I appreciate that, and I definitely see it as a moral victory of sorts.
This analogy only works if those office people, one of whom is particularly high up on the food chain, 'gossip' about using the fact that Alice is a woman (which many people may respond negitively too) against her. To make Bob the CEO of the company.
But it's totes cool cause nothing happened. Nevermind that the fact that these office fucks were willing to screw Alice over even though they should be impartial.
But That's Just Politics! *Cue Laugh Track*
If those emails turned you off.
You were not a reliable democratic voter anyway, and are just making excuses not vote for Hillary.
oh please if you're voting for trump then just say so. stop pretending the candidates are anything alike for you to even be considering one or the other.
"I mean, I can't vote for the people that privately wanted a specific candidate. I'm sure they're in the same category as the guy talking about the size of his penis on national television."
In another thread it's pretty established that voting for Trump at worst, makes you a racist, and at best, means you're absolutely fine with racism, just something to think about.
You must be joking. Did you just now realize that people are people? DWS is not the democratic party, she is the current chair of the DNC. There have been many chairs before her and after her. She's one person. And more importantly, politics is not a series of actions carried out by automation without subjectivity or opinion. Politics is messy.
There was a lot of pretty dumb stuff in the leaked mails which justifies more than just "getting emotional".
But using "...but Trump" as somekind of boogeyman to wave all kinds of bullshit about the Democrats and Clinton through is quite silly at best.
The Democrats and Clinton are not one or two monolithic figures. Democrats are a collection of people with shared or similar vested interest. If anything, this primary showed just how not monolithic democrats are. Democrats fight it out and are far less willing to fall in line than republicans who just gave up and can.
"My response to that is hashtag SMH," Wasserman Schultz said on CNN. SMH is an acronym used on TWitter for "shaking my head," often meant to show someone does not agree with something said.
Just because he may not be voting Hilary doesn't mean he's going to vote for Trump. He could be considering voting for Jill Stein.
Considering that and the fact that Bernie himself endorsed her, I'm kind've struggling to see why you'd vote third party. I mean, the green party has less in common with Bernie than Hillary does at this point.
All the same, since you're not in a swing state it'd only matter for the popular vote count and for moving the state's needle slightly more toward blue, so I don't think you're self-destructive in this case, I'm just honestly curious.
It's more than just the presidential candidates. I don't think I'm voting for any Democrats at all this election. And since I'm not usually inclined to vote for Republicans, many of those down-ballot choices will be left blank on my ballot. There'll be two alternate candidates besides Hillary and Trump for President in my state, so that will not be that difficult. However, I'm unaware if there's a third party candidate in Russ Feingold's race. I had been looking forward to voting for him, but I won't in light of these revelations.I've lost a lot of respect for the Democratic Party. I don't know who I'm voting for come November
Why does everyone assume I'm voting for Trump? We have other candidates outside the two party system and I didnt explicitly rule anyone out.
Just because he may not be voting Hilary doesn't mean he's going to vote for Trump. He could be considering voting for Jill Stein.
Hillary is an extension of the status-quo neoliberal part of the democratic party. She's a big business, free trade democrat. She is a tool of the status quo. She is supported by people in high places who don't want to rattle the boat.
I also dislike her choice of VP. He's even more conservative than her, and putting him in that position creates a trajectory for the entire democratic party. He becomes a presumptive presidential candidate down the line, and he'll have the deck stacked in his favor just the way Hillary did this time. So we're likely doomed to 16 more years of pro free trade, big business democrats. I just can't support that unless I absolutely have to. Because that means no change. That means status quo, for a very long time. It means the democratic party continues to shift closer and closer to the moderate republicans. Just no.
Hillary is an extension of the status-quo neoliberal part of the democratic party. She's a big business, free trade democrat. She is a tool of the status quo. She is supported by people in high places who don't want to rattle the boat.
I also dislike her choice of VP. He's even more conservative than her, and putting him in that position creates a trajectory for the entire democratic party. He becomes a presumptive presidential candidate down the line, and he'll have the deck stacked in his favor just the way Hillary did this time. So we're likely doomed to 16 more years of pro free trade, big business democrats. I just can't support that unless I absolutely have to. Because that means no change. That means status quo, for a very long time. It means the democratic party continues to shift closer and closer to the moderate republicans. Just no.
"Reliable Democratic voters" are the people who still vote for the greater good on election day, rather than throwing a fit over the Democratic nominee not being their first choice or not 100% matching their political beliefs and then voting for someone else out of a destructive impulse.Which says a lot about that "reliable democratic voter" remark.
This leads me to believe you must know nothing of her career. Several of these things she's proposing now she has actively opposed before, some of them breathtakingly recently.Status quo like making college debt-free? Overturning Citizens United? Creating a public option healthcare plan? Passing mandatory paid maternal leave?
These are policies she has proposed. If you know anything about her political career there is no reason to believe she does not fully believe in these positions. These are not status quo policies.
Status quo like making college debt-free? Overturning Citizens United? Creating a public option healthcare plan? Passing mandatory paid maternal leave?
These are policies she has proposed. If you know anything about her political career there is no reason to believe she does not fully believe in these positions. These are not status quo policies.
There is not a lot of similarity between moderate republicans and democrats like Clinton and Kaine. I suspect you haven't really looked into these differences.
This. I'd say maybe 10% of the people that vote actually fully understand the political process, ramifications of candidate's policies and are informed voters. Most of these "both sides are the same" are people that don't pay attention to politics and instead just see headlines in passing on their social media outlets or what's on the television. Unfortunately the reality is that it is most of America. Our mainstream media doesn't help in creating biases and our social media has only further enhanced it by creating echo chambers.There are plenty of fence sitters and they do not consider themselves racist bigots. Painting the race as black and white (and then telling said fence sitter they are a racist)is a sure way to have them vote republican. Whether you believe the issues are black and white or not, I'm just saying it's starting to look like Undecideds may be pretty important this election so reaching out to them in a non confrontational way ... It's important.
I'm not American myself so I have no stake in the game, just offering advice.
Edit: actually I do have some stake, I'm pretty sure Trump would be bad for Canada/NAFTA/Canadian trade agreements with US
I honestly doubt there are any real fence sitters this election. Most people who are outwardly presenting themselves as a fence sitter and undecided are probably do it because they are too cowardly to openly express their racist/bigoted views. These people will vote Trump. All the other fence sitters are the ones who are completely obliviously to what is going on in the world of politics.
Yes, however given the amount of attention surrounding all of Clinton's "scandals" I could see how someone with a lack of knowledge and care about politics seeing both sides are bad, which again unfortunately describes most Americans and the voting population in general.How so? Even someone who only has a cursory knowledge of the issues this election cycle should know that Donald Ttump wants to build a wall and ban Muslims in some fashion.
This leads me to believe you must know nothing of her career. Several of these things she's proposing now she has actively opposed before, some of them breathtakingly recently.
Go ahead and suspect whatever you like. I was an adult when Bill Clinton was president. I've been following politics since I was a teenager.
I know what the Clintons represent. It's democrat light. Democrats for the Reagan voter. New democrats, not pesky liberals like the old kind.
Bottom line: I don't trust anythings she says. She will say anything to get elected. She will try to thread the needle between her commitments to voters and her commitments to donors and special interests when she's in office, but she'll put special interests first. Everything she says is lip service.
She might accomplish a few things in office, because the Clintons are good at playing hardball, but I don't want a democratic party that aims so low. I want an inspirational, New Deal, kind of democratic party. I want to raise taxes on the rich, drastically strengthen the saftey net. Massive infrastructure spending. That should be the aim. She is not going to rock the boat like that, and wouldn't even if she had the power to,
You haven't described reliable voters, you've described reliable dupes. In order to expect 'reliable Democrat voters' to reliably vote Democrat, the Democratic Party has to be itself be reliable. It has to show itself as something worthy of support."Reliable Democratic voters" are the people who still vote for the greater good on election day, rather than throwing a fit over the Democratic nominee not being their first choice or not 100% matching their political beliefs and then voting for someone else out of a destructive impulse.
Imagine what the Republican emails say, particularly around Hillary Clinton...
Go ahead and suspect whatever you like. I was an adult when Bill Clinton was president. I've been following politics since I was a teenager.
I know what the Clintons represent. It's democrat light. Democrats for the Reagan voter. New democrats, not pesky liberals like the old kind.
Bottom line: I don't trust anythings she says. She will say anything to get elected. She will try to thread the needle between her commitments to voters and her commitments to donors and special interests when she's in office, but she'll put special interests first. Everything she says is lip service. She changes her mind so often, who knows what she really believes? She puts her finger to the wind, and checks the polls, then finds a way to re-position herself for maximum political benefit.
She might accomplish a few things in office, because the Clintons are good at playing hardball, but I don't want a democratic party that aims so low. I want an inspirational, New Deal, kind of democratic party. I want to raise taxes on the rich, drastically strengthen the saftey net. Massive infrastructure spending. That should be the aim. She is not going to rock the boat like that, and wouldn't even if she had the power to,
Let's see, you aren't a facist, homophobic adherent of white nationalism and nativism that happily pals with white supremacists and may possibly be in league with autocratic Russia?If you're willing to ignore sleezy stuff done by the "good" side, how are you any better than the bad one