"I Hate Donald Trump, but he might get my vote" Washington Post(Opinion)

Status
Not open for further replies.
TestOfTide said:
It's quite simple really. Actions speak louder than words. You want to know who a president/senator/governor/etc. is and what you can trust about them? Look at what they do politically. At the legislation that they sign and the actions they sign off on. Trump biggest weakness and biggest strength is that he has next to no political action to judge him on, meaning you are FORCED to judge him on his words mostly.
Click to expand...

And Hilary was pro every military intervention this country has had in the past twenty years and was against gay marriage until the winds shifted enough for her to feel comfortable "changing her mind".

Good point on Trump. There's no telling what scary things he'd bring about.
 
FrenchMovieTheme said:
I have an intuition that a lot of Hillary hate is because she is a female. People are uncomfortable to admit it, because people don't like being called racist/sexist, but if you truly believe that a good deal of the shit she has goiter the past 25 years isn't sex related you are very naive
Click to expand...

I actually agree that "a good deal" of criticism is likely because Hillary is a woman. But I can't possibly measure how much, and I don't think it does any good to assume bad faith on the part of someone sharing their political opinions. Yet that's exactly what happens when a poster who has never mentioned sex or gender gets accused of sexism simply for criticizing a candidate for president.
 
Who said:
And Hilary was pro every military intervention this country has had in the past twenty years and was against gay marriage until the winds shifted enough for her to feel comfortable "changing her mind".

Good point on Trump. There's no telling what scary things he'd bring about.
Click to expand...

But she supported same-sex marriage in New York back in 2004.
 
If you are a bigot and vote trump, that's one thing.

If you hate bigotry, but somehow dislike Hillary so much it doesn't matter and vote trump anyway.... That annoys me

If you hate bigotry, but vote for some unelectable 3rd party that will get 5% of the vote to send some kind of message.... That annoys me he most though. Because it's you that is gonna make swing states swing forwards bigotry as you fight the unwinnable fight that no one cares about
 
Who said:
And Hilary was pro every military intervention this country has had in the past twenty years and was against gay marriage until the winds shifted enough for her to feel comfortable "changing her mind".

Good point on Trump. There's no telling what scary things he'd bring about.
Click to expand...
It's weird when people exclusively attack one of the candidates for lying in 2016.
 
Who said:
And Hilary was pro every military intervention this country has had in the past twenty years and was against gay marriage until the winds shifted enough for her to feel comfortable "changing her mind".

Good point on Trump. There's no telling what scary things he'd bring about.
Click to expand...

Yes, Hillary is pro-intervention. Not arguing that.

But with regards to LGBT stuff, what legislation did she sign off on that was anti-LGBT? Last I checked, she showed support for LGBT rights on other issues even if she didn't openly support gay marriage until 2012.

It's like how Obama was called proLGBT even before he became openly in favor of gay marriage because of his actions, such as the repeal of DADT.
 
Freezie KO said:
I actually agree that "a good deal" of criticism is likely because Hillary is a woman. But I can't possibly measure how much, and I don't think it does any good to assume bad faith on the part of someone sharing their political opinions. Yet that's exactly what happens when a poster who has never mentioned sex or gender gets accused of sexism simply for criticizing a candidate for president.
Click to expand...

Agree sexism/racism/etc shouldn't auto matically come into play but when I see people say "she lied! A politician lied I can't vote for her!" I mean... what other conclusion can be drawn? Maybe if they expanded the if reasoning but on the surface it doesn't pass the smell test
 
I knew this guy was just watching Hillary lies videos.

People know Hillary lies and has had shifting political positions. Like every single other politician. You're falling hard for the most basic strategic move in elections.
 
Who said:
Jesus I didn't think I'd have to prove to you guys that she's bought out
Click to expand...

Then why did you say you already proved it? How could you possibly claim you didn't know you'd have to prove your claim when you yourself posted a paraphrased voice of the people you are talking to asking you to prove your claim?
 
Who said:
Jesus I didn't think I'd have to prove to you guys that she's bought out. Figured it was common knowledge.

Here you go, I guess?

https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cid=N00000019&cycle=Career

She's not bought out? Even Charlie Rose would scoff at that.

https://youtu.be/nSF4OSR22D0

I guess you can feel free to live in your nice little world where she's beholden to the wills of the people and is just one hell of a good gal!
Click to expand...

You've found the only politician ever to accept campaign contributions from companies. And the anchor laughing seals the deal. Good work detective!


Who said:
I've said like 9 times I think both are liars. There's just so much damn Hilary love in this forum that I have to challenge it
Click to expand...

Lol you said trump was genuine tho. A genuine liar?
 
Who said:
So... You can tell me with a straight face that she's honest and not in the pocket of Wall Street?

That's what I'm challenging here
Click to expand...
No. I really don't care. You're focused on stupid shit people knew forever ago that's so small in scale compared to the political situations you should care about.
 
Krejlooc said:
Then why did you say you already proved it?
Click to expand...

I didn't say I did?

Someone else posted her taking money from Goldman Sachs for a speech.

If that's not a red flag to you then I genuinely think you don't have a goof grasp on how things work in the seedy underbelly of DC politics
 
Who said:
I've said like 9 times I think both are liars. There's just so much damn Hilary love in this forum that I have to challenge it
Click to expand...

I just want to be clear. For me personally the issue wasn't that you called Hillary a liar. The issue was the suggestion that somehow that means she probably has worse opinions than trump, when trump has checked nearly every box on the list of shitty things to say. Liar or not, there is no proof that Hillary likes making fun of disabilities or thinks Muslims are all dangerous.

Personally I think Hillary is only pro-big-business as much as Obama is. Like, yes she's going to accept their money, but she will also push for more socially liberal policy and will replace justices with people like sotomayor or kagan.
 
Who said:
I didn't say I did?

Someone else posted her taking money from Goldman Sachs for a speech.

If that's not a red flag to yo then I genuinely think you don't have a goof grasp on how things work in the seedy underbelly of DC politics
Click to expand...
"Seedy underbelly of DC politics," LOL. Do you think House of Cards is like a documentary no one is paying attention to?

Everyone in power in government being corrupt is old news. What issues of substance do you care about actually getting traction to improve the lives of the people? Where do your candidates currently stand on that and what will they vote for, no matter how bought that vote is? Focus on reality, or focus on dismantling this reality, but don't get caught just looking at corruption and wondering why everyone isn't just gaping at it with you.
 
FrenchMovieTheme said:
Agree sexism/racism/etc shouldn't auto matically come into play but when I see people say "she lied! A politician lied I can't vote for her!" I mean... what other conclusion can be drawn? Maybe if they expanded the if reasoning but on the surface it doesn't pass the smell test
Click to expand...

There are literally hundreds of other conclusions to be drawn. If someone doesn't back up their argument, maybe it's because their social circle/friends/parents kept telling them something but they can't defend it? Maybe they just don't like arguing for hours about politics on the internet?

The truth is that given the situation you describe, there is insufficient evidence to draw any conclusion as to the motive of that person. Thus, you shouldn't rush to draw a conclusion just because it fits your preconceived political notions.

As with anything, if you can't draw an immediate conclusion, withhold doing so until you have further evidence. There's no shame in that. There's no shame in simply saying, "I don't understand why this person is thinking/acting/being this way."

People feel the need to immediately ascribe motives or bad faith when there are thousands of other conclusions to be drawn. And that leads to polarized or dead-end dialogue.
 
Who said:
Where did I say I showed the proof? I was commenting on another poster providing evidence and the dismissiveness posts in response to it.

This is all stupid semantics at this point, dear God.
Click to expand...

I'll ask again regarding her paid speech:

Uh ok? What is being implied? That she got the money for the speech in exchange for favors to Goldman sachs? What favors did they ultimately get?
 
Who said:
I didn't say I did?

Someone else posted her taking money from Goldman Sachs for a speech.

If that's not a red flag to you then I genuinely think you don't have a goof grasp on how things work in the seedy underbelly of DC politics
Click to expand...

It seems like you are looking for things to be angry about with Hillary to prove that seedy underbelly
 
Future said:
If you hate bigotry, but somehow dislike Hillary so much it doesn't matter and vote trump anyway.... That annoys me
Click to expand...

If you hate bigotry, but vote Trump anyway, you really don't actually hate bigotry all that much. I'd rather that those people be honest about their racism and sexism instead of pretending like they give a fuck, but oh, Hillary is just so bad that they just can't vote for her even though they TOTALLY care about what happens to women and brown people and black people.
 
Who said:
I didn't say I did?

Someone else posted her taking money from Goldman Sachs for a speech.

If that's not a red flag to you then I genuinely think you don't have a goof grasp on how things work in the seedy underbelly of DC politics
Click to expand...

Ultimately, she wasn't running for office nor was she in public office when she was paid to give a bullshit motivational speech at a Goldman Sachs event.

If they were paying her for favors, then that's one shitty, inefficient way to pay for favors.

If you think this speaks on her character, I can already tell you that he's not going to agree that it's a red flag. The legal ways she makes money as a private citizen really shouldn't have that type of reflection on whether she signs a finance reform bill that reaches her desk.
 
Liu Kang Baking A Pie said:
"Seedy underbelly of DC politics," LOL. Do you think House of Cards is like a documentary no one is paying attention to?

Everyone in power in government being corrupt is old news. What issues of substance do you care about actually getting traction to improve the lives of the people? Where do your candidates currently stand on that and what will they vote for, no matter how bought that vote is? Focus on reality.
Click to expand...

I am focused on reality and the reality is that we are run by oligarchs not representative of the people. Regardless of what my more specific political views are, there's no hope of seeing any real change until we find and support candidates that will challenge that status quot.

Hilary is not that. She's just another bought out politician and I refuse to support her.
 
Freezie KO said:
There are literally hundreds of other conclusions to be drawn. If someone doesn't back up their argument, maybe it's because their social circle/friends/parents kept telling them something but they can't defend it? Maybe they just don't like arguing for hours about politics on the internet?

The truth is that given the situation you describe, there is insufficient evidence to draw any conclusion as to the motive of that person. Thus, you shouldn't rush to draw a conclusion just because it fits your preconceived political notions.

As with anything, if you can't draw an immediate conclusion, withhold doing so until you have further evidence. There's no shame in that. There's no shame in simply saying, "I don't understand why this person is thinking/acting/being this way."

People feel the need to immediately ascribe motives or bad faith when there are thousands of other conclusions to be drawn. And that leads to polarized or dead-end dialogue.
Click to expand...

Maybe the people attributing sexism do so because they've had similar arguments where it was sexism? I don't know. I would say it's best to be ready to explain yourself if you're going to debate politics
 
Who said:
I am focused on reality and the reality is that we are run by oligarchs not representative of the people. Regardless of what my more specific political views are, there's no hope of seeing any real change until we find and support candidates that will challenge that status quot.

Hilary is not that. She's just another bought out politician and I refuse to support her.
Click to expand...
Do you believe there has been "real change" in America over the last 8 years, Who?
 
FrenchMovieTheme said:
I'll ask again regarding her paid speech:

Uh ok? What is being implied? That she got the money for the speech in exchange for favors to Goldman sachs? What favors did they ultimately get?
Click to expand...

You're naive if you think they got none and we're just doing it out of the kindness of their hearts
 
Who said:
You're naive if you think they got none and we're just doing it out of the kindness of their hearts
Click to expand...

Dude, corporate speeches like that are given to mid level employees at a million institutions. Famous people show up, talk about how great hard work or whatever is for half an hour and shake some hands
 
So I'm confused do you have proof or is this just intuition

You're jumping back and forth with each subsequent post



Who said:
Where did I say I showed the proof? I was commenting on another poster providing evidence and the dismissiveness posts in response to it.

This is all stupid semantics at this point, dear God.
Click to expand...

Who said:
I'm saying based off her lies and the character she seemingly has, I wouldn't be surprised to find out she's really just as vile as Donald Trump. I stand by the word guarantee. Call it intuition.
Click to expand...

Who said:
I assume as much based off what I know about her. I've seen her lie, bold-faced, dozens of times without flinching. She's gross and corrupt. I don't like her one bit, and yes, am sure she has disgusting views based off that.

Are we not allowed to share opinions based off facts?
I can't prove that she has vile beliefs but I can prove that she's a liar and corrupt. God I'm just saying the same shit over and over.

Why do people feel the need to defend such a person?
Click to expand...

Who said:
So when the world is full of liars, what can you trust? I said it was my personal intuition, I wasn't decreeing it as fact.

When I watch her lie, unapologetically, time and time again, I get a sense of what kind of person she is. And it's one that I will never support, defend, or vote for.

That's based off my intuition, sorry I don't have any links?
Click to expand...

Who said:
"Hilary isn't corrupt! Prove it!"

*Shows proof*

"Well so what?!? Everyone is!!"

Ok.. Cool. sorry for not jumping on board in defending your shit candidate. I guess I just have higher standards than that.
Click to expand...
 
Who said:
You're naive if you think they got none and we're just doing it out of the kindness of their hearts
Click to expand...

Right.. we are the naïve ones. Meanwhile you are the one just regurgitating GOP and Reddit talking points.
 
Thagomizer said:
So I'm confused do you have proof or is this just intuition

You're jumping back and forth with each subsequent post
Click to expand...

Ok you seem to be having difficulties so I'll spell it out to you before i go to bed.

I can prove she's a liar and bought out. I didn't think I'd have to but I provided evidence for the latter, and assume you're in tune enough to not need to be convinced of the former.

Based off this, it illustrates to me the kind of character she really must have, which is my intuition.

Pretty simple, yeah?
 
HStallion said:
And this is why people should still be scared Trump has a serious chance at the whitehouse. There are people who will go through such amazing feats of mental gymnastics to give themselves reason to vote for Trump.
Click to expand...
Nah, this doesn't scare me for that reason. I'm fairly optimistic that pending some curveballs he'll be curb stomped come fall.

Rather, what scares me is that this mentality is why he'll still get 40%+ of the vote and many areas of the country will still be Republican dominated. It's that mindset that keeps them coming in, partially anyway.
 
Who said:
Ok you seem to be having difficulties so I'll spell it out to you before i go to bed.

I can prove she's a liar and bought out. I didn't think I'd have to but I provided evidence for the latter, and assume you're in tune enough to not need to be convinced of the former.

Based off this, it illustrates to me the kind of character she really must have, which is my intuition.

Pretty simple, yeah?
Click to expand...

Lol what evidence did you provide? That she accepted campaign contributions? Alright brah
 
Who said:
Ok you seem to be having difficulties so I'll spell it out to you before i go to bed.

I can prove she's a liar and bought out. I didn't think I'd have to but I provided evidence for the latter, and assume you're in tune enough to not need to be convinced of the former.

Based off this, it illustrates to me the kind of character she really must have, which is my intuition.

Pretty simple, yeah?
Click to expand...

Wait that's it?

Your proof is campaign contributions and a segment that itself provides no evidence of anything?

Hahaha Watch out for big Emily's List buying all our politicians

https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=Career&cid=N00000528&type=I

Is Sanders in the pocket of Google and Microsoft?
 
Who said:
Sure. The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. The disparity between rich and poor is much wider than it was 8 years ago.
Click to expand...

If you care, then don't help a republican attain the highest national office 'kay? They all have hilarious income tax propositions.
I don't think you really care.
 
Who is what the dunning kruger effect looks like when it's applied to political corruption.

Condom said:
What I get from the last pages:
Corruption is hard to proof so let's act like it doesn't exist
Click to expand...

Really? What I got was "Corruption is hard to prove so let's assume everything is evidence of is corruption"
 
Who said:
Sure. The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. The disparity between rich and poor is much wider than it was 8 years ago.
Click to expand...
That is more or less the answer I expected. It shows how little attention and empathy you pay to the groups of people in this country who have seen a great deal of change over the last 8 years. Your defense of Donald Trump is elucidating.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
I don't get parasocial relationships.
6
619
reinking replied
Gifs that you hate…
2
66
3K
XXL replied
Cristina Mariani is hilarious
Opinion 
27
365
SirTerry-T replied
I fucking hate computers now.
2
66
4K
StueyDuck replied
My man Kojima San selects his top movies in 2024
Social Opinion 
27
2K
jonnyp replied
Top Bottom