• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

FBI's Comey - Clinton Still Not Guilty of Chargable Offense

The assertion that neither Trump nor Clinton have anything at all good about their policies is ridiculous on its face. Further, the reduction of criticism of that assertion to what is claimed above demonstrates a lack of a rational argument.
 
Jason Harvestdancer said:
Actually, on Wednesday, while it is true that Hillary's supporters won't be able to say "but... but... but Trump!" they will have another thing to say in order to avoid substance. When I say "she kills people" they will respond "oh you're just saying that because she's a woman, you don't like women in power, you're a sexist misogynist." Yet for the last 15 years I've been ardently opposing having men drop bombs on poor brown people. That won't actually matter. What matters is that this time it is a woman dropping bombs on poor brown people, and therefore I oppose it because she's a woman.

Those poor brown people will have to check their privilege as they are dying and realize how historic it is that they are being killed by a woman instead of a man.
Click to expand...

Hillary's hawkish stances are what puts me off her the most. Oh, I'm voting for her because the alternative is Trump. And we have ample evidence that he lacks the self control, expertise, intellect or imagination to do anything that would not lead to more, larger, and more lethal conflicts with about half the world, minimum.

I've listened to third party candidates and they are frankly worse. The real problem with having an 'outsider' as President is that they have no expertise in foreign affairs and no actual allies, or even a credible bench of experts to fill in knowledge gaps. This includes Trump, btw.

As much as it bothers me to recognize this, for this election cycle, Hillary is the least bad option, despite her hawkishness.
 
There is a third party ticket that has more executive experience than both major party tickets together. I'm not excited about them but recognize that they are not only better than the major party tickets, they are a little bit good.
 
Toni said:
Jason Harvestdancer said:
Actually, on Wednesday, while it is true that Hillary's supporters won't be able to say "but... but... but Trump!" they will have another thing to say in order to avoid substance. When I say "she kills people" they will respond "oh you're just saying that because she's a woman, you don't like women in power, you're a sexist misogynist." Yet for the last 15 years I've been ardently opposing having men drop bombs on poor brown people. That won't actually matter. What matters is that this time it is a woman dropping bombs on poor brown people, and therefore I oppose it because she's a woman.

Those poor brown people will have to check their privilege as they are dying and realize how historic it is that they are being killed by a woman instead of a man.
Click to expand...

Hillary's hawkish stances are what puts me off her the most. Oh, I'm voting for her because the alternative is Trump. And we have ample evidence that he lacks the self control, expertise, intellect or imagination to do anything that would not lead to more, larger, and more lethal conflicts with about half the world, minimum.

I've listened to third party candidates and they are frankly worse. The real problem with having an 'outsider' as President is that they have no expertise in foreign affairs and no actual allies, or even a credible bench of experts to fill in knowledge gaps. This includes Trump, btw.

As much as it bothers me to recognize this, for this election cycle, Hillary is the least bad option, despite her hawkishness.
Click to expand...

I don't know that she's all that much more of a hawk than Obama. He was considerably less hawkish than Bush, of course, but while he wound down the war in Iraq and scaled back in Afghanistan, he didn't exactly end the "global war on terror." Contrary to Republican assertions that he's a wuss because he won't say "radical Islamic terrorism," the Obama administration has been pretty ruthless in the use of drones and special forces to eliminate terrorists (and the occasional wedding party). I don't see Clinton changing that policy one way or another.
 
bleubird said:
Will Wiley said:
Nah...she is worse than most. Name another leader who would laugh about murdering a man in the way Gadaffi was murdered? Who would laugh in view of the awful tragedy in Libya.
Obama?? Never. Bush...no. Tony Abbott? No...Margaret Thatcher? no... Angela Merkel...no. Bill Clinton? no.

Hillary Clinton has no awareness or conception about how sick it actually is to laugh about a guy being murdered, and sodomised with a bayonet according to reports.

She is not even trying to be nasty...she just doesn't get it. It's frightening
Click to expand...
Why do you fucking care?Will it break your bones or pick your pocket if Clinton is president? Or is it just ideology?Will you be drafted into a war?Will your investments be at risk?
Click to expand...


I don't want Australia dragged into another war started by the U.S. That's it in a nutshell.

- - - Updated - - -

ZiprHead said:
Will Wiley said:
Name another leader who would laugh about murdering a man in the way Gadaffi was murdered?
Click to expand...

Putin.
Click to expand...

Do you have any evidence this time?
 
Toni said:
Jason Harvestdancer said:
There is a third party ticket that has more executive experience than both major party tickets together. I'm not excited about them but recognize that they are not only better than the major party tickets, they are a little bit good.
Click to expand...

And that would be...who, exactly?
Click to expand...

The Libertarians have a lot of executive experience, but they're not real(tm) libertarians, so I don't know if it counts.
 
Toni said:
Jason Harvestdancer said:
There is a third party ticket that has more executive experience than both major party tickets together. I'm not excited about them but recognize that they are not only better than the major party tickets, they are a little bit good.
Click to expand...

And that would be...who, exactly?
Click to expand...

I'm not thrilled about the Johnson/Weld ticket. I'm particularly not thrilled with Weld. At least they're better than Barr/Root.

But it is true that the LP ticket has more executive experience than the Dem ticket or the Rep ticket.

Don2 (Don1 Revised) said:
The assertion that neither Trump nor Clinton have anything at all good about their policies is ridiculous on its face. Further, the reduction of criticism of that assertion to what is claimed above demonstrates a lack of a rational argument.
Click to expand...

Pretending that calling me names is a rational argument doesn't make it a rational argument.

You can call me a doo-doo head all you want, just don't pretend you're being rational while you're doing it.
 
Jason Harvestdancer said:
There is a third party ticket that has more executive experience than both major party tickets together. I'm not excited about them but recognize that they are not only better than the major party tickets, they are a little bit good.
Click to expand...

That's lovely.

Of course, they have exactly the same chance of being elected as I do, so they are not, in fact, one of the choices open to you. Voting third party is indistinguishable from not voting at all.

Refusing to choose because you don't like the fact that there are only two options is childish. One option is less awful than the other - and not choosing won't get you access to a third choice, it will just make it more likely that the choice you preferred least will be selected.

I can understand that you don't like the system; but pretending that it is different from what it is, because you really WANT it to be different from what it is is also childish.

It's not relevant that your constitution sucks, and that it leads directly to this awful system. What matters (to adults) is that this is what you have, and you have to work with it. Refusing to accept that you have to work with the system you have is not productive - it actually makes things worse for you than participation would. If you don't like it, take it up with the authors of your fucking stupid constitution.
 
Or amend the constitution to change things like every other generation except this current group of lazy-assed bitches has.
 
bilby you obviously don't understand how low information are US voters. What you observe is true except what you observe cannot be understood by most of US electorate. So it is like that famous unheard tree in the forest people like you probably know nothing about which is appropriate I guess.
 
Jason Harvestdancer said:
But it is true that the LP ticket has more executive experience than the Dem ticket or the Rep ticket.
Click to expand...

Any foreign policy experience? Hmmm... I have fucking "executive experience" myself. It doesn't qualify me.

You never told me what you were advocating for, Jason. Why vote for Johnson or Weld when you might just as well write in the name of someone you really really like, say, your best friend - who also has zero chance?
 
Jason Harvestdancer said:
But it is true that the LP ticket has more executive experience than the Dem ticket or the Rep ticket.
Click to expand...
The LP has more government executive experience combined than either ticket. But in terms of executive experience (running large organizations) it is pretty clear that the Republican ticket has more combined experience.
 
laughing dog said:
Jason Harvestdancer said:
But it is true that the LP ticket has more executive experience than the Dem ticket or the Rep ticket.
Click to expand...
The LP has more government executive experience combined than either ticket. But in terms of executive experience (running large organizations) it is pretty clear that the Republican ticket has more combined experience.
Click to expand...


If you want a person with executive experience in running a business into bankruptcy, Trump is your man.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom