40
   

I'll Never Vote for Hillary Clinton

 
 
Debra Law
 
  1  
Wed 17 Feb, 2016 03:21 pm
@snood,
snood wrote:

I have no motivation to try to fear monger anyone, and I'd appreciate not being accused of it. I have no concern about who Democrats choose to vote for in their primaries. My only concern is for Hillary voters who have so much disdain they won't vote for Bernie, and Bernie voters who feel so ill toward Hillary they'd rather see Trump. I think they're being short sighted and mean spirited for reasons of their own, but those reasons damn sure have nothing to do with what's best for the country they live in.


Respectfully, snood ... that's what your post was all about ... fear mongering. I don't fear losing anything. I don't fear that the republicans will install justices on the supreme court who will overrule Roe v. Wade. If the American people cannot depend on the Supreme Court to protect individual liberty from the clutches of the self-designated morality police, then they better protect themselves by voting for representatives who won't strip them of their rights. I'm not going to let the Democrats hold "Roe v. Wade" or anything else over my head as a threat ... vote for Hillary or else. I'm not afraid ... bring it on!
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Wed 17 Feb, 2016 03:24 pm
@Debra Law,
Fear mongering in politics is a common tactic, and many don't know how to separate threats from reality.
Trump will build a fence between the US and Mexico. How many really believe this? Too many.
Debra Law
 
  1  
Wed 17 Feb, 2016 03:31 pm
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:

Debra Law wrote:

edgarblythe wrote:

Too many people on a2k think a Bernie campaign cannot win. I disagree.


I also disagree with that nefarious strategy: Settle for Hillary because Bernie can't win. That's untrue party propaganda and a ridiculous reason to support someone as awful as Hillary. She's as a bad as the Republican candidates.

This election cycle is truly an eye-opener, and many millions of people of every age are watching as our political parties show their true colors.



When it comes to politics, I don't care that Justice Scalia died. So what? It's sad for his family, but I'm not going to allow the Democrats to use that card against me ... vote for Hillary (the alleged "lesser evil") or else the Republicans will have the power to choose "conservative" justices. I'm getting old ... I already had to live with Scalia on the high bench for nearly 30 years ... and I still don't care about Hillary. I'll never vote for her even if that means the Democrats lose the white house. I'm sure others feel the same way: Let the Republicans can have the damn white house and stack the court and alienate the majority of voting-age citizens ... they're pounding the nails in their own party coffin everyday as it is, and the hate-mongering dinosaurs will soon be extinct.

Bernie can win, and if the Democrat party establishment blocks his chances, then the Democrats need to be replaced too.



So glad to have you back.


Thank you, Edgarblythe. Smile
0 Replies
 
Debra Law
 
  2  
Wed 17 Feb, 2016 03:37 pm
@snood,
snood wrote:

No. No, no, no. Not mean-spirited for disagreeing with ME. Mean-spirited for attacking Hillary on so many other things than her policies, or what she has done in the last 20 years. Mean-spirited for bringing the whole attitude of "If we don't get our candidate, we don't give a damn". That mean-spirited. You always want to accuse me of making this personal, but I STILL don't think I'm the one doing that.


Snood, it's not mean-spirited to say "No. I won't be used as a pawn for the warring political parties to see which one gets to dole out the American pie to their corporate sponsors while they toss red meat at the electorate, whom they view as salivating fools who are given no other choice but to vote the way they tell us to vote." I'm saying "No."
0 Replies
 
Robert Gentel
 
  2  
Wed 17 Feb, 2016 03:40 pm
@snood,
They have less of a chance of being responsible for a Republican presidency by talking about it than you do of being struck by lightning every day from now until the election.

Unless you take similar precautions for something as unlikely (e.g. staying inside all the time) I don't see why they should refrain from posting their opinions online on Clinton. The talk of it possibly causing a Republican presidency absolutely is fear mongering.

That being said, I agree that the generally correct game theory for those who lean Democrat is to vote Democrat even if it is Clinton. That much is obvious but invoking the Republicans as a boogey monster can be done for anything, one could say that some Democrats might be put off by your scolding of them and that could usher in and end of Row vs Wade etc too. It's no less ridiculous a claim than that their dim views of Clinton might do so.
0 Replies
 
Blickers
 
  2  
Wed 17 Feb, 2016 03:47 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote Cicerone Imposter:
Quote:
Recovering slowly. What I don't understand is that unemployment is supposed to be 4.9%.

Part of the reason the GDP is not in the range it used to be is that the population is no longer growing as fast as it once was. The GDP per capita is not doing badly at all.

http://i1382.photobucket.com/albums/ah279/LeviStubbs/Obama%20takes%20office%20chart_zps5m4sdv8f.png
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Wed 17 Feb, 2016 03:49 pm
@snood,
snood wrote:

No. No, no, no. Not mean-spirited for disagreeing with ME. Mean-spirited for attacking Hillary on so many other things than her policies, or what she has done in the last 20 years. Mean-spirited for bringing the whole attitude of "If we don't get our candidate, we don't give a damn". That mean-spirited. You always want to accuse me of making this personal, but I STILL don't think I'm the one doing that.



That's just it. You think we are saying, "If I can't have my candidate I don't give a damn." We (the ones like me are all I can speak for) are not giving up on Hillary because we might not get Bernie. We are giving up on her because we don't want her to be president. Has zero to do with Bernie.
DrewDad
 
  3  
Wed 17 Feb, 2016 03:57 pm
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:
That's just it. You think we are saying, "If I can't have my candidate I don't give a damn." We (the ones like me are all I can speak for) are not giving up on Hillary because we might not get Bernie. We are giving up on her because we don't want her to be president. Has zero to do with Bernie.

So let's run with that for a minute. If Hillary get's the Democratic nomination, which of the Republican candidates are you willing to vote for over her? Trump? Cruz? Rubio? Bush?
snood
 
  1  
Wed 17 Feb, 2016 03:58 pm
@edgarblythe,
But (and I swear it's the last time I'll ask), does your not wanting Hillary extend so far that you would rather have Trump or Cruz?
Debra Law
 
  2  
Wed 17 Feb, 2016 04:01 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Fear mongering in politics is a common tactic, and many don't know how to separate threats from reality.
Trump will build a fence between the US and Mexico. How many really believe this? Too many.


I agree, fear mongering must be seen for what it truly is ... and we can't fall prey to the tactic.

Trump is King of Red Meat one-liners, but he has no substance... "Trust me, I'm great, he says ... " He says everyone else is a lousy stupid liar, and he will make America great again, trust him ... he says that as he dons his slogan cap, which was made in China.

Why should we spend a trillion dollars on a useless wall when our infrastructure is failing? when our children are being poisoned by corroding lead water pipes? when bridges are falling into rivers? etc., etc., etc...

How much money will it cost us to deport 11 million people? how many people have to be deported each day to get all the alleged undesirables out of this country by the end of Trump's first term as president? 7,500 people per day, every day of the week, for four years straight? and how much will that cost us in terms of time, labor, administration and transportation? and how many of those same people will just come back, wall or no wall?

Are those alleged undesirables really taking jobs away from American citizens? who is responsible for the loss of jobs?

Trump supporters have no common sense. He says what they want to hear, but has no ability nor inclination to actually follow through.

Blickers
 
  3  
Wed 17 Feb, 2016 04:07 pm
@Debra Law,
Quote Debra Law:
Quote:
If the American people cannot depend on the Supreme Court to protect individual liberty from the clutches of the self-designated morality police, then they better protect themselves by voting for representatives who won't strip them of their rights. I'm not going to let the Democrats hold "Roe v. Wade" or anything else over my head as a threat ... vote for Hillary or else. I'm not afraid ... bring it on!

We won't bring it on. It's the fellows who oppose Roe v Wade who'll bring it on. And if Bernie supporters stay home because they can't stomach Hillary, then getting rid of Roe v Wade becomes considerably easier.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Wed 17 Feb, 2016 04:10 pm
@Debra Law,
He has no ability to follow through, because I read a report recently that a wall between the US and Mexico would cost tens of billions of dollars. His bluster that he's going to make Mexico pay for it is a monumental lie. The sad thing is, many citizens in this country believe him.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Wed 17 Feb, 2016 04:12 pm
@Blickers,
Blickers, We're not talking about Roe vs Wade. What has that got to do with this coming election and Hillary? There are more important issues facing this country.
Robert Gentel
 
  3  
Wed 17 Feb, 2016 04:15 pm
@DrewDad,
The man is in Texas. His vote is going to the Republican candidate no matter what he does.

I don't get why progressives keep hounding Edgar about this. It is really silly. Edgar is simply no threat to any progressive cause by not being willing to vote for Hillary. His state is winner-take-all, and always goes Republican and his vote never mattered in the first place.
edgarblythe
 
  3  
Wed 17 Feb, 2016 04:16 pm
I have explained why the carrot and stick Democrat campaigns of the Clintons and Obama no longer work for me, more times than a few. It has to do with their playing to the base during campaigns, and later on speeches, after elected, without delivering the goods. While they make tepid attempts to deliver on social justice, the country slides deeper into oligarchy, fundamentalist Republicans capture state governments and the US legislature and systematically dismantle as much government as possible. Health care got a little boost from Obamacare, but the insurance companies are making the system favor them instead of the customer, more and more, while big pharma runs rampant. One of our regulars has a thread about how she can't afford the health care she needs. Obama has given us more war, not the less he promised and Hillary said she wants a tougher foreign policy than Obama's. The increments they claim to be working on to help us are slowing the slide at times, but not often. Obama could have let the Bush tax cuts for the rich expire, but he "negotiated" that until his donors were still covered. Hillary says she can take all those millions of bribe money without getting bribed. I will promote Jill Stein if Bernie does not get nominated.
0 Replies
 
Robert Gentel
 
  3  
Wed 17 Feb, 2016 04:16 pm
@snood,
It's a false dilemma you keep trying to shove down his throat. Him being unwilling to vote for Clinton has absolutely no bearing on the odds of a Republican president.
Blickers
 
  2  
Wed 17 Feb, 2016 04:17 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Debra Law mentioned that she won't give into "fear mongering" about possibly Roe v Wade being overturned if Bernie supporters don't support Hillary if she wins the nomination, thereby delivering the Presidencey, (and the right to nominate Supreme Court justices), to the Republicans.

I just pointed out that if a Republican gets elected president, Roe v Wade being overturned becomes more of a possibility. And it does.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  3  
Wed 17 Feb, 2016 04:22 pm
@Robert Gentel,
Robert Gentel wrote:

It's a false dilemma you keep trying to shove down his throat. Him being unwilling to vote for Clinton has absolutely no bearing on the odds of a Republican president.


How do you figure, if all those people who will ONLY vote for bernie as the Democratic nominee, stay at home on November 4th, that has no bearing on the odds of a Republican president?
Ragman
 
  2  
Wed 17 Feb, 2016 04:24 pm
@parados,
Quote:
None of the male candidates are being attacked for what their spouses did or do.


None of the other candidates have a spouse that was a past Prez or even a candidate or even a politician (pretty sure). So the Hillary/Billary combo is unprecedented to my knowledge in thw annals of USA politics..
Robert Gentel
 
  3  
Wed 17 Feb, 2016 04:25 pm
@snood,
Edgar is just one person, in Texas who will have no bearing on the general election no matter what he does.

This silly season sniping between progressives should stop, it's sad.

And it's this kind of primary animosity that will dull Democrat enthusiasm for Clinton when she wins. It's not going to make people more likely to vote for her to have overstatement and fear mongering used to try to compel them.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 08:30:19