40
   

I'll Never Vote for Hillary Clinton

 
 
Sturgis
 
  -3  
Wed 11 May, 2016 07:53 am
@Blickers,
Go any lower and you'll be looking up your ass from between your toes.

Contrary to the actions of the cretins who have thumbed you up, jokes about lynching are never funny.
Blickers
 
  3  
Wed 11 May, 2016 08:02 am
@Sturgis,
Edgar brought up the topic. I pointed out that discussing being lynched by an anonymous message board in cyberspace where nobody knows who anybody is or where they live is pretty silly. I find nothing objectionable in doing that.
0 Replies
 
Blickers
 
  4  
Wed 11 May, 2016 08:11 am
@Sturgis,
Quote Sturgis:
Quote:
It's a new unwritten rule around here apparently; at least for some, we must present an idea or indicate which candidate other than Ms.Clinton we are in support of and then await approval. Just the other day I was given permission to vote for whichever candidate I wanted to.


I said that I would not allow Joe to say the only standard of proof we could use was some scenario that he was cooking up-that unless that scenario was somehow possible no proof was possible. I meant I would not allow him to do this in the conversation unchallenged.

Tell me, what exactly did you think I meant? Are you interpreting this as some kind of veiled threat on my part as well?
Sturgis
 
  1  
Wed 11 May, 2016 08:20 am
@Blickers,
Stop being so paranoid!

I was not looking at it as a threat. Nor was I seeing the comment you made towards eb as a threat.

On this matter of your interaction with joefromchicago, I was pointing out that there seems to be an overabundance of supporters of Ms.Clinton's supporters who seem to find it necessary to either allow or forbid permissions on various citizen rights.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Wed 11 May, 2016 10:37 am
@Blickers,
Blickers wrote:
You can show what the overwhelming probabilities were. Men have been hanged on less evidence.

Indeed. Many men have been hanged on no evidence at all, and there will always be those who are perfectly satisfied with that level of proof.

Blickers wrote:
That was back in the mid sixties. Ralph had long since morphed into an environmentalist advocate.

Not really.

Blickers wrote:
Quote:
it [the study] posits an imaginary ceteris paribus world where everything was just like it was in 2000 except that Nader didn't run

Actually, it examined the down ballots of the Florida counties to show that many more Nader voters were Democrats than Republicans. Which shouldn't surprise anyone since the Democrats are pro-environment, Republicans anti-environment. Hence Gore's loss in Florida due to environmentalist votes being diverted from Gore to Nader.

Or, in other words, the study posits an imaginary ceteris paribus world where everything was just like it was in 2000 except that Nader didn't run.

Blickers wrote:
Normally, there is one pro-environmentalist choice, (Democrats), and one anti-environmentalist choice, (Republicans). Nader foolishly siphoned just enough environmentalist votes away from Gore to give the whole damn election to the anti-environmentalist Bush. And now people are advocating the same disastrous course.

You really are sounding like oralloy, except instead of guns you think environmentalism was the sole issue in the 2000 election. If you were paying attention, though, you'd know that environmental issues were way down the list for most voters. Gore, after all, wasn't talking about putting the environment in a lockbox.
0 Replies
 
Debra Law
 
  1  
Wed 11 May, 2016 02:41 pm
@Blickers,
Blickers wrote:

In 2000, Ralph Nader decided the Democrats under Al Gore were not environmentally aware enough, so he ran himself. The election came down to Florida. Bush won by less than 560 votes. Nader had over 90,000 votes. In polls, 80% of the Nader voters had Gore had a second choice. Nader's Florida votes delivered the presidency to GW Bush.

Debra, are you trying for a repeat?


I don't live in Florida.

We survived GW Bush.

I don't care if Donald Trump appoints Orly Taitz to the Supreme Court. I'm not voting for him and I'm not responsible for what he does. I'm not voting for Hillary and I'm not responsible for what she does. But if you think her picks for the Supreme Court will somehow be better than Trump's, then you're fooling yourself.
Debra Law
 
  1  
Wed 11 May, 2016 02:52 pm
@DrewDad,
DrewDad wrote:

I think there's also an element of "a Democratic party that would select Hillary Clinton doesn't deserve my vote, and deserves to fail."

An attitude shared by many who are able to protect themselves from governmental intrusions on their personal liberties, and don't consider the cost to the disadvantaged.


Line up all the "disadvantaged" people and I dare say many of them will be voting for Trump.
Debra Law
 
  1  
Wed 11 May, 2016 02:55 pm
@RABEL222,
RABEL222 wrote:

You might as well vote for Trump because Hilary is going to be the nominee.


If Hillary is the nominee, I will write in Bernie Sanders' name on my ballot.
0 Replies
 
Debra Law
 
  0  
Wed 11 May, 2016 03:19 pm
@Lash,
Lash wrote:

Our way of life in the US has been perverted by corruption.

The gulf between average people and the super wealthy is growing exponentially. We are being separated between poor, largely brown workers, and ridiculously wealthy bosses, journalists, and politicians.

Our law enforcement is killing black and brown people with no consequence, and would continue unabated if it weren't for the life-risking actions of BLM and people who support them. A light is being shown on what happened to Sandra Bland, Tamir Rice, and Eric Garner, but without a president who will stand up and say NO YOU ******* DON'T ANYMORE, that light will fade.

I see only one man who I can count on to do that. The other so-called Democrat candidate profits by locking people up. Literally, not figuratively. Superpredator-hating prison-for-profit Clinton.

My man calls it loud in public. He's the only one.

The gulf is between us and them is growing.

Average people in this country now acknowledge that a college education for their children to compete in this world is out of reach. Only the elites can afford to educate their children because of the astronomical cost. Our government is charging our students ridiculous costs and withering interest rates. Our government is behind this. They are growing the gulf between rich and poor.

Do you want to ask why? It is in the best interests of this country - and all countries - to keep the rabble down. 99% of us are rabble. They must control us or we will control them. If we control them, they work for us. Right now, we're working for them. They're making out like bandits. We're fools.

Insurance in this country is unaffordable. I am a teacher who pays $200 a month for the pleasure of calling myself "insured." (Thanks, Obama!) AND THEN, I have a deductable of $500! I can't go to the doctor. We all deserve to pay a reasonable tax and get life-saving medical care. ALL of us.

I pay nearly 1/3 of my hard-earned check - and it is ******* hard-earned - to the govt etc - and the ultra-wealthy don't even pay their fair share. We're not asking for a hand-out - we're tired of bankrolling Wall Street's hand-out.

It is time for them to pay their share. Who has hoodwinked you into thinking hardworking men and women should pay Wall Street's way???

Thanks to Bill Clinton and other politicians like him who work for billionaires, the floodgates of money were opened into politics through Glass-Steagall, and I no longer have a voice in my own government. The idea of "America" and "democracy" is a joke. Laws are written by lobbyists, signed by corrupt politicians who are paid off by the ultra-wealthy - designed to make the ultra-rich even richer. As crazy as it sounds, you're seeing the results all over the US.

My life is at stake; so is yours. Our children's futures are hanging in the balance. The water we drink and the food we eat are being ruined by people like the Clintons and other politicians who get cash on the barrelhead for votes that allow these corporations to do what they please with our soil and our underground water tables.

So, those are a couple of the social issues you need to be addressing with your vote.

People like you and snood think the worst possible thing that can happen in this election cycle is if progressives who support Bernie don't vote for Hillary.

Think again.

.


I agree, Lash.

My husband and I pay approximately $1,600.00 a month for "affordable" health insurance. That high premium is allegedly necessary because of our age ... we're both over 50. If we get too sick, can't work, and can't pay our premium every month, then we won't be insured.

Obamacare is forced customers for the insurance industry. Both the Democratic and Republican Parties are corrupt. We work for them, they don't work for us ... they work for the rich and powerful oligarchy.

When are people going to get angry enough to do something about it? The Republicans have been trying to sell its "trickle down" theory for decades. The Democrats are trying to sell us the "incremental change" theory, but things have been incrementally getting worse for the middle class for decades. What will be the mass wake-up call?

I'm too old to do much of anything except protest on a message board and refuse to vote for Hillary. I don't care if she's touted as the lesser evil. She's still evil.

edgarblythe
 
  -2  
Wed 11 May, 2016 03:28 pm
@Debra Law,
You and lash are spot on. We can't afford to vote the lesser of two evils any more.
0 Replies
 
Blickers
 
  2  
Wed 11 May, 2016 06:28 pm
@Debra Law,
Under Bill Clinton, 16 Million new Full Time jobs were created. Full Time jobs for all races total increased 16%-which is very good. Full Time job for blacks increased 30%, which is excellent. Inflation adjusted wages went UP. More people went to college. Don't say the Democrats didn't build up the middle class. They did. And I'm looking for a repeat.
DrewDad
 
  5  
Thu 12 May, 2016 06:43 am
@Debra Law,
Debra Law wrote:

Line up all the "disadvantaged" people and I dare say many of them will be voting for Trump.

That may be one of the most morally bankrupt statements I've ever heard.

"Other people don't do the right thing, so I don't have to consider whether my actions have negative effects."
woiyo
 
  -1  
Thu 12 May, 2016 06:55 am
@Blickers,
Bill Clinton was "lucky" to be in office during the tech bubble. He rode that wave until he left office then this happened.

Quote:
On January 10, 2000, America Online (now Aol.), a favorite of dot-com investors and pioneer of dial-up Internet access, announced plans to merge with Time Warner, the world’s largest media company, in the second-largest M&A transaction worldwide.[12] The transaction has been described as “the worst in history”.[13][14] Within two years, boardroom disagreements drove out both of the CEOs who made the deal, and in October 2003 AOL Time Warner dropped “AOL” from its name.

Several communication companies could not weather the financial burden and were forced to file for bankruptcy. One of the more significant players, WorldCom, was found engaging in illegal accounting practices to exaggerate its profits on a yearly basis. WorldCom’s stock price fell drastically when this information went public, and it eventually filed the third-largest corporate bankruptcy in U.S. history. Other examples include NorthPoint Communications, Global Crossing, JDS Uniphase, XO Communications, and Covad Communications.[dubious – discuss] Companies such as Nortel, Cisco, and Corning were at a disadvantage because they relied on infrastructure that was never developed which caused the stock of Corning to drop significantly.

Many dot-coms ran out of capital and were acquired or liquidated; the domain names were picked up by old-economy competitors, speculators or cybersquatters. Several companies and their executives were accused or convicted of fraud for misusing shareholders’ money, and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission fined top investment firms like Citigroup and Merrill Lynch millions of dollars for misleading investors. Various supporting industries, such as advertising and shipping, scaled back their operations as demand for their services fell. A few large dot-com companies, such as Amazon.com, eBay, and Google have become industry-dominating mega-firms.

The stock market crash of 2000–2002 caused the loss of $5 trillion in the market value of companies from March 2000 to October 2002.[15] The September 11, 2001, attacks accelerated the stock market drop; the NYSE suspended trading for four sessions. When trading resumed, some of it was transacted in temporary new locations.


Millions of jobs lost and the middle class lost BILLIONS and many have ytt to recover.

Don't give any president too much credit to gains or losses and they are just temporary caretakers. The blame goes to the representatives and those who are to oversee the system which are controlled by the Congress.

Blame the people for continually voting in the same old retreads, like Hillary, and expecting different results.
revelette2
 
  3  
Thu 12 May, 2016 07:02 am
@Debra Law,
Iraqi veterans might think differently, I know Iraqis who are still suffereing yet today from ISIS think differently. At lesser importance, we are still suffering from the economic collapse, and our country as a whole suffered in the world opinion because of Gitmo and detainees torture and deaths. Some people I am sure survived the plague in times past, that doesn't mean they wanted to go through it again or watch more loved ones die in another one.
parados
 
  6  
Thu 12 May, 2016 07:03 am
@woiyo,
There were no millions of job losses as a result of the tech bubble. Stop making crap up Woiyo.

http://data.bls.gov/generated_files/graphics/latest_numbers_CES0000000001_1998_2002_all_period_M12_data.gif

The majority of the 1.5 million job losses occurred after 9/11.
Blickers
 
  1  
Thu 12 May, 2016 07:16 am
@woiyo,
Great chart, Parados. The "tech bubble" is a right wing myth. The dot com industry was not a big enough part of the economy to create a good economy or to crash it. The Dow Jones was doing fine all through Bill Clinton's presidency, along with the rest of the economy. The great economy of the 1990s was caused by the economic stimulus package of 1993, along with various other factors.

During Clinton's presidency, 16 Million Full Time jobs were created. All races total increased their Full Time jobs 16%, which is really good, and blacks increased their Full Time jobs 30%, which is phenomenal. Then Bush got into the White House. For the next eight years, the country created only 2 Million Full Time jobs. Starting on Bush's watch in 2008 and continuing into Obama's first year, the economy LOST 11 Million Full Time jobs in the worst recession since the great Depression. That wasn't the tech bubble.

However, in the last 12 months the economy has created 2.3 Million Full Time jobs and 5 Million Full Time jobs total. Almost all of these are private sector jobs, the percentage of people with government jobs has shrunk. The economy took a long time to get back on track, thanks largely to Republican obstructionism. The dollar is strong, and America is leading the world out of the recession. Except for Russia-they just screwed themselves with expansionist adventures.

woiyo
 
  -1  
Thu 12 May, 2016 10:30 am
@parados,
Quote:
The Labor Department estimates that a net 1.735 million jobs were shed in 2001, with an additional net 508,000 lost during 2002. 2003 saw a small gain of a mere 105,000 jobs. Unemployment rose from 4.2% in February 2001 to 5.5% in November 2001, but did not peak until June 2003 at 6.3%, after which it declined to 5% by mid-2005.


You're lying again !!! Yet you again miss the point. You want the same old politics that has stagnated the growth of this economy? You want the same politics for the rich that will continue to suppress the working class? You want another 4 years of Clinton scandals? I guess you do.
woiyo
 
  -1  
Thu 12 May, 2016 10:37 am
@Blickers,
Quote:
However, in the last 12 months the economy has created 2.3 Million Full Time jobs and 5 Million Full Time jobs total. Almost all of these are private sector jobs, the percentage of people with government jobs has shrunk. The economy took a long time to get back on track, thanks largely to Republican obstructionism. The dollar is strong, and America is leading the world out of the recession. Except for Russia-they just screwed themselves with expansionist adventures.


Creating jobs is only one aspect. Looking at the total unemployment pr real unemployment, the rate is a about 9.7%. Couple that with the declining salaries in this century, you can see why most Americans are no satisfied with the status quo of our political leaders. And you think Hillary is the answer? She, and all those like her, who have been in government positions are the one responsible for these failures. And you think it is a good idea to reward her with the ultimate prize?

ehBeth
 
  2  
Thu 12 May, 2016 10:39 am
@woiyo,
woiyo wrote:
She, and all those like her, who have been in government positions are the one responsible for these failures.


interesting point. Mr. Sanders has been in government for a long time. Not a good alternative eh.
woiyo
 
  0  
Thu 12 May, 2016 10:45 am
@ehBeth,
I am not saying Mr Sanders "is like her" at all. He certainly is NOT.

However, Bernie is correct that the democratic Party will do everything it can to make sure Hillary gets the nomination in spite of Bernies popularity.

It would not bother me in the least if Bernie actually won the nomination of the Democratic Party and went up against Trump. It would be a startling contrast of positions that would surly shake up the establishment, which is what this country needs.
0 Replies
 
 

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 0.09 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 03:54:41