The 2016 US Election (Part III)

[Simon_Jester]

Also, I am under no obligation to participate in making a choice between being shot and being lightly kicked in the shins. Fuck both those choices.

So let me get this straight.

If someone walks up to you and says "if you don't agree to be kicked lightly in the shins, I'll shoot you with this gun that I am holding in my hand," you will say "do whatever you like, I'm not participating in this decision."

...Seriously?

Because I think on reflection you will realize that this sounds like an incredibly stupid, immature, or outright insane thing to say.

I mean, what, do you enjoy being shot full of bullet holes? Do you get off on the idea of being horribly injured but it 'not being your fault' because there's someone else you can blame for a disaster you could have averted?

If the end result of me refusing to participate in the choice is that the country ends up shot, I won't feel any responsibility for that. There are many other people before me who made many other bad choices that resulted in the present bad choice, any result is their responsibility.

Yes, I'm aware that you like to deflect responsibility for bad outcomes onto other people.

Thing is, this isn't about who's responsible for a hypothetical bad outcome. It's just plain not about that.

We're not teenagers, we're not complete idiots. We're supposed to be thinking adult-ish people. And when you're a thinking adult, if something bad happens, figuring out who to blame isn't even the important part of the process. Because, see...

As an adult, you may not be personally responsible for every bad thing that ever happens to you. Lots of bad things that happen to a person aren't their fault; it happens all the time. But while you ARE NOT responsible for all the bad outcomes that might happen to you... You ARE personally responsible for your own welfare. And you ARE responsible for not being 'reckless' in the criminal sense- for not going around making decisions while totally ignoring their consequences for you or for others.

You don't get to ignore those consequences just because you don't like them, and still consider yourself a responsible adult as opposed to a petulant child.

Because yes, exporting responsibility for avoiding disaster, saying that I will do nothing to avoid the disaster because it's not my fault if disaster happens... that is the act of a child. Children have the luxury of acting that way, because they know mommy or daddy is looking out for them. They don't have to be sensible, they don't have to be rational, they don't have to plan ahead. All that is the responsibility of the adults. So they can indulge their emotions and gratify the underlying monkey-brain, which delights in blaming people for bad things, but isn't very good at predicting consequences or staying out of trouble.

As an American voter, you really, really should not be doing that. There is no grand-scale national mommy or daddy who will look out for you, or me, or for the American voters as a whole. If we want to avoid disaster, we have to make decisions consistent with that. If you make a decision consistent with "I'll happily allow a disaster to happen because I don't care whether it happens or not," you are not making a statement of principle. You are declaring your own immaturity to the world.

I'll cop to "fiddling while rome burns" but non-hillary supporters don't bear any responsibility for rome being on fire.

Do you really think that you are under no obligation to try to put out a fire, just because you personally didn't start it?

I know I'm being repetitive on this immaturity thing... But seriously, are you twelve or something?

[Flagg]

I think he's drunk or having a stroke because not only is he acting like an 8 year old who shit his pants and is acting like the shit fairy visited and the feces didn't emerge from his anus, but he's slandering people in the process.

[The Romulan Republic]

Thought we might enjoy some good news in between all the bickering:

http://www.nbcnews.com/card/gop-congres ... it-n621536

GOP Congressman: I'm Voting For Clinton, Trump 'Unfit'
Rep. Richard Hanna becomes first congressional Republican to say he will vote for Hillary Clinton on Tuesday.

"For me, it is not enough to simply denounce his comments: He is unfit to serve our party and cannot lead this country," Hanna wrote in an oped for Syracuse.com. "While I disagree with her on many issues, I will vote for Mrs. Clinton"

Hanna is retiring at the end of his term this year.

[Elheru Aran]

Thought we might enjoy some good news in between all the bickering:

http://www.nbcnews.com/card/gop-congres ... it-n621536

Hanna is retiring at the end of his term this year.

I suspect the bolded section there has more to do with it than anything else. I would wager that if a lot of Republican politicians didn't have to worry about re-election, they would happily spurn Trump. But since they *are* worrying about re-election, they feel like they have to toe the party line, shake his hand (and wipe theirs on their pants afterwards) and put on a big smile for the cameras.

[The Romulan Republic]

Thought we might enjoy some good news in between all the bickering:

http://www.nbcnews.com/card/gop-congres ... it-n621536

Hanna is retiring at the end of his term this year.

I suspect the bolded section there has more to do with it than anything else. I would wager that if a lot of Republican politicians didn't have to worry about re-election, they would happily spurn Trump. But since they *are* worrying about re-election, they feel like they have to toe the party line, shake his hand (and wipe theirs on their pants afterwards) and put on a big smile for the cameras.

Yeah, its not exactly the most gusty move when you're not running for reelection (although there's always the risk of more violent reprisals when it comes to Trump supporters, unfortunately).

But its nice to see some more cracks in the Republican Party- not just major politicians refusing to endorse him, but actually beginning to back Clinton against him. Hopefully we'll see more prominent Republicans outright leaving the party soon.

[The Romulan Republic]

Yeah, it appears that Hillary's camp followers are adopting Dubya's line that you're either with them or you're for the Turrists/Commies/Donald Hitler Trump/Putin. There's a whole lotta drama queening going on and were it done a little more artfully, it would work as brilliant satire. But since this line of agitprop is being done so badly...

Trump is a racist, quasi-fascist, cowardly, bullying, draft-dodging, belligerent asshole who lies constantly, incites hatred and violence against those who displease him, all the while salivating at the prospect of looting the treasury and wrecking the economy with his harebrained financial policies? Yep, sure is. But most if not all of the above applied to Von Reagan, Dubya and Sarah Palin (though not the draft-dodging part). I remember quite a bit of anger and shock when Bush 43 and Bitburg Ronnie won, and much relief when that nitwit from Alaska lost. Still, the only major difference I can see is that Trump is cruder and more obnoxious.

Hillary's lackeys need to get their story straight. Either the hardcore Sanders and Stein supporters are a tiny number of holdouts, not worthy of being listened to, let alone given a say in a coalition against Trump and the GOP, OR they are a vast legion of fanatics so numerous that they just might tip the election in Trump's favor. If it's the former, then shitting on them is a waste of time and effort best reserved for use against Trump. If the latter, then Hillary deserves to lose anyway because there can't possibly be a more retarded political strategy than "Fuck off, you Dirty Fucking Hippies! Now vote for me or else!"

I suspect all the bullshit about "Bernie Bros" and the recent slander aimed at Jill Stein are just the Dems' way of setting up an alibi should Hillary lose. Forty-eight years after Humphrey narrowly lost to Nixon, veal pen Democrats are still pissing their pants and crying about how those Dirty Fucking Hippies lost the election. Don't get me started on the scapegoating of Nader.

No contradiction regarding the importance of Bernie or Bust and Green voters (oh, and I'm including Libertarians in that somewhat, though they also take a lot of votes from the Republicans).

They are a minority, yes. Certainly Bernie or Bust does not appear to represent most Sanders voters.

However, even a small minority can tip a close election.

[Alyrium Denryle]

Once again you have a good argument against Donald Trump. I'd like to hear some arguments for Hillary about how she's going to help most Americans.

Just by keeping the ACA going, dumbass. Also she'll likely expand it.

But really you are asking for the benefits of not jumping off a 500' cliff with jagged rocks and eye eating rats at the bottom. "Well what has not dying and having my eyes eaten by rats ever done for me?"

So just to be clear, you: A. Spent the last year shitting all over Hillary's primary opponent as a "traitor", "carpetbagger", and "loony"; and B. after Hillary won the nomination, demand that I support her since she's the only choice against Donald Trump? Is that about right?

Fuck you. If I don't vote and donald trump wins, I'll be able to sleep fine knowing that you and people like you are much much more responsible for that outcome than I am.

I just used the search function as well. He used the term traitor precisely once, and it was in reference to Bernie's post primary party switch.

You will not lie about other members as that is a violation of PR 3 (though it specifies lies about your own person as examples, slander is just as bad as false representation). You WILL apologize to Flagg, in this thread. After that, the matter will be closed and vendetta protections apply.

[Flagg]

I did a search and didn't come up with anything regarding "Bernie" and "Traitor". Can you link me to that please?

[Alyrium Denryle]

I did a search and didn't come up with anything regarding "Bernie" and "Traitor". Can you link me to that please?

Sorry. You are right. I misread search results.

[Flagg]

I did a search and didn't come up with anything regarding "Bernie" and "Traitor". Can you link me to that please?

Sorry. You are right. I misread search results.

Yeah, I called Lieberman one in passing, and that had more to do with his bff'ing McCain and killing the public option. No biggie.

[General Zod]

Yeah, it appears that Hillary's camp followers are adopting Dubya's line that you're either with them or you're for the Turrists/Commies/Donald Hitler Trump/Putin. There's a whole lotta drama queening going on and were it done a little more artfully, it would work as brilliant satire. But since this line of agitprop is being done so badly...

Trump is a racist, quasi-fascist, cowardly, bullying, draft-dodging, belligerent asshole who lies constantly, incites hatred and violence against those who displease him, all the while salivating at the prospect of looting the treasury and wrecking the economy with his harebrained financial policies? Yep, sure is. But most if not all of the above applied to Von Reagan, Dubya and Sarah Palin (though not the draft-dodging part). I remember quite a bit of anger and shock when Bush 43 and Bitburg Ronnie won, and much relief when that nitwit from Alaska lost. Still, the only major difference I can see is that Trump is cruder and more obnoxious.

Hillary's lackeys need to get their story straight. Either the hardcore Sanders and Stein supporters are a tiny number of holdouts, not worthy of being listened to, let alone given a say in a coalition against Trump and the GOP, OR they are a vast legion of fanatics so numerous that they just might tip the election in Trump's favor. If it's the former, then shitting on them is a waste of time and effort best reserved for use against Trump. If the latter, then Hillary deserves to lose anyway because there can't possibly be a more retarded political strategy than "Fuck off, you Dirty Fucking Hippies! Now vote for me or else!"

I suspect all the bullshit about "Bernie Bros" and the recent slander aimed at Jill Stein are just the Dems' way of setting up an alibi should Hillary lose. Forty-eight years after Humphrey narrowly lost to Nixon, veal pen Democrats are still pissing their pants and crying about how those Dirty Fucking Hippies lost the election. Don't get me started on the scapegoating of Nader.

No contradiction regarding the importance of Bernie or Bust and Green voters (oh, and I'm including Libertarians in that somewhat, though they also take a lot of votes from the Republicans).

They are a minority, yes. Certainly Bernie or Bust does not appear to represent most Sanders voters.

However, even a small minority can tip a close election.

Frankly if the gap between Clinton and Trump is so small that a few holdouts will change the tide of the election it's really your own goddamn fault.

[The Romulan Republic]

Clinton would have to fuck up grotesquely (or something very improbable would have to happen to change public opinion) for her to have a narrow race on election day. But there's no reason to take any chances.

Personally, I want the margin to be as wide as possible, for four reasons:

1. To ensure that Trump has no chance, obviously.

2. So we don't have to deal with any shit like recounts.

3. So that the inevitable cries that Clinton won by cheating will have as little credibility as possible (especially since I suspect that some will use such cries to attempt to incite violence).

4. To send a message that Trump, and what he represents, are not part of the mainstream. To discredit him and his supporters, and restore something of America's tarnished reputation in the eyes of the world.

[The Romulan Republic]

I'll add another reason as well:

This election has shown, if it wasn't clear before, that the Republican Party has become a threat to the survival of American democracy. It is a vile, corrupt organization which no longer functions in an effective or ethical manner. Some may think that a resounding defeat for Trump will cause the party to moderate itself, but I don't believe that. We've seen how the Republican base often operates. A defeat is taken as meaning that they weren't extreme enough.

Well, there's not really anywhere further to go down that road short of outright, open Nazism (and we're nearly there now) or armed insurrection on a large scale.

I want the Republican Party dealt such a defeat in this election that it never recovers. Let some new party, or parties, rise from its ashes. Its time is past.

The nut job base will still be there, but hopefully it will be fractured, divided, and all the more sane elements will have left it behind.

Yeah, it might be a pipe dream, but I can hope.

[Flagg]

Clinton would have to fuck up grotesquely (or something very improbable would have to happen to change public opinion) for her to have a narrow race on election day. But there's no reason to take any chances.

Personally, I want the margin to be as wide as possible, for four reasons:

1. To ensure that Trump has no chance, obviously.

2. So we don't have to deal with any shit like recounts.

3. So that the inevitable cries that Clinton won by cheating will have as little credibility as possible (especially since I suspect that some will use such cries to attempt to incite violence).

4. To send a message that Trump, and what he represents, are not part of the mainstream. To discredit him and his supporters, and restore something of America's tarnished reputation in the eyes of the world.

Unfortunately Donnie Douchebag and his motley band of Human-Caterpillars are already laying the "Der, da Clinton bitch dun riggeted da vote uhee!!!" groundwork by Donnie Douchebag himself saying he expects Clinton to rig the vote. How she'll manage to accomplish this in a country where most states have Republican Governors, legislators, and Secretaries of State is a mystery, but between picking their assholes and ironing their klan hoods it will give them something to bitch about.

[The Romulan Republic]

The 538 nowcast is looking real sunny for Clinton:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/20 ... ecast/#now

[Terralthra]

It is five days after the DNC concluded with her nomination, and only ten days after you breathlessly thought she had lost the election due to the exact same short-term nowcast. Slow your roll, human.

[Flagg]

The 538 nowcast is looking real sunny for Clinton:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/20 ... ecast/#now

Still 3 months out and I wanna see the debates because the expectations for Donny Douchebag are so low that simply not voiding his bowels on stage will probably have the 24 network halfwits giving him accolades so as of yet the only poles I care about are bleached every night to get rid of the cunt brine.

[The Romulan Republic]

It is five days after the DNC concluded with her nomination, and only ten days after you breathlessly thought she had lost the election due to the exact same short-term nowcast. Slow your roll, human.

First, I never presumed to predict with certainty the results of the election.

Second, whatever concerns I had were sure as fuck based on more than one poll.

Third, I'm hardly declaring victory over this news. I'm simply saying that it is a very positive development, which it is.

You are simply taking the opportunity to throw tired insults at me without cause.

[Crown]

I'll add another reason as well:

This election has shown, if it wasn't clear before, that the Republican Party has become a threat to the survival of American democracy. It is a vile, corrupt organization which no longer functions in an effective or ethical manner.

Wait did the GOP email servers also get hacked and emails released showing implying (*wink* *wink* *nudge* nudge*) that the party foot soldiers and insiders conspired to rig the primary against The Donald's rivals to ensure that the God Emperor get the Republican nomination as well?!?

Holy shit when did this happen

[The Romulan Republic]

I'll add another reason as well:

This election has shown, if it wasn't clear before, that the Republican Party has become a threat to the survival of American democracy. It is a vile, corrupt organization which no longer functions in an effective or ethical manner.

Wait did the GOP email servers also get hacked and emails released showing implying (*wink* *wink* *nudge* nudge*) that the party foot soldiers and insiders conspired to rig the primary against The Donald's rivals to ensure that the God Emperor get the Republican nomination as well?!?

Holy shit when did this happen

Nah, there's just the fact that their nominee incites violence, proposes policies that would violate the Constitution, may have committed treason...

[maraxus2]

Wait did the GOP email servers also get hacked and emails released showing implying (*wink* *wink* *nudge* nudge*) that the party foot soldiers and insiders conspired to rig the primary against The Donald's rivals to ensure that the God Emperor get the Republican nomination as well?!?

Holy shit when did this happen

Yes, the DNC was rigging the Primary against Sanders in early/mid May, when he definitely still had a shot at winning the Primary. They definitely weren't a bunch of staffers talking shit about an annoying candidate with annoying followers.

Shouldn't you be getting into fights with SJWs over #FreeMilo or something?

[Crown]

Wait did the GOP email servers also get hacked and emails released showing implying (*wink* *wink* *nudge* nudge*) that the party foot soldiers and insiders conspired to rig the primary against The Donald's rivals to ensure that the God Emperor get the Republican nomination as well?!?

Holy shit when did this happen

Yes, the DNC was rigging the Primary against Sanders in early/mid May, when he definitely still had a shot at winning the Primary. They definitely weren't a bunch of staffers talking shit about an annoying candidate with annoying followers.

Oh that makes it totally okay then! *phew*

Shouldn't you be getting into fights with SJWs over #FreeMilo or something?

What happened to Milo, was he detained? And are you finding me "problematic"?

Nah, there's just the fact that their nominee incites violence, proposes policies that would violate the Constitution, may have committed treason...

The Democrat's nominee hasn't met a war she would turn down, referred to black people as "super predators" who specifically should be "brought to heel" and was being investigated (for a lack of a better term) by the FBI for gross misconduct.

Name me some of the policies that would violate the Constitution if you could though.

[maraxus2]

Oh that makes it totally okay then! *phew*

Yes, that is exactly what I said. Do you understand the difference between "stealing an election" and "talking mad shit behind someone's back?" Because you do not appear to. This is worrying.

What happened to Milo, was he detained? And are you finding me "problematic"?

No, he got banned from twitter, as you are no doubt aware. I do not find you "problematic." I find you to be a "dipshit." I know you have difficulty finding distinctions between two or more things, but I promise there is one.

[Mr Bean]

Hah hah oh yeah election fraud fun times it's not like there's a possible example of possible machine manipulation. And believe you me, once we get a really squirrely election the thing that will help most is a history of opposing investigations of electronic voting machines.

I'm sorry did everyone forget less than twenty years ago when voting irregularities ended up giving us George W Bush? Why under the sun would you not be happy to have our increasing proprietary yet still hideously vulnerable election process be thrust under review? For the last twenty four odd years since 1998's first big use of electronic voting machines we've been seeing results that are "off". Normally small enough people can brush off any calls for investigation to say the .5% vote flip that looks wrong is within the margin of error and maybe it is but the point is we don't check. Kansas is a good example of every single polling group being wrong or someone is putting their finger on the scales during state primaries to give the party insiders a 1% edge and the state Republican party has fought every effort to compare the electronic record vs the paper record.

Given the world we live in why the heck not embrace Trump's call to ensure the elections are not fixed by digging in deep and checking a few primaries or general elections to verify everything on the up and up?

It seems shortsighted not to embrace an opportunity for improvement just because Trump is the source of that idea.

Remember Virigina as of two years ago was using eletronic voting machines with such hard to guess passwords as abcd and admin. Truly the most secure of passwords to protect the process that results in the leader of the free world.

[Crown]

Oh that makes it totally okay then! *phew*

Yes, that is exactly what I said. Do you understand the difference between "stealing an election" and "talking mad shit behind someone's back?" Because you do not appear to. This is worrying.

I never said anyone "stole an election". Do you understand sarcasm? Because you do not appear to. This is worrying.

What happened to Milo, was he detained? And are you finding me "problematic"?

No, he got banned from twitter, as you are no doubt aware.

So Milo is not detained, and therefore free? Correct?

I do not find you "problematic." I find you to be a "dipshit." I know you have difficulty finding distinctions between two or more things, but I promise there is one.

"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the first tool of the loser." - Socrates

Wow, didn't take you long did it?