# USA election 2016



## CatParty (Sep 29, 2016)

who are you voting for and why? (and for those of you who are outside the US, who would you vote for and why?)


----------



## DuskEngine (Sep 29, 2016)

I would murder the fascist Donald Trump if I could get away with it.


----------



## AA 102 (Sep 29, 2016)

Both candidates are shit, if I lived in the US I wouldn't vote this election.


----------



## Beaniebon (Sep 29, 2016)

No third party options? Like fuck I'm voting for those two pieces of shit.


----------



## Abethedemon (Sep 29, 2016)

The problem with Hillary is that she's not really a friend of the people and if we elected her, we'd be continuing a whole dynastic trend.
The problem with Trump is that he's super incompetent, childish, xenophobic, and doesn't know how politics/economics work.
I really don't want to vote for either.


----------



## JU 199 (Sep 29, 2016)

You have to wonder if there's something terminaly broken about US politics if these candidates are the new norm.


----------



## Pickle Pirate (Sep 29, 2016)

I don't particularly want to vote for either of them, but to me Hillary, while simply being more of the usual, seems like she's the lesser of two evils here and less likely to get the country nuked on day 1. 

Third party options seem kind of shitty if I'm honest, and let's be real here, third party candidates have a snowballs chance in hell of winning the election anyway.


----------



## Lurkman (Oct 5, 2016)

We are all going to die this election


----------



## Lackadaisy (Oct 5, 2016)

I'm voting "Abstain".


----------



## charmaide (Oct 5, 2016)

I'll probably vote for third party, either Johnson or Stein. There's things I like of both, and things I dislike of both--Johnson's pretty damn ignorant of the world and Stein is two steps away from being a liberal fruitcake, if she isn't there already.

I don't want either a thin-skinned narcissist nor a corporate whore as president, but that's my two cents. I sincerely do wish to see some progressive change, but not "progressivism" regressive leftists, radfems and SJWs want to bring.


----------



## Picklepower (Oct 5, 2016)

Tempted to vote Trump just to see what happens if he wins.


----------



## kenham (Oct 5, 2016)

charmaide said:


> I'll probably vote for third party, either Johnson or Stein. There's things I like of both, and things I dislike of both--Johnson's pretty damn ignorant of the world and Stein is two steps away from being a liberal fruitcake, if she isn't there already.
> 
> I don't want either a thin-skinned narcissist nor a corporate whore as president, but that's my two cents. I sincerely do wish to see some progressive change, but not "progressivism" regressive leftists, radfems and SJWs want to bring.



Exactly. From a Europoor perspective, both are pretty much unvotable (although most tend to view Hillary as the lesser of two evils). Hillary would have been investigated against here a lot sooner and more thorough (Hell, the German Defense Minister had to go just because of a plagiarised PhD thesis) and Trump is just the exact opposite of presidential.
I'd probably vote for Johnson, as any socially liberal and fiscally conservative person should do.


----------



## Joan Nyan (Oct 5, 2016)

Daddy <3


----------



## DZ 305 (Oct 5, 2016)

DuskEngine said:


> I would murder the fascist Donald Trump if I could get away with it.


Hello Secret Service? Yeah...we got another hothead.

I'm about ready to say fuck everything and either vote straight down the party for the dems, or split the ballot and vote for Senator Toomey.


----------



## Lugal (Oct 5, 2016)

I'm strongly considering not voting at all. I almost hate Trump enough to vote for Clinton, as sleazy as she is, but the contempt that she and her campaign, along with the whole Democrat establishment, have showed for the left this whole election cycle has made me extremely reluctant to support her. No way in hell I'm going to vote for a lolbertarian, even one without Johnson's obvious ignorance, since their economic ideals are a large part of what fucked this country up so badly for the working class. At one point I was considering voting for Jill Stein, largely because the Green Party has become openly critical of capitalism, but after looking into her, she just seems like too much of a moonbat, and Baraka is even worse.


----------



## DZ 305 (Oct 5, 2016)

Lugal said:


> I'm strongly considering not voting at all. I almost hate Trump enough to vote for Clinton, as sleazy as she is, but the contempt that she and her campaign, along with the whole Democrat establishment, have showed for the left this whole election cycle has made me extremely reluctant to support her. No way in hell I'm going to vote for a lolbertarian, even one without Johnson's obvious ignorance, since their economic ideals are a large part of what fucked this country up so badly for the working class. At one point I was considering voting for Jill Stein, largely because the Green Party has become openly critical of capitalism, but after looking into her, she just seems like too much of a moonbat, and Baraka is even worse.


Warren giving Clinton an endorsement helped change my mind. She's sharp as they come and doesn't seem like she would endorse somebody just to stay relevent like some other rat we know.


----------



## Ruin (Oct 5, 2016)

I'll be voting for Donald Trump. The Political establishment in the U.S is rotten and corrupt to the core, and I wish to throw a wrench into the entire system even if I have to vote for a manchild to do it.


----------



## Morbid Boredom (Oct 5, 2016)

I'm gonna cover myself in honey before I go to the polling place, that's for sure.


----------



## Chiang Kai-shek (Oct 5, 2016)

I want a lolcow president, so I'm going Trump.


----------



## Reddit Avenger (Oct 6, 2016)

I'm voting Trump since living in a deep blue state means my vote in a general election is meaningless anyway.

I sure as hell ain't giving any kind of support to that literal harpy Clinton, so the least I can do is reward Trump for making this one of the greatest trainwrecks elections I've ever had the honor of witnessing purely out of spite.

Also I have trouble believing Jill Stein even exists, and Gary Johnson is a massive (albeit hilarious) tard so fuck him.

Although tbh I just want Clinton to win purely so I can keep my health insurance.


----------



## DZ 305 (Oct 6, 2016)

Reddit Avenger said:


> I'm voting Trump since living in a deep blue state means my vote in a general election is meaningless anyway.
> 
> I sure as hell ain't giving any kind of support to that literal harpy Clinton, so the least I can do is reward Trump for making this one of the greatest trainwrecks elections I've ever had the honor of witnessing purely out of spite.
> 
> ...








No judgment here fam.


----------



## Tranhuviya (Oct 6, 2016)

MAGA, I guess.

I hope.


----------



## DirkBloodStormKing (Oct 6, 2016)

Fuck Trump or Clinton, I'm writing in Harambe this election.


----------



## Joan Nyan (Oct 6, 2016)

DirkBloodStormKing said:


> Fuck Trump or Clinton, I'm writing in Harambe this election.


Harambe literally does do better in the polls than Stein when he's included.


----------



## Abethedemon (Oct 6, 2016)

I'd almost want to vote for Trump because I'm in an extremely blue state just to fuck the power, but the problem is that Mike Pence is fucking awful and will probably be behind the whole system.


----------



## CatParty (Oct 6, 2016)




----------



## Stereotypical Badger (Oct 6, 2016)

Florida blue? I don't think that prediction is very accurate. I would say Trump has a slight edge over Clinton at this point in time. Also three consecutive terms of any one party are very rare and all the enthusiasm seems to be on Trumps side. 

I'm genuinely interested in the result of this election and I think it's likely that Trump will win. Americans didn't want another Bush and deep down they don't want another Clinton. 

Let's just hope that Trump doesn't turn out to be another Bush, who basically outsourced his presidency to an evil clique of neocon warmongers.


----------



## Save Goober (Oct 6, 2016)

I'm planning to vote for either Johnson, Stein, or writing in Obama or something. I don't really know, it's a worthless protest vote.


----------



## Shokew (Oct 6, 2016)

I should remind people that states like Florida will virtually have thousands of innocent people not able to vote (especially against the scum dominating the state), if you pay attention to how voter registration laws in a lot of states have been used to screw over people who don't vote for a certain party who's mostly responsible for such underhanded and fascist BS. 

At this point, it doesn't matter who wins - if we can't deal with shit like my example on the local, or especially state level, what the fuck's the point???


----------



## Joan Nyan (Oct 6, 2016)

Shokew said:


> I should remind people that states like Florida will virtually have thousands of innocent people not able to vote (especially against the scum dominating the state), if you pay attention to how voter registration laws in a lot of states have been used to screw over people who don't vote for a certain party who's mostly responsible for such underhanded and fascist BS.
> 
> At this point, it doesn't matter who wins - if we can't deal with shit like my example on the local, or especially state level, what the fuck's the point???


Do you actually want to explain what the problem is or is it not your job to educate shitlords like us?


----------



## Gym Leader Elesa (Oct 6, 2016)

I am voting for Johnson, but not as a protest vote- I honestly think he is a good candidate and I might have voted for him in just about any year.


----------



## Reddit Avenger (Oct 6, 2016)

Legatus Lanius said:


> No judgment here fam.


Seriously though, fuck people who think this current system is somehow okay. Why the fuck does some hick farmer asshole in Iowa's vote mean more than mine?


----------



## Chiang Kai-shek (Oct 6, 2016)

Stereotypical Badger said:


> Florida blue? I don't think that prediction is very accurate. I would say Trump has a slight edge over Clinton at this point in time. Also three consecutive terms of any one party are very rare and all the enthusiasm seems to be on Trumps side.
> 
> I'm genuinely interested in the result of this election and I think it's likely that Trump will win. Americans didn't want another Bush and deep down they don't want another Clinton.
> 
> Let's just hope that Trump doesn't turn out to be another Bush, who basically outsourced his presidency to an evil clique of neocon warmongers.


Not to be a downer, but judging by poll data the dems might get a third term. Then again if I recall correctly Romney was like ahead of Obama in 2008 and we know how that turned out. Plus I think a Rasmussen poll said Trump lead Hilary by one point. 2016 has been a crazy election year so anything can happen.


----------



## Holdek (Oct 7, 2016)

CatParty said:


> who are you voting for and why? (and for those of you who are outside the US, who would you vote for and why?)


What is your choice catparty


----------



## Joan Nyan (Oct 7, 2016)

Gym Leader Elesa said:


> I am voting for Johnson, but not as a protest vote- I honestly think he is a good candidate and I might have voted for him in just about any year.






Have fun voting for an SJW.


----------



## Disgusted Face Hold (Oct 7, 2016)

lolbertarians are just shitlibs who hold a phony pretense of caring about "muh constitution and muh founders", thinking that doing so will somehow render the tumblrisms they love so much more digestible to the general electorate. 

Speaking of elections, the fix is still in, now with Brussels flavor added to the recipe.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/06/global-bureaucrats-invited-by-obama-to-inspect-us-elections/


----------



## Gym Leader Elesa (Oct 7, 2016)

Jon-Kacho said:


> Have fun voting for an SJW.



Honestly, after sitting through the whole thing, I still somehow managed to be less bothered by him than the other candidates. This is an interesting year.


----------



## Inquisitor_BadAss (Oct 7, 2016)

As a Brit from what I've seen of the coverage of your networks seem to never show third party candidates as an option. In all the interviews I seen reporters do they never ask if people are voting for someone other then Clinton or Trump.


----------



## Disgusted Face Hold (Oct 7, 2016)

tl;dr system is designed to favor dhimmicrats and republicucks only. globalists haven't yet figured out how to get lolbertarians and greenies to do their bidding.


----------



## Gym Leader Elesa (Oct 7, 2016)

Inquisitor_BadAss said:


> As a Brit from what I've seen of the coverage of your networks seem to never show third party candidates as an option. In all the interviews I seen reporters do they never ask if people are voting for someone other then Clinton or Trump.



That's because it is almost always irrelevant to do so.

I am pushing for Johnson because despite his utter foreign policy ignorance, his quaint mid-west sentimentalism, and his ultra-capitalist economic "reform" policies that are basically crackpot conspiracy theories, I feel like he strikes a good balance of domestic and social policy. U.S. non-interventionism, increased power to the states, what I call the "gays and guns" platform, and commitment to a secular government are enough of a sell for me. Trump and Clinton bring _literally nothing _to the table. Johnson is sometimes retarded, but only in the way that your lovable pot-smoking grandfather is sometimes retarded. He's like a 66% net gain for the U.S.

I have never hidden it. I am foremost a monarchist- constitutional and parliamentarian leanings notwithstanding- so libertarian is about as far away as you can get most days (on the right-wing spectrum), but unfortunately my EU citizenship isn't looking as good it used to. _Carlism_ is more about radical Catholicism and abortion rights these days.

Johnson is the best candidate stateside in a long time, because he at least maintains a veneer of "leave you in fucking peace" policies I can get behind while the U.S. establishment continues to fuck itself like it has since the War of Northern Aggression (not taking it back loltrolled). Smaller government and states rights are more significant to me than literally any other issue, followed by property rights.

Tear me apart @*Asterisk* @Jon-Kacho @Legatus Lanius


----------



## Ruin (Oct 7, 2016)

Reddit Avenger said:


> Seriously though, fuck people who think this current system is somehow okay. Why the fuck does some hick farmer asshole in Iowa's vote mean more than mine?



The electoral college is shit and anyone who defends it is an idiot.


----------



## Reddit Avenger (Oct 7, 2016)

Inquisitor_BadAss said:


> As a Brit from what I've seen of the coverage of your networks seem to never show third party candidates as an option. In all the interviews I seen reporters do they never ask if people are voting for someone other then Clinton or Trump.


Because they're an option in the same way that you might have the option at a car dealership to either buy the red car, the blue car, or to simply throw all your money into a garbage disposal. 

The first two options are more or less the same shit with a different color, while the last one is a complete waste that accomplishes literally nothing.


----------



## Joan Nyan (Oct 7, 2016)

Gym Leader Elesa said:


> That's because it is almost always irrelevant to do so.
> 
> I am pushing for Johnson because despite his utter foreign policy ignorance, his quaint mid-west sentimentalism, and his ultra-capitalist economic "reform" policies that are basically crackpot conspiracy theories, I feel like he strikes a good balance of domestic and social policy. U.S. non-interventionism, increased power to the states, what I call the "gays and guns" platform, and commitment to a secular government are enough of a sell for me. Trump and Clinton bring _literally nothing _to the table. Johnson is sometimes exceptional, but only in the way that your lovable pot-smoking grandfather is sometimes exceptional. He's like a 66% net gain for the U.S.
> 
> ...


Johnson supports taking in Syrian refugees. A vote for anyone except Trump is a vote for Sharia law.


----------



## Spudnik (Oct 7, 2016)

I'm seriously considering voting Vermin Supreme, just so I don't get that "you didn't vote, so you can't complain" bullshit.

My state is going to be red no matter what, and I don't want any of these clowns to have my vote.


----------



## Reddit Avenger (Oct 7, 2016)

Spudnik said:


> I'm seriously considering voting Vermin Supreme, just so I don't get that "you didn't vote, so you can't complain" bullshit.
> 
> My state is going to be red no matter what, and I don't want any of these clowns to have my vote.


>Vermin Supreme

If you're gonna vote for a literal meme, at least be current about it. #votesoutforharambe


----------



## DZ 305 (Oct 7, 2016)

Gym Leader Elesa said:


> That's because it is almost always irrelevant to do so.
> 
> I am pushing for Johnson because despite his utter foreign policy ignorance, his quaint mid-west sentimentalism, and his ultra-capitalist economic "reform" policies that are basically crackpot conspiracy theories, I feel like he strikes a good balance of domestic and social policy. U.S. non-interventionism, increased power to the states, what I call the "gays and guns" platform, and commitment to a secular government are enough of a sell for me. Trump and Clinton bring _literally nothing _to the table. Johnson is sometimes exceptional, but only in the way that your lovable pot-smoking grandfather is sometimes exceptional. He's like a 66% net gain for the U.S.
> 
> ...






I don't judge you


Jon-Kacho said:


> Johnson supports taking in Syrian refugees. A vote for anyone except Trump is a vote for Sharia law.


----------



## Shokew (Oct 7, 2016)

Jon-Kacho said:


> Do you actually want to explain what the problem is or is it not your job to educate shitlords like us?



People getting denied the right to vote over BS like gerrymandering of crucial districts in most states. It's a key factor in what allows assholes in power at the state and local levels to be assholes and fuck their constituents over - and yet, everyone blames & ridicules (albeit, it is somewhat justified.) the feds, instead of those who truly deserve it on those levels for pulling such BS.


----------



## Spudnik (Oct 7, 2016)

I'm not sure if it 100% fits with this topic, but it's been on my mind;

Bernie Sanders can fuck off. Don't get me wrong, he was my hopeful for the democratic nominee, but Back in April  Sanders stated:


			
				Bernie Sanders said:
			
		

> *we are not a movement where I can snap my fingers and say to you or to anybody else what you should do, because you won't listen to me. You shouldn't.* Uh, you'll make these decisions yourself.


However, in the last month or so, we've gotten:
 "If my supporters 'take a hard look' at what Gary Johnson stands for, they won't vote for him"
"It is imperative we elect Hillary"
"This is not the time for a protest vote"

I believe that Bernie's integrity was at least one aspect both sides could appreciate. But something changed after he lost the nomination. I don't know if it's just a threat of a trump presidency, or if Hillary has something to do with it (probably still begging for "bernie bros" votes). Either way, I can't stand him running around helping Clinton out, it goes against what he was running for.

Then again, this is the same man who said "Americans are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails", which was an unbelievably stupid move in the primaries. He had a silver bullet that could have prevented this mess (_maybe_), and he threw it away, and for what? to play nice with Hillary? that worked great, considering she told his campaign to "watch their tone" shortly after.

Edit: Also, I think if Trump wins the presidency, the DNC only has themselves to blame, it won't be Bernie Bros fault, it won't be Johnsons fault, it won't be Steins fault. It will *ONLY* be because Hillary is an abysmally weak candidate who couldn't beat a reality tv host.

This whole election has been a real eye-opener through-and-through


----------



## SailingtheSaltySeas (Oct 7, 2016)

It doesn't matter who we vote for, either way we're fucked.


----------



## Abethedemon (Oct 7, 2016)

You know it's dark times when Vermin Supreme is more promising than the two mainstream candidates.


----------



## Joan Nyan (Oct 7, 2016)

Spudnik said:


> I'm not sure if it 100% fits with this topic, but it's been on my mind;
> 
> Bernie Sanders can fuck off. Don't get me wrong, he was my hopeful for the democratic nominee, but Back in April  Sanders stated:
> 
> ...


Give Bernie a break, he's only endorsing Hillary so he doesn't have an accident at the gym.


----------



## Xarpho (Oct 7, 2016)

Spudnik said:


> I'm not sure if it 100% fits with this topic, but it's been on my mind;
> 
> Bernie Sanders can fuck off. Don't get me wrong, he was my hopeful for the democratic nominee, but Back in April  Sanders stated:
> 
> ...



A Hillary win would only illustrate how far she had to go to beat Donald Trump. But you're right, I felt that Bernie's best traits were honesty and integrity, and I might've considered voted for him if things had gone differently, but seeing Bernie turn into a Hillary shill, that's disheartening.


----------



## UtopiaGuy (Oct 7, 2016)

Xarpho said:


> A Hillary win would only illustrate how far she had to go to beat Donald Trump. But you're right, I felt that Bernie's best traits were honesty and integrity, and I might've considered voted for him if things had gone differently, but seeing Bernie turn into a Hillary shill, that's disheartening.



I think Bernie is still the Bernie people came to love. But he's facing the fact a Bizarro like Trump could win it, and it's only practical for him to promote the only viable alternative in the field. He's also probably thinking Hillary could swing some of his policy points later on and get some of it passed. Trump, Johnson and Stein won't, since one is on the GOP side and the other two won't come within a light-year of winning. He's doing the lemons-into-lemonade thing.


----------



## Shokew (Oct 8, 2016)

Abethedemon said:


> You know it's dark times when Vermin Supreme is more promising than the two mainstream candidates.



Vermin Supreme represents what we're gonna end up like, unless we fight back, truly and eventually. Why not vote for him. His very figure speaks a truth we cannot ignore any further. Even if he does come off like a comedy act to many.


----------



## Cheap Sandals (Oct 8, 2016)

No matter who wins, the American democracy looks like a shitshow.  It seems (to an outsider) like many people on both sides of the political spectrum are disengaging from the concept of "working with the Other", and are instead forming ideological camps where purity wins out over pragmatism. It looks, to a non-American, like there's no pan-American 'dream' anymore.

If H-Dog wins, a lot of right wingers will say "fuck this place" and if Trump wins, the same thing from the other side. It doesn't look like either candidate winning will actually help the country unify. It seems, to me, like no matter who wins, the divides only deepen.

I think the only winner in this election are voyeuristic aliens, because they get to watch everything from a safe distance.


----------



## Enclave Supremacy (Oct 10, 2016)

I've got a question as a non-American. In the UK, yeah it's not a duopoly like the US is but after the election the leader of the opposition still plays a large role in Parliament as the Leader of HM Loyal Opposition.

What happens in America? What happens to the presidential candidate who looses the election. Where do they stand in their party and do they still hold a position?


----------



## Optimus Prime (Oct 10, 2016)

Enclave Supremacy said:


> I've got a question as a non-American. In the UK, yeah it's not a duopoly like the US is but after the election the leader of the opposition still plays a large role in Parliament as the Leader of HM Loyal Opposition.
> 
> What happens in America? What happens to the presidential candidate who looses the election. Where do they stand in their party and do they still hold a position?



AFAIK the losing candidate generally gets nothing and goes back to being a prominent name in their respective party to run for senator or something. Just look at Al Gore after he lost the election - still relevant enough that South Park dedicated an entire side mission exclusively to him in _Stick of Truth_.


----------



## Null (Oct 10, 2016)

Enclave Supremacy said:


> I've got a question as a non-American. In the UK, yeah it's not a duopoly like the US is but after the election the leader of the opposition still plays a large role in Parliament as the Leader of HM Loyal Opposition.
> 
> What happens in America? What happens to the presidential candidate who looses the election. Where do they stand in their party and do they still hold a position?


We do not have party-based elections and we do not have opposition offices. As I understand in the Commonwealth, at least Australia, there are "Shadow Ministers" which are somehow juxtaposing the Minister (which humorously has resulted in Australia's Minister of Defense being a former Shadow Minister of Justice from Batman, Australia). For the Prime Minister, you actually vote for the party and then the party picks their Prime Minister. The PM can then be fired or resign (like David Cameron did) and the Party can replace them without new elections.

In the US there's none of that shit. Our parties are basically private clubs. In the primary elections, our party (which we belong to symbolically, basically) decides their nominee for President. The primary vote is really misunderstood and are _not_ comparable to our general election. They are not regulated like the GE, are basically like a private club's counting of votes, and frequently the parties smudge the rules to get the establishment favorite they want anyways regardless of the popular vote and each party has had different rules for how they select their nominee. The nominee then creates a ticket with a vice presidential pick of their choosing and they make their bid for the presidency.

The only reason parties hold these primary elections is it gives people an illusion that their vote is considered. Many high-ranking officials within the GOP wanted to block Trump from being the nominee, but the voter base was so enthused about Trump at the time they knew honoring the votes was the only way to keep the Republican party together. Not doing so would have resulted in an independent Trump party stealing half of the GOP's votes, or more, and cost the election for the conservatives. Nothing legally kept them from doing this however.

In our House of Representatives and Senate, collectively referred to as the Congress, we have two groups. The Senate is precisely 100 people -- 2 from each state, Washington D.C. not included. Congress is based on population and are elected from small, arbitrarily drawn districts within each state, determined by state government. There currently are over 400 people in Congress. In order for a bill to become law, it must be approved by the Senate and the House and then be signed into law by the President. If the President refuses to sign it, it is called a Veto. Senate may vote with a 2/3rds majority to override the veto and force a bill into law. This has happened precisely once in President Obama's two terms. Congress people are up for election every 2 years, and the Senate is up for election every 6 years. This year, at the same time, both congress and senate will appear on the ballot alongside the president.

What frequently happens in American politics is that, because of the varied lengths of terms, the house / congress / president will be of different party affiliations at different times. This usually results in a lame duck where nothing gets passed. Because of Bush Jr's failures, Obama was elected into office with a democratic congress and senate, and is frequently criticized for getting relatively little done with that opportunity.

A lot of the reason the 2016 election is so contentious is not only that Trump and Clinton stand to win both the White House, the Senate, and the Congress at the same time, but our federal Supreme Court has at least 2 people coming up for immediate replacement and up to 5 people within the next 8 years. The Supreme Court is 9-member life-long appointment that must be nominated by the President and approved by the Senate. They are the single most powerful entity in our country's legal system and are responsible for upholding the constitution. A law that is passed and signed, if against our constitution, can be thrown out by the Supreme Court. They are responsible for passing _de facto_ laws via court precedent which dictate how all lower courts will react to similar cases.

So basically, this election is super fucking important because it's winner takes all and if the wrong decisions are made the entire country might be a mad house for the next 50 years. Since we're already on the very precipice of total global war and economic collapse, most Americans are conscious that poor choices resulting from this election may be a real mortal wound to our very livelihood and existence.


----------



## Mrs Paul (Oct 10, 2016)

I'll hold my nose and vote for Hillary.  She really doesn't impress me all that much, but Trump so disgusts me that I just want to make sure he doesn't win.  The guy reminds me of Richard Nixon.  He's too thin-skinned, he's creepy, and his bromance with Putin disturbs me.  And the less said about Pence, the better.


----------



## Shokew (Oct 10, 2016)

Mrs Paul said:


> I'll hold my nose and vote for Hillary.  She really doesn't impress me all that much, but Trump so disgusts me that I just want to make sure he doesn't win.  The guy reminds me of Richard Nixon.  He's too thin-skinned, he's creepy, and his bromance with Putin disturbs me.  And the less said about Pence, the better.



I said before I wanna see Trump continue and carry on, not that I was voting for him. I still feel bad everyone else, save for da lizard woman is less sane.


----------



## Null (Oct 10, 2016)

Mrs Paul said:


> I'll hold my nose and vote for Hillary.  She really doesn't impress me all that much, but Trump so disgusts me that I just want to make sure he doesn't win.  The guy reminds me of Richard Nixon.  He's too thin-skinned, he's creepy, and his bromance with Putin disturbs me.  And the less said about Pence, the better.


So just to play devil's advocate, since I'm basically his PR agent at this point.



Mrs Paul said:


> creepy


Subjective.













Mrs Paul said:


> thin-skinned





Mrs Paul said:


> Putin





Mrs Paul said:


> bromance


Putin doesn't want war with the United States.
Clinton wants war with Iran and Russia.

The Obama administration blew their load early and blamed all of Wikileak's sources on Kremlin (Russian) hacks. They don't _know_ this, but they're saying it precisely to embed this idea that Russia is trying to implant Trump as President for some reason. Even if they are, it's probably to maintain peace.

Consider this. China is becoming Imperialist. They've staked claims on 3 ally's properties. An island east of South Korea. An island chain south of Okinawa belonging to Japan. Maritime borders and islands north in the Philippines. Obama has said that we will defend our allies against Chinese claims.

Russia is a bigger military threat to us than China, but China is a bigger economic threat to America than Russia. Putin would prefer a balance of power in which the three superpowers were willing to work with each other instead of just demeaning one another as being pure evil. Chinese censorship is detestable, Russian intolerance of homosexuality is detestable, but we are better poised to deal with these country's human rights violations when we are friendly than when we are adversarial. Having good relations with Putin puts China into place and allows us to negotiate these things we want for Russia's people.

Conversely, the Saudi's royal family is bragging that they estimate 20% of Clinton's campaign cash comes from them. That is overt influence on American politics and their motivation is clear. Clinton has enabled Saudi Arabia to get away with everything they want. Despite burying women to their necks in sand and stoning them to death for the crime of being raped ("adultery") and executing gays by throwing them off buildings, Saudi Arabia has somehow weaseled its way into the head of the UN's Human Rights committee and has secured an alliance with the US after funding al-Queada's attacks on New York City.

So sure Putin's bad but Saudi Arabia is objectively worse and I value peace with Putin more than I value peace with the house of Saud.

(Addendum: With all this blame going towards Russia, how do you think a President Clinton is going to treat Russia in Foreign Relations after all this hell they've given her by exposing the truth? "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.")


----------



## Very Honest Content (Oct 10, 2016)

PortsideDave said:


> Then again if I recall correctly Romney was like ahead of Obama in 2008 and we know how that turned out.



'Not a hero because he was captured' John McCain is the memory you're looking for or the year 2012 election but no, you are incorrect on that recollection.



Jon-Kacho said:


> Do you actually want to explain what the problem is or is it not your job to educate shitlords like us?



Governor eliminated early voting days, refused to extend registration due to a hurricane causing a declared state of emergency on the deadline to register date and the head of elections is notorious for false disqualifications from the voter rolls due to purges that catch similar names to convicted felons in them and result in innocent people otherwise properly registered to vote not being able to on election day at the polls.  But you could have looked into all that yourself if you were _really_ worried about disenfranchisement in the state too . . .

Anyway, OP, I'm with .  But I get to vote for legalizing the medical weed and as long as that gets through I can smoke eight years away on the great shit and it'll be gone before I know it if Mike Pence is running this thing while Donald tries to creep on his own daughter.  If Donald had chosen Vince McMahon Jr. for his VP I would have voted that ticket with my eyes clenched close and lied to everyone who asked me after the fact but he didn't so he lost my support at that very instant because I lost my chance at heel Vince cutting promos on other countries that piss off his tag team partner.


----------



## Chiang Kai-shek (Oct 10, 2016)

Very Honest Content said:


> 'Not a hero because he was captured' John McCain is the memory you're looking for or the year 2012 election but no, you are incorrect on that recollection.



Actually I meant to type _2012 _instead of _2008 _since I was referring to Mitt Romney's doomed campaign.


----------



## AnOminous (Oct 11, 2016)

Enclave Supremacy said:


> What happens in America? What happens to the presidential candidate who looses the election. Where do they stand in their party and do they still hold a position?



It depends on the context, how they lose, and who they lose to.  If Hillary loses this to Trump, she's fucking finished.  Same for Trump, because they will have both managed to engineer a total disaster for their respective parties, who will hate their guts forevermore.

So this one is basically a duel to the death.  The loser is politically dead.

Sometimes a candidate is just a sacrificial lamb, though, the party nominating them never had any real hope of winning, so they don't get blamed for it.


----------



## kenham (Oct 11, 2016)

Ruin said:


> The electoral college is shit and anyone who defends it is an idiot.


Are there actually any parties explicitely including introducing a proportional voting system in their platform? I imagine the Democrats/Republicans aren't very fond of such notions, considering their profiteering of the current broken system...


----------



## Very Honest Content (Oct 11, 2016)

kenham said:


> Are there actually any parties _explicitly _including introducing a proportional voting system in their platform? I imagine the Democrats/Republicans aren't very fond of such notions, considering their profiteering of the current broken system...



LOL, no.  It's not the parties who are necessarily the problem being against such a thing IMO, it's the money interests financing both of them already that don't want to bother having to financially guide the legislation lines by buying yet _another_ party in each of the 50 states+territories to continue to control the process at every level possible for their own benefit.

I'm also not 100% sold this is the end of either party regardless of even a landslide result either way.  House seat gerrymandering at the state level will keep the lower chamber of the legislative branch pretty safely where it is now, maybe you'll see a Senate tie, mid-term elections will favor Republicans in two years just on voting trends.  If Republicans lose the executive branch election and then can't reconfigure in time for a 2020 victory, then I'd say they're going the way of the Whig party they replaced due to not adapting with a changing demographic electorite.


----------



## Mrs Paul (Oct 11, 2016)

Null said:


> So just to play devil's advocate, since I'm basically his PR agent at this point.
> 
> 
> Subjective.
> ...



Well, like I said, I'm not a fan of Clinton either.  And as for the Saudis, we've been supporting them for decades -- going all the way back to the 1930s.  And it's all about oil.  NO president right now is going to break off relations until we find a better fuel source.  And I hate to tell you, but the U.S. has a history of supporting dictators -- (just look at what we did in Latin America over the last two centuries.)  
I'm not saying it's because Putin is bad, I'm saying it because right now I do believe he's a legit _threat_.  


And creepy?  This is a dude who talks about his daughter's boobs, calls her a "hot piece of ass" and said he'd date her if she wasn't his daughter.  I don't care who you are, that's fucked up.  *puke*


----------



## Null (Oct 12, 2016)

Mrs Paul said:


> And creepy? This is a dude who talks about his daughter's boobs, calls her a "hot piece of ass" and said he'd date her if she wasn't his daughter. I don't care who you are, that's fucked up. *puke*


So in light of a warning of total global war your main concern is Trump's penis. Okay


----------



## Very Honest Content (Oct 12, 2016)

If he's an incestuous leach, he's not going to be concerned with stopping global war.

If Hillary has leaked audio of her talking about tribbing Chelsea, I'd be concerned she doesn't have the ability to even begin to make a difference in the margins on stopping global conflict too.

I'm sure Mike Pence will be real interested in the worldwide conflagration that will consume us all having the brakes slammed on it to a halt while Donald deals with whatever really catches his interest in the job anyway, once they stop the lack of Republican early voting returns this election in North Carolina first though . . .


----------



## UtopiaGuy (Oct 12, 2016)

Very Honest Content said:


> I'm sure Mike Pence will be real interested in the worldwide conflagration that will consume us all having the brakes slammed on it to a halt while Donald deals with whatever really catches his interest in the job anyway, once they stop the lack of Republican early voting returns this election in North Carolina first though . . .



I may have mentioned it before, but this is my own personal conspiracy theory, based in part on the offers reportedly made to Kasich (when he was eyed for VP), and the lack of response by GOP leaders to Trump's behavior. I think Trump made a deal with GOP leadership, to wit; he would choose a conservative running mate they liked, who would actually run everything in the White House. Meanwhile, Trump will get to "play" President and "make America great again" as part of the ultimate ego trip/reality show. GOPers would then get the conservative SCOTUS appointments and policies and all the rest of it that they want. In return, they offer at least tacit support for Trump's candidacy, and this is why they don't condemn him or his hateful rhetoric and actions. These people are so desperate to win, they'll go even along with someone like Trump right to the bitter end. 

The same mistake they made by embracing the Tea Party they're making again with the Trumpists. They're thinking only of an upcoming election and getting quick, easy votes to secure power, and not the fact that later on they won't be able to control the Trumpists any more than they could the Tea Party guys. The result? Chaos in the party, chaos in Congress, more gridlock and divisiveness, and ultimately a weakening of power that comes with turning off the broader electorate.

Right now, I think it's dawned on them that they're in big trouble, and they're sweating bullets for a Clinton victory. It's easier by far for them to run against an adversary in the White House operating under normal political parameters than it would be to deal with what a President Trump would be like.


----------



## Very Honest Content (Oct 12, 2016)

UtopiaGuy said:


> I may have mentioned it before, but this is my own personal conspiracy theory . . . The same mistake they made by embracing the Tea Party they're making again with the Trumpists. They're thinking only of an upcoming election and getting quick, easy votes to secure power, and not the fact that later on they won't be able to control the Trumpists any more than they could the Tea Party guys . . . It's easier by far for them to run against an adversary in the White House operating under normal political parameters than it would be to deal with what a President Trump would be like.



Actually that sounds more like a causation explanation for the current state of the race for the office than a conspiratorial theory really to me.  I'd say the Trump faction in the party is more of the original pre-Koch financially co-opted T-baggers than it is its own independent new brand of political strain in the Republican base.  If Clinton is running for reelection in a cycle for presidency later I've already decided to call it America Chooses 2020: _Hate-fuck at the election booths_.


----------



## UtopiaGuy (Oct 12, 2016)

Very Honest Content said:


> Actually that sounds more like a causation explanation for the current state of the race for the office than a conspiratorial theory really to me.  I'd say the Trump faction in the party is more of the original pre-Koch financially co-opted T-baggers than it is its own independent new brand of political strain in the Republican base.



There's definitely some crossover there, to be sure, but a good portion of the Trumpers seem to be new to the party.


----------



## Very Honest Content (Oct 12, 2016)

UtopiaGuy said:


> There's definitely some crossover there, to be sure, but a good portion of the Trumpers seem to be new to the party.



New as in 'just aged into being legal to register and vote for their first time' primarily, or new as in 'I don't normally vote in Presidential politics but when I do, I vote for reality (or tabloid news or whatever goes here) TV stars,' primarily or some synthesis of those two?

I bet rat-fucking in the primaries was at an all time high this year if somebody went back and surveys that particular tactic, but I have no empirical proof of that, just pure supposition on my part.


----------



## UtopiaGuy (Oct 12, 2016)

Probably closer to the second. A lot of them are saying "a pox on both your houses!" Not necessarily young voters, but people who've been turned off by politics for a long time, feel marginalized and left out, and probably hate Obama on top of that.


----------



## Fougaro (Oct 12, 2016)

Eastern Eurofag here. I tried to enjoy this shitshow as an impartial observer but given how I always have a thing for people who cause apocalyptic amounts of asshurt, it was only natural that my bias would shift in favour of Trump.

While of all the candidates his positions (at least from what you can see from the various "who's my candidate" sites) are the closest to mine, one of the main reasons I'm cheering for the Don is that I want to see the media, the establishment and various virtue signaling celebrities continuing to chimp out with impotent tard rage. Glenn Beck's recent meltdown was a thing of beauty and if I was a betting person I'd put my money on him jumping from Trump Tower in case of a Trump presidency. On the other hand I also think it would be interesting to live to see the potential political end of both the Clinton and the Bush dynasty.

Though the polls and statistics currently suggest a Clinton presidency as a much more likely outcome, I'm still keeping my fingers crossed till November.


----------



## Mrs Paul (Oct 12, 2016)

Null said:


> So in light of a warning of total global war your main concern is Trump's penis. Okay



I think you know that's not what I meant.  I was asked what I find creepy about him.  His attitude towards women, minorities, POWs, veterans, the disabled, etc.  You can call it words, but they reflect an attitude, something you don't want in a president.  Think about it:  do you think it would be kosher for someone running for president to hang around here?  
And you really think Trump wouldn't hesitate to start a war?  Here's a guy who's bragged about how he's going to "bomb the shit out of them", use nukes, commit war crimes, etc.  They may be words -- BUT, demeanor is indeed important in a politician, like it or not.

He doesn't seem to realize what powers the president has, what they office is allowed to do and not do. Threatening to jail one's opponents, -- dude comes off like Nixon.  He's very petty, and as I said, very thin-skinned.  He's ignorant of much of the country (for example, claiming he's going to bring the steel industry back to Pittsburgh?  C'mon!), and no, he doesn't "say what he thinks".  He condemns outsourcing, but all of his products are made outside the country.  (Mexico, China, Brazil, India, etc).  He imports cheap Chinese steel for his buildings (so much for helping the steel mills around here!).  He has a history of not paying for services, he's been sued by employees how many times, (in addition to other lawsuits).  

Like I said, I don't really like Hillary.  But I think she's the lesser of two evils.  If it was anyone other than Trump running, I'd probably just stay home.  

(Besides, I want my fucking taco trucks)


----------



## feedtheoctopus (Oct 13, 2016)

The world basically gave me a choice between a neoliberal elitist and a bigoted psychopath. I really don't agree with either of these people on...well, anything. Still, Clinton's not insane and hasn't threatened to jail her political opponents and torture people for the fun of it. I really don't see any equivalency here.


----------



## KingGeedorah (Oct 13, 2016)

feedtheoctopus said:


> Still, Clinton's not insane and hasn't threatened to jail her political opponents and torture people for the fun of it. I really don't see any equivalency here.


Nah man she's going to purposely seize on her first day in office and land face first onto the nuke button, causing WW3 with the Chinese and Russians. Hillary is pretty much a crisis actor.


----------



## AnOminous (Oct 13, 2016)

feedtheoctopus said:


> The world basically gave me a choice between a neoliberal elitist and a bigoted psychopath. I really don't agree with either of these people on...well, anything. Still, Clinton's not insane and hasn't threatened to jail her political opponents and torture people for the fun of it. I really don't see any equivalency here.



Lol calm down.  Don't be a sore winner.


----------



## WW 635 (Oct 14, 2016)

lol The US is so screwed...


----------



## Oh Long Johnson (Oct 14, 2016)

CricketVonChirp said:


> lol The US is so screwed...


We have one thing going for us, politically speaking - a completely non-functional Congress that doesn't look to be getting any better. No new laws getting passed generally leads to less fuckery. Filibuster, pass a budget, stage a sit in and go home for the holidays. Rinse and repeat.

Antipathy is the country's only salvation at this point.


----------



## KingGeedorah (Oct 14, 2016)

Oh Long Johnson said:


> We have one thing going for us, politically speaking - a completely non-functional Congress that doesn't look to be getting any better. No new laws getting passed generally leads to less fuckery. Filibuster, pass a budget, stage a sit in and go home for the holidays. Rinse and repeat.
> 
> Antipathy is the country's only salvation at this point.


But isn't an apathetic congress leading to what you're describing here?
I feel like people REALLY need to get involved with local politics if they want to make a change from the ground up. Otherwise it's just the same jockeying for power/prestige.


----------



## Oh Long Johnson (Oct 14, 2016)

KingGeedorah said:


> But isn't an apathetic congress leading to what you're describing here?


Absolutely, yes.



KingGeedorah said:


> I feel like people REALLY need to get involved with local politics if they want to make a change from the ground up. Otherwise it's just the same jockeying for power/prestige.


This is the key - the vast majority of Americans do not want change unless that change conforms to their own personal laundry list of desires. If you take it as a given that the loudest elements of each party are the ones most likely to get the grease, it is in the interest of the majority of both parties to continue with the status quo of passing budgets, meaningless legislation and a judge or two per session, while spending the remaining time bickering and posturing.

I believe this is actually a great thing about our representative republic, when seemingly everything is divided down the middle, the whack jobs on the fringes are unable to promote any new legislation successfully. With the current climate, house majorities are temporary and super majorities are impossible. Thus, guns are safe, abortion is safe, ensuring legislative changes to two of the most important issues today don't get fucked with and set people rampaging into the streets. 

In our political system, you need to build consensus in order to effect change. With the way the electorate is currently, that appears to be impossible so limbo will have to do for the time being.


----------



## Lachlan Hunter McIntyre (Oct 15, 2016)

Given America's political system, a vote for any party besides Democrat or Republican is figuratively throwing your vote away. A 3rd party hasn't had more than 5% of the vote in nearly a _century._ If you think -this- is the year that'll change, you're sadly mistaken.

I consider myself centre-right, perhaps an old-fashioned republican in American political terms. I like some conservative values, but I hate how right wing politics have set about appeasing the militantly religious and the terminally stupid that ignore science. I personally don't give a shit who is elected, and since my actual political choice isn't an option I refuse to vote.

I'd vote to rescind American independence, and to return to part of the United Kingdom. America should've remained British, and the revolution was perhaps the worst thing to happen to the world in the past Millenia.


----------



## Oh Long Johnson (Oct 15, 2016)

Harakudoshi said:


> Given America's political system, a vote for any party besides Democrat or Republican is figuratively throwing your vote away. A 3rd party hasn't had more than 5% of the vote in nearly a _century._ If you think -this- is the year that'll change, you're sadly mistaken.


Just a correction: Ross Perot got almost 20% in 1992.


----------



## Lachlan Hunter McIntyre (Oct 15, 2016)

Oh Long Johnson said:


> Just a correction: Ross Perot got almost 20% in 1992.


I stand corrected.
But 20% is still a landslide loss by any measure.


----------



## mikemikevfan (Oct 15, 2016)

Republican establishment are a joke. They failed to see what their voters want, and then complain that voters have chosen Trump above others.



Harakudoshi said:


> , but I hate how right wing politics have set about appeasing the militantly religious and the terminally stupid that ignore science.


both parties ignore science when science says something they don't like. If you disagree, you are a latent democrat really, come out of closet, bro.



Null said:


> Russian intolerance of homosexuality is detestable, but we are better poised to deal with these country's human rights violations when we are friendly than when we are adversarial.


if you care about gays (sure, gays sometimes get killed in Russia, but in Russia they kill you for lulz regardless of your sexual orientation, really) start with these Saudi (capital punishment for gays), UAE, Bahrain and Qatar whackos, who funded ISIS where they officially throw gays from buildings.

Unfortunately, US cannot criticize these whackos, because if whey do, these whackos will ally with Russia and/or China and remove funds from US.



Null said:


> Having good relations with Putin puts China into place and allows us to negotiate these things we want for Russia's people.


US politicians are interested in US citizens votes, money and nothing else. As there is much more US voters who came from Eastern Europe who are pissed at Russia, than US voters who came from Russia, US politicians will threaten Russia to win votes. If you want to help Russia, you have to create something which is clearly run by American people not its corrupt elite.

Trump of course. It will help to fight PC everywhere in the world. Mudslimes must be stopped.
Obama says that Islam has nothing to do with terrorism.
Merkel says that Islam has nothing to do with terrorism.
Putin says that Islam has nothing to do with terrorism.  Did you even think Putin has something common with Democratic Obama?
It's the same disease everywhere.


----------



## Lachlan Hunter McIntyre (Oct 15, 2016)

mikemikevfan said:


> both parties ignore science when science says something they don't like. If you disagree, you are a latent democrat really, come out of closet, bro.


 I hate both parties. Left wing is so concerned about hurting anyone's feefees that they end up dictating how people can act. Right wing is so concerned with looking to the past they never want to advance to the future.

Democrats are whigning bleeding-heart authoritarians, Republicans are emotionless blowhard fascists that see other humans as little more than livestock and commodities.


----------



## mikemikevfan (Oct 15, 2016)

Harakudoshi said:


> I hate both parties. Left wing is so concerned about hurting anyone's feefees that they end up dictating how people can act. Right wing is so concerned with looking to the past they never want to advance to the future.
> 
> Democrats are whigning bleeding-heart authoritarians, Republicans are emotionless blowhard fascists that see other humans as little more than livestock and commodities.


You are latent dem after all. Dems are concerned exclusively with protecting protected classes' feelings. List of protected classes might change slightly with time, but it's not important. They turn white cisheterosexual males into scapegoats for all injustices in life.
They treat some classes as subhuman and intentionally insult them: islamophobes, vouyerists, pedophiles, racists, xenophobes, vegetarians (even though some want to add them to protected classes list), Russians, etc. etc. well pretty much anyone who disagrees with them.


----------



## UtopiaGuy (Oct 16, 2016)

mikemikevfan said:


> You are latent dem after all. Dems are concerned exclusively with protecting protected classes' feelings. List of protected classes might change slightly with time, but it's not important. They turn white cisheterosexual males into scapegoats for all injustices in life.
> They treat some classes as subhuman and intentionally insult them: islamophobes, vouyerists, pedophiles, racists, xenophobes, vegetarians (even though some want to add them to protected classes list), Russians, etc. etc. well pretty much anyone who disagrees with them.



Well, I disagree. Dems like vegetarians and vouyerists, because hippie-dippy and sex.

Pretty much I see (broadly speaking), the Left as wanting to help people and protect the environment and make sure everyone is equal and has a chance. On the Right (broadly speaking), they believe "only the strong" should win, and if you aren't strong or have what it takes to succeed, you don't deserve success. Dems and GOPers have become the respective parties for both philosophies, but both are very, very flawed vehicles for them. Pretty much, _both_ work for the wealthy and special interests to exploit people, resources, the environment and religion to the benefit of business and the wealthy at all costs. The system _is_ rigged, but only in the sense that third parties and independents are kind of quashed down in favor of the Big Two, and that reality is entrenched in the system we have. Institutionalized corruption is the norm. At least the Dems give the _pretense _that they care about the little guy, and some in the party even believe it. GOPers hardly ever bother with that fiction (unless they need some easy votes).

The Crash of 2008 has laid bare the reality that the "American Dream," that it can be had by anyone willing to work hard and play straight, is a more or less a lie, and maybe it always was. But after the Crash, everything soured as people saw first hand, and maybe for the first time, that the "dream" they've counted on is more than a little bit bullshit. Bullshit spoon-fed to them by both parties to keep the country distracted while the special interests tightened their grip for a century.

Breaking that grip will take way, way more than a vote for or against Clinton or Trump.


----------



## mikemikevfan (Oct 16, 2016)

UtopiaGuy said:


> Pretty much, _both_ work for the wealthy


Is it like that dems don't like to give free shit for poor blacks and mudslimes? How does extension of wellfare works for the wealthy?


----------



## Todesfurcht (Oct 16, 2016)

Why I'm Voting Trump:

*** Clinton did not support the civil rights movement or the ideals of Martin Luther Kind Jr. She fought AGAINST it.

*** Many politicians are liars, but Hillary more-so. She went from conservative liberal to the far left in this election to appeal to the millennial vote.

** *Clinton should be in PRISON for her email scandal. Any other American would have been seized by the FBI. Way to show your patriotism America, not even acknowledging when a federal law is broken.

*** Married to a convicted rapist. Has yet to justify that.

*** Hillary has similar ideals to education as Bill did. She believes in the "No Child Left Behind Act" (luckily overturned by Obama), and the standardized testing system. Both of which have destroyed American education for children.

*** In every state that Clinton won the primaries, there was voter fraud suspected. Nothing was done. It was hushed hushed and Sanders was pushed to the back. She uses her money and she is extremely corrupt.

*** Negligence to American deaths in Benghazi.

*** Self-proclaimed feminist, yet willingly takes donations from Saudi Arabia.

*** Practically funded ISIS.

*** Uses the woman card to cater to uneducated/uninterested/undecided voters.

*** Lizard queen.

I don't just dislike Clinton for running for president, I genuinely dislike her slimy character and behavior.


----------



## Tranhuviya (Oct 16, 2016)




----------



## Jan_Hus (Oct 16, 2016)

Johnson. Man's only scandal is that he's a bit of a pothead


----------



## Tranhuviya (Oct 16, 2016)

Jan_Hus said:


> Johnson. Man's only scandal is that he's a bit of a pothead


"WHAT IS ALEPPO?"
"FIVE ROUNDS IS THE STANDARD MILITARY CAPACITY"


----------



## Jan_Hus (Oct 16, 2016)

Tranhuviya said:


> "WHAT IS ALEPPO?"
> "FIVE ROUNDS IS THE STANDARD MILITARY CAPACITY"


Being a bit of a sperg and being a bit ignorant on foreign policy are not scandals


----------



## Broseph Stalin (Oct 16, 2016)

Shit, at least Johnson will hopefully NOT get us involved in any more shit in the Middle East. It'd be great if we had someone that gave a legitimate shit about what goes on within our borders and not the borders of some far flung pain in the ass third world shithole.


----------



## Unique Otter (Oct 16, 2016)

Could somebody tell me when the third Clinton-Trump debate is?


----------



## Ruin (Oct 16, 2016)

Unique Otter said:


> Could somebody tell me when the third Clinton-Trump debate is?



Wednesday.


----------



## Unique Otter (Oct 16, 2016)

Ruin said:


> Wednesday.


Thank you.


----------



## Jan_Hus (Oct 16, 2016)

Broseph Stalin said:


> Shit, at least Johnson will hopefully NOT get us involved in any more shit in the Middle East. It'd be great if we had someone that gave a legitimate shit about what goes on within our borders and not the borders of some far flung pain in the ass third world shithole.


That's why I'm voting for him


----------



## UtopiaGuy (Oct 16, 2016)

mikemikevfan said:


> Is it like that dems don't like to give free shit for poor blacks and mudslimes? How does extension of wellfare works for the wealthy?


That's part of the pretense I mentioned. They _act_ like they care about the downtrodden, but behind the scenes, they don't.  Welfare is mostly window dressing for them. They say they want to save the trees, but are happy to craft a bill favoring the timber companies. They decry wealth inequality, but vote to rig the tax code in favor of the rich, and take campaign money from Wall Street. Etc., etc., etc.

The GOPer politicians, by comparison, are some of the most un-christian guys out there, but they like to bray on and on about the Ten Commandments, Jesus, scripture, etc., etc., etc.  It's easy votes from their base. In private, they don't really seem to believe any of it. Classic scenario: GOPer rails against homosexuality while he himself has a cabana boy on the side. Or they rail about Bill Clinton's affairs, while at the same time they're cheating on their wives, too. Or they rant about ending Roe v. Wade, while they're quietly sending their mistress off to a clinic to "take care of a little problem." Or they cut funding for food stamps, home heating assistance for the elderly, school lunch programs, homeless shelters, drug treatment programs, etc., all while cheerfully spouting bible verses and talking about Jesus.

Both parties suck.


----------



## Mrs Paul (Oct 17, 2016)

At this point, I honestly will not be surprised if there are riots on election day (no matter _who_ wins).


----------



## UtopiaGuy (Oct 18, 2016)

Mrs Paul said:


> At this point, I honestly will not be surprised if there are riots on election day (no matter _who_ wins).



Sadly, I have to agree. If Trump wins, I expect to see incidents not unlike post-game hooliganism after the home team wins a big playoff championship. 

If Trump loses, I predict isolated incidents of violence over a period of several weeks. The violence will be mostly in poor or rural areas, and targeted against Democratic candidates' offices and staff, collegiates, and individuals who look gay, middle-eastern, or Muslim. Maybe it will just amount to a lot of harassment and yelling, a broken window or two, etc., but you will see at least a few angry Trump voters go even further down that road. Christ, I hope I'm wrong about that, but somehow I don't think I will be.


----------



## Lachlan Hunter McIntyre (Oct 18, 2016)

Hillary is the only waifu president. You know who you must vote for


----------



## Broseph Stalin (Oct 18, 2016)

Harakudoshi said:


> Hillary is the only waifu president. You know who you must vote forView attachment 145292



Is...Is that Leafy on the missing persons poster?


----------



## Pikimon (Oct 19, 2016)

Harakudoshi said:


> Hillary is the only waifu president. You know who you must vote forView attachment 145292



That's as horrifying as those creepy posts where people refer to Trump as "Daddy" in a semi-homoerotic way.


----------



## I-chi (Nov 7, 2016)

This week begins, and I already just want it to be over. I can't honestly bring myself to envision voting for either of them, legitimately; imagining either of them on that night and what follows has got me more depressed than I've ever been in my whole life, and I'm not the kind of person who tends to dwell on that sort of thing.

In some way, I've known a hefty portion of my adult life that both parties are just holding up a mirror to each other; but I don't think in my lifetime have we EVER come to a point where it's so blatantly on display that the conscious mind is all but forced into acknowledging it. There really is NOTHING different between them, between either Clinton or Trump; you're looking at all but the same picture standing on opposite podiums; and the only thing I can find myself hoping for is that whoever is elected will stand ultimately alone. Just ride out the next four years with as little alteration or incident as possible.


----------



## Shroom King (Nov 7, 2016)

You guys better get ready. The salt is already flowing and it is only going to get worse tomorrow:

https://www.reddit.com/r/the_meltdown/


----------



## Vitriol (Nov 7, 2016)

Redundant thread. One is bad enough.


----------

