Truck Billary and Fump
Lately I've been hearing that some folks are going to vote for Trump to stop Hillary. Well, not me. I refuse to play into the narrative that voting for the Alt-Right and 'mainstream' right's darling (They're just mad he's saying what they've been yelling at us in code for decades) will save the country. I'm sorry, but I won't give any quarter to any of those morons. Not in a million years.
Call me what you want to, but voting for a guy that many on the interwebs believe will wave his magic toupee and instantly make America whi.....I mean, great again just won't cut it. In fact, from where I'm standing, no matter who wins between Hillary and Trump, EVERYONE will lose. Even the Alt-Righters who are too damn stupid to realize it.
We're better than that.
See you around,
Aspie
Comments
They all should vote Jill
.....Nuff said.
So long, and thanks for all the fish
"Nuff said"
Well, I became a "single issue voter"
...when I saw Comey betray his oath of office and not indict the traitor, lying about the Espionage Act requiring "intent" when it is clear that subsection (f) does not require intent, and when I saw the massive overwhelming conclusive evidence that DNC rigged the election, and when I saw every single Democrat in congress, along with the Democrat President say nothing about any of this, and that single issue is Exposing / Prosecuting Hillary and the Clinton Arkansas Mafia Crime Family corruption, because I believe their corruption is so pervasive within US Politics and is so pervasive within the US Government that it is crippling our nation, and this represents the single greatest threat to our democracy today. It's a matter of priority, and the robbing U.S. citizens of our very right to vote means our democracy itself is in mortal danger. There is nothing --- no policy, no position, no value --- greater than our right to vote. Without the right to vote, we have nothing. This is the threat that the Hillary/DNC corruption represents today. And the only candidate who is explicitly exposing Hillary's corruption is Donald Trump, so I am supporting Donald Trump. It is that simple. I also like that he is opposed to the TPP and is in favor of reinstating Glass Steagall Act.
I love Stein / Green Party and fully believe they are the future for this nation, but I am not sure she can win in 2016, because the best she can hope for is 70% of the liberal vote (and even this assumes Hillary does not rig the general election) but with the massive increase in voters that Republicans are getting this election as we saw in the Rep Primary, she has no chance, I am sorry to say, though I would love to be wrong ---- however, I do believe it is CRITICAL that Stein does win the majority of the liberal vote in 2016 in order to destroy the Democrat Party, so (a) supporting Trump to beat Hillary and (b) supporting Stein to win the liberal vote, and (c) destroying the Democrat Party are my strategic objectives. As I said, it's a matter of priorities.
I also don't think Stein has the connections or power to deal with, and call out, Hillary's corruption (and live to talk about it)... only a tough ruthless S.O.B. like Trump does. I do not agree with Trump's environmental policies, no, hence I believe the Green Party is the key to our future, but in order for the Green Party to have a fighting chance, I believe we need Trump to expose and prosecute Hillary, the Clinton Foundation, and everyone in the DNC that is complicit in covering for Hillary's corruption.
“I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.”
― Harry Truman
Even if he exposes her, he'll use the office of the president...
to his own benefit. He's as corrupt as she is. If you want a good example of what I'm talking about, look no further than Florida. Rick Scott has passed policies for the sole purpose of fattening up his bank accounts. I won't get behind that kind of crap, especially on a national scale.
Then there's his VP, Mike Pence. He wants to do to the women of America what he did to Indiana and so much worse. I'm sure his economic policies were just as bad as well. He is your run-of-the-mill Republican, after all.
Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.
Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.
As long as Trump exposes the massive Clinton corruption,
and destroys her in the election, thus delivering a crippling blow to the Democrat Party, enabling the Green Party to rise (in 2020) from the ashes of the DNC's death in 2016, I don't care what he does. As I said, I have become a single issue voter. It's a matter of priority.
Whatever corrupt games Trump might do, they will pale in comparison to Hillary's with her Clinton "Foundation" Arkasnas Mafia Crimes family and their list of body bags "suspicious deaths" a mile long and Hillary's war mongering etc etc etc.
The Clinton propaganda machine can demonize Trump for what he has said, but Hillary is a "demon" for what she has DONE. Trump is NOT an "establishment" Republcian like Rick Scott, so any conparison to him falls under the heading of Clinton propaganda as far as I am concerned.
In any case, you completely ignored my point. Hillary rigged the election. Trump won fair and square. So... out of respect for the U.S. Constitution and preserving our Democracy itself, I am honor bound to support the only legitimate viable candidate. It's a matter of priority. Do you have anything to say in response to this? If not, I've nothing more to add. I see no point in debating what kind of Presidency Trump will make, since it is all speculation and I doubt I would change your mind by discussing Trump's business acumen and professionalism compared to the ineptitude of virtually every official in politics today. In short, we shall see. Personally, I think Trump will make an excellent Chief Executive Officer of the US GOV, but that's just my opinion. I've listened to 12 of his speeches now, start to finish, and have been studying him for 6 weeks now, and I have been rather impressed. But, as I said, I don't agree with his policies for our environment, so I do see the Green Party as critical for our future to replace the Democrat Party for the liberal community.
“I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.”
― Harry Truman
I agree with you that rigging an election is unforgivable
and one should vote for a candidate that hasn't done that 100% of the time, rather than supporting one who has.
But like I said, I'm not at all sure that Trump and Hillary are actually working against each other. Without him, she'd have been sunk months ago. Any Republican but Trump, or maybe Cruz, would have beaten her easily. Even Cruz might have had a shot.
The job of the villain in wrestling (the "heel") is to say and do outrageous, horrible things to increase the credibility of the good guy (the "face.") Trump is, in my view, doing the best job he can of trying to generate credibility for Hillary Clinton. But she's a terrible "face," so he has to keep getting more and more outrageous, and even that's not really making the crowd cheer for Good Gal Hillary Clinton.
Trump seems to be playing this role--but a lot less well than the original:
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cDWPvhiPWg]
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Wed, 09/14/2016 - 12:40pm —
Wed, 09/14/2016 - 12:40pm — CantStoptheSignal
For anyone having doubts of the possibility (I'd say strong probability, myself) of this:
It's certainly been noticeable that the more Hillary exposes herself/is exposed as what she is and the more her numbers drop (and the less credible a cheat-in could be made to look), the more disgusting and outrageous Trump becomes, with every utterance/action of this nature obligingly Trumpeted by the Hillary-supporting corporate media (the monopolies of which the Clintons facilitated, via legislation,) providing him with billions of dollars in free prime-time coverage while he (in a different fashion than does Fundraiser Hillary,) signally fails to conduct any sort of actual campaign.
I can't think of any other theory which would fit so well, (apart from the last-minute parachuting in of a corporate-preferred Republican candidate such as Bush 3 in the event of a Trump win, as has been threatened on the Dem side, should Corporate-Serving Hillary be too obviously rejected by the people to be viably cheated in) although, given the chance of doing so and actually surviving, Trump may well decide to actually go for the Presidency to run the country himself for his own personal profiteering.
An excellent illustration of various essential points is quoted from, (below,) which indicates that Trump's coverage - in every form of (corporate/Hillary-supporting) media, including known-to-be-owner-biased Twitter - never flagged where that of other candidates did, and was worth 2 billion at the time, way back in March, half a year ago...
Note that coverage was to eventually include the violence and other negatives of Trump's rallies - after he'd suckered enough prospective voters to be presented as The Ultimate Threat/The Biggest Evil Ever! So Vote 'Lesser' Evil, Not-Trump Hillary, not for a non-corporate-representing candidate like Jill, (threatening to serve the public interest rather than Those Who Matter at the public's expense - horror!) or everything will be ALL YOUR FAULT!
Because how can you possibly hope to ever get better, public-interest-serving candidates/public officials to bring beneficial change if everyone's invariably successfully scared away from ever voting for them, in case the (pick a side) 'greater evil' of the two corporate evils you're to exclusively choose between should win, either of which they'd be happy with precisely because you won't be? You can't - and yet this 'vote for evil' still is a thing for some, somehow, even now, while a chance potentially still exists for relatively peaceful political change...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/16/upshot/measuring-donald-trumps-mammoth...
Yet in this case, Trump's lower-weighted negative coverage is enormously useful to Hillary, the preferred corporate candidate.
Personally, I've long inclined toward Trump's purpose being as a foil, to chase the sheeple (actually hate the term, but...) into the Clinton fleecery. On the other hand, his character is one (as with Hillary) likely to do anything he feels might serve his personal purposes - that of being ridiculously wealthy, powerful and adulated. The public interest simply doesn't enter into this in any case, except as a resource to drain to destruction while any breathable air remains on the planet.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
It seems to me that
Trump's character and personality, his egotism bordering on narcissism, would preclude this scenario. I can't see him willingly adopting the role of "The Loser" under any circumstances. Besides, what could possibly be his motivation for such a charade?
native
You're not a pro wrestling fan, are you?
The ego of the performer is not troubled by the marks in the audience cheering his loss. He knows it's a preordained conclusion, and his ego gets stoked by how much smarter he is than the mooks who keep booing him and cheering his opponent as if there were some doubt about the outcome. There is a contempt here for the audience (in this case, the voters), even the ones who keep cheering him.
And what's the motivation? Why, cash, and lots of it. I don't have the specifics of Trump's deal, obviously, but I imagine the Clinton Foundation presents many admirably profitable options for a businessman who specializes in casinos and entertainment.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Not to nit pick, but rigging the election is not "unforgivable"
it is far worse than that, it is simply "unacceptable" .... and as such, the only ethical "constitutional" response is to put the opponent, Donald Trump, who won fair and square, into office. Period. I personally really don't see any other choice, not if we have any respect for the U.S. Constitution.
Additionally, having watched over 12 of Trump's speeches over the last 6 weeks, I really have not seen anything "outrageous" or offensive, in fact, quite the opposite. Hillary's minions were all up in arms when Trump made the accurate assessment that Hillary and Obama's policies effectively created ISIS. Trump's comments about NATO were also correct. Additionally, Trump's comments about immigration also seem to make sense to me as well. I also trust him to deal with Health Care reform far more than I trust "inept Hillary" who has had freakin zero experience managing any business in her life, much less, an honest political campaign, that's for damn sure. Hell, I agree with most of what Trump is saying. He is making a lot of rational sane sense to me, most certainly with respect to the National Defense and renegotiating deals with those nations. Look, I know that Hillary's propaganda machine likes to spread the meme that "Trump is outrageous" and sure, some of what Trump is saying is not PC, but he is making sense. As I said, I don't agree with his positions on environmental policies, but other than that, I tend to agree with him.
There is just no way that he is a on Hillary's side, he is attacking and exposing ALL of Hillary's weaknesses, and anyone who doesn't see that simply has not been paying attention to his campaign over the last 6 weeks and the media narrative that he has clearly been driving. TO WIT: The only reason the Clinton Foundation is being discussed in the media today is because of Trump. PERIOD. Case closed. Hillary is on the defensive and has been for 6 weeks now, and this is solely because of Trump. Trump has successfully dismantled Hillary's strongest attribute, that being her faux posture of "strong on National Defense" .... as evidenced by the results of the Military Forum last week. Trump won that debate according to the polls 70 to 30. He destroyed her. Trump has been running the meme that Hillary and Obama's military policies are "weak" for 6 weeks now, and they have become the dominant meme. Trump has systematically destroyed every strength that Hillary has. He has attacked her every major strength. There is just no way that this can be viewed as "helping" her. He is destroying her. Trump is a master of the media narrative, of this there can be zero doubt, and he has used his mastery to dominate the media narrative for 12 to 18 months, both during the Republican Primary and during the General Election. He intentionally makes seemingly "outlandish" statements, which result in massive media attention, yes, but then he uses that attention to redirect the spin to a rational logical sane attack on his opponent. Trump did that to 16 opponents in the primary. Now he is doing it to Hillary and she is being destroyed. She cannot get a word in edgewise and if you read the diaries on TOP, you can see them all complaining about the media focusing on Hillary's Clinton Foundation corruption and Hillary's health, but ignoring Trump's taxes, or his foundation, etc. It really is laughable, actually, because they are spitting i the wind, going up against a master of the media, Trump. They are nothing but an echo chamber, as we know, so no one is even listening to TOP today, not even the liberal base, which is why their strategy was so stupid. By become the Hillary shill that they are, they have lost all potency in the viral war, so they cannot even fight against Trump, because their own base doesn't even listen to them. Trump has therefore been able to dominate the viral world. He owns the online turf. Talk about a 180 flip. They really should have seen this populist movement in the wind, because the populist movement was clearly rising, but it was just a matter of whether it would be a Democrat one, with Bernie, or a Republican one, with Trump. Obama chose poorly when he had Comey betray his oath of office and not indict Hillary and lie about the Espionage Act requiring "intent" and by remaining silent while Hillary/DNC rigged the primary. That was the final nail in the coffin of the last vestige of populist support for the Democrat Party. The Green Party is now the liberal populist future. That fate was sealed the moment they robbed Bernie of the nomination and illegally gave it to Hillary. Trump won the general election and became the next President of the United States the moment they did that.
“I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.”
― Harry Truman
Nope, that doesn't follow.
It not only ignores Bernie and his claim--which could be reasonable, since Bernie himself has apparently no interest in prosecuting that claim--but also throws Stein, Johnson, and all the candidates in the GE who haven't rigged a goddamned thing down the garbage chute.
We're not required to vote Trump because Hillary cheated her ass off. The injury wasn't done to Trump, that he should get recompense. It was done to Bernie, and to us.\
Bernie, like I said, seems to have no interest in any of this, so that leaves us.
We were injured. What's the appropriate response? Not to vote for the person who did us injury. And to take back the thing she stole from us: our voting rights. Which means voting for any candidate who respects those rights.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I don't follow your logic.
My main point is that Hillary CANNOT be President via rigging the election. Period.
As I have stated numerous times, I would love to see Stein win in 2016, but given Hillary's corrupt power hold on politics in the USA, I do not believe she is viable. Johnson is a Libertarian, and I despise Libertarians because I know their history and ideology and I find them to be nothing more than a corporate lie.
In order for the Green Party to be viable in 2020, then Trump must destroy Hillary in 2016 in a landslide victory, and Stein/Green Party must win 70% of the liberal vote. It really is that simple.
Now, as I have said several times in my comments responding to this essay, personally, I have become a SINGLE ISSUE VOTER this election, and that single issue is EXPOSING HILLARY CORRUPTION, and since Trump is the only candidate who has as a centerpiece of his campaign, exposing Hillary's corruption, then I am supporting Donald Trump. It really is that simple. And further, I don't care what Bernie has said, because anyone paying attention knows that given the list of fucking body bags "suspicious deaths" that are a mile long of anyone who even remotely opposes Hillary, and given Obama's fucking treasonous removal of Bernie's SS Detail prior to the DNC Convention, I take it as a fucking given that Bernie had no choice, unless he wanted to end up in a body bag, so it is up to us to support, Donald Trump, the only viable legal legitimate candidate who can beat Hillary Clinton, the most corrupt politician this nation has ever known and who is the greatest threat to this nation and the greatest threat to democracy and the greatest threat to this planet. Again, I would love for Jill Stein to win, and I do support her and fully intend to support her in any way I can, but only a ruthless S.O.B. NYC Businessman like Trump can expose Hillary's corruption and live to talk about it. The second I heard Comey make his statement that he was not indicting Hillary, thus betraying his oath of office, and lie about the Espionage Act requiring "intent" when subsection (f) clearly does not require intent, I knew that Hillary's corrupt control of our government went to the highest levels and she therefore represents the greatest threat to this nation, ever. I am empowering Trump with the Presidency to prevent Hillary's corruption taking control of the Presidency. Do I think Trump will have some "corruption" .... sure ... but it will be NOTHING compared to the sociopathic murdering war mongering bat shit crazy puppet / tyrant, that is Hillary Clinton.
Are we clear now?
Look, CantStoptheSignal, I am not saying you should agree with me, in fact, given the comments you have made over the last few weeks, I am pretty sure you do not agree with me, and that's fine, and I really am not trying to change your mind, not at all, I am just being clear about my position and why I am supporting Trump. And, I am also explaining my support for Stein as well.
“I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.”
― Harry Truman
And let me stress here,
I did not say that "exposing/prosecuting corruption" in government is my single issue .... what I said was, "exposing/prosecuting Hillary Clinton's corruption" in the US government today is my single issue. There will always be a measure of corruption, only a fool would doubt this, but Hillary and the entire Clinton Arkansas Mafia Crime Family has taken it to league of their own and must be stopped because their widespread corruption is a clear and present direct threat to our democracy. I don't think you grasp the gravity of this.
You have stated that "Trunp is as corrupt as Hillary"'and if you honestly believe that, then I would politely suggest to you that you are utterly clueless about Hillary's treason and her racketeering and her murder crimes. Hilllary has a list of body bags / "suspicious deaths" associated with her a mile long, Trump does not. Hillary sold arms for billions to foreign dictators, Trump did not. Hillary sold US uranium to Putin, Trump did not. Hilllary is complicit in the death of over a million Muslims with her Iraq AUMF war vote, Trump is not. Hillary is directly responsible for the deaths and hardship of hundreds of thousands of Libyans, Trump is not.
And...
HILLARY RIGGED THE ELECTION.
TRUMP WON FAIR AND SQUARE.
So, anyone who suggests that Trump is "just as corrupt" as Hillary, is lying.
Look, if you don't like Trump, fine, and if you have valid criticisms of him, then please do make those criticisms and provide the proof, by all means, but please do not offend our sense and sensibilities by lying about him.
“I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.”
― Harry Truman
And further,
you are making claims about what Trump "will do" and I am making statements about what Hillary HAS DONE.
Your claims are speculation.
I am discussing FACT. I am discussing what Hillary has done and must be prosecuted and imprisoned for doing. I sincerely hope you can see the difference.
“I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.”
― Harry Truman
What makes you think Trump will prosecute her?
Considering he's very close with the Clintons, I don't expect him to do a damned thing in regards to prosecute her. Like I said, I refuse to make the choice between Hillary and Trump.
oth of them are disingenuous, racist, ableist, sexist sociopaths who don't give 2 fucks about the United States or its people. You're more than welcome to play that game if you wish, but I won't. I'll lose what little I do have no matter who wins and so will many others like myself.
Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.
Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.
If Trump's campaign exposes Hillary's corruption,
If Trump's campaign exposes Hillary's corruption, which he is doing as one of the center pieces of his campaign (e.g., #CrookedHillary #LockHerUp etc.) and destroys her in the general election, thus crippling the Democrat Party allowing the Green Party to rise from the ashes in 2020 and beyond, then this alone will be a sufficient victory. And, if Trump's campaign inspires his supporters focusing heavily on Hillary's corruption exposing Clinton Foundation, by the time he wins and takes office, the momentum of that media will drive the prosecution by itself and would actually require a massive effort to stop, and that effort would only make Trump look bad, so I seriously doubt he would do that... just makes no logical sense and would be out of character ... and furthermore, it's not the President, Trump, who is actually doing to the prosecuting, it would be his admin in conjunction with the congressional hearings which are also already in the throws of a massive momentum for this, and it has only been the Obama Admin that has been stonewalling that momentum. So, I think it is safe to say that if Trump is elected there won't be anyone in Government who will be able to stop her prosecution, not without themselves being implicated in a cover up.
But again, Hillary being justly convicted by the media in the "court of public opinion" which Trump's campaign is already working to accomplish, then I am satisfied. If Hillary, Bill, and Cheslea, all go to prison, now that would be icing on the cake. Remember, the real end-game is the death of the Democrat Party, enabling the birth of the Green Party, which requires the landslide defeat of Hillary to utterly disgrace and ruin the Democrat Party as a credible political party.
As I've been saying, I am ALREADY happy with Trump for saying the things that no one else has had the courage or honor to say outright about Hillary and her massive corruption, crimes and treason, not even Bernie has done this. Thank god for Trump, seriously. Finally someone is saying what needs to be said, and thank god that at least Fox News is reporting on that corruption too. The enemy of our enemy is our friend most profoundly this season.
“I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.”
― Harry Truman
I'm glad that somebody's
I'm glad that somebody's bringing up Hillary's corruption - as long as this isn't planned strategy to be in keeping with the claim of a 'massive right-wing conspiracy' against Hillary, and therefore with all saying the same to be ignored as such by 'good (propagandized) Dems', as anything pointed out about Hillary by lefties (including documented actions and even videos of her own words/speeches without text posted at TOP) was denigrated by certain Hill supporters as being part of the 'right-wing nuttery', flaggable/ultimately bannable as 'untrue by association' in despite of all provable reality and thereby defused as legitimate and important information regarding her suitablity for pubic office.
It seems very likely to me that Trump's run is part of the corporate/DNC strategy to stampede at least enough voters to make a Clinton win seem feasible and it seems insane to me that either could be accepted as Presidential candidates outside of an amusing - because fictional - farce or a horror story.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
As I said in my comment above,
having listened to over 12 of Trump's complete speeches over the past 6 weeks, he is making a ton of rational sense to me, so no, I do not agree with you that he is in any way helping Hillary's campaign. Furthermore, Trump has been attacking ALL of Hillary's major strengths, most especially, her claim to be "strong" on National Defense. Trump's main meme has been that Hillary is "weak" on National Defense. I am sorry, but there is just no way that he would be doing and saying that, if he wanted to help her. He is destroying her. And, he has finally gotten the media to focus on her corrupt Clinton Foundation, and this cannot possibly be something that helps Hillary. This is THE LAST thing that Hillary wants. So, no, I refute any notion that Trump is in the race to help Hillary. And this will be confirmed once and for all during the debate, because if Trump discredits and destroys Hillary during the debate, then there can be no doubt that he is in it to win.
“I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.”
― Harry Truman
And for the record, I am also not convince that Trump is
"disingenuous, racist, ableist, sexist sociopaths" ... that is just
more of the Clinton propaganda machine BS. The real tell is that Trump was never called a racist or sexist prior to this election. And the "ableist" slander was debunked months ago. And "sociopath" ??? Please, now that doesn't even have any base in reality and is clearly just a way to deflect attention away from the fact that there is rather chilling evidence of Hillary actually BEING a sociopath, what with her "Gadaffi... I came, We say, He died HAHAHA" clip. And "disingenuous" ??? Well, that is just your opinion, and everyone has one. And, after watching about 15+ hours of him speaking in his rallies over the past 6 weeks, and watching a series of videos of his past, with interviews of people who have worked with him, I really don't share it.
Look, if you don't like Trump, fine, and if you want to express valid criticism of his policies, great, let's discuss them, and I might even agree with you on certain issues (like environmental policies) but merely parroting Clinton Propaganda memes does not help people make informed decisions.
“I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.”
― Harry Truman
Alright. Here's 17 minutes worth, but you'll just dismiss it...
as Billary Propaganda.
[video:http://www.vox.com/2016/9/14/12919744/trump-keith-olbermann]
If you seriously think he's going to do anything to put Billary in jail then you aren't paying attention. He's playing his supporters, including you, for suckers and once he's done, he'll be laughing all the way to the bank, that's if he doesn't have his campaign declare bankruptcy first.
Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.
Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.
You ignored, again, my main point:
Let me repeat...
If Trump's campaign exposes Hillary's corruption, which he is doing as one of the center pieces of his campaign (e.g., #CrookedHillary #LockHerUp etc.) and destroys her in the general election, thus crippling the Democrat Party allowing the Green Party to rise from the ashes in 2020 and beyond, then this alone will be a sufficient victory.
Trump has ALREADY achieved my desired goal, which is to get the media, like Fox News, discussing the corrupt Clinton Foundation. Please stop ignoring my main point and undermine the value of what Trump HAS ALREADY done. Trump deserves our praise, as liberals, for pointing out the corruption at the center of the Democrat Party. Mind you, Trump is also pointing out the corruption and failings of the Republican "Establishment" as well. He has been very even handed in his critique of the party leaders on both sides, which is why he has generated such massive passionate inspired support from the Republican base. It really is quite exciting and inspirational to watch, because where Bernie has failed to overcome the "Establishment" Politicians, Trump is succeeding.
And did you notice that Trump is against the TPP and that he is in favor of reinstating the Glass Steagal Act? I realize that he pushes a few people's "buttons" but I have to tell you, since the main buttons he is pushing are Hillary's, I just fucking love it! Don't you?
“I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.”
― Harry Truman
Trump support
Thanks for your thoughts, sensetolisten. I'm hearing echos of what my co-workers have stated when we've had discussions about this election.
I usually work alongside eight other men; two are near retirement (I'm one of them), two are in their mid-thirty's, the rest 50-ish. Two are black, the rest white. All but one of them is supporting Trump. The one not supporting Trump says he has no opinion and will not vote. This happens to be in southern Louisiana, where I work (not where I live).
When our election discussions started, the primaries were still underway and it was not clear who would win. I was somewhat surprised to find that they all supported Trump. A couple of these men are very religious types and amazed me by supporting Trump over Ted Cruz. Also, most were very interested in Sanders. Our discussions have always stayed civil, calm, and reasoned. I've tried to understand why these men feel as they do, and now have a fairly decent handle on it. In fact, if anyone ever got close to out-of-line, it was me ... especially at first. Frankly, it blew my mind that these guys I thought I knew so well would be Trump supporters. I really had to watch what I said and likely did piss off a couple of them by attacking some of Trump's positions/statements.
All these men have stayed completely reasonable and straightforward during our talks. I think they do have to use extra effort in one regard though because they all have one thing in common: every one of them hates Hillary Clinton with a seething passion. Probably half of them detest Obama, but nothing like how they despise Clinton.
I've heard them all mention exactly the points you've made (all quite valid, by the way), with one additional point - and each of my co-workers made it: guns. Each of my co-workers is a gun owner and every single one of them is absolutely convinced that Hillary will take their guns.
They don't get much push-back from me in regard to Hillary. Well, I guess they don't get any. Some of their views were based on proven-to-be-false conspiracy theory, and I've shot those down as needed. Kindly. Many of them did not know just how corrupt the Clintons are; I filled them in as required. I'd say most of these men understood what Hillary had done to Sanders and they abhorred it. All were quick to point out that the GOP primary poll numbers agreed with the actual election results and that the Democratic poll numbers were wildly askew. More than anything else, these guys hate corruption and they see it in spades with Hillary.
Well, I don't advertiser my adamant support of the 2nd Amend
...or I did not on TOP, because when I did, some 5 or 6 years ago, I was HR'd for merely stating my opinion.
In point of fact, like many RKBA Democrats, the 2nd Amendment is the one issue I share with Republicans. I do not own a gun, no, but I do believe it is as sacred a right as freedom of speech. I am even 100% against the assault rifle ban. Why? Because a 100 lb girl who needs to defend herself against a gang rape and murder, or to defend against roaming gangs during the riots like were in Los Angeles 20 years ago, or the riots that were in England 5 years ago, will need an assault rifle. Period. So yeah, she has a right to defend herself, so assault rifles are a part of the 2nd Amendment right, as far as I am concerned.
So, I actually 100% agree with your co-workers on this issue as well. I even agree with their fear about Hillary's agenda to take guns away. Yes, I believe that because Hillary is that much of a paranoid self righteous tyrant, I believe.
“I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.”
― Harry Truman
Freedom to speak
I hope 99 always stays a place where one's opinion can be stated without banishment. One may be placed in a defensive position due to choosing to state views that may not be popular, but usually one knows that possibility going in.
It's not stifling here and I appreciate it.
Me too!
“I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.”
― Harry Truman
I disagree with both you guys,
but I'm glad you can, and do write what you want to write on this forum.
native
What part of what I said do you disagree with?
“I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.”
― Harry Truman
I don't disagree with
all of it, just some of it. But I'd rather not debate those things at the moment. You do raise some issues that are worthy of attention.
native
Doesn't need to be a debate,
it can just be a mutually informative discussion.
“I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.”
― Harry Truman
Certainly.
Another time, perhaps.
native
Another time,
before November 8th, 2016, hopefully.
“I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.”
― Harry Truman
Trump and Bernie were the outsider candidates
that's why people wanted them--
also, because each of them actually speaks some truths that are not spoken by anybody else in politics.
It's just that I don't think Trump means even 1/2 what he says--I think it's all theatrics to him. Donations to Hill in '06? Inviting them to his wedding? Chelsea and what's-her-name BFFs? Bill Clinton calling him before he got into the race? It all has a familiar smell: the smell of Clinton sleaze.
But I can understand how somebody who didn't believe Trump was collaborating w/the Clintons would be most positive about Trump and Bernie--Trump and Bernie are pretty much the only candidates from the two major parties who have spoken ANY truth about ANYTHING.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
If Trump destroys Hillary in the debate,
and really "goes to town" on her, ruthlessly, brutally, relentlessly, then all claims that Trump is "in the bag" for Hillary will have been proven false.
Trump may have donated to Hillary in the past. So what? He's not stupid.
Bill may have suggested to Trump to run. Again, so what? Bill may not have thought Trump could win. But if you watch interviews of Trump from 20 years ago, it is clear that Trump has been thinking about running for a very long time, long before Bill said anything.
Trump invited the Clintons to his wedding. Yet again, so what?
Trump's daughter is friends with his daughter. Yet again, so what?
I am sorry, but none of those things proves anything. All of that is merely circumstantial evidence.
Here is the one objective irrefutable fact: Trump is being ruthless in his campaign against Hillary, pulling no punches, and if he continues to do that, during the debate and for the remainder of the general election, then no one can claim that he is just a "fall guy" to help Hillary get elected. I have watched 12 complete speeches of Trump's from the last 6 weeks, and I am sorry, I have never seen a more serious candidate who wants, in no uncertain terms, to win. Trump is many things, but one thing he is not, is a stooge. Trump is his own man, of this there can be no doubt, and he hates to lose.
Trump is going to destroy Hillary, and as the ruthless shark NYC Businessman that he is, I really don't think it is in his genetic DNA to do anything but destroy Hillary, no matter what may or may not have been said in the past. Hillary and her minions pissed Trump off, and that is what is driving him now. Trump is in "fighter mode" now and he won't stop until Hillary is K.O. on the floor and he is standing over her in the ring and he is declared the victor. Trump is a fighter. He is an animal. And, four weeks ago when his "Republican Establishment" campaign manager tried to bridle him in and tone him down, Trump promptly fired his ass and hired the head of Brietbart. Seriously. If you had any doubts about Trump's agenda, those should have been dispelled when Trump did that. As they say, Trump is a shark and Trump is out for blood, and he smells blood, because Hillary is bleeding, profusely. Anyone who doesn't see this is just not paying attention. Fact is, Trump's ruthless fighter spirit is the only thing I trust in politics today, and this is the only reason I am supporting Trump.
“I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.”
― Harry Truman
If somebody put a gun to my head
and said "Vote Hillary or Trump!" I'd vote Trump.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I do not share in your sentiment.
I completely ignored the Republican Primary because I was too deeply enthralled in the Democrat Primary and intimately following the FBI Email
investigationcharade.I ignored anything said by Hillary's Propaganda machine about Trump and starting from a clean slate, I patiently listened to each and every speech Trump gave, start to finish, starting with his RNC Acceptance speech, with an open mind, letting go any preconceived notions about who he was in his reality TV show, or whatever the paparazzi might have glimpsed from his personal life over the years. I also listened to several documentaries of his life, with interviews of him and people close to him, over the years.
I liked almost all of what I saw and I agreed with almost all of what he said. I honestly had not really thought about immigration. It really is not a policy issue that I have focused on in the past. And, I realize this is probably the most inflammatory topic, given it's implications, and given his non-PC comments, however, after listening to his speeches discussing the issues and reviewing his proposed plans, like screening immigrants asking if they believe in Sharia Law, which contains beliefs in religious laws that are in violation of the U.S. Constitution, and which seem no different than asking if someone is a member of the NAZI Party, I can't say that Trump is wrong to want to add this question in the immigration process. I also can't say that the Wall is wrong, given the massive influx of illegal immigrants from South America, the majority of whom are the criminals and gang members, not the educated professionals. Again, I realize these are not PC statements he is making, but I cannot say that he is wrong, and I cannot say that there is not a massive problem in this area. And so no, I do not find his comments to be especially racist or bigoted, although 10 second misquoted sound bites taken out of context do appear that way.
“I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.”
― Harry Truman
God knows I understand where you're coming from--
but can't risk the possibility that she and Trump are actually working together. Like in pro wrestling, which Mr. Trump knows a lot about.
Also, Trump benefits from the same damned system he's revealing, so why would he change it?
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
The only thing I trust is what I am seeing RIGHT NOW.
And what I am seeing RIGHT NOW in Trump's campaign is Trump exposing Hillary and Clinton Foundation Treason/Corruption/Crimes. Nothing else matters or means anything. Trump has finally made the media, via his influence of Fox News, focus on the Clinton Foundation and on Hillary's treason and crimes. And, as I said, I am now a "single issue voter" and exposing Hillary corruption/crimes is my single issue, because I believe that this is the single greatest threat to our democracy today.
Hillary rigged the Democrat Primary election.
Trump won the Republican Primary fair and square.
Hence, Trump, ethically legally deserves the Presidency. Everything else is Hillary/DNC propaganda bs.
“I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.”
― Harry Truman
Completely disagree with you. But am willing to consider.
But can't stand Trump and watching 12 complete speeches would probably make me very ill.
Any chance you could post the videos along with your synopsis of each? Thanks!
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
You say...
What exactly, do you "completely disagree with" ...?
You add,
You've asked me to post the videos with synopsis of each. I am sorry, but my initial reaction is that I have to laugh, not out of disrespect, but because I think it's clear that you are just mocking me and not serious at all, because if you were serious, you would do your own homework. None-the-less, I am willing to respond with a respectful response, and possibly engage in a review of his speeches, however, the proof is in the pudding, as they say, so either you listen to his complete speeches or you don't, my cliff notes of his speech without you watching his speech is meaningless in this context. I would be happy to post links to the speeches I watched and discuss each one with you, but only after you've watched them yourself. We could take them one at a time, starting with the first speech I listened to of his which was his RNC acceptance speech, which I think would be most apropos. However, before we even do that, I really would like to know, what exactly, did I say that you "completely disagree with" ...?
Here, I will make it easy on you, since you seem to want me to spoon feed you, so I will accommodate, at least to a limited extent, as a sign of good faith. Let's make it a multiple choice question, just list all of the #letter's of which of these statements of mine you "completely disagree with":
#A. Hillary rigged the Democrat Primary election.
#B. Trump won the Republican Primary fair and square.
#C. Hence, Trump, ethically legally deserves the Presidency.
#D. Everything else is Hillary/DNC propaganda bs.
#F. What I am seeing RIGHT NOW in Trump's campaign is Trump exposing Hillary and Clinton Foundation Treason/Corruption/Crimes.
#G. Nothing else matters or means anything.
#H. Trump has finally made the media, via his influence of Fox News, focus on the Clinton Foundation and on Hillary's treason and crimes.
#I. The single greatest threat to our democracy today is Hillary's corruption's and crimes.
And here are the first
sixseven speeches I listened to, along with his more recent "immigration speech" (which includes someone else's synopsis):#1. Donald Trump Accepts Republican Nomination for President
(7-21-16) Trump RNC Speech
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34Svt3kfq1c]
#2. Full Event: Donald Trump Rally
in Colorado Springs, CO 7/29/16
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGv0NkuXJOE]
#3. FULL SPEECH: Donald Trump rally
in Mechanicsburg, PA
---- Aug 1, 2016 ----
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qi6i242Yauo[video:URL]
#4. Full Event: Donald Trump Holds HUGE Rally
in Harrisburg, PA 8/1/16
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTvsxTgzPjk]
#5. FULL EVENT: Donald Trump Holds Rally
in Ashburn, VA 8/2/16
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6H-DqWhXBE]
#6. FULL EVENT: Donald Trump MASSIVE Rally
in Jacksonville, FL 8/3/16
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5e6vf02MbcI]
Ahh, well, make it 7...
#7. Full Speech: Donald Trump Town Hall
in Daytona Beach, FL 8/3/16
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qait77O0DJs]
#8. Trump FULL Immigration Speech in Phoenix
Streamed live on Aug 31, 2016
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qait77O0DJs]
“I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.”
― Harry Truman
No, I'm being serious, I'm not mocking. You have hours of
video there, and while I respect your determination to make up your own mind, I can't spare that much time.
I have done my homework on the war issue - see the Video News queue. I watched a lot of clips to ensure that the one I ultimately chose fairly represented what he has repeatedly said on the issue, and that took a few hours. I'm not sure what other issues would concern me more than the endless killings done in our names over there.
Anyway. Yes to A and B. No to C: There are multiple issues. He seems like a hideous human being (all right, your point that much of it very well could be Clinton smears got through, so I modify from "He IS a hideous human being"; but bear with me for the moment). The only person who ethically and legally deserves the Presidency is the one who is going to make life better for the 99% citizens of this country. IF Trump is going to use the office to enrich himself at our expense, all his winning the nom fair and square means is that he fooled a lot of people. Does he deserve it more than cheating Hillary? Yes. But I'm planning to vote for Jill.
D. I don't know if everything else is Clinton BS. But I'm willing to entertain the possibility. I would imagine that a lot of it is but a lot of it is not. You yourself have the whole Mexican wall thing up there. Those are his own words. We don't need a wall, and I wouldn't be surprised if the Trump companies ended up with the multibillion dollar contract. Quelle surprise, he wants to do something ridiculously expensive that his own companies are good at. His "take out the families" statements are also his own words and I provide the context in the short video I uploaded. Which would be an international war crime. It is not legal to intentionally target noncombatants.
What happened to E?
Yes, I am also happy about F.
G. No, lots of things matter. Climate change, for example, as you know.
Not sure about H. Faux has no credibility and everyone else seems in the Clinton pockets. I have a feeling this won't go anywhere.
I. With or without Hillary, we have hackable voting machines, voter ID laws that disenfranchise minorities and other vulnerable groups, and we need to overturn Citizens United to greatly decrease the influence of money in politics. We also need to reinvent media so that they are no longer corporate tools. We need to restore the Fairness Doctrine or something like it. Those seem to me the greatest threats to democracy.
So why do I ask you to spoon feed me? Because you've obviously already put a lot of work into this, and you have a point of view 180 degrees from Clinton and the MSM, so in many ways it is unique. And while you may ultimately intrigue me enough to watch hours of Trump videos, that's not going to happen with most people. So what you write may influence many, not just me.
Oh, a big point of yours that I don't understand: Why vote Trump in order to empower the Greens in the future? Why not vote Green in order to empower the Greens now and in the future?
You think the Dem party would be destroyed by a Trump win? Repugs have won before and the Dems have soldiered on. Indeed, if Trump is all lies and is going to be another corporate tool once in office, there's no difference between the main parties and the rich don't care who wins. But now imagine there was a Green win! That would be a Holy $#I+ moment for the Dems, wouldn't it?
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
"E" was lost in my early morning "cut&paste" effort. :)
I feel as if I should just keep my previous comments in a doc so that I can cut and paste my entire position, in other words, I should have explained my position on Stein/Green Party, but do I need to do that with every comment I make? Well, if you had read ALL of my comments responding to this essay, you would know. With your comment, I was solely responding to the Trump attack here.
Here is what I posted above:
In other words...
You think the Dem party would be destroyed by a Trump win?
No, I think a Democrat Party landslide defeat, with Hillary as the "anointed" nominee, via a rigged Democrat Party primary election wherein the populist clear winner candidate (Bernie) was cheated, at this exact moment in time, by Trump, coupled with Stein/Green Party winning THE MAJORITY OF THE LIBERAL VOTE (70%), will result in the disgrace and death of the Democrat Party, because it will herald the Green Party as the viable and trustable liberal party for the future. It is the confluence of all of these factors, combined, in a virtual "perfect storm" that will destroy the Democrat Party. And, not only would this make me "ecstatic".... even more so, I believe this is an imperative for our future, because, I do agree, Climate Change is most critical, but without our "RIGHT TO VOTE" we cannot attack ANY issue. In other words, I am not advocating for anyone specifically to vote for Trump or Stein, either one is 100% okay with me. I believe each person should vote their conscience. I am taking the time to discuss Trump simply because I think he needs defending here, since this essay was attacking him, unfairly. I would and have defended Stein with equal passion. I am stressing Trump because I believe he is the first step, for the aforementioned reasons, namely, because I believe he is the only one with the courage and spine to expose Hillary's corruption.
#C ... Not to belabor or debate, but just to clarify my position, whether or not you or I agree with Trump's policies, according to the principles of the U.S. Constitution and our Democracy, if Trump won the election fair and square, and Hillary *rigged* it, then between Hillary and Trump, she is just not a legitimate candidate. Trump is. This is a separate discussion from the fact that Bernie Sanders' deserves the nomination, and separate from the fact that if there were no election rigging corruption preventing Stein from being a viable candidate, which I actually believe might be the case, given the online polls that I have seen, which I trust more than ANY of the official polls today. My statement about Trump legally ethically deserving the Presidency is solely a response to Hillary/DNC propaganda. All of that means ZERO. Trump is legitimate. Hillary is not. Everything else is meaningless. Supporting Hillary in any way shape or form is being complicit in an outright anti-democratic coup. This is what I am referring to in items C, D, F, G, H, I. If we let Hillary become President via using illegal means of outright election rigging, then our very right to vote has been robbed from us. And if this happens, democracy itself is over. Hillary's massive corruption has that much influence, hence I assert that she is the greatest clear and present immediate threat to our democracy. Citizens United, while important, no doubt, was proven impotent by BOTH Bernie's and Trump's campaign, so no, I do not personally think those are a greater threat than OUTRIGHT election rigging. If you don't see the difference, well, I don't know what to say.
You wrote:
The problem I have with your comment here is that, "who's to say?" You have your opinion about "who is going to make life better for the 99%" and Republicans have their opinion about "who is going to make life better for the 99%" so you cannot use that as the benchmark for "legal." This is called a democracy for a reason, which means, you need to add the clause, "THE MAJORITY VOTE decides" but if that vote has been robbed, then compared to Hillary, Trump, who won fair and square, via a legal ethical democratic process, is the only legal ethical candidate. Yes, we could discuss Bernie or Jill, but that is a moot discussion, because due to Hillary's corruption, neither Bernie or Jill have a chance of us seeing if they get the majority vote, which, again, is my point about why exposing and prosecuting Hillary's/DNC's is the highest priority. We can never have a Bernie or Jill until we remove Hillary and destroy the DNC/Democrat Party. I hope I have made myself clear.
You wrote:
I am not here to "influence" anyone or make you "intrigued." I am just expressing my own opinion and pointing out what I feel are Hillary Propaganda bs memes. If you are interested in engaging in an informed discussion, then by all means, I would enjoy that. But if it's not mutual, then I have better things to do with my time. If you do not feel it is important enough for you to actually spend the time to listen to a Presidential candidate, rather than merely listen to, or parrot, Hillary's Propaganda bs lies/memes, then that is on your head, not mine.
Regarding the wall: Needless to say, the need for this is, is debatable, and at the end of the day, a judgement call. One cannot deny the massive problem of the influx of criminals and gang members or possible terrorists coming from our southern border. What we have now is not working, of that there can be no debate. Any claims about Trump's "companies ending up with the multibillion dollar contract" are speculation, and while may or may not be true, this does change the fact of whether the wall is necessary, though it most certainly would be a motive for bias, if the wall is not necessary. But again, the question of whether the wall is necessary is the real question, not any speculation about corruption. And, if Trump can and does get Mexico to pay for it, well, it won't then cost the US citizens anything, not that this makes it okay, just making a point.
And, with regards to his "take out the families" statements, I don't have an answer to this question, I have not really analyzed this dynamic fully. I get the concern he is raising. It is not an easy question and we have to do something, I think he is right about that. His initial comments or proposals might have errorred on the side of too strong, but again, the current system seems to be problematic and is being exploited.
“I never did give them hell. I just told the truth, and they thought it was hell.”
― Harry Truman
I Can Try This...
Who kills more people, cops or people from south of the border?
I just don't see a lot of carnage coming from illegal immigration and the crime wave that would warrant a beautiful wall.
“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu
Well, it looks like we're not as far apart as I thought.
I did read all your comments. It still seems to me that if Trump is gaining and Jill is preferred, there's every reason to vote for Jill over Trump. If Hill's hackers rig the election then it doesn't matter who anybody votes for, she's going to "win". Sure, go Trump, expose her crap. But wanting him in the race to expose her is different from wanting him to win the White House.
It seems to me that Jill is being pretty tough on Hill: Stein hits Clinton on emails: Voters owed an explanation; Stein puts the nail in Hillary's 'basket of deplorables' coffin; Jill Stein: Hillary Clinton wants to start an air war with nuclear-armed Russia over Syria. These are just a few from the last month at the top of the Google search. I sure hope she can continue to do so without having a "purely coincidental accident"!
This is interesting, within the first minute of the interview: She has Secret Service protection she never requested and never wanted (hopefully she has rethought that!):
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JlDA8SqBjNk width:500]
Yes, between Clinton and Trump, legally and ethically Trump should be the winner because he does not seem to have rigged his nomination while she definitely did. However, they are not the only two people in the race. I would even encourage right wingers to consider Gary Johnson. I would love to see Stein win, Johnson come in second, and both mainstream corporate-rump-kissing parties die. Sure, my belief that Trump will only advance his own causes and not ours is speculation, and whoever wins the majority of votes without cheating wins. The election rigging is an immediate threat, yes, but you get rid of Hillary, you still have election rigging, election fraud, voter disenfranchisement, and corporate influence. Trump is neither self funding the general nor primarily funding with small donors, see his donors at Open Secrets, so only Bernie so far proves that you can win enough money for a viable campaign against corporate money. You have to be enormously popular. Most candidates will not think they can do what Bern did. So corporate influence is still a big problem.
Who's to say who deserves the election? Everybody with an opinion. "Deserves" is a value judgment. But to say that Trump deserves it just because he isn't Hillary, well, we disagree, obviously.
You certainly don't have to do anything with all this information you've acquired, for me or anyone else. I'm just saying I think you would see a lot of interest if you wanted to turn it into a diary or a series of diaries. But most people won't listen to hours of video, so to reach them you'd have to synopsize. Or perhaps you have or can find the money clips from those videos that you think reasonably expresses the whole.
At TOP in November of 2014, I told folks about Brave New Films' Over-Criminalized series (DKos link from 2014: Over-Criminalized: The Series). I put up four videos that totaled about 30 minutes - 7, 6, 8 and 9 minutes each. I summarized the content, that these were solutions to over-policing that a few cities had developed, without going into specifics. I put up a poll, one choice of which was "You want me to watch videos more than 5 minutes long?? What kind of attention span do you think I have?!" Of the 10 people who answered the poll, that received one vote. I put it up on a Saturday morning, thinking people might have a little more time and desire to watch videos on the weekend. The diary received 10 recs and 8 tips. Who knows how many saw and immediately left.
So this is why I say, virtually no one is going to watch multiple long videos. If I lose 10% of the audience with four videos of 30 minutes, and attract very few, then I predict your videos will lose more than 90%. That doesn't mean the content is unimportant.
I don't know how you get out of my comments that I am interested in parroting Hill's propaganda. I am encouraging people to vote Stein or Johnson. Hill would not be happy with that. For my own diaries, I go back to videos and listen to each candidate in their own words, along with enough surrounding words, often more videos, to get the context. If I question any facts they raise, I go research those facts, not what other candidates have said in response to those facts. By now, I am pretty much deaf to Hillary. Yes, I still visit TOP, but it's for my groups and pooties. I don't read political diaries there, it's an echo chamber, they're worthless.
The number of illegal immigrants is declining because our economy sucks and Mexico's has improved, see this WaPo article on a report from the Center for Migration Studies. I also read elsewhere that about half of the illegal "problem" is people who come here legally from around the world but then overstay their visas. Thus no need for a wall.
What do we need to do about ISIS and the Middle East? Stay the hell out and quit making the violence worse in order to enrich the MIC. Again, see my videos, Video News Open Thread August 5 2016. I even transcribed what I thought were the important parts for those who didn't want to take time to watch minutes of video. Jill goes into great detail about how we're arming all sides, making it all worse, and making money off it. I fact checked all that, although I didn't' write it down. She is correct; if we didn't create the whole mess, we are certainly worsening it. Trump is fear-mongering along with all the rest of the mainstream politicians on the issue.
So there's my informed discussion, complete with links. There are other issues I am not up on, I'm sure. One only has so much time.
Please check out Pet Vet Help, consider joining us to help pets, and follow me @ElenaCarlena on Twitter! Thank you.
Voting Jill Stein
I've tried to convince Mrs. Bollox to not vote for HRC.......
But anyway.
Gëzuar!!
from a reasonably stable genius.
I'm hoping my marriage survives
this election. It's awful - we never used to argue, and we're both liberals who never imagined we'd argue about politics of all things! But he's very freaked about Trump - can't say that I blame him - and he's so worried that all the negative talk about H (including mine --) will make her lose, that we wind up upset. We both felt the Bern, and we were happy!
Curse you DNC and Her Heinous!
Someone else made this point that I think is crucial:
If Hillary is elected she will have the support of both democrats and republicans in both houses because her agenda is basically republican,
If Trump is elected, he will be opposed by any politician with half a brain, because it will not bode well for their own re-election.
Both have deplorable agendas, so the decision is: who is more likely to be stymied?
The answer is Trump.
I'm not saying I'm voting for him - I'm truly undecided.
Wish I could remember who made this point, to assign proper credit. But I thought it was a good point, deserving of far wider distribution.
I've Said That, Frequently Here. Establishment Support of HRC
is the bigger fear for me.
The Drumpf trump card for his winning the Greater of Two Evils is not really about him, it's about the normalization and inflammation of his supporters' gross and inhumane belief system.
“Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.” ~ Sun Tzu
Welcome to my little slice of Hell!
Cat, I resemble that remark!!
My life is filled to exploding with loved ones who are voting for her Heinous because of scary Trump, scary Trump, scary Trump, scary Trump.
They just don't get that Clinton is Trump with better looking hair!
Our poor country........
I liken the "Clinton vs. Trump" choice to: "Would you prefer to die by hemlock, or arsenic?"
Gag O'Maggot!!!
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
Oh dear.
But...the exit polls....I mean.....the NV caucus...the voter purges in NY!
Oh dear.
See the problem is, if you're deeply involved as an activist--or as a political hack, which I've also been in my time--stuff like what happened at the NV caucus would be absolutely the last straw. Bridges burned, turned to ash.
But if you're not a political hack, political geek, activist, or such, the NV caucus wouldn't even register in your mind, probably. Donald Trump's racist speeches would be way more important.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I could see people voting for
I could see people voting for Hillary to stop Trump though. But I'm sure not going to criticize anyone for voting Green, they have the best platform and a candidate that would stay true to it, unfortunately they are in no position to defeat either major party candidate. I don't believe Clinton will bring the end of the world, we survived two crappy Clinton terms, I think we can survive a third term, I can not say that for one single Trump term, the country damn near did not survive a second Bush term.
Once Hillary is in, she'll
Once Hillary is in, she'll pass and enforce the corporate coups, illegally and unconstitutionally (using the to-be majority-corrupt Supreme Court to squelch challenges) off-shoring domestic law to totalitarian corporate control in all involved countries (then becoming corporate slave-states populated by highly disposable human assets/liabilities existing only to maximize the self-anticipated levels of involved corporate/billionaire profits even though it kills them) and doubtless begin the nuclear attacks on Russia and China which Obama has been setting up for her - unless the targeted countries send off preemptive ones in self-protection. Even if the planned nuclear holocaust in multiple countries and the defensive retaliation of Mutual Assured Destruction is somehow avoided, there will be endless attacks on and subjugation of other people's countries for 'business interests' at the cost of the various publics of involved countries while unlimited industrial pollution and a complete lack of human, animal and environmental protections against corporate depredations destroy all life - and oxygen production - on the planet within a few decades.
Hillary is very likely to bring about the end of the world.
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Well,the facts tell us it was
Well,the facts tell us it was the republican machine that damn near brought down the US economy. The facts tell us the economy was quite well most of the Clinton Administration, and the facts tell us the economy since 2008 has been stable but mostly lethargic and part of that is due to a horrible republican congress and partly due to Democrats assholish austerity for the 99% in 2009-10. If one looks at the facts surely one would conclude a much higher probability of destroying the country with a republican president than a Democratic president.
Goodness gracious, no.
Economics takes time.
It took about nine years from Clinton's deregulation of the financial sector to the 2008 crash.
These things don't happen all at once.
NAFTA and CAFTA also took time to increase the drain of American jobs into foreign sweatshops and to press American wages downward through that "competition."
When the government makes large-scale economic gestures like that, it takes some time before you see the impact. You can't turn a semi truck on a dime.
Where you *do* see immediate effects is when the government changes its own spending. So "welfare reform" had an immediate impact. When the government fiddles around with law enforcement, that also has immediate effects. So the crime bill had an immediate impact.
But trade treaties and financial deregulation take time to finish gutting the economy.
Bill is the playmaker. George is the finisher.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
And Shills is the Finisher Offer for the 99%
I'm tired of this back-slapping "Isn't humanity neat?" bullshit. We're a virus with shoes, okay? That's all we are. - Bill Hicks
Politics is the entertainment branch of industry. - Frank Zappa
That's a pretty simplistic
That's a pretty simplistic and narrow point of view. The Christmas of 2007 felt as impactful to us retailers as the months following 911. This is before Lehman brothers. We got a big nothing burger as to even acknowledge a problem. The republicans were hell bent on ridding out the recession because Republicans knew damn good and well any govt intervention before the election would include stimulus and of course George Bush the first lost an election due to his Highway stimulus bill.( at least in part). Surely you remember John McCain's the fundamentals of the economy are strong, statement. They knew damn good and well it wasn't and not just the banking and financial sector. There was a reason the recession was stated as starting in 2007. So there was no intervention other than the banking sector from dec. 2007 until early months of 2009.
That's one aspect, then there is the aspect of recovery after 911 were it was decided real estate and financials would lead the economy back onto solid ground( and shopping!) unfortunately it was nothing more than a huge bubble.
So yes Bill is culpable to some degree, republicans are the ones that created and lead us into the disaster that is still felt today by way too many people.
Yes. I'm saying they're working together.
Sorry, the sports metaphor may have gotten in the way.
Bill and George W are apparently great friends. I'm not certain that's actually a recent development. But whether it is or not, both the Clintons and the Bushes have been working for the same interests for decades, and while the devastation of the W administration's economic decisions is undeniable, those decisions were the far simpler consummation of the intricate moves made on many fronts by Bill in the 90's.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Wish I were as sanguine as you.
Then again, not sure we survived the first two terms very well, what with NAFTA, CAFTA, a deregulated financial industry, welfare "reform," the Crime Bill....the Telecommunications Act....
You couldn't ask for a better preparation for the wreckage we now inhabit.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Wed, 09/14/2016 - 12:50pm —
Wed, 09/14/2016 - 12:50pm — CantStoptheSignal
If I may add to your comment? that under the Bush 2 initiated, Hillary-promoted TPP and other corporate coups, there will be no regulation of any involved corporations/industries permitted in the interests of once-citizens-turned-corporate/billionaire-serfs by an illegal and traitorous signature, only the off-shored and uncontestable corporate regulation of the citizens and country for the immediate, short-term maximized profiteering of big funders/TPTB involved.
I don't see why anyone participating in, as example, the financial sector would support this except for those potentially rigging/taking advantage of financial markets for their own benefit, perhaps as planned recipients of everybody else's invested money which will vanish somewhere in each global market crash and/or of the doubtless enforced taxpayer bail-outs while any tax-money remains after all of the law-suits and crashes which will ensue and the lack of virtually anyone below multi-multi-millionaire level earning enough to survive, never mind buy things and/or pay taxes. Of course, I also don't see how anyone could countenance the destruction of the very concept of democracy/civilization and the extermination of the results (including oxygen) of billions of years of evolution forming our global life support system within possibly a very few decades or less simply in order to more rapidly add to a fund of money in many cases already far exceeding anything they could reasonably ever spend.
But under Wall St. Hillary's corporate management and these corporate coups, there assuredly will be massive and repeated financial crashes - with various derivative and other scams produced by The Right People protected by it being made illegal in already prearranged-to-be-Fast-Tracked 'trade deals' to prevent or prosecute and, it appears probable, all warnings to prospective victims made illegal as well, as having potential to impede the maximized anticipated future profits of whichever corporation/billionaire has been declared entitled to scam other market investors freely by involvement in an unconstitutional 'trade deal'.
Since they'll all wind up cannibalizing each other after draining public pensions and smaller investors, leaving nobody else to parasitize, nobody will be safe from these and profitable-for-some-insiders market crashes in the Borgia atmosphere. But psychopaths always figure they're smarter than everyone else and therefore will always come out alright, even when sawing off the branch they also stand upon...
The whole concept of polluting industries, corporations and the wealthiest being above all law except that which they inflict themselves on the poors on a global basis - and the fact that it hasn't yet been laughed out of court in all countries - indicates real malice in Dunderland stuff...
This was from 2014, for Pete's sake!
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2014/03/countries-rejecting-trade-deal-pr...
Reckless endangerment and consequence-free draining/murder/destruction of the public and environment by self-interested corporations/billionaires for personal profit at others expense being made mandatory by public officials sworn to serve the countries and people they betray isn't in the mandate of any government or anyone/group at all.
(Bolding, italics and underlining mine. Also wondering if the Ambassador who seems to have been threatening the Haitian government on behalf of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the corporations/'elites' enjoying and demanding the continuance of virtual or actual slave labour wages [work for food or for enough money to buy a little food and probably nothing else] rather than accept an increase of minimum wages to less than 1/4 of bare living costs, so still at slave wages] was one of the many who, I've read, have been revealed to have paid up to/in the area of a million dollars to become an Ambassador of a quite different sort from those generally visualized in this day and age.)
http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-suppressed-haitis-minimum-wage/
So, I expect that the Hillbots will argue that, as a joint effort between
to retain starvation wages resulting in human trafficking of children as slaves receiving food and shelter* and not entirely just the global fracking and Bush-initiated TPP-promoting US Secretary of State's Hillary's effort to serve these self-interests at the cost of the suffering people, that's alright then! As it will be when President Hillary, in conjunction with
does this to us all. I wonder what price per pound trafficked North American and European children will go for on the unregulated financial market...
(Bolding mine)
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94751408
Around the Nation
Great to know that Hill's good with that! We can all compete with and for the lowest available wage - that being some sort of food and (hopefully) shelter in return for labour - on a global basis, for the honour of being poisoned and worked to death in a dying and polluted world, knowing that our children aren't all that likely to outlive us, wherever they may be, and assuming that they're being actually fed and sheltered in return for labour, while we enable maximized corporate/billionaire profits for a very few. Being on the 'X' marking a direct hit in that 'limited' multi-country nuclear
attackwar Clinton's planning on starting begins to look better all the time...Hill supports a decent life for ('elite') women and their children, Whose Lives Really Do Matter, and who might vacation at some point in Haiti, in some of those nice resorts there.
(Bolding/italics mine)
http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/28/world/americas/haiti-hotel-clinton/index.html
(Bolding and italics mine)
http://freebeacon.com/issues/emails-clinton-foundation-donor-lobbied-sta...
Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.
A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.
Ellen--
I agree with you, but make this an essay!
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Vote Stein. Hillary IS the darling of the mainstream right.
Look around, The mainstream right is supporting Hillary, not Trump. They are either saying they cannot vote for him or they are damning him with simply "I support the candidate of my Party," which is all McCain will say about him. The Bushes don't even support him. Continuing to support Democrats who espouse rightist policies is, in my opinion, the worst thing we can do for the future of this county.
Without Democrats who fight back hard against things like DOMA, ending welfare and repealing Glass Steagall, the nation is headed for an even worse place than it is now. And the Clintons are the king and queen of Democrats who support rightist polices.
Yep. We have no effective left wing to speak of....
No matter what the internet trolls on youtube, facebook, 4chan, Return of Kings and reddit say, no real left wing exists in the United States...at least not one that can actively combat and push back the bullshit you speak of.
Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.
Guerrilla Liberalism won't liberate the US or the world from the iron fist of capital.
Effective is the key word
Effective is the key word here. As Bernie has showed there is a left in politics in the US.
The left in the populace is one thing. The left among
politicians with power is quite another.
Totally correct.
An important distinction.
Hell, I even make a distinction btw Republican politicians and pundits and Republicans in the populace.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Whatever there is
of environmental sanity in the USA, that's what I'm supporting - whether it is able to win elections or not. Whatever power is mine to wield doesn't derive from political office holders, but from my relations with people who think and feel as I do. The value of an individual vote is not so much that it can elect this or that person, but that it can serve as a way to connect like-minded people who share similar goals.
Obviously Jill Stein is the only candidate left standing who cares at all about the multitude of living creatures who cohabit the Earth with us. For both Trump and Clinton, nature exists merely as a means to an end. Only Stein recognizes the natural world for what it actually is - the substance, character, and identity of our very being. To me this is a very important distinction, and people who understand it should try to stick together in spite of, not because of power-hungry politicians.
native
I believe the role we may have played in eliminating
Democrats who fought back against Republicans was continuing to vote for Democrats who did not fight back against Republicans. Bill Clinton was responsible for DADT. He signed DOMA. He got NAFTA passed when Poppy failed. He lobbied Democrats hard for repeal of Glass Steagall and the Commodities Futures Modernization Act of 2000. He ended welfare as we know it. He was working on ending Social Security. And we kept voting for New Democrats because they were the lesser of two evils.
Hillary is ALSO the DARLING of the neoconservatives
Many of them have been in office since the Reagan administration and in the same types of positions.
Hillary is their dream candidate because she is a neoconservative of the first order and she will be the first neoconservative president.
Look at how much power Cheney wielded as Vice President and imagine what Hillary could achieve as the President of the Neoconservatives.
In this article are the people such as the Kagan family, Robert who helped write the PNAC, Victoria Nuland who helped with the coup in Ukraine and is rumored to be her secretary of state and the rest is of the klan.
http://www.veteransnewsnow.com/2016/09/03/1008921the-neocon-in-the-oval-...
As others have stated, Hillary Clinton is a threat to humanity..
Obama and NATO are already trying to start a war with Russia and then China.
And don't forget the people that she has advising her on economics.
Bill for one and he came within a rat's whisker of privatizing social security.
Thank Dawg for Monica's blue dress.
Paulson who has been in many administrations endorsed her because Trump wouldn't promise to privatize SS. He's advising her on economic policies too.
Any bets that Summers, Rubin and some of the rest of the gang from Bill's administration will be appointed to Hillary's?
Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.
Warren is interesting, isn't she?
She is all for reining in the banks and other financial institutions, big on talking about student loan debt, reinstating Glass Steagall and other banking reforms, yet instead of endorsing the candidate that best reflected her values, she didn't and then endorsed the candidate whose husband was responsible for removing Glass Steagal.
Yes, I find her very interesting.
Which AIPAC/MIC/pharma/bank bought politician are you going to vote for? Don’t be surprised when nothing changes.
interesting
In the Chinese sense of the word!
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
More threats?
I dunno.
I categorize pols as compromised, not-totally-compromised-but-scared, and not compromised.
There's very few in the final category, and fewer in the middle category every day.
Hooray for Barbara Lee.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
I don't see them at all as scared.
Not to be a little shit, but--
how much time have you spent on Capitol Hill?
Not saying this to be a dick, but because I spent a lot of time from 2005-2015 (though, admittedly, a lot more btw '05 and '12 than the last 3 years) on the Hill. My trick (not much of one) was to look into people's eyes rather than at their mouths.
Back then, I'd say about 2/3 of them looked worried/scared, and 1/3 looked smug and satisfied (those were the ones to really watch out for, IMO.)
I'd bet those proportions have changed, and there's a lot fewer worried/scared ones up there now. The purge is ongoing.
But I'd also be surprised if there weren't a lot of them who were scared and making exit plans.
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
We both left out: Scared of what?
I've read too many posts elsewhere excusing how Democrats vote, etc. by claiming that they are scared of Republicans. Well, more like "no spine." That is what I had in mind when I said that I don't see them as behaving as they do because they are scared. They may well be scared of being shot by wingers, of anthrax, of being voted out of office, of losing their millions of dollars, or a host of things. However, I don't see them as scared of Republicans.
As far as Warren, who is the subject of this subthread, I don't think she is endorsing and campaigning for Hillary because she (Warren) is scared. I think Warren is endorsing Hillary because Warren thinks Warren will benefit more from endorsing Hillary than Warren will benefit from remaining silent or opposing Hillary, also known as acting out of her own self-interest.
Warren had no need to get into elected office politics. She was a multi-millionaire with a big megaphone. But, she wanted more. Maybe more of a legacy, more adulation, who knows? But I don't think fear motivates her.
That she is...
The moment I heard she endorsed HRC, I felt sick to my stomach. That picture of the two of them still makes me mad! I felt like Elizabeth W. personally punched me in the stomach.
She's dead to me now anyway, and so are all the other "progressives" who have endorsed HRC. What an effing game this is, and what an effed up country we live in.
And supposedly, she particularly disliked the Clintons.
Some of my friends flat out fell in love with Warren, even while she was still administering TARP. I couldn't. For one thing, there was too much adoration too fast. It felt top down. For another, I kept reading that, although she had changed parties, she was still conservative. Come to think of it, that is true of Hillary, who changed parties decades before Warren changed. Finally, I could not get over some things in her wiki.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Warren
My understanding is that she voted for Reagan. I don't know about Poppy. In all, it seems she switched because it seemed to her that Third Wayers like Bill Clinton was better for markets than Republicans were? If so, I guess she did not have as much foresight as the few economists who predicted Clinton's policies were going to get us where we got in 2008.
Obama appointed most of them. Why wouldn't Hillary?
We focus on Hillary, but New Democrats, which the Clintons helped create, make me nauseous.
Neoconservatives and the mainstream right are one and the same.
Poppy Bush, Graham, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, McCain, etc.
THIS.
And truly I say unto you all yet again: THIS.
Es verdad!
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
Yes, we lose, no matter what, but we lose bigger and longer
if we keep voting for a Democratic Party that is more like the Republican Party by the day. Hillary did not support equal marriage until 2013--after the Supreme Court made it a constitutional right (and she was getting ready to run for POTUS).. She has put a constitutional amendment about Roe v. Wade on the table. She tried twice to pass a flag burning bill. W.T. F.
Break the duopoly. Break it. Break it.
www.votepact.org
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver
Preach!
:-)
"More for Gore or the son of a drug lord--None of the above, fuck it, cut the cord."
--Zack de la Rocha
"I tell you I'll have nothing to do with the place...The roof of that hall is made of bones."
-- Fiver