Clinton "Scandals" vs. Trump "Scandals"

[Jhhnn]

This argument would have more substance if the opponent of Trump was someone half decent at least. People vote FOR someone, not against someone. That is fundamental to any human choice for that matter. It is precisely why Hillary is struggling among the young and even what are called minorities. But in reality, she will become President (in reality, the race isn't close...it is almost inconceivable for Trump to get to 270). So I don't even know what is causing this angst among her supporters. Big ado about nothing.

Please. From a perspective such as your own, it's impossible for Dems to field a half decent candidate because you oppose the platform of the Democratic Party.

The sad truth is that Trump is a manifestation of Repub failure, the failure to tend to the needs of middle America rather than the desires of the financial elite. Trumpsters have reason to be mad- they're just mad at the wrong people, quite by design.

Their votes have enabled the class warfare waged against them for decades. Powerful forces have shaped the economy, the forces of largely unrestrained Capitalism. If the Job Creators wanted them to have jobs, they would, because the Financial elite has the power to make it so. Their best qualities, their pride, their self reliance, their work ethic & their loyalty have been exploited most cruelly by the people they vote for.

 

[glenn1]

Again, was it a false equivalency during Bush v. Gore. Remember we actually went to war and a lot of people died.

I would hope you love your country that you live in, love the lives of the people in it and know when to get off your high horse and actually take a stance against someone wholly un-equipped to be President, in fact too dangerous to be president. But, no, you'll sit it out and let grown ups make that hard decision. Thank You.

It's equally odd and disturbing listening to a lot of people in this thread act like they somehow don't live in this country and will be somehow removed from the dangers a President Trump poses.

In this election I have more respect for the Trump supporters than those who vote 3rd party. At least the majority of Trump supporters just don't know any better.

I realize this may be hard for you to believe but some of us out there have political views that don't fit neatly into a Republican or Democratic box. It's not "letting grownups make that hard decision," it's saying that I have decided against both candidates and am instead voting for the one who actually mostly fits my views. I would just not vote rather than vote for either of them if I had no other choices than those 2. I really don't give a damn that you think that Johnson or people like me who vote for him are "loons" or that you think Trump is the worst candidate since Hitler or whatever. I also don't care you are horrified that someone would vote for anyone but Hillary and make it infinitesimally more likely that Trump may win. FFS take a deep breath and remember what the purpose of democracy and voting is and remind yourself it's not there "so my candidate can win" or to point to an election victory to mentally validate that your political POV is morally superior to that of the other party. My voting choice is just as valid as yours and you're acting like a douche not respecting the thoughtfully considered choices that others make. Stop acting like a damn authoritarian nutjob and realize that not everyone thinks like you do.

 

[UglyCasanova]

The only legitimate appeal of trump, in my opinion, is if you believe that the system is irreparably broken. If you believe that, Trump might just be the man to burn the system down.

And they do. The reason for the Trump phenomenon I've been arguing for some time now is not that people agree with Trumps policies and ideas but rather they see him as a political bomb sent to level D.C. They view the federal government as out of control and broken, and Trump is the drastic solution to save the country.

He's a buffoon and idiot for sure, but people would rather have that than a crook. They hate politicians and would rather have a screw up rich reality tv star than another corrupt politician, rather have someone that says stupid shit over someone who peddles influence for those that donate to their foundations, and rather have someone who won't release his tax returns instead of someone who won't release her transcripts from multi-hundred thousand dollar speeches to Goldman Sachs or the 30k plus emails she's deleted clearly in the attempt to evade the Freedom of Information Act requests and that what we find in those emails and speech transcripts is much more important than whatever is in his tax returns.

I'm not voting for either though, and 99% sure I'm just sitting this one out.

 

[Jhhnn]

And they do. The reason for the Trump phenomenon I've been arguing for some time now is not that people agree with Trumps policies and ideas but rather they see him as a political bomb sent to level D.C. They view the federal government as out of control and broken, and Trump is the drastic solution to save the country.

He's a buffoon and idiot for sure, but people would rather have that than a crook. They hate politicians and would rather have a screw up rich reality tv star than another corrupt politician, rather have someone that says stupid shit over someone who peddles influence for those that donate to their foundations, and rather have someone who won't release his tax returns instead of someone who won't release her transcripts from multi-hundred thousand dollar speeches to Goldman Sachs or the 30k plus emails she's deleted clearly in the attempt to evade the Freedom of Information Act requests and that what we find in those emails and speech transcripts is much more important than whatever is in his tax returns.

I'm not voting for either though, and 99% sure I'm just sitting this one out.

Belief in lies & misplaced priorities are obviously quite common on the right wing. They've been horribly exploited for a long time.

 

[Cozarkian]

If pigs had wings, they'd fly. The chances of enough people voting for either third party candidate to win are precisely zero this election & we both know it.

Keeping that in mind, it's obvious that you're concern trolling to advance Trump's chances whether you'll admit it or not.

That's precisely the same odds that enough people will vote third party to cause Trump to beat Hillary.

The argument to vote third party (or write-in if you don't like them) isnt merely directed at anti-Trump voters, it is also directed at anti-Clinton voters and honestly, I think the latter will be more responsive. So yes, I am making an argument I suspect will hurt Trump and help Clinton.

 

[Jhhnn]

You've got President Obama, Michelle Obama, Bill Clinton, Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders and an infinite cast of surrogates stumping for Hillary. Trump is shooting from the hip and grossly incompetent. How is this a close election? At some point you need to accept that maybe you bet on the wrong horse.

How is it a close election? Like this-

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/20...on&action=Click&pgtype=Blogs&region=Body&_r=0

 

[Jhhnn]

That's precisely the same odds that enough people will vote third party to cause Trump to beat Hillary.

The argument to vote third party (or write-in if you don't like them) isnt merely directed at anti-Trump voters, it is also directed at anti-Clinton voters and honestly, I think the latter will be more responsive. So yes, I am making an argument I suspect will hurt Trump and help Clinton.

Please. The vast majority of anti Clinton voters are already firmly in the basket of deplorables. However many there are, Donald already has them & it seems unlikely he'll win many converts given his performance Monday night. So if convincing more of the mushy middle to vote third party works as intended it means fewer votes for Clinton. Fewer votes for Clinton increases Trump's chances of winning.

 

[emperus]

I realize this may be hard for you to believe but some of us out there have political views that don't fit neatly into a Republican or Democratic box. It's not "letting grownups make that hard decision," it's saying that I have decided against both candidates and am instead voting for the one who actually mostly fits my views. I would just not vote rather than vote for either of them if I had no other choices than those 2. I really don't give a damn that you think that Johnson or people like me who vote for him are "loons" or that you think Trump is the worst candidate since Hitler or whatever. I also don't care you are horrified that someone would vote for anyone but Hillary and make it infinitesimally more likely that Trump may win. FFS take a deep breath and remember what the purpose of democracy and voting is and remind yourself it's not there "so my candidate can win" or to point to an election victory to mentally validate that your political POV is morally superior to that of the other party. My voting choice is just as valid as yours and you're acting like a douche not respecting the thoughtfully considered choices that others make. Stop acting like a damn authoritarian nutjob and realize that not everyone thinks like you do.

I don't think anyone has political views that fit neatly into two boxes. I don't. I don't even like Hilary, don't think she is a transformational candidate and think she represents the status quo too much. But I learned a lesson from what happened in 2000 that sometimes "grown ups" don't have the luxury of throwing a tantrum by voting 3rd party and/or not voting. Elections and who we elect as president have consequences (i.e 5,000 dead Americans and hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqi's) and they are as much as who we share political views with as they are those we DEFINITELY do not share political views with and making sure they never get into office.

I'm sure it's easy for you to paint me as being an "authoritarian nut-job", it's easier to do that than look at yourself and say that you're sitting on your high horse, pretending you have some greater morals than the rest of us, all the while putting all that over the health and future of your country.

Well, unless you believe both would be equally destructive to our country. And you sound (at times) more reasonable than that.

 

[emperus]

And they do. The reason for the Trump phenomenon I've been arguing for some time now is not that people agree with Trumps policies and ideas but rather they see him as a political bomb sent to level D.C. They view the federal government as out of control and broken, and Trump is the drastic solution to save the country.

He's a buffoon and idiot for sure, but people would rather have that than a crook. They hate politicians and would rather have a screw up rich reality tv star than another corrupt politician, rather have someone that says stupid shit over someone who peddles influence for those that donate to their foundations, and rather have someone who won't release his tax returns instead of someone who won't release her transcripts from multi-hundred thousand dollar speeches to Goldman Sachs or the 30k plus emails she's deleted clearly in the attempt to evade the Freedom of Information Act requests and that what we find in those emails and speech transcripts is much more important than whatever is in his tax returns.

I'm not voting for either though, and 99% sure I'm just sitting this one out.

How is Hilary a crook and Trump isn't a bigger one? Did you even watch the clip in the first post? Why don't you call for Trump to release his taxes and then all his emails for the last 4 years as well? Wouldn't that make them equal? The false equivalence is maddening. Btw, you do know that Trump University was generally a scam, thus making him a crook who bilked people to pad his wealth.

 

[Triloby]

And they do. The reason for the Trump phenomenon I've been arguing for some time now is not that people agree with Trumps policies and ideas but rather they see him as a political bomb sent to level D.C. They view the federal government as out of control and broken, and Trump is the drastic solution to save the country.

He's a buffoon and idiot for sure, but people would rather have that than a crook. They hate politicians and would rather have a screw up rich reality tv star than another corrupt politician, rather have someone that says stupid shit over someone who peddles influence for those that donate to their foundations, and rather have someone who won't release his tax returns instead of someone who won't release her transcripts from multi-hundred thousand dollar speeches to Goldman Sachs or the 30k plus emails she's deleted clearly in the attempt to evade the Freedom of Information Act requests and that what we find in those emails and speech transcripts is much more important than whatever is in his tax returns.

I'm not voting for either though, and 99% sure I'm just sitting this one out.

I seriously cannot understand that kind of mentality. Do people honestly believe that the federal government has gotten so bad to the point that they're placing all of their hopes on some reality TV fraud to burn it all down to the ground, no matter the cost? What makes them think that Trump wouldn't eventually turn into one of those "politicians" they despise so much if he ever becomes President?

And even if by some miracle Trump manages to accomplish that kind of insanity, how can we be certain that the government we get afterwards won't be as bad or even more corrupt than the one before it? Some people are placing all of their hopes on some extreme hypothetical scenario that would never work out the way they want it.

 

[glenn1]

I don't think anyone has political views that fit neatly into two boxes. I don't. I don't even like Hilary, don't think she is a transformational candidate and think she represents the status quo too much. But I learned a lesson from what happened in 2000 that sometimes "grown ups" don't have the luxury of throwing a tantrum by voting 3rd party and/or not voting. Elections and who we elect as president have consequences (i.e 5,000 dead Americans and hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqi's) and they are as much as who we share political views with as they are those we DEFINITELY do not share political views with and making sure they never get into office.

I'm sure it's easy for you to paint me as being an "authoritarian nut-job", it's easier to do that than look at yourself and say that you're sitting on your high horse, pretending you have some greater morals than the rest of us, all the while putting all that over the health and future of your country.

Well, unless you believe both would be equally destructive to our country. And you sound (at times) more reasonable than that.

I have no doubt you think one would be more destructive but in reality I don't think it will matter. This is the same bullshit that got spewed in the 1964 election (OMG Goldwater will get us all nuked) and then LBJ got us into the worst foreign policy disaster of the late 20th century and tens of thousands of war dead. The idea that you can scientifically know who will be worse is crap. You think he's more dangerous because it suits your political worldview to think that.

 

[Jhhnn]

I seriously cannot understand that kind of mentality. Do people honestly believe that the federal government has gotten so bad to the point that they're placing all of their hopes on some reality TV fraud to burn it all down to the ground, no matter the cost? What makes them think that Trump wouldn't eventually turn into one of those "politicians" they despise so much if he ever becomes President?

And even if by some miracle Trump manages to accomplish that kind of insanity, how can we be certain that the government we get afterwards won't be as bad or even more corrupt than the one before it? Some people are placing all of their hopes on some extreme hypothetical scenario that would never work out the way they want it.

They've been propagandized into tearing down the govt of the people for decades not realizing that they're tearing down the buffer between them & complete corporate control.

Power vacuums will be filled once created & that's been the whole point for decades.

 

[Perknose]

I'm not scared if Trump wins so threatening me with it doesn't help.

That right there reveals, in the starkest and most pointed way possible, the dark underbelly of your political views. You would be comfortable with Trump as President. Tell us, under it all, does he say a lot of what you've been thinking?

 

[chowderhead]

Gary Johnson has no interest in foreign policy. He just went on Hardball and could not name a single foreign leader past or present from any other country in the world. Sad!

 

[squarecut1]

But I learned a lesson from what happened in 2000 that sometimes "grown ups" don't have the luxury of throwing a tantrum by voting 3rd party and/or not voting. Elections and who we elect as president have consequences (i.e 5,000 dead Americans and hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqi's)

t.

Hillary is actually more likely to cause more innocent death and suffering around the world. Lack of empathy is part of her narcissistic nature. She is a well known chicken hawk...the kind of hawks who get others killed while they count their cash and properties, as the Clinton clan loves to do.

Heck even Obama was blasting Hillary on this back in 08.

 

[MongGrel]

Hillary is actually more likely to cause more innocent death and suffering around the world. Lack of empathy is part of her narcissistic nature. She is a well known chicken hawk...the kind of hawks who get others killed while they count their cash and properties, as the Clinton clan loves to do.

Heck even Obama was blasting Hillary on this back in 08.

You have not posted a single thing yet that is worth reflecting on IMHO.

You seem to be confusing her with Cheney and Haliburton a bit, it seems.

Trump has a lot of properties his kids would love to expand on while he would be in office, they must be salivating over the thought of that as we speak in the backs of their minds, where ever the psychos are at the moment.

They'd be busy running the "Blind Trust" thing once he took office.

 

[ivwshane]

Hillary is actually more likely to cause more innocent death and suffering around the world. Lack of empathy is part of her narcissistic nature. She is a well known chicken hawk...the kind of hawks who get others killed while they count their cash and properties, as the Clinton clan loves to do.

Heck even Obama was blasting Hillary on this back in 08.

Your view of Hillary is seriously warped. You've been indoctrinated by 25 years of right wing propaganda.

 

[agent00f]

I realize this may be hard for you to believe but some of us out there have political views that don't fit neatly into a Republican or Democratic box. It's not "letting grownups make that hard decision," it's saying that I have decided against both candidates and am instead voting for the one who actually mostly fits my views. I would just not vote rather than vote for either of them if I had no other choices than those 2. I really don't give a damn that you think that Johnson or people like me who vote for him are "loons" or that you think Trump is the worst candidate since Hitler or whatever. I also don't care you are horrified that someone would vote for anyone but Hillary and make it infinitesimally more likely that Trump may win. FFS take a deep breath and remember what the purpose of democracy and voting is and remind yourself it's not there "so my candidate can win" or to point to an election victory to mentally validate that your political POV is morally superior to that of the other party. My voting choice is just as valid as yours and you're acting like a douche not respecting the thoughtfully considered choices that others make. Stop acting like a damn authoritarian nutjob and realize that not everyone thinks like you do.

If you support this in politics why don't you support it in economics.

Hillary is actually more likely to cause more innocent death and suffering around the world. Lack of empathy is part of her narcissistic nature. She is a well known chicken hawk...the kind of hawks who get others killed while they count their cash and properties, as the Clinton clan loves to do.

Heck even Obama was blasting Hillary on this back in 08.

She's a centrist which means she supports welfare for white folks, too. If we don't go kill some expendable people once in a while, taxpayers might think all that money funneled to the flyover states for what are basically gubmint bomb manufacturing jobs is going to waste.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Dems can shove Clinton up their collective ass. You guys didn't have to support a narcissist that felt the nomination was her birthright, but you did and now you're stuck with someone that actually has to fight to make a person as shitty as Donald Trump look like the worse candidate. I'll laugh my butt off if he wins. Don't think he will, but it will be a yuge source of hilarity.

 

[agent00f]

In retrospect good thing democrats didn't pick a socialist to run given how much half the country hates even the centrists.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Do you think that virtually no one else ran just because they didn't feel like it? Is the Democratic party that deprived of decent candidates? (By decent I mean purely as a candidate, meaning having a competitive shot of beating what was initially assumed to be some Republican establishment candidate).

 

[agent00f]

Do you think that virtually no one else ran just because they didn't feel like it? Is the Democratic party that deprived of decent candidates?

Pretty sure she lost last time. Let's put this in perspective. Said half of the country is willing to vote for a white nationalist candidate to spite a centrist, so frankly it's not as if it even matters unless you believe the democrats are going to put up a right winger of their own.

 

[ivwshane]

Dems can shove Clinton up their collective ass. You guys didn't have to support a narcissist that felt the nomination was her birthright, but you did and now you're stuck with someone that actually has to fight to make a person as shitty as Donald Trump look like the worse candidate. I'll laugh my butt off if he wins. Don't think he will, but it will be a yuge source of hilarity.

You don't seem to know what a narcissist is. I also don't recall Hillary ever saying she was entitled to be president or anything to that effect.

Once again, the rights irrationality shows up again in their irrational hatred of Hillary. After eight years of Obama hate, all anyone can do is laugh at you.

 

[Starbuck1975]

How is it a close election? Like this-

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/09/26/the-falsity-of-false-equivalence/?module=BlogPost-Title&version=Blog Main&contentCollection=Opinion&action=Click&pgtype=Blogs&region=Body&_r=0

Yawn, its the media's fault. I do find the press surge of the last few days interesting. Clinton clearly won the debate, yet I am seeing a tsunami wave of articles now suddenly very critical of Strein and Johnson. Somebody is worried.

 

[khon]

They are equivalent in that they both fail to meet the standards we should have for a President.

If a passing score is a B, it really doesn't matter if Trump gets an F and Hillary gets a C, it matters that they both failed to get a B.

It matters a great deal when they are the only possible outcomes. Sure you can vote for someone else, but they won't win. The only possible presidents are Clinton and Trump, and a C-grade president is a lot better than an F-grade president.