Conversation
Notices
-
Did Trump just hand Clinton the election with a serious of truly cringe-worthy own goals?
http://qttr.at/1f9w
- Mike Gerwitz likes this.
-
True, Clinton is more responsible for the invasion of Iraq than Trump, but his trivialization of that family's tragic loss is appalling
-
Honestly, this US presidential election is like watching a reboot of Mothra vs. Godzilla:
http://qttr.at/1fa5
-
@strypey Hillary's a worm that changes forms and Trump's attacking China economically.
-
US voters; the lesser-of-two-evils is still evil. You want more democracy? Join a third party and campaign for proportional representation
-
@strypey I originally supported that position, and in any other case I'd be voting for Jill Stein. But should Trump get elected, my ideals cannot exist; there's no point in standing atop a mountain of ideals when the world around me burns. This "election" isn't one at all---it's a last-ditch effort to quell a mindless dictator because somehow US citizens have completely lost their goddamn minds.
So I could vote for a third party. But that does absolutely nothing to help me---in fact, it works wholly against me. This isn't the time to push ideals---we're far past that; I lost that chance with Bernie. Electing Hillary is an unfortunate but essential consequence of self-preservation.
The time to start a movement to fix a broken two-party system is not during a general election. But hopefully now people will see why they should care, and push hard so that it matters for the next time around.
-
@mikegerwitz "mindless dictator" describes Clinton equally as well as Trump, as do the words 'narcissist' and 'sociopath'.
-
@mikegerwitz The world is burning already, thanks in large part to Clinton's mates in Wall St, and their ongoing investments in fossil fuel
-
@mikegerwitz attacking Trump, rather than saying anything positive about Clinton, shows you've chosen a flavour of the lesser-evil Kool-aid
-
@mikegerwitz but you're entitled to your opinion, and best of luck with your part in the circus
-
some articles folks should read before declaring Clinton the "lesser evil":
http://qttr.at/1fce http://qttr.at/1fcf http://qttr.at/1fcg
-
Asking "which candidate for Prez of the USA do I support?" is the like asking "which candidate for Prez of the Hell's Angels do I support?"
-
@strypey > you've chosen a flavour of the lesser-evil Kool-aid
I don't support Clinton; I'm not being subtle about that. This is now an exercise in logic: Trump must not get elected. The only way to stop him is if he's defeated, or if he happens to fall dead. Since I doubt the latter, then the only way to achieve the former outcome is to counter votes for him, which means _not_ splitting votes onto other parties that won't win. There are no sidelines here, despite what people like to think. This "circus" is no laughing matter.
I get it---I was one of the Bernie or Bust guys. I'm now saying the exact opposite of what I'd like to say, and it pains me to do so; I'm firm in my ideals; setting them aside takes exceptional threats, and raising my children under Trump is one such threat. But those who think that Hillary is as "evil" as Trump either _completely_ miss the point, favor Trump, or (dangerously) dismiss this situation entirely; they're talking about different "evil"s.
-
@strypey But if you (or anyone else) don't see Trump as a threat to the country and don't like Hillary, then you wouldn't have voted either way to begin with, and so your vote for a third party wouldn't be subject to what I just described. That's the "dismiss the situation" I mentioned---in your words, as a "circus".
-
@mikegerwitz "Trump must not get elected" Why not? According to Pilger, Clinton is more dangerous:
http://qttr.at/1fce
-
@mikegerwitz "Trump must not get elected" people will support Trump using the same logic in reverse. Zero-sum game. Is there no alternative?
-
@mikegerwitz is it really so hard to admit that the USA will continue to be the greatest threat to world peace and democracy either way?
-
@strype The article mentions nuclear weapons: Trump himself said he won't "take nuclear off the table". Trump wants to build our military, calling it "weak". He insults Gold Star parents, says John McCain wasn't a war hero because he was captured and tortured, and jokes about how easy it was receiving a Purple Heart when someone handed it to him. He supports isolationism. He is a totalitarian bigot that can be set off by a single tweet. It says Trump is not the "great deporter [...] but Obama is"---Trump hasn't had the chance, so such a statement has no meaning. He has talked not only about building this now-rhetorical wall, but also wants to be able to deport _US citizen children_ of foreign families.
The article mentions violence in the US---Trump incites violence; promotes racism, sexism, and xenophobia. He claims to know more about IS than the US government, and somehow promises to wipe them out (yet he talks about destabilization). He doesn't understand that such wouldn't defeat their ideology---but he's going to "see Bill Gates" about "closing that internet up", calling people who cite free speech as "foolish people". He advocates torture, and going after families of terrorists; our own military said they'd refuse Trump's orders.
-
@strypey There is no way to know what Trump's foreign policy might be, because he _has none_, and even if he did, he changes his stance on various topics sometimes within sentences; he could well be worse than the current administration, and he's not only cuddling up to Putin, but _inviting foreign espionage_. It is incredible naive to think that Trump won't continue with or enhance many existing tactics. And on top of that, he wants to abandon NATO unless our allies "pay up"---he treats foreign policy like a business dealing.
The article mentions press---Trump wants to expand libel laws to stop the press from saying bad things about him that he doesn't like.
The article describes the state of affairs under the current and past administrations without making any compelling case against Clinton herself, and making absolutely no contrast against Trump.
-
@mikegerwitz @strypey If Trump truly supports isolationism, that could be the one attractive part of his policy.
-
@mikegerwitz so you still don't have anything good to say about Clinton's policy claims and record? Damned with faint praise...
-
@strypey I'm not sure why you're falling back on that again; I've already said that I don't support Clinton. A vote for my candidate (Stein) is useless in defending against my adversary (Trump), which (now that the primaries have eliminated Bernie) is now my sole concern for this election. There's nothing else to it.
I'm not saying I don't agree with her on anything; I'm far left; I agree with her on certain things in the same sense that I agree with Democrats far more than Republicans. But there are too many core issues that prevent me from coming close to supporting her.
-
@mikegerwitz this is what I don't get. You are not obliged to be involved. You think it makes a difference which sociopath wins. I don't.
-
> he's going to "see Bill Gates" about "closing that internet up"
Gee, I'm eager to see that ! By the way, how many buddies it takes to run the world ? 5 ? 10 ?
Danyl Strype
Fox Vox
Mike Gerwitz
Claes Wallin (韋嘉誠)
1g0r
All Mike Gerwitz's GNU Social Instance content and data are available under the