|
Ixnay on the Omelet posted:Personally, aside from Maggie Thatcher, I could never vote for a woman leader. I'll ignore your first misogynistic point, and focus on the second: There's a difference between royal families and family businesses. A lot of people take up what their parents do (see: Kennedy family and Bush family), or marry because of similarities and ambitions (Clintons). I wouldn't be surprised if in several years we see at least one of Obama's daughters become a politician. In the end, however - Americans decide who they want. If there were "royal families" in the US as you'd described, Hillary would have been elected president in 2008, and Jeb! would have been the Republican nominee this year.
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2016 18:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 22:39 |
|
|
boner confessor posted:donald trump took out a full page ad in the new york daily news specifically calling for the reinstatement of the death penalty to punish five black teens falsely accused of rape but let's get really twisted up and mad that hillary clinton said superpredators once Sanders actually voted for the superpredator bill too, if I recall correctly.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
the trump tutelage posted:Hillary Clinton represents everything I hate about the American political class, and the liberal elite in particular. A stupendously wealthy lawyer with ostensible aw-shucks modest beginnings that don't really hold up to scrutiny; I know. Her acting like the millions of dollars she got from her father was a small loan doesn't hold much merit. quote:callous disregard for foreign lives in pursuit of American empire obfuscated by a veneer of progressive policies at home; Yeah, can you believe she's wondered why we can't use nukes first? quote:unabashed cronyism and favourable media treatment by apparently serious thinkers whose ends-justify-the-means editorializing won't mount earnest criticism as long as there's always some other bogeyman on the horizon. Yeah. The fact that all the media attention means she doesn't have to spend a dime in battleground states! quote:She is the rot in the system, a caricature of a liberal the way Romney was a caricature of a GOP conservative, only it rubs rawer because she's supposed to be the lesser of two evils and not just the second of them. Yeah, her preying on the housing market and hoping for it to fail really does show how the system failed us. Screw the lesser or the two evils, vote for a candidate that makes me feel good.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2016 22:42
|
|
|
CAPT. Rainbowbeard posted:Fairness implies impartiality, which the DNC and superdelegates have flat out admitted they weren't. People have tried to explain that Hillary won the primary by millions of votes. Showing preference to a candidate is not the same as voter suppression or rigging the system - rigging implies changing votes, which there has been zero evidence of. You're bitching about ~superdelegates~ despite the fact that Hillary would have clinched the nomination without them. Superdelegates generally go toward the will of the voters. In 2008, superdelegates heavily favored Clinton but switched towards Obama when they saw that he was preferred by the voters and switched to him. Superdelegates exist in the off chance that the party ends up picking someone unelectable - like if John Edwards was close to getting the nom, then his love child story would have sunk the party. Hell, I'm sure the Republican party would love superdelegates right now since it would have prevented a Trump presidency. The fact that you keep bringing up DNC rigging and superdelegates as reasons you won't vote for Hillary (which are two things she doesn't have control over!) despite them being complete red herrings shows that there's probably just some other reason why you can't bring yourself to vote for her.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
Vehementi posted:What are some other reasons besides the jobs hostage situation? This is an interesting perspective on it: http://www.theestablishment.co/2016/05/24/i-know-why-poor-whites-chant-trump-trump-trump/ A lot of rural whites see Republicans as one of their own. They've been conditioned that poor living conditions are their own fault. The article uses Don Tyson as an example - he's the billionaire CEO of Tyson, and has a Southern demeanor that Southern whites identify with. He's just an "aw shucks" kind of guy who made it big, so he's an idolized guy. So when he begins importing in Mexican immigrants illegally to pay them godawful wages and displace jobs, it's the Mexicans' fault, not Don Tyson's. In addition, liberal elitism is a thing in their mind - rural whites are being made fun of for lacking teeth, being uneducated hicks, etc. There's a lot more to it - there's been a lot of convincing by the billionaire class to show whites that the problems of the world isn't the billionaires, but other races / creeds. Ideally, a social revolution should have blacks and poor rural whites rising together to smash the system, but instead they've grown discontent for each other.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2016 19:10
|
|