Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Hillary Clinton's disappointing claim.


  • Please log in to reply
56 replies to this topic

#1 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 4,832 posts

Posted 07 September 2017 - 10:05 AM

Hillary Clinton is blaming Bernie Sanders for costing her the election.

Really? Is she surreal?

It's the other way around. The Electoral College gerrymandered things so that Hillary could win, yet Bernie was able to give her a run for her money, nevertheless. The election was stolen from Sanders, not Hillary.

People didn't vote for Hillary primarily because they didn't like her.

Sour grapes, petty, small-minded . . . the list of reasons to not like her is growing.
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#2 yadda yadda

yadda yadda
  • Islander
  • 1,449 posts

Posted 07 September 2017 - 01:08 PM

Yeah, you're right. She's so unlikeable. So glad we have Trump instead. We wouldn't have been able to enjoy him so much if Bernie's chaos kids hadn't decided she was unworthy, that there was no difference between her and Trump so why bother to vote for the Dem nominee. No difference...

#3 Cait

Cait

    Democracy Dies in Darkness

  • Moderator
  • 10,772 posts

Posted 07 September 2017 - 02:01 PM

IMO [and I know others will argue], Bernie voters are indeed one of the reasons she lost. Why stating the obvious is such an intolerable sin is beyond me.

I also strongly urge people to save their critique of the book until, you know, you've read it.  As a writer, I can tell you that context is everything.  Just sayin'.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.

Source:
http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html


#4 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 8,819 posts

Posted 07 September 2017 - 04:06 PM

^ Yeah. One does NOT have to say that Hillary, or the Democrats, were entitled to peoples', or even liberal/progressive peoples' votes, EVEN IF one is saying that third party-voters/non-voters helped ensured Trump's victory. Context.

(And, yes, turn-out/non-voters can affect elections, I saw it happen in the last Canadian election, all the extra votes went towards one party, none of the other parties increased their total votes, and hardly decreased. It was a massive turnout to turf the Conservatives, and they decided to vote Liberal to do it. Where were those people in previously elections?).

I wouldn't even say Democrats are entitled to votes in the next Presidential election against Trump, Pence, Ryan, or whoever ends up on that ballot under R. But you deal with the choices you have in front of you, not the ones you wished you had.

U.S. voters in 2016 had four choices, between
a) an unlikeable person who was competent and corporatist, or
b) an unlikeable person who was incompetent and a con-man who is going to put corporate interests before his populist rhetoric, except in the odd case that it is to appease the xenophobia in his base.
c) a third party candidate unlikely to win. Which is in some years fine, but context matters. We'll see how people feel about that in a couple years. I can at least understand their choice even if I don't agree with it.
d) not vote at all. Again, some years that is fine, and that is always someones personal choice and right. But, again, context matters on whether that was a reasonable or good choice or not.

Edited by sierraleone, 07 September 2017 - 04:32 PM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#5 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 8,819 posts

Posted 07 September 2017 - 04:09 PM

I heard one political talk show host strongly suggest that instead of focusing efforts on changing the hearts and minds of Trump voters, to try to change the heart and minds of non-voters. Considering there were almost as many people voting as not-voting, not a bad suggestion.
Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#6 Elara

Elara

    Feel the silence of the moonlight.

  • Watchdog
  • 2,862 posts

Posted 07 September 2017 - 04:38 PM

View Postgsmonks, on 07 September 2017 - 10:05 AM, said:

Hillary Clinton is blaming Bernie Sanders for costing her the election.

Really? Is she surreal?

It's the other way around. The Electoral College gerrymandered things so that Hillary could win, yet Bernie was able to give her a run for her money, nevertheless. The election was stolen from Sanders, not Hillary.

People didn't vote for Hillary primarily because they didn't like her.

Sour grapes, petty, small-minded . . . the list of reasons to not like her is growing.

Really? Seems more like your dislike of her is coloring your opinion. This prevents you from finding anything good about her, regardless of facts.

A page from her book:

Quote

Because we agreed on so much, Bernie couldn’t make an argument against me in this area on policy, so he had to resort to innuendo and impugning my character. Some of his supporters, the so-called Bernie Bros, took to harassing my supporters online. It got ugly and more than a little sexist. When I finally challenged Bernie during a debate to name a single time I changed a position or a vote because of a financial contribution, he couldn’t come up with anything. Nonetheless, his attacks caused lasting damage, making it harder to unify progressives in the general election and paving the way for Trump’s “Crooked Hillary” campaign.
I don’t know if that bothered Bernie or not. He certainly shared my horror at the thought of Donald Trump becoming President, and I appreciate that he campaigned for me in the general election. But he isn’t a Democrat — that’s not a smear, that’s what he says. He didn’t get into the race to make sure a Democrat won the White House, he got in to disrupt the Democratic Party. He was right that Democrats needed to strengthen our focus on working families and that there’s always a danger of spending too much time courting donors because of our insane campaign finance system. He also engaged a lot of young people in the political process for the first time, which is extremely important. But I think he was fundamentally wrong about the Democratic Party — the party that brought us Social Security under Roosevelt; Medicare and Medicaid under Johnson; peace between Israel and Egypt under Carter; broad-based prosperity and a balanced budget under Clinton; and rescued the auto industry, passed health care reform, and imposed tough new rules on Wall Street under Obama. I am proud to be a Democrat and I wish Bernie were, too.

And from Sanders' former press secretary:

Quote

But let me be clear - NO ONE STOLE THIS ELECTION! Team Sanders we did AMAZING WORK. But we lost. It's a hard reality for some.

— Symone D. Sanders (@SymoneDSanders) July 25, 2016

But of course, people will decide that she is lying. Conspiracy thrives.
El
~ blue crystal glows, the dark side unseen, sparkles in scant light, from sun to planet, to me in between ~


I want a job in HRC's "shadow" cabinet. Good pay, really easy hours, lots of time off. Can't go wrong.

"You have a fair and valid point here. I've pointed out, numerous times, that the Left's or Democrats always cry "Racist" whenever someone disagrees with them. I failed to realize that the Right or Republicans do the same thing with "Liberal"." ~ LotS

#7 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 4,832 posts

Posted 07 September 2017 - 04:54 PM

Fact: the Electoral college gerrymandered the election.

Fact: Bernie Sanders was a viable candidate from the beginning.

Fact: Bernie Sanders, funded with pennies, ran an amazing campaign against corporate America.

Fact: Bernie Sanders should have won the election, would have if the playing-field was level, and was the only viable alternative to Trump.

It's Hillary's sickening sense of entitlement here that makes me glad a Democrat isn't in office.

Is she a good alternative to Trump?

Give your head a shake. She would have preserved the status quo and ignored the demands of the grassroots movement that was backing Bernie. She and her ilk are just as guilty as Reagan for destroying the Middle Class. Neither she nor her husband did a thing to undo the damage done by Reagan. They had eight-bleeping-years to fix things, rip the grubby mitts of corporate America off the throats of the Middle Class and minimum wage earners, and reinstate the tax structure that prevented corporate America from bleeding the economy, the Middle Class, and low-wage earners white.

If you're for Hillary, that is what you're for.
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#8 yadda yadda

yadda yadda
  • Islander
  • 1,449 posts

Posted 07 September 2017 - 05:52 PM

View Postgsmonks, on 07 September 2017 - 04:54 PM, said:

Fact: the Electoral college gerrymandered the election.

Fact: Bernie Sanders was a viable candidate from the beginning.

Fact: Bernie Sanders, funded with pennies, ran an amazing campaign against corporate America.

Fact: Bernie Sanders should have won the election, would have if the playing-field was level, and was the only viable alternative to Trump.

It's Hillary's sickening sense of entitlement here that makes me glad a Democrat isn't in office.

Is she a good alternative to Trump?

Give your head a shake. She would have preserved the status quo and ignored the demands of the grassroots movement that was backing Bernie. She and her ilk are just as guilty as Reagan for destroying the Middle Class. Neither she nor her husband did a thing to undo the damage done by Reagan. They had eight-bleeping-years to fix things, rip the grubby mitts of corporate America off the throats of the Middle Class and minimum wage earners, and reinstate the tax structure that prevented corporate America from bleeding the economy, the Middle Class, and low-wage earners white.

If you're for Hillary, that is what you're for.

I'm with her

#9 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 4,832 posts

Posted 08 September 2017 - 12:33 PM

Ah. Then you're for the ol' Billary Dixiecrat bait 'n' switch game.

Corporate tax was around 95% until Reagan. Billary did nothing to change that, despite being in office for 8 years.

Reagan destroyed the Middle Class. Billary did nothing to restore a fair tax system,

So that is what you're with- the status quo.
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#10 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 4,832 posts

Posted 08 September 2017 - 12:34 PM

Oh, and most of the goodies Billary was offering during the election were stolen from Bernie's platform.
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#11 Elara

Elara

    Feel the silence of the moonlight.

  • Watchdog
  • 2,862 posts

Posted 08 September 2017 - 01:27 PM

This sounds vaguely familiar, like someone else who has trouble with facts. Hmmm...

Seriously though, it was exactly your type of thinking that got us 45, so you will have to forgive me if I am finding your line of thinking... lacking.
El
~ blue crystal glows, the dark side unseen, sparkles in scant light, from sun to planet, to me in between ~


I want a job in HRC's "shadow" cabinet. Good pay, really easy hours, lots of time off. Can't go wrong.

"You have a fair and valid point here. I've pointed out, numerous times, that the Left's or Democrats always cry "Racist" whenever someone disagrees with them. I failed to realize that the Right or Republicans do the same thing with "Liberal"." ~ LotS

#12 Lord of the Sword

Lord of the Sword
  • Islander
  • 15,626 posts

Posted 08 September 2017 - 03:39 PM

Last I heard, Hillary had expanded her "Blame List" to include Matt Lauer. I guess blaming the Martians on Mars will be next. And this book is nothing more then her attempt at remaining in the spotlight, and getting some money now that all those foreign nation donations to the Clinton Foundation have, magically and overnight, dried up.
"Sometimes you get the point of the sword, sometimes the edge, sometimes the flat of the blade (even if you're the Lord of the Sword) and sometimes you're the guy wielding it. But any day without the Sword or its Lord is one that could've been better  " ~Orpheus.

The Left is inclusive, and tolerant, unless you happen to think and believe different than they do~ Lord of the Sword

The last republican leaning independent on this message board. All others have been silenced and driven off, or outright banned. Only ONE remains. I guess HighLander had it right all along....In the end, there can be only ONE.

#13 Elara

Elara

    Feel the silence of the moonlight.

  • Watchdog
  • 2,862 posts

Posted 08 September 2017 - 04:30 PM

So says The Daily Mail (the first to report this). I get your following and believing Fox News, but everyone, you included, following and believing The Daily Mail? That is really reaching for facts to back up your dislike of Clinton. This is a sad day.
El
~ blue crystal glows, the dark side unseen, sparkles in scant light, from sun to planet, to me in between ~


I want a job in HRC's "shadow" cabinet. Good pay, really easy hours, lots of time off. Can't go wrong.

"You have a fair and valid point here. I've pointed out, numerous times, that the Left's or Democrats always cry "Racist" whenever someone disagrees with them. I failed to realize that the Right or Republicans do the same thing with "Liberal"." ~ LotS

#14 Norville

Norville
  • Islander
  • 4,480 posts

Posted 08 September 2017 - 06:43 PM

The Daily Mail is also known as the Daily Fail for very, very good reason. No one with legitimate brains would trust that thing an inch. Just commenting. I mean, believe what you will, LotS; you always do...
"The dew has fallen with a particularly sickening thud this morning."
- Marvin the Paranoid Android, "Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy"

Rules for Surviving an Autocracy
Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
http://www.nybooks.c...s-for-survival/

#15 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 4,832 posts

Posted 08 September 2017 - 08:26 PM

View PostElara, on 08 September 2017 - 01:27 PM, said:

This sounds vaguely familiar, like someone else who has trouble with facts. Hmmm...

Seriously though, it was exactly your type of thinking that got us 45, so you will have to forgive me if I am finding your line of thinking... lacking.

My line of thinking leading to 45? You're joking, right?

My line of thinking is/was social and tax reformation for the working poor, free education for students, anti-big-business. How on earth does any of that equate thinking that backs 45?

Like people who vote democrat, you seem to be living in your own world. Every time the Dems get in, it's a classic case of bait 'n' switch. They make promises but deliver the status quo, and do nothing to eliminate corporate and political corruption.

Sure, they throw in a few reasonable-sounding nuggets, like standing up for science, evolution, and climate change, but in the end it's largely lip-service.

Edited by gsmonks, 08 September 2017 - 08:27 PM.

Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#16 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 8,819 posts

Posted 08 September 2017 - 09:23 PM

The way I see it is third-party/non-voters would mainly be vindicated if all of the following three things happen:
1) The rise of the resistance is able to effectively counter Trump most of the time.
2) The rise of the resistance doesn't peter out when Trump/Pence/Ryan is gone, and makes necessary fundament gains and changes to U.S. society to change whats wrong with the status quo.
3) Trump's policy attacks on Muslims, women, LGBTQI+, DACA recipients, hispanics, African-Americans actually result in very little harm coming to pass. And that is a matter of perspective. Are we comparing what befalls them to what befell the Jews in WWII, or what befell these groups under Obama, or against what would have likely befallen these groups if we got a Clinton or a Sanders?

Is 1) and 2) worth it if, under Trump….
- Muslims communities are preferentially monitored for extremism over KKK/neo-Nazis/fascists?
- Women's Title IX rights protections are being eroded?
- DoJ defends religious rights, of say bakers, over the civil rights of LGBT community?
- 800,000 DACA recipients are under threat of deportation?
- Trump shows signs, via pardons or other means, that law enforcement has his favour to violate the civil rights of people who look hispanic?
- Rolls back justice system reforms that had positively impacted Black communities more?
- Trump threatens everyone's health care via trying to implode Obamacare?
- His SCOTUS pick(s) moves SCOTUS to the right on social issues for a generation or more?

Oh yeah, that all has already happened, or at least started. And we're about 16% of the way through his 4 year term….

Edited by sierraleone, 08 September 2017 - 10:14 PM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#17 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 4,832 posts

Posted 08 September 2017 - 10:06 PM

Trump is a sociopathic slug, no doubt, but a unique thing about the last election is that the true frontrunners (Trump and Bernie) are neither Republican nor Democrat.

Also, neither the Republicans nor the Democrats seem able to get it through their thick skulls that they've become wholly irrelevant. People want something different, and they are sick to death of the status quo.

Instead of acknowledging their 1870-year-old book of fairy tales is on the way out, Republicans are digging in their little heels and throwing a hissy-fit. They do that every time one of their core ideas is challenged. Instead of moving forward, they nail their own feet to the floor and drag everything to a halt. Billary likewise won't address the fact that their time came and went, that they're badly out of step with the times, and that they're not even beginning to try to come to terms with that fact.

People have simply grown out of politics and politicians. They could be led around by the nose when they were poorly educated and were more prone to follow the snake-oil salesmen around, but today people are better educated, less tolerant of smarmy weasels who make pleasing noises but are short on content, and the modern person is less inclined to hand over their lot to suits who want to act as their proxy in all things. In short, Joe Public wants some degree of control that extends past the ballot box.

Pierre Trudeau, rat-faced fascist weasel that he was, predicted that with the advent of the personal computer, absolute democracy was within our grasp. In an ideal world, that certainly appears to be a desirable option.

Edited by gsmonks, 08 September 2017 - 10:08 PM.

Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#18 Elara

Elara

    Feel the silence of the moonlight.

  • Watchdog
  • 2,862 posts

Posted 08 September 2017 - 10:59 PM

View Postgsmonks, on 08 September 2017 - 08:26 PM, said:

My line of thinking leading to 45? You're joking, right?

My line of thinking is/was social and tax reformation for the working poor, free education for students, anti-big-business. How on earth does any of that equate thinking that backs 45?

Like people who vote democrat, you seem to be living in your own world. Every time the Dems get in, it's a classic case of bait 'n' switch. They make promises but deliver the status quo, and do nothing to eliminate corporate and political corruption.

Sure, they throw in a few reasonable-sounding nuggets, like standing up for science, evolution, and climate change, but in the end it's largely lip-service.

Yes, your line of thinking:

View Postgsmonks, on 07 September 2017 - 04:54 PM, said:

Fact: the Electoral college gerrymandered the election.

Fact: Bernie Sanders was a viable candidate from the beginning.

Fact: Bernie Sanders, funded with pennies, ran an amazing campaign against corporate America.

Fact: Bernie Sanders should have won the election, would have if the playing-field was level, and was the only viable alternative to Trump.

It's Hillary's sickening sense of entitlement here that makes me glad a Democrat isn't in office.

Is she a good alternative to Trump?

Give your head a shake. She would have preserved the status quo and ignored the demands of the grassroots movement that was backing Bernie. She and her ilk are just as guilty as Reagan for destroying the Middle Class. Neither she nor her husband did a thing to undo the damage done by Reagan. They had eight-bleeping-years to fix things, rip the grubby mitts of corporate America off the throats of the Middle Class and minimum wage earners, and reinstate the tax structure that prevented corporate America from bleeding the economy, the Middle Class, and low-wage earners white.

If you're for Hillary, that is what you're for.

This refusal by many in the USA to vote for Hillary because they were so against her and for Bernie, that they refused to step up and vote for her, which is what led us to the current president. Sure, they weren't alone, oh no. Those that felt 45 would get them the freedom to do whatever they wanted, came out to vote. So yes, your attitude with the "Fact:" says that if you had been a US citizen, you also would have decided to not cast a vote for Hillary, which effectively cast a vote for 45. So, once again, your line of thinking got us 45.

And then there is this:

View Postgsmonks, on 08 September 2017 - 08:26 PM, said:

Like people who vote democrat, you seem to be living in your own world. Every time the Dems get in, it's a classic case of bait 'n' switch. They make promises but deliver the status quo, and do nothing to eliminate corporate and political corruption.

Sure, they throw in a few reasonable-sounding nuggets, like standing up for science, evolution, and climate change, but in the end it's largely lip-service.

There it is, the fall back insult. It's what you always use when you have no clue about a person. You assume knowledge and your assumptions are always far off base.
El
~ blue crystal glows, the dark side unseen, sparkles in scant light, from sun to planet, to me in between ~


I want a job in HRC's "shadow" cabinet. Good pay, really easy hours, lots of time off. Can't go wrong.

"You have a fair and valid point here. I've pointed out, numerous times, that the Left's or Democrats always cry "Racist" whenever someone disagrees with them. I failed to realize that the Right or Republicans do the same thing with "Liberal"." ~ LotS

#19 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 8,819 posts

Posted 16 September 2017 - 11:48 AM

I watched (or rather mostly listened) to Clinton's interview by Rachel Maddow Thursday night.

The starting claim of this thread of course is that Clinton is so thoroughly wrong when she asserts that Sanders cost her the election.
Not on whether she would have been a better President than Trump. Which is a really really low bar….

However, listening to that interview, I can't help to think we ended up with the much worst candidate (between Trump and Hillary) by far, and wonder how other people couldn't see that.

Again, a low bar, but even when I compare her to the rest of GOP primary field, I can't recall who I think would have been able to compare to her gravitas, qualities, and qualifications. The closest (of that big field) I can think of would be Jeb. Which some might think a damning indictment (as her politics being so centrist and corportist). I don't know how else in that big field I might be forgetting, who might have been a valid comparison as President to a President Clinton in my opinion.

Out of the Democratic (and socialist-democrat ;) ) candidates, I don't know enough about Lessig or O'Malley really, other than they were not ready for prime-time it seemed (which is not an indictment of their characters or qualities). Do I believe Sanders would have made a better President than Hillary? It is hard to say, within the 'restrictions' of the Presidency. Both would have had a difficult time working with GOP lead congress and senate, to get legislation past. For what they could do, within the Presidential powers, I think in some areas they would do equally good things, except when it comes to confronting corporations malfeasance. Which, when one thinks about it, is pretty much everywhere, even education to some degree (school choice for example). Financial regulation, health care, labour laws, environmental protections, all these have to contend with corporations and their influence. While I have no doubt Hillary would be better than Trump, I also have no doubt Sanders would have been better on these things than Hillary. The choice in the federal general election was between Hillary and Trump. I think Hillary would have been better than Sanders on general foreign diplomacy/relations, simply because of her Secretary of State experience, though I would have trusted Sanders to endeavour to get good people in the State Department. And I think he would have been able to better resist the siren call of the Military Industrial Complex and big oil, whereas I don't think I could have trusted Clinton to do the same. I would definitely have preferred Sanders picking the next SCOTUS (and other federal judges) than Hillary. Hillary's SCOTUS choices may have leaned socially left, but I have little doubt that they'd also lean towards corporate interests.

As for general election competition, like I said, Clinton was an obvious choice over Trump. Considering the damage Trump has done and will continue to do, one could make an argument that one should ignore the third party candidates. If one doesn't, the third party candidates most people know about are Gary Johnson - Libertarian, Jill Stein - Green, Evan McMullin - Better for America. They also has the most state ballot access IIRC, compared to other third party candidates.

It is hard to say, as they got so much less coverage. Libertarians I am sometimes on the same page, sometimes not. But I believe government should have a greater role than they would generally believe in. Green. Well, I once voted for Green party here ;) , so I can't say I disagree with the Green parties. Would Jill Stein been ready (as reasonably possible) for the Presidency? I don't know. And that may not be always the best measuring stick, if it means things like that they have essentially been co-opted by special interests in their pursuit of relevant experience. Which maybe, heck probably, why people were giving Trump (and Sanders too) a chance. One thing I think you are right about gsmonks is that people are looking for outsiders, unsullied, so to speak, by these systematic issues in politics.

Edited by sierraleone, 16 September 2017 - 11:49 AM.

Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html

#20 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 4,832 posts

Posted 16 September 2017 - 08:59 PM

The problem with Clinton is that she's a middle-class bourgeois skank. Like all modern politicians, she's about giving head to the middle class (the greater proportion of voters) to the exclusion of all else. The veterans, the poor, the mentally ill (including those in the penal system), the working poor, are treated with depraved indifference by both parties, and this is equally true in Canada, Europe, and around the world.

Elections come down to two things: the budget, and giving head to the middle class. This was kind of okay when corporations were taxed at a rate of around 95%, but in this day and age when even the middle class has the corporate jackboot on its neck, politicians can only make empty promises to the middle class.

Any politician who only cares about giving head to the middle class is a syphilitic pustule of depraved indifference, in my estimation. Bernie was the only politician, in decades, to actually address the underlying problems and do something about them.

But hey, if you're okay with depraved indifference towards society's most vulnerable, I guess you can be excused, because that makes you like most people.
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.


0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users