I can't wait for November 8th either and it's because I have a day off from work so I get to spend the day sitting home figuring out who is deserving of my well thought out vote. It's definitely not Hillary, so that narrows it down.

Prog Snob wrote:I can't wait for November 8th either and it's because I have a day off from work so I get to spend the day sitting home figuring out who is deserving of my well thought out vote. It's definitely not Hillary, so that narrows it down.

If the last 3 months haven't made you understand that Trump is the worst person on earth for this job, one day won't help.

The idea of "well thought out" and "trump" in the same sentence......

More like "Trump" and "garbage heap" would be more appropriate.

Now now, there are other options besides Trump if one likes to spend their time following Clinton conspiracy theories.

SafeAsMilk wrote:Now now, there are other options besides Trump if one likes to spend their time following Clinton conspiracy theories.

And there are still women following this pig, which is the weirdest part of all this circus to me.

Call me crazy, but I find Hillary to be worse than him. That doesn't mean I'm saying he's good. It means I'm saying she's worse.

Prog Snob wrote:Call me crazy, but I find Hillary to be worse than him. That doesn't mean I'm saying he's good. It means I'm saying she's worse.

In what way ?

The years of corruption. What good did she accomplish as Secretary of State? What about her deserves my vote?

Prog Snob wrote:The years of corruption. What good did she accomplish as Secretary of State? What about her deserves my vote?

That would be more specific if you vaguely waved your hand and said, "Your answer is somewhere over that way."

Your answer is somewhere over that way.

I'm sure you can find a list of her accomplishments as secretary of state if you use the google machine.

Personally, I'm not sure there's anything about her that deserves your vote other than being actually experienced enough to do the job. That's even if you somehow convince yourself that Trump won't do what he's said, or that somehow what he's said isn't many times worse than anything Clinton's done on her worst day.

Of course you could be voting third party, which I think is a much more meaningful protest vote.

Yes, she's more experienced, but that's like saying Jeffrey Dahmer is an expert at unique cuisine so let me see what he thinks I should have for lunch.

Well it is kind of like saying that, in the same way that saying some words are kind of like saying other words.

But, beyond those basically similarities, the comparison falls down.

The principle remains. Granted I sensationalized it a bit, but this is politics we're talking about.

Which principle?

That using Hillary's experience as a reason to vote for her is completely non sequitur.

I think we're seeing an extension of faking it until you make it, sort of a miniature demonstration of how the Faux News Channel repeats false claims until they are accepted as true. Except that Prog Snob hasn't even bothered to make a proper claim- just vague innuendo.

We can be very specific about documented incidences of Trump carrying out racist and illegal behaviors, sexist and illegal behaviors (sometimes by his own admission), as well as suggesting racist and unconstitutional policies, and moving to the fiscal rather than the ethical, proposing budgetary measures that people in his own party tell us won't fucking work. We could write paragraph after paragraph about specific things that Trump has done which make him unfit for the Presidency, and possibly unfit for human society. I won't write those paragraphs here because they've already been covered at length in another thread.

What do we have on Clinton? An ill-advised e-mail server, a bunch of manufactured non-scandals, and bitching because she wasn't the only person in the Senate, but somehow everything the Senate did or did not do is her fault if we didn't like it.

I think there are specifics about Hilary's career that you could judge her against and find her lacking, which still has performing leaps and bounds ahead of Trump. A judgment of Trump's career finds everything to be lacking, a man with a comprehensive dearth of achievements and someone who appears to be a failure as a human being as well.

ScholasticSpastic wrote:I think we're seeing an extension of faking it until you make it, sort of a miniature demonstration of how the Faux News Channel repeats false claims until they are accepted as true. Except that Prog Snob hasn't even bothered to make a proper claim- just vague innuendo.

We can be very specific about documented incidences of Trump carrying out racist and illegal behaviors, sexist and illegal behaviors (sometimes by his own admission), as well as suggesting racist and unconstitutional policies, and moving to the fiscal rather than the ethical, proposing budgetary measures that people in his own party tell us won't fucking work. We could write paragraph after paragraph about specific things that Trump has done which make him unfit for the Presidency, and possibly unfit for human society. I won't write those paragraphs here because they've already been covered at length in another thread.

What do we have on Clinton? An ill-advised e-mail server, a bunch of manufactured non-scandals, and bitching because she wasn't the only person in the Senate, but somehow everything the Senate did or did not do is her fault if we didn't like it.

I'm not claiming Trump is innocent and I sure as fuck didn't use Faux News to back up my claims, so first start with what I did say, and not what I didn't say. Okay? Thanks, dearie.

However, I suppose anything someone says about Clinton would just be some manufactured scandal and not the reality of it, right? I guess lying to Congress is the quality we look for in a president. Her husband disgraced himself, so why not her, too? Now, I'm starting to see your type. Thank you for that moment of clarity.