Who do you vote for?

[Clanscorpia]

10 hours ago, kelvinhall05 said:

neither one, my family is moving to canada. jobs and trump.

Its not that easy  

[AresKrieger]

4 minutes ago, stconquest said:

Six bankruptcies later.  I guess Trump sees a socialist way out as his status quo.  I bet he says something to the contrary.

You do know when a business owner files bankruptcy on a company it only affects the assets of that company ie his personally finances were not involved as a whole rather just said businesses individually.

Quote

Unethical behavior out of these two camps would be:  lying to the public in a public forum; stealing/financial corruption; hurting others needlessly; being beholden to entities and groups that have say in a politician's decision making process other than the general public;  and many more.  

This isn't very clear tbh are you saying they are both guilty of all these things, if so I'll give you some of them but frankly the fact that I consider Clinton's actions of selling influence to a foreign organization treason it would be hard for Clinton to win a moral character argument with Trump despite some of his less than stellar business moves.

[stconquest]

1 minute ago, AresKrieger said:

You do know when a business owner files bankruptcy on a company it only affects the assets of that company ie his personally finances were not involved as a whole rather just said businesses individually.

This isn't very clear tbh are you saying they are both guilty of all these things, if so I'll give you some of them but frankly the fact that I consider Clinton's actions of selling influence to a foreign organization treason it would be hard for Clinton to win a moral character argument with Trump despite some of his less than stellar business moves.

W h a t e v s.

 

Do you want to discuss this man? 

[AresKrieger]

4 minutes ago, stconquest said:

W h a t e v s.

 

Do you want to discuss this man? 

Yes and no, I don't want to start a war with you hence why I'm just pointing out some weaker parts/looking for some clarification of your side rather than outright arguing against all your points as that would be pointless, it's not as if I can claim Trump is sunshine and rainbows after all as that would be lying on my part.

[dalekphalm]

3 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

Im voting for Bernie Sanders. Ill write his name in. At the end of the day Ill be able to sleep. 

I get that sentiment. I just personally could never willingly throw away a vote like that.

 

When you have a horrible system like in the US, where even if you wanted to, voting for a third party is a wasted vote, you've got to vote strategically, if you want your vote to count.

 

If I were an American, I would vote for Clinton. Some people might not like her, but when you compare the two, Trump really is the worse candidate. I'd willingly vote for the lesser of two evils to keep Trump out of Office.

 

There have also been numerous analyses that predict that Trumps platform will actually cost America a lot more than Hillary in the long run, and definitely more than Obama, in terms of Federal Debt. Granted, he's recently brought on some bigger experts in the field, and they've trimmed his proposed tax cuts to more reasonable numbers, but it's still estimated to cost over $4 Trillion USD.

 

4 minutes ago, AresKrieger said:

You do know when a business owner files bankruptcy on a company it only affects the assets of that company ie his personally finances were not involved as a whole rather just said businesses individually.

This isn't very clear tbh are you saying they are both guilty of all these things, if so I'll give you some of them but frankly the fact that I consider Clinton's actions of selling influence to a foreign organization treason it would be hard for Clinton to win a moral character argument with Trump despite some of his less than stellar business moves.

And that doesn't scare you? America is going to be his next business, if he wins. Except if he bankrupts America, it's not just the business that loses, but all American Citizens lose too. He essentially ran his business into the ground multiple times, and came out relatively unscathed. That's not a characteristic I'd want in a US President, personally.

[dalekphalm]

8 minutes ago, stconquest said:

W h a t e v s.

 

Do you want to discuss this man? 

I know it's difficult, but you got to keep your cool in these kinds of discussions. When you lose control, you're telling the "other side" (that being those who have a different political opinion) that you give up and you're out of points to argue.

 

Always fight back with facts and with logic. Oddly enough, both things Trump seems to lack

[Shakaza]

40 minutes ago, NavyCuda said:

I believe in climate change, there is plenty of history to prove Earths climates have gone through a number of changes.  I believe it is supremely arrogant to claim we're solely

responsible for it.

Let me point you to a lovely xkcd comic that illustrates perfectly the influence humanity has had on the climate: http://xkcd.com/1732/

 

(Hint: Do you notice the big slope change in the graph shortly after CO2 emissions began to significantly increase? Such a big change in such a short time does not appear anywhere else in the graph. It's also quite entertaining the read the whole thing[in my opinion], but I digress.)

[AresKrieger]

4 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

 

 

And that doesn't scare you? America is going to be his next business, if he wins. Except if he bankrupts America, it's not just the business that loses, but all American Citizens lose too. He essentially ran his business into the ground multiple times, and came out relatively unscathed. That's not a characteristic I'd want in a US President, personally.

Not at all the President can't really spend money without congressional approval or special circumstance such a foreign arrangements like purchasing territory, fiscal bills come from Congress the president has no say on that matter (minus veto of the bill), this is why people were upset at Obama for some of his executive orders that seemed to bypass this aspect of the constitution.

[Nowak]

Neither. All of the candidates, major party and third party, suck. I'd much rather vote for someone who I feel represents my ideals for this country, and Trump, Clinton, Stein and Johnson do not.

if the 2020 candidates are better, I'll consider registering to vote, but this election? No.

[dalekphalm]

Just now, Shakaza said:

Let me point you to a lovely xkcd comic that illustrates perfectly the influence humanity has had on the climate: http://xkcd.com/1732/

 

(Hint: Do you notice the big slope change in the graph shortly after CO2 emissions began to significantly increase? Such a big change in such a short time does not appear anywhere else in the graph. It's also quite entertaining the read the whole thing[in my opinion], but I digress.)

Ahh good graph. I've read it before

 

The thing to note on these graphs is the RATE OF CHANGE. Certainly, global temps have been at a similar temperature as they are today. But that change naturally takes around 2000 years (give or take) to happen. We've managed to make that change happen in around 100 years. Scary as fuck, my friends.

 

Climate change is real. We're part of the problem. We might not be the SOLE cause of the problem, but the facts indisputably point to us as the main cause.

 

Can we afford to take the chance that we're wrong and it's nothing? No. That doesn't mean cripple the global economy, but it does mean enforce regulations to limit emissions, while working towards cleaner energy practices.

 

4 minutes ago, AresKrieger said:

Not at all the President can't really spend money without congressional approval or special circumstance such a foreign arrangements like purchasing territory, fiscal bills come from Congress the president has no say on that matter (minus veto of the bill), this is why people were upset at Obama for some of his executive orders that seemed to bypass this aspect of the constitution.

While it's true that Congress approves the budget, the President still sets the tone, and makes the plan (Whether he can get it approved by congress is a different story).

 

By that argument, you're basically hoping that Congress will prevent Trump from fucking up too badly. While you may be right, that's definitely not something I'd like about my chosen candidate. Counting on another party to keep him in line is not a selling point.

[AresKrieger]

9 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

While it's true that Congress approves the budget, the President still sets the tone, and makes the plan (Whether he can get it approved by congress is a different story).

 

By that argument, you're basically hoping that Congress will prevent Trump from fucking up too badly. While you may be right, that's definitely not something I'd like about my chosen candidate. Counting on another party to keep him in line is not a selling point.

Well that's the beauty of it neither party is actually on Trumps side, that's the only reason I'm confident the checks and balances will work out granted I still would trade Trump for Rand Paul any day of the week, that's the problem with first past the post it forces you into one choice when you'd rather list based of preference value. If we had that sort of system this party nonsense would be less of a problem, though my state would probably be ignored as a result though I honestly think NH just wants to be left alone.

[dalekphalm]

6 minutes ago, AresKrieger said:

Well that's the beauty of it neither party is actually on Trumps side, that's the only reason I'm confident the checks and balances will work out granted I still would trade Trump for Rand Paul any day of the week, that's the problem with first past the post it forces you into one choice when you'd rather list based of preference value. If we had that sort of system this party nonsense would be less of a problem, though my state would probably be ignored as a result though I honestly think NH just wants to be left alone.

You should vote for someone who is in favour of Electoral Reform, then. Ranked Ballot system is the best in my opinion.

 

The Canadian Government is currently exploring Electoral Reform possibilities now (One of the things the Liberal Party ran on was getting rid of FPTP). The committee responsible for making the recommendation to the Prime Minister is a multi-party committee that includes Liberals (current majority government), Conservatives (Official Opposition, and the next largest party by seats in Parliament), the NDP (New Democratic Party - basically these guys are usually your ultra-left social democratic party guys, think Bernie Sanders), Bloc Quebecois (A sort of "nationalist" party from Quebec that is always popular there, but never runs outside of Quebec), and Elizabeth May, leader of the Green Party of Canada (And currently the only Independent with a seat).

 

So, while the Liberal MP's (Member of Parliament - kind of like Congressmen) are the largest group of the committee, it is well represented by all major political factions in the country, even the smaller ones.

 

Ranked Ballot is my personal favourite, but some form of Proportional Representation in general may also do well. I just think Ranked Ballot fixes the major issues, without over complicating things.

[AresKrieger]

1 minute ago, dalekphalm said:

You should vote for someone who is in favour of Electoral Reform, then. Ranked Ballot system is the best in my opinion.

That's the problem, neither party wants to end the two party system since ultimately they benefit from it, also in order to fix the issue states individually would have to fix it on their own as voting laws are state matters not federal and if it was changed to be one system via a federal law the constitution would have to be altered (not happening for a couple of reasons). Granted NH might be on board as our state is more libertarian than most but without the support of NY TX and CA it will not happen, and funny enough those are some of the more "problematic states" when it comes to party politics.

[dalekphalm]

6 minutes ago, AresKrieger said:

That's the problem, neither party wants to end the two party system since ultimately they benefit from it, also in order to fix the issue states individually would have to fix it on their own as voting laws are state matters not federal and if it was changed to be one system via a federal law the constitution would have to be altered (not happening for a couple of reasons). Granted NH might be on board as our state is more libertarian than most but without the support of NY TX and CA it will not happen, and funny enough those are some of the more "problematic states" when it comes to party politics.

Well, you gotta try. I know each state can make up many of it's own laws (Or decide on how some federal laws are implemented).

 

It sucks, because America has great potential, but then certain things like the 2-party system (and other issues) really hold it back from being the best nation on earth.

[stconquest]

1 hour ago, AresKrieger said:

Yes and no, I don't want to start a war with you hence why I'm just pointing out some weaker parts/looking for some clarification of your side rather than outright arguing against all your points as that would be pointless, it's not as if I can claim Trump is sunshine and rainbows after all as that would be lying on my part.

Sorry was playing LOL...

 

You seem to leave out what happens to investor money.  "I am going to make you tons of money.  You will be so rich it will make your head spin.  Look how rich I am.  Wnat a steak, maybe some wine or water?"

 

I was objectively giving examples of what is, and what is not, "unethical".

1 hour ago, dalekphalm said:

I know it's difficult, but you got to keep your cool in these kinds of discussions. When you lose control, you're telling the "other side" (that being those who have a different political opinion) that you give up and you're out of points to argue.

 

Always fight back with facts and with logic. Oddly enough, both things Trump seems to lack

I am lazy and dumb... bad combo.  I have to actively search stuff for a real discussion.  With Trump, the obvious is easy enough.  Just like Clinton, the more you dig, the more crap you find. 

 

The problem is that when you bottom out Trump's hole, it moves laterally across a wide spectrum of dealings.  Hillary's hole is situated smack dab in the political sphere, questionable ethics that Trump has not had the chance to mess up in yet.  Her shortcomings are found in Donald, but not all Donald's shortcomings are found in her.  He will screw over anyone to get ahead.  Scamming people for thousands of dollars when he is empowered to feel he can be the bully. 

 

'Take me to court.  You will spend three times what I owe you in the legal proceedings.'  He does not care, his lawyers are on retainer so he might as well use them.

 

Clinton is objectively the better candidate.  This is not debatable to any extensive degree.  She is a success in her field, whereas Donald is not really successful by any standard measure of big business.  He is a celebrity that acts like a businessman.  Trump supporters are really voting for Paris Hilton, he is not much smarter... if smarter.

 

+1 to getting rid of FPTP

47 minutes ago, AresKrieger said:

Well that's the beauty of it neither party is actually on Trumps side, that's the only reason I'm confident the checks and balances will work out granted I still would trade Trump for Rand Paul any day of the week, that's the problem with first past the post it forces you into one choice when you'd rather list based of preference value. If we had that sort of system this party nonsense would be less of a problem, though my state would probably be ignored as a result though I honestly think NH just wants to be left alone.

I am amazed you consider voting for Donald Trump not because he is capable, but because he has enemies that will stop him when he tries to do bad things.

 

Clinton has enemies too, and they are much more firmly dug in to fight her. 

[stconquest]

What kind of person tries to prove the POTUS was not born in the USA for four years AFTER the POTUS releases his birth certificate?  This is brutal.

 

Idiot, insane or a sociopath?

[deleted_member_030719]

Added a poll!

[stconquest]

11 minutes ago, Jed M said:

Added a poll!

We are beyond a poll at this point.

[deleted_member_030719]

3 minutes ago, stconquest said:

We are beyond a poll at this point.

Don't really give a flying fuck.

[Mike Soda]

I don't vote & rather than explain why myself I'll let a legend do it.

 

[stconquest]

29 minutes ago, Jed M said:

Don't really give a flying fuck.

i c

[No]

o god only one person voted in the poll thing and they voted trump

[stconquest]

12 minutes ago, No said:

o god only one person voted in the poll thing and they voted trump

lol, yeah.... the OP.

[GlassBomb]

7 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

Are you an American Citizen of voting age?

 

If so, I strongly discourage you from not voting. Voting is one if the biggest and most important powers and responsibilities that a citizen holds. It's our responsibility as part of a democracy to vote.

 

By not voting, you're letting the system work without your input. You essentially give up the right to complain about what happens, if you don't vote.

 

But it's a personal choice of course

Not an American citizen.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[ShadowCaptain]

3 hours ago, No said:

o god only one person voted in the poll thing and they voted trump

Maybe they thought it was a "who do you want to be assassinated" poll