I will be voting for Hillary Clinton.

[annabenedetti]

I really do not want to vote for Hillary Clinton. Not because I think she's such a terrible human being, or politician, but because I resent the DNC forcing her on us as a candidate. And because I resent the fact that she is being presented as the only alternative to the insanity of Donald Trump.

Do you think the situation is similar to the GOP, though? Not at the conventions, but during the primary, and for different reasons: the GOP because the huge number of candidates allowed Trump to flourish, the Dems because they have superdelegates? I wonder what November would have looked like without those two factors.

 

[annabenedetti]

Donald Trump's campaign co-chairman offered up an alternate explanation for the Republican nominee's recent comments about the geopolitical situation between Russia and Crimea:

He "was thinking about something else" when he said that Vladimir Putin would not invade Ukraine.

​

 

[ok doser]

the blind squirrel finds a nut!

I really do not want to vote for Hillary Clinton. ... I think she's such a terrible human being...

:first:

 

[annabenedetti]

I'm a nut!

:first:

 

[annabenedetti]

[h=1]Trump retreats from claim that NFL sent letter regarding debates[/h]:chuckle:

 

[ok doser]

[h=1]Trump retreats from claim that NFL sent letter regarding debates[/h]:chuckle:

this amuses you enough to post? :freak:


wot

a

tard

 

[PureX]

Do you think the situation is similar to the GOP, though? Not at the conventions, but during the primary, and for different reasons: the GOP because the huge number of candidates allowed Trump to flourish, the Dems because they have superdelegates? I wonder what November would have looked like without those two factors.

I think Ted Cruz would have been worse for the country than Donald Trump. Same with Chris Christie and most of the other GOP candidates.

I don't think Bernie would have been able to 'save us', either. Though he is the only one that wants to.

The problem isn't just the electoral system, it's the systematic corruption of both parties, and of the minds of the voters. We are in some very deep …

 

[annabenedetti]

this amuses you enough to post? :freak:

Yes.

wot

a

tard

Thanks for responding.

 

[DavidK]

Don't be so naïve David, surgical abortions are down because our promiscuous society prefers pills over scalpels.

I did't mean to derail this thread with a discussion about the reasons behind the decrease in number of abortions. I wrote, "in part," because making the operation of a clinic more difficult has been one of the contributing factors identified not only by pro-life groups, but by pro-abortion groups.

The whole comment was offered in the context of agreeing that more has been done to limit abortion outside of the Supreme Court than all of this argument over the next appointment acknowledges.

In addition to clinics closing due to the difficulty of operating under regulation and increasing ease of access to birth control, there has been a shift toward pro-life attitudes with regard to personal decisions (while still advocating that it should remain legal). This has been attributed to increase awareness of life in the womb in part due to ultrasound technology, life-support technology for premature births, and information campaigns.

The next supreme court justice can do a lot of good or harm, but is not the totality of the abortion issue.

 

[annabenedetti]

I think Ted Cruz would have been worse for the country than Donald Trump. Same with Chris Christie and most of the other GOP candidates.

I wouldn't have voted for Ted Cruz either if he'd been the last candidate standing.

I don't think Bernie would have been able to 'save us', either. Though he is the only one that wants to.

No one can 'save us' all by himself, but I would like to have seen Bernie have a chance to work with Congress. No matter who wins now, we'll be more polarized than ever.

The problem isn't just the electoral system, it's the systematic corruption of both parties, and of the minds of the voters. We are in some very deep …

It's all we have to work with.

 

[ok doser]

...
The next supreme court justice can do a lot of good or harm...

and that justice will be appointed by trump or clinton



we already know what we'd get from clinton

 

[annabenedetti]

I did't mean to derail this thread with a discussion about the reasons behind the decrease in number of abortions. I wrote, "in part," because making the operation of a clinic more difficult has been one of the contributing factors identified not only by pro-life groups, but by pro-abortion groups.

The whole comment was offered in the context of agreeing that more has been done to limit abortion outside of the Supreme Court than all of this argument over the next appointment acknowledges.

I agree with you. You're not derailing, feel free to post as you wish.

In addition to clinics closing due to the difficulty of operating under regulation and increasing ease of access to birth control, there has been a shift toward pro-life attitudes with regard to personal decisions (while still advocating that it should remain legal). This has been attributed to increase awareness of life in the womb in part due to ultrasound technology, life-support technology for premature births, and information campaigns.

The next supreme court justice can do a lot of good or harm, but is not the totality of the abortion issue.

Again, I agree. Ultrasound technology is definitely a factor, because it's a lot harder to consider the baby a mass of tissue when you can count the fingers and toes, and see the baby sucking his or her thumb. And technology: I have a friend whose baby weighed less than 2 lbs at birth, and he's a healthy kindergartner now.

 

[DavidK]

Nobody cares who you're voting for

Tell that to the people who keep calling my home phone asking if I have a minute to answer a few quick questions.

 

[DavidK]

Either way, we lose.

In the short run. But maybe, just maybe, this turns us to repentance.

 

[PureX]

Bernie Sanders understands that the only way to help this country get out of the abyss of corruption and idiocy that it's fallen into will require a massive unified social movement. And he has already begun that movement with his presidential campaign, attracting many thousands to his rallies compared to a few hundred at any of the other candidate's rallies. If the DNC had made him their candidate for president, just imagine the crowds that would turn out for him when he has Donald Trump as the example to point to for all the things that are wrong with this country and government. I think he could have generated a landslide in the election that he could have then whipped up further into that massive social movement that really could change things in this country's government for the better.

Which is exactly WHY the DNC had to make sure that Bernie was not their candidate. Because the democratic political party does NOT WANT CHANGE. Not really. They want to speechify about change, and pretend they are progressive and populist, while actually being neither. I really don't see Hillary as being all that different from a Ted Cruz or a Chris Christie. When the doors are closed and the back room deals are being made, I suspect we couldn't tell the behavior of any one of them from any other.

`

 

[annabenedetti]

Bernie Sanders understand that the only way to help this country get out of the pit of corruption and idiocy that it's fallen into will requite a unified massive social movement. He has already begun that movement with his campaign, attracting many thousands to his rallies compared to a few hundred at any of the other candidate's rallies. If the DNC had made him their candidate for president, just imagine that crowds that would turn out when he has Trump as his example to point to for all the things that are wrong with this country. I think he could have generated a landslide in the election that he could have perhaps been whipped up into that massive social movement that really could change things in this country's government.

Which is exactly WHY the DNC had to make sure that Bernie was not their candidate. Because the democratic political party does NOT WANT CHANGE. Not really. They want to speechify about change, and pretend they are progressive and populist, while actually being neither. I really don't see Hillary as being all that different from a Ted Cruz or a Chris Christie. When the doors are closed and the back room deals are being made, I suspect we couldn't tell the behavior of any one of them from any other.

Are you voting in November?

 

[PureX]

Yes, I will vote because the legislative races are more important than the presidential race. And I don't know what I'll do about the presidential race. Maybe vote for a 3rd party candidate, or maybe just not vote for any of the presidential candidates.

 

[annabenedetti]

Yes, I will vote because the legislative races are more important than the presidential race. And I don't know what I'll do about the presidential race. Maybe vote for a 3rd party candidate, or maybe just not vote for any of the presidential candidates.

Fair enough.

 

[PureX]

Fair enough.

I think it's important to send the DNC a message, that their disingenuous pretense of being 'for the people' is no longer acceptable. They need to either be for the people, or the people will reject them.

It's the only option that I can see.

 

[annabenedetti]

I think it's important to send the DNC a message, that their disingenuous pretense of being 'for the people' is no longer acceptable. They need to either be for the people, or the people will reject them.

Hmm. Well, I tried that option in 2012. The GOP didn't seem to notice.

It's the only option that I can see.

It's not the only option for me this time around. I'm voting against Trump.