Bi_3 wrote:Yet it's somewhat accurate. The reaction of anger in the press towards Comey is telling; whatever they found on Abedin's laptop doesn't matter because Trump.
It doesn't matter because it doesn't matter, genius.
And they haven't even found anything yet, if they ever will.
Don't you think that's a little bit sleazy and premature?
Oops, I forgot who I'm talking to. To Trump supporters, sleazy is a good thing.
This is one of the dumbest pieces of coverage I've seen throughout this election cycle.
Yet it's somewhat accurate. The reaction of anger in the press towards Comey is telling; whatever they found on Abedin's laptop doesn't matter because Trump. If this were anyone other than Hillary, she would have been forced out already, but Trump. We are making a shit ton of excuses for her corruption because somehow the republicans have a worse candidate in place, but what does that say about us?
Consdiering the Republican candidate for president, I'm not sure this new revelation is really the straw that breaks the camel's back regarding our dignity. In regards to this race, that got jettisoned ages ago. I also don't really see why "Trump is worse" isn't good enough, and it ties into something I've never really understood about a person who will only support someone that checks every single box for them. Out of the 350 million plus people in this country, I'm offered two of those, and am asked to choose one to lead the country. Couple that with the fact that these people are often coming out of situations that will lead people into ethical quandaries more often than not, and I'm fairly shocked that in my life I've had a chance to vote for a viable presidential candidate I actually respected and supported.
The e-mails are important, sure, and if she wins I have no doubt we'll be hearing about them for years to come. Unfortunately at the moment that point is moot because Donald Trump's the other choice, which makes my decision fairly simple.
I think it's appalling that Clinton hasn't stepped down - if the situation were to occur in Australia or the UK I would expect she would almost have no choice.
BurtReynolds wrote:how did we get here and how can we ensure that this never happens again?
“This two-hundred-and-forty-year experiment in self-rule began with the best of intentions, but I think we can all agree that it didn’t end well,” she said.
This is one of the dumbest pieces of coverage I've seen throughout this election cycle.
Yet it's somewhat accurate. The reaction of anger in the press towards Comey is telling; whatever they found on Abedin's laptop doesn't matter because Trump. If this were anyone other than Hillary, she would have been forced out already, but Trump. We are making a shit ton of excuses for her corruption because somehow the republicans have a worse candidate in place, but what does that say about us?
Consdiering the Republican candidate for president, I'm not sure this new revelation is really the straw that breaks the camel's back regarding our dignity. In regards to this race, that got jettisoned ages ago. I also don't really see why "Trump is worse" isn't good enough, and it ties into something I've never really understood about a person who will only support someone that checks every single box for them. Out of the 350 million plus people in this country, I'm offered two of those, and am asked to choose one to lead the country. Couple that with the fact that these people are often coming out of situations that will lead people into ethical quandaries more often than not, and I'm fairly shocked that in my life I've had a chance to vote for a viable presidential candidate I actually respected and supported.
The e-mails are important, sure, and if she wins I have no doubt we'll be hearing about them for years to come. Unfortunately at the moment that point is moot because Donald Trump's the other choice, which makes my decision fairly simple.
I don't particularly disagree with you, and nothing is gonna make me vote for Trump (even if the emails detail favors to cover up Anthony W actually having slept with a minor), but the point I was getting at wasn't about the emails themselves. Its that we are suppose to be outaged at Comey for threatening Hillarys election. That's the reality of it. All this "the attorney general opposed" and "violation of standard procedures" are just words wrapped around the perceived effrontery of supporting Trump, which is strictly verboten on threat of excommunication. And it's part of a large coordinated effort by all flavors of media and likely multiple federal agencies to manipulate information and public perception to hide the truth about her. It's rigged. And we are forced to be ok with this.
"The fatal flaw of all revolutionaries is that they know how to tear things down but don't have a f**king clue about how to build anything."
Birds in Hell wrote:I think it's appalling that Clinton hasn't stepped down - if the situation were to occur in Australia or the UK I would expect she would almost have no choice.
BurtReynolds wrote:how did we get here and how can we ensure that this never happens again?
“This two-hundred-and-forty-year experiment in self-rule began with the best of intentions, but I think we can all agree that it didn’t end well,” she said.
Birds in Hell wrote:I think it's appalling that Clinton hasn't stepped down - if the situation were to occur in Australia or the UK I would expect she would almost have no choice.
BurtReynolds wrote:how did we get here and how can we ensure that this never happens again?
“This two-hundred-and-forty-year experiment in self-rule began with the best of intentions, but I think we can all agree that it didn’t end well,” she said.
How do you feel about trump stepping down?
Either her conduct was acceptable or it was not, consideration of Trump shouldn't come into it.
If her standing down means handing Trump victory, then so be it, as uncomfortable as that may be; the blame rests with her.
The sanctity of institutions matter more than one election victory.
Birds in Hell wrote:I think it's appalling that Clinton hasn't stepped down - if the situation were to occur in Australia or the UK I would expect she would almost have no choice.
BurtReynolds wrote:how did we get here and how can we ensure that this never happens again?
“This two-hundred-and-forty-year experiment in self-rule began with the best of intentions, but I think we can all agree that it didn’t end well,” she said.
How do you feel about trump stepping down?
Either her conduct was acceptable or it was not, consideration of Trump shouldn't come into it.
If her standing down means handing Trump victory, then so be it, as uncomfortable as that may be; the blame rests with her.
The sanctity of institutions matter more than one election victory.
Sanctity of the institution lies with Donald trump then. Okay that makes sense.
Wait, hold on a second, Spenno, are you talking about Clinton's private server scandal in general? Or just these new e-mails that surfaced and whose content we are not privy to yet?
Anders wrote:I do not have a «neoliberal assessment of geopolitics», so please stop writing that I do.
Birds in Hell wrote:I think it's appalling that Clinton hasn't stepped down - if the situation were to occur in Australia or the UK I would expect she would almost have no choice.
BurtReynolds wrote:how did we get here and how can we ensure that this never happens again?
“This two-hundred-and-forty-year experiment in self-rule began with the best of intentions, but I think we can all agree that it didn’t end well,” she said.
How do you feel about trump stepping down?
Either her conduct was acceptable or it was not, consideration of Trump shouldn't come into it.
If her standing down means handing Trump victory, then so be it, as uncomfortable as that may be; the blame rests with her.
The sanctity of institutions matter more than one election victory.
you don't think there is any gray area there? Such fundamentalist rigidity is crazy.
theplatypus wrote:Wait, hold on a second, Spenno, are you talking about Clinton's private server scandal in general? Or just these new e-mails that surfaced and whose content we are not privy to yet?
Both - "presidential candidate under FBI investigation" is not a good look.
I think she should've stepped down the moment this became an issue. Other candidates may arguably have done a better job opposing Trump in any case.
If your going to suggest that Clinton email scandal somehow soils the sanctity of our democratic process, wherein no criminal activity had ever been declared, but not even discuss Donald and his complete anarchist beliefs and acknowledgement of trying to defile the actual system....
theplatypus wrote:Wait, hold on a second, Spenno, are you talking about Clinton's private server scandal in general? Or just these new e-mails that surfaced and whose content we are not privy to yet?
Both - "presidential candidate under FBI investigation" is not a good look.
I think she should've stepped down the moment this became an issue. Other candidates may arguably have done a better job opposing Trump in any case.
Of course it looks ugly. But again this email "scandal" is so fucking stupid and played out as a right wing taking point and I believe a majority of Americans are over it.
theplatypus wrote:Wait, hold on a second, Spenno, are you talking about Clinton's private server scandal in general? Or just these new e-mails that surfaced and whose content we are not privy to yet?
Both - "presidential candidate under FBI investigation" is not a good look.
I think she should've stepped down the moment this became an issue. Other candidates may arguably have done a better job opposing Trump in any case.
And for the record : I think it's embarrassing that the democrats couldn't put forth a candidate that could actually destroy the Donald. Should be a no brainer. Alas go America
theplatypus wrote:Wait, hold on a second, Spenno, are you talking about Clinton's private server scandal in general? Or just these new e-mails that surfaced and whose content we are not privy to yet?
Both - "presidential candidate under FBI investigation" is not a good look.
Then the new e-mails are a non-issue, because the investigation won't be officially closed until the statute of limitations runs out. That's just how these things go.
This whole e-mail controversy feels like a lot of nothing, but I am biased because I want Clinton to win and think she's actually a very qualified and competent candidate.
Anders wrote:I do not have a «neoliberal assessment of geopolitics», so please stop writing that I do.
If foreign politicians would so easily step down, that sounds like more of a problem with them then the US. Call me when they're convicted. This ain't the minor leagues. This is for control of the most powerful country on Earth. "So be it?" Give me a break.
