Election 2016

[Simple Torture]

Who should I vote for?

Are you asking me "Who should I vote for?" or "Whom should I vote for?"

[Norah]

Not a fan of vanden Heuvel.

wouldn't expect you to be

Why's that?

I'm not offended, I'm just curious.

Honestly, I don't read her specifically a lot, but she's been a supporter of Sanders and you seem to be more in the moderate realm of liberalism.

[Norah]

Who should I vote for?

Are you asking me "Who should I vote for?" or "Whom should I vote for?"

The most Simple Torture post of all time.

[E.H. Ruddock]

My wife and I are past having any more kids, so I guess I don't care about ab*rtion

that's fucked up, ruddo

*shrugs*

[Simple Torture]

Who should I vote for?

Are you asking me "Who should I vote for?" or "Whom should I vote for?"

The most Simple Torture post of all time.

I fully expect a ban for that one.

[E.H. Ruddock]

Who should I vote for?

Are you asking me "Who should I vote for?" or "Whom should I vote for?"

I'm asking you to stfu

[Simple Torture]

Who should I vote for?

Are you asking me "Who should I vote for?" or "Whom should I vote for?"

I'm asking you to stfu

idga*

[b_i_revisited]

Listen, I'm not the smartest person when it comes to politics. And I am a very left-leaning conservative. In fact, the only reason I consider myself conservative at all is because of my views regarding military and national security. Everything else for me would be considered pretty liberal. But I have seen first hand how lazy handling of sensitive information can lead to disastrous consequences. There are very easy to follow guidelines that can prevent a lot of data leaks/breaches. So when someone blatantly doesn't follow them, even if nothing is compromised, is very lazy, irresponsible, and worrisome. And if it is some staffer doing it, they get punished and move on. But this is someone who wants to be president. I'm sure some of you brainiacs can argue otherwise, but I like to think I bring a somewhat unique viewpoint to this argument.

You and I are similar in this respect. It only takes a brief look behind the curtain to make some liberal views swing dramatically the other way.

I admittedly don't know all that much about the e-mail scandal, but everything I have heard makes it sound like not that big of a deal.

Except for the fact that the law is that all official government business is to be conducted through government email only, yeah it really isn't a big deal.

That's NOT accurate. It was NOT against the law to use a personal server when she was SoS. It was discouraged, but it was NOT illegal.

You could say she used bad judgment, but she did nothing illegal.

Except for having SAP data on a non-governmental server, which would put you or I into jail for a decade, and acting like it's no big deal, she did nothing wrong. And another thing to note is that some of this classified information wasn't coming from government sources, essentially she was getting some intel from private security companies and god knows how they were getting it.

But still, she's probably the only choice if Bloomberg doesn't run. Bernie Sanders would be an economic disaster for the US, even if he would make improvements in many of the social policies that divide us, and people who support him are going to have to decide which they think is more important.

[Green Habit]

But seriously, it is becoming more and more frustrating for me to vote because I always find something major wrong with every candidate. I guess I have to prioritize and figure out what policies/values I'm willing to sacrifice for ones that I'm not, if that makes sense. My wife and I are past having any more kids, so I guess I don't care about ab*rtion, but I'm worried about retirement so Social Security should be high on my list. While I welcome the apocalypse, I don't want to die of radiation poisoning. I like owning guns but don't see the need for a whole closet full of them. I want to be able to burn leaves without my HOA getting on my ass, but I want them to do something about the rental house down the street that has shady people living there. I don't care if the government spies on me and collects my data, I just don't want them ever telling my wife what kind of pr0n I look at. If having the fast food worker construct my burger properly means higher minimum wage and a more expensive burger, then I'm out. I'd rather spend more money on legitimate space travel and less on global warming. It's already hot, what is a few degrees more? I'd like to know what world organizations are secretly preventing places like Africa from becoming civilized places, but I don't want them to be exposed so that they can't keep the bad guys from taking over.

Who should I vote for?

This is very close to the post I was going to write before I had to do some work things and this conversation picked up in pace. I would, of course, pick a different set of issues I want to see done or not done than you have, but ever since I've been eligible to vote, no major candidate has come even close to satisfying that set. And it just seems to get worse and worse every year, with each and every presidential candidate in 2016 being exceptionally terrible.

So what do I do when I go to the ballot booth? I try to vote for the combination that's the most likely to create gridlock in DC. When you don't trust the agenda of either party, it's the best you can hope for. And thankfully, most of us are fortunate in America in which shifts in power aren't nearly as dramatic as they can be in less stable countries in the world. So I take some solace in not getting emotional over what happens.

[Norah]

But seriously, it is becoming more and more frustrating for me to vote because I always find something major wrong with every candidate. I guess I have to prioritize and figure out what policies/values I'm willing to sacrifice for ones that I'm not, if that makes sense. My wife and I are past having any more kids, so I guess I don't care about ab*rtion, but I'm worried about retirement so Social Security should be high on my list. While I welcome the apocalypse, I don't want to die of radiation poisoning. I like owning guns but don't see the need for a whole closet full of them. I want to be able to burn leaves without my HOA getting on my ass, but I want them to do something about the rental house down the street that has shady people living there. I don't care if the government spies on me and collects my data, I just don't want them ever telling my wife what kind of pr0n I look at. If having the fast food worker construct my burger properly means higher minimum wage and a more expensive burger, then I'm out. I'd rather spend more money on legitimate space travel and less on global warming. It's already hot, what is a few degrees more? I'd like to know what world organizations are secretly preventing places like Africa from becoming civilized places, but I don't want them to be exposed so that they can't keep the bad guys from taking over.

Who should I vote for?

This is very close to the post I was going to write before I had to do some work things and this conversation picked up in pace. I would, of course, pick a different set of issues I want to see done or not done than you have, but ever since I've been eligible to vote, no major candidate has come even close to satisfying that set. And it just seems to get worse and worse every year, with each and every presidential candidate in 2016 being exceptionally terrible.

So what do I do when I go to the ballot booth? I try to vote for the combination that's the most likely to create gridlock in DC. When you don't trust the agenda of either party, it's the best you can hope for. And thankfully, most of us are fortunate in America in which shifts in power aren't nearly as dramatic as they can be in less stable countries in the world. So I take some solace in not getting emotional over what happens.

Based on the level of gridlock seen in Washington over the last administration, do you think we have, or are capable of reaching, a point where the gridlock has gone too far despite none of the candidates representing your beliefs very well?

[Green Habit]

Based on the level of gridlock seen in Washington over the last administration, do you think we have, or are capable of reaching, a point where the gridlock has gone too far despite none of the candidates representing your beliefs very well?

I don't think so, but the answer that is going to differ depending on your worldview. It's perfectly fair to disagree if you think that one of the parties has an agenda that you entirely or mostly agree with and want to see get enacted.

[stip]

It may be time to make peace with the fact that anyone selected to run a large diverse organization is not likely to faithfully represent 100% of the views of any one person within that organization. If that's your threshold you're always going to be alienated from politics, and it's not politics' fault.

[Norah]

Based on the level of gridlock seen in Washington over the last administration, do you think we have, or are capable of reaching, a point where the gridlock has gone too far despite none of the candidates representing your beliefs very well?

I don't think so, but the answer that is going to differ depending on your worldview. It's perfectly fair to disagree if you think that one of the parties has an agenda that you entirely or mostly agree with and want to see get enacted.

Sure, I was just wondering if someone who thought both party's agendas were damaging to the country might reach a point where gridlock might be worse.

[Green Habit]

It may be time to make peace with the fact that anyone selected to run a large diverse organization is not likely to faithfully represent 100% of the views of any one person within that organization. If that's your threshold you're always going to be alienated from politics, and it's not politics' fault.

I don't need to ask for 100%, but I'm not sure if anyone's even crossed 50%. I've been at peace with this for a long time though, and still like to read and talk about politics while fully knowing that I'll unlikely to see most of the changes that I'd want.

Sure, I was just wondering if someone who thought both party's agendas were damaging to the country might reach a point where gridlock might be worse.

You can never say never, but I don't think things have been bad in my lifetime when there was split retention of power between the White House and Congress. The US seems to do OK when it's on autopilot. Not great, but OK.

[nyquillyn]

Not a fan of vanden Heuvel.

wouldn't expect you to be

Why's that?

I'm not offended, I'm just curious.

Honestly, I don't read her specifically a lot, but she's been a supporter of Sanders and you seem to be more in the moderate realm of liberalism.

That's fair enough, I guess.

But honestly, I read and can appreciate many opinions outside of my "realm." I just find her to be a terrible writer.

[96583UP]

Hillary is to Democratic party in 2000's as Buffalo Bills were to NFL in 1990's

feel

the

bern

[nyquillyn]

Despite Bernie's recent gains in New Hampshire and Iowa, Hilldog still has a 15+ point lead in most national polls.

Bernie isn't gonna be able to make up the ground in the minority vote to make it all that close.

[Simple Torture]

Carcetti is hanging around just in case Clinton is suddenly indicted over e-mails, right?

[96583UP]

feel




the







bern

[Simple Torture]

Word now is that Trump is going to skip the next Fox debate. Big deal / little deal / no big deal?