[POLL] U.S. Presidential Election 2016

[osaka35]

I was quite surprised by the dislike Hillary Clinton seems to be garnering. I tried to find out why and most of what came back (the emails, the embassy, being cosy with business and some abysmal PR management of each of those) seemed like the standard doings of a politician, by no means does she seem to be a good one but the more that Mr Trump either speaks or has dealings from the past come to light the bigger detached and clueless wanker he seems to be (though as a mouthpiece he does not have the worst speech writers, even they write some contemptible nonsense). The two party system is probably going to see a bit of a shake up after this (looking at things they seem to mostly be keeping it together for the kids election) but it is still two party enough that I am not expecting the other two to do any real damage. If Mr Trump stood a chance of pulling off even half the bollocks he has been spouting (even if congress, the judiciary and the various other branches were aligned with his party and he could whip them into line he would still seem to have basic economics, physics, the legal system, international pressure and probably some in the general population as well) then I would be pissing myself in terror.

I would be surprised if either gets a second term.

Anyway I don't vote as a rule (too much effort to actually pick someone and think about it all and going with gut might as well be going random which might as well be not at all) and probably will not unless I am legally compelled to.

As far as legit reasons to dislike Hillary: She's against free journalism (viciously and disregarding law, same as obama), against a free internet (threw her weight behind PIPA and all the others), anti-privacy (always votes for increasing and solidifying NSA powers) and is very much a war-hawk (always a pro-military position). There are other reasons, but these are the ones I am opposed to her for.

Mainly because it's a simple matter to check her voting record on such things. You have to ignore what she says, as she's a standard politician that says what people want to hear and seem disconnected with her actions.

That being said, Trump is obviously going to be bad on all those fronts as well, so really, both are going to be terrible for many fundamental rights.

 

[Lacius]

As far as legit reasons to dislike Hillary: She's against free journalism (super against whistle-blowers), against a free internet (threw her weight behind PIPA and all the others)

Hillary Clinton was against PIPA and has a strong history of advocating for net neutrality.

 

[osaka35]

Hillary Clinton was against PIPA and has a strong history of advocating for net neutrality.

Oh, good, she changed her stance. Hopefully she sticks with it this time. I recall her voting for it first time it came up. I'll go find the actual vote.

 

[Lacius]

Oh, good, she changed her stance. Hopefully she sticks with it this time.

I tried to find an instance when she didn't support net neutrality, but I couldn't.

 

[osaka35]

I tried to find an instance when she didn't support net neutrality, but I couldn't.

Well, she voted for and still supports the patriot act, which isn't very kind to net neutrality mentality. I'm looking for her votes on all the PIPA related stuff.

 

[Lacius]

Well, she voted for and still supports the patriot act, which isn't very kind to net neutrality. I'm looking for her votes on all the PIPA related stuff.

Yeah, the vote for the Patriot Act sucks, but I couldn't find an instance when she was actually against net neutrality, and every quote I've found shows her being for net neutrality.

 

[Clydefrosch]

Oh, good, she changed her stance. Hopefully she sticks with it this time. I recall her voting for it first time it came up. I'll go find the actual vote.

at least she didn't change her stance every other day of the week like the annoying orange

 

[osaka35]

Yeah, the vote for the Patriot Act vote sucks, but I couldn't find an instance when she was actually against net neutrality, and every quote I've found shows her being for net neutrality.

The thing with her, and with most politicians, is you can safely ignore what they say. Only concern yourself with how they vote, not for who they say they represent. Her voting record makes me suspicious of any desire to protect privacy and free-speech rights. But I still need to find direct evidence, otherwise my point is moot

I suspect this is why Trump has any support. He doesn't have any voting history, so for a lot of people that's kind of like a blank slate. Maybe if they squint hard enough? I dunno, it's hard to understand why there are Trump supporters.

 

[Whole lotta love]

I'm crossing my fingers that Hillary gets indicted and arrested and forces the DNC to run Sanders.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

at least she didn't change her stance every other day of the week like the annoying orange

Only every other week : /

 

[Lacius]

The thing with her, and with most politicians, is you can safely ignore what they say. Only concern yourself with how they vote, not for who they say the represent. Her voting record makes me suspicious of any desire to protect privacy and free-speech rights. But I still need to find direct evidence, otherwise my point is moot

As far as I can see, she has been very consistent on the topic of net neutrality, and she has advocated for specific policy classifying the internet as a utility and treating it as such. I would take this one off your list of grievances.

 

[osaka35]

As far as I can see, she has been very consistent on the topic of net neutrality, and she has advocated for specific policy classifying the internet as a utility and treating it as such. I would take this one off your list of grievances.

It'll depend on when she started advocating for it, and how she voted for it and related items. I don't really care how vocal she is against it if she voted for it.

All I can find is her not supporting or being against it until it was popular to be against it. I suppose that's not a negative, but I suppose as long as it stays within the realm of the popular to be against it, she's going to stay against it.

I'll keep looking though.

Her extreme reaction to Snowden, wikileaks, and her still supporting the patriot act make me suspicious. They're all kind of the same ball of wax, and supporting one but not the others comes across as, at best, missing the point. I'm happy she's vocal about supporting at least some of our privacy concerns, but I'm not sure how much you can rely on them.

She says things like:
"Our Constitution is being shredded. We know about the secret wiretaps, the secret military tribunals, the secret White House e-mail accounts. We’ve seen U.S. attorneys fired to silence them because they didn’t bring bogus lawsuits against Democrats during election years. We’ve seen information taken off of government websites. It is a stunning record of secrecy and corruption, of cronyism run amok. It is everything our founders were afraid of, everything our Constitution was designed to prevent.Source: Take Back America 2007 Conference Jun 20, 2007"

But then votes for those very things she says she's against. She says the right things most of the time, but there's no way of knowing if she actually means anything she says.

 

[Logan Pockrus]

I'm crossing my fingers that Hillary gets indicted and arrested and forces the DNC to run Sanders.

Honestly, if Hillary were to be indicted, I believe it would have happened already. Ultimately we'll have to wait and see what the future holds, but mark my words, it's not going to happen (although I wish it would).

 

[LightyKD]

Bernie or Bust baby!. I will write him in if I have to. Hell, I even declined my DNC membership this year because of how badly things were handled. Also, I do like Jill Stein stating that she would step aside for Bernie if he joined the Green Party.

 

[FAST6191]

Or else just don't vote at all, but then I wouldn't be able to bitch and complain about who won since I didn't participate in the first place.

I have really never got that line of logic. If you live under the system you can complain how it is run, you have many other ways of interacting with the politicos beyond a statistically insignificant vote as well.

 

[Lacius]

I have really never got that line of logic. If you live under the system you can complain how it is run, you have many other ways of interacting with the politicos beyond a statistically insignificant vote as well.

One cannot justifiably complain about politics if he or she has the opportunity to vote but doesn't.

 

[FAST6191]

One cannot justifiably complain about politics if he or she has the opportunity to vote but doesn't.

That would be the summary of the logic but not any kind of justification for it.

You live in the country or are otherwise subject to its laws. Assuming you are not in some flavour of dictatorship you then have the right to complain about said laws and those that make them. That alone is enough for me but even if we took the idea that you need to engage in some way with it then there are plenty of alternatives to voting, many of which would have more impact (voting means you voted, writing letters, going in person, calling, emailing, protesting and other such things arguably have far more impact).

For me the no vote, no voice thing is a cute way to try to increase voter engagement but not much more. Maybe I am wrong but that would be how I view it.

 

[Pacheko17]

I'm not American but if I where, I'd vote for Trump.
See if he can fuck up the US more then Bush did, just for fun.

In reality, I don't know.
Haven't paid any interest in what they wanted and promised.
All I know is that Trump is a racist cunt and Clinton gets bad PR.

They're all crap. I'd vote for Trump just to leave the USA as far from the left as possible.
This is what I'll do in 2018 here in Brazil, I'll vote for Bolsonaro which is our version of Trump, instead of the leftist shit that has been buttfucking our country without consent for 13 years.

 

[Lacius]

You live in the country or are otherwise subject to its laws. Assuming you are not in some flavour of dictatorship you then have the right to complain about said laws and those that make them.

When you choose to abstain from voting for the people who make said laws, then it's a bit hypocritical to advocate for people to change the system when you did nothing yourself to help change it. You're basically telling other people to do the work you can't be bothered to do, whether it's voters voting or policy-makers changing policy.

 

[Lucifer666]

I'm with @endoverend, anyone who thinks Trump will implement any of his so-called "insane" and "racist" ideas bought a publicity stunt hook, line and sinker. The man's a capitalist, he built his empire on international trade. He knows exactly what he's doing and there's no amount of liberal whining that can turn it around. In fact, it's putting more water on his mill - the only winning move would be not to play, but that's not an option. He's like a Wild Card - you don't know what you'll get, but at least it's not some lofty socialist utopia based on "free money" conjured up by fairies and good wishes.

cut down on military funds and stop sending israel millions of dollars per year, that should be more than enough to cover more students' tuition fees several times over

the UK grants home status fees (i.e. university for practically nothing, say £1,000 a year) to anyone from the EU and/or a taxpayer within the EU. It's not "free money" nor is it magical it's just re-prioritising what a country wants above all else. The pound is a very strong currency, evidence of a good economy. There's a lot wrong with the UK politically but this is one thing they have right. It's not impossible

I'm shocked to see that you find Trump's blatant racism to be an act. Even if that were the case there is no reason on Earth for that to be the case; there's no underlying genius scheme he's unleashing, if anything that's unrealistically hopeful

---

As an outsider and non-american my candidate of choice is of little relevance, I don't 100% agree with any of them namely re: foreign affairs but if I had to take a pick I'd go for Bernie Sanders. Clinton is a military-obsessed mastermind the likes of which I'd only hypothetically vote for to prevent Trump rising to power, assuming Sanders is kicked out of the game.

 

[orangy57]

No offense, but why do people vote for independent parties? They're just wasting a vote, as independent parties have never ever won.