I hate that I might reluctantly vote for Hillary Clinton.

This is the first time in my life that I had. Presidential candidate practically have all of the policies I want. I first voted for Obama in 08 without really looking into it. Like two years ago I was reading about NY gerrymandering and it really struck a chord with me to vote locally. Most candidates I found didn't really match my philosophy.

But then this election cycle I really delved into all of the candidates. The more I looked into Hillary the more I didn't like. She was into fracking around the world, she does her bidding to her donors and the Clinton Foundation and she armed countries who donated to it while simultaneously saying she was anti-gun.

When Bernie came along, as a progressive liberal he was a dream. I was thinking to myself that even if he gets 1% done, it'll be more than Hillary would do in 4 years. When he started to gain momentum it felt great. Even with the mass media practically lying about Bernie, it didn't kill the true momentum.

I went to the rally it was euphoric! I felt like, perhaps naively, We're finally going to take back our country! I was feeling the Bern! In the absurd primary rules in NY, you had to be registered 6 months prior, even before Bernie had his first debate. I lucked out, even though I felt more like an independent, I was a registered Democrat. I did my due diligence, nothing was fishy, even got my pin. When he lost NY, I was disappointed, but not dismayed.

I think after feeling the Bern, I built a bit of a disdain for Hillary Clinton. I don't like what she stands for and she seems to say anything to get a vote. I was a borderline BernieorBust person, but there is no way, over my dead body, that I would vote for Trump. Even if it means to reluctantly vote for Hillary.

Views: 1396

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I find the Hillary/Nixon comparison intriguing. It seems that they want to be president for themselves and will shoot people on the foot to make it happen. I think Nixon did a better job of acting like he ran for the people, while Clinton is extremely transparent.

I disagree, even if Sanders loses, a lot has changed. He is basically the first grassroots social media presidential candidate. He was practically completely publically financed and it is almost all due to social media.  Our votes win or lose are a voice heard and shines a light on the crooked delegates primaries and caucuses.

Maybe not this election, but in the next two, we can get the power back by doing our research and doing our due diligence on voting on House and Senate.

A vote for the Green or Libertarian Party is a vote for Donald Trump. If you are a Bernie supporter you should know he has already gone on record to say that if he is not nominated he will vote for Hillary. It's just common sense. We need a viable Blue candidate. Why do you think Bernie became a Democrat? Our current system cant be changed by third party famtasies or write ins. We have to work from within the system until the system itself is successfully changed. Bernie is no dummy. He has figured it out. Let's follow his lead to a Blue Victory

Yes several times, Angie. And more.

Any such vote, even a write-in for Bernie, is a vote for Trump. The person who does this can far more constructively join with people to block what President Clinton might do.

Bernie has several times said that is he's not nominated he will do everything he can to make sure Trump loses.

Bernie knows that if he is elected president, a largely corrupt Congress will block his more progressive endeavors. How many of us know this?

Bernie knows that if he isn't elected, he can perform a legacy-making public service by leading his supporters (and millions more people too) in efforts to take the bribery out of election campaigns.

The Greens have not done that. Their candidates for president have failed to build their party by having candidates in state and local elections.

As usual, Tom, you provide the reasons I can change my position in good conscience. OK. I've got work to do! Thanks, dear friend. And thanks to Angie, as well. I like reasons that stand up to scrutiny.

And you did it, not by name calling, or screeching , you did it the civil way. Just as we on Atheist Nexus learn to do.  

Angie, I now agree. I was wrong and very pleased to be shown how and why I was wrong. Thank you. 

Hillary did not violate Federal Law. The law was changed to prohibit using a private server after she left the State Department in 2014.
It was a common practice for people at the State Department before that. Colin Powell had his on a privatre server, and when he left the State Department HE violated the law by having ALL of that correspondence permanently DELETED. This is a violation of the Freedom of Information Act. Why wasnt he investigated or prosecuted? Because he wasnt the Democratic Nominee for President. All of this crap about Hillary being indicted is a witch humt. They cant and dont change laws retroactively to criminalize something after the fact. That would be insane. So I'm going to flatly state right now she will not be indicted about anything to do with her emails. Period. Bullshit called once and for all on this right wing propaganda smear campaign. Hillary didnt break the law.

Yes, Angie, but not insane.

An attempt to criminalize Hillary's use of a private server would violate the Constitution's ban on ex post facto (after the offense) laws.

Tragically however, America's foreign policy since the 1953 overthrow of an elected government in Iran has violated more than the Constitution. It has violated international law too. In my opinion, the very best a President Sanders can do would result in America's accepting the jurisdiction of the ICC, the International Criminal Court.

That's a tall order. America would have to stop building an overseas empire and start cooperating with other nations to improve the lives of the world's people.

Angie, thank you for the analysis. What you describe is my impression as well.

Right on Angie

I can hardly begin to write how wrong all that is:

Do you think George W Bush is responsible for nine-eleven??? Thats not logically possible.

Muslims hate atheist, christians, Jews, and all the minorities the liberals claim to care so much about. Do you want millions of them to come to this country???

Hillary C. did a bad job as secretary of state. You can't just vote for somebody just because it is politically correct to vote for a woman just because Hillary is a woman.

What is this obsession with the so called one percent??? The government does not or should not owe you anything. Successful people just did more work than you did.

A Hillary presidency would be a disaster.

Mr. Pianko states, with confidence, his expert opinion:

"Hillary C. did a bad job as secretary of state."

Well, No, she did a good job as Secretary of State.  

Now, where do you go from here?

"A Hillary presidency would be a disaster."

No it wouldn't.

I expect you to back-up your empty, uninformed opinions, and if you can't, STFU.

Muslims hate atheist, christians, Jews, and all the minorities the liberals claim to care so much about. Do you want millions of them to come to this country???

Michael, they are here already, 3.3 million of them last year:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/01/06/a-new-estimate-of-t...

It's still jarring to me to see women walking around town in hijab, maybe because I was taught by nuns.  But they are here, and they are Americans, and they have a right to be here and do what they want.  One of my best customers is a Muslim global businessman, originally from Pakistan.  Not a terrorist.  Employs about a hundred other Americans of all faiths and sexes.  Not a bad guy or a stereotype.

Please try to have a little perspective, ok?

RSS

About

line

Update Your Membership :

Membership

line

Nexus on Social Media:

© 2019   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: The Nexus Group.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service