Total Posts:14|Showing Posts:1-14
Jump to topic:

Moral Reasons to Vote for Clinton

bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2016 1:37:55 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
I've always wondered, is there a moral reason as to why one might be able to vote for a cheat, criminal, and absolute crook? Is there, in any way, some sort of ethical conviction that any individual can have to decidedly cast their vote for Hillary Clinton, irrespective of the opposition.

Do any of you think that, should we isolate voting to just Clinton, which removes the argument of the lesser of two evils, would there be any moral reason as to why someone could/would vote for an individual that is so easy to despise?
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2016 1:53:49 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/29/2016 1:37:55 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
I've always wondered, is there a moral reason as to why one might be able to vote for a cheat, criminal, and absolute crook? Is there, in any way, some sort of ethical conviction that any individual can have to decidedly cast their vote for Hillary Clinton, irrespective of the opposition.

Do any of you think that, should we isolate voting to just Clinton, which removes the argument of the lesser of two evils, would there be any moral reason as to why someone could/would vote for an individual that is so easy to despise?

There isn't a reason. She would be a neoliberal disaster to quote Cornel West
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2016 1:57:03 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/29/2016 1:53:49 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 7/29/2016 1:37:55 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
I've always wondered, is there a moral reason as to why one might be able to vote for a cheat, criminal, and absolute crook? Is there, in any way, some sort of ethical conviction that any individual can have to decidedly cast their vote for Hillary Clinton, irrespective of the opposition.

Do any of you think that, should we isolate voting to just Clinton, which removes the argument of the lesser of two evils, would there be any moral reason as to why someone could/would vote for an individual that is so easy to despise?

There isn't a reason. She would be a neoliberal disaster to quote Cornel West

Cornel west is useless, but he's right when it comes to Clinton being a disaster, just not so sure about a "neoliberal" one.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
Burzmali
Posts: 1,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2016 5:23:40 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/29/2016 1:37:55 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
I've always wondered, is there a moral reason as to why one might be able to vote for a cheat, criminal, and absolute crook? Is there, in any way, some sort of ethical conviction that any individual can have to decidedly cast their vote for Hillary Clinton, irrespective of the opposition.

Do any of you think that, should we isolate voting to just Clinton, which removes the argument of the lesser of two evils, would there be any moral reason as to why someone could/would vote for an individual that is so easy to despise?

Voting is irrelevant if there is no alternative choice. You can't eliminate the opposition as a factor and get any kind of meaningful response. A better question is if there's anything to like about Clinton. And there's admittedly very little.
triangle.128k
Posts: 3,641
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2016 12:33:02 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/29/2016 1:53:49 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 7/29/2016 1:37:55 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
I've always wondered, is there a moral reason as to why one might be able to vote for a cheat, criminal, and absolute crook? Is there, in any way, some sort of ethical conviction that any individual can have to decidedly cast their vote for Hillary Clinton, irrespective of the opposition.

Do any of you think that, should we isolate voting to just Clinton, which removes the argument of the lesser of two evils, would there be any moral reason as to why someone could/would vote for an individual that is so easy to despise?

There isn't a reason. She would be a neoliberal disaster to quote Cornel West

Hillary Clinton is anything but a neoliberal. Her economics are more in line with crony capitalism, wheras neoliberalism is a synonym for classical liberal economics.
triangle.128k
Posts: 3,641
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2016 12:36:20 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/29/2016 1:37:55 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
I've always wondered, is there a moral reason as to why one might be able to vote for a cheat, criminal, and absolute crook? Is there, in any way, some sort of ethical conviction that any individual can have to decidedly cast their vote for Hillary Clinton, irrespective of the opposition.

Do any of you think that, should we isolate voting to just Clinton, which removes the argument of the lesser of two evils, would there be any moral reason as to why someone could/would vote for an individual that is so easy to despise?

There's no moral reason to vote for crooked, corrupt, Clinton. Hillary Clinton is simply just a sock puppet of special interest groups, disguised as a *progressive liberal who wants to bring change.*
twocupcakes
Posts: 2,748
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2016 2:07:25 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/29/2016 1:37:55 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
I've always wondered, is there a moral reason as to why one might be able to vote for a cheat, criminal, and absolute crook? Is there, in any way, some sort of ethical conviction that any individual can have to decidedly cast their vote for Hillary Clinton, irrespective of the opposition.

Do any of you think that, should we isolate voting to just Clinton, which removes the argument of the lesser of two evils, would there be any moral reason as to why someone could/would vote for an individual that is so easy to despise?

Well, it IS between Trump and Clinton. It is like voting between a pick-pocket and a murderer. Is there any moral reason to vote for the pick-pocket? Well, yeah, because it is better than a murderer.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2016 4:16:21 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/29/2016 2:07:25 PM, twocupcakes wrote:
At 7/29/2016 1:37:55 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
I've always wondered, is there a moral reason as to why one might be able to vote for a cheat, criminal, and absolute crook? Is there, in any way, some sort of ethical conviction that any individual can have to decidedly cast their vote for Hillary Clinton, irrespective of the opposition.

Do any of you think that, should we isolate voting to just Clinton, which removes the argument of the lesser of two evils, would there be any moral reason as to why someone could/would vote for an individual that is so easy to despise?

Well, it IS between Trump and Clinton. It is like voting between a pick-pocket and a murderer. Is there any moral reason to vote for the pick-pocket? Well, yeah, because it is better than a murderer.

I know, but I am asking whether there's any moral reason to vote for Clinton solely on her own character, not her competitors. Meaning, let's say, Ben Carson, who is undoubtedly a good person, would definitely be a good candidate to vote for based on ethics, and it would be the moral choice. That's what I'm asking about, not simply voting for Carson because the competition is worse.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
twocupcakes
Posts: 2,748
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2016 4:20:33 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/29/2016 4:16:21 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/29/2016 2:07:25 PM, twocupcakes wrote:
At 7/29/2016 1:37:55 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
I've always wondered, is there a moral reason as to why one might be able to vote for a cheat, criminal, and absolute crook? Is there, in any way, some sort of ethical conviction that any individual can have to decidedly cast their vote for Hillary Clinton, irrespective of the opposition.

Do any of you think that, should we isolate voting to just Clinton, which removes the argument of the lesser of two evils, would there be any moral reason as to why someone could/would vote for an individual that is so easy to despise?

Well, it IS between Trump and Clinton. It is like voting between a pick-pocket and a murderer. Is there any moral reason to vote for the pick-pocket? Well, yeah, because it is better than a murderer.

I know, but I am asking whether there's any moral reason to vote for Clinton solely on her own character, not her competitors. Meaning, let's say, Ben Carson, who is undoubtedly a good person, would definitely be a good candidate to vote for based on ethics, and it would be the moral choice. That's what I'm asking about, not simply voting for Carson because the competition is worse.

I do not think Clinton's "character" is a strength of hers. Many people voted for Bernie just because he had better "character" than Clinton. However, Trump & the right demonize her too much and it makes her worse than she it. She is not that good of a person, but she gets a bad rap and is not the Devil
Foodiesoul
Posts: 579
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2016 5:44:16 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/29/2016 1:37:55 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
I've always wondered, is there a moral reason as to why one might be able to vote for a cheat, criminal, and absolute crook? Is there, in any way, some sort of ethical conviction that any individual can have to decidedly cast their vote for Hillary Clinton, irrespective of the opposition.

Do any of you think that, should we isolate voting to just Clinton, which removes the argument of the lesser of two evils, would there be any moral reason as to why someone could/would vote for an individual that is so easy to despise?

There are no moral reasons to vote for Clinton. She's a misandrist and a radical feminist.

Voting for Clinton is voting for misandry, male oppression, gender bias, and dystopia.

Voting for Trump is voting for freedom, greatness, and maybe, just maybe, some actual men's rights that are just to both men and women.

Voting for Sanders is voting for integration, unity, and wisdom.
Foodiesoul
Posts: 579
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2016 5:47:40 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/29/2016 2:07:25 PM, twocupcakes wrote:
At 7/29/2016 1:37:55 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
I've always wondered, is there a moral reason as to why one might be able to vote for a cheat, criminal, and absolute crook? Is there, in any way, some sort of ethical conviction that any individual can have to decidedly cast their vote for Hillary Clinton, irrespective of the opposition.

Do any of you think that, should we isolate voting to just Clinton, which removes the argument of the lesser of two evils, would there be any moral reason as to why someone could/would vote for an individual that is so easy to despise?

Well, it IS between Trump and Clinton. It is like voting between a pick-pocket and a murderer. Is there any moral reason to vote for the pick-pocket? Well, yeah, because it is better than a murderer.

That's a really nice way of putting it.

Pickpockets are less harmful than murders so I agree with you that it would be more rational to vote for the pickpocket.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2016 7:52:42 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/29/2016 5:44:16 PM, Foodiesoul wrote:
At 7/29/2016 1:37:55 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
I've always wondered, is there a moral reason as to why one might be able to vote for a cheat, criminal, and absolute crook? Is there, in any way, some sort of ethical conviction that any individual can have to decidedly cast their vote for Hillary Clinton, irrespective of the opposition.

Do any of you think that, should we isolate voting to just Clinton, which removes the argument of the lesser of two evils, would there be any moral reason as to why someone could/would vote for an individual that is so easy to despise?

There are no moral reasons to vote for Clinton. She's a misandrist and a radical feminist.

Voting for Clinton is voting for misandry, male oppression, gender bias, and dystopia.

Voting for Trump is voting for freedom, greatness, and maybe, just maybe, some actual men's rights that are just to both men and women.

Voting for Sanders is voting for integration, unity, and wisdom.

Voting for Sanders is voting for economic disaster, mass collectivization, Constitutional destruction, and a degenerate society. There's no wisdom in having 20 year old brats vote for some old man that will give them stuff they don't want to work for.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
Foodiesoul
Posts: 579
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2016 7:59:13 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/29/2016 7:52:42 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/29/2016 5:44:16 PM, Foodiesoul wrote:
At 7/29/2016 1:37:55 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
I've always wondered, is there a moral reason as to why one might be able to vote for a cheat, criminal, and absolute crook? Is there, in any way, some sort of ethical conviction that any individual can have to decidedly cast their vote for Hillary Clinton, irrespective of the opposition.

Do any of you think that, should we isolate voting to just Clinton, which removes the argument of the lesser of two evils, would there be any moral reason as to why someone could/would vote for an individual that is so easy to despise?

There are no moral reasons to vote for Clinton. She's a misandrist and a radical feminist.

Voting for Clinton is voting for misandry, male oppression, gender bias, and dystopia.

Voting for Trump is voting for freedom, greatness, and maybe, just maybe, some actual men's rights that are just to both men and women.

Voting for Sanders is voting for integration, unity, and wisdom.

Voting for Sanders is voting for economic disaster, mass collectivization, Constitutional destruction, and a degenerate society. There's no wisdom in having 20 year old brats vote for some old man that will give them stuff they don't want to work for.

Really? But Bernie Sanders seems like such a kind guy and plus, he's better than Hilary Clinton, who is a misandric feminist.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/29/2016 8:08:35 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/29/2016 7:59:13 PM, Foodiesoul wrote:
At 7/29/2016 7:52:42 PM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 7/29/2016 5:44:16 PM, Foodiesoul wrote:
At 7/29/2016 1:37:55 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
I've always wondered, is there a moral reason as to why one might be able to vote for a cheat, criminal, and absolute crook? Is there, in any way, some sort of ethical conviction that any individual can have to decidedly cast their vote for Hillary Clinton, irrespective of the opposition.

Do any of you think that, should we isolate voting to just Clinton, which removes the argument of the lesser of two evils, would there be any moral reason as to why someone could/would vote for an individual that is so easy to despise?

There are no moral reasons to vote for Clinton. She's a misandrist and a radical feminist.

Voting for Clinton is voting for misandry, male oppression, gender bias, and dystopia.

Voting for Trump is voting for freedom, greatness, and maybe, just maybe, some actual men's rights that are just to both men and women.

Voting for Sanders is voting for integration, unity, and wisdom.

Voting for Sanders is voting for economic disaster, mass collectivization, Constitutional destruction, and a degenerate society. There's no wisdom in having 20 year old brats vote for some old man that will give them stuff they don't want to work for.

Really? But Bernie Sanders seems like such a kind guy and plus, he's better than Hilary Clinton, who is a misandric feminist.

Hillary being a feminist is not the worst about her personality. The fact that she is a criminal is far worse, on top of her incessant lying.

When it comes to Sanders, he is a sellout and an absolute moron. His supporters are even worse than he is though.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.