Total Posts:60|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Jill Stein: Trump less dangerous than Clinton

1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 2:19:52 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
Did I mention she's a complete political hack?

http://www.rawstory.com...

Jill Stein insists Trump is less dangerous than Clinton " and attacks Bernie Sanders as a DC insider

I swear to god: one more Green apologist and I will lose my sh!t. There's no defending the idiocy of this woman.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
lannan13
Posts: 23,111
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 2:27:10 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
They're all trash.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-Lannan13'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

If the sky's the limit then why do we have footprints on the Moon? I'm shooting my aspirations for the stars.

"If you are going through hell, keep going." "Sir Winston Churchill

"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." "Eleanor Roosevelt

Topics I want to debate. (http://tinyurl.com...)
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 2:28:23 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 2:19:52 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Did I mention she's a complete political hack?

http://www.rawstory.com...

Jill Stein insists Trump is less dangerous than Clinton " and attacks Bernie Sanders as a DC insider

I swear to god: one more Green apologist and I will lose my sh!t. There's no defending the idiocy of this woman.

Did you read the whole article? All Stein points out is that Clinton will have an easier time passing some of the worst stuff in her platform than Trump will.
It's a leading headline. Do you even read the articles you post?
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 2:29:38 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 2:28:23 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:19:52 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Did I mention she's a complete political hack?

http://www.rawstory.com...

Jill Stein insists Trump is less dangerous than Clinton " and attacks Bernie Sanders as a DC insider

I swear to god: one more Green apologist and I will lose my sh!t. There's no defending the idiocy of this woman.

Did you read the whole article? All Stein points out is that Clinton will have an easier time passing some of the worst stuff in her platform than Trump will.
It's a leading headline. Do you even read the articles you post?

Yeah. I read it. I think she's a fvcking idiot.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 2:31:08 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 2:29:38 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:28:23 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:19:52 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Did I mention she's a complete political hack?

http://www.rawstory.com...

Jill Stein insists Trump is less dangerous than Clinton " and attacks Bernie Sanders as a DC insider

I swear to god: one more Green apologist and I will lose my sh!t. There's no defending the idiocy of this woman.

Did you read the whole article? All Stein points out is that Clinton will have an easier time passing some of the worst stuff in her platform than Trump will.
It's a leading headline. Do you even read the articles you post?

Yeah. I read it. I think she's a fvcking idiot.

If you did you would know that none of what is said in the headline is said in the article. I've read it nearly 20 times today, and I'm still laughing people fall of this click bait BS
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 2:33:52 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 2:31:08 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:29:38 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:28:23 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:19:52 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Did I mention she's a complete political hack?

http://www.rawstory.com...

Jill Stein insists Trump is less dangerous than Clinton " and attacks Bernie Sanders as a DC insider

I swear to god: one more Green apologist and I will lose my sh!t. There's no defending the idiocy of this woman.

Did you read the whole article? All Stein points out is that Clinton will have an easier time passing some of the worst stuff in her platform than Trump will.
It's a leading headline. Do you even read the articles you post?

Yeah. I read it. I think she's a fvcking idiot.

If you did you would know that none of what is said in the headline is said in the article. I've read it nearly 20 times today, and I'm still laughing people fall of this click bait BS

You irrationally support this woman despite her not showing a shred of intellectual integrity. For a third party candidate, that's pretty sad.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 2:35:13 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
"Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, won"t " Hillary has the potential to do a whole lot more damage, get us into more wars, faster to pass her fracking disastrous climate program, much more easily than Donald Trump could do his."

-Jill fvcking Stein
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 2:41:20 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
"I think he's on the wrong team, perhaps because he's been in Washington, D.C., too long, because he used to really understand independent politics and why we cannot have a viable political system unless we have independent political parties."

-Jill Stein on Bernie Sanders

"When we're talking about president of the United States, in my own personal view, this is not the time for a protest vote. I know more about third-party politics than anyone else in the Congress, okay? And if people want to run as third-party candidates, God bless them! Run for Congress. Run for governor. Run for state legislature."

-Bernie Sanders

So, sure. He doesn't appreciate third parties right now. And that displays that he understands more about the US political structure and its inherent two-party bias - there is no - I repeat - no chance of a third party win. If there was, Bernie would not tell people to not vote third party. There's a reason he tells people to vote for them elsewhere: because they can actually win positions of lesser potency than the Presidency.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 2:44:39 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 2:19:52 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Did I mention she's a complete political hack?

http://www.rawstory.com...

Jill Stein insists Trump is less dangerous than Clinton " and attacks Bernie Sanders as a DC insider

I swear to god: one more Green apologist and I will lose my sh!t. There's no defending the idiocy of this woman.

She's a dingbat, true, but right. Hillary has shown in real life that she'll bomb innocent people unprovoked. Can't wait to see what she does with executive power...
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 2:57:06 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 2:44:39 AM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:19:52 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Did I mention she's a complete political hack?

http://www.rawstory.com...

Jill Stein insists Trump is less dangerous than Clinton " and attacks Bernie Sanders as a DC insider

I swear to god: one more Green apologist and I will lose my sh!t. There's no defending the idiocy of this woman.

She's a dingbat, true, but right. Hillary has shown in real life that she'll bomb innocent people unprovoked. Can't wait to see what she does with executive power...

You are going to see exactly what she does. She WILL be POTUS, and you will have your own fellow idiots to blame. Anyone but Trump could have won this for you, but you couldn't resist the cheap appeal of Trump.
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 3:00:35 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 2:33:52 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:31:08 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:29:38 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:28:23 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:19:52 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Did I mention she's a complete political hack?

http://www.rawstory.com...

Jill Stein insists Trump is less dangerous than Clinton " and attacks Bernie Sanders as a DC insider

I swear to god: one more Green apologist and I will lose my sh!t. There's no defending the idiocy of this woman.

Did you read the whole article? All Stein points out is that Clinton will have an easier time passing some of the worst stuff in her platform than Trump will.
It's a leading headline. Do you even read the articles you post?

Yeah. I read it. I think she's a fvcking idiot.

If you did you would know that none of what is said in the headline is said in the article. I've read it nearly 20 times today, and I'm still laughing people fall of this click bait BS

You irrationally support this woman despite her not showing a shred of intellectual integrity. For a third party candidate, that's pretty sad.

And you use an obvious hit piece as "evidence" she is irrational.
I support her because I agree with her the most. That's my reason
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 3:02:26 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 2:41:20 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
"I think he's on the wrong team, perhaps because he's been in Washington, D.C., too long, because he used to really understand independent politics and why we cannot have a viable political system unless we have independent political parties."

-Jill Stein on Bernie Sanders


"When we're talking about president of the United States, in my own personal view, this is not the time for a protest vote. I know more about third-party politics than anyone else in the Congress, okay? And if people want to run as third-party candidates, God bless them! Run for Congress. Run for governor. Run for state legislature."

-Bernie Sanders

So, sure. He doesn't appreciate third parties right now. And that displays that he understands more about the US political structure and its inherent two-party bias - there is no - I repeat - no chance of a third party win. If there was, Bernie would not tell people to not vote third party. There's a reason he tells people to vote for them elsewhere: because they can actually win positions of lesser potency than the Presidency.

1. They have and they are trying too. There are greens running for office at every level.
2. I thought the point was that this is about a movement and not a man?
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 3:03:51 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 2:35:13 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
"Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, won"t " Hillary has the potential to do a whole lot more damage, get us into more wars, faster to pass her fracking disastrous climate program, much more easily than Donald Trump could do his."

-Jill fvcking Stein

She's not wrong. Many of the plans Clinton supports would get passed while trump is still trying to figure out how to build his bloody wall. Her plans have more support in congress than Trump's. The key word is potential.
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 3:05:02 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 2:57:06 AM, TBR wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:44:39 AM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:19:52 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Did I mention she's a complete political hack?

http://www.rawstory.com...

Jill Stein insists Trump is less dangerous than Clinton " and attacks Bernie Sanders as a DC insider

I swear to god: one more Green apologist and I will lose my sh!t. There's no defending the idiocy of this woman.

She's a dingbat, true, but right. Hillary has shown in real life that she'll bomb innocent people unprovoked. Can't wait to see what she does with executive power...

You are going to see exactly what she does. She WILL be POTUS, and you will have your own fellow idiots to blame. Anyone but Trump could have won this for you, but you couldn't resist the cheap appeal of Trump.

https://media4.giphy.com...
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 3:10:12 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 3:00:35 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:33:52 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:31:08 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:29:38 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:28:23 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:19:52 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Did I mention she's a complete political hack?

http://www.rawstory.com...

Jill Stein insists Trump is less dangerous than Clinton " and attacks Bernie Sanders as a DC insider

I swear to god: one more Green apologist and I will lose my sh!t. There's no defending the idiocy of this woman.

Did you read the whole article? All Stein points out is that Clinton will have an easier time passing some of the worst stuff in her platform than Trump will.
It's a leading headline. Do you even read the articles you post?

Yeah. I read it. I think she's a fvcking idiot.

If you did you would know that none of what is said in the headline is said in the article. I've read it nearly 20 times today, and I'm still laughing people fall of this click bait BS

You irrationally support this woman despite her not showing a shred of intellectual integrity. For a third party candidate, that's pretty sad.

And you use an obvious hit piece as "evidence" she is irrational.
I support her because I agree with her the most. That's my reason

A hit piece? Raw Story isn't exactly Mother Jones in regards to it demanding everyone bow to Clinton. Really, they call bullsh!t when they see it. Reality might just be inconvenient for you - but Jill Stein has forfeited the good of the nation for her pathetic career's gain, and will continue to do so, like a true politician.

Bernie Sanders could have run third party. Where would that have led us? To a truly split vote and Trump win? Why do you think he wants Clinton to win?

Take his 1996 statement on endorsing Bill.

"In terms of who to support for president, the choice is really not difficult. I am certainly not a big fan of Bill Clinton's politics. As a strong advocate of a single-payer health care system, I opposed his convoluted health care reform package. I have helped lead the opposition to his trade policies, which represent the interests of corporate America and which are virtually indistinguishable from the views of George Bush and Newt Gingrich. I opposed his bloated military budget, the welfare reform bill that he signed, and the so-called Defense of Marriage Act, which he supported. He has been weak on campaign finance reform and has caved in far too often on the environment. Bill Clinton is a moderate Democrat. I'm a democratic socialist.

Yet, without enthusiasm, I've decided to support Bill Clinton for president. Perhaps "support" is too strong a word. I'm planning no press conferences to push his candidacy, and will do no campaigning for him. I will vote for him, and make that public. Why? I think that many people do not perceive how truly dangerous the political situation in this country is today. If Bob Dole were to be elected president and Gingrich and the Republicans were to maintain control of Congress, we would see a legislative agenda unlike any in the modern history of this country. There would be an unparalleled war against working people and the poor, and political decisions would be made that could very well be irreversible.

Medicare and Medicaid would certainly be destroyed, and tens of millions more Americans would lose their health insurance. Steps would be taken to privatize Social Security, and the very existence of public education in America would be threatened. Serious efforts would be made to pass a constitutional amendment to ban abortion, affirmative action would be wiped out, and gay bashing would intensify. A flat tax would be passed, resulting in a massive shift in income from the working class to the rich, and all of our major environmental legislation would be eviscerated.

The Motor Voter bill would be repealed, and legislation making it harder for people to vote would be passed. Union-busting legislation would become law, the minimum wage would be abolished, and child labor would increase. Adults and kids in America would be competing for $3.00-an-hour jobs.

You think I"m kidding. You think I"m exaggerating. Well, I"m not. I work in Congress. I listen to these guys every day. They are very serious people. And the folks behind them, the Christian Coalition, the NRA, the Heritage Foundation, and others, are even crazier than they are. My old friend Dick Armey is not some wacko member of Congress laughed at by his colleagues. He is the Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives. Check out his views. No. I do not want Bob Dole to be president. I"m voting for Bill Clinton.

Do I have confidence that Clinton will stand up for the working people of this country - for children, for the elderly, for the folks who are hurting? No, I do not. But a Clinton victory could give us some time to build a movement, to develop a political infrastructure to protect what needs protecting, and to change the direction of the country."
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 3:14:10 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 3:02:26 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:41:20 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
"I think he's on the wrong team, perhaps because he's been in Washington, D.C., too long, because he used to really understand independent politics and why we cannot have a viable political system unless we have independent political parties."

-Jill Stein on Bernie Sanders


"When we're talking about president of the United States, in my own personal view, this is not the time for a protest vote. I know more about third-party politics than anyone else in the Congress, okay? And if people want to run as third-party candidates, God bless them! Run for Congress. Run for governor. Run for state legislature."

-Bernie Sanders

So, sure. He doesn't appreciate third parties right now. And that displays that he understands more about the US political structure and its inherent two-party bias - there is no - I repeat - no chance of a third party win. If there was, Bernie would not tell people to not vote third party. There's a reason he tells people to vote for them elsewhere: because they can actually win positions of lesser potency than the Presidency.

1. They have and they are trying too. There are greens running for office at every level.
2. I thought the point was that this is about a movement and not a man?

How about a nation, and not the self-absorption of a female political hack?
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 3:17:40 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 3:03:51 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:35:13 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
"Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, won"t " Hillary has the potential to do a whole lot more damage, get us into more wars, faster to pass her fracking disastrous climate program, much more easily than Donald Trump could do his."

-Jill fvcking Stein

She's not wrong. Many of the plans Clinton supports would get passed while trump is still trying to figure out how to build his bloody wall. Her plans have more support in congress than Trump's. The key word is potential.

Damage goes far beyond what they do in their policy. Trump could single-handedly destroy American diplomatic leverage and respect. And you think Trump would be running domestic policy alone? How about Mike Pence saying he would want to be like Dick Cheney if they win? Mike Pence running the nation as Trump plays a diplomatic role more retarded and less skillful than Boris Johnson would be far, far more disastrous than a Clinton Presidency, as bad as she is.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 3:23:08 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 3:10:12 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:00:35 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:33:52 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:31:08 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:29:38 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:28:23 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:19:52 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Did I mention she's a complete political hack?

http://www.rawstory.com...

Jill Stein insists Trump is less dangerous than Clinton " and attacks Bernie Sanders as a DC insider

I swear to god: one more Green apologist and I will lose my sh!t. There's no defending the idiocy of this woman.

Did you read the whole article? All Stein points out is that Clinton will have an easier time passing some of the worst stuff in her platform than Trump will.
It's a leading headline. Do you even read the articles you post?

Yeah. I read it. I think she's a fvcking idiot.

If you did you would know that none of what is said in the headline is said in the article. I've read it nearly 20 times today, and I'm still laughing people fall of this click bait BS

You irrationally support this woman despite her not showing a shred of intellectual integrity. For a third party candidate, that's pretty sad.

And you use an obvious hit piece as "evidence" she is irrational.
I support her because I agree with her the most. That's my reason

A hit piece? Raw Story isn't exactly Mother Jones in regards to it demanding everyone bow to Clinton. Really, they call bullsh!t when they see it. Reality might just be inconvenient for you - but Jill Stein has forfeited the good of the nation for her pathetic career's gain, and will continue to do so, like a true politician.

Her career? She is retired, and has been for years. She runs for office to help grow progressive causes and put forward progressive solutions. She doesn't gain much.

Bernie Sanders could have run third party. Where would that have led us? To a truly split vote and Trump win? Why do you think he wants Clinton to win?

Ballot access, debates, media coverage, union endorsements, repercussions from the senate, threats to committee assignments, There are numerous reasons he didn't run third party. Why does he want Clinton to win? Because he has vote Democrat every time since 1992.
Moreover didn't someone who resides in the same state, who wears similar glasses to Bernie and have a distinct lack of hair say "This campaign has never been about any single candidate. It is always about transforming America..."?


Take his 1996 statement on endorsing Bill.

"In terms of who to support for president, the choice is really not difficult. I am certainly not a big fan of Bill Clinton's politics. As a strong advocate of a single-payer health care system, I opposed his convoluted health care reform package. I have helped lead the opposition to his trade policies, which represent the interests of corporate America and which are virtually indistinguishable from the views of George Bush and Newt Gingrich. I opposed his bloated military budget, the welfare reform bill that he signed, and the so-called Defense of Marriage Act, which he supported. He has been weak on campaign finance reform and has caved in far too often on the environment. Bill Clinton is a moderate Democrat. I'm a democratic socialist.

Yet, without enthusiasm, I've decided to support Bill Clinton for president. Perhaps "support" is too strong a word. I'm planning no press conferences to push his candidacy, and will do no campaigning for him. I will vote for him, and make that public. Why? I think that many people do not perceive how truly dangerous the political situation in this country is today. If Bob Dole were to be elected president and Gingrich and the Republicans were to maintain control of Congress, we would see a legislative agenda unlike any in the modern history of this country. There would be an unparalleled war against working people and the poor, and political decisions would be made that could very well be irreversible.

Medicare and Medicaid would certainly be destroyed, and tens of millions more Americans would lose their health insurance. Steps would be taken to privatize Social Security, and the very existence of public education in America would be threatened. Serious efforts would be made to pass a constitutional amendment to ban abortion, affirmative action would be wiped out, and gay bashing would intensify. A flat tax would be passed, resulting in a massive shift in income from the working class to the rich, and all of our major environmental legislation would be eviscerated.

The Motor Voter bill would be repealed, and legislation making it harder for people to vote would be passed. Union-busting legislation would become law, the minimum wage would be abolished, and child labor would increase. Adults and kids in America would be competing for $3.00-an-hour jobs.

You think I"m kidding. You think I"m exaggerating. Well, I"m not. I work in Congress. I listen to these guys every day. They are very serious people. And the folks behind them, the Christian Coalition, the NRA, the Heritage Foundation, and others, are even crazier than they are. My old friend Dick Armey is not some wacko member of Congress laughed at by his colleagues. He is the Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives. Check out his views. No. I do not want Bob Dole to be president. I"m voting for Bill Clinton.

Do I have confidence that Clinton will stand up for the working people of this country - for children, for the elderly, for the folks who are hurting? No, I do not. But a Clinton victory could give us some time to build a movement, to develop a political infrastructure to protect what needs protecting, and to change the direction of the country."
And now you see why he was likened to an insider?
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 3:23:55 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 3:14:10 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:02:26 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:41:20 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
"I think he's on the wrong team, perhaps because he's been in Washington, D.C., too long, because he used to really understand independent politics and why we cannot have a viable political system unless we have independent political parties."

-Jill Stein on Bernie Sanders


"When we're talking about president of the United States, in my own personal view, this is not the time for a protest vote. I know more about third-party politics than anyone else in the Congress, okay? And if people want to run as third-party candidates, God bless them! Run for Congress. Run for governor. Run for state legislature."

-Bernie Sanders

So, sure. He doesn't appreciate third parties right now. And that displays that he understands more about the US political structure and its inherent two-party bias - there is no - I repeat - no chance of a third party win. If there was, Bernie would not tell people to not vote third party. There's a reason he tells people to vote for them elsewhere: because they can actually win positions of lesser potency than the Presidency.

1. They have and they are trying too. There are greens running for office at every level.
2. I thought the point was that this is about a movement and not a man?

How about a nation, and not the self-absorption of a female political hack?
Exactly, that's why we aren't backing Clinton.
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 3:25:51 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 3:23:55 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:14:10 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:02:26 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:41:20 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
"I think he's on the wrong team, perhaps because he's been in Washington, D.C., too long, because he used to really understand independent politics and why we cannot have a viable political system unless we have independent political parties."

-Jill Stein on Bernie Sanders


"When we're talking about president of the United States, in my own personal view, this is not the time for a protest vote. I know more about third-party politics than anyone else in the Congress, okay? And if people want to run as third-party candidates, God bless them! Run for Congress. Run for governor. Run for state legislature."

-Bernie Sanders

So, sure. He doesn't appreciate third parties right now. And that displays that he understands more about the US political structure and its inherent two-party bias - there is no - I repeat - no chance of a third party win. If there was, Bernie would not tell people to not vote third party. There's a reason he tells people to vote for them elsewhere: because they can actually win positions of lesser potency than the Presidency.

1. They have and they are trying too. There are greens running for office at every level.
2. I thought the point was that this is about a movement and not a man?

How about a nation, and not the self-absorption of a female political hack?
Exactly, that's why we aren't backing Clinton.
For all of Clinton's flaws, she has infinitely more political skill than Jill Stein.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 3:27:44 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 3:23:08 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:10:12 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:00:35 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:33:52 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:31:08 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:29:38 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:28:23 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:19:52 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Did I mention she's a complete political hack?

http://www.rawstory.com...

Jill Stein insists Trump is less dangerous than Clinton " and attacks Bernie Sanders as a DC insider

I swear to god: one more Green apologist and I will lose my sh!t. There's no defending the idiocy of this woman.

Did you read the whole article? All Stein points out is that Clinton will have an easier time passing some of the worst stuff in her platform than Trump will.
It's a leading headline. Do you even read the articles you post?

Yeah. I read it. I think she's a fvcking idiot.

If you did you would know that none of what is said in the headline is said in the article. I've read it nearly 20 times today, and I'm still laughing people fall of this click bait BS

You irrationally support this woman despite her not showing a shred of intellectual integrity. For a third party candidate, that's pretty sad.

And you use an obvious hit piece as "evidence" she is irrational.
I support her because I agree with her the most. That's my reason

A hit piece? Raw Story isn't exactly Mother Jones in regards to it demanding everyone bow to Clinton. Really, they call bullsh!t when they see it. Reality might just be inconvenient for you - but Jill Stein has forfeited the good of the nation for her pathetic career's gain, and will continue to do so, like a true politician.

Her career? She is retired, and has been for years. She runs for office to help grow progressive causes and put forward progressive solutions. She doesn't gain much.

Bernie Sanders could have run third party. Where would that have led us? To a truly split vote and Trump win? Why do you think he wants Clinton to win?

Ballot access, debates, media coverage, union endorsements, repercussions from the senate, threats to committee assignments, There are numerous reasons he didn't run third party. Why does he want Clinton to win? Because he has vote Democrat every time since 1992.
Moreover didn't someone who resides in the same state, who wears similar glasses to Bernie and have a distinct lack of hair say "This campaign has never been about any single candidate. It is always about transforming America..."?


Take his 1996 statement on endorsing Bill.

"In terms of who to support for president, the choice is really not difficult. I am certainly not a big fan of Bill Clinton's politics. As a strong advocate of a single-payer health care system, I opposed his convoluted health care reform package. I have helped lead the opposition to his trade policies, which represent the interests of corporate America and which are virtually indistinguishable from the views of George Bush and Newt Gingrich. I opposed his bloated military budget, the welfare reform bill that he signed, and the so-called Defense of Marriage Act, which he supported. He has been weak on campaign finance reform and has caved in far too often on the environment. Bill Clinton is a moderate Democrat. I'm a democratic socialist.

Yet, without enthusiasm, I've decided to support Bill Clinton for president. Perhaps "support" is too strong a word. I'm planning no press conferences to push his candidacy, and will do no campaigning for him. I will vote for him, and make that public. Why? I think that many people do not perceive how truly dangerous the political situation in this country is today. If Bob Dole were to be elected president and Gingrich and the Republicans were to maintain control of Congress, we would see a legislative agenda unlike any in the modern history of this country. There would be an unparalleled war against working people and the poor, and political decisions would be made that could very well be irreversible.

Medicare and Medicaid would certainly be destroyed, and tens of millions more Americans would lose their health insurance. Steps would be taken to privatize Social Security, and the very existence of public education in America would be threatened. Serious efforts would be made to pass a constitutional amendment to ban abortion, affirmative action would be wiped out, and gay bashing would intensify. A flat tax would be passed, resulting in a massive shift in income from the working class to the rich, and all of our major environmental legislation would be eviscerated.

The Motor Voter bill would be repealed, and legislation making it harder for people to vote would be passed. Union-busting legislation would become law, the minimum wage would be abolished, and child labor would increase. Adults and kids in America would be competing for $3.00-an-hour jobs.

You think I"m kidding. You think I"m exaggerating. Well, I"m not. I work in Congress. I listen to these guys every day. They are very serious people. And the folks behind them, the Christian Coalition, the NRA, the Heritage Foundation, and others, are even crazier than they are. My old friend Dick Armey is not some wacko member of Congress laughed at by his colleagues. He is the Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives. Check out his views. No. I do not want Bob Dole to be president. I"m voting for Bill Clinton.

Do I have confidence that Clinton will stand up for the working people of this country - for children, for the elderly, for the folks who are hurting? No, I do not. But a Clinton victory could give us some time to build a movement, to develop a political infrastructure to protect what needs protecting, and to change the direction of the country."
And now you see why he was likened to an insider?

Trump has been preaching this exact message for 40+ years.
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 3:30:27 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 3:23:08 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:10:12 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:00:35 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:33:52 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:31:08 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:29:38 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:28:23 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:19:52 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Did I mention she's a complete political hack?

http://www.rawstory.com...

Jill Stein insists Trump is less dangerous than Clinton " and attacks Bernie Sanders as a DC insider

I swear to god: one more Green apologist and I will lose my sh!t. There's no defending the idiocy of this woman.

Did you read the whole article? All Stein points out is that Clinton will have an easier time passing some of the worst stuff in her platform than Trump will.
It's a leading headline. Do you even read the articles you post?

Yeah. I read it. I think she's a fvcking idiot.

If you did you would know that none of what is said in the headline is said in the article. I've read it nearly 20 times today, and I'm still laughing people fall of this click bait BS

You irrationally support this woman despite her not showing a shred of intellectual integrity. For a third party candidate, that's pretty sad.

And you use an obvious hit piece as "evidence" she is irrational.
I support her because I agree with her the most. That's my reason

A hit piece? Raw Story isn't exactly Mother Jones in regards to it demanding everyone bow to Clinton. Really, they call bullsh!t when they see it. Reality might just be inconvenient for you - but Jill Stein has forfeited the good of the nation for her pathetic career's gain, and will continue to do so, like a true politician.

Her career? She is retired, and has been for years. She runs for office to help grow progressive causes and put forward progressive solutions. She doesn't gain much.

Put forward progressive solutions by suggesting electing Trump may not end up being as bad as Clinton. Got it.

Bernie Sanders could have run third party. Where would that have led us? To a truly split vote and Trump win? Why do you think he wants Clinton to win?

Ballot access, debates, media coverage, union endorsements, repercussions from the senate, threats to committee assignments, There are numerous reasons he didn't run third party. Why does he want Clinton to win? Because he has vote Democrat every time since 1992.
Moreover didn't someone who resides in the same state, who wears similar glasses to Bernie and have a distinct lack of hair say "This campaign has never been about any single candidate. It is always about transforming America..."?

And is the answer starting at the bottom, or taking votes at the top?

Take his 1996 statement on endorsing Bill.

"In terms of who to support for president, the choice is really not difficult. I am certainly not a big fan of Bill Clinton's politics. As a strong advocate of a single-payer health care system, I opposed his convoluted health care reform package. I have helped lead the opposition to his trade policies, which represent the interests of corporate America and which are virtually indistinguishable from the views of George Bush and Newt Gingrich. I opposed his bloated military budget, the welfare reform bill that he signed, and the so-called Defense of Marriage Act, which he supported. He has been weak on campaign finance reform and has caved in far too often on the environment. Bill Clinton is a moderate Democrat. I'm a democratic socialist.

Yet, without enthusiasm, I've decided to support Bill Clinton for president. Perhaps "support" is too strong a word. I'm planning no press conferences to push his candidacy, and will do no campaigning for him. I will vote for him, and make that public. Why? I think that many people do not perceive how truly dangerous the political situation in this country is today. If Bob Dole were to be elected president and Gingrich and the Republicans were to maintain control of Congress, we would see a legislative agenda unlike any in the modern history of this country. There would be an unparalleled war against working people and the poor, and political decisions would be made that could very well be irreversible.

Medicare and Medicaid would certainly be destroyed, and tens of millions more Americans would lose their health insurance. Steps would be taken to privatize Social Security, and the very existence of public education in America would be threatened. Serious efforts would be made to pass a constitutional amendment to ban abortion, affirmative action would be wiped out, and gay bashing would intensify. A flat tax would be passed, resulting in a massive shift in income from the working class to the rich, and all of our major environmental legislation would be eviscerated.

The Motor Voter bill would be repealed, and legislation making it harder for people to vote would be passed. Union-busting legislation would become law, the minimum wage would be abolished, and child labor would increase. Adults and kids in America would be competing for $3.00-an-hour jobs.

You think I"m kidding. You think I"m exaggerating. Well, I"m not. I work in Congress. I listen to these guys every day. They are very serious people. And the folks behind them, the Christian Coalition, the NRA, the Heritage Foundation, and others, are even crazier than they are. My old friend Dick Armey is not some wacko member of Congress laughed at by his colleagues. He is the Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives. Check out his views. No. I do not want Bob Dole to be president. I"m voting for Bill Clinton.

Do I have confidence that Clinton will stand up for the working people of this country - for children, for the elderly, for the folks who are hurting? No, I do not. But a Clinton victory could give us some time to build a movement, to develop a political infrastructure to protect what needs protecting, and to change the direction of the country."
And now you see why he was likened to an insider?

No, frankly. I think he made a pragmatic move. Despite all of the bullsh!t that he's a "pie-in-the-sky" candidate, he's always opted for pragmatism in order to get through times in the least worst way when the idealistic approach falls short. Being a pragmatist isn't being an insider. Do insiders have primaries rigged against them, and have access to voter databases suspended for no reason?
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 3:32:39 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 2:57:06 AM, TBR wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:44:39 AM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:19:52 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Did I mention she's a complete political hack?

http://www.rawstory.com...

Jill Stein insists Trump is less dangerous than Clinton " and attacks Bernie Sanders as a DC insider

I swear to god: one more Green apologist and I will lose my sh!t. There's no defending the idiocy of this woman.

She's a dingbat, true, but right. Hillary has shown in real life that she'll bomb innocent people unprovoked. Can't wait to see what she does with executive power...

You are going to see exactly what she does. She WILL be POTUS, and you will have your own fellow idiots to blame. Anyone but Trump could have won this for you, but you couldn't resist the cheap appeal of Trump.

Really? You must have missed that Trump by far and away got more votes than any candidate in history. Hillary has a problem that makes it all pointless, mindless, liberal jabber. Trump's supporters actually vote. Hillary's supporters are busy looking for wellfare checks, bon bons, and prescription meds on the streets.
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 3:33:18 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 3:17:40 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:03:51 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:35:13 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
"Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, won"t " Hillary has the potential to do a whole lot more damage, get us into more wars, faster to pass her fracking disastrous climate program, much more easily than Donald Trump could do his."

-Jill fvcking Stein

She's not wrong. Many of the plans Clinton supports would get passed while trump is still trying to figure out how to build his bloody wall. Her plans have more support in congress than Trump's. The key word is potential.

Damage goes far beyond what they do in their policy. Trump could single-handedly destroy American diplomatic leverage and respect. And you think Trump would be running domestic policy alone? How about Mike Pence saying he would want to be like Dick Cheney if they win? Mike Pence running the nation as Trump plays a diplomatic role more retarded and less skillful than Boris Johnson would be far, far more disastrous than a Clinton Presidency, as bad as she is.

1) You contradict yourself immediately after your first sentence
2) And so war crimes are ether than war crimes and a loudmouth? People are tired of having a foreign policy based on military intervention and imperial ambitions. Clinton has never found a war she didn't like.
3) Foreign policy was the whole reason I left the democrats in the first place. The DNC platform on foreign policy is atrocious.
4) Want to improve Americas image around the world? GET OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 3:34:23 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 3:25:51 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:23:55 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:14:10 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:02:26 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:41:20 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
"I think he's on the wrong team, perhaps because he's been in Washington, D.C., too long, because he used to really understand independent politics and why we cannot have a viable political system unless we have independent political parties."

-Jill Stein on Bernie Sanders


"When we're talking about president of the United States, in my own personal view, this is not the time for a protest vote. I know more about third-party politics than anyone else in the Congress, okay? And if people want to run as third-party candidates, God bless them! Run for Congress. Run for governor. Run for state legislature."

-Bernie Sanders

So, sure. He doesn't appreciate third parties right now. And that displays that he understands more about the US political structure and its inherent two-party bias - there is no - I repeat - no chance of a third party win. If there was, Bernie would not tell people to not vote third party. There's a reason he tells people to vote for them elsewhere: because they can actually win positions of lesser potency than the Presidency.

1. They have and they are trying too. There are greens running for office at every level.
2. I thought the point was that this is about a movement and not a man?

How about a nation, and not the self-absorption of a female political hack?
Exactly, that's why we aren't backing Clinton.
For all of Clinton's flaws, she has infinitely more political skill than Jill Stein.

Her policies are what matter, and her policies are the problem.
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 3:35:29 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 3:33:18 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:17:40 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:03:51 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:35:13 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
"Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, won"t " Hillary has the potential to do a whole lot more damage, get us into more wars, faster to pass her fracking disastrous climate program, much more easily than Donald Trump could do his."

-Jill fvcking Stein

She's not wrong. Many of the plans Clinton supports would get passed while trump is still trying to figure out how to build his bloody wall. Her plans have more support in congress than Trump's. The key word is potential.

Damage goes far beyond what they do in their policy. Trump could single-handedly destroy American diplomatic leverage and respect. And you think Trump would be running domestic policy alone? How about Mike Pence saying he would want to be like Dick Cheney if they win? Mike Pence running the nation as Trump plays a diplomatic role more retarded and less skillful than Boris Johnson would be far, far more disastrous than a Clinton Presidency, as bad as she is.

1) You contradict yourself immediately after your first sentence
I don't. But thanks for explaining why.
2) And so war crimes are ether than war crimes and a loudmouth? People are tired of having a foreign policy based on military intervention and imperial ambitions. Clinton has never found a war she didn't like.
And Trump has tended to agree with every war at first.
3) Foreign policy was the whole reason I left the democrats in the first place. The DNC platform on foreign policy is atrocious.
I agree.
4) Want to improve Americas image around the world? GET OUT OF THE MIDDLE EAST
And Trump will do that?
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 3:39:08 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 3:34:23 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:25:51 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:23:55 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:14:10 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:02:26 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:41:20 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
"I think he's on the wrong team, perhaps because he's been in Washington, D.C., too long, because he used to really understand independent politics and why we cannot have a viable political system unless we have independent political parties."

-Jill Stein on Bernie Sanders


"When we're talking about president of the United States, in my own personal view, this is not the time for a protest vote. I know more about third-party politics than anyone else in the Congress, okay? And if people want to run as third-party candidates, God bless them! Run for Congress. Run for governor. Run for state legislature."

-Bernie Sanders

So, sure. He doesn't appreciate third parties right now. And that displays that he understands more about the US political structure and its inherent two-party bias - there is no - I repeat - no chance of a third party win. If there was, Bernie would not tell people to not vote third party. There's a reason he tells people to vote for them elsewhere: because they can actually win positions of lesser potency than the Presidency.

1. They have and they are trying too. There are greens running for office at every level.
2. I thought the point was that this is about a movement and not a man?

How about a nation, and not the self-absorption of a female political hack?
Exactly, that's why we aren't backing Clinton.
For all of Clinton's flaws, she has infinitely more political skill than Jill Stein.
Her policies are what matter, and her policies are the problem.
Right, and I even disagree with Stein on some major sh!t. For example: for a doctor, she can be really retarded with science sometimes.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 3:39:57 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 3:30:27 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:23:08 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:10:12 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:00:35 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:33:52 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:31:08 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:29:38 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:28:23 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:19:52 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
Did I mention she's a complete political hack?

http://www.rawstory.com...

Jill Stein insists Trump is less dangerous than Clinton " and attacks Bernie Sanders as a DC insider

I swear to god: one more Green apologist and I will lose my sh!t. There's no defending the idiocy of this woman.

Did you read the whole article? All Stein points out is that Clinton will have an easier time passing some of the worst stuff in her platform than Trump will.
It's a leading headline. Do you even read the articles you post?

Yeah. I read it. I think she's a fvcking idiot.

If you did you would know that none of what is said in the headline is said in the article. I've read it nearly 20 times today, and I'm still laughing people fall of this click bait BS

You irrationally support this woman despite her not showing a shred of intellectual integrity. For a third party candidate, that's pretty sad.

And you use an obvious hit piece as "evidence" she is irrational.
I support her because I agree with her the most. That's my reason

A hit piece? Raw Story isn't exactly Mother Jones in regards to it demanding everyone bow to Clinton. Really, they call bullsh!t when they see it. Reality might just be inconvenient for you - but Jill Stein has forfeited the good of the nation for her pathetic career's gain, and will continue to do so, like a true politician.

Her career? She is retired, and has been for years. She runs for office to help grow progressive causes and put forward progressive solutions. She doesn't gain much.

Put forward progressive solutions by suggesting electing Trump may not end up being as bad as Clinton. Got it.
Where did I suggest we elect Trump? Last I checked I have been telling people NOT to vote for him.

Bernie Sanders could have run third party. Where would that have led us? To a truly split vote and Trump win? Why do you think he wants Clinton to win?

Ballot access, debates, media coverage, union endorsements, repercussions from the senate, threats to committee assignments, There are numerous reasons he didn't run third party. Why does he want Clinton to win? Because he has vote Democrat every time since 1992.
Moreover didn't someone who resides in the same state, who wears similar glasses to Bernie and have a distinct lack of hair say "This campaign has never been about any single candidate. It is always about transforming America..."?

And is the answer starting at the bottom, or taking votes at the top?
1) Green candidates have been running since 1984
2) You cannot take votes, they do not belong to any candidate.

Take his 1996 statement on endorsing Bill.

"In terms of who to support for president, the choice is really not difficult. I am certainly not a big fan of Bill Clinton's politics. As a strong advocate of a single-payer health care system, I opposed his convoluted health care reform package. I have helped lead the opposition to his trade policies, which represent the interests of corporate America and which are virtually indistinguishable from the views of George Bush and Newt Gingrich. I opposed his bloated military budget, the welfare reform bill that he signed, and the so-called Defense of Marriage Act, which he supported. He has been weak on campaign finance reform and has caved in far too often on the environment. Bill Clinton is a moderate Democrat. I'm a democratic socialist.

Yet, without enthusiasm, I've decided to support Bill Clinton for president. Perhaps "support" is too strong a word. I'm planning no press conferences to push his candidacy, and will do no campaigning for him. I will vote for him, and make that public. Why? I think that many people do not perceive how truly dangerous the political situation in this country is today. If Bob Dole were to be elected president and Gingrich and the Republicans were to maintain control of Congress, we would see a legislative agenda unlike any in the modern history of this country. There would be an unparalleled war against working people and the poor, and political decisions would be made that could very well be irreversible.

Medicare and Medicaid would certainly be destroyed, and tens of millions more Americans would lose their health insurance. Steps would be taken to privatize Social Security, and the very existence of public education in America would be threatened. Serious efforts would be made to pass a constitutional amendment to ban abortion, affirmative action would be wiped out, and gay bashing would intensify. A flat tax would be passed, resulting in a massive shift in income from the working class to the rich, and all of our major environmental legislation would be eviscerated.

The Motor Voter bill would be repealed, and legislation making it harder for people to vote would be passed. Union-busting legislation would become law, the minimum wage would be abolished, and child labor would increase. Adults and kids in America would be competing for $3.00-an-hour jobs.

You think I"m kidding. You think I"m exaggerating. Well, I"m not. I work in Congress. I listen to these guys every day. They are very serious people. And the folks behind them, the Christian Coalition, the NRA, the Heritage Foundation, and others, are even crazier than they are. My old friend Dick Armey is not some wacko member of Congress laughed at by his colleagues. He is the Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives. Check out his views. No. I do not want Bob Dole to be president. I"m voting for Bill Clinton.

Do I have confidence that Clinton will stand up for the working people of this country - for children, for the elderly, for the folks who are hurting? No, I do not. But a Clinton victory could give us some time to build a movement, to develop a political infrastructure to protect what needs protecting, and to change the direction of the country."
And now you see why he was likened to an insider?

No, frankly. I think he made a pragmatic move. Despite all of the bullsh!t that he's a "pie-in-the-sky" candidate, he's always opted for pragmatism in order to get through times in the least worst way when the idealistic approach falls short. Being a pragmatist isn't being an insider. Do insiders have primaries rigged against them, and have access to voter databases suspended for no reason?

Funny you mention pragmatism, do you know who one of the main thinkers in modern pragmatism is? Cornel West. And do you know who he endorsed?
BrendanD19
Posts: 2,050
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/20/2016 3:41:16 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/20/2016 3:39:08 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:34:23 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:25:51 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:23:55 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:14:10 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
At 9/20/2016 3:02:26 AM, BrendanD19 wrote:
At 9/20/2016 2:41:20 AM, 1harderthanyouthink wrote:
"I think he's on the wrong team, perhaps because he's been in Washington, D.C., too long, because he used to really understand independent politics and why we cannot have a viable political system unless we have independent political parties."

-Jill Stein on Bernie Sanders


"When we're talking about president of the United States, in my own personal view, this is not the time for a protest vote. I know more about third-party politics than anyone else in the Congress, okay? And if people want to run as third-party candidates, God bless them! Run for Congress. Run for governor. Run for state legislature."

-Bernie Sanders

So, sure. He doesn't appreciate third parties right now. And that displays that he understands more about the US political structure and its inherent two-party bias - there is no - I repeat - no chance of a third party win. If there was, Bernie would not tell people to not vote third party. There's a reason he tells people to vote for them elsewhere: because they can actually win positions of lesser potency than the Presidency.

1. They have and they are trying too. There are greens running for office at every level.
2. I thought the point was that this is about a movement and not a man?

How about a nation, and not the self-absorption of a female political hack?
Exactly, that's why we aren't backing Clinton.
For all of Clinton's flaws, she has infinitely more political skill than Jill Stein.
Her policies are what matter, and her policies are the problem.
Right, and I even disagree with Stein on some major sh!t. For example: for a doctor, she can be really retarded with science sometimes.

If you are about to pull that antivaxx myth, I'd like to point out that was debunked in July, and the wifi thing was a point about EMFs.