TRUMP 2020!

[Mack]

so your mad he is good at building an image.. hes smart. irs not like he did this in a few years hes been the same guy forever.. name an honest billionair eh. name one that has done it in a more honest way than him.. beside all that and all the words hes said i still judge his actions as very very good for our nation, not his words his actions.

[Most Lee Harmless]

so your mad he is good at building an image.. hes smart. irs not like he did this in a few years hes been the same guy forever.. name an honest billionair eh. name one that has done it in a more honest way than him.. beside all that and all the words hes said i still judge his actions as very very good for our nation, not his words his actions.

I am not 'mad' at him. He is a joke, not a very good one but laughable enough. If you think he has been the same guy forever then he has fooled you. Just go look at his speeches when he was a Democrat supporter.

Behind every great fortune lies a crime. His have been more blatant than some. That you view that as a recommendation tells us enough.

Beware the fnords.

[Mack]

i didnt say i support it i was saying look at those who oppose him they have done much worse than him in my opinion. hes done some shady bankruptsy crap..

[Most Lee Harmless]

Ah, the 'others have done worse' defence. Tell me, which is better : one broken leg or two?
Using that defence invites getting a leg broken because, after all, that is what you have chosen, isn't it?

Maybe the real choice you should be wanting is not between two crooks and working out which is the greater or lesser of them. Maybe you should start arguing for a system which encourages honourable men and women to stand.

[Mack]

well we have to make a choice for the now, i think trump is the better choice because i dont think the comunist ideals the oposers are promoting are very very bad ideas

[Most Lee Harmless]

So you choose a crook. How easily pleased some folk are.

[Leo the Conqueror]

Ah, the 'others have done worse' defence. Tell me, which is better : one broken leg or two?
Using that defence invites getting a leg broken because, after all, that is what you have chosen, isn't it?

Maybe the real choice you should be wanting is not between two crooks and working out which is the greater or lesser of them. Maybe you should start arguing for a system which encourages honourable men and women to stand.

That is called a whataboutism. It's one of FOX's favorite tactics. "Trump supports the seperation of children from parents at the border? What about Hillary's emails?"

And it is a pretty crappy tactic because it does not address the problem at hand, but rather steers towards another. Two wrongs don't make a right, and one person doing a shitty thing doesn't excuse someone else from doing a shitty thing.

[Meliva]

You seem to either be forgetting or ignoring the fact that the majority of people only have 2 options at this point. Trump, or Biden. I certainly can't do anything to put a third option and get them into the white house, so if it comes down to me picking either Trump or Biden, I'm gonna pick trump. Even when Biden was of a sound mind and younger he wouldn't be a good candidate in my opinion, and now that his mind is riddled with dementia, to pick him would be a big mistake in my opinion.

If the democrats had sent a candidate that I felt was better then trump, then sure, I'd be willing to choose them over trump. They didn't.

Sure you can tell us to support a system where honorable folks will stand up, it's real easy to say something like that-do you have any advice on how though? Or is this a case of telling someone to do better without actually having anything constructive?

The sad truth is, is that ultimately any system, is going to be flawed. The US government is pretty well made, but it has it's problems sure. No system however is going to be free of any corruption or getting bad folks involved in it. Systems will always be flawed because they require people to make and run those systems, and people are flawed. So again, real easy to say "just make a system that runs flawlessly" but a lot harder to actually MAKE that system.

[Most Lee Harmless]

When you vote for a rubbish candidate on the basis they are the least worst option you reinforce the system that only allows you those two rubbish choices. They dont need to consider that what is required is better : only do enough to make you think one is worse.

Thus the 'attack' style of politicking we see today. Dont tell us why their policy is better, just tell us the other guy is feeble, fucks pigs or wears a frock in bed. It ends up nothing to do with politics or policy or hope for a better future, it's just insults and who can insult best. Toss a few soundbites in about a 'new dawn' or 'pie in the sky' and that's your campaign sorted. The tough part is raising the cash to buy the TV slots.

And every time you vote for one of the tweedledums or tweedledees you tell them they are right. They don't need to respect you or the truth or democracy or the Constitution. Just convince half +1 that the other guy eats babies.

In which case, you get what you voted for and you nourish and feed the system which produces such candidates.

Is it tough to produce a better system. Yep. And it should be tough. Getting elected should be tough. Producing policies should be tough. But as long as the easy options we allow them exist, the option to build their campaigns on slurs, rumours and personal prejudices being enough to win, then crap in, crap out.

[Meliva]

The only other option is to not vote at all, or vote for someone who has 0 chance in the election. Neither of which will have any lasting impact unless done on masse. Now folks could start a movement to try to do so, after all parties have come and gone before-while at the moment democrat and republican's are the main 2, it might not stay that way.

Now personally I don't bother voting as Kansas is a pretty deep red state, and I also tend to think of politics as more or less meaningless in the grand scheme of things.

Though if you look at history, it's almost always been this way. There has almost always been 2 main parties. First were the Federalists and democratic-replublicans, then feds died out and I think Whigs popped up, eventually the DR turned into just the dems I believe and republicans popped up a bit later.

Ultimately if folks just leave on masse to a third party, that will probably just shift the balance to that third party becoming one of the new 2.

Also, sometimes it's better to pick the lesser of 2 evils, then to not pick at all. Not always mind you, but take this case for example. I would rather trump be elected then Biden who I believe has dementia. Would I pick a third option that is better then both if I thought it was valid? Sure. Does that option actually exist at the moment? Not as far as I'm aware.