Azuren said:
I'm sorry, but comments like this absolutely disgust me.
Politics is not a contact sport. Politics isn't a sport. Politics is a debate, but instead of debating they throw shade and sling mud. They resort to BULLSHIT that would actually get you kicked out of debate. Completely meaningless drivel that has no place being somewhere as important as Congress. Politics, as it is, is a disgusting, festering cesspool of degenerates and criminals who sell themselves to the highest bidder. Defend or condone, even in the apathetic "nothing we can do about it" sense again and I'll simply terminate the conversation.
Plenty of people were present to view the presidency numerous times and turned out to be horrible-to-mediocre presidents. Off the top of my head, Bush. That said, being wide to one of the greatest presidents ever in no way entitles you to being a good president. It's clear from her campaign that, despite what (half of) the left will say, Hillary is no better a choice than Trump.
As far as experience is concerned, Trump had kept a multi-billion dollar empire afloat (in spite of setbacks that everyone is rather quick to point out in the face of overwhelming success) for quite some time now. In the mean time, Hillary became (an awful) senator. Just because Trump is Lucifer doesn't mean Hillary isn't Beelzebub. They're both outright awful choices, and no matter how you slice it America is in for another rough 4-8 years.
Side note: At least if Trump or Bernie win, we're not still owned by Goldman Sachs |
Politics is an ugly game, I know maybe people don't like it characterized that way but that's just how it is.
Goldman Sachs will still have influence (particularily on Trump who has no real tanigable policy that he actually sticks to other than China is bad, and he'll probably back off that too once he realizes fucking with China is probably not smart) no matter who is president. To say that Trump would anti Wall Street banks is laughable, he'd do the same thing Clinton does maybe even moreso.
It's president, not king or queen or czar. They have limited power. Unfortunately corporations have overwhelming power no matter what because money is power on this planet right now.
Maybe in some Star Trek utopia like future things will be different, but that's past our life time most likely.
Generally what I'm saying is there's this dilenation I think between the person being president should be a "nice person who makes you feel good", but that isn't actually a neccessity for getting anything done. I don't have to like my electrican when my power goes out, I just want to know that he knows what he/she is doing when they are doing the repair.
Clinton is not Mrs. Charisma or likable, she has made mistakes (like any long serving politican, find me one with a spotless track record who's been in high ranking positions of power for a long time). That said she is experienced, uniquely so probably because she was first lady for 8 years of a very successful presidency. Say what you want, but she wouldn't be some green novice having to learn things on the fly from day 1. She's had almost 25 years to prep for the job and is reasonably intelligent and thoughtful (doesn't mean she's right all the time, but there does seem to be a logical thought process there, Trump is wildly erratic).
