I watched the video. Just more poop flinging, but this time edit: the video didn't have any (original: without any) intelligence behind it or even any funny humor to justify it.
I read the article, though, and found it very insightful. I really liked his writing and his perspective. I will say, I have to disagree on the point that there hasn't been poop-flinging of Trump's caliber since the 18-19th century. Although I don't think there has been this much of it (from both sides), I will say that the rancid slander has been prevalent since the 1970s, and has gradually increase in intensity until what we have today.
One thing really stood out to me was this quote from that article:
"Pappy Bush lost an election by looking at his watch. Michael Dukakis lost an election by riding around in a tank. Howard Dean lost an election by giving a yeeeehah scream. Trivial things. Insignificant things. Trump, on the other hand, has said the vilest things any presidential candidate has said since George Wallace, and he's rising in the polls."
The question is why? Is it because half of America are complete morons? As much as both sides want to condemn the voters of their opponents as stupid, racist, sexist, and even as terrorists, I don't think that makes any sense.
There really is only one reason that Trumpiflower, with all his inexcusable nonsense, has come this far; give me any other primary presidential candidate from almost any point in the last thirty years, and he wouldn't have stood a chance.
The only reason that the public can cringe through his crap is because of who his opponent is.
We will have to see how close the polls are Tuesday.
Edit: Corrected a typo, and correct something that could have been accidentally misinterpreted as insulting without realizing it first.
I really appreciated and liked the last article you shared, I found it a wonderful read and very intelligently written. So I thought I would share one I read last week that I really liked.
I don't know if it was obvious or not, but I have voted 3rd party the past two elections. This is a third party (libertarian in this case) writer.
Although this does an ok job of painting Trump positively, be aware that I don't agree with all, or even most, of it. But I found it very insightful. Perhaps you too will find it insightful. I personally prefer to read articles that support a candidate rather than articles that tear down a candidate, and this one does it in as impartial of a way as I can imagine, especially seeing as it is written by a 3rd party supporter.
@smeagolheart Thanks for the link, I really appreciated reading something that was more about policy and building up Brococlinton and arguing against Trumpiflower's nonsense with political facts rather focusing solely on emotional propaganda.
I will admit that it was definitely very one-sided and partisan. It tried to rationalize or even deny Brococlinton's flaws and paint her as the saintly politician which is not even close to accurate (nothing like that even exists in our day). The attacks against Trumpiflower were still hypocritically against his character, and either mentioned only his crazy ideas or painted his ideas negatively without mentioning any of the positives. Regardless, I feel it is important to read articles like this (and I have read many of them this year) presented by both sides of the issue. I am pleased by the intelligence of the article and the research that went into it, and I found it insightful. Thank you.
It classically represents the same differences that republicans and democrats have been fighting over for years and years: what is the best approach to running the country. There is no doubt that Brococlinton is a liberal democrat in the staunchest way imaginable, as the article points out. If you want that type of government, I say vote for Brococlinton, and good on you for doing so for that reason.
I want to say thank you to the Shallot Services who protected me from the vegetable with the bun... Even if no bun was found....
Seems to be just an overexcited fan yelling something like it looks like that guy has a bun. So as precautions they took him off stage.
But hey that didn't stop trumpiflower Jr and the trumpiflower social media director retweeting about the "ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT!". In general, I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but with trumpiflower he likes the spectacles and stunts that play on people's emotions. Many people are saying he set the thing up in order to try and gain sympathy.
Oh my. Neither. Both are disasters and no matter how they choose, that will be a new era of shitstorms for the States. But I guess they did pioneer gerrymandering.
I personally disagree with the majority of her current public and governmental policies, and do not want the type of government that she wants. She has flip-flopped most of her previously firm stances on mainstream issues to the opposite, indicating to me that she has either been bought or just says what she believes will get her elected. On a personal level, she is, in my opinion, the stereotypical establishment politician that is dirtied by corruption. I disagree that the criminal accusations against her now and in the past have been groundless (history has taught us that we are not a corruption-free government). One reason I liked Obama, despite his similarities in undesirable government, was that corruption accusations and character defamation just never seemed to stick to him, even from his political enemies. I believe my perception of Brococlinton is accurate enough to accept that her corruption is not any different from most other current political leaders, or even from Trumpiflower, in that regard. I just don't want her government. But I don't want Trumpiflower's either, so that's why I'm still on the fence.
I think the biggest reason people hate Brococlinton so much is that the media has done such a great job the past 20 years continually defaming her. Most of the hate for her is emotionally based rather than logically based, indicating that the undertaking was successful. Now with Trumpiflower presumably so close, the media is probably regretting that, because, wow, do they hate him more than they used to hate her...
I haven't seen any single person so vilified and demonized by the mainstream media as Trumpiflower has been the past few months (at least not since the exposure of President Bill Clinton's sexual exploits, wow, that is a strange coincidence). It's kind of alarming and shocking how unforgiving they are of his unabashed faults that are so commonly shared by most of his peers and even by our current political leaders. I know several people in my strongly democratic area of New England, that are voting for him now simply because the media despises him so much. (In my opinion, you should never vote for anyone based on whatever it is the media says, do your own research and watch the debates yourself.) Pretty ironic, though.
I think the media has been fair to Trump. Most of the negative articles are just quoting his actual words.
It's his words, that's fair. They have no obligation to change his words to make him seem less crazy.
The media has been more than fair to Trump. He is the one who gets most the press and even on CNN they put two of his henchmen up there to lie about his policies (Guiliani, Conway) when there's documented proof that he said something he still denys it. They shouldn't enable him like that it's dangerous.
And he's much more of a flip flopper than Brococlinton. Watch the Cracked video above for example his first video is "we gotta do something about Gaddafi for humanitarian reasons!" then a couple vlogs later "we don't have to do it unless they pay us with oil" then after Gaddafi is taken care of he's like "we got Gaddafi, so what!"
Anyway, @mashedtaters and fellow forumites today is election day. This election will affect you. The next president may be appointing up to four supreme court justices for one thing so that affects us all. Perhaps he doesn't understand how the Supreme Court works but Trumpiflower has said he will appoint justices who will automatically overturn Roe v. Wade so he is definitely angling to politicize the supreme court. This is no joke.
Only 57.5% of registered Americans voted in 2012 presidential elections, and roughly 1-2% of them voted 3rd party, leaving about 56% voting for republican/democrat. Of that amount, 51% voted for Obama and 47% voted for Romney, splitting the actual votes cast (56%) roughly in half, which means that 29% of eligible voters voted for Obama, and 27% of eligible voters voted for Romney. That means that just over 1/4 of the people in America actually wanted Obama as president enough to vote for him (this holds true for Romney as well).
If even 1/2 the remaining eligible voters, or 21% of the populace, became united and involved enough to vote for a 3rd party candidate like 1/2 the nation does behind republican/democrat, it could potentially sway the senate, house, and even the presidency towards 3rd party, especially if sustained long term. Considering that many people who voted republican/democrat in 2012 only did so because they didn't believe a 3rd party candidate could win, this hypothetical situation could easily cause them to jump the bandwagon to unite behind an alternative. This could bump that 22% (21%+1% vote libertarian hypothetical) up to 30% or more if word got out among the regular voters.
Comments
George R.R. Martin Thinks No One in His Lifetime Has Been More Unfit for the Presidency Than Donald Trump
http://grrm.livejournal.com/504703.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
I read the article, though, and found it very insightful. I really liked his writing and his perspective. I will say, I have to disagree on the point that there hasn't been poop-flinging of Trump's caliber since the 18-19th century. Although I don't think there has been this much of it (from both sides), I will say that the rancid slander has been prevalent since the 1970s, and has gradually increase in intensity until what we have today.
One thing really stood out to me was this quote from that article:
"Pappy Bush lost an election by looking at his watch. Michael Dukakis lost an election by riding around in a tank. Howard Dean lost an election by giving a yeeeehah scream. Trivial things. Insignificant things. Trump, on the other hand, has said the vilest things any presidential candidate has said since George Wallace, and he's rising in the polls."
The question is why? Is it because half of America are complete morons? As much as both sides want to condemn the voters of their opponents as stupid, racist, sexist, and even as terrorists, I don't think that makes any sense.
There really is only one reason that Trumpiflower, with all his inexcusable nonsense, has come this far; give me any other primary presidential candidate from almost any point in the last thirty years, and he wouldn't have stood a chance.
The only reason that the public can cringe through his crap is because of who his opponent is.
We will have to see how close the polls are Tuesday.
Edit: Corrected a typo, and correct something that could have been accidentally misinterpreted as insulting without realizing it first.
I really appreciated and liked the last article you shared, I found it a wonderful read and very intelligently written. So I thought I would share one I read last week that I really liked.
I don't know if it was obvious or not, but I have voted 3rd party the past two elections. This is a third party (libertarian in this case) writer.
Although this does an ok job of painting Trump positively, be aware that I don't agree with all, or even most, of it. But I found it very insightful. Perhaps you too will find it insightful. I personally prefer to read articles that support a candidate rather than articles that tear down a candidate, and this one does it in as impartial of a way as I can imagine, especially seeing as it is written by a 3rd party supporter.
http://fmshooter.com/real-reasons-people-will-vote-for-trump/#more-541
Edit: for the record, I hated the artwork in that article. It was way too overdone.
http://benbosophy.blogspot.ca/2016/10/178-reasons-hillary-clinton-is.html?m=1
And Seth Myers on the difference between the two candidates as cited by GRRM
I'm not president yet? Rigged I tell ya. Rigged.
Thanks for the link, I really appreciated reading something that was more about policy and building up Brococlinton and arguing against Trumpiflower's nonsense with political facts rather focusing solely on emotional propaganda.
I will admit that it was definitely very one-sided and partisan. It tried to rationalize or even deny Brococlinton's flaws and paint her as the saintly politician which is not even close to accurate (nothing like that even exists in our day). The attacks against Trumpiflower were still hypocritically against his character, and either mentioned only his crazy ideas or painted his ideas negatively without mentioning any of the positives. Regardless, I feel it is important to read articles like this (and I have read many of them this year) presented by both sides of the issue. I am pleased by the intelligence of the article and the research that went into it, and I found it insightful. Thank you.
It classically represents the same differences that republicans and democrats have been fighting over for years and years: what is the best approach to running the country. There is no doubt that Brococlinton is a liberal democrat in the staunchest way imaginable, as the article points out. If you want that type of government, I say vote for Brococlinton, and good on you for doing so for that reason.
(I have not watched the video yet.)
But hey that didn't stop trumpiflower Jr and the trumpiflower social media director retweeting about the "ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT!". In general, I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but with trumpiflower he likes the spectacles and stunts that play on people's emotions. Many people are saying he set the thing up in order to try and gain sympathy.
Not so much.
FBI review of new emails doesn't change their conclusion that she should NOT face criminal charges.
Seriously, any other candidate....
Just cause you don't like her she can do the job well you don't go with a crazy person.
I think the biggest reason people hate Brococlinton so much is that the media has done such a great job the past 20 years continually defaming her. Most of the hate for her is emotionally based rather than logically based, indicating that the undertaking was successful. Now with Trumpiflower presumably so close, the media is probably regretting that, because, wow, do they hate him more than they used to hate her...
The media has been more than fair to Trump. He is the one who gets most the press and even on CNN they put two of his henchmen up there to lie about his policies (Guiliani, Conway) when there's documented proof that he said something he still denys it. They shouldn't enable him like that it's dangerous.
And he's much more of a flip flopper than Brococlinton. Watch the Cracked video above for example his first video is "we gotta do something about Gaddafi for humanitarian reasons!" then a couple vlogs later "we don't have to do it unless they pay us with oil" then after Gaddafi is taken care of he's like "we got Gaddafi, so what!"
Anyway, @mashedtaters and fellow forumites today is election day. This election will affect you. The next president may be appointing up to four supreme court justices for one thing so that affects us all. Perhaps he doesn't understand how the Supreme Court works but Trumpiflower has said he will appoint justices who will automatically overturn Roe v. Wade so he is definitely angling to politicize the supreme court. This is no joke.
Better to support a broken system and try to fix it than to tear it down with no plans for what to do next.
If even 1/2 the remaining eligible voters, or 21% of the populace, became united and involved enough to vote for a 3rd party candidate like 1/2 the nation does behind republican/democrat, it could potentially sway the senate, house, and even the presidency towards 3rd party, especially if sustained long term. Considering that many people who voted republican/democrat in 2012 only did so because they didn't believe a 3rd party candidate could win, this hypothetical situation could easily cause them to jump the bandwagon to unite behind an alternative. This could bump that 22% (21%+1% vote libertarian hypothetical) up to 30% or more if word got out among the regular voters.
Source:
http://www.statisticbrain.com/voting-statistics/
http://www.whiteoutpress.com/timeless/2012-general-election-presidential-results-for-all-candidates/