Trump or Hillary
Donald Trump vs Hillary Clinton who is worse.
I'm 16 so I can't vote but I was just wondering what people on hear have to say.
I'm 16 so I can't vote but I was just wondering what people on hear have to say.
Definitely Trump is worse. He has a $200M class action against him at the moment for the Trump University fraud that he carried out. Innocent until proven guilty, but there apparently aren't any reasons so far for that to fail. When questioned about it, he said they were "Minor civil cases". Well $35,000 might not seem much to him, but it is a lot for an average citizen. And apparently he his applying his full legal resources to beat his opponents one by one. So, IMO that alone should prevent him from even being a presidential candidate. Never mind having a criminal as President. He just doesn't seem to be statesmen like enough - how is going go when there are serious decisions to be made? And he has the hide to refer to Hillary as "Criminal Clinton". Don't get me started on Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfield - they should be in jail too.
But on top of that his rhetoric is loud, populist and xenophobic. It unfortunately it can appeal to a large enough section of society for it to be a political force. I have seen it before, twice here in Australia. In the late 1980's there was a Senator by the name of Pauline Hanson, who had quite clear racist "Anti Asian, White Australia" policies. Unfortunately there were enough people to which this appealed to, and she actually had several Senators/ MP's at one point. It took several years for them to be voted out. More recently, the previous Prime Minister, Tony Abbot when in opposition had a MO (Method Opportunity) of relentless negativity - basically putting a truckload of BS out to the media every day. I am not saying the incumbent government was perfect - there were some bad decisions made. And it is the job of the opposition to be opposed, but really? What got me was the Australian public believed it, and even the government was starting to doubt itself. I guess if one throws enough crap at someone, they will eventually believe they deserve it. And this foundation of BS didn't last, after 2 years he was rolled by the current Prime Minister, otherwise it was obvious they would loose the election (which is this Saturday) Btw, I can't vote here, am not a citizen. But I do wish we could have sensible politics.
I think the same sorts of things have happened with the Brexit. The worst thing about that is the economic shock of it - the world has not yet fully recovered from the GFC - now we have big hits to stock markets around the world, exchange rates, and credit ratings. One UK millionaire said on the first day: "The Pound is down a bit, it's starting to bounce back". Well, down 12% a 15 year low on the first day, today it was down to a 31 year low. Not too bad at all, eh?
So for me, it's crystal clear - I hope Trump doesn't get anywhere near the White House.
But on top of that his rhetoric is loud, populist and xenophobic. It unfortunately it can appeal to a large enough section of society for it to be a political force. I have seen it before, twice here in Australia. In the late 1980's there was a Senator by the name of Pauline Hanson, who had quite clear racist "Anti Asian, White Australia" policies. Unfortunately there were enough people to which this appealed to, and she actually had several Senators/ MP's at one point. It took several years for them to be voted out. More recently, the previous Prime Minister, Tony Abbot when in opposition had a MO (Method Opportunity) of relentless negativity - basically putting a truckload of BS out to the media every day. I am not saying the incumbent government was perfect - there were some bad decisions made. And it is the job of the opposition to be opposed, but really? What got me was the Australian public believed it, and even the government was starting to doubt itself. I guess if one throws enough crap at someone, they will eventually believe they deserve it. And this foundation of BS didn't last, after 2 years he was rolled by the current Prime Minister, otherwise it was obvious they would loose the election (which is this Saturday) Btw, I can't vote here, am not a citizen. But I do wish we could have sensible politics.
I think the same sorts of things have happened with the Brexit. The worst thing about that is the economic shock of it - the world has not yet fully recovered from the GFC - now we have big hits to stock markets around the world, exchange rates, and credit ratings. One UK millionaire said on the first day: "The Pound is down a bit, it's starting to bounce back". Well, down 12% a 15 year low on the first day, today it was down to a 31 year low. Not too bad at all, eh?
So for me, it's crystal clear - I hope Trump doesn't get anywhere near the White House.
Trump, for pretty much the reasons TheIdeasMan has listed. I don't want a president that conducts foreign policy by calling leaders, "losahs" and thinks xenophobia, blatant racism, and whipping up all the hate that comes with it is acceptable behavior. Those who don't learn history are destined to repeat it, and I don't want any part of that, and yes, I am implying what you're all thinking, and no, I don't think it's paranoia that electing him president is the first step in a journey towards it.
Of course, I was a Sanders supporter. For whatever you may call him, his views on education and healthcare resonated well with myself. It's too late for me, and while I'm not old, I'm not a kid anymore. That said, I do believe our youth is the future, I've seen some extraordinarily great kids today, and I want them to have the opportunities I wish I had.
I've said all I have to say on the matter, I'm not an overly political person, and I have no interest in continuing the discussion, for the inevitable arguments and quoting that will result.
Of course, I was a Sanders supporter. For whatever you may call him, his views on education and healthcare resonated well with myself. It's too late for me, and while I'm not old, I'm not a kid anymore. That said, I do believe our youth is the future, I've seen some extraordinarily great kids today, and I want them to have the opportunities I wish I had.
I've said all I have to say on the matter, I'm not an overly political person, and I have no interest in continuing the discussion, for the inevitable arguments and quoting that will result.
> Innocent until proven guilty, but (...)
no buts, never.
and who knows, perhaps the process is lengthy enough to everybody forget about it and then the system may decide to judge in his favor.
> And apparently he his applying his full legal resources to beat his opponents
> one by one.
probably lost in translation, I fail to see the issue here.
> So for me, it's crystal clear
I didn't see you mentioning Clinton.
> his rhetoric is loud, populist and xenophobic. It unfortunately it can appeal
> to a large enough section of society for it to be a political force.
a shame, really.
> I'm 16 so I can't vote
don't worry, even if you could, your vote would be worthless.
instead of voting, you should campaign.
but if the mentality is «the lesser evil» then you lost already.
no buts, never.
and who knows, perhaps the process is lengthy enough to everybody forget about it and then the system may decide to judge in his favor.
> And apparently he his applying his full legal resources to beat his opponents
> one by one.
probably lost in translation, I fail to see the issue here.
> So for me, it's crystal clear
I didn't see you mentioning Clinton.
> his rhetoric is loud, populist and xenophobic. It unfortunately it can appeal
> to a large enough section of society for it to be a political force.
a shame, really.
> I'm 16 so I can't vote
don't worry, even if you could, your vote would be worthless.
instead of voting, you should campaign.
but if the mentality is «the lesser evil» then you lost already.
@ne555
Fair enough, but it will be interesting to see how it plays out.
Truth, Justice, and Fairness are three different things, sometimes they don't coincide as much as they should. Does letting it go until people forget (or until the election has happened) strike you as a form of interference? Maybe both political and legal?
Billionaire versus ordinary citizens. Even with the resources of a $200M class action with possibly good potential to win legal costs, I still wonder whether that will be fair. Donald Trump will spend any amount of money (apparently his is spending millions) to avoid being tarnished by this, the big prize is the Presidency. Judges can be influenced, despite them supposed to being above all that. If those kind of issues are discovered, it will be several years before that lands in court.
You are right I wasn't being balanced in that respect, but could I get way with not doing that? If it quacks like a duck it probably is a duck. Alternatively, a spade is a spade. That is, I have seen his type before, as I mentioned. There is plenty of history that tells us what is bad, if the same is happening again, should there be a need to provide the context for the opposing side in order to point out the badness?
So, what - we sit back and let it all roll by? Not speaking out (or at least encourage a debate) against something that is ostensibly wrong, is mediocre. Mediocrity is one of the reasons bad things can flourish.
Well that is decidedly undemocratic: if no-one (or a small proportion) exercised their voting rights , we wouldn't have an effective democracy. Apparently, in the Brexit referendum, 76% of young people voted against leaving the EU. But the participation rate for young people was only 36%. One might wonder how the result may have been different (maybe there is reasonable probability that more would have voted to stay) if there had been a much higher participation rate. Participation is important: some countries have compulsory voting and fine those who don't.
Doing both would be very good democratic things to do.
And what of the amount of difference between these two evils? If the difference is large (I think it is), I know what I would prefer to do. Defeating oneself to the point of inaction isn't very democratic either.
Another thing, if Trump does manage to win, there could be considerable financial fall-out as there has been with the Brexit. The opposition by other leaders to Trump isn't universal though, apparently North Korea thinks he is a swell guy.
| no buts, never. |
Fair enough, but it will be interesting to see how it plays out.
| and who knows, perhaps the process is lengthy enough to everybody forget about it and then the system may decide to judge in his favor. |
Truth, Justice, and Fairness are three different things, sometimes they don't coincide as much as they should. Does letting it go until people forget (or until the election has happened) strike you as a form of interference? Maybe both political and legal?
| probably lost in translation, I fail to see the issue here. |
Billionaire versus ordinary citizens. Even with the resources of a $200M class action with possibly good potential to win legal costs, I still wonder whether that will be fair. Donald Trump will spend any amount of money (apparently his is spending millions) to avoid being tarnished by this, the big prize is the Presidency. Judges can be influenced, despite them supposed to being above all that. If those kind of issues are discovered, it will be several years before that lands in court.
| I didn't see you mentioning Clinton. |
You are right I wasn't being balanced in that respect, but could I get way with not doing that? If it quacks like a duck it probably is a duck. Alternatively, a spade is a spade. That is, I have seen his type before, as I mentioned. There is plenty of history that tells us what is bad, if the same is happening again, should there be a need to provide the context for the opposing side in order to point out the badness?
| a shame, really. |
So, what - we sit back and let it all roll by? Not speaking out (or at least encourage a debate) against something that is ostensibly wrong, is mediocre. Mediocrity is one of the reasons bad things can flourish.
| don't worry, even if you could, your vote would be worthless. |
Well that is decidedly undemocratic: if no-one (or a small proportion) exercised their voting rights , we wouldn't have an effective democracy. Apparently, in the Brexit referendum, 76% of young people voted against leaving the EU. But the participation rate for young people was only 36%. One might wonder how the result may have been different (maybe there is reasonable probability that more would have voted to stay) if there had been a much higher participation rate. Participation is important: some countries have compulsory voting and fine those who don't.
| instead of voting, you should campaign. |
Doing both would be very good democratic things to do.
| but if the mentality is «the lesser evil» then you lost already. |
And what of the amount of difference between these two evils? If the difference is large (I think it is), I know what I would prefer to do. Defeating oneself to the point of inaction isn't very democratic either.
Another thing, if Trump does manage to win, there could be considerable financial fall-out as there has been with the Brexit. The opposition by other leaders to Trump isn't universal though, apparently North Korea thinks he is a swell guy.
> Billionaire versus ordinary citizens. (...) Donald Trump will spend any
> amount of money to avoid being tarnished by this,
well, you can't blame the guy for using every resource that he has, even if the direct consequences would be considered «small change» for him.
perhaps the problem is that that situation can be reached, but that's another issue.
> You are right I wasn't being balanced in that respect, but could I get way
> with not doing that? If it quacks like a duck it probably is a duck.
'A' is a duck, ¿what's 'B'? ¿is it a duck, a cat, a frog?
> a shame, really.
>> So, what - we sit back and let it all roll by?
I'm agreeing with you.
> don't worry, even if you could, your vote would be worthless.
>> Well that is decidedly undemocratic: if no-one (or a small proportion)
I'm talking about just one person. It's a delusion to think that getting up one day and choosing a piece of paper is exercising democracy.
The idea is not «this doesn't matter, so I'm not going to do it» but instead «this doesn't matter, so I'll try something else»
> instead of voting, you should campaign.
>> Doing both would be very good democratic things to do.
sorry, tend to forget that vote is not compulsory.
> amount of money to avoid being tarnished by this,
well, you can't blame the guy for using every resource that he has, even if the direct consequences would be considered «small change» for him.
perhaps the problem is that that situation can be reached, but that's another issue.
> You are right I wasn't being balanced in that respect, but could I get way
> with not doing that? If it quacks like a duck it probably is a duck.
'A' is a duck, ¿what's 'B'? ¿is it a duck, a cat, a frog?
> a shame, really.
>> So, what - we sit back and let it all roll by?
I'm agreeing with you.
> don't worry, even if you could, your vote would be worthless.
>> Well that is decidedly undemocratic: if no-one (or a small proportion)
I'm talking about just one person. It's a delusion to think that getting up one day and choosing a piece of paper is exercising democracy.
The idea is not «this doesn't matter, so I'm not going to do it» but instead «this doesn't matter, so I'll try something else»
> instead of voting, you should campaign.
>> Doing both would be very good democratic things to do.
sorry, tend to forget that vote is not compulsory.
theres no real difference, depends if you like your rascism blatant or institutional
To be honest, I can't wait to see the one on one debates with Trump and Hillary. They are gonna rip each other apart. I think trump might 'win' in the debate though like he did in the republicans debate.
closed account (E0p9LyTq)
| rabster wrote: |
|---|
| Donald Trump vs Hillary Clinton who is worse. |
Fie and a Pox on both of their Houses. *SPIT*
| rabster wrote: |
|---|
| I'm 16 so I can't vote but I was just wondering what people on hear have to say. |
More than a few of the people here at cplusplus are citizens of other countries, so have no say other than expressing their opinion.
closed account (E0p9LyTq)
Heh, the report-happy troll couldn't be any worse than either Hillary or Trump.
@ne555
Yes, exactly :+)
Based on the evidence from history A and B are the same. As expressed here:
But it's not just one person, despite being that is what you meant. Simply by making the comment on a public forum means that it isn't. The point is if groups of people have that attitude, it diminishes the democracy.
Strongly disagree. Every time there is an election, people can and do change the political landscape, by doing exactly that: making a choice. Voting is at the very heart of democracy; without it there is no democracy. Again, if one thinks that voting for party A, in order to get rid of party B, is going to be ineffective, then that is defeating oneself and also diminishes the democracy.
A key point is that it does matter. And what is : "something else" ?
@devonrevenge
But the issues are more than just racism (as a singular topic). There is xenophobia, issues about consultation and decision making, fairness, doing the right thing, being sensible etcetera. IMO there is a huge difference between the two.
@rabster
I reckon Trump's MO will be to dump a truckload of BS, that is his methodology. As I said earlier, if one throws enough crap, eventually people will believe it. The huge danger is that it is a massive step, to go from doing that to actually governing. That's what happened here in Australia with Tony Abbott, IMO. It didn't take long for cracks to appear, but took 2 years before it fell apart. What of the damage in that time? As far as I can tell, things are different in the USA: impeachment is apparently a difficult thing to pull off, and doesn't happen very often. So once a President is in, they are there for awhile.
@FurryGuy
.
Yes, exactly right. Hopefully our outside opinions may be of some value though :+) They might provide a different perspective.
In terms of the reporting, I don't know why the troll bothers: It won't make a difference for most all of us. Hopefully the oxygen thief will get bored eventually.
| perhaps the problem is that that situation can be reached, but that's another issue. |
Yes, exactly :+)
| 'A' is a duck, ¿what's 'B'? ¿is it a duck, a cat, a frog? |
Based on the evidence from history A and B are the same. As expressed here:
| TheIdeasMan wrote: |
|---|
| That is, I have seen his type before, as I mentioned. There is plenty of history that tells us what is bad, if the same is happening again, should there be a need to provide the context for the opposing side in order to point out the badness? |
| I'm talking about just one person. |
But it's not just one person, despite being that is what you meant. Simply by making the comment on a public forum means that it isn't. The point is if groups of people have that attitude, it diminishes the democracy.
| It's a delusion to think that getting up one day and choosing a piece of paper is exercising democracy. |
Strongly disagree. Every time there is an election, people can and do change the political landscape, by doing exactly that: making a choice. Voting is at the very heart of democracy; without it there is no democracy. Again, if one thinks that voting for party A, in order to get rid of party B, is going to be ineffective, then that is defeating oneself and also diminishes the democracy.
| The idea is not «this doesn't matter, so I'm not going to do it» but instead «this doesn't matter, so I'll try something else» |
A key point is that it does matter. And what is : "something else" ?
@devonrevenge
| theres no real difference, depends if you like your rascism blatant or institutional |
But the issues are more than just racism (as a singular topic). There is xenophobia, issues about consultation and decision making, fairness, doing the right thing, being sensible etcetera. IMO there is a huge difference between the two.
@rabster
| To be honest, I can't wait to see the one on one debates with Trump and Hillary. They are gonna rip each other apart. I think trump might 'win' in the debate though like he did in the republicans debate. |
I reckon Trump's MO will be to dump a truckload of BS, that is his methodology. As I said earlier, if one throws enough crap, eventually people will believe it. The huge danger is that it is a massive step, to go from doing that to actually governing. That's what happened here in Australia with Tony Abbott, IMO. It didn't take long for cracks to appear, but took 2 years before it fell apart. What of the damage in that time? As far as I can tell, things are different in the USA: impeachment is apparently a difficult thing to pull off, and doesn't happen very often. So once a President is in, they are there for awhile.
@FurryGuy
| More than a few of the people here at cplusplus are citizens of other countries, so have no say other than expressing their opinion |
Yes, exactly right. Hopefully our outside opinions may be of some value though :+) They might provide a different perspective.
In terms of the reporting, I don't know why the troll bothers: It won't make a difference for most all of us. Hopefully the oxygen thief will get bored eventually.
I guess we can have this discussion, as it remains civil, which is a first.
Impeachment is a difficult thing to do, and even then doesn't necessarily bring removal. It's really just the beginnings of the process. Clinton and Johnson were the only two in history to ever face impeachment hearings, and neither were removed from office, so it's difficult to say how bad you must screw up before you're forcibly removed. Let's just say there was a period between 2000-2008 where things completely fell apart under what could only be described as monumental lies and incompetence that never resulted in removal (or even impeachment as it so happens).
I don't like Trump because of one singular issue - his overt racism, xenophobia, sexism, mockery of the disabled, prisoners of war, and the list goes on - it's because he represents (personally) every poor quality a human being could have.
He's a racist, he's xenophobic, he's sexist, he mocks the disabled, etc., which is bad enough in and of itself, but he's also a liar. He lies about lying. He lies when he's caught dead-to-rights lying. He's also a con artist, and has been sued numerous times (and is in the process of now) for it. He's also egotistical. He's the greatest person he has ever known as far as he's concerned. He's also thin-skinned. A crayon is twice as sharp as it needs to be to hurt him, and off to Twitter he runs to cry about it. He flip-flops constantly. You could rely on a crackhead to pay you back $10 than what Trump will believe from day-to-day.
Short of Hilary Clinton walking on stage and saying, "I hate every one of you and will do everything in my power to ruin this country" I'm voting for her, because in more words that's basically all I hear from Trump. I'm not going to be responsible for turning that lose on the world. We're talking about a 70-year-old man with the emotional stability of a teen and an ego to match, but instead of letting him rant on Twitter want to give him a standing army, and why do some people love him? Largely because of the racism and xenophobia! I don't get it.
| As far as I can tell, things are different in the USA: impeachment is apparently a difficult thing to pull off, and doesn't happen very often. So once a President is in, they are there for awhile. |
Impeachment is a difficult thing to do, and even then doesn't necessarily bring removal. It's really just the beginnings of the process. Clinton and Johnson were the only two in history to ever face impeachment hearings, and neither were removed from office, so it's difficult to say how bad you must screw up before you're forcibly removed. Let's just say there was a period between 2000-2008 where things completely fell apart under what could only be described as monumental lies and incompetence that never resulted in removal (or even impeachment as it so happens).
I don't like Trump because of one singular issue - his overt racism, xenophobia, sexism, mockery of the disabled, prisoners of war, and the list goes on - it's because he represents (personally) every poor quality a human being could have.
He's a racist, he's xenophobic, he's sexist, he mocks the disabled, etc., which is bad enough in and of itself, but he's also a liar. He lies about lying. He lies when he's caught dead-to-rights lying. He's also a con artist, and has been sued numerous times (and is in the process of now) for it. He's also egotistical. He's the greatest person he has ever known as far as he's concerned. He's also thin-skinned. A crayon is twice as sharp as it needs to be to hurt him, and off to Twitter he runs to cry about it. He flip-flops constantly. You could rely on a crackhead to pay you back $10 than what Trump will believe from day-to-day.
Short of Hilary Clinton walking on stage and saying, "I hate every one of you and will do everything in my power to ruin this country" I'm voting for her, because in more words that's basically all I hear from Trump. I'm not going to be responsible for turning that lose on the world. We're talking about a 70-year-old man with the emotional stability of a teen and an ego to match, but instead of letting him rant on Twitter want to give him a standing army, and why do some people love him? Largely because of the racism and xenophobia! I don't get it.
Topic archived. No new replies allowed.