Serious US Election Thread (read post #2014)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Shrug

is a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Past SPL Championis a Past SCL Champion
LCPL Champion
LonelyNess said:
Until a Republican candidate stops saying they will end abortions, make a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, and denying racism / sexism exist, they will never win the white house again. The American cultural landscape has changed enough to not tolerate people with this kind of backwards thinking anymore. Looking at the current slate of candidates, it's unlikely the political party will change its views in this election cycle.
this will not happen unless the primary system is abolished. The people who vote in Republican primaries are significantly more conservative than the general voterbase so it will always be advantageous to swing pretty hard right in order to win the nomination - witness Mitt Romney pretending to give a shit about conservative social issues / becoming more staunch in his economic positions for the primary then veering back into the center for the general, which led to his being characterized as unprincipled; only a truly gifted speaker / leader / motivator will be able to pull off such movement and unfortunately for the Republicans those people tend to be Democrats (Reagan was one which is partially why every Repub. spends 10 min. daily polishing and worshiping statues of him). This problem has been exacerbated in recent years because American social thought (the center of) has shifted left and the conservative position has by definition stayed the same so any such leaps between primary and general will need to be bigger. In addition, the left-shift of the populace on social issues means the conservative base will have a desire even more fervid to nom a True Conservative to Right The Ship and once again get fucked in the general by people who rationally believe two guys should be allowed to get married, mexicans arent all rapists, etc. Since the Republicans are so swaddled in tradition, they wont get rid of the primary system and fade into obscurity and the "Right" will become a socially liberal fiscally conservative-enough (libertarian) party and said party will probably elect Rand Paul in 2024 so be ready for that
 

LonelyNess

Makin' PK Love
is a Tournament Director Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
Well, when the civil war democrats faded into obscurity and the populist party rose up, the dems just absorbed their party values and became populists with a more recognizable name.

I fully expect at some point for the republicans to absorb the libertarians and basically be them 2.0.
 
Anyone but Hilary, please.

I know most of you were born after the year 2001, but that woman is a horrible, horrible person.
 

Texas Cloverleaf

This user has a custom title
is a Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnusis a Smogon Media Contributor Alumnusis a Battle Simulator Moderator Alumnus
Yes, everyone reading a thread about something where you have to have been born in '97 at the latest is definitely 14

Care to say something more constructive?
 
Yes, everyone reading a thread about something where you have to have been born in '97 at the latest is definitely 14

Care to say something more constructive?
I don't know. Care to be less bitchy?

Edit: To add as to why she is a horrible person, all you have to do is look back at how her and her pal Lieberman tried to ban games cause muh children. I get it, she's the likely democratic nominee, so you feel compelled to vote for her based on stupid political lines in the sand. Doesn't change the fact that she is a horrible person and a worse candidate.
 

SteelEdges

Banned deucer.
I don't know. Care to be less bitchy?

Edit: To add as to why she is a horrible person, all you have to do is look back at how her and her pal Lieberman tried to ban games cause muh children. I get it, she's the likely democratic nominee, so you feel compelled to vote for her based on stupid political lines in the sand. Doesn't change the fact that she is a horrible person and a worse candidate.
Banning games? Go on. Explain.
 
Banning games? Go on. Explain.
Especially the part at 3:54, but you can watch the whole thing if you want. What she says doesn't sit well with me. If you agree with her that is certainly your silly prerogative.

And let me be clear, because so VERY often when you speak ill of one side it automatically means you support the other, that I would gladly be happy to vote for someone who is democratic over a Bush or Trump as long as it isn't Hilary. Anyone. But. Hilary. (And Lieberman I guess.)
 

Shrug

is a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Past SPL Championis a Past SCL Champion
LCPL Champion
outlaw said:
Especially the part at 3:54, but you can watch the whole thing if you want. What she says doesn't sit well with me. If you agree with her that is certainly your silly prerogative.

And let me be clear, because so VERY often when you speak ill of one side it automatically means you support the other, that I would gladly be happy to vote for someone who is democratic over a Bush or Trump as long as it isn't Hilary. Anyone. But. Hilary. (And Lieberman I guess.)
so your participation in the political system is mostly determined by a candidate's position on video games?
 
so your participation in the political system is mostly determined by a candidate's position on video games?
Isn't participation for everyone based on what matters to them? It's not my only reason, but I'd say it's one that is important to me. You may think it isn't, just like I don't think "First Woman President" is a very good reason. I'd honestly prefer Elizabeth Warren for that one. Hilary's stance on videogames is simply something I remember, and I'm bitter enough about it. It implies a certain train of logic that I don't subscribe to. So sorry if that upsets you.

Ross Perot 2016
 

Isa

I've never felt better in my life
is a Tournament Director Alumnusis a Social Media Contributor Alumnusis a Community Leader Alumnusis a Community Contributor Alumnus
if you think that's seriously an important issue for you to the point that you'd vote for a candidate like scott walker who thinks gay marriage is an abomination, who wants to turn back the clock on climate science, health care, flipflop a bit on immigration etc...then maybe youre not really in a position to call out 14 year olds
 
if you think that's seriously an important issue for you to the point that you'd vote for a candidate like scott walker who thinks gay marriage is an abomination, who wants to turn back the clock on climate science, health care, flipflop a bit on immigration etc...then maybe youre not really in a position to call out 14 year olds
When did I say anything about Scott Walker? Haha, you serious? Just because I loathe Hilary, doesn't mean I'll vote for a whackjob like that. Not like he has any chance at getting the nomination to begin with. He sounds worse than Santorum.
 

SteelEdges

Banned deucer.
Especially the part at 3:54, but you can watch the whole thing if you want. What she says doesn't sit well with me. If you agree with her that is certainly your silly prerogative.

And let me be clear, because so VERY often when you speak ill of one side it automatically means you support the other, that I would gladly be happy to vote for someone who is democratic over a Bush or Trump as long as it isn't Hilary. Anyone. But. Hilary. (And Lieberman I guess.)
Maybe one day, you'll grow up and care about things that actually matter.
 
Last edited:
If you're trying to dig up dirt on Hillary, there's plenty of it out there to where pointing out her comments on video games a decade ago isn't the way to go about it. Still, all this dirt is readily available on the Internet, so you have to have a IQ in the double digits to want Hillary as president.
 
Maybe one day, you'll grow up and care about things that actually matter.
Maybe one day, you'll grow up to be less salty whenever someone rags on your politician of choice?

Excuse me for preferring someone NOT Hilary getting the democratic nominee.
 
Last edited:

SteelEdges

Banned deucer.
Maybe one day, you'll grow up to be less salty whenever someone rags on your politician of choice?

Excuse me for preferring someone NOT Hilary getting the democratic nominee.
I'm actually voting for Sanders. There are many reasons to be against Clinton, but you chose what may be the most idiotic one.
 
Last edited:

Shrug

is a Community Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Past SPL Championis a Past SCL Champion
LCPL Champion
Outlaw said:
Maybe one day, you'll grow up to be less salty whenever someone rags on your politician of choice?
It isn't the message you conveyed (a dislike for Hilary) but the reason you cited (a 2000 speech on video games) that has people confused or irked by you. He probably doesn't even like Hillary. It's slightly alarming someone who can vote has such a trifling reason to dislike a canadate in the Democratic Party. You are a one-issue voter and that issue is near meaningless to the U.S. government.

To spin this more politically, Outlaw seems a little like a particularly strange example of a trend I've seen in a lot of places: people don't like Hillary. Anyone who doesn't intend to support her seems to find her personally offensive or insulting; in contrast, Republican candidates with whom they disagree are met with bland disapproval. Anti-Hillary people will claim they "hate" her, while anti-Jeb people will merely disagree with him. My personal hypothesis holds people are angry at the idea of inevitability regarding Hillary promulgated by the media and not disputed by the candidate herself. "Ready for Hilary" as a campaign slogan seems to put her as the colonoscopy of candidates - not fun or exciting but needed. Bernie, however, inspires genuine excitement, making Clinton seem icier and hurting her in the general while still in the primaries. It's my guess the democrats are a little upset Liz Warren isn't running - she's closer to moderate (thus the US populace) than Bernie but does not project the same cold front (or inspire the same vitriol) as Clinton.
 

SteelEdges

Banned deucer.
It isn't the message you conveyed (a dislike for Hilary) but the reason you cited (a 2000 speech on video games) that has people confused or irked by you. He probably doesn't even like Hillary. It's slightly alarming someone who can vote has such a trifling reason to dislike a canadate in the Democratic Party. You are a one-issue voter and that issue is near meaningless to the U.S. government.

To spin this more politically, Outlaw seems a little like a particularly strange example of a trend I've seen in a lot of places: people don't like Hillary. Anyone who doesn't intend to support her seems to find her personally offensive or insulting; in contrast, Republican candidates with whom they disagree are met with bland disapproval. Anti-Hillary people will claim they "hate" her, while anti-Jeb people will merely disagree with him. My personal hypothesis holds people are angry at the idea of inevitability regarding Hillary promulgated by the media and not disputed by the candidate herself. "Ready for Hilary" as a campaign slogan seems to put her as the colonoscopy of candidates - not fun or exciting but needed. Bernie, however, inspires genuine excitement, making Clinton seem icier and hurting her in the general while still in the primaries. It's my guess the democrats are a little upset Liz Warren isn't running - she's closer to moderate (thus the US populace) than Bernie but does not project the same cold front (or inspire the same vitriol) as Clinton.
Hell, you see it in this thread. Hillary inspires revulsion, while reactionary fuckwads like Ted Cruz or Bobby Jindal or Ben Carson are just "oh, I disagree with them."
 
It isn't the message you conveyed (a dislike for Hilary) but the reason you cited (a 2000 speech on video games) that has people confused or irked by you. He probably doesn't even like Hillary. It's slightly alarming someone who can vote has such a trifling reason to dislike a canadate in the Democratic Party. You are a one-issue voter and that issue is near meaningless to the U.S. government.
Like I said before, it's not my only reason. It's simply the oldest reason I have, ever since I cared who Hilary was. By virtue of that, it's become bigger to me than the others. It also implies a train of thought, that I do not like seeing in a candidate. "Oh, this new fangled thing is making our children evil! (Despite being disproved time and time again.) Better regulate it, because the government is so good about that kinda stuff!" I can see, (And kinda agree) about what you have to say about her. I also think she is more god damn wishy washy than Kerry ever was as she will say literally anything to weasel your vote for her.

Would it make SteelEdges feel better if I added that I also loathe 99% of the republican candidates? Cause I do, but I don't think any of them but say Bush or maybe Rubio has a shot at actually winning the nominee. Hell, my dream election would be Sanders V Rand Paul but fuck if we're getting that.
 

SteelEdges

Banned deucer.
Another thing: I've always found it strange that Ben Carson is running. When he was speculated as someone who might run, I didn't think it would happen. I mean, he's a pundit, right? No political experience. (Didn't stop Trump, but Trump's a whole different ball game.) And you could even argue why the hell people listen to an (admittedly extremely accomplished) neurosurgeon as a political pundit.

He's said some phenomenally stupid stuff, though, like comparing political correctness to Nazi Germany and the IRS to the Gestapo.
 

OLD GREGG (im back baby)

old gregg for life
I think Clinton or Bush are the only candidates who can possibly win this upcoming election. They have proven themselves to be as corrupt as hell which is a huge part of being POTUS. Don't expect anything good or surprising here, this is business as usual. I don't even see why people still think that it matters who they vote for or that it matters if they vote.
 
"I will be the greatest jobs president that God ever created." –Donald Trump, announcing his campaign for president
very nice very nice
>and im not even American
 

UncleSam

Leading this village
is a Forum Moderator Alumnus
If all someone cares about is one issue why does that seem to seriously bother others?

You can't force someone to care about all the same things you care about or even any of the same things you care about. People seem offended that certain others really just don't give a shit about what the tax rate is, or how relations are with Iran, or whether there are enforced regulations on carbon emissions or not. While an ostensibly selfish position, I don't see anything wrong with it.

The stronger and more accurate response to someone saying that 'Hilary Clinton is anti-video game' would be that while that is definitely a reason to dislike her, stance on the regulation of video games is not an isolated issue. Economic conditions change the price of games (as does the tax rate) and foreign policy could conceivably alter game distribution and availability in the future. Many issues are interconnected, and so if all that matters to one is video games than there are other factors that have to be taken into account.

The point is that many positions that could be seen as 'single issues' on which to vote are actually related to other issues. However, demonstrating animus or ridicule for someone expressing a lack of concern over issues that you personally care about is silly.

Finally, I want to say that this post is not meant to be taken as me saying that Outlaw (or anyone else) is a single-issue voter (regardless of what others have portrayed him to be). I'm saying that the people who knee-jerkingly ridicule someone for expressing care over only a single issue need to re-think things; I'm also saying that there may well be a logical flaw with caring only about one particular issue if it is connected to others, and so people SHOULD point that out.

In other news, Joe Biden 2016?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 0)

Top