Layco wrote:Guys, ask yourselves why you aren't voting for Jill Stein; if the answer is that "she can't win", then ask yourself why she can't win. The answer? Because you won't vote for her because you think she can't win prima facie.
Conservatives/Liberals (as they are called in the US) all want the same things... higher standard of living, ethical decision making (ethics across country share a lot of common ground), free and open democratic politics, and to feel that they are treated equally/fairly. The differences are that one side has been tricked by the Republicans and the other side has been tricked by the Democrats.
Partisan politics is a thing of the past - it will come back after societies are far more advanced and the only policy decisions to rule on are social issues, but that's a ways away.
Hillary Clinton belongs in prison, has committed war crimes (as has Obama folks - Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Somalia, Palestine, Lybia, Sudan), and has laundered money through her foundation including bribes from dictators from countries like Saudi Arabia and the DRC.
Donald Trump is a racist and hate-fueled demagogue. He hasn't actually committed any crimes near the level of Clinton, but he also hasn't had nearly as much power as her. His racism, however, seems to run pretty deep and one can imagine that it will color every important policy decision he makes. He has made zero effort to challenge AIPAC, NSA, or any other seriously corrupt institution - signaling that he intends to use them for his own corrupt benefit once he obtains power.
You start off OK, and then you descend into the loony bin. The part where Democrats and Republicans trick voters, that's where you start sounding hyperbolic. After that, you sound like a conspiracy theory/nut job.
What's the evidence? Did you listen to too much reporting from the Breitbart? Your criticism of Trump seems very superficial. For one thing, Trump has committed crimes, he's settled more court cases than Clinton. Wait, did you just accuse the (AIPAC)Jews of being seriously corrupt?
Do you know how military strikes are ordered? Who's responsible for it?
You sir, are just as bad as Trump. You're full of hate, and an example of the worst that third parties bring to the table. Welcome to the forums.
I'm actually filled with sorrow and compassion, but let us leave our emotions aside from this point forward.
I don't go on right-wing media, I don't go on any mainstream media (breitbart is right-wing isn't it?). The last time I went on Fox/CNN's website was to check if they were covering the latest uptick in the genocidal massacres of Kurds by Turkey's government (unfortunately they were not, and AP's tiny article on it left out many important details). My criticisms of Trump sound superficial because I'm more interested in actions than words; Trump hasn't held power, so there's less to point at. Let us be content with the consensus that he'd make a poor president for many reasons that we are well aware of.
Before I get to PeteP's post (I think it's a bit more challenging and I would be remiss to ignore such a clear offer for a level-headed dialectic on an important topic) let me just say that AIPAC doesn't represent Judaism. It represents the reactionary forces in Israeli politics (including its current head of state). AIPAC supports and advocates for terrorism in the form of a violent, genocidal oppression against the civilian population of Palestine. It advocates for the stealing of Palestinian land and expansion of the settlements in Palestinian territory. If anyone is interested in denying the existence of one of the most horrific occupations in human history, please do not engage me on this topic. It's tangential (sadly) to what we are here to discuss.
PeteP (and others), let me know what it is that you require historical evidence for. We have Obama's war crimes in Yemen, Somalia, Iraq, Syria, Palestine, Libya, and Sudan - of which Clinton is most directly complicit in Libya. We have Clintons' war crime not covered by this list: namely the tragedy of the Haitian relief effort.
Next we have her accepting of bribes from dictators in foreign countries (I named Saudi Arabia and DRC).
Then we have her money laundering activities with the Clinton Foundation. The evidence here isn't definitive (it can't be without an official government investigation), but clearly there is illicit activity going on.
I'll also submit into her list of crimes election fraud, specifically in the Democratic Primary versus Bernie Sanders.
There's also the matter of her carelessness in handling her private email server... but I'm uninterested in that so I won't bother linking you to the FBI's official statement.
I think I hit all the major criminal activity that Clinton is responsible for... I could be wrong about that though.
As for Trumps' failure to confront AIPAC for NSA etc... I'm guessing you don't care to have that demonstrated. At any rate I hope we can just agree that Trump is a horrible candidate and set aside any concerns about him for this discussion.
My hope is that I won't have to provide a comprehensive case for every one of these points and that you'll already be satisfied with at least some of them. Let me know if that isn't the case, however.
Also Jill Stein is not anti-science, she's a doctor. She's not anti-vacines, she's not anti-GMOs prima facie and she's not anti-scientific progress. By the way the ACA is fundamentally and economics failure. It's a very basic failure too - the idea that you can have a government opt-in health insurance plan that competes on the market and have it be high quality is disproven at every level of economics education. Government health insurance has to have three characteristics: Obligatory,All-Inclusive, and Monopoly.