And America Continues to Show it's True Colors. . .

[Old Thunder]

So you're a fan of the guy who spreads hate and has a crumbling presidency, but don't support said guy? ...I'm sure it makes sense give me a year or two...

Me on the other hand, I'm a supporter but not a fan. I don't like Trump, but I supported him because he's the lesser of two evils IMO.

 

[D'Snowth]

I still fail to see how he was the lesser of two evils. Granted, neither Hillary or Bernie were ideal candidates for the DNC, but at least they had qualifications in terms of political experience, and wanted to continue to steer the country in the same kind of progressive, forward-thinking direction that Obama had for the last eight years - not to mention neither of them intended on attacking the middle and working class like the GOP always goes after, and already, Trump has screwed them over with his willy-nilly executive orders, like undoing a mortgage premium rate cut that was going to save lower-income homeowners $200-$900 (depending) a year, or now undoing an energy policy that's been saving America billions in utiliy bills.

Like I've been saying, if BEAUTY AND THE BEAST has proven anything, it's that we're right back where we started over eight years ago in being a hateful, intolerant, unaccepting, divided country where if you're not wealthy, white, heterosexual, and a fire-and-brimstone Christian, then you apparently don't belong here - no different than when parents and other moral groups began burning Harry Potter books after J.K. Rowling outed Dumbledore back when Bush was President. Would there still be outcry and backlash against BEAUTY AND THE BEAST if Hillary or Bernie were President? Of course! Would that outcry and backlash be as loud and aggressive? Probably not - they would probably feel the "P.C. Police" are "oppressing" their right to free speech. And again, free speech is something the GOP has turned into a double standard: they can say all the disrespectful things they want about the left, or Obama, or minority groups, or whatever, because it's their "right to free speech;" if the left says something critical of the right, Trump, the wealthy, or whatever, they're a bunch of "delicate snowflake crybabies" who might as well leave the country.

But, then again, I could be wrong about a bunch of things, but this is all based on observations I've been making for quite a while, and I'm a very observational person.

 

[jvcarroll]

So you're a fan of the guy who spreads hate and has a crumbling presidency, but don't support said guy? ...I'm sure it makes sense give me a year or two...

Me on the other hand, I'm a supporter but not a fan. I don't like Trump, but I supported him because he's the lesser of two evils IMO.

I can understand people voting for Trump over Clinton because they hold conservative principles above progressive ones. However, I still don't understand how Sec Clinton was evil?


Republicans unleashed a campaign of hate against her decades ago and it never let up. She campaigned for healthcare as First Lady (and and actually accomplished it for children), yet when her husband cheated on her, the blame somehow fell on her. And that's all that people choose to remember. She's been a senator and secretary of state. One can claim that she didn't have many personal accomplishments in the Senate beyond cosigning bills, but that's most Senators. What were the glowing accomplishments of the other candidates? There weren't much, if any.


In truth, she's no more tied to special interests than any other candidate, excluding Sanders. That's no glowing recommendation. Just a pragmatic observation. The Dem party did favor her over him, and that is a shame. But that's the party, not her. That was done mostly because he's never been a Democrat and they saw him as an interloper. On the other hand, Trump has all of the sleaze, none of the experience and more conflicts of interest and special interest ties than any other candidate since the Bush administration.


Words matter. Accusations matter. While Hillary makes for a popular punching bag, there isn't much substance to it. The worst a person can really claim is that she's arrogant and they believe she felt entitled to the presidency, but that's really every candidate who runs for office. The only differences are that she's a very familiar face with lots of history in D.C. and she's a woman.


The truth is that the hatred for her goes beyond just sex. political leanings or her life in D.C.. She lacks charisma! That's her crime. So when someone attacks her, no matter how baseless, the stink usually sticks. I hope we get beyond that sort of smoke and mirrors manipulation as a country.


Trump, on the other hand, was sold like a branded bottle of cola - just packaging, diabetes-inducing sugar water with empty calories, name recognition with no real nutritional value. In essence, voters were duped into buying a product through the usual advertising practices that get all of us in some form or another. The American public should eventually see things as they are, but brand loyalty is king.

 

[CensoredAlso]

differences are that she's a very familiar face

A familiar name too. And this dynasty thing in Washington stinks. That's a good enough reason for me to not vote for her. But then...Trump supporters make excuses for why it's OK for Trump's kids to be involved in the government.

People are simply hypocrites, on both sides, lol.

 

[D'Snowth]

That was kind of one of my problems with Hillary as well - Bill's influence.

 

[D'Snowth]

This is exactly what I'm talking about:

 

[jvcarroll]

A familiar name too. And this dynasty thing in Washington stinks. That's a good enough reason for me to not vote for her. But then...Trump supporters make excuses for why it's OK for Trump's kids to be involved in the government.

People are simply hypocrites, on both sides, lol.

There's a false illusion that all things are equal.They are not. While I understand the anti-dynasty push, you're right. It's been replaced by a White House run by nepotism and many Trump family conflicts of interest. That's much worse. I wonder how anyone thought this would be any different. His entire cabinet smacks of Bush era cronyism. People bought into a brand - an idea. Not a reality. They did so out of anger and frustration. It's understandable, but I feel that it's misplaced and it continues to blind so many people to the lunacy of Trump.

The problem with Hillary Clinton is some folk will find *any* reason not to vote for her because she comes off as unlikable. While that seems silly, that's politics 101. By for pete's sake, she couldn't even admit to carrying hot sauce in her purse without being accused of pandering. This is a habit that many women share - particularly ones who want to lose weight. Spicy things curb the appetite. I have no doubt that little tidbit was true. How she was attacked for it exposes a bizarre bias against her. It's always been a struggle for her. That's where she failed during her first run and why she lost again. She came off as unapproachable and kind of a know-it-all, but we should want a prestigious person who's intelligent. This anti-intellectualism is what brought us 8 dark years of GW Bush and his endless war.

She's a brilliant woman. It's too bad her mind will be forever eclipsed by her husband's high profile. While I could never bring myself to vote for President Bill Clinton (due to his heinous conduct), I still consider him the second greatest President in my lifetime.

RBG said something recently that gives me home. America is like a pendulum. When it swings too far one way it swings back the other. Even with a do-nothing congress, Progressives enjoyed many wins. The country did too, but the reality wasn't *felt* and that's a failure of politics. Again, politics is perception and the perception was that liberal policies made a mess of the economy and this is what Americans felt would correct that. I believe that mistake will eventually be seen for what it is and we'll swing back again. At least, I hope. Most of Trump's working class supporters are really going to be hurt by his policies.

 

[CensoredAlso]

I...just don't see how she's "brilliant." I mean, I agree that conservatives often suffer from "intellectual envy." And I don't think she's stupid or anything, but I don't see exceptionalism in her, or why in the world she was the most qualified person for the job. Heck, they thought she was the ONLY person qualified for the job. Really??? Plus I just don't like how underhanded she is, just like her husband.

I really think there's a chance Bernie could have beaten Trump. Two Independents going at it, it could have been glorious! But the Democrats wanted to keep it in the clique. And they thought Hillary would get points for being a pioneer, the same as Obama did. But like Chappelle said on SNL, it's not really the same thing.

I've been talking to Trump supporters on social media lately. They actually don't talk much about Trump. They talk about why they hate the Democrats and why they don't trust the government in general (both parties). They're hoping Trump will tear it all down because it's just too corrupt to live. That is what really needs to be rectified, or else they'll just vote for some other version of Trump next time.

 

[D'Snowth]

As I've said, I didn't think she was the most qualified for the job either, and yes, one of the main reasons is Bill's influence. I mean, Bill wasn't the greatest human on the planet, yet he was a decent president when he was in Office . . . still, I couldn't help but foresee him trying to wheedle power and control from behind if Hillary was in Office, thus making her Administration an actual third term for him. I'll also agree with Jamie - she lacked charisma and personality (which Bill does possess), which is something Trump did have going for him. Bernie? As I said, my concern was he could just literally drop dead one day during his Administration. That's what happened to my previous primary doctor: he was so old, he literally just dropped dead one day.

As for Trump supporters hating Democrats . . . have you noticed they hate Democrats for all the same reasons that they themselves are actually guilty of? Ignorance? Hatred? Obsession with conformity? All of those things are charactertistics of Trump supporters (and the GOP in general), yet they claim it's the Democrats who possess those characteristics. I mean it's amusing how they complain about those "Dumocratic Libtards," yet Trump didn't know how to spell "unprecedented," Michelle Bachmmann though Elvis' deathdate was his birthday, Palin kept pivoting back to energy when asked about things she didn't understand, Kellyanne Conway made up the term "alternative facts" to keep from admitting Trump and his Administration tell blatant lies, and Ivanka didn't even know what the word "complicit" meant while she was being interviewed.

But hey, since apparently those blender cartoons are still a thing, here's both Trump and Hillary in blenders:

 

[CensoredAlso]

As for Trump supporters hating Democrats . . . have you noticed they hate Democrats for all the same reasons that they themselves are actually guilty of? Ignorance? Hatred? Obsession with conformity?

Well you know me, Snowth, I say both parties are world class projectors, hehe.

it's amusing how they complain about those "Dumocratic Libtards,"

I will agree with you about the name calling and insults. Especially conservatives calling people YouTube buzzwords like "snowflake," "triggered," and saying they need a "safe space." You know what it feels like? It likes conservatives were told "Arm yourself with these holy words, they are guaranteed to smite your enemy down!" Yet they don't seem to notice they are the ones acting like triggered snowflakes most of the time, crying because SNL is making fun of the President? Demanding it be cancelled? Now who wants a safe space? Lol. And they are literally STUNNED when you throw the words back at them. Like, "But, but, our master said these words would make us strong!!!" And I suppose that's the result of both conservatives and liberals generally only hanging around with people who agree with them.