It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is Hilary the Lesser Evil in 2016?

page: 4
8
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 07:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: Metallicus

There is no lesser evil, there is only evil. Anyone running for the nomination of one of the two parties is absolutely evil!

The two parties serve the same evil master.


That's almost right. But you missed something. Parties don't even matter. The whole idea is hopeless. The people who want power the most will always get it sooner or later. You can call them anything you want. You can call them independent. It doesn't matter. They'll still be power hungry control freaks. Nobody else wants the job. Take a random person off the street and give him/her the most powerful office in the world for a year and you'll have a power hungry control freak in a couple of weeks. If not immediately.


Well, yeah. I could have gone on and on.


So the problem is fundamental. It's not a matter of individuals or parties or even what system is in place. This is what everybody is running from and no one wants to admit. IT CAN'T WORK. Everyone is tiptoeing around the implications of that and what it fundamentally means for human beings as a species.




posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 07:29 PM
link   
a reply to: CynConcepts

I can't trust Trump and I don't like Jeb. You could put a GUN to my head and what the other side offers would go without my vote,the rest are SOP politicians.
More of the same.
Bleak as ever.
edit on 18-2-2016 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 08:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: interupt42

Sanders: Sanders its about LONG term strategy to hopefully open the door for a third party like the libertarian party down the road with the hand we have been dealt.


You're delusional if you think a socialist would intentionally do anything to empower libertarianism. Everything about socialism is bad for liberty.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 08:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: interupt42

Sanders: Sanders its about LONG term strategy to hopefully open the door for a third party like the libertarian party down the road with the hand we have been dealt.


You're delusional if you think a socialist would intentionally do anything to empower libertarianism. Everything about socialism is bad for liberty.


Sanders just mentioned and aligned himself with the Libertarians on the Democrat Town Hall debate.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 08:32 PM
link   
a reply to: greencmp

And neither have a chance in hell of getting more than 28% of the popular vote, which is why I am all for either one.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 09:26 PM
link   
a reply to: BrianFlanders




You're delusional if you think a socialist would intentionally do anything to empower libertarianism

It has nothing todo with socialism and its about a long term strategy and accepting the reality of the crap hand you are dealt.

Number 1 issue this country has is corruption and conflict of interest in congress. Even over political ideals.

Nobody should be discussing any of the symptoms of corruption like healthcare,economy,SS,immigration,etc until corruption is addressed. Trying to fix those symptoms of corruption by the people who created the regulations that broke those industries because of their conflict of interests is truly delusional.

1. libertarianism will never come to fruition with a corrupted DNC and GOP at the helm, Period.

2. Corruption will never be addressed as long as its not focused on, period.

3. Neither Hillary,Bush,Rubio,or Cruz will discuss or bring corruption to the forefront, period.

4. No Third party is going to win this election, period.

5. Trump is about trump , period.

6. That leaves Bernie sanders as the only candidate that will actually bring attention to corruption.

7. Bernie Sandars socialist views will lead to a lame duck congress. As president he will not be able to implement any socialist ideals by himself. The rest of congress has an Oligarch and implementing socialist ideals would actually be downgrading for the Oligopolies.


So the only thing I expect out of a Bernie Sandars presidency will be TALK as the president exposing corruption. That in itself is the best outcome for this election.

Their is no issue or political ideals more important than exposing the conflict of interest and corruption in DC. Until you tackle corruption the only political ideal that matters is an Oligarch , the first step of tackling corruption is bringing it to the forefront.

So:
1. Let me hear your best outcome for this election?
2. What do you think is the number 1 issue?
3. who do you think would be best realistic candidate to get the nomination and not some third party?

edit on 49229America/ChicagoThu, 18 Feb 2016 21:49:24 -0600000000p2942 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 09:43 PM
link   


Everything about socialism is bad for liberty.


Oh come on, I've been to several socialist countries and they still have freedoms, they have some that we don't have like not having to work themselves to death and being able to spend time on things they enjoy.

Yes, Hillary probably wouldn't do much that's bad, she's really somewhat moderate hence why she keeps trying to convince everyone that she's liberal. She would just push women's and gay rights a lot and that would piss Republicans off massively, but substantively she wouldn't do much unusual.

Cruz is a psycho and his preacher father wants him to take everything from everyone who's not a fundamentalist.

Kasich would be OK, but after he cuts all social spending millions of people will suffer massively.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 10:05 PM
link   
SHe is THE white devil, pure evil.



posted on Feb, 18 2016 @ 10:18 PM
link   
Honestly if Trump doesn't make it we are screwed and this is why. How high do You guys think our debt can go up ? It is at 20 TRILLION DOLLARS.

USDEBTCLOCK.ORG CHECK IT OUT.

Here is why, its not Trump specifically that can do it, it would be the fine minds that he hires. Right now we have politicians making deals with other countries that aren't exactly fine minds, Trump knows fine minds even if he doesn't have one and he will use them. I could care less about the looks or the person, its the talent they will use, they are the ones that can do it, its not Trump .ALL of the others will lose out on lots of deals and we make lots of deals and that is the key to starting our companies growing again here in the U.S..

By the time the next president comes into office our debt will be close to 30 trillion, it is growing exponentially. We can see the current administration isn't changing it and we all know Hilary will be Obama 3 and Bernie DAMN sure isn't worried about debt.

This debt will become a real"thing" to some soon.



posted on Feb, 19 2016 @ 02:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: BrianFlanders

originally posted by: interupt42

Sanders: Sanders its about LONG term strategy to hopefully open the door for a third party like the libertarian party down the road with the hand we have been dealt.


You're delusional if you think a socialist would intentionally do anything to empower libertarianism. Everything about socialism is bad for liberty.


Sanders just mentioned and aligned himself with the Libertarians on the Democrat Town Hall debate.


Oh really? Well, that means absolutely nothing to me because when it turns out to all be BS, there won't be any way to hold him to any of it. The man is a socialist and socialism has a bad historical habit of being against everything that is liberty. So you'll have to excuse me if I don't believe anything Bernie Sanders has to say for himself.



posted on Feb, 19 2016 @ 03:57 AM
link   
a reply to: CB328

I will take Crony Capitalism over Socialism any day and twice on Sunday. A small corrupt Government is preferable to any BIG Government.

As long as they are ineffectual and leave me alone they can continue to be political parasites.



posted on Feb, 19 2016 @ 08:03 AM
link   
a reply to: BrianFlanders



Oh really? Well, that means absolutely nothing to me because when it turns out to all be BS, there won't be any way to hold him to any of it. The man is a socialist and socialism has a bad historical habit of being against everything that is liberty. So you'll have to excuse me if I don't believe anything Bernie Sanders has to say for himself.


You know, it gets really old hearing this same old line over and over. Yes, extreme versions of socialist systems have failed. So has every single economic system contrived to date. Look at the failures of capitalism we are beginning to witness as we speak.

But people regurgitate the same things as if they heard it from some know-it-all on TV. God forbid they actually pick up a book and learn why these systems failed and perhaps they would learn that the failures do not come from the system itself, but the people that control it.



posted on Feb, 19 2016 @ 11:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

You know, it gets really old hearing this same old line over and over.


Well, it's not going to get any newer because people like me are just going to keep reminding you that the past happened. I wasn't born yesterday so you'll just have to deal with it.


Yes, extreme versions of socialist systems have failed.


Oh I disagree. They succeeded in doing exactly what they were intended to do. Totalitarianism. That's all any system of government ever really aspires to. Governments all want to just endlessly expand. Which is why limits have to be built in. Socialism removes the limits from day one. A system that transitions to socialism gradually removes the limits until one day people wake up and find themselves screwed and wonder how they got there. Boiling frog and all that jazz that socialists know so well.

edit on 19-2-2016 by BrianFlanders because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2016 @ 11:29 AM
link   
a reply to: BrianFlanders



Well, it's not going to get any newer because people like me are just going to keep reminding you that the past happened. I wasn't born yesterday so you'll just have to deal with it.


Yes, please keep reminding me how so many people can have such a poor grasp on history and it's context, that they can make uninformed blanket statements. If you weren't born yesterday and have done any sort of research on socialism or communism, you would not be saying the things you said.



That's all any system of government ever really aspires to. Governments all want to just endlessly expand.


You speak as if a government is an entity that can act on it's own behalf. What you are talking about is a fault in Man. Men are greedy and push for control. Government is just the system in which that greed and control manifests.

Socialism does not give them more power to corrupt than capitalism.



Which is why limits have to be built in. Socialism removes the limits from day one.


If socialism is utilized in a system that has those controls, how does socialism remove those limits?

The US military is a socialist program and it is very well-organized and limited in what it can do. How has socialism removed limits from the military?



A system that transitions to socialism gradually removes the limits until one day people wake up and find themselves screwed and wonder how they got there. Boiling frog and all that jazz that socialists know so well.


A cliche line used by those that know little to nothing about what they speak.

Socialism is working quite well in many nations and it is not socialism that is causing them problems. In fact, socialism is what helps people get medical care, retirement funds, education, etc.

Wouldn't that be nice to wake up to?
edit on 19-2-2016 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2016 @ 11:36 AM
link   
The thing with Bernie is he still needs to get though Congress. I do see him as one of the more honest of the bunch though socialism is a hard thing to chew on, but does that part really matter when he will learn very quickly he needs to work with Congress or end up like Obama. He either works with congress or becomes a first term lame duck like Obama did, not much of a threat there.

Hillary on the other hand has worked on how to get around laws and government her whole life. She will not spend a second working with congress and will do everything she can outside of our processes, this is bad very bad for the country.



edit on 19-2-2016 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2016 @ 11:38 AM
link   



posted on Feb, 19 2016 @ 11:40 AM
link   
I think the philosophy behind voting for the “Lesser of two evils” is what has gotten us into the political mess we are currently in. It leads to a backward race to the bottom and we just keep going lower and lower.

Instead I propose a change in philosophy to voting out the incumbent consistently and with impunity. I propose that if we create a revolving door for elected officials the constant turnover will insure that there are more percipients in the process, greater transparency and less concentration of power.



posted on Feb, 19 2016 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero
He either works with congress or becomes a first term lame duck like Obama did, not much of a threat there.



And obstructionism had/has nothing to do with it, right.

I've never seen anything like this before in my life time. And I was Republican at one time.

The GOP Has Gone From the Party of No to the Party of F You: www.huffingtonpost.com...



posted on Feb, 19 2016 @ 11:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Xtrozero
He either works with congress or becomes a first term lame duck like Obama did, not much of a threat there.



And obstructionism had/has nothing to do with it, right.

I've never seen anything like this before in my life time. And I was Republican at one time.


Of course there was...he walked in with his "my way or the highway" attitude, he didn't have a single compromise thought in his head since his narcissistic attitude would not allow it. He’s the smartest person in the room any room by his belief, so Annee you want to now do a poor Obama post? The fact that he could not find a single way to work with Congress once his short term congress golden ticket ran out shows his ineptness.

I don't blame him as much...He was labeled the Golden Child by the press and the first few months congress still being democrat was kissing his ring any time he moved.


edit on 19-2-2016 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 19 2016 @ 12:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Xtrozero
He either works with congress or becomes a first term lame duck like Obama did, not much of a threat there.



And obstructionism had/has nothing to do with it, right.

I've never seen anything like this before in my life time. And I was Republican at one time.


Of course there was...he walked in with his "my way or the highway" attitude, he didn't have a single compromise thought in his head since his narcissistic attitude would not allow it. He’s the smartest person in the room any room by his belief, so Annee you want to now do a poor Obama post? The fact that he could not find a single way to work with Congress once his short term congress golden ticket ran out shows his ineptness.

I don't blame him as much...He was labeled the Golden Child by the press and the first few months congress still being democrat was kissing his ring any time he moved.



Congress could not find a single way to work with Obama.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join