Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    28 Apr '16 21:153 edits
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra to Normbenign
    In case you hadn't noticed, Donald Trump is running for president.
    As a 'scumbag' himself, Normbenign finds it hard to notice when it's conspicuous in his hero, Donald Trump.
  2. The Catbird's Seat
    Joined
    21 Oct '06
    Moves
    2598
    28 Apr '16 21:20
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    In case you hadn't noticed, Donald Trump is running for president.
    I conclude that you consider running for President an evidence of being a scumbag.
  3. The Catbird's Seat
    Joined
    21 Oct '06
    Moves
    2598
    28 Apr '16 21:21
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    As a 'scumbag' himself, Normbenign finds it hard to notice when it's conspicuous in his hero, Donald Trump.
    From the mouth of a Duchebag.
  4. Germany
    Joined
    27 Oct '08
    Moves
    3118
    28 Apr '16 21:30
    Originally posted by normbenign
    I conclude that you consider running for President an evidence of being a scumbag.
    I conclude that you're not very good at drawing conclusions from what people say.
  5. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    28 Apr '16 21:391 edit
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra to Normbenign
    I conclude that you're not very good at drawing conclusions from what people say.
    Normbenign, a proud native speaker of American English, has boasted that his 'reading
    comprehension' iis far superior to mine. But he always has run away from risking a large
    sum of money in a test (made by American professors of English) comparing his reading
    comprehension in formal written American English to mine (I am not a native speaker of English).
  6. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10113
    29 Apr '16 02:19
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qIPSEft1Cc

    Should Sanders lose the democratic nomination (increasingly likely), why should his voters automatically vote for her?

    Her policy remains the same, the reasons sander's voters voted for him and not her remain the same. Why should they change their mind if nothing else changes? Just because the other guy is ...[text shortened]... e of Sander's ideas (or at least lie about it) or do her math without counting on their support.
    How about a free Hillary phone?
  7. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    40034
    29 Apr '16 02:20
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qIPSEft1Cc

    Should Sanders lose the democratic nomination (increasingly likely), why should his voters automatically vote for her?

    Her policy remains the same, the reasons sander's voters voted for him and not her remain the same. Why should they change their mind if nothing else changes? Just because the other guy is ...[text shortened]... e of Sander's ideas (or at least lie about it) or do her math without counting on their support.
    The big question is whether the young voters who flocked to Bernie in the primaries will continue to turn out and vote for Democratic candidates not just for President, but for Congress and State posts as well. That is the only way for Democrats to break the deadlock that has prevented any serious legislating for 6 years; a Hillary win, however likely, is not going to represent any type of major change (even if she was willing to support major change) unless Democrats can retake the Congress. And they will need young voters going into the polls at high numbers to do that.
  8. Standard memberSoothfast
    0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,
    Planet Rain
    Joined
    04 Mar '04
    Moves
    2445
    29 Apr '16 03:58
    If Hillary wins the nomination, well, that leaves me nothing to do but vote for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party in November. But that's just for the position of president. I'll vote for all the Democrats on the rest of the ballot.

    I've never voted for a Clinton, and I never will.
  9. SubscriberSuzianne
    Misfit Queen
    Isle of Misfit Toys
    Joined
    08 Aug '03
    Moves
    35902
    29 Apr '16 04:19
    Originally posted by Soothfast
    If Hillary wins the nomination, well, that leaves me nothing to do but vote for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party in November. But that's just for the position of president. I'll vote for all the Democrats on the rest of the ballot.

    I've never voted for a Clinton, and I never will.
    But you seem perfectly willing to see Trump win the White House.
  10. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    40034
    29 Apr '16 04:51
    Originally posted by Suzianne
    But you seem perfectly willing to see Trump win the White House.
    There is the moral issue of whether someone who considers themselves "liberal" wants to share the blood guilt from the enhanced military operations that Hillary will surely engage in.

    A progressive might also wonder whether four years of a unpopular, ineffectual Hillary would really be better in the long run than the disaster the Republicans would cause. The latter could very well lead to long term Democratic dominance while the former merely kicks the can down the road.
  11. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    29 Apr '16 04:551 edit
    Originally posted by Suzianne to Soothfast
    But you seem perfectly willing to see Trump win the White House.
    As I recall, Soothfast and Vistesd (who supports Hillary Clinton) argued about this issue.
    Soothfast apparently believed that having Donald Trump as US President for four years
    would be bad enough for most Americans that the Republican Party would be ruined
    for a long time but not bad enough that the United States would be ruined for a long time.
    Vistesd apparently believed that Soothfast was insufficiently concerned about how the
    most vulnerable people (not tenured academics) could be harmed by President Trump.

    In my view, hoping that President Trump would be a disaster for the future of the Republican Party
    but *not* also a disaster for the future of the United States leaves not enough margin of error.
    (I would have had only one reason to vote for Hindenburg, and it was that he's not Hitler.)
  12. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    29 Apr '16 04:57
    Originally posted by no1marauder to Suzianne
    There is the moral issue of whether someone who considers themselves "liberal" wants to share the blood guilt from the enhanced military operations that Hillary will surely engage in.

    A progressive might also wonder whether four years of a unpopular, ineffectual Hillary would really be better in the long run than the disaster the Republica ...[text shortened]... well lead to long term Democratic dominance while the former merely kicks the can down the road.
    No one should be compelled to vote against one's conscience.

    As I wrote earlier, I believe that hoping that President Trump would be a disaster for the
    future of the Republican Party but *not* also a disaster for the future of the United States
    leaves not enough margin of error.
  13. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    40034
    29 Apr '16 05:02
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    As I recall, Soothfast and Vistesd (who supports Hillary Clinton) argued about this issue.
    Soothfast apparently believed that having Donald Trump as US President for four years
    would be bad enough for most Americans that the Republican Party would be ruined
    for a long time but not bad enough that the United States would be ruined for a long time.
    Viste ...[text shortened]... or.
    (I would have had only one reason to vote for Hindenburg, and it was that he's not Hitler.)
    Trump isn't Hitler and the imposition of a dictatorship in the 21st Century following a Trump victory is rather unlikely.
  14. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    40034
    29 Apr '16 05:11
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    No one should be compelled to vote against one's conscience.

    As I wrote earlier, I believe that hoping that President Trump would be a disaster for the
    future of the Republican Party but *not* also a disaster for the future of the United States
    leaves not enough margin of error.
    The reality is that unless the political deck is radically reshuffled, a Republican will win a Presidential election at some point in the near future. A Trump Presidency in 2017 might be preferable to a Ted Cruz one in 2021.
  15. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    29 Apr '16 05:17
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Trump isn't Hitler and the imposition of a dictatorship in the 21st Century following a Trump victory is rather unlikely.
    I know that Donald Trump is not Hitler, and I don't expect a President Trump to be able to impose a dictatorship.
    That silliness aside, my general point is that it's often better to vote against what's
    worst when one no longer has an opportunity to vote for what one thought best.
Back to Top