Guccifer 2.0 releases documents showing more collusion between the DNC and Hillary Clinton - Polidicks

both conventions have evidence of manipulating the media in these ways to easily get their way, its distasteful.

[QUOTE=TestECull;50568407]Ahh, yes, that glorious American track record of putting third parties in the Oval Office is a gilded path therein, right? He didn't have a choice in the matter. You want the Oval Office? You run as either GOP or Dem. That's it. You don't get media coverage otherwise, and without that, your campaign goes nowhere.[/QUOTE] Exactly. If he wanted to be president, he should've learned to play the game. As admirable as his views are, Bernie is a terrible politician [editline]22nd June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50568626]Wasn't there some law or something about making it illegal to take people's money and then don't do what you said you were going to do? I'll break down this next post into tiny snippets because it made me guffaw: lmao Yeah the candidate specifically campaigning on the platform of being against political corruption should have been corrupt enough to win. Hillary supporters, everybody! When I say Trump's been a Democrat for most of his life and only recently switched to being a Republican I'm an asshole, but apparently this is okay. Well yeah if it's rotten to the core I can't imagine a candidate interested in reform would be interested in doing that. Your team is full of crooks and sycophants, as made evident by your hilarious mental gymnastics in every single one of these threads. Were it the other way and Hillary was on the outside we would be subject to your shrill wailing about how everything is so unfair, you don't give a [I]fuck[/I] about what's right as long as you've got yours so it's no wonder why you support Hillary Clinton.[/QUOTE] Why do you always have to get so personal? We're talking about politics and the argument isn't about the merits of Clinton vs Sanders, but always why Clinton supporters aren't genuine or have character flaws? It's so typical of a Bernie supporter. It's not possible that people disagree with you or have different opinions. No, that would entertain the possibility that Bernie might actually be incorrect about [I]something[/I]. The answer, of course, is that Hillary Supporters are Shills, Uneducated, or evil. It's such a black and white worldview. That's why I said I might support sanders if I was 5 years younger. I was 16 five years ago and saw everything so black and white like that, too.

[QUOTE=proboardslol;50569127]Exactly. If he wanted to be president, he should've learned to play the game. As admirable as his views are, Bernie is a terrible politician[/QUOTE] Well when his campaign slogan is basically "the rules to the game are rigged" then... how is he supposed to do that exactly? Why are you advocating for people to abide by a broken system and then criticizing people who don't do so? [editline]22nd June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=proboardslol;50569127]Why do you always have to get so personal? We're talking about politics and the argument isn't about the merits of Clinton vs Sanders, but always why Clinton supporters aren't genuine or have character flaws? It's so typical of a Bernie supporter. It's not possible that people disagree with you or have different opinions. No, that would entertain the possibility that Bernie might actually be incorrect about something. The answer, of course, is that Hillary Supporters are Shills, Uneducated, or evil. It's such a black and white worldview. That's why I said I might support sanders if I was 5 years younger. I was 16 five years ago and saw everything so black and white like that, too.[/QUOTE] Lol I can't believe you're accusing Sanders supporters of making it personal and then saying something ridiculous like this.

[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;50569153]Well when his campaign slogan is basically "the rules to the game are rigged" then... how is he supposed to do that exactly? Why are you advocating for people to abide by a broken system and then criticizing people who don't do so?[/QUOTE] I wouldn't say I'm criticizing him exactly... Since I'm not a supporter, he can run his campaign all he wants. But if I were a supporter who believed in his platform, I'd be upset that he was such an idealist that he refused to play the system [I]at all[/I]. It's simply unrealistic to believe that you can achieve the things he wanted just by trying really hard. Maybe I'm more pragmatic than others, or maybe I believe in the platform more than I believe in the candidate, but I personally would rather see policy changes implemented than to see the entire "system" upended. Elizabeth Warren is a much better progressive than Sanders. She's been in the game for a while. She's a democrat, she reserved her endorsement until it became clear who would win the nomination, and as a result, she's got a chance to actually get her platform [I]done[/I]. If she's chosen as the VP under Clinton, not only does she have a national spotlight (she's not very well known to the average American) with which to voice her platform, she's also got a chance at the presidency after Clinton, giving her a [I]lot[/I] more potential to push the progressive agenda. Sanders, to me, is good for the election because he forced the DNC platform far to the left, but he's a very poor politician. I mean, compare him to Obama in 2008. Obama was a democrat (though, admittedly, only a 1 term senator by that point), and had a much more progressive rhetoric. He played the DNC, made deals with Clinton and got elected, pulled the country back from the brink, and has been a great president. Why was he able to do so much good? Because he played the system. He was a team player. I think I'm kind of ranting at this point. I just think that Bernie is way too idealistic. He lives in a fantasy world.

[QUOTE=proboardslol;50568344]The POTUS is chosen by us, the people. The nominee is chosen by the party[/QUOTE] As shitty as it sounds he's got a point. The democratic party, or any other party for that matter, are nopt the government. They are private organisations who can set their own rules and regulations, and quite literally do whatever they want. That's how it should be. The problem is we as a country let our system devolve into a de facto 2 party system, where it's either blue or red. If you don't like either, rather then settle you should be trying for a 3rd party. Until people finally say they're going to do something rather than assume that whoever they really like is never going to win because they're not red/blue, the system we have will remain unchanged.

Everyone says that Bernie was a terrible politician and that meant he could never physically win but look at the repubs with trump RN. At least they had the nads to accept the candidate they didn't want

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;50569216]As shitty as it sounds he's got a point. The democratic party, or any other party for that matter, are nopt the government. They are private organisations who can set their own rules and regulations, and quite literally do whatever they want. That's how it should be. The problem is we as a country let our system devolve into a de facto 2 party system, where it's either blue or red. If you don't like either, rather then settle you should be trying for a 3rd party. Until people finally say they're going to do something rather than assume that whoever they really like is never going to win because they're not red/blue, the system we have will remain unchanged.[/QUOTE] AFAIK, the issue lies in first past the post. When 51% is needed to achieve the presidency, then it forces the country into a 2 party system. We ought to change the constitution to make it easier for 3rd party systems. But it's not the entire problem. Paul Ryan is right when he says that parties have come to dominate Congress. He says that in the 1990s and before, it was easier for an individual congressman to vote his or her mind, present his or her own bills, and to stray from the party leadership as much as he/she wants. But today, rank and file members of congress are often overshadowed by a handful of A-list committees and committee members and have very little influence on the outcome of a bill, to the point where votes are typically expected to go along party lines. I agree with Ryan, when he basically says that the party insiders have too much power in congress. it causes gridlock, and if things were less along party lines then more bills would get passed. There would be more liberal republicans and more conservative democrats, willing to vote against the party and not be afraid of the leadership. [editline]22nd June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=A_Pigeon;50569253]Everyone says that Bernie was a terrible politician and that meant he could never physically win but look at the repubs with trump RN. At least they had the nads to accept the candidate they didn't want[/QUOTE] Yeah, who knew all you had to do was say a bunch of racist shit and you could get people to give you free money to funnel back into your own businesses? Good thing Trump is self funding, though his campaign will probably have to pay him back on the loan he gave to it, with interest of course [sp]Trump is in it for the easy cash. A fool and his money are soon parted[/sp]

[QUOTE=proboardslol;50568246]Yeah, so? The DNC chose its preferred candidate. They're a private organization. They can do whatever they want to choose their candidate[/QUOTE] how are you okay with this even being a thing it should make you mad that this is even a thing

[QUOTE=proboardslol;50569127]Why do you always have to get so personal?[/QUOTE]Hey, pot, this is kettle, you left something over here:[QUOTE=proboardslol;50568335]Even if I were a sanders supporter (if I were maybe 5 years younger I'd probably be one), I'd be mad at Bernie because he didn't play the game correctly.[/QUOTE]What was it you were saying? [QUOTE]We're talking about politics and the argument isn't about the merits of Clinton vs Sanders, but always why Clinton supporters aren't genuine or have character flaws?[/QUOTE]You demonstrated them several times in this thread and in other threads, [I]I called you out for being smug[/I] in another thread two days ago. [QUOTE]It's so typical of a Bernie supporter.[/QUOTE]People threw a fucking tantrum when I said I'd vote for Trump out of spite if people like you wouldn't shut the fuck up about Hillary Clinton. Before that I got into [I]two different arguments[/I] with Hillary supporters when I said I was absolutely going to vote third party, hell, even before this race I said third party was what I was going to do. I think you've forgotten who the fuck you're talking to because my center-right political views are not at all unknown on this board. [QUOTE]It's not possible that people disagree with you or have different opinions. No, that would entertain the possibility that Bernie might actually be incorrect about [I]something[/I].[/QUOTE]I can give you a list of things I don't like about Bernie, but I don't think it'll cut through all the bullshit that you've got rattling around in your skull. See the above sentences for more information if you're curious. [QUOTE]The answer, of course, is that Hillary Supporters are Shills, Uneducated, or evil.[/QUOTE]There's plenty of adjectives that you're skipping over, but that's a good start. [QUOTE]It's such a black and white worldview. That's why I said I might support sanders if I was 5 years younger. I was 16 five years ago and saw everything so black and white like that, too.[/QUOTE]Yeah, I remember being 21 and thinking I was oh so much better than 16-year-olds. Fun times. It's not about a black and white worldview, theoretically you could be a reasonable, intelligent young man but unfortunately for you all I know about you is what you post. [editline]22nd June 2016[/editline] You want to talk about "being a team player" and yet I haven't read an iota of a fucking peep from you about Bernie pulling in third party voters like me. Instead I get shit for not voting for Hillary, so again [B][U]fuck[/U] your team.[/B]

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50569975] People threw a fucking tantrum when I said I'd vote for Trump out of spite if people like you wouldn't shut the fuck up about Hillary Clinton. [/QUOTE] If by "tantrum" you mean several posts offering counter points to your illogical, emotion-driven analysis of this election that you never replied to, sure.

[QUOTE=proboardslol;50568344]The POTUS is chosen by us, the people. The nominee is chosen by the party[/QUOTE] I can't imagine how the obviousness of this problem hasn't hit you in the face like an actual brick but now that it's been some hours, I doubt it's possible you even realize the inherit contradiction in this nonsense.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;50570131]If by "tantrum" you mean several posts offering counter points to your illogical, emotion-driven analysis of this election that you never replied to, sure.[/QUOTE]Haha [I]no, my sweet summer child.[/I] I replied to it several times to the point where it just devolved into shitposting. Oh and psst! It's still my vote, if I want to vote for Donald "The God Emperor" Trump just because I think it would be hilarious I can. Your argument boils down to "but whyyyyy" and my argument is essentially, "because yolo." I have no problem admitting it's not a very good one, at the end of the day I couldn't give a fuck what you have to say because it's [U]my[/U] vote. Really, deal with it, I think it's hilarious that you were so bothered by that entire thread that you replied here. [editline]22nd June 2016[/editline] Oh and the best part is that initial post was pure hyperbole, instead of going "come on JJF would you really do that?" several people threw a fit and I dug in my heels. I mean I [I]did[/I] say it and a small part of me meant it at the time, so I felt it was necessary to defend until I started laughing about it. Really, if you want to bitch at me some more for scaring you (like it's any of your goddamn business anyway) feel free to shoot me a PM.

[QUOTE=Anti Christ;50568237]yes. because it means that the DNC doesnt care who anyone actually voted for, they just want their candidate to be the nominee. whats the point of voting in the first place, if thats how they operate?[/QUOTE] The illusion of choice

[QUOTE=proboardslol;50569210]but I personally would rather see policy changes implemented than to see the entire "system" upended.[/quote] You can't have one without the other. The policy changes you want to see just aren't going to happen unless you pretty much raze the whole system and rebuild anew. What we need to do is fire every single fuckstick on Capitol Hill, ban them from holding high offices for 8 years, and elect an entirely new batch of senators, representatives, and of course POTUS. That's probably the closest we're gonna get to what needs to happen. [quote] She's been in the game for a while.[/quote] And that's why I don't want her in office. I don't want [i]anyone[/i] in that office that's been in the game for a while. That's the whole fucking problem. We've had decades upon decades of exactly that and look where it's gotten us. Social policies lagging decades behind, knee-jerk bullshit getting passed that pisses on the Constitution, political gridlock, near constant involvement in petty bullshit wars(I have not known a single day as an adult where the US has not been in a state of war, and that's fucking depressing as hell), meh-at-best presidents that don't even try to manhandle the morons on Capitol Hill(You say Obama was a good president, I say he was 'meh at best' and didn't bonk enough heads in Congress), basically just more of the same old bullshit. I want change. I don't want the rhetoric version. I want the actual thing. The real deal. I want the system upended. If having Trump in office does that then I want a complete lunatic in the office. If Sanders would do that I want Sanders in office. I would honestly prefer not to have a POTUS at all than have someone like Clinton or Cruz in that chair.

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50570236]Haha [I]no, my sweet summer child.[/I] I replied to it several times to the point where it just devolved into shitposting. Oh and psst! It's still my vote, if I want to vote for Donald "The God Emperor" Trump just because I think it would be hilarious I can. Your argument boils down to "but whyyyyy" and my argument is essentially, "because yolo." I have no problem admitting it's not a very good one, at the end of the day I couldn't give a fuck what you have to say because it's [U]my[/U] vote.[/QUOTE] Well if you're happy with the consequences of a vote for trump then one can't really fault you for it if a wall rises over the Rio Grande and the no-fly list swells in size. I'm voting tomorrow myself, in a referendum that (although bad) hasn't been as terrible in its choices as the American presidential elections. It's one of the greatest nations on earth, and it deserves better than Trump or Clinton.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;50570315]Well if you're happy with the consequences of a vote for trump then one can't really fault you for it if a wall rises over the Rio Grande and the no-fly list swells in size. I'm voting tomorrow myself, in a referendum that (although bad) hasn't been as terrible in its choices as the American presidential elections. It's one of the greatest nations on earth, and it deserves better than Trump or Clinton.[/QUOTE]Oh spare me the appeal to my sense of patriotism, I've already said that I'm glad Trump's big mouth and Hillary's corruption are driving people to third party in... I believe three threads now, this being the fourth. Doesn't matter though, it's still [U]my[/U] vote and I'll do whatever the hell I want with it.

My country is such a shithouse

[QUOTE=TestECull;50570281] And that's why I don't want her in office. I don't want [i]anyone[/i] in that office that's been in the game for a while.[/QUOTE] Exactly, fuck career politicians.

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50570236]Haha [I]no, my sweet summer child.[/I] I replied to it several times to the point where it just devolved into shitposting. Oh and psst! It's still my vote, if I want to vote for Donald "The God Emperor" Trump just because I think it would be hilarious I can. Your argument boils down to "but whyyyyy" and my argument is essentially, "because yolo" .[/QUOTE] You can vote for whoever you want. You can defend your choices however you want, including "Because I want to". But you should expect people to wonder why you choose the things you choose, and immaturely calling any such discussion a "tantrum" because your self-evidently contradictory position was untenable is pretty low. There is no need to be so petulant. [QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50570236]I have no problem admitting it's not a very good one, at the end of the day I couldn't give a fuck what you have to say because it's [U]my[/U] vote.[/QUOTE] You clearly do have a problem admitting it's not a very good one because you doggedly defended it. [QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50570236]Really, deal with it, I think it's hilarious that you were so bothered by that entire thread that you replied here.[/QUOTE] I only brought it up because you referenced a what I thought to be legitimate difference of opinion a "tantrum" first. [QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50570236]Oh and the best part is that initial post was pure hyperbole, instead of going "come on JJF would you really do that?" several people threw a fit and I dug in my heels. I mean I [I]did[/I] say it and a small part of me meant it at the time, so I felt it was necessary to defend until I started laughing about it. Really, if you want to bitch at me some more for scaring you (like it's any of your goddamn business anyway) feel free to shoot me a PM.[/QUOTE] For the record I don't think a lot of the people on FP who say they are going to vote for Trump will actually vote for Trump, particularly people like you, or the Bernie Bros hopping from one cult of personality to the other. Your opinions don't really scare me at all and I've made peace with the fact that whoever get selected in November, America will get the president they deserve.

I'll respond to two things: [QUOTE=Raidyr;50570496]You can vote for whoever you want. You can defend your choices however you want, including "Because I want to". But you should expect people to wonder why you choose the things you choose, and immaturely calling any such discussion a "tantrum" because your self-evidently contradictory position was untenable is pretty low. There is no need to be so petulant.[/QUOTE]It was a tantrum, you and others threw a tantrum because I refused to vote for Hillary and it's not the first thread where that's happened. I even explained why my abrupt exaggeration (I think I even conceded that it was an exaggerated statement in that thread) would be acceptable to me, which only served to make you and everyone else that much more angry. Really it boiled down to trying to browbeat and shame me (plunger458's words) into voting how you wanted me to vote, and I think the only reason why you're so bent out of shape about this is I said as much in that thread. Voter intimidation is wrong, but I guess for Hillary supporters (I'm doing you a solid not calling you an epithet like "Bernie Bros") it's okay which is the kind of behavior that pissed me off then and it's the same shit that's pissing me off here. That's okay though, I'm still going to do whatever I please no matter how much it upsets you or anyone else because I'm not easily swayed by the angry rantings of people on the internet. [QUOTE]You clearly do have a problem admitting it's not a very good one because you doggedly defended it.[/QUOTE]I guess indirectly saying it hasn't been good enough across these threads: it wasn't a good argument, I knew it when I was defending it, I did it anyway. I'll make it official like I did in that other thread: I'm done responding to you about this, (along with anyone else) I'm not going to derail this thread any further with this shit so again if you want to continue to bitch at me then send me a PM.

[QUOTE=*Freezorg*;50570455]Exactly, fuck career politicians.[/QUOTE] Why do we want the least experienced person for the most important job in the world?

[QUOTE=Raidyr;50570496]You can vote for whoever you want. You can defend your choices however you want, including "Because I want to". But you should expect people to wonder why you choose the things you choose, and immaturely calling any such discussion a "tantrum" because your self-evidently contradictory position was untenable is pretty low. There is no need to be so petulant. You clearly do have a problem admitting it's not a very good one because you doggedly defended it. I only brought it up because you referenced a what I thought to be legitimate difference of opinion a "tantrum" first. For the record I don't think a lot of the people on FP who say they are going to vote for Trump will actually vote for Trump, particularly people like you, or the Bernie Bros hopping from one cult of personality to the other. Your opinions don't really scare me at all and I've made peace with the fact that whoever get selected in November, America will get the president they deserve.[/QUOTE] I just don't know if you really understand how dirty it looks to the rest of the world that your two choices for politicians are both terrible, and one of them is increasingly, continiously, being implemented in some really fucking terrible shit but her supporters still seem to believe she's relatively flawless. I know you don't, but enough people in enough positions of power act like she's the best choice. Even ignoring Bernie and Trump, there's gotta be a better option than her. [editline]22nd June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=proboardslol;50570725]Why do we want the least experienced person for the most important job in the world?[/QUOTE] I want to argue with you about this but in a year, you've not given me one non glib answer. so i give up

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50570739]I just don't know if you really understand how dirty it looks to the rest of the world that your two choices for politicians are both terrible, and one of them is increasingly, continiously, being implemented in some really fucking terrible shit but her supporters still seem to believe she's relatively flawless. I know you don't, but enough people in enough positions of power act like she's the best choice. Even ignoring Bernie and Trump, there's gotta be a better option than her.[/quote] Okay but that isn't even related tangentially to anything I said my reply to someone else. [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50570739]I want to argue with you about this but in a year, you've not given me one non glib answer. so i give up[/QUOTE] Feel free to argue it with me. Sanders is more of a career politician than Clinton is and people seem enamored with him. I don't know if that's you and Freezorg but the general idea that we would dismiss someone from being a candidate purely because they have been a politician is silly. [editline]22nd June 2016[/editline] It's like saying a carpenter is inherently bad at his job because he has been building houses for 30 years. It's nonsensical. Career politicians can be bad, or they can be good, but the qualities that determine these are generally subjective and have nothing to do with how long they have been politicians.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;50571211]Okay but that isn't even related tangentially to anything I said my reply to someone else. Feel free to argue it with me. Sanders is more of a career politician than Clinton is and people seem enamored with him. I don't know if that's you and Freezorg but the general idea that we would dismiss someone from being a candidate purely because they have been a politician is silly. [editline]22nd June 2016[/editline] It's like saying a carpenter is inherently bad at his job because he has been building houses for 30 years. It's nonsensical. Career politicians can be bad, or they can be good, but the qualities that determine these are generally subjective and have nothing to do with how long they have been politicians.[/QUOTE] I'm not saying career politicians are bad. I'm not in that camp. I think Clinton falls into being one of the bad career politicians.

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50570607]I'll respond to two things: It was a tantrum, you and others threw a tantrum because I refused to vote for Hillary and it's not the first thread where that's happened. [/QUOTE] Do you know what a tantrum is? [QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50570607]I even explained why my abrupt exaggeration (I think I even conceded that it was an exaggerated statement in that thread) would be acceptable to me, which only served to make you and everyone else that much more angry.[/QUOTE] I can assure you with absolute certainty that no one was angry [QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50570607]Really it boiled down to trying to browbeat and shame me (plunger458's words) into voting how you wanted me to vote, and I think the only reason why you're so bent out of shape about this is I said as much in that thread. Voter intimidation is wrong,[/QUOTE] "Here is a list of reasons why you should not vote for Trump/why voting for Trump would be in your best interests" is not voter intimidation. [QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50570607]but I guess for Hillary supporters (I'm doing you a solid not calling you an epithet like "Bernie Bros")[/QUOTE] I'm not a Hillary supporter but I'd appreciate your ostensible holding of a moral highground if you weren't so transparently condescending. You've made several remarks already in this thread that essentially boil down to saying "umad bro??" to the people who respond to you, people who seem to be for the most part genuine in their replies. [QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50570607]it's okay which is the kind of behavior that pissed me off then and it's the same shit that's pissing me off here. That's okay though, I'm still going to do whatever I please no matter how much it upsets you or anyone else because I'm not easily swayed by the angry rantings of people on the internet.[/QUOTE] I'm just going to point out that across all these posts about people being mad and bent out of shape and pitching tantrums you are the only one actually saying they are "pissed off". Maybe you should take a break from SH if posts rile you up so much. [QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50570607]I guess indirectly saying it hasn't been good enough across these threads: it wasn't a good argument, I knew it when I was defending it, I did it anyway.[/QUOTE] Good to know but I've seen a backpedal more gracefully executed in my time here. [QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50570607]I'll make it official like I did in that other thread: I'm done responding to you about this, (along with anyone else) I'm not going to derail this thread any further with this shit so again if you want to continue to bitch at me then send me a PM.[/QUOTE] I'd hope you be done when you backpedaled away from arguing the point to saying "pffft I knew it was a bad position to hold anyway, stop being so mad by proving me wrong" but you brought it up in this thread so I replied (bitched, I guess).

[QUOTE=Reshy;50568267]Why bother having a democracy/republic then? Why not have the DNC and RNC dictate to us who our glorious leader is.[/QUOTE] Well that's good because we don't actually have one and haven't had since before the civil war.

This shit is depressing to read.

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;50570379]Doesn't matter though, it's still [U]my[/U] vote and I'll do whatever the hell I want with it.[/QUOTE] Well yeah but that doesn't mean it's a good choice, I'm free to criticise it and call it out for how bad it is because your reasoning for voting that way is literally "yolo".

And somehow we're supposed to have Emperor Scorpius and Raidyr sitting here and telling us Hillary is a "lesser evil" compared to Trump. Uh-huh.

they're both shit.