The Clinton campaign has started pumping out Trump attack ads - Polidicks

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50265367]I'm not going to argue what the right path is. I am going to argue it's a massive issue that will continue to be kicked down the road by people like yourself because you never want to deal with it. [url]http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/Prisons_and_Drugs#sthash.a7vQXo3Z.dpbs[/url] The statistics here are overwhelmingly showing how this is a bigger problem than people like yourself care to even realize. I don't know why you don't care about the lives of non violent drug offenders who've now lost the chance at a normal life and will fight stigma to get a job, feeding back into the criminal system, but you clearly don't if this is just another issue we can kick down the road. This needs to be dealt with in SOME way. I don't know what that is at this moment, but you cannot tell me this is a tennable situation. This cannot keep going on for another 8-16 years. This is a major issue which needs fixing NOW. Why does a 40 year old problem keep getting kicked down the road? Is it because the only people it bothers are non violent drug offenders(who gives a shit about them, am I right?) and drug users(who gives a shit about them, am I right?)? It seems to be the case, which means it's never going to be fixed.[/QUOTE] Hey man I really do agree with you on this. I'm a fan of decriminalization not legalization. I don't believe that people should go to prison for their self destructive habits; as long as they're not dealers or suppliers that's fine. Hard drug users are well within their rights to fuck up their lives and die an early death. I do not believe the answer is legalization of all drugs as much as decriminalization, education, and support. We need to continue to restrict access to these harmful substances and provide support to those non violent offenders and personal users. [editline]6th May 2016[/editline] Legalization is not the answer. The other part of this is that we see the effects of drug use in America but where does the hard shit actually come from? Take Colombia in the 80's and 90's for example. The whole Pablo Escobar shit show that strangulated the country and destroyed countless lives was thanks in large part to cocaine. What about Afghanistan and the Opium trade? We don't get to see the problems in our country that the demand for illicit drugs cause in the rest of the world.

[QUOTE=Maegord;50265431]Reminder not to engage Cody, since Trump could literally advocate nuking countries and commiting genocide against some minority group, and he would still argue that Clinton is worse.[/QUOTE] Sad but true The war on drugs is a major issue but a) Trump isn't even 'strong' on it, just more liberal than other Republicans and equal to Clinton and b) it still isn't as important as other issues (the economy, the Supreme Court, foreign policy, counter-terrorism etc.) unless you're a pothead loser

Both Clinton and Trump have the same issue regarding drugs; "hard" drugs should remain illegal to posses while medical marijuana research and prescription should be allowed and states have the right to legalize recreational use. [editline]5th May 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;50265367]I'm not going to argue what the right path is. [B] I am going to argue it's a massive issue that will continue to be kicked down the road by people like yourself because you never want to deal with it. [/B] [url]http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/Prisons_and_Drugs#sthash.a7vQXo3Z.dpbs[/url] [B]The statistics here are overwhelmingly showing how this is a bigger problem than people like yourself care to even realize. I don't know why you don't care about the lives of non violent drug offenders who've now lost the chance at a normal life and will fight stigma to get a job, feeding back into the criminal system, but you clearly don't if this is just another issue we can kick down the road. [/B]This needs to be dealt with in SOME way. I don't know what that is at this moment, but you cannot tell me this is a tennable situation. This cannot keep going on for another 8-16 years. This is a major issue which needs fixing NOW. [B]Why does a 40 year old problem keep getting kicked down the road? Is it because the only people it bothers are non violent drug offenders(who gives a shit about them, am I right?) and drug users(who gives a shit about them, am I right?)?[/B] It seems to be the case, which means it's never going to be fixed.[/QUOTE] You're presuming a lot about the content of peoples character through the internet and you should stop that.

[QUOTE=postal;50264170]i love how a trump attack ad is just a compilation of him running his mouth[/QUOTE] The man is a clown and I just hope this country has the awareness to laugh [I]at[/I] him instead of with him. [media]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/728297587418247168[/media] :/

[QUOTE=Katska;50265924]The man is a clown and I just hope this country has the awareness to laugh [I]at[/I] him instead of with him. [media]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/728297587418247168[/media] :/[/QUOTE] for a wealthy guy that office and scene outside look kinda of mediocre

[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;50265405]Alright you got me there. Where does Heroin come from (not talking about where Hospitals get their stuff)? What about Cocaine (not medical Cocaine either)?[/QUOTE] heroin is diacetlyl morphine, and morphine grows from a plant, so does cocaine, why do you ask?

[QUOTE=plunger435;50265131]And have absolutely no say in who gets elected this cycle? No thanks. I'm not so out of touch as to vote third party and just hope the president gets impeached.[/QUOTE] So a repeat of the last 16 years is ok with you? I'm sorry but those are the consequences I am not willing to suffer. I rather vote for someone who isn't going to abuse me. Even if I lose. At least I am not contributing to the issue. I mean one candidate is being indicted by the FBI for mishandling classified information and the other is getting sued for fraud. You literally telling me the "right thing to do" is to pick a either a crook or a criminal. That is not ok.

[QUOTE=cody8295;50265243]I'm voting for trump if bernie doesn't get the nomination or run independent because he's less shitty than clinton. Trump said he wanted to legalize all drugs and to me, that's the most important issue facing america right now. I dont care what his current position on the subject it, the fact that he said it is why I'd vote for him over clinton. But please keep trying as hard as you can to prove anyone who doesn't support clinton is just mad or something[/QUOTE] Trump went far-right to [i]pander to far-right voters[/i]. Now that he's moving left you think he doesn't actually hold any of those positions? No, he's [i]pandering to far-left ex-Sanders supporters[/i]. His entire campaign strategy is saying bullshit that he doesn't believe in order to get people to support him, hoping that they'll ignore that he's said [i]completely contradictory shit weeks before[/i]. Yes, Trump said he wanted to legalize all illicit drugs. In 1991. Since then, he's said that he wants medical marijuana legal federally, and wants individual states to decide on recreational weed. He said, verbatim, "I said it's something that should be studied and maybe should continue to be studied. But it's not something I'd be willing to do right now." Hillary and him hold the same opinion on drugs - medical marijuana legal federally, and let's study the rest for a while. You're doing [i]exactly what he wants you to do[/i] and cherry-picking his opinions that you like while ignoring or remaining unaware of the completely contradictory opinions he's held simultaneously. Going from Sanders to Trump is absurd. There is no genuine reason for doing so, unless you're a single issue voter on isolationist trade policies. Hillary's domestic platform is way, way, way more similar to Sanders in effectively every way. Trump is unreliable and unpredictable. Anyone who decides to vote for Trump because Sanders lost is too braindead to realize that Trump is just mass pandering to low-information Sanders supporters who hold no political opinion other than "FUCK THE SYSTEM BRO." His policies barely overlap with Sanders' ideas at all. He's pandering to you and you're gobbling his shit up.

[QUOTE=.Isak.;50266069]Trump went far-right to [i]pander to far-right voters[/i]. Now that he's moving left you think he doesn't actually hold any of those positions? No, he's [i]pandering to far-left ex-Sanders supporters[/i]. His entire campaign strategy is saying bullshit that he doesn't believe in order to get people to support him, hoping that they'll ignore that he's said [i]completely contradictory shit weeks before[/i]. Yes, Trump said he wanted to legalize all illicit drugs. In 1991. Since then, he's said that he wants medical marijuana legal federally, and wants individual states to decide on recreational weed. He said, verbatim, "I said it's something that should be studied and maybe should continue to be studied. But it's not something I'd be willing to do right now." Hillary and him hold the same opinion on drugs - medical marijuana legal federally, and let's study the rest for a while. You're doing [i]exactly what he wants you to do[/i] and cherry-picking his opinions that you like while ignoring or remaining unaware of the completely contradictory opinions he's held simultaneously. Going from Sanders to Trump is absurd. There is no genuine reason for doing so, unless you're a single issue voter on isolationist trade policies. Hillary's domestic platform is way, way, way more similar to Sanders in effectively every way. Trump is unreliable and unpredictable. Anyone who decides to vote for Trump because Sanders lost is too braindead to realize that Trump is just mass pandering to low-information Sanders supporters who hold no political opinion other than "FUCK THE SYSTEM BRO." His policies barely overlap with Sanders' ideas at all. He's pandering to you and you're gobbling his shit up.[/QUOTE] Oh another user who can read minds. Trump was expressing liberal ideas in the 90's such as drug legalization and I think that's what he still believes in today. What he's said recently doesn't matter because now he's pandering, that includes what hillary has said recently because she too is obviously pandering. I know all about trumps shitty ideas, stupid comments, and silly policies, but in the bigger image, clintons negatives far outweigh trumps.

[QUOTE=.Isak.;50266069]Trump went far-right to [i]pander to far-right voters[/i]. Now that he's moving left you think he doesn't actually hold any of those positions? No, he's [i]pandering to far-left ex-Sanders supporters[/i]. His entire campaign strategy is saying bullshit that he doesn't believe in order to get people to support him, hoping that they'll ignore that he's said [i]completely contradictory shit weeks before[/i].[/quote] all of trump's "i don't like bernie, but the system is working against him" speeches were so transparent that i'd feel ashamed for anyone that gets baited by them

[QUOTE=Anonymuzz;50266082]all of trump's "i don't like bernie, but the system is working against him" speeches were so transparent that i'd feel ashamed for anyone that gets baited by them[/QUOTE] I've been saying trump is the lesser of the evils before he made those specific comments

[QUOTE=cody8295;50266078]Oh another user who can read minds. Trump was expressing liberal ideas in the 90's such as drug legalization and I think that's what he still believes in today. What he's said recently doesn't matter because now he's pandering, that includes what hillary has said recently because she too is obviously pandering. I know all about trumps shitty ideas, stupid comments, and silly policies, but in the bigger image, clintons negatives far outweigh trumps.[/QUOTE] So, Trump can openly pander to the far-right and openly flip-flop on his positions that he's held since the 1990s, and he's not a flip-flopper, but if Hillary starts moving left on certain positions she's a flip-flopper scumbag? Trump has pandered to the far right. The only reason you aren't calling him a pandering flip-flopper is because you're not a member of the far right. Hillary is centrist, and she's pulling left, and so you think she's a pandering flip-flopper because she's moving left? That's because you're left, so it feels like she's pandering to you. What's the bigger image? What are Clinton's negatives in comparison to Trump? Why are you choosing to look at Trump's policies thirty years ago and say "oh those are his actual ones" and then look at Hillary's policies thirty years ago and say "those are awful she's awful" instead of looking at their policies [i]as they are speaking them now at this moment[/i], where it matters, instead of 30 years ago?

[QUOTE=cody8295;50264478] Paint her as a defender of rape, along with the victims of Bill's sexual past, I don't see how clinton could beat trump. Eventually the superdelegates will realize they need to back the electable democrat[/QUOTE] Wait, Bernie Sanders is electable?

I'm amazed that someone is deluded enough to think that Trump is a reasonable second choice for a Sanders supporter. I've been campaigning for Sanders for months now, I've been phonebanking, I helped my college get a voting location on campus, I've been doing fucktons for this campaign and dedicating my time to it, and then people are still stupid enough to say "Hillary said bad thing, she must be bad. Trump said bad thing, he's just pandering to dumb republicans, he's actually a liberal!" Fuck's sake, man. Sanders supporters who go Trump are some of the thickest, most delusional and anti-progressive people I know. They don't care about policy, they care about public image. They don't care about pandering and openly lying on positions [i]so long as they aren't the ones being lied to[/i]. They stretch their imagination to the point that Trump's side comments 30 years ago are somehow more important than his speeches that he's talking about [i]right fucking now[/i]. Throwing a temper tantrum because Sanders is unlikely to get the nomination is infantile. Vote for the candidate that most represents your views - Hillary is far, far closer to Sanders in policy than Trump. Trump wants to see the ACA get totally axed, Planned Parenthood entirely defunded, back-alley abortions become the new normal, weaken the EPA and trash environmental regulations, ban entire religious groups from entering the country because of guilt by association, privatize the entire public school system through predatory voucher programs, privatize social security, and increase military funding. Sanders wants none of these. If you're willing to sacrifice all these positions, go ahead, vote for Trump. But don't call yourself a fucking progressive. You're a fickle anti-establishment single-issue voter, not a progressive.

[QUOTE=.Isak.;50266097]So, Trump can openly pander to the far-right and openly flip-flop on his positions that he's held since the 1990s, and he's not a flip-flopper, but if Hillary starts moving left on certain positions she's a flip-flopper scumbag? Trump has pandered to the far right. The only reason you aren't calling him a pandering flip-flopper is because you're not a member of the far right. Hillary is centrist, and she's pulling left, and so you think she's a pandering flip-flopper because she's moving left? That's because you're left, so it feels like she's pandering to you. What's the bigger image? What are Clinton's negatives in comparison to Trump? Why are you choosing to look at Trump's policies thirty years ago and say "oh those are his actual ones" and then look at Hillary's policies thirty years ago and say "those are awful she's awful" instead of looking at their policies [i]as they are speaking them now at this moment[/i], where it matters, instead of 30 years ago?[/QUOTE] In the post you quoted, I call trump a pandering flip flopper, so I don't know where your analysis is stemming from. 30 years ago trump had better views than clinton did, that's kinda important, foresight and all. What they say recently doesn't matter to me much because I don't trust either of them [editline]5th May 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=.Isak.;50266139]I'm amazed that someone is deluded enough to think that Trump is a reasonable second choice for a Sanders supporter. I've been campaigning for Sanders for months now, I've been phonebanking, I helped my college get a voting location on campus, I've been doing fucktons for this campaign and dedicating my time to it, and then people are still stupid enough to say "Hillary said bad thing, she must be bad. Trump said bad thing, he's just pandering to dumb republicans, he's actually a liberal!" Fuck's sake, man. Sanders supporters who go Trump are some of the thickest, most delusional and anti-progressive people I know. They don't care about policy, they care about public image. They don't care about pandering and openly lying on positions [i]so long as they aren't the ones being lied to[/i]. They stretch their imagination to the point that Trump's side comments 30 years ago are somehow more important than his speeches that he's talking about [i]right fucking now[/i]. Throwing a temper tantrum because Sanders is unlikely to get the nomination is infantile. Vote for the candidate that most represents your views - Hillary is far, far closer to Sanders in policy than Trump. Trump wants to see the ACA get totally axed, Planned Parenthood entirely defunded, back-alley abortions become the new normal, weaken the EPA and trash environmental regulations, ban entire religious groups from entering the country because of guilt by association, privatize the entire public school system through predatory voucher programs, privatize social security, and increase military funding. Sanders wants none of these. If you're willing to sacrifice all these positions, go ahead, vote for Trump. But don't call yourself a fucking progressive. You're a fickle anti-establishment single-issue voter, not a progressive.[/QUOTE] Throwing a temper tantrum versus voting strategically because the voting system sucks are 2 different things

[QUOTE]Sanders wants none of these. If you're willing to sacrifice all these positions, go ahead, vote for Trump. But don't call yourself a fucking progressive. You're a fickle anti-establishment single-issue voter, not a progressive.[/QUOTE] I am not progressive. I worship chaos. By voting Trump, I shall expedite the return of cthulhu. Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn

[QUOTE=Dayzofwinter;50266151]I am not progressive. I worship chaos. By voting Trump, I shall expedite the return of cthulhu. Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn[/QUOTE] Very few people take into account the chaos vote.

[QUOTE=Zenreon117;50266166]Very few people take into account the chaos vote.[/QUOTE] Nyarlathotep is displeased with your hearsay. ' The reason I said that Isak keeps forgetting there are a wide array of views beyond the "left-right" classification he restricts himself to. Instead of talking down to people who will switch to Trump, maybe it would profit him to learn these views. People are really sick of the system being rigged by big moneyed interests. They will take some one who is talking about this issue (even if dishonest) over someone who is seen as part of the issue. Sometimes lip service is all one can get out of an election. If that the best they can do, that what they will grab.

[QUOTE=cody8295;50266008]heroin is diacetlyl morphine, and morphine grows from a plant, so does cocaine, why do you ask?[/QUOTE] Not their chemical compounds. Who creates and supplies these products? Who are some of the top producers of Opium and Cocaine?

[QUOTE=Dayzofwinter;50266063]So a repeat of the last 16 years is ok with you? I'm sorry but those are the consequences I am not willing to suffer. I rather vote for someone who isn't going to abuse me. Even if I lose. At least I am not contributing to the issue. I mean one candidate is being indicted by the FBI for mishandling classified information and the other is getting sued for fraud. You literally telling me the "right thing to do" is to pick a either a crook or a criminal. That is not ok.[/QUOTE] If you have put in an honest amount of effort in examining both candidates and decided that they are both equally bad, then vote third-party. Otherwise, there is next to no purpose. It's not about being "okay" with it or not. I'm not okay with it. It's about recognizing what is within the realm of possibility and how to spend your vote in a way that can make actual, realizable positive change. People underestimate just how extremely powerful the incentive to vote strategically that the FPTP system gives is. Your username leads me to believe that you're an alt of someone I've told this to already, so I won't repeat myself much here. If you are, then you already know what I have to say about why this happens. Ultimately, it is your right to vote the way you please, and I can't stop you if you vote third-party. But what I'm trying to tell you is that if, by the time you get in line at the polls your favorite party hasn't actually garnered the support it needs to win an election, your vote for them will do almost nothing for them when it could have been used to help keep whoever you wanted less out of the White House. These elections can get very close. I can pretty much guarantee it will not rest solely on you alone, but it's possible for them to be won or lost because of third-party voters. You might be okay if you're in a safe state and just want to help your candidate get matching funds for the next election, but the influence of third-party voters might be high this year, and so I worry.

[QUOTE=Katska;50266388]If you have put in an honest amount of effort in examining both candidates and decided that they are both equally bad, then vote third-party. Otherwise, there is next to no purpose. It's not about being "okay" with it or not. I'm not okay with it. [/QUOTE] Then why are you rewarding bad behavior?

[QUOTE=.Isak.;50266097]What's the bigger image? What are Clinton's negatives in comparison to Trump? Why are you choosing to look at Trump's policies thirty years ago and say "oh those are his actual ones" and then look at Hillary's policies thirty years ago and say "those are awful she's awful" instead of looking at their policies [i]as they are speaking them now at this moment[/i], where it matters, instead of 30 years ago?[/QUOTE] They are both lying (pandering) because it's an election and they both want to be nominated in the respective parties they are running for. The difference is, Hillary's non-pandering history is full of bad decisions while Trump has historically held a more liberal view point. Because both are currently in lying mode, there's almost zero point in looking at their current views, as such there's only history. To my view, Trump wins in that regard. It isn't like I can look back 30 years and see Hillary holding the same views now as she did then, so why should I believe whatever she is saying now when, when it actually mattered, when votes were being held in congress, she voted in ways I strongly disagree with? Not to mention in the 2008 primary she followed a similar pattern on, for example, trade policy. It's clear to me Hillary has no problem saying one thing then doing another when she's actually in a position of power. With Trump, who the fuck knows. Maybe he fell down some stairs and turned into an extremist republican, or maybe he's just pandering really well to the extreme right that the republican party has been stringing along for votes. I'll take my chances though. I truly wish the Democrats had at least put their support behind some average candidate; I'm not bitter (enough) at the DNC (for showing a clear bias to one candidate) to vote for Trump out of spite, but Hillary is just such a awful candidate between her questionable political history and the email thing that Trump--to me--seems like the better choice.

[QUOTE=Dayzofwinter;50266396]Then why are you rewarding bad behavior?[/QUOTE] I have stakes in this that are higher than just telling [I]the man[/I] that I don't like the state of American politics right now, and I would hope you do too.

[QUOTE=Katska;50266418]I have stakes in this that are higher than just telling [I]the man[/I] that I don't like the state of American politics right now, and I would hope you do too.[/QUOTE] I do not make decisions on fear. Any one who makes a decision based on fear is going lose all they defend any ways. What ever reasons you are voting for, if it is out of fear, I guarantee you are going to lose it. All of it and then some. Fear is a thief that will rob you of everything. I know that if I do not get my way, I will adapt and take advantage of the chaos. I will exploit the situation to my benefit. One way or another. Personally I rather vote for a party who is not going abuse me. I may lose, but fuck no am I going to partake in my own demise. Neither should you.

[QUOTE=Dayzofwinter;50266471]I do not make decisions on fear. Any one who makes a decision based on fear is going lose all they defend any ways. You win some you lose some. What ever reasons you are voting for, if it is out of fear, I guarantee you going to lose it. All it and then some. [/QUOTE] Are you saying you never take risk into account when making decisions? [QUOTE=Dayzofwinter;50266471]I know that if I do not get my way, I will adapt and take advantage of the chaos. I will exploit the situation to my benefit. One way or another.[/QUOTE] What does this mean.

[QUOTE=Katska;50266490]Are you saying you never take risk into account when making decisions? What does this mean .[/QUOTE] What are your stakes? Is your decision based on fear? If so, you run 100 percent risk of losing whatever it is and then some. Whenever you make a decision on fear, you lose. As for what do I mean? If third party wins, society gets better, I profit. If Clinton wins, I will sell ammo for inflated price and profit due to her stance on gun control. If Trump wins, I will sell counterfeit Canadian citizenship papers to American Liberals. No matter the out come, I will profit. This is how I manage risk. I try to think of ways of how to make a situation benefit me no matter what. You should do the same. Like I said, I will vote third party because I will not stand for choosing between two criminals. Neither should you.

[QUOTE=cody8295;50265371]You didn't prove I disagree with him, you demonstrated that you don't understand my reasons for voting, and I think it's kinda pathetic.[/QUOTE] What's pathetic is you willing to sacrifice civil liberties, international relationships and poor people just to fuel (maybe, because this wouldn't even happen) your own habit. I mean, do you really have nothing else of value in your life?

[QUOTE=Dayzofwinter;50266518]If you are making a decision out of fear, it will be lost and then some. 100 percent guaranteed. That a bit risky don't ya think? Besides I do take risk into account. I ask my self, if I do not get what I want, how will I manage? How will I make each out come work out the best for me? Personally, I would not vote for two crooks. No way. I am going to vote third party. I know I am going to lose but forget giving consent to two people (or parties) who will exploit me and abuse me. Fuck. that. I do have some self respect you kn[/QUOTE] There is more to both candidates than just being "crooks". I don't disagree that they're both very shady but there are other factors to them that should surely make one more or less desirable to you than the other. Also, this should be about more than self-respect. This should be about swallowing your pride and voting in order to protect not just yourself but other people who are probably not like you that you believe also stand to lose something in the event of a Trump/Clinton presidency. This should not just be about [I]you[/I], and your ability to say "I voted for who I [I]really[/I] like!" Voting for a candidate you know is going to lose just so you can say you did does no service to anybody else. If you admit that you know your third-party vote isn't helping anyone, then you have made your stake in this election entirely personal and on such superficial grounds. [QUOTE=Dayzofwinter;50266518]Hey whenever there is a disaster, there is an opportunity. If Clinton gets into office, time to start selling fire arms at inflated prices due to her position on gun control. If Trump wins, I will be selling the lot of you counterfeit Canadian citizen ship papers. Either way, I will find a way to profit.[/QUOTE] Okay. [QUOTE=Dayzofwinter;50266518]Does this answer your question concerning risk?[/QUOTE] No. While all business ventures have a degree of risk inherently, it is with [I]fear[/I] that we take those risks into consideration. Fear of losing all of your capital by making a risky move should factor into your decision on whether or not to make it. Fear, in this situation, might lead you to make a sounder decision that is less likely to leave you in ruin. This does not mean you have failed. It means you used your noodle! People take fear into consideration while making choices all the time time and the notion that you fail, [I]guaranteed[/I], when you do that sounds like pretentious nonsense meant to sound like something deep or motivational. You've given me this empty talk about moving forward without reason before, and I still don't understand your thought process. No, what this actually does is raise questions about what kind of person you are. You've indicated to me that you know your third-party candidate will lose, but you'll vote for them just because you have "self-respect". You've said that you will literally [I]capitalize[/I] on the election results, somehow, because you want each outcome to work out for you. Is that dignity to you? The claim that you're going to go and start a business based on whoever wins is probably hot air, but what am I supposed to think about someone who says they're going to find a way to profit off of and exploit the harm they perceive will be done by each candidate? I shouldn't need to alert you to the hypocrisy in your constant complaining about how the establishment is crooked and screws people over for personal gain, when you're pretty much saying you'd do the same thing here. Sure, it's not on the same scale, but that doesn't make this okay. I can take the "counterfeit Canadian citizenship papers" thing as a joke, but your proclamation of there being opportunity for profit in disaster does not strike confidence in me that you wouldn't be doing the same thing the "establishment" is doing if you were given the chance. It's easy to call somebody a troll when they're being particularly obtuse. I don't know if I want to make that claim about you, but I just don't know. I'd like to think you aren't so I know I haven't been wasting my time.

[QUOTE]There is more to both candidates than just being "crooks".[/QUOTE] No there is not. One is being sued by the federal government for fraud and the other is being indicted for criminal charges. Why the heck should I vote for two people who are border line criminals? Why should I keep rewarding bad behavior? Why are you insisting on rewarding bad behavior? Neither are desirable to me. Why should they be desirable to me? [QUOTE]It's easy to call somebody a troll when they're being particularly obtuse.[/QUOTE] I view you obtuse as well. The solution to fixing our nations is stop rewarding bad behavior by voting in people and parties who are corrupt. It is that simple. It is this mindset you espouse that got us in this mess in the first place. By rewarding bad behavior, you hurt people. Simple.

[QUOTE=Dayzofwinter;50266518]What are your stakes? Is your decision based on fear? If so, you run 100 percent risk of losing whatever it is and then some.[/QUOTE] My stakes are both personal and moral. I believe a Trump presidency creates risks to my own well-being as a member of several minority groups that conservative politicians and Trump himself have, for the most part, made clear they care very little for, in addition to being a person who is currently worrying about my ability to support myself in the future. Clinton does not make me feel fear in this same way, crooked as she is. And it is fear not just for myself, but for other people who are in similar situations to me, as well as people who, while not like me, also have reason to fear Donald Trump taking command over our country. I feel that their fears are legitimate and that they deserve to be protected. It is this, among many other things. If I sound like I'm being melodramatic, then you probably don't stand to lose as much in this race. Be glad! [QUOTE=Dayzofwinter;50266518]Whenever you make a decision on fear, you lose. As for what do I mean? If third party wins, society gets better, I profit. If Clinton wins, I will sell ammo for inflated price and profit due to her stance on gun control. If Trump wins, I will sell counterfeit Canadian citizenship papers to American Liberals. No matter the out come, I will profit. This is how I manage risk. I try to think of ways of how to make a situation benefit me no matter what. You should do the same. Like I said, I will vote third party because I will not stand for choosing between two criminals. Neither should you. [/QUOTE] Your nonchalance over this is concerning. You don't care who wins, as long as you can make money. Can you really claim to care about those less fortunate than you? Is all this talk about the establishment anything more than blind outrage? Anyway, you edit almost every post you make and I keep replying to the older versions, but the new version of this post doesn't really change much that I talked about in my last post except make it a little less clear if your whole counterfeit Canadian citizenship papers thing is a joke or not. [QUOTE=Dayzofwinter;50267162]No there is not. One is being sued by the federal government for fraud and the other is being indicted for criminal charges. Why the heck should I vote for two people who are border line criminals? Why should I keep rewarding bad behavior? Why are you insisting on rewarding bad behavior? Neither are desirable to me. Why should they be desirable to me? I view you obtuse as well. The solution to fixing our nations is stop rewarding bad behavior by voting in people and parties who are corrupt. It is that simple. It is this mindset you espouse that got us in this mess in the first place. By rewarding bad behavior, you hurt people. Simple.[/QUOTE] Seems I've reached a dead-end here. All that I can say here has already been said.