Donald vs Hillary - Disgusting or Hillarious
Posted by freedomforall 9 years, 2 months ago to Politics
"On one side we have a rich, fat, old, white, blonde-haired, blue-eyed, candidate with an unpleasant voice, an arrogant manner, and an authoritarian personality. On the other side we have Donald Trump. Apart from sex, they’re like two megalomaniacal peas in a pod.What is a voter to do? Imagine a ballot with Benito Mussolini and Eva Perón. Choose one. Go ahead. "
SOURCE URL: http://www.libertyunbound.com/node/1455
For neither The Bitch nor The Trump.
I want honesty and ethics
And a long-missing mix
Of courage and vision
To be the new mission.
Since most of the insiders
Are political spiders,
An outsider or two
Is long overdue!
When I look at them all
I like Carson or Paul...
What kind of fool goes through multiple bankruptcies without learning just a little humility?
Every deal that Trump does includes "surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons"
By definition, they are conspiracies.
Anyone who thinks they aren't is naive.
"Just like a spin of the roulette wheel"
You think the gambling "industry" is the ethical goal that businessmen should model their actions upon?
There is nothing in my reponse that indicated a legal offense by Trump. Trump acts as a businessman with the ethics of a looter in the Wall Street bankster tradition.
I have no hatred of capitalism. I have a dislike for unethical practices by people who claim to be ethical productive businessmen.
Trump and his attorneys created contracts in his deals to reduce his risk and increase his profit as much as possible at the expense of other shareholders. Trump is not unique in this; it is accepted practice in business. Being accepted does not make it ethical, nor is it a criticism of 'capitalism' to point out the faults of current accepted unethical practices.
I think that Trump wil act in the same manner if he is elected POTUS That is not acceptable practice for any president.
One who runs for POTUS, of course. No room for humility (when there's so much hubris.)
at my gut -- I pick the loose cannon, and will learn to dance. -- j
.
Against Us. . you are right about that, sir!!! -- j
.
I'm posting a Question on this topic...
Hillary is fundamentally threatened and opposed to every ideal of the gulch. She is untrustworthy. No one will have any idea what she is really up to in the oval office.
Hillary will 100% try to move more power to government, and not just in funding. She will try to strengthen the EPA and every other legislating executive branch agency. I know she will do this, and she has the skills and staff to effect change in government. Trump may not even be able to get things done. Trump will probably not take this tact unless he gets too frustrated with congress.
If we are lucky, either will have to deal with Republican controlled congress, and little on the left will happen...maybe.
Trump is in no way a conservative, a libertarian, or objectivist although he is sort of pretending to the be first on TV.
Stop throwing away your vote for Republicans. They have betrayed you for 155 years and that is not going to change.
Voting GOP because they are arguably better than Democrats is the main reason that there is always more government and less liberty.
YES, vote for someone who is for liberty and against the state. Stop wasting your vote.
GOP voters are like Jews in Nazi Germany, pretending the enemy who only kills half your family is an answer, when it's nothing but consenting to murder. There will be no improvement until conservatives leave the GOP and have the courage to vote for someone who has ethics and integrity to promote liberty instead of just someone "better than Hillary."
1) Continue to consent to the existing system. Be a slave.
2) Peacefully resist by doing the thing that the parties fear the most: take your votes elsewhere. Your votes are the only thing that disguises the slavery for the evil that it is.
3) Revolt using force.
You go ahead and consent. Be a slave. Lots of luck with that.
There is a very uncomfortably real set of circumstances that could lead to violent revolution, but I don't think it will come from a purposeful, planned event. The collapse of law enforcement would drop the demand for security on the individual, fighting against criminal elements. If government chooses to view individuals defending themselves, their family, and their property as a vigilante force, a battle between government and the people could very well ensue. Who knows what happens after that?
As long as people that call themselves conservatives continue to vote for the GOP there will be no change in the growth of government and the loss of liberty. However, more and more people are coming to the rational conclusion that the GOP is no more an answer than the Dems. Assuming my goal is to work for a peaceful, political solution, encouraging thoughtful, rational people to come to that conclusion is worthwhile and the seeds I plant will grow and spread, and the voting power will be transferred to more ethical candidates outside the two parties.
Stop pretending you are doing something to slow growth of government and look at the results of the past 30 years. Voting for the lesser of two evils is a perfect example of Einstein's definition of insanity: repeating the same action and expecting a different result.
Conservative voters have been doing the same thing for 30 years and what has been the result? It's time to wake up and desert the lying, looting GOP because they have failed to do ANYTHING they have promised and instead have continually done the oppopsite, leading to bigger government, more socialism, less liberty, and a pathetic managed economy with no chance of improvement.
Then we should be campaigning mightily for killing the two party system in the general election. There is nothing in the constitution about it, and one could bring a case that the ballot having D and R options to click and a write-in only for another candidate is unconstitutional. Make everyone write in their vote of select without instrumentational bias from the field of options.
...otherwise, I go back to "we are throwing away our votes." Go ahead. I'm not doing this, unless there is a landslide for Hillary. Anybody is better for our country than Hillary.
Current lineup , approximately.
All Democrats are a lost cause they do not have quite enough for a solid majority.
Most Republicans are Democrats by another name RIN
Some Republicans might be convinced to join the third largest group.
Non-Voters, Independents, Third Party Voters, and Write-in Voters.
Add in those that might be inclined to register but not vote.
Non-Registrants, Non -voters, and Republicans who are faithful to a party that is not faithful to them.
That's your target audience. They also number more than the Democrats.
I can't believe that Republicans completely and totally lack any principles but they are proving it with their support of Trump.
She should run.
If he is elected, government cronies will undergo a population explosion. His supporters remind me of that friend with a new girlfriend/boyfriend "that can do no wrong".
http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/trump...
-- j
.
Damned if you do and Damned if you don't.
Not as a politician, but if you can build buildings in New York City, you understand politics.
That being said, I'm not sure who I'm voting for in the Republican Party. I like Rand Paul a lot, but he doesn't seem like he's a serious contender. I don't want Bush -- Republicans like him keep the water boiling under the pot we frogs are in.
No Where!
What you'll now here is some flavor of give them another chance. No way fifty years of having no credibiity is enough for me. Meaning without credibility or ...the truth isn't in them. Forget the PC definition.
What part of Republicans being lapdogs of the left have you not noticed for the last umpteen years. Rhetoric means zero. Actions are what counts. Three strikes your out only takes three words. I'm A Republican (Democrat)
In terms of policies he is a democrat and has always been. He just knew he had a better chance by pretending to be a republican. And he has proven that there are a lot of suckers born every day.
Or do you think objectivists have no ethics, and do not take fiduciary responsibility for the public service jobs if they hold them?
When he is running for an office where his actions must be to represent the American people, not himself, Trump can be depended on to dump his failures on the American people, and take the profit of any success for himself, exactly as he has done in his businesses. He can't be trusted in any position with fiduciary responsibility to America.
Remember, the original question was that if the only choice was between Trump and Clinton, who would we choose. I'm uncomfortable with Trump, but absolutely fear the destruction of the republic will be completed with a Clinton Presidency.
The answer is vote for liberty by removing your support from both the GOP and the Dems.
You may be right about the entire field of candidates offered by the GOP and the Dems. The concentration of power tempts them all, and none can be trusted. The real solution is decentralization of power, and, as you noted earlier, neither of the parties want their power reduced.
In a religious sense I don't believe there is any such thing as a Democrat or Republican Christian. One cannot serve two masters and adhere to the demands of two oaths. Ergo sum it's two oxymorons.
In a secular sense you either honor your oath of Citizenship to the Constitution or you don't.
People who didn't serve in the military or other public offices and were born in the country don't have to make that choice with one sort of exception . Their citizenship was bought for them by others if they are female.
The excepton.....
If they are male they come under the Military Conscription Act where in they are coerced by threat of jail and fines to volunteer and bought and paid for with college loans and promises of government jobs and a little side benefit the promise of no jail time nor fines.
Involuntary Volunteers the ultimate oxymoron.
All you have is your conscience. One you said the magic words 'lesser of two evils' you made defined the situation and made the choice.' Now go look in the mirror and define self respect.
Unless of course the two evils are equally evil then it doesn't matter what you do.
People who support evil are by definition evil people. A left winger would undoubtedly say that about me.
The degree of evil is irrelevant. What is relevant is their definition of evil or translated what are their morals, values, and standards. If any.
Left Wing fascist socialism is evil.
Both eventual choices belong to political parties which are left wing, socialist and fascist in that they both support government control over citizens to one degree or another.
I support the opposite.viewpoint
Under the choices allowed A, B or blank the only moral choice is not playing the game of Evil.
My conscience is clear, I maintain self respect. I have not indulged in play pretend. What others choose to do is their choice. At least for a while. That's getting problematical.
What choice you want is unboxed. You get to choose according to your ...personal beliefs. You still may and can say I'm choosing the best of the best choices. And if your choices are the ones that rigged the election don't worry be happy.
I supported Perot because I didn't want either Bush or Clinton (damn here we are again), I would have preferred Bush as the lesser of two evils but as a consequence of Perot we got Clinton. I accept that I helped elect him.
I consider supporting the present system functionally useless and hastening it's demise not only useful but a requirement - the opening of a counter revolution in rhetorical terms.
I most certainly do accept the consequences and have done so for fifty one years. That was the first time I swore to uphold the Constitution. The mission now is to get it back. Looking at it objectively I can only say what does this government have to do with that document?
My useful phrase for that is A citizen has rights and responsibilities. Without both the other must surely fail. (The exception of course are the draft laws.)
I still applaud the Perot supporters. they accomplished one great objective. That of forcing recognition of the reality of the present system and it's perversions. For that Thank You for serving your country. It was not a waste nor the wrong thing to do. It was a necessary step.
Its our job to awaken their minds to the insidious slavery they are living and to provide a way to break those chains.
If there were two candidates- one of them Hitler and the other Trump- would it make sense to not vote at all? Or to vote for the lesser evil.
I will not.
We are tallking about consent.
When someone threatens you with force beyond your ability to defend yourself, you are not consenting to their wishes, you are being robbed at gunpoint.
When you cast a vote for continuation of this robbery after decades of evidence, you are giving consent with knowledge of the evil it represents.
Stop giving consent to enslavement by your enemies.
The idea of a consumer strike is also a promising one, but the government party encourages FUD among us that only serve the purpose of enhancing the government's power and preventing united efforts that would change the situation in favor of liberty. We have to concentrate on one goal, reducing government power. We must stop taking the bait and giving 'one more chance' to lying looters in the statist party. They have proven repeatedly that they don't deserve support or consent.
1) dens get 32% let's say of electoral college republican get 33.5% and an independent gets 34.5%. Does the independent win?
2) only a small number of citizens actually vote, say 10%. Is the election still valid or is it required that a certain percentage of citizens vote
http://www.archives.gov/federal-regis...
AFAIK, there is no quorum-type requirement on voters.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0D8Cz...