|
Who What Now posted:So, again, you don't actually give a poo poo about your supposed principals, you just want to pretend that you do. Actually no, I'm enough of a realist to be willing to compromise my vote to get what I want but Hillary's not offering enough.
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 10:31 |
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:Actually no, I'm enough of a realist to be willing to compromise my vote to get what I want but Hillary's not offering enough. Oh my god, you're the worst.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:Again, with Hunter Biden taking a board seat of a major Ukranian gas company, it's hard to believe the US/EU had no sort of agreements with the groups that were pushing the social movements in Ukraine. Again, not saying it's a bad thing in of itself, but it's hard to look at the situation now and say we did anything to help. What exactly did we gain by attempting to enforce the borders of a country where a sizable portion of the population that got annexed was happier to be part of Russia anyways.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Oh my god, you're the worst. I'll take that as "you're right and it's hurting my brain to accept it" A Buttery Pastry posted:Of course there are people who stood to benefit from Ukraine ridding itself of Russian influence, who saw Maidan as a chance to move in. That doesn't mean the opposition to Russian influence wasn't a popular thing. Also, you seem to be happily ignoring the ethnic cleansing the Russians started carrying out the moment they took over Crimea. I'm not ignoring anything, I'm saying that none of the actions we have taken have done anything good and there probably was no better answer. I don't even think the US hosed up Ukraine or is responsible for much of it at all. I was asked about that particular situation and my answer is it sucks but military intervention wouldn't have made things any better and things are hosed to hell anyways so it's hard to argue that Maidan did more good than harm in the long run. The fact that the son of the vice president is on the board of one of the major energy companies is a very bad look for the US.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
USSR, Tsarist Russia, it's all the same am I right guys? Just bears and vodka and Bond villains, the Evil Empire just like Raegan said. I am a progressive.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:I'll take that as "you're right and it's hurting my brain to accept it" Take it however you want, I'm glad you've exposed yourself as being completely terrible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 20:33
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:Actually no, I'm enough of a realist to be willing to compromise my vote to get what I want but Hillary's not offering enough. You aren't compromising, though. You're just pretending to compromise while actually doing nothing at all except patting yourself on the back as hard as possible. What's the point of doing something so useless? Besides to jerk yourself off, I mean.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:You aren't compromising, though. You're just pretending to compromise while actually doing nothing at all except patting yourself on the back as hard as possible. What's the point of doing something so useless? Besides to jerk yourself off, I mean. twodot fucked around with this message at 20:46 on Oct 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Have you paid any attention at all to the last eight years? Obama has had a tough time because in a lot of situations, the president needs the support of a majority of Congress to enact their policies - and that means having the support of conservatives. It's absolutely indisputable that Hillary is going to be better at building consensus and gathering support for leftist policies than Bernie would. There's a reason I compared her to LBJ. Because if there's anyone who could get the Republicans to cross the aisle and cooperate with the Democrats, it'd be the woman who they've spent the past 24 years building up as the singular personification of everything that they hate about us.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
Bob le Moche posted:USSR, Tsarist Russia, it's all the same am I right guys? Just bears and vodka and Bond villains, the Evil Empire just like Raegan said. I am a progressive.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:You aren't compromising, though. You're just pretending to compromise while actually doing nothing at all except patting yourself on the back as hard as possible. What's the point of doing something so useless? Besides to jerk yourself off, I mean. Again, I voted for Obama in 2008 despite being a cynical leftist due to his rhetoric, which I do believe, despite his lack of action, has pushed a lot of Democrats to the left. My bar really isn't that high. It's sad that "Don't attempt to incite world war 3" is now a deal breaker not worth having.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:It's sad that "Don't attempt to incite world war 3" is now a deal breaker not worth having.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Standing up to Russia is actually the opposite, as it ensures they won't get the idea that they can actually pull a Ukraine on EU members. Standing up to Putin (who here rhetoric should be directed at, no reason to fuel the propaganda machine) is a fine goal. Saying that Russian aggression is the cause of the problems we see today in Syria is so dumb I can only assume that's a line she has to say in order to ensure those sweet sweet defense contractor dollars keep rolling in.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Standing up to Russia is actually the opposite, as it ensures they won't get the idea that they can actually pull a Ukraine on EU members.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:It's sad that "Don't attempt to incite world war 3" is now a deal breaker not worth having. You have no earthly idea what would incite WWIII. The only thing worse than a single issue voter is one that doesn't actually know anything about their issue.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:You have no earthly idea what would incite WWIII. The only thing worse than a single issue voter is one that doesn't actually know anything about their issue. I don't know, if you want to use this thread to interrogate me about every international conflict (and keep doing so after I answer them all) or every policy position I have, trust me, you will find holes. I'm human. I have hypocrisies(is that a word?), I'm not perfect, I don't claim to be. I have one small personal decision I've made about a vote that everyone in this thread can agree doesn't matter. So why is everyone so angry?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
Bob le Moche posted:USSR, Tsarist Russia, it's all the same am I right guys? Just bears and vodka and Bond villains, the Evil Empire just like Raegan said. I am a progressive. The Soviet Union was very bad at times, especially with certain Premieres. The United States was very bad at times, especially with certain administrations. Tzarist Russia was a near-feudal state that treated most of the populace as disposable fodder. Most nations are pretty loving terrible at multiple points in their history. Edit: vvvv You really don't want to think about how many people are in favor of that. Taerkar fucked around with this message at 20:58 on Oct 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:You have no earthly idea what would incite WWIII. The only thing worse than a single issue voter is one that doesn't actually know anything about their issue. edit: NewForumSoftware posted:I don't know, if you want to use this thread to interrogate me about every international conflict (and keep doing so after I answer them all) or every policy position I have, trust me, you will find holes. twodot fucked around with this message at 21:02 on Oct 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
twodot posted:I think this thread has a little too much "This policy doesn't lead to the effects you think it does because X" and not enough "Wanting this policy doesn't justify voting third party because Y". Like maybe NewForumSoftware is wrong about this particular thing, and maybe you can convince them they are wrong about this particular thing, but it doesn't really say anything about how people should vote in an election, and there aren't objective answers to this anyways so you probably can't convince them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:I was just trying to figure out where NewForumSoftware stood on the topic of Russia, because that's a pretty good indicator of where he/she would be coming from in regards to their position on Hillary vis-a-vis foreign policy. I mean, a lot of Western left-wing defenders of Putin basically seem to treat him as an anti-establishment figure because he stands up to the US. If that's where you are politically, I can see why you'd never vote for Hillary. I don't like Putin in the same way I don't like Assad or Saddam. The sad truth is we've seen now with Iraq what happens when you create a power void in a place with no realistic plans to replace it with something sustainable. We need to focus on methods other than warfare to enact political change around the world, even when it gets really bad and we don't like it. The time for war is when we are attacked by a nation state on our own soil.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 21:05
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:I don't know, if you want to use this thread to interrogate me about every international conflict (and keep doing so after I answer them all) or every policy position I have, trust me, you will find holes. I'm human. I have hypocrisies(is that a word?), I'm not perfect, I don't claim to be. I have one small personal decision I've made about a vote that everyone in this thread can agree doesn't matter. So why is everyone so angry? Because outrage is cheaper than heroin.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:I don't like Putin in the same way I don't like Assad or Saddam. The sad truth is we've seen now with Iraq what happens when you create a power void in a place with no realistic plans to replace it with something sustainable. We need to focus on methods other than warfare to enact political change around the world, even when it gets really bad and we don't like it. The time for war is when we are attacked by a nation state on our own soil.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:For what it's worth, I don't really disagree with the thrust of this. (except for the apparent desire to drop out of NATO.) I don't have a desire to drop out of NATO. What I have is a desire for the US to stop acting unilaterally overseas with military action(which honestly has gotten way better) and for politicians to stop using the kinds of rhetoric that allow for these conflicts to take place in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:I don't like Putin in the same way I don't like Assad or Saddam. The sad truth is we've seen now with Iraq what happens when you create a power void in a place with no realistic plans to replace it with something sustainable. We need to focus on methods other than warfare to enact political change around the world, even when it gets really bad and we don't like it. The time for war is when we are attacked by a nation state on our own soil. When has America enacted positive political change (post WWII)? If America has never enacted positive political change (post WWII), then I think you need to reexamine your fundamental premises.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
Rated PG-34 posted:When has America enacted positive political change (post WWII)? If America has never enacted positive political change (post WWII), then I think you need to reexamine your fundamental premises. Trust me you don't have to convince me to be more cynical. It's way too easy to just throw your arms up and give up. I do believe there is good we can do in the world without dropping bombs. Foreign aid should be increased across the board. We should start providing things like sexual education (not abstinence you loving idiot republicans) and contraception across the world. We can improve the world by holding domestic firms to higher standards of environmental treatment by improving the standards on what we're willing to import. There are tons of ways to influence international politics that don't involve munitions.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
Bob le Moche posted:Like for example the entire world celebrates International Workers' Day on May First, which commemorates an event in US history, whereas many Americans don't even know about it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 21:23
|
|
|
Flayer posted:Well that's a load of old rubbish. May Day pre-dates Christianity, let alone a country that didn't even exist 250 years ago. Yes and Christmas isn't really about Jesus, it's truly a pagan holiday. You're so smart.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 21:24
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Both were Russian supremacist empires. Not exactly accurate, I'm afraid https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korenizatsiya Bob le Moche fucked around with this message at 21:43 on Oct 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:I don't have a desire to drop out of NATO. What I have is a desire for the US to stop acting unilaterally overseas with military action(which honestly has gotten way better) and for politicians to stop using the kinds of rhetoric that allow for these conflicts to take place in the first place. Bob le Moche posted:Not exactly accurate, I'm afraid A Buttery Pastry fucked around with this message at 21:39 on Oct 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:Trust me you don't have to convince me to be more cynical. It's way too easy to just throw your arms up and give up. I do believe there is good we can do in the world without dropping bombs. Foreign aid should be increased across the board. We should start providing things like sexual education (not abstinence you loving idiot republicans) and contraception across the world. We can improve the world by holding domestic firms to higher standards of environmental treatment by improving the standards on what we're willing to import. There are tons of ways to influence international politics that don't involve munitions. There's no question that there's room for a country such as America to be a force for good in the world. I just disagree with the premise that America attempts to be a force for good while being somehow misguided, seeing as how America has almost unequivocally not been a force for good in the world throughout history (post WWII). The more pertinent question is how can America do less bad poo poo in the world.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 21:48
|
|
|
Rated PG-34 posted:I just disagree with the premise that America attempts to be a force for good while being somehow misguided I will agree that it isn't reality, but I do think that's the reason people vote for warhawk politicians. The premise that America should be a force for good is the (publicly justifiable) basis for most of the military intervention we see today. The fact that it's a backdoor bailout to defense firms at the cost of innocent lives is sadly not something you're going to convince the population of. But I think you could realistically get a majority of Americans to agree that we should be less willing to use the military to achieve political objectives.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
gtrmp posted:Because if there's anyone who could get the Republicans to cross the aisle and cooperate with the Democrats, it'd be the woman who they've spent the past 24 years building up as the singular personification of everything that they hate about us. Hillary's experience and connections in Congress, including previous major failures which she's made sure to learn from, do in fact position her better to win over the support of moderate Republicans than the current president and Bernie Sanders, both of whom are similarly hated by the right but lack the political chops necessary to slip around that. Rated PG-34 posted:There's no question that there's room for a country such as America to be a force for good in the world. I just disagree with the premise that America attempts to be a force for good while being somehow misguided, seeing as how America has almost unequivocally not been a force for good in the world throughout history (post WWII). The more pertinent question is how can America do less bad poo poo in the world. Bad poo poo is going to happen in the world regardless, and the only question is whether we want to be complicit in it by action or by inaction. Are American drone strikes worse than, say, the Assad regime using chemical weapons in civilian areas?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 21:58
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Bad poo poo is going to happen in the world regardless, and the only question is whether we want to be complicit in it by action or by inaction. Are American drone strikes worse than, say, the Assad regime using chemical weapons in civilian areas? Considering American drone strikes are a big reason that the Assad regime was forced to use chemical weapons in civilian areas... I'm going to say yes. Only in this case because it directly led to the other. Main Paineframe posted:Hillary's experience and connections in Congress, including previous major failures which she's made sure to learn from, do in fact position her better to win over the support of moderate Republicans than the current president and Bernie Sanders, both of whom are similarly hated by the right but lack the political chops necessary to slip around that. Would you care to provide a shred of evidence that the right hates Bernie as much as Hillary?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 22:00
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:I will agree that it isn't reality, but I do think that's the reason people vote for warhawk politicians. I am not voting for a warhawk politician, I'm voting for Hillary Clinton. Donald "bomb the poo poo out of them" and "take the oil" Trump is the warhawk politician I am voting against.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 22:01
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:I am not voting for a warhawk politician, I'm voting for Hillary Clinton. The fact that political discourse is so bad here that both choices are warhawks doesn't mean Hillary isn't one. How you can categorize her statements during the second debate as anything but is beyond me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:I will agree that it isn't reality, but I do think that's the reason people vote for warhawk politicians. The premise that America should be a force for good is the (publicly justifiable) basis for most of the military intervention we see today. The fact that it's a backdoor bailout to defense firms at the cost of innocent lives is sadly not something you're going to convince the population of. But I think you could realistically get a majority of Americans to agree that we should be less willing to use the military to achieve political objectives. Right, but once we ask the question of how can America be less bad, we come up with a wide range of more interesting foreign policies that would have an immediate positive on the world. Stop interfering in foreign government affairs. Stop the War on Drugs. Stop drone strikes. Stop military aid to lovely regimes like Israel, Saudi Arabia, etc.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Bad poo poo is going to happen in the world regardless, and the only question is whether we want to be complicit in it by action or by inaction. Are American drone strikes worse than, say, the Assad regime using chemical weapons in civilian areas? The problem is not that bad poo poo happens and whether America is complicit in inaction, but more so that bad poo poo happens and America is responsible either directly or indirectly. Rated PG-34 fucked around with this message at 22:30 on Oct 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
NewForumSoftware posted:I think the idea that reinforcing Assad could lead to less bloodshed in Syria makes a hell of a lot more sense than any plan the US has put forth. Backing the Lion Assad: Making the best of a bad situation. Backing the Lyin' Hillary: A step too far my friends.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 22:46
|
|
|
Yak of Wrath posted:Backing the Lion Assad: Making the best of a bad situation. Civilian death is cool and good so long as I don't have to personally feel bad about it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 22:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 10:31 |
|
|
And thus we come full circle:SSNeoman posted:When you make a vote for third party to be "be in line with your morals", you are doing this to soothe yourself and nobody appreciates or cares. It's an inherently selfish action which is justified to nobody but yourself. im sorry for making people vote 4 dat gary, endorph but this is what 3rd p voters look like and its lol af
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 23:11
|
|
