BREAKING: even brown negroes dislike Obama

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Originally Posted by MrSparkle001 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Don't be so sure. Obama was elected. The american public is dumb as shit. Individually we may be intelligent and informed but as a public we're fucking stupid.

Obama won because his entire campaign centered on one word. "Change". After 8 years of Bush, that's what everyone wanted.

Obama wasn't a terrible president, in fact he did demonstrably more good than harm, the problem is that it wasn't in any areas where average Joe dipshit takes notice. He was clearly no Billiam.

TL;DR- Hillary represents more of the same and people aren't angry, they are getting tired.

Originally Posted by katrik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't think Clinton has a chance anymore. I wouldn't vote for her. Mostly because I'm not a liberal retard.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Lune]

Hillary is perfectly electable. What fucking country do you think we live in where awful and horrendously flawed candidates are 'un-electable'? Hillary is an insanely good fund-raiser, she's extremely well-connected, and she's embedded in the power structure like a tick. Money and power buy offices, votes are only political currency. And that's especially true when your typical voter's capacity for critical thought and ability to see beyond the left/right dichotomy looks something like this:

Originally Posted by katrik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't think Clinton has a chance anymore. I wouldn't vote for her. Mostly because I'm not a liberal retard.

[khanable]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Hillary is perfectly electable. What fucking country do you think we live in where awful and horrendously flawed candidates are 'un-electable'? Hillary is an insanely good fund-raiser, she's extremely well-connected, and she's embedded in the power structure like a tick. Money and power buy offices, votes are only political currency. And that's especially true when your typical voter's capacity for critical thought and ability to see beyond the left/right dichotomy looks something like this:

You're a good poster, Lune

[Humerox]

Well we can probably narrow our choices down to two. A plutocracy that gives as little as possible to the populace or a plutocracy that throws a few more scraps our way.

Take your pick.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Hillary is perfectly electable. What fucking country do you think we live in where awful and horrendously flawed candidates are 'un-electable'? Hillary is an insanely good fund-raiser, she's extremely well-connected, and she's embedded in the power structure like a tick. Money and power buy offices, votes are only political currency. And that's especially true when your typical voter's capacity for critical thought and ability to see beyond the left/right dichotomy looks something like this:

She's been beating around the bush for too long about her presidential aspirations. Also Monsanto. She didn't make it through the primary twelve years ago and since then her name has been dragged through the mud so many times I've lost count.

[Patriam1066]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Hillary is perfectly electable. What fucking country do you think we live in where awful and horrendously flawed candidates are 'un-electable'? Hillary is an insanely good fund-raiser, she's extremely well-connected, and she's embedded in the power structure like a tick. Money and power buy offices, votes are only political currency. And that's especially true when your typical voter's capacity for critical thought and ability to see beyond the left/right dichotomy looks something like this:

Yeah. My favorite is how half of the country believed "hope and change!" Lol

$342,000,000,000.

That's the most recent (2014) trade deficit with China. Both parties are a fucking joke.
Libertarian 2016, because even anarchists would be better than the ass holes running this country right into the ground.

https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5700.html

[loramin]

Originally Posted by Patriam1066 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Both parties are a fucking joke.
Libertarian 2016, because even anarchists would be better than the ass holes running this country right into the ground.

[Lune]

Originally Posted by Patriam1066 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yeah. My favorite is how half of the country believed "hope and change!" Lol

$342,000,000,000.

That's the most recent (2014) trade deficit with China. Both parties are a fucking joke.
Libertarian 2016, because even anarchists would be better than the ass holes running this country right into the ground.

https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5700.html

It breaks my heart that people would flee the current situation into the arms of a market liberal platform, and then justify it with a situation which is perfectly acceptable under that platform.

Nothing about pure libertarianism has a problem with massive trade deficits. US businesses are profiting from this situation immensely, precisely because they were allowed to follow the path of least resistance to their profit (outsourcing manufacturing/some services) overseas, and depressing wages at home.

Don't like depressed wages and trade deficits? Too bad, that's capitalism. You're competing with a chinaman for the value of your productivity, and you're losing. If someone wants to fix that, they aren't a libertarian.

[katrik]

Did.. You forget about Benghazi.. And her resignation..?

Lol.

Also, conservatism is a different way of thinking, it's how I was raised. My girlfriend is a liberal nutterhead.. And we don't see eye to eye on everything.

[Patriam1066]

Assuming the government isn't corrupt, you're correct. Assuming that the government structurally created this problem, you're wrong. A corporate controlled government cannot be used to thwart corporate profiteerism. However, once that government is severely limited in its power and scope, these issues can be addressed. For my part, I don't buy products made in China. Sucks though, especially with phones. I'm using an iPhone that I got a long ass time ago (before I realized what the trade deficit was with China).

Lune, let's say leftists are right about all of their policies. You'd probably point to sweden and Denmark as an example. I don't know why yall don't get that the first issue to address is corruption. Also, state governments are legalizing weed, reforming prisons, and making education and healthcare more efficient (Michigan is trying to cut out insurance companies entirely and allow patients to directly purchase healthcare from doctors). The federal government is the problem, which is why I, and many like me, are steadily moving more towards libertarianism.

Socialism can work, so can capitalism. They work in harmony in places like germany, chile, finland, estonia, Poland... Etc. Looking at reforms in Eastern Europe, specifically Poland, estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania ... Capitalism and moving towards weaker government is what helped to reform these countries. The first step in any system is honestly assessing the problem. The #1 issue beyond right/left debate in the US is to acknowledge that the government is fundamentally unresponsive to what people actually need. I don't see how that gets fixed without sendingn a message that they can be replaced / limited. IE libertarianism