Edwarelinski hit the nail on the head. There are many more issues to consider in the upcoming elections, beyond warmongering and the neocons:
A Donald victory would likely hasten financial collapse and although many in the PP community are ready (if not eager) for collapse to occur, we should "be careful what we ask for because we just might get it".
I cannot vote for Donald because there's so much more at stake here. Environment. Reproductive rights. Worker wages and fairness. Community. Equality. Wealth gap between rich & poor… Donald could care less about women. His misogyny is as strong as his racism.
The logic of voting for Donald based on war/neocons is valid. But there's so much more at stake here.
EE-
Yes, my comments were directed at your comments. :) But not at you per se.
Its interesting about the MYL fiasco - that particular problem was created by a rapacious woman CEO, and then a bunch of other women brought some serious focus to the issue. ("pay the mortgage, or buy a pair of epi-pens"). Was the gender of the CEO important? I don't think so. Nasty people come in all genders. But the women looking after their kids - gender did seem to be key there.
Elizabeth Warren creating the CFPB was awesome. She's a powerhouse, and that's why the elites want her nowhere near the Oval Office. Not even as VP. She'd outshine Clinton simply because she has a very strong ethical sense and she's incredibly persuasive. There's a reason she resonates so well; she's authentic. And of course if Clinton's medical issues end up taking her out of office, Warren would then be president! They blocked her from becoming the head of the CFPB, so she went off and became senator instead. I'm a huge fan.
Clinton? She's more like the MYL CEO in my book. I don't like her policy decisions as Sec State, I don't like all the money she took from all the different companies, and I don't like the pay-to-play at the State Dept, and all the banker money she's accepted - she's the Anti-Liz-Warren for me. Is my dislike of Clinton because she's female? I don't think so, any more than I like Warren because she's female.
I understand your interest in the composition of the supreme court; I feel the same way there too. But I simply can't ignore Clinton's record of accepting money and then doing favors - and also who she's accepted money from, and the kind of policy decisions she's made. $25 million from Saudi Arabia!
Ultimately, I assume if someone is corrupt, what they say simply doesn't matter. What they do will be driven entirely by who supplies them with money - it will have no relation to what they've talked about on the campaign trail.
Compare the contributors - Sanders, Clinton, and Warren. In some sense, we're voting for who a person's contributors are. Seriously, go look.
Thank you for the clarification.I read open secrets on a regular basis as well as Democracy now.Warren has stated time and again she has no interest in becoming president.I believe she is most useful to all of us exactly where she is.Wreaking havoc on the most deserving is what she does best.In fact she and Saunders are making it known they will have a major problem with Clinton if she attempts to sweep in her financial cronies.She was the only Female democrat on the hill that would not endorse her last year.So even small,that is progress.Again when someone shows you who they are,believe them.Warren has shown that time and again. Oh and Dave,many womens issues are tough for guys to understand…
The assumption in your logic is that continuation of the neocon war agenda and it's attendant death destruction and suffering will be contained to 'over there' regional MENA or Eastern European destruction with a bit of Western blowback.
However, the rhetoric, actions and stated objectives point to a much more dire showdown. CM is right that Obama, for all his faults has checked the deepest aspirations of the NeoCon's in Syria, where the consequence is direct conflict with Russia. Based on her rhetoric, and record, her demonstrated character and fealty to the Neo Con interests it is unlikely that Hillary would show such restraint.
What is at stake is potential thermonuclear war with Russia. Consider the environmental, reproductive, wealth inequality, racial and gender equality consequences of that. Consider it's effect on workers wages and community.
There are NO safe spaces in the aftermath of a Nuclear exchange. the most progressive appointment to the Supreme court will not matter in that scenario.
Economic collapse, and social conflict is baked into the cake at this point so is global warming, and continued environmental degradation. The fallout from these issues is going to be hard and ugly. The fallout from the NeoCon end game is a whole different level of ugly.
The logic tree is this:
Can Trump check the necon's? maybe… small chance.
Can Hillary check the neocons? No. Hillary is a Neocon
Banker's Slave posted a video on Trump in the DD comments for 9/27/16, which I've reposted below. One of the things that struck me was a story starting at 5 minutes and 44 seconds; how Trump was trying to use his power and influence to get ownership of an old woman's home in Florida, so he could put up parking for his Casino across the street. The message I came away with: don't delude yourself into believing this person gives a rat's ass about the little guy; he doesn't. https://youtu.be/vgYfkvfjvn4
So if I vote for Trump in the election, it will be while holding my breath and plugging my nose. This is not a man I like or admire. All he's got going in my book is that he isn't Hillary.
And this is if it even matters who we vote for.
[Correction: "Florida" should have been "NJ". -Been listening to news about Hurricane Matthew approaching the Florida coast…]
Same here. I don't mistake Trump for anything except him not being Hillary, who I judge is most likely to get us involved in a war with Russia for reasons that make no sense to me.
If my kids get drafted to go die in a war because we couldn't figure out how to say no to a group of neocons I will consider that a massive personal failure on my part.
If she does get elected I will continue to shine a bright light on what's actually happening knowing that puts me and my family at great personal risk of reprisals from a rather inhospitable group of people who consider any boundary setting the same thing as a personal attack.
For them, you are either with them or against them. There's no room for your opinion or thoughts. Any of us who disagree with initiating hostilities with Russia (and later China, etc and so forth) will be branded as traitors or enemy sympathizers or terrorists or whatever works best to stifle our input and ability to say "no" to whatever nonsense they've cooked up.
I am not predicting anything here, merely extrapolating the trend over the past 15 years.
And I may chicken out at the end…I may decide in the moment that it's not worth risking everything to make a point nobody will care about or remember. Sometimes you have to let the alcoholic drink themselves to the bottom of the pit. Anything you say before then just angers them.
I don't know…but on my way here to Hong Kong I took off my belt and shoes, and stood with my arms over my head in the millimeter wave scanner machine, even though I know that none of those actions do anything to improve safety, but are routine acts of conformance demanded by the deep state.
And I submit, so perhaps I overly glorify myself in thinking that I will stand tall if Hillary gets elected and allows the necons to shove us towards war.
All I know is that when I looked on the magazine rack here at the hotel this is what I saw staring back at me:
You see the choice presented? You either believe in our election results or you have fallen for a Putin trap.
Never mind your investigations that show outside hacking is an impossibility but inside hacking is a piece of cake. And forget about the wildly and impossibly unbelievable election returns over the past four presidential elections.
And don't ask why Putin seemed to care about deploying his hackers to install a Tea Party candidate Governor in KY, or managed to get Kerry to fold within hours of the statistically impossible win for Bush in Ohio.
None of that is relevant. Either you are with us (the system) or you are with Putin. Got it?
This is how they work. How does one stand against this?
This is what Hillary represents to me…more of this. And I am tired of this.
We have a multi-exojoule energy predicament before us and we cannot be spending our time fiddling around with ego-driven fantasies of total world power and domination. Every minute we spend, and every BTU we waste going down the neocon path makes our eventual date with reality that much more difficult.
When is enough enough? When is it finally time to say we don't have time for the sort of rubbish printed on the most recent cover of Time, or what the neocons have in store for us?
If not now, when? It's always a bad time to elect a buffoon, and every election is presented as if this one vote will either make or destroy us. Ever since Nixon, always the same story.
Well, I'm done with the charade, and so are an astonishing number of young people I talk to. They know this is all BS and and this is what has "them" (TPTB) so worried.
Hence the Time cover.
It's setting you up for anomalous election results that don't make any sense…unless we can blame it on Putin…then…ah…than…do you see? We'll be completely justified in attacking someone who dares to mess with the very core of democracy itself; voting! He will have desecrated our temple. Bad juju that.
To which I say; Don't Fall For It!
(Same as the Time title, just an entirely different take).
BTW, I didn't go looking for this (I know, it's hard to imagine, right). It was a link from a news site interestingly enough. Naturally, the name caught my eye. So, I was thinking a house party for the second debate this Sunday, with this product. Maybe colour the bags green, blue, red, and yellow to denote voting choices. Toss the "bag" into the opposing team's corn hole. The candidate getting the most "bags" in the corn hole obligates the party's attendees to vote for that candidate. Easy. https://www.walmart.com/ip/Go-Gater-Bean-Bag-Toss/23369596
Yes, I also hope that is not the case. Chris' podcast with Stockman was the opposite of the discussion with Mark Morey. Before this podcast with Stockman I thought the man was making some sense considering his resume, but now I do not.
The lesser of two evils has been discussed everywhere and how it got us to this place but the reason I'm supporting Stein is that she stands for the same principles that I do. She went to Standing Rock. Case closed.
Not in my name. When you vote for someone you don't trust or believe in, you are endorsing that person nonetheless. I am voting for Stein who represents my beliefs and am knocked off my chair that Chris is for Trump. I would not want him to endorse Hillary either.
In Pope Francis' book "The Name of God is Mercy" he talks at length about corruption vs. sin and how corruption is the true evil. Corrupt people feel their sinful actions are justified and don't need forgiveness, while sinners recognize that they have done wrong.
Do I think Trump and Clinton are corrupt and merciless? Yes, but Clinton's corruption has lead to the death of tens of thousands, all while benefiting multi-nationals. If given the chance, maybe Trump would do the same, but I feel like a vote for Hilary is one that sanctions corruption.
Its all just Disney land make believe theatrics. You are a debt slave regardless of who occupies the White house but they never tell you that do they? An FRN is an instrument of debt. All the FRNs in your pocket belong to the creator of the note…and that is not you or me. Will Stein tell you about Universal Commercial Code and that you are owned property and that your body is collateral for all the public loans…nope did not think so!
I've made this abundantly clear but I will re-clarify just to be even more crystal clear.
I am not for Trump.
I am against thermonuclear war.
As an aside, I do think the presidency has become to big for its britches and I've postulated that Trump would be such a buffoonish disaster in the office that he might help to knock the office back down to a more manageable size.
But then I was reminded that GWB didn't manage to do that and so I had to reassess that idea.
Chris…I have never felt so distressed and torn over an election. I want to do the right thing and there appears to be no "right" thing to do. It will be at best a strategic compromise, but I must vote and have to make my vote count. I applaud your candor and know that you have stepped into an uncomfortable space to talk about this, but I see a new gravity in your postings in the last Month. The Russia connection is alarming. Everything is part of the big picture and once again you have given us an overview that might change our lives. Sincere Thanks
[quote=kfetty]Not in my name. When you vote for someone you don't trust or believe in, you are endorsing that person nonetheless. I am voting for Stein who represents my beliefs and am knocked off my chair that Chris is for Trump. I would not want him to endorse Hillary either.
[/quote]
I’m also voting for Stein, and while I don’t agree with Chris voting for Trump per se, I respect and understand his reasons for doing so. That’s kind of how this how democracy thing is supposed to work, and I’m under no illusions that all of us here at PP, while sharing some core beliefs and interpretations, all share the same core beliefs and interpretations about everything.
Plus, I think Chris and many others realize that voting for any of the two main candidates is like tossing a stick into a river and hoping it diverts the path of the water, whereas voting for a third party candidate is like tossing your stick into the nearby forest. I’ll still vote Green because I can say, at the end, that I voted my conscience…and because that way I can then bitch about whomever gets elected.