The plea of the worthless Democrats…..they have caved on the idea of limited interventionism…..this will NOT make America safer!
Normally I do not pay much attention to the US elections….they are so boring and mundane that it is just a waste of my time….but this year, 2016, has been a completely different horse all together….as the general creeps closer and closer….there are a couple of things that need to be considered.
Our choices are a divisive candidate and a war hawk which is more neocon than Dem……fascinating choices indeed….
I have read many opinion pieces both pro and con….as an anti-war person I can safey say that neither of these two candidates will get my vote but beyond that many are seeing it as a necessity to elect the war hawk over the…..I’m not sure what to call the other…..
An explanation for why defeating Donald Trump—despite what we know about Hillary Clinton—should be the left’s primary national electoral objective this November
In 1991, former Klansman and American Nazi Party functionary David Duke ran for governor of Louisiana and made the runoff election against Democrat Edwin Edwards, the popular but scandal-plagued three-term former governor. Duke had made the runoff between the two top vote-getters since no one received a majority in the first primary. Duke had received just over 31% of the vote in the first primary, and Edwards had just over 33% in a twelve-person field.
I do not agree…..that is just a long way of saying “vote for the best of two evils”…..I will not do that……She is not acceptable to me for one good reason……
The modern Democratic Party has had a potent anti-war wing since Eugene McCarthy called for a swift withdrawal from Vietnam during the 1968 primary. Democratic anti-war highlights in this millennium include California Rep. Barbara Lee’s opposition to the 2001 Afghanistan invasion, the 126 House Democratic votes against the Iraq War resolution in 2002 and Howard Dean’s 2004 campaign.
Unfortunately, Hillary Clinton does not follow in this tradition, leaving Democrats who want to “give peace a chance” a difficult choice in November.
Source: Clinton’s Foreign Policy Would Be More Like Bush’s Than Obama’s | The Fiscal Times
Just what this country needs another GW war hawk running foreign policy. (Sarcasm intended)
And to show where her, Clinton, mind will be if elected…..
In an interview, Paul Wolfowitz, 72, an advisor to former President Bush, discusses the dangers of a Donald Trump presidency, why he will likely vote for the Democrat’s candidate this year and mistakes made during the Iraq war.
Source: Paul Wolfowitz Says He Will Likely Vote for Clinton – SPIEGEL ONLINE
You should remember this warwonger for he and Cheney and Rumsfield were the cheerleaders that convinced GW into the 2003 Iraq invasion and we know that turned out….now don’t we?
I will NOT vote for this woman…….I will search for an alternative……….I’m thinking Green!
chuq, I’m honestly thinking Green too. Either that or write-in Bernie as I’ve said. I know there isn’t a chance for either but if there are enough votes for “other” candidates to actually be referred to; at least those in the loop will see those of us who are not; CARE!
And you can call the “Other Guy” a tertiary syphilitic; megalomania. ~~dru~~
I have Green on my ballot but they will not allow a write-in…it will not be counted….and LOL….chuq
What ever happened to “For the people, by the people….NO WAIT…I know! ~~dru~~
So in fact you are not represented in the coming election.
I know, that is the American voting system.
I really would like to say something positive about the American voting-system, but honestly, I can’t find anything.
Major improvement is in order!
Oh so true Marie-Jacqueline so don’t even try. We are all idiots for letting it get to this. ~~dru~~
I’m Dutch, so from the Netherlands. Every type of more or less has something positive, be it small. However the American system takes the voter not serious, the voting system discourage in many ways the average voter in going to vote. A 2 year periode for electing a president, so my check money spent, money that comes from all kind of people’s and organizations who have all an hidden agenda.
A democratic and a republican candidate that have a changes to bee chosen. Independent candidates of different other parties have no change at all to get at least their ideas across.
So, the sum of it is undemocratic, those with money have to much influence. What annoyed me is that the loudmouthed keep convinced it is the best system in the world. It isn’t and the competent, but with no money to back them up have no chance to be a positive influence.
I really feel for those Americans that have no influence or say in the government of their country.
Sorry some mistakes in some sentences. Hope you get the idea! Type answer on mobile phone, not that accurate!
You are accurate…on all accounts….but I am use to it…I seldom vote for the “major” candidates for they do not represent me…chuq
Ping appreciated…thanx chuq
The less attention the potential voters pay to the elections the more likely they will end up getting a government that will bite them in the butt. Votes do have consequences and people do eventually wind up with the government they deserve. People who don’t vote have no bitch coming. People who do vote accomplish nothing because elections are decided by something or someone else other than the voters these days.
Wow, so the major party choice is between someone whose own party is so divided it will keep him in check versus someone who will usher in the police state and send us marching off to foreign wars with the full backing of the nation’s “elite”. It’s beginning to look like the days of the Weimar Republic are drawing to a close. Interesting times.
History repeating itself…..or “Recurrent cycles”….thanx for the visit…..chuq