not wanted...............

[aubiefifty 18,231]

[jj3jordan 2,171]

Oh yeah he is a real expert. Maybe he could write a fake letter about it.

[aubiefifty 18,231]

i would believe him all day long versus you cultists. besides all i have to do is look at the piece of crap you guys sold your souls for........

[bigbird 60,939]

2 hours ago, aubiefifty said:

i would believe him all day long versus you cultists. besides all i have to do is look at the piece of crap you guys sold your souls for........

Let me ask something. If there was a candidate that was a blow hard incessant liar, with a terrible record on race relations, had a long track record of limited accomplishments and missteps and he was the democratic nominee running against Trump, would you vote for them?

If so, wouldn't that be the same as what you accuse so many on the right as to have done?

 

It sucks that we didn't have a better choice in 2016 and it sucks now that we have a very similar case in this election. I didn't vote for Trump in '16. I won't vote for him this time either. That doesn't mean I will vote for the other bad choice either, but many will. Just like it was a vote against HRC last time most on the left will cast a vote against Trump. 

You may not like it but the views on the issues may shift across the aisle, but the behavior being displayed by both parties and their supporters is the exact same.

[aubiefifty 18,231]

2 hours ago, bigbird said:

Let me ask something. If there was a candidate that was a blow hard incessant liar, with a terrible record on race relations, had a long track record of limited accomplishments and missteps and he was the democratic nominee running against Trump, would you vote for them?

If so, wouldn't that be the same as what you accuse so many on the right as to have done?

 

It sucks that we didn't have a better choice in 2016 and it sucks now that we have a very similar case in this election. I didn't vote for Trump in '16. I won't vote for him this time either. That doesn't mean I will vote for the other bad choice either, but many will. Just like it was a vote against HRC last time most on the left will cast a vote against Trump. 

You may not like it but the views on the issues may shift across the aisle, but the behavior being displayed by both parties and their supporters is the exact same.

i disagree bird. he dissed vet and pow's. he refused to do anything about bounties on americans heads. he tells the world how wonderful putin and fat boy from north korea how wonderful even tho they are both mass murderers. no sir it is not even close.  i can go on and on but i need my coffee. besides i got to post an auburn secondary article for you.

[GiveEmElle 1,559]

2 hours ago, bigbird said:

Let me ask something. If there was a candidate that was a blow hard incessant liar, with a terrible record on race relations, had a long track record of limited accomplishments and missteps and he was the democratic nominee running against Trump, would you vote for them?

If so, wouldn't that be the same as what you accuse so many on the right as to have done?

 

It sucks that we didn't have a better choice in 2016 and it sucks now that we have a very similar case in this election. I didn't vote for Trump in '16. I won't vote for him this time either. That doesn't mean I will vote for the other bad choice either, but many will. Just like it was a vote against HRC last time most on the left will cast a vote against Trump. 

You may not like it but the views on the issues may shift across the aisle, but the behavior being displayed by both parties and their supporters is the exact same.

This is ridiculous. We had a choice in 2016. You had  a woman with a lifetime of political experience who had an accomplished record of policies for the greater good. And then you had a game show host with ZERO experience who has never done anything g that wasn’t completely self serving. You had a choice. Maybe you didn’t like her because she was a strong woman. Many men are intimidated by that. Maybe you bought into a all the right wing propaganda about her. Maybe you just hate the left. But she was the better choice. She was a good choice. 3.5 million more Americans said so.

Now we've got this same “no choice” argument again. But again, you have a politically experienced candidate who possesses empathy for his fellow Americans and you’ve got the game show host who has now let 170,000 Americans die. You can snub your nose at Biden if you like, but don’t you say you don’t have a choice. You do. You just don’t care enough to make the correct choice. Even though the soul of this nation depends on it. 

[aubiefifty 18,231]

let me say this. there are people out there that still believe hill was hooking girls out of the basement of a pizza place for goodness sake's.

[Mikey 16,781]

Dan Rather: A paragon of honesty and fair reporting! That's funny.

PS: The elderly and infirm can do what they have done for decades. That's request an absentee ballot. There is no problem except for the Dems. They fear that they cannot win without cheating.

[aubiefifty 18,231]

6 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Dan Rather: A paragon of honesty and fair reporting! That's funny.

PS: The elderly and infirm can do what they have done for decades. That's request an absentee ballot. There is no problem except for the Dems. They fear that they cannot win without cheating.

your boy just admitted he was trying to cheat so you can get out of here with that bull. HE admitted it which makes you look bad.

[aubiefifty 18,231]

mikey go throw a banana at a black person and see what happens............... and leave me your auburn memorabilia in your will.......

[DKW 86 7,899]

10 hours ago, bigbird said:

Let me ask something. If there was a candidate that was a blow hard incessant liar, with a terrible record on race relations, had a long track record of limited accomplishments and missteps and he was the democratic nominee running against Trump, would you vote for them?

If so, wouldn't that be the same as what you accuse so many on the right as to have done?

 

It sucks that we didn't have a better choice in 2016 and it sucks now that we have a very similar case in this election. I didn't vote for Trump in '16. I won't vote for him this time either. That doesn't mean I will vote for the other bad choice either, but many will. Just like it was a vote against HRC last time most on the left will cast a vote against Trump. 

You may not like it but the views on the issues may shift across the aisle, but the behavior being displayed by both parties and their supporters is the exact same.

Ralph Northam, Racist Democrat Governor of Virginia, blackface wearer...says hi...

[McLoofus 35,182]

10 hours ago, bigbird said:

Let me ask something. If there was a candidate that was a blow hard incessant liar, with a terrible record on race relations, had a long track record of limited accomplishments and missteps and he was the democratic nominee running against Trump, would you vote for them?

If so, wouldn't that be the same as what you accuse so many on the right as to have done?

It sucks that we didn't have a better choice in 2016 and it sucks now that we have a very similar case in this election. I didn't vote for Trump in '16. I won't vote for him this time either. That doesn't mean I will vote for the other bad choice either, but many will. Just like it was a vote against HRC last time most on the left will cast a vote against Trump. 

You may not like it but the views on the issues may shift across the aisle, but the behavior being displayed by both parties and their supporters is the exact same.

More normalizing. More false equivalencies. 

It is not the exact same because the Democratic party has not produced a pile of s*** anything remotely like trump in the 45 years that I've been alive.

It's a shame that you continue to beat this drum.

[bigbird 60,939]

23 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

Ralph Northam, Racist Democrat Governor of Virginia, blackface wearer...says hi...

It was a big misunderstanding, he was just foolin'.  You're just bringing him up because you're a cultist.

[bigbird 60,939]

14 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

More normalizing. More false equivalencies. 

It is not the exact same because the Democratic party has not produced a pile of s*** anything remotely like trump in the 45 years that I've been alive.

It's a shame that you continue to beat this drum.

What am I normalizing?

What exactly am I trying to make equivalent? Is it the fact that many voted against HRC in 2016 just like many will vote against Trump in 2020? If so, guilty.

 

It's a simple question. Would you vote for a candidate like that against Trump?

[McLoofus 35,182]

7 minutes ago, bigbird said:

I'm not saying it's the same, I'm asking would you vote for a candidate like that against Trump?

You are saying that it's the same- like, you literally said it's the same- and it clearly is not. This conscientious objector bit is bogus. You're doing gymnastics to create fanciful scenarios that have absolutely nothing to do with our current reality.

But because you deserve that respect, I will play along with this completely bogus scenario. If the Democratic party somehow came up with a candidate nearly as dangerous or unqualified as trump, then yes, I would still vote blue because if all things are equal then I will vote for the progressive party. 

But that is not even remotely close to what happened in 2016 and Republicans cannot in good conscience use that same bull**** rationale this year.

[homersapien 12,230]

8 hours ago, GiveEmElle said:

.......Now we've got this same “no choice” argument again. But again, you have a politically experienced candidate who possesses empathy for his fellow Americans and you’ve got the game show host who has now let 170,000 Americans die. You can snub your nose at Biden if you like, but don’t you say you don’t have a choice. You do. You just don’t care enough to make the correct choice. Even though the soul of this nation depends on it. 

This ^

I don't understand how any thinking person can compare Biden and Trump and imply there's any sort of equivalence or they represent two equally bad choices. 

Trump is a monster - a narcissistic sociopath.  He represents a clear danger to our democracy.

Biden is obviously the more rational - and moral - choice even if you aren't all that crazy about him.

Even a lot of life-long Republicans understand and appreciate that.

 

[McLoofus 35,182]

And just to be clear, it was bull**** rationale in 2016, but at least people had plausible deniability that it really was going to be as bad as it has been. That deniability is clearly and obviously no longer plausible.

[bigbird 60,939]

55 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

You are saying that it's the same- like, you literally said it's the same- and it clearly is not. This conscientious objector bit is bogus. You're doing gymnastics to create fanciful scenarios that have absolutely nothing to do with our current reality.

But because you deserve that respect, I will play along with this completely bogus scenario. If the Democratic party somehow came up with a candidate nearly as dangerous or unqualified as trump, then yes, I would still vote blue because if all things are equal then I will vote for the progressive party. 

But that is not even remotely close to what happened in 2016 and Republicans cannot in good conscience use that same bull**** rationale this year.

I appreciate it, but I think you're reading too much into it. I'm not saying that to be rude as much as let me try and clarify better.

You're correct in that Biden/Trump are not HRC/Trump. However, there were many that viewed HRC '16 as dangerous and unqualified. It's the same way that many view Trump '20. The respective electorate may be polar in their views, but the fact remains a lot are voting solely against the other candidate rather than supporting their parties nomination.

I'm saying that, the many that voted against HRC are similar to the many voting against Trump. Not in that they have similar views or beliefs but more in their motivation and desire for the other candidate not to succeed.

 

My question, while hypothetical, was only to see if given the choice between one you think is a terrible person and a bad candidate verses one you can't trust and despise, would you hold your nose and vote for the first candidate? If so, then that would place you in the same boat as many that did the same in '16.  

That's the point. For 4 years many have been chastised for their vote against HRC by the left and when the situation is flipped, they fervently are doing the same. 

 

[McLoofus 35,182]

3 minutes ago, bigbird said:

I appreciate it, but I think you're reading too much into it. I'm not saying that to be rude as much as let me try and clarify better.

You're correct in that Biden/Trump are not HRC/Trump. However, there were many that viewed HRC '16 in the same way that many view Trump '20. The respective electorate may be polar in their views, but the fact remains a lot are voting solely against the other candidate rather than supporting their parties nomination.

I'm saying that, the many that voted against HRC are similar to the many voting against Trump. Not in that they have similar views or beliefs but more in their motivation and desire for the other candidate not to succeed.

 

My question, while hypothetical, was only to see if given the choice between one you think is a terrible person and a bad candidate verses one you can't trust and despise, would you hold your nose and vote for the first candidate? If so, then that would place you in the same boat as many that did the same in '16.  

That's the point. For 4 years many have been chastised for their vote against HRC by the left and when the situation is flipped, they fervently are doing the same. 

 

Except the situation isn't flipped. 

It's not that your point isn't understood. It's that it's invalid.

[McLoofus 35,182]

Also, it's interesting that you're painting trump's 2016 as victims when they clearly earned the disdain they received.

[bigbird 60,939]

2 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

Except the situation isn't flipped. 

It's not that your point isn't understood. It's that it's invalid.

How is it not?

'16, candidate that a lot didn't necessarily like vs candidate they despised.

'20, candidate that a lot don't necessarily like vs candidate they despised.

The only difference is the letter after their names. The fact is, this is election is a referendum on Trump just like '16 was a referendum on HRC.

You say it's invalid but that's only because you're seemingly ignoring the obvious similarities between the two cycles. Many openly admit they are voting against Trump rather than for Biden just like many in '16 openly admitted they voted for Trump rather than voting for HRC.

[bigbird 60,939]

1 minute ago, McLoofus said:

Also, it's interesting that you're painting trump's 2016 as victims when they clearly earned the disdain they received.

What?!?!

How, in anything I said, did you get me trying to paint anyone as a victim? That's really strange.

[homersapien 12,230]

3 minutes ago, bigbird said:

That's the point. For 4 years many have been chastised for their vote against HRC by the left and when the situation is flipped, they fervently are doing the same. 

 

One big difference.  The hate for Hillary was largely the result of a decade long effort by the right wing to demonize here (Benghazi!!).  And that hate was irrationally vehement.

But we don't know how good of a POTUS she would have made, probably much better than most of her haters realize. (And I have had thinking Republicans admit as much to me.)  On the other hand, after four years, we do know how Trump has performed as POTUS.  And we  completely understand his character - which is the ultimate basis for that record.

But again, getting back to your original premise, there is no rational argument to suggest any sort of equivalency between Biden and Trump.  It's a choice. A clear choice.

The fact that many people who made a terrible choice in 2016 simply because they hated Hillary more than they liked Trump has nothing to do with choice we have in 2020.

 

[McLoofus 35,182]

11 minutes ago, bigbird said:

How is it not?

'16, candidate that a lot didn't necessarily like vs candidate they despised.

'20, candidate that a lot don't necessarily like vs candidate they despised.

The only difference is the letter after their names. The fact is, this is election is a referendum on Trump just like '16 was a referendum on HRC.

You say it's invalid but that's only because you're seemingly ignoring the obvious similarities between the two cycles. Many openly admit they are voting against Trump rather than for Biden just like many in '16 openly admitted they voted for Trump rather than voting for HRC.

You're creating similarities that aren't there and ignoring the far greater and more acute differences. 

As for victims, I'd like you to really explore your own language. Homer quoted you above.

[bigbird 60,939]

7 minutes ago, homersapien said:

On the other hand, after four years, we do know how Trump has performed as POTUS

100% fact.

That doesn't change the fact that this cycle, just like the last, is more about a vote against one candidate than a vote for the other.

7 minutes ago, homersapien said:

But again, getting back to your original premise, there is no rational argument to suggest any sort of equivalency between Biden and Trump.

I'd love to get back to the original premise. The original premise is about the election and the similar motivations between the two cycles and how one side, after years of criticisms for a vote against, are gleefully prepared to do the same thing.