Just posted this in the News & Politics forum, but this is a great article if you think that the two candidates are even comparable:

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/th...s-a7384421.html

I really hope it is Clinton, but I think it will be Trump.

I expect Hilary Clinton to win (but then I also expected remain to win - I know, not really comparable.. but still)

 

Bush-Clinton-Bush-Obama-Clinton- Jeb in 2020??

Jeb's totally finished. He didn't want to run either way and any hype he ever had is completely cratered.

Aaaaand this is how rich right-wingers turn poor people against their own interests and the 'snobbish metropolitan liberal elite'.

 

(granted, guilty on occasion)

 

Agreed. I really dislike it when I know people have voted without understanding the implications of what they've voted for, but all we can do is encourage them to understand the importance of politics and get them to learn more about the issue for the future so they do vote from a fully informed position, whatever that may be.

 

I understand the sentiment, when people say things like 'the unintelligent shouldn't vote', it's a reaction to what's perceived to be society doing its utmost to go in the opposite direction to what is believed to be good for the society in the future (and it is often when some right-wing populist, like now, somehow enraptures large swathes of those decidedly not part of the liberal elite, and probably desperate for a change, any change, with plans to take 'backwards' steps that won't benefit the people who are voting for him except perhaps in the very short-term).

So you think we should stop people from voting if it gets your (and mine) favoured result?

No, and maybe uneducated was the wrong word to use as there are a lot of people who don't go through education who are very intelligent. It's just me being angry and I get people's argument that everyone has the right to vote.

 

It's just to me, I really can't understand how all of a sudden it feels like we're going back in time almost to a place where racism is being more accepted ...it's just upsetting.

The main problem here is that the media have been able to get away with peddling outright lies and half truths for decades without penalty. I am supportive of a free press but the press should report the truth and their xenophobic and outright racist lies should come with consequences. Otherwise what the f*** is the point in legislation against hate speech.

There is no point in legislating against hate speech, I'd rather know who the racists are and on the whole society shuns them. It just reveals their true character and shows what twats they are rather than have them harbouring and hiding racist views leading to more extreme movements. I'd say this is why the EDL and BNP have faded into obscurity, they had the opportunity to make themselves laughing stocks. That said, newspapers should be fined or something for spreading misinformation absolutely.

 

As for the candidates neither of them particularly appeal to me but hopefully Hillary will win if only by virtue of not being Trump.

Hillary Clinton. The idea of Trump winning is appalling to me.

There is no point in legislating against hate speech, I'd rather know who the racists are and on the whole society shuns them. It just reveals their true character and shows what twats they are rather than have them harbouring and hiding racist views leading to more extreme movements. I'd say this is why the EDL and BNP have faded into obscurity, they had the opportunity to make themselves laughing stocks. That said, newspapers should be fined or something for spreading misinformation absolutely.

 

As for the candidates neither of them particularly appeal to me but hopefully Hillary will win if only by virtue of not being Trump.

EDL and BNP faded into obscurity because more mainstream-friendly movements like UKIP supplanted them lol. You see the same thing now with the Tories adopting UKIP's manifesto, eating up their voterbase and making proposals that would be unthinkable from a major party a decade ago. It's given UKIP a bit of an identity crisis.

Edited November 3, 20168 yr by Harve

That is sadly true to a degree but as loathsome as UKIP is to me there's no way they could reasonably be construed in a way that is as extreme as the BNP and EDL, likewise with the Tories (even now) in comparison to UKIP. UKIP is falling apart now mostly because they achieved their singular goal and they have no idea what to do with themselves. The Tories have always been awful and fickle and now they're just appealing to their voters, they sway with popular opinion among the right wing voter base. It's not an ideal situation in any way it's just better than the alternative. Imagine how much worse it'd have been if it was the BNP that got 3.8M votes last election.

Edited November 5, 20168 yr by Jacob Alan

This is as good a thread as any to put it in but a YouTuber who I'm very much a fan of did this video essay on the history of Hilary Clinton in the media. Certainly puts all the associations people have of her into context of the best part of the last 25 years.

 

Have just rediscovered this site which tests how much you agree with each of the candidates running and decided to take it again lol. I get 97% for Jill Stein (the whole anti-vax thing (as well as her not actually having any chance of winning) is a shame really because she'd be pretty good otherwise), 93% for Hillary, 42% for Gary Johnson and a whopping 13% for Trump. That's slightly higher for Hillary and slightly lower for Trump than I remember from the last time I did this ~

 

(also allows you to show the dropped out candidates - 95% for Bernie Sanders (R.I.P.), and despite how low that number for Trump is, he's still somehow more agreeable than all of the other Republicans bar Rand Paul who I get 20% for, with John Kasich being the only other one even above 10% :') and it also shows the 2012 candidates, giving me 91% for Obama (surprisingly low) and just 3% for Mitt Romney :lol:)

heard a rumour bré prefers donald trump to mitt romney :kink:

My results:

 

96% Jill Stein

93% Hilary Clinton

42% Gary Johnson

7% Donald Trump

Simpatizo con Hillary Clinton an la mayoría de los asuntos de las Elecciones Presidenciales del año 2016.

 

Los candidatos que apoyas...

Hillary Clinton

88% DEMOCRAT

Hillary Clinton

 

Jill Stein

87% GREEN

 

Gary Johnson

68% LIBERTARIAN

 

Donald Trump

18% REPUBLICAN

 

And 89% Bernie and 92% for Obama

 

7% Romney :P

Edited November 6, 20168 yr by ¡Michael Myers!

92% Hillary Clinton (Democrat)

83% Jill Stein (Green)

41% Gary Johnson (Libertarian)

15% Donald Trump (Republican)

 

95% Barack Obama (Democrat 2012)

21% Mitt Romney (Republican 2012)

 

79% Bernie Sanders

98% Jill Stein

97% Hilary Clinton

35% Gary Johnson

23% Donald Trump

 

95% Obama

12% Ron Paul

6% Romney

 

97% Sanders

62% O'Malley

22% Bush

12% Rand Paul

6% Huckabee

6% Cruz

5% Christie

5% Rubio

4% Carson

3% Fiorina

3% Graham

1% Santorum

 

 

In conclusion, I am so not a republican.

what's surprising is that there were so many Republican candidates that are apparently even worse than Trump. Some scored as low as 5% for me.

95% Hilary Clinton

93% Jill Stein

36% Gary Johnson

25% Donald Trump (oops)

 

98% Obama :wub:

21% Ron Paul

6% Romney

 

89% Sanders

74% O'Malley

22% Bush

11% Cruz

 

97% Hillary

95% Jill Stein

94% Bernie Sanders

40% Rand Paul

36% Gary Johnson

8% Trump

8% Ted Cruz

 

the shift between left and right between the US/UK is still baffling :lol: at least this proves identifying as centre right in the UK does not make me a Trump supporter :mellow: (as has been legitimately asked before)