Hillary Clinton

As I said earlier, I gave a few examples in that post, not a comprehensive list of the GOP's attempts to disenfranchise voters this year. It's happening everywhere. There's a reason you keep seeing stories about record lines at polling places all over the country. I also wasn't wrong about what I said earlier. You simply disagree, and believe that those particular attacks on democracy are fair, reasonable, or justified.

You continue to argue that lighting the house on fire because you found a gnat is a fair compromise to secure the place. I find that position outrageous, and stand by everything I've said in this thread. The fact that the law in some places allow these attacks to occur is horrific. The technical legality of some of these acts doesn't remotely make them right or fair, though.

"

Jennik wrote:

On that Black Panther photo:

Two men, on their own,

The fact that they don't appear to be part of a larger group tells me it's less likely that they are part of an organized effort. I haven't heard of enough such incidents to consider it worrisome.

"

Jennik wrote:

decided to go to a polling location in their city and stand around looking menacing. They had reasons for doing this (dumb ones), but they were clearly in the wrong, and I have literally never seen a person say they weren't wrong to be there. If any defenders exist, they're certainly rare. The two men were at that location for roughly half an hour. The situation was dealt with and rational human beings moved on.

Cut to the right, who, not being rational humans, have been focusing an insane amount of attention on these two men ever since. Much of this attention is unabashedly racist, while some is simply moronic in nature. None of the attention is reasonable or justified.

You could reasonably argue that the *amount* of attention wasn't justified, but to say that it didn't merit some initial scrutiny isn't correct. Last election, the SEIU certainly had its issues. One such example (and there were others):
http://www.thebusinessjournal.com/news/employment/3054-seiu-cited-for-intimidating-voters-in-2009-election

"

Jennik wrote:

This was an independent incident in one city that lasted for about half an hour. It's not remotely as big of a deal as you irrationally believe it is, and using it to justify the racist rhetoric from Trump about all the filthy "riggers" in inner cities is pathetic, dishonest, and delusional.

You ASSUMED Trump's commentary on the elections being rigged has something to do with race. It has to do with HILLARY being corrupt, the MEDIA being in her pocket, and having CORRUPT politicians - including corrupt republicans, and a flawed election system that can be manipulated.

Criticizing the DNC for shafting Bernie has nothing to do with race.
Criticizing states that don't have a paper trail to validate electronic voting has nothing to do with race.
Criticizing media coverage that is extremely biased in favor of Hillary isn't racist.
Criticizing voting machines that count fractions of ballots, can easily be hacked (demonstrated live on television for the doubters), and questionable ties of ownership isn't racist.

I can't imagine that an intelligent person actually believes a company advertises its voting machines in the USA thusly

"In the US, Smartmatic has offered technology and support services to the Electoral Commissions of 307 counties in 16 States"

but then backtracks and says that since 2007 it has only participated in three projects (Utah Caucus and 2 pilot projects)

http://archive.is/NT4Tp
http://www.smartmatic.com.ph/case-studies/article/united-states-elections/

"

Jennik wrote:

At best, you're arguing that two wrongs (one tiny and localized, the other a massive, organized uprising against democracy nation-wide) make a right. At worst your racism's showing and you're just propagating more fear of blacks in an effort to justify more persecution of blacks.

The only person bringing racism into this particular topic is yourself. If someone sees the two people potentially intimidating voters in the photo as a race issue, they might be a racist.
If someone says "inner cities" and then assume it is code speak for a particular race, they might be a racist.

Of the two candidates for president - ONLY ONE OF THEM said:

"I will talk only to white people."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOfDieOzKF8

Yes, that is taking it partially out of context.

The full context of the question and answer session is here:
(both parts are fairly short, not sure why they split the video)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eCraUvIq-s


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eY9zpv7nZYo
@0:56 is her famous "only to white people" comment.

What the video in context does show that Hillary doesn't trust the people, she trusts "the process". She doesn't realize that the very crime law her husband signed may have been a major factor in the increased number of police confrontations leading to deaths. She thinks there is some imaginary moment in time that makes things happen, rather than understanding how social consciousness shifts over time.

Her message is - as always - "Follow my orders, and don't get out of line."

Imagining racism in Trump's skepticism of a fair election process is worse than imagining a potato chip is racist because it resembles Bill Cosby. Why? Because there is conscious intent to harm behind the imagining that Trump's "rigged" commentary is racism. It is the difference between a tree falling on someone's house and someone chopping down a tree to make it fall on a house.

Your chop marks are showing.

"

Jennik wrote:

You continue to argue that lighting the house on fire because you found a gnat

137,00 potential gnats in one county in Florida. Yes, it is the same one that had Chad Gnat problems in a prior election.

83 gnats at ONE house

Gnats caught on security cameras breaking into a secure voting machine in the middle of the night.

Lots of gnats in Illinois that changed into birds - one of them happening to an elected official.

Fractions of gnats.

Dead gnats that are somehow flying around and voting - in some cases up to ten years after they died.

gnats that are being bussed from state to state.

illegal gnats that are coming across the border in record numbers (reportedly a 60% surge in some locations)

gnats who are registered AFTER the last legal day (Nevada for example)

In response - the gnat defense fund is claiming that screen doors are disenfranchising bugs everywhere.

DL, and I say this with all the love in my heart, you are literally insane. Please see a professional. There is nothing I can say to help you, and I really wish I could.

To anyone who missed it, the recent Hillary email junk was wrapped up yesterday. As expected, it was a huge ball of nothing. Man I hope the FBI gets hosed out after this. I meant to post this earlier and got distracted by that damn Black Panther nonsense and Scrotes. Damn you Scrotes!

"

Jennik wrote:

DL, and I say this with all the love in my heart, you are literally insane.

Nah - You could say I am information vigilant, but it's intentional for good reasons.

Although I may disagree with your assessments, I do appreciate the counter point of view, and I try to look at everything you link. When it comes to being right or learning more from others, I'd rather learn. Conversing with others who disagree offers more chances of new information, than from those who usually agree.

"

Jennik wrote:

To anyone who missed it, the recent Hillary email junk was wrapped up yesterday. As expected, it was a huge ball of nothing. Man I hope the FBI gets hosed out after this. I meant to post this earlier and got distracted by that damn Black Panther nonsense and Scrotes. Damn you Scrotes!

I have to wonder why they took so long with the first batch. Maybe our leaders should have put more pressure on them to deliver long ago. Then none of this would have been an issue.

If the FBI believes Hillary did nothing that merits prosecution, then I think it is a good thing they got that information out as soon as they made that determination.

I would far rather see Hillary Clinton elected based on accurately informed voters, than have her not get elected because of inaccurate information.

Regardless of who does get elected, hopefully, all the visibility will mean our leaders pay more attention to the security of their communications - and maybe even worry a little bit more about the security of information for everyone else.

I do pity the screenwriters who will eventually have to make a fictional movie. It's going to be difficult to make things more extreme and bizarre than they actually were/are.

Maybe a Clinton/Trump car chase with a third chase party who is trying to get them both - while Hillary sits besides Huma - not realizing she is a double agent for Trump and Trump doesn't realize that the large African American secret service guy sitting next to him (The Doctor) is a double agent for Hillary....

"

Jennik wrote:

DL, and I say this with all the love in my heart, you are literally insane. Please see a professional. There is nothing I can say to help you, and I really wish I could.

Being stubborn, biased, overly trusting, and passionate isn't insanity. If somehow it was, then I think you both would be in equal need of professional help. I can count on both of you to deviate only minimally from your party's line and parrot the crazier claims from each.

(I'm not overly trusting. Other three apply though.)

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

Jennik wrote:

DL, and I say this with all the love in my heart, you are literally insane. Please see a professional. There is nothing I can say to help you, and I really wish I could.

Being stubborn, biased, overly trusting, and passionate isn't insanity. If somehow it was, then I think you both would be in equal need of professional help. I can count on both of you to deviate only minimally from your party's line and parrot the crazier claims from each.

(I'm not overly trusting. Other three apply though.)

Please call me out on the crazy claims I've made. Your Podesta wackiness is reminiscent of hysteria in the 80s about D&D or in the 90s about Marilyn Manson, but I don't recall saying anything similarly crazy. Admittedly, if I was crazy enough to be saying crazy things, odds are I wouldn't think they were crazy. You gotta make the case for my craziness since I can't see it myself. Help me, Scrotie-Wan Kenobi, you're my only hope!

There are some things I say that Trump fans will disagree with, but I don't think those things are crazy. At the most extreme, Hitler comparisons (which I've at least defended) are based on observable facts, since the rise of Hitler closely parallels the rise of Trump. Note that this is not saying that Trump will start exterminating Muslims or anything. We don't know what Trump will do in office, but looking at fascists (one article of dozens with arguments that he is one) and demagogues throughout history informs us that it will likely not be anything good.

I think anything "crazy" I've said is simply something Trump fans don't accept because, for whatever reason, they can't see Trump for what he is. At the same time, they see Hillary as some horrific, distorted, evil caricature of herself, and many have have completely lost themselves in the most outlandish of conspiracy theories about witches, pedophilia, and demons.

think your vote matters?

















sorry.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

Jennik wrote:

DL, and I say this with all the love in my heart, you are literally insane. Please see a professional. There is nothing I can say to help you, and I really wish I could.

Being stubborn, biased, overly trusting, and passionate isn't insanity. If somehow it was, then I think you both would be in equal need of professional help. I can count on both of you to deviate only minimally from your party's line and parrot the crazier claims from each.

(I'm not overly trusting. Other three apply though.)

Healthy skepticism is always a good thing!