The Logic Of Not Voting ?
Options
Comments
-
NoCompetition wrote: »
People really need to quit blaming the media. These ? wanted a white man in that seat and they got it. THe media always got to be the scapegoat for everything man. People were blaming the media when they thought Trump would lose, and now media is getting blame for him winning. You can't have it both ways. Man this guy did everything wrong but still won. People are talking about Clinton pandering... yeah it was ? ridiculous, but we aren't talking about the pandering that Trump did. These redneck ass fools actually think that once Trump takes over, that all this "PC ? is over." Same people think Trump is going to somehow silence Black Lives Matter. If that ain't pandering I don't know what is. Them inbreds voted, a lot of us didn't. I'm not understanding people who either voted third party or write in being mad at Trump winning either. I literally have friends that trashed both Clinton and Trump before the votes came in, but are now on some "I'm afraid for the future" ? now. I'M like ? .voting for 3rd parties /= not voting
if they get 5% of the popular vote, they qualify for public campaign funding assistance which would aid in getting them into the larger platforms
or another way to put it
Wouldnt you want someone else on the stage to challenge both Hilary and Donald on their ? ? Unless you are just blindly voting, i cant imagine that having more legit choices is a bad thing.
I would've LOVED to see Johnson AND Stein on stage, debating Hilary and Trump
The fact that the process is this convoluted speaks to the sham that it is. All candidates should be in one venue debating each other in front of the American people.
EXACTLY
but the media has to assume responsibility for this as well b/c they care about ratings too much
Exactly. People who are mad at the outcome, but didnt bother to vote. That says they care, and it effects them, but they chose to have no say. I think its worse for them. Its a whole different feeling knowing you did your part and exercised your right.
Most folks who didn't vote aren't ? about the outcome it's those who did who are screaming ? murder. This idea that because, you didn't vote nullifies your opinion is stupid ? logic in every sense of the phrase. I didn't vote in the election in South Africa but I certainly can have opinion on the outcome and who was voting in. Why? Because, I am informed and stay abreast of current events and world happenings. You and people like you have the carry the brunt that you continue to support White Supremacy and it's faux voting sham.
This shows I hit the nail on the head. Why you so emotional? I get it. Anyway theoretically if my statement didnt apply to you, why you catchin feelings about it? This post actually shores up everything I said. -
There's some logic to it.NoCompetition wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »NoCompetition wrote: »This is how I see it. If people have a more "my vote counts" mentality than an it doesnt count mentality, then they would be more likely to vote. If thousands to millions who sat around doing nothing actually voted, it could and can change outcomes. If people have the erroneous attitude that their vote doesnt count, then those who do vote have the power. This is quite clear. Its just an overall mentality. Seeing the forest or the trees. Anyway the fact that people who didnt bother to vote dont like the results pretty much says it all. But in the end all we can do is our part. We get one vote. Im just happy I at least did mine. To think I didnt even try would probably be a harder pill to swallow.
I don't have a general "my vote doesn't count" attitude though. But I do understand that there are times when my vote will be meaningful and times when it won't. I take every election on a case by case basis. In this particular case, my vote wouldn't have meant anything and I knew that. So it was more important to me to stand on my principles that none of the candidates were worth voting for than it was to vote just to say I voted.
And problem with the logic that you and others push is that you seem to think that if everyone who didn't vote got out and voted that things would go your way. Maybe that's correct, maybe its the opposite. If all the nonvoters got out there, it's possible Trump could have won more handily than he did. You don't know, so once again, this kind of speculation is pointless. People have their reason for who they vote for and whether or not they vote. Other people should just respect that and leave at that. You don't have to agree, but bashing people because they voted a certain way or didn't vote at all is stupid. The exception to that is if laziness is the primary factor for what they did or didn't do, but even then I'd prefer a person that's to lazy to understand the issues also be too lazy to vote. We don't need more uninformed voters.
I think its an error to look at voting from the viewpoint of predicting the outcome. We just saw that the outcome is not certain and can be changed by people actually voting. Saying "my state is-anyway" is an incorrect way to look at it. Look at all the projected blue states that went red. Because the projections can get thrown out of the window when people actually vote.
Also I used to think kind of like that. My state is red so why bother. However its turning purple. Its actuall probably blue but more people arent voting. That made me realize some things. Thats not even my function. My function is to exercise my individual power and right. Others will. And obviously all the "my state is blue/red" or whatever all goes out the window when election day comes you never know.
Clinton won the popular vote so what are you talking about?
The outcome was already decided before you voted but you can't see that smh
You didn't choose the next president, you selected between 2 preselected options placed in front of you so what are you talking about?
-
There's some logic to it.blackamerica wrote: »The logic in not voting? Because both candidates are full of ? . We voted Obama in only to be told "blue lives don't matter" and "what about black on black crime". ? don't change regardless
Like the original post said......Specifically in reference to elections like the present, where you might not be feeling none of the candidates, but you know that one is worse than the others.
What's wrong with voting for the lesser evil ? ....
Which one is worse in your opinion? -
There's some logic to it.Colin Kaepernick has been making headlines after he began kneeling during the national anthem in protest against the oppression, racism, and police brutality against black people and other minorities. The San Francisco 49ers quarterback has also been working in the community on those same issues, so when he revealed that he was not voting in the presidential election, many people felt he wasn't proactive about his platform. Kaepernick explained why he didn’t vote or “really didn’t pay too close of attention” to the election at all.
Kaepernick said he didn't believe any of the candidates, including President-elect Donald Trump, would change a system that he said: "oppresses people of color.”. The new commander in chief previously criticized the quarterback's decision to kneel during the "Star Spangled Banner," telling him to leave the country.
“I’ve been very disconnected from the systematic oppression as a whole,” Kaepernick said. “So, for me, it’s another face that’s going to be the face of that system of oppression.
“And to me, it didn’t really matter who went in there. The system still remains intact that oppresses people of color.”
After the first debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, Kaepernick had this to say about the candidates:
“To me, it was embarrassing to watch that these are our two candidates,” Kaepernick said. “Both are proven liars, and it almost seems like they’re trying to debate who is less racist, and at this point, I was talking to one of my friends who goes, ‘You have to pick the lesser of two evils, but in the end, it’s still evil.'”
Kaepernick is not alone. Trump and Clinton are two of the most disliked candidates in history. Nearly half of eligible voters (231,556,622 people, 46.6%) did not head to the polls this year. -
There's absolutely no logic to it.
People really need to quit blaming the media. These ? wanted a white man in that seat and they got it. THe media always got to be the scapegoat for everything man. People were blaming the media when they thought Trump would lose, and now media is getting blame for him winning. You can't have it both ways. Man this guy did everything wrong but still won. People are talking about Clinton pandering... yeah it was ? ridiculous, but we aren't talking about the pandering that Trump did. These redneck ass fools actually think that once Trump takes over, that all this "PC ? is over." Same people think Trump is going to somehow silence Black Lives Matter. If that ain't pandering I don't know what is. Them inbreds voted, a lot of us didn't. I'm not understanding people who either voted third party or write in being mad at Trump winning either. I literally have friends that trashed both Clinton and Trump before the votes came in, but are now on some "I'm afraid for the future" ? now. I'M like ? .voting for 3rd parties /= not voting
if they get 5% of the popular vote, they qualify for public campaign funding assistance which would aid in getting them into the larger platforms
or another way to put it
Wouldnt you want someone else on the stage to challenge both Hilary and Donald on their ? ? Unless you are just blindly voting, i cant imagine that having more legit choices is a bad thing.
I would've LOVED to see Johnson AND Stein on stage, debating Hilary and Trump
The fact that the process is this convoluted speaks to the sham that it is. All candidates should be in one venue debating each other in front of the American people.
EXACTLY
but the media has to assume responsibility for this as well b/c they care about ratings too much
who televises these debates fam? -
blackamerica wrote: »The logic in not voting? Because both candidates are full of ? . We voted Obama in only to be told "blue lives don't matter" and "what about black on black crime". ? don't change regardless
Like the original post said......Specifically in reference to elections like the present, where you might not be feeling none of the candidates, but you know that one is worse than the others.
What's wrong with voting for the lesser evil ? ....
Which one is worse in your opinion?
Trump obviously.
The one who openly supports killer-cops, and plans to increase their funding and power and "provide more resources" to them, and put a killer-cop-commander (Giuliani) into leadership of the justice department. -
There's some logic to it.So I guess Kap is irrelevant because he didn't vote right? @NoCompetition
-
NoCompetition wrote: »
People really need to quit blaming the media. These ? wanted a white man in that seat and they got it. THe media always got to be the scapegoat for everything man. People were blaming the media when they thought Trump would lose, and now media is getting blame for him winning. You can't have it both ways. Man this guy did everything wrong but still won. People are talking about Clinton pandering... yeah it was ? ridiculous, but we aren't talking about the pandering that Trump did. These redneck ass fools actually think that once Trump takes over, that all this "PC ? is over." Same people think Trump is going to somehow silence Black Lives Matter. If that ain't pandering I don't know what is. Them inbreds voted, a lot of us didn't. I'm not understanding people who either voted third party or write in being mad at Trump winning either. I literally have friends that trashed both Clinton and Trump before the votes came in, but are now on some "I'm afraid for the future" ? now. I'M like ? .voting for 3rd parties /= not voting
if they get 5% of the popular vote, they qualify for public campaign funding assistance which would aid in getting them into the larger platforms
or another way to put it
Wouldnt you want someone else on the stage to challenge both Hilary and Donald on their ? ? Unless you are just blindly voting, i cant imagine that having more legit choices is a bad thing.
I would've LOVED to see Johnson AND Stein on stage, debating Hilary and Trump
The fact that the process is this convoluted speaks to the sham that it is. All candidates should be in one venue debating each other in front of the American people.
EXACTLY
but the media has to assume responsibility for this as well b/c they care about ratings too much
Exactly. People who are mad at the outcome, but didnt bother to vote. That says they care, and it effects them, but they chose to have no say. I think its worse for them. Its a whole different feeling knowing you did your part and exercised your right.
Most folks who didn't vote aren't ? about the outcome it's those who did who are screaming ? murder. This idea that because, you didn't vote nullifies your opinion is stupid ? logic in every sense of the phrase. I didn't vote in the election in South Africa but I certainly can have opinion on the outcome and who was voting in. Why? Because, I am informed and stay abreast of current events and world happenings. You and people like you have the carry the brunt that you continue to support White Supremacy and it's faux voting sham.So I guess Kap is irrelevant because he didn't vote right? @NoCompetition
Where did his post say that those who don't vote's opinion is null or irrelevant ? -
So I guess Kap is irrelevant because he didn't vote right? @NoCompetition
I dont see him butting in on a topic he isnt involved in either though. Non voting just gives your power and choice to others...and they obviously do and have used it. Anyway Im not going to continue to argue a topic with people who are not involved in it. You didnt want people to vote, they apparently didnt in certain key areas, and it had an effect. Meanwhile others did vote in other areas and it, likewise had an effect. but anyway you didnt want people to vote, some didnt, so hey, you can take that with you. -
What are you saying? How does this change anything I said?
People really need to quit blaming the media. These ? wanted a white man in that seat and they got it. THe media always got to be the scapegoat for everything man. People were blaming the media when they thought Trump would lose, and now media is getting blame for him winning. You can't have it both ways. Man this guy did everything wrong but still won. People are talking about Clinton pandering... yeah it was ? ridiculous, but we aren't talking about the pandering that Trump did. These redneck ass fools actually think that once Trump takes over, that all this "PC ? is over." Same people think Trump is going to somehow silence Black Lives Matter. If that ain't pandering I don't know what is. Them inbreds voted, a lot of us didn't. I'm not understanding people who either voted third party or write in being mad at Trump winning either. I literally have friends that trashed both Clinton and Trump before the votes came in, but are now on some "I'm afraid for the future" ? now. I'M like ? .voting for 3rd parties /= not voting
if they get 5% of the popular vote, they qualify for public campaign funding assistance which would aid in getting them into the larger platforms
or another way to put it
Wouldnt you want someone else on the stage to challenge both Hilary and Donald on their ? ? Unless you are just blindly voting, i cant imagine that having more legit choices is a bad thing.
I would've LOVED to see Johnson AND Stein on stage, debating Hilary and Trump
The fact that the process is this convoluted speaks to the sham that it is. All candidates should be in one venue debating each other in front of the American people.
EXACTLY
but the media has to assume responsibility for this as well b/c they care about ratings too much
who televises these debates fam? -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »not my job. google "how does the electoral college work"
Oh I know how it works, better than you. Please believe that
YOU don't know how it works, yet you still feel like you can post as if you're an authority when you clearly are not
You copy/pasted that paragraph about the EC, which means you cannot explain the EC in your own words, which means that you do not understand how it works. It's really that simple
It's also not your job to make ignorant statements that you cannot support fyi. So next time I'll just assume you don't know what you're talking about and I'll ignore your post
No i pasted a paragraph about the number of individual votes that determined the outcome of the 2000 election you dolt.
And you still don't seem to understand the information you're posting. What you pasted doesn't support the broad statements you're making. Florida was decided by ~500 votes. You're acting like that some kind of evidence that everyone who didn't vote was responsible for Bush being elected because that margin was so slim. If you truly understood how the EC works, then you'd understand how stupid it is to hold nonvoters in other states responsible for what happened in FL.
Hey ? ... you're arguing something I never actually said or even implied. The 2000 election was decided by 537 votes in Florida. Just like what I posted said.
People in Florida that didn't vote had no idea what the outcome would be just like many of you smart-dumb-non-voting-ass-yet-still-want-to-talk-about-politics-ass ? had no idea what the outcome of this election would be in your state. -
NoCompetition wrote: »NoCompetition wrote: »
People really need to quit blaming the media. These ? wanted a white man in that seat and they got it. THe media always got to be the scapegoat for everything man. People were blaming the media when they thought Trump would lose, and now media is getting blame for him winning. You can't have it both ways. Man this guy did everything wrong but still won. People are talking about Clinton pandering... yeah it was ? ridiculous, but we aren't talking about the pandering that Trump did. These redneck ass fools actually think that once Trump takes over, that all this "PC ? is over." Same people think Trump is going to somehow silence Black Lives Matter. If that ain't pandering I don't know what is. Them inbreds voted, a lot of us didn't. I'm not understanding people who either voted third party or write in being mad at Trump winning either. I literally have friends that trashed both Clinton and Trump before the votes came in, but are now on some "I'm afraid for the future" ? now. I'M like ? .voting for 3rd parties /= not voting
if they get 5% of the popular vote, they qualify for public campaign funding assistance which would aid in getting them into the larger platforms
or another way to put it
Wouldnt you want someone else on the stage to challenge both Hilary and Donald on their ? ? Unless you are just blindly voting, i cant imagine that having more legit choices is a bad thing.
I would've LOVED to see Johnson AND Stein on stage, debating Hilary and Trump
The fact that the process is this convoluted speaks to the sham that it is. All candidates should be in one venue debating each other in front of the American people.
EXACTLY
but the media has to assume responsibility for this as well b/c they care about ratings too much
Exactly. People who are mad at the outcome, but didnt bother to vote. That says they care, and it effects them, but they chose to have no say. I think its worse for them. Its a whole different feeling knowing you did your part and exercised your right.
Most folks who didn't vote aren't ? about the outcome it's those who did who are screaming ? murder. This idea that because, you didn't vote nullifies your opinion is stupid ? logic in every sense of the phrase. I didn't vote in the election in South Africa but I certainly can have opinion on the outcome and who was voting in. Why? Because, I am informed and stay abreast of current events and world happenings. You and people like you have the carry the brunt that you continue to support White Supremacy and it's faux voting sham.
This shows I hit the nail on the head. Why you so emotional? I get it. Anyway theoretically if my statement didnt apply to you, why you catchin feelings about it? This post actually shores up everything I said.
Same reason you are here sharing your "feelings" and "emotions". It's a message board dingbat where we discuss our opinions and views. More importantly because, as I said; "I didn't vote in the election in South Africa but I certainly can have an opinion on the outcome and who was voted in. Why? Because, I am informed and stay abreast of current events and world happenings. "
-
There's absolutely no logic to it.
What are you saying? How does this change anything I said?
People really need to quit blaming the media. These ? wanted a white man in that seat and they got it. THe media always got to be the scapegoat for everything man. People were blaming the media when they thought Trump would lose, and now media is getting blame for him winning. You can't have it both ways. Man this guy did everything wrong but still won. People are talking about Clinton pandering... yeah it was ? ridiculous, but we aren't talking about the pandering that Trump did. These redneck ass fools actually think that once Trump takes over, that all this "PC ? is over." Same people think Trump is going to somehow silence Black Lives Matter. If that ain't pandering I don't know what is. Them inbreds voted, a lot of us didn't. I'm not understanding people who either voted third party or write in being mad at Trump winning either. I literally have friends that trashed both Clinton and Trump before the votes came in, but are now on some "I'm afraid for the future" ? now. I'M like ? .voting for 3rd parties /= not voting
if they get 5% of the popular vote, they qualify for public campaign funding assistance which would aid in getting them into the larger platforms
or another way to put it
Wouldnt you want someone else on the stage to challenge both Hilary and Donald on their ? ? Unless you are just blindly voting, i cant imagine that having more legit choices is a bad thing.
I would've LOVED to see Johnson AND Stein on stage, debating Hilary and Trump
The fact that the process is this convoluted speaks to the sham that it is. All candidates should be in one venue debating each other in front of the American people.
EXACTLY
but the media has to assume responsibility for this as well b/c they care about ratings too much
who televises these debates fam?
the media IS responsible
just look at how Trump was able to just bully all the other candidates during the Republican debates. Why didnt they cut his mic off when he went over his time? Why didnt they cut his mic when he started hurling insults at people?
I'll tell you why...b/c they wanted the ratings and clicks from his fuckery -
There's some logic to it.The Lonious Monk wrote: »not my job. google "how does the electoral college work"
Oh I know how it works, better than you. Please believe that
YOU don't know how it works, yet you still feel like you can post as if you're an authority when you clearly are not
You copy/pasted that paragraph about the EC, which means you cannot explain the EC in your own words, which means that you do not understand how it works. It's really that simple
It's also not your job to make ignorant statements that you cannot support fyi. So next time I'll just assume you don't know what you're talking about and I'll ignore your post
No i pasted a paragraph about the number of individual votes that determined the outcome of the 2000 election you dolt.
And you still don't seem to understand the information you're posting. What you pasted doesn't support the broad statements you're making. Florida was decided by ~500 votes. You're acting like that some kind of evidence that everyone who didn't vote was responsible for Bush being elected because that margin was so slim. If you truly understood how the EC works, then you'd understand how stupid it is to hold nonvoters in other states responsible for what happened in FL.
Hey ? ... you're arguing something I never actually said or even implied. The 2000 election was decided by 537 votes in Florida. Just like what I posted said.
People in Florida that didn't vote had no idea what the outcome would be just like many of you smart-dumb-non-voting-ass-yet-still-want-to-talk-about-politics-ass ? had no idea what the outcome of this election would be in your state.
But I did know what would happen. Just because you're too stupid to understand how I knew what would happen in my state doesn't mean I didn't know. And Florida is a swing state, so once again you show you don't know what the ? you're talking about. So just stop. Believe what you want to believe and take your ass somewhere else. You already made it clear you don't want to know why people didn't vote, so why continue this discussion only to continuously make yourself look like a fool? -
There's some logic to it.blackamerica wrote: »The logic in not voting? Because both candidates are full of ? . We voted Obama in only to be told "blue lives don't matter" and "what about black on black crime". ? don't change regardless
Like the original post said......Specifically in reference to elections like the present, where you might not be feeling none of the candidates, but you know that one is worse than the others.
What's wrong with voting for the lesser evil ? ....
Which one is worse in your opinion?
Trump obviously.
The one who openly supports killer-cops, and plans to increase their funding and power and "provide more resources" to them, and put a killer-cop-commander (Giuliani) into leadership of the justice department.
Like I said before, I think you'll get it eventually
You guys are spending so much energy imagining what trump MIGHT do that you can't see what hillary has already done
Trump is a buffoon at worst. Hillary is a fully aware malevolent entity -
There's some logic to it.NoCompetition wrote: »So I guess Kap is irrelevant because he didn't vote right? @NoCompetition
I dont see him butting in on a topic he isnt involved in either though. Non voting just gives your power and choice to others...and they obviously do and have used it. Anyway Im not going to continue to argue a topic with people who are not involved in it. You didnt want people to vote, they apparently didnt in certain key areas, and it had an effect. Meanwhile others did vote in other areas and it, likewise had an effect. but anyway you didnt want people to vote, some didnt, so hey, you can take that with you.
Again, you're just talking in circles
You can't name why hillary is a better candidate and you can't explain how voting would have changed anything when she won the popular vote anyway
You also can't explain what hillary has done for black people to make you defend her so strongly but hey, I guess those questions are irrelevant
Vote just because. I promise it works guys. I can't explain how and I can't refute any explanation of how it doesn't, but apparently I'm so above supporting my statements with facts that none of that matters, you should just believe my words -
There's some logic to it.And fyi this topic is about the logic of not voting, so technically you're the one butting in @NoCompetition
-
There's some logic to it.The Lonious Monk wrote: »not my job. google "how does the electoral college work"
Oh I know how it works, better than you. Please believe that
YOU don't know how it works, yet you still feel like you can post as if you're an authority when you clearly are not
You copy/pasted that paragraph about the EC, which means you cannot explain the EC in your own words, which means that you do not understand how it works. It's really that simple
It's also not your job to make ignorant statements that you cannot support fyi. So next time I'll just assume you don't know what you're talking about and I'll ignore your post
No i pasted a paragraph about the number of individual votes that determined the outcome of the 2000 election you dolt.
And you still don't seem to understand the information you're posting. What you pasted doesn't support the broad statements you're making. Florida was decided by ~500 votes. You're acting like that some kind of evidence that everyone who didn't vote was responsible for Bush being elected because that margin was so slim. If you truly understood how the EC works, then you'd understand how stupid it is to hold nonvoters in other states responsible for what happened in FL.
Hey ? ... you're arguing something I never actually said or even implied. The 2000 election was decided by 537 votes in Florida. Just like what I posted said.
People in Florida that didn't vote had no idea what the outcome would be just like many of you smart-dumb-non-voting-ass-yet-still-want-to-talk-about-politics-ass ? had no idea what the outcome of this election would be in your state.
How is this relevant to what's happening now?
For some reason you think that Hillary would have been a better president. Can one of you please back this up with some kind of evidence FOR ONCE??
How can you not understand how simple and ignorant you're being?
I choose not to vote for POLITICAL reasons smh pseudo-intellectuals -
But how did that affect the election? People were ready to drop the Hilary was selected memes but Trump won. If anything this whole election was set up for Hilary to win if you want to bring the media into it. Big bad bully guy bashing the only true woman candidate for the presidency. People are trying to re write ? now that Trump actually won. So the media gets blame but the non voters ir the people who wrote in ? don't get blame? OK.
What are you saying? How does this change anything I said?
People really need to quit blaming the media. These ? wanted a white man in that seat and they got it. THe media always got to be the scapegoat for everything man. People were blaming the media when they thought Trump would lose, and now media is getting blame for him winning. You can't have it both ways. Man this guy did everything wrong but still won. People are talking about Clinton pandering... yeah it was ? ridiculous, but we aren't talking about the pandering that Trump did. These redneck ass fools actually think that once Trump takes over, that all this "PC ? is over." Same people think Trump is going to somehow silence Black Lives Matter. If that ain't pandering I don't know what is. Them inbreds voted, a lot of us didn't. I'm not understanding people who either voted third party or write in being mad at Trump winning either. I literally have friends that trashed both Clinton and Trump before the votes came in, but are now on some "I'm afraid for the future" ? now. I'M like ? .voting for 3rd parties /= not voting
if they get 5% of the popular vote, they qualify for public campaign funding assistance which would aid in getting them into the larger platforms
or another way to put it
Wouldnt you want someone else on the stage to challenge both Hilary and Donald on their ? ? Unless you are just blindly voting, i cant imagine that having more legit choices is a bad thing.
I would've LOVED to see Johnson AND Stein on stage, debating Hilary and Trump
The fact that the process is this convoluted speaks to the sham that it is. All candidates should be in one venue debating each other in front of the American people.
EXACTLY
but the media has to assume responsibility for this as well b/c they care about ratings too much
who televises these debates fam?
the media IS responsible
just look at how Trump was able to just bully all the other candidates during the Republican debates. Why didnt they cut his mic off when he went over his time? Why didnt they cut his mic when he started hurling insults at people?
I'll tell you why...b/c they wanted the ratings and clicks from his fuckery
EDIT: and I'll add this. All this ? that came down last minute with Trump should've killed his chances to even win this ? but he did anyway. (Some)Black folks threw Nate Parker away over what happened with him and that woman ten years ago but Trump is out here with pending court cases and ? but is president now. Women saying he sexually assaulted them and all kinds of ? . The media showed his face on tv too much yes, but you as a voter should be able to research what the ? these guys are going to do in office. The media didn't tell you to not vote or write in Harambe. People are quick to try and find the quick excuse but it's too late now. Donald Trump is your new President. -
blackamerica wrote: »The logic in not voting? Because both candidates are full of ? . We voted Obama in only to be told "blue lives don't matter" and "what about black on black crime". ? don't change regardless
Like the original post said......Specifically in reference to elections like the present, where you might not be feeling none of the candidates, but you know that one is worse than the others.
What's wrong with voting for the lesser evil ? ....
Which one is worse in your opinion?
Trump obviously.
The one who openly supports killer-cops, and plans to increase their funding and power and "provide more resources" to them, and put a killer-cop-commander (Giuliani) into leadership of the justice department.
Like I said before, I think you'll get it eventually
You guys are spending so much energy imagining what trump MIGHT do that you can't see what hillary has already done
Trump is a buffoon at worst. Hillary is a fully aware malevolent entity
A "buffoon" can still make ? a whole lot worse.
1. Imagining huh ?
Most of that is directly from Trump's First 100 days list.
http://www.npr.org/2016/11/09/501451368/here-is-what-donald-trump-wants-to-do-in-his-first-100-days
As for Giuliani, the talk is out there. All you have to do is wait and see if he gets the position.
2. What "Hillary has already done" ? I'm not even too sure what you're referring to since she was never president.
But if you want to equate Obama to Hillary (since you might say that they're all the same), then why is Trump looking to change the situation ? If it's already that bad (because of "Hillary" ?), then why does Trump need to restore law and order and increase funding and power.
Sounds like you're downplaying everything that Trump says he wants to do, like he can't do it.
If presidents are that powerless, then how was Hillary able to pull off all the damage you're implying she did - and she wasn't even president ? -
There's absolutely no logic to it.
But how did that affect the election? People were ready to drop the Hilary was selected memes but Trump won. If anything this whole election was set up for Hilary to win if you want to bring the media into it. Big bad bully guy bashing the only true woman candidate for the presidency. People are trying to re write ? now that Trump actually won. So the media gets blame but the non voters ir the people who wrote in ? don't get blame? OK.
What are you saying? How does this change anything I said?
People really need to quit blaming the media. These ? wanted a white man in that seat and they got it. THe media always got to be the scapegoat for everything man. People were blaming the media when they thought Trump would lose, and now media is getting blame for him winning. You can't have it both ways. Man this guy did everything wrong but still won. People are talking about Clinton pandering... yeah it was ? ridiculous, but we aren't talking about the pandering that Trump did. These redneck ass fools actually think that once Trump takes over, that all this "PC ? is over." Same people think Trump is going to somehow silence Black Lives Matter. If that ain't pandering I don't know what is. Them inbreds voted, a lot of us didn't. I'm not understanding people who either voted third party or write in being mad at Trump winning either. I literally have friends that trashed both Clinton and Trump before the votes came in, but are now on some "I'm afraid for the future" ? now. I'M like ? .voting for 3rd parties /= not voting
if they get 5% of the popular vote, they qualify for public campaign funding assistance which would aid in getting them into the larger platforms
or another way to put it
Wouldnt you want someone else on the stage to challenge both Hilary and Donald on their ? ? Unless you are just blindly voting, i cant imagine that having more legit choices is a bad thing.
I would've LOVED to see Johnson AND Stein on stage, debating Hilary and Trump
The fact that the process is this convoluted speaks to the sham that it is. All candidates should be in one venue debating each other in front of the American people.
EXACTLY
but the media has to assume responsibility for this as well b/c they care about ratings too much
who televises these debates fam?
the media IS responsible
just look at how Trump was able to just bully all the other candidates during the Republican debates. Why didnt they cut his mic off when he went over his time? Why didnt they cut his mic when he started hurling insults at people?
I'll tell you why...b/c they wanted the ratings and clicks from his fuckery
i think we talking at each other fam b/c i voted lol -
There's some logic to it.blackamerica wrote: »The logic in not voting? Because both candidates are full of ? . We voted Obama in only to be told "blue lives don't matter" and "what about black on black crime". ? don't change regardless
Like the original post said......Specifically in reference to elections like the present, where you might not be feeling none of the candidates, but you know that one is worse than the others.
What's wrong with voting for the lesser evil ? ....
Which one is worse in your opinion?
Trump obviously.
The one who openly supports killer-cops, and plans to increase their funding and power and "provide more resources" to them, and put a killer-cop-commander (Giuliani) into leadership of the justice department.
Like I said before, I think you'll get it eventually
You guys are spending so much energy imagining what trump MIGHT do that you can't see what hillary has already done
Trump is a buffoon at worst. Hillary is a fully aware malevolent entity
A "buffoon" can still make ? a whole lot worse.
1. Imagining huh ?
Most of that is directly from Trump's First 100 days list.
http://www.npr.org/2016/11/09/501451368/here-is-what-donald-trump-wants-to-do-in-his-first-100-days
As for Giuliani, the talk is out there. All you have to do is wait and see if he gets the position.
2. What "Hillary has already done" ? I'm not even too sure what you're referring to since she was never president.
But if you want to equate Obama to Hillary (since you might say that they're all the same), then why is Trump looking to change the situation ? If it's already that bad (because of "Hillary" ?), then why does Trump need to restore law and order and increase funding and power.
Sounds like you're downplaying everything that Trump says he wants to do, like he can't do it.
If presidents are that powerless, then how was Hillary able to pull off all the damage you're implying she did - and she wasn't even president ?
Smh come on man please don't be this obtuse right now
Hillary has been in washington for 30 YEARS NOW. She was also an NY senator AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE
Her POLICIES WHILE IN THOSE POSITIONS have been more DETRIMENTAL than what you are IMAGINING that trump might do in office
Smh at the bolded. That's how I really know that you have a lot to learn when it comes to what's going on in the world right now -
blackamerica wrote: »The logic in not voting? Because both candidates are full of ? . We voted Obama in only to be told "blue lives don't matter" and "what about black on black crime". ? don't change regardless
Like the original post said......Specifically in reference to elections like the present, where you might not be feeling none of the candidates, but you know that one is worse than the others.
What's wrong with voting for the lesser evil ? ....
Which one is worse in your opinion?
Trump obviously.
The one who openly supports killer-cops, and plans to increase their funding and power and "provide more resources" to them, and put a killer-cop-commander (Giuliani) into leadership of the justice department.
Like I said before, I think you'll get it eventually
You guys are spending so much energy imagining what trump MIGHT do that you can't see what hillary has already done
Trump is a buffoon at worst. Hillary is a fully aware malevolent entity
A "buffoon" can still make ? a whole lot worse.
1. Imagining huh ?
Most of that is directly from Trump's First 100 days list.
http://www.npr.org/2016/11/09/501451368/here-is-what-donald-trump-wants-to-do-in-his-first-100-days
As for Giuliani, the talk is out there. All you have to do is wait and see if he gets the position.
2. What "Hillary has already done" ? I'm not even too sure what you're referring to since she was never president.
But if you want to equate Obama to Hillary (since you might say that they're all the same), then why is Trump looking to change the situation ? If it's already that bad (because of "Hillary" ?), then why does Trump need to restore law and order and increase funding and power.
Sounds like you're downplaying everything that Trump says he wants to do, like he can't do it.
If presidents are that powerless, then how was Hillary able to pull off all the damage you're implying she did - and she wasn't even president ?
Smh come on man please don't be this obtuse right now
Hillary has been in washington for 30 YEARS NOW. She was also an NY senator AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE
Her POLICIES WHILE IN THOSE POSITIONS have been more DETRIMENTAL than what you are IMAGINING that trump might do in office
Smh at the bolded. That's how I really know that you have a lot to learn when it comes to what's going on in the world right now
Bruh, saying some ? , or constantly telling people they're wrong, doesn't make it so.
Instead of posting ? about what you think I know and don't know, post the policies that Hillary was responsible for in comparison to Trump's policies - and you'd save yourself a whole lot of posting. -
There's some logic to it.blackamerica wrote: »The logic in not voting? Because both candidates are full of ? . We voted Obama in only to be told "blue lives don't matter" and "what about black on black crime". ? don't change regardless
Like the original post said......Specifically in reference to elections like the present, where you might not be feeling none of the candidates, but you know that one is worse than the others.
What's wrong with voting for the lesser evil ? ....
Which one is worse in your opinion?
Trump obviously.
The one who openly supports killer-cops, and plans to increase their funding and power and "provide more resources" to them, and put a killer-cop-commander (Giuliani) into leadership of the justice department.
Like I said before, I think you'll get it eventually
You guys are spending so much energy imagining what trump MIGHT do that you can't see what hillary has already done
Trump is a buffoon at worst. Hillary is a fully aware malevolent entity
A "buffoon" can still make ? a whole lot worse.
1. Imagining huh ?
Most of that is directly from Trump's First 100 days list.
http://www.npr.org/2016/11/09/501451368/here-is-what-donald-trump-wants-to-do-in-his-first-100-days
As for Giuliani, the talk is out there. All you have to do is wait and see if he gets the position.
2. What "Hillary has already done" ? I'm not even too sure what you're referring to since she was never president.
But if you want to equate Obama to Hillary (since you might say that they're all the same), then why is Trump looking to change the situation ? If it's already that bad (because of "Hillary" ?), then why does Trump need to restore law and order and increase funding and power.
Sounds like you're downplaying everything that Trump says he wants to do, like he can't do it.
If presidents are that powerless, then how was Hillary able to pull off all the damage you're implying she did - and she wasn't even president ?
Smh come on man please don't be this obtuse right now
Hillary has been in washington for 30 YEARS NOW. She was also an NY senator AND THE SECRETARY OF STATE
Her POLICIES WHILE IN THOSE POSITIONS have been more DETRIMENTAL than what you are IMAGINING that trump might do in office
Smh at the bolded. That's how I really know that you have a lot to learn when it comes to what's going on in the world right now
Bruh, saying some ? , or constantly telling people they're wrong, doesn't make it so.
Instead of posting ? about what you think I know and don't know, post the policies that Hillary was responsible for in comparison to Trump's policies - and you'd save yourself a whole lot of posting.
Nah I'm done repeating myself in every thread
I've been posting the same facts for month and moths, you chose to ignore it so that's on you
You can start in this thread then check my post history if you wanna learn about hillary.
http://community.allhiphop.com/discussion/552885/aye-yall-know-hillary-clinton-is-trash-right/p1
I don't understand how a person can say there's no logic to something before knowing all of the facts around that thing but that's just me /shrug -
There's some logic to it.And fyi trump has never been in political office so he has no "policies" to be responsible for with respect to government legislation
