What Will You Do After Hillary is Elected?

Jack Fabulous · Aug 24, 2016

Hopefully, this election will be looked back upon by history as the beginning of the end of the two party system.

Reading this forum makes me sick to my ****ing stomach sometimes. Seriously, the whole damn board is filled up with "Trump sucks because..." or "Hillary sucks because..." and from there people try to split hairs to determine which of the two has the least amount of suckage! I'd really like to say right now that we deserve better but I'm honestly leaning more towards we're getting exactly what we deserve. You really want to make a statement? How about growing a pair, walking into the polls, and giving both of these two assclowns a big ole **** YOU!!

2016: NONE OF THE ABOVE

Unitedwestand13 · Aug 24, 2016

Perotista said:
You know come to think of it. I have been following politics since 1956 when I watched the Democratic and Republican conventions on TV. This is the first election where I see a whole bunch of people coming down hard on both candidates. It isn't just the Democrats coming down hard on the Republicans or vice versa, the Republicans coming down hard on the Democrats. Sure there is plenty of that. But there is also plenty of coming down hard on both Trump and Clinton. Along with the record low favorability ratings of both major party candidates, this too is a first.

What a unique election. Electing someone the majority doesn't want. I suppose we should have come to expect this. Party affiliation/identification is at an all time low for the two major parties and those who classify themselves as independents at a record high. The two major parties have shrunk, but they continue to hold all the power they did back in the day when 80% of Americans identified with them. Today according to Gallup, they are down to 56% and independents have grown from 18% to 42%.

If the two major parties keep giving America choices like Clinton and Trump, come ten years from now independents will cross the 50% mark. But that probably doesn't matter, the two major parties will still be calling all the shots.

Democrats elect democrats, republicans elect republicans

Unitedwestand13 · Aug 24, 2016

Perotista said:
No it wasn't close. Clinton was already decided on as the the Democratic nominee before the first ballot was cast and the DNC made sure she won. Whether or not she beats Trump is irrelevant. She's tainted, could she have won without the DNC on her side along with just about every state Democratic Party organization doing its best to make sure she would win? Who knows?

Hilliary won on the ballot box.

No states were stolen from Bernie.

Boss Tweed's Tammany hall is the gold standard of corruption.

People are so &$!&ing cynical they can't admit that Bernie sander's lost the delegate count.

TurtleDude · Aug 24, 2016

Captain Adverse said:
(Not that I believe your premise, but I'll play "what if.")

I'll wait a couple of months until she dies a natural death from that hidden set of diseases she clearly suffers from...then see how her VP does in office. :shrug:

a valid response that probably has a great deal of truth to it

The Mark · Aug 24, 2016

Unitedwestand13 said:
Democrats elect democrats, republicans elect republicans

What about everyone else?

Perotista · Aug 24, 2016

Unitedwestand13 said:
Democrats elect democrats, republicans elect republicans

Maybe not this time. There is a huge question about Trump. The thee time Democrat, three time Republican, three time independent and once belonging to my tiny Reform Party. Sure he registered as a Republican sometime in 2012, but being registered and actually being are two different things.

A lot of Democrats switched their party registration this year to vote for Trump in the GOP primaries. But be that as it may, Trump is one of these who bends with the wind. He is whatever is advantageous at the time. Same for all his donations which went about equally to both parties. I would call him an opportunist.

Skeptic Bob · Aug 24, 2016

Just keep living my life. I'm fortunate enough I have been able to consistently improve my lot in life despite what idiots get elected.

Perotista · Aug 24, 2016

Unitedwestand13 said:
Hilliary won on the ballot box.

No states were stolen from Bernie.

Boss Tweed's Tammany hall is the gold standard of corruption.

People are so &$!&ing cynical they can't admit that Bernie sander's lost the delegate count.

Yep, with a lot of help from the DNC and super delegates. Did you know out of 712 super delegates which is made up of PLEO's, party leaders and elected officials, Sanders received only 46. That sounds fair and honest doesn't it?

Clinton is tainted, without the DNC doing everything it could to get her to win, who knows how things would have turned out? Oh well, everyone with a bit of political knowledge knows Sanders was just for show anyway. The nomination was Clinton's long before Sanders even announced.

Casper · Aug 24, 2016

trouble13 said:
Invest in their Foundation so i can play too

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

You really do not know what a Ponzi scheme is, do you? :roll:

DamnYankee · Aug 24, 2016

jet57 said:
I think it's interesting that nobody in the thread has - said what they intend to do to make it better for Republican candidates. I was kinda hopin some of those answers would be forthcoming.

I imagine GOP'ers will do what is right for the country.

azgreg · Aug 24, 2016

Captain Adverse said:
(Not that I believe your premise, but I'll play "what if.")

I'll wait a couple of months until she dies a natural death from that hidden set of diseases she clearly suffers from...then see how her VP does in office. :shrug:

You think she's going to die from hypothyroidism?

trouble13 · Aug 24, 2016

Casper said:
You really do not know what a Ponzi scheme is, do you? :roll:

You really dont know what sarcasim is, do you :roll:

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

Unitedwestand13 · Aug 24, 2016

Perotista said:
Yep, with a lot of help from the DNC and super delegates. Did you know out of 712 super delegates which is made up of PLEO's, party leaders and elected officials, Sanders received only 46. That sounds fair and honest doesn't it?

Clinton is tainted, without the DNC doing everything it could to get her to win, who knows how things would have turned out? Oh well, everyone with a bit of political knowledge knows Sanders was just for show anyway. The nomination was Clinton's long before Sanders even announced.

If sander's wanted to win super delegates, he should have courted support from them prior to his run.

Obama did the same thing in 2008, and that race was closer then 2016. Hilliary got her first endorsements from super delegates as early as November 2014. Everyone knew Hilliary was running and the party united around the strongest canididate.

Unitedwestand13 · Aug 24, 2016

Perotista said:
Maybe not this time. There is a huge question about Trump. The thee time Democrat, three time Republican, three time independent and once belonging to my tiny Reform Party. Sure he registered as a Republican sometime in 2012, but being registered and actually being are two different things.

A lot of Democrats switched their party registration this year to vote for Trump in the GOP primaries. But be that as it may, Trump is one of these who bends with the wind. He is whatever is advantageous at the time. Same for all his donations which went about equally to both parties. I would call him an opportunist.

My statement is in response to independents whining about the party nominees, when they made the choice to abstain from identifying with a political party.

That is the devils bargain: choose to identify with one of the major parties and you get a voice in the primaries. If you value being independent, that comes with a price: you don't get to decide what canididate the major parties nominate.

Democrats elect democrats, republicans elect republicans, and independents have to choose what side they are on.

Perotista · Aug 24, 2016

Unitedwestand13 said:
If sander's wanted to win super delegates, he should have courted support from them prior to his run.

Obama did the same thing in 2008, and that race was closer then 2016. Hilliary got her first endorsements from super delegates as early as November 2014. Everyone knew Hilliary was running and the party united around the strongest canididate.

If the very baggage laden, flawed Hillary was the Democrat's strongest candidate. Well, that says a lot about the sorry state that party is in. Then again, the GOP must be in worst shape since they nominated Trump.

Perotista · Aug 24, 2016

Unitedwestand13 said:
My statement is in response to independents whining about the party nominees, when they made the choice to abstain from identifying with a political party.

That is the devils bargain: choose to identify with one of the major parties and you get a voice in the primaries. If you value being independent, that comes with a price: you don't get to decide what candidate the major parties nominate.

Democrats elect democrats, republicans elect republicans, and independents have to choose what side they are on.

I choose neither, not this time. As far as I am concerned if this is the types of candidates provided us, then both major parties deserve the scrap heap. If we as Americans continue to let this happen, the two major parties providing sorry to horrible candidates, then America deserves it fate under either Trump or Clinton. Which one really doesn't matter.

The two major party have given all of America a choice of pick your own poison. Arsenic Trump or Cyanide Clinton. Either way, no matter which poison, one is just as dead.

ajn678 · Aug 24, 2016

jet57 said:
I heard that: I don't like her, but I'll vote for her because she's not Trump or a crazy right-winger. I don't expect much from her. She may go after the gun lobby, which will be good for the country; health care? maybe, but we'll see. I think she's a corporatist though, so working people are still gonna have a hard time.

I'll be watching the Republicans very closely, but I don;t think they'll be ready in four years; the radical right has too strong a'hold these days, and that's how they ended up with Trump in the first place.

The only thing Clinton will do when she's in office is make her friends in defense and Wall Street more wealthy.

blaxshep · Aug 25, 2016

Go on a shooting spree, then have a shot of Rumplminz

reinoe · Aug 25, 2016

Unitedwestand13 said:
Hilliary won on the ballot box.

No states were stolen from Bernie.

Boss Tweed's Tammany hall is the gold standard of corruption.

People are so &$!&ing cynical they can't admit that Bernie sander's lost the delegate count.

There's no telling how the election would have gone if there wasn't cheating by the DNC.

Unitedwestand13 · Aug 25, 2016

Perotista said:
If the very baggage laden, flawed Hillary was the Democrat's strongest candidate. Well, that says a lot about the sorry state that party is in. Then again, the GOP must be in worst shape since they nominated Trump.

And the libertarians recycled their last presidential candidate, because no one else was available.

Duvergers law is in full force.

There may be other choices to vote for, but trump and Clinton are the only two that have a chance of winning.

reinoe · Aug 25, 2016

Unitedwestand13 said:
If sander's wanted to win super delegates, he should have courted support from them prior to his run.

Obama did the same thing in 2008, and that race was closer then 2016. Hilliary got her first endorsements from super delegates as early as November 2014. Everyone knew Hilliary was running and the party united around the strongest canididate.

That's not true. Bernie is a far stronger general election candidate than Hillary.

Henrin · Aug 25, 2016

Unitedwestand13 said:
And the libertarians recycled their last presidential candidate, because no one else was available.

Duvergers law is in full force.

There may be other choices to vote for, but trump and Clinton are the only two that have a chance of winning.

Ummm..there was other people that ran, you know.

blaxshep · Aug 25, 2016

reinoe said:
That's not true. Bernie is a far stronger general election candidate than Hillary.

i agree, Bernie would be walking away with it against Trump, Hillary is a disater

DamnYankee · Aug 25, 2016

blaxshep said:
i agree, Bernie would be walking away with it against Trump, Hillary is a disater

Comrade BS is a commie. The only thing he could walk off with is your wallet. :mrgreen:

blaxshep · Aug 25, 2016

DamnYankee said:
Comrade BS is a commie. The only thing he could walk off with is your wallet. :mrgreen:

He is still more electable than Hillary

What Will You Do After Hillary is Elected?

Jack Fabulous

Friend Zone

Unitedwestand13

Unitedwestand13

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands

The Mark

Sporadic insanity normal.

Perotista

Skeptic Bob

Perotista

Casper

DamnYankee

azgreg

Chicks dig the long ball

trouble13

Unitedwestand13

Unitedwestand13

Perotista

Perotista

ajn678

blaxshep

reinoe

Unitedwestand13

reinoe

Henrin

blaxshep

DamnYankee

blaxshep

What Will You Do After Hillary is Elected?

Friend Zone

warrior of the wetlands

Sporadic insanity normal.

Chicks dig the long ball

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency