# bernie supporters: will you throw your support to hillary if..



## ae1905 (Jun 7, 2014)

...she wins the democratic nomination?


----------



## Snowflake Minuet (Feb 20, 2016)

Jill Stein of the Green Party.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

Yes.


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

Yes. 

I would be really really happy if she made him her VP. 

Though even better if vice versa. Power team go.


----------



## dragthewaters (Feb 9, 2013)

Yes. She's a lyin-ass bitch and faker than Michael Jackson's nose, but at least she will do SOMETHING to help curb global climate change. Meanwhile The Muskrat (Trump) says it's a conspiracy invented by the Chinese to stop American industry...do you guys seriously want to give this guy ANY chance of winning? You guys may not give a fuck about global climate change now...but you will in 20 years. It's the greatest threat to our economy and national security, and likely the greatest issue we will face this century. Just pretend it's like every other election where you have to choose the lesser of two evils.



Snowflake Minuet said:


> Jill Stein of the Green Party.









angelfish said:


> Yes.
> 
> I would be really really happy if she made him her VP.
> 
> Though even better if vice versa. Power team go.


----------



## WickerDeer (Aug 1, 2012)

dragthewaters said:


> Yes. She's a lyin-ass bitch and faker than Michael Jackson's nose, but at least she will do SOMETHING to help curb global climate change. Meanwhile The Muskrat (Trump) says it's a conspiracy invented by the Chinese to stop American industry...do you guys seriously want to give this guy ANY chance of winning? You guys may not give a fuck about global climate change now...but you will in 20 years. It's the greatest threat to our economy and national security, and likely the greatest issue we will face this century. Just pretend it's like every other election where you have to choose the lesser of two evils.



I think that Simpsons clip is so iconic. lol I was a child when Ross Perot ran for president but I still remember. And then I also remember Bush being elected and reelected (G.W.Bush)...and can only imagine how fucked up Trump's presidency would be. I totally didn't believe Bush would be reelected either. I still remember the shock, which is one reason why I wouldn't want my vote to count for Trump. : p

At least Hillary will somewhat answer to the Democratic party, which (especially considering Trump won for Republicans) is a comfort even if they are divided between Hillary and Bernie.

The clips are hilarious btw. Thanks for lightening up the topic.


----------



## nburns (Dec 4, 2015)

Bernie supporters had better support Hillary. Trump should not be allowed to win because embarrassment.


----------



## dragthewaters (Feb 9, 2013)

Meltedsorbet said:


> I think that Simpsons clip is so iconic. lol I was a child when Ross Perot ran for president but I still remember. And then I also remember Bush being elected and reelected (G.W.Bush)...and can only imagine how fucked up Trump's presidency would be. I totally didn't believe Bush would be reelected either. I still remember the shock, which is one reason why I wouldn't want my vote to count for Trump. : p
> 
> At least Hillary will somewhat answer to the Democratic party, which (especially considering Trump won for Republicans) is a comfort even if they are divided between Hillary and Bernie.
> 
> The clips are hilarious btw. Thanks for lightening up the topic.


I finally understand the Ross Perot joke after reading about him. Wonder what would have happened if he didn't have to drop out of the race and re-enter in 1992. Would he have become president? That would have been zany to say the least.

I remember Bush being re-elected...I couldn't believe it either, I became jaded with politics at the age of 13 LOL. If we elect Trump...can we even call it America anymore?

BTW, why was this not Bernie Sanders' campaign song?

* *


----------



## Miss Bingley (Jun 28, 2013)

absolutely, because #nottrumptho2016


----------



## Toroidal (Apr 14, 2016)

dragthewaters said:


> Yes. She's a lyin-ass bitch and faker than Michael Jackson's nose, but at least she will do SOMETHING to help curb global climate change. Meanwhile The Muskrat (Trump) says it's a conspiracy invented by the Chinese to stop American industry...do you guys seriously want to give this guy ANY chance of winning? You guys may not give a fuck about global climate change now...but you will in 20 years. I*t's the greatest threat to our economy and national security, and likely the greatest issue we will face this century.* Just pretend it's like every other election where you have to choose the lesser of two evils.


I'm sorry but this is total bullshit. 









1) CO2 makes up less than .1% of the atmosphere. 
2) The peak normal peak is about 300ppm. The current level is about 400 ppm. So we have only increased CO2 by 100 ppm.
3) The CO2 level during the age of the Dinosaurs--you know when there were huge lush jungles--was over 2000 ppm.

So we have 100s of years until global warming becomes a threat to human life. In all likelihood the natural progression of renewables (such as solar) and electric vehicles will drastically reduce or flatline CO2 emissions within the next half century. For the record I'm a total environmentalist: I'm against plastic bags, I don't like pollution of chemicals in the ocean, I think overfishing is a huge problem, and smog is no good but global warming is completely overblown. There is also an irony in that sometime within the next 10,000 years we'll need to increase greenhouse gases to offset the next ice age.

The biggest problems we will face this century is going to be a destabilization of the nation-state caused by economic problems (automation and outsourcing), overspending (on welfare and military NATO) and demographic shift (illegal and even legal immigration). The numbers are terrible right now. Home ownership rate is down to 1960s level, workforce participation rate (adjusted for demographics) is down to late 70s level, and medium household income back to mid 90s level. The federal interest rate has been at near 0% for the last 8 years meaning there is little the govt. can do when the next crash happens and that we've created a bubble of cheap money. China will be a huge problem 20 years from now when their economy surprises ours, especially because they hack our US companies to steal their secrets and force our US companies to invest in China for an access to their market.... I could go on about Saudi Arabia and others. 

Suffice it to say I don't agree with everything Trump both he is a godsend for addressing the *core *military, cultural, and economic problems. *I think he will be Teddy Roosevelt 2.0*. If Trump doesn't get elected you can kiss America goodbye within our lifetimes. In fact it might already be too late for Western Europe.


----------



## Kitaraah (May 13, 2016)

Toroidal said:


> I'm sorry but this is total bullshit.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Trump wants to cooperate with Putin and all those other dictators, he wants to be the dictator of America


----------



## dragthewaters (Feb 9, 2013)

Toroidal said:


> I'm sorry but this is total bullshit.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The vast majority of scientists who have actually dedicated their lives to researching global climate change, disagree with you. It's pretty arrogant to think that you know more than they do as a layman. In fact most climate scientists say that politicians are understating the severity of global climate change.

Now you are probably going to say, "Climate scientists are just pretending climate change exists so they can continue to get funding"...but that's ridiculous, and if you have ever worked in a field of science (which I have) you would know that is ridiculous. The very nature of peer-reviewed science would make this impossible and it would also be impossible that 97% of all climate scientists would be in on this "conspiracy." Nope, this research is real.

We are already seeing the effects of global climate change. More common extreme weather events which lead to people being displaced and dying during said weather events. More frequent droughts (did you know that the Syrian refugee crisis was compounded by a drought which is thought to have been caused by global climate change?) Countries sinking underwater (Bangladesh and many small island nations are accepting it as a reality that they will be underwater or have large portions of their nations underwater by the end of this century. South Florida will basically not exist in 30 years (although perhaps that's not too much of a loss). Additionally, there's also a good chance that much of Northern Africa will actually become uninhabitable by humans due to the extreme heat by the end of this century. Try reading about coral bleaching, which is caused by ocean acidification; coral bleaching events are so severe that many of the world's major coral reefs are in danger of being destroyed in as little as the next 20 years. Ocean acidification events are fucking up the oceans in general and severely depleting the oceans of life.

Yes the CO2 levels used to be much higher in the past...but the life that existed back then was adapted for it. The life that is on earth currently is not adapted for a CO2 level that high. Fish that are currently in the oceans are adapted to survive at a specific pH. Plants are adapted to grow in specific climate zones, and so are the animals that feed on them. And so on. And now there are also more extreme weather events which cause damage to wildlife as well as humans. You may act like the fate of wildlife doesn't affect our way of life, but it does.

Basically it is extremely arrogant of you to act like you know more than people who actually have Ph.Ds in climate science and years of experience researching it. That's the equivalent of going up to a scientist researching breast cancer and telling them that you know how to cure breast cancer. Or going up to a scientist researching astrophysics and telling them that you know what existed before the Big Bang.

"In all likelihood the natural progression of renewables (such as solar) and electric vehicles will drastically reduce or flatline CO2 emissions within the next half century" --> This is the goal as set out by the Paris Accords, but climate scientists say that on our current trajectory, we will not be on track to achieve this. A lot of ignorant people do not support renewable energy because it will cause workers in the fossil fuel industries to lose their jobs. This makes absolutely no sense because a) people losing their jobs has never caused the government to stop the progression of technology in ANY other industry, EVER, b) technology putting people out of work is an inevitability as society progresses, and c) the solar industry is one of the fastest-growing industries creating tons of jobs. Also, government officials do not want to invest in the initial startup costs of solar energy, because most people are fucking morons and want short-term gratification for everything and don't want to slowly build something that will pay off in the long run.

Some municipalities are good about going solar on their own. For example, New Jersey (the state where I live) is really into solar power: we have solar panels on most utility poles, lots of people have them on their homes, and I've even seen them on town halls. There's also a huge wind power farm in Atlantic City. Our apartment is entirely powered by solar and wind power through the power grid, because the power company started a program so people can do that. However there are also many backwards places in America where dumbass ******** will refuse renewable energy just on principle simply because they associate it with bleeding-heart liberals.

As for electric vehicles, they will definitely increase in prevalence in the next 30 years (we're planning to get a Tesla 3) but many people are still going to hold onto their old cars for financial reasons, or because they don't want to drive an electric car on principle because it's "not a real car."



> The biggest problems we will face this century is going to be a destabilization of the nation-state caused by economic problems (automation and outsourcing), overspending (on welfare and military NATO) and demographic shift (illegal and even legal immigration). The numbers are terrible right now. Home ownership rate is down to 1960s level, workforce participation rate (adjusted for demographics) is down to late 70s level, and medium household income back to mid 90s level. The federal interest rate has been at near 0% for the last 8 years meaning there is little the govt. can do when the next crash happens and that we've created a bubble of cheap money. China will be a huge problem 20 years from now when their economy surprises ours, especially because they hack our US companies to steal their secrets and force our US companies to invest in China for an access to their market.... I could go on about Saudi Arabia and others.


Well guess what...you know what's going to increase the amount of illegal immigration and refugee crises in the US? Climate change causing droughts, famines, and extreme weather, displacing people in developing countries. 90% of climate change related deaths are expected to happen in developing countries. As I said before, it's already happened with the Syrian refugee crisis. Then we will have to spend even more on the military and welfare.

As for the other issues, yes, they are issues, but at least they're issues of human nature that can be worked around. Climate change is not going to respond to negotiations or treaties, and will take a very long time to respond to changes in policy.



> Suffice it to say I don't agree with everything Trump both he is a godsend for addressing the *core *military, cultural, and economic problems. *I think he will be Teddy Roosevelt 2.0*. If Trump doesn't get elected you can kiss America goodbye within our lifetimes. In fact it might already be too late for Western Europe.


Teddy Roosevelt was an American hero. Trump is no Teddy Roosevelt. Trump's response to any setback in life is to declare bankruptcy and screw over his creditors by defaulting on them. Trump's career is that of failed business deals and shady dealings, then using his charisma to make people forget his past actions. Trump is such a spoiled brat that he thinks he started from the bottom with "a small loan of a million dollars" from his father. Trump appeals to the lowest common denominator by using rhetoric that preys upon their insecurities. Trump flip-flops back and forth on the issues all the time depending on who he is talking to. Trump reduces all the issues to simple fixes similar to those that a fifth-grader would dream up, even though any critical reasoning would reveal that his plans are wildly impractical. Trump would embarrass us in front of other heads of state with his uncouth demeanor, causing other countries to have even less respect for the US than they do now. He is nothing more than a scummy conman with narcissistic personality disorder. That's why I call him the Muskrat (also because he looks like one).


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

Toroidal said:


> *I think he will be Teddy Roosevelt 2.0*. If Trump doesn't get elected you can kiss America goodbye within our lifetimes. In fact it might already be too late for Western Europe.


Oh hell no. That's insulting to Teddy. If Trump had even half the intellect Roosevelt did I'd eat all the hats in the Western hemisphere. Teddy had values for things other than money and his own name and reflection. Teddy was a naturalist who emphasized fair play, reformed the NY police force, and regulated businesses in addition to being a robust and strong-willed president. I don't think he was perfect but I do have respect for him as a reformer, as a politician, and as a leader. Trump has zero political experience and there is zero evidence that he has ever or even has the ability to lead a group in a manner that is conscientious to the needs of anyone but himself.

@dragthewaters 

It would be good to see the party united though. As a Bernie supporter I find Hillary kind of mehhhhh but a lot of people I get along with and respect IRL support her and I do think that she'd bend and flex to compromise between meeting the needs of the people and heeding the existing powers. I think it's Bernie's greatest strength but also his Achilles heel that he doesn't kiss ass.


----------



## Static Void (May 28, 2016)

Yes I will vote for Clinton if Sanders does not get the nomination. I would urge other Sanders supporters to do the same, as voting for another candidate would only split the vote and increase Trump's chances of winning. Not voting at all would have the same effect.


----------



## Toroidal (Apr 14, 2016)

Kitaraah said:


> Trump wants to cooperate with Putin and all those other dictators, he wants to be the dictator of America


This shows a real ignorance of foreign policy. 

Some of the worst "dictators" right now are Erdogan of Turkey and the Saudis. Instead of working with Putin to fight terrorism caused by those jackasses, NATO points missiles and aggravates Putin. Newsflash the Soviet Union collapsed 20 years ago and Putin has no intention of spreading communism. Because of this cold war mentality we let these jackasses get away with supporting terrorism and extremism (ISIS), all while overspending on NATO. 

Trump's plan to change our foreign policy to focus on Turkey, Saudi Arabia, North Korea and China instead of Russia is the correct course of action.

Hillary Clinton will stay on the same misguided path of seeing Putin as the Number 1 enemy. She'll continue in her reckless policies of destabilizing the countries and then bring those terrorist here as refugees. It's madness that anyone would consider her foreign policy sound.


----------



## Toroidal (Apr 14, 2016)

angelfish said:


> Oh hell no. That's insulting to Teddy. If Trump had even half the intellect Roosevelt did I'd eat all the hats in the Western hemisphere. Teddy had values for things other than money and his own name and reflection. Teddy was a naturalist who emphasized fair play, reformed the NY police force, and regulated businesses in addition to being a robust and strong-willed president. I don't think he was perfect but I do have respect for him as a reformer, as a politician, and as a leader. Trump has zero political experience and there is zero evidence that he has ever or even has the ability to lead a group in a manner that is conscientious to the needs of anyone but himself.


I think you are seeing what you want to see. I agree Trump is meh on environmental issues unlike Teddy however he plans to stand up to business by ending these lousy trade deals. Furthermore he plans to change the tax laws so US firms are competitive again. He has also said that he is willing to raise taxes on the wealthy. If you listen to his speeches it's really obvious he isn't happy with how much weaker America's economy has gotten over the last few decades, nor America's standing across the world. Saying he doesn't care about the needs of anyone but himself is flat out wrong. The guy is a full blown patriot.


----------



## Toroidal (Apr 14, 2016)

dragthewaters said:


> TOO LONG


You know how we were taught examples of "propaganda" in school and people wondered how could anyone believe this? Well look above.

There are soo many problems here.

1) the 97% number is BS. Climate Change: No, Itâ€™s Not a 97 Percent Consensus | National Review Online
Even if you accept the 97% figure it doesn't mean 97% of people believe global warming will cause desert to form in Iowa. The question is are people causing CO2 to increase and/or is that causing the temperate to increase. But you can't just extrapolate that into a catch all phrase for every single natural disaster. There is no consensus about "Day after Tomorrow" armageddon effect. It should be so obvious that this is blatant fear mongering. 

Which is really ironic btw because people will say accuse Trump of fear-mongering but then not realize the same is happening for "global warming."

2) Cooler oceans are better at absorbing CO2. So same PH increase would effect fish during the next ice age. 

3) Syrian reuige crisis caused by global warming. I'm sorry but this is exactly why Bernie Sanders would never be president. I cannot believe someone would actually believe that. People are immigrating to US and EU because of welfare and benefits, not because of global warming. As for Syria, Hillary and Obama caused that mess. 

4) I'm surrounded by rich people and I can tell you every few will ever become billionaires. Seeing all the people believing the spin about Trump being a business failure makes me question humanity. The guy has tower's with his name on them and a private jet and helicopter. It takes a real stretch of the immigration aka propaganda to believe he is a failure. Most people would end up blowing that small loan on a million dollars or cocaine and ecstasy. It takes a lot of skill to transfer that into 4.5B dollars.


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

Toroidal said:


> I think you are seeing what you want to see. I agree Trump is meh on environmental issues unlike Teddy however he plans to stand up to business by ending these lousy trade deals. Furthermore he plans to change the tax laws so US firms are competitive again. He has also said that he is willing to raise taxes on the wealthy. If you listen to his speeches it's really obvious he isn't happy with how much weaker America's economy has gotten over the last few decades, nor America's standing across the world. Saying he doesn't care about the needs of anyone but himself is flat out wrong. The guy is a full blown patriot.


He doesn't care about others' needs. He cares about America because _he_ lives here. He cares because a robust American economy means business for him. He cares about tax laws because his businesses are taxed. He is willing to raise taxes on the wealthy because it's an area in which he can stand to lose while gaining in others. He's made quite a big deal about not being financially supported by anyone but himself but that and the tax increase are akin to Arnold Palmer saying he'll give you an extra handicap in your putt-putt game. It's so inconsequential to them that it really shouldn't even count, and it certainly shouldn't be something that's touted by the giver as if it's impressively generous. If it's going to mean anything of worth, it has to be a sacrifice in an area that could actually level the playing field and hurt their wellbeing. 

If you can provide it, I would be genuinely ecstatic to hear an example of Trump doing something altruistic for a group that he is not part of in a way that isn't about asserting his power or otherwise benefitting him.


----------



## dragthewaters (Feb 9, 2013)

Toroidal said:


> 1) the 97% number is BS. Climate Change: No, It’s Not a 97 Percent Consensus | National Review Online
> Even if you accept the 97% figure it doesn't mean 97% of people believe global warming will cause desert to form in Iowa. The question is are people causing CO2 to increase and/or is that causing the temperate to increase. But you can't just extrapolate that into a catch all phrase for every single natural disaster. There is no consensus about "Day after Tomorrow" armageddon effect. It should be so obvious that this is blatant fear mongering.


Once again, I think I will accept the consensus of scientists who have actually devoted their lives to studying this subject matter over...some hack writing for a political news website which clearly seeks to advance a specific political agenda. Propaganda, indeed.

Most scientists do not think that global warming will cause armageddon, the end of the human race, or any other such exaggerated scenarios. However, they do believe it will cause multiple refugee crises (as I said, this is already happening), cause loss of homes in low-lying areas, increase the severity of weather-related natural disasters (again, this has already been happening for some time) and pandemics (probably going to happen soon with Zika virus), and cause millions of deaths, most of which will be in developing countries.



> 2) Cooler oceans are better at absorbing CO2. So same PH increase would effect fish during the next ice age.


I'm not sure what you are trying to convey here. The wildlife that currently lives in the oceans, is adapted to oceans of a certain pH. Due to increased carbon dioxide emissions, the oceans are becoming more acidic. This is an objectively measurable fact. Many species (most notably coral, which supports entire ecosystems, which means many other species will die out once it's gone) cannot survive at a lower pH, so they are being negatively affected by climate change. Have you ever heard of "coral bleaching", because it's happening on an unprecedented scale right now. Yes, the oceans may have had a higher pH or a lower pH some time in the past, and wildlife was adapted to live in those conditions at that time. However, in general the CO2 levels have changed slowly over geological timescales so wildlife had a chance to evolve. That is not the case today; the CO2 levels have been rising quickly in a matter of decades. If changes in the environment occur very quickly and wildlife has no chance to adapt, generally that's when a mass extinction occurs -- as is occurring today.



> Syrian reuige crisis caused by global warming. I'm sorry but this is exactly why Bernie Sanders would never be president. I cannot believe someone would actually believe that. People are immigrating to US and EU because of welfare and benefits, not because of global warming. As for Syria, Hillary and Obama caused that mess.


You are presenting a very reductionist summary of what actually happened to make it seem ridiculous. The refugee crisis was exacerbated by a drought which can be attributed to global climate change. This has been well documented by several reputable news sites.
How climate change is driving migration to Europe



> 4) I'm surrounded by rich people and I can tell you every few will ever become billionaires. Seeing all the people believing the spin about Trump being a business failure makes me question humanity. The guy has tower's with his name on them and a private jet and helicopter. It takes a real stretch of the immigration aka propaganda to believe he is a failure. Most people would end up blowing that small loan on a million dollars or cocaine and ecstasy. It takes a lot of skill to transfer that into 4.5B dollars.


A lot of skill or a lot of ability to con people. Here's an article from that hack political site that you seem to love so much: Donald Trump’s 2016 Debate Lies: He Did Go Bankrupt | National Review


----------



## wickedly (Mar 13, 2016)

No. i refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils which are actually two sides of the same coin.

let the chips fall where they may.


----------



## castigat (Aug 26, 2012)

I'm reluctant, but I'm thinking about it. All I know is that it's not going to Donald Trump.


----------



## Toroidal (Apr 14, 2016)

angelfish said:


> He doesn't care about others' needs. He cares about America because _he_ lives here. He cares because a robust American economy means business for him. He cares about tax laws because his businesses are taxed. He is willing to raise taxes on the wealthy because it's an area in which he can stand to lose while gaining in others. He's made quite a big deal about not being financially supported by anyone but himself but that and the tax increase are akin to Arnold Palmer saying he'll give you an extra handicap in your putt-putt game. It's so inconsequential to them that it really shouldn't even count, and it certainly shouldn't be something that's touted by the giver as if it's impressively generous. If it's going to mean anything of worth, it has to be a sacrifice in an area that could actually level the playing field and hurt their wellbeing.
> 
> If you can provide it, I would be genuinely ecstatic to hear an example of Trump doing something altruistic for a group that he is not part of in a way that isn't about asserting his power or otherwise benefitting him.


Your mentally is wrong. You are saying altruism = good, anyone who isn't 100% altruistic = bad. I think you need to establish a reasonable boundary of those whom you are obligated to help and those whom you are not.

I want the President of the United States to look after the people of the United States. By people, I mean especially the (lower) middle-class citizens. Trump's policies of fixing bad trade deals will bring back 1000s of jobs to America and make our corporations more competitive against China. I think securing the border will stop this mass wave of illegal immigration. I have friend at the border and they tell me how the cartels smuggle drugs through his neighborhoods. It's ridiculous. I've seen the number, we spend billions on welfare and social services for the illegals. So yes I want a president that will look after Americans First. That is good IMO. 

On the flip-side Crooked Hillary is looking after the special interests of her lobbyist. She will flood the nation with illegal aliens diluting my vote and my influence on the nation's future. She will force my taxes to raise to pay for all the new welfare form amnesty. As well as reward these people who cut the line instead of waiting like legal immigrations. She'll continue to fund pointless wars and destabilize regions for the industrial military complex. Her trade deals, like TPP, will suck more and more jobs out of the economy. I think her policies will quite frankly lead to the destruction of the American nation. That is bad IMO.


----------



## Toroidal (Apr 14, 2016)

dragthewaters said:


> You are presenting a very reductionist summary of what actually happened to make it seem ridiculous. The refugee crisis was exacerbated by a drought which can be attributed to global climate change. This has been well documented by several reputable news sites.
> How climate change is driving migration to Europe


You seem beyond savings. I'll just leave you with this. Rise in CO2 has 'greened Planet Earth' - BBC News


----------



## dragthewaters (Feb 9, 2013)

Toroidal said:


> You seem beyond savings. I'll just leave you with this. Rise in CO2 has 'greened Planet Earth' - BBC News


Different effects in different areas. The effects of climate change are not homogeneous throughout the entire planet.

Also, did you even...READ the article you just posted?

"They warn the positives of CO2 are likely to be outweighed by the negatives.

The lead author, Prof Ranga Myneni from Boston University, told BBC News the extra tree growth would not compensate for global warming, rising sea levels, melting glaciers, ocean acidification, the loss of Arctic sea ice, and the prediction of more severe tropical storms."

"Warming the Earth releases CO2 by increasing decomposition of soil organic matter, thawing of permafrost,* drying of soils,* and reduced photosynthesis - potentially leading to tropical vegetation dieback.


He said: "Carbon sinks (such as forests, where carbon is stored) would become sources if carbon loss from warming becomes larger than carbon gain from fertilisation."


----------



## Toroidal (Apr 14, 2016)

dragthewaters said:


> Different effects in different areas. The effects of climate change are not homogeneous throughout the entire planet.
> 
> Also, did you even...READ the article you just posted?
> 
> ...


That's the great part about global warming is there is always an excuse for every argument against it because of global warming. It's seriously religion 2.0.


----------



## dragthewaters (Feb 9, 2013)

Toroidal said:


> That's the great part about global warming is there is always an excuse for every argument against it because of global warming. It's seriously religion 2.0.


Maybe you should actually read some peer-reviewed scientific journals for a change instead of getting all your information from conservative websites.

I mean like...sorry dude but it's pretty fucking ignorant to say that climate science, which is backed up by decades of actual peer-reviewed and validated studies, by people who have advanced degrees in the field, most of which you could read if you really wanted to, is no more factually based than a religious ideology. That just indicates to me that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.


----------



## ArmchairCommie (Dec 27, 2015)

Even though I don't really like Hillary Clinton that much I still might support her come this fall over Trump. She is still a Democrat after all, and I'm sure she will get some social reforms done, just not as much as I would like. And Trump is really too much of a danger to the general public, his brash nature could seriously send this nation spiraling into chaos though I doubt it would be apocalyptic or anything. While I may like some of his policies most of them are way too right wing for me and I don't want anymore conservative justices on the Supreme Court.

And besides the fact that voting for a third party is equivalent throwing away your vote here in America all the third parties aren't any good regardless, seeing as the Libertarian Party is almost the opposite of what I believe and the Green Party is way too hippie-ish with their anti-vaccine stance and support of homeopathy.


----------



## Imnotme (Jun 1, 2016)

I will be writing Bernie in.


----------



## Solrac026 (Mar 6, 2012)

dragthewaters said:


> Maybe you should actually read some peer-reviewed scientific journals for a change instead of getting all your information from conservative websites.
> 
> I mean like...sorry dude but it's pretty fucking ignorant to say that climate science, which is backed up by decades of actual peer-reviewed and validated studies, by people who have advanced degrees in the field, most of which you could read if you really wanted to, is no more factually based than a religious ideology. That just indicates to me that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.


Don't feed the trolls.


----------



## Toroidal (Apr 14, 2016)

ArmchairCommie said:


> I'm sure she will get some social reforms done


Do you want Open Borders? Because that's the social issue of the day.


----------



## angelfish (Feb 17, 2011)

Toroidal said:


> Your mentally is wrong. You are saying altruism = good, anyone who isn't 100% altruistic = bad. I think you need to establish a reasonable boundary of those whom you are obligated to help and those whom you are not.


That's not true at all; I firmly believe that too much giving is problematic. I do however believe that Trump is nowhere near swinging to that side of the balance. 

Additionally I do expect an elected representative of the United States - a _representative democracy_ - to _represent_ the needs of the people. We just seem to vastly disagree on what those needs are.



> I want the President of the United States to look after the people of the United States. By people, I mean especially the (lower) middle-class citizens. Trump's policies of fixing bad trade deals will bring back 1000s of jobs to America and make our corporations more competitive against China. I think securing the border will stop this mass wave of illegal immigration. I have friend at the border and they tell me how the cartels smuggle drugs through his neighborhoods. It's ridiculous. I've seen the number, we spend billions on welfare and social services for the illegals. So yes I want a president that will look after Americans First. That is good IMO.
> 
> On the flip-side Crooked Hillary is looking after the special interests of her lobbyist. She will flood the nation with illegal aliens diluting my vote and my influence on the nation's future. She will force my taxes to raise to pay for all the new welfare form amnesty. As well as reward these people who cut the line instead of waiting like legal immigrations. She'll continue to fund pointless wars and destabilize regions for the industrial military complex. Her trade deals, like TPP, will suck more and more jobs out of the economy. I think her policies will quite frankly lead to the destruction of the American nation. That is bad IMO.


Do Illegal Immigrants Actually Hurt the U.S. Economy?

But it's so easy to just point fingers at outsiders rather than to acknowledge that the majority of US citizens actually have it pretty good and that there are a lot of people born into situations with a lot less than us for no other reason than the luck of the draw. The good, right, and fair thing to do would be to make a small sacrifice so that those born into less can have an opportunity to have a safe, happy life as well.

That all while supporting local small businesses and subsidizing US goods to sustain our economy. I honestly don't know where the candidates stand on that issue, but personally I am in favor of encouraging local and intra-national small business growth and trade.


----------



## Clyme (Jul 17, 2014)

I'm Canadian, but if I were in the United States, I'd vote for Hillary if Bernie didn't acquire the nomination.


----------



## Toroidal (Apr 14, 2016)

angelfish said:


> That's not true at all; I firmly believe that too much giving is problematic. I do however believe that Trump is nowhere near swinging to that side of the balance.
> 
> Additionally I do expect an elected representative of the United States - a _representative democracy_ - to _represent_ the needs of the people. We just seem to vastly disagree on what those needs are.
> 
> ...


I always find propaganda interesting. People are able to be convinced of things they should logically know are false. 

First I want to point out that the NYT is liberal shill newspaper. They did this hit piece on Trump where the women came out and said their quotes were misrepresented and taken out of context. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/15/us/politics/donald-trump-women.html In that link you posted, the article starts with, "Earlier this month I met Pedro Chan..." That is an anecdote which is one of the most common logical fallacies, so that should be a huge red-flag that this article is misleading. 

Second everyone knows that rich people pay more in taxes because they can afford it and that money goes to subsidizing public schools or food stamps or public housing for people that make less. So where do most immigrants fall on the economic scale? Specifically people that are coming to US with nothing? That's right the poor-side. So they require a lot of financial assistance. Here are the actual numbers. The Fiscal Burden of Illegal Immigration on California Taxpayers (2014) illegals pay $3.5B in taxes while getting $25.3B in benefits. So they cost over $20B a year in services. 

To put that $20B into context Trump's wall is estimated to cost just half that at 10B. Again this is $20B in CA alone, not including other border states. Another way to phrase that is if CA did not have illegal aliens then everyone could get free college education. So the government is making a decision to fund high-school and health services for illegals instead of lower tuition for actual citizens and people are not even being told this. Not only that but illegals themselves qualify for free college tuition. As an ENFP I find it disgusting that people are being lied too and misled about the actual costs. People are being denied the choice of deciding if they want this or not, it's being forced upon us by the politicians. As an ENFP this violates every aspect of my beliefs. 

Actually people were given the right to vote on this and people voted against spending billions for illegals. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_187 But that choice was struck down in courts and never appealed by the politicians that didn't like the ruling. If you want to talk about democracy then this is how democracy falls. 






For the record I am for immigration but a nation-state has to balance the needs of it's citizens with immigrants. Right now we are not doing that right.


----------



## Morfy (Dec 3, 2013)

If I was a U.S. citizen, definitely not. She's arguably worse than Trump and both are ridiculously vile people.
I would probably vote for some other candidate just cuz.


----------



## MonieJ (Nov 22, 2010)

No,I hate that vile creature.

I don't use hate lightly if ever but I honestly hate her and her husband.


----------



## Turquoise Rain (Feb 15, 2016)

Dear American citizens, 

Please, just don't vote for Trump. 

Sincerely, 

The World.


----------



## Morfy (Dec 3, 2013)

Turquoise Rain said:


> Dear American citizens,
> 
> Please, just don't vote for Trump.
> 
> ...


As a foreigner I don't care whether Trump or Clinton get elected. Both are really scary but Clinton might actually win out on that front because she seems more war-mongering and has a lot of experience in throwing other countries into chaos.


----------



## mushr00m (May 23, 2011)

A shame Bernie supporters have been stitched up. A lot of leftists have been let down by prospective left candidates. Lets hope they learn from this. Truth always comes out in the end.


----------



## Morfy (Dec 3, 2013)

Toroidal said:


> Do you want Open Borders? Because that's the social issue of the day.


If Hillary actually wanted completely open borders I might actually support her.


----------



## Morfy (Dec 3, 2013)

mushr00m said:


> A shame Bernie supporters have been stitched up. A lot of leftists have been let down by prospective left candidates. Lets hope they learn from this. Truth always comes out in the end.


----------

