Stopping Clinton is top reason people are voting for Trump, vice versa

[Morphine Prince 109,983]

 

Nearly half of American voters who support either Democrat Hillary Clinton or Republican Donald Trump for the White House said they will mainly be trying to block the other side from winning, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released Thursday.

The results reflect a deepening ideological divide in the United States, where people are becoming increasingly fearful of the opposing party, a feeling worsened by the likely matchup between the New York real estate tycoon and the former first lady, said Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics.

"This phenomenon is called negative partisanship," Sabato said. "If we were trying to maximize the effect, we couldn't have found better nominees than Trump and Clinton."

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-anti-vote-idUSKCN0XX06E

 

[HEARTHUNTER 7,611]

Either way it will be a huge mess

[PartySick 174,386]

Can't say I'm surprised. People passionately dislike both

Imo, Hillary's easily the lesser of the two "evils".

[FATCAT 60,967]

Republicans don't want Hillary. All Republicans don't love Trump.

Democrats don't want Trump. All Democrats don't want Hillary. 

[crisTEAne 21,059]

[Didymus 34,380]

Cackle.

To be connected to the genius Gregory Sams' latest blog post about the election, titled "What flavour of sh*t will voters select?":

Spoiler

As America decides upon a new leader is it not bizarre to find ourselves debating whether a narcissistic psychopath, with no political experience or corporate sponsors, would be preferable to a bad actress pretending to be human, in the pockets of bankers and corporations? And we’ve still got Bernie in the mix, a man of the people and one just as capable as any to crash the ship of state onto the rocks. Ted Cruz is now out of the picture.

Why all the excitement this time? It’s as though decades of Americans have had the choice of either dog sh*t or cat sh*t on their political menu. They’ve come to dislike the taste of both, decrying the evils of the political process while validating it with their vote. This year, for the first time ever, there are two new options on the menu – pig sh*t and horse manure. The simple logic for many is that however unsavoury these new excrements may be they “can’t be any worse than what we’ve already got so why not?”

Those who hate the straw of horse manure getting caught in their teeth might opt for pig sh*t, the nutritionally denser option. Those who’d prefer the vegetarian source will opt for horse manure, needing more chewing to extract its nutritional value – but better for the planet. And many will stick with the same old sh*t, hoping it might taste better coming from a female animal. Some even profess to like their chosen diet and argue its virtues.

...

For many today, much of government itself seems generously endowed in bullsh*t, with politicians consistently ranking as the least trusted of all the professions, below estate agents and bankers. But people are not so much upset about having to search through the bullshit to find things of value, as at the reduction in good stuff to be found, as less and less of our taxed wealth gets sprinkled back in valuable and essential services.

Very few like the wars, corruption, infighting, corporate control, appalling waste, callousness, loss of freedoms and underlying brutality of the state apparatus that rules this nation of people. But they accept it as “the way it is” and hold up gems like worker’s safety and the NHS, building standards and the laying of roads, in the assumption that humanity could never have arrived at those desirable places by any other means. Of course, we the people do all this stuff and get paid for with our own money – you don’t see politicians or civil servant laying roads or performing heart surgery.

...

Before assuming the state to be a necessary evil consider that it was not the state that built canals, railways, the London Underground and laid telegraph cables across the Atlantic; it was people who set up the first charities for alcoholics, the homeless, single mothers; people who created product and service certification standards such as the Fairtrade Mark and Soil Association; people who created wine, airplanes, jewelry, radio, TV, bread, the personal computer, buttons and smartphones. Britain’s Royal National Lifeboat service is charity and volunteer based, as are many of America’s rural fire services.

We complain constantly about out-of-touch bureaucrats making daft rules; spending billions, our billions, on pointless wars, failed NHS projects, obsolete-at-birth nuclear submarines, overpriced rail schemes and a fiscally disastrous nuclear power establishment. We desperately wish that our rulers would stop waging wars and pandering to the power of corporations, bailing out the bankers who supply them with thin-air money. We want them to help the disadvantaged, create rewarding employment, and defend the rights of their people. But when it comes to the crunch, this is not what ruling is about. We keep hoping that some savvy saint will get to the top and transform government into a caring and compassionate enterprise, will make a barrel of rotten apples fresh and crisp again. Dream on.

...

There have been many successful cultures that progressed without a set of rulers setting the rules and telling us what we may or may not think, do or consume. Human civilization and trade preceded the concept of a ruling class, whether in South America or early Mesopotamia, tribal Europe or the Indus Valley. Cities and civilizations developed and functioned in freedom, without rulers, for thousands of years in some cases. You have to create wealth before plunderers arise.

You can imagine how difficult, often terrible, it must have been for those first generations to come under the yoke of a ruler claiming authority over their lives at the point of a sword. Today’s rulers rarely need to wave their swords, such is the compliance of their subjects to be governed, subjects who equate freedom with occasionally having influence over what flavor of ruler they get. This is not democracy, this is not self-rule or true freedom.

...

In short, as much as we may think this sh*t is essential to our lives, we may one day discover that we can live without it. There is another way.

Read More

[lego 44,165]

reposting my status

 

[brendablethyn 536]

Both of them will be too damaged to govern. 

[lego 44,165]

@Didymus I'm dying I almost threw up. 

[Morphine Prince 109,983]

14 minutes ago, HEARTHUNTER said:

Either way it will be a huge mess

Me on election day when I have to wait more than 20 minutes to vote for the lesser evil, Clinton:

 

[gagaforgaga2010 129]

To be honest, I don't hate Bernie, but I do think he feeds on the entitlement of the younger generation. I had my friend's brother go off on me because I had positive things to say about Hillary. He was like "I need free college and a $15 minimum wage". I was absolutely floored at the sheer selfishness of that statement. I replied "Though my estate taxes will not increase, my income tax will. And I don't have an extra 5,000 to give to Uncle Sam just because you think you're entitled to something myself and half the country have paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for". Bernie isn't God and Hillary isn't Satan, and I hope to the Higher Power that my generation wakes up in time to see that.

[brizoda 4,203]

this is nothing new. a lot of people voted against Obama, not against the democràtic party

[Bonkers 30,871]

That's evidence for what I suspected.  When hardcore Bernie folks are polled, they say Trump so that the polling will look bad for Hillary (and boost Bernie)

I believe many will just not vote for Hillary - but I can't imagine anyone who believes what Bernie is all about actually voting for Trump to just because they're a sore loser.  Say what you want about Hillary, but she is highly regarded around the world and is infinitely more likely to keep everything safe.

[Morphine Prince 109,983]

3 minutes ago, Bonkers said:

That's evidence for what I suspected.  When hardcore Bernie folks are polled, they say Trump so that the polling will look bad for Hillary (and boost Bernie)

I believe many will just not vote for Hillary - but I can't imagine anyone who believes what Bernie is all about actually voting for Trump to just because they're a sore loser.  Say what you want about Hillary, but she is highly regarded around the world and is infinitely more likely to keep everything safe.

It's not evidence at all. You are assuming this is what's happening. I'm sure most Bernie supporters fall in the category that they're voting for Clinton to stop Trump. 

[brizoda 4,203]

5 minutes ago, Bonkers said:

That's evidence for what I suspected.  When hardcore Bernie folks are polled, they say Trump so that the polling will look bad for Hillary (and boost Bernie)

I believe many will just not vote for Hillary - but I can't imagine anyone who believes what Bernie is all about actually voting for Trump to just because they're a sore loser.  Say what you want about Hillary, but she is highly regarded around the world and is infinitely more likely to keep everything safe.

you're wrong. If Hillary wins, this would mean more wars at the middle east. and a lot more problems with China and Russia. more refugees (more suffering)