Nader Redux: Green Party Nominee Jill Stein Invites Sanders To Take Over

[Guest]

1 hour ago, LebaneseDude said:

Stop trying to frame her wanting votes as self-entitlement. That's what people in elections do.

She already has her **** together. You're just too mad at her for some reason to see it.

Like honestly what has her CAMPAIGN done incorrectly so far? Tell me?

She's speaking on the issues and is showing what her real opponent in the general is about. That's what people always do in contests like these.

Her catch phrase is literally "I'm With Her" & gurl to say she's honest and straight forward with us is simply not true, she lies so much even now with the FBI thing even after the facts are out she insists nothing was classified at the time...

 

She can't debate for the life of her & at every single debate with Bernie she made herself look so stupid, look @ NY Debate where she was booed so many times, or even Flint; why would you say you support Fracking in Flint, she lies about everything else she couldn't just lie about that too? And the way her and the DNC have set up the thing against Bernie from the beginning is disgusting, y'all got mad at Bernie saying the truth but she was plain ruthless.

 

She is a total embarrassment to progressives everywhere, she wouldn't do anything of what she claims to do now had it not been for Bernie's push & Donald Trump being the Devil. She is a fraud, she is a crook... being happy she didn't get an indictment is you also you being happy that she is above the law, that Comey said she broke the law and anybody else would have been in trouble is you being blind enough to be happy the system is rigged. Had the email thing been Bernie you would have gone off on him, I personally would have never supported him.

 

She is a pro-war, bad trade deal, big bank loving crook; yeah she said she changed but that's like hearing a prostitute saying she's gonna be celibate. What's your stance on her charity taking money from countries where being Gay is illegal, or where Women are oppressed, or her lowering the Haiti minimum wage, or having no problem with killing other people's kids?

 

You asked me what problem I have with her campaign, WHY DON'T YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH HER?!

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

3 minutes ago, YourSweet666 said:

 

Why do you always quote me?

Why do you always think I care what you have to say?

I was not talking to you.

Simon chose to say something in my name, because he thinks he knows me, so let him reply. 

 

I quote you because you make as much posts about Israel and Palestine than I do regarding politics.

It's a persistent theme that you under represent the situation there for your own agenda, which by the way I agree on when it comes to Palestinians.

Just because someone supports Israel doesn't mean they support oppressing Palestinians. At worst, Israel is a necessary "evil" that the US needs in order to maintain order in the Middle East.

There are no easy solutions. The Middle East is a turbulent place and direct "obvious" solutions don't work there. 

I believe that the apartheid needs to end and Israel needs to cool its overreaction to Palestinian violence resulting from oppression, but I also understand why the USA would support Israel given the Middle Eastern battleground with Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and other countries in the mix.

---

I find it odd that you are so averse to conversations about this. Do you like living in an echo chamber? You're not from the Middle East. Your words are based on nothing but ideals rather than personal experience. You should be seeking out conversations with people like me, not pushing us away just because we disagree on your conclusions. 

Whatever. Don't post in my threads if you don't want to get quoted. You should know this by now.

[lego 44,165]

I will post wherever I like. This is not a personal blog. I can just mute you again. 

 

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

54 minutes ago, ALEXANDRE said:

Her catch phrase is literally "I'm With Her" 

Alright I'm going to try to be less aggro and try to talk with you on a more level-headed manner.

What are you trying to say regarding her slogan? Her supporters are the ones who say "I'm with her". She's not implying that people should be with her. I don't see how you can get that interpretation.

Do you NOT think that her platform has not been influenced by the fact that she's a woman? Do you think her work regarding women and children's rights is not due to what she experiences as a woman? Do you not think that her inherent characteristic of being a woman has not been a barrier for her? 

Her being a woman is a fundemental part of her campaign, not because she's pandering to the fact that she's a woman, but because her being a woman has shaped her viewpoints in a way that only a woman would know. 

For women, minorities, LGBT people, etc... the fact that the potential candidate is someone who has that experience of being marginalized is an important factor.

----

54 minutes ago, ALEXANDRE said:

she's honest and straight forward with us is simply not true, she lies so much even now with the FBI thing even after the facts are out she insists nothing was classified at the time...

Nobody ever said Hillary was the embodiment of honesty and everyone including me agrees that Hillary has a problem with transparency.

However there's the misconception here that lack of transparency implies dishonesty. 

Hillary has problems with transparency due to her distrust of the media. Look at her history. Look how easily twisted her words are by mass media. Look at how they blow the scandals out of proportion for ratings, squeezing them for all they're worth as a First Lady, Senator, SoS, and presidential candidate.

I personally take issue with people calling her a chronic liar. That's fundamentally untrue. 

Here's a documentation of her statements' veracity by a Pulitzer Prize winning fact checker Politifact:

As you can see, of the contested statements she has made, approximately a quarter of them can qualify as some sort of lie.

Now you can think that's still a lot, but that's actually pretty much close to the average politician. 

Even presumably honest ones like Sanders score similarly.

 

What's happening here is that the media is tunneling on Hillary's very few mistruths and blowing them out of proportion, giving the image of her being a consistent liar. People believe that because they don't hear all the hundreds of truths she said. They only look at the bad parts.

Now one can contest the statements you are saying about her lying in the e-mail investigation because according to the FBI, Hillary did not to her knowledge realize she was not completely correct.

For example, one "lie" that you mention is whether she deleted emails with classified information.

It was revealed that three emails out of 300,000 did have some classified information.

The GOP tried to twist that as saying that she lied.

Later on, it was shown by a Democrat that the e-mails did NOT have a REQUIRED classified tag in the title of the message, only a (C) in the body.

How can you, a rational person, extrapolate that she must have lied when it can be just as easily ascertained that it was done by accident?

54 minutes ago, ALEXANDRE said:

She can't debate for the life of her & at every single debate with Bernie she made herself look so stupid, look @ NY Debate where she was booed so many times, or even Flint; why would you say you support Fracking in Flint, she lies about everything else she couldn't just lie about that too? And the way her and the DNC have set up the thing against Bernie from the beginning is disgusting, y'all got mad at Bernie saying the truth but she was plain ruthless.

Now this is just untrue. Even Obama has stated that Hillary was a formidable challenge in debates due to her extensive knowledge of the subject materials.

I don't understand why you feel compelled to denigrate Hillary in order to make Bernie look better. Bernie did fine in the debates. So did Hillary. They were compelling. They both discussed matters that are important to us. 

Why are you bringing up the "boos"? Those were done by overzealous supporters of Sanders or by Republican plants. I don't understand why you bring that up as a judge of her character. Some people don't like her. That's fine.

You seem to be bringing up random points to make your arguments. She did support fracking before because she thought the benefits outweighed the costs. It's a fair argument to be made. You are basing your opinion on fracking only due to the environmental effects. Hillary also takes the economic impact into consideration. Perhaps you feel comfortable in having strong opinions, but people's livelihoods are on the line here.

Now don't take that as an endorsement of fracking by me. I'm glad she switched sides, and I believe the long term benefits outweight the short-term damages. Hillary believes that now too. She should be commended.

In fact this is a frequent problem I see. People disparage others for having different opinions. Then when the others switch their opinions, they're disparaged for not being on the "right" team all along. How does that help anyone?

54 minutes ago, ALEXANDRE said:

 

She is a total embarrassment to progressives everywhere, she wouldn't do anything of what she claims to do now had it not been for Bernie's push & Donald Trump being the Devil. She is a fraud, she is a crook... being happy she didn't get an indictment is you also you being happy that she is above the law, that Comey said she broke the law and anybody else would have been in trouble is you being blind enough to be happy the system is rigged. Had the email thing been Bernie you would have gone off on him, I personally would have never supported him.

You can't say that. Hillary's current agenda is very similar to where she was in 2015. Bernie did not have as big an impact as you think.

Of course it would be obtuse to deny that he didn't. It wasn't directly because of him though. Bernie did something good in inspiring many of the younger generation to engage in political conversations and bring about their problems and desires to the forefront. Bernie did a great job in revitalizing the political participation of younger people. 

This had the affect of allowing Hillary to take bolder action with her planned policies because now she is confident that she will be capable of doing that with the support from the younger people.

Do you understand? She had to be practical and now that she has support she can actually do even more. 

So this is why I have NEVER stated that it wasn't a good thing that Bernie run. He did a great job. I just wish he'd stepped aside sooner when the primary contest was over. It's all good. He's going to endorse her on Tuesday.

----

You cannot call Hillary a crook. She has never been charged. Comey did not say she broke the law. She said she did not follow the guidelines set by the state. He admitted she had no malevolent intent, cooperated fully, and did not obstruct justice. If you want to believe that she is guilty, then go right ahead. However despite the fact that every single scandal she has had involved dozens of investigations, all consistently exonerating her, it all goes to show that nothing came from them.

She just did mistakes. She fumbled here and there. She didn't always make the right choices.

Does that make someone a criminal? No. It just makes them human.

She has an error rate of approximately 0.5%. Tell me. How much do YOU mess up? Are you as hard on yourself as you are on Hillary?

54 minutes ago, ALEXANDRE said:

 

She is a pro-war, bad trade deal, big bank loving crook; yeah she said she changed but that's like hearing a prostitute saying she's gonna be celibate. What's your stance on her charity taking money from countries where being Gay is illegal, or where Women are oppressed, or her lowering the Haiti minimum wage, or having no problem with killing other people's kids?

She is not pro-war. She is pro-intervention and frankly I believe it is a misguided viewpoint to believe that the USA has no responsibility towards maintaining RELATIVE global peace.

Ignoring all that, the Bush administration decided to engage in an unfounded war and destabilized the region. What's done is done.

Do you personally believe that the USA should not be accountable for making sure that the situation doesn't increase?

Do you think the USA should withdraw and let the **** deal with itself?

Once again, ignoring all that, do you believe that ISIS should not be contained?

Do you believe that Russia/Iran/China bloc should be able to overpower the other powers in the region?

Do you believe that the life of my Lebanese Christian family is less valuable than yours?

If you answered yes to any of these questions, then you don't support peace. 

----

I don't have an answer regarding your question.

Do you object to Hillary's foundation taking donations from countries that have certain policies that conflict with what you believe in?

Why do you only focus on LGBT issues?

What about women's rights? Do you believe she should not take money from countries that treat women badly? 

What about racial rights? Economic rights? Political rights?

Why do you use LGBT rights as the definitive marker?

By your logic, the only countries that should donate money to the foundation are some parts of the USA, Western European countries, and Canada.

Not only that is a culturally insensitive and borderline xenophobic belief, it also believes that a charity should not be practical in what it can and cannot solve.

The Clinton Foundation may not be able to help improve gay rights in Saudi Arabia, but it has been singlehandedly responsible for reducing HIV medication costs. Almost 10 million people with HIV or AIDS around the world have benefited from more affordable medicine because of the Clinton Foundation. And since 2002, the Clinton Health Access Initiative has reduced the cost of HIV and AIDS medications in many countries from over $10,000 per person per year to just $100 to $200 per person per year.

So tell me. Is the good being done not worth it?

Why do you politicize the charity foundation, chastising her for taking money used to help others because you take issue with where it came?

Do you disparage other charities for taking money from Republicans who continually battle LGBT rights advancements among MANY other progressive values?

You may have the luxury, but that African mother doesn't give a damn. She wants her son to live.

54 minutes ago, ALEXANDRE said:

You asked me what problem I have with her campaign, WHY DON'T YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH HER?!

I don't know. I appreciate you taking the time to lay out your opinion, but you haven't really addressed major points regarding her policies. You have simply repeated the same general rhetoric used by the media and are using personal attacks against her to justify some incompetence.

You didn't tell me WHY she should be a bad president. Just why you think she's a bad person.

If you want, I can lay out why I think she's a good person and a good president rather than only defend her from the bad things.

We can talk more about this if you're interested.  

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

43 minutes ago, YourSweet666 said:

I will post wherever I like. This is not a personal blog. I can just mute you again. 

 

Oh that's fine. You can post what you want. I never stated that you should not. In fact I agree with many of your opinions regarding the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

Why do you think I'm trying to shut you up?

I'm trying to have a conversation with you regarding your demonization of anyone that supports the Israeli people.

You're the one that takes offense when people challenge your views. You can take your own advice and make a blog if you wish. I'd certainly read it  

[socotra 3,357]

GO GREENS!!!!!!!!!