3 ms·

You are on the verge of voting a women into office that is likely the most corrupt politician in US history that has ever run for this office. How on earth is e

You are on the verge of voting a women into office that is likely the most corrupt politician in US history that has ever run for this office. How on earth is exposing this bad for your country, you want to be ruled by people who steal and lie to you about what they are going to do? How did she earn $250 million dollars while in public office? Oh and Assange is not a US citizen, why would anyone expect him to think like one, let alone make it a requirement.

wslh 10y ago
I am neither an US citizen nor living in US, and have not said anything about Hillary in my reply.
empath75 10y ago
I'm not against publishing this stuff in general. And in a normal election, it would be totally disqualifying. There are mitigating circumstances, however. 1) Her opponent is totally unqualified for the presidency, and is basically a fascist, and a bigot, and obsessed with revenge. 2) The information was obtained via espionage by a foreign power, attempting to interfere in the US election. I can only imagine what kind of stuff we'd find in RNC emails. As far as I'm concerned the correct course of action here is to elect Hillary, and then have congressional hearings into both the contents of those emails, and the methods by which they were obtained. Hillary is a crooked in the usual way that politicians are. We can survive another crooked politician in the White House for four years. Trump would be the end of the republic.
- BoorishBears 10y ago
  > Trump would be the end of the republic. That's not exaggeration? To me, it's insulting the people who founded this country to imply that all it takes to defeat an intricate system of governance they founded to ensure the preservation of their country is an uncouth man becoming president.
  - drewbug 10y ago
    The people who founded this country didn't know about nuclear weapons.
  - empath75 10y ago
    It's been two hundred years and there has been plenty of time to erode the checks and balances that keep the executive in check. The president literally has the power to end all life on earth. How is congress going to check that? Not to mention the power of the surveillance state.
  - JoeAltmaier 10y ago
    Michael Dell wrote, that every time Dell doubled in size they had to reinvent their processes. The good ol' USA has grown by orders of magnitude. And we're still trying to use the same rules that worked for horses and written letters and muskets. We've rarely even revisited the rules, much less rewrite them. Yes I think its a fragile thing, that depends upon the good will of the people executing the processes. When they brag about how they're going to twist the rules for personal vendettas, then we should all worry.
    - BoorishBears 10y ago
      There are parts of the constitution that show their age (The second amendment being written in a time before modern weapons, nuclear arms, and drones where the people really could keep a government in check), but I don't buy the concept of a president without absolute power has eroded so far that one "bad president" could bring about the end of the US. Are you seriously considering what that'd even mean? What would "the end of the republic as the GP mentioned even mean? The president has more power than ever, but Trump will not be the end of the United States because the system of governance we have limits the harm he could do. I honestly think Trump would be less likely to bring about WW3 (the only barely realistic way I could see the fall of the US happening) than any other candidate if only for his lack of sophistication.
      - JoeAltmaier 10y ago

wslh 10y ago

I am neither an US citizen nor living in US, and have not said anything about Hillary in my reply.

empath75 10y ago

I'm not against publishing this stuff in general. And in a normal election, it would be totally disqualifying. There are mitigating circumstances, however. 1) Her opponent is totally unqualified for the presidency, and is basically a fascist, and a bigot, and obsessed with revenge. 2) The information was obtained via espionage by a foreign power, attempting to interfere in the US election. I can only imagine what kind of stuff we'd find in RNC emails. As far as I'm concerned the correct course of action here is to elect Hillary, and then have congressional hearings into both the contents of those emails, and the methods by which they were obtained. Hillary is a crooked in the usual way that politicians are. We can survive another crooked politician in the White House for four years. Trump would be the end of the republic.

BoorishBears 10y ago
> Trump would be the end of the republic. That's not exaggeration? To me, it's insulting the people who founded this country to imply that all it takes to defeat an intricate system of governance they founded to ensure the preservation of their country is an uncouth man becoming president.
- drewbug 10y ago
  The people who founded this country didn't know about nuclear weapons.
- empath75 10y ago
  It's been two hundred years and there has been plenty of time to erode the checks and balances that keep the executive in check. The president literally has the power to end all life on earth. How is congress going to check that? Not to mention the power of the surveillance state.
- JoeAltmaier 10y ago
  Michael Dell wrote, that every time Dell doubled in size they had to reinvent their processes. The good ol' USA has grown by orders of magnitude. And we're still trying to use the same rules that worked for horses and written letters and muskets. We've rarely even revisited the rules, much less rewrite them. Yes I think its a fragile thing, that depends upon the good will of the people executing the processes. When they brag about how they're going to twist the rules for personal vendettas, then we should all worry.
  - BoorishBears 10y ago
    There are parts of the constitution that show their age (The second amendment being written in a time before modern weapons, nuclear arms, and drones where the people really could keep a government in check), but I don't buy the concept of a president without absolute power has eroded so far that one "bad president" could bring about the end of the US. Are you seriously considering what that'd even mean? What would "the end of the republic as the GP mentioned even mean? The president has more power than ever, but Trump will not be the end of the United States because the system of governance we have limits the harm he could do. I honestly think Trump would be less likely to bring about WW3 (the only barely realistic way I could see the fall of the US happening) than any other candidate if only for his lack of sophistication.
    - JoeAltmaier 10y ago