Hillary history is that of a saint!
Rigged economy, not the election. Context matters
Trump is just a big baby who can't stand losing.
Never said she is a saint. Just pointing out that Trump is shady as hell and some people can't seem to see that.
You support a bloody murdering genocidalist over a con man, congrats
Honestly there is no logical sense to think Hitlery is the lesser of the evil, none whatsoever.
My logical sense is not to vote for either.
Johnson may be an "idiot" but he isn't a criminal or shady douche, and he does seem to support more individual freedoms than Trump or Hillary. Granted, he doesn't stand a chance this election, but this is how I rank libertarians and candidates this election:
I've been watching more and more stuff about him, and he just strikes me as a simpleton. He also very easily folds when pressured about his stances. I just can't get behind getting rid of things like the Department of Education, HUD, etc. either. Libertarianism is very short-sighted IMO, no offense. It makes these grand claims of deregulating everything without seeming to have any thought about how to get there or the consequences.
There's a HUGE difference between having personal freedom and helping those less fortunate. I know, charities can take up the slack, blah, blah (I've heard it all, I have several Libertarian friends). Some of the countries with the largest degree of personal freedom have high degrees of government involvement, i.e. most Scandinavian countries. And no, I don't like the "Human Freedom" index written by the Cato Institute
I forget what class it was, but a professor I had was so obsessed with income inequality, and used it a way to show how "bad" the USA was, but didn't mention any other type of income statistics that HAVE to be taken into consideration for income inequality to even be relevant (such as average, median, etc). So if there is high income inequality, but a relatively high average/median income, that's somehow worse than having low income inequality but also low average/median income? If that's the case, then just make sure everyone has no money, and you've eliminated income inequality, because 0=0.
How about Libertarian-leaning then? Or Libertarian with some safety nets? I think hays something that a lot of people can get behind. I just like the idea of a government that says you can do what you want as long as it doesn't infringe on someone else's rights (or their ability to do what they want).I've been watching more and more stuff about him, and he just strikes me as a simpleton. He also very easily folds when pressured about his stances. I just can't get behind getting rid of things like the Department of Education, HUD, etc. either. Libertarianism is very short-sighted IMO, no offense. It makes these grand claims of deregulating everything without seeming to have any thought about how to get there or the consequences.
There's a HUGE difference between having personal freedom and helping those less fortunate. I know, charities can take up the slack, blah, blah (I've heard it all, I have several Libertarian friends). Some of the countries with the largest degree of personal freedom have high degrees of government involvement, i.e. most Scandinavian countries. And no, I don't like the "Human Freedom" index written by the Cato Institute
Me too. The thing is, in reality, it's only an ideological compromise, not a practical one, as we already have social nets, and likely will for the foreseeable future, so a trend towards some libertarian beliefs (specifically more personal freedoms) would be great, even if safety nets stay in place.
Austrian or Australian? I've seen both mentioned LOL.
I've read a lot about Libertarianism, trust me. I've also had many act all high and mighty like this as well
The other thing is that there is a large spectrum of Libertarian beliefs, hard to single out one as being "true" Libertarianism.
I meant Austrian. I say there is only one because a true libertarian society will allow other societies to flourish, Austrian economics is as right as right can go. Allowing individuals and private property to be truly private. Left libertarianism promotes collectivism which historically speaking promotes aggression on individuals or outsiders.
Australian economics involves significantly more kangaroos I think.Austrian or Australian? I've seen both mentioned LOL.
I've read a lot about Libertarianism, trust me. I've also had many act all high and mighty like this as well
The other thing is that there is a large spectrum of Libertarian beliefs, hard to single out one as being "true" Libertarianism.
On the contrary; now we can argue that the poles are biased and/or intentionally skewed/altered/fabricated
On the contrary; now we can argue that the poles are biased and/or intentionally skewed/altered/fabricated
When she's President, can we still blame Bush for everything, or do we have to blame Obama now?
I think we've all seen what Dump's capable of. Inciting violence, fanning the flames of discontent and malice - especially within the far right (or as I like to say, fanning the flames of stoopidity), and a whole lot of fluff and bull****ting. He was decent at flying by the seat of his pants but most intelligent people could see he had no idea what he was doing and wasn't fit for president. But of course, this is just my libtarded opinion