Clinton or Trump - Please Vote

[Guest]

Because government experience is the be all, end all. It's not like the career politicians have led us down this road.

[Tycooner]

I dont even know what to say

 

to even think trump would be better than Hillary is something i can't understand at all

 

[GiankaBonghi]

I dont even know what to say

 

to even think trump would be better than Hillary is something i can't understand at all

 

 

Same for me, in reverse lol.

[shockg]

 

Never said that once. The closest thing I said to that was "I can't understand how anyone who isn't a racist biggot would vote for him". And I can't. So anyone who isn't a racist who would vote for him, as I'm sure there are many, I would be fascinated to know how you can possibly vote for such a disgusting, openly racist man.

 

Anyway, it was not my intention to wade in here and tell people who support Donald Trump to go and vote for someone else. I'm not sure that someone who's decided they're voting for trump would change their mind based on a persuasive argument. I guess the reason I ended up being so vocal was the inaction is an action thing... I'm just frankly not OK with sitting by and watching this hate monger in action and I want to make that very clear.

 

 

 

 

Everything's always the media's fault. Before the Brexit vote here, the leave campaigners said over and over that it would cause damage to the pound. The leavers said that was scaremongering. We left. The pound crashed to 1970s levels. The leavers blamed the media for causing the crash because of their "negativity". They're already blaming the potential recession on the media and negativity, even though that's what all the economists said would happen if we left. Yes, the media does often dictate the agenda but Donald Trump made this campaign about race, about fear and about division. He'll keep doing that for the whole process.

 

I agree wholeheartedly Mike. Especially that second to last sentence.

[shockg]

 

But that's Democrats attacking Jews.. which is completely acceptable to them. Democrats only give a shit about Jews when it comes time for voting.

 

Actually, Evangelicals are Israel's largest supporters in the United States. By far.

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=evangelical+supports+israel&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

[Tycooner]

And once again you have no idea about American cabinet politics or how they work. The Secretary of state doesn't "basically" control foreign relations. That is a statement that highlights your ignorance of my country and it's government.

"The Secretary of state doesn't "basically" control foreign relations"

well yes "basically" they do sir

The Secretary of State is a senior official of the federal government of the United States of America

heading the U.S. Department of State, principally concerned with foreign policy

and is considered to be the U.S. government's equivalent of a Minister for Foreign Affairs.

As the highest-ranking member of the cabinet, the Secretary of State is the third-highest official

of the executive branch of the Federal Government of the United States after the President and Vice President

and is fourth in line to succeed the Presidency

The specific duties of the Secretary of State include

Organizes and supervises the entire United States Department of State and the United States Foreign Service

Advises the President on matters relating to U.S. foreign policy

including the appointment of diplomatic representatives to other nations

and on the acceptance or dismissal of representatives from other nations

Participates in high-level negotiations with other countries

either bilaterally or as part of an international conference or organization

or appoints representatives to do so.

This includes the negotiation of international treaties and other agreements

Responsible for overall direction, coordination, and supervision of interdepartmental activities of the

U.S. Government overseas

Ensures the protection of the U.S. Government to American citizens, property, and interests in foreign countries

Supervises the United States immigration policy abroad

The nature of the position means that Secretaries of State engage in travel around the world. The record for most countries visited in a secretary's tenure is 112

by Hillary Rodham Clinton.

[kenlow73]

So, if you want to bring up political expierence, Johnson and Weld have more than Trump.

[Tycooner]

So, if you want to bring up political expierence, Johnson and Weld have more than Trump.

 

Yes sir they do and both Johnson and Weld would be better than trump shit i would take bush over trump and i am not a bush fan at all.

[PBR]

I find it odd how so many people that do not live in usa feel they know whats best for usa just by going off media. -- I mean thats like me for instance telling someone from uk or another country how or whats best for them -- I dont live there i have no clue other than what the media wishes to release

 

 

now is trump good? NO -- is hillary good? FUCK NO ------- do i choose trump over hillary? HELL YEA!!!! (if a 3rd party ever had a chance they might this time but sadly they still dont) -- the system is rigged and government is corrupt -- hillary will be nothing but a million times worse as she is most corrupt there is and this is been proven so much over last few yrs --------- hillary is just as racist as anyone ever and divides just as much or more than trump -- i live america and see many of the problems and issues first hand and how the government treats its own people -- to me america needs to stop worrying about others and worry about ourselves -- to hell with fighting other countries wars or rebuilding afterwards, pfft rebuild here -- america first all others second -- and this isnt being racist i feel other countries should do and feel the same way -- dont even know if making any sense, lol -- on pain meds for fucked up neck again -- anyway go TRUMP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! "Let's make America great again"

 

 

on side note here just talking -- back in late 70's throughout 80's everything was "Made in America" thats all that stores sold period -- they advertised it that way proud of everything being "Made in America" -- now through messed up trade agreements and other bad moves nothing is made in america anymore -- take biggest store around walmart -- their main logo and sales pitch back then was everything made in america -- now you cant find anything made in america in stores anymore

 

 

also on trump banning all muslims why not? -- other presidents have banned certain groups before, pretty sure at least 2 have done it before and they were dems -- just like bringing 10's of thousands here to hell with that

[shockg]

 

"The Secretary of state doesn't "basically" control foreign relations"

well yes "basically" they do sir

The Secretary of State is a senior official of the federal government of the United States of America

heading the U.S. Department of State, principally concerned with foreign policy

and is considered to be the U.S. government's equivalent of a Minister for Foreign Affairs.

As the highest-ranking member of the cabinet, the Secretary of State is the third-highest official

of the executive branch of the Federal Government of the United States after the President and Vice President

and is fourth in line to succeed the Presidency

The specific duties of the Secretary of State include

Organizes and supervises the entire United States Department of State and the United States Foreign Service

Advises the President on matters relating to U.S. foreign policy

including the appointment of diplomatic representatives to other nations

and on the acceptance or dismissal of representatives from other nations

Participates in high-level negotiations with other countries

either bilaterally or as part of an international conference or organization

or appoints representatives to do so.

This includes the negotiation of international treaties and other agreements

Responsible for overall direction, coordination, and supervision of interdepartmental activities of the

U.S. Government overseas

Ensures the protection of the U.S. Government to American citizens, property, and interests in foreign countries

Supervises the United States immigration policy abroad

The nature of the position means that Secretaries of State engage in travel around the world. The record for most countries visited in a secretary's tenure is 112

by Hillary Rodham Clinton.

 

 

You forgot the part about how they are appointed by the President and have to do what he says or they get booted. They have some autonomy, as described above. Really though, if they don't do as they are told they are gone. Almost all cabinet appointees serve at will of the President.

 

That's why I said the little blurb about cabinet politics. She has to answer to more people than just the President on Foreign Policy. A lot more people.

[Tycooner]

 

You forgot the part about how they are appointed by the President and have to do what he says or they get booted. They have some autonomy, as described above. Really though, if they don't do as they are told they are gone. Almost all cabinet appointees serve at will of the President.

 

That's why I said the little blurb about cabinet politics. She has to answer to more people than just the President on Foreign Policy. A lot more people.

The president pick her because of her views on Foreign Policy

[Guest]

Third parties will never have a chance when you say you won't vote for them until they have a chance.

 

Banning muslims... I'd rather ban christians first, they have committed and continue to commit atrocities both in the US and world wide.

 

I also love how if you are against Hillary you are for Trump, way to play into the broken ass 2 party system we have now. This is what the big 2 want... all the while anally raping you but making you think your side is better and winning.

[GiankaBonghi]

The president pick her because of her views on Foreign Policy

 

Dude just give up with him, he was just there to pick a retarded internet fight with me, funny thing is that he said europeans dont know shit about american politics, well look at him now how he is backpedaling.

 

40 yo brony, nutcase and McCain lover, rambling some 12yo stuff in the buzzfeed , i dont really need to explain anything more.

 

He dress like a minuteman in front of the mirror too, probably , with all that nonsense about war heroes he spit around.

[GiankaBonghi]

I find it odd how so many people that do not live in usa feel they know whats best for usa just by going off media. -- I mean thats like me for instance telling someone from uk or another country how or whats best for them -- I dont live there i have no clue other than what the media wishes to release

 

 

 

If you are referring for me, thats not the case, you are just giving your interpretation as an american.

 

Because first of all, US is not UK, you know what i mean??

 

US is the last superpower in the world more or less, there is no more a bipolar world, your government not only dictate where your country will go but also the European Union as a whole, we did sanctions to Russia at request of USA afterall, losing billions of $ in the process.

 

Foreigners are interested in US foreign policies, not in what the US is going to do on theyr citizen, if thats what you really wanted to know, there i nothing odd since we are talking about USA, ofcourse i couldnt care less about who will be the next president of Zimbabwe, Trump , according to his speeches and plans, have a better foreign policy than the psycho of Hillary Clinton, thats the only thing i care and thats why i cheer for Trump.

 

The only thing i find "odd" to be honest, is that Mike is against Trump just because he sound racist in his speeches (i dont believe he is racist, at all) forgetting about all the rest, and how bad Hillary would be for Europeans and all the other small nations she want to invade.

[KingEpicity]

I don't even know where to get started with this mess but I will just start typing what comes to my mind first and go from there. At least this has become a stable discussion again for the most part.

 

First off, the biggest stand out of the thread is people admitting Johnson is a better candidate than the big 2 party presumptives yet many say the same thing, they won't vote for them unless they have a chance. Right above me DoctorWho says it best with "Third parties will never have a chance when you say you won't vote for them until they have a chance." This is true 100% and most Americans don't even realize this. The two party system is so ingrained in the system they have a number of checks and balances to hold third parties and independents in check. The first and biggest is big media is pretty much controlled by Republicans or Democrats and will essentially freeze out any possible news of any other candidate for presidents to the point where most Americans don't even know who else is running. This is why so many are saying choose the lesser evil right now for president. A lot of people are saying this, enough to make a difference but the main problem is no one is willing to do that unless they see results but they won't see results until people start saying they will vote for someone like Gary Johnson. That includes every single poll you see which once again, many polls out there won't even have anyone but Trump or Clinton on it. The main sub-point of this main problem is the fact that as a third party candidate, you can't even be apart of the main presidential debates(the ones most of the the Nation actually watches) unless you have enough evidence to say you have a shot at winning. You have to have a ridiculous 15% of support from the voters to even participate in these along with other factors the committee will use to keep them out if possible. Problem is they are froze of the big media so getting 15% is almost impossible unless every single person out there who thinks Johnson is the better option shows that support. If Johnson doesn't get into the presidential debate then yes he has 0% chance of winning the presidency. Even if that happens I still see no reason for anyone to be complicit in voting for either "evil". If you are one of the many Americans who dislike both Trump and Clinton and what shit Party 1.A and Party 1.B have dished up for the American people to eat this time, show your support and get Johnson into that debate. Something that hasn't happened since father Bush was running for president. If there was ever a chance for a third party candidate to make waves it's this election where so many are against Trump and Clinton both. Hell, if he actually gets a chance to speak to a major national audience like in the debates he already has the best speech ready "I'm not Trump or Clinton" -cue the roaring applause-.

 

I kinda rambled there so I apologize. I also don't understand how anyone can actually support banning all Muslims from entering the country. This is not WW2 for ffs. Have we not evolved as a society as a whole and realized that kind of behavior and handling of situations is wrong? It wasn't right when Japanese people were forced into camps and it's FAR wronger in this situation when you want to ban an entire loaf of bread because of a small spot of mold. Once again, media all over the world rears its ugly head and in the USA it's probably worse than most countries. Less than 1% of the Muslim population are considered "extremists" or "terrorists". Less than 1% in just about every study I have ever read. You are telling me you all support a plan to ban the other 99% from entering or enjoying our country because of 1%? That is wrong, plain wrong and to me it screams ignorance of the world. Now, if this was a full-proof, ironclad, air-sealed plan that would 100% guarantee to stop terrorism in our country than MAYBE you could make an argument that the good outweighs the bad but that's just not the case. There is no way of knowing what will happen but I do know it offends Muslims all over the world including the ones who are already citizens of our country. This will do nothing but make tensions all around the world and in our own country much much higher and in no way do I see it stopping terrorism. If anything it will only incite the people will mental issues already in our country to commit extreme acts like what it is already happening, take Tampa for example. Omar Mateen was born in New York, a ban on all Muslims would not of stopped half a hundred people from meeting their fates that night. If anything I believe it will only create more people like him with history of problems to getting pushed over that mental ledge. Banning all Muslims in my eyes, is more giving into the "terror" of terrorism than against it and I feel like Trump used this to exploit the fear of terrorism in Americans. Of course these are all my opinions, just like everyone else has there's but I don't see how this would make anything better, even on a global scale it just creates a bigger divide between the USA and the international Muslim community and all the countries that fall into the category who already have such a low opinion of us. I am an atheist yet I respect religion and it's place in the world and in people's lives.

 

I understand as citizens of other countries will have different views and will want different things from U.S. citizen because what may be better for us may not be better for your country in particular but my view is as an American I don't see how any evil can be lesser than the other. They both have huge glaring red flags that say they should never be a leader of a country, especially one with the power and pull internationally like the USA.

[shockg]

 

Dude just give up with him, he was just there to pick a retarded internet fight with me, funny thing is that he said europeans dont know shit about american politics, well look at him now how he is backpedaling.

 

40 yo brony, nutcase and McCain lover, rambling some 12yo stuff in the buzzfeed , i dont really need to explain anything more.

 

He dress like a minuteman in front of the mirror too, probably , with all that nonsense about war heroes he spit around.

I think this might be the funniest thing anyone has said about me in the Internet so far. I'm just going to fully mute you now. You are a child.

[GiankaBonghi]

About time, piss the fuck off from me.

[Guest]

About time, piss the fuck off from me.

 

Fuck you

[GiankaBonghi]

 

Fuck you

 

Ouch.

[MMATycoon]

 

But thats not racism....religion doesnt have anything to do with race, plus islamic terrorism exist because of muslims, because of stupid religion, by doing this he is ALSO not allowing anymore potential terrorists in his country, look the two sides of the coin not only one, you know better than me that it is impossible to stop terorism just by controlling and filtering the border, the most viable solution and the first step to the right direction is to stop the muslim immigration until they find a proper solution, like neutralize a criminal government like the one of Saudi royals and all theyr network of wahabism, including Qatar, UAE and all those imam on PAY WAGE to preach intolerance.

 

Now be real, what would be the first and most easier step to temporarily stop more terrorists from ruining your country?

 

 

It is literally (as in the proper use of the word literally) the dictionary definition of racism.

 

As for banning Muslims from entering the US being an easy way to temporarily stop terrorists from ruining your country... Well... it's basically the exact opposite, if you ask anyone with any experience / knowledge on the matter.

 

If Trump did ban all Muslims from entering the US, you can pretty much guarantee an increase in terrorism. Not that he could anyway but the mere mention of it is enough to increase the chance of terrorism, because terrorism comes out of hate, isolation and marginalization. You tell an entire religion that they are a problem or that they are unwanted, you're going to piss some of those people off enough to do something about it. It's the reason that France has more terrorist incidents than the neighbouring countries. They have a combative retoric to how they talk about terrorists and that doen't work. They've alienated Muslims for years by e.g. trying to ban Burkas. If a country is intolerant, it breeds hate and hate increases terrorism.

 

But hey, if Trump wins and terrorism goes up because of his hateful speeches, that'll be the media's fault in the eyes of his supporters.... not the guy actually preaching the hateful, divisive shit that fuels the fire.

[GiankaBonghi]

 

 

If Trump did ban all Muslims from entering the US, you can pretty much guarantee an increase in terrorism.

 

Because as of now, isnt the terrorism increasing already? since Bin Laden got killed and " mission accomplished blablablah yppeee kee yaa motherfuckers" ? despite Western countries being so open to muslims and immigration, integration bullshit, we are still getting slaughtered on a monthly basis, i did see an increase of terrorism already, what are we supposed to do then, keep going with the inaction??

[JLP]

Never said that once. The closest thing I said to that was "I can't understand how anyone who isn't a racist biggot would vote for him". And I can't. So anyone who isn't a racist who would vote for him, as I'm sure there are many, I would be fascinated to know how you can possibly vote for such a disgusting, openly racist man.

 

Anyway, it was not my intention to wade in here and tell people who support Donald Trump to go and vote for someone else. I'm not sure that someone who's decided they're voting for trump would change their mind based on a persuasive argument. I guess the reason I ended up being so vocal was the inaction is an action thing... I'm just frankly not OK with sitting by and watching this hate monger in action and I want to make that very clear.

The way you phrased it was terrible then. It came off as a whiny attack and if thats not how you meant it, then im sorry. Talking as if the only reason you could think people would want to vote for Trump is because they are racist is rather juvenile and shows a complete lack of understanding of the US. Its a childish type of thinking that appeals to a base instinct, its the "people who dont think as I do must be horrible people" thought pattern that is pretty destructive and never leads to any productive conversation.

I get around a lot due to work and get to talk to a very diverse collection of people and I hear many different reasons about people supporting Trump. I'll list the ones I hear the most.

 

The economy. The economy for working class and middle class Americans is pretty awful. Especially compared to the late 80s and early to mid 90s. The good jobs that you could get without a college degree were sent out of the country. The ones that are still here pay far less then they did when inflation is factored in. Even college educated professionals have seen a hit to income/work conditions. I have a few accounts where I service process steam/cooling, 20 years ago the workers in there made around $20/hr with profit sharing /good insurance and benefits and were born in America. Now they make $10-15hr, are on obamacare(abysmal failure) or working/residing here illegally. The jobs leaving are a direct result of NAFTA, GATT and other "free trade" agreements. Bill Clinton was the first to sign one of these job-killer agreements and Trump has said he will re-negiotate them. That promise right there will garner him lots of support.

 

Crime. The murder/crime rate in the US had plummeted since the mid 80s. In the last few years it has spiked again. Many people have described it as "The Ferguson Effect" the idea that police have pulled back from the most dangerous neighborhoods rather then risk losing a career or being prosecuted as the result of a confrontation.

 

Obama's legacy. A horrible president in Bush got us a horrible president in Obama just because people wanted change and to punish the ruling party. Clinton is rightly seen as the continuation of the obama presidency. People will vote for trump because he isnt clinton.

 

Trump talks about all sorts of issues. You have keyed in on a few quotes he made.

 

 

[JLP]

 

 

It is literally (as in the proper use of the word literally) the dictionary definition of racism.

 

As for banning Muslims from entering the US being an easy way to temporarily stop terrorists from ruining your country... Well... it's basically the exact opposite, if you ask anyone with any experience / knowledge on the matter.

 

If Trump did ban all Muslims from entering the US, you can pretty much guarantee an increase in terrorism. Not that he could anyway but the mere mention of it is enough to increase the chance of terrorism, because terrorism comes out of hate, isolation and marginalization. You tell an entire religion that they are a problem or that they are unwanted, you're going to piss some of those people off enough to do something about it. It's the reason that France has more terrorist incidents than the neighbouring countries. They have a combative retoric to how they talk about terrorists and that doen't work. They've alienated Muslims for years by e.g. trying to ban Burkas. If a country is intolerant, it breeds hate and hate increases terrorism.

 

But hey, if Trump wins and terrorism goes up because of his hateful speeches, that'll be the media's fault in the eyes of his supporters.... not the guy actually preaching the hateful, divisive shit that fuels the fire.

Terrorism comes from blowback due to the West supporting Israel, intervening in the ME national/political affairs and bombing/invading them under false pretenses. The west's ME policies has encouraged the rise of radicalization of Islam aided by Saudi Arabia funding and exporting Wahabiists. France has experienced more terrorism because they have a large muslim population due to their heavy colonization of muslim N. African and the easy immigration allowed between the former colonies. Multi-culturalism then encouraged French Muslims to resist assimilation and live in isolated and impoverished communities that became breeding grounds for terrorists.

[Guest]

You still should be able to get good jobs without a college degree, it's just the college machine in league with corporations, government and the military have made it very hard on someone without a degree both socially and financially. Socially you are looked down on if you do real work or make something of yourself. Financially the colleges are lapping up these automatic loans like crazy. Got 1000 slots/year and you are charging 14000/year with 150% over subscription rate let's raise it to 16000. Wait... rate is still the same, let's raise it 18000. This is why the cost for college has exploded to the point where you have to depend on these loans which is what the government wants. Then corporations got in on the act and fuck if it matters how much experience you have, or what you learned/taught yourself.. if you don't have a piece of paper we aren't looking at your resume. Military is just as bad too, in the NCO ranks you had better get a 4 year for e7/8/9 and you probably will need a Masters. Hell, in the Army you start out as an E4 with a college degree... doesn't matter what it is in, could be general studies but you are supposed to be able to lead everyone below you and be 1 step from e5.

 

I don't have any college and really hoping my contacts and tenacity pull me through for my next job. Or whoever we are sold too brings me along... we will see.

[JLP]

I don't even know where to get started with this mess but I will just start typing what comes to my mind first and go from there. At least this has become a stable discussion again for the most part.

 

First off, the biggest stand out of the thread is people admitting Johnson is a better candidate than the big 2 party presumptives yet many say the same thing, they won't vote for them unless they have a chance. Right above me DoctorWho says it best with "Third parties will never have a chance when you say you won't vote for them until they have a chance." This is true 100% and most Americans don't even realize this. The two party system is so ingrained in the system they have a number of checks and balances to hold third parties and independents in check. The first and biggest is big media is pretty much controlled by Republicans or Democrats and will essentially freeze out any possible news of any other candidate for presidents to the point where most Americans don't even know who else is running. This is why so many are saying choose the lesser evil right now for president. A lot of people are saying this, enough to make a difference but the main problem is no one is willing to do that unless they see results but they won't see results until people start saying they will vote for someone like Gary Johnson. That includes every single poll you see which once again, many polls out there won't even have anyone but Trump or Clinton on it. The main sub-point of this main problem is the fact that as a third party candidate, you can't even be apart of the main presidential debates(the ones most of the the Nation actually watches) unless you have enough evidence to say you have a shot at winning. You have to have a ridiculous 15% of support from the voters to even participate in these along with other factors the committee will use to keep them out if possible. Problem is they are froze of the big media so getting 15% is almost impossible unless every single person out there who thinks Johnson is the better option shows that support. If Johnson doesn't get into the presidential debate then yes he has 0% chance of winning the presidency. Even if that happens I still see no reason for anyone to be complicit in voting for either "evil". If you are one of the many Americans who dislike both Trump and Clinton and what shit Party 1.A and Party 1.B have dished up for the American people to eat this time, show your support and get Johnson into that debate. Something that hasn't happened since father Bush was running for president. If there was ever a chance for a third party candidate to make waves it's this election where so many are against Trump and Clinton both. Hell, if he actually gets a chance to speak to a major national audience like in the debates he already has the best speech ready "I'm not Trump or Clinton" -cue the roaring applause-.

 

I kinda rambled there so I apologize. I also don't understand how anyone can actually support banning all Muslims from entering the country. This is not WW2 for ffs. Have we not evolved as a society as a whole and realized that kind of behavior and handling of situations is wrong? It wasn't right when Japanese people were forced into camps and it's FAR wronger in this situation when you want to ban an entire loaf of bread because of a small spot of mold. Once again, media all over the world rears its ugly head and in the USA it's probably worse than most countries. Less than 1% of the Muslim population are considered "extremists" or "terrorists". Less than 1% in just about every study I have ever read. You are telling me you all support a plan to ban the other 99% from entering or enjoying our country because of 1%? That is wrong, plain wrong and to me it screams ignorance of the world. Now, if this was a full-proof, ironclad, air-sealed plan that would 100% guarantee to stop terrorism in our country than MAYBE you could make an argument that the good outweighs the bad but that's just not the case. There is no way of knowing what will happen but I do know it offends Muslims all over the world including the ones who are already citizens of our country. This will do nothing but make tensions all around the world and in our own country much much higher and in no way do I see it stopping terrorism. If anything it will only incite the people will mental issues already in our country to commit extreme acts like what it is already happening, take Tampa for example. Omar Mateen was born in New York, a ban on all Muslims would not of stopped half a hundred people from meeting their fates that night. If anything I believe it will only create more people like him with history of problems to getting pushed over that mental ledge. Banning all Muslims in my eyes, is more giving into the "terror" of terrorism than against it and I feel like Trump used this to exploit the fear of terrorism in Americans. Of course these are all my opinions, just like everyone else has there's but I don't see how this would make anything better, even on a global scale it just creates a bigger divide between the USA and the international Muslim community and all the countries that fall into the category who already have such a low opinion of us. I am an atheist yet I respect religion and it's place in the world and in people's lives.

 

I understand as citizens of other countries will have different views and will want different things from U.S. citizen because what may be better for us may not be better for your country in particular but my view is as an American I don't see how any evil can be lesser than the other. They both have huge glaring red flags that say they should never be a leader of a country, especially one with the power and pull internationally like the USA.

The two party system will die only when the two parties die. Happily, I dont think that reality is really all that far off. As a Bernie supporter, I knew he was a longshot from the beginning and I knew that more than likely that the nomination process was rigged. The hacks of the DNC server and subsequent document dump has pretty much confirmed this.

 

 

On July 18, hacker Guccifer 2.0 released a new batch of documents obtained from DNC servers. Among the files given exclusively to The Hill is a DNC memo to Clinton political operatives on March 24, 2015—before she formally announced her candidacy—outlining how to legally solicit pro-Clinton super-PACs. “The memo was sent to political consultant John Podesta, now Clinton’s campaign chairman; Clinton fundraising guru Dennis Cheng; and campaign manager Robby Mook,” reported The Hill.

The memo is just one of several documents released by Guccifer 2.0 proving the Democratic National Committee rigged the system for Clinton. Before the primaries began, DNC strategies were developed with Clinton in mind as the presidential nominee. The leak affirms claims by Bernie Sanders’ supporters that the Democratic primaries were not an election, but rather a coronation for Hillary Clinton.

 

http://observer.com/2016/07/latest-guccifer-2-0-leak-reaffirms-primaries-were-rigged-for-clinton/

 

As it gets more obvious how rigged and corrupt the nomination process is in particular and how corrupt both parties are as a whole, they will die off. As of now, there is so little actual policy difference between the two parties now that its pretty apparent that they are two sides of the same coin. There is never a disagreement on foreign policy and both parties mirror the pro-big banks/wallstreet/multinational business platform. All the really important issues are not up for debate, to the detriment of the overwhelming majority of Americans.