Looks like the Donald & Hillary come the Fall

[Jack]

Great Cthulhu is running, too! Why vote for a lesser evil?

https://cthulhuforamerica.com

 
I am honestly not sure Cthulhu is the greater evil amongst all the candidates.

[Redfaery]

I am honestly not sure Cthulhu is the greater evil amongst all the candidates.

But he says what's on his mind!

[Jack]

But he says what's on his mind!

 
Looks like it's a moot point anyway!

[RecycledBenedict]

The American Empire never really existed -- fortunately for both The US and the rest of the world.

Are you sure of that? I am, of course, thankful for that US and the Soviet Union teamed up in 1941 in order to stop Hitler, but some particulars in the expansionist policy of US  1898-1975 caused a lot of suffering abroad. The same is true about the suffering the Soviet Union brought to eastern Europe 1945-1989.

The three bullies in the global schoolyard are China, USA and Russia (in that order), and whomever grabs the executive power of these countries will impact the life in smaller countries.

Germany is a reformed former bully, but after the recent elections on state-level in the states of Rheinland-Pfalz, Baden-Württemberg and Sachsen-Anhalt, I am becoming nervous. Alternative für Deutchland sounds too Nazi in my ears to keep me comfortable. Throw in Donald Drumpf in that mix, and international politics will become ugly, especially since he seem to like Voldemort Putin.

[RecycledBenedict]

Nooooppppeeee.

I'm holding out hope for Bernie to make the nomination; despite what the mainstream media says, he actually has a fair chance.

If Bernie gets the nomination, I will go through the trouble of voting from abroad, as I did for him in the primaries. If Clinton gets the nomination, it's unlikely I'll bother.

As an outside observer, I do not really understand USA. It puzzles me, and the puzzlement has grown, not diminished, since I became a user on this forum: The everyday experiences of some users here are very far from the usual secular democratic western European perspective I am used to.

News from that country is generally about groups of people who try to keep 17th century Puritanism mixed with 1930s Creationism alive in some sort of updated 1980s version (burning Qurans and shouting that God either hates or loves USA, since they can't make up their minds), and it makes me worried.

On the other hand, now and then reasonable voices are heard in the flow of news: There exist Human Rights organisations in the US; anti-racist and feminist movements seem to be on the rise; some actors - surprisingly - use their fame to make political statements (Matt Damon spring to mind); and, on one of his better days, President Obama is not that bad (and a great improvement after the days of Bush II, who pushed Iraq - and colaterally Syria - into civil war).

I hadn't been surprised to find someone like Bernie Sanders leading a political party in Norway, Iceland, Sweden or Finland (but maybe not Denmark), but isn't he very unusual to be a North American politician? Does he really appeal to voters over there?

[missgraceless]

As an outside observer, I do not really understand USA. It puzzles me, and the puzzlement has grown, not diminished, since I became a user on this forum: The everyday experiences of some users here are very far from the usual secular democratic western European perspective I am used to.

News from that country is generally about groups of people who try to keep 17th century Puritanism mixed with 1930s Creationism alive in some sort of updated 1980s version (burning Qurans and shouting that God either hates or loves USA, since they can't make up their minds), and it makes me worried.

On the other hand, now and then reasonable voices are heard in the flow of news: There exist Human Rights organisations in the US; anti-racist and feminist movements seem to be on the rise; some actors - surprisingly - use their fame to make political statements (Matt Damon spring to mind); and, on one of his better days, President Obama is not that bad (and a great improvement after the days of Bush II, who pushed Iraq - and colaterally Syria - into civil war).

I hadn't been surprised to find someone like Bernie Sanders leading a political party in Norway, Iceland, Sweden or Finland (but maybe not Denmark), but isn't he very unusual to be a North American politician? Does he really appeal to voters over there?

As an American, the US puzzles me. So you're not alone on that one. I've heard a lot of people say they want Hillary to win just because she's a woman. And back a few years ago when her talk of running was just talk, I was one of those. But now seeing her in action I think she's a hypocritical moron, and Trump is nothing but the big bully on an ant hill with the magnifying glass.

I'm actually a huge supporter of Bernie Sanders. We'll have other chances for women to be President, but I don't think we'll ever get another chance to have someone who isn't owned by Wall Street.

[DIASPORA-1963]

The American Empire never really existed -- fortunately for both The US and the rest of the world.

Same here. Extremist Capitalism is as bad a Communism or Fascism, IMHO.

I'm interested in everyone on the planet winning. It's not some game where one group has to win and everyone else has to lose.  Thinking of it like that is silly -- and in my humble opinion -- a product of political and economic extremism. For example, this is how the 1% sees capitalism -- everyone else has to lose for they can win big so they are going to do whatever it takes to win.

 
Sad but true - that's how the Game is played. It isn't fair, hasn't ever been fair, never will be fair. The only people interested in fair are on the bottom - & they're only interested in fair until they get off the bottom. I'm a cynic - no Kumbaya for me. If you think your pal isn't thinking about cutting your throat to take your goodies and put them in his sack, think again. When it comes to money, you're lucky if you can trust your own mommy.

[RecycledBenedict]

As an American, the US puzzles me. So you're not alone on that one.

Oh.

You see, If a politician in any of the five Nordic countries began to mention God in any of their speeches, they would commit political suicide. The same is true - in a different manner - in France. The French and the Scandinavians doesn't refer to exactly the same thing when they say 'secular society'. I guess that this description apply fairly well on Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxemburg and Germany as well.

UK is slightly different. Within narrow perimeters, a British politician is allowed to use the C-word without becoming ostracised, but, as the Blairite governments said back in the days: 'The British goverment doesn't do God'.

When North American politicians says: 'God bless America', we western Europeans wonder which asylum they have escaped from. It is not a proper exclamation within a country claiming separation of church and state. Even countries with a remaining established church, like England and Denmark, seem to be more secular than USA.

[RandallS]

I hadn't been surprised to find someone like Bernie Sanders leading a political party in Norway, Iceland, Sweden or Finland (but maybe not Denmark), but isn't he very unusual to be a North American politician? Does he really appeal to voters over there?

Sanders is very unusual in the current political climate as the far right has dragged the country so far to the right that today's moderates would have been considered  conservatives in the 1960s and 1970s. 30-40 years ago there were more like Sanders in office -- although few as "extreme".  Back then both parties had liberals and conservatives.

[RecycledBenedict]

Sanders is very unusual in the current political climate as the far right has dragged the country so far to the right that today's moderates would have been considered  conservatives in the 1960s and 1970s. 30-40 years ago there were more like Sanders in office -- although few as "extreme".  Back then both parties had liberals and conservatives.

Yes. That rings true. And if I remember correctly, the Democrats and the Republicans both switched sides in the civil rights debate in the 1960s and 1970s, didn't they? Especially in the South?

Why was your Puritan legacy wakened up from the grave by Republicans in the 1980s?

And before WWII your politicians sounded a lot more like your founding fathers, when it comes to Englightenment values, than from the 1950s and forward. I know about the Cold War (which my country stayed outside of, together with Ireland, Finland, Switzerland and Austria), but were there any other factors influencing this turn?

[DIASPORA-1963]

A Reminder:

Hi, Diaspora, While public figures such as politicians are fair game for criticisms that it'd be out-of-line to direct against private individuals when posting on TC, name-calling such as 'First Witch' is excessive. (And a rather odd choice of circumlocution on a pagan forum, where 'witch' is often a religious identity.) As well, TC is an international forum, with members from many countries; statements like the second bit I quoted are very dismissive of those members. I strongly suggest that you read our Political Discussion Guidelines, and take what they say into account when posting in the Political Discussions forum. Unrelatedly, I've noticed that many of your posts are rambles about what's on your mind, rather than engaging in discussion and debate. You might want to consider writing a blog, on one of the many blog hosting platforms such as Wordpress, Blogspot/Blogger, Typepad, Dreamwidth, etc. And/or, TC will be changing its forum software sometime in the next few weeks, and our new software includes the ability for members to have blogs here. Sunflower TC Forum Staff

 
That wasn't what I was calling her! That was what the ex-Secret Service agents were calling her! I voted for her!

[DIASPORA-1963]

A Reminder:

Hi, Diaspora, While public figures such as politicians are fair game for criticisms that it'd be out-of-line to direct against private individuals when posting on TC, name-calling such as 'First Witch' is excessive. (And a rather odd choice of circumlocution on a pagan forum, where 'witch' is often a religious identity.) As well, TC is an international forum, with members from many countries; statements like the second bit I quoted are very dismissive of those members. I strongly suggest that you read our Political Discussion Guidelines, and take what they say into account when posting in the Political Discussions forum. Unrelatedly, I've noticed that many of your posts are rambles about what's on your mind, rather than engaging in discussion and debate. You might want to consider writing a blog, on one of the many blog hosting platforms such as Wordpress, Blogspot/Blogger, Typepad, Dreamwidth, etc. And/or, TC will be changing its forum software sometime in the next few weeks, and our new software includes the ability for members to have blogs here. Sunflower TC Forum Staff

"First Witch" was what the agents who were detailed to guard Mrs Clinton took to calling her during the Clinton Administration b/c, according to them, she was a complete nightmare once the cameras stopped rolling - this according to reviews of a new book out this week that interviews these agents. I overheard the report, while dressing; I believe it was on Fox news. The state police who guarded her while she was First Lady of Arkansas have even less flattering things to say about her, including reports that they were forbidden to speak to her, look at her, or wear their uniforms in her presence and routinely got called "Stupid!" if they hit a pot-hole while driving her some place.

I apologize for my rambling. It's a symptom of Asperger's Syndrome. I try to control it. I am better than I was. I will try harder. At least my comments are thought out, unlike many of the one-line, snarky bits that litter the board yet never seem to be barked at.

I make no apologies for placing the economic welfare of the US above the economic welfare of every other country in the World. I am citizen of the United States - not of the World. I'm old fashioned. Before I would sit by and allow a small town in this country feel a small pinch, I'd allow another country to starve. "The knee is nearer than the shin" - Augustus Caesar.

[DIASPORA-1963]

Oh.

You see, If a politician in any of the five Nordic countries began to mention God in any of their speeches, they would commit political suicide. The same is true - in a different manner - in France. The French and the Scandinavians doesn't refer to exactly the same thing when they say 'secular society'. I guess that this description apply fairly well on Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxemburg and Germany as well.

UK is slightly different. Within narrow perimeters, a British politician is allowed to use the C-word without becoming ostracised, but, as the Blairite governments said back in the days: 'The British goverment doesn't do God'.

When North American politicians says: 'God bless America', we western Europeans wonder which asylum they have escaped from. It is not a proper exclamation within a country claiming separation of church and state. Even countries with a remaining established church, like England and Denmark, seem to be more secular than USA.

 
There never has been an effective separation between Church & State in the US.
The US deputizes religious bodies to perform marriage ceremonies, for instance.
The US Congress opens & closes w/prayers, said by an Episcopal priest. An effort to diversify this by having clergy from other denominations was a disaster, especially when the Hindu priest was met by masses of representatives getting up and walking out.
"In God We Trust" appears on US currency.
Oaths are taken on a St James Bible - in God's name!
Until recently, several states did not allow atheists to sit on juries.
Americans are free to have whatever beliefs they choose - but they had damned well better have some beliefs!
There is no effective separation between Church & State. It's what one calls a "legal fiction".

[DIASPORA-1963]

Yes. That rings true. And if I remember correctly, the Democrats and the Republicans both switched sides in the civil rights debate in the 1960s and 1970s, didn't they? Especially in the South?

Why was your Puritan legacy wakened up from the grave by Republicans in the 1980s?

And before WWII your politicians sounded a lot more like your founding fathers, when it comes to Englightenment values, than from the 1950s and forward. I know about the Cold War (which my country stayed outside of, together with Ireland, Finland, Switzerland and Austria), but were there any other factors influencing this turn?

 
The Puritan legacy never went anywhere. The Progressive Movement lasted a mere 60 years, from about 1870 to 1930, when America's wealthy were actually concerned w/something other than money. Great effort was put into education, art, culture of all kinds, museums, music, beauty in architecture - for all Americans - clean cities, clean drinking water, hospitals, better working conditions, civil rights, efforts on all fronts, all across the board. But the nasty, miserable, miserly, cringing, stingy, mean Puritan narrow-mindedness remained, biding its time, waiting for a chance for a big comeback, and it got it, starting w/the Depression, when all the Revivalist movements got going, & these quickly became politicized. Once President Johnson dragged the Democratic Party across the line into the right of the Civil Rights debate and signed all of that legislation (Johnson did far more for Civil Rights than Kennedy ever did - or intended to do), the racist elements in the Democratic Party jumped ship for the GOP. Better to suck up to the rich white folks than to be equal to the "niggers".

[Sefiru]

I'm actually a huge supporter of Bernie Sanders. We'll have other chances for women to be President, but I don't think we'll ever get another chance to have someone who isn't owned by Wall Street.

Not that I know much about the American political system, but I always thought it was Congress that was owned by Wall Street. (Lobbyists for everything!)

I don't know anything about any of the candidates' platforms, but I have formed an impression of some of them based on their ... demeanor, I guess? Anyway, the following is solely about image:

Hillary comes across as having a cool head and being sensible/pragmatic.
Sanders ... I dunno, I just get this kind of dissonance about him, something that just rings hollow (again, based solely on body language and tone, not the content of any of his views)
Trump: :sick:

What I'd personally like to see is Clinton as the Democratic candidate with Sanders as running mate.