Eff the DNC

[Kishkumen]

No, not “Bye bye American Republic.” “Vote for a non-corrupt, non-out-of-touch candidate.”

Right! Because your vote is all about you? What it accomplishes or fails to accomplish beyond that is not your concern?

[Dr. Shades]

No, not “Bye bye American Republic.” “Vote for a non-corrupt, non-out-of-touch candidate.”

Right! Because your vote is all about you? What it accomplishes or fails to accomplish beyond that is not your concern?

No, my vote is all about getting the most qualified candidate into office. If my fellow-voters select the most or second most corrupt candidate on the ballot, then that’s on them, not me.

[Kishkumen]

No, my vote is all about getting the most qualified candidate into office. If my fellow-voters select the most or second most corrupt candidate on the ballot, then that’s on them, not me.

I won’t bother delving into what you think qualifies someone to be president because I am convinced that would be a waste of our time.

[Dr. Shades]

No, my vote is all about getting the most qualified candidate into office. If my fellow-voters select the most or second most corrupt candidate on the ballot, then that’s on them, not me.

I won’t bother delving into what you think qualifies someone to be president because I am convinced that would be a waste of our time.

Then I’ll tell you the first thing that I think DISqualifies someone to be president: Corruption. Yes, even if it’s only “slight” corruption. And yes, even if some other candidate is even more corrupt.

You see, if I vote for corruption, then I myself am corrupt. That may be acceptable to most, but it’s unacceptable to me.

[Kishkumen]

Then I’ll tell you the first thing that I think DISqualifies someone to be president: Corruption. I’m Yes, even if it’s only “slight” corruption. And yes, even if some other candidate is even more corrupt.

You see, if I vote for corruption, then I myself am corrupt. That may be acceptable to most, but it’s unacceptable to me.

So, as I thought, your standard is fundamentally solipsistic. That works poorly in a functioning political society.

[Dwight]

Dr. Shades is it the debunked, not even senate republicans could find wrong doing Burisma thing?

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/fact ... 991434002/

[Kishkumen]

Dr. Shades is it the debunked, not even senate republicans could find wrong doing Burisma thing?

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/fact ... 991434002/

Yeah, I would like to know what makes Biden corrupt in his view. I have always assumed he was kinda slimy, but I do not presently recollect specific allegations from before Trumpublicanism.

[Moksha]

No, not “Bye bye American Republic.” “Vote for a non-corrupt, non-out-of-touch candidate.”

Right! Because your vote is all about you? What it accomplishes or fails to accomplish beyond that is not your concern?

Kishkumen, you are just being far-sighted and wish to avoid a future catastrophe. Remember, in the case of Trump it is called Mega-Maga-Grift. Big difference!

[Dr. Shades]

Then I’ll tell you the first thing that I think DISqualifies someone to be president: Corruption. I’m Yes, even if it’s only “slight” corruption. And yes, even if some other candidate is even more corrupt.

You see, if I vote for corruption, then I myself am corrupt. That may be acceptable to most, but it’s unacceptable to me.

So, as I thought, your standard is fundamentally solipsistic. That works poorly in a functioning political society.

Nope. I’m the standard-bearer. If everyone voted the way I do, then the best, least corrupt, and most qualified candidate would always win.

You say that you always thought he was “slimy,” but you’re perfectly willing to vote for slime, thus further enabling the sliminess. Congratulations! You get what you vote for.

[Moksha]

Kishkumen, put your head in the sand and hope for the best. Just ignore the rhythmic beat of the goosestepping.