Discussion » Questions » Communication » Did you know you are a super evil person if you don't vote?

Did you know you are a super evil person if you don't vote?

....for Hillary. 

Posted - November 7, 2016

Responses


  • 3934
    Sounds like a plan. In lieu of voting for HRC, I will open up an evil petting zoo....;-D...
      November 7, 2016 9:45 AM MST
    0

  • 46117
    http://www.flasharcadegamessite.com/evil-pet-salon-online-game.html
      November 7, 2016 9:47 AM MST
    0

  • 3191
    Oh goodie, do I get horns issued to me now?  
      November 7, 2016 9:46 AM MST
    4

  • 46117
    Super evil horns. 
      November 7, 2016 9:48 AM MST
    0

  • 3191
    Super cool!
      November 7, 2016 9:49 AM MST
    1

  • 46117
    Image and video hosting by TinyPic
      November 7, 2016 9:50 AM MST
    2

  • 3191
      November 7, 2016 9:56 AM MST
    3

  • 46117
    Hey  Now WAIT a minute.

    She is wiping Trump off the planet.  She deserves some props.
      November 7, 2016 10:18 AM MST
    0

  • 3191
    If she actually got what she deserves, you'd be crying about it. This post was edited by Bozette at November 7, 2016 2:18 PM MST
      November 7, 2016 10:26 AM MST
    2

  • 46117
    I seriously doubt that.  I am not a crier.  I would cry if Trump won.  I can only take so much.  She doesn't bug me all that much.  Not like Bush, not like Romney and certainly not like TRUMP.
      November 7, 2016 10:31 AM MST
    0

  • 3191
    They all bug me, but that is beside the point.  Point being, if the woman was actually held to account for her actions, you would have a fit.
      November 7, 2016 10:39 AM MST
    1

  • 46117
    I don't believe there were any actions. 

    So, try proving that one before I have any fits.  I know she is no saint, she is a politician.  I rather like the woman so far.  I am sure that will change down the road.  I am not living in la la land.  I liked Obama until he got in too. But again, he is NOT Romney and he is NOT Bush so I am not as unhappy as I could be and do not need to throw further fits. 
      November 7, 2016 10:42 AM MST
    0

  • 3191
    Even she doesn't dispute that there were actions.  Even the director of the FBI admitted that others doing the same could/would face sanctions.  

    What the hell do Romney and Bush have to do with anything, Sharonna?
      November 7, 2016 11:05 AM MST
    0

  • 3934

    @Bozette -- Fine, let's have some sanctions.

    Let's fire HRC as Secretary of State. Oh, wait....

    Let's suspend her security clearance for her negligent actions. Oh, wait....

    So, happy now?

    The problem with the "Anyone else who did what HRC did would be punished argument" is that it's SIMPLY NOT TRUE. Other people HAVE done what HRC did and have NOT been sanctioned for it.

    So, why should HRC be singled out?

      November 7, 2016 11:14 AM MST
    0

  • 3191
    How about we not give her another position with a security clearance...a higher one, since she has proven herself to be negligent in handling one in the past?  

    I did not say that anyone else would be punished for it, I clearly stated "others".  Most Americans are aware that those who should most be held accountable seldom are.  That there are still citizens, like yourself, who feel that some people are above being held accountable is beyond sickening.   
      November 7, 2016 11:23 AM MST
    1

  • 3934
    @Bozette -- I think you misunderstood my post (I'm shocked...SHOCKED!...;-D...)

    Yes, in a perfect world, HRC's various indescritions would disqualify her from being a presidential candidate. Heck, the stuff she has done that is PERFECTLY LEGAL should disqualify her.

    But our only reasonable choices are either elect her for the job with the ultra-high security clearance (and hope she has learned her lesson and does a better job this time around) or elect the raving narcissist who has little to no understanding of how the geopolitical world actually works. That sounds a lot like cutting off one's nose to spite one's face.

    As for your charge, "...there are still citizens, like yourself, who feel that some people are above being held accountable is beyond sickening," you are completely mistaken. I am all for the Rich and Powerful being held to account for their transgressions. What I am NOT for is SELECTIVE demonization/prosecution of particular Rich and Powerful people because they are STOOPID EBIL LIBRUHL DEMOCRAP BITCHES...

    http://www.vox.com/2016/11/1/13480416/trump-supporters-sexism


    That's just F***ING HYPOCRISY.
      November 7, 2016 11:30 AM MST
    0

  • 3191
    Actually SKOS, I am not for selective demonization/prosecution, I want them all held accountable.  

    As for your "STOOPID EBIL LIBRUHL" BS, YOU are the ONLY person I have ever seen use that...it got old a loooooong time ago.  You have proven yourself to be a "F***KING HYPOCRITE" repeatedly.
      November 7, 2016 11:40 AM MST
    1

  • 3934
    @Bozette -- I have found a curious pattern among many who claim to be universally against government corruption/malfeasance. They say they are non-partisan in their desires, yet they spend 90%+ of their time focusing on the trangressions of STOOPID EBIL LIBRUHL DEMOCRAP politicians, while hand-waving away the (often greater) transgressions of those elsewhere on the political spectrum.

    We see this most dramatically in the wailing and gnashing of teeth about voter fraud, while the GOP engages in much larger amounts of voter SUPPRESSION, which is far more influential on actual election outcomes than voter fraud.

    As for your complaint about my use of STOOPID EBIL LIBRUHL...well, if the Usual Suspects would quit engaging in the practice of holding STOOPID EBIL LIBRUHL DEMOCRAPS to different standards than others who engage in substantially the same behavior, I would quit pointing out their ideologically-motivated F***ING HYPOCRISY by using that characterization of their stances.

    If you have evidence of my repeated instance of similar F***ING HYPOCRISY, I encourage you to present it. I would be curious to see where I am doing so.
      November 7, 2016 11:48 AM MST
    0

  • Focus on your own hypocrisy instead of only others.    Your own  you can actually do something about.

      November 7, 2016 11:50 AM MST
    1

  • 3934
    @Gils -- I think your assertion fails on two points:

    1) I am unmotivated to acknowledge or examine my own hypocrisy (not me specifically, everyone falls into this trap). Hence, it is likely someone else has a better perspective (and a lack of self-regard defense motivation) to point out my failings.

    2) I think pointing out public hypocrisy can be useful. It provides a counterweight to those who would use hypocritical standards to demonize some and denigrate others in an attempt to influence the outcome of other people's decisions.
      November 7, 2016 11:58 AM MST
    0

  • Ahhh but you rely on demonizing and denigrating others as a go to tactic.  With a generous helping of strawmans and ad hominems.    That makes you divisive and a hypocrite. Your methods are the major  problem on both the left and the right. You employ the same tactics you pretend to loath the other for.
      November 7, 2016 12:05 PM MST
    1

  • 3191
    Your comment is a perfect example of your F***KING HYPOCRISY.  
      November 7, 2016 11:54 AM MST
    0

  •   November 7, 2016 11:48 AM MST
    1

  • 46117
    I think I made total sense, Boz.  She is not as bad as the others I mentioned and neither is Obama despite the fact that he nor Hilldog are far from saints, they cannot compare to the lying thieves that I mention on the OTHER side. 

    ....And also what Old School said. This post was edited by WM BARR . =ABSOLUTE TRASH at November 7, 2016 11:25 AM MST
      November 7, 2016 11:23 AM MST
    0