Cool, maybe you can actually reply to what I said then. If you're going to announce that you're voting for a factually bigoted and sexist man who literally wants to ban an entire religion from entering the country (by creating a religious database) and who said he would try to overturn the gay marriage decision, there's a good chance you'll be called out on it. So instead of being passive aggressive, explain why what I said was wrong. Or don't bother replying at all.
You are really encouraging me to write-in Bernie, which I was thinking of doing anyway considering Clinton is an awful shell of a human being. But thanks for helping on my path to a voting decision.
Literally nothing I said in that quote should have made you think such nonsense. Would love to see the logic behind that childish and selfish crap.
I gave you a legitimate chance to vouch for Clinton, and you didn't/couldn't. Probably because she is not a good person. And true, voting for the best candidate in a free country is definitely childish and selfish. I'm sure Mr. Trump would agree with you there.
I'm not the one insinuating people are sexist after being critical of someones grammar based on one internet post. Kindly go fuck yourself.
I don't have to "vouch" for Clinton. That isn't the argument here. The fact is that Bernie lost and now the decision is Clinton vs. Trump. That's what it is. I voted for Bernie. He lost. That is an unarguable fact. Now I will be voting for Clinton because every person who has a basic understanding of what is at stake (Muslim ban, overturning gay marriage, abortion rights, foreign policy, etc.), especially now that he has a picked a far right nut like Pence as his VP, knows the most important thing is stopping Trump. But the fact that you were actually talking about superdelegates still, at this point, kind of shows you're not of a good
So you really have nothing even remotely intelligent to say in response. Interesting. Then again, you were talking about superdelegates still like two weeks ago so I suppose I shouldn't expect that much of you.
You're taking the Internet too seriously. Life is short, kick back, vote for the incompetent compulsive liar, and hope that you can live with yourself when we end up in another Iraq war situation. Really hope it turns out for ya.
Yeah everyone's taking the discussion about politics and the future of our nation based on our choices and their possible outcomes way too seriously.
... You do realize that you just described Trump, right? Multiple studies were done after the debates that showed he was by far the biggest liar out of the major candidates. You'll find lies with every politician ever. But the title "compulsive" only belongs to Donald Trump. The guy got caught pretending to be his own fucking publicist and denied it. ... After ADMITTING to it years prior. And stop with the "war hawk" bullshit. Hillary has moved far more to the left. This idea that Hillary is going to get us in another Iraq situation is not only baseless but FAR more likely with Trump. The basic facts and what Trump has literally said he would do is proof of this. The guy is ANNOUNCING he will force our military to commit war crimes and that he will bring back waterboarding and go even further than that. And Hillary is the one you're yelling "war hawk" at? Inform yourself more on this stuff, please. You can start with this news from last night which is absolutely more frightening than anything Hillary has ever even hinted at during this election: Trump says US may abandon automatic protections for Nato countries - BBC News That's the foreign policy of a madman.