I haven't been watching cartoons lately, but I did work on a Trump project. Almost 100% union, and we made a small fortune.

Well, there you have it, folks: erikj has been bought and paid for by the Trump machine. Now, we just need to figure out what Trump did to garner Rich's support.

In all seriousness, erikj, I get your point about union labor, etc., but I would argue that's just evidence the unions are doing their jobs (keeping scabs out of the market so contractors have no choice but to hire union labor), not evidence of Trump's heart for the working class. Not to worry. Once trump's in office, he'll bust those pesky unions and make America great again.

I was completely joking, Hank, although I'd be surprised if there weren't a grain of truth in there somewhere. As you said, we take care of our own first. Lots of truth in that statement, and not all of it is prideworthy, but hey, it's Capitalism, so abide we do (I'm no exception).

Hank has some sand issues today.

Well, someone had to respond with the token reason why we should all vote. I must say I'm a bit surprised at who took up the keyboard, but okay!

I don't disagree that the growing sense of apathy among citizens may be part of the reason these two clowns are what we have to choose from, but I think it's more than a little dishonest to even pretend anymore that government serves the interests of the People (which is what we elect them to to do), don't you?

I mean, look at these oil and coal terminal projects being considered locally. It's abundantly clear to anyone with a pulse that the citizens and local governments are overwhelmingly opposed to the projects, yet somehow, those who will eventually decide their fate remain "undecided." This should be simple. Public says no, the $hit doesn't happen. As we all know, that's not the reality. As with any such project, as soon as the State decides they've squeezed all the revenue potential possible out of the deal, these projects will be approved. Whether or not they go forward depends more on the price of oil than anything else; government approval is basically a very expensive formality for people like Warren Buffett and his new oil cronies. (By the way, I would hazard a guess those folks have a lot more to do with which candidates we get to choose from than average citizens, apathetic or otherwise.)

Another problem (and this is a biggie) is what inevitably happens (whether by intent or by osmosis) to even the most honest of politicians (not saying much, but I digress) once they take office. It doesn't take long for the campaign support from the keepers of the status quo to start pouring in, and that lure is extremely powerful. Indeed, I believe the "contributions" lawmakers receive are the chief incentive for a person to run for office. Why else would a bunch of ex-attorneys and the like take a job with a base salary half of what they're accustomed to? Power, you say? What is more powerful in today's America than money? It drives everything. Now that our Supreme Court (great purveyors of justice they are) has made it legal for corporations to lobby under the guise of free speech (talk about a twist of intent with ill will written all over it!), there aren't going to be many citizens getting what they want out of lawmakers from here on out, unless they happen to be very wealthy, in which case they're probably on the other team already.

With all that, should I REALLY compromise my principles by voting for one of these repugnant individuals, just so I can call myself a patriot who did his duty? Screw that! My integrity is worth more to me than that. And don't bother suggesting I vote for an independent or other third party; that's nothing but a foolish waste of time and paper.

When Americans decide they're ready for change, it will come, and I seriously doubt votes will be among the most effective tools used in that process.

My God, what have I become?

Which [Bleeeeep!] idiot was that directed at (there's a few of us around here)?

Just want to make sure i don't lose context in a thread as globally significsnt as this....

Not forever, BU. Just until after the revolution. I suppose I'd vote for any non-scumbag that manages to fall through the cracks in the meantime.

Did any of you read the Wikileaks email from John Podesta to Barack Obama and understand the gravity of what they implied?

If yes, please explain your understanding.....

Wait until after the election, when the Whitehouse and Senate go Democratic, then you'll see a sandy super nova.

Which one Ryley? The older 2008 emails or the recent one asking the State Dept. to downgrade the classifications on some of the emails sent over Hillary's private server?

One thing I don't get... and maybe Hank can help me out with this: What exactly do Hillary haters think she had to gain by using her personal account? What nefarious schemes and acts of treason do you folks think she was engaged in and why?

I really don't have the energy to "hate" on anyone.

If you use a private server to engage in illegal business, you can scrub the server clean.

She had to be in control of her emails to avoid the FOIA so the email record connecting the pay to play donations to the Clinton Foundation for State Department authorization of arms sales to foreign governments would not become public.

It's called "espionage", purposely use an unsecured account so it can be hacked, there could be many motives but probably money is the most likely. FOIA is not likely the reason because deleted, scrubbed emails almost always can be recovered. She new the server would be hacked by everybody but she did it anyways, Obongo was complicet, evidence is in the coverup and his lies. Everybody she had communication with knew what she was doing and went along with it from Generals to presidents, obviously they were part of the conspiracy.

There is a very sinister motive we likely will never know about. obviously they all knew what they were doing, any government officials who had email contact with her. She had a private address for official buisness.

Go back to Sasquatch research. It's your calling.

Sleep it off, Rich

The 2008 ones. Read carefully, then observe the dates as compared to the general election date that year. They look benign on their surface, but there is a very significant reason Assange posted them.

I will Ryley, thanks.

Thanks for your explanation as well Keta, it seems logical.
Obviously weapons sales to these foreign governments is something that the Administration thought useful in the geopolitical scheme of things... which isn't necessarily a bad thing. The U.S. has been doing it for a long time now.

No bunker at my house. No guns either. I'm not at all pleased with this nation's politics, but I don't choose to live in fear of things I can't control.

Sadly, I fear you're correct in that I'll be waiting a while to see meaningful change, but I'm patient.

Not always a bad thing, but sometimes it is.

The US armed the Afghani's to the teeth back in the 80's because they were fighting the Soviet's. Hundreds of millions of US dollars were spent giving them RPG's, missile's for taking out tanks and helicopters, etc. The Soviets couldn't handle the hardware losses so they gave up and went home.

Those Afghani's we were fighting in the 90's (and probably still) were the same SOB's, and they are shooting at us with guns we bought them.

Sounds like Hillary ought to have her cabinet all but full by now. Ugh.