Should I Vote for Hillary Clinton? A Flowchart

Comments

1
Wow - i just learned what to call a poorly constructed "Decision tree" - a "flow chart"! Maybe the author should be running for president.
2
Needs railroad tracks. #NoBrakes
3
Fascist Bloomberg is speaking tonight at the DNC convention. It's ok to have stormtroopers if their targets are black. The fear of Trump is that all the power white liberals have gladly given to the police to destroy black life will be turned on white life as well.
4
Most of this is funny, except that she actually is a war hawk. Why are neoliberals completely unwilling to discuss her history of overthrowing governments (Libya anyone?) that later collapse and then benefit terrorist organizations?
5
If that's a flow chart, this comment is a 12 dimensional pivot-table with embedded pie charts.
6
@4 This source is as liberal* as it gets and has covered the issue at length.

http://www.democracynow.org/2016/3/3/the…

*Unless you actual mean neoliberal, in which case I don't understand the context in which you're using it.
7
Also, what #5 said. I get the point, but that's not a flow chart.
8
@4 -- I respectfully disagree. She is a reactionary. Her husband fucked up in not getting involved in Yugoslavia soon enough or in Rwanda at all. She saw the horrors of disengagement.

So, in Libya, she (and -- by the way, Susan Rice) decided that intervening was better than nothing. I am sure she (and Susan Rice) realized they fucked up. But given the fucked up political environment we live in, admitting mistakes is not a good idea. Better to keep up the ridiculous idea that you infallible.

My guess is, as president, she will bounce back to the center. She will be a lot more like Obama (don't do stupid shit) and generally keep the hell out of such situations. The Middle East did not transform itself into a new democratic world -- it did not enter a new age of enlightenment (as many people thought and hoped). Which means that Clinton will have to deal with horrible, mean, evil dictators that kill their own people, because removing them will be worse.
10
But there's a ton of publicly available information that strongly indicates that she is a war hawk, and is owned by the banks.
11
You're going to have to do better than this to convince those that need convincing.
12
I just wish for a moment people would stop trying to scare folks into voting for Hillary Clinton. You are are pushing the 'Bernie or Bust' voters away and you will only distance them further.

You are not helping the matter, find a different solution to the problem then yelling at `Bernie Bros` about how stupid they are and how they are going to ruin the country by not voting for Hillary.

Damned shameful
13
I'm with her. Though I'm also with @5 and at a loss as to how to discern flow from this. Kinda reads more like a spreadsheet.
14
This is not a flowchart. Please hire a competent person could make one. For instance, what's your reason to dislike Hillary? Military weakness -->She was sec.State when we killed the shit out of Bin Laden, who Republicans let run around free, therefore vote Hillary. Military neoliberal hawkishness --> She oversaw massive troop reduction in the middle east, ceased torture, opposed Gitmo/Guantanamo (Congress is to blame for those, actually) drones actually = less dead troops, and FFS if you think a drone is less humane than a bomb or gun you're an Reddiot, and she never jingoistically painted all Islam with the same brush.

In other words, the FLOW of a CHART leads to rebuttals to a person's concern. And they work really well! If your CHART has a FLOW. The proper response (aka FLOW) to "Her email server was illegal" isn't "whatever, just vote for Hillary." The response to the FLOW of that CHART is, uh, an ANSWER. Such as "Hillary was found innocent by her mortal enemies currently in an international push to ruin her political ambitions with more funding than any other political contest in the world, plus control of the house and senate. If THEY didn't find anything and YOU'RE still holding on, please see your doctor about brain tumors."
-->
Therefore....
-->
Vote Hillary.

See? It's a CHART. With a FLOW.

FFS Stranger, you're not wrong. It's just that you're hiring your drug dealers as your writers. And this cycle's happened enough that now, it's a paper fulla drug dealers hiring THEIR drug dealers. Does anyone here write?

And BTW, the graphical shambles of that flowchart also shows another huge problem you guys have: how rarely/ever you pay for good graphics content. Cut the weed budget, hire some designers.

MOTHERFUCKING TRUMP COULD BE PRESIDENT!!! Is this NOT SOBERING to you guys? I know you're pushing for Hillary, but you're doing a pathetic, shitty job of it. This is too important of an election for your editorial laurels to be rested and unsharpened.

15
@10 "But there's a ton of publicly available information that strongly indicates that she is a war hawk, and is owned by the banks."

There isnt a shred of evidence that suggests the money she got in speaking fees resulted in legislation that benefited the banks.
16
Or you could just vote libertarian and screw the 2 party system....the lesser of 2 evils is still evil. You've really insulted your readership with this one.
17
As a rule, I don't vote for war criminals.
18
I often get the feeling that Trump voters aren't "real" enough to some Seattle progressives. They're that sparse population on the other side of the mountain. Well, that's not true in more densely populated regions of the country. WA does tend to go blue as far as the electoral college goes, but that depends on Seattle. Like, holy shit guys. We don't want to have to explain 30 years of Trump related scotus decisions to our grandkids, right?
19
"She is a war hawk owned by the banks." "No she isn't."

EXCELLENT ARGUMENT, BOYOS