LoneDreamer wrote: Summerlander wrote:
Not Trump. But you're very much like Hillary.
I don't have much good opinions about her. But what is your reason for saying so, if you were talking about me.
Oh sorry, I was referring to erichsa in that she is a bit of a demagogue in the realm of New Age.
No, I don't like Hillary either. She might have been the lesser of two evils, as they say, but she is also responsible for Donald Trump being elected.
While she kept babbling on about gun control and raising awareness of islamophobia (a repulsively weaponised fascist meme and the antithesis of freedom of expression) in the aftermath of the Orlando shooting, Trump, despite being the conman that he is, stated one simple fact: There is something wrong with Islam. (What's been on the minds of many Americans post-9/11.)
Yes, Clinton was qualified to run the country---unlike Mr. tycoon buffoon for sure---but I must say that she was easy prey in the game of persuasion. She was so predictable as to be tedious. So the public more or less thought: Do we have more of the same rabble-rousing shit or do we empower the guy promising a somewhat radical change? America first? I'm down with that. Rather that than swallowing the spiel of having to beware of---and blackball!---the alleged crime of rationally criticising the tenets of the enemy's religion and the root cause of barbaric tribalism hindering ethical progress worldwide.
And this is, I believe, the real reason why Trump won by default. Because people did not want a leader hamstringing the nation's critics of the enemy's immoral way of life. Trump rightly pointed out how both Obama and Clinton were under the Voldemort effect
. 'They can't even say Islamic