Do you think diehard Clinton and Trump supporters are completely blind to corruption, greed, and scandal?

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 19 Oct 2016 16:07:59 -0400

It seems to me diehard frontrunner supporters put on massive blinders to their respective favorites glaring flaws. Neither candidate is fit for the role of President. Both are a brilliant display of the flaws in the system. Are we all just too accepting of the status quo?

Response by SGM Erik Marquez made Oct 19 at 2016 4:12 PM

SGM Erik Marquez — Wed, 19 Oct 2016 16:12:01 -0400

I think if there was of a no confidence vote option, which forced the parties to start from scratch and choose more palatable candidates for the people to chose from, that is an option many would take...
But our system of election has no such option...it was built assuming, one candidate would be a "Good" choice, not just one, less worse than the other..

Response by SFC George Smith made Oct 19 at 2016 4:12 PM

SFC George Smith — Wed, 19 Oct 2016 16:12:11 -0400

The HRC supporters Have to be... Most of the Trumpster Supporters are voting against the Business as usual... and the Career Criminal Politicians inDC and the Filth and Trash Running the Country...

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Oct 19 at 2016 4:20 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Wed, 19 Oct 2016 16:20:55 -0400

I have yet to meet any Trump supporters who are "blind" to his many flaws. Hillary supporters on the other hand excuse hers away. It's understandable. A voter can accept Trump's flaws and still vote for him, reluctantly for sure. Anyone who accepts Hillary's flaws must turn away in disgust. They are so much more egregious.

Response by Sgt Wayne Wood made Oct 19 at 2016 4:23 PM

Sgt Wayne Wood — Wed, 19 Oct 2016 16:23:30 -0400

The same ppl who believe ANYTHING about Trump believe NOTHING about Hillary. Trump backers see the flaws, they just hate Hillary more.

Response by MSgt James Mullis made Oct 19 at 2016 4:26 PM

MSgt James Mullis — Wed, 19 Oct 2016 16:26:29 -0400

They don't care about corruption as long as it is on their side. What has the Democrats freaked out is that the Republicans have started to play by their "dirty tricks/anything goes" rules.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 19 at 2016 4:33 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 19 Oct 2016 16:33:10 -0400

Many are passively complicit...as long as they are benefiting.

Response by SrA Edward Vong made Oct 19 at 2016 4:38 PM

SrA Edward Vong — Wed, 19 Oct 2016 16:38:20 -0400

I acknowledge that she has issues, but I don't care. Bottom line.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 19 at 2016 4:40 PM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 19 Oct 2016 16:40:42 -0400

There are a FEW diehard supporters in either camp, but the majority who are voting for either candidate ( in this election ) are voting against the other. I am not voting for trump, I am voting against hillary and I suspect a lot of hillary supporters are saying the exact opposite.

Response by MAJ James Woods made Oct 19 at 2016 4:45 PM

MAJ James Woods — Wed, 19 Oct 2016 16:45:53 -0400

Absolutely. Talk about supporters who dig their feet in and fight to the bitter end no matter the onslaught of facts thrown at them. It's the Monty Python Holy Grail "Black Knight" syndrome.

Response by CPT Jim Schwebach made Oct 19 at 2016 4:49 PM

CPT Jim Schwebach — Wed, 19 Oct 2016 16:49:40 -0400

Recognizing the keyword "diehard", the answer to your title question" is "YES!" Those in the most diehard 10% are those of whom Trump spoke when he said he could stand on 5th Avenue, shoot someone and he wouldn't lose support. And, similarly, Clinton's diehards would support her if she shot back. Thankfully there are enough rational people in this great nation who will collectively make the best decision regarding the flawed candidates presented to us all.

Response by SrA Mike VanDeMark made Oct 19 at 2016 5:02 PM

SrA Mike VanDeMark — Wed, 19 Oct 2016 17:02:32 -0400

I don't know so much about being completely oblivious, but they know they are stuck with what is put in front of them. They can ignore the obvious and vote along party lines like normal, or they can simply not vote. Sure there are those rabid supporters who will defend their candidate no matter what, but most are just hoping their candidate doesn't do something so heinous they are forced to vote for the other.

Response by Maj John Bell made Oct 19 at 2016 6:31 PM

Maj John Bell — Wed, 19 Oct 2016 18:31:09 -0400

Right now we do not have a viable other. The tragic and funny thing is we did it to ourselves.

Response by SSG Warren Swan made Oct 19 at 2016 6:38 PM

SSG Warren Swan — Wed, 19 Oct 2016 18:38:45 -0400

It's not the candidates that are flawed, it's the system that is used to put them there that is. There is no way any of us on RP would've picked either one to represent a dead horse, but they are . Both parties are to blame and like Ryan said "you don't pick the nominee...WE do". That should tell you right there where you are in the pecking order. Again if you look at what both parties put out as "candidates" it was preordained that the RNC's candidate would be Bush, and the DNC's Clinton. Everything else was meant to be cannon fodder for those two. Then Trump happened. Trump has effectively destroyed the traditional means of campaigning and you see it in smaller contests where we've gone beyond the usual mud-slinging, to truly personal attacks on family members or relatives. The old status quo is done for. I'm just not sure if that was the best move for our country. You can look at European governments and they are actually fighting in their chambers. All out brawls. That should not be what we do, but in this climate, it's coming.

Response by SFC Bruce Pettengill made Oct 19 at 2016 7:15 PM

SFC Bruce Pettengill — Wed, 19 Oct 2016 19:15:21 -0400

YES, but take out the diehard

Response by SMSgt Roy Dowdy made Oct 19 at 2016 8:10 PM

SMSgt Roy Dowdy — Wed, 19 Oct 2016 20:10:22 -0400

Clinton followers most certainly are since they deride any and every empirical fact of behavior!

Response by MAJ Norm Michaels made Oct 19 at 2016 8:28 PM

MAJ Norm Michaels — Wed, 19 Oct 2016 20:28:21 -0400

Look beyond the President for a minute and consider the ramifications of who selects the next four Supreme Justices. Are you satisfied with homosexual marriages being legalized? Are you satisfied with gender of choice in the military? This is what you must vote for this time around: who will select the next four justices.

Response by SPC Kevin Ford made Oct 19 at 2016 8:58 PM

SPC Kevin Ford — Wed, 19 Oct 2016 20:58:43 -0400

I suspect the die hards on both sides have spent so much time demonizing the other side that they can't acknowledge in any substantive way the problems with their own candidate. In fact, you will see a lot of cries of foul pointing out problems with the other side while simultaneously doing the same things.

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Oct 19 at 2016 9:04 PM

CAPT Kevin B. — Wed, 19 Oct 2016 21:04:44 -0400

Actually there's a number of things that lead to moral, ethical, corruption, etc. blindness that those who are in the tank often exhibit. The denialists brush off the issues. My mom is in the tank for Hillary. If you ask her about email whatever, Benghazi whatever, foundation whatever, she'll just say it's a conspiracy against her and Trump is a kook. Huckabee is a country bumpkin, the list goes on, and that's that. Pretty much similar reaction on the other side of the coin. Then there are the elitist power brokers. Now Hillary has an advantage because the current power brokers want to continue to be power brokers, so they'll look the other way. A lot of people will ignore most everything so long as their gravy train runs on schedule. Then there are the haters. I just hate The Donald. Doesn't matter what Hillary does and you're probably lying anyways. I just hate Hillary. I don't care what the Donald is, he's not Hillary. There are good doses of bleeding hearts on both sides with the usual eco PC touchy feely liberal types that ply the countryside. There are also the thumpers out there in right field, probably detesting both, but biting the bullet for Trump because bakers should be able to deny gay wedding cakes.

What all these have in common is a narrowly defined polarization towards a reality which isn't the overall reality. They just want the rest of it to go away and the people along with it. What I dislike about Pols so much is that in office, they must serve all their constituents and be a reflection of the diversity, not the polarization. That said, it's likely to get worse before it gets better. Just reporting what's out there. I guess I'm in the frustrated majority. We MILs have a concept of "service" that the Pols don't seem to get.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Oct 19 at 2016 10:23 PM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Wed, 19 Oct 2016 22:23:16 -0400

If we get even 40% of what Trumps says we'll be lucky. If we get 100% of what Clinton says we'll be sorry!

Response by A1C Johnny Green made Oct 20 at 2016 3:31 AM

A1C Johnny Green — Thu, 20 Oct 2016 03:31:29 -0400

I'm just glad I don't have to vote for bad or worse. My vote was going to be neither, but I'm glad I can now vote for someone and not against someone.

Response by SSgt David Tedrow made Oct 20 at 2016 3:46 AM

SSgt David Tedrow — Thu, 20 Oct 2016 03:46:19 -0400

They are blinded by emotion and today's electronic media, which is far from truthful or accurate.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 20 at 2016 9:18 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 20 Oct 2016 09:18:36 -0400

corruption, greed, and scandal is an issue with EVERY PRESIDENT this country had !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Response by CPT Alan Bentson made Oct 20 at 2016 10:17 AM

CPT Alan Bentson — Thu, 20 Oct 2016 10:17:34 -0400

Rule #8: don't argue with ignorant, obstinate, or crazy.
All it does is raise your blood pressure while they ignore you're arguments and call you names.

Response by MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P made Oct 20 at 2016 11:23 AM

MSgt Steven Holt, NRP, CCEMT-P — Thu, 20 Oct 2016 11:23:58 -0400

I think the best response I've seen so far this election cycle went like this:

Hillary Clinton could be on National television boiling a vat of 30 newborn live puppies and her supporters would say, "oh, she's just trying to feed the poor starving people!"

Response by SPC Alexander Brandt made Oct 21 at 2016 7:38 PM

SPC Alexander Brandt — Fri, 21 Oct 2016 19:38:35 -0400

I don't doubt it. I've witnessed it too many times in both the real world and the internet (alas, RallyPoint is no exception).

The worst cases tend to be when someone tries to redirect the conversation by saying, "Oh, X did this, but Y did THIS!" There's a tendency to rationalize a candidate's problems by looking at the problems experienced by the other camp.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 22 at 2016 4:25 PM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 22 Oct 2016 16:25:24 -0400

Nope. They can find all of it (or make some up) for the other side.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 23 at 2016 8:53 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 23 Oct 2016 20:53:07 -0400

So what now? And how long would we be w/o leadership? And, because Hillary is engaged in some REAL corruption, they take preemptive shots at Trump. If by default Hillary wins, it would because of apathy and a political naivete or just plain parochrialism. My daddy voted rep/dem and so will I. No one is really ready to be president, and then again, no one has gone around the legislature, ostensibly because there is gridlock.

The point is, this becomes 'talking points' and PC. Dogmas are so ingrained. For example: Give me one program on TV that ever really supports the right/conservative? And do not give me some far-flung intended meaning. So, by saying both parties are corrupt, you are equivocating or in Hillary's case, deflecting.

If Americans are sick and tired of corruption, let's effect change. Not spew hateful rhetoric in an attempt to marginalize an opponent. Only an idiot would put their faith in a lying, socipathic menace. Hillary. America wants change, not neo-political bullshit. Not losing or our right of self-determinization. And not by spending peoples monies on frivilous pork barrel projects.

When Nixon was impeached, it was non-partisan. It was the quest for truth. Of all people, Hillary has done far more than Nixon ever done. She actually our country at risk. Weakened the militaty, all for naked gain and aggression. So the both parties are corrupt, is to give this election, by default to Hillary. PO2 (Anonymous) Are you bing stalked, ED?

Response by CPO Mike Anderson made Oct 25 at 2016 6:10 AM

CPO Mike Anderson — Tue, 25 Oct 2016 06:10:08 -0400

Choice Between a liar, thief and cheat and a sexist pig makes for a difficult decision. I can't believe that these are the best canidates that the parties could nominate.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 25 at 2016 3:46 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 25 Oct 2016 15:46:05 -0400

ask a die-hard Cleveland Browns fan if their team sucks it would be the same answer to the Clinton and Trump supporters.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 25 at 2016 6:11 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:11:11 -0400

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 25 at 2016 6:18 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 25 Oct 2016 18:18:28 -0400

I am so repulsed by what Hildebeast has done that I could vomit. I think my stomach will digest itself if she wins this election. I can't imagine the things she will do to us under our noses. Do I like Donald? Not initially. He is an unpolished man. But I think he has our best interest in mind. I think she will just continue more pay for play. Just business as usual.

Response by Sgt Sal Hirto made Oct 26 at 2016 7:35 AM

Sgt Sal Hirto — Wed, 26 Oct 2016 07:35:38 -0400

the funny thing, all the complaints about Clinton are, for the most part, while she was on the govt. payroll, so it really is significant, Trump is/was a private citizen.
while on might act or say things counter to your beliefs, the other compromised national security and plaid par-for-play politics .
i look at it like this, a civilian burns the US flag, i don't like but likely 1st amendment right , now lets say an active duty 1st sergeant burns the US flag, -----well off with his head

Response by Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 27 at 2016 12:10 PM

Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 27 Oct 2016 12:10:35 -0400

MSgt Jack DeYoung is a coward.

Response by MSgt James Mullis made Oct 28 at 2016 1:37 PM

MSgt James Mullis — Fri, 28 Oct 2016 13:37:47 -0400

Sgt Barrett: To answer your question, No. Do you think that folks who choose to vote third party are ignoring reality, don't care about facts, or are more concerned about their personal honor than their country? It seems to me that your question and mine are two sides of the same coin. However, there is one big difference mine concerns itself with facts and the ultimate outcome for the country while yours picks on personal "flaws".

Response by MAJ Keira Brennan made Oct 28 at 2016 9:24 PM

MAJ Keira Brennan — Fri, 28 Oct 2016 21:24:16 -0400

Sorry for this long paste - but good lord it is meaningful to me...
And let me just say this: If you’re a politician — not just in Washington but in business and industry, you have to be a politician — there are a lot of things that you have to do that you’re not proud of. There are a lot of compromises you have to make because it means that you can get this other thing over here. And if you think that you can go to fucking Washington and be rainbows and butterflies the whole time, you’re living in a fucking fantasy world. So now, having said that, think about what a female has to do with that: All of those compromises, all of that shit, double it by ten. And you get to understand who this woman is and how powerful, persuasive, brilliant, and resilient she is. Any female executive, anybody who has been put to the side — women, blacks, gays — for them to succeed in a white-male-dominated culture is an act of brilliance. Of resilience, of grit, of everything you can imagine. So, what do I think of Hillary? I think she’s fucking awesome. Is she in bed with Wall Street? Goddammit, I should hope so! You’ve got to dance with the devil. So which of the horrible people do you want? That’s more of the question. Do you want a pompous braggart who doesn’t know anything about diplomacy? Or do you want a badass bitch who knows how to get shit done? That’s really the question.

Response by SPC Phil Norton made Oct 31 at 2016 4:47 PM

SPC Phil Norton — Mon, 31 Oct 2016 16:47:31 -0400

It's simple really which candidate has the best platform according to your beliefs all people are flawed and in today's world it's hard to hide past mistakes although one campaign has been all about cover up neither one is the savior but I know that with one I will keep my weapons so that's how I vote not on personality but on issues that affect me and my family

Response by CPT Alexander Grant made Nov 6 at 2016 1:36 AM

CPT Alexander Grant — Sun, 06 Nov 2016 01:36:32 -0500

I'm not sure how anyone could vote for either of these criminals. Vote Clinton, you must accept corruption, or vote Trump and you must accept fascism. This is why there are other candidates.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 9 at 2016 8:29 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 09 Nov 2016 08:29:55 -0500

SSG Private RallyPoint Member I think that this administration (Obama) is the gold standard for corruption and crime.

Response by MCPO Tom Miller made Dec 28 at 2016 10:05 AM

MCPO Tom Miller — Wed, 28 Dec 2016 10:05:20 -0500

Our socialist intended progressive leadership has moved our patriotic base towards bigger government control compounded with a PC mentality. Today's leaders are moved by self interest and a power base devoted to corruptive behavior and party interest over the basics of constitional law. Outside the Military this deviantency is spreading it influence into our high levels of military leadership with its PC acceptance! Look at Hillary and her corrupt Clinton Foundation and the rest of her tenure of corruption and she was still able to run for president? Corruption is so deep, it has become acceptable!

Response by SPC Brian Stephens made Dec 28 at 2016 3:22 PM

SPC Brian Stephens — Wed, 28 Dec 2016 15:22:20 -0500

No. They just don't care.

Response by SPC Byron Skinner made Dec 29 at 2016 3:06 PM

SPC Byron Skinner — Thu, 29 Dec 2016 15:06:36 -0500

Sp4 Byron Skinner I really think this question is irrelevant. Clinton spent her professional life as a public servant and First Lady. She was a known item and praise and criticism of her generally rundown party lines. She like President Gore won the popular vote. Donald Trump is a billionaire Business man who filed personal bankruptcy three times and thats about the extent of his public life. As a former businessman, retired I can say in all honesty we are all piers and cheaters, it all party of the game. Since President Elect won't be President until noon on January 20th., there is nothing to judge him by. I think all Americans should look at him as a blank sheet of paper until he "officially" takes office. The other intended question here are the supporters of both candidates. All in all they acted rather well. In recent memory the elections of 1960 and 1964 had far more vandalism, fighting and actual murder the the 2016 election. There was good reason that alcohol was not sold back then on election day.

Response by CPT Duane Caswell made Dec 30 at 2016 1:08 PM

CPT Duane Caswell — Fri, 30 Dec 2016 13:08:18 -0500

Running for public office in general has become more about marketing and spin than experience and ability. The front runners tend to be in possession of character traits that make them least desirable as a leader and more desirable as a celebrity.

Response by SP5 Robert Ruck made Jan 10 at 2017 10:08 AM

SP5 Robert Ruck — Tue, 10 Jan 2017 10:08:38 -0500

All humans have flaws thus all candidates have flaws. A recent question on this forum asked if today's politicians could pass a background check. There were lots of opinions both ways. I for one would never run for office in this day and age. Both candidates for President went through the worst character assassinations I've ever seen in my lifetime. I'm guessing an overwhelming amount of information put out against each candidate was untrue. I tried to filter through the BS and chose who most closely reflected my views on important policy isssues. It was hard to do considering all the slander that was put forth as the "truth". Now we have a new President and his opponents still persist in fear mongering and sabotage rather than getting behind him to support his efforts. Had the other candidate won I'm sure it would have been the same. Personally, I didn't vote against anyone. I voted for the candidate of my choice based on my belief of what was best for the country. Both candidates had the courage to withstand the personal attacks and had the fortitude to campaign vigorously for what they believed in. I have gratitude to both for making that sacrifice for this country.

Response by Kathlean Keesler made Jan 10 at 2017 11:08 AM

Kathlean Keesler — Tue, 10 Jan 2017 11:08:17 -0500

Most well intended,respectful,obedient,complacent,citizens have never truly seen, understood let alone comprehended the size of our gov't corruption; then there are those who know very well all about the "secret society" servants. Will Trump expose the "shadow government" - dark side? Twitter -Trump see what tweets back.