Was just about to sift this. The last 3 minutes is pure gold.

Especially that Chomsky quote. So true unfortunately.

I only listened to that last 3 minutes because of ^, and because i generaly can't stomach Bill.

I have a hard time buying into the idea that people can't tell them apart. You don't have to do much/any study to see that they are incredibly different. Just because you don't like either of them doesn't in any way say that you think they are equal. I hate them both for completely different reasons. And although i dislike them both I would rather one of them be president over the other. My vote however will not reflect who that is.

I love Bill, but I will be happy when this election is over and I don't have to listen to any more of this sanctimonious crap about how not voting for Hillary is a vote for Trump.
Sometimes evil is loud and in your face like Trump, both publicly and in private I suspect Trump is pretty evil, or at least an Olympic class asshole.
Hillary on the other hand is I suspect basically good and is sincere in her desire to help others, but she is still bound by our corrupt political system. She still accepts money from Wall Street and big business and they will expect something in return for those millions. Namely watered down regulation and legislation, and a tax code with more holes than a sieve.
They're paying to continue the status quo, and the status quo for the rest of us means stagnant wages and housing, healthcare and education costs at a rate that would leave the Voyager 1 probe in the dust.

*controversy

Videos are limited to being in a maximum of 7 channels - ignoring all requests by MrFisk.

Bill is trying to get through to exactly people with your voting strategy.

He's saying :

Don't throw away your vote by voting for a 3rd person, just because you don't want either Trump or Clinton.

What people have to accept is that the president will either be Trump or Clinton. So the only sensible thing to do is to vote Clinton, just to be doubly sure that Trump is not going to get in.

Save your protest against Clinton for the next election (assuming we don't have Trump again!) Because voting for anyone but Clinton, is basically a vote for Trump.

You lose either way this election, so voting is now just a matter of making sure you lose as best as possible.

That's what Bill is saying in terms of false equivalency: Just because they are both bad, doesn't mean that they are of equal badness

Anyway I'm not in the US but the knock on effects of your vote will still effect me so please vote Clinton

Let's see, insane, fourth-grade intellect, pussy-grabbing, vengeful, ego-maniacal, tax-cheating, swindling, false-charity operating, pathological lying demagogue vs a woman who plays fast and loose with the rules to her own benefit, has been caught out in the past too often doing the politically expedient thing rather than the right thing, but knows her shit pretty well.

At least with Hillary it's a given that there will be another election in four years (unless Trump supporters manage to overthrow the government). Trump is already saying the US should suspend the normal election procedures and just appoint him president. What would he be like in four years if he actually got elected?

If you understand how are voting system works and know that i'm in California you would know that ALL the electoral votes in California will go to Clinton no matter how i vote. If i were in a swing state (think there are eleven* of them out of fifty) my vote would have an impact and most likely id hold my nose and vote for her. I'm thankful i don't have to do that. Im glad i get to have my 'protest' vote, and by the way, it's a vote against both candidates and both the major parties.

Although If you have any thoughts regarding the rest of my ballot im happy to listen The only thing i've decided on thus far is where my presidential vote will go.

*Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin

Well then you get the best of both worlds!

(I was under the assumption that the US didn't have a preference system, my bad)

Isn't calling a vote for a third (or fourth) party candidate a vote FOR Trump also a false equivalency?

"Really, Hillary is evil?"

Well, Bill, I suppose it depends on your definition of evil, doesn't it.

To me, voting for both the invasion of Iraq and the Patriot Act (twice!) is an absolute disqualifier. Like it used to be in '08 when HRC ran against Obama. Remember that one, Bill?

Now, looking at it from a country that had its leaders punished for waging a war of aggression, and rightfully so, Hillary meets my definition of evil. Her push for war in Libya, her immoral comments on the ghastly death of Gaddafi, her militaristic calls for a more robust foreign policy (aka war), her calls for a no-fly zone in Syria (aka war with Syria & Russia)... Bill, that shit is evil. And it's only the lesser of two evils because her opposition is Trump.

So spare me the horseshit. I don't even have to judge her economic policies which basically are the same flavour of neoliberalism as always, her hawkishness is enough evil for several lifetimes.

False equivalency that all electronic music sounds the same.

I think it's not so much not being able to tell them apart but not being willing to investigate them beyond their labels. I spend some time in other online communities with people from the US and the sense I get is Clinton is generally seen as corrupt and criminal and Trump as perhaps sexist / racist but a good businessman. I would argue both labels are to some extent misleading and false.

I don't see much discussion that goes beyond those labels. In both cases from the snippets I've seen of US TV and of some online tabloids, that's about as deep as the discussion goes. To really understand the problem with both candidates you need to read good editorial work from more reputable / long form media (weekly publications, newspapers that aren't tabloids) and frankly I think very few have been willing to do that.

Much of it comes down to politics being treated as entertainment and reading long written articles simply isn't entertaining. Unfortunately it's going the same way here in Australia. Everyone is obsessed about opinion polls. We might have short periods of formal election campaigning (unlike the epic US election process), but because of only 3 years between elections for our Prime Minister (and the fact that he or she can and does get replaced within those 3 years by Parliament, unlike the US President), we have constant personal political battles and recrimination rather than deliberation over policy.

I mean right now, we have a prime minister (Turnbull, re-elected earlier this year), who unseated a previously elected prime minister (Abbott, in the previous term) by a vote of no confidence. Abbott himself (several parliamentary terms before) had successfully unseated Turnbull as minority leader (when another party held the prime minister-ship). Now there are rumors that Abbott wants to challenge Turnbull. And that's just one of our political parties.

That's true, some sound much worse than others