The Americanized attitude is not my fault; do you think I would willingly admit to better candidates being lost in the flood of the race? No, that's ridiculous.
Chastizing me just because I'm picking the lesser of two evils is ridiculous, and frankly, I think you're a bitch for it.
America's elections (especially Presidential) are completely reliant on corporate funding, the Republican Party's main sponsor being Walmart, (the biggest whore out our employees and leave them stranded just make money company) and even though there are better candidates every election, they are always overshadowed by the two main party candidates.
This irony almost parallels the definition of separation of church and state, so why would you meet my logic with malice after I am only thinking in accordance to the way it is?
I'd like to be more idealistic Ben, but that's outside of political elections, not political debate, just elections.
When it comes down to it in elections, especially Presidential, it's the lesser of two evils, not going to change in the near future.
Besides, just because Clinton bolsters big business, it doesn't mean she'll destroy America's image.
An end of the war is where the Democratic party is headed, that's better than where George Bush's veto ended up.
But I agree with her not being ideal, the economy will still be in an even greater recession if she is elected.
__________________
A mi no me importa nada
Para mi la vida es un sueño
|