Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry


There is a presidential election looming on the far horizon. Bearing that in mind, I have sound political reasoning that will help ease your decision by removing a contender.

Do NOT Vote for Hillary Clinton.

This is not about my distrust of her sincerity. Nor is it really even about her downward-spiraling campaign1. It's about math.

I know, I know. I am the last person you would have expected this from, but hear me out.

The last time we had a White House without a Bush or a Clinton in the oval office was way back in 1989. That was 18 years ago. This means that every single person under the age of 18 has never known a White House that has not been under the rule of a Clinton or a Bush, two prominent political American families. Think of every single high school, most college freshmen, and our newest round of voters. Not a single one of them has experienced anything other than Bush, Clinton, Bush2.

If that doesn't make you want to throw up in your mouth a little bit, you just wait.

If Clinton were to get elected, we would have to push that age group back to every American under the age of 2231. If she got re-elected, the age group would need to be pushed back to 26. That's over two and a half decades, and over one third of the average American life expectancy4 spent under two alternating families in power.

Do you taste the bile yet?

Think about future generations of children who will inevitably be forced to recite the order of the presidents. When they get to the 90s, suddenly they have Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton5? Not on my watch, America.

Just think about the numbers. Then think about how going from father to son, husband to wife6 would be veering dangerously near monarchy. And we all know that democracy just won't stand for that sort of thing.

Moral of the Story:

Variety is the spice of life, people. Diversity makes us strong. So do what's right, and don't vote for Hillary.

1 Now complete with hostages and officials who verbally attack the character of her political opponents!
2 Technically Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush.
3 Now with a bunch of legal drunks knowing only Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton!
31 That's twenty-two, not twenty-two cubed.
4 According to CNN, the average American life expectancy for a child born in 2004 is 77.9 years.
5 Potentially Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Clinton, Clinton?
6 Technically Father, Husband, Son, Wife.

Site Meter


( 31 comments — Leave a comment )
Dec. 15th, 2007 12:51 am (UTC)
that is true
Dec. 15th, 2007 01:38 am (UTC)
It's weird that no media outlet has really capitalized on how weird it is.

Also, you TOTALLY freaked me out with the new lj name. I like it though, and ace on the layout, as always.
Dec. 15th, 2007 01:24 am (UTC)
What will you do if Clinton wins the nomination? I'd never vote for any of the Republicans running and although Hillary isn't my first choice I'd still vote for her over all of them. I also think the idea of Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton is amusing...if it does happen. I don't want it to but if it did I'd be like "LOL."
Dec. 15th, 2007 01:28 am (UTC)
It honestly depends on who the other candidate is. I do not trust Clinton farther than I can throw her. I think she has no backbone, and I don't think she herself has a stance on anything. I think she just wants the office, and will do whatever it takes to get there. I will not vote for her.

I would vote for Huckabee, I think. I need to do some more research into him, but he's not so Neo-Republican as the other candidates.

However, if no suitable candidate can be found, I will abstain from voting. After all, in the words of Albert Einstien regarding the philisophy and life of Ghandi: "We should strive to do things in his spirit: not to use violence in fighting for our cause, but by non-participation in anything you believe is evil."
(no subject) - wonky - Dec. 15th, 2007 01:32 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - virtuistic - Dec. 15th, 2007 01:36 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - wonky - Dec. 15th, 2007 02:21 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - virtuistic - Dec. 15th, 2007 02:48 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - virtuistic - Dec. 15th, 2007 01:53 am (UTC) - Expand
Dec. 15th, 2007 01:29 am (UTC)
Yeah, didn't we split from Britain to get AWAY from a monarchy? (Is there such a thing as a duarchy?)

Obama all the way.

BTW, are you feeling better? You had me worried there!
Dec. 15th, 2007 01:32 am (UTC)
We have, I believe, an oligarchy. Literal translation being: government by the few.

I do like Obama. And I think, now that he's got Oprah on his side he could really have a shot. I'm hopeful. I think he is a breath of fresh air.

And in response to your other question, yes and no. I went to the hospital, as you know, and got the 'roids. Now my heart is freaking its shit out though. At work today there were a few times where I had to just put my head down and breath because it was racing so fast. My heartbeat is naturally very low and it was around 90-110 all day. So... if it does it again tomorrow I'll be going back to the doctor. :(
(no subject) - extremetapir - Dec. 16th, 2007 12:38 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - virtuistic - Dec. 16th, 2007 07:18 pm (UTC) - Expand
Dec. 15th, 2007 02:33 am (UTC)
Why not give a person a benefit of the doubt? People are not copies of each others. They are unique individuals. They have their own thoughts and their own original ideas.
Dec. 15th, 2007 02:54 am (UTC)
I think history has proven that giving the benefit of the doubt doesn't work too well when you're dealing with the President of the United States.
(no subject) - greyduck - Dec. 15th, 2007 09:14 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - virtuistic - Dec. 15th, 2007 11:21 pm (UTC) - Expand
Dec. 15th, 2007 03:59 am (UTC)
That's an interesting point, and one I'd certainly give a lot of thought to.

Huckabee sounded palatable up until the whole bit where he thinks all AIDS victims should be put under quarantine- yeah, he made the statement 15 years ago, but when asked again he said he would not back down from that statement. Otherwise, he'd be edging out McCain in my decent-Republican slot, but that was sort of a make or break statement for me, and he broke.
Dec. 15th, 2007 11:30 pm (UTC)
Yeah, that is particularly shitty. I don't think we need any modern day leper colonies out there.

There are a few things about him that I really don't like. I don't like his stance on gay marriage, and I really don't like that he wants to overturn Rowe vs. Wade... but I don't think he'd be able to ban either. I just don't think Congress or the Senate would stand for that shit, so it's *kind of* moot?

Plus, Huckabee is Chuck Norris approved. I don't know if you've seen that ad, but it is staggering.

But... it's better than blimp boy or Rudy I-can-say-911-at-least-138,049-times-before-you-can-blink. I confess I haven't really given McCain much thought. Hm.
(no subject) - mattador - Dec. 16th, 2007 03:59 am (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - virtuistic - Dec. 16th, 2007 07:09 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - mattador - Dec. 16th, 2007 08:47 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - virtuistic - Dec. 16th, 2007 11:53 pm (UTC) - Expand
(no subject) - mattador - Dec. 17th, 2007 12:14 am (UTC) - Expand
Dec. 15th, 2007 04:05 am (UTC)
agreed! mathemolitics haha
Dec. 15th, 2007 11:24 pm (UTC)
Can't argue with sound reasoning! XD
Dec. 15th, 2007 04:39 am (UTC)
who should i vote for then????
Dec. 15th, 2007 11:23 pm (UTC)
That's up to you. :) As I am totally against trying to make someone vote for my preferred candidate, I would counsel doing some brief campaign research.

Although, I would like to add that you should Not vote for Ron Paul, because of the blimp. That update will be coming soon.
(no subject) - bullet4fob - Dec. 19th, 2007 05:32 am (UTC) - Expand
(Deleted comment)
Dec. 30th, 2007 04:43 pm (UTC)
Re: Huckabee is a nut
But he's Chuck Norris approved. Heh.

(Deleted comment)
Re: Huckabee is a nut - virtuistic - Jan. 3rd, 2008 01:33 am (UTC) - Expand
( 31 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

May 2013


Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow