Why should I need to make an argument here? I was going to elaborate on pragmatism vs idealism and hint that Hillary supporters are dirty morally bankrupts pieces of shits, but you've made my arguments for me



And I never said that a person should be proud of voting for a candidate just so they can say they voted for the winner, though the jousting straw men makes for a great visual.
I said that the outcomes factor into who is 'right' for pragmatists: That pragmatists must consider the chances their candidate will win or lose. Voting for someone to tip the balance towards the side you favor is pragmatism, not voting for the winner regardless of policy.

A pragmatist can be proud of voting for someone they wouldn't think is the right candidate if they were to disregard outcomes. Because as Otto Von Bismarck would tell you, "politics is the art of the cowardly spineless pieces of shit"

How does me saying Hillary was the best point available make your point for you. It's simply me disagreeing with you. I mean I can give you evidence as to why Trump is a terrible choice but I think you probably know most of it already. So what makes you think Hillary is a worse choice than a rambling sex pest?

None of the posts I made were directed at you until you quoted me...




What a strawman.

I'm more of a pragmatist than anyone I know and I am firmly not saying to disregard probability of winning.

Outcomes do not factor into who is the right voting choice for pragmatists. Odds of winning before the election do. Basic decision theory.

Who in fact ends up winning is not at all relevant. Voting for Trump was only a rational decision if Trump was a better candidate to Clinton proportional to their pre-election odds of winning. The fact that he won does not somehow vindicate all his voters as being "correct".

This post was edited by Voyaging on Mar 20 2017 09:02pm

I'm making a point about pragmatism vs idealism. You explained how a pragmatist could proudly support Hillary Clinton without thinking she's the right candidate if outcomes were disregarded, since as you put it, she's the best choice available, and the first female president would be a big deal. For pragmatists, the outcome matters- it matters enough to change who you'd vote for, in hopes of swinging the election as much as your tiny vote can, and it matters in that the outcome may either vindicate or attaint your decision, particularly when it comes to tight races or three-or-more way races, ask the Nader voters.

You're doing a poor job of disagreeing with me, just not in the usual way

leaked pic of a 'russian hacker' who undermined the US election in 2016:

leaked pic of hacker according to Trump and his research

But Hillary was a pretty sure bet so I don't see your point. There was literally no moral or intellectual reason to vote Trump over Hillary.

If I'm doing a poor job of disagreeing with you it's because you're doing a poor job of presenting any solid argument.

Obama trying to steal Trump's dino eggs

Or because you're agreeing with me.
You can disagree with yourself if you want, I'd listen