Hillary graciously absolving herself of any responsibility

[Montmorency]

I'm glad when people like her lose.

So, does watching politics give you a lot of joy? It's technically a parade of people much like her losing, because other people like her are beating them.

It's understandable if you hate American (and hey, maybe your own) political institutions, but in that case you don't have much call to favor a Sanders over a Clinton. If the system is rotten, then differentiating on the basis of perceived sincerity just means you got sucked in. If the system is not rotten, then you ought to temper your distaste for someone playing the game properly.

She actually isn't. Sure, the media had a field day with her emails and gave Trump a lot of coverage, but was he portrayed positively by the mainstream media? He was practically made fun of. That excuse goes out the window immediately.

I'm sure we just covered these points, but let me note one more thing:

Coverage of Trump was not as negative, in that it presented his own words as he spoke them. We interpret it as negative, but that's how he gained his base - they saw it positively. His unvarnished speech had a lot of exposure.
(From what I gather of news networks this year, they're still obsessed with publicizing and breaking down Trump's words, sentence by sentence, with copious video accompaniment.)
Clinton coverage on the other hand had little to do with her own statements or positions, being rather about items related to her.
It's pre-existing flaws that Trump was able to take advantage of, but you measure by the process not by alleged intentions.

[Sarmatian]

So, does watching politics give you a lot of joy? It's technically a parade of people much like her losing, because other people like her are beating them.

It's understandable if you hate American (and hey, maybe your own) political institutions, but in that case you don't have much call to favor a Sanders over a Clinton. If the system is rotten, then differentiating on the basis of perceived sincerity just means you got sucked in. If the system is not rotten, then you ought to temper your distaste for someone playing the game properly.

As I've said, I see her as an archetype of a career politician. Not in the sense that she spent almost her whole adult life in politics but in a sense that she lacks principles and has no problems doing 180's when it is convenient. Most politicians are like that, but she is the poster girl for it

In general, yes, I place very little trust in politicians. I haven't yet found myself voting for a good option, I was always choosing "less bad" option. Sanders was closest to a good option. Not just because of his policies but because he actually has a long record of sticking to his guns and fighting for the things he believes in.

It's not a binary issue. Politicians tend to be shifty, but there's a scale. Hillary's really high on that scale, Sanders is quite low.

I'm sure we just covered these points, but let me note one more thing:

Coverage of Trump was not as negative, in that it presented his own words as he spoke them. We interpret it as negative, but that's how he gained his base - they saw it positively. His unvarnished speech had a lot of exposure.
(From what I gather of news networks this year, they're still obsessed with publicizing and breaking down Trump's words, sentence by sentence, with copious video accompaniment.)
Clinton coverage on the other hand had little to do with her own statements or positions, being rather about items related to her.
It's pre-existing flaws that Trump was able to take advantage of, but you measure by the process not by alleged intentions.

Good point, and I'm inclined to agree for the most part. We also have to keep in mind, though, that media is all about the ratings. Her email story resonated with the people.

[Pannonian]

As I've said, I see her as an archetype of a career politician. Not in the sense that she spent almost her whole adult life in politics but in a sense that she lacks principles and has no problems doing 180's when it is convenient. Most politicians are like that, but she is the poster girl for it

In general, yes, I place very little trust in politicians. I haven't yet found myself voting for a good option, I was always choosing "less bad" option. Sanders was closest to a good option. Not just because of his policies but because he actually has a long record of sticking to his guns and fighting for the things he believes in.

It's not a binary issue. Politicians tend to be shifty, but there's a scale. Hillary's really high on that scale, Sanders is quite low.

Good point, and I'm inclined to agree for the most part. We also have to keep in mind, though, that media is all about the ratings. Her email story resonated with the people.

Dunno what it's like in Serbia, but over here people tend to vote for who they think would form the best government. News media like to harp on about u-turns and so on, but it's incompetence and corruption that really gets on people's nerves.

[Gilrandir]

Dunno what it's like in Serbia, but over here people tend to vote for who they think would form the best government.

Strange people are those Brits. All over the world people vote for those who are likely to screw up and the British tend to differ. Insular mentality?

[Pannonian]

Strange people are those Brits. All over the world people vote for those who are likely to screw up and the British tend to differ. Insular mentality?

Or maybe my point is that principles haven't generally been an issue in British elections. Where politicians stand on various issues haven't been as big a factor as whether voters reckon they can competently govern a country.

[Gilrandir]

Or maybe my point is that principles haven't generally been an issue in British elections. Where politicians stand on various issues haven't been as big a factor as whether voters reckon they can competently govern a country.

So an effective manager like Hitler would have a good chance to be elected in modern Britain?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

So an effective manager like Hitler would have a good chance to be elected in modern Britain?

Only two back-and-forth's on this exchange with Pannonian and Godwin is invoked.

[Sarmatian]

Dunno what it's like in Serbia, but over here people tend to vote for who they think would form the best government. News media like to harp on about u-turns and so on, but it's incompetence and corruption that really gets on people's nerves.

Corruption in western democracies is on an acceptable level, and there's enough checks and balances to make sure that most politicians are aware of the huge risks they're taking. A lot of money is still being lost, but it's not such a huge issue, especially compared to the rest of the world.

It's connected, though. A person without principles is usually more prone to corruption. In Hillary Clinton, I see a person willing to sacrifice everything for her political career.

So, again - most of them are bad, Hillary is worse than most.

[rory_20_uk]

Democracy is like sausage making - no one likes the process, but we like the end result.

Bernie has held to his principles and has achieved... nothing beyond a principled stance. How nice to have a well paid job where one can just drone on and on without having to do anything.

I'm not sure UK politicians are all that great - we have one set of "bastards" who everyone seems to hate and one lot of "idealistic idiots" who dream of a utopia that would require an influx of money from an as-yet unnamed source and we've not really paid off the last time they managed to "end the boom and bust cycle".

Politicians are of course a reflection of the voters - after all they are the ones who elect them. So Americans seem to get extremely polarised candidates who are engaged in an endless "zero-sum" game where even if Trump were to have a plan that would manage to fix healthcare, the tax system and end the wars in Afghanistan the Democrats would be incapable of letting the Republicans have the "win".

Hilary has little else but her political career. An empty nester with a philandering husband of worldwide proportions I imagine she'd like to have a "win". In that regard, she's not that different to Donnie T.