Of course I financially supported another candidate altogether, but what you say is very likely true as long as there is a qualifier attached. We'd have to assume she was the only democrat running -- and she was of course -- against any of the pitiful Republicans chosen from those on the stage during the primary season. (I should point out that there were actually two Republican stages, the Big Stage, and the Kiddie Stage.) The only possible exception I can think of would have been Jeb. Then it would have been just a coin toss. I couldn't support either Jeb or Hillary because I'm dead set against sons, daughters wives, mother in laws of former presidents running. I don't want any of them. I didn't want John Quincy, but I wasn't born yet, so I couldn't protest. Not much problem with Franklin D.-- Teddy was a fifth cousin, can live with that. And I didn't want the Dub'U for the same and a host of other reasons, such as unbounded stupidity and all those strings connected to his body with Dick Rasputin Cheney at the controls. So yah, I'd have voted for Hillary even though she is annoying as hell and mean as a rattlesnake. It was, again, a choice between Comcast and Direct TV -- both terrible, but one vastly more terrible than the other. One of the main reasons I couldn't have enthusiastically voted for any of the stumbling, bumbling Republicans in that covey of the inept was that they all embrace supply-side economics. They think it works! Well, that may be a bad word choice, because it does "work," but in a ways that are disastrous for the long-term prospects of the nation. Their other common trait was a palpable absence of intellect. I would have preferred the "libertarian" V.P. candidate -- Weld -- to any of them, but that would be throwing a vote away. And too, Weld's running mate was a certified wing nut. That made it impossible to vote for Weld, regardless. So pick your poison I say, Comcast or Direct TV.
I'll stick with your entertainment theme which pertains to your usual rambling responses, like the one above. From True Romance: "Now, what we got here is a little game of show and tell. You don't wanna show me nothin', but you're tellin me everything." By your own admission, you haven't voted for a Republican in the presidential general election in over fifty years. That's fine, but, don't pretend that you take an objective look at the candidates.
That is just a bunch of limp dicked college students.... "Perhaps Patel went on to say actually insensitive things—why the easily offended would attend any comedy show, ever, is fodder for another discussion—but if this joke is representative of his set, the outrage looks that much more ridiculous."
Did I pretend that? Everyone thinks they are taking an objective look. But what is objectivity? Never mind what our Ph.D.s in Philosophy say. Isn't objectivity, to use George Will's term, a rather oleaginous concept? Aren't we in fact just looking through a window colored by our upbringing , our education, our personal experiences, and our peer group?
" Aren't we in fact just looking through a window colored by our upbringing , our education, our personal experiences, and our peer group? " Absolutely! Our learned cognitive bias' create a perceptual warp we employ without recognizing the potential distance between it and absolute reality. If one is in the business of creating and selling, be it a product , political campaign, r.e. subdivision, films etc, that must be distributed over a large audience to be profitable one better have spent time and energy reducing one's perceptual warp to near zero. Then the problem of the warp employed by the end user, target audience, must be solved. America aptly demonstrates the level of hapless clowns politics has attracted the world over. We desperately need a reset. If I were a billionaire kingmaker functioning in the shadows of power I would shape Mike Bloomberg. He has re- registered as a democrat and is currently making noises re: selling his co. IF he runs for POTUS. I would create a new party, horrendously expensive I know but the dems are sullied with far too much baggage that needs to be commited to the trash heap. Bloomberg is "clean", wealthy, legit and experienced, no negative baggage. I'd find a clean younger female with some legit experience, governor, congress etc as VP. He'd have the trust of older voters and the VP would attract younger mindsets. All imo of course.
Interesting Jung is mentioned in this article as I was on the fence about Peterson with him being in the media so much until I saw some of his outstanding work on Jung. No wonder the Trotskyites dislike him so much lol.