@Comrade Sky yeah except Clinton has been investigated, multiple times, by republicans, democrats, and independent organisations, yet no wrongdoing has been filed. Trump has blocked every investigation into his organisation since taking office, he did not even testify in his own impeachment hearing, whether you believe it's a witch hunt or not. As president, he should have testified. He obstructed Mueller's investigation and Barr tied Mueller's hands by saying no sitting president could be charged of a crime. Big difference when one cooperated with investigations and was cleared, whilst the other obstructs investigations, intimidates witnesses, cries on social media how unfair everybody is to him, then clears himself again via social media.
@Comrade Sky you are shifting the goalposts. Yes, the US government in general has committed all sorts of atrocities around the globe for decades, however, we are not talking about Obama, nor anyone else but Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Hillary has faced multiple investigations and complied with them, from people all over the political spectrum, including her own party. Trump has been protected by his party and obstructed all other investigations. That's the point here, don't distract by bringing up irrelevant things, no matter how much I agree with you on war crimes.
@Comrade Sky even worse than being partisan, you're a both sides buffoon. Enjoy sitting on the fence crying like a baby about how crap American government is.
Me watching this in 2016: The world is going to heck!!! And who the hell is that tiger dude??? What is wrong with the world? Why is this happening???? Me watching this in 2020: Ah the simpler times
@@nerminsnowhuseinbasic9340 Joe Exotic murders and abuses tigers, and literally tried to murder people for calling him out. He also pushed a young dude to suicide
"Or they would vote for the ghost of MLK, assuming he only said the 3 quotes that white people like." MLK was so great but many people ignore a huge part of his greatness.
True. The closest thing to a perfect candidate is probably some half lawyer, half accountant who plays chess and Civ 6 in his spare time, and wouldn't run for political office under any circumstances. But I'd settle for Trey Gowdy.
Even George Washington was in support of no main parties, he thought the idea of parties at all was a dumb idea as it would stick America into a never ending cycle of never changingness.
he also said to not get involve in Europe conflicts and do not go to war against each other. Washington stated these as things that we should never do. Thats why we took forever to get involve in WWI and WWII
Well in the Kaiserriech alternate timeline (a Hearts of Iron IV mod) where Germany wins WW1 and a Communist Revolution in Britain led to the British Royal Family and Nobility to flee to Canada to plan the homecoming liberation of Britain, America falls to Civil War and Canada invades Alaska and sets up a allied nation in New England and upstate New York.
Watching from canada this debate is like seeing your Neighbors house burn down and the fire department is all on strike. i feel bad for all the americans out there stuck with these horrible choices.
Speaking of Joe Exotic, I've actually been to his zoo and was there the day he broke his leg, necessitating the brace you see here. Just before his tiger wrangling show he handed out condoms (with his picture on the wrapper) to all the males in audience. He made a speech predicting that his death would be from a tiger attack, then started his show. In the cage with two tigers, they were getting increasing frisky playing with one another and one snuck behind Joe hitting his leg at just the angle to break it. He collapsed in pain. I wondered "how is this guy not on TV??"
Yeah Joe was arrested for a murder for hire plot. The fact that he did NOT use a lion to commit that murder is ironically the most surprising thing about that situation... Say no to meth
Watching it I got a sudden feeling of "I'm pretty sure I've seen that guy's presidential election campaign video on LWT" and then I couldn't let it go until I'd checked! 😂 🐯 John Oliver as usual did not disappoint! ❤
I'd love for him to do another segment on third parties, this time talking about the need for a multi-party system and how our electoral system makes it virtually impossible.
The stupid Freedom Caucus is proving that a third party that actually has party is absolutely problematic with the current system. They managed to make the party that in theory has a majority in the house unable to seat their choice for speaker until after 15 rounds of voting over 4 days and with major sacrifices being made in order to give him their vote, some incredibly dangerous. Speaker McCarthy is the weakest speaker ever in terms of control of his party and its because of this fringe party. Obviously not every third party would do this, but this example shows how problematic it can be with the current structure.
@@iamoctonate This was inevitable. In almost every other "democratic country" these people would never be in the same party but they are because there are only two parties you can join if you want to be elected. There will always be divisive extremists no matter how many parties you have but if the so-called Freedom Caucus was a separate party, a more moderate Republican Party could emerge and they maybe could've reached out to the Democrats instead, leaving the crazies isolated. Plus, a more radical left-wing party could also emerge and then I could vote without holding my nose.
John: *Does a piece on the biggest scandals facing HRC and Drumpf, being particularly thorough with Hillary's* Third Party People: "There's more than two choices! DON'T BE SO BIASED!" John: *Does a piece about the two most prominent third party candidates, pointing out their flaws* Third Party People: "OMG why aren't you doing a piece on Hillary? Corrupt! DON'T BE SO BIASED!" I'm not following your logic, here.
I know he's addressed what he would consider scandals. I watch like every episode. I like John Oliver. But I would disagree if I were to say he were thorough.
aaronlwu257 Oh you mean he addressed the fact that all the Hillary scandals do is look shady and that made you sad? He didn't condemn your least favorite candidate but looked at the objective facts and came up with the fact that everything wasn't as bad as it looked and you are upset?
Stop focusing so much on the presidential shit show and get yourself ready to vote in the other races taking place in your area. Vote for congress, vote for senate, vote for your state rep, your attorney general, your local sheriff, and all the other offices up for election this year. Whatever you do, don't say "I'm not voting because I hate both candidates." Don't be stupid. Staying home on Election Day because you don't like the presidential nominees is like not buying your dream home because you don't like the drapes.
But when you cannot truly decide which of the candidates you dislike the least, where the hell to you go making a vote? Do you just fucking pick at random? What the fuck do we do here?
Funny how many people did not understood what he meant when saying things like "two boyfriends most of my life" and "bitch down in florida", when now people who didn't even watch the doc knows what he's talking about
You mean the two boyfriends that joe attracted and kept woth meth and the "bitch down in florida" that most likely killed her husband and fed his corpse to a tiger?
@@unknownname1941 Joe Exotic was "married" to two guys at the same time, one died, and the other one broke up with him, and by "some bitch in Florida" he means Carole Baskin, owner of Big Cat Rescue sanctuary in Florida, who Joe had some serious beef with, and at one point tried to get her killed.
Pretty pointless statement, since psychologically speaking, probably none of the candidates are actually sociopaths. That's just bad political rhetoric. Can we implement IQ tests for the right to vote? This election seems to make that option seem more palpable.
+Andrew S Your comment reeks of stupidity and ignorance. Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are proven pathological liars. Let's check things off the list here: Lacks empathy, manipulative, no sense of shame or remorse, unchecked egocentricity, willingness to lie to achieve ones goals. That's LITERALLY the textbook definition of a sociopath, and both Clinton and Trump fit the bill perfectly. Apply some critical thinking for once in your life instead of trying to project the appearance of pseudo-intelligence.
Andrew S I think it's a very hard sell to tell that high politic are not sociopath..especially this two, and i dont think you should kill yoursel for trying to sell it..that's disturbing.
If you ask Alaskans, their not in America either. But they''ll take all the federal dollars they can get and sell their oil to foreign companies for pennies on the dollar. Yes it's that kind of stupidity from Alaskans that brought us Sarah Palin. Now let's re-elect Don Young! Fucking morons.
Reality check? Are you kidding? Have you even seen or heard the things that Trump and Clinton have been doing and saying? Compared to those two, Johnson and Stein look like saints. There's a reality check for you.
He does a show every week. This week was on third parties. That is why he talked about them and not Trump and Hillary. Grow the fuck up and get some perspective Third party claims they don't get enough media attention - and you you cry when it's not all positive. You think all Trump and Hillary news is positive?
Very informational video, sadly lots of people in denial in the comments. John's not biased, he's just telling the facts about the 3rd party candidates.
I think the problem isn't that he's lying, it's just that it's kind of clear he's pushing an agenda. He hates Trump and wants Hillary to win, and that's fine, but sidestepping a majority of scandals from Hillary's side (even just to debunk them, which might make people believe that he can't debunk them), and then immediately saying voting third party is horrible while still failing to remain objective is pretty fucked up. He's usually very objective about things but this election season he shows his true colors imho. After watching the "Scandals" vid I've been skipping John's vids (until this one of course) because of his failure to remain objective. I'm just going to come back after the election where hopefully his vids go back to the way they used to be.
The Moodic He wasn't saying that voting third party is horrible though. If you listen carefully, what John's message is that third party voting is certainly an option, and both major third party candidates are running with some appealing platforms --however, their proposed policies should be scrutinized as much as Clinton/Trump's policies. He's saying that if we want third party candidates to be serious candidates, we should treat them as such. The whole purpose of pointing out the flaws of Johnson and Stein was to emphasize that even the "better" alternatives aren't perfect.
you guys do know he's an entertainer right? he's not a journalist, nor is the research team, he is here to entertain, he said so himself. and yet if he is biased, it is you job to find the real answers, og find an unbosed source, which can be pretty tough in the USA I know.
While Gary Johnson may not have been ready for prime time, the best reason I could think of to vote for a 3rd party was that if they break 5% of the vote, they are entitled to federal campaign money the next election cycle. Even an ill-suited candidate would shake things up by simply getting to share the stage.
Honestly, we should also fix the Presidential debates, too, cus rn it is just two people talking over each other. Otherwise, it's going to be three people talking over each other.
YES!!! And everyone is biased. Liberals, Conservatives- everyone's biased. There's no such thing as objectivity. Therefore, accusing someone of being biased is like accusing them of breathing air.
Let's see John has taken the time to critique all the candidates in depth. Trump, Johnson, and Stein. There's only one he hasn't done yet gosh I can't remember her name!
He ended up talking more about trump than Hillary in that "anti-clinton" video anyway. I'm not American so obviously I'm not voting or supporting either candidate but I think its real obvious that Oliver wants Clinton to win.
Whenever Trump supporters hear the opposition criticize Hillary, they go deaf, because it doesn't fit their narrative that only paid shills are voting for her.
Worth noting that's a biologically male pikachu wearing the wedding dress at 3:51. Props to the Last Week Tonight team for being accepting of the LGBT+ Pokemon community
Yep I noticed that as well. Though I wish we could see the other one's tail as they might have been female and it was just a fun crossdressing theme wedding.
Did no one see the episode where he brings up Hillary's scandals and said that people were perfectly justified in not liking her and that a big reason he's opposed to Trump is that he has far more scandals? Did everyone miss the part where he called her "a hawkish, wall street friendly embodiment of everything that some people can't stand about politics?" Or is everyone upset that he pointed out there is no perfect candidate and that all of them have serious problems?
This video really made him look like part of the establishment. For instance, the way he freaked out over how Jill suggested to re-open the 9/11 investigation really shows it. I thought her answer was perfect. Ron Paul out right said the commission was made to cover up rather than really honestly tell what happened on 9/11. But John reacted the same way the establishment reacts to anyone who brings up 9/11.
First User You mean have the exact reaction nearly everyone in the country has? Very few people take the 9/11 conspiracy seriously, especially now that it's been 15 years. Just because Ron Paul said something, that doesn't automatically make it true. I feel her answer was blatantly saying "I'm desperate for voters, so I want as many people as possible to like me."
***** And very few people in Israel actually think their government is an oppressive one that have done countless human rights violations. Very few North Koreans believe that their leader is actually a terrible person. Why is that do you think? Its because you are trained to react to certain things in certain ways. You are taught in schools at a young age that terrorists used box cutters to high jack airplanes and fly them into buildings, which was masterminded by a man hooked to a dialysis machine in a cave in Afghanistan. You are indoctrinated in schools at a young age to take this story as fact and if you question it, you will be ostracized. This has a lot to do with how Americans think the way they do. As you mentioned people who even bring it up are not taken seriously. That's why people like Ron Paul and now Jill Stein are being shut down by the establishment, and clearly John is doing the exact same thing here. Shutting her down simply because he is part of that establishment.
i was going to bring up the "hawkish" line but, in comparison to the other three candidates, he was clearly treating hillary with kid gloves in that part of the video.
This should've been an actual discussion and investigation on why our two party system should be replaced instead of just John taking shits on Jill and Gary...
If you live in a state with write-ins, you technically can. It's just really kind of a wasted vote since it is virtually impossible for him to win at this point.
The "I'm not aware of evidence linking autism with vaccines" line is the correct scientific approach that a medical doctor should take. I don't understand what the problem is.
It opens up doubt - giving millions of idiots a reason to keep avoiding vaccines and putting the rest of the entire population in danger due to their confirmation biases. There's no clear and clean evidence thus far that links autism to vaccines so it's rational to assume there is no connection and it's far safer to do so too. There is, from a technical standpoint, nothing absolute in science - but that doesn't mean we should go around telling people and assuming from the start that gravitational forces don't exist or something. Maintaining skepticism is good - all science was founded on questions. But being an irrational and dangerous version of Descartes isn't.
Forrest Gump bullshit. I don't give a fuck if some idiots misinterpret her words. You know what never encourages cohesion and collaboration? Shouting down people you disagree with and never being open to the possibility that you are wrong. I would want my president to be open minded and hear all sides of an argument, then erring on the side with the stronger evidence, as is the proper scientific approach.
Yeah, I understand that she should moderate her wording so as not to confuse the masses of idiots, but its that exact two faced, screened nature that we seem to then turn around and hate politicians for.
***** 1. Wow - the NSA. 2. I agree it wasn't a strong argument (I feel like John should've outlined her lack of understanding of economics far greater) - but it's still something important to note. Just because there might be tons of other flammable things inside of a burning house - doesn't mean we should tolerate someone dousing the outside with a bit of lighter fluid too. It's akin to the the whole 'so much people are doing X, so who cares if I do it or not' case and all the problems that come with it.
Just think of it as near-monopolic corporatization of myriads of political ideas. Though, speaking as a former Republican and current Democrat, the latter party really is a big tent party (to the point of analysis paralysis) while the former is really lockstep at the national level.
Oliver Boisen Looks the coalitions of parties from center-right and center-left and call them party one and party two. They should be this in practice, but in the USA right and left are just a conservative and a progressive form of two right parties
Hilarius no, it would actually make extremist candidates more likely to exist, if one party shifts one way and the other goes the other way, you would have both extremes at the same time, in a multiparty system it is much harder to slide since a party would already encompass that section of the spectrum
No candidate is anywhere near good. Stein is too passive, Trump is too aggressive, Hillary is corrupt, and Johnson is not patient. Although their weaknesses tend to be their strengths is some cases. Stien being charismatic and loving, Trump appearing honest and genuine, Hillary with the skills of leadership, and Johnson with the ability to adapt to the situation.
MynameisBrianZX More like out of context garbage. That tweet by Jill is exactly how a medical professional would respond to that question. You can't unequivocally deny something if there is more ongoing research. By the way, Hillary also said something similar to what Jill said on the topic but he didnt present that, did he? HM, I WONDER WHY.
How is Jill Stein's cancelling student debt so impossible if the banks' debt was so easily cancelled recently? Additionally, the economy would actually benefit from excusing student debt, unlike the bank bailout.
It would, and the "counter-argument" provided by Hope&Despair is just silly. The writer has put no effort beyond a quick Google to find something that sounds like it agrees with his position. The article linked is already gone and the position implied by the title is baseless.
their debt wasn't cancelled actually, they were given cheap loans for liquidity and the loans were in the form of the government taking stakeholder position in their stock
The bailout program was the tip of the iceberg as far as I know. the real bailout was QE rounds that kept the economy size increasing and eroded real capital. the banks got the chance to offload bad debt onto the FED in return for cheap money. it's just feeding a pyramid economy. forgiving student debt is the OPPOSITE: those students get loans that then can repay because they could more easily construct a household and generate new income. unlike banks.
So a president can support and organize a Wall Street 4 trillion dollar bailout, but dear oh dear, he has no authority to do the same thing for student debt? Economic tools are just that, tools that can be adjusted according to the situation.
+agroeconomist 77, actually, its technically a government book you would need. An economics book would most likely talk about economic theory rather than who has authority to issue economic policies.
What, if he wins, does that make like his pride of lions & tigers Congress??? Ok that's actually sorta cool....coming from one crazy cat person to another even crazier one🦁🐯🇺🇸
Jill: "Quantitative Easing is a magic trick" John: "No it isn't though, it's a complicated economic policy" Me: "... She called it a Magic Trick because it amounts to economic sleight of hand. It's not really all that complicated as much as it is an exploit of the economic system."
Okay, but many magic tricks are complicated when you actually explain how to do them and most people don’t understand how to do them, so in a sense he was still right.
I don't get the outrage. He rips on Hillary all the fucking time. I honestly don't get it. He's said that she sucks. Some of you guys are just so damn emotionally attached to your horrible candidates. Good grief
Justin Purdy Ha, I knew someone would bring up the one in this episode. The one in this episode is obviously implied. OPs quote was: "He rips on Hillary all the fucking time." That implies more than one rip. This episode makes one. There must be other episodes that have rips. So what are these episodes? I know you're gonna try and say the scandals piece. The scandals piece was utterly defensive and apologetic. Unless you can quote a good rip from that segment. So are there any other episodes?
Who’s watching this after Trump created then lost over a trillions dollars in an hour by trying to save the stock market instead of giving the American people a reoccurring stimulus checks?
Yep. And the only thing bad were the lyrics. And I've heard heard *worse* . Both from a structural, moral, and grammatical standpoint. As well as in "how bad the lyrics sound if the music was taken away and they were told in a non-distracting voice".
Could have been atleast as bad as Canada's former Prime Minister [Stephen Harper]'s band was. Look at the "Canadian Election" Lastweek Tonight video on youtube if you want to see it, lol.
@@moondust2365 I felt that 'silent thunder' meant, a soundless threat. Thunder is the sound you hear when there's lightning that just struck. When there's thunder, but you can't hear it, you can be unprepared and then struck. It made perfect sense to me.
not even american just like you are mostly too... and the "Scottish German" Trump for that case. just mixture of imports from somewhere else. lets find a descendant of Sioux Chief Standing Bear and get him to be USA's president... then finally USA gets it first _American_ president...
Ari Vishnu but that statement doesn't even have a reason behind it. It's just a collection of words that sound full of conviction and elegant. It appeals to your emotions, sure, political ideas need to be on facts, not feelings. Saying you'd rather want a malimformed, useless, and irresponsible President than a corrupt one is all fine and dandy until it actually happens.
It should be good to note that this isn't an argument against 3rd parties institutionally. In the UK, we have really good 3rd parties that often help raise specific ideologies such as green, SNP or DUP and other countries like Germany even have functional coalition governments. It can work and no one can figure out why the US can't have more than specifically 2 parties.
There's a few reasons for this -- though it's a good question. The biggest reason is the relative strength of party infrastructure; parties in the US are (compared with British ones) institutionally very weak. It's best to think of American political parties less like the parties you're used to, and more like alliances between various interest groups that can change. American party whips can count votes but don't have the same mechanisms to enforce party discipline, and there's no party vetting process to get a candidate onto the list for a constituency like there is in the UK. If you want to run as a Democrat in an American district, you can run as a Democrat, and vice versa. You won't _win_ if you're too alien to what most party voters want (and by the way, you don't join the two major American parties in the same way you do in the UK -- instead you register, which often determines which ballot you get), but there's nothing anyone can do about your choosing the party ballot line. Generally, when a movement wants to generate some sort of effective change in the UK, it has to form a group from the outside and make deals and fights with the other parties until it forces its way into Parliament and either grows (e.g. Labour, now a government-in-waiting), formally merges into a larger party (e.g. the Social Democrats, now part of the LibDems), or disappears (e.g. the Irish Parliamentary Party, which once held the balance of power in Parliament and then collapsed after Ireland won independence). In the US, though, groups can operate within parties to affect change internally and there's not much the party higher-ups can do about it, so this leads to it being generally easier to work within parties than outside them. The Civil Rights movement did this with the Democrats, resulting in the white-supremacist "Dixiecrat" faction leaving the party entirely and mostly defecting to the Republicans by the 1990s. So did the Bernie people, and although you couldn't call the Democrats a socialist party, you can definitely say that Bernie's movement left a lasting imprint on party policies and energized millions of people. By the same token, the Tea Party did this with the Republicans, as did the MAGAheads -- both of those groups spurred a realignment within the GOP that would be all-but-impossible -- or at least very very very slow -- within a British political party. Corbyn tried -- love him or hate him, he tried -- and it wrecked him. Most German and other European parties operate differently, partly because they're responding to different types of concerns (no single-member districts, more proportionality ...). They're more stable, but also more liable to real coalitions, which have their own host of benefits and problems.
When John was talking about the FED and printing money, it was the first time that I thought he has no clue what he is talking about. His research team let him down on this.
Robert Hsu so you are "pretty sure"? I'm pretty sure you know nothing about the process of how money comes into the world. and the FED is not "independent of everything", that is rediculous. In 1951, the Fed and Treasury reached an accord in which the Fed got back the power to run a monetary policy independent of fiscal policy. And that is the historically correct and economically sensible meaning of independence: It is the Fed’s policy that is independent. That does not mean politicacly indepedent by any means. Its actions have long been dictated by the president and politicians in power.
+XGX787 it`s a complex subject. One thing is, that the state actually pays a private bank to "print" money for the state.* That`s in fact a hidden Tax the US-Citizens have to pay for every single dollar they get. So billions of dollars are only spent on interest on that process, that the bank creates money out of thin air. And the FED NEVER refuses to print money for the state if asked for. Never has, and most likely never will. So the whole "you don`t want to give presidents the power to print money" is obsolete. On the other hand: what does it tell you when one of the crucial rights in a state, printing money, is not owned by the state, but by a private company? What does it tell you about a democracy when the elected head of state is, in last consequence, dependend of the banks? And this is just scratching at the surface of the problem with the FED-system and central banks in general. *in fact the FED is printing notes, but it gives digital (not physical) money to the state in exchange for state bonds. The minting of coins does the Department of the Treasury.
"in fact the FED is printing notes, but it gives digital (not physical) money to the state in exchange for state bonds. The minting of coins does the Department of the Treasury." Where do the private banks you mentioned come in to this?
I'm actually a little happy John is not airing right now. Mainly because of the Jill cult. John would have been critical of all people running, which would be fine with Jill supporters until their candidate got criticised, than Jon would become a "Sellout piece of shit shill" They would say Stewart is doing his masters willing, like how they say that Oliver can't say anything about Clinton because of time Warner. Well interesting for Oliver to do that Net neutrality piece he did than. Don't try to make others dig deeper when all you do is dig till you get the angle you want to view in life. As a Canadian at first I thought that maybe the Jill road would be a nice road for the progressive moment in America, but slower, and slower it has turned into more of an angry cult. Like trump supporters. If someone dares to criticise your God they are "shills," because how dare someone running for the highest seat in America be under any kind of negative questioning? Trump and Hilary only get good coverage right? it sucks because the progressive movement deserves better than people like you.
I won’t say that people can’t have their own opinions on 911, but my father (who is a civil engineer) was actually with structural engineers at the time of 911, and they were watching it play out on the news when they had an entire discussion on skyscraper design and jet fuel. There are many skyscrapers that wouldn’t have collapsed like the twin towers, but they are not the twin towers. Average skyscrapers are structurally supported on the sides, but taller ones, like the twin towers, are supported in the middle. Then the thing that people forget about the fact that planes use jet fuel, which is designed to burn extremely hot for an extremely long time. When you put these two things together, you’ll find that it makes sense how the towers burned how they did, and you’ll also find that it makes perfect sense from an engineering standpoint that the towers collapsed into itself when the main support was in the center, compared to falling over when there’s four sides of main support and only one gave way. Also, those structural engineers told my father that if they didn’t put out the fires soon, the towers would collapse. Then, a few minutes later, a tower collapsed. So, maybe, just maybe, trust the licensed engineers this time.
Well said it made sense to me how the towers went down you can't rig a building to go against physics and engineering without a blue screen or cords and cranes that would have standed out it in both meaning of the word!
Steel often melts at around 1370 degrees C (2500°F) prolonged burning of metals as the flammable roof tiles and flammable furniture would provide with the fire accelerant jet fuel that heat can be hit fast!
Blondie Boy ik your comment is probably a joke but just in case it isn’t, jet fuel can’t fully melt steel beams, but it can make it malleable enough that it would collapse the way it did. there’s a video of a welder (i think ?) who heated a steel beam to the same temperature as it would be if it was “melted” by jet fuel and it didn’t completely melt, but he was able to bend it in half with only his pinkie. :)
light yagami I think this is an intentional choice. He knows Clinton isn't perfect, but thinks she's the best option. So knowing that he potentially has some influence over voting, yeah, he favors Clinton some. But, I mean, he never claims to be unbiased, and those that don't agree don't have to watch.
He did mention that she has been exonerated by EVERY federal inquiry she has been subjected to. And about 90% of the shit Clinton gets attacked for is just speculation or flat out lies. And even she admits her vote for the Iraq War was a mistake.
He's done it in every other episode for the past year including calling out her superficial statements but this episode points out policy ignorance, which is not a weakness Clinton has for all the ones she does.
The problem with third parties isn't that the ones you have now aren't up to the task. It's that all the decent ones you did have were swallowed by your two big monolithic parties. There's no reason why Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton should be in the same party, and there's no reason why Trump should be in the same party as most of the other republican candidates. The ideal solution would be to break up those parties, and preferably employ the alternative vote to avoid the spoiler effect and prevent simple majority rule, but that'll never happen. It's easier for politicians to only have one real opponent, and they won't throw away the "sports team-like" fervor a lot of voters have for their party. Many people know nothing about who they're voting for, they just know they're not voting for "the other guy". Politicians know they get a lot of votes this way, so they have no incentive for changing things, but make no mistake, this is awful for the regular citizen.
No one ever said Last Week Tonight was unbiased. If you want John Oliver to make politically neutral content, you'll have to convince FOX to do so as well.
I mean one main segment devoted solely to Hillary Clinton. John did one for Trump, he did one for the third party candidates, so now we need one for Hillary. John hasn't talked about Hillary nearly enough compared to Trump. It doesn't have to be all criticism. I just think he should talk about each candidate to the fullest extent.
Yes, he piled a bunch of stacks of paper on his desk and said "The government practically investigated itself and shockingly it decided not to incriminate itself. But now that you've seen these stacks of paper and heard my flippant assertion of their metaphorical validity, let's head over to Trumpland!" The government has pleaded the 5th in regards to investigating Clinton.
Perhaps it’s that America’s deeply flawed electoral system reinforces having two deeply ingrained major parties, pushing minor parties way out to the fringe.
its not flawed it works as intended. also the 2 parties are not responsible for there not being a 3rd party. its how people decide to spend their vote that is responsible for it. its also not politicians fault they are all slimy lying bastards that exists also because of voters spend their vote. people discard people who run with even the slightest flaw then people who are the best at lying survive the gauntlet of the american voter. you want to change the system change the voter.
@@mayainverse9429 It isn't working as intended; in fact, we don't even have the same electoral system as when the country was founded. The original system was states would select(usually by election, but it isn't a coincidence that they pick as many people as they have in congress) a set of representative called the electoral college. The electoral college from all the states would then meet up, debate, and select a president. People were never suppose to vote directly for the president. There was never suppose to be a risk of getting somebody most people didn't want because the electoral college would have worked a compromise between similar candidates. What we have now was a patch work of trying to turn the constitutionally mandated indirect election into a direct election without having enough votes to change the Constitution(enough people support direct election, but people don't agree on how it should work).
You don't think her not actually having any type of stances isn't a good thing? At least with Trump we know he's a racist piece of shit because he loves reminding us but Jill might be racist with one crowd and then not in another.
Einchy Seriously? She does have stances. What do you call: increasing infrastructure spending, Universal Health Care, eliminating student debt, College Free Tuition, cutting military spending, legalizing marijuana and decriminalizing all drugs... etc.?
He isn't racist ok? I'm not a Trump supporter but MY GOD are you regressives ignorant. Donald Trump never said anything bad about any race, he was talking about the illegal immigrants that come in from Mexico, Syria etc.
The Green Party has really good local and congressional candidates in my state. Not a big fan of Jill herself but if she gets 5% they will get federal campaign funding for their local candidates. You don't vote third party because you expect them to win presidency, you vote so that maybe the party will have a voice someday. They will need to get local positions before they win the presidency but to do that they needed funding and exposure.
no. it´s actually you understanding that e v e r y other option in this election is just dumb. america had it's chance electing Bernie but blew it. now you have 1 option and that is to maintain the status quo i.e. voting for Hillary. the other options are either dumb, uninformed or down right dangerous to your country and pretty much the rest of the world. best regards from sweden
My life back in 2016 in somewhere non-america: Mom: hillary is so great, she's the best representative for women. Dad: donald trump is rich and honest. Me: i wish for more weed, that weed dude looks cool.
If you write in Bernie enough that it's a three way tie, the choice goes to the House. Each member votes for President and Vice president (VP can be different than President (ie Clinton and Pence)). The house is Republican. They hate Hillary, so no. They hate Donald, so no. Bernie wants to remove money from politics - so no. The House sits on their hands. "And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in case for example the death or other (constitutional disability) of the President." USCS Const. Amend. 12. Mike Pence becomes President. (Republican Establishment = Happy House). I love Bernie but he needs to play this game outside of the system.
***** He had no choice. He has to protect his position in government. Otherwise he would be alienated. I believe Hillary has already won, and Bernie knew it as soon as Hillary scammed him out of his campaign.
Let me remind everyone that a lot of us thought that Bernie should have won. If that is the case, he is now voting for Hilary. Maybe we should, as Bernie supporters, follow his lead.
Only if you believe that people voted Bernie because of a cult of personality and won't disagree with him on anything. I believe Bernie supporters are more principled by that and can make their own decisions, and may come to a different conclusion even with taking into account that Bernie is voting Hillary.
Yeah no... People didn't support Bernie because he was some charismatic super star. We supported him due to the policies he espoused. And telling people to vote for someone just because one other person is doing so is a bad idea.
Coming back to here after seeing the relevant episodes of Tiger King is amazing because his thing about the 'judgement against me from some bitch in Florida' is true
their flaws, even combined, are still nothing compared to either trump or hilary ... and the point of "she woudln't be good as a president, because her music is terrible" is a very pitiful point. funny, but pitiful
***** so what does "her platforms are poorly thought out" conclude to? that she is fit for presidency? and yes. it is comedy, and I know that. I specifically stated that it was funny to communicate that, and to circumvent the "it's a comedy bit" argument I was expecting... well... still didn't work.
LE0NSKA "her platforms are poorly thought out" concludes to her being unfit for presidency. Her terrible music is simply an aside, and has no bearing on her legitimacy as president. It's like saying "Bill Clinton is a terrific sax player. Here's a clip of him playing!" or "George Bush is a world renowned skateboarder, watch him do this Ollie!"
I think your pitfall was phrasing your original comment as if "she made terrible music" was the only point he had made about her which sounds as if you just ignored the video until that point.
Your only criticism of Jill Stein is her policy on quantitative easing? Did you criticize the government when they used it to bail out wall st? It's actually doable for her, John. Way to misrepresent. My vote is for Jill.
I think he chose to focus more on Johnson(he got twice more time) because he has 3x as much presumptive voters. His point is, after all, to discourage potential Democrat voters from voting for them. So of course, the focus went to the 3rd party candidate with the most potential votes.
Jill Stein has really taken a dive in the years since this episode- she’s literally just a conservative now, engaging in Russia apologia and associating with Glenn “Tucker Carlson Is A Socialist” Greenwald.
Who would have thought Joe Exotic would have been the biggest thing in America right now.
if i was voting age back then i would have voted for him lol
Somehow only the _second-least_ qualified person to run for President.
Sure, he’s hot-headed and gun-toting, but also very honest and upfront.
Juan Garza other than corona virus memes.
Probably Joe himself
jamie greenberg I would vote vermin supreme
John was on the Joe Exotic train before it was cool.
Brandon Hibbert true
I was about to leave a very similar comment lol
@putsome basilonit th-cam.com/video/Z-xI1384Ry4/w-d-xo.html
josh shelton a
Yep
Mindboggling that Joe Exotic is the only one of the 2016 candidates in prison
Ahaha I know right
Lock her up!
Huh, she did nothing illegal?
Impeach and lock him up!
Huh, the senate are a bunch of spineless hypocrites?
Oh, ok.
@Comrade Sky yeah except Clinton has been investigated, multiple times, by republicans, democrats, and independent organisations, yet no wrongdoing has been filed.
Trump has blocked every investigation into his organisation since taking office, he did not even testify in his own impeachment hearing, whether you believe it's a witch hunt or not. As president, he should have testified. He obstructed Mueller's investigation and Barr tied Mueller's hands by saying no sitting president could be charged of a crime.
Big difference when one cooperated with investigations and was cleared, whilst the other obstructs investigations, intimidates witnesses, cries on social media how unfair everybody is to him, then clears himself again via social media.
@Comrade Sky you are shifting the goalposts.
Yes, the US government in general has committed all sorts of atrocities around the globe for decades, however, we are not talking about Obama, nor anyone else but Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.
Hillary has faced multiple investigations and complied with them, from people all over the political spectrum, including her own party. Trump has been protected by his party and obstructed all other investigations. That's the point here, don't distract by bringing up irrelevant things, no matter how much I agree with you on war crimes.
@Comrade Sky even worse than being partisan, you're a both sides buffoon. Enjoy sitting on the fence crying like a baby about how crap American government is.
Me watching this in 2016: The world is going to heck!!! And who the hell is that tiger dude??? What is wrong with the world? Why is this happening????
Me watching this in 2020: Ah the simpler times
I miss Obama
And Joe Exotic is now more famous than before
I miss the good old days
Watching this only 6 months later.... the times are even more complicated
@@nerd2219 And now Biden has won
This is wild after listening to the Joe Exotic true crime documentary.
Especially with him talking about “that bitch down in Florida.”
Even wilder after watching Tiger King
@@tonightsbiggestloser4163 what do you think they were referring to?
@@michaelabbott5999 A true crime documentary from over 2 months ago. AKA. Not Tiger King.
I hate that bitch in Florida, free Joe he is great and that bitch is obsessive moronic cat-opsesed idiot.
@@nerminsnowhuseinbasic9340 Joe Exotic murders and abuses tigers, and literally tried to murder people for calling him out. He also pushed a young dude to suicide
John Oliver was so spot on with the meth comment...it’s like he knew.
Gallagher girl they do research all of this very well!
As a fellow Oklahoman it is not unfair for someone to assume someone from Oklahoma is doing meth, we all fuckin Walter White in this bitch
Yeah... It's almost as if he'd had a beer with him.. then another one... then a third, fourth, etcetera, and then he tried meth for the first time.
Maybe he was Joes 6th husband at some point.
John Oliver’s videos have a tendency to age like fine wine.
My favorite part after watching part of the documentary is how in the clip he says, "I have a judgement against me by some bitch in Florida"
I love it when he almost proudly announces, "I am broke as shit...."
My second favorite part is Jill Stein’s song. I had no idea.....
*oh how little we knew about who that was*
Four years later, even after all we know, Joe Exotic is still not the worse candidate.
yeah I'd still take him over Trump lol
@@bellabliss1860 And Biden. At least then we would be able to know the incompetence wasn't 100% intentional.
Marihuana now dude seems better
Is it me or does Joe Exotic gesture towards the lion when mentioning his boyfriends?
rofl xD
Richard Emms yep lol
not just you
I was nervous that he was brag about fucking the lion
@@WolfRider2002 Either that or castrated.
The first 3 minutes have a whole new meaning now after Tiger King lol
so true 😀
The meaning is ~animal abuse~
Shoutout to the folks here who knew about Joe Exotic before Tiger
King
I know y’all here for Joe and it’s at 1:40
Chan Thea 6:18 Joe Exotic’s first act after becoming president
Thank you. Not all heroes wear capes it seems.
thanks for you service
Thanks
The world thanks u
"Or they would vote for the ghost of MLK, assuming he only said the 3 quotes that white people like."
MLK was so great but many people ignore a huge part of his greatness.
To be fair, the perfect canidate probably wouldn't willingly run for president.
True. The closest thing to a perfect candidate is probably some half lawyer, half accountant who plays chess and Civ 6 in his spare time, and wouldn't run for political office under any circumstances. But I'd settle for Trey Gowdy.
nekomarulupin To summarize: people are a problem.
Alex Kim Exactly! Which is why we should elect Cthulhu in 2020. Enslavement is better than these guys. ;)
Cthulhu for President 2020!
(Insert shitty Cthulhu meme here)
fitofmadrage hell no
Even George Washington was in support of no main parties, he thought the idea of parties at all was a dumb idea as it would stick America into a never ending cycle of never changingness.
Wait a minute...
Make congress elected via proportional representation/MMP and let Congress decide who the president is.
Parliamentary system > Presidential system.
Can't have a functional democracy in a country as big as the US without political parties tho
lo and behold he was spot on
he also said to not get involve in Europe conflicts and do not go to war against each other. Washington stated these as things that we should never do. Thats why we took forever to get involve in WWI and WWII
I don't know why everybody is still arguing, we have our candidate: Joe Exotic 2016
TRUTH
naturesDIP and he likes guns!
Lauritz Wiesinger Jill stein for president 2016👍💚
he injured himself trying to have sex with a tiger while high on meth. there ain't nothing more American than that. #Xotic2016
fuck off, vermin supreme 4 president!
7:20 Is no one gonna mention how Canada seems to have invaded Alaska in this drawing?
They were no match for our weaponized Beavers and Moose
Galactic Gaming fear the moose
Pyromanic8 that was the first thing i noticed. The weirdest thing is that it has the border line still.
We'll just send our geese to reclaim the state. They feed on souls using the teeth that grow out of their tongues!
Well in the Kaiserriech alternate timeline (a Hearts of Iron IV mod) where Germany wins WW1 and a Communist Revolution in Britain led to the British Royal Family and Nobility to flee to Canada to plan the homecoming liberation of Britain, America falls to Civil War and Canada invades Alaska and sets up a allied nation in New England and upstate New York.
Watching from canada this debate is like seeing your Neighbors house burn down and the fire department is all on strike. i feel bad for all the americans out there stuck with these horrible choices.
Thank you for your sentiments. _Maybe, "condolences," is a better word to use._
Thanks.
Also sorry about the army of postmen that might be coming your way soon.
Todd Zimmerman Help us
Todd Zimmerman HELP US PLEASE.
Jill is a pretty sweet choice though.
I'm broke as shit and won't wear a suit either. I know who I'm voting for.
2016 is the year to be exotic!
Speaking of Joe Exotic, I've actually been to his zoo and was there the day he broke his leg, necessitating the brace you see here. Just before his tiger wrangling show he handed out condoms (with his picture on the wrapper) to all the males in audience. He made a speech predicting that his death would be from a tiger attack, then started his show. In the cage with two tigers, they were getting increasing frisky playing with one another and one snuck behind Joe hitting his leg at just the angle to break it. He collapsed in pain. I wondered "how is this guy not on TV??"
well he definetly sounds like the best choice,
I wish I was being sarcastic
make America exotic again!
Hi
I can relate to Joe Exotic. He is, like me, “broke as SHIT.”
Sprite Cranberry are you also a murdering psychopath? Because Joe is going to die in prison
Yeah Joe was arrested for a murder for hire plot. The fact that he did NOT use a lion to commit that murder is ironically the most surprising thing about that situation...
Say no to meth
billytimmy 2009 lmao 😂
Dana lions would of definitely been the way to go
@GidorahX very
That Joe Exotic cameo was completely blindsiding and I loved every second
What do you mean by cameo? He's the main part.
Who is here after the Netflix Doc!
I had to come check it out after watching!
Now that video has such a sinister and hilarious context
Watching it I got a sudden feeling of "I'm pretty sure I've seen that guy's presidential election campaign video on LWT" and then I couldn't let it go until I'd checked! 😂 🐯
John Oliver as usual did not disappoint! ❤
Other way round 🤣
What’s the doc called
there was a perfect candidate...and we failed him
killblade6 Ron Paul didn't run this year.
NO! Just no.
We didn't fail him The established political arm failed us.
Wayne F. Watley, Jr. He was getting too old and probably wanted to "hand the torch" to his son Rand Paul
i know... they shot him..
RIP Harambe.
Gary Johnson was definitely high the whole campaign.
I'd love for him to do another segment on third parties, this time talking about the need for a multi-party system and how our electoral system makes it virtually impossible.
A democratic socialist party would be a great option
@@will823 it would split the vote, but sure.
a popular vote wouldn't have made it any better I'm afraid
The stupid Freedom Caucus is proving that a third party that actually has party is absolutely problematic with the current system. They managed to make the party that in theory has a majority in the house unable to seat their choice for speaker until after 15 rounds of voting over 4 days and with major sacrifices being made in order to give him their vote, some incredibly dangerous. Speaker McCarthy is the weakest speaker ever in terms of control of his party and its because of this fringe party. Obviously not every third party would do this, but this example shows how problematic it can be with the current structure.
@@iamoctonate This was inevitable. In almost every other "democratic country" these people would never be in the same party but they are because there are only two parties you can join if you want to be elected. There will always be divisive extremists no matter how many parties you have but if the so-called Freedom Caucus was a separate party, a more moderate Republican Party could emerge and they maybe could've reached out to the Democrats instead, leaving the crazies isolated.
Plus, a more radical left-wing party could also emerge and then I could vote without holding my nose.
John: *Does a piece on the biggest scandals facing HRC and Drumpf, being particularly thorough with Hillary's*
Third Party People: "There's more than two choices! DON'T BE SO BIASED!"
John: *Does a piece about the two most prominent third party candidates, pointing out their flaws*
Third Party People: "OMG why aren't you doing a piece on Hillary? Corrupt! DON'T BE SO BIASED!"
I'm not following your logic, here.
"being particularly thorough with Hillary's" is a matter of your own opinion.
He has done Hillary. Search John Oliver 'Scandals'
They're still butthurt about Bernie losing.
I know he's addressed what he would consider scandals. I watch like every episode. I like John Oliver. But I would disagree if I were to say he were thorough.
aaronlwu257 Oh you mean he addressed the fact that all the Hillary scandals do is look shady and that made you sad? He didn't condemn your least favorite candidate but looked at the objective facts and came up with the fact that everything wasn't as bad as it looked and you are upset?
Stop focusing so much on the presidential shit show and get yourself ready to vote in the other races taking place in your area. Vote for congress, vote for senate, vote for your state rep, your attorney general, your local sheriff, and all the other offices up for election this year. Whatever you do, don't say "I'm not voting because I hate both candidates." Don't be stupid. Staying home on Election Day because you don't like the presidential nominees is like not buying your dream home because you don't like the drapes.
+
Bumped for prosperity.
cyanmanta ++
+
But when you cannot truly decide which of the candidates you dislike the least, where the hell to you go making a vote? Do you just fucking pick at random? What the fuck do we do here?
“Silent thunder is nothing; you’re describing silence” - I laughed soooo hard at that
Funny how many people did not understood what he meant when saying things like "two boyfriends most of my life" and "bitch down in florida", when now people who didn't even watch the doc knows what he's talking about
You mean the two boyfriends that joe attracted and kept woth meth and the "bitch down in florida" that most likely killed her husband and fed his corpse to a tiger?
not knowing what he's talking about is part of the fun though
What he mean?
@@unknownname1941 Joe Exotic was "married" to two guys at the same time, one died, and the other one broke up with him, and by "some bitch in Florida" he means Carole Baskin, owner of Big Cat Rescue sanctuary in Florida, who Joe had some serious beef with, and at one point tried to get her killed.
A summit between joe exotic and Lord buckethead
Indeed !!! Kudos !!!
Yesss! I’d back that!
And Vermin Supreme! That would be amazing!
Hey hey, at least Lord Buckethead appears more level headed
Get all of the joke candidates lined up and vote on them from across the world
Aww, that Pikachu wedding was a gay wedding! You can tell because it didn't have a curved dent in its tail, indicating it as female.
PushoverMediaCritic This is the only comment here I care about.
PushoverMediaCritic I don't think that Last Week Tonight really give a fuck about that
YOU CAN'T STOP THEIR LOVE!!!!
For all you know, the other one might be female.
female pikachu have a dent on the tail neither of them did.
Honestly I don't give a shit how they plan on achieving these things. At THIS point, I just want somebody who isn't a fucking sociopath.
Pretty pointless statement, since psychologically speaking, probably none of the candidates are actually sociopaths. That's just bad political rhetoric. Can we implement IQ tests for the right to vote? This election seems to make that option seem more palpable.
+Andrew S
Your comment reeks of stupidity and ignorance. Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are proven pathological liars. Let's check things off the list here: Lacks empathy, manipulative, no sense of shame or remorse, unchecked egocentricity, willingness to lie to achieve ones goals. That's LITERALLY the textbook definition of a sociopath, and both Clinton and Trump fit the bill perfectly. Apply some critical thinking for once in your life instead of trying to project the appearance of pseudo-intelligence.
Bill Nye, Nick Saban, Oprah, Joss Whedon..... all people I would genuinely trust as president more than the four options.
Andrew S I think it's a very hard sell to tell that high politic are not sociopath..especially this two, and i dont think you should kill yoursel for trying to sell it..that's disturbing.
RollOnToVictory There is not an ounce of being in me that would oppose a Bill Nye presidency
John Oliver warned us about joe exotic. I can’t believe I laughed this off before ... ya know
7:14 Alaska isn't Canada lol
After 8th of November it is...
John Oliver is involved in selling Alaska to Canada! Illuminati confirmed.
Soon though...soon.
Jill Stein thinks it is.
If you ask Alaskans, their not in America either. But they''ll take all the federal dollars they can get and sell their oil to foreign companies for pennies on the dollar. Yes it's that kind of stupidity from Alaskans that brought us Sarah Palin. Now let's re-elect Don Young! Fucking morons.
Yet another hit piece on third parties. No scrutiny for Clinton in sight.
this is the only video you've ever seen isn't it
Hit piece....or reality check
Maybe there is a reason they aren't prime time
Reality check? Are you kidding? Have you even seen or heard the things that Trump and Clinton have been doing and saying? Compared to those two, Johnson and Stein look like saints. There's a reality check for you.
ROBLOXobama1337 you're a tool. Someone makes a critique of your nominee and that's apparently not okay.
He does a show every week. This week was on third parties. That is why he talked about them and not Trump and Hillary. Grow the fuck up and get some perspective
Third party claims they don't get enough media attention - and you you cry when it's not all positive. You think all Trump and Hillary news is positive?
Very informational video, sadly lots of people in denial in the comments. John's not biased, he's just telling the facts about the 3rd party candidates.
I think the problem isn't that he's lying, it's just that it's kind of clear he's pushing an agenda. He hates Trump and wants Hillary to win, and that's fine, but sidestepping a majority of scandals from Hillary's side (even just to debunk them, which might make people believe that he can't debunk them), and then immediately saying voting third party is horrible while still failing to remain objective is pretty fucked up. He's usually very objective about things but this election season he shows his true colors imho.
After watching the "Scandals" vid I've been skipping John's vids (until this one of course) because of his failure to remain objective. I'm just going to come back after the election where hopefully his vids go back to the way they used to be.
The Moodic He wasn't saying that voting third party is horrible though. If you listen carefully, what John's message is that third party voting is certainly an option, and both major third party candidates are running with some appealing platforms --however, their proposed policies should be scrutinized as much as Clinton/Trump's policies. He's saying that if we want third party candidates to be serious candidates, we should treat them as such. The whole purpose of pointing out the flaws of Johnson and Stein was to emphasize that even the "better" alternatives aren't perfect.
So when is he starting to tell the facts about Hillary?
you guys do know he's an entertainer right? he's not a journalist, nor is the research team, he is here to entertain, he said so himself. and yet if he is biased, it is you job to find the real answers, og find an unbosed source, which can be pretty tough in the USA I know.
well he did hit pieces on trump,. and now these 3rd parties. i wonder if he will do one on hillary now? oh wait...
While Gary Johnson may not have been ready for prime time, the best reason I could think of to vote for a 3rd party was that if they break 5% of the vote, they are entitled to federal campaign money the next election cycle. Even an ill-suited candidate would shake things up by simply getting to share the stage.
You can't think of anyone else?
Honestly, we should also fix the Presidential debates, too, cus rn it is just two people talking over each other. Otherwise, it's going to be three people talking over each other.
Hope Dr Cornell West hits it this go around
joe exotic's got my vote
Anna Sanchez me too
#JoeExotic2020 we the people must band together
with fluffy the tiger for vp
Maybe the President of the "We love Tigers" fan club but I never have this guy be president!
He would definitely be a better President than Donald Trump.
I love how he just says "I'm broke as shit"
He didn't lie.
He never financially recovered
@@oliverluke2363 damn you got the whole squad laughing
"I dont agree with you so you must be biased" -every TH-cam comment ever
YES!!! And everyone is biased. Liberals, Conservatives- everyone's biased. There's no such thing as objectivity. Therefore, accusing someone of being biased is like accusing them of breathing air.
I don't agree with you so you must be biased.
+dhodz hoddy Unfortunately, the vast majority of Clinton's supporters either a) don't know this b) don't care
"You don't believe the same thing as me so you're a bigot" - Also a lot of TH-cam comments
SSkoSS, "But Clinton is worse" and "But Trump is worse" are also pretty common.
I don't watch this show to be comfortable but you crossed a line by making me listen to Jill Stein singing
It’s SO BAD
TWICE.
Let's see John has taken the time to critique all the candidates in depth. Trump, Johnson, and Stein. There's only one he hasn't done yet gosh I can't remember her name!
He did. He did a video on the email scandal and the controversy surrounding the Clinton Foundation.
He ended up talking more about trump than Hillary in that "anti-clinton" video anyway. I'm not American so obviously I'm not voting or supporting either candidate but I think its real obvious that Oliver wants Clinton to win.
Eather way it semes those motherfucker are gonna cause some war.take provisions cause things are gonna get rough
Whenever Trump supporters hear the opposition criticize Hillary, they go deaf, because it doesn't fit their narrative that only paid shills are voting for her.
Khorney. Yeah he hasn't exactly tried to hide that. Why is it a problem for him to have an opinion?
Worth noting that's a biologically male pikachu wearing the wedding dress at 3:51. Props to the Last Week Tonight team for being accepting of the LGBT+ Pokemon community
Yep I noticed that as well. Though I wish we could see the other one's tail as they might have been female and it was just a fun crossdressing theme wedding.
Hey hey that was a gay Pikachu wedding were one of them got to be a pretty pretty princes
@@i.k.239 That's the joke
Love Wins
By the way, did John actually predict the pikachu beach wedding in the 2017 games?!
..And I still hope Bernie somehow saves us
Ya, i can use that extra welfare
Nah, Joe Exotic is our one true savior.
He'll keep pushing his policies, free from having to deal with the presidency. And NOW he has name recognition.
LegendaryKing Nope, you idiots already fucked that up. Boohoo, no one feels sorry for you now.
Sir Clasher Hahaha stay with grandpa Bernie 😂😂😂
Never thought Kanye West would be a third party
You should've bc I'm pretty sure he mentioned it in 2016 at least
Hes independant
I almost threw up when a coworker said he would vote for Kanye
More third positionist
Just watched "Tiger King" on Netflix and had to come here to learn more about Joe Exotic. Wow!
Did no one see the episode where he brings up Hillary's scandals and said that people were perfectly justified in not liking her and that a big reason he's opposed to Trump is that he has far more scandals? Did everyone miss the part where he called her "a hawkish, wall street friendly embodiment of everything that some people can't stand about politics?" Or is everyone upset that he pointed out there is no perfect candidate and that all of them have serious problems?
This video really made him look like part of the establishment. For instance, the way he freaked out over how Jill suggested to re-open the 9/11 investigation really shows it. I thought her answer was perfect. Ron Paul out right said the commission was made to cover up rather than really honestly tell what happened on 9/11. But John reacted the same way the establishment reacts to anyone who brings up 9/11.
First User You mean have the exact reaction nearly everyone in the country has? Very few people take the 9/11 conspiracy seriously, especially now that it's been 15 years. Just because Ron Paul said something, that doesn't automatically make it true. I feel her answer was blatantly saying "I'm desperate for voters, so I want as many people as possible to like me."
***** And very few people in Israel actually think their government is an oppressive one that have done countless human rights violations. Very few North Koreans believe that their leader is actually a terrible person. Why is that do you think? Its because you are trained to react to certain things in certain ways. You are taught in schools at a young age that terrorists used box cutters to high jack airplanes and fly them into buildings, which was masterminded by a man hooked to a dialysis machine in a cave in Afghanistan. You are indoctrinated in schools at a young age to take this story as fact and if you question it, you will be ostracized. This has a lot to do with how Americans think the way they do. As you mentioned people who even bring it up are not taken seriously. That's why people like Ron Paul and now Jill Stein are being shut down by the establishment, and clearly John is doing the exact same thing here. Shutting her down simply because he is part of that establishment.
First User Or because he believes she'll have certain downsides as a president.
i was going to bring up the "hawkish" line but, in comparison to the other three candidates, he was clearly treating hillary with kid gloves in that part of the video.
Thanks Jon for not making any candidate viable.
Damien333 Have you actually watched his shows? He said that Hillary's issues only sounds bad and is actually clean...
Hyperion he actually criticised hillary pretty fairly
yep Jon Oliver making everything depressing with comedy since 2014
evilpub pretty fairly? What he pretty much said was 'She may look bad but isn't'
evilpub Not as hard as the others. He never seems to mention the e-mails, or the lies she made, like the gay marage thing.
"The Federal Reserve does not take marching orders from the White House."
2020: "Hold my beer"
Yeah, but to be honest, 2020 took one look at the contemporary rule book, laughed at it and then ripped it to shreds.
He ignored Vermin Supreme. He. Ignored. Vermin. SUPREME
giggy biggy I want my free pony
This should've been an actual discussion and investigation on why our two party system should be replaced instead of just John taking shits on Jill and Gary...
When we have third party candidates that would actually be good at their job, then we can replace the two party system.
Tyler Morton The two party system will be replaced when America gets rid of FPTP.
I agree with you, but John Oliver has a point.
And this is why we'll never have third party candidates that are actually good at their job.
So you want him to give you confirmation bias, instead of the reality check that you actually got?
Why can't I just vote for Bernie?
Because he's not running for president
He is a write in option, so even though he isn't running anymore you can vote for him.
Well technically you can if your state allows write-in voting. Just check mark the 'Others' box and put Bernard Sanders.
Like a scumbag..? No. He lost the primaries, so he endorsed Hillary Clinton. It's not hard to comprehend.
If you live in a state with write-ins, you technically can. It's just really kind of a wasted vote since it is virtually impossible for him to win at this point.
"You can't just fan the flames of a conspiracy theory and just walk away" That aged well.
The "I'm not aware of evidence linking autism with vaccines" line is the correct scientific approach that a medical doctor should take. I don't understand what the problem is.
It opens up doubt - giving millions of idiots a reason to keep avoiding vaccines and putting the rest of the entire population in danger due to their confirmation biases.
There's no clear and clean evidence thus far that links autism to vaccines so it's rational to assume there is no connection and it's far safer to do so too.
There is, from a technical standpoint, nothing absolute in science - but that doesn't mean we should go around telling people and assuming from the start that gravitational forces don't exist or something.
Maintaining skepticism is good - all science was founded on questions. But being an irrational and dangerous version of Descartes isn't.
Forrest Gump bullshit. I don't give a fuck if some idiots misinterpret her words. You know what never encourages cohesion and collaboration? Shouting down people you disagree with and never being open to the possibility that you are wrong. I would want my president to be open minded and hear all sides of an argument, then erring on the side with the stronger evidence, as is the proper scientific approach.
Yeah, I understand that she should moderate her wording so as not to confuse the masses of idiots, but its that exact two faced, screened nature that we seem to then turn around and hate politicians for.
+Forrest Gump The scientific approach is the right approach despite what idiots might think.
***** 1. Wow - the NSA.
2. I agree it wasn't a strong argument (I feel like John should've outlined her lack of understanding of economics far greater) - but it's still something important to note.
Just because there might be tons of other flammable things inside of a burning house - doesn't mean we should tolerate someone dousing the outside with a bit of lighter fluid too.
It's akin to the the whole 'so much people are doing X, so who cares if I do it or not' case and all the problems that come with it.
As a European, I simply can't understand the logic behind a two-party system
I think fear and a lust for power has a lot to do with it, which has nothing to do with logic
Just think of it as near-monopolic corporatization of myriads of political ideas. Though, speaking as a former Republican and current Democrat, the latter party really is a big tent party (to the point of analysis paralysis) while the former is really lockstep at the national level.
But maybe it can be good sometimes because it can erase too extremist candidates usually
Oliver Boisen Looks the coalitions of parties from center-right and center-left and call them party one and party two. They should be this in practice, but in the USA right and left are just a conservative and a progressive form of two right parties
Hilarius no, it would actually make extremist candidates more likely to exist, if one party shifts one way and the other goes the other way, you would have both extremes at the same time, in a multiparty system it is much harder to slide since a party would already encompass that section of the spectrum
jeez, hillary is ACTUALLY the best choice. can't believe i'm saying that
no she is still probably the worse, you should do more research than watching a fifteen minute comedy to decide that.
that's your opinion, but against 3 people who really don't know how to government, I dunno. still would prefer none of these people though
David R Yes, and research will still show that she is the better choice.
I think "best" is the wrong word here. More like: "Least awful depending on your personal views."
No candidate is anywhere near good. Stein is too passive, Trump is too aggressive, Hillary is corrupt, and Johnson is not patient. Although their weaknesses tend to be their strengths is some cases. Stien being charismatic and loving, Trump appearing honest and genuine, Hillary with the skills of leadership, and Johnson with the ability to adapt to the situation.
John, can you make a part 2 of this... 7 years later??
The saddest part of this is that both Jill and Gary are still reasonable candidates.
GARY JOHNSON?
YES, GARY JOHNSON!
what about Darrel Castle or Evan McMullin
Yeah, no they're not, they're bad jokes.
Hahahahahahahahahaha. ::takes breath:: hahahahahahaha. That's cute.
Disgusting lies and slander against Jill Stein! You should be ashamed of yourself John!
video and audio clips of candidate = lies and slander. Trump logic.
MynameisBrianZX you're a moron
MynameisBrianZX
More like out of context garbage. That tweet by Jill is exactly how a medical professional would respond to that question. You can't unequivocally deny something if there is more ongoing research. By the way, Hillary also said something similar to what Jill said on the topic but he didnt present that, did he? HM, I WONDER WHY.
Gato Loco anyone dumb enough to defend this segment is clearly dumb enough to vote either democrat or Republican
Najee A'VE Good point!
I'm sure Time Warner is VERY proud of you John.
Johnny is a good boy for Time Warner.
Didn't take too long to figure out why you were upset with this video.
Angel Flores Didn't take long to figure out the two party shill
So you're just not going to debate any of the content in the video and instead just call names. Got it. Typical
Is that how being a Steinie works? Anything that disagrees with you is part of a vast global conspiracy? Your beliefs are unfalsifiable?
Eight years later and this segment is still valid. Nothing ever really changes does it
Heck the international movement of green parties (not sure of the official name) just denounced stein.
I stayed up until 2:30 am because I can't afford HBO...
Yousef Elraghy same
1:30 for me
Yousef Elraghy 10:30 here
1230
Yousef Elraghy 9am in morning for me
Shoutout to the folks here who knew about Joe Exotic before Tiger
King
I knew about him because of this!!
@@demon515 same
Me
@@demon515 same, i was like, wait, the 3rd party guy has a netflix serie?
Ayo, I said: "Holy shit, the guy from John Oliver has a show!?
HE DID WHAT NOW!?"
How is Jill Stein's cancelling student debt so impossible if the banks' debt was so easily cancelled recently? Additionally, the economy would actually benefit from excusing student debt, unlike the bank bailout.
Knight Chime www.occupy.com/article/student-debt-cancellation-hidden-tax-trap-will-cripple-americas-families
Hope&Despair The bank bailout didn't though, & didn't improve the economy to boot, unlike a student bailout would.
It would, and the "counter-argument" provided by Hope&Despair is just silly. The writer has put no effort beyond a quick Google to find something that sounds like it agrees with his position. The article linked is already gone and the position implied by the title is baseless.
their debt wasn't cancelled actually, they were given cheap loans for liquidity and the loans were in the form of the government taking stakeholder position in their stock
The bailout program was the tip of the iceberg as far as I know. the real bailout was QE rounds that kept the economy size increasing and eroded real capital. the banks got the chance to offload bad debt onto the FED in return for cheap money. it's just feeding a pyramid economy. forgiving student debt is the OPPOSITE: those students get loans that then can repay because they could more easily construct a household and generate new income. unlike banks.
Dudeeee... Stimulus checks, tiger king, and conspiracies? This just sounds like 2020 with extra steps
Imagine he did a bit on Hillary equally critical...
Tarorc79 he did a scandals video.
yep, but equal critisism ? No.
KEK, his scandal video was nothing but Hillary apologetics.
Wait until the next two weeks. I believe he is going to do a full segment on Podesta. I could be wrong, but I think he is based on the full HBO video.
Tarorc79 Hillary hasn't admitted to sexual assault
So a president can support and organize a Wall Street 4 trillion dollar bailout, but dear oh dear, he has no authority to do the same thing for student debt? Economic tools are just that, tools that can be adjusted according to the situation.
Tiago Toledo you probably have no idea how monetary policy works.
Tiago Toledo that was the federal reserve not the government, please buy an econ book, you desperately need one
Sure he can. Just not via QE. Which is what she claimed.
+agroeconomist 77, actually, its technically a government book you would need. An economics book would most likely talk about economic theory rather than who has authority to issue economic policies.
Eragon7 The textbook would likely mention that it is the central bank that exercises this function. Briefly mention.
All I know is Joe Exotic 2020!!!!!
Matthew Williams yes! I wish I would have seen this before I voted lol! I would have voted for him instead of Johnson
Amen. (FYI, I am Australian and have no say in the matter.)
Matthew - Joe might not have been as bad as what the wise electoral college thrust upon the nation . . .
Anyone else notice how badass he was just walking in front of a lion
What, if he wins, does that make like his pride of lions & tigers Congress??? Ok that's actually sorta cool....coming from one crazy cat person to another even crazier one🦁🐯🇺🇸
Jill: "Quantitative Easing is a magic trick"
John: "No it isn't though, it's a complicated economic policy"
Me: "... She called it a Magic Trick because it amounts to economic sleight of hand. It's not really all that complicated as much as it is an exploit of the economic system."
Is there anything that isnt an exploit of the economic system?
Okay, but many magic tricks are complicated when you actually explain how to do them and most people don’t understand how to do them, so in a sense he was still right.
And yet, now, in June 2018, Joe Exotic seems a saner option than the current WH resident.
Robert van Deventer sadly true
And better than the only declared democrat candidate (John Delaney).
Not anymore, he was busted for a murder for hire plot where ordered the hit of some bitch in Florida.
So just another politician after all. And yet he's not successfully governor of Ohio. The other criminal is president! Your country isn't fair!
Seriously?
Joe exotic is actually honest at least.
ChrisRidge he attempted to murder someone...
I don't get the outrage. He rips on Hillary all the fucking time. I honestly don't get it. He's said that she sucks. Some of you guys are just so damn emotionally attached to your horrible candidates. Good grief
Eamenic1 but he never has made a serouis video exposing her
And in which episodes are these "rips"?
One of these rips was in the end of this very episode. Would you like me to quote it?
Justin Purdy Ha, I knew someone would bring up the one in this episode. The one in this episode is obviously implied.
OPs quote was: "He rips on Hillary all the fucking time."
That implies more than one rip. This episode makes one. There must be other episodes that have rips. So what are these episodes?
I know you're gonna try and say the scandals piece. The scandals piece was utterly defensive and apologetic. Unless you can quote a good rip from that segment.
So are there any other episodes?
Eamenic1 Preach it.
Who’s watching this after Trump created then lost over a trillions dollars in an hour by trying to save the stock market instead of giving the American people a reoccurring stimulus checks?
Ayyy, it is Corona Time
Wait, really? That's kinda hilarious for Trump, but disturbing to think about with the stimulus checks.
which time?
*recurring
For all the terrible music i have heard, that music wasnt actually THAT bad.
Yep. And the only thing bad were the lyrics. And I've heard heard *worse* . Both from a structural, moral, and grammatical standpoint. As well as in "how bad the lyrics sound if the music was taken away and they were told in a non-distracting voice".
Well, Trap IS worse.
Could have been atleast as bad as Canada's former Prime Minister [Stephen Harper]'s band was. Look at the "Canadian Election" Lastweek Tonight video on youtube if you want to see it, lol.
@@moondust2365
I felt that 'silent thunder' meant, a soundless threat.
Thunder is the sound you hear when there's lightning that just struck.
When there's thunder, but you can't hear it, you can be unprepared and then struck.
It made perfect sense to me.
The lyrics are some of the worst i've ever heard, but the music's alright
And now a word from our sponsor: Time Warner.
Ah, sorry: AT&T !
John Oliver is a nobody. Just a corporate comedian shill for Hillary Clinton. He's not even American.
but he said bad things about clinton before. why would he do that when she bought him?
Oh grow up. "Not even American?" Get off your elitist high horse. That doesn't mean anything. He lives here. He's an American. Deal with it.
not even american just like you are mostly too... and the "Scottish German" Trump for that case.
just mixture of imports from somewhere else.
lets find a descendant of Sioux Chief Standing Bear and get him to be USA's president...
then finally USA gets it first _American_ president...
I'd rather vote someone who has the wrong implementation of the right idea than the right implementation of the wrong idea.
FSSZilla well said, you may have cemented my choice of whom to vote for...
Ari Vishnu
but that statement doesn't even have a reason behind it. It's just a collection of words that sound full of conviction and elegant.
It appeals to your emotions, sure, political ideas need to be on facts, not feelings.
Saying you'd rather want a malimformed, useless, and irresponsible President than a corrupt one is all fine and dandy until it actually happens.
Stein Baracka 2016!
Evan McMullin or Darrel Castle ?
yt
It should be good to note that this isn't an argument against 3rd parties institutionally. In the UK, we have really good 3rd parties that often help raise specific ideologies such as green, SNP or DUP and other countries like Germany even have functional coalition governments. It can work and no one can figure out why the US can't have more than specifically 2 parties.
There's a few reasons for this -- though it's a good question. The biggest reason is the relative strength of party infrastructure; parties in the US are (compared with British ones) institutionally very weak. It's best to think of American political parties less like the parties you're used to, and more like alliances between various interest groups that can change. American party whips can count votes but don't have the same mechanisms to enforce party discipline, and there's no party vetting process to get a candidate onto the list for a constituency like there is in the UK. If you want to run as a Democrat in an American district, you can run as a Democrat, and vice versa. You won't _win_ if you're too alien to what most party voters want (and by the way, you don't join the two major American parties in the same way you do in the UK -- instead you register, which often determines which ballot you get), but there's nothing anyone can do about your choosing the party ballot line. Generally, when a movement wants to generate some sort of effective change in the UK, it has to form a group from the outside and make deals and fights with the other parties until it forces its way into Parliament and either grows (e.g. Labour, now a government-in-waiting), formally merges into a larger party (e.g. the Social Democrats, now part of the LibDems), or disappears (e.g. the Irish Parliamentary Party, which once held the balance of power in Parliament and then collapsed after Ireland won independence). In the US, though, groups can operate within parties to affect change internally and there's not much the party higher-ups can do about it, so this leads to it being generally easier to work within parties than outside them. The Civil Rights movement did this with the Democrats, resulting in the white-supremacist "Dixiecrat" faction leaving the party entirely and mostly defecting to the Republicans by the 1990s. So did the Bernie people, and although you couldn't call the Democrats a socialist party, you can definitely say that Bernie's movement left a lasting imprint on party policies and energized millions of people. By the same token, the Tea Party did this with the Republicans, as did the MAGAheads -- both of those groups spurred a realignment within the GOP that would be all-but-impossible -- or at least very very very slow -- within a British political party. Corbyn tried -- love him or hate him, he tried -- and it wrecked him. Most German and other European parties operate differently, partly because they're responding to different types of concerns (no single-member districts, more proportionality ...). They're more stable, but also more liable to real coalitions, which have their own host of benefits and problems.
When John was talking about the FED and printing money, it was the first time that I thought he has no clue what he is talking about. His research team let him down on this.
Why do you think he's wrong?
pretty sure it's spot on, the fed is independent of everything and everyone. president can appoint but after that, nada
Robert Hsu
so you are "pretty sure"? I'm pretty sure you know nothing about the process of how money comes into the world. and the FED is not "independent of everything", that is rediculous. In 1951, the Fed and Treasury reached an accord in which the Fed got back the power to run a monetary policy independent of fiscal policy. And that is the historically correct and economically sensible meaning of independence: It is the Fed’s policy that is independent. That does not mean politicacly indepedent by any means. Its actions have long been dictated by the president and politicians in power.
+XGX787
it`s a complex subject. One thing is, that the state actually pays a private bank to "print" money for the state.* That`s in fact a hidden Tax the US-Citizens have to pay for every single dollar they get. So billions of dollars are only spent on interest on that process, that the bank creates money out of thin air. And the FED NEVER refuses to print money for the state if asked for. Never has, and most likely never will. So the whole "you don`t want to give presidents the power to print money" is obsolete. On the other hand: what does it tell you when one of the crucial rights in a state, printing money, is not owned by the state, but by a private company? What does it tell you about a democracy when the elected head of state is, in last consequence, dependend of the banks? And this is just scratching at the surface of the problem with the FED-system and central banks in general.
*in fact the FED is printing notes, but it gives digital (not physical) money to the state in exchange for state bonds. The minting of coins does the Department of the Treasury.
"in fact the FED is printing notes, but it gives digital (not physical) money to the state in exchange for state bonds. The minting of coins does the Department of the Treasury."
Where do the private banks you mentioned come in to this?
Jon Stewart must be so ashamed right now.
I'm actually a little happy John is not airing right now. Mainly because of the Jill cult. John would have been critical of all people running, which would be fine with Jill supporters until their candidate got criticised, than Jon would become a "Sellout piece of shit shill"
They would say Stewart is doing his masters willing, like how they say that Oliver can't say anything about Clinton because of time Warner. Well interesting for Oliver to do that Net neutrality piece he did than. Don't try to make others dig deeper when all you do is dig till you get the angle you want to view in life. As a Canadian at first I thought that maybe the Jill road would be a nice road for the progressive moment in America, but slower, and slower it has turned into more of an angry cult. Like trump supporters. If someone dares to criticise your God they are "shills," because how dare someone running for the highest seat in America be under any kind of negative questioning? Trump and Hilary only get good coverage right? it sucks because the progressive movement deserves better than people like you.
Nick Key I had the exact same thought.
Can’t believe he didn’t mention vermin supreme that guy and his free pony initiative is comedy gold. Too easy maybe? Lol
🎵 My name is Vermin, my name is Vermin, my name is Vermin, Vermin Surpreme 🎵
Vermin Supreme is running for president 2020 under the Libertarians!
@@moveslikemacca
One more thing, jesus told me to make Randle Terry gay
Hes turning gay
Turning gay
Eggert FL The only Libertarian I’d vote for.
Can we get an updated overview of Jill Stein? Because I think a lot of young voters need it.
she’s a russian asset who grifts with leftist/progressive views who’s sole purpose is to take votes from dems
It’s sad that teenagers are currently being duped by old tricks
Vote no to jill stein (because they accidentally registered her as a referendum question rather than a candidate.
Dont worry,young voters are aware of everything and they are still voting for Dr.Stein
I won’t say that people can’t have their own opinions on 911, but my father (who is a civil engineer) was actually with structural engineers at the time of 911, and they were watching it play out on the news when they had an entire discussion on skyscraper design and jet fuel.
There are many skyscrapers that wouldn’t have collapsed like the twin towers, but they are not the twin towers. Average skyscrapers are structurally supported on the sides, but taller ones, like the twin towers, are supported in the middle.
Then the thing that people forget about the fact that planes use jet fuel, which is designed to burn extremely hot for an extremely long time.
When you put these two things together, you’ll find that it makes sense how the towers burned how they did, and you’ll also find that it makes perfect sense from an engineering standpoint that the towers collapsed into itself when the main support was in the center, compared to falling over when there’s four sides of main support and only one gave way.
Also, those structural engineers told my father that if they didn’t put out the fires soon, the towers would collapse. Then, a few minutes later, a tower collapsed. So, maybe, just maybe, trust the licensed engineers this time.
Well said it made sense to me how the towers went down you can't rig a building to go against physics and engineering without a blue screen or cords and cranes that would have standed out it in both meaning of the word!
Jet fuel cant melt steel beams.
Steel often melts at around 1370 degrees C (2500°F) prolonged burning of metals as the flammable roof tiles and flammable furniture would provide with the fire accelerant jet fuel that heat can be hit fast!
It is harder to heat unrefined iron.
Blondie Boy ik your comment is probably a joke but just in case it isn’t, jet fuel can’t fully melt steel beams, but it can make it malleable enough that it would collapse the way it did. there’s a video of a welder (i think ?) who heated a steel beam to the same temperature as it would be if it was “melted” by jet fuel and it didn’t completely melt, but he was able to bend it in half with only his pinkie. :)
People. If you think John is so biased, then why are you even here?!
cus they love to complain
John calls out other people when they say something stupid or dishonest. Why shouldn't we call out John when he does the same?
Because they want their voice heard.
Trolling is humanity's nature when incognito.
Have nothing good to do in their lives.
He never criticizes Clinton and when he does it changes to trump
light yagami I think this is an intentional choice. He knows Clinton isn't perfect, but thinks she's the best option. So knowing that he potentially has some influence over voting, yeah, he favors Clinton some. But, I mean, he never claims to be unbiased, and those that don't agree don't have to watch.
He did mention that she has been exonerated by EVERY federal inquiry she has been subjected to. And about 90% of the shit Clinton gets attacked for is just speculation or flat out lies. And even she admits her vote for the Iraq War was a mistake.
He's done it in every other episode for the past year including calling out her superficial statements but this episode points out policy ignorance, which is not a weakness Clinton has for all the ones she does.
He does not talk about the elecction fraud, controlling the media,helping to make Trump the candidate
I've noticed that too. He went too far in his "trying to be a [white] feminist" story
3:02 imagine having the chance to vote for Roosevelt and choosing Wilson instead.
The problem with third parties isn't that the ones you have now aren't up to the task. It's that all the decent ones you did have were swallowed by your two big monolithic parties. There's no reason why Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton should be in the same party, and there's no reason why Trump should be in the same party as most of the other republican candidates.
The ideal solution would be to break up those parties, and preferably employ the alternative vote to avoid the spoiler effect and prevent simple majority rule, but that'll never happen. It's easier for politicians to only have one real opponent, and they won't throw away the "sports team-like" fervor a lot of voters have for their party. Many people know nothing about who they're voting for, they just know they're not voting for "the other guy". Politicians know they get a lot of votes this way, so they have no incentive for changing things, but make no mistake, this is awful for the regular citizen.
This is great, John! Now when are you going to do a 20-minute video on Hillary Clinton?
Ro Ban he did. it was a video about how Clinton's scandals don't even compare to Sniffles' litany of fuckups.
No one ever said Last Week Tonight was unbiased. If you want John Oliver to make politically neutral content, you'll have to convince FOX to do so as well.
I mean one main segment devoted solely to Hillary Clinton. John did one for Trump, he did one for the third party candidates, so now we need one for Hillary. John hasn't talked about Hillary nearly enough compared to Trump. It doesn't have to be all criticism. I just think he should talk about each candidate to the fullest extent.
I hate quote Jon, but they are not the news. They are not the news and therefore have no responsibility to remain unbiased.
Yes, he piled a bunch of stacks of paper on his desk and said "The government practically investigated itself and shockingly it decided not to incriminate itself. But now that you've seen these stacks of paper and heard my flippant assertion of their metaphorical validity, let's head over to Trumpland!" The government has pleaded the 5th in regards to investigating Clinton.
Perhaps it’s that America’s deeply flawed electoral system reinforces having two deeply ingrained major parties, pushing minor parties way out to the fringe.
That's a conspiracy theory.
its not flawed it works as intended. also the 2 parties are not responsible for there not being a 3rd party. its how people decide to spend their vote that is responsible for it.
its also not politicians fault they are all slimy lying bastards that exists also because of voters spend their vote. people discard people who run with even the slightest flaw then people who are the best at lying survive the gauntlet of the american voter. you want to change the system change the voter.
@@mayainverse9429 It isn't working as intended; in fact, we don't even have the same electoral system as when the country was founded. The original system was states would select(usually by election, but it isn't a coincidence that they pick as many people as they have in congress) a set of representative called the electoral college. The electoral college from all the states would then meet up, debate, and select a president.
People were never suppose to vote directly for the president. There was never suppose to be a risk of getting somebody most people didn't want because the electoral college would have worked a compromise between similar candidates. What we have now was a patch work of trying to turn the constitutionally mandated indirect election into a direct election without having enough votes to change the Constitution(enough people support direct election, but people don't agree on how it should work).
Undemocratic majority vote brough you there
It is very true
Everything John Oliver said here holds up so well in the 2024 election cycle.
Yeah I don't see how Stein's negative points are anywhere as bad as the other main candidates' issues.
You don't think her not actually having any type of stances isn't a good thing? At least with Trump we know he's a racist piece of shit because he loves reminding us but Jill might be racist with one crowd and then not in another.
Einchy Seriously? She does have stances. What do you call: increasing infrastructure spending, Universal Health Care, eliminating student debt, College Free Tuition, cutting military spending, legalizing marijuana and decriminalizing all drugs... etc.?
+Noel Berhane Have you watched the video ? She can't eliminate the student debt as president and she's rather open for conspiracy theories.
He isn't racist ok? I'm not a Trump supporter but MY GOD are you regressives ignorant. Donald Trump never said anything bad about any race, he was talking about the illegal immigrants that come in from Mexico, Syria etc.
Michael yes I watched the video. She can't but the Fed can. However improbable it may be, it's not impossible, it's actually possible.
The Green Party has really good local and congressional candidates in my state. Not a big fan of Jill herself but if she gets 5% they will get federal campaign funding for their local candidates. You don't vote third party because you expect them to win presidency, you vote so that maybe the party will have a voice someday. They will need to get local positions before they win the presidency but to do that they needed funding and exposure.
Exactly!
Never gonna happen
@@ForrestFox626 Change happens all throughout history.
@@Secretsofsociety Not in our lifetimes
@@ForrestFox626 I guess you are a TV watcher
is it just me or LastWeekTonight is telling people to vote for Hilarry?
no. it´s actually you understanding that e v e r y other option in this election is just dumb.
america had it's chance electing Bernie but blew it. now you have 1 option and that is to maintain the status quo i.e. voting for Hillary. the other options are either dumb, uninformed or down right dangerous to your country and pretty much the rest of the world.
best regards from sweden
I'm not from America either, so I'm just sitting here eating popcorn.. lol
Good work troll :P
Hahaha me too!
Brandon U. Ok so are you saying trump supporters aren't affected because they're not voting for Hilary ?
My life back in 2016 in somewhere non-america:
Mom: hillary is so great, she's the best representative for women.
Dad: donald trump is rich and honest.
Me: i wish for more weed, that weed dude looks cool.
Fuck it. I'm writing in Bernie Sanders in my ballot.
If you write in Bernie enough that it's a three way tie, the choice goes to the House. Each member votes for President and Vice president (VP can be different than President (ie Clinton and Pence)). The house is Republican. They hate Hillary, so no. They hate Donald, so no. Bernie wants to remove money from politics - so no. The House sits on their hands.
"And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following,
then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in case for example the death or other (constitutional disability) of the President."
USCS Const. Amend. 12.
Mike Pence becomes President. (Republican Establishment = Happy House).
I love Bernie but he needs to play this game outside of the system.
EVOLICIOUS I wish it was possible but because he volunteered dropping he can't be voted in
Me too.
***** He had no choice. He has to protect his position in government. Otherwise he would be alienated.
I believe Hillary has already won, and Bernie knew it as soon as Hillary scammed him out of his campaign.
nuts4ppgxrrb Thanks for making this whole voting thing for me 1000x more difficult. lol.
Let me remind everyone that a lot of us thought that Bernie should have won. If that is the case, he is now voting for Hilary. Maybe we should, as Bernie supporters, follow his lead.
Only if you believe that people voted Bernie because of a cult of personality and won't disagree with him on anything. I believe Bernie supporters are more principled by that and can make their own decisions, and may come to a different conclusion even with taking into account that Bernie is voting Hillary.
Yeah no... People didn't support Bernie because he was some charismatic super star. We supported him due to the policies he espoused. And telling people to vote for someone just because one other person is doing so is a bad idea.
Fact Ninja Bernie himself said follow your heart not me if I support Hillary
Sander & Clinton told us to "vote your conscience." #JillStein2016
Fact Ninja write him in please
Coming back to here after seeing the relevant episodes of Tiger King is amazing because his thing about the 'judgement against me from some bitch in Florida' is true
is he talking aboout that Carole Baskin? I never watched the show but I heard of it
mikelor84 yes, he’s talking about the newest star on Dancing With The Stars
John is a fucking psychic for somehow including Joe Exotic in this
it is wild looking back at the comments from a year ago saying Joe looked like the saner option
their flaws, even combined, are still nothing compared to either trump or hilary ...
and the point of "she woudln't be good as a president, because her music is terrible" is a very pitiful point. funny, but pitiful
Comedy doesn't have to be dumb.
***** so what does "her platforms are poorly thought out" conclude to? that she is fit for presidency?
and yes. it is comedy, and I know that. I specifically stated that it was funny to communicate that, and to circumvent the "it's a comedy bit" argument I was expecting... well... still didn't work.
LE0NSKA "her platforms are poorly thought out" concludes to her being unfit for presidency. Her terrible music is simply an aside, and has no bearing on her legitimacy as president. It's like saying "Bill Clinton is a terrific sax player. Here's a clip of him playing!" or "George Bush is a world renowned skateboarder, watch him do this Ollie!"
CJ asphid you just said what I said. but differently.
I think your pitfall was phrasing your original comment as if "she made terrible music" was the only point he had made about her which sounds as if you just ignored the video until that point.
Your only criticism of Jill Stein is her policy on quantitative easing? Did you criticize the government when they used it to bail out wall st? It's actually doable for her, John. Way to misrepresent. My vote is for Jill.
I think he chose to focus more on Johnson(he got twice more time) because he has 3x as much presumptive voters. His point is, after all, to discourage potential Democrat voters from voting for them. So of course, the focus went to the 3rd party candidate with the most potential votes.
Except they didnt...
Cyrus Yareff So you missed the part where she said, as a doctor, "Autism could be caused by vaccines"?
Proof? Where did she say this?
She didn't say that
Jill Stein has really taken a dive in the years since this episode- she’s literally just a conservative now, engaging in Russia apologia and associating with Glenn “Tucker Carlson Is A Socialist” Greenwald.
She was like that in 2016 as well, people just didn't see it. The US Green Party has always been a joke.
She pulled a Tulsi Gabbard ☠️
She's not. And we don't need to be at war with anybody, let alone Russia.
@@RyanFeatherston Do you or do you not support Ukraine defending itself from Russian aggression? I’m curious.
@@Dreigonix Like I said, we don't need to be at war with anybody, let alone Russia.