I am not going to name any names in this thread. All I would like to point out is whenever a political candidate (especially for President) refuses to attend an important debate, forum or political event because of a "scheduling conflict", it's really a polite way of telling the event sponsors to go screw themselves.
If the candidate in question wanted to be totally honest, then he/she would either politely decline, or state that attending the event is not in his/her political interest. But telling the event sponsors that he/she has a "scheduling conflict" basically is the same thing as telling the event sponsors to go screw themselves, because it makes the candidate look like he/she wanted to attend, but couldn't make it because of another event; when in reality, the candidate really had no intentention of attending the event whatsoever. Thus, the voters who support the issue related to the event get fooled into believing that the candidate really supports the issue they care about, but just "couldn't" make it on that day (or multiple days).
Politicians who continue to use the term "scheduling conflict" as an excuse to back out of addressing legitimate political issues that they feel uncomfortable with should be ashamed of themselves! And voters who feel neglected because the politician of their choice failed to show up at a forum, debate or political event to address their issues because of a "scheduling conflict", should have a "scheduling conflict" of their own on Election Day, and not be ashamed of it.
That's all I have to say.
Originally Posted by DUmbass128
