@langster This late invasion is good fun, I'm sitting at work all done for the week but get up and go, because I'm just laughing at the evolution of the arguments.
2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
What's worse? The racist or sexist remarks he said or Bill Clinton's secretary of state, Madeleine Albright saying that 500000 children dying in Iraq is a price that's worth it. The Clintons and everyone around them are a sack of shit.
What's worse saying something on face value, or being responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands in the middle east?
Ah yes, that's presidential nominee Bill and his VP Madeleine, right?
she hasnt been elected yet and you already saving face...
Are you a student or recent graduate ?
Have to admit it's not encouraging. Even less encouraging though is the thought of Trump as President. Pity Sanders isn't standing really.
1) his campaign is built on overt, undeniable white nationalism
2) he has championed the deportation of 11 million people and that the military should commit war crimes against the families of terrorists
3) he has identified immigrants of all types as scapegoats for our nation's problems and used it to rally his white nationalist base
4) he frequently professes to "rebuild our depleted military" as part of his plan to "make America great again" (Literally a page from the Nazi German playbook)
5) I'd say the sexism is patently obvious
6) he has actually controlled the entire media narrative about this election as he has bounced from one outlandish statement to another, always keeping the narrative on whatever he has chosen to say about himself or his opponents, leading to over $3 billion in free air time, and has a stated goal to make it easier to sue press outlets that print negative things about him
7) he frequently speaks in exaggerations about national security details and plans and it is a central plank of his campaign
8) he and the GOP frequently tie Christian fundamentalism into their domestic/social policy points
9) he's a billionaire who has exploited every trick in the book, has used the campaign to fund his own enterprise, and has promised to cut corporate and top individual tax brackets while renegotiating trade deals to benefit big business
10) he's been sued dozens of times for not paying laborers, is against raising minimum wage, against healthcare initiatives that would help common laborers, and has frequently employed non-Union labor to complete projects
11) frequently discounts expert opinions on almost any and all policy positions
12) has run a campaign promising sweeping expansion of policing power as the "law and order candidate"
13) again obvious in his personal business dealings
14) has frequently attempted to discredit the American electoral process and has pushed false claims of voter fraud while simultaneously promoting voter intimidation
Exactly. Great post
It's not just words with Trump. His business actively stopped black people from using their properties, and he shoves his hands down any panties in groping distance.
Sanders is a sell out. A puppet. In the emails it shows that he was backstabbed by the DNC, and lost unfairly.
You seem a bit old to be an idealist...
The people saying Trump won't implement fascism are kind of missing the point. I don't think he's intelligent enough or capable enough to implement full-scale fascism across the US, and I don't think a lot of his rabid supporters would actually have the stomach for it, but several elements of his campaign do resemble the beginning of a fascist regime and that's concerning.
His campaign is built upon hatred and fear...and that hatred and fear is largely being directed against people of others races. It's not just arguing for less immigration, either, it's outright building a wall to stop one group getting in and advocating banning Muslims.
His campaign is trying to create a siege mentality by arguing that the press are against him and that this is rigged. He is trying to lend credibility to unfounded conspiracies which, again, allow his supporters to direct their anger at the other, whether that other is the establishment or an immigration. No criticism of him is allowed - if he wins it's because he's great, if he fails it's because it's rigged. His supporters refuse to accept an alternative, and if he wins those who oppose him in the media will continue to be demonised.
That does resemble fascism. Ignoring fact to espouse your own ideology, trying to silence opposition viewpoints and demonising others.
His campaign is built upon hatred and fear...and that hatred and fear is largely being directed against people of others races. It's not just arguing for less immigration, either, it's outright building a wall to stop one group getting in and advocating banning Muslims.
His campaign is trying to create a siege mentality by arguing that the press are against him and that this is rigged. He is trying to lend credibility to unfounded conspiracies which, again, allow his supporters to direct their anger at the other, whether that other is the establishment or an immigration. No criticism of him is allowed - if he wins it's because he's great, if he fails it's because it's rigged. His supporters refuse to accept an alternative, and if he wins those who oppose him in the media will continue to be demonised.
That does resemble fascism. Ignoring fact to espouse your own ideology, trying to silence opposition viewpoints and demonising others.
What's old for you?
What's wrong with either ?
I'm not ignoring anyone but having tens of alerts is not what I've expected and I honestly should leave this thread for now.You do realise you're being ignored by this guy, right?
To be fair, the question as to whether or not he's a young student or graduate doesn't really bear relevance to a Presidential discussion, does it?
I'm pretty sure the "sanctions killed 100k's of kids" thing was debunked
Sadly Trump would turn out to be the biggest puppet of them all. He's nothing but clueless hot air and would be completely ruled by the GOP if he got in.
After you collect those verifiable emails and highlight the clear context of them, right? Clearly marking how they show her to be worse than Trump
What bollocks. She's in favour of Obama's deal with Iran that has prevented them from developing nuclear weapons. She isn't going to attack Iran now unless they attack somewhere first.
And imagining that she wants war with Russia - which would inevitably lead to nuclear destruction on both sides - is just crazy. She is stable character with years of experience in dealing with international relations, whilst Trump is unstable and has zero experience of international relations. In fact Trump has zero experience of elected office at any level.
Trump goes around calling for more countries to have nuclear weapons, has spoken in terms that undermine NATO and the stability that comes with it, and is an erratic, thin-skinned idiot who admires 'strong men'. It's pretty clear which candidate is more likely to precipitate war.
You seem like a serious man. Make some research to try and understand the other side of the story. Hillary's corruption is all over youtube if you want the easier route. This is the fight we have to partake in.
And you know, the funny thing is, in contrast to the emails that he keeps talking about, we have the videos of him saying all of these things right here already in this thread. How odd.
Not to mention that Trump said his reaction to the Iranian navy "taunting" American troops in the Gulf would be to "blow them out of the water."
Just one non-debunked video would do us for tonight, please. You can get us everything else you claim tomorrow.
A bit unrelated to the general vibe of this thread but I'm pretty surprised about how much flack Nate Silver is catching for daring to have a model which is predicting a competitive race. I think someone above linked to Daily Kos, one of his contemporaries, and even they had a fairly scathing piece on him reaching trump levels of madness.
Did a bit of looking into one example: in New Hampshire Clinton had a rough patch of polling earlier in the week (0, +1, -5, 0, -2) and the Daily Kos Estimate for the state dropped from >99% chance of a Hillary win to 98%. I'm not sure how you can justify that level of certainty with those sorts of numbers coming in a few days before the election. FiveThirtyEight had her chances going from 85% to 61%.
Did a bit of looking into one example: in New Hampshire Clinton had a rough patch of polling earlier in the week (0, +1, -5, 0, -2) and the Daily Kos Estimate for the state dropped from >99% chance of a Hillary win to 98%. I'm not sure how you can justify that level of certainty with those sorts of numbers coming in a few days before the election. FiveThirtyEight had her chances going from 85% to 61%.
Youth, inexperience, naïveté, and irrational idealism are certainly not exempt from the discussion.
"Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Iran" - The GOP's 2008 presidential candidate, John McCain. Hillary's a hawk by Democrat standards, she's got fecking nothing on the lunatics on the other side.
Nevada could more or less be decided tonight.
I appreciate it. Bet he won't touch it though.
Hillary wants to arm the Kurds, which means trouble with a NATO ally in Turkey, so she isn't far from what you are calling out trump for. And this from 2008:
Deary me is that someone with years of experience talking? Stop fooling yourself.
I have my moments.
I know about Hilary's corruption, and I don't particularly rate her as a candidate (I'd have preferred Sanders, or Biden if he stood), but I'd argue that her own level of corruption probably isn't that bad compared to plenty within powerful political positions within the US. I mean...if we want to talk emails, then George W. Bush was just as bad when it came to deleting them. She's kind of a middle-of-the-road, powerful and fairly corrupt politician up against a guy who's pretty much admitted he sexually assaults women over a tape, who thinks climate change is a hoax and who doesn't pay federal income tax. I'll take some leaked emails over that.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/04/politics/donald-trump-political-ads-cambridge-analytica/index.html
Part of me is like... "Very interdasting" and part of me is like "well they suck at targeting me"
Part of me is like... "Very interdasting" and part of me is like "well they suck at targeting me"
But it's better to argue the posters actual point than just respond with, "You're naive." I mean...you could argue stuff like this is kind of why a lot of younger people are disillusioned with politics. Being told by others, "No, you're wrong and foolish. Be quiet." Yeah, it's probably irrational but at least point out why, instead of just writing the point off with an unrelated observation that's about the poster and not the post.
I promise you that with just a few hours of research you will understand how troubling the extent of her and her husbands corruption goes.I have my moments.
I know about Hilary's corruption, and I don't particularly rate her as a candidate (I'd have preferred Sanders, or Biden if he stood), but I'd argue that her own level of corruption probably isn't that bad compared to plenty within powerful political positions within the US. I mean...if we want to talk emails, then George W. Bush was just as bad when it came to deleting them. She's kind of a middle-of-the-road, powerful and fairly corrupt politician up against a guy who's pretty much admitted he sexually assaults women over a tape, who thinks climate change is a hoax and who doesn't pay federal income tax. I'll take some leaked emails over that.
Tbf Jill Stein is as much of a hack as Garry Johnson. She just doesn't getting attention to highlight it.
I feel like that skeleton sitting on the bench meme waiting for some of these emails to be posted.
- Status