|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
This election will be easy to predict.
Trump will be the republican candidate. Because the republicans do not have any candidate atm that stands a change they have already given up on this election and they are going for a win in 2020. Rubio is the only credible candidate atm but he seems to be to young for now,maybe in another 4 years. They probably don't want risk Rubio loosing now since its their only good guy so they safe him for an election the gop think they can win.
So it will be trump against Clinton,initially I thought trump had a change but after seeing the media for the past few days I have to conclude he wont have a change against Clinton. He will blow 100m on his campaign,enjoy the spotlights,fullfill his life goal of at least running for president and then leave politics forever.
|
On December 10 2015 04:44 Rassy wrote:
This election will be easy to predict.
Trump will be the republican candidate. Because the republicans do not have any candidate atm that stands a change they have already given up on this election and they are going for a win in 2020. Rubio is the only credible candidate atm but he seems to be to young for now,maybe in another 4 years. They probably don't want risk Rubio loosing now since its their only good guy so they safe him for an election the gop think they can win.
So it will be trump against Clinton,initially I thought trump had a change but after seeing the media for the past few days I have to conclude he wont have a change against Clinton. He will blow 100m on his campaign,enjoy the spotlights,fullfill his life goal of at least running for president and then leave politics forever.
Just gonna quote this for posterity once it becomes obvious that Trump will not be the candidate.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
i mean i don't really know what republicans are up to. but their best shot is trump. in sports terms trump looks like an underscouted european 7'3'' player with some hype, but profiling against traditional conceptions of the ideal player. guy has loads of skills and most importantly, high potential to revolutionize the game. do you draft him and play some games to find out, or do you draft the NCAA champion big man with empty stats and no defense.
call is yours sam i mean gop
|
On December 10 2015 04:00 Cowboy64 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2015 02:53 ragz_gt wrote:On December 09 2015 23:45 Plansix wrote:
Ted Cruz, man who takes money directly from the oil industry and coal industry, tells us climate change isn't real. And even if it wasn't there that air pollution issue is a big one that can be solved with alternative energy. The Ex-Governator, Arnold himself, put it best in response to people criticizing his investment in solar energy.
"I don't want to be the last guy betting on Blockbuster as Netflix is taking off." This is an industry we could be leading in if our entrenched energy industry wasn't trying to hold the government back. So other countries will lead the way, like India.
Ted Cruz imo is the most dangerous man in US. He is calculating, manipulative, and has a track record of doing anything for political gain, closest comparison I can think of is probably Joe McCarthy. Other than Joe McCarthy being a buzz-word among the left to denote "bad person", I really fail to see the similarities you're reaching for here. I suppose if Ted Cruz was asserting that Muslims had put spies in all levels of our government then the comparison might be apt, though even then it would be questionable (as far as I know, there are few prominent Muslims in our government, whereas the Venona cables proved that there were many Communist spies inside the federal government, sometimes in very high positions). Basically, if people aren't going to research Joe McCarthy and who he actually was and what he actually did then comparisons to him will only sound intelligent to the uninformed and uneducated. To those with some knowledge of the actual person, it will usually sound silly and wildly ignorant.
The comparison is not new and is justified. He routinely uses half-truths and innuendo to smear his adversaries, usually in the pursuit of unattainable political goals, but always with his own political aggrandizement in mind.
|
You know what republican I would like for president? Arnold Schwarzenegger. Shame he was born in another country.
|
On December 10 2015 06:06 ticklishmusic wrote:
You know what republican I would like for president? Arnold Schwarzenegger. Shame he was born in another country.
Secret service would get tired really fast of "get back to the choppah!" every time he uses marine one though.
|
On December 10 2015 04:00 Cowboy64 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 10 2015 02:53 ragz_gt wrote:On December 09 2015 23:45 Plansix wrote:
Ted Cruz, man who takes money directly from the oil industry and coal industry, tells us climate change isn't real. And even if it wasn't there that air pollution issue is a big one that can be solved with alternative energy. The Ex-Governator, Arnold himself, put it best in response to people criticizing his investment in solar energy.
"I don't want to be the last guy betting on Blockbuster as Netflix is taking off." This is an industry we could be leading in if our entrenched energy industry wasn't trying to hold the government back. So other countries will lead the way, like India.
Ted Cruz imo is the most dangerous man in US. He is calculating, manipulative, and has a track record of doing anything for political gain, closest comparison I can think of is probably Joe McCarthy. Other than Joe McCarthy being a buzz-word among the left to denote "bad person", I really fail to see the similarities you're reaching for here. I suppose if Ted Cruz was asserting that Muslims had put spies in all levels of our government then the comparison might be apt, though even then it would be questionable (as far as I know, there are few prominent Muslims in our government, whereas the Venona cables proved that there were many Communist spies inside the federal government, sometimes in very high positions). Basically, if people aren't going to research Joe McCarthy and who he actually was and what he actually did then comparisons to him will only sound intelligent to the uninformed and uneducated. To those with some knowledge of the actual person, it will usually sound silly and wildly ignorant.
It's not what McCarthy did specifically, it's more that he has no trouble with fucking over tons of people for his own personal gain, it's just happens that communism was easiest tool at the time. Ted Cruz is one of those people I see as knows what's right / true, and have no problem picking the other side because it suits him better.
I think Jeb and Romney sincerely believe in what they say, and I don't seriously question that they have the best interest of the nation in heart if they became president, even if I don't agree with their view. I cannot say the same for Ted Cruz.
|
.....
In the oral arguments Wednesday for a Supreme Court affirmative action case, Justice Antonin Scalia—a well known critic of affirmative action—suggested that the policy was hurting minority students by sending them to schools too academically challenging for them.
Referencing an unidentified amicus brief, Scalia said that there were people who would contend that "it does not benefit African-Americans to -- to get them into the University of Texas where they do not do well, as opposed to having them go to a less-advanced school, a less -- a slower-track school where they do well."
He argued that "most of the black scientists in this country don't come from schools like the University of Texas."
"They come from lesser schools where they do not feel that they're -- that they're being pushed ahead in -- in classes that are too -- too fast for them," Scalia said.
The case, Fisher v. University of Texas-Austin, is being brought by a white woman who was not accepted by the university and who says its policy to use race as a factor in a pool of the students it accepts is unconstitutional.
The case is unique in that the University of Texas accepts three-quarters of its students in a race-blind program (which actually was designed to increase diversity) that automatically accepts Texas high school students who are in the top 10 percent of their class. The other quarter of students are accepted through a qualitative "holistic" review that includes race along with a number of other personal and academic factors.
Source
|
Is that supposed to be the nice version of "black people are retarded?" and a call for segregation?
|
For some reason i associate "retarded", "dumb beyond reason", "stupid" and "not stupid, but worse" with the name Scalia.
Turns out, rightfully so.
|
No, it's saying that AA might get you into a school you aren't academically prepared for, and that such a thing would be bad.
|
What a horrible thing to say lol. Just Scalia things. If you are going to make that argument I think you would want to go at it from the angle of "African Americans often come from shitty schools that don't prepare them for college". Then he goes even more off the rails suggesting that most black scientists don't come from "schools like the university of Texas" Lol what does that even mean? UT isn't even that amazing of a school rofl.
|
No its a stream of consciousness description of "mismatch" which is a rigorous social science theory probably discussed in the majority of the briefs.
|
On December 10 2015 06:18 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:..... Show nested quote +In the oral arguments Wednesday for a Supreme Court affirmative action case, Justice Antonin Scalia—a well known critic of affirmative action—suggested that the policy was hurting minority students by sending them to schools too academically challenging for them.
Referencing an unidentified amicus brief, Scalia said that there were people who would contend that "it does not benefit African-Americans to -- to get them into the University of Texas where they do not do well, as opposed to having them go to a less-advanced school, a less -- a slower-track school where they do well."
He argued that "most of the black scientists in this country don't come from schools like the University of Texas."
"They come from lesser schools where they do not feel that they're -- that they're being pushed ahead in -- in classes that are too -- too fast for them," Scalia said.
The case, Fisher v. University of Texas-Austin, is being brought by a white woman who was not accepted by the university and who says its policy to use race as a factor in a pool of the students it accepts is unconstitutional.
The case is unique in that the University of Texas accepts three-quarters of its students in a race-blind program (which actually was designed to increase diversity) that automatically accepts Texas high school students who are in the top 10 percent of their class. The other quarter of students are accepted through a qualitative "holistic" review that includes race along with a number of other personal and academic factors. Source
The sheer amount of [citation needed] in that statement makes my head spin.
That said, affirmative action is not an easy thing to rule on in my opinion, especially from a strict constructionist standpoint. Even if it is a net benefit to society it is kind of hard to decide how to judge it especially when half the people discussing it have different definitions of discrimination, all of which probably differ from what the people that wrote the 14th amendment would call discrimination.
|
Scalia gives fewer fucks than ever.
|
United States43298 Posts
There are many issues with affirmative action but I am amazed the one he went with was "the blacks don't like going to good schools because they're unable to keep up because they're not smart enough, we should stop trying to help them because it makes them unhappy to be pushed beyond their natural limitations". Nothing about fairness or equal opportunity or the part it plays in building racial tension or resentment. Just "I, an old white man, understand the mind and ability of the negro and know best where his talents lie. Many people, motivated by a earnest desire to help, have brought the negro up above his divinely ordained station. These people need to understand that however good their intentions, they are doing him no favours."
Does nobody proofread his opinions for tone? If you're echoing the condescension of slave owners after emancipation you probably should reconsider or at the very least reword.
|
To some degree I agree that affirmative action is dumb. The goal is not to inflate underachieving groups, it's to decrease achievement gap. But since no one seem to know how to do (or pay for) it, it's better than nothing.
|
Scalia is one of those justices that has not become better with age. This quote is one of the more amazing ones and apparently the interview goes great places.
|
The biggest problem with race-based affirmative action is that the people it disadvantages most (the people who didn't get in that would have gotten in if they were (insert minority here)) are, on average, the people with worse socioeconomic status. That's my biggest bone to pick with it, and why I think SES based affirmative action should always be used alongside it if your true goal is education equality across societal strata.
|
On December 10 2015 06:06 ticklishmusic wrote:
You know what republican I would like for president? Arnold Schwarzenegger. Shame he was born in another country.
I was thinking the same thing. I'd vote for him over Sanders any day of the week. A reasonable, well accomplished guy with a solid record.
It's really weird that we require candidates to have been born here. What a strange requirement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
