EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 3085
| Forum Index > Closed |
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. | ||
KwarK
United States43959 Posts
| ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On March 02 2016 03:37 oBlade wrote: So you have an a priori conviction that racism will be a problem forever, and that's enough for you to say that it's still a big issue in wider US society today. Who are white people to argue with "all evidence," indeed...  So is your argument that racism is no longer an issue in America worthy of national attention? That we have addressed the problems of systematic repression based on race to the best of our ability? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On March 02 2016 03:40 Nyxisto wrote: I think at this point they might be all trying to make Hillary president There is going to be a section of Republicans that is all about that. I feel there will be good overlap with the group that was totally fed up with the Tea Party. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On March 02 2016 03:40 Nyxisto wrote: I think at this point they might be all trying to make Hillary president Could it be argued that Trump would damage the republican party more as president than he would losing? Does president trump kill the GOP whereas at least losing to Clinton only makes them quadriplegic? | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On March 02 2016 03:43 Mohdoo wrote: Could it be argued that Trump would damage the republican party more as president than he would losing? Does president trump kill the GOP whereas at least losing to Clinton only makes them quadriplegic? No. Patrick Buchanan wrote a good article on this yesterday. Here's part of it: Whether Trump wins or loses the nomination, the immigration, trade and foreign policies pursued by the elites since the end of the Cold War are dead letters. The nation has declared them to be so in the primaries. Who is campaigning, in either party today, for open borders, or passing The Trans-Pacific Partnership, or sending troops back to Iraq or into Syria? The Bernie Sanders insurgency appears to have been turned back by the vested interests of his party. But like the George McGovern insurgency in ’72, which also relied heavily upon the enthusiasm of the young, Sanders’ socialism may be the ideological future of his party. The same may be said of the Trump insurgency. Whatever happens at Cleveland, the returns from the primaries look like the passing of the old order, the death rattle of an establishment fighting for its life, and being laughed at and mocked as it goes down. As in 1964 and 1980, a new Republican Party is taking shape. Defections are to be expected, and not altogether unwelcome. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
...Probably not. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On March 02 2016 03:49 Mohdoo wrote: Am I the only one who sees a Rick Scott endorsement as the conclusive end of Rubio? I feel like Rick Scott is almost a bigger deal than super Tuesday lol. Rubio's governor disowning him is just massive. Not that it would matter. Rubio looks toast in Florida, but maybe a 2 week miracle could happen? ...Probably not. Yes, Rubio is done. | ||
|
KT_Elwood
Germany1150 Posts
How can he create "Millions of jobs"? And if he could, why has he not told anyone how to do that yet? He had the reach and the influence... This is your problem: ![[image loading]](http://www.neopresse.com/wp-content/uploads/USA-Vermoegensverteilung.jpg) and it is spreading. In Germany the richest percent of the richest 10% has accumulated more wealth than the poorer half of the Country (35.000.000 poeple) combined. And this is fixed. Unless you are a Gates or a Zuckerberg, you can not join the club. If you are a Trump and got 200 Million from daddy, you can sort of join the lower ranks of the club. Unless, worldwide, labour will be less taxed than financial transactions, your wont get rid of this shit. | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
On March 02 2016 03:52 KT_Elwood wrote: Trump has no plan, only catchy phrases. It would even be cheaper to invade Mexico than to secure the border. How can he create "Millions of jobs"? And if he could, why has he not told anyone how to do that yet? He had the reach and the influence... This is your problem: and it is spreading. In Germany the richest percent of the richest 10% has accumulated more wealth than the poorer half of the Country (35.000.000 poeple) combined. And this is fixed. Unless you are a Gates or a Zuckerberg, you can not join the club. If you are a Trump and got 200 Million from daddy, you can sort of join the lower ranks of the club. Unless, worldwide, labour will be less taxed than financial transactions, your wont get rid of this shit. I'm really not sure of that. Invading a country doesn't just mean send your army here to show off its muscles, it's also - and mainly - occupying land that locals don't want you to occupy, and recreating some sort of order and a functioning society from the ashes of the one you just destroyed, which is really costly and complicated. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On March 02 2016 03:52 KT_Elwood wrote: Trump has no plan, only catchy phrases. I think that only people who aren't paying attention think that this is the case. It is more accurate to state that Trump has a plan, some of which he has revealed (protectionism, immigration reform, isolationism etc), and the rest of which he's purposefully obscuring (health care in particular comes to mind). | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
But the specifics thing isn't a fair attack. Play your cards close etc. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43959 Posts
On March 02 2016 03:54 xDaunt wrote: I think that only people who aren't paying attention think that this is the case. It is more accurate to state that Trump has a plan, some of which he has revealed (protectionism, immigration reform, isolationism etc), and the rest of which he's purposefully obscuring (health care in particular comes to mind). How can you separate what he says just because and what he says because he means? Trump might have a plan but it's doubtful anyone but him knows any part of what it is. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On March 02 2016 03:57 KwarK wrote: How can you separate what he says just because and what he says because he means? Trump might have a plan but it's doubtful anyone but him knows any part of what it is. You can't do it with absolute certainty. However, you can make reasonable projections based upon his history. Yesterday, I laid out what I think we can reasonably expect from a President Trump. Anything else is quite a bit less certain. | ||
|
ErectedZenith
325 Posts
On March 02 2016 03:57 KwarK wrote: How can you separate what he says just because and what he says because he means? Trump might have a plan but it's doubtful anyone but him knows any part of what it is. Well nobody asks him about his plans. The media are all like "You are a -cist!". That's the fault of the media, no Trump to focus less on his plans. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
| ||
