EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 3196
| 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. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
| ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
On March 06 2016 13:56 ticklishmusic wrote: Didn't the Nazi leadership have really high IQ or something? On average 128 for the defendants of the nuremberg trials. edit: that's obviously just a number, actual intelligence isn't measurable or even definable. In fact, if a person goes through 5 different tests (of which there are many more, not just the "DO A FREE IQ TEST" google ads, but actual tests that are used for statistics etc), he will have 5 different IQs. If he goes through 10, the number of IQs rises too. There's no test for measuring actual "intelligence" (whatever that might be in the first place). IQ tests are tests of cogitative development, nothing more. Cognitive. If the translation serves me right, cogitative development isn't measured, but cognitive ability. There seems to be a difference. | ||
|
Reaper9
United States1724 Posts
| ||
|
ErectedZenith
325 Posts
On March 06 2016 14:41 Reaper9 wrote: I prefer if people would measure EQ more than IQ, especially in this day and age. IQ is rising, but EQ if anything in my eyes is dropping. I'm looking at you Internet. Its very hard to show emotions through text along thank you very much. And actuaries definitely do some calculations based upon someone's class background before giving them insurances. Because that's their job. | ||
|
RenSC2
United States1089 Posts
"Institutional racism" is different and it definitely exists. Institutional racism doesn't need to be codified for it to be real and many people are effected by it to this day, sometimes paying the ultimate price. So it's a very sensitive topic and people want to attack anyone who denies it. I think there was an issue of definitions. If people would avoid jumping down each others throats immediately and listen and ask questions first, they'd recognize that it was a definition issue from the beginning and it could have been cleared up in less than a page. | ||
|
kwizach
3658 Posts
On March 06 2016 15:41 RenSC2 wrote: I think there was an issue of definitions. If people would avoid jumping down each others throats immediately and listen and ask questions first, they'd recognize that it was a definition issue from the beginning and it could have been cleared up in less than a page. The thing is that even when he was confronted with the definition of institutional racism, he deliberately ignored it in order to keep claiming that it did not exist. He continued defending his stance long after he was explained what institutional racism was and what others meant by it. | ||
|
OtherWorld
France17333 Posts
On March 06 2016 13:47 Slaughter wrote: Sure but you have to acknowledge that IQ tests are rubbish and don't actually measure intelligence. You'd be hard pressed to quantitatively mesure intelligence in the first place though | ||
|
LemOn
United Kingdom8629 Posts
That man scares me way more than trump to be honest, he's a total Frank Underwood figure | ||
|
oBlade
United States6102 Posts
| ||
|
RenSC2
United States1089 Posts
On March 06 2016 17:00 LemOn wrote: Holy shit - Cruz resurgence? That man scares me way more than trump to be honest, he's a total Frank Underwood figure Cruz doesn't scare me because I'm pretty sure that either Clinton or Sanders would hold onto Obama's states against Cruz and win easily. He'll crush in a few southern states, but I can't see him flipping blue states and he could even lose some of the borderline red states. The establishment hates him and he doesn't really draw independents either. He only fires up the Tea Party group which is not nearly large enough to win a general election. His winning message in the primary seems to be "I'm the only one that can beat Trump". That's not a message to win the general election. Trump is such a wildcard. He gets a ton of hate, but also a ton of support. He could flame out in the general debates or he could rip Sanders/Clinton to shreds. I genuinely don't know. He could win some very random states from Clinton or Sanders that would be safe against the other Republicans. He would also still hold most/all of the southern states who will begrudgingly vote him in over a socialist or the Clinton boogeywoman. I think Cruz or Trump would both be terrible presidents in their own ways. However, Trump can win a general, Cruz can't. That's why Trump is a lot scarier to me. And yes, I'm leaning Democrat this election, but if Kasich somehow managed to get the Republican nomination, there's a very good chance I'd vote for him. I might even make my first ever primary vote for him. I just want a sane leader without a ton of negatives. I can accept his social conservatism which I generally disagree with if he can give me that. | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
Cruz in presidency, can legit move Republican House into actually getting some stuff done (his crazy stuff). | ||
|
LemOn
United Kingdom8629 Posts
On March 06 2016 17:25 wei2coolman wrote: Cruz way scarier than Trump. Trump gets into presidency, literally both establishment bars him from doing anything in both House and Senate. Cruz in presidency, can legit move Republican House into actually getting some stuff done (his crazy stuff). Yeah, unlike Trump he knows how to play the game. And unlike Hillary, he can appear reasonably sincere doing it. Trump will get obstructed left right and centre if elected, will need to learn how to pass policies from 0. Where Cruz will manipulate the system from the get go | ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4411 Posts
On March 06 2016 17:20 RenSC2 wrote: Cruz doesn't scare me because I'm pretty sure that either Clinton or Sanders would hold onto Obama's states against Cruz and win easily. He'll crush in a few southern states, but I can't see him flipping blue states and he could even lose some of the borderline red states. The establishment hates him and he doesn't really draw independents either. He only fires up the Tea Party group which is not nearly large enough to win a general election. His winning message in the primary seems to be "I'm the only one that can beat Trump". That's not a message to win the general election. Trump is such a wildcard. He gets a ton of hate, but also a ton of support. He could flame out in the general debates or he could rip Sanders/Clinton to shreds. I genuinely don't know. He could win some very random states from Clinton or Sanders that would be safe against the other Republicans. He would also still hold most/all of the southern states who will begrudgingly vote him in over a socialist or the Clinton boogeywoman. I think Cruz or Trump would both be terrible presidents in their own ways. However, Trump can win a general, Cruz can't. That's why Trump is a lot scarier to me. And yes, I'm leaning Democrat this election, but if Kasich somehow managed to get the Republican nomination, there's a very good chance I'd vote for him. I might even make my first ever primary vote for him. I just want a sane leader without a ton of negatives. I can accept his social conservatism which I generally disagree with if he can give me that. Cruz will bring out the Hispanic vote for the republicans.He would smash Clinton in a general. From what I've seen his policies look great.Auditing the fed, scrapping the IRS and simplifying the tax system, passing laws to require a balanced budget - all good.Needs to cut military spending and close the offshore bases though.Stop funding militia groups in the mid east etc...Cannot balance the budget without doing that. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23930 Posts
Cruz will bring out the Hispanic vote for the republicans.He would smash Clinton in a general. lol no. Cruz doesn't get any more Hispanic votes than other (white) Republicans. He actually got less than the other people who won when he ran. He just barely beat Trump among Hispanic voters in Texas. Source | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22308 Posts
On March 06 2016 17:25 wei2coolman wrote: Cruz way scarier than Trump. Trump gets into presidency, literally both establishment bars him from doing anything in both House and Senate. Cruz in presidency, can legit move Republican House into actually getting some stuff done (his crazy stuff). I don't know, out of all the realistic candidates I think Trump is the one most likely to bridge the gap between parties. The Tea party will never work with Hillary or Bernie. The Democrats might work with Cruz if he doesn't try anything to radical, and he will try. But Trump, if he makes his turn to the center that is expected in the general, can work just fine with the Democrats and despite the hard attacks from the GOP on Trump I do expect them to, begrudgingly, side with him if he wins the nomination. I don't think they are willing to openly block their own president to that extreme. | ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4411 Posts
On March 06 2016 19:14 GreenHorizons wrote: lol no. Cruz doesn't get any more Hispanic votes than other (white) Republicans. He actually got less than the other people who won when he ran. He just barely beat Trump among Hispanic voters in Texas. Source He will bring over more democrat and independent hispanics when it is the general.Cruz leads Hilary head to head, Trump does not. | ||
|
strongwind
United States862 Posts
On March 06 2016 18:38 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: Cruz will bring out the Hispanic vote for the republicans.He would smash Clinton in a general. From what I've seen his policies look great.Auditing the fed, scrapping the IRS and simplifying the tax system, passing laws to require a balanced budget - all good.Needs to cut military spending and close the offshore bases though.Stop funding militia groups in the mid east etc...Cannot balance the budget without doing that. People that believe Cruz has great policies seriously scare me. http://www.vox.com/2016/2/16/11019986/ted-cruz-tax-policy-center | ||
|
Soap
Brazil1546 Posts
The probability that Clinton leads Cruz is 99%. Source | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
From what I've seen his policies look great.Auditing the fed, scrapping the IRS and simplifying the tax system, passing laws to require a balanced budget - all good.Needs to cut military spending and close the offshore bases though.Stop funding militia groups in the mid east etc...Cannot balance the budget without doing that. You haven't seen much then, do you. Postcards for taxes is funny and sounds brilliant maybe (no it doesn't, but that's a different matter) - but cutting military spending when he already said that he will lift RoE to allow "precise surgical saturationcarpetbombing" and get a "space based missile defense" going, which will pretty much start a new arms race with russia.. Nah. You basically endorse (yet again) a person advertising war crimes as cornerpoint in his campaign. What's wrong with you people, honestly? | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
| ||
