|
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. |
On June 20 2016 07:18 oneofthem wrote: it is funny that trump can reasonably be seen as both a russian plant and also a clinton plant
I think anyone believing either of those is the exact opposite of reasonable.
|
On June 20 2016 07:18 oneofthem wrote: it is funny that trump can reasonably be seen as both a russian plant and also a clinton plant Easy to reconcile if Clinton is also a Russian plant.
|
On June 20 2016 07:27 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2016 07:18 oneofthem wrote: it is funny that trump can reasonably be seen as both a russian plant and also a clinton plant I think anyone believing either of those is the exact opposite of reasonable.
Coming from someone who believes Clinton plans to stage a coup thats something. Never mind, impulsive statement after a bad day, my apologies.
|
On June 20 2016 07:35 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2016 07:27 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On June 20 2016 07:18 oneofthem wrote: it is funny that trump can reasonably be seen as both a russian plant and also a clinton plant I think anyone believing either of those is the exact opposite of reasonable. Coming from someone who believes Clinton plans to stage a coup thats something.
Is this normal for you to make up false statements and attribute them to someone who hasn't said anything of the sorts?
I've never said Clinton plans to stage a coup what are you talking about?
|
Edit: Nvm, probably shouldnt have said that, my apologies.
|
On June 20 2016 06:31 farvacola wrote:There's also the fact that Wisconsin is underperforming and in an unfavorable place compared to its chief rival of a neighbor. Not that a governor's impact on his state ought count for much, look at what Kasich did after all  GOP is underdelivering on promises, and we got to see Scott stand firm on his lavish union benefits cuts despite tens of thousands of protesters and Democrats literally fleeing the state. Now, the budget is in much better shape and he survived a recall election. I'll save my analysis of Walker's presidential campaign missteps for later, all I saw was bad debate performances and didn't do an in depth search like the failed campaigns of Goldwater and Reagan.
|
On June 20 2016 06:18 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2016 02:10 ticklishmusic wrote: Cruz had a freakishly good data and GOTV operation. It's how he managed to keep limping forward despite his anticipated evangelical base not going for him and being the most hated guy in the Senate. In the zeitgeist of rebellion against the establishment, not chumming it up with the hated elites is a resume enhancer. Trump to some extent made the charge of he's just unlikeable stick. I despise McConnell and Senate leadership. Cruz's fight against them on conservative grounds was a major reason I supported him after Walker petered out. Things would've been quite different if the conservative field wasn't packed from the very beginning.
i'm pretty sure a lot of people hated cruz, and also found him smugly unlikeable as a person, ,long before trump got involved.
|
On June 20 2016 02:44 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2016 02:41 LegalLord wrote: I mean, Trump is pretty clearly a highly successful businessman. Everyone who tries to say otherwise purely by virtue of the fact that they don't like him makes the anti-Trump side look like complete morons. Putting his daddies starting money into stock and sitting on his ass would have made him just as rich as he is today. That is why people call him a mediocre businessman. His 'success' is in not having lost it all like others have. Probably not given the first ETF(SPY) to track S&P 500 started in 1993. Prior to that he would have had to invest in mutual funds which dramatically eat into the return. Just look at John Olivers video last week on retirement/mutual funds.
|
On June 20 2016 08:16 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2016 06:18 Danglars wrote:On June 20 2016 02:10 ticklishmusic wrote: Cruz had a freakishly good data and GOTV operation. It's how he managed to keep limping forward despite his anticipated evangelical base not going for him and being the most hated guy in the Senate. In the zeitgeist of rebellion against the establishment, not chumming it up with the hated elites is a resume enhancer. Trump to some extent made the charge of he's just unlikeable stick. I despise McConnell and Senate leadership. Cruz's fight against them on conservative grounds was a major reason I supported him after Walker petered out. Things would've been quite different if the conservative field wasn't packed from the very beginning. i'm pretty sure a lot of people hated cruz, and also found him smugly unlikeable as a person, ,long before trump got involved.
The problem I feel is that the American right as a whole has worked itself into a corner. Trump's nativist stuff isn't compatible with American society and neither is the hyper-religious or individualist right while the whole debate basically evolves around centrist/liberal positions, comparable to how the European left fell out of fashion. The Republicans need to come up with a new third way or something. (or second way rather)
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
yet another reminder that trump obtained ~100m in credit to start out with. that's not possible without his dad and dad's bank as cosigners.
|
On June 20 2016 08:44 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2016 08:16 zlefin wrote:On June 20 2016 06:18 Danglars wrote:On June 20 2016 02:10 ticklishmusic wrote: Cruz had a freakishly good data and GOTV operation. It's how he managed to keep limping forward despite his anticipated evangelical base not going for him and being the most hated guy in the Senate. In the zeitgeist of rebellion against the establishment, not chumming it up with the hated elites is a resume enhancer. Trump to some extent made the charge of he's just unlikeable stick. I despise McConnell and Senate leadership. Cruz's fight against them on conservative grounds was a major reason I supported him after Walker petered out. Things would've been quite different if the conservative field wasn't packed from the very beginning. i'm pretty sure a lot of people hated cruz, and also found him smugly unlikeable as a person, ,long before trump got involved. The problem I feel is that the American right as a whole has worked itself into a corner. Trump's nativist stuff isn't compatible with American society and neither is the hyper-religious or individualist right while the whole debate basically evolves around centrist/liberal positions, comparable to how the European left fell out of fashion. The Republicans need to come up with a new third way or something. (or second way rather) The GOP has tried to go into a different route, the problem is that a large enough block of their voters is not willing to get out of their corner. That is why Jeb was the preferred candidate for the GOP and Cruz and Trump were anything but.
They know about the hole they are in but are held hostage by the Tea party.
|
On June 20 2016 08:45 oneofthem wrote: yet another reminder that trump obtained ~100m in credit to start out with. that's not possible without his dad and dad's bank as cosigners. beating the market over that long period on credit is an impressive feat having said that I'm not sure what the credit interest was.
|
On June 20 2016 07:28 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2016 07:18 oneofthem wrote: it is funny that trump can reasonably be seen as both a russian plant and also a clinton plant Easy to reconcile if Clinton is also a Russian plant.
Specifically, Perovskia atriplicifolia. Sorry I had to.
|
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On June 20 2016 09:27 CorsairHero wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2016 08:45 oneofthem wrote: yet another reminder that trump obtained ~100m in credit to start out with. that's not possible without his dad and dad's bank as cosigners. beating the market over that long period on credit is an impressive feat having said that I'm not sure what the credit interest was. not just anyone can build in ny/nj. ask trump's concrete partners
|
Video on the wage gap myth and why Hillary is literally pandering for votes based on false premises by continuing to propagate the myth to the masses as a part of her campaign strategy
+ Show Spoiler +
|
Man its been a while since I've seen anything from the Independent Women's forum. Its nice to see they are still out there doing what it is they do. If anything, they have proven that anyone can disprove the ever feared "wage gap" if given enough time fiddle with the numbers.
When it comes to relative wage and income, there are better places to information than conservative and liberal think tanks.
|
On June 20 2016 10:06 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2016 09:27 CorsairHero wrote:On June 20 2016 08:45 oneofthem wrote: yet another reminder that trump obtained ~100m in credit to start out with. that's not possible without his dad and dad's bank as cosigners. beating the market over that long period on credit is an impressive feat having said that I'm not sure what the credit interest was. not just anyone can build in ny/nj. ask trump's concrete partners typical dealings for real estate people in the 80's from what i gather (not that it's right) on the other hand, it would be hard to say the same for the clinton foundation (mob union money vs anti women/LGBT money)
|
On June 20 2016 10:41 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Video on the wage gap myth and why Hillary is literally pandering for votes based on false premises by continuing to propagate the myth to the masses as a part of her campaign strategy + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mH4lb88DMeo The wage gap is not a myth at all. First of all, studies have shown that overall there remains a pay gap between men and women for the same jobs, even taking into account various factors like the number of hours worked, the qualifications, etc. (see for example the Invest in women, invest in America - A Comprehensive Review of Women In the U.S. Economy report by the U.S. Congress' Joint Economic Committee). A difference remains, some of which is attributable to gender discrimination (for example in the hiring process). And with regards to STEM jobs specifically, here's another study which shows gender pay disparity in STEM jobs even after controlling for hours, age, experience, education, etc. Second, the existence of statistical differences in occupations between men and women is not at all an argument against the idea that there are differences in earnings between the two that need to be addressed. The point is precisely that social norms and representations about both genders still permeate our societies and contribute to the choices made by individuals with regards to their studies and careers. The pay gap is therefore very real, and it needs to be addressed by targeting both gender discrimination at (and to access) work and the cultural factors that play a role in the professional trajectories of men and women.
|
On June 20 2016 10:56 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2016 10:41 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Video on the wage gap myth and why Hillary is literally pandering for votes based on false premises by continuing to propagate the myth to the masses as a part of her campaign strategy + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mH4lb88DMeo The wage gap is not a myth at all. First of all, studies have shown that overall there remains a pay gap between men and women for the same jobs, even taking into account various factors like the number of hours worked, the qualifications, etc. ( see for example the Invest in women, invest in America - A Comprehensive Review of Women In the U.S. Economy report by the U.S. Congress' Joint Economic Committee). A difference remains, some of which is attributable to gender discrimination (for example in the hiring process). And with regards to STEM jobs specifically, here's another study which shows gender pay disparity in STEM jobs even after controlling for hours, age, experience, education, etc. Second, the existence of statistical differences in occupations between men and women is not at all an argument against the idea that there are differences in earnings between the two that need to be addressed. The point is precisely that social norms and representations about both genders still permeate our societies and contribute to the choices made by individuals with regards to their studies and careers. The pay gap is therefore very real, and it needs to be addressed by targeting both gender discrimination at (and to access) work and the cultural factors that play a role in the professional trajectories of men and women. The NYC department of sanitation is 91% male. I haven't seen a single person advocate for gender equality in this area.
|
|
|
|