US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4294

On July 17 2016 09:50 GGTeMpLaR wrote:


Weren't you one of the first ones crying about it? If you don't want to get bogged down in stupid arguments like this don't hypocritically make whine-posts over things you don't actually care about.



Various people on both sides of the aisle have been warned/banned for shitposting here before.

Shitposting doesn't exactly result in a meaningful discussion to say the least.

On July 17 2016 10:11 OuchyDathurts wrote:


"Regressive left" isn't a term invented on 4chan or the_donald, it's just a term they picked up and ran with. Its a low effort insult that gets parroted. Just like "racist" or "sexist" gets thrown around a lot to shut down an argument and put the other person on the back foot "regressive left" gets used in the exact same way. Most people who use any of those terms flippantly don't actually have any idea what they mean. All they do is stifle discussion, shut people down, and suddenly put the burden of proof on the other person. Instead of discussing what we were talking about now I've gotta prove I'm not sexist or racist or regressive. It's throwing a bomb into the works. It's the epitome of laziness, but it wasn't invented over there, they just decided to pick up a cool new insult to toss around.

On July 17 2016 10:11 Shingi11 wrote:
So do you guys think it is fair to call this election white american men vs everyone else in terms of voting groups. Seems like trump is has the animosity of almost every minority voting group while hillery is floundering with all the white vote that does not have 2 X chromosomes.

On July 17 2016 10:16 Slaughter wrote:

If Trump doesn't significantly tap into some other demo besides white men he will get crushed because even if he takes that demo by a large margin he won't win (even doubtful that he will take white men by a super large margin).

On July 17 2016 10:17 farvacola wrote:
As an anti-Trump American white man, I'm not sure that's an entirely accurate characterization, but I do think that it's a fair one

On July 17 2016 10:19 FiWiFaKi wrote:


Men and Whites side with Trump. Women, Latinos, and Blacks side with Hillary, that's more or less every election in the last 30 years though.

Trump is doing pretty good with Latinos overall, he's more or less tied with Hillary with the Latino's who speak English primarily (I think it's an interesting statistic).

[A nationwide survey of Hispanic voters conducted for Univision in the leadup to next week's Republican National Convention found 67 percent support Clinton. Trump is at 19 percent.

Among Hispanic voters surveyed, 73 percent believe Trump is racist. Just 20 percent say he isn't racist and 7 percent said they didn't know.

Mr. Trump drew 22% Hispanic support in the most recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, taken in June, compared to Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton’s 69%. A Pew Research Center poll released last week showed Mr. Trump with 24% Hispanic support nationwide versus Mrs. Clinton’s 66%.

On July 17 2016 12:42 FiWiFaKi wrote:
Anyway, I went a few pages back, and didn't see the Mike Pence speech posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CP0quaNeFo

Thoughts?

As for me, I think he's a pretty good pick. Having no religious affiliation and supporting people like this definitely puts me in the minority, but I suppose it prevails (for me) over those bad form of feminism or LGBTQIA perspectives that some of the left has. As long as abortion remains legal, people are judged on performance in the workplace and not sex/age/race/etc (which is something Trump believes)... Light Christian values are alright, having some foundation is nice, because in my viewpoint the rationalism being executed by the left can be used to argue anything with careful selection of information.

So anyway, a safe pick, much more careful with his words (which I'm sure some people who support some of Trump's ideas but not his personality will appreciate). While VP picks really don't matter that much, this will probably help Trump most with White women, I don't see this making an impact on either of the two big minorities.

Donald Trump's campaign is still soliciting illegal donations from foreign individuals – including members of foreign governments at their official email addresses — weeks after the campaign was put on notice by watchdog groups.

Foreign members of parliament from the United Kingdom and Australia confirmed to The Hill that they received fundraising solicitations from the Trump campaign as recently as July 12 — two weeks after a widely publicized FEC complaint issued on June 29 by non-partisan watchdogs Democracy 21 and the Campaign Legal Center.

These latest campaign finance violations were first reported by the investigative website "WhoWhatWhy" and have been confirmed by The Hill.

The Trump campaign did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Terri Butler, a progressive Parliament member in Australia, told The Hill in a telephone interview Friday night that she was surprised to continue receiving fundraising solicitations from the Trump campaign at her official government email address.

She shared several of these emails, including one dated July 12 asking her to make a "generous contribution" to the Trump campaign.

Butler says she has no idea how her government email ended up on the Trump fundraising list.

"I haven't signed up to any Trump lists," she said.

Federal law on foreign money in campaigns is black and white, campaign finance lawyers on both sides of the political divide say.

It's illegal for foreign individuals, corporations and governments to either give money directly to U.S. candidates or spend on advertising to influence U.S. elections.