| 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. | ||
|
amazingxkcd
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
On July 26 2016 07:12 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Either you're joking or you haven't started to follow his election campaign yet. except i do follow his campaign closely? you're making assumptions that he's some tyrannical warlord that wants ot remove everything dems have done just for the hell of it | ||
|
GGTeMpLaR
United States7226 Posts
On July 26 2016 07:14 amazingxkcd wrote: except i do follow his campaign closely? you're making assumptions that he's some tyrannical warlord that wants ot remove everything dems have done just for the hell of it That's because he isn't pandering 24/7 it makes them uncomfortable | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 26 2016 07:14 amazingxkcd wrote: except i do follow his campaign closely? you're making assumptions that he's some tyrannical warlord that wants ot remove everything dems have done just for the hell of it Then you are ignoring those things, because the GOP is pushing to end all of them. Gay marriage, abortions, the voters rights act. They want them all removed. If you don't believe is it going to happen, that is fine. But don't expect everyone else to take that chance. | ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
He did not to most of things, no. Especially, he doesn't want to tear them down. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45847 Posts
On July 26 2016 07:14 amazingxkcd wrote: except i do follow his campaign closely? you're making assumptions that he's some tyrannical warlord that wants ot remove everything dems have done just for the hell of it That's really not an assumption; in fact, that's been the message of the Republican Party from the second that Obama took office, and Trump has made that his message as well to appeal to voters. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
| ||
|
amazingxkcd
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
On July 26 2016 07:16 Plansix wrote: Then you are ignoring those things, because the GOP is pushing to end all of them. Gay marriage, abortions, the voters rights act. They want them all removed. If you don't believe is it going to happen, that is fine. But don't expect everyone else to take that chance. since when did donald say blacks cant vote? since when did donald sasy gay marriage should be removed? i personally am against abortion but i havent seen donald say we must ban abortion without any questions | ||
|
Kickstart
United States1941 Posts
On July 26 2016 07:07 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: The idea that the token Hillary voter is appealing to emotion more than the token Trump voter is astounding to me. Trump and the RNC are 100% about fearmongering and hatemongering, whereas the Democratic message has been much more positive and optimistic. And what about the entire list of great reforms that I just posted, that Hillary and the Democrats support, that Trump and the Republicans don't? To expand on this, to me it seems a large portion of Trump voters just want something new. We know what a Hillary presidency will be like: more of what we've had and boring. Those who think that things are going to go haywire with a HRC win are just delusional and working themselves into a frenzy, it would just be the same shit we've had. But that allows for someone who promises to shake things up to come in. People are sick of 'politics as usual' and are more than turned off by the idea of another term or two of the same shit. Clinton is a 'safe' choice, we know what we are getting. On the other hand, I see Trump as a wild card; and that is a large part of his appeal and it is understandable. I too would much rather have someone who would shake things up instead of giving us 4 or 8 more years of the same shit like HRC would. The problem is, Trump is incompetent and dangerous. Everything he says is inflammatory, everything he has proposed he would do about certain issues would be detrimental, and it is nigh impossible to pin down what his policies are. Hell, he even wanted to give his VP control over foreign and domestic issues while he would be in charge of 'making america great again'. The want for something to change is palpable, and I get it. But Trump is not going to provide any positive change, at least not if you believe anything he has been saying. Hillary is boring and will bring more of the same, but she is the 'safe' choice, we know what we are getting. | ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
On July 26 2016 07:14 amazingxkcd wrote: except i do follow his campaign closely? you're making assumptions that he's some tyrannical warlord that wants ot remove everything dems have done just for the hell of it Well, he hasn't stated plans to remove *all* those things. But quite a few of them are directly threatened by the platform of the party he is running in (and thus presumably endorses). (specifically here: https://prod-static-ngop-pbl.s3.amazonaws.com/media/documents/DRAFT_12_FINAL[1]-ben_1468872234.pdf) The obvious one that's easy to validate being Roe v. Wade. He's probably just lying about endorsing it and is only going to do what you think he should do, that's a reasonable expectation. | ||
|
Lord Tolkien
United States12083 Posts
On July 26 2016 06:44 ticklishmusic wrote: Yeah, they weren't children about it. Solid chance that I'll be a Republican in 20 years as I get slightly more conservative and the conservatives ditch their stupid wing. I am an unrepentant statist (and overall would describe myself as a pragmatic social liberal), however I would not be opposed to having the option of actually voting Republican if the finally ditched social issues and wised up on the environment. As is, I have no idea how I could possibly vote R when they want to reverse gay marriage, support HB2 (and the removal of anti-discrimination protections to GSM individuals) and introduce gay conversion therapy nationally (FFS), and that's just one set of issues. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On July 26 2016 07:14 GGTeMpLaR wrote: That's because he isn't pandering 24/7 it makes them uncomfortable + Show Spoiler + https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/757699964550148096 There's a difference between pandering and being knowledgeable and having plans about issues that matter to different groups. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18857 Posts
On July 26 2016 07:06 DeepElemBlues wrote: food assistance is the only thing in that list that the government is actually competent at providing. and that's probably because it's so simple, it's basic wealth transfer. take the tax money and put it on cards and provide them to those who qualify. not a lot of complexity although of course the government has managed to make it complicated and stupid at times. everything else it is either mediocre to outright awful at. by its own admission it is terrible at environmental protection because global warming, and that is a bit of a troll argument but the EPA's constant rejection by the courts and a couple high-profile environmental accidents caused BY the EPA have kind of reduced its public image and effectiveness. it is terrible at providing healthcare with medicare being an important but isolated exception. i have to deal extensively with government-provided healthcare in my work and unless it is medicare the headaches are endless both for me and for the patients. people working longer suggests that it has not been terribly effective at providing good retirement in the face of economic weakness. disability insurance is one of the things that is gutting social security and the reason it is is that standards were too lax during the recession, way too many people got SSDI who shouldn't have. although they did finally tighten things up about 4 years ago there. things aren't much better at the state level either at least not in my state or in states like CA. Environmental regulation aside, what you're saying about SS-DIB is nonsense. The approval rate never went above 48% of all applicants, and the standards have only gotten more strict, particularly in any of the circuits that are particularly hostile to the feds (mostly the 7th, 9th, and 4th, from what I'm told). I actually got to see Judge Posner excoriate SSA attorneys in person for not paying out benefits when the agency should have  If you're talking SSI, on the other hand, given that it's income tested, there'll definitely be an increase in applicants and an accompanying increase in awards, but since it pays out a mere fraction of what DIB does, the budgetary impact is minimal. As for the bit on healthcare, I think my point relates more the idea that we just have medicare for everyone instead of Obamacare, but I'll concede there. And in regards to the states, yes, they suck, and that's why the fed is important  | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
| ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
On July 26 2016 07:19 TheTenthDoc wrote: Well, he hasn't stated plans to remove *all* those things. But quite a few of them are directly threatened by the platform of the party he is running in (and thus presumably endorses). (specifically here: https://prod-static-ngop-pbl.s3.amazonaws.com/media/documents/DRAFT_12_FINAL[1]-ben_1468872234.pdf) The obvious one that's easy to validate being Roe v. Wade. He's probably just lying about endorsing it and is only going to do what you think he should do, that's a reasonable expectation. Roe v. Wade like I said before, is one of the 4 things on that list that is a valid concern. Everything else is completely dumbfounded. Though if we're going to be picky, Trump is probably pro-choice, it's the party that's not. | ||
|
GGTeMpLaR
United States7226 Posts
On July 26 2016 07:20 Lord Tolkien wrote: I am an unrepentant statist (and overall would describe myself as a pragmatic social liberal), however I would not be opposed to having the option of actually voting Republican if the finally ditched social issues and wised up on the environment. As is, I have no idea how I could possibly vote R when they want to reverse gay marriage, support HB2 (and the removal of anti-discrimination protections to GSM individuals) and introduce gay conversion therapy nationally (FFS), and that's just one set of issues. The social issues are pretty much my main gripe with the republican establishment as well and it seems very much to me like that is part of the reason they hate Trump so much - he doesn't care for any of it either because he's by means a social liberal as well. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On July 26 2016 07:20 Nevuk wrote: Let's be real, I doubt trump has actually read the GOP platform, he didn't even know they were anti-marijuana legalization until he was told in the middle of an interview... That's a fair assumption. Remember the interview where Pence mouthed "no you can't do that" to something Trump said? | ||
KwarK
United States43971 Posts
On July 26 2016 07:18 amazingxkcd wrote: since when did donald say blacks cant vote? since when did donald sasy gay marriage should be removed? i personally am against abortion but i havent seen donald say we must ban abortion without any questions He claimed that women seeking abortions should be punished. http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/article/2016/mar/30/context-transcript-donald-trump-punishing-women-ab/ MATTHEWS: Do you believe in punishment for abortion, yes or no as a principle? TRUMP: The answer is that there has to be some form of punishment. MATTHEWS: For the woman. TRUMP: Yeah, there has to be some form. Like he literally said women should be punished for abortion. Edit: Holy shit, this random guy absolutely destroys Trump on the subject. Trump keeps trying to turn it back on him and put words in his mouth and claim that the guy says "he's a very good Catholic" and the other guy calmly corrects Trump, as if Trump were a slow student and he a patient teacher, and then gets right back to the interrogation. And Trump tries to get out of it over and over but he slowly gets nailed down on the issue and no amount of deflection to what the interrogator thinks can get him to escape because, as his persecutor correctly identifies, Trump is running for President, only what Trump thinks matters, not what the Catholic church might think of the other guy. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 26 2016 07:18 amazingxkcd wrote: since when did donald say blacks cant vote? since when did donald sasy gay marriage should be removed? i personally am against abortion but i havent seen donald say we must ban abortion without any questions http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/31/us/politics/donald-trump-abortion.html?_r=0 And then there is his vice president, who thinks that gays shouldn't marry. And the GOP wants to remove the voters right's act. The only way he is against those things is if we assume that he is going to oppose what he said in March, his VP and most of the GOP platform. Not really better on that But you are right, he did not say those things out loud. Which we all know is how we figure out if people are going to do things or not. So we just need to believe he won't do a single thing in the GOPs party platform and then I can vote for Trump. Except the stupid wall and ban on Muslims. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
| ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9859 Posts
On July 26 2016 07:22 ticklishmusic wrote: That's a fair assumption. Remember the interview where Pence mouthed "no you can't do that" to something Trump said? Trump specifically asked Pence, hey can we do that? Guys please, I hate having to reply to like every comment, but lets be a bit less biased. Anyway, I'm going to watch the DNC now and stop with the thread for a bit. I suppose I'm a bit to blame too, but it's getting to the point where it feels like we're running two propaganda channels in this thread instead of intellectual discussion. | ||
| ||
WardiTV Invitational
Wardi Spring Cup
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Weekly #130 (TLMC 22 Edition)
herO vs TriGGeR
ByuN vs Classic
[ Submit Event ] |
|
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Britney Dota 2  27899Calm  16839Bisu 9300Sea  8942BeSt 3502Horang2 1383Mini 1314Light 1178EffOrt 928Pusan 623[ Show more ] Counter-Strike Other Games Organizations Other Games StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 StarCraft: Brood War StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War |
|
PiGosaur Cup
GSL
Classic vs Cure
Maru vs Rogue
GSL
SHIN vs Zoun
ByuN vs herO
OSC
OSC
Replay Cast
Escore
The PondCast
WardiTV Invitational
Zoun vs Ryung
Lambo vs ShoWTimE
OSC
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/YGHxhAf.jpg)
