|
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 July 26 2016 07:41 FiWiFaKi wrote:
Oh, you call 50% of the US population know-nothings? Cool cool, all inclusive.
The Republican party is not "50% of the US population".
|
On July 26 2016 07:39 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2016 07:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 26 2016 07:34 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2016 07:31 GreenHorizons wrote:
lol. It's just ridiculous. We're so united...
We broke rules on purpose because we want to fuck over the guy we wanted to win!!!! He doesn't even want us to do this!!!!! Woooo!!! Oh so the rules about signs you care about, the being impartial, not so much. lol. Trump's probably going to win since dems seem incapable of even understanding why the people are resisting so hard. I'm sorry, 3.7 million people disagreed. But keep trolling. It only shows just how unreasonable Bernie set your expectations. Or maybe you did this to yourself.
call them unreasonable if you want, but we're going to fight for what we believe and we're not "uniting" under a banner that takes someone like DWS and praises them and gives them a position on their campaign.
You all didn't believe it, now you all are just calling them names (instead of acknowledging how wrong you were), and I'm loving every second.
|
On July 26 2016 07:42 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2016 07:41 FiWiFaKi wrote:
Oh, you call 50% of the US population know-nothings? Cool cool, all inclusive. The Republican party is not "50% of the US population".
At least 40%+ of USA who support the Republican party? Or 40%+ of voters if I really must be that specific.
|
On July 26 2016 07:40 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2016 07:36 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
I think it comes down to the fact that he honestly doesn't care that much about it, much in line with the fact that he's a social liberal, but knows what he's expected to say to appeal to the far right of his party, for whom it is a very important moral issue. So what does that mean when a Republican Congress puts anti-abortion legislation on his desk?
He just won't care that much about it, man.
|
United States44295 Posts
On July 26 2016 07:36 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2016 07:34 Plansix wrote:We broke rules on purpose because we want to fuck over the guy we wanted to win!!!! He doesn't even want us to do this!!!!! Woooo!!! Oh so the rules about signs you care about, the being impartial, not so much. lol. Trump's probably going to win since dems seem incapable of even understanding why the people are resisting so hard. It's just reinforcing the reality that the notion that the party is united is imaginary. You want a united party you make some real change, otherwise this is just the beginning. Today was the tamest stuff planned since most of the speakers were Bernie supporters trying to calm the fire.
Hi,
The Democratic party held a big vote on which direction they should go in. Your side lost. Now the idea of being a party is that even if you disagree on some issues you'd still rather work together to get someone from your side in rather than risk the other side because you disagree with them a whole lot more. To that end you vote for Clinton, even if she was just your 2nd favourite of the two Democratic candidates, and the Clinton supporters agree to vote for Bernie over Trump if he were to win.
Obviously you're not okay with that, even though you'd rely on the exact same system for Bernie to have a hope had he been the nominee. At this point I guess you could betray the party and take your ball and go home, refusing to support the winner of a contest because your guy didn't win, even though the contest was to decide who you should all collectively support.
But rather than take your ball and go home you're instead deciding to stage a collective protest that is doing nothing but embarrassing your own candidate who is doing everything he can to get you all to go home at this point.
You need to invest in a mirror and then go take a long hard look at yourself in it.
|
On July 26 2016 07:43 FiWiFaKi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2016 07:42 TheYango wrote:On July 26 2016 07:41 FiWiFaKi wrote:
Oh, you call 50% of the US population know-nothings? Cool cool, all inclusive. The Republican party is not "50% of the US population". At least 40%+ of USA who support the Republican party? Or 40%+ of voters if I really must be that specific.
23% per the last pew research poll.
|
On July 26 2016 07:41 FiWiFaKi wrote:
Oh, you call 50% of the US population know-nothings? Cool cool, all inclusive.
To be fair, republicans/conservatives tend to come off as pretty ignorant a lot of the time. Their stance on gay rights and abortion are pretty glaring examples.
|
On July 26 2016 07:42 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2016 07:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 26 2016 07:34 Plansix wrote:We broke rules on purpose because we want to fuck over the guy we wanted to win!!!! He doesn't even want us to do this!!!!! Woooo!!! Oh so the rules about signs you care about, the being impartial, not so much. lol. Trump's probably going to win since dems seem incapable of even understanding why the people are resisting so hard. It's just reinforcing the reality that the notion that the party is united is imaginary. You want a united party you make some real change, otherwise this is just the beginning. Today was the tamest stuff planned since most of the speakers were Bernie supporters trying to calm the fire. ýour the vocal minority, yes you can boo and shout but none of it matters. The party leaders and vast majority of voters are united behind Hillary Unlike the Republicans where the majority of voters are behind Trump and the party leadership wants nothing to do with him.
The people are not united behind Hillary. Hillary and the Dem machine were able to win a primary, but the general is a different animal.
The vast majority of voters have a negative/indifferent view of Hillary. She's just banking on selling Trump as worse. Problem is she's less trusted than he is and so is the media trying to help her.
Having republican leadership against you is probably one of the biggest uniting factors outside of R party loyalists for Trump.
Hillary supporters would be sour if Bernie got the nomination but the same logic they are using to try to ram Hillary down our throats would apply to them.
|
On July 26 2016 07:33 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2016 07:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 26 2016 07:28 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 26 2016 07:26 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2016 07:24 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 26 2016 07:22 KwarK wrote:On July 26 2016 07:18 amazingxkcd wrote:On July 26 2016 07:16 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2016 07:14 amazingxkcd wrote:On July 26 2016 07:12 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
[quote]
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 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 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. If Congress were to pass legislation making abortion illegal and the federal courts upheld this legislation, or any state were permitted to ban abortion under state and federal law, the doctor or any other person performing this illegal act upon a woman would be held legally responsible, not the woman. The woman is a victim in this case as is the life in her womb. My position has not changed - like Ronald Reagan, I am pro-life with exceptions. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-statement-regarding-abortion Is this like the Muslim ban: where he says its not a thing and then a week later he is talking about it again like he is totally going to ban all Muslims? It's a thing where you should just watch the interview yourself and decide. It looked like the interviewer was out for blood, got the upper hand on him, and baited him into saying something he didn't want to say. He instantly backed off what he said and put this statement out in response. The interview with Chris Matthews? I agree that the video should be watched, because Matthews wasn't baiting anything imo; he just insisted that Trump actually give a straight answer, and Matthews didn't back down from his abortion question until Trump actually gave an answer (which Trump isn't used to). The text from that was actually a great read. Trump tried to redirect and change the subject to the Pope, to Catholic dogma, to whether Matthews was a good Catholic etc over and over and Matthews just smoothly dismissed that and then hammered it back onto Trump. Even if you believe that Trump was just trying to give any kind of answer and completely misspoke on the issue it still shows how badly out of his depth he was and how ineffectual and incompetent he is when not allowed to slither around on an issue.
And I'm hoping that the debate moderators have as much of a backbone as Chris Matthews does. If Trump is forced to actually give answers during the debates, then he's fucked. He's great at dodging and strawmanning and throwing red herrings, but not at displaying any actual knowledge.
|
On July 26 2016 07:43 FiWiFaKi wrote:
At least 40%+ of USA who support the Republican party? Or 40%+ of voters if I really must be that specific.
Voting for the party's candidate is not the same as being a member of that party. Calling the Republican party the modern equivalent of the Know Nothing Party (which was the actual name of the historical party he referred to) does not mean said moniker encompasses all people that vote for a Republican president.
|
On July 26 2016 07:45 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2016 07:43 FiWiFaKi wrote:On July 26 2016 07:42 TheYango wrote:On July 26 2016 07:41 FiWiFaKi wrote:
Oh, you call 50% of the US population know-nothings? Cool cool, all inclusive. The Republican party is not "50% of the US population". At least 40%+ of USA who support the Republican party? Or 40%+ of voters if I really must be that specific. 23% per the last pew research poll.
Plansix, I will not argue with you anymore. You are probably the most stubborn person in this thread, which I have seen time and time again throughout LD.
I really should not need to say a word to argue that the statistics you're citing say nothing.
|
On July 26 2016 07:44 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2016 07:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 26 2016 07:34 Plansix wrote:We broke rules on purpose because we want to fuck over the guy we wanted to win!!!! He doesn't even want us to do this!!!!! Woooo!!! Oh so the rules about signs you care about, the being impartial, not so much. lol. Trump's probably going to win since dems seem incapable of even understanding why the people are resisting so hard. It's just reinforcing the reality that the notion that the party is united is imaginary. You want a united party you make some real change, otherwise this is just the beginning. Today was the tamest stuff planned since most of the speakers were Bernie supporters trying to calm the fire. Hi, The Democratic party held a big vote on which direction they should go in. Your side lost. Now the idea of being a party is that even if you disagree on some issues you'd still rather work together to get someone from your side in rather than risk the other side because you disagree with them a whole lot more. To that end you vote for Clinton, even if she was just your 2nd favourite of the two Democratic candidates, and the Clinton supporters agree to vote for Bernie over Trump if he were to win. Obviously you're not okay with that, even though you'd rely on the exact same system for Bernie to have a hope had he been the nominee. At this point I guess you could betray the party and take your ball and go home, refusing to support the winner of a contest because your guy didn't win, even though the contest was to decide who you should all collectively support. But rather than take your ball and go home you're instead deciding to stage a collective protest that is doing nothing but embarrassing your own candidate who is doing everything he can to get you all to go home at this point. You need to invest in a mirror and then go take a long hard look at yourself in it.
It's hard to accept both the idea that Republican leadership is anti-Trump but Trump still represents "the other side" This shit isn't binary no matter how hard they try to ram that concept down our throats.
|
On July 26 2016 07:36 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2016 07:33 KwarK wrote:On July 26 2016 07:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 26 2016 07:28 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 26 2016 07:26 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2016 07:24 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 26 2016 07:22 KwarK wrote:On July 26 2016 07:18 amazingxkcd wrote:On July 26 2016 07:16 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2016 07:14 amazingxkcd wrote:
[quote]
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. 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. If Congress were to pass legislation making abortion illegal and the federal courts upheld this legislation, or any state were permitted to ban abortion under state and federal law, the doctor or any other person performing this illegal act upon a woman would be held legally responsible, not the woman. The woman is a victim in this case as is the life in her womb. My position has not changed - like Ronald Reagan, I am pro-life with exceptions. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-statement-regarding-abortion Is this like the Muslim ban: where he says its not a thing and then a week later he is talking about it again like he is totally going to ban all Muslims? It's a thing where you should just watch the interview yourself and decide. It looked like the interviewer was out for blood, got the upper hand on him, and baited him into saying something he didn't want to say. He instantly backed off what he said and put this statement out in response. The interview with Chris Matthews? I agree that the video should be watched, because Matthews wasn't baiting anything imo; he just insisted that Trump actually give a straight answer, and Matthews didn't back down from his abortion question until Trump actually gave an answer (which Trump isn't used to). The text from that was actually a great read. Trump tried to redirect and change the subject to the Pope, to Catholic dogma, to whether Matthews was a good Catholic etc over and over and Matthews just smoothly dismissed that and then hammered it back onto Trump. Even if you believe that Trump was just trying to give any kind of answer and completely misspoke on the issue it still shows how badly out of his depth he was and how ineffectual and incompetent he is when not allowed to slither around on an issue. I think it comes down to the fact that he honestly doesn't care that much about it, much in line with the fact that he's a social liberal, but knows what he's expected to say to appeal to the far right of his party.
He's said far worse than any previous Republican candidate ever has to on those issues, and plenty of what he's said are seriously beyond the pale. Also, given what his past political history shows, I find the notion he actually has a clear set of political views or any clear ideas on how to govern to be ridiculous. He's an apolitical narcissist with a compulsive need to be praised and heard.
Quite frankly, the last Republican I would've voted for would either have been McCain or George H.W. Bush. It's somewhat unfortunate, but the party has shown nothing but the worst of American politics over the past decade.
On July 26 2016 07:43 FiWiFaKi wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2016 07:42 TheYango wrote:On July 26 2016 07:41 FiWiFaKi wrote:
Oh, you call 50% of the US population know-nothings? Cool cool, all inclusive. The Republican party is not "50% of the US population". At least 40%+ of USA who support the Republican party? Or 40%+ of voters if I really must be that specific.
Party membership is something along the lines of 23% Republican, 32% Democratic, 39% Independent.
In terms of "lean", 39% lean Republican, 48% lean Democratic.
Pew Research Center
|
I think he'll do fine.
I agree in the past decade, the Republican party establishment has been absolutely terrible.
|
I know the DNC is on, but I just saw an interesting comment about the end of the RNC, when the audience booed Cruz for not explicitly endorsing Trump (i.e., using his name). Cruz's comments were purposely generic in regards to voting your heart for the best candidate, etc. etc.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/BRN2P0l.jpg)
|
On July 26 2016 07:47 Lord Tolkien wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2016 07:36 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 26 2016 07:33 KwarK wrote:On July 26 2016 07:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 26 2016 07:28 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 26 2016 07:26 Plansix wrote:On July 26 2016 07:24 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 26 2016 07:22 KwarK wrote:On July 26 2016 07:18 amazingxkcd wrote:On July 26 2016 07:16 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
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 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. If Congress were to pass legislation making abortion illegal and the federal courts upheld this legislation, or any state were permitted to ban abortion under state and federal law, the doctor or any other person performing this illegal act upon a woman would be held legally responsible, not the woman. The woman is a victim in this case as is the life in her womb. My position has not changed - like Ronald Reagan, I am pro-life with exceptions. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-statement-regarding-abortion Is this like the Muslim ban: where he says its not a thing and then a week later he is talking about it again like he is totally going to ban all Muslims? It's a thing where you should just watch the interview yourself and decide. It looked like the interviewer was out for blood, got the upper hand on him, and baited him into saying something he didn't want to say. He instantly backed off what he said and put this statement out in response. The interview with Chris Matthews? I agree that the video should be watched, because Matthews wasn't baiting anything imo; he just insisted that Trump actually give a straight answer, and Matthews didn't back down from his abortion question until Trump actually gave an answer (which Trump isn't used to). The text from that was actually a great read. Trump tried to redirect and change the subject to the Pope, to Catholic dogma, to whether Matthews was a good Catholic etc over and over and Matthews just smoothly dismissed that and then hammered it back onto Trump. Even if you believe that Trump was just trying to give any kind of answer and completely misspoke on the issue it still shows how badly out of his depth he was and how ineffectual and incompetent he is when not allowed to slither around on an issue. I think it comes down to the fact that he honestly doesn't care that much about it, much in line with the fact that he's a social liberal, but knows what he's expected to say to appeal to the far right of his party. He's said far worse than any previous Republican candidate ever has to on those issues, and plenty of what he's said are seriously beyond the pale. Also, given what his past political history shows, I find the notion he actually has a clear set of political views or any clear ideas on how to govern to be ridiculous. He's an apolitical narcissist with a compulsive need to be praised and heard. Quite frankly, the last Republican I would've voted for would either have been McCain or George H.W. Bush. It's somewhat unfortunate, but the party has shown nothing but the worst of American politics over the past decade. Show nested quote +On July 26 2016 07:43 FiWiFaKi wrote:On July 26 2016 07:42 TheYango wrote:On July 26 2016 07:41 FiWiFaKi wrote:
Oh, you call 50% of the US population know-nothings? Cool cool, all inclusive. The Republican party is not "50% of the US population". At least 40%+ of USA who support the Republican party? Or 40%+ of voters if I really must be that specific. Party membership is something along the lines of 23% Republican, 32% Democratic, 39% Independent. In terms of "lean", 39% lean Republican, 48% lean Democratic. Pew Research Center
Do these numbers really matter? Why not just look at how people vote? No need for research.
And he said the know-nothings came back 8 years ago where McCain received 46%, so clearly 46% of people preferred him over whatever the Democrats were bringing. Either way, it's not pretty.
|
On July 26 2016 07:47 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2016 07:44 KwarK wrote:On July 26 2016 07:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 26 2016 07:34 Plansix wrote:We broke rules on purpose because we want to fuck over the guy we wanted to win!!!! He doesn't even want us to do this!!!!! Woooo!!! Oh so the rules about signs you care about, the being impartial, not so much. lol. Trump's probably going to win since dems seem incapable of even understanding why the people are resisting so hard. It's just reinforcing the reality that the notion that the party is united is imaginary. You want a united party you make some real change, otherwise this is just the beginning. Today was the tamest stuff planned since most of the speakers were Bernie supporters trying to calm the fire. Hi, The Democratic party held a big vote on which direction they should go in. Your side lost. Now the idea of being a party is that even if you disagree on some issues you'd still rather work together to get someone from your side in rather than risk the other side because you disagree with them a whole lot more. To that end you vote for Clinton, even if she was just your 2nd favourite of the two Democratic candidates, and the Clinton supporters agree to vote for Bernie over Trump if he were to win. Obviously you're not okay with that, even though you'd rely on the exact same system for Bernie to have a hope had he been the nominee. At this point I guess you could betray the party and take your ball and go home, refusing to support the winner of a contest because your guy didn't win, even though the contest was to decide who you should all collectively support. But rather than take your ball and go home you're instead deciding to stage a collective protest that is doing nothing but embarrassing your own candidate who is doing everything he can to get you all to go home at this point. You need to invest in a mirror and then go take a long hard look at yourself in it. It's hard to accept both the idea that Republican leadership is anti-Trump but Trump still represents "the other side" This shit isn't binary no matter how hard they try to ram that concept down our throats.
What are your thoughts on Bernie asking people to not do what you're doing? Or they or whoever. Can't tell if you're actually at the convention or not.
|
On July 26 2016 07:42 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2016 07:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 26 2016 07:34 Plansix wrote:We broke rules on purpose because we want to fuck over the guy we wanted to win!!!! He doesn't even want us to do this!!!!! Woooo!!! Oh so the rules about signs you care about, the being impartial, not so much. lol. Trump's probably going to win since dems seem incapable of even understanding why the people are resisting so hard. It's just reinforcing the reality that the notion that the party is united is imaginary. You want a united party you make some real change, otherwise this is just the beginning. Today was the tamest stuff planned since most of the speakers were Bernie supporters trying to calm the fire. ýour the vocal minority, yes you can boo and shout but none of it matters. The party leaders and vast majority of voters are united behind Hillary Unlike the Republicans where the majority of voters are behind Trump and the party leadership wants nothing to do with him.
Popular vote was roughly, doing this from memory, 55 to 45 Clinton to Sanders. So yes a majority, but I wouldn't call it a "vast majority."
|
On July 26 2016 07:51 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
I know the DNC is on, but I just saw an interesting comment about the end of the RNC, when the audience booed Cruz for not explicitly endorsing Trump (i.e., using his name). Cruz's comments were purposely generic in regards to voting your heart for the best candidate, etc. etc.
People booed because he didn't endorse Donald Trump. Stop trying to stir things up DPB.
|
On July 26 2016 07:50 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
I think he'll do fine.
Just keep interpreting what he means to be different than what he says ("there has to be punishment") and you'll keep your hope alive.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
