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.
something I'm curious about in this thread. You can get another dem or rep of your choice basically.
I mean anyone or anyone realistic? Biden doesn't want the job, Obama is constitutionally prohibited from keeping the job and Bernie wouldn't be very good at the job. Hillary is a senior politician with the ability to do the job. But I'm still on team where Obama's BLM paramilitaries create some sort of incident triggering the UN to invade America to disarm the patriots while Obama gets declared emergency dictator.
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has run an unusually cheap campaign in part by not paying at least 10 top staffers, consultants and advisers, some of whom are no longer with the campaign, according to a review of federal campaign finance filings.
Those who have so far not been paid, the filings show, include recently departed campaign manager Paul Manafort, California state director Tim Clark, communications director Michael Caputo and a pair of senior aides who left the campaign in June to immediately go to work for a Trump Super PAC.
The New York real estate magnate and his allies have touted his campaign's frugality, saying it is evidence of his management skills. His campaign's spending has totaled $89.5 million so far, about a third of what Democratic rival Hillary Clinton's campaign has spent.
But not compensating top people in a presidential campaign is a departure from campaign finance norms. Many of the positions involved might typically come with six-figure annual paychecks in other campaigns.
"It's unprecedented for a presidential campaign to rely so heavily on volunteers for top management positions," said Paul Ryan, an election lawyer with the campaign finance reform advocacy group Campaign Legal Center.
The Trump campaign said the Reuters' reporting was "sloppy at best" but declined to elaborate.
One of the 10 who were unpaid, Michael Caputo, told a Buffalo radio station in June after he resigned from the campaign, that he was not volunteering. Rather, he said he just had not gotten paid. Caputo confirmed to Reuters on Thursday that the Trump campaign has still not paid his invoices.
something I'm curious about in this thread. You can get another dem or rep of your choice basically.
I mean anyone or anyone realistic? Biden doesn't want the job, Obama is constitutionally prohibited from keeping the job and Bernie wouldn't be very good at the job. Hillary is a senior politician with the ability to do the job. But I'm still on team where Obama's BLM paramilitaries create some sort of incident triggering the UN to invade America to disarm the patriots while Obama gets declared emergency dictator.
No Obama because of term limit. Must be legally able to serve.
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has run an unusually cheap campaign in part by not paying at least 10 top staffers, consultants and advisers, some of whom are no longer with the campaign, according to a review of federal campaign finance filings.
Those who have so far not been paid, the filings show, include recently departed campaign manager Paul Manafort, California state director Tim Clark, communications director Michael Caputo and a pair of senior aides who left the campaign in June to immediately go to work for a Trump Super PAC.
The New York real estate magnate and his allies have touted his campaign's frugality, saying it is evidence of his management skills. His campaign's spending has totaled $89.5 million so far, about a third of what Democratic rival Hillary Clinton's campaign has spent.
But not compensating top people in a presidential campaign is a departure from campaign finance norms. Many of the positions involved might typically come with six-figure annual paychecks in other campaigns.
"It's unprecedented for a presidential campaign to rely so heavily on volunteers for top management positions," said Paul Ryan, an election lawyer with the campaign finance reform advocacy group Campaign Legal Center.
The Trump campaign said the Reuters' reporting was "sloppy at best" but declined to elaborate.
One of the 10 who were unpaid, Michael Caputo, told a Buffalo radio station in June after he resigned from the campaign, that he was not volunteering. Rather, he said he just had not gotten paid. Caputo confirmed to Reuters on Thursday that the Trump campaign has still not paid his invoices.
There are a lot of problems with this, but mostly that when people at that level are working for free, they are getting paid elsewhere. But it is just as likely that Trump is adopting his classic plan of just not paying people and letting them sue him. Which has been his operating procedure through most of his career.
One can hear the exact same sentiments at any libertarian gathering in which Paultards have attempted to control the agenda. This back and forth, complete with overuse of -isms, is hardly thoughtful or unique.
Damn people in this thread genuinely are FOR hrc and not just anti-trump? That is surprising. I will be even more distrusting of the opinions floating around here.
also don't get the trump is more libertarian than johnson, at all. you can't just discount immigration or strong focus on police from libertarian principles. I think the argument that Hillary (rather, democrats in general) is more libertarian than Trump is more correct than the idea of Trump being more libertarian than johnson. . (trump more libertarian than hillary fiscally, hillary (democrats) more libertarian than trump socially). But really Johnson is significantly more libertarian than either.
On September 02 2016 23:58 biology]major wrote: Damn people in this thread genuinely are FOR hrc and not just anti-trump? That is surprising. I will be even more distrusting of the opinions floating around here.
Considering the views you hold, being able to not see that some people are perfect happy with Hillary is no suprise.
As for your poll, for Dems its either Hillary or Bernie and this thread already had more Hillary supporters then Bernie during the primary. (mostly once it became clear Bernie never actually had a plan for his idea's). I hardly consider the result surprising.
On September 02 2016 23:58 biology]major wrote: Damn people in this thread genuinely are FOR hrc and not just anti-trump? That is surprising. I will be even more distrusting of the opinions floating around here.
She's a known quantity. She's been around forever, has a good voting record on most issues that I care about and has enough political muscle to work in the current ultra-partisan environment. And she actually seems to want the job and while I don't know that things wouldn't be better if we reserved politics exclusively to the unwilling we can't exactly chain Biden to the Oval Office desk. I know what I'm likely to get with Hillary and I can live with that. She's no Obama but you said that I can't vote for Jade Helm.
On September 03 2016 00:05 Liquid`Drone wrote: also don't get the trump is more libertarian than johnson, at all. you can't just discount immigration or strong focus on police from libertarian principles. I think the argument that Hillary (rather, democrats in general) is more libertarian than Trump is more correct than the idea of Trump being more libertarian than johnson. . (trump more libertarian than hillary fiscally, hillary (democrats) more libertarian than trump socially). But really Johnson is significantly more libertarian than either.
There is absolutely no conflict between libertarianism and immigration, quite the opposite, national borders function as an artificial imposition on the free functioning of the labor market. There are plenty of very good arguments against the free movement of goods and people between nations but very few of them are libertarian.
As Kwark said, Clinton is known and I will take the devil I know. The issues I am concerned are part of what the Democrats are pushing for and she is pushing for those things as well. At worst she isn’t a great president and I can live with that. I’ve lived under “Not Great” presidents before. There are other people in the party I would have like to see run, but they didn't and I can't force them.
On September 03 2016 00:05 Liquid`Drone wrote: also don't get the trump is more libertarian than johnson, at all. you can't just discount immigration or strong focus on police from libertarian principles. I think the argument that Hillary (rather, democrats in general) is more libertarian than Trump is more correct than the idea of Trump being more libertarian than johnson. . (trump more libertarian than hillary fiscally, hillary (democrats) more libertarian than trump socially). But really Johnson is significantly more libertarian than either.
There is absolutely no conflict between libertarianism and immigration, quite the opposite, national borders function as an artificial imposition on the free functioning of the labor market. There are plenty of very good arguments against the free movement of goods and people between nations but very few of them are libertarian.
There's a rather large difference between nationalistic libertarianism a la Rand vs. anational libertarianism a la Nozick. Simply using the term "libertarian" glosses over that difference.
Oh maybe you guys misunderstood the Poll, it was anyone you wanted in the democratic party lol. Not just HRC or Bernie, I was just trying to see if there were people who actually LOVED hrc
As I said last night while watching that train wreck: That sounds awesome, bring me that. Will they travel through my neighborhood selling burritos like the ice cream truck, because I fucking want that in my life.
On September 03 2016 00:18 biology]major wrote: Oh maybe you guys misunderstood the Poll, it was anyone you wanted in the democratic party lol. Not just HRC or Bernie, I was just trying to see if there were people who actually LOVED hrc
That might be your fault since that isn’t what your poll said.
EPT
