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.
Well it'd be going back 30 years. Pence is all about religion, and Kaine is too right wing of most people.
Pence would never win, which is bad, since the Democratic establishment is screwed up right now, and they need to lose ro get their senses straight.
The Republican establishment isn't doing so hot either so~
But we're imo seeing positive change forward due to Trump. A smaller focus on religion, but still a large focus on patriotism and putting US interests above world interests, particularly economically.
This hopefully will kill off the Tea Party type stuff for next elections, and focus more on protectionism and less government involvement.
The willingness of posters to make sweeping political proclamations without engaging with local/state dynamics speaks volumes. In other words, you have a lot more reading to do if you don't think Democrats are losing lol.
On September 12 2016 03:03 FiWiFaKi wrote: But we're imo seeing positive change forward due to Trump. A smaller focus on religion, but still a large focus on patriotism and putting US interests above world interests, particularly economically.
It depends how the establishment takes things. Trump being an outsider means they also get to disavow him if they lose and go back to being the same shitty party they always were.
They could also rationally view what Trump's rise means for their voter base and appropriately adjust their position, but I'm not convinced the Republican elite are that introspective.
On September 12 2016 03:03 FiWiFaKi wrote: This hopefully will kill off the Tea Party type stuff for next elections, and focus more on protectionism and less government involvement.
Yeah I'm not really convinced of that at all. Whether Trump wins or loses, I don't see the Tea Partiers being gone in 2020.
Hell, I would gladly take 4 years of a Trump presidency if I knew that were going to be true, but I'm pretty skeptical of it.
On September 12 2016 03:04 farvacola wrote: The willingness of posters to make sweeping political proclamations without engaging with local/state dynamics speaks volumes. In other words, you have a lot more reading to do if you don't think Democrats are losing lol.
Nearly 16 years of gerrymandering makes its easy to hold the house. The GOP will be in deep shit if they don't control the housing during redistricting and the districts make sense again.
On September 12 2016 02:49 FiWiFaKi wrote: To me it's fairly mind-boggling that people genuinely want such a sickly person in power. Maybe it's just me who thinks it portrays US really poorly... The attack ads will be there, they will hurt, but this is certainly one of the more legitimate things to attacks out there. Soon you'll see someone feeding Hillary food (exaggeration)... Yeah, not leadership material, I wish she went another political route (or retired).
Anyway, next few weeks of the elections should be interesting, a really good poll came out for Hillary today at +8, if that has any accuracy, it's game over for Trump.
And another one that has her at +1. She's ahead, but not 'game over' ahead. If she won't appear in tip top shape at the debates, this will hurt her chances more than anything Trump can say.
On September 12 2016 02:49 FiWiFaKi wrote: To me it's fairly mind-boggling that people genuinely want such a sickly person in power. Maybe it's just me who thinks it portrays US really poorly... The attack ads will be there, they will hurt, but this is certainly one of the more legitimate things to attacks out there. Soon you'll see someone feeding Hillary food (exaggeration)... Yeah, not leadership material, I wish she went another political route (or retired).
Anyway, next few weeks of the elections should be interesting, a really good poll came out for Hillary today at +8, if that has any accuracy, it's game over for Trump.
And another one that has her at +1. She's ahead, but not 'game over' ahead. If she won't appear in tip top shape at the debates, this will hurt her chances more than anything Trump can say.
On September 12 2016 02:49 FiWiFaKi wrote: To me it's fairly mind-boggling that people genuinely want such a sickly person in power. Maybe it's just me who thinks it portrays US really poorly... The attack ads will be there, they will hurt, but this is certainly one of the more legitimate things to attacks out there. Soon you'll see someone feeding Hillary food (exaggeration)... Yeah, not leadership material, I wish she went another political route (or retired).
Anyway, next few weeks of the elections should be interesting, a really good poll came out for Hillary today at +8, if that has any accuracy, it's game over for Trump.
And another one that has her at +1. She's ahead, but not 'game over' ahead. If she won't appear in tip top shape at the debates, this will hurt her chances more than anything Trump can say.
I'm not sure if you've watched presidential debates before, but keep in mind they are very different in format than the Republican primary debates if you haven't. It's not a classic debate, it's more like here is a statement/question, you have x amount of time to give your thoughts on the subject.
So as much as I want to believe Trump will roll over her in debates, the format does not favor him. I'd probably go as far as to say that if it goes average for both candidates, she will come out better than before the debates.
On September 12 2016 03:04 farvacola wrote: The willingness of posters to make sweeping political proclamations without engaging with local/state dynamics speaks volumes. In other words, you have a lot more reading to do if you don't think Democrats are losing lol.
If it weren't for some of the recent scotus rulings overturning some ultra conservative state laws this would be a lot more obvious.
On September 12 2016 03:03 FiWiFaKi wrote: But we're imo seeing positive change forward due to Trump. A smaller focus on religion, but still a large focus on patriotism and putting US interests above world interests, particularly economically.
It depends how the establishment takes things. Trump being an outsider means they also get to disavow him if they lose and go back to being the same shitty party they always were.
They could also rationally view what Trump's rise means for their voter base and appropriately adjust their position, but I'm not convinced the Republican elite are that introspective.
On September 12 2016 03:03 FiWiFaKi wrote: This hopefully will kill off the Tea Party type stuff for next elections, and focus more on protectionism and less government involvement.
Yeah I'm not really convinced of that at all. Whether Trump wins or loses, I don't see the Tea Partiers being gone in 2020.
Hell, I would gladly take 4 years of a Trump presidency if I knew that were going to be true, but I'm pretty skeptical of it.
Yeah, you're probably right, a man can dream I suppose.
I'm in a limbo now, traditionally, I feel like I'm more democrat than republican, but I think they are being too idealistic nowadays, and having way too big of a focus on social issues and environment for that matter, without addressing the economy enough. Also like I mentioned before, I think you destroy any sense of culture if you allow immigration in ways that Germany, Sweden, etc... So those are my 3 biggest issues with the Democrats nowadays.
I don't know what I like about the Republicans, because geez, I've always thought they were a joke. Tea Party, religion over rationalism, calling global warming a hoax, wanting private schools... All things I disagree with really hard. But at the same time, they just feel like more down to earth people, people who's intentions are easier to see through, more practical to me, keeping a way of life that makes me feel like I wont be watched for everything (or the information wont be used in some really fancy ways). And most importantly, I think socially and economically, they think more long-term than short-term, minus the global warming thing that they're trying to hold off on as long a possible.
So yeah, some middle ground would be nice, from the positions that I've tried to extract from Trump, he seems like middleground to me, and hence I like his values on politics. The personal issue is a different matter, but that's the case with both candidates.
You can hear the metal sound in every clip, I've seen the video 10+ times but never heard it but its the only thing I notice now, weird.
Hillary actually next gen cyborg confirmed.
No, but that it weird. I slowed it down and it does come from inside her right pant leg. My first guess would be some sort of brace. Nothing especially wrong with that, unless you're one of the people who pushed/believed that "excellent health" stuff.
You can hear the metal sound in every clip, I've seen the video 10+ times but never heard it but its the only thing I notice now, weird.
And that Asian guy who's only job looks like is to walk in front of the camera if something goes wrong -__-, what a wonderful use of donations.
I'd imagine Hillary uses some kind of brace, for her legs and/or back, I don't think it's too surprising for a lot of older people, particularly when you need to move around so much. Some people even said that high-energy Trump has been more fatigued recently, having to wear a bulletproof vest, doing so many speeches, it'd drain me too, and I'm 22.
I remember several liberal posters on this forum comparing me and xDaunt to 9/11 truthers for saying Hillary's health was not perfect and that it was reasonable to doubt her physicians claims that she had "perfect health".
On September 12 2016 03:40 GoTuNk! wrote: I remember several liberal posters on this forum comparing me and xDaunt to 9/11 truthers for saying Hillary's health was not perfect and that it was reasonable to doubt her physicians claims that she had "perfect health".
I said from the beginning that it's pretty reasonable to assume she had health issues. Where you jumped off the deep end from reasonable assumption to conspiracy theory bullshit was assuming that her physical illness consistently affected her mental state.
If you think her being physically ill disqualifies her from the presidency, that's fine. But don't link an infowars piece that pretty clearly makes the irrational leap into her being addled/insane merely from signs of physical illness.
On September 12 2016 02:49 FiWiFaKi wrote: To me it's fairly mind-boggling that people genuinely want such a sickly person in power. Maybe it's just me who thinks it portrays US really poorly... The attack ads will be there, they will hurt, but this is certainly one of the more legitimate things to attacks out there. Soon you'll see someone feeding Hillary food (exaggeration)... Yeah, not leadership material, I wish she went another political route (or retired).
Anyway, next few weeks of the elections should be interesting, a really good poll came out for Hillary today at +8, if that has any accuracy, it's game over for Trump.
And another one that has her at +1. She's ahead, but not 'game over' ahead. If she won't appear in tip top shape at the debates, this will hurt her chances more than anything Trump can say.
I'm not sure if you've watched presidential debates before, but keep in mind they are very different in format than the Republican primary debates if you haven't. It's not a classic debate, it's more like here is a statement/question, you have x amount of time to give your thoughts on the subject.
So as much as I want to believe Trump will roll over her in debates, the format does not favor him. I'd probably go as far as to say that if it goes average for both candidates, she will come out better than before the debates.
I was talking about physical shape, that's what I said can hurt her more than anything Trump can say during the debates. I do agree that average debates favor Hillary.
But he will say a lot about her, don't believe for a second that he will stick to his policies on the given subjects. In the commander-in-chief forum he answered almost every single time by first firing at Obama/Hillary, questions that were specifically about his plans.
Trump isn't going to be running any 5Ks or playing a pick up game with a highschool basketball team. I have no doubt he has several health problems that we are not aware of.
EPT
