|
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 September 15 2016 02:57 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2016 02:53 farvacola wrote: both of which are not liberal posters lol. They are closer to center than most other people in this thread. If we need to put people into categories. Seriously? Igne and Legallord don't like Hillary because she isn't far enough left for them. The idea that they are centrists is utterly retarded.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On September 15 2016 02:56 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2016 02:55 LegalLord wrote:On September 15 2016 02:50 zlefin wrote:On September 15 2016 02:48 LegalLord wrote: People who say they reluctantly support Hillary, then go right on ahead and shill for her, don't really have much credibility. Some self-awareness would go a long way in making a valid argument in favor of Hillary that isn't just "but trump so nothing else matters." which people are that? It's a common problem that we use here to vent our frustrations; so we're complaining about people who aren't here, and there's a lot of people that could be. I won't name names - I don't call people out unless they really, really deserve it - but let's just say that if you are a Hillary supporter who starts with "I don't like Hillary but..." and then go on to use her talking points as if they are reality, hyperbolically deny her most apparent flaws in their entirety (rather than just the hyperbole), and make similar hyperbolic attacks on Trump that are well beyond his real (severe and notable) weaknesses... then I'm talking about you. so, you're referring to certain people who are in the thread, who you prefer not to name? Among them are the active to semi-active posters in this thread, yes. I only call out people who are particularly shitty though, which requires more than just garden variety shilling to qualify.
|
On September 15 2016 02:56 farvacola wrote: It doesn't matter what you call them because you don't know what you're talking about, you just like to try and curry favor with posters by carving them out from the general class of "everyone who disagrees with xDaunt is an idiot/shill/ignoramus."
A number of posters have identified pro-Hillary positions that are very much aware of Hillary's shortcomings, and no, that list doesn't include igne nor LL. I'll give you this about the bolded: my earlier post was a little uncharitable. There are a few pro-Hillary posters who are honest about her shortcomings. I just tend to forget about them given their relatively small number and the cacophonous hollering of all of the other posters who undeniably fall within LegalLord's description.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On September 15 2016 02:57 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2016 02:53 farvacola wrote: both of which are not liberal posters lol. They are closer to center than most other people in this thread. If we need to put people into categories. I'm a mix of somewhat far left and somewhat far right on a number of issues that people care about, and moderate on others. I guess on average I qualify as slightly left-of-center but I can't say that that's completely accurate either.
|
The center and the fringe can look almost the same, depending on the issue, and that's why the whole "left/right" dichotomy falls apart when viewed with any kind of meaningful granularity.
|
On September 15 2016 03:01 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2016 02:56 zlefin wrote:On September 15 2016 02:55 LegalLord wrote:On September 15 2016 02:50 zlefin wrote:On September 15 2016 02:48 LegalLord wrote: People who say they reluctantly support Hillary, then go right on ahead and shill for her, don't really have much credibility. Some self-awareness would go a long way in making a valid argument in favor of Hillary that isn't just "but trump so nothing else matters." which people are that? It's a common problem that we use here to vent our frustrations; so we're complaining about people who aren't here, and there's a lot of people that could be. I won't name names - I don't call people out unless they really, really deserve it - but let's just say that if you are a Hillary supporter who starts with "I don't like Hillary but..." and then go on to use her talking points as if they are reality, hyperbolically deny her most apparent flaws in their entirety (rather than just the hyperbole), and make similar hyperbolic attacks on Trump that are well beyond his real (severe and notable) weaknesses... then I'm talking about you. so, you're referring to certain people who are in the thread, who you prefer not to name? Among them are the active to semi-active posters in this thread, yes. I only call out people who are particularly shitty though, which requires more than just garden variety shilling to qualify. ok; I ask because the claim is made that I might disagree with, but is sufficiently nebulous that I can't be sure of that without more detail. i.e. it's hard to rebut a claim that's too nebulous. Though I suspect we overuse the term shilling. not just in the strict it means doing ti for money way; but that even allowing for other kinds of things to qualify as shilling, we use it more often than is justified.
|
On September 15 2016 03:04 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2016 02:57 Plansix wrote:On September 15 2016 02:53 farvacola wrote: both of which are not liberal posters lol. They are closer to center than most other people in this thread. If we need to put people into categories. I'm a mix of somewhat far left and somewhat far right on a number of issues that people care about, and moderate on others. I guess on average I qualify as slightly left-of-center but I can't say that that's completely accurate either. Wait, wait. What policies do you consider yourself being conservative/right on? You've been left on pretty much everything and reject Pence as an acceptable president out of hand.
EDIT: And just to be clear, the post below is where I'm confused:
On September 14 2016 04:32 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2016 02:51 Mohdoo wrote:On September 14 2016 02:43 LegalLord wrote:On September 14 2016 02:42 Plansix wrote:On September 14 2016 02:41 LegalLord wrote: Hillary supporters (rather than reluctant voters) are not really any better. Well at least you found a way to feel superior to both of them. It's not hard, it just requires a moderate amount of ability to acknowledge the flaws of each candidate. As opposed to the denial is I highlighted a few pages back of course (Hillary flaws are fake -> Not actually fake -> "but trump so w/e). As long as Trump is barrrrrrrrrrrrrrrely worse than Clinton, I will not hesitate for a moment to vote for Clinton. People focus way too much on having a good candidate. Maybe sometimes you don't get a good candidate. Oh fucking well. Not a whole lot I/we can do about it right now, so all that's left is a pros and cons list of what we have. I'm not in the habit of patting myself on the back for voting 3rd party, so I get what I get. I still firmly believe that a Trump presidency would be bad in ways we don't even think about because he is so grossly unqualified. Trump is no more qualified to be president than I am. That's terrifying. So I vote Clinton because I think she'll keep the lights on. I fully appreciate all the bad parts about her, but I only have 2 choices. So here's my political calculus for making voting decisions. First consideration is obviously policy, as in whose platform is more in line with the one I support? On that end, it's split along specific issues - I like Trump's "America first" approach to trade, FP, and to a much milder extent immigration. On social issues, Hillary is nominally socially progressive rather than nominally ass-backwards on most social issues; Trump's willingness to call out the shittiness of the "regressive left" is absolutely a good thing. On domestic economic/public policy, Hillary's policy suggestions are flawed, but more sane, because the Republican platform for those issues is a blend of corporate shilling and denial. Hillary's has a fair bit of corporate shilling, but notably less. Hillary wins on this one. .... And ultimately, this final reason - the anti-Republican vote - is why I think I'll end up voting for Hillary. Not lesser of two evils, not because pro-Hillary denialism has any validity, but because pushing for the reform (or replacement) of the Republican Party is the most effective way to lead to a better public policy in the future. It's an anti-Republican vote, pure and simple.
|
On September 15 2016 03:06 farvacola wrote: The center and the fringe can look almost the same, depending on the issue, and that's why the whole "left/right" dichotomy falls apart when viewed with any kind of meaningful granularity. Which is why the entire concept of slotting someone into those groups is so just dumb. Everyone someone say “The leftist” it translates to “left of them”.
|
On September 15 2016 02:41 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2016 02:17 hunts wrote:On September 15 2016 02:13 Danglars wrote: Between the Clinton family foundation, the emails, and the Clinton health stories, today's voters are getting a very clear picture of the way Hillary Clinton & husband operate and what the next four years could look like. The most transparent election, ever, I swear. No joke, the clear pattern from both of them tells you exactly what you're getting. so you name scandals that were created by the republican media machine and republican lawmakers, that were shot down and proven untrue, and say "see! she's untrustworthy!" This is the equivalent or trump taking a gun, shooting himself in the foot, and going "look what Clinton made me do!" I freely admit you and others are dragging out the "vast right-wing conspiracy" like Bill Clinton was still getting blowjobs in the White House. I mean the health scandal is not even old, but it's another "shot down and proven untrue" nonscandal scandal in your eyes. And you credit the GOP with creating them? Clinton is the author and sustainer of her own missteps and lies. You're doing the equivalent of saying Trump's position on every issue has been the same from day one, and the Dems have created the impression of a changing policy plan from whole cloth. It's breathtaking and rivals the biggest Reddit/The_Donald Trump supporter. The "health scandal" is a massive joke of politics.
It started as some desperate reaching for any reason to disqualify the opposition with unsubstantiated claims of mental or physical unwellness.
Then she turned out to be sick, but not in any way that actually hurts her candidacy, and people have to act like she's a Typhoid Mary, or that going to work and saying you're fine when you're not is anything more than going to work when you're sick.
There are plenty of legitimate reasons to not like Hillary Clinton. The pneumonia thing is just a molehill...she could even be pushed around by her staff in a wheelchair for all that matters; being sick or injured or physically incapable of walking is completely unrelated to presidential candidacy.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On September 15 2016 03:08 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2016 03:04 LegalLord wrote:On September 15 2016 02:57 Plansix wrote:On September 15 2016 02:53 farvacola wrote: both of which are not liberal posters lol. They are closer to center than most other people in this thread. If we need to put people into categories. I'm a mix of somewhat far left and somewhat far right on a number of issues that people care about, and moderate on others. I guess on average I qualify as slightly left-of-center but I can't say that that's completely accurate either. Wait, wait. What policies do you consider yourself being conservative/right on? You've been left on pretty much everything and reject Pence as an acceptable president out of hand. Some forms of immigration, gun rights, Israel, some poorly conceived socialist programs (punitive taxation etc.), space and military funding, Brexit and issues of sovereignty, some of the cultural norms associated with "religious values" in the US. The issue with Pence is that the Republican Party itself is terrible and does not represent a party that genuinely seeks to improve things for people, so I can't support its representatives at all at present.
|
President Obama has announced that the U.S. is ready to lift economic sanctions against Myanmar in light of political reforms in the Southeast Asian nation.
It's going to happen "soon," Obama said, but he did not indicate a specific timeline during a joint news conference Wednesday at the White House with Myanmar's de facto leader, Aung San Suu Kyi.
Lifting sanctions "is the right thing to do in order to ensure that the people of Burma see the rewards from a new way of doing business, and a new government," Obama said. (The country is also known as Burma.)
As NPR's Michele Kelemen explained, the sanctions were "originally put in place to isolate Myanmar's former military junta" — and the military "still controls much of the economy and retains great political power."
The two leaders said in a joint statement that the U.S. will also give preferential trade status to Myanmar "in light of progress on a number of fronts, including strengthening protections for internationally recognized worker rights."
These changes are designed to create incentives for U.S. businesses and non-profits to invest in the country, Obama said.
Source
|
On September 15 2016 03:12 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2016 02:41 Danglars wrote:On September 15 2016 02:17 hunts wrote:On September 15 2016 02:13 Danglars wrote: Between the Clinton family foundation, the emails, and the Clinton health stories, today's voters are getting a very clear picture of the way Hillary Clinton & husband operate and what the next four years could look like. The most transparent election, ever, I swear. No joke, the clear pattern from both of them tells you exactly what you're getting. so you name scandals that were created by the republican media machine and republican lawmakers, that were shot down and proven untrue, and say "see! she's untrustworthy!" This is the equivalent or trump taking a gun, shooting himself in the foot, and going "look what Clinton made me do!" I freely admit you and others are dragging out the "vast right-wing conspiracy" like Bill Clinton was still getting blowjobs in the White House. I mean the health scandal is not even old, but it's another "shot down and proven untrue" nonscandal scandal in your eyes. And you credit the GOP with creating them? Clinton is the author and sustainer of her own missteps and lies. You're doing the equivalent of saying Trump's position on every issue has been the same from day one, and the Dems have created the impression of a changing policy plan from whole cloth. It's breathtaking and rivals the biggest Reddit/The_Donald Trump supporter. The "health scandal" is a massive joke of politics. It started as some desperate reaching for any reason to disqualify the opposition with unsubstantiated claims of mental or physical unwellness. Then she turned out to be sick, but not in any way that actually hurts her candidacy, and people have to act like she's a Typhoid Mary, or that going to work and saying you're fine when you're not is anything more than going to work when you're sick. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to not like Hillary Clinton. The pneumonia thing is just a molehill...she could even be pushed around by her staff in a wheelchair for all that matters; being sick or injured or physically incapable of walking is completely unrelated to presidential candidacy. It shouldn't have been a scandal but for the fact that her health was defended during the time she was sick. Her pattern of secrecy and casting criticism as kookery made the mountain out of a molehill. She had every opportunity to claim pneumonia at the outset and ho hum people get sick and life goes on. Now that she and her campaign lied to everybody, we wonder if she's telling the truth now.
"It started as some desperate reaching" + "She turned out to be sick." How about "She started out trying to hide it, reactively doubled down to perpetuate the fiction, then fessed up when there could be no doubt of it." I give you: The Hilary Campaign and the search for a cure to an unhealthy penchant for privacy. + Show Spoiler [Plot Spoiler] +Age generally makes you less likely to change your patterns of behavior.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On September 15 2016 03:08 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2016 03:04 LegalLord wrote:On September 15 2016 02:57 Plansix wrote:On September 15 2016 02:53 farvacola wrote: both of which are not liberal posters lol. They are closer to center than most other people in this thread. If we need to put people into categories. I'm a mix of somewhat far left and somewhat far right on a number of issues that people care about, and moderate on others. I guess on average I qualify as slightly left-of-center but I can't say that that's completely accurate either. Wait, wait. What policies do you consider yourself being conservative/right on? You've been left on pretty much everything and reject Pence as an acceptable president out of hand. EDIT: And just to be clear, the post below is where I'm confused: Show nested quote +On September 14 2016 04:32 LegalLord wrote:On September 14 2016 02:51 Mohdoo wrote:On September 14 2016 02:43 LegalLord wrote:On September 14 2016 02:42 Plansix wrote:On September 14 2016 02:41 LegalLord wrote: Hillary supporters (rather than reluctant voters) are not really any better. Well at least you found a way to feel superior to both of them. It's not hard, it just requires a moderate amount of ability to acknowledge the flaws of each candidate. As opposed to the denial is I highlighted a few pages back of course (Hillary flaws are fake -> Not actually fake -> "but trump so w/e). As long as Trump is barrrrrrrrrrrrrrrely worse than Clinton, I will not hesitate for a moment to vote for Clinton. People focus way too much on having a good candidate. Maybe sometimes you don't get a good candidate. Oh fucking well. Not a whole lot I/we can do about it right now, so all that's left is a pros and cons list of what we have. I'm not in the habit of patting myself on the back for voting 3rd party, so I get what I get. I still firmly believe that a Trump presidency would be bad in ways we don't even think about because he is so grossly unqualified. Trump is no more qualified to be president than I am. That's terrifying. So I vote Clinton because I think she'll keep the lights on. I fully appreciate all the bad parts about her, but I only have 2 choices. So here's my political calculus for making voting decisions. First consideration is obviously policy, as in whose platform is more in line with the one I support? On that end, it's split along specific issues - I like Trump's "America first" approach to trade, FP, and to a much milder extent immigration. On social issues, Hillary is nominally socially progressive rather than nominally ass-backwards on most social issues; Trump's willingness to call out the shittiness of the "regressive left" is absolutely a good thing. On domestic economic/public policy, Hillary's policy suggestions are flawed, but more sane, because the Republican platform for those issues is a blend of corporate shilling and denial. Hillary's has a fair bit of corporate shilling, but notably less. Hillary wins on this one. .... And ultimately, this final reason - the anti-Republican vote - is why I think I'll end up voting for Hillary. Not lesser of two evils, not because pro-Hillary denialism has any validity, but because pushing for the reform (or replacement) of the Republican Party is the most effective way to lead to a better public policy in the future. It's an anti-Republican vote, pure and simple. My last point that you quoted is perhaps worth expanding on.
The country - and most of the at least somewhat progressive world - has decided that we shouldn't be looking to create a Christian fundamentalist paradise. Women's rights, minority rights, and gay rights are a horrible hill to die on. But at the same time, conservative values are important and liberal progressives often have a dangerous lack of self-awareness on the long term consequences of their more stupid programs. By focusing on issues that are batshit insane, the Republican Party undermines more genuine conservative concerns (some of which are religiously motivated yet valid) by focusing on fundamentalism plus corporate shilling. We need a better Republican Party and that is the most pressing priority right now.
|
It was the battleground state that swung it for George W Bush in 2004 and, once again, Ohio looks to be taking centre stage in a tightening presidential race between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton.
As both campaigns wait to assess the impact of a bumpy weekend for Democrats, a shock new poll from the Buckeye state released on Wednesday places Trump five percentage points ahead, helping him lead in a rolling average there for the first time.
The Bloomberg survey was conducted between Friday and Monday, a period in which the Clinton campaign admitted mishandling news of her pneumonia diagnosis and the candidate made controversial comments, labeling half of Trump’s supporters “a basket of deplorables”.
Trump was due to appear at a rally in Canton, Ohio, on Wednesday evening, while Clinton remained at her home in New York on doctor’s advice to rest before her scheduled return to the campaign trail in North Carolina on Thursday.
Trump’s own disclosure record remained confused ahead of an expected television discussion on the Dr Oz Show of his recent physical examination.
And his alleged unfitness for office was underlined by leaked emails from former Republican defense secretary Colin Powell, who called his party’s nominee “a national disgrace” and an “international pariah”.
Ohio is a must-win state for Trump, but not for Clinton, and the latest poll may well just prove to be an outlier – only a week earlier another poll had Clinton ahead in Ohio by seven points. Yet it also coincided with signs of a more competitive race nationally, and in other key battleground states.
A new national poll, conducted by Ipsos for Reuters, showed a dead heat between Clinton and Trump, down from a two-point lead for the Democrat in its past few surveys. Likely voters asked to choose between the two frontrunners or Libertarian Gary Johnson and Green Jill Stein placed Trump and Clinton neck-and-neck at 39% each. His national lead was four points among independents.
Source
|
On September 14 2016 09:45 Saryph wrote:How often do these assaults happen? I feel like I read about a protester getting punched in the face inside a rally as well, maybe even the same rally? Show nested quote +69-year old woman punched in face outside rally by Trump supporterWLOS — ASHEVILLE, N.C. -- Police say they arrested five people at Trump's night rally Monday in Asheville, and as of publishing have warrants out for two more people. Police plan to arrest Richard Campbell of Edisto Island, South Carolina for assault on a female. That female is 69-year-old Shirley Teter. She has protested her whole life, she said. Now she adds Donald Trump's campaign to the list of things she's protested against. "Why did I get involved yesterday, at my age? Because I ran into another situation that was sickening my heart," she said Tuesday afternoon, outside Cafe 64 in downtown Asheville. Protesters met Trump supporters before the rally, and Teter was having fun. "Whenever groups of them would start chanting 'Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump!' I would chant back, 'Dump, dump, dump, dump.' It was kind of comical," Teter said. After the rally, Teeter experienced something she had never seen in all of her protests. Peace teetered over into something else. "I said you better learn to speak Russian, and I said the first two words are going to be, ha ha. He stopped in his tracks, and he turned around and just cold-cocked me," Teter said. She was punched in the face. She says she fell on her oxygen tank and has sore ribs, a sore jaw, and cut her elbow. She later went to the hospital and is thankful she did not break any bones. Police said they didn't make an arrest because officers didn't witness the punch. Teter thanked the police for giving her a ride home. She said they were wonderful. Many people expressed concerns for Teter on social media, and to those folks she says, "Thank you." After the interview, Teeter called News 13. She wanted to add one more thing, a question. She asks if people find a Trump supporter punching her in the face deplorable.
Didn't this all sound a little too convenient?
+ Show Spoiler +FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Mr. Richard Campbell is 73 year old retired electrical engineer who has lived his entire life in South Carolina. He has three daughters and seven grandchildren. Mr. Campbell suffers from cataracts and is of poor vision. He is also on various medications including heart medication. Mr. and Mrs. Campbell traveled to Asheville, NC for the weekend of September 10, 2016 to celebrate their 50th wedding anniversary The Campbells decided to extend their vacation in Asheville when they learned that Donald Trump was coming to the civic center. The couple attended the Trump rally peacefully. As they exited the rally, approximately 1,000 protesters were allowed to surround the exits of the Civic Center. Many of these protestors hurled profanities and other insults at the Rally attendees as they left. Mr. Campbell and his wife observed what they believed to be saliva on their clothing as they passed through the crowd, presumably from protestors. Mr. Campbell was led by the left hand by his wife as they exited the building and made their way single file through the crowd. As they left, Ms. Shirley Teeter approached Mr. Campbell from behind and grabbed him on the left shoulder. Mr. Campbell reflexively moved his arm to release himself from Ms. Teeter’s grip. Ms. Teeter then fell backwards onto the ground. Ms. Teeter has given several media interviews stating that she was “punched in the face”, “sucker punched” and “punched in the jaw”. She claims she suffered severe injuries requiring treatment at Mission Hospital. She also claimed that she had engaged Mr. Campbell in a discussion about living in Russia and he “sucker punched me”. (WLOS interview of 9/13/2016). She has also repeatedly denied ever touching Mr. Campbell. Fortunately, witnesses have come forward which have disputed Ms. Teeter’s account and have stated that she was in fact the aggressor by first grabbing Mr. Campbell. Video has also surfaced which shows Mr. Campbell walking through the crowd led by his wife by the hand. He stumbles at one point due to his poor vision. The video shows Ms. Teeter approaching Mr. Campbell from behind and reaching up her arm to grab his left shoulder from behind. The video clearly shows that Ms. Teeter did not engage Mr. Campbell in any conversation prior to the incident despite her claims. This video can be found at: https://www.facebook.com/bill.fiesser/videos/10208124579330852/Ms. Teeter, in spite of her claim of injuries, was later photographed at the rally smiling with other protestors. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=654834511342026&set=p.654834511342026&type=3&theater She does appear to have a bandage to her left elbow where she fell. Multiple video and photographic evidence of Ms. Teeter’s face the following day show no bruising or other trauma to Ms. Teeter despite her claim that she was “punched in the jaw”. Photographs of Mr. Campbell’s hands also so no sign of trauma. As Mr. Campbell is on blood thinner, he bruises easily and with little pressure applied. In any event, Mr. Campbell looks forward to having this case heard in court. He hopes that more video and witnesses will come forward. If any wishes to provide this additional evidence, they can contact his attorney, Mr. Jack Stewart at (828) 253-5673. http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/09/14/trump-supporter-asheville-exclusive-attorney-accused-made-whole-thing/
|
On September 15 2016 03:18 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2016 03:08 xDaunt wrote:On September 15 2016 03:04 LegalLord wrote:On September 15 2016 02:57 Plansix wrote:On September 15 2016 02:53 farvacola wrote: both of which are not liberal posters lol. They are closer to center than most other people in this thread. If we need to put people into categories. I'm a mix of somewhat far left and somewhat far right on a number of issues that people care about, and moderate on others. I guess on average I qualify as slightly left-of-center but I can't say that that's completely accurate either. Wait, wait. What policies do you consider yourself being conservative/right on? You've been left on pretty much everything and reject Pence as an acceptable president out of hand. Some forms of immigration, gun rights, Israel, some poorly conceived socialist programs (punitive taxation etc.), space and military funding, Brexit and issues of sovereignty, some of the cultural norms associated with "religious values" in the US. The issue with Pence is that the Republican Party itself is terrible and does not represent a party that genuinely seeks to improve things for people, so I can't support its representatives at all at present.
Ok, so looking at this in combination with your earlier post about why you're likely to support Hillary, I'd classify you as a "nationalist liberal." And I find it interesting that many of the areas where you agree with Trump are where he's to the left of Hillary.
EDIT: I missed this:
On September 15 2016 03:48 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2016 03:08 xDaunt wrote:On September 15 2016 03:04 LegalLord wrote:On September 15 2016 02:57 Plansix wrote:On September 15 2016 02:53 farvacola wrote: both of which are not liberal posters lol. They are closer to center than most other people in this thread. If we need to put people into categories. I'm a mix of somewhat far left and somewhat far right on a number of issues that people care about, and moderate on others. I guess on average I qualify as slightly left-of-center but I can't say that that's completely accurate either. Wait, wait. What policies do you consider yourself being conservative/right on? You've been left on pretty much everything and reject Pence as an acceptable president out of hand. EDIT: And just to be clear, the post below is where I'm confused: On September 14 2016 04:32 LegalLord wrote:On September 14 2016 02:51 Mohdoo wrote:On September 14 2016 02:43 LegalLord wrote:On September 14 2016 02:42 Plansix wrote:On September 14 2016 02:41 LegalLord wrote: Hillary supporters (rather than reluctant voters) are not really any better. Well at least you found a way to feel superior to both of them. It's not hard, it just requires a moderate amount of ability to acknowledge the flaws of each candidate. As opposed to the denial is I highlighted a few pages back of course (Hillary flaws are fake -> Not actually fake -> "but trump so w/e). As long as Trump is barrrrrrrrrrrrrrrely worse than Clinton, I will not hesitate for a moment to vote for Clinton. People focus way too much on having a good candidate. Maybe sometimes you don't get a good candidate. Oh fucking well. Not a whole lot I/we can do about it right now, so all that's left is a pros and cons list of what we have. I'm not in the habit of patting myself on the back for voting 3rd party, so I get what I get. I still firmly believe that a Trump presidency would be bad in ways we don't even think about because he is so grossly unqualified. Trump is no more qualified to be president than I am. That's terrifying. So I vote Clinton because I think she'll keep the lights on. I fully appreciate all the bad parts about her, but I only have 2 choices. So here's my political calculus for making voting decisions. First consideration is obviously policy, as in whose platform is more in line with the one I support? On that end, it's split along specific issues - I like Trump's "America first" approach to trade, FP, and to a much milder extent immigration. On social issues, Hillary is nominally socially progressive rather than nominally ass-backwards on most social issues; Trump's willingness to call out the shittiness of the "regressive left" is absolutely a good thing. On domestic economic/public policy, Hillary's policy suggestions are flawed, but more sane, because the Republican platform for those issues is a blend of corporate shilling and denial. Hillary's has a fair bit of corporate shilling, but notably less. Hillary wins on this one. .... And ultimately, this final reason - the anti-Republican vote - is why I think I'll end up voting for Hillary. Not lesser of two evils, not because pro-Hillary denialism has any validity, but because pushing for the reform (or replacement) of the Republican Party is the most effective way to lead to a better public policy in the future. It's an anti-Republican vote, pure and simple. My last point that you quoted is perhaps worth expanding on. The country - and most of the at least somewhat progressive world - has decided that we shouldn't be looking to create a Christian fundamentalist paradise. Women's rights, minority rights, and gay rights are a horrible hill to die on. But at the same time, conservative values are important and liberal progressives often have a dangerous lack of self-awareness on the long term consequences of their more stupid programs. By focusing on issues that are batshit insane, the Republican Party undermines more genuine conservative concerns (some of which are religiously motivated yet valid) by focusing on fundamentalism plus corporate shilling. We need a better Republican Party and that is the most pressing priority right now.
Like what?
|
The Atlantic Coast Conference is following the NCAA's lead in announcing Wednesday that it has decided to relocate its neutral-site championship events from North Carolina because of the state's recently enacted legislation regarding gender and bathrooms.
The law, which among other things bans transgender people from using the bathroom corresponding with their gender identity, was a leading factor in the NCAA's decision Monday to pull seven championship events from the state.
In a statement, the ACC Council of Presidents said it "reaffirmed our collective commitment to uphold the values of equality, diversity, inclusion and non-discrimination."
"Every one of our 15 universities is strongly committed to these values and therefore, we will continue to host ACC Championships at campus sites," the council said in a statement, consistent with the NCAA's announcement earlier in the week. "We believe North Carolina House Bill 2 is inconsistent with these values, and as a result, we will relocate all neutral site championships for the 2016-17 academic year. All locations will be announced in the future from the conference office.”
Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton on Tuesday praised the NCAA as "right" to relocate tournament games from the state as long as HB2 was in effect.
The relocated events include women's soccer, men's and women's swimming and diving, women's basketball, men's and women's tennis, men's and women's golf, baseball and the football conference championship previously scheduled for Dec. 3 at Bank of America Stadium in Charlotte.
Clemson University President James P. Clements, who also chairs the conference council, acknowledged in a statement that the decision "was not an easy one but it is consistent with the shared values of inclusion and non-discrimination at all of our institutions.”
Source
|
On September 15 2016 03:45 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 15 2016 03:12 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 15 2016 02:41 Danglars wrote:On September 15 2016 02:17 hunts wrote:On September 15 2016 02:13 Danglars wrote: Between the Clinton family foundation, the emails, and the Clinton health stories, today's voters are getting a very clear picture of the way Hillary Clinton & husband operate and what the next four years could look like. The most transparent election, ever, I swear. No joke, the clear pattern from both of them tells you exactly what you're getting. so you name scandals that were created by the republican media machine and republican lawmakers, that were shot down and proven untrue, and say "see! she's untrustworthy!" This is the equivalent or trump taking a gun, shooting himself in the foot, and going "look what Clinton made me do!" I freely admit you and others are dragging out the "vast right-wing conspiracy" like Bill Clinton was still getting blowjobs in the White House. I mean the health scandal is not even old, but it's another "shot down and proven untrue" nonscandal scandal in your eyes. And you credit the GOP with creating them? Clinton is the author and sustainer of her own missteps and lies. You're doing the equivalent of saying Trump's position on every issue has been the same from day one, and the Dems have created the impression of a changing policy plan from whole cloth. It's breathtaking and rivals the biggest Reddit/The_Donald Trump supporter. The "health scandal" is a massive joke of politics. It started as some desperate reaching for any reason to disqualify the opposition with unsubstantiated claims of mental or physical unwellness. Then she turned out to be sick, but not in any way that actually hurts her candidacy, and people have to act like she's a Typhoid Mary, or that going to work and saying you're fine when you're not is anything more than going to work when you're sick. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to not like Hillary Clinton. The pneumonia thing is just a molehill...she could even be pushed around by her staff in a wheelchair for all that matters; being sick or injured or physically incapable of walking is completely unrelated to presidential candidacy. It shouldn't have been a scandal but for the fact that her health was defended during the time she was sick. Her pattern of secrecy and casting criticism as kookery made the mountain out of a molehill. She had every opportunity to claim pneumonia at the outset and ho hum people get sick and life goes on. Now that she and her campaign lied to everybody, we wonder if she's telling the truth now. "It started as some desperate reaching" + "She turned out to be sick." How about "She started out trying to hide it, reactively doubled down to perpetuate the fiction, then fessed up when there could be no doubt of it." I give you: The Hilary Campaign and the search for a cure to an unhealthy penchant for privacy.+ Show Spoiler [Plot Spoiler] +Age generally makes you less likely to change your patterns of behavior. The longer elections go on, or the more one-sided it is, the more people will try to find some magical button to automatically get rid of their opposition.
And most of the time that ends up being harping on things that anyone less invested in discrediting the opposition doesn't care about.
|
|
Not so much trust but nobody watches the Mass Media anymore expect for older people in their 60's...
|
|
|
|