EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 5210
| 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. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
|
Yoav
United States1874 Posts
On September 27 2016 11:54 zlefin wrote: Some time later, after our discussion has calmed down, I'd like to try answering some questions as if I were in a debate; anyone else wanna do that maybe tomorrow? Sure. I did a lot of competitive debate in school (HS debate etc.) and I kinda do it instinctively. That little part of my brain that gets erections when people open themselves up to attack went crazy all debate long. | ||
|
plasmidghost
Belgium16168 Posts
| ||
|
Adreme
United States5574 Posts
On September 27 2016 12:04 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Oh please let him do this. Please tell me he is going to try and somehow paint Bills affairs as her fault or even anyone's business. I will absolutely love every second of it. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On September 27 2016 12:04 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: https://twitter.com/ellencarmichael/status/780603154492641280 it'd probably hurt him tbh. ill bet clinton has a very good response to it, plus it just looks really shitty. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On September 27 2016 12:06 Doodsmack wrote: Trump is not a serious candidate, and a vote for him is indefensible. hmm, I'm almost tempted to devil's advocate the few points on which there is some level of defensibility. but nah. | ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
On September 27 2016 12:07 plasmidghost wrote: I think now that Trump has a feel for the kind of opponent Clinton is, he'll be better prepared for the next one. I still give the edge to Clinton going in because she actually has policies, even if I disagree with them I dunno. He clearly spent like two days prepping for this one. I suspect he'll prepare for the next one the same way. It's not like he ever did well at the Republican debates in any capacity or showed the ability to prep. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On September 27 2016 12:06 Yoav wrote: Sure. I did a lot of competitive debate in school (HS debate etc.) and I kinda do it instinctively. That little part of my brain that gets erections when people open themselves up to attack went crazy all debate long. ok, but I'm gonna focus on actual sound policy and planning and reality, rather than attacks and counterpunches. | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
| ||
|
CorsairHero
Canada9491 Posts
cnn says no | ||
Nakajin
Canada8989 Posts
On September 27 2016 12:06 Doodsmack wrote: Trump is not a serious candidate, and a vote for him is indefensible. At least 40% of your country voters are going to vote for him, there is certainly defence to vote for him. You have to cross ideological bridge to do so, but of course there is some arguments to vote for him if he fit your value more. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On September 27 2016 12:08 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Chris Christie just said fact checkers have an agenda.... Well it's a valid accusation. I've seen some really shitty and biased things from factcheck.org and much, much more from Politifact. Doesn't mean Trump doesn't lie more though. | ||
|
Blisse
Canada3710 Posts
On September 27 2016 11:57 radscorpion9 wrote: I feel like Clinton seemed more knowledgeable and had specific policies in mind. On one hand I empathize with Trump's statement that she has been in power for so long and what has really changed, it seems like politicians talk about all these things and yet the country still has these enormous problems. But on the other hand, she was a senator for most of her life and can't single handedly alter the course of government, and even when she was in power there's only so much you can do when you are in a major recession. So you have to be fair. I'm just not convinced Trump really has a better alternative or a magic answer; just because he's an outsider doesn't mean he can solve all these things. As far as I can see Clinton has a plan to make things better, Trump has vague appeals to better trade deals. The economists think she has a better plan on the economy, that kind of influence would significantly affect my vote towards Clinton. And most of all I think she clearly cares about climate change which is an extremely important problem. I actually think Donald Trump might be better on foreign policy, in the sense that I think he had better intuitions on Iraq and to be honest I didn't find Hillary's defense of why they left Iraq very convincing (I'm pretty sure there were major protestations by George Bush and the military at the time). I do think Hillary did a great thing with Iran and that that country is being unfairly demonized for a statement their leaders never even said. On the whole she just seems to have a clear plan, that is vetted by experts. We are not in wartime, so its not too relevant that Donald Trump has the support of so many generals. I do empathize with Trump's claim. It is pretty annoying being a citizen and being disgruntled with how politicians don't seem to do anything. But I intuitively realize that it's not always that simple and it doesn't mean an outsider can do better. A lot of people who will grasp onto this kind of statement not realize what they are and what they're used for, and that's what makes Trump so dangerous and amazing to watch. It's like watching an argument on the Internet. Hillary will say one thing and Trump will discredit her with a strawman by saying shit like "well you haven't done anything in 30 years in office". And he'll continue with these vague soundly possibly true likely false logical fallacies. There's a huge population of people who don't understand the logical fallacy and enjoy his antics. You can empathize with the claim, but you need to take one more step to realize that it's a logical fallacy and that you're not really saying anything. Hillary gives him so much ammo for those though, but he also manages to spin up new ones. I can't agree with you saying that Trump has more intuition about it. He keeps flip-flopping between we should have and we shouldn't have invaded, and now he says that we should've stayed in when he previously said we should have left (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/08/trump-isis-obama-clinton-iraq-withdraw-2006-interview). Like, obviously in hindsight we know that ISIS formed due to the vacuum of the US leaving, but c'mon you have to accept hindsight bias. I don't think he ever knows what he's talking about because he never expands beyond the first point, he never says concrete stuff, and when his first point is done he changes the topic to strawman or discredit Hillary. It was crazy watching this. | ||
|
oBlade
United States5570 Posts
On September 27 2016 12:08 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Chris Christie just said fact checkers have an agenda.... They do, remember this gem you posted? https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/778375644321288192/ | ||
|
plasmidghost
Belgium16168 Posts
| ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
On September 27 2016 12:12 plasmidghost wrote: One thing that seriously bothers me about Clinton is her support of banning weapons sales to people on a terror watch list. It sounds good, but is pretty awful. While I agree on gun restrictions in some ways, you should not and cannot deprive an American citizen of their constitutional rights without due process, especially since the terror watch list has little to no transparency I think it's pretty disgusting Trump supports it too tbh. No-fly bans are not a reasonable ban unless the process becomes transparent. | ||
|
acker
United States2958 Posts
Says it all, really. | ||
| ||
