US Politics Mega-thread - Page 7425

On May 02 2017 00:45 On_Slaught wrote:
Trump is not a very smart man. This is shown on an almost daily basis.

I thought listening to him was bad; reading the text of his interviews is like trying to decipher the speech of an 8th grader with English as their 3rd language.

On May 02 2017 00:51 Mohdoo wrote:
I don't understand this budget. Is this supposed to be like when Obama tried to establish good will?

On May 02 2017 00:51 Mohdoo wrote:
I don't understand this budget. Is this supposed to be like when Obama tried to establish good will?

On May 02 2017 00:58 Simberto wrote:


Though, to be fair, if you transcribe word for word what someone says, it will look bad for most people. You usually just don't talk in complete sentences in real life, and there are going to be fillers, repetitions, "you know"s, and things like that.

I don't remember interview transcripts reading as horrible for other people than Trump, but i don't know if that is because Trumps speech is worse, or because the transcriber goes to great length to transcribe every sound Trump utters, while possibly overlooking some of those sounds for other people.

On May 02 2017 00:58 Simberto wrote:


Though, to be fair, if you transcribe word for word what someone says, it will look bad for most people. You usually just don't talk in complete sentences in real life, and there are going to be fillers, repetitions, "you know"s, and things like that.

I don't remember interview transcripts reading as horrible for other people than Trump, but i don't know if that is because Trumps speech is worse, or because the transcriber goes to great length to transcribe every sound Trump utters, while possibly overlooking some of those sounds for other people.

On May 02 2017 01:02 Plansix wrote:

He is a transcriber's nightmare, to be honest. He doesn't end sentences in any predictable manner. Any "um" or pause could be the end of a thought or a launching point to a discussion about cake. And then they have to go through and try to convert that into something someone can read and glean information from.

TYT Politics: In Florida court documents I've obtained, DNC lawyer defending against election fraud lawsuit brought by Bernie Sanders voters said:
"We could have—and we could have voluntarily decided that, Look, we're gonna go into back rooms like they used to and smoke cigars and pick the candidate that way. That's not the way it was done. But they could have. And that would have also been their right."
Also:
"There's no right to not have your candidate disadvantaged or have another candidate advantaged. There's no contractual obligation here...it's not a situation where a promise has been made that is an enforceable promise."
Also:
"You have a charter that says you have to be -- where the party has adopted a principle of evenhandedness, and just to get the language exactly right, that they would be evenhanded and impartial, I believe, is the exact language. And, you know, that's not self-defining, your Honor. I mean that's kind of like, you know, saying, Who's a Baptist?
You know, I mean, for your Honor to wade into that, you would really have to -- whether the party was evenhanded or not, whether they gave each side equal debate time, and whether their hiring decisions reflected in some measure a bias towards Secretary Clinton, these are all issues that courts -- really would drag this Court right into the political squabbles, and really there'd be no way constitutionally to offer redress for -- even for what they are claiming."

On May 02 2017 01:22 KwarK wrote:

They're not wrong that the primary races aren't legally protected. Who the party selects as their candidate is an internal party business.

On May 02 2017 00:58 Simberto wrote:


Though, to be fair, if you transcribe word for word what someone says, it will look bad for most people. You usually just don't talk in complete sentences in real life, and there are going to be fillers, repetitions, "you know"s, and things like that.

I don't remember interview transcripts reading as horrible for other people than Trump, but i don't know if that is because Trumps speech is worse, or because the transcriber goes to great length to transcribe every sound Trump utters, while possibly overlooking some of those sounds for other people.

On May 02 2017 01:31 Adreme wrote:


The core thought is laughably stupid though. I forgive some ahhs and umms as one tries to build a complete idea and even some repetition if your overall point is sound. He overall point is moronic though and laughs in the face of provable US history.

On May 02 2017 01:22 KwarK wrote:

They're not wrong that the primary races aren't legally protected. Who the party selects as their candidate is an internal party business.

One woman was killed and seven people were wounded, several critically, when a man opened fire Sunday at a San Diego apartment complex swimming pool where a number of adults were attending a birthday party.

Police rushed to the apartment building in the University City area and fatally shot the man after he pointed his gun at officers, San Diego Police Chief Shelley Zimmerman said.

The reports were grim: A white man wearing brown shorts was armed with a gun and shooting at what two witnesses described as approximately 30 people around the pool, most of them African American.

A police helicopter reached the area first and, from above, authorities could see a shooter near the pool who appeared to be reloading his weapon, Zimmerman said.

Seven people, all adults, were hit by gunfire: four black women, two black men and a Latino man. A woman later died at the hospital. Her name was not released. A man broke his arm while fleeing the shooting, Zimmerman said.

The ongoing controversy and litigation over the Trump administration’s “Muslim ban” has reignited a debate that has raged since the 9/11 attacks: Who commits more domestic terrorism–violent Salafists or traditional “right wing” extremists? According to a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, it’s the latter and by a very wide margin. From p. 4 of GAO’s report:

Of the 85 violent extremist incidents that resulted in death since September 12, 2001, far right wing violent extremist groups were responsible for 62 (73 percent) while radical Islamist violent extremists were responsible for 23 (27 percent).
But as researchers at the Georgia State recently reported, media coverage of terrorist incidents makes it seem as if terrorism is almost exclusively perpetrated by Muslims:

We examined news coverage from LexisNexis Academic and CNN.com for all terrorist attacks in the United States between 2011 and 2015. Controlling for target type, fatalities, and being arrested, attacks by Muslim perpetrators received, on average, 449% more coverage than other attacks. Given the disproportionate quantity of news coverage for these attacks, it is no wonder that people are afraid of the Muslim terrorist. More representative media coverage could help to bring public perception of terrorism in line with reality.

On May 02 2017 01:46 Plansix wrote:
There wasn't a lot of discussion around it, but I could have watched Hasan Minhaj rip into CNN, MSNBC and Fox for hours. The joke about CNN's low bar for "panel experts" was perfect.

On May 02 2017 02:00 warding wrote:

The guy is very talented but there's something about his - and Trevor Noah's - brand of political satire that doesn't seem quite right to me. Satirists like Jon Stewart and Jon Oliver include a large dose of self-deprecation that alleviates tension and makes them very effective at calling out bullshit, whereas Minhaj and Noah seem to take themselves too seriously, often coming across as morally self-righteous.