2016 Presidential Election

[telee.kom]

No joke. Someone said that *my* commentary in *this* thread made someone (a pro-HRC Dem) feel like they didn't fit in.

I choked. Then died. Am now dead but still registered to vote.

Something something safe space. Considering this is a discussion forum, some people here have very low tolerance of different opinions.

[Jinsai]

Something something safe space. Considering this is a discussion forum, some people here have very low tolerance of different opinions.

you are the one complaining about how the majority consensus isn't to your liking, you know

[telee.kom]

Not at all, it's just the way people tend to jump on anyone who doesn't fall in line with certain narative. I don't mind it, I welcome any kind of discussion, it was just an observation

[Swykk]

Something something safe space. Considering this is a discussion forum, some people here have very low tolerance of different opinions.
Just the real substance lacking garbage opinions. Check the last few pages and you'll see I have no problem calling out inaccuracies, no matter who is typing them. Does it make me a favorite here? Doubtful but I've always been a heart on my sleeve, "if you see something, say something" kind of guy.

[allegro]

Not at all, it's just the way people tend to jump on anyone who doesn't fall in line with certain narative. I don't mind it, I welcome any kind of discussion, it was just an observation
Sometimes "observation" = "troll" or "flame bait," though, just saying. Not in THIS THREAD because this is a free-for-all.

I don't understand people hiding out because they "don't belong," though. For a long time, HRC fans weren't saying they were HRC fans (except maybe for RhettButler) because they didn't want to become flame bait. But, otherwise, methinks it's because nobody is buying the conspiracy theories and they have nothing else to contribute.

I use the term "HRC fan" reluctantly because it's an overstatement. We kinda get what we get. I still wish there would have been crop of younger people with newer ideas on the Dem side. But, no.... We got people with one foot in the crypt. And on the other side, we have a brainless real estate tycoon.

[Dra508]

Honestly, you're not going to find fair and balanced here. Anyone who thinks that is just dumb.

[allegro]

Honestly, you're not going to find fair and balanced here. Anyone who thinks that is just dumb.

True. And anybody who thinks this board is going to accept conspiracy theories, well ...

[Wretchedest]

well, for me I find the conspiracy theory mentality particularly inflammatory, because it just completely derails any competent and constructive discussion of politics. It also has a way of being pretty virulent. It's maddening to think of how easily people buy that schwill.

and so I have to live in a world where I accept that people are just that crazy or illiterate and theres nothing you can do, or I have to live in a world where I believe they can be persuaded and convinced through rational argument that that kind of thinking is ridiculous, the latter is more optimistic, at least but ever since the Sanders campaign went the way it did, I've mostly stopped engaging those people.

[DigitalChaos]

Just the real substance lacking garbage opinions. Check the last few pages and you'll see I have no problem calling out inaccuracies, no matter who is typing them. Does it make me a favorite here? Doubtful but I've always been a heart on my sleeve, "if you see something, say something" kind of guy.

Let me just dig up the following post from a few weeks back.



More so, point me to the ETS republicans who are active here. I'm not really into ongoing critiques of people/groups who aren't present.So you're just doing it because no one else is stepping up to the plate? Because you're just that awesome of a guy that you want to play devil's advocate? I'm so glad you're here, fighting the fight for the little guy.
which was a sarcastic post by allegate, if you don't remember the context :)

[Jinsai]

I generally avoid the band related drift, but if people are seriously wondering why the majority here might not like Donald Trump, it might have something to do with the fact that Head Like a Hole was seemingly written with him in mind

[DigitalChaos]

As I told the Obama haters for the last 8 years: if he is as bad as you say, you shouldn't have to make up reasons to show how bad he is.

[Jinsai]

Not sure what's being fabricated HERE

[allegro]

More so, point me to the ETS republicans who are active here. I'm not really into ongoing critiques of people/groups who aren't present.
There are, like, TWO Republicans on ETS and both have deliberately trolled this thread with nasty comments, they aren't afraid of anybody. Certain forums have a tendency to attract certain types of people, and ETS has *always* attracted intellectuals and liberals, from Day One and in the old days conservatives were Shit Listed so at least THOSE days are over, but any Republican on here crying that they're afraid to state their opinion is, frankly, on the wrong fucking board. I think Trent Reznor said that once, already (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1bpACV6zRQ).

But the NIN.com forums had this topic, once, back in '08 (http://forum.nin.com/bb/read.php?42,32597,page=1).

[Swykk]

Let me just dig up the following post from a few weeks back.


which was a sarcastic post by allegate, if you don't remember the context :)

I am not allegate. I was speaking for myself but yes, now that you mention it, it's more than a little fucked up to me that you're taking up the mantle for Trump lately. You've always come across to me as smarter than that. I don't always agree with you (see: guns) but you can't defend the proudly ignorant asshole messiah of the bottom. There's no argument, no telee.kom twisting of words, crying victim and finger pointing that can mount ANY kind of viable defense of Trump.

[allegro]

I am not allegate. I was speaking for myself but yes, now that you mention it, it's more than a little fucked up to me that you're taking up the mantle for Trump lately. You've always come across to me as smarter than that. I don't always agree with you (see: guns) but you can't defend the proudly ignorant asshole messiah of the bottom.
Come on, he's just playing Devil's Advocate Troll, because nothing's on TV right now and he didn't install the latest WoW patch. :p

[DigitalChaos]

I am not allegate. I was speaking for myself but yes, now that you mention it, it's more than a little fucked up to me that you're taking up the mantle for Trump lately. You've always come across to me as smarter than that. I don't always agree with you (see: guns) but you can't defend the proudly ignorant asshole messiah of the bottom. There's no argument, no telee.kom twisting of words, crying victim and finger pointing that can mount ANY kind of viable defense of Trump.

See, I was merely pointing out that there are plenty here who are intolerant of what you described (calling out bullshit on all sides). But then you go into the "you support Trump" rant and demonstrate my exact point against yourself.

I'm not afraid of people straw manning me as a Trump supporter. But it should be pretty obvious that I'm not.

[allegro]

DigitalChaos: I know you're not, but I don't know why you ALWAYS have to play devil's advocate even in instances where it's stirring up shit just to avoid the thread from getting stagnant. Too late. The problem with trying to defend Trump in any way (which I have actually done in this very thread) is that it sometimes does come across as "supporting" Trump instead of pointing out the bullshit media shit-stirring but, by doing so, we are kinda not really doing anything really constructive because Trump is still, well, Trump and he says such vague stupid shit, it's hard to make anything he says come across clearly.

Are you gonna SMOKE that joint or what? Pass it over here.

[DigitalChaos]

This shit is the ultimate hypocrisy in the left. The left is more than happy to back things like non-binary gender, sexuality that has so many shades it requires a 6 axis graph, but when it comes to political identity NOPE THAT SHIT IS BLACK AND WHITE and binary as possible. I'd bet that not one of you with this mindset have even heard of, let alone understand, post-left as a political label, for instance.

[Wretchedest]

There are, like, TWO Republicans on ETS and both have deliberately trolled this thread with nasty comments, they aren't afraid of anybody. Certain forums have a tendency to attract certain types of people, and ETS has *always* attracted intellectuals and liberals, from Day One and in the old days conservatives were Shit Listed so at least THOSE days are over, but any Republican on here crying that they're afraid to state their opinion is, frankly, on the wrong fucking board. I think Trent Reznor said that once, already (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1bpACV6zRQ).

But the NIN.com forums had this topic, once, back in '08 (http://forum.nin.com/bb/read.php?42,32597,page=1).

*goes back to NIN forums for first first time since wave goodbye*

*leaves for hopefully another decade*

I will say that, in the last few years dissent from the popular opinion of established members (I say as an established member who shares many of the popular opinions) tends to result in some pretty serious flaming, despite the lack of insulting or hostile language from that dissenter.

I don't know if it's a mob mentality thing or a general internet message board thing, but it's always frustrating and has derailed many of my go to threads...

[implanted_microchip]

it should be pretty obvious that I'm not.

Nah you're just somebody operating from their own agenda behaving as if you're impartial who is able to do so because your point of view is niche at best so you're never really put to the test because people like Gary Johnson aren't exactly mainstream figures and therefore never face the level of scrutiny anyone else does, so you can sit back and take your cheap potshots at anybody different from you and be a general down-talking "gee, shucks, I'm just pointing out whenever anybody's wrong!" asshole. You're obsessed with being a condescending ass to anybody on the left and going "BUT YOU DO IT TOO!" as if you can't call out injustice where you see it if your hands aren't always clean.

http://i.imgur.com/rXA8qtv.jpg

Saying garbage like "I'll bet not one of you has so much as heard of [thing that makes me sound smarter than and more enlightened than you here]" just makes you seem like a cock. You're really good at trashing everyone else's views and yet seem to do little else. It's non-constructive and dickish.

[allegro]

This shit is the ultimate hypocrisy in the left. The left is more than happy to back things like non-binary gender, sexuality that has so many shades it requires a 6 axis graph, but when it comes to political identity NOPE THAT SHIT IS BLACK AND WHITE and binary as possible. I'd bet that not one of you with this mindset have even heard of, let alone understand, post-left as a political label, for instance.

Meh, that's where you lose me, when you start pointing fingers at directions, left, right. They all do it. The right is pointing, the left is pointing, they're both full of shit. And they're both correct sometimes. But the conspiracy shit is just that: Shit.

You know, as a longtime Democrat (but for the last 8 years or so more of an Independent in most local elections), I read today's article by Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass and I wanted to be pissed but there were elements of it that rang true to me. (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/kass/ct-urban-unrest-kass-0821-20160819-column.html) The answer is somewhere in the middle, in a party that does not yet exist or no party at all, no "right" or "left."

[DigitalChaos]

I'll come back to the last 2 posts you made, allegro, because they are good. Your 2nd one actually contains 80% of how I was going to respond to the first.

[allegro]

*goes back to NIN forums for first first time since wave goodbye*

*leaves for hopefully another decade*
Wait, is that still ALIVE?? Heh. Don't leave, there are a lot of liberals over there, too! And crazy conservatives! Wearing camouflage! To be fair, the "dissenters" over there derailed the threads more than over here, that's why I ended up hanging more over here.


I'll come back to the last 2 posts you made, allegro, because they are good. Your 2nd one actually contains 80% of how I was going to respond to the first.
Meh, don't try to butter me up, :p

[Swykk]

See, I was merely pointing out that there are plenty here who are intolerant of what you described (calling out bullshit on all sides). But then you go into the "you support Trump" rant and demonstrate my exact point against yourself.

I'm not afraid of people straw manning me as a Trump supporter. But it should be pretty obvious that I'm not.

I didn't think you were. I'm confused as to what your intentions are or were in your recent posts in this thread. I hope that confusion was clear in what I wrote.

I am almost positive you said you're voting for Gary Johnson. I don't find the libertarians to be grounded in reality but I sure as hell respect them more than the LCD Trump supporters.

[Swykk]

Come on, he's just playing Devil's Advocate Troll, because nothing's on TV right now and he didn't install the latest WoW patch. :p

I definitely react poorly to trolling. At least this Devil's Advocate angle makes sense.

[allegro]

(dying laughing)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjTqyNe0C1w&feature=youtu.be

[allegro]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XriXDtfqCg

[Dra508]

Who's this allegate? [emoji57]

[DigitalChaos]

I didn't think you were. I'm confused as to what your intentions are or were in your recent posts in this thread. I hope that confusion was clear in what I wrote.


Mantra was confused as to how a person of color could ever support Trump due to how racist Trump is. I was providing the likely answer to this. Cause hey, it's good for people to understand the minds of a large portion of this country. We don't get anywhere good if everyone is stuck in their own echo chambers and has no understanding or empathy for those outside of it.

See here: http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/threads/3669-2016-Presidential-Election?p=313614#post313614

[DigitalChaos]

Come on, he's just playing Devil's Advocate Troll
Not even DA this time. Just taking a guess at why a PoC would support Trump and not see him as being racist, in response to Mantra's confusion on that topic. (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/threads/3669-2016-Presidential-Election?p=313615#post313615)


The problem with trying to defend Trump in any way (which I have actually done in this very thread) is that it sometimes does come across as "supporting" Trump instead of pointing out the bullshit media shit-stirring but, by doing so, we are kinda not really doing anything really constructive because Trump is still, well, Trump and he says such vague stupid shit, it's hard to make anything he says come across clearly.
What is exactly constructive by not playing devils advocate, by not using skepticism, or in the most recent case simply trying to explain the perspective of another group of people?

I mean, it's not like *anything* constructive is going to really come out of these ETS threads in any form really. Which ETS thread in The Headlines subforum ever changed anything? I doubt many are changing their minds in here and then taking the new info and propagating it to the world.


Meh, that's where you lose me, when you start pointing fingers at directions, left, right.
Yes, but only the left is a strong proponent of the non-binary gender and huge array of sexualities. Thus, hypocrisy. The right doing the black and white political identity is the status quo for them.

[DigitalChaos]

The answer is somewhere in the middle, in a party that does not yet exist or no party at all, no "right" or "left."
THIS is where everything connects together. So I'm breaking it to a separate post.

I agree. And HOW do you get centrism? It sure as hell doesn't happen when you have echo-chambers that magnify. It sure doesn't happen when you don't even understand the mindset of people who disagree with you.

Skepticism and playing devils advocate helps eliminate a lot of false narratives. False narratives are frequently something that divides people. Devil's advocate allows you to step back and try to really understand the perspective of an opposing group. It helps cut away cartoonish stereotypes and straw men... more things that only force division between people and a lack of understanding. All of these things allow people to further cement their perspective and further distance themselves from anyone outside of that perspective. There is no centrism there, only separation.


I can show you so many instances where equally applied skepticism creates some pretty incredible centrism.

[Jinsai]

the only way to destroy the broken election system here is to institute instant runoff voting, because it logically would supply the clearest will of the people, and legitimately empower the third party vote in a way that couldn't be accused of "spoiling" the vote. That is what we need to fight for if we're looking towards the election after Hillary wins and Trump doesn't become president.

[Khrz]

Skepticism and playing devils advocate helps eliminate a lot of false narratives.

Which is great. But more often than not you're less the devil's advocate than merely a condescending contrarian which puts you in the convenient position of judging everyone without having to bring any argument to the table. You may think you're elevating yourself above the divides when you're actually looking down on people. It's not the same.

I rarely agree with your position on any matter, but when you do bring counter-arguments and actually discuss the matters at hand, I always respect your opinion. But too often lately you drift into judgemental bystander mode, where you don't correct the perspective as much as turn a blind eye to what's inconvenient to your narrative.

There's devil's advocate, and then there's devil's bitch. It's a fine line to walk, and nowadays you're doing 50/50.

[Deepvoid]

THIS is where everything connects together. So I'm breaking it to a separate post.

I agree. And HOW do you get centrism? It sure as hell doesn't happen when you have echo-chambers that magnify. It sure doesn't happen when you don't even understand the mindset of people who disagree with you.

.

Can you achieve centrism when religion is still playing a major role in your society?
I've always been under the impression that religion is what has been steering the Republican party further right?

Sam Harris said one thing that stuck with me. By electing Donald Trump, the United States would be electing an atheist for the first time. The right may believe Trump is not an atheist but I believe Sam Harris had some good arguments to suggest that guy really doesn't believe in God.

Maybe there's no correlation but I've always been under the impression that centrism and religion don't go together.

[allegate]

Sometimes we have to try to remember that we all "know" each other in here and we need to try to keep things good-natured so we can try to make it through this election without letting these politicians lead us to killing each other. :p

Also, @telee.kom (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/member.php?u=3032) is from another country and his English isn't so great but he's right in that the media "news" spins both the left and right to create these fights.

But, to me, the "worst" thing about Trump isn't Trump, himself: It's that he is a mirror reflecting the worst elements of this country, reflecting it back all to us, showing it to us; he's also a magnifying glass, maybe making it all larger than life and out of the shadows so we can't ignore it anymore. His "Make America Great Again" is truly ironic.
So are you saying that Trump is some kind of...Black Mirror? :p
Who's this allegate? [emoji57] Uh...just some guy. You know?

[Deepvoid]

Michele Bachmann is currently advising trump on Foreign Policy.
(http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/292126-michele-bachmann-donald-trump-foreign-policy)
“He [Trump] also recognizes there is a threat around the world, not just here in Minnesota, of radical Islam,”

Surrounding himself with the best of the best.

[elevenism]

Michele Bachmann is currently advising trump on Foreign Policy.
(http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/292126-michele-bachmann-donald-trump-foreign-policy)
“He [Trump] also recognizes there is a threat around the world, not just here in Minnesota, of radical Islam,”

Surrounding himself with the best of the best.
And here i thought that radical islamists were all disenfranchised Minnesotans.
You learn something new every day.

[telee.kom]

You may think you're elevating yourself above the divides when you're actually looking down on people. It's not the same.



Oh my god really? He's the condescending one? Of all people in this thread? He's the sane one, most people here are so blinded by rage against Trump they don't want any kind of discussion apart from how Trump is the devil. Pointing out how his statements are blown out of proportions is "looking down on people" how exactly?

[Dra508]

Oh my god really? He's the condescending one? Of all people in this thread? He's the sane one, most people here are so blinded by rage against Trump they don't want any kind of discussion apart from how Trump is the devil. Pointing out how his statements are blown out of proportions is "looking down on people" how exactly?

Replace rage with "can't believe we are even talking about Trump this far into the cycle."

Since this is just a thread in a old music forum, I'd love to speculate what we'd be chatting about if a different Republican had won the nomination or if Sanders never created so much conversation on the Dem side, where what would we be posting about?

[Khrz]

Oh my god really? He's the condescending one? Of all people in this thread? He's the sane one, most people here are so blinded by rage against Trump they don't want any kind of discussion apart from how Trump is the devil. Pointing out how his statements are blown out of proportions is "looking down on people" how exactly?

Way to pick a paragraph and ignore the post at large, but fair enough.

I was actually talking to DigitalChaos because I know for a fact that he can discuss and argue a point (full disclosure, I wasn't talking to you since so far you haven't displayed the same qualities). I'm just saying that lately, he's been walking the line between offering a contradicting view (which is great) and being a contrarian (which is crap). And I find more and more posts that are dishonest in nature, cherry picking sentences and arguments and ignoring that actual points, which I find regrettable coming from someone whose perspective can be informative and challenging.

Saying that Trump is denouncing institutional racism ? Yeah, that one time, that one topic. You have to ignore how he's targeting foreign cultures systematically though. And you can't on one hand say that his followers are in on the jokes no one gets, and act like their racist mentality has nothing to do with him. Either they get where he's at, or they don't. Accusing members of whitewashing cop killers just because they're trying to explain the context is another load of crap that's bellow him.

I'm not saying nobody's condescending. I'm not saying everyone's level-headed. But you can't pull off that kind of stuff and then pretend you're speaking from some political high ground for the sake of perspective.

[telee.kom]

he's been walking the line between offering a contradicting view (which is great) and being a contrarian (which is crap).


How you define someone who's being contrarian/troll? It seems to me lot of people here tend to label anyone they disagree with as trolls and that's really cheap way to disregard someone else's opinion tbh. Maybe, just maybe, there are people with different opinions and different world views and yours is not the only one to take seriously. Nothing is black and white. Neither is Trump. He said some horrible dumb shit, the point was, he didn't the last time. People should be pointing that out, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. And it doesn't really matter if you argue about it because you want to defend Trump, or because you hate dishonest media.

[Khrz]

I'm pretty sure I've made clear that I'm capable of acknowledging the validity of his arguments without necessarily agreeing with him. Twice now.

I'm pretty open-minded to differing views. I just don't suffer bullshit, and neither can DigitalChaos, I suspect.

And that's pretty much the extent to which I will further that discussion, I'm not comfortable discussing this in his absence, and this isn't about you.

[DigitalChaos]

instant runoff voting, because it logically would supply the clearest will of the people
I agree that this would be a huge benefit. I don't see it changing the echo-chamber problem though.


judgemental bystander mode, where you don't correct the perspective as much as turn a blind eye to what's inconvenient to your narrative.

so I'm an asshole for explaining to Mantra why a PoC could possibly be a Trump supporter? K, I guess i'm an asshole then. Unless you are talking about something else? I'm pretty sure the majority of that type of confusion comes from a misunderstanding of the case I am making. So it's helpful to know specifics. I don't have the entire thread in my head.





Can you achieve centrism when religion is still playing a major role in your society?
I've always been under the impression that religion is what has been steering the Republican party further right?

That's a great question that I don't really know the answer to. I'd point out that there is plenty of religion on the left. They just aren't as into shoving it into their politics. So I feel you could certainly improve the existing lack of centrism while religion exists. And I'm someone who things just about all forms of tribalism are ground zero for most of the problems we have around us.

[allegro]

Replace rage with "can't believe we are even talking about Trump this far into the cycle."

Since this is just a thread in a old music forum, I'd love to speculate what we'd be chatting about if a different Republican had won the nomination or if Sanders never created so much conversation on the Dem side, where what would we be posting about?
Ugh it coulda been Ted Cruz, the Devil Incarnate. EEEEEEEEK. He scares me WAY more than Trump. But I've been in real estate for nearly 30 years and have been dealing with people like Trump, none of his shit surprises me. Extreme Capitalism. I still wanna eat at Sixteen, though.

The other day, I realized that it's almost Labor Day which means it's almost Fall which means this shit is almost over.

[Deepvoid]

Trump cancels three events (http://www.politicususa.com/2016/08/22/republicans-turmoil-trump-abruptly-cancels-campaign-events-states.html) including his much anticipated speech on immigration that was supposed to take place this Thursday.

[Dra508]

Ugh it coulda been Ted Cruz, the Devil Incarnate. EEEEEEEEK. He scares me WAY more than Trump..
Exaaactly. What if it was Rubio? And Sanders hadn't gotten Clinton to not walk around like she had a crown on?

Believe it or not, I think Trump v. Clinton is more settling.

[implanted_microchip]

Exaaactly. What if it was Rubio? And Sanders hadn't gotten Clinton to not walk around like she had a crown on?

Believe it or not, I think Trump v. Clinton is more settling.

I'm both very glad that this isn't a Rubio v. Clinton election and that it isn't a Trump v. Sanders election because Donald being able to point and go "They're a socialist! They're a socialist! Total socialist, folks" would be terrifyingly effective with a ton of this country. I can't imagine the wild shit he'd've shot in Sanders' direction with all the Russia talk around Trump's campaign. "They say I support Putin -- this guy had a Soviet flag in his office! BIASED SOCIALIST MEDIA SURE IS SAD!"

[Mantra]

Mantra was confused as to how a person of color could ever support Trump due to how racist Trump is. I was providing the likely answer to this.

uh...sure.

You have described Trump's comments as him "pointing out institutional racism," which is a pretty creative way of reinterpreting both Trump's campaign as well his actual statement. Going on stage and saying "You're all poor, uneducated and crime ridden with the Dems, please give me a chance" doesn't exactly constitute a sincere examination of systemic racism. You make it sound like he stood up there and talked about how austerity and privatization have decimated inner city school budgets, how our penal systems openly target minorities, how we have an ongoing history of discriminatory mortgage lending, etc. He's not going to admit any of that, cause he knows he'd alienate his base. One important part of Trump's appeal is that he validates the fantasy of white persecution, hence his anti-BLM stance, his scapegoating of immigrants, his fear-mongering of Muslims, etc. He's telling his people what they want to hear, and they do NOT want to hear about all the ways in which our country actively discriminates against non-whites. That kinda talk is veering way too close to the "politically correct" bogeyman that they view Trump as an antidote to.

And anyway, are you implying that the dude who got kicked out of that rally supported Trump because he was won over by Trump's insightful critiques against institutional racism? Because that is not what the kid actually said. He said, "When people called him a racist, I said he's a critic of our flawed immigration system. He's strong on Islamic terrorism." So this kid was fine with the fear-mongering and the stereotyping of certain groups of people, just so long as it was never directed towards him. He was hoping there might be a seat for him on the xenophobia train and was bummed out to discover that the weird, irrational anger of the Trump movement could just as easily be directed toward someone like him as it could toward, say, a judge of Mexican heritage. So I didn't find the incident "confusing," I found it mildly funny in a depressing, ironic sort of way.

[elevenism]

Allow me to point out, just for the record, that "religion" has been co-opted and warped by the right.
If they were real, OG christians, they would be all about trying to take care of people, not fuck them over and step on them and such.
Fuck the right wing for doing that. Fuck turning something nice into hate and whatnot.

The right isn't driven by religion though. It's driven by MONEY. CAsH MONEY. Perhaps the ignorant base is fueled by some garbled version of xianity, i'll buy that, but as a whole it's about GREED.

[Khrz]

so I'm an asshole for explaining to Mantra why a PoC could possibly be a Trump supporter?

I never called you an asshole, first of all. That's on you.

And I was talking about a general attitude, where you'll claim to actually offer counterpoints, play devil's advocate as you put it, when clearly half of the time you're too biased to merit that role.

I understand, you have a bone to pick with the left and most leftists, and that's fair, especially considering your stance on certain issues, you've likely had to deal with very aggressive ones in the past .

But when you point out the hypocrisy and dishonesty of the left's campaign and supporters while actively sweeping under the rug the same dysfunctions of the right's side, you can't pretend to comment from a distanced position anymore.

I have no problems with you defending or attacking one side rather than the other. I'm just calling bullshit on the whole "devil's advocate" thing.

[Jinsai]

uh...sure.

You have described Trump's comments as him "pointing out institutional racism," which is a pretty creative way of reinterpreting both Trump's campaign as well his actual statement. Going on stage and saying "You're all poor, uneducated and crime ridden with the Dems, please give me a chance" doesn't exactly constitute a sincere examination of systemic racism. You make it sound like he stood up there and talked about how austerity and privatization have decimated inner city school budgets, how our penal systems openly target minorities, how we have an ongoing history of discriminatory mortgage lending, etc. He's not going to admit any of that, cause he knows he'd alienate his base. One important part of Trump's appeal is that he validates the fantasy of white persecution, hence his anti-BLM stance, his scapegoating of immigrants, his fear-mongering of Muslims, etc. He's telling his people what they want to hear, and they do NOT want to hear about all the ways in which our country actively discriminates against non-whites. That kinda talk is veering way too close to the "politically correct" bogeyman that they view Trump as an antidote to.

Amazingly well said

[Deepvoid]

This is just too good not to post. Apparently, the polls are all fine. However, the reason the polls aren't showing Trump in the lead is because of "Hidden Trump voters"


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CoRNzzRwjY8

... and the reptilian people who don't have phones of course.

[WorzelG]

Can I apologise on behalf of Britain for spawning that unbelievable cunt Nigel Farage?
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/24/nigel-farage-donald-trump-rally-hillary-clinton?CMP=share_btn_tw

[Ryan]

Once trump is elected I'll have this on repeat -


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gErz-TJY2nA


A bomb hits the city, all life instantly vaporized
But I'm not so fortunate, burning right before my eyes
Stumbling, I trip over pieces of descending -- Ooh, flesh
Leaving a pile of smoldering humanoid mess


Radiation
Coming in waves
Leading me to
A nuclear grave


Are you ready?
Will you be?
Will you fight in world war III?

Are you ready?
Are you sure?
Will you fight in world war IV?


Humanity somehow stood up on its mutated feet
Reeling with pride man just would not accept his defeat
Into the missiles, deadly disease and poison gas...


Launching them off terracidal journey kills the last


Vomiting blood,
I choke on my tongue
The gas from above is filling my lungs


Silence and darkness, the species of man is extinct
The boiling oceans into which the continents sink
Gravity gone, the moon collides with a dead earth
Flaming world out of orbit flying into deep space


Pray for your death,
If you survive
You'll die in pain
In world war five.
elevenism Space Suicide Wolfkiller seasonsinthesky wizfan

[allegate]

Republican Party of Minnesota forgot to put Donald Trump on Minnesota ballot, scrambling to fix it (http://www.citypages.com/news/republican-party-of-minnesota-forgot-to-put-donald-trump-on-minnesota-ballot-scrambling-to-fix-it/391288881)

[Jinsai]

read please http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-noonan-trump-nuclear-20160809-snap-story.html?utm_source=kw&kwp_0=200246&kwp_4=778684&kwp_1=391111

[DigitalChaos]

A fat transexual man in SF is protesting the body shaming of the Trump statues:

https://www.facebook.com/sbroad.eye/videos/315504868794784/

[hellospaceboy]

A fat transexual man in SF is protesting the body shaming of the Trump statues:

https://www.facebook.com/sbroad.eye/videos/315504868794784/

Good! I resent Trump, but my first thought was that this argument that his manliness/penis size is part of the problem is shitty. There's no substance there, other than to ridicule him. Well, there are men out there with micro penises or no penises (as the trans-man in your link) and I can only imagine how hurtful those statues were to them...

[Jinsai]

A fat transexual man in SF is protesting the body shaming of the Trump statues:

https://www.facebook.com/sbroad.eye/videos/315504868794784/

The person behind the statue was talking about making one of Hillary too, saying that he views them as equal and that he's going to vote for Johnson. I think he's an attention-seeking opportunist.

[telee.kom]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoLDX6RHTY4

[Khrz]

Good! I resent Trump, but my first thought was that this argument that his manliness/penis size is part of the problem is shitty.

Well, it's been part of the discourse at some point. The topic has actually been whether Trump has a short dick or not. Trump actually defended himself about that.

I don't think the statue is clever, and if anything there's a lot to say about Trump without having to go literally below the belt. But when you're parading your ego around, people will poke at it.

[DigitalChaos]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZXbG5gvoC0

[GulDukat]

Trump's latest speech:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4gnTXlzITqk

[Sallos]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoLDX6RHTY4

did that really happened?

[telee.kom]

I hope so.

[Deepvoid]

What's going on with Clinton. She's been invisible lately. Is she taking this race for granted?

[allegro]

What's going on with Clinton. She's been invisible lately. Is she taking this race for granted?
We're seeing TV ads here all the time.

I was getting, no shit, about 5 emails per day from her campaign until I unsubscribed.

[implanted_microchip]

We're seeing TV ads here all the time.

I was getting, no shit, about 5 emails per day from her campaign until I unsubscribed.

God, the emails are so annoying.

I finally set it to only let me know when something more important is happening because, sorry, I just can't stand getting ten requests to donate every single day. I like getting updates on stuff and notices about volunteering opportunities, but, god.

Also Deepvoid I don't think she's taking things for granted, but in the past few weeks Trump has been really doing a lot of his own damage in a lot of ways, and she's letting him keep the scrutiny on him for a bit. It's a holiday weekend, she just recently did her speech on the alt-right which made a bit of a splash and has gotten the phrase into the general media. There are a ton of TV ads and volunteering events are constant. Her campaign has focused a lot more on ground game than national media, and I do think it'll pay off. You can tweet all you want but if you're not getting people registered and educated and out to vote and arranging groups to help drive people to the ballot box, you're going to struggle winning.

[allegro]

God, the emails are so annoying.
"Hi, ___, this is Ellen! We really need your help!"

"Hi, ____, this is Michelle Obama, don't let Trump win! We need your help!"

"Hi, ____, this is [insert name of yet another celebrity who didn't write this email], please help Hillary now!"

No. Now leave me alone.

The phone rang last week and it was somebody from Jill Stein's campaign.

I quickly hung up, heh.

[elevenism]

did that really happened?Breitbart informs (http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/08/26/spoke-guy-shouted-pepe-hillarys-alt-right-speech/):

[A] man in the crowd was ejected for yelling “PEPE!”, the name of the iconic green frog meme that has become the alt-right’s mascot, as soon as she mentioned the movement...

Meet Sean, the Pepe guy...

"As for the ‘Pepe’ shout… She gave me the opening by saying “alt right” with a bit of a pause, so I pounced. It was just to kind of throw off her false narrative and a shout out to the fellow patriots on “Frog Twitter” for all their hard work in trying to get Donald Trump into the White House. About 3 seconds after I screamed “Pepe”, I was escorted out by Secret Service

[elevenism]

Also, can i just say that a fucking AMERICAN MOVEMENT that prides itself on "nativism" and "opposition to multiculturalism" BETTER fucking be made up of like Choctaws and Cherokees and Comanches?

Ooooooooooooooh that shit makes my blood boil, this "alt right."

Still, any politician being interrupted by some goofy bastard is always great, with the holy grail being this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OM3Z_Kskl_U

You gotta love dubya fucking GRINNING after the first shoe was thrown

[DigitalChaos]

"Hi, ___, this is Ellen! We really need your help!"

"Hi, ____, this is Michelle Obama, don't let Trump win! We need your help!"

"Hi, ____, this is [insert name of yet another celebrity who didn't write this email], please help Hillary now!"

No. Now leave me alone.

The phone rang last week and it was somebody from Jill Stein's campaign.

I quickly hung up, heh.

ahaha. Was that the DCCC list? I intentionally subscribed to them to keep an eye on the crazy shit going on and the weird bullshit rhetoric they try to push. The waves of desperation in their emails are good comedy.
A friend of mine who does campaigning for Dems absolutely hates them.

here are the last few in my inbox:
http://i.imgur.com/OX89ttL.jpg

[allegro]

ahaha. Was that the DCCC list?
I contributed 5 bucks to HRC's campaign so I could get a free sticker. No sticker yet but I got 5-10 emails per day asking for more money, help, my firstborn child, etc.

[DigitalChaos]

I contributed 5 bucks to HRC's campaign so I could get a free sticker. No sticker yet but I got 5-10 emails per day asking for more money, help, my firstborn child, etc.
loooool
FFS. I even signed up for Bernie's free stickers (after they hilariously ran out) and that address didn't get on DCCC.

[DigitalChaos]

So when people talk about how the voters are totally sick of corruption and all that other bright rainbow bullshit, do you think they have this kind of shit in mind: Debbie Wasserman Schultz retains the Florida primary (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/31/ousted-from-dnc-wasserman-schultz-wins-florida-pri/).
I really do laugh at the idea that Dems are capable of any revolutionary progress that extends beyond very brief moments of unfocused anger. They seem the most willing to fall back in line.

[sentient]

Likely another post mortem Tom Clancy novel. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/intelligence-community-investigating-covert-russian-influence-operations-in-the-united-states/2016/09/04/aec27fa0-7156-11e6-8533-6b0b0ded0253_story.html)

[aggroculture]

Question: why isn't Pam Bondi being investigated for this? http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/about-as-clear-cut-as-they-get
Why aren't we hearing about this story around the clock for months like we are with Hillary's emails?
Trump being corrupt gets a pass. Astonishing really.

[GulDukat]

Nate Silver on the state of the race:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-clintons-lead-keeps-shrinking/

[Deepvoid]

Nate Silver on the state of the race:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-clintons-lead-keeps-shrinking/

I just hope Clinton doesn't have one of her coughing fit during the debate. I know it's probably nothing but it would still give the right, ammunition on her alleged health issues.

[GulDukat]

Learned a lot from last night's forum. In Iraq, we should have "taken the oil," and Trump will fire all the terrible generals and get some really great ones, believe me. Also, the people briefing Trump know that Obama has been a disaster because of "their body language."

[Deepvoid]

Learned a lot from last night's forum. In Iraq, we should have "taken the oil," and Trump will fire all the terrible generals and get some really great ones, believe me. Also, the people briefing Trump know that Obama has been a disaster because of "their body language."

I actually had to stop watching after the whole "take their oil" bit. It blows my mind that people are voting for this guy. The guy is advocating for war crimes on live TV and people just shrug it off as just being not PC.

[GulDukat]

Now it appears that he won on "style" and she won on "substance."

[Deepvoid]

RhettButler winning on style shouldn't even fucking matter. Why is it even a thing. His voting base are so ridiculously dumb. No shit they only care about style and not substance. They probably don't know the difference between Libya and Syria. They probably think Captain Crunch was a real explorer.
What pisses me the most now is that I feel like Clinton is just going through the motions. I don't feel like she wants to win. She should be dominating in the polls. There's no reason for this race to be this tight.

Trump exposed himself as fraud last night. The whole "I gotta super plan but maybe I'm gonna ask my generals if they have a plan too but of course I won't tell you what my plan is" is such bullshit.
Trumpbots to respond "of course he's not gonna tell his plan to the enemy". I mean, are you they that dense?

[Deepvoid]

HOLY SHIT! This guy is done. Pack your bags. Go home.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKb2oiJluLk

[Khrz]

The other candidates got away with worse...

[Deepvoid]

In my opinion, if you don't know what Aleppo is, you shouldn't be running for President of the United States.
Then again, Donald Trump is running. Logic has been thrown out of the window a while ago.

[implanted_microchip]

Deepvoid you say he's done as if he actually had a sizable chance at winning the election before this

[Lew]

I actually had to stop watching after the whole "take their oil" bit. It blows my mind that people are voting for this guy. The guy is advocating for war crimes on live TV and people just shrug it off as just being not PC.

that's the whole point though, no? freedom to speak hatefully and the freedom to hate, period. that, from what i have seen thus far, is precisely why he is popular. sure it is always ALWAYS worded as "he tells it like it is", but that simply means: hate hatey hate hate.

[Lew]

.Trumpbots to respond "of course he's not gonna tell his plan to the enemy". I mean, are you they that dense?

not dense, necessarily, but very very scared people. scared people like big blowhard empty speaking bullies, like drumpf. it is soothing to know he is going to make america great again, bring america back (pssst...apparently your country wandered off, y'all) and fix "everything" with no plan or specifics or substance or anything but (metaphorically) jerking off extremely fearful patriots with extremely fearful patriotism. sad stuff, man.

[Deepvoid]

@Deepvoid (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/member.php?u=676) you say he's done as if he actually had a sizable chance at winning the election before this

He was still polling close to 10%. That's a huge chunk of the electorate. I don't know if he's gonna drop out after this blunder but I'm sure his numbers are gonna go down substantially.
I also saw that Jill Stein had an arrest warrant issued against her last night.

Big year for third party candidates.

[implanted_microchip]

He was still poll close to 10%. That's a huge chunk of the electorate. I don't know if he's gonna drop out after this blunder but I'm sure his numbers are gonna go down substantially.
I also saw that Jill Stein had an arrest warrant issued against her last night.

Big year for third party candidates.

I will say it's amusing that we have all-but-definite-proof that Trump tried to bribe several state judges and he's been charged with fuck-all but Jill Stein's getting a vandalism charge.

Also, Johnson's "I don't know" sadly pales in comparison to Herman Cain's "Uz-becky-becky-stan" moment. I miss that guy these days; his campaign was a dream.

[implanted_microchip]

It's worth noting: I know a lot of elderly, upper class people here in Florida. Like, classical upper-crust retirees that people think most of this state is made up of (while ignoring the very large portion of poor people that act as their servants, basically). A lot of them are extremely sharp people, very warm, giving, charitable, generally pleasant to be around, hold their own in conversations, worked in law. I knew a wonderful man who passed away a handful of years back now who had an office full of degrees, awards and commendations and photos of him with almost every president from Ford on.

Almost all of these people are Republicans and all of them are voting for Trump, or, at least, say they are. Most of them have Fox News on all day long in their houses or only go there for information when they do check it out. Bookstores in the area almost exclusively advertise conservative extremist literature; Ann Coulter's book is at the entrance of every shop and front and center on every new arrivals table. Flip through FM radio here and find maybe half a dozen stations easily where people are railing Obama 24/7. Go into any restaurant and, if they have TVs on, then unless they have ESPN on, it's gonna be Fox or, on occasion, at the right hour of the day, Nancy Grace.

My point to this is this: it's very easy to say "His supporters are all idiots, clearly!"

But that's really not it, and that reduces the issue way too heavily. Basically to not think Trump is THE guy in this region, you have to be able to ignore the vast majority of advertisements, billboards, TV sets and literature around you. You're surrounded by it. I remember in 2012, the day after Obama won, seeing someone with "RIP AMERICA - 1776 - 2012!" painted on the back of their car like it was their wedding. (I also remember laughing my cock off over the thought that America had held on for the past four years and that Obama had really just been lying in wait the entire time, and now he'd spring his gay-Arabian-atheist-Islamic-Marxist agenda on us all.)

It's a culture of being insulated with propaganda that allows a lot of his supporters to support him. Yes, he has the white trash vote. Yes, he has the redneck vote. Yes, he has the poorly educated vote (after all, he loves the poorly educated!). But he also has a whole lot of older, generally bright people who just can't stand to see that evil Crooked Hillary Clinton win, who have spent 30 years seeing her painted as a demon and who only see Sean Hannity verbally blowing Trump and behaving as if Hillary eats babies for brunch and that's what gave her the ten different types of cancer she supposedly has.

I genuinely know one woman who, in her late 80's, has lived her life raising children, being a homemaker and a devoted wife and is quick to tell you: she may not like Trump, but "it's not a woman's place to lead a country."

It's a whole lot more than just being too dense or too stupid. It's living in a culture of propaganda and being raised in a world of sexism, inequality and reinforcement of the idea that a big, tough, strong man is what this nation leads. He's no Reagan, but he's as close as they're gonna find on their ballots, so they do it anyway.

[allegate]

Pence: 'I accept' Obama was born in US (http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/pence-i-accept-obama-was-born-in-us/ar-AAiC6IU?ocid=ansmsnnews11)

So will this hurt Trump? I mean, it's kind of his thing and that's his VP.

[implanted_microchip]

So will this hurt Trump?

If:

- insulting our military

- saying he knows more than generals

- insulting a celebrated POW

- accepting a Purple Heart and bragging how much easier it was to get it than by getting shot

- saying he's sacrificed a lot of things in response to a Gold Star family's criticisms of him and then making an Islamophobic comment about the wife

- skipping a primary debate to host a fundraiser that was basically a sham

- bribing judges

- and everything else he's ever done in his entire life

hasn't been enough to permanently hurt him, I really don't think that the living beige paint swatch that is Mike Pence saying something that doesn't agree with him (which I believe has happened before as well) will be the silver bullet

[Deepvoid]

Pence: 'I accept' Obama was born in US (http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/pence-i-accept-obama-was-born-in-us/ar-AAiC6IU?ocid=ansmsnnews11)

So will this hurt Trump? I mean, it's kind of his thing and that's his VP.

Pence is on a roll. He announced that he would release his tax returns, which inadvertently puts pressure on Trump to do the same.
However, I don't think this remark about Obama's birthplace will hurt trump. Again, Trump's base likely thinks Obama is a Muslim. They don't care about what Pence thinks. They only care about what Trump thinks.

[allegate]

Well yes, but his birther movement is a lot of tea partiers who are voting for him. I understand they already have something of a tenuous grasp on reality but wouldn't the gymnastics required of this one be a little much? I'm not talking about the people who use rational thought in their daily lives, is what I'm getting at.

[implanted_microchip]

Well, when you're in the conspiracy theory world, people who have already made the leap to detach from known reality are in a space where they can say this:

If someone they support says something opposing their insane views, they can simply say, "Well, of course they're saying that, they have to win everybody else over! I know what they really believe, everybody."

If someone says something crazy they disagree with, they can say, "Oh, they're just saying that to win those crazy people over."

The Birther nuts will still support Trump because they'll never not believe that he agrees with them. Those that aren't that way will desperately cling to things like Pence's comment to try and validate their false belief that he says these things just to get those voters.

His campaign has been constant self-contradiction and everybody in his campaign saying things that disagree with one another. At the end of the day there is no clear, objective consensus and, in turn, people who support him have plenty of narratives to choose from, going with whichever suit their biases the most. Like, what, two weeks ago now there was the multiple-times-a-day flip-flopping among his surrogates about immigration? Ann Coulter's meltdown? All that craziness? But, guess what, all the hardcore xenophobes are still hitched to his wagon anyway, because, hey, he said he'll build that wall, right?

[cynicmuse]

Last night, Trump also defended (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/09/us/politics/donald-trump-sexual-assault-military-women.html) his twitter quote about sexual assault in the military: "What did these geniuses expect when they put men & women together?” His glib quote underscores his lack of knowledge. He blames the victim for the assault and ignores the fact that a fair number of the victims are male. He also also doesn't seem to realize that women have been serving in the armed forces for quite some time.

[elevenism]

@allegate (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/member.php?u=1739) , i am not trying to be hyperbolic when i say that i don't think your average Trump supporter falls into the category of "people who use rational thought."

I really, seriously don't. They hear crazy shit and repeat it to each other. They don't care about the veracity of the thing.

And Trump knows this, which is why he throws things out there like "Barack Obama founded ISIS (and i DON'T mean he created the vacuum that led to ISIS, i mean he's the founder of ISIS)" and sees what sticks.

[aggroculture]

HOLY SHIT! This guy is done. Pack your bags. Go home.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nKb2oiJluLk

Wait! @DigitalChaos (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/member.php?u=598) needs to put a sophisticated yet ultimately untenable positive spin on it first.
Then he can go home.

[implanted_microchip]

Wait! @DigitalChaos (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/member.php?u=598) needs to put a sophisticated yet ultimately untenable positive spin on it first.
Then he can go home.

But like why do that when he can find some 90's video of Bill Clinton not knowing something or Hillary in 2003 having a slip-up and behaving as if we're all hypocrites and he's on a higher moral level than us without actually ever admitting to the flaws in his own ideology or really addressing the main topic at hand in any tangible, meaningful way that isn't dripping with condescension and faux-amusement

[DigitalChaos]

Sure is a lot of butt hurt in here. Johnson's minor slip up is your big opportunity to stick it to me? LOL... apparently.

I stopped being interested in voting for Johnson when he picked his horrific VP. But hey, let's go for it. I won't pass up an opportunity this easy.


Everyone who already supports Johnson knows he talks about Syria a lot. Him not knowing the name of a city in Syria isn't going to change what's important: policy.

There is also his response (https://twitter.com/govgaryjohnson/status/773895309848113152) that is quite solid and has a lot of people even more interested in him because of how it deviates from anything you would expect from Clinton or Trump. Then there is follow up commentary by the guy who asked him this question (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/09/08/i-asked-gary-johnson-about-aleppo-i-don-t-blame-him-for-not-knowing.html).

There is also the humorous "i dont actually know what Aleppo is but want to mock Johnson" types. NY Times published an article mocking him, but they incorrectly identified aleppo and issued a correction... but still got it wrong and had to issue a correction for their correction (https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/773989145433763840). They had to edit the article FIVE (http://newsdiffs.org/article-history/www.nytimes.com/2016/09/09/us/politics/gary-johnson-aleppo.html) times. That's just fucking funny! Or how about MSNBC interviewing the former Obama-appointed ambassador who got it wrong while mocking Johnson (https://twitter.com/Jamie_Weinstein/status/773867745658019840). There are other fun examples of this, but you get the idea.


There's also the fact that Aleppo has been destroyed thanks to a lot of Hillary's leadership, but that's apparently less news worthy than Johnson not being able to recall that city. If Hillary supporters gave a shit about Aleppo, they wouldn't be voting for her. If this is the biggest newsworthy problem for Gary, it's nothing compared to the other candidates.


Ultimately, this is doubtful to hurt Johnson. It's more likely to help him. His biggest problem is a lack of visibility. When people actually learn about him and get to hear his actual positions, a significant amount tend to like him. This gaffe is now getting him quite a few interviews that increase his visibility in areas he needs it. One of his first followup interviews was The View, and it reflected extremely well on him. The crowd loved him as did most of the panel.


So Johnson people should pack it up and go home? Nah, they aren't Sanders people now voting for Hillary and letting DWS retain her congress seat.



edit: i hate that you can't link to a youtube video without it embedding... Here is the referenced interview he had with The View shortly after his gaffe.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlDgh6WM-Cc

[aggroculture]

Called it!:D
No butthurt here, just playfully pointing out what's what.


Back on topic: I don't understand why Hillary is leading such a passive, defensive campaign.
Obama galvanized people to go out and vote for him: that's how he won.
Al Gore and John Kerry did no such thing, and I see Hillary going down that path to defeat. Is "hey I'm not Trump" really going to drive people to the voting booths? I'm not so sure.
Trump inspires passion, one way or the other. Hillary? Not so much.

[DigitalChaos]

You called nothing. The only untenable thing here is your own post.

Meanwhile, Schwarzenegger just called for Johnson to be included in the debates. This follow Mitt Romney and Mitch Daniels doing the same. I'll just grab my popcorn and keep re-reading your posts while watching the new roll in :)

[Deepvoid]

Some are saying that Clinton calling Trump voters deplorable people is her "Romney 47%" moment.

She has apologized since.
I doubt it's have the same impact but I guess we'll see with the next few polls.

[Sallos]

What the hell? She apologized? Big mistake, don't know what's worse trying to fight Trump in the gutter, which he owns, or, then apologizing for doing it.

[DigitalChaos]

Some are saying that Clinton calling Trump voters deplorable people is her "Romney 47%" moment.

She has apologized since.
I doubt it's have the same impact but I guess we'll see with the next few polls.

She said half of them were deplorable. Talking shit about the electorate is never a good idea. Who knows how it'll impact her though.

This is a good Obama tweet though.

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160910/390983070c247c6f691e17a165ce0ed2.jpg

[implanted_microchip]

I think she made a big mistake in trying to make a nuanced point but using divisive language. She didn't say "all Trump supporters are deplorable." She tried to say "There's a section of hateful people and the rest are still worth listening to." Problem is, no one's going to hear that second half -- doesn't hit as hard, doesn't make a headline, doesn't stand out. You can't say something incendiary and then become nuanced after.

I think it's a misstep, not an irreparable one, but a misstep nonetheless. Trump can get away with whatever the fuck he wants, all the time, 24/7, but if Hillary so much as coughs (and, quite literally, coughs), it's going to be picked apart, dissected like a Roswell alien and analyzed like the Torah. It's a shit reality but one she's got to navigate in.

[Khrz]

if Hillary so much as coughs (and, quite literally, coughs), it's going to be picked apart, dissected like a Roswell alien and analyzed like the Torah. It's a shit reality but one she's got to navigate in.

To be fair, Trump gets picked apart just as much. Every tidbit gets analyzed and interpreted. The thing is, the left has a field day doing so with things Trump actually says and does, while the right* is left with a lot of conjecture. I'm not saying there aren't issues with Clinton, but they don't make the headlines and clickbaits quite as satisfying.


* : Yeah I've bundled the Trump opponents as "left" and Clinton opponents as "right" for the sake of simplicity, sue me.

[implanted_microchip]

To be fair, Trump gets picked apart just as much. Every tidbit gets analyzed and interpreted. The thing is, the left has a field day doing so with things Trump actually says and does, while the right* is left with a lot of conjecture. I'm not saying there aren't issues with Clinton, but they don't make the headlines and clickbaits quite as satisfying.


* : Yeah I've bundled the Trump opponents as "left" and Clinton opponents as "right" for the sake of simplicity, sue me.

Trump gets picked apart, sure, but does it ever damage him much? Has he been wounded all that much? He set himself immediately in a corner where there were people that'd always be isolated from him. Has anyone else been put off since, though?

The people trolling twitter and getting hashtags going and tumbling and facebooking mostly are not the people Trump ever appealed to to start with. He opened up swinging from a space of xenophobia, barely-veiled racism and promotion of fear and ignorance. What's he done to lose his base at all?

Hillary gets hurt a lot when she gets attacked at times. People on the left are quick to be a lot more choosy. Just look at the toxic river of shit sent her way during the primary process and the way that there are still people running around saying "Bernie or Bust!" Sure, they're more of a minority now, but I think they're far more viable in terms of taking support from her away than the Never Trumpers are in taking his support away.

[DigitalChaos]

What the hell? She apologized? Big mistake, don't know what's worse trying to fight Trump in the gutter, which he owns, or, then apologizing for doing it.
agree, but she could have totally owned this with a slight twist to the apology. "I'm sorry that I wasn't politically correct enough for Trump supporters"


i mean... fucking *come on*

[Khrz]

That would actually have been good.

[DigitalChaos]

if Hillary so much as coughs (and, quite literally, coughs), it's going to be picked apart, dissected like a Roswell alien and analyzed like the Torah. It's a shit reality but one she's got to navigate in.

Howard Dean can yell "YEHAW" on mic once and it ends his entire campaign. But Hillary can cough INTO a microphone for 4 solid minutes and that's too much? ok kleiner...


seriously, have you seen this? I don't give a shit about all the GOP analysis of her other coughing fits and her health. THIS specific incident was ridiculous on the part of Hillary.
- She coughs INTO the mic, repeatedly.
- Instead of just temporarily pausing the event (to deny footage to the press) she fucking keeps trying while croaking out words. Where was her staff to tell her how horrible that looked?
- she does this for FOUR SOLID MINUTES

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ld-yRgZL-8Y

[Khrz]

Howard Dean can yell "YEHAW" on mic once and it ends his entire campaign. But Hillary can cough INTO a microphone for 4 solid minutes and that's too much? ok kleiner...

That's not what ended his campaign, that was the final nail in its coffin. The man had no credibility and this emphasized that. I'm not saying nobody's being hyperbolic, but being hyperbolic in reverse doesn't end up in statu quo.

[DigitalChaos]

That's not what ended his campaign, that was the final nail in its coffin. The man had no credibility and this emphasized that. I'm not saying nobody's being hyperbolic, but being hyperbolic in reverse doesn't end up in statu quo.
That's true. My point about that super cringey 4min of coughing (it's apparently just one of many incidents?) still stands though.


That would actually have been good.
It looks like Trump already took the "thats insulting" direction on this.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump
Hillary using the PC angle would have been really interesting. It would have forced Trump even more toward trying to take the moral high ground when it comes to not being offensive. That's a place he has no footing. He would lose that battle horribly.

[allegro]

Look, my Mom and I have the same allergic coughing condition, it is not deadly, it just sucks. My Mom is on two separate nose sprays for it, we are both on the same oral asthma medicine for it. My Mom has to carry Halls drops in her purse all the time. It sucks that it happened to Hillary during a speech like that; it has happened to my Mom while she was DRIVING HER CAR. It's worse this time of year.

[DigitalChaos]

@allegro (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/member.php?u=76) - unless your allergy forces you to repeatedly cough directly into microphones and forces you to not pause a speech, im not sure how that's related. I'm not making this about her health, like the GOP is.

If Trump had a medical condition that caused him to shit his pants at random... but he decided to drop his pants and shit directly on the stage like GG Allin... I'd be asking wtf is with the choice to do it that way.

[allegro]

@allegro (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/member.php?u=76) - unless your allergy forces you to repeatedly cough directly into microphones and forces you to not pause a speech, im not sure how that's related. I'm not making this about her health, like the GOP is.

If Trump had a medical condition that caused him to shit his pants at random... but he decided to drop his pants and shit directly on the stage like GG Allin... I'd be asking wtf is with the choice to do it that way.

The GOP has pointed at Clinton's cough as a sign of serious illness, or even a reason why she is not fit to be President. When it happens, you're more concerned about breathing than decorum. It's a shame that she couldn't get that cough drop out faster so it could start working faster. It's obvious that her throat was totally spasming and she was trying to soldier through it.

I just don't see it as a big fucking deal.

Newt Gingrich had a coughing fit while discussing Clinton's cough (https://thinkprogress.org/gingrich-coughs-while-discussing-clintons-cough-cff7aea1cdde#.qahvvh2du) LOL

[Deepvoid]

And Clinton almost fainted today. Blamed the heat.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnbDZXoA78k

[telee.kom]

https://twitter.com/danmericaCNN/status/774999978804666368

why is this so funny to me?

[Khrz]

An excess of empathy for pathological trolls perhaps ?

[DigitalChaos]

Holy shit. That video is some Weekend At Bernies level bad. How the hell was that induced by heat? It's like mid 70's and breezy in NY right now.


Even WaPo is ready to talk about her health after that.

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160911/700925040aa8e70673580a4ffd944d0c.jpg

[marodi]

She has been diagnosed with pneumonia on Friday

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/12/us/politics/hillary-clinton-campaign-pneumonia.html?_r=0

[Khrz]

She has been diagnosed with pneumonia on Friday

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/12/us/politics/hillary-clinton-campaign-pneumonia.html?_r=0

Too bad it sounds like there's such a thick layer of denial and misinformation surrounding her health that even a proper diagnosis doesn't mean shit anymore. I didn't care about that topic and even I, reading through that piece, am questioning whether that's what her illness is. Of all the sources quoted in there, none end up in consensus.

[allegro]

The pneumonia diagnosis makes sense, though; it's hard recovering from that, and you don't necessarily "look" sick all the time, but it can make you feel really weak (and the "overheated" thing can be lingering fever). The older you get, the more susceptible you are to pneumonia (it's why seniors are supposed to get the pneumococcal vaccine). What started as a cough from postnasal drip due to allergies ends up being bacterial pneumonia (infection), or more susceptible to viral respiratory infections.

[Khrz]

The pneumonia diagnosis makes sense, though; it's hard recovering from that, and you don't necessarily "look" sick all the time, but it can make you feel really weak (and the "overheated" thing can be lingering fever). The older you get, the more susceptible you are to pneumonia (it's why seniors are supposed to get the pneumococcal vaccine).

It does, and it's not so much that I question its veracity, but after all the denials and rebuttals on the subject, why would I believe that ? I do believe it, I just mean that I have no real reason to do so anymore...
Funny how the candidates have an information control problem, Trump has none, Clinton tries too hard. Trying to hide it made a lot more damage than coming clean about it in the end.

[allegro]

It does, and it's not so much that I question its veracity, but after all the denials and rebuttals on the subject, why would I believe that ? I do believe it, I just mean that I have no real reason to do so anymore...
Funny how the candidates have an information control problem, Trump has none, Clinton tries too hard. Trying to hide it made a lot more damage than coming clean about it in the end.
But there have been no "denials and rebuttals," really. Two years ago, Clinton's physician released a one-page summary of Clinton's current health and there have not been any formal "rebuttals" of conspiracies other than laughing them off. The coughing incident was explained by Clinton that day, at the time, as allergies and then then next day, again, as allergies, which was again confirmed today by her physician. Clinton opted to not issue a formal press release about having pneumonia as she is a pretty private person and it wasn't life-threatening and she was being treated with antibiotics; it isn't like she was diagnosed with Alzheimer's, like Reagan, and kept it secret for years (which he did, while President). Clinton attended the 9/11 Memorial but probably was not yet well enough. This isn't a giant conspiracy. For a 68-yr-old person, pneumonia is like having the flu; if it was truly serious, she would have been hospitalized. She wasn't. People are LOOKING FOR (more) reasons why Clinton shouldn't be President.

I'm just waiting for them to bring up menopause.

[DigitalChaos]

I'm with Khrz. I'm doubtful that pneumonia conveys the full picture. I'm just not going to be surprised to learn that it goes deeper.

You know what else predisposes you to pneumonia? A severely compromised immune system by a whole lot of things.

[DigitalChaos]

*cough*
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160911/00ada71f0cac0bc4baf37253db0cf10e.jpg

[DigitalChaos]

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160912/852dc6a4d0dbb2de5aef4934a576521f.jpg

[DigitalChaos]

I wonder if Gary Johnson will remind everyone that he has climbed the highest mountains on all 7 continents, now that health is a topic.

[allegro]

Ugh, God, will you just please stop, you sound like a conspiracy theorist right now (http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/hillary-clinton-s-wobbly-incident-classic-walking-pneumonia-n646516).

One of several doctors who has weighed in online (http://www.usnews.com/news/news/articles/2016-09-11/doctors-pneumonia-is-serious-but-clinton-should-bounce-back):


Added Dr. Stephen Hargarten, head of emergency medicine at the Medical College of Wisconsin: "I'm not surprised to hear this happen to someone engaged in the kind of frenetic schedule she has."


People over age 65 have a harder time returning to normal than do younger patients. Many people her age need a week or more to recover from even a mild case of pneumonia, said Dr. Sharon Bergquist, an Emory University assistant professor of medicine who specializes in internal medicine.

"The body needs rest. The more she pushes, the harder it is for her to recover," she said.


Pneumonia can be caused by viruses or bacteria, and it refers to an infection that gets into the lungs. Bacterial pneumonia is common, usually not serious and easily treated with antibiotics.

These mild bacterial infections can cause a cough and sometimes a mild fever.

People often feel well enough to go about their business, especially once they start taking antibiotics. And once they've been taking antibiotics for a day or so, they are unlikely to infect anyone else.

But the infection can take a toll, making patients prone to getting tired and dehydrated. And since people often don't realize they have an infection, they can go for days or weeks before they seek treatment — all time for the infection to wear them out even more.

[allegro]

I wonder if Gary Johnson will remind everyone that he has climbed the highest mountains on all 7 continents, now that health is a topic.
I wonder if anybody will remind people that FDR was in a wheelchair because he was partially paralyzed from polio; that JFK had Addison's disease and chronic back problems and was on painkillers; that Wilson suffered a few strokes, had hypertension, migraines, and was paralyzed on his right side; or that GHW Bush had Grave's disease ...

[DigitalChaos]

It's not conspiracy to feel Hillary has been untrustworthy. Or that her handling of this does not instill confidence.

You've sure been pulling out the stops to defend her. It was a day ago that you were saying your allergies are basically identical to (what we now know to be) her pneumonia. Fair to say that looks a little silly in retrospect, hey?

[marodi]

Pneumonia is absolutely awful. I've had two so I know. It feels like you're drowning; you struggle constantly to breath. I couldn't sleep in a bed because I was choking if I laid down so I had to sleep sitting on a chair.

She's struggling with that and she still does all this work? That woman is tough. She's no whiner. I like that.

[Jinsai]

It's not conspiracy to feel Hillary has been untrustworthy. Or that her handling of this does not instill confidence.

You've sure been pulling out the stops to defend her. It was a day ago that you were saying your allergies are basically identical to (what we now know to be) her pneumonia. Fair to say that looks a little silly in retrospect, hey?

But from where I stand, I don't care if she's terminally ill. I'll take her running mate over Trump/Pence any day of the week. That may sound morbid or dark, but it's reality, and the truth really. I'm not friends with any politicians. And sure, I'll do backflips to apologize for anything that's looking damaging right now. I just know I cannot psychologically stand a Trump presidency. That's me being completely honest. I'm not the biggest Hillary fan, but go Hillary, I'm with her, you can do it.

[newmodel87]

Update: After I dumped Trump, I started to drink the Clinton Kool-aid and it tastes pretty good. I can finally give my brain a rest. Plus it feels good to breathe with my mouth open.

What is so untrustworthy about Hillary? Hell, if I did a bunch of horrible shit I would absolutely trust Hillary to keep a secret.

I'm certainly no doctor whatsoever but I don't think pneumonia is a big deal. Who hasn't had it? I'd guess to say that seasonal Trump allergies and overheating from the early morning NY heatwave is pretty common. And we can now finally put to rest all of those alt-right Putin & Alex Jones-led conspiracies about her having moderate to advanced level Parkinson's disease since there is zero correlation between pneumonia and Parkinson's although I forget what the leading cause of death is among Parkinson's patients.

I will defend Hillary until the day she dies (which won't be any time soon). She simply cannot do any wrong! I can't understand how I could ever have supported Trump before. He has bad hair and he's a little bit mean sometimes.

I'll be back to check in with you Clinton supporters next month! Until then, let's keep the status quo!

[allegro]

You've sure been pulling out the stops to defend her. It was a day ago that you were saying your allergies are basically identical to (what we now know to be) her pneumonia. Fair to say that looks a little silly in retrospect, hey?
I'm in LAW. I've been trained and educated to look at facts, not hype. People get walking pneumonia all the time, and they tend to write it off as their typical allergic cough (or whatever). Having been in law for decades, I don't jump on the "OMG IT'S CANCER!" train the second somebody coughs.

Clinton thought it was allergies (6 days ago), only to find out (3 days ago) that she actually had pneumonia.

Edit:
My husband and I have been going for long daily hikes. And we both agreed today during our evening hike that these political discussions are useless and they're enraging for us since they contain so little logic, so I am taking his advise: I'm out.

[Khrz]

I'll be back to check in with you Clinton supporters next month! Until then, let's keep the status quo!

You might have missed it, which would be understandable with that serious case of blinding seething rage you got there, but most of us here don't even like Clinton. We just really, really despise the alternative.

[Dra508]

I wonder if anybody will remind people that FDR was in a wheelchair because he was partially paralyzed from polio; that JFK had Addison's disease and chronic back problems and was on painkillers; that Wilson suffered a few strokes, had hypertension, migraines, and was paralyzed on his right side; or that GHW Bush had Grave's disease ...

I thought it was Barbara who has Graves' disease? Regardless, Bush threw up on a head of state and the world did not freak out, we guffawed. Never mind that Bush 2 was basically in the program, right? This HRC pneumonia thing is bull shit. I'm seriously sick of the scrutiny. Let's go fucking vote tomorrow and get this over with.

[Exocet]

maybe its time to think about another candidate... ...she just dismissed half the country the other day.
She wants to draw more people to her sterile boring robotic flat uninspiring dated mediocre campaign...she is is distancing herself from people more with her rhetoric.

[Dra508]

maybe its time to think about another candidate... ...she just dismissed half the country the other day.
She wants to draw more people to her sterile boring robotic flat uninspiring dated mediocre campaign...she is is distancing herself from people more with her rhetoric.

Loller skates

[Frozen Beach]

Clinton really sucks at handling this health conspiracy about her. At this point, she's just giving them ammunition.

[DigitalChaos]

But from where I stand, I don't care if she's terminally ill. I'll take her running mate over Trump/Pence any day of the week. That may sound morbid or dark, but it's reality, and the truth really. I'm not friends with any politicians. And sure, I'll do backflips to apologize for anything that's looking damaging right now. I just know I cannot psychologically stand a Trump presidency. That's me being completely honest. I'm not the biggest Hillary fan, but go Hillary, I'm with her, you can do it.

See, I can totally respect how you are just straight with it; completely honest and not hiding it. I really am pissed of on the behalf of people like you who really should have Sanders right now. He would be polling so much higher than Hillary is against Trump. And to think her surrogates were trying to trash Sander over his potential health and age... lol fuck them.

This whole election is just horrible. I can't even find my usual hint of mental & moral refuge in the Libertarian ticket. Johnson's VP pick, Bill Weld, is worse on guns & gun control than Clinton or Trump (among other issues). It's insane. I'm left wishing we could legitimately have no president for 4 years. Or maybe elected a dog like that city in MN keeps doing: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dog-mayor-duke_us_57bbebf5e4b00d9c3a19cb19

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuhtuPWzq0k

[Jinsai]

See, I can totally respect how you are just straight with it; completely honest and not hiding it. I really am pissed of on the behalf of people like you who really should have Sanders right now.

Oh well though, I'm used to not getting what I want. That's part of being an adult I guess. I just really, really, really don't want an asshole like Trump (and really, is there a bigger asshole on this planet?) to be president. I'm a fair-weather fan for the opposition, and I won't try to hide it.

[Deepvoid]

One thing I've noticed is that people are putting way too much emphasis on the national polls compared to the actual electoral map.
I haven't seen one forecast that has Trump close or in the lead with the electoral votes.

Could we see a repeat of the 2000 elections with Trump winning the popular vote and Clinton getting more electoral votes. That would be interesting.

[allegate]

I think she made a big mistake in trying to make a nuanced point but using divisive language. She didn't say "all Trump supporters are deplorable." She tried to say "There's a section of hateful people and the rest are still worth listening to." Problem is, no one's going to hear that second half -- doesn't hit as hard, doesn't make a headline, doesn't stand out. You can't say something incendiary and then become nuanced after.

I think it's a misstep, not an irreparable one, but a misstep nonetheless. Trump can get away with whatever the fuck he wants, all the time, 24/7, but if Hillary so much as coughs (and, quite literally, coughs), it's going to be picked apart, dissected like a Roswell alien and analyzed like the Torah. It's a shit reality but one she's got to navigate in.
I don't visit during the weekend so I missed this one but wow, this is going to be a tough month.

[allegate]

I'm in LAW. I've been trained and educated to look at facts, not hype. People get walking pneumonia all the time, and they tend to write it off as their typical allergic cough (or whatever). Having been in law for decades, I don't jump on the "OMG IT'S CANCER!" train the second somebody coughs.

Clinton thought it was allergies (6 days ago), only to find out (3 days ago) that she actually had pneumonia.

Edit:
My husband and I have been going for long daily hikes. And we both agreed today during our evening hike that these political discussions are useless and they're enraging for us since they contain so little logic, so I am taking his advise: I'm out.

This was me not four months ago. I kept telling everyone it was allergies - because it was prime hay fever - and it wasn't until I went to the doctor (because everyone was sick of my shit cough) that I found out what it was. Got put on antibiotics and it was gone in a little over a week.

Granted I'm about half her age so that's a factor as well.

[DigitalChaos]

One thing I've noticed is that people are putting way too much emphasis on the national polls compared to the actual electoral map.
I haven't seen one forecast that has Trump close or in the lead with the electoral votes.

Could we see a repeat of the 2000 elections with Trump winning the popular vote and Clinton getting more electoral votes. That would be interesting.


"an Electoral College landslide against Trump is at least as likely a prospect as the election coming down to the wire. But if the race does close, Trump is more likely to win the Electoral College while losing the popular vote than the other way around, according to our models."
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-10-big-questions-about-the-election-revisited/

[Deepvoid]

"an Electoral College landslide against Trump is at least as likely a prospect as the election coming down to the wire. But if the race does close, Trump is more likely to win the Electoral College while losing the popular vote than the other way around, according to our models."
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-10-big-questions-about-the-election-revisited/

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/
http://www.270towin.com/
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_elections_electoral_college_map.html
http://election.princeton.edu/electoral-college-map/

Trump isn't leading anywhere in the current electoral vote forecast. Event Fivethirtyeight has Trump behind at this time.

[DigitalChaos]

You misread what they are saying. It's conditional on the race tightening.

[telee.kom]

By the way the video of Clinton's collapse was shot by some random czech guy. I was just watching an interview with him, he said he's receiving death threats and doesn't really care for all this attention at all.

[DigitalChaos]

I wonder if anybody will remind people that FDR was in a wheelchair because he was partially paralyzed from polio; that JFK had Addison's disease and chronic back problems and was on painkillers; that Wilson suffered a few strokes, had hypertension, migraines, and was paralyzed on his right side; or that GHW Bush had Grave's disease ...

You forgot a big one...
Basically everyone focusing on Hillary's health have been the same people who voted for Bush/Cheney. Cheney's health was such a concern that he had his resignation pre-written and ready to hand over for almost his entire time in office.


Fun fact: in 2007 they disabled the wireless telemetry of Cheney's heart for fear that hackers would kill him.

[Mantra]

in 2007 they disabled the wireless telemetry of Cheney's heart for fear that hackers would kill him.

damn it. where were those Russian hackers when we truly needed them?

[tony.parente]

How out of touch can this womans campaign be? (https://www.hillaryclinton.com/feed/donald-trump-pepe-the-frog-and-white-supremacists-an-explainer/)

The best way to prove you aren't suffering from brain damage is to declare war on a cartoon frog .

[Frozen Beach]

Please tell me that's a joke. Please. There's no way someone can be this stupid.

[aggroculture]

She's wasting time talking about Trump. She should run a positive campaign and ignore Trump completely.

[tony.parente]

Welcome to campaign 2016 where Hillary Clinton has legitimized memes as valid political topics and Donald Trump is the meme king.

God help us all

EDIT:
OH MY GOD

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iu2HXqotKM

[telee.kom]

fucking lmao. Was her site hacked or something? Joking aside, going for divisive campaign is the worst thing she could do right now.

[Deepvoid]

Her presidential campaign has been atrocious in my opinion. She had a much better campaign during the primaries. I don't know what's happening right now but if she continues down that path, you guys are in for a rude awakening comes November 8.

[DigitalChaos]

How out of touch can this womans campaign be? (https://www.hillaryclinton.com/feed/donald-trump-pepe-the-frog-and-white-supremacists-an-explainer/)

The best way to prove you aren't suffering from brain damage is to declare war on a cartoon frog .

our fucking presidential candidates are explaining memes on their fucking websites.



That said, i will never forgive Hillary for not igniting the full Presidential Meme War when Trump people got offended. Hillary: "Sorry I wasn't *politically correct* enough for Trump voters. <THUG LIFE>"


also:


"But in recent months, Pepe’s been almost entirely co-opted by the white supremacists"

"But it’s just his son and one of his closest advisers, right? Nope. <1 year old image as proof>

[Frozen Beach]

Great, now these white nationalist memers are try to brainwash our children with their white nationalist mascot. WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zzu15ZezipE

[DigitalChaos]

So, Trump is going to be announcing his plan for mandatory 6 weeks paid maternity leave. Also tax deductible child care and expenses. Holy shit...

http://archive.is/kMqJr

I want to know how trump supporters will rationalize this. I want to know how everyone else will perceive this.

[sick among the pure]

Her presidential campaign has been atrocious in my opinion. She had a much better campaign during the primaries. I don't know what's happening right now but if she continues down that path, you guys are in for a rude awakening comes November 8.

...Will I fail my Canadian citizenship test if I remain loyal to the Buffalo Sabres?

[Deepvoid]

...Will I fail my Canadian citizenship test if I remain loyal to the Buffalo Sabres?

Haha! As long as you keep it on the down low.

[Exocet]

Loller skates

She would never be where she is now without her husband....its nepotistic.

Margaret Thatcher never used a man to get to a position of power....it would be great to have a female president..i would be so up for that.
everyone KNOWS why there is such a lack of enthusiasm about this. Its just like the Bush dynasty.. the same shit.
its all about who you know.

[implanted_microchip]

Yeah nothing says "got to the presidency with nepotism" quite like a well-regarded tenure as a senator from New York and a time spent as Secretary of State where, while in office, you had immensely high approval ratings and support across the aisle

[telee.kom]

So, Trump is going to be announcing his plan for mandatory 6 weeks paid maternity leave. Also tax deductible child care and expenses. Holy shit...

http://archive.is/kMqJr

I want to know how trump supporters will rationalize this. I want to know how everyone else will perceive this.

That seems awfully short to me, but apparently USA have none right now so..

You gotta give it to him, he kinda uses Hillary's own weapons against her. I don't know if people here discussed how Trump reacted to Hillary's basket od deplorables, but whoever is in charge of his twitter account deserves a blow job for this. Using words of a democratic president who even endorsed Hillary against her, that's gotta hurt.

http://i.imgur.com/6E0nVPl.png

And now after all this "vote for me because I'm a woman" campaing , Trump might come off of this as a candidate who actually care more about well being of women in US. That's nuts. As someone who works in marketing, I gotta respect that. His PR is on point these last couple of days, and Hillary should either wake up, or she's going to loose this one.

[allegro]

And now after all this "vote for me because I'm a woman" campaing
First of all, she never says that.

Second of all, this has been on her issues page for about a year (https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/paid-leave/).


Guarantee up to 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave to care for a new child or a seriously ill family member, and up to 12 weeks of medical leave to recover from a serious illness or injury of their own.

Thirdly, the person behind Trump's childcare revelation? His brilliant daughter, Ivanka.

See also this (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/08/08/the-problem-with-donald-trumps-plan-for-child-care/) from August 8th re the problems with a "tax write-off" for childcare.


There are a few reasons that these deductions primarily benefit wealthy families. First, many working-class households do not pay any federal taxes on their income. Second, even those that do pay income taxes generally opt to take the standard deduction from their income, rather than itemizing expenses like child care. From the few words that Trump offered in his speech, it was not clear whether his plan would provide additional benefits for these households beyond the current standard deduction.

Finally, HRC didn't write off "half the country," she wrote off half of Trump's supporters which certainly IS NOT half the country.

People were bitching that HRC was making a mistake by lying low and ignoring Trump and not addressing Trump's shit. Then she directly addresses Trump's shit and people tell her she's making a big mistake by not lying low and ignoring Trump's shit.

[telee.kom]

And you think people are going to care it's in her program for a year? I'm saying how Trump managed to take advantage of something that should be Hillary's domain. And this works by design. If Hillary said that, nobody would give a shit, but because it's Trump of all people, everybody will talk about it

[allegro]

And you think people are going to care it's in her program for a year? I'm saying how Trump managed to take advantage of something that should be Hillary's domain. And this works by design. If Hillary said that, nobody would give a shit, but because it's Trump of all people, everybody will talk about it
But, as was mentioned, the Republicans are NOT going to like it. The Democrats might, but that totally defies the Republican "less Government" platform, and the Tea Party that is trying to get rid of "entitlement" programs, and small businesses that are going to go apeshit trying to figure out how to pay for that many weeks of paid leave. Get it? He is trying to court some Dems but he'll lose his own supporters (and he won't get any Dem votes, no way, not with his pro-life stance). The Executive branch doesn't even have the AUTHORITY to pass that kind of thing, anyway; he'll need the REPUBLICAN-CONTROLLED Congress to write it and pass it, and they'll just as soon see PIGS FLY. You're not really getting how the American parties are divided, and how Trump's voters are voting.

Trump said a lot of this shit OVER A MONTH AGO (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/08/08/the-big-difference-between-donald-trumps-and-hillary-clintons-child-care-plans/?tid=a_inl), it's not new news. He's spinning it again, now, because he's in trouble for a few things (the Florida attorney general contribution money, the Putin is a great leader shit yet again, and now he's getting shit for lying and saying that he "knew 100 people who died on 9/11" when it's been surmised that he didn't know one single person who died on 9/11 and not only did he never donate one penny to the 9/11 fund, he actually got money FROM the 9/11 fund for "business losses", etc.) so he's trying to deflect attention.

Here is a sample of how the Republican conservatives are reacting to Trump's proposal. (http://www.dailywire.com/news/9092/new-conservatism-trump-pushes-paid-maternity-leave-ben-shapiro)

[telee.kom]

You're not really getting how the American parties are divided, and how Trump's voters are voting.


Yeah you're probably right. I honestly have no clue, why would anybody be against this. Even developing African nations have paid maternity leave. I guess my european perspective is getting in a way of freedom™ again

[allegro]

Yeah you're probably right. I honestly have no clue, why would anybody be against this. Even developing African nations have paid maternity leave. I guess my european perspective is getting in a way of freedom™ again

In the U.S., the cost of paid maternity leave is absorbed not by the Government but by the individual businesses, even small businesses. So not only does a small business have to pay the person (who is off) her/his salary, the business has to pay for a temp. Because our Government does not pay for the leave. And Republicans are REALLY against Government-mandated anything, and they're ESPECIALLY against our Government paying for mandated anything, so that's why the cost is passed off onto the businesses (or taxpayers). That's why businesses pay for health insurance of their employees, and the employees contribute toward it out of their respective salaries. The only time the Government pays for healthcare is Medicaid and Medicare (really poor people and old people, respectively).

Hell, we didn't have Medicaid and Medicare until the 60s during the Johnson administration; it was called "KennedyCare" until he was assassinated and then LBJ got it passed, but a whole SHITLOAD of Republicans HATED it and they are pretty much STILL trying to get rid of it.

The U.S DOES have FMLA (the Family and Medical Leave Act (https://www.dol.gov/whd/fmla/)) which insures that employees who work for qualifying companies (larger than a certain number of employees) are guaranteed leave for family emergencies etc., BUT WITHOUT PAY, without being fired. Companies voluntarily choose to pay employees for leave, if they want, or to extend leave time, etc.; it is not mandatory.

[telee.kom]

And Republicans are REALLY against mandated Government anything, and they're ESPECIALLY against Government paying for mandated anything, so that's why the cost is passed off onto the businesses.

If government is collecting taxes, is it really so far fetched to think, that state should also provide certain kind of services towards their own citizens? US doesn't even have very low income tax in comparison to other countries. So it only really depends what the government choose to do with the money. I recently speak to an American who moved to Czech Rep. and he was saying how US has become very socialistic country because of whole Obamacare and really just the social system in general. So I don't really get that, you'd rather spend almost half of your taxes on military? Why? Wouldn't something like parental leave, standard in every developed nation in the world, be more beneficial towards your own citizens? It's about finding the right balance, having all out socialistic state is terrible idea, but there are certain basic services I would expect my government to provide.

[tony.parente]

First of all, she never says that.
She literally sells a woman card on her website.
(https://shop.hillaryclinton.com/products/the-woman-card)

[Khrz]

She literally sells a woman card on her website.
(https://shop.hillaryclinton.com/products/the-woman-card)

Having that as your argument and making fun of your opponent's argument aren't the same thing though, in fact it's exactly the opposite.

[tony.parente]

Having that as your argument and making fun of your opponent's argument aren't the same thing though, in fact it's exactly the opposite.
Well there's also this (https://shop.hillaryclinton.com/products/the-statement-tank), this (https://shop.hillaryclinton.com/products/women-for-hillary-tee), this (https://shop.hillaryclinton.com/products/stitch-by-stitch-throw-pillow), and this deck of cards (https://shop.hillaryclinton.com/products/deck-of-woman-cards) that literally says "only 5% of woman are fortune 500 companies" on the front.

[telee.kom]

She made her gender an important part of her camping, I don't think there's any point in denying that. It depends how much of a strong card is that. If you compare it to Obama's first elections, I don't think he really tried to sound like "Hey, you can make me first black president of USA". Him being black was part of the discussion, but it was not really part of his marketing. I think it's better to revolve your campaing about something broader, like "change" for example (which you can interpret in many ways), rather than "her" "I'm with her" etc.

[Swykk]

I just hate the whole thing. It's why I've been mostly silent in this thread for awhile. To say neither choice is good is an understatement as is the lesser of two evils schtick. I hate how Sanders got fucked by his own party, and the rotten twat that was responsible for it got a slap on the wrist, then a promotion, then won her spot in November's election. Fuck Wasserman-Schultz. And also, the Lena Dunham "I'm With Her Because I'm A Woman And That's The Only Reason, No Need To Look At Anything Else" HRC supporters are utterly embarrassing as well. It was a shit show from the word go. I also wound up losing a lot of respect for Elizabeth Warren, who sat on the fucking bench until the game was already over. Weak sauce.
Sour grapes? Maybe. What I know is the best person, the most sincere person, for the job got screwed from every direction possible.
And ever since the race was set, what's Hillary been doing? Not much. Hanging out on fucking Twitter, shooting that low hanging fruit. It's been all Trump in the headlines, better or worse (DEFINITELY worse). The most press she's gotten is from having pneumonia, which sucks by the way. The "basket of deplorables" thing? That's been her best move yet. You have to strike at these LCDs. You have to stand up for progress. You do not cater to them. So I applaud her for that but she's acting like she knows she's already won and let the dopey orange troll cry himself to sleep. You cannot high road this one because it looks like apathy, Hillary. It looks like you don't care and have better things to do. That rubs people on the fence the wrong way.

Fight fire with better fire. So yes, good job on the "deplorables" comment. Let the lowest know their behavior isn't acceptable.

[allegro]

She made her gender an important part of her camping, I don't think there's any point in denying that. It depends how much of a strong card is that. If you compare it to Obama's first elections, I don't think he really tried to sound like "Hey, you can make me first black president of USA". Him being black was part of the discussion, but it was not really part of his marketing. I think it's better to revolve your campaing about something broader, like "change" for example (which you can interpret in many ways), rather than "her" "I'm with her" etc.
You are in Marketing? I was a Manager in Marketing for many years. Key element is know the demographics (https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/women/report/2012/12/12/47916/how-women-changed-the-outcome-of-the-election/).


There has been much discussion about the demographic makeup of the 2012 electorate, and one thing is clear: Women’s voices determined the outcome of the election. Across the board, women made the difference. Here are seven key facts about women voters and the gender gap in the 2012 elections.

1. Women were the majority of voters.
According to exit polls 53 percent of the voters in the 2012 elections were women—more than one out of every two voters across the country was a woman. Moreover, 55 percent of those women cast votes for President Barack Obama. Women who voted for President Obama made up 29 percent—nearly one-third—of the electorate.

Saying, "I'm with her!" or saying, "We"ve shattered the glass ceiling" are facts and they are Marketing. But Clinton is not saying "Run for me BECAUSE I am a woman" because that is silly, she has a bunch of stances on her platform, and her primary demographic doesn't even need to hear the female message; it already knows it, and the entire demographic can make the decision using the two choices currently provided to the primary demographic (female) and secondary demographic (everybody else):

1. Sexist racist stupid comments, pro-life, SCOTUS appointees, national security disasters certain, financial meltdown certain, entitlement programs go bye-bye, ACA gets gutted by Congress, seniors and poor get poorer (Trump)

2. Clinton

The "deal me in" slogan was CREATED BY TRUMP, as a RESPONSE to a Trump comment (http://m.wmdt.com/news/Trump-on-Clinton-Only-card-she-has-is-the-woman-s-card/39247074). The Clinton demographic LOVES it. They CHANT it at rallies.

Also from the above link re women and the 2012 election:

The top issues for women were the economy and a candidate who will fight for them. Abortion may have been salient, but jobs and the economy are still the primary concern. Polling firm Momentum Analysis conducted a bipartisan study of “Walmart moms”—women with kids younger than age 18 and who have shopped at a Walmart at least once within the past month—and found abortion lagged behind the economy as a vote driver for these women. Similarly, according to the official exit polls, Gov. Romney bested President Obama by approximately 14 points with the three-fourths of the electorate who said the most important candidate qualities were that he “shares my values,” “is a strong leader,” or “has a vision.” But President Obama trounced Gov. Romney by 63 points with the one-fifth of voters who said “cares about people like me” was the most important value.

[telee.kom]

3. neither, because the choices are both so bad, people just won't bother come to these elections

and you've said it, her primary demographic doesn't have to hear the female message, but what does she have to offer to undecided voters? What's the strong message she's carrying apart from "I'm female" and "I'm not Trump"? That's good enough for a lot of people, but undecided voters won't be impressed be neither of those things, if they were, they wouldn't be undecided voters. This is just my outsider perspective, but all I really see from Clinton's message is Trump is bag of dicks + I'm a woman. And you can point me to her program, but politics is all about appearances. And she honestly appears like someone who doesn't have appealing and/or strong message to me. I just always hated primarily negative campaigns. They're both doing this and that's part of the reason why these elections are so shitty this year.

[allegro]

What's the strong message she's carrying apart from "I'm female" and "I'm not Trump"? That's good enough for a lot of people, but undecided voters won't be impressed be neither of those things, if they were, they wouldn't be undecided voters.
Again, there are all of the items on her platform in addition to the "stop Trump" initiative (which is PRETTY FUCKING STRONG, btw), which include:

1. Pro Choice; supports full and comprehensive immigration reform with path to citizenship; supports increasing background checks to keep guns and ammo out of the hands of the mentally ill and terrorists and criminals; wants to close corporate tax loopholes, wants to streamline wasteful and redundant government programs, wants to end no-bid contracts, wants to bring legislation that will overturn Citizens United; wants to bring legislation that will bring back the Voters Rights Act; wants equal pay legislated; wants family paid leave and tax credits legislated; wants stronger climate change laws, wants to penalize countries that do not adhere to climate change laws; wants free tuition at public colleges and wants to ease the burden of college tuition for college students; etc. etc. etc.

2. Liberal appointees to now one and possibly THREE United States Supreme Court positions (the President nominates these SC justices)

3. Experience: She was a United States Senator from New York from 2001 through 2009, and served on these committees (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_career_of_Hillary_Rodham_Clin ton), and she was the United States Secretary of State from 2009 through 2012 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton%27s_tenure_as_Secretary_of_State).

4. Plain old Democrat vs. Republican, which has always been how this country mostly votes: Democrat platform vs. Republican platform. There have always been the "undecided," the "third party," the "outliers" and since a candidate can't court their vote without alienating their own base, the general aim is to stay on path.

[allegro]

US has become very socialistic country because of whole Obamacare and really just the social system in general
For the record: Obamacare, or the Affordable Care Act (as it is really known) is not socialized medicine; it's "affordable" medical insurance and the Government does not pay for it. The only part of the ACA that the Government pays for is the expanded portion of Medicaid, and the individual STATES pay for that, not the Federal government. I think it's one thing that Europeans really misunderstand when it comes the ACA a/k/a "Obamacare." The ONLY form of "socialized medicine" that we have is Medicare (for people above 65) and Medicaid (for very very poor people or people on Federal disability) but it's still not totally socialized because monthly premiums are paid by the recipients of Medicare.

Insurance payments on the "exchange" (group of participating medical insurance companies, which vary by state) on the ACA is subsidized for people who have very very low incomes because insurance is now mandatory and these subsidies are provided by way of tax credits.

Republicans hate the ACA (again, they hate mandatory Government anything); Democrats now acknowledge that there are problems with the ACA (Obama initially promised a single-payer system where the Government would be the insurer for individual healthcare and individuals would pay premiums to the Government, and any healthcare bill would NOT mandate individual plans) but when the INSURANCE COMPANIES were called in by Congress to write the actual act, they got rid of the single-payer idea, and included the individual mandate. Republicans HATE Medicare and Social Security (our version of a Government old-person pension, which isn't much and the age keeps increasing) and they want to decrease the benefits or privatize it. Democrats want neither.

Republicans keep refusing to base Social Security payments on inflation AS EXPERIENCED BY SENIORS but, instead, base it off general inflation.

So, this year for example, my Mom's Social Security payment stays the same (no inflation increase) but the amount the Government takes out of it for her Medicare (again, WE PAY FOR THAT, it's not FREE) went UP, so her net monthly payments WENT DOWN. So "inflation" to senior citizens means food, Medicare, prescription drugs, cost of supplemental medical insurance (Medicare doesn't pay for everything) etc. Not all the other shit that the Government counts toward inflation.

President GW Bush and Congress at that time passed a bill that added prescription drug coverage ("Plan D") to Medicare coverage, but there is a monthly premium charged to seniors, a lot of drugs are on Tiers 2 and 3 (higher co-pays) and some drugs aren't covered at all, and there is the infamous "donut hole (https://www.medicare.gov/part-d/costs/coverage-gap/part-d-coverage-gap.html)" (coverage gap) AND the Government DOES NOT negotiate with drug companies for lower prices. My Mom's current Plan D premium deducted from her monthly Social Security check is nearly $70.

Both Clinton and Trump want to negotiate with drug companies for lower prices under Plan D, although Republicans DO NOT (Trump is breaking from party platform, although a private meeting with House Speaker Paul Ryan supposedly indicated that Trump is just saying this shit to win swing votes).

[allegro]

Also, there is a third choice:

http://f.tqn.com/y/politicalhumor/1/S/2/M/5/weiner-holder-2016-ticket.jpg

[DigitalChaos]

Second of all, this has been on her issues page for about a year (https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/paid-leave/).


Guarantee up to 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave to care for a new child or a seriously ill family member, and up to 12 weeks of medical leave to recover from a serious illness or injury of their own.
We need more info on Hillary's 12 weeks. All we know is that it is PARTIAL pay (where Trump's is full pay). Hillary's also has various exemptions (companies under 50 employees) where as Trump's doesn't.

It's a good topic and Trump may actually push it into the spotlight and force Hillary to be more specific. That's something I figured we were done with after Sanders left.







he'll need the REPUBLICAN-CONTROLLED Congress to write it and pass it, and they'll just as soon see PIGS FLY.
And so would Hillary. Trump, being a republican, would have a better chance of getting something difficult negotiated with that situation. Also, when midterms happen, Congress has a better chance of swinging Dem under a GOP POTUS, and a better chance of solidifying GOP under a Dem POTUS.



Of course, all of this is assuming that you believe anything politicians say to get elected. Closing Gitmo. Most transparent administration ever. Whistleblower protections. Stopping illegal spying.

[allegate]

I remember when Obama was first elected a lot of pundits were talking about him walking back some of the Presidential "powers" that Bush instituted. Months later, when nothing had changed - and in some cases seemed to have been made stronger - it was discussed that once power is attained, it's very hard to give it up.

[allegro]

We need more info on Hillary's 12 weeks. All we know is that it is PARTIAL pay (where Trump's is full pay). Hillary's also has various exemptions (companies under 50 employees) where as Trump's doesn't.
Which is exactly why his won't pass a Republican Congress; he's lying. I doubt Clinton's would pass a Republican Congress, either. Republicans protect small businesses and charging small businesses full pay for family leave? Yeah, right. But, anyway, see below:

As a child of small business-owners, I think there definitely needs to be exemptions. Also, as somebody with no kids: If you are going to extend paid leave for maternity, you have to also give those same benefits to people with no kids. Sorry, but fair is fair. Call it "family leave" (as it is currently called with FMLA) and include paid leave for sick parents, sick spouses, yourself if you are injured, whatever.

Their plans are never totally "specific" because they never write 'em: Congress does.


Of course, all of this is assuming that you believe anything politicians say to get elected. Closing Gitmo. Most transparent administration ever. Whistleblower protections. Stopping illegal spying.
Well, exactly. Voters like to dream. (Congress likes to kill those dreams.) All career politicians are mostly full of shit. All.

[DigitalChaos]

I don't think he is lying any more than Hillary is. Trump has a history of progressive positions.

We can debate the merits of parental leave, but I'd suggest considering the full economic picture. Children become tax payers.

[allegro]

I don't care what children become. Let them pay the taxes later. Penalizing non-childbearers is not democratic or equal. Parents already get tax deductions for those kids, and non-parent workers already pay undue burdens for parents who leave early, take off work, etc. for their kids (which was never the case in the old days). If I hear one more crock of shit about fucking seniors "for our grandchildren," I'll scream.

It's like in the suburb where I live, where the genius school board wanted to pass A $1.98 MILLION DOLLAR REFERENDUM FOR A HUGE NEW SINGLE MIDDLE SCHOOL. Our city has seen a huge decrease in the number of kids in our schools, and some of the schools need repairs, etc., so the school board decided that we need to close at least 5 schools and then they came up with the brilliant fucking idea for borrowing ALL THIS FUCKING MONEY for this giant school, which would require tearing down two local elementary schools so those kids would now have to be BUSED to other elementary schools and all middle school kids in my city would have to be bused to this new middle school and taxpayers would see AT MINIMUM a $1,000 per year tax increase for a home that is worth $350,000 and then up from there and our state is ALREADY paying the 2nd largest property taxes in the country.

And our demographic? OVER SIXTY PERCENT of the citizens of my city don't have any kids, and a huge amount of them are retired senior citizens on fixed incomes, and a growing number of the school district are Mexican-American immigrants with low incomes and some of them don't even speak any English in an adjacent village that is part of our school system, but this new plan would wipe out the "dual language" program that taught the Spanish kids English and vice-versa. And the money for this school? BORROWED over a FIFTY-YEAR period, making it the largest loan IN STATE HISTORY.

It FAILED BY A LANDSLIDE.

Wanna guess WHY? Gee, 60 fucking percent tells a lot, #1. #2, there is absolutely zero evidence that those "future taxpayers" are even going to STAY HERE. NINETY PERCENT of our current property taxes already go to: THE SCHOOL SYSTEM. Until children are taxpayers, they are tax burdens. Any fees or salaries paid are passed on to consumers, taxpayers, etc.

The only real "solution" would be to allow people to collect temporary unemployment during that time (if their employer is exempt or does not offer the benefits) so the Government would then pay the benefit, rather than force small businesses to pay the benefits.


Re Trump lying. Okay, substitute "lying" with "strategy"

In a meeting with Paul Ryan, Trump allegedly said (http://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-reince-priebus/):


“From a moral standpoint, I believe in [entitlement cuts],” Trump told Ryan. “But you also have to get elected. And there’s no way a Republican is going to beat a Democrat when the Republican is saying, ‘We’re going to cut your Social Security’ and the Democrat is saying, ‘We’re going to keep it and give you more.’ ”

[DigitalChaos]

^^ All of that is an argument against basically every tax funded service that doesn't benefit 100% of the people directly. Tax money for public schools. Childless people don't directly benefit. Hell, even tax money taken for socialized healthcare. Healthy people don't directly benefit.

It's almost as if... voluntary payment for services is morally superior (aka democratic and equal) than forcing people to fund all these public services.

[allegro]

^^ All of that is an argument against basically every tax funded service that goes to only a subset of people. Tax money for public schools. Childless people don't directly benefit. Hell, even tax money taken for socialized healthcare. Healthy people don't directly benefit.
Do you know how many people LOSE THEIR HOUSE because they have to be off work after, say, surgery and they don't get any pay? And that's not "having a baby," it's just unpaid FMLA leave. And it's just as important to get some kind of pay. Now, at law firms where i worked, my employer-provided health insurance included disability pay and that coverage would have provided me with full pay should I have had surgery or whatever. But many do not have that kind of employer-provided insurance. We now have a fast-growing aging and dying Baby Boomer population where people have to take care of aging parents, so it's going to be FAR more likely that somebody has to take off work to care for their dying mom than for maternity leave.

Healthy people DO benefit from healthcare, because they take advantage of preventative medicine, regular checkups, vaccinations, etc. It's a big reason why they STAY healthy.

We gladly pay for social services like fire protection, police protection, public schools, etc., so long as it does not place undue burden on taxpayers. We are seeing that undue burden right now in the City of Chicago where the teacher's union is demanding that a contract that was negotiated many years ago by prior administrations allowing that the Chicago (and State) taxpayers kick in 7% of pension contributions and teachers kick in the remaining 2% (while police and fire contribute the full 9%) while the City is so broke it's currently lowered to Junk Bond status and we can't hire any more police and we just passed 3,000 shootings, but the City has to get money from somewhere so they're taxing the shit out of EVERYTHING, and the Republican Governor is refusing to budge in increasing state taxes to pay for Chicago's woes, because the state taxpayers have sent a clear message that they are sick of paying for Chicago's debts. We're talking downstate farmers, local suburbs that generate their own revenues, etc.

Nobody is going to voluntarily pay for anything. They wouldn't send their kids to school if they didn't have to (they didn't used to, people made their kids work and contribute to the family debts until school became mandatory).

[DigitalChaos]

yeah, cause preventative medicine is totally worth the money put into the insurance that covers it, compared to just paying out of pocket for it. that's exactly how the insurance companies make their money!</s>

Lets go back to schools. No public schools then?

[allegro]

yeah, cause preventative medicine is totally worth the money put into the insurance that covers it, compared to just paying out of pocket for it. that's exactly how the insurance companies make their money!</s>

Lets go back to schools. No public schools then?
Insurance sucks, and you know what made us have to HAVE insurance? Medicare. Pretty much. Before that, healthcare was cheap enough that people paid cash. Once health insurance started up, greed set in, hospitals found out that the Government wrote checks for pretty much anything, it's the same reason why college tuition skyrocketed. Hospitals and Universities and insurance companies are in the business of making profit. They don't give a shit about anything except profit, and the Government checks arriving = guaranteed income.

But, we pay for insurance for the event of catastrophic anything. It's why we have any insurance. The COST of insurance is high because of all of those UNHEALTHY people out there. It's why my car insurance is high even though I don't have any tickets and don't get into any accidents and my house insurance is high even though I've never made one single claim.

Public schools yes, but NO CORRUPTION. I can't even get started on this, it pisses me the fuck off, public schools are based on ZIP CODES. If you live in Chicago and your zip code is, say, Forest Glen, hey, your house is worth $600,000, you get good schools, a LOT of police protecting your house and car (because the cops all live around you and you pay higher property taxes), etc. If your zip code is, say, some shit south side area, your house is worth shit so your property taxes are not as high so your school is falling apart, or maybe they closed your school so your kid has to take a CTA bus through 4 gang-infested neighborhoods and you get NO cops and there are 5 crack houses on your block that are boarded-up with weeds growing out front but the City won't do anything because they don't give a shit because of your zip code because, hey, you don't pay a lot in taxes. Meanwhile, the teachers are screaming about PENSION PENSION PENSION and their aren't even any art supplies and they took away the art programs, the kids have no music programs in these neighborhoods, some of the buildings have rats ...

Meanwhile, if you live in Winnetka and that school district you get to go to New Trier where they have sushi in the cafeteria (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Trier_High_School).


New Trier spends more than $15,000 yearly per student, well above the state average of $8,786.

You may recognize it from various movies (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Trier_High_School#In_the_movies).

[DigitalChaos]

Oh, i agree that public schools get completely fucked up and corrupt quite easily. Its like most public services. The primary incentives lean toward corruption, so thats what you get without HEAVY involvement by those who oppose corruption.

But back to the fundamentals. Public schools (operated perfectly) that are funded by local tax payers are ok, even though the kids in them may not stay local and child-less adults do not directly benefit. But parental leave... not ok because the kids it is supporting may not stay local and feed the economy? Or...?

I'm just confused. You opposition to parental leave being unfair to some people seems to also apply to quite a few other tax funded social initiatives.

[allegro]

I'm just confused. You opposition to parental leave being unfair to some people seems to also apply to quite a few other tax funded social initiatives.

I'm saying don't have JUST "parental leave" ...the U.S. already has "family leave (https://www.dol.gov/whd/fmla/)" (Family and Medical Leave Act) which is not ONLY for maternity, but is for "family" which includes:


The FMLA entitles eligible employees of covered employers to take unpaid, job-protected leave for specified family and medical reasons with continuation of group health insurance coverage under the same terms and conditions as if the employee had not taken leave. Eligible employees are entitled to:

Twelve workweeks of leave in a 12-month period for:
* the birth of a child and to care for the newborn child within one year of birth;
* the placement with the employee of a child for adoption or foster care and to care for the newly placed child within one year of placement;
* to care for the employee’s spouse, child, or parent who has a serious health condition;
* a serious health condition that makes the employee unable to perform the essential functions of his or her job;
* any qualifying exigency arising out of the fact that the employee’s spouse, son, daughter, or parent is a covered military member on “covered active duty;” or

Twenty-six workweeks of leave during a single 12-month period to care for a covered servicemember with a serious injury or illness if the eligible employee is the servicemember’s spouse, son, daughter, parent, or next of kin (military caregiver leave).

I'm saying don't focus on "maternity" leave but focus on "family leave" which is more equitable. And, then we have to make sure we know who is PAYING FOR IT and to make sure it is not an undue burden that won't negatively affect small businesses or that the cost won't end up being passed on to consumers or won't put small businesses out of business, etc. If the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT pays for it, and there is some sort of tax stream established for that which doesn't burden small businesses or taxpayers, then small businesses won't be burdened and consumers won't be burdened.

[allegro]

NBC has done a comparison of the Trump and Clinton plans (http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/comparing-trump-clinton-s-child-care-plans-n647711):


Paid Family Leave

Trump: Trump doesn't offer leave for fathers, but his maternity leave plan would guarantee six weeks of paid maternity leave in the form of unemployment insurance, which is capped at a percentage of income in many states.

Clinton: Clinton's plan guarantees 12 weeks of paid family leave - for mothers and fathers with at least two-thirds of their salary. It would be paid for by raising taxes on the wealthy.

Cost of Child Care

Trump: Working parents - and parents who stay home to care for children - can deduct the costs on their taxes via the Earned Income Tax Credit. The campaign estimates that middle class families could receive a $1,200 tax break.

Trump also proposes a Dependent Care Savings Account that allow the accumulation of funds and are tax deductible and appreciate tax free. Dependent care accounts already exist but must be used by the end of the year and only available through an employer.

Clinton: She wants to cap child care costs at ten percent of a family's income. To do that, she'd rely on tax cuts or state block grants for the government to subsidize costs exceeding ten percent.

From CNN regarding Trump's plan (http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/13/news/economy/trump-child-care/):


New mothers would be guaranteed six weeks of partially paid leave.
Women whose employers don't offer paid maternity leave could collect six weeks of unemployment benefits when they have a child.

The campaign estimates the program would cost about $2.5 billion a year, but said it would pay for that by ridding the unemployment insurance system of fraud, which it valued at $3.4 billion.

[DigitalChaos]

i see

well shit, you and i have talked about this topic several times. most in depth was probably the feminism thread, i've finally made some progress on my side of things! My company just decided to roll out 10 week 100% paid leave that applies to both the mother and father. I am not going to say exactly how it was done or what my involvement was (cause confidentiality and all that) but I will say what the influencing factors were: quantity was decided so that we would stay competitive. equal amount applied to gender/family role was because we present ourselves as extremely progressive on the gender/sexuality/identity/etc end of things.

And who says you need government to force the market to provide these things! :D

(ill be nuking this post after a day or so)

[sick among the pure]

Yeah nothing says "got to the presidency with nepotism" quite like a well-regarded tenure as a senator from New York and a time spent as Secretary of State where, while in office, you had immensely high approval ratings and support across the aisle

Which is why most of NY State hates her?

[allegro]

well shit, you and i have talked about this topic several times. most in depth was probably the feminism thread, i've finally made some progress on my side of things! My company just decided to roll out 10 week 100% paid leave that applies to both the mother and father.
Well, but Jerry Brown has upped that even further to paid FAMILY leave (http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-sac-paid-family-leave-california-20160411-story.html):


The measure Brown signed into law will allow people earning close to minimum wage to be paid 70% of their salary while on leave, while workers with higher pay, up to $108,000 annually, will get 60% of their salary during leave. The change takes effect in 2018.

Brown signed the bill in a packed ceremony in his office surrounded by advocates for the poor and by Californians who will benefit. Vivian Thorp from Alameda County talked about being a single mother who is on leave to care for an ailing parent.

“Having the ability to take paid family leave is truly critical to my sole ability to assist in taking care of my mother,” Thorp said as Brown looked on.

In a statement, President Obama lauded California's new law as setting a good precedent for the rest of the country.

"This is great news for California," Obama said. "Yet millions of Americans still don’t have access to any form of paid leave. Congress needs to catch up to California — and to countries all over the world — by acting to guarantee paid family leave to all Americans. [...]

The family leave measure was introduced by Assemblyman Jimmy Gomez (D-Echo Park) based on personal experience. As a child, he spent seven days in a hospital with pneumonia, something he said caused severe financial hardship for his family, he said.

“It is unrealistic to expect a worker who is already living paycheck to paycheck on 100 percent of their salary to use a program for 6 weeks at nearly half of their wages,” Gomez in a statement."

[DigitalChaos]

Well, but Jerry Brown has upped that even further to paid FAMILY leave (http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-sac-paid-family-leave-california-20160411-story.html):

Huh? How is 6 weeks pay at 60-70% "even farther" compared to 10 weeks at 100%?

[allegro]

Huh? How is 6 weeks pay at 60-70% "even farther" compared to 10 weeks at 100%?

It's family leave that pays for sick parents, sick kids, dying spouses or parents, etc.

Not just "I just had a baby."

You just wait until you get older and you don't have to only worry about your little kids, anymore. Trust me.

I can't tell you the MONTHS G and I have taken dedicated to caring for our sick or dying parents (and my dying brother).

At some point, you enter the "sandwich generation" where you are caring for kids AND parents.

[allegate]

fucking seniors "for our grandchildren,"


https://img.ifcdn.com/images/33fa4960966fecd631f53681a17589d148fe042ccf1a2a0906 1688c1165c3f25_3.jpg

[allegro]

Also, you people in Europe sometimes think there is "nothing going on" or don't see what's happening because you aren't seeing all of the TV ads all day long like we are (http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/13/politics/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-ads/index.html). This is why our Presidential candidates needs many many millions of dollars: TV ads and plenty of them.

I must've seen this ad about 100 times last week:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mrX3Ql31URA

[allegro]

Here's another one that runs all the time:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SR4L6rJ-MV0

[GulDukat]

The latest polls have me nervous. I can't believe so many people are supporting this asshole. It shouldn't even be close. A lot of ignorant people out there.

[allegro]

At this point, I agree.

Although, it could only be worse with Ted Jesus Cruz.

[implanted_microchip]

Which is why most of NY State hates her?
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/01/17/wsjnbc-poll-hillary-clinton-exits-with-69-approval-rating/

[DigitalChaos]

I haven't seen one political TV ad in forever. Dropping TV service back in 2000 was the greatest ever.


The latest polls have me nervous. I can't believe so many people are supporting this asshole. It shouldn't even be close. A lot of ignorant people out there.
pseudo democracy is fucking great, isn't it!

[Dra508]

I'm going to jump off now
http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/a3356886/ivanka-trump-child-care-maternity-leave-policy/

[allegro]

I'm going to jump off now
http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/a3356886/ivanka-trump-child-care-maternity-leave-policy/

What the fuck.

[theimage13]

I'm going to jump off now
http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/a3356886/ivanka-trump-child-care-maternity-leave-policy/

My head hurts. I stopped reading after this part. Which is, for those who didn't read, the THIRD straight question from the interviewer trying to clarify who the policy would actually help.

So I just want to be clear that, for same-sex adoption, where the two parents are both men, they would not be receiving special leave for that because they don't need to recover or anything?

Well, those are your words, not mine. [Laughs.] Those are your words. The plan, right now, is focusing on mothers, whether they be in same-sex marriages or not.

[allegro]

Cosmo: OK, I just wanted to make sure I understood. In 2004, Donald Trump said that pregnancy is an inconvenient thing for a business. It's surprising to see this policy from him today. Can you talk a little bit about those comments, and perhaps what has changed?

Ivanka Trump: So I think that you have a lot of negativity in these questions, and I think my father has put forth a very comprehensive and really revolutionary plan to deal with a lot of issues. So I don't know how useful it is to spend too much time with you on this if you're going to make a comment like that.

[Exocet]

Maybe a Donald Trump presidency would not be as bad as everyone makes out....YES he is vile.
but you need to look at the bigger picture.

Maybe Americans are governed by fear...

Everyone said Britain would sink after Brexit....guess what our economy is doing better now...
All the fear mongering was bullshit. It was all bullshit...you know what i mean..

the world is structured in a certain way...Brexit destroyed this...

I know he is awful but look at the bigger picture....

[WorzelG]

^^^we haven't Brexited yet so we have no idea how things will pan out when we do.

[allegro]

I know he is awful but look at the bigger picture....
The bigger picture is a guy with a bad temper with the codes to a SHITLOAD of our nuclear weapons. It ain't the same as Brexit, hon.

[Exocet]

^^^we haven't Brexited yet so we have no idea how things will pan out when we do.

Yeah so what...UK is the 5th richest country in the world, we have a bigger economy than Brazil and Russia combined.. im fairly confident we will be ok.

Why would we not be....why is there no Asian Union, why is there no Latin American Union..

get your head out of the sand..the EU is dated...

[allegro]

Here's another Clinton ad:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeYKFRV34kY

[allegro]

Yeah so what...UK is the 5th richest country in the world, we have a bigger economy than Brazil and Russia combined.. im fairly confident we will be ok.

Why would we not be....why is there no Asian Union, why is there no Latin American Union..

get your head out of the sand..the EU is dated...

What she is SAYING is that you don't know what is going to happen, yet, because it hasn't fully happened, yet, so you can't use that as an example of what will happen with Trump. Get it?

(jesus christ)

Also, BREXIT has NOTHING to do with the U.S. Nothing. Quit comparing it to the U.S. Sorry, but the U.K is 57% of the size of CALIFORNIA and we can't even BEGIN to compare the U.S. to the U.K. economically, so just stop, please. This is just drift in this thread.

[Exocet]

The bigger picture is a guy with a bad temper with the codes to a SHITLOAD of our nuclear weapons. It ain't the same as Brexit, hon.

Your a useless nuclear warehouse....He will never use them...get real....nobody is scared of that....

[allegro]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SR4L6rJ-MV0&feature=youtu.be

[Exocet]

What she is SAYING is that you don't know what is going to happen, yet, because it hasn't fully happened, yet, so you can't use that as an example of what will happen with Trump. Get it?

(jesus christ)

Also, BREXIT has NOTHING to do with the U.S. Nothing. Quit comparing it to the U.S. Sorry, but the U.K is 57% of the size of CALIFORNIA and we can't even BEGIN to compare the U.S. to the U.K. economically, so just stop, please. This is just drift in this thread.

OMG im not comparing the UK to the US economically at all ...that ABSURD...its like comparing a country to a continent...the U.S is bigger than Europaen continent...its not same thing at all....totally different countries in that regard. .. im saying is that culturally its simillar to whats going on....

Ignore at your peril

[onthewall2983]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Csc09vLXEAA7j3Z.jpg:large

[allegro]

OMG im not comparing the UK to the US economically at all ...that ABSURD...its like comparing a country to a continent...the U.S is bigger than Europaen continent...its not same thing at all....totally different countries in that regard. .. im saying is that culturally its simillar to whats going on....

Ignore at your peril


It's not culturally the same at all, either. At all. Trump is a Capitalist American Billionaire. He could probably BUY your country right now. And, bottom line, he represents the typical white American aspiring Capitalist Patriot. He is the Walmart Hero.

Look, our Capitalism DEPENDS ON our immigrants. We can't survive without them. Trump's lawn is mowed by Mexicans. He certainly ain't getting out there and mowing his own fucking lawn, and he can't get White Americans to do it. Study Marxism: Everything at the bottom in Capitalism depends on people working for bottom wages, and in America that means minorities. It used to mean slavery until that was abolished. Then it was child labor, until that was abolished. Labor unions are still really strong in this country. Trump was a sorta-Democrat but he fucked Union labor and used illegal immigrants via contract labor. Now he says he's a Republican but the Republican establishment says he is full of shit, and that he is only using this position to gain more publicity for his own businesses. Which is probably true.

[Exocet]

It's not culturally the same at all, either. At all. Trump is a Capitalist American Billionaire. And, bottom line, he represents the typical white American aspiring Capitalist Patriot. He is the Walmart Hero.

Look, our Capitalism DEPENDS ON our immigrants. We can't survive without them. Trump's lawn is mowed by Mexicans. He certainly ain't getting out there and mowing his own fucking lawn, and he can't get White Americans to do it. Study Marxism: Everything at the bottom in Capitalism depends on people working for bottom wages, and in America that means minorities. It used to mean slavery until that was abolished. Then it was child labor, until that was abolished. Labor unions are still really strong in this country. Trump was a sorta-Democrat but he fucked Union labor and used illegal immigrants via contract labor. Now he says he's a Republican but the Republican establishment says he is full of shit, and that he is only using this position to gain more publicity for his own businesses. Which is probably true.

Yeah ok 65 Million people in my country....one of the oldest democracies in the world just ignored this bullshit.
i dont understand why the U.S is different

[allegro]

Yeah ok 65 Million people in my country....one of the oldest democracies in the world just ignored this bullshit.
i dont understand why the U.S is different

First of all, the U.S. has nearly 319 Million people.

Secondly, this country was founded TO ESCAPE YOUR FUCKING COUNTRY (no offense)

Thirdly, we have a two-party system (currently, anyway)

And why do you think that branch of Republicans is called the TEA PARTY (http://www.history.com/topics/american-revolution/boston-tea-party), anyway???

[Exocet]

First of all, the U.S. has nearly 319 Million people.

Secondly, this country was founded TO ESCAPE YOUR FUCKING COUNTRY (no offense)

Thirdly, we have a two-party system (currently, anyway)

And why do you think that branch of Republicans is called the TEA PARTY (http://www.history.com/topics/american-revolution/boston-tea-party), anyway???

Whatever cupcake...we formed the biggest Empire of all time after we lost you ...LOL you were founded by a bunch or sexless god fearing virgin frigid Puritans...no wonder your fucking crazy lol..

Look i love America dearly. I just see similarities..i hate the way things are at the moment.

[WorzelG]

The only way in which I would compare Brexit to this election is DON'T BE COMPLACENT and polls can be totally wrong

[allegro]

Whatever cupcake...we formed the biggest Empire of all time after we lost you ...LOL you were founded by a bunch or sexless god fearing virgin frigid Puritans...no wonder your fucking crazy lol..
Darling, you aren't exactly sexy Romans ... you're a bunch of virgin frigid Puritans, too. But, whatever. We still have L.A. and New Orleans. You don't. Ptttttht. Stiff upper lip, show us your tits, love. You're still drifting in the U.S. election thread and your horrendous English grammar and spelling implies that you're not even from the U.K.

[implanted_microchip]

I'm pretty concerned we're gonna see people claim Trump will have "won" the first debate, because he has set expectations so unbelievably and incomparably low that all it'll require is him to not call Hillary a bitch on live television and people will be "impressed."

Meanwhile Hillary will continue to be held to an absurd standard by plenty of people in a weird and hypocritical way as is tradition. If she knocks it out of the goddamn park no one's going to likely give her credit or do a lot of "Sure, but" bullshit.

I think the first debate is going to matter a lot and if the moderation continues to be as lazy and unprofessional as most of the media has been all election long, I'' extremely concerned. If Trump gets his feet held to the fire for his consistent non-answers, obvious bullshitting and dodging of questions, it'll hit him hard. If we just get more lazy "Excuse me"'s and ignoring of his garbage he'll have too much room to get away with shit. (What I'm really saying is: fuck Matt Lauer's useless ass)

[DigitalChaos]

lol. Exocet makes a perfectly valid point about people's fear creating rhetoric that just might not match reality and gets attacked. Most-important-election-ever-must-steamroll-anything-that-suggests-otherwise.

[allegate]

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/trump-campaign-statement


TRUMP CAMPAIGN STATEMENT

"Hillary Clinton’s campaign first raised this issue to smear then-candidate Barack Obama in her very nasty, failed 2008 campaign for President. This type of vicious and conniving behavior is straight from the Clinton Playbook. As usual, however, Hillary Clinton was too weak to get an answer. Even the MSNBC show Morning Joe admits that it was Clinton’s henchmen who first raised this issue, not Donald J. Trump.

In 2011, Mr. Trump was finally able to bring this ugly incident to its conclusion by successfully compelling President Obama to release his birth certificate. Mr. Trump did a great service to the President and the country by bringing closure to the issue that Hillary Clinton and her team first raised. Inarguably, Donald J. Trump is a closer. Having successfully obtained President Obama’s birth certificate when others could not, Mr. Trump believes that President Obama was born in the United States.

Mr. Trump is now totally focused on bringing jobs back to America, defeating radical Islamic terrorism, taking care of our veterans, introducing school choice opportunities and rebuilding and making our inner cities safe again." – Jason Miller, Senior Communications AdvisorWell alright then. BTW, the sky is green.

[Swykk]

Building on what I said two pages ago, which was largely ignored, HRC today said she was "glad she could finally get the GOP interested in women's health."

THAT is the fighting fire with smarter fire attitude I've been wanting. Add it to the deplorables comment. Keep doing this, Hillary. Do not cater to the lowest. It's the fence riders you need to gather now.

[allegro]

Building on what I said two pages ago, which was largely ignored, HRC today said she was "glad she could finally get the GOP interested in women's health."

THAT is the fighting fire with smarter fire attitude I've been wanting. Add it to the deplorables comment. Keep doing this, Hillary. Do not cater to the lowest. It's the fence riders you need to gather now.
I don't think it was "ignored," I just think there's not a lot more that can be said; Clinton has been running ads for months showing Trump to be a total asshole, I put a few right here on this page (which were also "ignored" but there's not much that can be said about them). She really doesn't need the fence-riders when you think about it; if she gathers her own voters who voted for her in the primaries, and Trump gathers all of the voters that he got in the primaries, she still beats him hands down she doesn't need any more. The Cruz voters and the Kasich voters and the Rubio voters have made it pretty clear that they hate Trump and will stay home or will vote for Johnson, so whatever. And the Sanders voters' votes can't be counted on for HRC. So, throw all of those votes out and we pretty much come down to the votes in the primary, right? Plus consider that a lot of Democratic voters didn't even bother to show up (but Republicans did).

Primary results:

Clinton: 16,912,545

Trump: 14,015,993

So AT LEAST that will stay the same but what MIGHT change is that Trump number getting LOWER, the worse he looks.

[allegro]

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/trump-campaign-statement

Well alright then. BTW, the sky is green.

Hillary Clinton herself or her campaign NEVER raised the birther bullshit, never said it, in fact she refuted it; some people who were her SUPPORTERS may have BUT SHE AND HER CAMPAIGN DID NOT (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/09/23/republicans-are-blaming-hillary-clinton-for-the-birther-movement-thats-wishful-thinking/). Trump can repeat this lie 1000 times and hope his stupid followers will believe it (they will) but it doesn't make it true.

[DigitalChaos]

her supporters "may" have? No, her supporters DID give birth to the birther bullshit: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2010/02/08/the-secret-history-of-the-birthers.html

It was done by very strong supporters of hers who did not want to let Obama take the nomination from Hillary. Of course, they were also hiding behind "this is mysogynistic" back then too. They thought that if they dug up enough dirt on Obama, that it would bring Hillary back after her concession. They filed an injunction relating to the birth certificate to stop the DNC from moving forward!

There is no "may have"

[allegro]

her supporters "may" have? No, her supporters DID give birth to the birther bullshit: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2010/02/08/the-secret-history-of-the-birthers.html

It was done by very strong supporters of hers who did not want to let Obama take the nomination from Hillary. Of course, they were also hiding behind "this is mysogynistic" back then too. They thought that if they dug up enough dirt on Obama, that it would bring Hillary back after her concession. They filed an injunction relating to the birth certificate to stop the DNC from moving forward!

There is no "may have"
Look, at some point those same alleged supporters got so pissed at Clinton for supporting Obama and refuting the birther shit, they jumped ship to the Republican side. And all that is IN THE LINK I PROVIDED FROM WAPO. I suggest you sit and read the ENTIRE article that I linked. I know it might require pain, suffering, a highlighter and some tranquilizers ... Breitbart linked that same WaPo article as the "source" indicating that Clinton is the origin of the birther movement (http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/09/26/washington-post-confirms-hillary-clinton-started-the-birther-movement/), because Breitbart can't read and mixes up the topics of "Muslim" with "born in another country" as being synonymous because they're too stupid to know that they aren't mutually exclusive.

[sick among the pure]

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/01/17/wsjnbc-poll-hillary-clinton-exits-with-69-approval-rating/


Sorry, I'm missing the part that says NY doesn't hate her. Where is that part?

[allegro]

Sorry, I'm missing the part that says NY doesn't hate her. Where is that part?

Look, regardless of that article that he posted, HRC won the US Senate position in New York by election, twice, and not by appointment by nepotism. She was elected. If so many people truly hated her, she wouldn't have been elected. Twice. If she was only there in that job due to nepotism, she would have been appointed, not elected. I understand that she might be really loved in the populous areas of the NYC boroughs particularly after 9-11 where she tirelessly fought for funds and medical help, etc. but perhaps is thought to have neglected the remainder of the state (which is also what happens here in Illinois when our Senators focus on Chicago and forget the farmers or small towns and citizens in, say, Centralia which is 5 hours south of Chicago and is closer to St. Louis than Chicago). But the original post (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/threads/3669-2016-Presidential-Election?p=316482#post316482) (made by a European) was about how HRC is only known for being a First Lady and having Bill as a Husband, and she is a candidate only through nepotism, and kleiner352 merely corrected that by stating that she was also a US Senator in NY as well as a U.S. Secretary of State, and then you made a rather incongruous remark saying that she was hated in NY State, which is not related to nepotism since she was elected in that position, twice, and it doesn't relate to the OP's comment about nepotism and her being a First Lady as her sole qualification and history.

[implanted_microchip]

Sorry, I'm missing the part that says NY doesn't hate her. Where is that part?

Well, she won with 67% of the vote in her second term.

Approval ratings often drop for senators later on. That really wasn't my point at all though -- the whole "it's all nepotism!!!" argument would imply she unfairly got where she's gotten. If that was the case she wouldn't have had the highest approval of anyone in the Obama administration nor would she have become a senator twice with an even higher margin of victory the second time around -- you know, the point where voters had some years of her tenure to judge.

This is the same shit that keeps me out of here as often as I'd like to be -- pedantic, childish bullshit.

[allegro]

Well, incongruous illogical stuff is the stuff I don't get. It's like interjecting "But, it has SLEEVES" into the middle of a discussion about politics. It doesn't make sense. She wasn't appointed to the U.S. Senate position. She was elected. She won via popular vote. Twice. If she was hated, she wouldn't have won, twice. And if she is where she is at right now "strictly through her husband and nepotism" that would imply that she had not authored some best-selling books, had not been selected to the position of U.S. Secretary of State by her former Presidential opponent (somebody her husband allegedly dislikes), hadn't earned her J.D. from Harvard, etc. etc. Her resume speaks for itself, there is no indication that the original poster's comment -- "She would never be where she is now without her husband" -- is anything but sexist.

[sick among the pure]

Look, regardless of that article that he posted, HRC won the US Senate position in New York by election, twice, and not by appointment by nepotism. She was elected. If so many people truly hated her, she wouldn't have been elected. Twice. If she was only there in that job due to nepotism, she would have been appointed, not elected. I understand that she might be really loved in the populous areas of the NYC boroughs particularly after 9-11 where she tirelessly fought for funds and medical help, etc. but perhaps is thought to have neglected the remainder of the state (which is also what happens here in Illinois when our Senators focus on Chicago and forget the farmers or small towns and citizens in, say, Centralia which is 5 hours south of Chicago and is closer to St. Louis than Chicago). But the original post (made by a European) was about how HRC is only known for being a First Lady and having Bill as a Husband, and she is a candidate only through nepotism, and @kleiner352 (http://www.echoingthesound.org/community/member.php?u=4417) merely corrected that by stating that she was also a US Senator in NY as well as a U.S. Secretary of State, and then you made a rather incongruous remark saying that she was hated in NY State, which is not related to nepotism since she was elected in that position, twice, and it doesn't relate to the OP's comment about nepotism and her being a First Lady as her sole qualification and history.

Look, regardless of the fact that the link you provided had ZERO to do with what I said, I'll clue you in on something. Which is to say I'll have to restate my post and see if you understand it now.
The majority of New York State has hated Hillary since she became our senator.

She was voted in mostly due to her name (she was seen favorably as the former first lady, at the time) and due to NYC and Albany big-money politics (which is why, if you look at county-by-county voting, the ENTIRE STATE voted against her minus long island and the county Albany is in). Have you ever stopped to think about WHY she ran for NYS senator, and not her home state? Because of NYC. Because of Wall Street.
Note I never said we hated her but elected her anyway, which is what you seem to be arguing with your "but you elected her" bullshit.
Since before Hillary even ran back in 2008, there have been signs all over the entire state against Hillary. As time has gone on, they've grown in number and spread to even the big cities. As it stands right now, traveling across the entire state, I have seen at most one pro-Hillary sign for every 100 or more signs that are either pro-Trump, pro-Bernie (even still), pro "anyone but Hillary", or pro Hillary for prison (which are signs that have been up since her re-election to state senate, they're not new for her time as secretary of state or the 2016 election, it's an old phrase for how she treated NYS).

If someone was elected to any position, and then hated by the people who they represented after having taken said position, you wouldn't use that as something to list under accomplishments, would you?
Point being, if a senator is running for president, but hated by the majority of the state they represent, that should probably be a sign.

Those who have been represented by her despise her.

This is a warning coming from a life-long democrat who might vote for her this fall, not from someone who is on a tirade to make her look bad. She's done enough of that on her own.

[aggroculture]

But why is she hated exactly?

[implanted_microchip]

Oh okay now instead of nepotism it's Wall Street, good to be kept up on the narrative changes here

And as Secretary of State you kinda represent everyone in the country and, as that article I linked shows, she sure had the majority on her side (overwhelmingly, in fact) and it wasn't until the usual propaganda blitz of Fox News and Co. really kicked in that her favor as SoS dropped.

I don't think she's perfect, allegro doesn't, I've really seen no one here explicitly claim she is. What I see a lot of people saying is "She has some issues, sure, and maybe things she ought to work on, but she's overall a qualified and competent candidate and when you look at the alternative there's little room for debate over who would better not fuck this whole thing up for four to eight years," and then "BUT SHE'S THE WORST THING EVER SINCE CANCER SHE IS AIRBORNE AIDS."

[allegro]

Look, regardless of the fact that the link you provided had ZERO to do with what I said, I'll clue you in on something. Which is to say I'll have to restate my post and see if you understand it now.
The majority of New York State has hated Hillary since she became our senator.

She was voted in mostly due to her name (she was seen favorably as the former first lady, at the time) and due to NYC and Albany big-money politics (which is why, if you look at county-by-county voting, the ENTIRE STATE voted against her minus long island and the county Albany is in). Have you ever stopped to think about WHY she ran for NYS senator, and not her home state? Because of NYC. Because of Wall Street.
The link I provided was the original topic of discussion, the reason for kleiner352's response about HRC being US Senator in NY and her being US Secretary of State.

She didn't really HAVE a home state, anymore. She grew up in Illinois, then she moved to Arkansas to be with Bill Clinton but they had lived in Washington D.C. for 8 years and then they planned to live in NY. They STILL LIVE THERE. They weren't moving back to Arkansas, and they certainly weren't moving to Chicago where she hadn't lived in so long she barely remembered it. (Guess what? The Obamas ain't moving back to Chicago, either.) I have known people who owned seats on the NY Stock Exchange who didn't live in NY state at all. You don't have to live there if you have a private plane. And, of course, HRC won the NY Democratic Presidential primary. Seeing signs is not an indication of hatred or love. Jinsai said he did not know one person who liked Hillary in California, yet guess who won the primary in California? No, it wasn't rigged. It just means one side is more vocal with more signs.

Regarding people she represented who "all hate her," I recommend that you read this (https://www.facebook.com/james.grissom/posts/10210311889333429).*

People don't elect people they hate. That's just ignorant. But you go right ahead and keep believing that. As kleiner352 indicated, she had a good favorability rating when she exited to become Secretary of State. During the NY primary, she won mostly in the counties near NYC whereas Sanders won in outlying counties. Those demographics can be explained by philosophies and economic and age demographics more than simply "everybody hates her."

*In case the link isn't available, I'll quote it here:

James Grissom
July 29 · New York, NY ·

I thought for a time that Bernie Sanders might be our best option for President. I liked his radical ideas, and I believed, and still believe, that things need to be changed. But then I was reminded that some people speak well and inspire, and others actually show up and get things done. It may not be as inspirational; it may not lead to a slogan or button, but the showing up--consistently and firmly--changes lives.

In February of 2007, when I was working part-time in the bookstore of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, I was diagnosed with bladder cancer. I did not have insurance, and I did not have savings. The urologist who diagnosed me sent me to Planned Parenthood, where a female physician mapped out the treatment options for me. I was treated for a time by Planned Parenthood physicians, not the cartoon abortionists or criminals they are often said to be. The doctor at Planned Parenthood put me in touch with an oncologist who, when told of my lack of insurance or funds, treated me as a family member, telling me to remind the billing department and other personnel that I was her family member. Being labeled as such entitled me to discounts on my treatment.

It takes a woman. Or women.

I attempted to pay, as well as I could, the fees for the treatment, but the hospital chose to report me to a collection agency, which began legal action. My physician was startled, and suggested that I contact both the billing department and my senator.

The billing department told me I earned too much money to qualify for Medicaid, but I could apply for financial aid offered by the hospital. However, I was told, the collection process would continue.

I contacted the office of my senator, Hillary Clinton, and within two weeks I was speaking to someone in her office, who, at one point, handed the phone to the senator herself. "You did not enter a credit agreement with that hospital," she told me, "so I cannot fathom why they are pursuing you as if you did. In addition, that hospital is aided by the state of New York and the federal government, so they are way out of line. You need to fight this cancer and get well: You don't have time for this nonsense. Let me look into it."

Within a week, the collection calls ceased, and within a month, Hillary Clinton put me in touch with two organizations offering financial aid to people undergoing cancer treatment. These organizations eliminated half of my debt, and within eighteen months, I had paid the remaining amount, without any collection activity or annoying calls.

I just re-read the letter that Hillary Clinton sent to the hospital (It was Roosevelt, if you must know), and in her indignation, she refers to me as her friend. Not a constituent, but a friend. She prevailed upon the proud history of the hospital and the medical profession to do the right thing, and adjudged the collection activity to have been an "unfortunate mistake or oversight."

On two occasions I received letters from her, and once a phone call. The doctor from Planned Parenthood and the oncologist recommended by that organization continued to treat me at discounted rates. My friends--again female--at the Museum kept my cancer a secret, and probably saved my job.

I am now receiving treatment through insurance made available through the Affordable Care Act, and while I am cancer-free, there are still follow-up procedures that are necessary.

And yet--Hillary Clinton and Planned Parenthood are villainous, despicable, ready for defunding or defeat. I don't understand that, and I don't understand how we have difficulty in choosing our next President or where our donations should go. But that's me.

That's my time with HIllary Clinton. Sorry I looked away for a time. But now you can deal me in.

[DigitalChaos]

People don't elect people they hate. That's just ignorant. But you go right ahead and keep believing that.

hahahahaha
... no

Let me introduce you to Diane Feinstein. Another corrupt bag of shit from a Dem controlled city. I promise you that a whole lot of the locals here hate her, but the problem is that they refuse to vote for anyone without a D. Jill Stein or Bernie Sanders could be running with an R by their name and they would lose badly. And the Dems refuse to put anyone else up that would challenge Feinstein because they know their voters will eat what they are fed.

[allegro]

hahahahaha
... no

Let me introduce you to Diane Feinstein. Another corrupt bag of shit from a Dem controlled city. I promise you that a whole lot of the locals here hate her, but the problem is that they refuse to vote for anyone without a D. Jill Stein or Bernie Sanders could be running with an R by their name and they would lose badly. And the Dems refuse to put anyone else up that would challenge Feinstein because they know their voters will eat what they are fed.

Again, that's just silly. If they HATED her, they would vote for a Republican (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_D%27Amato). Which is exactly what I have done, and the REPUBLICANS WIN, HERE. The sole reason why a Dem wins, here, is because they like 'em If they hate 'em, they're out, fuck 'em. If you think that Chicago is less Dem than where you live, you are smoking CRACK, buddy. The sole exception is Mayors in Chicago but no Republican ever even RUN. *shrug* I guess they don't want to be bothered.

I voted for Senator Mark Kirk (Republican) TWICE (he used to be the U.S. Representative in my District). He's out this time, though, Duckworth is gonna be in. I voted for Rauner (Republican) for Governor, but he's kinda screwed right now while House Speaker Madigan (Democrat) has been in there FOR 900 FUCKING YEARS.

[allegate]

Sorry, I'm missing the part that says NY doesn't hate her. Where is that part?

How about instead of you asking for proof of your point, you provide some proof of your point. Yes/No?

[allegro]

But why is she hated exactly?

You lived in NY for a long time; were you surrounded by Hillary haters?

[DigitalChaos]

You must not know any progressives. Voting R is voting against their entire identity. So no, they won't vote R just because they hate the D option.




....lol hate the D

[hellospaceboy]

Strange, I have several friends who live in NYC and they all LOVE Hillary.

I'm not saying that every NYC resident loves her, but that I know several people who do. Of course I'm liberal so I KNOW that my group of friends is NOT a randomly selected group that somehow reflects the population. They will be mostly liberals. But it tells me that there are people out there who love her, who don't think that she's the lesser of the two evils, and in fact she was their first choice!