Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - American Politics the 2016 edition
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedAmerican Politics the 2016 edition

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 121122123124125 146>
Author
Message
Triceratopsoil View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 03 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 18016
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 14 2016 at 20:51
Mainstream media is fairly accurate LOL

Buzzfeed as a citation for that claim LOLLOLLOL
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 14 2016 at 23:34
Everyone. I hate to be "this guy" but stop giving Colin attention. 
He has clearly joined the alt right club. Like Trump himself attention fuels the fire. You can't win. It will just be nonsensical, circular arguments filled with stupid memes, purposely designed to annoy and distract. When all else fails, the classic alt right argument is to find a way to turn it on you. YOU actually are the one being racist/sexist etc happens every time. No matter how detailed the response, mockery and "LOLLOLLOL" will be the response. You won't get anywhere. 

No idea if he's just being edgy or actually a conservative, but if it's the latter..don't fall for his "bubble" and red areas liberals dont understand blah blah   He's an engineer from a good family. Knows nothing of rural/working class people. Those of us who knew him on FB can confirm, he's about the farthest that can be from that. He is the one out of the touch with the average American. 

Maybe he can be elected President next! As 2016 has proven, no political experience, being out of touch with working voters and even being from Canada are no barriers to success! LOL




Edited by JJLehto - November 14 2016 at 23:36
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 14 2016 at 23:43
Originally posted by rushfan4 rushfan4 wrote:

The second thing that Trump does after becoming president is eliminate the Estate tax.  i.e. preserves his family at least 1/2 a billion dollars in Estate taxes that they might otherwise be subject to upon his death.  One might think that this is well worth becoming president and only getting paid $1 per year.

Ah yes. Trump's "I wont take my salary" has won an iota of respect from even die hard haters. You are right however, just like the $1/year CEOs this is probably a financially beneficial move for him. That f**ker always winsLOL
Oh and no doubt, despite his web of lies and flip flops no question he and the GOP Congress will try to finally kill the "death tax" 
Between the wealthy tax cuts they will pass, the rich will finally have it all! Little taxes paid during life, and none in death. 


The sincerely anti elitist/aristocracy conservatives (cough Steven Bannon cough) have pushed a guy to the Presidency that may create a true aristocracy! 
Back to Top
Triceratopsoil View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 03 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 18016
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2016 at 00:41
Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

Knows nothing of rural/working class people.


WRONG, most of my family are farmers.  Special thanks for the implication that ruralites aren't "good families"

Look, it's nothing personal to anybody here, but the DRAMATIC changes to public discourse of the past 5-10 years are reversing and reversing hard.  Anybody who is paying attention can tell that, just like anybody who was paying attention has known Trump would win for well over a year.  The kali yuga is ending.


Edited by Triceratopsoil - November 15 2016 at 00:54
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2016 at 00:54
Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

Trump has named Reince Priebus, whose name rolls off the tongue as either Rice Primus or Prince Penis, as Chief of State with the divisive Steve Bannon as his head council. Now the Secret Service has to secure the  perimeter of the park bench that Bannon retires to every night.
This will either be a marriage made in hell for the Republicans or for the Democrats. Only time will tell.

It really is impressive how far off the rails the Republican Party has gone. 
Even if you were not a fan of McCain, and I wasn't, tough to dislike the guy. Famously defended Obama against the "not an American" nonsense, and now there's a champion of the birther movement, Trump about to be President. The fringe of internet politics, Breitbart, is now hand in hand with the RNC. 

Guess we should've seen the warning signs in 2012: Rick Perry, Michelle Bachmann, Ron Paul and the OG Trump...Herman Cain. 
I hope the Democrats can capitalize. It's relieving that Keith Ellison has picked up several big endorsements for his run for DNC chair. Shame Chuck Schumer is certain to be the next Senate Minority Leader. Talk about a wall st paid off insider! Would love Warren or Sanders,but I wont even dreamLOL




Edited by JJLehto - November 15 2016 at 01:44
Back to Top
Triceratopsoil View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 03 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 18016
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2016 at 01:09
Trump is already talking to Trudeau about renegotiating NAFTA as well
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2016 at 01:27
Originally posted by Triceratopsoil Triceratopsoil wrote:

Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

Knows nothing of rural/working class people.


WRONG, most of my family are farmers.  Special thanks for the implication that ruralites aren't "good families"

Look, it's nothing personal to anybody here, but the DRAMATIC changes to public discourse of the past 5-10 years are reversing and reversing hard.  Anybody who is paying attention can tell that, just like anybody who was paying attention has known Trump would win for well over a year.  The kali yuga is ending.

OH...did Mr Alt Right haha I troll all you whiny liberals grow a backbone!, get a tad upset?Wink 
Was barely even a mean comment.

Anywho, I do thank you for at least giving a proper response. You are correct, the last 10 years has been a shift in politics. Trust me, I have not missed it. I wasn't really active here during the campaign but I was a die hard Sanders supporter. Didn't agree 100% with him, but his theme/message was correct.

It started exactly 10 years ago actually. The Democratic wave had a lot of populism to it, lost in anti Iraq and Bush fervor. Swept Obama in 2008, and has forked into the Tea Party, OWS and the rejection of both: trumpsim. 
Though no, I didn't expect Trump's win because while not perfect: polling didn't indicate it, demographics didn't indicate it, and Trump is such a lying sh*t head, never figured the Rust Belt would actually believe him. Too many Republicans didn't like Trump, the list goes on. I did figure it would be a close election, but she just wins. Sure, it was disturbing how Trump never faltered, but can't just use your gut to analyze such things. What can ya say? All reasonable, realistic expectations failed. And ya know, more people actually DID vote for ClintonLOL 


You mention public discourse. If you mean this specifically, no doubt there's been an increasingly "simplistic" tone. 
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2016 at 01:37
Originally posted by Triceratopsoil Triceratopsoil wrote:

Trump is already talking to Trudeau about renegotiating NAFTA as well

Saw that, think I posted it here. Got lost in all the chaos of trolling and yellingLOL
In all fairness, sounds like it was Trudeau extending the olive branch, saying he's "open" to discussing. We shall see what comes of it. Never believed Trump, I mean the guy has personally profited from overseas labor, and has already reneged on several of his platform policies. But hey, if he can actually achieve something positive I'd applaud it. 
I have no idea how NAFTA has been for Canada. If it has been a negative, or had any negatives, for Canada it makes sense. From all I've heard it's been a net positive, but I'm sure there's been some job loss Trudeau can use to compromise on. 

Since Obama ran on renegotiating NAFTA in 2008, one reason I liked him, it would be painful if Trump managed to do itLOL 

Though personally US-Canada trade seems the least of concern. It's trade with low income, developing nations and the lack of regard for labor, environmental standards that is concerning. China will be a much tougher fight than Trudeau. 


Edited by JJLehto - November 15 2016 at 01:48
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2016 at 01:47
Anyway speaking of.  TPP is dead, at least for the lame duck period. 
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/nov/12/tpp-trade-deal-congress-obama  
This is relieving, I was certain a lame duck vote would happen. It's now on Trump. Will he flip flop on one of very pillars of his campaign, stopping the trade deal? One that he could actually achieve? We shall see.

Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2016 at 03:44
Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

Ah yes. Trump's "I wont take my salary" has won an iota of respect from even die hard haters.
This is a 'smart' move by Trump and one that no one should ever applaud or condone. A country of 300 million people cannot be governed by a part-time unpaid president. By not drawing a public salary he is not an employee of the people so in principle it makes him unaccountable.

What?
Back to Top
SteveG View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20616
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2016 at 04:33
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

Ah yes. Trump's "I wont take my salary" has won an iota of respect from even die hard haters.
This is a 'smart' move by Trump and one that no one should ever applaud or condone. A country of 300 million people cannot be governed by a part-time unpaid president. By not drawing a public salary he is not an employee of the people so in principle it makes him unaccountable.

I have the strange feeling that Trump would think himself unaccountable with a salary.
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Back to Top
Sean Trane View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Prog Folk

Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 20313
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2016 at 05:17
Originally posted by micky micky wrote:

balletto di bronzo man.... Thumbs Up
 


Ooohhh... I could've searched for eternity, I don't think I would've gone the Via Roma direction in that quest

Thanks Wink
Back to Top
progaardvark View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Crossover/Symphonic/RPI Teams

Joined: June 14 2007
Location: Sea of Peas
Status: Offline
Points: 51474
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2016 at 06:45
Originally posted by lazland lazland wrote:

Originally posted by progaardvark progaardvark wrote:

Originally posted by Triceratopsoil Triceratopsoil wrote:

You have no idea whatsoever how conservative (especially socially) the average person is, because (unlike liberals) conservatives aren't willing to ruin friendships over politics so they keep their mouths shut & their facebook posts apolitical.
It must smell nice in that bubble you live in. From out here it smells like a raging potato salad urinating all over the back seat of a 1974 Ford Maverick.



Blimey. Are potato salads capable of urinating? Are raging potato salads urinating worse than ordinary ones? Is it worse on the back seat than the front? Would it make any difference in a 1976 Capri?

I think we should be told
It only takes an ounce of Sun for a bag of doorknobs to ameliorate a panorama of "clear form" buttons.
----------
i'm shopping for a new oil-cured sinus bag
that's a happy bag of lettuce
this car smells like cartilage
nothing beats a good video about fractions
Back to Top
Gamemako View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 31 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1184
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2016 at 11:07
Originally posted by Triceratopsoil Triceratopsoil wrote:

Mainstream media is fairly accurate LOL

Buzzfeed as a citation for that claim LOLLOLLOL


Complaining about the source of good data does not make for intelligible debate. For that matter, do recall that John Edwards was correctly outed by the National Enquirer and not by any traditional news source on either side.

For any interested parties, I actually found my way to that Buzzfeed article by way of Harvard's Niemen Lab, on which an article was published concerning the disparities in media consumption.

Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

Everyone. I hate to be "this guy" but stop giving Colin attention. 
He has clearly joined the alt right club. Like Trump himself attention fuels the fire. You can't win. It will just be nonsensical, circular arguments filled with stupid memes, purposely designed to annoy and distract. When all else fails, the classic alt right argument is to find a way to turn it on you. YOU actually are the one being racist/sexist etc happens every time. No matter how detailed the response, mockery and "LOLLOLLOL" will be the response. You won't get anywhere. 


That's a bit of the same trap that lead to Trump's presidency. Refusing to engage just means that the only person speaking in that realm is the one preaching absurdity. I would argue that disengagement is the genesis of the echo chamber. Debating against popular opinion can be mentally exhausting. People don't cling ever more tightly to opinions they know to be unpopular as that crowd becomes less receptive; rather, they seek out a sanctuary in which those opinions are taken as gospel. Being involved here means he likely won't simply admit to it, but by hearing a rational response, he might begin to see the cracks in the wall behind which he keeps his treasured assumptions. Furthermore, the audience on a public forum is not merely the individual to whom the response is ostensibly directed. Providing context or rebuttal helps keep the thread from spiraling out of control.

Plus, I'm also a (former) engineer, and engineers love nothing more than to argue about everything. Wink

Originally posted by Triceratopsoil Triceratopsoil wrote:

Look, it's nothing personal to anybody here, but the DRAMATIC changes to public discourse of the past 5-10 years are reversing and reversing hard.


Context: 10 years ago, George W. Bush was striking the midpoint of his second term, and the Great Recession had yet to strike. Unemployment was at 4.5% (it is presently 4.9%), and labor force engagement was still high, albeit below its Clinton-era peak.

I make this point because the conditions which have yielded a Trump victory are largely economic. Following the Great Recession, we saw a dramatic loss of manufacturing jobs. In fact, there's some evidence that manufacturing job loss is centered on recessions, of which we have since experienced the largest in nearly a century. Agricultural employment has stagnated for decades, losing in number and more dramatically in percentage of the workforce. Unemployment remains high in that sector, even as the overall unemployment rate has fallen. Similarly, the recovery hasn't brought a return to manufacturing employment. Wisconsin and Michigan have two of the slowest population growth rates. Let's not forget how much Obama touted the (wildly successful) auto bailout in 2012, which certainly helped bolster his numbers in the key state of Michigan.

The cultural factors? Well, despite what some liberals would say, W. largely governed from the center. Obama has governed from the center. The center has been the bedrock of politics. What has changed in the past 10 years is the dramatic polarization of our electorate, and that has not been reversed but rather accelerated by Trump's rise. However, I as I said, I am tempted to believe the primary driver of that polarization has been economic. It has been West Virginians -- the only state to decline in population -- raising hell over the decline of their way of life. Like Ross Perot's aversion to debt, I expect that the cause of protecting the economic well-being of all people will simply be co-opted by both parties. The safeguards against aristocracy have been eroded for half a century, and this may be the pushback.
Hail Eris!
Back to Top
Triceratopsoil View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 03 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 18016
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2016 at 11:52
Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

And ya know, more people actually DID vote for ClintonLOL 

Without New York and California she would have lost popular vote by millions.  Do you think New York and California should decide things for the rest of the country?  Electoral votes exist for a reason.


Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

Since Obama ran on renegotiating NAFTA in 2008, one reason I liked him, it would be painful if Trump managed to do itLOL 

Honest question, if Trump passes changes that you support is it a bad thing in your eyes?  Especially if they are changes the democrats have been talking about for years and never actually did anything about?


Edited by Triceratopsoil - November 15 2016 at 11:52
Back to Top
Gamemako View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 31 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1184
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2016 at 12:19
Originally posted by Triceratopsoil Triceratopsoil wrote:

Without New York and California she would have lost popular vote by millions.  Do you think New York and California should decide things for the rest of the country?  Electoral votes exist for a reason.


Whether Trump would win without the Electoral College is moot. The dynamics would shift dramatically as people would vote who otherwise don't due to their vote not actually mattering. Noncompetitive states have low turnout, which skews the result, and pollsters almost universally seek likely voters rather than the electorate at large. Consider these turnout rates: Hawaii 42%, Utah 46%, West Virginia 51%, Tennessee 51%, Oklahoma 52%, New York 52%, Arkansas 52%, California 54%. Those are the non-competitive states at the bottom of the turnout rolls. How about the competitive ones? New Hampshire 70%, Wisconsin 68%, Colorado 68, Michigan 65%, Virginia 65%, Florida 65%, Ohio 65%, Pennsylvania 61%. The swing states are the high-turnout ones.

As for why the Electoral College exists, it has nothing at all to do with the current dynamic. The framers of the Constitution did not plan on political parties dominating the discussion, did not plan on statewide plurality voting for electors, did not plan on bound delegates, and did not even plan on the Electoral College deciding most elections. There can be no mistake here: the current function of the Electoral College was never intended or even considered to be a possibility. (Federalism was, however, quite intended with the system, but that's a different issue altogether.)
Hail Eris!
Back to Top
dr wu23 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 22 2010
Location: Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 20631
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2016 at 13:57
^ Hail Eris indeed........one wonders who RAWilson would have voted for ...?   Wink
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin
Back to Top
dr wu23 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 22 2010
Location: Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 20631
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2016 at 14:01
To be honest, I’m less troubled by the alien invaders than I am by the leader we’re taking them to.”[&amp;amp;#8203;IMG]

Edited by dr wu23 - November 15 2016 at 14:02
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin
Back to Top
The T View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 15 2016 at 14:05
^Aliens... oh poor foreigners they're so going to pack up their flying saucer and leave once they see how unwelcome they are in the new US of Whitemerica 
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 16 2016 at 00:15
Originally posted by Triceratopsoil Triceratopsoil wrote:

Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

And ya know, more people actually DID vote for ClintonLOL 

Without New York and California she would have lost popular vote by millions.  Do you think New York and California should decide things for the rest of the country?  Electoral votes exist for a reason.



Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

Since Obama ran on renegotiating NAFTA in 2008, one reason I liked him, it would be painful if Trump managed to do itLOL 

Honest question, if Trump passes changes that you support is it a bad thing in your eyes?  Especially if they are changes the democrats have been talking about for years and never actually did anything about?

Part 1: You just can't say that. It is what it is. NY and CA existLOL 
Anywho, that is not a new argument. "I dont want CA and NY running everything" heard it ever since the election and it goes back to the founding of this country. Yes, I know history, and why the Electoral College was designed. Here are my issues.

1: One purpose was to ensure rural areas had input and didn't get over run by urban areas. Candidates would have to run a national campaign. What you alluded to. 
BUT, that is not what has happened. The EC has done the opposite, it has boiled elections down to 3-5 states basically that gets the lions share of focus. Look at this election, it was basically decided by WI, MI and PA. 
A bit over 100,000 people in 3 states negated over 100 million people in 47 others. Doesn't seem like the national strategy panned out. 

2: The EC creates "worthless" votes. Millions of Trump voters in CA and NY were essentially worthless. Just like how the votes in states like NY, CA, TX, KS are "worthless" because you know they're gunna be red/blue. So the whole NY/CA will run everything is false. Republican voters in those states would actually now have a say. People tend to think of no EC like we still have one, a state vs state thing. But actually it's more individualistic. Every vote counts and matters the same. Maybe (thought I doubt it) more people would vote knowing "Hey I like Trump and live in California and now my vote won't be useless!"

I am not saying we should just abolish it, but reform is needed. The moment this happens to a Republican, they'll cry bloody murder. I've asked Repub friends of mine imagine this: Kasich (or whoever they like best) vs Sanders....the guy they fear and hate most. What if Kasich wins the pop vote but loses the EC to Bernie Sanders. Oh and the Senate flips Democrat because of it. Would you just quietly accept it without issue and not even at least ask if that's fair? I think one has responded at all, rest just stopped dead in their tracksLOL

PART 2:
Of course not. If Trump achieves something good, it's good. I put policy over party. If you do 9/10 things wrong I'll bash em but will praise the 1 they do good. I have criticized Obama, even Sanders, and given praise to Bush, Ron Paul. I'm fair and will support/attack ideas regardless of the party and politician. 
And hey, I've long been critical of the Democratic Party, especially in recent years. Including Obama's total "lol trolled yall" on NAFTA or his push for TPP. His biggest failing in my book. 

If Trump stops TPP, renegotiates some trade deals, does something pro labor....the Democrats only have themselves to blame. 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 121122123124125 146>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.289 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.