A new US Republican thread 2016

[seebart]

That is quite common now

disagreeing with argument = hate now

some people have even made a career out of it.

Spoiler:

106pvc.jpg (44.32 KiB) Viewed 7892 times

Just saw this, pretty wild:

New York Times Publishes Intense Game About Voter Suppression

http://kotaku.com/new-york-times-publis ... 1788583833

[Findecanor]

Hitler came to power when Germany was poor with promises to break the power of the banking elite that is keeping Germany in an iron fist, to help all Germans, to bring economical prosperity, to bring social justice, etc. That is why it was called national socialism (=nazi).

Sure, I think that many Germans at the time believed that when they voted for the Nazi party. People tend to be naive and stupid, not bothering to read up on what was really behind the slogans. There were also more moderate politicians in the Nazi party at the time who did have more towards socialist-democratic ideals, people which Hitler later had expelled and/or murdered.

But in the core of "national socialism", the "socialism" was only intended for those that the Nazi party deemed worthy: people who were strong (by their definition) and of the right race. The nazis killed even their own kind: drug-addicts, the depressed and the terminally ill in hospital gas chambers. That is not socialism.
Don't you ever go mistaking what they called "socialism" for actual socialism.

disagreeing with argument = hate now

That tactic become quite common even among the PC (politically correct) crowd nowadays as a way of dissuading arguments.

[fohat]

I want to vote for someone, not against someone else.

It may be objected, if man does not act from free will, what will happen if the incentives to action are equally balanced, as in the case of Buridan's ass? [In reply,] I am quite ready to admit, that a man placed in the equilibrium described (namely, as perceiving nothing but hunger and thirst, a certain food and a certain drink, each equally distant from him) would die of hunger and thirst. If I am asked, whether such a one should not rather be considered an ass than a man; I answer, that I do not know, neither do I know how a man should be considered, who hangs himself, or how we should consider children, fools, madmen, &c.
— Baruch Spinoza, Ethics, book 2, proposition 49

[adhoc]

However, for future discussion I would appreciate it if you tried to not attack me personally,
but rather rely on arguments.

You fail to see you were the one to first attack me personally, which is the only reason why I started doing it so...thanks, you too.

I attacked your arguments, not you as a person.
Sorry if you feel not agreeing with you is a personal offense.

Nah, you explicitly called me a name first, out of the blue. Not in this thread, but in the past. I don't forget, though.

[jacobolus]

kbdfr: don’t worry about adhoc. Russia has been running a propaganda/disinformation campaign throughout Eastern Europe for the past decade, and by now plenty of otherwise reasonable folks living there have become apologists for authoritarianism. It’s a sad story, but don’t hold him personally responsible.

[webwit]

Why is it a bad thing that Trump gets along with Putin? The alternative would be that he wouldn't get along with Putin. We are blessed at the moment to be out of the cold war with a realistic, tangible threat of nuclear war.

On a side note, this reminds me of the EU and the Ukraine. One of the reasons we had the EEC and now the EU is because we never wanted a repeat of WWII. And now we're expansionist. We're fucking pulling at Ukraine. Putin is a very scary guy who has never backed out of bloody conflicts, to say the least, but we should thank higher beings that in geopolitics he has been smart and practical, instead of pointing nukes at us. We seem to be begging for a new cold war, by continuously fucking with Russia, with trade sanctions and with Ukraine for example. The EU has become the opposite of its original goal. If you think I'm dramatizing, there's a very real war in the Ukraine caused by these tensions, a very real plane with civilians was shot out of the sky, not to mention all the civilian casualties and pain it caused on the ground. Yah, EU. And yet they claim, cynically, that the whole approach is about peace. It is land grab. Hasn't history taught us: do-not-fuck-with-Russia.

[002]

Why is it a bad thing that Trump gets along with Putin? The alternative would be that he wouldn't get along with Putin. We are blessed at the moment to be out of the cold war with a realistic, tangible threat of nuclear war.

Totally agree...isn't a US / Russia friendship a better prospect for our future than the contrary? Hillary is much scarier in this regard because she is the one prodding the bear and pissing them off.

[jacobolus]

US / Russia friendship would be entirely plausible if the Russians would give up on their ambition of breaking NATO and reconquering Eastern Europe, stop meddling in politics across Europe (e.g. funding pro-Brexit propaganda and far-right parties across the continent), and commit to building a less authoritarian society.

The problem for Russia is that they need foreign militarism as a distraction from the complete collapse of the Russian economy under the weight of low oil prices. This is roughly comparable to the US Republican Party’s political calculus (see: various support for nasty dictators, money funneled to paramilitaries, military adventures in Latin America and the Middle East, etc. under Reagan and both Bushes), where foreign military adventures are a substitute for any kind of domestic policy proposals.

The Russian state today is weak, political corruption is endemic, and domestic stability is tenuous. Oligarchs have smuggled vast wealth out of the country, and wages, employment, healthcare, education, etc. are all in a crippled state, far below the standard of, say, 1975 USSR. Russia has fallen from world superpower status down to mid-level regional power. This leaves Russian nationalists pining for the good old days, and war in e.g. Crimea and denunciations of the USA are one way for Putin and his cronies to rally public support.

Even as a mid-level regional power, Russia is a serious threat to world stability though. They have nuclear weapons, a large army, plenty of computer hackers, and strongly centralized wealth in the hands of people who are willing to go to great lengths to keep it. Russia is scarier than roughly comparable powers like, say, Brazil, Italy, Mexico, or Indonesia.

[jacobolus]

Speaking of Nixon..

John W. Dean (White House counsel to President Richard M. Nixon from 1970 to 1973):

[...] Taken together, these investigations revealed astounding abuses of presidential power by Nixon, which included other illegal break-ins and burglaries; illegal electronic surveillance; misuses of agencies of government like the I.R.S., C.I.A. and F.B.I.; the practice of making political opponents into enemies and using the instruments of government to attack them; and then employing perjury and obstruction of justice to cover it all up.

Whatever mistakes Mrs. Clinton made, her actions bear no similarities whatsoever to Nixon’s criminalization of his presidency, and his efforts to corrupt much of the executive branch. As Nixon’s secretly recorded conversations show, he rejected the advice of his lawyers at every stage of Watergate; he was determined to do it his way. When he was forced to resign, or be removed from office by the impeachment process, he never truly apologized. Once out of office, he claimed he did not need the pardon he accepted that precluded his criminal prosecution, and he went to his grave claiming he was innocent of criminal behavior, absurdly asserting when the president does it, that means it is legal.

Contrast that with Mrs. Clinton, whose “scandal” is the result of her desire — like that of many, including President Obama — not to give up her Blackberry email account when she entered the executive branch. Only slowly did she come to appreciate the security risk of not using the antiquated State Department system.

She was unaware that a few classified items — some of which were classified after the fact — were in her private email system. Unlike Nixon, she has apologized. The F.B.I. record also shows that — again, unlike Nixon — she had no criminal intent in any of her actions.

Still, the efforts to draw a comparison between Mrs. Clinton and Nixon by Mr. Trump and many Republicans are telling, for several reasons.

First, they show how little they understand about Watergate itself. [...]

Second, Mr. Trump’s insistence that “Emailgate” is worse than Watergate serves to divert attention from the fact that, in my opinion, Mr. Trump is remarkably Nixonian, perhaps even more so than Nixon himself.

I say that because while Nixon’s dark and nasty side, largely hidden from public view, got him in trouble, he was also a man of intelligence, with a strong understanding of government, a deep knowledge of the world and a heartfelt vision for lasting peace. If Mr. Trump has such positive qualities, he has kept that side of him well hidden, while giving free rein to his dark and nasty worldview. [...]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/31/opini ... rgate.html

John Dean was the guy the FBI called the “master manipulator of the cover-up” in the Watergate scandal. So he’s someone who can speak with authority about what Nixon was like.

[kbdfr]

[…] You fail to see you were the one to first attack me personally, which is the only reason why I started doing it so...thanks, you too.

I attacked your arguments, not you as a person.
Sorry if you feel not agreeing with you is a personal offense.

Nah, you explicitly called me a name first, out of the blue. Not in this thread, but in the past. I don't forget, though.

Sorry, I often don't remember who I have been arguing with,
because - again - I concentrate on arguments and not on the person.

And as I rely on facts, I'd be interested to hear when, where, and on which occasion I called you a name.
And of course which name

[kbdfr]

And as I rely on facts, I'd be interested to hear when, where, and on which occasion I called you a name.
And of course which name

I searched and found the post where I called you not just a single name,
but even two names to choose from
off-topic-f10/brexit-the-dt-poll-t13885 ... ml#p312979

[…] None of the links you posted indicates a single case of [quoting you again] "Germany arresting their citizens for critisizing their government".
There is a simple reason to that: it is just not true,
and you are either a liar or a a gullible idiot.

I obviously shouldn't have posted that, even if it was an imperative inference

[adhoc]

kbdfr: don’t worry about adhoc. Russia has been running a propaganda/disinformation campaign throughout Eastern Europe for the past decade, and by now plenty of otherwise reasonable folks living there have become apologists for authoritarianism. It’s a sad story, but don’t hold him personally responsible.

Slovenia...eastern Europe? You must be american. I hope. And noone on this world runs a more intense propaganda program than the US. Get real.

And how tf does Trump represent authoritarianism jesus christ you're worse than a cult.

@kbdfr look, I enjoy a debate with arguments even if I am wrong. But I treat people same way they treat me. And that's not the only post where you called me names, by the way.

[vivalarevolución]

Given the absolute choice between Clinton and Trump, I take Clinton.

Don't flush your vote down the toilet. It *IS* an absolute choice.

And most importantly, vote Democratic all the way down-ticket.

The choice is not absolute, the purist sense of absolute, as we technically have more than two choices. And I live in a state that surely will go to Trump, and not enough people will vote for independents or third parties to influence the overall result. One Democratic candidate has won Indiana since 1964, which was Obama in 2008. I feel very comfortable with my intended vote in the presidential election, and do not consider any person's vote to be a throwaway vote.

I do not believe in straight ticket voting. Saying things like that causes me to lose respect for a person's opinion. We had a somewhat successful Republican mayor in Indianapolis from 2007-2015 that did a lot to improve the attractiveness and other aspects of the city. In fact, many of his initiatives were continued by the current Democratic mayor. I would have considered voting for Richard Lugar if he wasn't chased out of the Senate by the Tea Party nonsense.

In general, I vote for the person that I think will do the best job, regardless of party.

[vivalarevolución]

Oh boy you two are really "giving this a go". As a german I'm not even going to get into this argument. Bottom line is Trump is a fraction as intelligent as Hitler, and hopefully only a fraction as evil. Want to see a live transformation of a country from democracy > dictatorship? Just look at Turkey right now.

This is so true, it's scary and not even funny. I fear for what is going in Turkey right now.

Why is it a bad thing that Trump gets along with Putin? The alternative would be that he wouldn't get along with Putin. We are blessed at the moment to be out of the cold war with a realistic, tangible threat of nuclear war.

Totally agree...isn't a US / Russia friendship a better prospect for our future than the contrary? Hillary is much scarier in this regard because she is the one prodding the bear and pissing them off.

The danger of being friendly with Russia is that Putin clearly is an autocrat that has intimidated, harassed, and even killed opponents/activists in politics, media, journalism, and elsewhere. If you are okay with a leader that does that to citizens of his own country, then might you be okay with a similar situation in your own country? That type of chuminess is on a completely different level of being friendly with, for example, Justin Trudeau in Canada.

And with Clinton, starting more wars, both direct and proxy, seems likely. She does not represent a significant change from the status quo, except that she is a woman instead of man. We already are bombing about a half dozen countries. Why not add a couple more to the list?

Except the United States is friendly with various other abhorrent world leaders, for example, the people that run Saudi Arabia and Turkey at the moment.. We utilize those alliances for military and oil. Human rights? Meh, we'll look the other way.

The candidates that interest me the most are those that advocate for dismantling the military-industrial complex and using those resources to create opportunities for people in our country and also utilize soft power rather than military power if we are going to dabble in the affairs of other nations. The Democrats and Republicans will never offer those choices, because they benefit too much from the current system, and have little incentive to change it.

Overall, brushing up on my Spanish and taking an extended trip to South America doesn't sound too bad right now.

[webwit]

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/76 ... 56/video/1

[vivalarevolución]

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/76 ... 56/video/1

Well good, then we have our choice of Putin-esque leaders.

I was summoned for jury duty this week, so in the spirit of the moment, I would love to see all this circumstantial evidence against Putin and Clinton presented in an actual court of law without all the media filtering. But of both those individuals seem above the law, so that seems unlikely.

[chuckdee]

In general, I vote for the person that I think will do the best job, regardless of party.

That's how it's supposed to work. And the only rational way to vote, IMO. Unfortunately, the parties themselves have corrupted that. And, to a lesser extent, the voters have bought the line of BS that they're selling.

[vivalarevolución]

In general, I vote for the person that I think will do the best job, regardless of party.

That's how it's supposed to work. And the only rational way to vote, IMO. Unfortunately, the parties themselves have corrupted that. And, to a lesser extent, the voters have bought the line of BS that they're selling.

The primary goal of both the Democratic and Republican parties is the same: to capture and maintain power. Everything else is secondary, which includes actually running a government and protecting individuals from the mob mentality and the government.

[seebart]

This thread isn't fun anymore...

Unbenannt.JPG (65.67 KiB) Viewed 7665 times

[fohat]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwi0sheVoNc

[jacobolus]

Russian media backs Trump, questions US democracy
http://bigstory.ap.org/1608ed9579624d56ae6110f73c31f844

[webwit]

I wonder if Clinton will get the Nobel Peace Prize for being the first female president of the United States.

[002]

Russian media backs Trump, questions US democracy
http://bigstory.ap.org/1608ed9579624d56ae6110f73c31f844

We should all look to the American media as the shining example of impartial reporting on the election

[seebart]

I wonder if Clinton will get the Nobel Peace Prize for being the first female president of the United States.

She would deserve it just slightly more than Obama did.

[vivalarevolución]

I wonder if Clinton will get the Nobel Peace Prize for being the first female president of the United States.

She would deserve it just slightly more than Obama did.

They just had to award that prize as the ultimate feel-good cherry-on-top for the ultimate feel-good presidential campaign. Even the Nobel Prize committee was drinking the Obama kool-aid. And they basically destroyed whatever credibility they had left.

[seebart]

I wonder if Clinton will get the Nobel Peace Prize for being the first female president of the United States.

She would deserve it just slightly more than Obama did.

They just had to award that prize as the ultimate feel-good cherry-on-top for the ultimate feel-good presidential campaign. Even the Nobel Prize committee was drinking the Obama kool-aid. And they basically destroyed whatever credibility they had left.

Right, that whole episode was embarrassing for the committee, not for Obama. No way he could have turned that down.

[vivalarevolución]

Nobel Peace Prize had a questionable run for a few years there. Al Gore, Obama, the European Union. Seriously, the EU? You couldn't come up with an actual person or group of people? Maybe the next one they will hand out to a Constitutional amendment.

[seebart]

'THE SOCIOPATH' A Crowdfunded Documentary About The Enigma That Is Donald Trump

[webwit]

The message is that they'd like you to vote for their sociopath instead.

[fohat]

Trump actually fits the profile of "psychopath" much more closely than "sociopath"

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wi ... psychopath