So I know we're not supposed to talk politics - Presidential Election - Poll

On a side note, shout-out to all those who are participating and keeping the convo civil threads like this would have been shut down very quickly not too long ago. Good stuff guys!

trump for president!

Ok so outline how her proposed policies are BETTER? Third debate they pointed out neither one has a healthcare policy with any merit. The two have been so busy slinging mud that the true issues that matter are all but forgotten.

 

The funny thing is, no one seems to be able to make a convincing case for Clinton. Everyone has said how Trump is a "this hat or the other" but no one has still made the case as to why Clinton is better b comparison. So much energy is being spent on why Trump is the wrong choice but no one has mad the case for why Clinton is the right one...and that is inherently very dangerous.

 

Based on all that I have seen I am pretty convinced Trump will win, and a shake up to the system will be a good thing in the long term.

On a side note, shout-out to all those who are participating and keeping the convo civil threads like this would have been shut down very quickly not too long ago. Good stuff guys!

 

The convo is civil but quite counterproductive, I can sense the resentment on both sides and perhaps that's why we shouldn't discuss politics, it's easier to stay friends that way LOL, nobody was convinced otherwise by the counter arguments, all evidence on both sides was refuted almost blindly and without much justification, exactly how politics is always played, you have your camp and you stick with it no matter what they do and how ridiculous their proposed policies are.

I can sense the rage boiling just under the surface, I believe in speaking your mind without a gag order and that's why this thread is frustrating, civil but frustrating

 

PS: this thread needs a poll, let's see who LP really wants for president

 

LOL, you can't be serious thinking this wasn't a well crafted propaganda video by Putin.

 

 

Also, if I saw the captain of the ship managing and inspecting the cleaning staff, I'd be running for the life boats.

The convo is civil but quite counterproductive, I can sense the resentment on both sides and perhaps that's why we shouldn't discuss politics, it's easier to stay friends that way LOL, nobody was convinced otherwise by the counter arguments, all evidence on both sides was refuted almost blindly and without much justification, exactly how politics is always played, you have your camp and you stick with it no matter what they do and how ridiculous their proposed policies are.

I can sense the rage boiling just under the surface, I believe in speaking your mind without a gag order and that's why this thread is frustrating, civil but frustrating

 

PS: this thread needs a poll, let's see who LP really wants for president

+1 for LP Poll for fun 😜

And the RNC isn't corrupt? Sure there are no emails regarding derailing Trump's nomination bid?

 

What it implies is Russia believes America would be weaker with somebody like Trump who has no real understanding of foreign policy and said things like nuclear proliferation is a good thing. Trump also has publicly stated he is willing to destabilize long existing alliances that have kept Russian aggression in check. Trump's statements America could work with Russia are a pipe dream. Clinton is a hawk and will be far more assertive than Obama and they know it. Russia couldn't give a flying fcuk whether we are more or less corrupt. All they care about is weakening America both internally and externally. Romney was right about Russia in 2012.

 

An unstable and/or weak US is in Russia's direct interests, who's main goal is survival and keeping their status. Think about it folks. What does Russia bring to the table in the grand scheme of things? How do they contribute in the present day to the advancement of humanity? They are dead weight. They're effectively a giant oil state with nukes. Their political capital on the world stage is dramatically over leveraged. It doesn't have a leg to stand on.

 

I see some of you guys even buy into Russian propaganda destined for their own population. Have you guys ever been to Russia? Do you have any idea how things work over there? If you have any admiration for their system, it's clear to me that you don't. If you go 60 miles outside the few big cities it's like going back to the middle ages. Villages without plumbing, no roads, poverty, endemic alcohol abuse, a population so indoctrinated and beaten down that even when speaking to intelligent people you get a sense that they're disconnected from reality, and many think Americans hate them.

 

Some of you have a hard time viewing things from the outside, and don't really know how good you have it. You say that the US system is rigged and corrupt, now please show me one that is not. What do you compare it with, that makes you despise it so much? What is your standard?

 

You know what the main difference is between your system and others? Yours works. However corrupt and rigged you may perceive it to be, America is a functioning society, it moves forward and it has for 250 years now, it advances, it changes things, it innovates and evolves. Sure it sometimes takes a step back but then it also takes two forward. Most others do not. Some things about the way things work in the US are seen as profoundly corrupt in Europe, and many of the lobbying practices employed over there would create a monstrous scandal and land everyone in jail over here, but what everyone fails to see, because they get lost in petty details (that often serve their own agenda), is that this system works. It really doesn't matter if a society or system is corrupt or not as long as it functions and moves forward. The system in European countries even though it might be perceived as less corrupt is not as effective as the one in the US. We can't agree on anything, some countries are so ineffective and paralyzed, that dealing with gvt bureaucracy even on little things is a complete nightmare.

 

You guys are the least taxed developed country in the world, you don't really appreciate that and constantly complain. Just to shine a light on the massive difference I'll compare the amount of taxes your gvt collects from the GDP. At the moment if my memory serves me right it's somewhere around 26-27% GDP federal and states combined. The average in the EU is around 46-47%, and in countries like Denmark or France it goes up to 55 and 57% respectively. Considering the expenses of the US gvt, from social programs to the military and many many more, it's actually pretty efficient.

 

 

+1 for LP Poll for fun ��

 

Wouldn't that be an example of oversampling?

double post

I have to say. I love the argument of "every system is corrupt, so let's just stick with the one who was have mountains of proof of corruption, instead of the guy we surmise is corrupt." Give me a break....

Trump Tower Live launched today. He held a campaign event at Doral. He took the time to promote Doral and his latest property the Old Post Office.

And the RNC isn't corrupt? Sure there are no emails regarding derailing Trump's nomination bid?

 

What it implies is Russia believes America would be weaker with somebody like Trump who has no real understanding of foreign policy and said things like nuclear proliferation is a good thing. Trump also has publicly stated he is willing to destabilize long existing alliances that have kept Russian aggression in check. Trump's statements America could work with Russia are a pipe dream. Clinton is a hawk and will be far more assertive than Obama and they know it. Russia couldn't give a flying fcuk whether we are more or less corrupt. All they care about is weakening America both internally and externally. Romney was right about Russia in 2012.

 

There's corrupt, then there's corrupt beyond all recognition.

 

Long term benefits for Russia from less corruption (and Trump) my ideas were it would be more difficult for USA to employ it's global tactics from too much transparency and would be easier for Russia to gain influence through USA mainstream media outlets without the stranglehold the DNC has over it all.

 

Trump will have a steep learning curve when it comes to USAs strategic use if it's power over the globe however with a more unified USA (which is what Trump is aiming for right?) the long term benefits will far outweigh the short term 4-8 yr cost.

 

I do agree there are benefits to Russia from the Podesta emails all coming out right now but only in the relatively short term. I'd think Russia plans further ahead than 4-8 yrs.

 

Interesting times.

There's corrupt, then there's corrupt beyond all recognition.

 

Long term benefits for Russia from less corruption (and Trump) my ideas were it would be more difficult for USA to employ it's global tactics from too much transparency and would be easier for Russia to gain influence through USA mainstream media outlets without the stranglehold the DNC has over it all.

 

Trump will have a steep learning curve when it comes to USAs strategic use if it's power over the globe however with a more unified USA (which is what Trump is aiming for right?) the long term benefits will far outweigh the short term 4-8 yr cost.

 

I do agree there are benefits to Russia from the Podesta emails all coming out right now but only in the relatively short term. I'd think Russia plans further ahead than 4-8 yrs.

 

Interesting times.

 

 

Could you back up and take another shot of what you are trying to lay out. It's incoherent. Benefits for Russia? DNC is controlling the media? Trump is unifying the country?

I don't see how Wikileaks benefits Russia in a real way long term without getting too abstract. Short term I agree with you but I'd think Russia plans further ahead than 1 or 2 terms.

 

The convo is civil but quite counterproductive, I can sense the resentment on both sides and perhaps that's why we shouldn't discuss politics, it's easier to stay friends that way LOL, nobody was convinced otherwise by the counter arguments, all evidence on both sides was refuted almost blindly and without much justification, exactly how politics is always played, you have your camp and you stick with it no matter what they do and how ridiculous their proposed policies are.

I can sense the rage boiling just under the surface, I believe in speaking your mind without a gag order and that's why this thread is frustrating, civil but frustrating

 

PS: this thread needs a poll, let's see who LP really wants for president

 

Haha, good idea.

 

I actually don't think there's that much animosity on here, even under the surface.....mostly because we've known each other a long time and have nice debates from time to time on non political stuff. And maybe even more importantly, we can see grey when apparently the average friend on Facebook cannot (or will not).

 

Nima's write up on Trump is something you will not see on FB from someone who does not like him.

 

Appreciate Kinnsella's anti-Trump stances on non character related issues. This is good stuff to know.

 

I'd be a bit leery of anyone who votes Trump or Hillary with the type of conviction seen in past elections, where there wasn't too many major concerns with character and/or policy like we have now.

 

I tend to believe that the presidential figurehead's power/influence is very overrated by the public. We are governed by unknown forces much larger than him or her.

 

Wouldn't that be an example of oversampling?

 

Haha, only if it was meant to actually predict the election.

Which of the four candidates would tolerate this the least? the most?

 

http://ijr.com/2016/10/720736-berkeley-pro...to-go-to-class/

 

 

Which of the four candidates would tolerate this the least? the most?

 

http://ijr.com/2016/10/720736-berkeley-pro...to-go-to-class/

 

Assuming what they are reporting is actually correct. It's Berkeley....They could protest the sky is blue. Why is this relevant?

The convo is civil but quite counterproductive, I can sense the resentment on both sides and perhaps that's why we shouldn't discuss politics, it's easier to stay friends that way LOL, nobody was convinced otherwise by the counter arguments, all evidence on both sides was refuted almost blindly and without much justification, exactly how politics is always played, you have your camp and you stick with it no matter what they do and how ridiculous their proposed policies are.

I can sense the rage boiling just under the surface, I believe in speaking your mind without a gag order and that's why this thread is frustrating, civil but frustrating

 

PS: this thread needs a poll, let's see who LP really wants for president

I disagree. I don't think anyone here is or should be arguing to necessarily convince the other side. We should argue/discuss to open up conversation. The problem here is that the narrative so far has been led by the extremes on both sides. Ideally someone should be involved in a discussion like this where, though they may have their views, they should also be open to new views and most importantly open to changing their mind on various things if presented with evidence...I think people stick to their camps too much....the political parties for the most part have become like religions as far as I can see. Trump has polarized this even further. When I suggested that on certain issues, like the economy, the US isn't doing as badly as Trump has proposed, either the counter argument is that all of the numbers are fabricated or that I'm playing into some leftist agenda etc etc. This is why open discussion is important. With religion people just assume they're right and take it on faith. Politics can't go this route.

 

When I joined this convo my viewpoint was that the US isn't doing as badly as Trump has proposed and based his candidacy on.

When Trump initially ran I kinda liked him, saw it as a good change....then bit by bit shit hit the fan over and over until in my mind his candidacy lost all legitimacy. This isn't to say I'll disagree with all right wing ideas. I like the idea of less government involvement in people's lives, I like the idea of responsible government spending, etc. I think they actually go hand in hand with a lot of social leftist ideas like the legalization on marijuana, equality for the LGBT community, etc etc.

 

 

 

 

 

I don't really get what you are disagreeing with, the definition of arguing is trying to persuade, the definition of persuasion is convincing someone of your views, one obiously belives their views are correct I see no point in arguing unless I am trying to get you to agree with my views or at least to prove to the audience that my views are the correct ones, my point was nobody was convinced to jump camps hence the arguments being counterproductive.

 

Of course some posts were quite interesting and educational and I enjoyed the back and forth.

I tend to believe that the presidential figurehead's power/influence is very overrated by the public. We are governed by unknown forces much larger than him or her.

 

 

I completely agree with you.

How would it ever get anywhere? There has be zero point by point discussion on each candidates policies and their feasibility. It always boils down to perceived character issues.

I don't really get what you are disagreeing with, the definition of arguing is trying to persuade, the definition of persuasion is convincing someone of your views, one obiously belives their views are correct I see no point in arguing unless I am trying to get you to agree with my views or at least to prove to the audience that my views are the correct ones, my point was nobody was convinced to jump camps hence the arguments being counterproductive.

 

Of course some posts were quite interesting and educational and I enjoyed the back and forth.

I disagree that it's counter productive. Having no discussion at all would be counter productive. If someone posts some stats or facts about topic X and other read into it and do further research then in my books its not counter productive.

 

Counterproductive would be name calling and putting arguments forward without facts, etc. At that point might as well shut the thread down. Now if someone is not WILLING to listen and it hell-bent on "I'm right, you're wrong" then the argument isn't necessarily counter productive in my view, but it is a waste of time.

 

I have no doubt that this far along most have already made up their minds about the candidates...as they should have it's only 2 weeks out.

You are entitled to disagree, you are missing my point.

Assuming what they are reporting is actually correct. It's Berkeley....They could protest the sky is blue. Why is this relevant?

 

The ultra PC/white guilt BS that's become a popular trend under the current administration annoys the hell out of a lot of people I know.

 

Just feels like something that Trump would tolerate a lot less than Clinton or typical Democrat, although I get the impression that the next President will be better off in handling these situations or at least not fostering the atmosphere that breeds it.

 

The irony that BLM and all of this police brutality is seemingly peaking under a black president is not lost on many of us. Or maybe it's just the reporting of it.

 

Either way I think it's somewhat relevant.

If they wanted harmony they would stop breaking groups into race, sexual orientation and gender... but they don't want harmony. The more they can keep groups divided the more they can manipulate people, thats just how I see it. Politicians always fear unity and national pride since it becomes harder to control people that way.