|
Post by Baph on Oct 9, 2016 21:36:34 GMT -5
This is my first debate and I'm really enjoying it. Very aggressive debate. Some killer one-liners. "You'd be in jail" is a legit mic drop moment.
|
|
|
Post by Baph on Oct 9, 2016 23:04:24 GMT -5
Trump savaged Hitlary.
Point blank, if politicians were held to normal legal standards she would not be here.
Trump was calm and quick and substantial, vague on a couple points, the Muslim question in particular, but over-all this is the best I've seen him. Can't believe he came out and hit this hard after the BRUTAL press cycle he's had in the past 2-3 days.
This is such an odd and generic thing to say, because it really means nothing, but Hitlary is just insanely boring. She's the same political suit we've been staring at for decades now. Generic answers. Stand on the X. Deliver the lines the focus group indicated would go over well. Pretend to be hip and a reformer despite the fact you've been soaking in D.C. sewage for nearly 30 years now accomplishing exactly zip.
Trump, for all his faults, and they are many, is pure sound and fury. He's high energy. He's traveling 7 days a week. He's on TV, radio, and town halls multiple times a day. He's got 300% the work capacity she does. And though you won't hear it in the media, he's shown an ability to adapt smartly when pressured. Banning all Muslims temporarily . . . has morphed into very closely vetting immigrants from specific parts of the world with known threats. That's intelligent adaptation of a position. That's a pretty rare thing, honestly. I'd like to see more of that.
I think it's fascinating that two people can watch the same thing and come away with so wildly different views on what went down. Politics is such a powerful, twisting influence on our psyche.
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Oct 10, 2016 0:28:04 GMT -5
What shocked me the most, though it probably won't be picked up by the media is the tax the wealth question.
Trump wants to close loopholes that even he uses, and only tax cut businesses and the middle/low class. Hillary for all intents and purposes admitted to want to keep the loopholes in place for her donors.
|
|
|
Post by Baph on Oct 10, 2016 0:38:44 GMT -5
Noticed that. And to slam corporations with an even higher rate, which is what's driving them to Ireland and Mexico in the first place.
Loved that Trump focused on interstate insurance bans. This is my pet issue and you've heard me say it 100 times. This is THE key to healthcare reform.
He also savaged her in some critical ways. The way Debbie Wasserman Shultz and the DNC super delegates screwed Bernie over. The way she got away with fraud espionage and destruction of evidence. The way she's been in DC for 30 years and reformed nothing, but now has all these "plans and shit".
Bitch you fucked up Libya and Syria and voted for Iraq and Afghanistan and ObamaCare and got on TV and said the siege at your gun running depot (embassy) in Benghazi was a spontaneous protest to some random YouTube video and you couldn't respond in time (how did you know how long the siege would last, Nostradamus?) so you had to let those people burn and get dragged through the streets, you got Russia a uranium mine in Canada after they donated to your foundation, which also takes money from Saudi, Wall St banks, and everyone else you publicly pretend to oppose . . . 75% of our current problems went down on your watch with your support. Your state department LOST six billion fucking dollars through disorganization and got subpoenaed by congress and the FBI for keeping top secret data on fucking flip phones and lying about it. You are a walking calamity. You are the personification of elitist political corruption. You are the most stereotypical sleazeball power-mad phony of all time, and you even lied to the black folks about never leaving home without hot sauce in your purse. Get fucking bent, cuntopolus Rex.
How anyone supports Hitlary is fucking beyond me.
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Oct 10, 2016 0:54:08 GMT -5
Loved that Trump focused on interstate insurance bans. This is my pet issue and you've heard me say it 100 times. This is THE key to healthcare reform. No. Sorry but no. As long as the focus is on insurance, we can't reform healthcare. Insurance is what ruined healthcare. Our healthcare system, even though we pay less out of pocket average than Canada and UK (if you account for taxes) on average per year is still fucked up. You want to fix it you need to remove the insurance variable entirely. I have an idea on how to do that, but people may think it is nuts even though it is based off of previous Republican/Conservative ideas.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2016 1:05:08 GMT -5
I forget what point it was that Trump said he disagreed with Pence on and "hadn't talked with him" about it, but that was one of the most fucked up things EVER to say IMO, or to do if he in fact never discussed that issue with Pence.
You should be discussing EVERY single issue with you vice presidential candidate.
You are going to say you disagree with your potential vice president on an important issue and haven't even discussed it with him less than a month away from the election??
Way to sound like a fucking idiot.
And thinking it was cool that Trump said he'd arrest Hilary if he was president?
Shit, if another country's presidential candidate said that to their opponent we'd probably be monitoring them closely for that kind of threat.
He can think it all he wants but to say it at a presidential debate is just stupid.
I don't think Trump did a particularly good job in that he didn't probably say anything that will most likely convince undecided voters to vote for him, but I'm not sure Hilary did either.
I think it's pretty much set at this point for the most point in that those choosing Trump will choose him no matter what he says or does, and that may be true for Hilary as well, but I think the last debate may have swayed some undecideds towards Hilary.
Plus, Trump's body language during the whole thing was fucked up IMO: he was lurching over Hilary from behind while she addressed points in a fairly threatening posture IMO.
I mean one of the female reporters afterwards said the same thing: for a small women to have a man a foot taller than her LURCHING over her shoulder while she talks feels threatening, and I strongly believe Trump meant it to feel that way for her.
He barely even addressed the fucking questions of the audience while Hilary did it EVERY single time.
At one point the female moderator had to ask Trump THREE TIMES to answer the question she was asking and he STILL didn't answer it.
It wasn't so much a debate this time around as two people arguing, with Trump being the much more threatening and angry of the two, and yet people LIKE him for that kind of act.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2016 1:08:41 GMT -5
What shocked me the most, though it probably won't be picked up by the media is the tax the wealth question. Trump wants to close loopholes that even he uses, and only tax cut businesses and the middle/low class. Hillary for all intents and purposes admitted to want to keep the loopholes in place for her donors. I was pretty sure I heard her say she wanted to stop the tax loophole, but maybe that was the gun show loophole which I know for a fact she said she wanted to stop.
|
|
|
Post by Baph on Oct 10, 2016 1:10:46 GMT -5
How old are you?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2016 1:11:24 GMT -5
Excuse me? I may not be very politically informed, but there are people of all age who aren't. So what's your point?
|
|
|
Post by Baph on Oct 10, 2016 1:21:14 GMT -5
Honest question.
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Oct 10, 2016 1:24:10 GMT -5
You should be discussing EVERY single issue with you vice presidential candidate. You are going to say you disagree with your potential vice president on an important issue and haven't even discussed it with him less than a month away from the election?? Way to sound like a fucking idiot. He barely even addressed the fucking questions of the audience while Hilary did it EVERY single time. What shocked me the most, though it probably won't be picked up by the media is the tax the wealth question. Trump wants to close loopholes that even he uses, and only tax cut businesses and the middle/low class. Hillary for all intents and purposes admitted to want to keep the loopholes in place for her donors. I was pretty sure I heard her say she wanted to stop the tax loophole, but maybe that was the gun show loophole which I know for a fact she said she wanted to stop. 1. VP candidates since the early 1900s (changed under FDR I think it was) have been basically in name only, to carry a state. To discuss anything with them that they didn't have anything supremely useful to add (that they were willing to) would be considered a political mistake. 2. Trump actually addressed the questions more than Hillary did if you go back and watch it. Hillary gave the roundabout standard political answers as expected. Trump yes praised himself here and there, made personal comments and attacks, but at least he offered actual actions (good or bad is to debate) to most of the questions while Hillary did for none. 3. When Trump admitted to using the loopholes he wanted to close, while Hillary voted against closing them while in office because of her donors and friends (and herself if you look at how she gets her money), she never said she wanted to close them. Why? Because she knows the moment she says that her funding dries up, as well as her personal income. 4. The gun show loophole is a red herring. NO, I REPEAT NO, NO, NO, gun control measures can actually make more than a needle in a haystack difference as long as the states have their say. Now, whether it should be federal or state, that is a debate you can have. But take Missouri where can without registering (and until early 2000s as an ex-con) go and buy an automatic weapon, conceal carry it with an extended clip, and silencer, while wearing body armour, yet you can't in NY? See the issue, go buy in MO, and drive to NY. It doesn't matter. As long as states have open borders, federal gun control laws don't matter, especially when states (such as MO who started it) threaten to arrest federal officers who try to enforce federal gun laws in the state that disagree with state laws. Two solutions to this, have the USMS do federal gun law violation arrests so the state arrest of the agents don't matter, or remove state rights in regards to gun laws.
|
|
|
Post by boboplata on Oct 10, 2016 1:26:35 GMT -5
That is a bit condescending. Unless you're setting up for a 401(k) question. The better question/s would be: Are you an employee or a business owner? If you're an employee, in what field are you involved in? Because being a Huffington Post contributor doesn't count. Ok, that was condescending.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2016 1:26:40 GMT -5
I feel like it's a loaded one...but I can't tell what your tone is. I'm in my 30s, we'll say that much. I have a few niche areas in life that I'm very knowledgable about, though politics is certainly not one of them, admittedly. I'm trying to fill in the gaps in my education here and this is really the first debate I've ever watched. I've been pretty influenced by my early surroundings and family environment to support some of the things I say, so I won't even try to pretend I'm not biased. I might entirely change many of my opinions some day, who knows... Some people pay attention to political shit from early on in life, while others don't...if that is what you are getting at with your question... I'm one of those who never has, but my guess is I'll start figuring out my opinions on different issues slowly over time, as I don't know where I really stand on most of the issues right now to be honest.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2016 1:31:02 GMT -5
That is a bit condescending. Unless you're setting up for a 401(k) question. The better question/s would be: Are you an employee or a business owner? If you're an employee, in what field are you involved in? Because being a Huffington Post contributor doesn't count. Ok, that was condescending. I am not a business owner. I currently tutor English as a Second Language to immigrants and foreigners at a University near me. I guess that has swayed my opinion on being open to other cultures and turned me off from some of the stuff Trump has said.
|
|
|
Post by boboplata on Oct 10, 2016 1:37:06 GMT -5
That is a bit condescending. Unless you're setting up for a 401(k) question. The better question/s would be: Are you an employee or a business owner? If you're an employee, in what field are you involved in? Because being a Huffington Post contributor doesn't count. Ok, that was condescending. I am not a business owner. I currently tutor English as a Second Language to immigrants and foreigners at a University near me. I guess that has swayed my opinion on being open to other cultures and turned me off from some of the stuff Trump has said. I'm in my 4th year working in an islamic country. Most of my close friends here are muslims. They are not evil as perceived by others, with that said. Global islamization is on the rise & its no coincidence that most act of terrorism is caused by that religion. Either by terroristic acts or by the silence of the majority.
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Oct 10, 2016 1:39:26 GMT -5
That is a bit condescending. Unless you're setting up for a 401(k) question. The better question/s would be: Are you an employee or a business owner? If you're an employee, in what field are you involved in? Because being a Huffington Post contributor doesn't count. Ok, that was condescending. I am not a business owner. I currently tutor English as a Second Language to immigrants and foreigners at a University near me. I guess that has swayed my opinion on being open to other cultures and turned me off from some of the stuff Trump has said. Honestly I think it more depends on what you were doing before/up to being ESL teacher, and what country you are doing it in. Most of the ESL people I know (especially in South Korea and Japan) have become much much more conservative for example. One actually was ex Army Intelligence, after time in both Iraq and Afghanistan he finally was able to finish up college. He was extremely liberal, and after graduation to make some money he went to teach ESL in South Korea. Cut to 2 years later, he turned his back on his entire lifetime of political leaning, and even the military couldn't make him conservative. The ESL teachers I know who still live in the US, they become more liberal because they base it off their students observations rather than experience.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2016 1:43:58 GMT -5
I'm in my 4th year working in an islamic country. Most of my close friends here are muslims. They are not evil as perceived by others, with that said. Global islamization is on the rise & its no coincidence that most act of terrorism is caused by that religion. Either by terroristic acts or by the silence of the majority. Yeah I have also worked with quite a few Muslims from various countries like Jordan, Pakistan, etc, and people from all over the world. They have all been very nice people for the most part. Of course we know it's only the radicals who cause the violence and they probably don't make up 1% of all Muslims in the world so I wouldn't phrase it as "caused by that religion" so much as "caused by a sub section of radicals within that religion". I mean there are Christian fanatics who have done horrible things who could hardly be called proper Christians and shouldn't be speaking for Christianity as a whole either. But of course I agree we need to be STRONGLY vetting ANYONE who enters the country, Muslim or not, and Hilary also agreed on that point. It's just exactly how far we should go that is the question, and I don't really have an answer to that either, but not letting any Muslims into the country is NOT the answer IMO. I wouldn't want to make the announcement to such nice Muslims that I have worked with one day that "hey, sorry, but you have to go back to your country now because our xenophobic president decided because some insane people commit violence in the name of your religion that you must be evil too..." There are horrible people who believe in all kinds of shit. Just like the "guns don't kill people, people kill people" argument, religions don't kill people, insane people kill people, and then claim their religion makes them do what they do. They'd probably find another excuse to commit such acts without it.
|
|
|
Post by boboplata on Oct 10, 2016 1:43:59 GMT -5
Honestly I think it more depends on what you were doing before/up to being ESL teacher, and what country you are doing it in. Most of the ESL people I know (especially in South Korea and Japan) have become much much more conservative for example. One actually was ex Army Intelligence, after time in both Iraq and Afghanistan he finally was able to finish up college. He was extremely liberal, and after graduation to make some money he went to teach ESL in South Korea. Cut to 2 years later, he turned his back on his entire lifetime of political leaning, and even the military couldn't make him conservative. The ESL teachers I know who still live in the US, they become more liberal because they base it off their students observations rather than experience. My buddy here who taught in japan for 10 years became libertarian after being a democrat for majority of his life.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2016 1:46:40 GMT -5
Honestly I think it more depends on what you were doing before/up to being ESL teacher, and what country you are doing it in. Most of the ESL people I know (especially in South Korea and Japan) have become much much more conservative for example. One actually was ex Army Intelligence, after time in both Iraq and Afghanistan he finally was able to finish up college. He was extremely liberal, and after graduation to make some money he went to teach ESL in South Korea. Cut to 2 years later, he turned his back on his entire lifetime of political leaning, and even the military couldn't make him conservative. The ESL teachers I know who still live in the US, they become more liberal because they base it off their students observations rather than experience. Yeah, I don't know how doing this may change my views over time. I did hear one Pakistani girl I worked with talk about how horrible it was in her country and how much she wanted to get out. She wouldn't want to be told it was time for her to go back either lol... Obviously I can see why people like her would rather be here than in their country, but I don't know whether or not she was Muslim. I have also taught a lot of South Koreans and even a few North Koreans. It was pretty strange hearing one or two North Koreans actually SUPPORT the regime over there...
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Oct 10, 2016 1:51:29 GMT -5
Honestly I think it more depends on what you were doing before/up to being ESL teacher, and what country you are doing it in. Most of the ESL people I know (especially in South Korea and Japan) have become much much more conservative for example. One actually was ex Army Intelligence, after time in both Iraq and Afghanistan he finally was able to finish up college. He was extremely liberal, and after graduation to make some money he went to teach ESL in South Korea. Cut to 2 years later, he turned his back on his entire lifetime of political leaning, and even the military couldn't make him conservative. The ESL teachers I know who still live in the US, they become more liberal because they base it off their students observations rather than experience. My buddy here who taught in japan for 10 years became libertarian after being a democrat for majority of his life. Real close college friend of Jess and me moved to Japan, teaches ESL. She was moderate, depending on the day you talked to her no idea what you'd pin her as. After living there (was even in the Fukishimia area I think at the time of the incident) she's not only more hippy lovey dovey than ever, but also more conservative than ever.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2016 1:59:59 GMT -5
My brother lives and teaches in Kyoto, Japan and has been there for around 10 years.
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Oct 10, 2016 2:02:33 GMT -5
My brother lives and teaches in Japan and has been there for around 10 years. Your point? My brother been stationed on and off there for 9 years, few friends from college and growing up for longer than that. Every one of them, even the Lesbian has become more conservative as time went on.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2016 2:03:42 GMT -5
My brother lives and teaches in Japan and has been there for around 10 years. Your point? My brother been stationed on and off there for 9 years, few friends from college and growing up for longer than that. Every one of them, even the Lesbian has become more conservative as time went on. I wasn't making a point, I was just commenting lol. My brother personally has not become more conservative and is as liberal as ever. But that may just be him.
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Oct 10, 2016 2:06:33 GMT -5
Funny enough one of the most conservative people I know is a woman I went to college with. She was always conservative, hippy, and years later wound up getting engaged to a devout Muslim Moroccan, and that only made her more conservative.
|
|
|
Post by boboplata on Oct 10, 2016 2:08:24 GMT -5
Funny enough one of the most conservative people I know is a woman I went to college with. She was always conservative, hippy, and years later wound up getting engaged to a devout Muslim Moroccan, and that only made her more conservative. You went to college with Elissa?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2016 2:09:12 GMT -5
My brother's wife is also Japanese.
The only political discussion I ever heard between them was when she found out that we have a major political party that denies climate change.
She was SHOCKED that it wasn't unanimously agreed on over here as they have more than one political party over there but there is mutual agreement that of course global warming is a real thing that is most likely man made.
I think the U.S. is pretty unique because almost every country and all their political parties agree on this from what I know.
I remember seeing a poll a while back and the U.S. has more climate change deniers than almost any other developed country.
Off topic: her maiden name is Kimura so it's pretty cool as a BJJ guy I can say we have a kimura in the family.
If they ever have kids I am teaching them to rip off shoulders like champions hahahhaa.
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Oct 10, 2016 2:09:32 GMT -5
Funny enough one of the most conservative people I know is a woman I went to college with. She was always conservative, hippy, and years later wound up getting engaged to a devout Muslim Moroccan, and that only made her more conservative. You went to college with Elissa? HAHAHAHHAA to quote the great old man... ....ZING
|
|
|
Post by Angelo on Oct 10, 2016 2:12:10 GMT -5
My brother's wife is also Japanese. The only political discussion I ever heard between them was when she found out that we have a major political party that denies climate change. She was SHOCKED that it wasn't unanimously agreed on over here as they have more than one political party over there but there is mutual agreement that of course global warming is a real thing that is most likely man made. I think the U.S. is pretty unique because almost every country and all their political parties agree on this from what I know. I remember seeing a poll a while back and the U.S. has more climate change deniers than almost any other developed country. The Republican denying climate change is bullshit. There are a few that do, but in general it comes down to this 1. Fear mongering Democrat party line. Humans responsible for climate change 2. Science shows e can't affect climate change no matter how hard we try because it is related to natural events outside our control, so lets find ways to deal with it. But when you rely on Huffington and Politifact... you won't realize that
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2016 2:16:16 GMT -5
My brother's wife is also Japanese. The only political discussion I ever heard between them was when she found out that we have a major political party that denies climate change. She was SHOCKED that it wasn't unanimously agreed on over here as they have more than one political party over there but there is mutual agreement that of course global warming is a real thing that is most likely man made. I think the U.S. is pretty unique because almost every country and all their political parties agree on this from what I know. I remember seeing a poll a while back and the U.S. has more climate change deniers than almost any other developed country. The Republican denying climate change is bullshit. There are a few that do, but in general it comes down to this 1. Fear mongering Democrat party line. Humans responsible for climate change 2. Science shows e can't affect climate change no matter how hard we try because it is related to natural events outside our control, so lets find ways to deal with it. But when you rely on Huffington and Politifact... you won't realize that It's late so I dont' want to get in a debate on this, but what I've read has suggsted it is probably man made. Why are the polar ice caps melting at so much faster a rate than they were 100 or 200 years ago?? What has changed in the past couple centuries more than what we as humans are doing with industry and pollution?? I've seen specials where scientists with extensive background explained why they believe we are causing it. Whether or not it is caused by us though, it still is happening, and even that is debated on.It's not all republicans, nor did I say it was, but they support the fossil fuel industry so that's probably one reason many of them want to disagree with it. But where do you get your info that you think it's so proven that we haven't caused it?? Regardless, it's happening, but whatever.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 10, 2016 2:29:59 GMT -5
You'd probably say "it's just wikipedia" but nevertheless, it's still science.
I'm sure there's many MUCH more reputable sites saying the same thing as this:
"Human activities since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution (taken as the year 1750) have produced a 40% increase in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide, from 280 ppm in 1750 to 400 ppm in 2015.[6][7]...It has been estimated that if greenhouse gas emissions continue at the present rate, Earth's surface temperature could exceed historical values as early as 2047, with potentially harmful effects on ecosystems, biodiversity and the livelihoods of people worldwide.[11] Recent estimates suggest that on the current emissions trajectory the Earth could pass a threshold of 2°C global warming, which the United Nations' IPCC designated as the upper limit for "dangerous" global warming, by 2036.[12]....
"According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, "warming in the Arctic, as indicated by daily maximum and minimum temperatures, has been as great as in any other part of the world."[6] The period of 1995-2005 was the warmest decade in the Arctic since at least the 17th century, with temperatures 2 °C (3.6 °F) above the 1951-1990 average.[7] Some regions within the Arctic have warmed even more rapidly, with Alaska and western Canada's temperature rising by 3 to 4 °C (5.40 to 7.20 °F).[8] This warming has been caused not only by the rise in greenhouse gas concentration, but also the deposition of soot on Arctic ice.[9] A 2013 article published in Geophysical Research Letters has shown that temperatures in the region haven't been as high as they currently are since at least 44,000 years ago and perhaps as long as 120,000 years ago. The authors conclude that "anthropogenic increases in greenhouse gases have led to unprecedented regional warmth."[10][11]"
|
|