2016 Election -- Part II

Quote: AcesAndEights

Nailed it!

Yeah, great call. He's such a lying piece of filth. He couldn't just admit he had been wrong (which probably took enormous pressure from his handlers); he had to turn it into another ridiculous Hillary smear. And people seriously are planning to vote for this ball of crud?

Well, there are terms for everything.

Quote: beerseason

Oh same can be said for Hillary. You just can't see it through your government employee muddled eyes. She doesn't care about me and sure as heck(^edit)doesn't care for some ex government employee who moderates a gambling board. But go ahead and think that.

One of the pleasures of reading these forum posts is the ludicrous partisan raving you see here. Yeah, Hillary is just like Trump. And anyone who disagrees with that brilliant premise just can't see it. The sun is green. You just can't see it.

Besides, I don't care whether Hillary or Trump cares for me or not. I just don't want either one to fork up my life, and Trump is far more likely to do that than Hillary.

Quote: rxwine

Well, there are terms for everything.

Would that apply to Trump's avowed love for the uneducated (and later, the filthy stinking rapist, er, wonderful Mexican people)?

Quote: Joeshlabotnik

One of the pleasures of reading these forum posts is the ludicrous partisan raving you see here. Yeah, Hillary is just like Trump. And anyone who disagrees with that brilliant premise just can't see it. The sun is green. You just can't see it.

Besides, I don't care whether Hillary or Trump cares for me or not. I just don't want either one to fork up my life, and Trump is far more likely to do that than Hillary.

Oh I see something everyday that makes me wonder how we ever got to these two candidates.... Also should make everyone nervous Paul Ryan could literally be VP.

If something were to happen to Hillary (health wise, I'm not saying anything else), Ryan would be VP. As polls are looking now it looks like we could have a split senate. VP casts tie breaker. Woof

Quote: beerseason

Oh I see something everyday that makes me wonder how we ever got to these two candidates.... Also should make everyone nervous Paul Ryan could literally be VP.

If something were to happen to Hillary (health wise, I'm not saying anything else), Ryan would be VP. As polls are looking now it looks like we could have a split senate. VP casts tie breaker. Woof

That's not how succession works.

If Hillary wins and then dies, Kaine becomes President and chooses a new VP, who is confirmed by the legislature (this is how Ford became VP; Nixon chose him after Agnew resigned).

The only way Ryan comes in to play is if Hillary AND Kaine are killed/resign/removed from office in some fashion at the same time. Then Ryan is "acting president" and we're basically in new territory (has never happened).

Ryan would not advance to VP under any circumstances.

Quote: beerseason

Oh I see something everyday that makes me wonder how we ever got to these two candidates.... Also should make everyone nervous Paul Ryan could literally be VP.

If something were to happen to Hillary (health wise, I'm not saying anything else), Ryan would be VP. As polls are looking now it looks like we could have a split senate. VP casts tie breaker. Woof

As opposed to him figuratively being VP?

Ryan could become acting President if the President and VP both die in office (and it would have to be simultaneously, as a survivor would be or become President and would choose a new VP). However, there's pretty much no way he could ever become VP. If Pence died of self-contradiction or something, then a President Trump could conceivably nominate Ryan. Although given their history, that would be about as likely as his nominating Michelle Obama.

And how did we get to these two candidates? From Trumpers trying to convince themselves that Hillary's carelessness with an email server is somehow equivalent to Trump's lies, bigotry, racism, lack of knowledge or experience in government, and decades of willful fraud. The Republiholes couldn't imagine that their constituency would be stupid/insane enough to support Trump, so they thought that a normal human would win the nomination. On the other side, Clinton's candidacy was more or less inevitable, Bernie-poo notwithstanding.

The mistake people are making is in paying attention to stupid shit like Hillary's email and her stumbling as she walked up some steps but completely ignoring Trump's lies, bigotry, ignorance, and long, long history of fraud. If we, the dumb people, think that these two people are even remotely equivalent, then we deserve to get Trump.

Quote: Joeshlabotnik

If we, the dumb people, think that these two people are even remotely equivalent, then we deserve to get Trump.

On that question, I'd say Chris Christie who has questions of character, is much more similar to Hillary. At least of the candidates who ran this time. I mean, his character damage is somewhere within normal limits, or what we might normally see.

Trump Is in a ballpark all his own. And not in a good way.

Quote: Joeshlabotnik

Yeah, great call. He's such a lying piece of filth. He couldn't just admit he had been wrong (which probably took enormous pressure from his handlers); he had to turn it into another ridiculous Hillary smear.

Total genius on his part! Better yet he got loads of coverage and won yet another news cycle.

Quote: Joeshlabotnik

And how did we get to these two candidates?

Fairly simple how. The Democrats do not care abut how crooked and unlikable Hillary is. Their leader wanted a woman and wanted Hillary so the deck was cleared for her. Other candidates were discouraged from even trying. You can imagine the "Hey, Joe, how's the family? Good to have a family you care about!" conversation. When her email story broke she was given a pass same as the Clintons always have been given, by the press and their supporters.

On the GOP side, you had 18 candidates listening to consultants who never win telling them they need to act like Democrats to win. All listening to how to message this or that and don't dare say anything bad. Then you had Trump who had a keen sense of what people cared about and was experienced at delivering a message. It helped that he had a TV show for years so was used to being on camera, same as Reagan was, and he had the additional advantage Reagan didn't in that he knew how to improv what he wanted to say.

That is how it happened.

Quote: Joeshlabotnik

<snip>The mistake people are making is in paying attention to stupid shit like Hillary's email and her stumbling as she walked up some steps but completely ignoring Trump's lies, bigotry, ignorance, and long, long history of fraud. If we, the dumb people, think that these two people are even remotely equivalent, then we deserve to get Trump.<snip>

There is this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been trying to take the Clintons down for many years. They've found (or made up) a large number of "issues" involving the Clintons. A quick "Google" search shows number like 16, 21, 22, 44...I don't really know exactly how many there are out there. Many of them may be unfounded. The issue is that many of them are not. There are a whole lot of pieces of the truth out there that add up to a couple that is not worthy of the trust of the people. It is easy to sit around and poo-poo all of them, but the Democrats would have an absolute field day with a Republican as corrupt as these two pieces of work.

Perhaps, if the taint of other things was not there, the email thing would have passed easily as a simple mistake. You probably would have handled much differently (I know that I would have; then again, I would never have gotten into a situation where classified material was mishandled because I have vast experience in that type of thing). She did not take charge of the issue, get things out quickly, apologize, and put the investigation behind her. Her choice was to lie, lie again, delay, and to deny misleading (sometimes it was not an outright lie, just a misdirection) anyone.

The problem with Hillary is HILLARY, not the people looking into her email or the press. It isn't sexism or anything of the sort. Hillary is a very smart woman who has held one of the highest offices in the land. She has helped break through glass ceilings and people quite likely will elect her President of the United States. There is no sexism in the reasons she might not get elected; there are real and tangible reasons. Hillary, and her husband, lie. A lot. Worse yet, the lies have been proven.

It is easy to sit back in your easy chair, sip some kool aid, and deny all kinds of stuff about your candidate and spout on and on about how horrible the other candidate is and how completely insane (and therefore worthy of being executed or deported) his supporters are while completely ignoring all of the "whys" behind where we are today with the Democrat candidate. The Democrat party anointed Hillary as their chosen one and their system for selection of a candidate automatically favored her with a huge number of "super delegates". Beating her, in spite of Bernie's very solid attempt, was nearly impossible and election science has shown us that some percentage of people stop voting once they see results heading solidly in a specific direction. How many "discouraged" Bernie voters were out there? How close could the race have gotten if it was truly an even playing field?

If the Democrat party apparatus had half a collective brain, they would have realized that Barack Obama's trouncing of Hillary back in 2008 signaled that their party was done with the Clintons and ready to move on, much as the inability of Jeb to gain any traction early in the primaries (before everyone came to see him as uninterested in even competing) showed the Republican voters were done with the Bush name for at least a while. They put their own party in a position to lose because Hillary Clinton excites so few people. Obama excited people. Bernie excited people.

This would not even be a contest if the Democrat party had not gone "all-in" with Hillary and she had not lied to the faces of the voters right through the campaign.

If Trump wins, take a hard look at the Democrat/Liberal folks and their leadership. It will not be as much because of all those people you dismiss as evil and stupid. It will be because of that party and their chosen one.

Yeah, I was wrong on the VP succession, I admit don't know why I thought Ryan would just move up. But could we see no VP as it would have to be confirmed.

But yeah Hillary has had 2 chances to put presidential candidates away and hasn't. It will be interesting to see if she relies on a safe strategy and manages to blow it this time again.

Quote: beerseason

Yeah, I was wrong on the VP succession, I admit don't know why I thought Ryan would just move up. But could we see no VP as it would have to be confirmed.

But yeah Hillary has had 2 chances to put presidential candidates away and hasn't. It will be interesting to see if she relies on a safe strategy and manages to blow it this time again.

No evidence she's "blown it" even once. The election is still seven weeks away. Whatever the poll numbers happen to say at any point before that is irrelevant. Those numbers will naturally go up and down, and wringing hands when they go down and cheering when they go up are both unjustified reactions. I think the media is overhyping Trump's actual chances in order to make the contest seem close.

The only real deciding factor will be the disgust Trump generates by statements like his non-retraction re the birther crap. He seems incapable of telling the truth, and can't even admit when he's wrong without lying about it in the same breath. In fact, I think the poll numbers are terrible indicators of how people will actually vote because a borderline Trumper might say "Yeah baby! Stick it to the man! I'm voting for The Donald!" in response to a poll but on Election day, will say, "Naah..." and probably not vote, or piss away an afternoon waiting in line to vote for Gary Johnson.

Also, answering a poll is easy. Actually voting takes effort. Will Joe Sixpack actually get off the couch, fight through his hangover, take a shower, put on a clean t-shirt, and stumble down to the polling place? Remember, WWF wrestling is on TV on Mondays! Would Joe Sixpack miss that just to vote??

Quote: Joeshlabotnik

No evidence she's "blown it" even once. The election is still seven weeks away. Whatever the poll numbers happen to say at any point before that is irrelevant. Those numbers will naturally go up and down, and wringing hands when they go down and cheering when they go up are both unjustified reactions. I think the media is overhyping Trump's actual chances in order to make the contest seem close.

The only real deciding factor will be the disgust Trump generates by statements like his non-retraction re the birther crap. He seems incapable of telling the truth, and can't even admit when he's wrong without lying about it in the same breath. In fact, I think the poll numbers are terrible indicators of how people will actually vote because a borderline Trumper might say "Yeah baby! Stick it to the man! I'm voting for The Donald!" in response to a poll but on Election day, will say, "Naah..." and probably not vote, or piss away an afternoon waiting in line to vote for Gary Johnson.

Also, answering a poll is easy. Actually voting takes effort. Will Joe Sixpack actually get off the couch, fight through his hangover, take a shower, put on a clean t-shirt, and stumble down to the polling place? Remember, WWF wrestling is on TV on Mondays! Would Joe Sixpack miss that just to vote??

Joe Sixpack will go to the polls Tuesday when they are open.

Quote: beerseason

Oh same can be said for Hillary. You just can't see it through your government employee muddled eyes. She doesn't care about me and sure as heck(^edit)doesn't care for some ex government employee who moderates a gambling board. But go ahead and think that.

You misunderstand me entirely. I don't care if she cares about me. I care that she gets in there and gets things done. I care that she researches, reads, knows the background and the subject before she takes executive action. I want a policy wonk in the Oval, not a guy who shoots his mouth off whenever a golden turd floats to the top of his addled punchbowl. I want an educated, well-traveled, collaborative, experienced government person in charge. Trump has exactly zero of any of those qualities, and I think they're all essential.

Why? I've lobbied a couple dozen members of Congress several times, worked in the executive branch in DC for several years, helped draft legislative language and white papers, federal regulations, and worked federal contracts from both the executive and contractor sides. So I've seen a lot of what works and what doesn't. Still not an expert in the job, but I bet I'd be a better president than Trump.

However, Hillary is suited to the presidency and wants it. Can't imagine why. Target for every critic or buffoon of every stripe. But there's no one who's ever been better qualified.

I read "Clinton Cash."

OMG.

I'll never vote for her.

Then again, Trump is an idiot, so what to do?

The situation is akin to a guy stumbling into a whorehouse and given a choice between two of the ugliest, least attractive whores ever to lie down in a crib.

Quote: beachbumbabs

You misunderstand me entirely. I don't care if she cares about me. I care that she gets in there and gets things done. I care that she researches, reads, knows the background and the subject before she takes executive action. I want a policy wonk in the Oval, not a guy who shoots his mouth off whenever a golden turd floats to the top of his addled punchbowl. I want an educated, well-traveled, collaborative, experienced government person in charge. Trump has exactly zero of any of those qualities, and I think they're all essential.

Why? I've lobbied a couple dozen members of Congress several times, worked in the executive branch in DC for several years, helped draft legislative language and white papers, federal regulations, and worked federal contracts from both the executive and contractor sides. So I've seen a lot of what works and what doesn't. Still not an expert in the job, but I bet I'd be a better president than Trump.

However, Hillary is suited to the presidency and wants it. Can't imagine why. Target for every critic or buffoon of every stripe. But there's no one who's ever been better qualified.

Isn't it amazing, though, that so many Trumpers, not to mention Trump himself, are touting his complete lack of qualifications and experience as a virtue?? I mean, we need a guy to fly this 767. Here's a guy who has never even been inside a plane before, let alone ever tried to fly one! He'll be perfect!!! Better than that other pilot who has thirty years' flying experience!

That astoundingly stupid viewpoint can only be explained by Trump mouth-breathers hating "the establishment" so much that they think that un-government is a superior alternative. That thinking isn't confined to Trumper knuckle-draggers, though; you've also heard it from supporters of Bernie-poo.

Only an irredeemably stupid country such as ours could even be considering electing a bozo like Trump. Anyone who actually thinks he can do the job needs to be led gently away from the voting booth and given a glass of warm milk and a plate of cookies (to make him forget all about voting).

Quote: MrV

I read "Clinton Cash."

OMG.

I'll never vote for her.

Then again, Trump is an idiot, so what to do?

The situation is akin to a guy stumbling into a whorehouse and given a choice between two of the ugliest, least attractive whores ever to lie down in a crib.

That analogy implies that the two candidates are qualitatively equivalent. They're not. Assuming you believe Clinton to be a corrupt liar, she's still a corrupt lying productive politician with decades of experience, a proven track record, and -- most importantly -- a predictable set of future policies and actions. Frankly, that describes a lot of politicians. She may not be transparent with her own health records, but when she says she's going to try to expand environmental protections or education or consumer protections, you don't disbelieve her.

Trump is a corrupt lying fraudulent businessman whose track record is littered with the corpses of the companies he's screwed over. He has no track record of living up to his promises and -- most importantly -- you have *no idea* what his future policies and actions will be.

Markets hate unpredictability. So do corporations. People tend to hoard cash when they're uncertain of the future, and at least one billionaire (Mark Cuban) is on the record as saying a Trump victory will tank the markets:
http://fortune.com/2016/09/16/donald-trump-mark-cuban-twitter-fight/
Naturally, Trump lashes out at Cuban, calling him "not smart enough to know what we're doing," so Cuban offered to donate $10M to charity (or to simply pay $10M to Trump directly) if he agreed to be interviewed for 4 hours 1-on-1 with Cuban and actually answer policy questions. "We're gonna make America great again" is not a policy statement, it's an aspirational goal.

Be honest with yourself. You don't know what Trump is doing, and it's not because you're unintelligent, it's because Trump hasn't told you. If you believe Trump is going to build a wall and get Mexico to pay for it, well, there's this wall I have to sell you...

Quote: AZDuffman

I neither support it nor do I rule it out. Do you think the FBI and NSA do not keep similar databases on people or do you accept reality that they probably do?

You don't rule out keeping a federal database of all Muslims in America. Okay then:

Will you unequivocally rule out keeping a federal database of all Christians in America? Yes or no.

Quote: AZDuffman

You fail to comprehend it because the piece of paper is important to you. I have my degree but I still have more respect to the guy who broke his balls in the real world and did not let the lack of a degree stop him. The guy who did it in a world where they were always told, "GET YOUR DEGREE!" "Get a degree or you will not succeed.

Watch some Mike Rowe and you will understand where I am coming from. Knowing what I know now in today's market I would take a trade.

You think my piece of paper is important to me? It's in a big red envelope somewhere in a box. I actually don't know where it is right now. My degree was important early in my career for what it indicated to others, because unlike the stock market, with people, past performance is a great indication of future returns.

Your degree may not have been useful to you, but that's your fault, not the school's. You have this mistaken concept that working "in the real world" is more valuable than working in school, or learning how to learn, and it's just not. Education and work experience are complimentary if you know how to leverage them. It sounds like you never learned that. That's sad, but it's not a sound reason to lambast all education as useless. Education is only as useless as the effort put into it. If you're not willing to work -- either in school, or at work -- you won't get ahead. The world doesn't owe you anything, regardless of whether you went to school or whether you spent 20 years working construction jobs out of high school. There's no disputing the fact that some people make money without formal education, and some people with formal education don't make much money, but there is nevertheless a strong positive correlation between the two. That's the truth whether you like it or not.

And Mike Rowe seems like a hilarious guy, but that's because he's a successful entertainer and TV personality, not some run-of-the-mill construction worker. Entertainers and athletes are well-known to make a lot of money without needing college degrees. Normal construction workers aren't. Here's what his bio has to say:

Quote: Mike Rowe's bio page

His transition to television occurred in 1990 when — to settle a bet — he auditioned for the QVC Shopping Channel and was promptly hired after talking about a pencil for nearly eight minutes. There, he worked the graveyard shift for three years, until he was ultimately fired for making fun of products and belittling viewers.

Thanks to QVC, Mike became practiced at the art of talking for long periods without saying anything of substance, a skill that would serve him well as a TV host.
...
Eventually, Mike was overcome with a strange desire to give something back. On Labor Day 2008, he launched mikeroweWORKS, a PR campaign designed to reinvigorate the skilled trades. He’s since written extensively about the country’s relationship with work, the widening skills gap, offshore manufacturing, infrastructure decline, currency devaluation and several other topics for which he has no actual credentials.

Like I said, pretty funny stuff -- but he was basically a smart-ass TV personality for a long time before he became known as a tradesman.
http://mikerowe.com/about-mike/bio/

You didn't think Mike was "just" a construction worker, did you? Sorry to burst your bubble on that. But I can understand why you're a fan of someone who has practiced the art of talking for long periods without saying anything of substance. Mike Rowe for President!

ME would have it reduced to choosing the lesser of two evils.

That dog won't hunt.

As always, I'll vote for the candicate whose views most closely mirror my own: I'll vote Libertarian.

Ah, it's good not to lose any sleep over this political tomfoolery.

Quote: MrV

ME would have it reduced to choosing the lesser of two evils.

That dog won't hunt.

As always, I'll vote for the candicate whose views most closely mirror my own: I'll vote Libertarian.

Ah, it's good not to lose any sleep over this political tomfoolery.

I dispute that characterization. I don't think Hillary is evil, I think she's a typical politician. You don't become and stay successful as a politician without learning how to be political. You may not like her politics, but that doesn't make her evil.

Trump is no politician and never will be. Moreover, many of the things he's said or suggested truly are evil, like assassinating Hillary or instituting a thought police or nuking the Middle East or attempting to discredit the sitting POTUS with a racist charge that he's not American, only to retract it three months from the end of his term. It's not a choice between the lesser of two evils, it's a choice between politics as normal and evil.

Query: if Hillary's policy positions were exactly in line with libertarian political philosophy, would you vote for her? I'm betting the answer is not only yes, but that you'd be happy that your political views were finally represented with someone with her level of credibility and experience as opposed to the kooks who normally run under the big-L Libertarian banner.
But if Trump's policy positions were exactly in line with libertarian political philosophy, would you vote for him?
Or here's a better question -- suppose both Trump and Clinton equally espoused libertarian ideals. Take the policy distinctions off the table. Based on the rest of their public personae, who would you vote for?


"Please vote for Gary Johnson"
-- Donald Trump


(And I wouldn't be losing any sleep if I didn't agree with Mark Cuban that the markets will tank if Trump is elected. I'm not going to take out my money and put it under the mattress; are you?)

Quote: MathExtremist

You don't rule out keeping a federal database of all Muslims in America. Okay then:

Will you unequivocally rule out keeping a federal database of all Christians in America? Yes or no.

I do not see where there would be a reason to. One, you are talking probably over half the population. And two, we do not have Christians crashing planes into buildings or shooting up places like gay nightclubs, military bases, and government buildings in the name of Christianity. We are not importing Christian refugees from countries that are open enemies of the USA. Christian nations do not have large crowds chanting "Death to America!" We have not found Christian terror cells in places like NYC and Lackawanna.

Now, I know your reply will be to show me an abortion clinic shooting or some other isolated thing. And my advance reply is if you cannot see the difference then you are willfully blind in the name of PC and not wanting to be an islamaphobe.

The danger is a bit like the old definition of the difference between art and porn. You may not be able to define it, but you sure know it when you see it. I know I see it.

Quote: MathExtremist

You didn't think Mike was "just" a construction worker, did you? Sorry to burst your bubble on that. But I can understand why you're a fan of someone who has practiced the art of talking for long periods without saying anything of substance. Mike Rowe for President!

I never thought that. I don't know anyone who would have thought that. I don't know anyone who would think people thought that.

I knew him from the voice over to "Deadliest Catch" where he gave a serious, call to action tone that made the series fun to watch. I knew him from "Dirty Jobs" which was a combination of investigative journalism and reality TV. I didn't see that one so much, but enough to get the premise that there are, well, dirty jobs that need done.

One point of that show is that there are dirty jobs going begging because people think a degree is a road to an easier life. Mike Rowe Works points out that you can do really well, often better, by a good deal when you add in faster time to earning in trades vs lost time and costs of college. He may be having an effect. College earning power gets skewed by the way top earners. ROI is worse and worse every year for most. I call what he is saying something of substance.

Quote: MrV

ME would have it reduced to choosing the lesser of two evils.

That dog won't hunt.

As always, I'll vote for the candicate whose views most closely mirror my own: I'll vote Libertarian.

Ah, it's good not to lose any sleep over this political tomfoolery.

That's another false equivalence, something that a lot of members of this forum loooooove to use as an argumentative tactic. Maybe because Trump uses it so often???

ME writes a bunch of well-reasoned arguments that the people he intends them for don't bother to read. He didn't paint the choice between the two candidates as between two evils. Anybody with a functioning cerebrum (which does disqualify many Trumpers) can tell that Clinton would be a far, far better President than Trump. It's not even close. It's not even close to close.

Choosing Trump rather than Clinton is like choosing a half-blind elderly drunk rather than an abdominal surgeon to remove your appendix. It's not a matter of the lesser of two evils--it's a matter of the only sane choice.

Quote: AZDuffman

I never thought that. I don't know anyone who would have thought that. I don't know anyone who would think people thought that.

I knew him from the voice over to "Deadliest Catch" where he gave a serious, call to action tone that made the series fun to watch. I knew him from "Dirty Jobs" which was a combination of investigative journalism and reality TV. I didn't see that one so much, but enough to get the premise that there are, well, dirty jobs that need done.

One point of that show is that there are dirty jobs going begging because people think a degree is a road to an easier life. Mike Rowe Works points out that you can do really well, often better, by a good deal when you add in faster time to earning in trades vs lost time and costs of college. He may be having an effect. College earning power gets skewed by the way top earners. ROI is worse and worse every year for most. I call what he is saying something of substance.

Actually, the facts (I know you hate facts) are that college graduates lag behind those who join the workforce immediately after high school in earning power--for the first five years after they graduate. At that point, they catch up with and zoom past the less educated. Their lifetime earnings are eventually more than double what those without a college degree earn.

You constantly express disdain for those who have a degree, expressing the populist nonsense that you don't learn anything of practical value in college, so it doesn't help you in the real world. Well, earning figures prove you absolutely, totally, pitifully wrong. And those figures come from dozens of sources, within and without the government, so you can't dismiss them as liberal nonsense. People with college degrees earn more, and that's because their skills are worth more in the marketplace. Period.

I venture to say that had you gotten a college degree, you would be earning more now as well. And your posts would make much more sense!

Quote: AZDuffman

I do not see where there would be a reason to. One, you are talking probably over half the population. And two, we do not have Christians crashing planes into buildings or shooting up places like gay nightclubs, military bases, and government buildings in the name of Christianity. We are not importing Christian refugees from countries that are open enemies of the USA. Christian nations do not have large crowds chanting "Death to America!" We have not found Christian terror cells in places like NYC and Lackawanna.

Now, I know your reply will be to show me an abortion clinic shooting or some other isolated thing. And my advance reply is if you cannot see the difference then you are willfully blind in the name of PC and not wanting to be an islamaphobe.

The danger is a bit like the old definition of the difference between art and porn. You may not be able to define it, but you sure know it when you see it. I know I see it.

Well, the fact that you see something doesn't mean that it's really there. But i know you do see such things...

Timothy McVey was an avowed Christian. His act of Christian terrorism was to blow up a government building and kill several hundred people. The Columbine shooters were Christian. They killed two dozen classmates. The Virginia Tech shooter...etc. etc. etc. We have to stop this wave of Christian terrorism NOW!

Furthermore, the Orlando shooting wasn't motivated by Islam--it was motivated by homophobia. The shooter killed gay men, without ascertaining what their religions were. Likewise, the San Bernardino shooter killed people he worked with. While we don't know his motives, it seems most likely that he simply hated his colleagues. But you and other Islamophobes point out that they were Muslim, so naturally, that must have been what motivated them. Idiocy to say that.

It isn't willfully blind, or politically correct, to say that the so-called "Islamic threat" is vastly overstated. It is very, very stupid to call people who disagree with your extreme, radical, and unsupported views willfully blind (or PC). If someone can't see your illusions, maybe that just means that they're sane. Or at least not wildly paranoid.

Quote: Joeshlabotnik

Actually, the facts (I know you hate facts) are that college graduates lag behind those who join the workforce immediately after high school in earning power--for the first five years after they graduate. At that point, they catch up with and zoom past the less educated. Their lifetime earnings are eventually more than double what those without a college degree earn.

You constantly express disdain for those who have a degree, expressing the populist nonsense that you don't learn anything of practical value in college, so it doesn't help you in the real world. Well, earning figures prove you absolutely, totally, pitifully wrong. And those figures come from dozens of sources, within and without the government, so you can't dismiss them as liberal nonsense. People with college degrees earn more, and that's because their skills are worth more in the marketplace. Period.

So that is 10 years of less earning power then still saddled with student loans in most cases. Then you have to add in that some college degrees, like for an MD, are 10-20Xs as much, skewing those results. Bottom line is a degree *can* be a good investment, but only the right degree with proper leverage.

Then there is this little part that most street smart people know. We have so flooded the market with degrees that more and more jobs with little to no need for a degree ask for one simply to weed people out since there are so many degrees out there. The idea is "we can do it. why not ask?"

Quote:

I venture to say that had you gotten a college degree, you would be earning more now as well. And your posts would make much more sense!

I got my B.S. back when you were dating cheerleaders. I am talking from the inside, not the outside.

Read "Clinton Cash" and see if you still think Hillary is worthy of holding the oval office.

Trump is a fool, but Hillary is clearly corrupt.

Pick your poison?

Did you read "Bush Bucks"? Written by the same guy.

No, Bush is off my radar.

The astounding revelations about Hillary, Bill, his huge "speaking fees," supplicants contributing to the Clinton Foundation in exchange for political consideration by Hillary: that is worth looking at.

Check how she let the Russians control the US uranium supply, and how she let India keep its favored nation status while not signing the non-proliferation treaty.

She's one venal policy wonk.

And no, Trump is a P.O.S. also.

To hell with both of them.

If they're the best this country can do, we deserve to fail.

Quote: MrV

Check how she let the Russians control the US uranium supply, and how she let India keep its favored nation status while not signing the non-proliferation treaty.
.

Quote:

Several weeks after the book's initial publication, Harper Collins and the author made several corrections to the Kindle edition of the book. Schweizer corrected "seven or eight" passages that were revealed to be inaccurate after the book was released.[2] FactCheck.org found Schweizer's assertion that Clinton, as Secretary of State, could have stopped Russia from buying a company with extensive uranium mining operations in the U.S. to be false.[19] PolitiFact found the assertion that Clinton changed her views on a nuclear deal with India in response to donations to her family's foundation to be false.[20]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_Cash

Can't say that's not par for the course though. Tons of things are alleged about the Clintons, and whether substantiated or not, the stuff follows the Clintons since many people think she's already been convicted of many crimes or perhaps keeps escaping justice.

Quote: MrV

Read "Clinton Cash" and see if you still think Hillary is worthy of holding the oval office.

Trump is a fool, but Hillary is clearly corrupt.

Pick your poison?

Didn't have to. The guy is an internet conspiracy theorist and his book has already been discredited due to dozens of factual misstatements (aka lies).

I'm certain, though, that you and anyone else who might buy that book will believe what you have already made up your minds to believe.

Holy crap, Paddy Power, the Irish betting
site, has Trump within 20 electoral votes
of Clinton. This is huge news, they
don't have the Left leaning bias all
the pollsters in the US have, they deal
in real odds and real money. Remember,
the Brit betting sites had Trump a huge
loser in the nomination race, then they
folded way early and paid off when they
knew Trump was the probable winner.

"The Clinton Foundation accepted millions of dollars from seven foreign governments during Hillary Rodham Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, including one donation that violated its ethics agreement with the Obama administration, foundation officials disclosed Wednesday."

"Most of the contributions were possible because of exceptions written into the foundation’s 2008 agreement, which included limits on foreign-government donations."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/foreign-governments-gave-millions-to-foundation-while-clinton-was-at-state-dept/2015/02/25/31937c1e-bc3f-11e4-8668-4e7ba8439ca6_story.html

This is the kind of stuff that causes the Clintons headaches--or should... Instead of simply insisting on foreign governments diverting their contributions to other, similar charities during her tenure as SoS, they decided to add "exceptions" that allowed those contributions and then even violated those.

They just don't give a crap about the rules--even the ones they make for themselves! She KNEW she would be running for President (barring some physical issue stopping her) and that all of these things would come under heavier scrutiny during her campaign but she did it anyway. In their core, they know that they have conned the Democrat voters into believing in them in spite of the litany of misdeeds. The average Democrat has lost the ability to discern between right and wrong and the Clintons have also cornered the market on those who look to the government for their next (free) meal.

Quote: EvenBob

Holy crap, Paddy Power, the Irish betting
site, has Trump within 20 electoral votes
of Clinton. This is huge news, they
don't have the Left leaning bias all
the pollsters in the US have, they deal
in real odds and real money. Remember,
the Brit betting sites had Trump a huge
loser in the nomination race, then they
folded way early and paid off when they
knew Trump was the probable winner.

Not scientific, but a measure of energy. Was out for a convertible ride yesterday, mostly rural but some suburban. 7 Trump lawn signs to 1 Hillary. Thought a second was a Hillary sign but it was Hillary for Prison, with Trump signs nearby.

"But you were out in the country where they vote GOP" will be the retort. Yes, but in 2008 there were several Obama signs in the countryside in these parts. Polls can make calls, but the energy is on his side big time.

Quote: EvenBob

Holy crap, Paddy Power, the Irish betting
site, has Trump within 20 electoral votes
of Clinton. This is huge news, they
don't have the Left leaning bias all
the pollsters in the US have

Oh EvenBob, never stop being you....

It's going to be a rough election night for you (again).

Hopefully you won't mysteriously vanish for a few months afterwards (again)!

Quote: ams288

Oh EvenBob, never stop being you....

It's going to be a rough election night for you (again).

Hopefully you won't mysteriously vanish for a few months afterwards (again)!

I would never predict a Trump victory at this point with the numbers that point to Clinton; I have no idea how this thing is going to turn out. I would not be sure of it either way...you have to remember to carry the ball ACROSS the goal line to score a touchdown...

There is one significant difference between the last two elections and this one...the Democrat candidate had a huge advantage in personality in both of those and he won. Thinking about it, why don't we go back further...Clinton beat GHW Bush, GW Bush beat Gore and Kerry, Obama beat McCain and Romney...all of those wins were at least in part personality driven. The only time "boring" wins is when both candidates are boring...Carter and Ford maybe???

Obama had no experience worth noting in his first election cycle; he beat a guy with a whole lot of experience.

Bernie pushed Hillary to the limits because he had a personality that engaged people...I may not like him, but he connected with the people.

At the end of the day, this election is not about blowhards sitting in ivory towers on either side spouting platitudes about their chosen candidate; it is about how the candidates connect to the everyday person...the ones Washington forgets about much of the time.

I would not bet on this race either way...

Quote: ams288

Oh EvenBob, never stop being you....

It's going to be a rough election night for you (again).

Hopefully you won't mysteriously vanish for a few months afterwards (again)!

So in EvenBob World, all the pollsters who show results he doesn't like are left-leaning, but those who show results he approves of are towering examples of truth and objectivity. Really, EvenBobSter, an Irish betting site? I assume that you would also have been rushing to tell us if that site had shown Clinton in the lead by 20 points.

I'm sure there's an internet-crazy poll site out there that shows Trump leading in every state, and Russia to boot, where he is a favorite to oust Putin. He is also leading in the race for the papacy and is all but a lock for UN Secretary-General.

A poll of insane asylum inmates in Florida shows Trump leading by 154 percent.

It looks like they may have labeled every state where trump was within a poll's margin of error as trump-leaning.

Quote: Joeshlabotnik

So in EvenBob World, all the pollsters who show results he doesn't like are left-leaning, but those who show results he approves of are towering examples of truth and objectivity. Really, EvenBobSter, an Irish betting site? I assume that you would also have been rushing to tell us if that site had shown Clinton in the lead by 20 points.

I'm sure there's an internet-crazy poll site out there that shows Trump leading in every state, and Russia to boot, where he is a favorite to oust Putin. He is also leading in the race for the papacy and is all but a lock for UN Secretary-General.

A poll of insane asylum inmates in Florida shows Trump leading by 154 percent.

100% of Democrat inmates sentenced to long terms in prison at least partially because of the Clinton's escalation of mass incarceration back in 1994 are in favor of electing Hillary Clinton. Amazing!

Quote: RonC

100% of Democrat inmates sentenced to long terms in prison at least partially because of the Clinton's escalation of mass incarceration back in 1994 are in favor of electing Hillary Clinton. Amazing!

"THE Clintons"? I'm not aware of Hillary having held any executive office in 1994. Of course, much of the criticism directed at Hillary from the wingnut right has been based on things her HUSBAND did two decades ago--idiotic!.

I'm not even going to challenge your assertion about the "escalation of mass incarceration," but it sounds like something Republicans ought to have approved of at the time, assuming you're describing it accurately. And no, don't bother to tell us what internet meme you're referring to--I don't really want to see a video of talkshow host Batshit Billy on KRUD Channel 54 raving about how "the Clintons" have locked up everybody.

Quote: Joeshlabotnik

"THE Clintons"? I'm not aware of Hillary having held any executive office in 1994. Of course, much of the criticism directed at Hillary from the wingnut right has been based on things her HUSBAND did two decades ago--idiotic!.

I'm not even going to challenge your assertion about the "escalation of mass incarceration," but it sounds like something Republicans ought to have approved of at the time, assuming you're describing it accurately. And no, don't bother to tell us what internet meme you're referring to--I don't really want to see a video of talkshow host Batshit Billy on KRUD Channel 54 raving about how "the Clintons" have locked up everybody.

Democraps always want to have things both ways...they say that Hillary's experience includes her time as First Lady (when she was indeed involved in various policy issues and obviously had access to Bill most did not have). Then someone brings up something potentially negative about Hillary and all the sudden that experience does not count.

No memes necessary; they are fun, but usually inaccurate and believed by way too many who are gullible on both sides. There is actually proof of this out there; I would bet that you don't care to read it. If you do read it, please don't forget that I said "partially" and not "only" because of that bill. I can see how that part could easily be forgotten.

Trump went up 16 points this week among Blacks,
since they all saw Hillary being thrown into a van
like a side of beef. Her most Presidential moment,
btw.

http://nypost.com/2016/09/18/black-voters-are-turning-from-clinton-to-trump-in-new-poll/

The RCP page has her dropping every day, she's
now leading Trump by a scant 0.7, which means
they're basically tied. Momentum, Trump. Coughing
and passing out in public, Hillary. Have you seen the
video of her making a statement on the bombing
last night at 11pm? She looks like death warmed
over.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html

Quote: EvenBob

Trump went up 16 points this week among Blacks,
since they all saw Hillary being thrown into a van
like a side of beef. Her most Presidential moment,
btw.

http://nypost.com/2016/09/18/black-voters-are-turning-from-clinton-to-trump-in-new-poll/

The RCP page has her dropping every day, she's
now leading Trump by a scant 0.7, which means
they're basically tied. Momentum, Trump. Coughing
and passing out in public, Hillary. Have you seen the
video of her making a statement on the bombing
last night at 11pm? She looks like death warmed
over.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton_vs_johnson_vs_stein-5952.html

Ugh, just watched the video. Looks like someone who has been awake for36 hours or something.

Quote: AZDuffman

Ugh, just watched the video. Looks like someone who has been awake for36 hours or something.

Notice the lack of flash bulbs. Flashes
are banned with Hillary, even at rallies.
They cause grand mal seizures is people
with Hillary's condition. She looks drunk
or drugged up here:

Quote: EvenBob

Trump went up 16 points this week among Blacks,
since they all saw Hillary being thrown into a van
like a side of beef. Her most Presidential moment,
btw.

http://nypost.com/2016/09/18/black-voters-are-turning-from-clinton-to-trump-in-new-poll/

Luckily for Clinton, Trump reawakened the birther nonsense on Friday so I'd say she's not going to have a problem getting the vote of "the blacks."

Quote: EvenBob

Notice the lack of flash bulbs. Flashes
are banned with Hillary, even at rallies.
They cause grand mal seizures is people
with Hillary's condition. She looks drunk
or drugged up here:

Have you seen this compared with Trump? She looks like she is reading a teleprompter and giving the same statement she would give if there was say a plane crash or tornado. He came off as authentic and that he understands there is an ongoing problem.

She lost every news cycle last week and now she has lost today's.

Quote: AZDuffman

She lost every news cycle last week and now she has lost today's.

Riiiiight. Is that what Breitbart told you?

Friday was a disaster for Trump. Just look at his Twitter feed. You can always tell when he's had a bad day when he lashes out at CNN on Twitter like a whiny little b.....

He recommended that somebody shoot Hillary...AGAIN. I know this won't make any difference to the knuckle-draggers, but it's got to hurt him with the semi-deplorables.