2016 Election -- Part II

Quote: AxelWolf

If only they all actually voted. Unfortunately the people who would like to vote for T are probably not big on voting.

That is a major problem.

Quote: RS

Modern Family is as +EV as Chipotle, infinite.

Chipotle is as bad as trees. Bad. Qdoba 4 lyfe

Quote: SOOPOO

Comparing breaking the speed limit to illegally crossing the border using either force or forged documents is silly.

In 2014, nearly 10,000 traffic fatalities were attributed to speeding. Illegal immigrants were responsible for far fewer deaths than that, even according to numbers published by Breitbart. So why is it silly?

It may be tempting to equate the legal language of a crime's description with it's social impact, but that's a false equivalence. A state misdemeanor like speeding can be far more damaging than a federal crime like illegal immigration. And so can common acts that aren't even criminal at all, like burning coal or oil for heat. Someone recently said that without borders, we don't have a country. Well, without a breathable atmosphere, we don't have a planet.

Roughly 300,000,000 children worldwide are breathing air toxic enough to cause brain damage. But we don't need to worry about the toxic air on the other side of the planet because, after all, it can't get here.

Oops, it turns out that Chinese air pollution comes to the United States.

Yes, let's focus on illegal immigration. Keeping illegal aliens out of the country is much more important than breathing.

Quote: MathExtremist

In 2014, nearly 10,000 traffic fatalities were attributed to speeding. Illegal immigrants were responsible for far fewer deaths than that, even according to numbers published by Breitbart. So why is it silly?



Yes, let's focus on illegal immigration. Keeping illegal aliens out of the country is much more important than breathing.

Far more people speed than are illegal aliens if you want to talk about false equivalencies, it's silly because it's just not an arms length comparison.

Is it possible to focus on controlling immigration and clean air? Do we have to choose between one or the other? If so that is really sad.

Quote: MathExtremist

In 2014, nearly 10,000 traffic fatalities were attributed to speeding. Illegal immigrants were responsible for far fewer deaths than that, even according to numbers published by Breitbart. So why is it silly?

It may be tempting to equate the legal language of a crime's description with it's social impact, but that's a false equivalence. A state misdemeanor like speeding can be far more damaging than a federal crime like illegal immigration. And so can common acts that aren't even criminal at all, like burning coal or oil for heat. Someone recently said that without borders, we don't have a country. Well, without a breathable atmosphere, we don't have a planet.

Roughly 300,000,000 children worldwide are breathing air toxic enough to cause brain damage. But we don't need to worry about the toxic air on the other side of the planet because, after all, it can't get here.

Oops, it turns out that Chinese air pollution comes to the United States.

Yes, let's focus on illegal immigration. Keeping illegal aliens out of the country is much more important than breathing.

Well this sure quickly went on a tangent (IMO). Similar to what mcallister said -- why can't people who speed get tickets, we do clean-air stuff (not that I support the clean-air hocus pocus windmill propaganda), AND keep Mexicans out? There's a million and a half things wrong with the world, and we're only discussing a few of them. It doesn't mean the other 999,999 problems don't matter or are mutually exclusive -- it just means we aren't discussing them. For now on, shall we only talk about the most important stuff, leaving everything else less important un-discussed?

Quote: mcallister3200

Chipotle is as bad as trees. Bad. Qdoba 4 lyfe

Those some fightin' words. Might have to block ya.

But seriously, Qdoba....dafaq??? They put nasty a** cheese n shjt on your food. I'll take ebola or whatever the hoaxes are claiming Chipotle puts into their wonderful and majestic burritos.

I am shocked and horrified by the dark turn this thread just took........


Qdoba is infinitely better than Chipotle!!!

Quote: ams288

Qdoba is infinitely better than Chipotle!!!

Its funny, a friend of mine was always telling me the same thing and I resisted going. He finally took me saying he would pay, so I went. I got the nachos and they were pretty damn tasty. The diablo cheese will definitely cleanse your sinuses.

Quote: MathExtremist

Oops, it turns out that Chinese air pollution comes to the United States.

Yes, let's focus on illegal immigration. Keeping illegal aliens out of the country is much more important than breathing.

Unfortunately, there is nothing we can do about the use of fossil fuels in China and India, or the radiation reaching our shores from Fukushima.

We can control immigration.

The main purpose for legal and illegal immigration is to depress wages and provide cheap labor for US businesses, and votes for the Dem Party.

We certainly don't need workers when according to the BLS, the number of Americans not in the labor force has risen from 77 million in 2006, to 94 million today.

Millions more people are out of the workforce today than at the height of the Bush recession.

BLS

According to the BLS, the economy has been creating one million jobs annually.

At the same time, the government is admitting one million permanent residents annually, with another 600,000 temporary work visas, plus illegals.

Brookings

All of this puts a downward pressure on wages and increased pressure on housing and municipal resources.

Instead of a sensible policy to bring in only the number of workers we need, we bring in one third more than that each year.

Adding to this is the ACA which is reducing job growth.

Forbes

Unemployment may be at 5%, but Real Household income is at 1995 levels while the costs for food, housing and healthcare is increasing.

Two Minds

Neither Party is doing anything currently to protect the American worker or the bottom 95%.

Chris Mathews has advice for Trump.

Quote: MathExtremist

In that case, it's my mistake. But here's something Trump actually did say in the Art of the Deal (unless my fact-checking failed):


He also said that he saw thousands of Muslims in New Jersey cheering as the WTC fell on 9/11 (false), that he never supported the Iraq war (false), that Hillary started the birther rumor that Obama is a foreign-born Muslim (false), that he supports conservative values (false), or that the system is broken and he alone can fix it (false).

True!

Quote: Tanko

Chris Mathews has advice for Trump.

Why Hillary Clinton Is the Only Choice to Keep America Great
(Joe Klein's editorial to be published on in the November 14, 2016 issue of TIME)

“It is the job of editorial writers,” the late, great Murray Kempton once observed, “to come down from the hills after the battle is over and shoot the wounded.” I’ve been thinking about that as publication after publication has come forward to endorse Hillary Clinton for President–including some that have never made an endorsement before and others that have never endorsed a Democrat. Well, sure: Donald Trump is unendorsable. There hasn’t been a major-party candidate less fit for the presidency in American history.

I’ve never actually endorsed a candidate. It’s not my job. Endorsements are official. They are the prerogative of ownership. But I want to be clear in this crucial year: I will be voting for Hillary Clinton on Nov. 8.

Read more here: http://time.com/4556052/hillary-clinton-only-choice/

Quote: Tanko

Quote: MathExtremist

Oops, it turns out that Chinese air pollution comes to the United States.

Yes, let's focus on illegal immigration. Keeping illegal aliens out of the country is much more important than breathing.

Unfortunately, there is nothing we can do about the use of fossil fuels in China and India, or the radiation reaching our shores from Fukushima.

We can control immigration.

The main purpose for legal and illegal immigration is to depress wages and provide cheap labor for US businesses, and votes for the Dem Party..

Also to create cultural and racial divisions, which helps both parties. If whites become more Republican, and non-whites Dem, it's win/win. Neither party has to do anything to benefit average people in order to get votes.

If and when people start to unify, those divisions can just be stirred up.

Quote: ams288

Update: it was a nothing-burger.

The accuser didn't want to show her face because of death threats, allegedly.

A civil suit against Donald Trump alleging he raped a 13-year-old girl was dismissed in California in May 2016 and refiled in New York in June 2016.

A copy of the California lawsuit (filed on 26 April 2016) shared via the Scribd web site outlined the allegations, which included the accusation that Trump and Epstein had (over 20 years earlier) "sexually and physically" abused the then 13-year-old plaintiff and forced her "to engage in various perverted and depraved sex acts" — including being “forced to manually stimulate Defendant Trump with the use of her hand upon Defendant Trump’s erect penis until he reached sexual orgasm,” and being “forced to engage in an unnatural lesbian sex act with her fellow minor and sex slave, Maria Doe, age 12, for the sexual enjoyment of Defendant Trump” — after luring her to a "series of underage sex parties" by promising her "money and a modeling career":

A federal lawsuit filed in New York accuses Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump of repeatedly raping a 13-year-old girl more than 20 years ago, at several Upper East Side parties hosted by convicted sex offender and notorious billionaire investor Jeffrey Epstein.

The suit, first reported by the Real Deal, accuses Trump and Epstein of luring the anonymous plaintiff and other young women to four parties at Epstein's so-called Wexner Mansion at 9 East 71st Street. Epstein allegedly lured the plaintiff, identified in the suit only as Jane Doe, with promises of a modeling career and cash.

Another anonymous woman, identified in additional testimony as Tiffany Doe, corroborates Jane's allegations, testifying that she met Epstein at Port Authority, where he hired her to recruit other young girls for his parties. Trump had known Epstein for seven years in 1994 when he attended the parties at Wexner, according to the suit. He also allegedly knew that the plaintiff was 13 years old.

Jane Doe filed a similar suit in California in April, under the name Katie Johnson, also accusing Trump and Epstein of rape. That suit was dismissed on the grounds of improper paperwork — the address affiliated with her name was found to be abandoned. Today's suit confirms that the plaintiffs are one and the same.

Read more here: http://www.snopes.com/2016/06/23/donald-trump-rape-lawsuit/

Quote: Tanko

Unfortunately, there is nothing we can do about the use of fossil fuels in China and India, or the radiation reaching our shores from Fukushima.

That's only true if we antagonize those countries rather than trying to work with them. It's like saying you can't do anything about your neighbor if he's burning tires in his backyard and the smoke makes your house black.

Can't? Or don't want to, because working together is more difficult than just complaining about it, throwing up your hands, and saying "there's nothing we can do, folks, China is killing us." Good leaders look for solutions, they don't just accept problems because they're too hard.

Quote:

The main purpose for legal and illegal immigration is to depress wages and provide cheap labor for US businesses, and votes for the Dem Party.

Therefore, by restricting or eliminating immigration, US businesses' labor costs will increase. That seems entirely antithetical to the GOP's pro-business platform.

Quote:

Neither Party is doing anything currently to protect the American worker or the bottom 95%.

To paraphrase Thomas Friedman's column from a few days ago, American workers didn't lose their jobs to Mexico, they lost them to a microchip. Walling ourselves off from the rest of the world will absolutely do no good for the job market if the jobs that need doing are more cheaply done by automation than by humans. Are you going to tell Ford that they need to scrap their industrial robots because human laborers need jobs? That's entirely the opposite of what we should do.

Rather than going backwards, complaining about technology and the impact it's having on productivity and the economy, we should be adjusting our society to fit the realities of the new economy. In the future, there simply won't be enough low-skilled jobs to go around. Pining for the days when you could make a good living as a lamplighter or buggy-wheel repairperson is all well and good for nostalgia's sake, but we shouldn't aim to reverse our economy and bring back buggies or gas-lit street lamps just so we can create more menial jobs. The US manufacturing sector is 100% more productive than it was 30 years ago but it uses 1/3 the labor. The jobs of the future will involve personal service or technology, something most people would rather not deal with.

I hired an electrician recently. I'm decent with wiring simple outlets and switches but not good enough to deal with multiple circuits or whatnot. As a trained computer scientist, I could be successful if I wanted to take the time to learn what I needed, but instead I chose to hire someone. The fellow who came over was a recent immigrant, within the past decade. He was a trained electrical engineer in Venezuela, moved here with his daughter, now in college. He's working as an electrician because the job was there for him, and he opened up several of my switch panels and said "oh, no, this isn't right" and fixed the wiring. Apparently whoever lived in my house most recently did a bunch of bad stuff, but that's not the point. The point is that there are many immigrants with significant training and education who come to the US for a better life and take jobs for which they are overqualified, then work upwards from there. Meanwhile, native-born under-educated Americans complain about not having jobs because the immigrants are taking them. The answer isn't to keep the smart, motivated immigrants out, the answer is to provide education (and maybe anti-entitlement, motivational training) to the under-educated native-born Americans so they can compete. That's better for businesses and better for the citizenry.

But you know what's not better for the citizenry? Enabling them to be under-educated and complacent. The American worker and the bottom 95% doesn't need job protection for the sake of job protection. They need a government that establishes programs to deal with the new, hyperproductive economy where not all of those 95% will ever be working. If you care about 100% of the population, you should not support a conservative political philosophy that has no answers for an economy where businesses won't need them.

Math Extremist: You made some good points but you didn't hit on all of them. Certain jobs, that used to be fairly good jobs have been lost to immigrants doing the same work for much less. And I am NOT anti-immigrant. Nobody thinks of being a janitor as being a very good job but for thousands of people it wasn't a bad job. Now there almost no decent jobs as a janitor as contractors are hired to clean buildings using teams of undocumented workers. The same is true of unskilled labor at construction sites. You could argue that native born Americans should aspire to have better jobs if you want but the reality is that many just don't have whatever combination of smarts or ambition or drive or whatever it is to work as professionals. That's just reality. It's always been that way. And probably always will be that way. When a society is uplifted by technology there are always going to be those that did not get uplifted. And they have to be considered too. Not just thrown away. The difference is that now those without professional or skilled labor skills are left out completely or marginalized in terrible low paying jobs. It's not a black and white issue. It's not a home run for either side.

Quote: lilredrooster

Math Extremist: You made some good points but you didn't hit on all of them. Certain jobs, that used to be fairly good jobs have been lost to immigrants doing the same work for much less. And I am NOT anti-immigrant. Nobody thinks of being a janitor as being a very good job but for thousands of people it wasn't a bad job. Now there almost no decent jobs as a janitor as contractors are hired to clean buildings using teams of undocumented workers. The same is true of unskilled labor at construction sites. You could argue that native born Americans should aspire to have better jobs if you want but the reality is that many just don't have whatever combination of smarts or ambition or drive or whatever it is to work as professionals. That's just reality. It's always been that way. And probably always will be that way. When a society is uplifted by technology there are always going to be those that did not get uplifted. And they have to be considered too. Not just thrown away. The difference is that now those without professional or skilled labor skills are left out completely or marginalized in terrible low paying jobs. It's not a black and white issue. It's not a home run for either side.

That's exactly my point, but what other part of society is going to step in and help those left-behind workers? There's no profit incentive for a commercial enterprise to do that. Otherwise, corporations would be picking up the cost of college. No, the only way to feasibly help those workers is to retrain them using resources that are redistributed from wealthier taxpayers. It's the government's job to be "for the People," and that means all of them, not just the top 5%.

If you have a landscaper or housekeeper, they're probably not native-born Americans. But they're here, working hard, because they want to be. If native-born Americans were willing to do those jobs for the offered wages, you'd see more of them in those roles. But profit-seeking businesses naturally -- and the GOP argues, correctly -- seek the lowest-cost labor available. So when Trump hires thousands of immigrant laborers to build and clean his buildings, he's being a good businessman, right? It seems two-faced for him to suggest that what he himself is doing is what's killing the economy. That's just bogus.

And it's not that I think native-born Americans should "aspire" to have better jobs. We can't have a whole labor market full of CEOs and doctors. There's nothing wrong with working as a landscaper or housekeeper or unskilled laborer on a construction site. I did unskilled laborer jobs when I was a teenager, but I decided I didn't like those jobs and wanted more for myself. But the bigger picture is that once technologists make robots to do all the unskilled jobs like cleaning hotel rooms or throwing out job-site trash, we're going to need people who know how to fix robots, not clean hotel rooms or throw out job-site trash. Our society needs to be planning for that future, not building a wall. There is no moral difference between native-born and immigrant in that respect. People are just people. We can argue about the details of immigration policy all day long but I think a hard-working immigrant American better represents the American ideal than a lazy native-born American who's angry that harder-working people are "taking" their jobs. Every single human that ever lived in North America can trace his or her ancestry back to some other continent, so this idea of "native-born" vs. "immigrant" is just an arbitrary temporal distinction anyway. Who cares where people were born? I care about what people *do*. Or, in the case of some, what they don't do.

If an American wants to work but doesn't know what to do or how to do it, we should be helping them with education or vocational training, not scorning them for being unemployed. If scorn is deserved anywhere, it should be directed at people who should and could be working but aren't because they just don't want to. But far better than scorn is kindness and education. The education part is obvious. The kindness is because often the variances in the labor market hit people and communities far harder than was expected, and it's just mean to laugh and say "haha sucker, tough for you."

The No Toss-Ups map at RCP has Clinton at only 273. I don't see why she has a 69% chance to win. It looks closer than that with momentum going Trump's way. I think election night my go into extra innings.

Quote: lilredrooster

You could argue that native born Americans should aspire to have better jobs if you want but the reality is that many just don't have whatever combination of smarts or ambition or drive or whatever it is to work as professionals. That's just reality. It's always been that way. And probably always will be that way. When a society is uplifted by technology there are always going to be those that did not get uplifted. And they have to be considered too. Not just thrown away. The difference is that now those without professional or skilled labor skills are left out completely or marginalized in terrible low paying jobs. It's not a black and white issue. It's not a home run for either side.

I agree
I actually look at my own extended family as an example
I am bi-racial.
My mothers side, Chinese immigrants
My fathers side, Upstate New York Americans with Irish ancestry.
Chinese immigrant side, all the families I am related to by blood are very strict regarding education. Study real hard and get a good job. All are hard working and successful. Education is an extremely high priority.
Irish American side of my family that have been in the USA for generations, alcoholism runs rampant. Sad. Education not a high priority and some struggle.
That's just my extended family.

Quote: JimRockford

The No Toss-Ups map at RCP has Clinton at only 273. I don't see why she has a 69% chance to win. It looks closer than that with momentum going Trump's way. I think election night my go into extra innings.

It's a question of her being very likely to get those 273. According to the polling stats on Huffpollster, those 273 votes all come from states in which she's polling +5% or better:

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2016/forecast/president#state-by-state-averages
Click on each state and it gives you a stat summary. If you drop NC and FL (less than 3% lead) you get 273.

Quote: JimRockford

The No Toss-Ups map at RCP has Clinton at only 273. I don't see why she has a 69% chance to win. It looks closer than that with momentum going Trump's way. I think election night my go into extra innings.

That map has Trump winning FL, NC, and NV.

Based on early voting, NV is pretty safe for Hillary.

NC could go either way.

And Florida will be Florida: extremely close. Hillary's ground game gives her the advantage in a 50/50 race there.

With the Electoral Map tilting more and more towards Democratic states, how long before the GOP proposes a change to it? With the majority of people under 18 in Texas being Hispanic, it's just a matter of time until that State turns solid Blue. Then you'll never see a Republican President. Wouldn't it be nice if GW is remembered as the last one? History Quiz. Who was the last Whig President? Do you think they knew he would be at the time?

If Texas turns blue then maybe the GOP will figure out how to turn Hispanics red. Maybe other states will align differently. Texas used to be blue and republicans still found their way to the White House.

Quote: billryan

With the Electoral Map tilting more and more towards Democratic states, how long before the GOP proposes a change to it? With the majority of people under 18 in Texas being Hispanic, it's just a matter of time until that State turns solid Blue. Then you'll never see a Republican President. Wouldn't it be nice if GW is remembered as the last one? History Quiz. Who was the last Whig President? Do you think they knew he would be at the time?

Beside amending the constitution to allow only white males to vote, what other change(s) can the GOP make?

Quote: MathExtremist

You are being deceived by a false prophet who pretends to understand or care about your grievances, but in reality has no way to solve them.

I'm not being deceived at all. I want a candidate that shares more of my values.

I want a candidate who wants to protect the borders. I do not want a candidate who wants to bring in tens of thousands of refugees with a built in hostility to USA culture and values.

I believe in equal pay for equal work. I do not want a candidate who thinks we should mandate higher pay for lesser work that some people choose to do.

I do not want a candidate who upon seeing the government stealing 40% of a person's wealth at just the federal level screams "NOT ENOUGH!" and plans to take even more.

I do not want a candidate who broke email security rules because she felt the rules did not apply to her.

I could go on and on, but not much use. If Trump wins I will know we still have a USA that believes in electing the better person. If Hillary wins I will know the nation cares so much about race-baiting and handouts that they ignore criminal activity and all to do is sit back the last third of my life, crack some beers, and watch it all fall apart.

Quote: 777

Beside amending the constitution to allow only white males to vote, what other change(s) can the GOP make?

Allocating electoral votes by congressional district instead of winner takes all for each state. Congressional districts are heavily gerrymandered so that would give a huge advantage to the Republicans.

Quote: ams288

Allocating electoral votes by congressional district instead of winner takes all for each state. Congressional districts are heavily gerrymandered so that would give a huge advantage to the Republicans.

Can this change be made without having to amend the constitution?

Quote: AZDuffman

I'm not being deceived at all. I want a candidate that shares more of my values.

I want a candidate who wants to protect the borders. I do not want a candidate who wants to bring in tens of thousands of refugees with a built in hostility to USA culture and values.

I believe in equal pay for equal work. I do not want a candidate who thinks we should mandate higher pay for lesser work that some people choose to do.

I do not want a candidate who upon seeing the government stealing 40% of a person's wealth at just the federal level screams "NOT ENOUGH!" and plans to take even more.

I do not want a candidate who broke email security rules because she felt the rules did not apply to her.

I could go on and on, but not much use. If Trump wins I will know we still have a USA that believes in electing the better person. If Hillary wins I will know the nation cares so much about race-baiting and handouts that they ignore criminal activity and all to do is sit back the last third of my life, crack some beers, and watch it all fall apart.

A rapist candidate can become a POTUS, but a mishandling of email candidate can't.

Quote: 777

Can this change be made without having to amend the constitution?

Yes, the Constitution lets the states decide how to pick their electors. Since 2000, liberals have been pushing laws in states that would force them to the national popular vote. IOW, Trump gets a majority and the bluest state goes his way. I forget how many states are on it, but the laws trigger when 270 electoral vote states pass them.

PA and CA looked at doing it by congressional district, kind of a more fair way IMHO.

Quote: 777

A rapist candidate can become a POTUS, but a mishandling of email candidate can't.

Well, Bill Clinton as a rapist did in 1992. The email was more than "mishandling." And she should be facing prison time for it, same as someone in the military would if they did the same thing.

Quote: AZDuffman

Well, Bill Clinton as a rapist did in 1992

I didn't vote for him either.

Quote: AZDuffman

PA and CA looked at doing it by congressional district, kind of a more fair way IMHO.

AZDuffman thinks it's a more fair way. That tells you all you need to know as to who it benefits....

Quote: JimRockford

I didn't vote for him either.

57% of the people in 1992 who voted didn't.

Quote: AZDuffman

Well, Bill Clinton as a rapist did in 1992. The email was more than "mishandling." And she should be facing prison time for it, same as someone in the military would if they did the same thing.

Any proof to your rape claim? Or you just don't know the difference between rape and adultery.

Trump is an adulterer and a rapist. Adultery act is not the same as raping a 13 years old girl or anyone.

Quote: AZDuffman

Well, Bill Clinton as a rapist did in 1992. The email was more than "mishandling." And she should be facing prison time for it, same as someone in the military would if they did the same thing.

1. There was no evidence Clinton raped anyone on or prior to the election of 1992.

2. The FBI concluded after a year long investigation that she did nothing nefarious. There were documents that weren't properly labeled as classified (2 or 3 out of thousands) that she passed on through a private email server that was hacked. If it wasn't hacked you would have never known about it and there has been no national crisis due to the leaked classified information.

Meanwhile you have trump proposing a ban on an entire religion from entering the United States, which is blatant discrimination based on religion.

Quote: JimRockford

I didn't vote for him either.

Bill was an adulterer but he did not rape anyone. Trump is a rapist, and AZD is o.k. with it.

Quote: 777

Any proof to your rape claim? Or you just don't know the difference between rape and adultery.

Clinton raped Juanita Broaddrick.

Quote:

Trump is an adulterer and a rapist. Adultery act is not the same as raping a 13 years old girl or anyone.

No basis for the claim. In the first place makes no sense that he would do that to a 13 year old.

Quote: crazydazy

The FBI concluded after a year long investigation that she did nothing nefarious. There were documents that weren't properly labeled as classified (2 or 3 out of thousands) that she passed on through a private email server that was hacked. If it wasn't hacked you would have never known about it and there has been no national crisis due to the leaked classified information.

The fact that she had it at all breaks policies and laws. And it WAS hacked, by at least 5 entities they say.

Quote:

Meanwhile you have trump proposing a ban on an entire religion from entering the United States, which is blatant discrimination based on religion.

GOOD! We should keep them out. Maybe you are blind to what muslims are doing in Europe, but it is still happening. And there is no "right" to enter the USA if you are not a citizen. I don't care if it is not PC or "not who we are." You are talking about cultural destruction. Ask the average German how all those muslims are working out for them.

Quote: AZDuffman

Clinton raped Juanita Broaddrick.

Quote:

Trump is an adulterer and a rapist. Adultery act is not the same as raping a 13 years old girl or anyone.

No basis for the claim. In the first place makes no sense that he would do that to a 13 year old.

Bill also says you raped Juanita Broaddrick, and many other girls of various ages. Right? How would you react to such accusation?

A Judge called Hastert 'serial child molester,' and gave him 15 months in prison. Does this make any sense to you? I guess not because Trump's raping a 13-year old does not make sense to you.

I think you are o.k. with physically raping someone, but sex-ting via email an absolute no-no.

Quote: 777

Bill also says you raped Juanita Broaddrick, and many other girls of various ages....

...I think you are o.k. with physically raping someone, but sex-ting via email an absolute no-no.

Is this allowed?

Quote: 777

I think you are o.k. with physically raping someone, but sex-ting via email an absolute no-no.

I think there is no reason to believe any of these Trump allegations. Funny how they all come out at the end of the election season?

I think sexting is childish behavior. I think inability to stop texting is a sign of deep emotional issues.

Quote: AZDuffman

I think sexting is childish behavior. I think inability to stop texting is a sign of deep emotional issues.

I think tweeting is childish behavior. I think inability to stop tweeting is a sign of deep emotional issues.

Quote: ams288

AZDuffman thinks it's a more fair way. That tells you all you need to know as to who it benefits....

I think Scalia cited the 14th amendment's Equal Protection clause in his reasoning when he APPOINTED George Bush as a POTUS in the Bush v. Gore.

If you apply Scalia's logic, then inconsistent or selective "gerrymandering" the Presidential election by States is not constitutional. For gerrymandering to be constitutional, the Constitution must be amended to IMPOSE gerrymandering in the Presidential Election on ALL 50 states.

Quote: AZDuffman

I'm not being deceived at all. I want a candidate that shares more of my values.

Trump's values include making fun of women he deems unattractive and mocking disabled people. No decent person shares those values. Trump's values are based on exclusion and discrimination and bigotry and meanness. We don't need any more meanness. What we need is more people with a well-developed sense of decency.

Quote:

I do not want a candidate who upon seeing the government stealing 40% of a person's wealth at just the federal level screams "NOT ENOUGH!" and plans to take even more.

I want an educated electorate who understands the difference between wealth and income. I want a citizenry who understands that paying taxes to fund the government programs that their elected representatives enact is a civic obligation, not some illegitimate suggestion that can and should be dodged. Enjoying public benefits and then skipping out on taxes is no different than enjoying a restaurant meal and running out before the bill gets there.

Quote:

If Trump wins I will know we still have a USA that believes in electing the better person.

Here's your better person:

"I always wanted to get the Purple Heart."

"Jon Stewart is a pussy."

"I’d fire Rosie O’Donnell. I mean, I’d look at her right in that fat, ugly face of hers..."

"if Ivanka weren’t my daughter, perhaps I’d be dating her."

"You know, it doesn’t really matter what [the media] write as long as you’ve got a young and beautiful piece of ass."

"Nobody has more respect for women than I do."

Trump is a showman, so I can't tell whether he's actually a wretched person or just playing the part of a wretched person. But it really doesn't matter. What matters is that he's got tens of millions of people voting for him either because of or in spite of the fact that he acts like a wretched person. That's just so shameful.

Quote: MathExtremist

We don't need any more meanness. What we need is more people with a well-developed sense of decency.

Good luck with that.

Quote: 777

I think Scalia cited the 14th amendment's Equal Protection clause in his reasoning when he APPOINTED George Bush as a POTUS in the Bush v. Gore.

I still fail to see how stopping Gore's attempts to steal an election is appointing the winner.

Now, the 14th applied because Gore knew his chances of stealing the election improved if he only disputed votes in the most heavily Democrat counties. So adding Gore votes there and not in a more conservative county would indeed violate Equal Protection. I'm not even a lawyer and can easily understand that.

States may select electors however they feel fit. If the congressional districts are approved and they want to do it that way then this is a good thing. It would protect the interests of the rural areas over the big cities. Would also dilute attempted voter fraud in big cities since you would not be able to steal nearly as many electors. More I think on it the more sense it makes!

Quote: AZDuffman

Good luck with that.

My high school civics teacher once taught us that a distinction between liberal and conservative political views is their view of human decency: the liberal view is optimistic, the conservative view is pessimistic.

I've been screwed over by enough business partners that I should be a total cynic by now, but I'm not (yet). I still think that most people are basically good, and I try to act accordingly. If Trump acted the same way, he'd be winning in a landslide.

I've heard (many times) liberals vote with their heart while conservatives vote with their brain.

Quote: Melania Trump

We have to find a better way to talk to each other, to disagree with each other, to respect each other.

Oh, the irony.

Quote: MathExtremist

We don't need any more meanness. What we need is more people with a well-developed sense of decency.

Quote: AZDuffman

Good luck with that.

Quote: MathExtremist

My high school civics teacher once taught us that a distinction between liberal and conservative political views is their view of human decency: the liberal view is optimistic, the conservative view is pessimistic.

I've been screwed over by enough business partners that I should be a total cynic by now, but I'm not (yet). I still think that most people are basically good, and I try to act accordingly. If Trump acted the same way, he'd be winning in a landslide.

We are all looking at the same partially filled glass
Libs, its half full, cool
Conservatives, its half empty, damm

Quote: AZDuffman

The fact that she had it at all breaks policies and laws. And it WAS hacked, by at least 5 entities they say.



GOOD! We should keep them out. Maybe you are blind to what muslims are doing in Europe, but it is still happening. And there is no "right" to enter the USA if you are not a citizen. I don't care if it is not PC or "not who we are." You are talking about cultural destruction. Ask the average German how all those muslims are working out for them.

It's good that we discriminate people on the basis of what they believe in? What are Muslims doing in Europe by the way besides dealing with xenophobia, like in France where they banned burkas in public. I hope you realize more people die from shark attacks and falling coconuts than radical terrorism annually in the western world.

Your closed-mindedness speaks volumes.