Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Shadowlord]

Trump is a cause for optimism, so rarely does such a clear and absolute fuckup manage to gain substantial support in the face of the establishment. The power of a sufficiently authoritative fuckup cannot be denied, we must harass this power.

[mainiac]

ಠ_ಠ

electing her is a clear step in the wrong direction and reinforces the already present trend towards oligarchy and tyranny.

"Oligarchy" apparently means the platform of:
-Make all large donations public
-Close the superPAC loophole that allows unlimited donations by the wealthy
-Increase matching donations for small donors

Or perhaps Oligarchy is her love fest for wall street:
-Make executives at investment banks personally liable for misconduct if the banks want to keep operating in the US financial system
-Tax on high-frequency trading
-End the investment bank loophole
-Tax too big to fail banks
-If congress stymies wall street reform, issue unilateral executive branch action to punish banks for exploiting too big to fail by creating new regulatory burdens

You could perhaps argue that she doesn't go far enough.  I would be somewhat sympathetic to that view when it comes to campaign finance reform.  But it's clearly not moving in the wrong direction.

[wierd]

Mainiac--

Her track record of wishy-washy politics is a strong indicator that her rhetoric is purely for election purposes, and that such reforms are very unlikely to be implemented under her administration.

Dont underestimate how deep the hentai tentacles of superPACs and bigtime lobbyist groups go. Dont underestimate the recalcitrant natures of senators and congressmen in the face of such reforms being threatened.

Even IF she were to aggressively campaign for, and fight for those changes, the others in government would work tirelessly to stonewall and prevent such changes, as those changes would upset thier ability to be career politicians.

Try not to fall victim to your own confirmation biases.

[PTTG??]

Let's not forget that in an actual election, the Republicans already have a strong narrative against her. They'll say that she's effectively an illegal third term for Bill. Everything they've ever said about Bill they'll turn against her.

It's pretty clear that 2016 will be a year if unvoting, where people vote against politicians they hate rather than for the ones they like. Personally, I'm looking forward to fistfights at polling places.

[Shadowlord]

I don't really believe she's seriously going to try to do what she's saying either, but that's no reason to vote for Trump. There's every reason to vote for anyone but Trump.

[smjjames]

WMUR (NH tv station) got booted from the democratic debate because a labor dispute was getting in the way, apparently.

Wouldn't be surprised if a question or two on labor unions worked their way into that debate.

Mainiac--

Her track record of wishy-washy politics is a strong indicator that her rhetoric is purely for election purposes, and that such reforms are very unlikely to be implemented under her administration.

Dont underestimate how deep the hentai tentacles of superPACs and bigtime lobbyist groups go. Dont underestimate the recalcitrant natures of senators and congressmen in the face of such reforms being threatened.

Even IF she were to aggressively campaign for, and fight for those changes, the others in government would work tirelessly to stonewall and prevent such changes, as those changes would upset thier ability to be career politicians.

Try not to fall victim to your own confirmation biases.

Yep, it's pretty well known that she is up to her eyes in lobbyists.

Also, the Republicans already have reasons to stonewall her (among them 'because she's Hillary Clinton'), they don't really need new ones.

Let's not forget that in an actual election, the Republicans already have a strong narrative against her. They'll say that she's effectively an illegal third term for Bill. Everything they've ever said about Bill they'll turn against her.

It's pretty clear that 2016 will be a year if unvoting, where people vote against politicians they hate rather than for the ones they like. Personally, I'm looking forward to fistfights at polling places.

Given the number of people voting at once, theres bound to be a few scuffles and theres usually one or two every time.

Warning - while you were typing a new reply has been posted. You may wish to review your post.  nin-nin-nin-ninja

I don't really believe she's seriously going to try to do what she's saying either, but that's no reason to vote for Trump. There's every reason to vote for anyone but Trump.

There are people who are using 'theres every reason to vote for anyone but Hillary'. Trump might not even BE the nominee.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Let's not forget that in an actual election, the Republicans already have a strong narrative against her. They'll say that she's effectively an illegal third term for Bill. Everything they've ever said about Bill they'll turn against her.

Hillary Clinton/Monica Lewinski slash fanfics when

It's pretty clear that 2016 will be a year if unvoting, where people vote against politicians they hate rather than for the ones they like. Personally, I'm looking forward to fistfights at polling places.

We've already proven that this can't be fixed by voting for the politicians you like, so clearly the recourse is to vote for those you hate.

[mainiac]

Her track record of wishy-washy politics is a strong indicator that her rhetoric is purely for election purposes, and that such reforms are very unlikely to be implemented under her administration.

A lovely non falsifiable statement.

Bernie Sanders track record of consistently supporting the democratic leadership in the senate is a strong indicator that his rhetoric is purely for election purposes, and that such reforms are very unlikely to be implemented under his administration.

Jill Steins track record of not holding office is a strong indicator that her rhetoric is purely for election purposes, and that such reforms are very unlikely to be implemented under her administration.

Karl Marx's track record of endorsing avowed capitalist politicians such as Abraham Lincoln is a strong indicator that his rhetoric was purely empty and that he didn't actually support any of the reforms he spoke of.

Try not to fall victim to your own confirmation biases.

[wierd]

I didnt ask you to double-down on confirmation biases, mainiac.

I asked you to be genuinely critical of them, and seriously consider other possibilities.

[smjjames]

It's pretty clear that 2016 will be a year if unvoting, where people vote against politicians they hate rather than for the ones they like. Personally, I'm looking forward to fistfights at polling places.

We've already proven that this can't be fixed by voting for the politicians you like, so clearly the recourse is to vote for those you hate.

Which would end up with Republicans voting for Hillary and ending up back at square one. I don't really want to vote for Hillary (for various reasons) and I don't want to vote for Trump, but third party candidates are essentially throwing away your vote in this climate.

Here's hoping Hillary has a brainfart and picks some horrible VP choice.

[Shadowlord]

I didnt ask you to double-down on confirmation biases, mainiac.

I asked you to be genuinely critical of them, and seriously consider other possibilities.

He called and raised. You were expecting... what? 

[Shadowlord]

Here's hoping Hillary has a brainfart and picks some horrible VP choice.

Feinstein?

Edit: Forums need a combine posts button. Was expecting someone else to have posted again already. :V

[RedKing]

Mainiac--

Her track record of wishy-washy politics is a strong indicator that her rhetoric is purely for election purposes, and that such reforms are very unlikely to be implemented under her administration.

^^^^
THIS.


Even putting aside for the moment the fact that she's going to face a Congress still controlled by the Republican party (unless a Trump nomination unleashes an anti-GOP groundswell that sweeps away GOP control of Congress, which thanks to gerrymandering would be an even more astounding event than Trump getting nominated) and whom the GOP base will be shrieking to obstruct Clinton at every turn....

...she still doesn't have a lot of credibility or track record of pushing for policies of the kind you're listing. I could say right now that I am absolutely in favor of mandating the death penalty for anyone caught entering the US illegally, and I'd get votes for it. Doesn't mean I believe it, or that I'd actually do that if elected. (BTW, don't elect me. Ever.)

[smjjames]

Here's hoping Hillary has a brainfart and picks some horrible VP choice.

Feinstein?

Edit: Forums need a combine posts button. Was expecting someone else to have posted again already. :V

Feinstein wouldn't be too bad of a choice I don't think. She was a bit of a loose cannon early on (or was that someone else? I forget.) but calmed down.

[wierd]

I know better than to trot out counter examples with mainiac. It turns into a shitstorm the rest of the board has to then scrub off the walls.

I am calling him out on the confirmation bias angle; he has not even so much as acknowledged that clinton is a human being,  and thus capable of human faults and failings, like the afore mentioned confirmation biases, when it comes to her administration.

He could counter with a non-argument, like "her and every other politician", but that does not explain why she is the better candidate in his opinion. When people challenge his personal views of clinton, he responds with handwaving. That is not the hallmark of intelligent debate, and I expect better of him. When counter-opposed factoids are exhibited, he waves it off as "irrelevent", rather than exploring the raised issue. That is not a hallmark of intelligent debate, and I expect better of him.

Basically, I am saying that I see that he is clearly an intelligent person, and it alarms me that he holds fast to confirmation biases, as I expect better of him.

Doubling down on the confirmation bias only makes me want to facepalm.