American Politics

[shionoro]

What do you mean, the point is that in a place with less guns violent events still happen, meaning its pointless to restrict guns.

You seem to continously have trouble understanding that japan has a murder rate of 0,3 and the us is above 4.
Just because 'sometimes, violent crimes do happen' does not mean the laws preventing them are ineffective if the countries in which they are enforced have much, much less such crimes as the US.

With your logic, you could basically allow murder because it happens anyway.

 

[Philia]

Sanders gave a damn good speech. But I doubt how much impact it will have among his supporters. They might not want a Trump presidency but a lot of things are wrong with Clinton as well.

 

[SharkBait]

Knives are limited. There are many laws in many states concerning the types of knives that can be carried concealed in public, much less owned at all. Just look at your own state's laws.

But the knives arent limited in The Old Dominion since you can own any knife and open carry any knife. Virginia fortunately believes in freedom of its citizens, which is why Im proud to live in the commonwealth of Virginia.

With your logic, you could basically allow murder because it happens anyway.

but people do allow murder, the murder of babies which democrats love not to mention they love assisted murder by physician.

Also yesterday was another gun incident in germany, meaning it is becoming a day to day thing over there, once again laws arent doing nothing.

 

[shionoro]

but people do allow murder, the murder of babies which democrats love not to mention they love assisted murder by physician.

Also yesterday was another gun incident in germany, meaning it is becoming a day to day thing over there, once again laws arent doing nothing.

First of all: abortion is not murder. Calling it like that is just wrong, because murder is clearly defined in the US law.
On this topic, i can actually say with a good reason that banning abortion does not help, because we know that it does not actually diminish the numbers of aborted children..

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/12/world/12abortion.html?_r=0

So if you are against abortion, banning it still does not help because it just endangers the women who seek it.
Being against abortion but still being against a ban would be reasonable.

Being against weapon based violence and not restricting guns is unreasonable, because the US leads on every other developed nation in gunviolence and mass shootings and murder rate.

And it is not becoming a 'day to day' thing in germany.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffenmissbrauch#/media/File:SchusswaffenmissbrauchBRDbis2006.png
2006 there were about 6000 times in which someone illegally shot a gun.
So there are cases, yes, but those are just the smallest fraction of cases in the US.
The media in germany just focus on those things now due to obvious reasons.

You are still trying to take singled out cases and ignore statistical facts.
We have about 70 dead people due to gun incidents per year her including people shot down by the police and including accidents.
2012, the US had about 9000 homicides through guns.

So, germany has not even one percent of your gun related homicides.
Pls, let's call it a day to day thing and say gun laws don't work when we have 10% of your numbers.
Fortunately, that will never happen.

And before you say it: Yes, even if we multiply the 70 dead people by 4 we still have 280 people, which is not even 3% of your numbers.

So again: Gun laws don't work when they cut the gun related homicides (and we are generous here) by more than 80%?

 

[M3J]

Eh, I don't know. I don't use a gun to cut steak or transport goods (that would either be amazing, or scary, or a combination of both).
Also remember that vehicles (including trucks) are regulated with Drivers Licenses and Permits.


Not surprised by their action. I've read idiots claiming that "Hillary doesn't need Millennials to win the Election", which is extremely idiotic if you ask me. If she wins this election, then it would be by the skin of the teeth; however, they'll soon have to learn that they'll eventually need Millennials (both Democrats and Republicans) in the future elections.
That aside, I've sorta expected that to happen. His endorsement may have hurt Sanders, but it is nowhere near the collateral damage when compared to the email leaks. At least with Sanders' endorsement, he did made it clear that his goal is to defeat Trump (and Hillary is the only candidate who can beat him; Jill and Gary aren't even anywhere near as popular as them); the emails spat on both Sanders and the voters (including his supporters), which I doubt they'll just sit there and accept the kind of behavior.

One thing's for sure: Both Democratic and Republican Party needs a MASSIVE reform after the election. To hell with Terrorism, Guns, and Police Brutality; we can't fix any of them without fixing the party.

She almost has no chance of winning without millennials, especially considering plenty of them are voting for Trump. Bernie endorsing Hillary hurt his image, which is pretty stupid considering all it does is show that Bernie is against Trump, and he managed to get Hillary to adopt some leftist ideas. I don't get why people don't see this, and why they're willing to let US burn by voting Trump.

So far, a lot of Bernie supporters are pissed. Audibly.

No, it applies to all crime as far as I know. It's based on studies done at prisons.

It could potentially lower the amount of fatalities, yes. Anything other than that, who can say?

Really? I've red otherwise when it came to mass shootings and guns being legal.



Great article on how Trump is a shit choice, and why he's a bad person: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...-why-im-a-college_us_579260d7e4b0a1917a6e9040

 

[xi0]

But the knives arent limited in The Old Dominion since you can own any knife and open carry any knife.

OPEN carry any knife, yes. But you cannot CONCEAL carry all knives.

However, if you look at my state, Maryland, the laws are a bit stricter.

I don't see why anyone would need the legal right to conceal carry a throwing star, dirk, automatic/gravity knife or bowie knife. If you want to make the self defense or hunting argument, a pocket knife of any size more than suffices. And even then, the law stated here specifically mentions intent.

And either way, your point was about regulating knives because crimes are committed with them, when they are regulated. It's the same with owning and operating automobiles. There isn't a single adult in this country that doesn't require the use of a knife or an automobile on a daily basis. You use this false equivalency time and time again, and even when you try to make a correlation between crimes involving guns and those with knives or vehicles, it still doesn't hold up. Someone hellbent on mass murder could use any means possible to do it, but why make it easier and more efficient for them? That's the entire argument at hand here, not the actual right to own a firearm...that's never going away and nor should it.

 

[Onyx Darkmatter]

She almost has no chance of winning without millennials, especially considering plenty of them are voting for Trump. Bernie endorsing Hillary hurt his image, which is pretty stupid considering all it does is show that Bernie is against Trump, and he managed to get Hillary to adopt some leftist ideas. I don't get why people don't see this, and why they're willing to let US burn by voting Trump.

So far, a lot of Bernie supporters are pissed. Audibly.

It's probably because they see Trump as a "non-politician who's fighting for the people", compared to Hillary as a "crooked politician who's accepted money from foreign governments".
I mean, at least with the GOP, they despise Trump, but they've embraced him; Democrats took away the people's choice by tampering with the election.

Who could blame them at this point? Sanders has accepted the establishment and they repaid him and his supporters with shit.

 

[M3J]

It's probably because they see Trump as a "non-politician who's fighting for the people", compared to Hillary as a "crooked politician who's accepted money from foreign governments".
I mean, at least with the GOP, they despise Trump, but they've embraced him; Democrats took away the people's choice by tampering with the election.

Who could blame them at this point? Sanders has accepted the establishment and they repaid him and his supporters with shit.

Pretty sure no Bernie supporter thinks that of Trump, they're just more disenfranchised with DNC. Bernie at least supports the party even after what they did, his supporters at the very least should not support Trump.


Also, in response to "trucks should be regulated!" bullshit, it actually is. You can't drive a truck without a proper license, though I'm not sure if you need a CDL licence to own/buy one either. Most of the counters against gun control are dumb, to be honest.

 

[SharkBait]

So again: Gun laws don't work when they cut the gun related homicides (and we are generous here) by more than 80%?

It is a statement that is hard to accept when the country in question has been having violent issues with guns day to day. Its like someone from france saying that accepting refugees from terrorist ridden countries has been a good effort, yet terroristic events seem to be weekly happenings in the country, implying refugees are security liabilities. How could I accept a statement that is against reality, I just cant.

 

[kkck]

It's funny how politics at the US can change as arbitrarily as its weather.... A couple months ago you see the republican party being an absolute mess while trying to grasp how in the holy hell a man who is evidently not a conservative, dubious claims at even being a republican and at best lax Christianity (being a 3 times divorced womanizer whose very ex wife claims to have been assaulted by him who is overtly proud of his womanizing) who runs rather unethical business (I can't fathom anyone thinking there is anything ethical about the casinos or the trump "university") made it to being a candidate but now you see the party lining up perfectly behind the guy. In turn there was a semblance of stability in the democrat party during the primaries. And it just seems to have disappeared by now. It does seem like a number of bernie supporters might actually support trump.. I guess it goes to show that bernie supporters are not ultimately different from trump supporters. Evidently they don't give two consecutive shits about policy because otherwise there is no conceivable way they would rather support the guy who is literally absolutely everything bernie stands against of. Welp, I guess I got until november to mentally prepare for trump presidency. Yay apathy!

 

[shionoro]

It is a statement that is hard to accept when the country in question has been having violent issues with guns day to day. Its like someone from france saying that accepting refugees from terrorist ridden countries has been a good effort, yet terroristic events seem to be weekly happenings in the country, implying refugees are security liabilities. How could I accept a statement that is against reality, I just cant.

Because it is not against reality.
Germany and France still have not even a tenth of the US gun incidents if you count them together, even tho germany took 1million refugees and france as 10% muslim inhabitants.

The US (or parts of it) is scared about the 2% muslims you have there. So, our gunlaws are so effective that even tho we took bigger risks when it comes to refugees, we have not even 10% of your gunbased homicides.
In fact, even if we watch at all homicides, the US has a homicide rate four times as high as in france and germany.

What you do is ignoring reality. What you do is the same as saying that noone should have to get a driver's licence because there are accidents happening anyway.

Let's look at how many massshootings were committed in the US in the last week:

http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting

It were 9 with also 9 victims. 10 is the number of victims which died in germany due to terror last week in munich .
The week before you had 13 mass shootings with 14 dead persons. Germany has 0 massshootings. There was an incident in the train with no victims (persecutor excluded here)
The week before? US has 7 mass shootings and 10 dead. germany? Zero incidents, zero dead.
And i could go back with this game, with the US almost never having less than at least 5 victims per week and several incidents and germany having zero of both.
I could do that for the whole year 2016. I would find some few incidents if i am generous and count acts in which it is not clear whether the perpetrator wanted to kill a single victims for reasons like revenge or greed, so where it is not clear whether it was a mass shooting.
But even if i would count ALL GUN BASED CRIME in germany, i would still have less incidents than the US had this year alone with only mass shootings.

So don't tell me gunlaws dont work.
In fact, if you think refugees and terrorists are so incredbily threatining in europe, they obviously work even better because the US does not have these guys in significant numbers.

You know, there is a reason why the week were several incidents happened in germany got the name 'week of bloodshed' over here. The reason is that it is not common.
By that standard, every week is a week of bloodshed in the US.

 

[Onyx Darkmatter]

Pretty sure no Bernie supporter thinks that of Trump, they're just more disenfranchised with DNC. Bernie at least supports the party even after what they did, his supporters at the very least should not support Trump.

Point being, is that Sanders Supporters are turning their backs on Hillary Clinton. It's like I said: Sanders may have the strength to withstand the shit thrown at him by the Democratic Party, but definitely not his supporters. It's a mess to be reckoned with.

It's funny how politics at the US can change as arbitrarily as its weather.... A couple months ago you see the republican party being an absolute mess while trying to grasp how in the holy hell a man who is evidently not a conservative, dubious claims at even being a republican and at best lax Christianity (being a 3 times divorced womanizer whose very ex wife claims to have been assaulted by him who is overtly proud of his womanizing) who runs rather unethical business (I can't fathom anyone thinking there is anything ethical about the casinos or the trump "university") made it to being a candidate but now you see the party lining up perfectly behind the guy. In turn there was a semblance of stability in the democrat party during the primaries. And it just seems to have disappeared by now. It does seem like a number of bernie supporters might actually support trump.. I guess it goes to show that bernie supporters are not ultimately different from trump supporters. Evidently they don't give two consecutive shits about policy because otherwise there is no conceivable way they would rather support the guy who is literally absolutely everything bernie stands against of. Welp, I guess I got until november to mentally prepare for trump presidency. Yay apathy!

That's the thing: the GOP never wanted Trump, but because of the mess they've made, it bites them back in the ass. However, at least they're embracing Trump (whether they like him or not) and accepted that he's the nominee, whereas the Democratic side didn't want Sanders and backstabbed him and the American people. Not that I'll ever support Trump, but who could blame people who backed Sanders only to get the middle finger from the Democrats?
Ditto, I'll have to get ready for his godawful presidency. Hopefully, just hopefully, that Congress finally does something and start an Impeachment process if Trump were to do one stupid shit (but then we'll have to deal with Moron Pence).

Looks like the Democrats apologized for the emails to Sanders supporters and other Americans. Yeah, an apology that's about rigging the election, questioning a candidates' faith, implying that Hispanic votes are currency, and allowing the party to hire another Anti-Sanders Chairman (or Chairwoman). You can't take back the damage, because you've already hurt yourselves more than Trump's takeover of the GOP.

 

[kkck]

That's the thing: the GOP never wanted Trump, but because of the mess they've made, it bites them back in the ass. However, at least they're embracing Trump (whether they like him or not) and accepted that he's the nominee, whereas the Democratic side didn't want Sanders and backstabbed him and the American people. Not that I'll ever support Trump, but who could blame people who backed Sanders only to get the middle finger from the Democrats?
Ditto, I'll have to get ready for his godawful presidency. Hopefully, just hopefully, that Congress finally does something and start an Impeachment process if Trump were to do one stupid shit (but then we'll have to deal with Moron Pence).

Looks like the Democrats apologized for the emails to Sanders supporters and other Americans. Yeah, an apology that's about rigging the election, questioning a candidates' faith, implying that Hispanic votes are currency, and allowing the party to hire another Anti-Sanders Chairman (or Chairwoman). You can't take back the damage, because you've already hurt yourselves more than Trump's takeover of the GOP.

I get why they are angry. That is more than abundantly clear (though I am not 100% caught up with the whole thing to be honest, I am not sure the leaked emails suggest anything that clinton having 600 super delegates supporting her does not to begin with). However regardless of that, it does not make a shred of sense to switch from sanders to trump. Sanders isn't interchangeable with trump, they stand at polar opposite sides of the political spectrum (assuming trump stands for anything at all). There is no such thing as a protest vote (unless it involves voting for a literal donkey, not a figurative one), each sanders supporter that goes votes trump is betraying absolutely everything they claimed to believe or stand for. Voting for trump can be a rejection of the democratic party but that will also as a matter of fact also be a slap to sanders. Sanders most basic point through his entire campaign has been that what matters is policy. I would argue that sanders supporters that do not see that simply did not get what sanders was about to begin with.

 

[z.5]

Yeah, a vote for Trump does appear, from the outside, to be a vote made out of spite.

I'd have guessed that it would make more sense to vote for a 3rd party - sure, they are incredibly unlikely to win, but it surely beats a non-vote or a vote against what you claim to believe in...

Also, if everyone who was BoB voted for a 3rd party, they'd probably do quite well...

 

[kkck]

Yeah, a vote for Trump does appear, from the outside, to be a vote made out of spite.

I'd have guessed that it would make more sense to vote for a 3rd party - sure, they are incredibly unlikely to win, but it surely beats a non-vote or a vote against what you claim to believe in...

Also, if everyone who was BoB voted for a 3rd party, they'd probably do quite well...

As far as I can tell third parties are already likely to do well. The libertarian party is already polling at 10% and the green party at about 4 or 5 % IIRC. Of course, that is not a win but they are set to get support beyond anything they have had before. If bernie guys go for the green party they would at least be coherent.... I would even respect that. At least apathy itself wouldn't be the sole factor determining trump winning.

 

[z.5]

At least apathy itself wouldn't be the sole factor determining trump winning.

I am not sure that it is fair to blame Trump winning (if that unfortunate outcome ends up occurring) on Bernie supporters not voting Clinton.

Sure, she won the Democratic primary - but party unity shouldn't be a sole reason to vote for a candidate.

Certainly I can sympathise with them not wanting to have to vote for one candidate, who they don't appear to agree with, purely out of fear of the alternative.

I do feel that their desire for her to have to reach out/earn their vote (an argument that 'She won' isn't really enough) does have some merit.
She shouldn't just get it by default.

 

[kkck]

I am not sure that it is fair to blame Trump winning (if that unfortunate outcome ends up occurring) on Bernie supporters not voting Clinton.

Sure, she won the Democratic primary - but party unity shouldn't be a sole reason to vote for a candidate.

Certainly I can sympathise with them not wanting to have to vote for one candidate, who they don't appear to agree with, purely out of fear of the alternative.

I do feel that their desire for her to have to reach out/earn their vote (an argument that 'She won' isn't really enough) does have some merit.
She shouldn't just get it by default.

Well, surely it wouldn't be only their fault, that is not what I meant to say. Their potential apathy and trump protest votes would be but a small part of a much bigger issue, the bernie or bust guys certainly won't be the only ones doing this.

I am not sure of how that makes sense. At least to me it certainly does not. Sure, people might not like hillary or trump. But the options they get are basically trump, hillary, johnson and stein. That's it. At this point it is not about any of these assholes earning a vote, it's gonna be one of them regardless of how much they have or not earned votes or trust. At this point the consideration regardless of whether you like any of them should be "well, which of this assholes' policy is at least close to what I want?". There is no such thing as a protest vote, the notion is asinine.... Voting as a sign of protest for a guy whose policy is contrary to what you want or need does not make a point, it just gives someone whose policy is against your own interest a vote.

And as far as bernie supporters... Would they like another democrat who ran on the same platform as hillary that wasn't hillary? Does this really come down to whether they like hillary specifically or not? I think this misses a big part of the bigger picture here.... Ultimately bernie worked his butt off to get the democrat party to run a platform he could get behind. I am not saying the democratic party haven't been assholes to bernie but the democrat party changing it's platform to appeal to bernie supporters is a huge deal. His policies effectively became mainstream. But what he is getting is that his very supporters are getting carried away over who becomes president rather than looking at the policy and in doing that they are literally pissing away the very policies sanders has been fighting for. Honestly, at this point I don't think sanders' supporters actually give two shits about what bernie actually stood for. If that is too extreme, then at least there is a difference between what sanders thinks he stands for and what bernie supporters think bernie stands for.

 

[M3J]

It is a statement that is hard to accept when the country in question has been having violent issues with guns day to day. Its like someone from france saying that accepting refugees from terrorist ridden countries has been a good effort, yet terroristic events seem to be weekly happenings in the country, implying refugees are security liabilities. How could I accept a statement that is against reality, I just cant.

According to Think Progress, majority of the terrorism, if not all, were caused by citizens, not refugees. The Paris attack was carried out by citizens who were carrying fake Syrian passports to frame Syrian refugees so countries wouldn't take them in, thus making it easier to extort money and recruit these refugees. People like you are making things worse by blindly blaming refugees. You can't even provide one proof that shows refugees in the US are dangerous or bad, all you can fall back on is San Bernardino (one attack, where one of the attackers was an American citizen) and a guy faking his age in Canada so he could keep playing basketball.

You seem to accept statements that are against reality all the time, especially as a conservative. At least 95% of the things you've said in this thread are against reality and proof that you have lived a privileged, sheltered life or that you live in your own world. What you'd be doing in this case is accepting a statement that is a reality.

It's funny how politics at the US can change as arbitrarily as its weather.... A couple months ago you see the republican party being an absolute mess while trying to grasp how in the holy hell a man who is evidently not a conservative, dubious claims at even being a republican and at best lax Christianity (being a 3 times divorced womanizer whose very ex wife claims to have been assaulted by him who is overtly proud of his womanizing) who runs rather unethical business (I can't fathom anyone thinking there is anything ethical about the casinos or the trump "university") made it to being a candidate but now you see the party lining up perfectly behind the guy. In turn there was a semblance of stability in the democrat party during the primaries. And it just seems to have disappeared by now. It does seem like a number of bernie supporters might actually support trump.. I guess it goes to show that bernie supporters are not ultimately different from trump supporters. Evidently they don't give two consecutive shits about policy because otherwise there is no conceivable way they would rather support the guy who is literally absolutely everything bernie stands against of. Welp, I guess I got until november to mentally prepare for trump presidency. Yay apathy!

The stability in the democrat party disappeared because of the email leaks showing just how negatively many democrats thought of Bernie and his supporters. Understandably, many Bernie supporters are mad, so they're choosing Trump over Hillary. Bernie supporters are different from Trump supporters in that they're not racist shitheads.


Hmm, I hope @Drmke posts his results of attending the Philly DNC soon.

 

[xi0]

Sanders and Trump campaigns were all about being anti-establishment. There are plenty of reasons to dislike Clinton and the type of role people like her have in politics. Anyone who goes from Sanders to Trump is doing it out of protest maybe. Perhaps it is spiteful, but how exactly is the Democratic Party leadership not deserving of it? There are plenty of people on the left, who think Hillary shouldn't have even be allowed to run.

The DNC is a perfect example of a broken system. People are forced into uniting behind a questionable and corrupt person, and if they aren't, they're treated horribly by fellow party members. The DNC knew who they wanted to be their nominee well over a year ago.

All that being said, last night's speeches were far superior to anything the RNC put forth. But it's clear the DNC is bringing out as many heavy hitters as possible, because they know their nominee isn't likable. She is not a strong candidate, plain and simple.

 

[z.5]

But the options they get are basically trump, hillary, johnson and stein. That's it. At this point it is not about any of these assholes earning a vote, it's gonna be one of them regardless of how much they have or not earned votes or trust. At this point the consideration regardless of whether you like any of them should be "well, which of this assholes' policy is at least close to what I want?".

Which is exactly what I meant by 'winning their votes'.
She needs to convince people why they should vote for her - rather than give it to a 3rd party (or Trump).

Her argument can not solely be 'he's the fucking anti-Christ, the next Adolf Hitler, Fear, FEAR, FEAR!'

She can't expect people to want to vote for her if she says 'I know you despise me, but if you don't vote for me then it is your fault we will end up with Satan himself'.

If she can switch her rhetoric up, acknowledge that she has been pushed to the left by Bernie - and assure people it isn't a temporary switch before a later pivot back to the right...

Not 'sack' Wasserman Schultz, then instantly offer her an honorary position 5 mins later... Shit like that just reinforces the view, in people's minds, that the whole system is corrupt.

Hell, give some positivity and listen to Oddball

Ultimately bernie worked his butt off to get the democrat party to run a platform he could get behind. I am not saying the democratic party haven't been assholes to bernie but the democrat party changing it's platform to appeal to bernie supporters is a huge deal.

Bernie has done pretty damn well, all things considering.
Anyone who doubts that, really is looking for excuses to hate on him...

If that is too extreme, then at least there is a difference between what sanders thinks he stands for and what bernie supporters think bernie stands for.

I feel that Bernie's supporters were always a hugely varied bunch - having different ideas for where the whole movement should go.

Many appear to have different ideas, compared with Bernie, on what is actually feasible.
Bernie thinks he has got enough (for the moment) - they do not.

That said, I don't think that most of the protesters are solely protesting that Clinton won - I think some are making a point of how they are sick and tired of how corrupt and biased the whole system was/is. They want to make a point of never again.
You will always get 1 or 2 who are truly protesting that the DNC should choose Bernie instead, but I'd be shocked if that was the majority.