American Politics

[SharkBait]

I'm actually curious as to whether the democrats did the same, if not similar, thing long time ago. I'm guessing they did around the 1800s, given more seemed to want to keep slavery and eventually broke off from United States and created Confederate States.. I think. At least, Jefferson Davies was a democrat while Abraham Lincoln was a republican.

Truth be told, I'd rather have Obama take up third term again over getting Drumpf, Cruz, or Hillary as president. Bernie is an apt successor, but will he be able to get much done? I mean, Obama likely couldn't do much due to the politicians fighting him on almost everything and preventing Obama from being able to bring about change. If I recall, democrats turned on him too. For all the talk Drumpf keeps doing, I highly doubt he can ban anyone from entering or force Mexico to pay for a wall if the others don't agree with it.

Why would anyone want someone as clueless and out of the loop like Obama to even get a third term? America has got worst since he's been in office. Look at how he's failed to even stimulate wages in America or worst they fell under his tyrannical reign on us. Then he's caused massive irreversible job lost in a time in which America should be exhibiting itself as being strongly energy independent.

 

[Dragoon]

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!


You're fucking hilarious, Sharkbait. Posting fox news as a reliable source... shit... I'm gasping for air here... *cough* *gasp* *wheeze*

 

[M3J]

Why would anyone want someone as clueless and out of the loop like Obama to even get a third term? America has got worst since he's been in office. Look at how he's failed to even stimulate wages in America or worst they fell under his tyrannical reign on us. Then he's caused massive irreversible job lost in a time in which America should be exhibiting itself as being strongly energy independent.

you, or any republican, really, have no right to call anyone clueless or out of the loop. At least, republicans who believe anything their party says without even fact checking, which you clearly are a part of. And because Obama is a better choice than any of the republican candidate or Hillary that I'd rather he get a third term. According to few sources, America actually got a bit better with Obama in office, lower unemployment rate anyway. Bush was the one who did the most damage to the country, and yet Obama gets the most flak, especially when the government tries to cockblock him in anything he tries to do.

Stimulating wage is hard when most politicians, especially republicans, are against that or making life better for citizens. You're part of the group who doesn't care about others and don't want to improve others' lives, by the way.

lololol Fox News. Try using unbiased sources. Pretty sure you don't care about job loss, but you seem to flip flop your opinions a lot. And with comments like "waiters and retail workers are lazy!!" you show how woefully clueless and ignorant you are, along with other republicans and conservatives. I also think you support Bernie Madoff and anyone who came up with or executed the Ponzi scheme, given what you have said and implied.

Actually, the more I debate with any republicans or conservatives, the more disgusted I get at them and the more I am against them having any kind of power. They seem to prefer wantin to hold the country back and preventing it from progressing. It's funny because democrats were pretty corrupt (although they did help the public too), supported slavery, and split the country in two until the Union kicked the Confederate's ass.


That aside, these protests against Drumpf are pretty good. I'd normally be against them/feel confused, but because Drumpf is a horrible human being and his supporters are garbage (most anyway), I'm glad these protesters are making their lives hell.

 

[kkck]

Ok, now i am convinced sharkbait is posting jokes. Dunno how i ever thought his jokes could be serious posts. You should break character every now and then though.

 

[SharkBait]

I dont understand the fox meme when those images are just census bureau and another organizations fact.

 

[Riku]

I've followed the thread, but kinda scared to post anything, since I've been left with a feeling that anyone not from the US participating here gets axed to bits and then set to fire, just for not being from US. But I came up with a pretty nice point of view for Sanders and his Nordic-like policies, that often get dissmissed because "homogenic nanny state utopia".

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/bernie-sanders-nordic-countries/473385/

Actually the biggest unrest in finnish politics currently, is that the sitting goverment seems to adore traditional american politics. Less state support (loan, loan and loan for individuals who have not inherited a fortune or a social standing) and more of a class hierarchy.

Sure, Sanders lost, but I think his key point was to be heard and his ideas considered anyways, more than actually being elected.

 

[SharkBait]

you, or any republican, really, have no right to call anyone clueless or out of the loop. At least, republicans who believe anything their party says without even fact checking, which you clearly are a part of. And because Obama is a better choice than any of the republican candidate or Hillary that I'd rather he get a third term. According to few sources, America actually got a bit better with Obama in office, lower unemployment rate anyway. Bush was the one who did the most damage to the country, and yet Obama gets the most flak, especially when the government tries to cockblock him in anything he tries to do.

Stimulating wage is hard when most politicians, especially republicans, are against that or making life better for citizens. You're part of the group who doesn't care about others and don't want to improve others' lives, by the way.

lololol Fox News. Try using unbiased sources. Pretty sure you don't care about job loss, but you seem to flip flop your opinions a lot. And with comments like "waiters and retail workers are lazy!!" you show how woefully clueless and ignorant you are, along with other republicans and conservatives. I also think you support Bernie Madoff and anyone who came up with or executed the Ponzi scheme, given what you have said and implied.

Actually, the more I debate with any republicans or conservatives, the more disgusted I get at them and the more I am against them having any kind of power. They seem to prefer wantin to hold the country back and preventing it from progressing. It's funny because democrats were pretty corrupt (although they did help the public too), supported slavery, and split the country in two until the Union kicked the Confederate's ass.


That aside, these protests against Drumpf are pretty good. I'd normally be against them/feel confused, but because Drumpf is a horrible human being and his supporters are garbage (most anyway), I'm glad these protesters are making their lives hell.

Whats the point of praising a slightly better employment rate when people are getting part time jobs (multiple) and more low brain powered ones. A decreased income but higher employment strongly suggests and highly implies the creation of more low brain power low wage jobs. The ideal system would be more high brain powered jobs and the elimination or limiting of jobs for the lazy. This would benefit so many as it decrease a reliance on free handouts and boost the economy since more people will be making more money. Democrats only want to increase the amount of handouts for the lazy while taxing companies more which, by the way, stiffles better wages and greatly raises prices on goods.

 

[xi0]

At least, republicans who believe anything their party says without even fact checking

Democrats do the same thing. Just because they prefer to appeal to people's humanity more than their traditional views, or greed or ignorance doesn't make it honest.

I've followed the thread, but kinda scared to post anything, since I've been left with a feeling that anyone not from the US participating here gets axed to bits and then set to fire, just for not being from US

Errr...I hope that's not a vibe I contributed to...?

 

[GrySun]

Just look at his comments about there being riots if he isn't given the nomination.

Yeah I was thinking about that too, riots aren't something a presidential candidate should be "looking forward to" if a situation happens.
But either way I don't think he's wrong. If the GOP really does end up screwing him over in a brokered convention I'm sure many people will be unhappy. I don't think it'll come to that though. He'll either get the number of delegates or go 3rd party without riots taking place. He's just making threats, not exactly a pretty thing.

It's not an overestimation of the problem, it's that what he's proposing isn't a solution. Like it or not, illegals are a vital part of our workforce. They're the ones breaking the law, but it's also businesses fault for paying people under the table with no consequences. Trump himself has been someone who has done this despite his position. I don't see how breaking up families and then spending billions to build a wall is a solution. You can say you like his approach to it more than what his "solution" is but the practicality of what someone wants to do still matters. Policy matters.

I'm pretty sure he also talked about ways to force companies to take citizens in the workforce instead of illegals, and I do see many problems that could arise there. It all depends on how it's done. But either way I prefer a bad solution to no solution.

Priceless as a meme, sure. But all that is doing it rallying his "troops". No one on the fence is going to look at that ad and take anything out of it except Trump's pettiness.

I don't think you should underestimate the the magic power of memes Well I think it was mostly just there to mock Hillary a little, and I love how it gets free screentime on TV just because of how ridiculous it is. Oh and I heard that the Russians(government officials) being displeased because Trump used Putin in that video to further his agenda LMAO.

Because the primaries are a different race from a general election. In the general you have to actually propose common sense things and bring people to your cause. In case you haven't noticed, Trump has a giant problem with likability among all voters. Clinton isn't necessarily stellar among certain demographics either, but all Trump has to do is talk about her in the wrong way and any headway he thinks he's made with independents will be erased. He's definitely entertaining I guess, but it's not in his nature to say ridiculous things and then have to backtrack. He might appear teflon among conservative voters, but the majority of voters tend to be liberals.

But that's only if Trump takes the same approach with the general election as with the republican nomination. I'm sure the odds aren't in his favor and he knows it, which is why I expect a highly interesting general election. He'll either play around insults and ridicule and make things highly entertaining with Hillary's reactions, or something else entirely which leaves me curious. If Hillary however is the first one to make remarks about Trump it could be even more interesting. I guess we'd have to wait to find out, although Trump and Hillary haven't won the nomination yet. A sudden(yet unlikely) Bernie victory would be quite astounding.

--- Double Post Merged, Mar 20, 2016, Original Post Date: Mar 20, 2016 ---

I've followed the thread, but kinda scared to post anything, since I've been left with a feeling that anyone not from the US participating here gets axed to bits and then set to fire, just for not being from US.

I had the feeling at first as well but I don't think that's the case. It only happens if you support the wrong person

 

[xi0]

Yeah I was thinking about that too, riots aren't something a presidential candidate should be "looking forward to" if a situation happens.
But either way I don't think he's wrong. If the GOP really does end up screwing him over in a brokered convention I'm sure many people will be unhappy. I don't think it'll come to that though. He'll either get the number of delegates or go 3rd party without riots taking place. He's just making threats, not exactly a pretty thing.

It's set up this way on purpose. The great irony in all this is that the threshold for when a person can be even considered as a nominee is a recent thing and is called the "Romney rule" and was done in response to people going super anti-establishment and voting for Ron Paul instead. Now it might actually prevent the "anti-establishment" candidate that's in the lead.

So, Trump and his supporters might feel "screwed over" by such a thing, but what about the 60% of the electorate that isn't pledged to Trump? That's the argument being made by people in the Republican party who are against his nomination. It's a problem they helped create, but there is structure in place to prevent it as a failsafe. That's not an accident.

'm pretty sure he also talked about ways to force companies to take citizens in the workforce instead of illegals, and I do see many problems that could arise there. It all depends on how it's done. But either way I prefer a bad solution to no solution.

Like most of his ideas, they are severely lacking in practicality. I don't see how someone can force companies to do that, when there's already laws that are being ignored that are supposed to prevent it. It runs directly in contrast to his platform regarding business as well. He's the ultimate, free-wheeling capitalist, no? So how is he going to reconcile trying to add more meaningless government restrictions to businesses and hope that accomplishes anything?

I don't get that logic either. A bad solution isn't only bad because it doesn't actually solve anything, it also almost always creates more problems.

I don't think you should underestimate the the magic power of memes Well I think it was mostly just there to mock Hillary a little, and I love how it gets free screentime on TV just because of how ridiculous it is. Oh and I heard that the Russians(government officials) being displeased because Trump used Putin in that video to further his agenda LMAO.

Yeah it's funny, but like any other meme, the it's not supposed to be taken seriously or mean anything. That was my point.

Nah, Putin has to love that shit. Especially when he's basically already "endorsed" him in the press. Massive troll that guy is.

I had the feeling at first as well but I don't think that's the case. It only happens if you support the wrong person

Nice b8 m8 r8 8/8

 

[Dragoon]

@Ustegius

Nah man. Feel free to contribute. You couldn't possibly be any less informed than even some of our own citizens.

 

[kkck]

Several people who post here are not us citizens. The thread does not require a green card or visa lol. In the end the US president ends up having the whole "leader of the free world" thing going on so the thread easily concerns anyone.

 

[M3J]

I've followed the thread, but kinda scared to post anything, since I've been left with a feeling that anyone not from the US participating here gets axed to bits and then set to fire, just for not being from US. But I came up with a pretty nice point of view for Sanders and his Nordic-like policies, that often get dissmissed because "homogenic nanny state utopia".

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/bernie-sanders-nordic-countries/473385/

Actually the biggest unrest in finnish politics currently, is that the sitting goverment seems to adore traditional american politics. Less state support (loan, loan and loan for individuals who have not inherited a fortune or a social standing) and more of a class hierarchy.

Sure, Sanders lost, but I think his key point was to be heard and his ideas considered anyways, more than actually being elected.

Where did that happen? My reaction to GrySun was more due to his rudeness than anything.

Ah, that's a shame for Finnish countries. Supporting class hierachy is why America is in a dither, and same will happen to those countries.

Whats the point of praising a slightly better employment rate when people are getting part time jobs (multiple) and more low brain powered ones. A decreased income but higher employment strongly suggests and highly implies the creation of more low brain power low wage jobs. The ideal system would be more high brain powered jobs and the elimination or limiting of jobs for the lazy. This would benefit so many as it decrease a reliance on free handouts and boost the economy since more people will be making more money. Democrats only want to increase the amount of handouts for the lazy while taxing companies more which, by the way, stiffles better wages and greatly raises prices on goods.

I don't know about you, but I prefer 5% unemployment rate than 5.5%. Means more people are able to make ends meet better. You really need to stop sayin "low brain" because you don't even understand what that term means.

What job is for the lazy? As far as I know, most jobs aren't for the lazy at all. Maybe your state is full of lazy people because of judgmental people like you who want to hold people back from being successful, so they probably wonder why they should even bother. I doubt it'll boost the economy or decrease reliance on free handouts given a lot of "high brain powered jobs" require college education, and college is getting more and more expensive.

Not really. It's the companies' fault in many cases because they care more about their profits than anything else. I'm sure the CEO can afford to decrease his pay to make sure the employees get paid well despite taxes. Or that successful companies can afford to raise wages without suffering losses. yet they rather would not because companies are greedy, which isn't bad.

Republicans only want to give free handouts to the rich and make them richer while leaving the middle class and lower worse off. You seem to prove this pretty well, calling anyone who works hard in a labor job lazy and wantin to let criminals who work in "high brain powered jobs" get away scot-free.

Democrats do the same thing. Just because they prefer to appeal to people's humanity more than their traditional views, or greed or ignorance doesn't make it honest.


Errr...I hope that's not a vibe I contributed to...?

They do, but how badly does it affect others? Republicans are hurting groups like women and homosexuals with crap like trying to get Planned Parenthood centers closed or banning same sex marriage.

 

[SharkBait]

Well thats unfortunate, I doubt it will change the further we go.

 

[M3J]

Man, imagine if Kasich, Bernie, and others got the amount of attention that Trump and Hillary gets. Those two and Cruz would be at severe disadvantage. Damn!

 

[xi0]

 

[Dragoon]

Oh god... that picture is pricless

 

[kkck]

I don't get the picture....

 

[xi0]

I don't get the picture....

The disappearance thing is a meme on it's own. But, basically it's a commentary on Clinton having the advantage with minority voters, when her detractors don't really see it as being justified. "Thanks for the vote" and then she'll just forget about those issues afterwards.

--- Double Post Merged, Mar 21, 2016, Original Post Date: Mar 21, 2016 ---

http://www.mediaite.com/uncategoriz...olence-on-cable-news-adding-fuel-to-the-fire/

Ah, always enjoyable when the supposed Party of "personal responsibility" complete forgets that they hold such a thing as a principle.

 

[kkck]

Well, of course personal responsibility only applies to other people. Republicans are always responsible citizens so obviously is something negative happens around them it's the fault of brown immigrants or other people who make poor life decisions. Such as supporting trump or reporting trump stuff...

One thing which I have been interested recently is on how republican economic policy views are viewed by actual economists. This is the closest thing I have found so far (though I haven't had a chance to read all of it, the part which I found interesting was the statistics at the start).
http://politicsthatwork.com/blog/which-party-is-better-for-the-economy.php

At least going by this most of republican views would fall at odds with mainstream economic theory today. In context the democratic party is more or less sticking to mainstream economic theory which economists agree works although even then the party is not quite enough to the left as it should be. In other words republican attitude towards economics should be held in more or less the same regard as their views on evolution or technology in general.