Author Topic: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.  (Read 71500 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 15908
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #175 on: August 22, 2016, 08:46:48 AM »
To voice legitimate Conservative opinions as a major artist (music or theater) is to make yourself a pariah.

I dont even think you need to be a major artist to have your conservative opinion turn into you being labelled a racists and whatnot. 

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9491
  • Gender: Male
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #176 on: August 22, 2016, 08:49:31 AM »
It's exceedingly hypocritical to criticize Trump for the way he does things but ignore people on the opposing side for doing the same thing, and sometimes even worse. It's as if only right wing politicians and supporters are capable of doing bad or have alterior motives for their altruistic inclinations. I laugh every time I see someone say Trump did this but he can write it off, so it means nothing, yet everyone gives Oprah a fingerbang for all of her good deeds that she gets to write off as well. It shows just how brainwashed some people are and how biased political discussions reveal themselves to be. For every wrong thing Trump has done, which aren't many since he has spent limited time in the political crosshairs, much like our current President before he was nominated, I'll show you worse from the other side. When I see people spend the same time attacking the questionable motives of the left wing politicians, and don't even try and tell me Trump is worse than them, then I can unequivocally say that the discussion is bipartisan. Trump has said a lot of ridiculous things, but how about speaking of the actual actions of your left wing nominee, along with the others. I've seen every excuse in the book for her and it's risible. My favorite is that because the government didn't find sufficient evidence she is probably innocent. Right, because the government would never lie to us. All I have seen are one-sided arguments from people who claim to call it how they see it or claim they don't fully like either candidate. However, it's as believable as an honest politician with a blank check.
I agree. But then I haven't been criticizing Trump. As I said earlier, even if all he did was glad-hand and sign autographs, I'm a firm believer in the benefit of moral support. As long as he didn't create a diversion of personnel I commend him for going down there. I don't think it's Trump and his fans who are the victims of hypocrisy, though. I do suspect they're the ones that ridiculed Penn for his efforts, though, while holding up St. Donald as an icon of presidential demeanor.

You tell me, were Penn's actions any less commendable than Trump's?

Two observations:

Sean Penn and Donald Trump actions can't be compared, because where the stand in society, and their objectives aren't the same.   We mock Trump for not knowing how to be a President, but isn't actually BEING there, whether he does anything or not, help him see how these things unfold?   I had no idea how impactful a disaster could be until I actually SAW the water hip deep in New Jersey after Sandy.   Or seeing the clean-up efforts in NO (my company helped rebuild the valves who's initial failure helped exacerbate the problem down there).   Or seeing the cleanup of the Shuttle disaster (my company did environmental cleanup on the wreckage of the Columbia).   

Obama didn't hesitate to "divert resources" in New Jersey a week before the election, in the wake of Hurricane Sandy.   

Offline DragonAttack

  • Posts: 1119
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #177 on: August 22, 2016, 12:14:31 PM »
'Obama says the sky is partly cloudy....opponents vehemently object, stating it is partly sunny.'

'Obama follows up, says the sky is partly sunny.....opponents ridicule him for flip flopping, stating that the sky is partly cloudy.'

The Louisiana governor requested on Thursday that the president and the candidates stay away, then changes his tune on Sunday.  Had the president visited last week, his opponents who are jumping on him for not visiting, would have jumped him for going against the governor's stated wishes.

Partly sunny.  Partly cloudy.  Please make up your minds.

btw......eight years ago.....per the Huffington Post
"President Bush, a longtime sports fan, immersed himself into the Olympic spirit with abandon, acting like a kid — even when his body was reminding him that he’s 62.

Yet there were reminders that the world’s troubles follow wherever Bush goes.

He received regular updates after Russia sent columns of tanks and reportedly bombed Georgian air bases Friday. That came after Georgia launched a military offensive to retake the breakaway province of South Ossetia. The fast-changing hostilities threaten to ignite a broader conflict in the region."

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9491
  • Gender: Male
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #178 on: August 22, 2016, 12:47:54 PM »
Are you really trying to show bias?  Because even if your example is true (and it is, largely) the opposite is also true:

"Trump says the sky is partly cloudy... opponents vehemently object, stating that he must've meant the sky is "dark", which of course is racist."

Trump follows up, says he was misunderstood and that it is partly sunny... opponents ridicule him for yellow hair, and claim he's not qualified to determine what state the sky is in."

Please.

Offline DragonAttack

  • Posts: 1119
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #179 on: August 23, 2016, 01:03:27 PM »
I never once mentioned the GOP candidate.   I listed comparatives, nothing more. 

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Whiskey Bent and Hell Bound
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 40263
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Dad 1943-2010
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #180 on: August 23, 2016, 01:56:17 PM »
Are you really trying to show bias?  Because even if your example is true (and it is, largely) the opposite is also true:

"Trump says the sky is partly cloudy... opponents vehemently object, stating that he must've meant the sky is "dark", which of course is racist."

Trump follows up, says he was misunderstood and that it is partly sunny... opponents ridicule him for yellow hair, and claim he's not qualified to determine what state the sky is in."

Please.
Except Trump is very rarely ambiguous.  There is very rarely a "good" way to take the nonsense and rancor that spills from his mouth.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9491
  • Gender: Male
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #181 on: August 23, 2016, 03:22:36 PM »
Are you really trying to show bias?  Because even if your example is true (and it is, largely) the opposite is also true:

"Trump says the sky is partly cloudy... opponents vehemently object, stating that he must've meant the sky is "dark", which of course is racist."

Trump follows up, says he was misunderstood and that it is partly sunny... opponents ridicule him for yellow hair, and claim he's not qualified to determine what state the sky is in."

Please.
Except Trump is very rarely ambiguous.  There is very rarely a "good" way to take the nonsense and rancor that spills from his mouth.

But doesn't that prove my point?  You say he's rarely ambiguous, but the general knock is, he's too ambiguous and therefore subject to misinterpretation (his policies; that whole "2nd Amendment People" thing).     Can't be both. 

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Whiskey Bent and Hell Bound
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 40263
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Dad 1943-2010
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #182 on: August 23, 2016, 03:59:39 PM »
It isn't both.

He is rarely ambiguous.

The knock isn't that he is ambiguous.  It's that he's a racist misogynist faschist demagogue with a limited grasp on reality as we know it.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10385
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #183 on: August 23, 2016, 04:13:46 PM »
he's a racist misogynist faschist demagogue with a limited grasp on reality as we know it.

Opposed to Hilary who is a proven habitual,  liar who knowingly and smugly lies through her teeth to further her agenda and cover the last lie she told and whose greed and lust for power is only rivaled by her massive elitist ego.....all the while willingly ignoring the reality that we live in....in favor of the fairy tale reality she's created for her self through her and her husbands bountiful careers as thieves and politicians.

Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Offline Progmetty

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 6436
  • Gender: Male
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #184 on: August 23, 2016, 04:19:54 PM »
^ I was just gonna post something about how it's increasingly difficult to talk about Trump without Trump supporter rebuttal being about Hillary, I agree Hillary is awful and we can talk about that but you gotta have a different comeback to Trump shitiness other than Hillary's.
I think Pepsi is really awful!
Well Coke is really bad too!
I didn't bring up Coke, I was TALKING ABOUT PEPSI! :lol
I wouldn't want somebody with 18 kids to mow my damn lawn, based on a longstanding bias I have against crazy fucks.

Offline gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10385
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #185 on: August 23, 2016, 04:31:04 PM »
^ I was just gonna post something about how it's increasingly difficult to talk about Trump without Trump supporter rebuttal being about Hillary, I agree Hillary is awful and we can talk about that but you gotta have a different comeback to Trump shitiness other than Hillary's.
I think Pepsi is really awful!
Well Coke is really bad too!
I didn't bring up Coke, I was TALKING ABOUT PEPSI! :lol

It doesn't matter the comeback in this thread about "free pass" Hillary. Could you imagine if Trump had been Sec. Of State and it came to light that over half the people he met with during that duration were donors to his Company, or that he appointed donors with no experience to National Security posts....and every other revelation we are learning about free pass Hillary? There aren't enough hours in the day for the news media to blast him or paper to print the gazillion attacks he would get.

But nay a word about Hillary even as each revelation about her continues to prove that she's taken corruption to a whole new level....with no signs of stopping.
Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Offline cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 15908
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #186 on: August 23, 2016, 04:40:37 PM »
I was just gonna post something about how it's increasingly difficult to talk about Trump without Trump supporter rebuttal being about Hillary, I agree Hillary is awful and we can talk about that but you gotta have a different comeback to Trump shitiness other than Hillary's.


It's also really difficult to talk about Trump when this is what gets spewed:

It's that he's a racist misogynist faschist demagogue with a limited grasp on reality as we know it.

It goes both ways.  It's sad.

Offline Progmetty

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 6436
  • Gender: Male
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #187 on: August 23, 2016, 04:47:42 PM »
Could you imagine if Trump had been Sec. Of State and it came to light that over half the people he met with during that duration were donors to his Company, or that he appointed donors with no experience to National Security posts....and every other revelation we are learning about free pass Hillary? There aren't enough hours in the day for the news media to blast him or paper to print the gazillion attacks he would get.

Trump specifically? No I can't imagine that, but let's say a respectable decent Republican figure, Paul Ryan or Rand Paul maybe, then yes I could imagine how much he'll be blasted for doing such a thing, I don't disagree on Hillary's corruption or DNC influence over the media and it's not an ignorant conspiracy theory at all but proven from Wikileaks documents that they are in the business of telling CNN what to say. I bring that shit up and shove it in Hillary's supporters faces when they try to sway me over.
But none of that is a reason why Trump is "racist misogynist fascist demagogue with a limited grasp on reality as we know it". We're talking about two different subjects here.

I was just gonna post something about how it's increasingly difficult to talk about Trump without Trump supporter rebuttal being about Hillary, I agree Hillary is awful and we can talk about that but you gotta have a different comeback to Trump shitiness other than Hillary's.


It's also really difficult to talk about Trump when this is what gets spewed:

It's that he's a racist misogynist faschist demagogue with a limited grasp on reality as we know it.

It goes both ways.  It's sad.

No dude, that Hef line about Trump, is not opinion, it's fact, it's good old "since" and "therefore", it's any logical man's conclusion of everything Trump has given us to work with over the last year.
So it's not sad, it's as much a fact statement as "Hillary is corrupt, in bed with media, incompetent leader that's been tried and a failure", these are not shit that's being spewed around, these are facts based on evidence.
I wouldn't want somebody with 18 kids to mow my damn lawn, based on a longstanding bias I have against crazy fucks.

Offline gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10385
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #188 on: August 23, 2016, 04:53:54 PM »
without Trump supporter rebuttal being about Hillary

I'll lambast Hillary every chance I get...even if it's uncalled for because I think she's a despicable human being......but I'm not a trump supporter because I do so.

I think the media bias pro hillary and con trump is shameful....there is no real reporting that happens in this day and age. Every story on every channel is biased or slanted to drive a certain agenda....there is no unbiased reporting going on.

and I'm assuming trump gets the racist card thrown at him for his immigration stance? The same stance that St. Bill had back in 96? everything I've read about trump and his career as a builder/businessman he's treated minority groups with respect and regard....but that is rarely if ever mentioned given 98% of the media is eating out of hilary's hand.
Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Offline Prog Snob

  • Posts: 16597
  • Gender: Male
  • Truth is not for all men, only those who seek it.
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #189 on: August 23, 2016, 06:26:56 PM »
^ I was just gonna post something about how it's increasingly difficult to talk about Trump without Trump supporter rebuttal being about Hillary, I agree Hillary is awful and we can talk about that but you gotta have a different comeback to Trump shitiness other than Hillary's.
I think Pepsi is really awful!
Well Coke is really bad too!
I didn't bring up Coke, I was TALKING ABOUT PEPSI! :lol

That's the most ridiculous I've ever heard. This is a competition where the two main candidates are Trump and Hillary. It seems like you're just making excuses to slight someone for verbally trashing Hillary. However, if you want to talk about an exercise in futility, try getting a Hillary supporter to admit that she's everything wrong with politics today. They won't. They'll hurl insults at Trump, some of which he probably deserves, but what they're doing is ignoring her behavior in spite of their better judgment. At least in Trump's case, he hasn't been given the chance to fuck up the system yet. Denying Hillary's guilt in any of the scandals she has been involved in just because she wasn't indicted is a clear sign of a misunderstanding of just how the system works. She is perfect to play the politics game. The problem is that the game needs to change. She's just going to take us further down the road we've been traveling down for the last couple of decades. I don't know anyone in their right mind who thinks the status quo is desirable. Most people are voting for her just to keep Trump out of office.

Oh, and comparing them to different beverages doesn't say too much about your priorities.

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 25864
  • Gender: Male
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #190 on: August 23, 2016, 07:36:32 PM »
No dude, that Hef line about Trump, is not opinion, it's fact, it's good old "since" and "therefore", it's any logical man's conclusion of everything Trump has given us to work with over the last year.
So it's not sad, it's as much a fact statement as "Hillary is corrupt, in bed with media, incompetent leader that's been tried and a failure", these are not shit that's being spewed around, these are facts based on evidence.

With all due respect, I don't think you understand what facts are.  I think Trump is most or all of those things that hef said, but they are NOT facts; they are opinions.

Offline Progmetty

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 6436
  • Gender: Male
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #191 on: August 23, 2016, 10:23:09 PM »
That's the most ridiculous I've ever heard. This is a competition where the two main candidates are Trump and Hillary. It seems like you're just making excuses to slight someone for verbally trashing Hillary.

No, it's not ridiculous. Every single previous U.S. presidential elections in living memory had two candidates who were individually defendable without bringing up how bad the other guy is, no matter how bad they were. I could make an argument for any of the Republican nominees for the last 30 years without bringing up how shitty the Democratic nominee is, even W.
I'm not making excuses to slight someone for verbally trashing Hillary, I'm not a Hillary supporter, I've already swayed at least a dozen people in my circles so far to not vote for her, if I wasn't broke I'd probably be actively campaigning for Johnson.
But it really suck that I have to tell you all that so you'd see that I'm not just bull shitting.

However, if you want to talk about an exercise in futility, try getting a Hillary supporter to admit that she's everything wrong with politics today. They won't. They'll hurl insults at Trump, some of which he probably deserves, but what they're doing is ignoring her behavior in spite of their better judgment.

Yes they do that, but I have met many many more Hillary supporters who tried to talk me into Hillary by discussing her experience and political track record, some with conviction and some circle back to "At least she's not Trump", it's much easier to pinpoint a stereotypical Trump supporter talking points than to do so for a Hillary supporter.

At least in Trump's case, he hasn't been given the chance to fuck up the system yet. Denying Hillary's guilt in any of the scandals she has been involved in just because she wasn't indicted is a clear sign of a misunderstanding of just how the system works. She is perfect to play the politics game. The problem is that the game needs to change. She's just going to take us further down the road we've been traveling down for the last couple of decades. I don't know anyone in their right mind who thinks the status quo is desirable. Most people are voting for her just to keep Trump out of office.

That's something that I personally have a problem with and bothers me a lot, mainly because of my background and experience in Egypt. One of the things I love most about America is the rule of law and how everyone seems to find it a life-or-death essential to abide by it, so if people start questioning the decency of the people handling the laws; all bets are off, "if Hillary was not indicted then system is definitely rigged", you go by that and what stops you from applying the "rigged" thing to everything else? The election results for example! It will be chaotic and possibly disastrous, from experience. I've read numerous instances in American history where loopholes and legal trickery has been used to make unjust decisions through the law, but everyone still accepts the results, because most people seem to understand that it's what holds a country together. That's my opinion that I formed reading American history.

Oh, and comparing them to different beverages doesn't say too much about your priorities.

A lot of times I'm tempted to pull a Trump and throw a sexist remark on some of your passive aggressive comments but then I don't because of DTF rule of law heh
But also cause you're pretty cool outside of P&R  ;D
The reason I made that comparison -and laughed at it- is that I'm not 100% confident that I can convey what I'm thinking to you guys because of the language barrier, I've said that many times over the 10 years I've been here.

With all due respect, I don't think you understand what facts are.  I think Trump is most or all of those things that hef said, but they are NOT facts; they are opinions.

I respectfully disagree, conclusions can be facts if you have givens. Hillary was caught lying therefore she's a lair, Trump has said and done things that are degrading to women and therefore he's a misogynist. Unless you think some of the things Hef said about Trump are relative, which is possible but I don't believe so.
I wouldn't want somebody with 18 kids to mow my damn lawn, based on a longstanding bias I have against crazy fucks.

Offline kaos2900

  • Posts: 1932
  • Gender: Male
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #192 on: August 24, 2016, 06:54:34 AM »
^ I was just gonna post something about how it's increasingly difficult to talk about Trump without Trump supporter rebuttal being about Hillary, I agree Hillary is awful and we can talk about that but you gotta have a different comeback to Trump shitiness other than Hillary's.
I think Pepsi is really awful!
Well Coke is really bad too!
I didn't bring up Coke, I was TALKING ABOUT PEPSI! :lol

The issue I see is that people are tired of ONLY Trump being bashed when Hillary is just as bad, if not worse. This is a story from last year. I'll say for the millionth time that I'm not a Trump supporter, but there are hard facts that Hillary has used her political position for personal gain. She is despicable person who has no business being president.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/05/clinton-foundation-donors-include-dozens-of-media-organizations-individuals-207228

Offline kaos2900

  • Posts: 1932
  • Gender: Male

Offline cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 15908
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #194 on: August 24, 2016, 07:47:44 AM »
No dude, that Hef line about Trump, is not opinion, it's fact, it's good old "since" and "therefore", it's any logical man's conclusion of everything Trump has given us to work with over the last year.
So it's not sad, it's as much a fact statement as "Hillary is corrupt, in bed with media, incompetent leader that's been tried and a failure", these are not shit that's being spewed around, these are facts based on evidence.

With all due respect, I don't think you understand what facts are.  I think Trump is most or all of those things that hef said, but they are NOT facts; they are opinions.

Agreed.  Unless this was sarcasm which was how I initially read it as.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9491
  • Gender: Male
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #195 on: August 24, 2016, 07:53:16 AM »
It isn't both.

He is rarely ambiguous.

The knock isn't that he is ambiguous.  It's that he's a racist misogynist faschist demagogue with a limited grasp on reality as we know it.

No, those are just big words from people that can't articulate anything more substantive (I'm not talking about you, personally).   I would argue that in her own way, Hillary is a facist demagogue with a limited grasp on reality as we know it (meaning, how an ordinary person conducts their day).   You don't think Hillary - a multimillionaire who is in the pocket of Wall Street - campaigning on the premise that "she's going to make Wall Street, the 1%, the rich, the wealthy, and those with extensive means pay" isn't demagoguery?   That is the DEFINITION of demagoguery. 

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9491
  • Gender: Male
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #196 on: August 24, 2016, 07:59:28 AM »
^ I was just gonna post something about how it's increasingly difficult to talk about Trump without Trump supporter rebuttal being about Hillary, I agree Hillary is awful and we can talk about that but you gotta have a different comeback to Trump shitiness other than Hillary's.
I think Pepsi is really awful!
Well Coke is really bad too!
I didn't bring up Coke, I was TALKING ABOUT PEPSI! :lol

I agree with you 1000%, except for one thing:   it's not like we're talking two different policies and comparing and contrasting.  Then of course, since it's not a zero sum game, whether Trump's healthcare plan works or not is irrelevant and immaterial to whether Hillary's will work or not.  There is no connection, causal, correlationary, or coincidental.    But when you attack Trump the MAN - which is what calling him a "racist", a "misogynist" and a "demagogue" is, it's scant criticism when the corollary is that you're supporting an equally flawed PERSON.   

Because then it devolves into the basest and crudest of political analysis:  "My liar is better than your liar, because they are MY lies and for MY cause."   That's meaningless.   And while I do not support Trump, I will not vote for him (I agree he is appealing to the baser, racist and misogynist instincts of people that aren't informed on the facts of how to govern 315 million people and a $19 trillion dollar economy) I will call out anyone and everyone that thinks their own little opinions are sacred, and somehow more meaningful than anyone else's.   Don't like Trump?  Fine, don't vote for him.  But don't pretend that somehow because YOU agree with her (even in a relative sense) that she is any better, and any different than the other side of the same, twisted, evil coin.

They are two peas in a pod. 

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9491
  • Gender: Male
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #197 on: August 24, 2016, 08:05:09 AM »

No dude, that Hef line about Trump, is not opinion, it's fact, it's good old "since" and "therefore", it's any logical man's conclusion of everything Trump has given us to work with over the last year.
So it's not sad, it's as much a fact statement as "Hillary is corrupt, in bed with media, incompetent leader that's been tried and a failure", these are not shit that's being spewed around, these are facts based on evidence.

Please don't play that logical tautology game - "that any logical man would conclude".    No, YOU concluded that.  That doesn't make you logical, smarter, better, more informed, it just makes you YOU.    I am just as smart, logical and informed as you and while I feel Trump APPEALS to some of those things, I don't necessarily agree with Hef's conclusion.   And even if I did, I fully and completely and without reservation feel that - except for the "racist" part of it - the same line could apply to Hillary, rendering it useless as a distinction.   As such, it's not really helpful to the discussion, because if you don't vote for Trump for non-ideological reasons, by definition - unless you are a party hack, hypocrite or "illogical" - you won't be voting for Hillary either.   So why not state that? 

Offline gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10385
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #198 on: August 24, 2016, 08:19:24 AM »
The issue I see is that people are tired of ONLY Trump being bashed when Hillary is just as bad, if not worse. This is a story from last year. I'll say for the millionth time that I'm not a Trump supporter, but there are hard facts that Hillary has used her political position for personal gain. She is despicable person who has no business being president.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/05/clinton-foundation-donors-include-dozens-of-media-organizations-individuals-207228

Pretty much nails the root of my disdain for her. She gets a free pass for everything. Break Federal law with the whole e-mail situation....no problem, forget about it. Violate your ethics clause as Sec. of State with the conflict of interest with your foundation....no big deal, forget about it. If this were any other candidate....especially a Republican one....the media would have buried them long ago but they utterly refuse to give anything but drive by reporting on these issues so they don't become an issue for her.
Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18874
  • Bad Craziness
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #199 on: August 24, 2016, 08:47:45 AM »
This election has completely fucked people's ability to be impartial. Hillary has not gotten a free pass from the media. There's a reason the only thing we've been discussing for the last four months is how she's a crooked and deceitful woman. Nobody likes her and nobody trusts her. She gets support for the same reason Trump does, which is only because the other lizard is worse. While she did get a pass from the DOJ, anybody who thinks that Paul Ryan or Ted Cruz wouldn't have received the same deference is getting better drugs than I am.

I swear, this election has lowered the collective IQ of this country by 10 points.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10385
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #200 on: August 24, 2016, 08:54:16 AM »
This election has completely fucked people's ability to be impartial.

If I thought that 'the other side' had any intention of trying to meet in the middle somewhere on any of the issues out there....I'd be less hostile. But, the current climate of the political environment simply does not and will not allow anyone to budge from the 'my way or the highway' stance. We can debate all day long on whose 'fault' that is....there's plenty of convincing evidence out there to prosecute and convict either side of total guilt.

we have not had a true leader as a President for so long that it's going to take a drastic measure to break the grid lock in Washington. obama was a team player for the dems....hillary will be....Trump would just stir the pot even more for four years....there really isn't a end in sight as far as the US vs THEM mentality.
Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9491
  • Gender: Male
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #201 on: August 24, 2016, 10:07:35 AM »
This election has completely fucked people's ability to be impartial. Hillary has not gotten a free pass from the media. There's a reason the only thing we've been discussing for the last four months is how she's a crooked and deceitful woman. Nobody likes her and nobody trusts her. She gets support for the same reason Trump does, which is only because the other lizard is worse. While she did get a pass from the DOJ, anybody who thinks that Paul Ryan or Ted Cruz wouldn't have received the same deference is getting better drugs than I am.

I swear, this election has lowered the collective IQ of this country by 10 points.

Generally I think you're spot on in these matters, but I think you may be a tick off here.  Kevin McCarthy was asked to step away because of an allegation of an affair - no one's business but his and his wife's - and yet... Hillary is not being called to task.   She may or may not have done something convictable, but step away.   I think to me it's a little bit the gumption and arrogance that bothers me, not the act itself (though as I've said elsewhere, I think the lack of truthfulness materially and substantially undermines the integrity of our judicial and law enforcement system).   

Why did Debbie Wasserman-Asshat lose her job, but Hillary gets to continue onward, unabated? 

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18874
  • Bad Craziness
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #202 on: August 24, 2016, 10:30:33 AM »
This election has completely fucked people's ability to be impartial. Hillary has not gotten a free pass from the media. There's a reason the only thing we've been discussing for the last four months is how she's a crooked and deceitful woman. Nobody likes her and nobody trusts her. She gets support for the same reason Trump does, which is only because the other lizard is worse. While she did get a pass from the DOJ, anybody who thinks that Paul Ryan or Ted Cruz wouldn't have received the same deference is getting better drugs than I am.

I swear, this election has lowered the collective IQ of this country by 10 points.

Generally I think you're spot on in these matters, but I think you may be a tick off here.  Kevin McCarthy was asked to step away because of an allegation of an affair - no one's business but his and his wife's - and yet... Hillary is not being called to task.   She may or may not have done something convictable, but step away.   I think to me it's a little bit the gumption and arrogance that bothers me, not the act itself (though as I've said elsewhere, I think the lack of truthfulness materially and substantially undermines the integrity of our judicial and law enforcement system).   

Why did Debbie Wasserman-Asshat lose her job, but Hillary gets to continue onward, unabated?
I'm not sure what your point about McCarthy is. Who asked him to step aside? It was the conservative press that created the whole story. In any case, you've got Anthony Weiner, David Wu and Eric massa who have all been called to task for sexual wrong-doings.

And I agree about the arrogance and gumption. She really is a dislikable person. However, I still think my point is spot-on.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Whiskey Bent and Hell Bound
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 40263
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Dad 1943-2010
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #203 on: August 24, 2016, 01:56:07 PM »
It isn't both.

He is rarely ambiguous.

The knock isn't that he is ambiguous.  It's that he's a racist misogynist faschist demagogue with a limited grasp on reality as we know it.

No, those are just big words from people that can't articulate anything more substantive (I'm not talking about you, personally).
Good, because I wasn't giving my opinion (necessarily).  I was explaining what the knock against Trump is.

BTW, thanks to everyone for their reading comprehension on that point.

I would argue that in her own way, Hillary is a facist demagogue with a limited grasp on reality as we know it (meaning, how an ordinary person conducts their day).   You don't think Hillary - a multimillionaire who is in the pocket of Wall Street - campaigning on the premise that "she's going to make Wall Street, the 1%, the rich, the wealthy, and those with extensive means pay" isn't demagoguery?   That is the DEFINITION of demagoguery.
God bless America, I don't understand why a disparaging comment about Trump absolutely has to be followed by one about Hillary, as if that negates the one about Trump.  I'm not talking about Hillary.  I'm talking about Trump. 

Some of this stuff is almost school yard-like. 

BTW, Stadler, you certainly seem a lot more accepting of Trump now than when you were arguing against him with Calvin during primary season.  What gives?
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9491
  • Gender: Male
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #204 on: August 24, 2016, 02:11:36 PM »
It isn't both.

He is rarely ambiguous.

The knock isn't that he is ambiguous.  It's that he's a racist misogynist faschist demagogue with a limited grasp on reality as we know it.

No, those are just big words from people that can't articulate anything more substantive (I'm not talking about you, personally).
Good, because I wasn't giving my opinion (necessarily).  I was explaining what the knock against Trump is.

BTW, thanks to everyone for their reading comprehension on that point.

I would argue that in her own way, Hillary is a facist demagogue with a limited grasp on reality as we know it (meaning, how an ordinary person conducts their day).   You don't think Hillary - a multimillionaire who is in the pocket of Wall Street - campaigning on the premise that "she's going to make Wall Street, the 1%, the rich, the wealthy, and those with extensive means pay" isn't demagoguery?   That is the DEFINITION of demagoguery.
God bless America, I don't understand why a disparaging comment about Trump absolutely has to be followed by one about Hillary, as if that negates the one about Trump.  I'm not talking about Hillary.  I'm talking about Trump. 

Some of this stuff is almost school yard-like. 

BTW, Stadler, you certainly seem a lot more accepting of Trump now than when you were arguing against him with Calvin during primary season.  What gives?

You're not the first to ask that, by the way.  And I generally get your point about the "a comment about Trump doesn't need a comment about Hillary".  I'm with you.  I'd be the first to argue that point with you.

EXCEPT (and this partly answers your question):

I'm a process guy.  Meaning, to me, the process is more important than the outcome.  We didn't last 240 years because "DEMOCRATS ALWAYS WON!" (or vice versa).  We made it this far because all (most) candidates respected the process and fought like adults.  I believe (for the most part) that laws are blind.  They don't have relative value or merit.  The PUNISHMENT might be different (and we as individuals may accept the penalty for our transgressions) but ANY transgressions ought to be treated as such.

And I feel with this campaign we've moved full force into the "ends justify the means" territory.  I don't think highly of Trump at all (like I didn't think highly of Bernie).  But early on, he was treated relatively fairly, and in some quarters, almost TOO fairly.   But now?  I see too many Democrats taking the "WHATEVER IT TAKES" approach, justifying immoral and possibly illegal behavior on the grounds that "Look what we're up against!". 

I'm not more accepting of Trump himself, I'm more trying to comment that regardless of whether you like him or not, your weapon is your vote.   Not attacks on his orange hair, not made-up accusations about things he didn't actually say, etc.  I don't bring up Hillary in order to "negate" the comment about Trump, but rather to highlight that 95% of the alleged criticisms of Trump - I don't mean POLICY discussions, I mean the ad hominem, below-the-belt attacks that seem to be de rigueur here - can and should be levied against Hillary.  In other words, it's not a comment on Trump or Hillary, but on the commenter. 

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Whiskey Bent and Hell Bound
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 40263
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Dad 1943-2010
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #205 on: August 24, 2016, 02:23:08 PM »
That doesn't really answer my question, TBH.

When I make comments about Trump, they are drawn from things he actually said or did, not generalizations or misinterpretations or his silly perma-tan or tiny hands. 

When I make comments about how dangerous I think Trump would be as a President, that isn't to say that I think Clinton is beyond reproach (although I do think she gets more shit than is actually warranted).

I do not love Clinton except that, insofar as she is not Trump, I think she is the best choice for me in this election.  That is as warm of an endorsement as I can give her.

A critique of Trump doesn't need a critique of Clinton in return.

But hey, whatever.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.

Offline Implode

  • Lord of the Squids
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 5432
  • Gender: Male
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #206 on: August 24, 2016, 02:38:57 PM »
Well, hey. Let's take hef's words and see how they stack up between the candidates.

racist misogynist faschist demagogue

Racist: Trump's words and policies support this claim without much question. I wouldn't be surprised if Hillary also has some racist tendencies, but even so, it'd be nowhere near the level of Trump.

Misogynist: Trump has shown this clearly as well. Hillary in the past has shown in the past that she did have some elements of internalized misogyny, but again, nowhere near Trump. Also, she's a woman.

Fascist: Trump's propositions like the wall and Muslim registry are pretty fascist in nature. The same can't really be said to the same degree for Hillary. Sure, you can say she's strong and a bit authoritarian maybe, but I wouldn't go so far as to say fascist.

Demagogue: This pretty much fits Trump to a T. Regardless of the logistics or feasibility of his ideas, he's more just pandering to many angry and prejudice viewpoints, stirring up anger and discontent, and creating scapegoats. Yes, all politicians including Hillary pander, but Trump is the only one right now doing it in such a disparaging way to minorities.

There are plenty of bad things to say about Hillary, but everything Hef said fits much more with Trump. I don't really think every criticism can easily be applied to both candidates.

Offline gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10385
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #207 on: August 24, 2016, 02:43:52 PM »
I think the best thing for me to do personally is to check out of this thread for a while. I'm not going to change any opinions and mine isn't going to be swayed, so...rather than say something ignorant to members I like and respect....I think I'm going lurk mode in this thread and will just keep my thoughts to myself.
Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18874
  • Bad Craziness
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #208 on: August 24, 2016, 03:14:20 PM »
I think the best thing for me to do personally is to check out of this thread for a while. I'm not going to change any opinions and mine isn't going to be swayed, so...rather than say something ignorant to members I like and respect....I think I'm going lurk mode in this thread and will just keep my thoughts to myself.
Yeah, I've dropped out of this thread a couple of times. A week or two away does some good. It's nice to be a spectator from time to time. It honestly seems to me that this election is turning reasonable people into real assholes, and I'd just as soon not be one of them (to the extent that I'm no one already, at least).
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline hefdaddy42

  • Whiskey Bent and Hell Bound
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 40263
  • Gender: Male
  • RIP Dad 1943-2010
Re: 2016 Presidential Race v2.0: Post convention discussion.
« Reply #209 on: August 24, 2016, 03:17:53 PM »
It's certainly a winner of a choice that we have.

Again, not that I would necessarily vote for him, but I hope Gary Johnson gets the 15% approval necessary to get into the debates.
Hef is right on all things. Except for when I disagree with him. In which case he's probably still right.