Serious US Election Thread (read post #2014)

Status
Not open for further replies.

thesecondbest

Just Kidding I'm First
Hillary back in blame the messenger mode. Instead of saying what she did with the emails is OK, she's yelling at Comey because he's a Republican. Lol. Can't defend herself once again (like with all the leaks) so it's full deflection mode.
 

TheValkyries

proudly reppin' 2 superbowl wins since DEFLATEGATE
They aren't necessarily even new e-mails and the FBI genuinely does not know if they're pertinent AT ALL, and if they ARE they don't even know if they're duplicates, or at the very least they haven't announced any such information. What exactly does she have to defend herself from. And yes pointing out the suspect firing from the hip "THERE'S MORE E-MAILS THAT WE HAVE NO INFORMATION ON WE DONT KNOW IF THEY'RE ABOUT CATS OR BENGHAZI BUT THEY EXIST EVERYONE GO NUTS ITS SCANDAL TIME" coming out under two weeks before the election is a valid thing to point out.

Christ the fucking endless campaign against Hillary based entirely on her sexist caricature made up in the 90s by the republicans is old as fuck.

Meanwhile in the land of ACTUAL REASONS TO CRITICIZE CLINTON: https://soundcloud.com/user-3089954...oud.com/user-30899546/hrc-determine-who-win-1

She called for the direct rigging of the palestinian election by a foreign govt. Fucking weird how dems are against that domestically (RUSSIA RED SCARE WHERE) but internationally HELL YEAH LETS GOOOOOO.
 

Soul Fly

IMMA TEACH YOU WHAT SPLASHIN' MEANS
is a Contributor Alumnus
A little something i came across that should give the fine people in this thread something to chew over while trying to prove who's the literal Hitler.
pls vote responsibly next week!

 
Quick question: Once this is over and done with, will either of the nominees take action on the Dakota pipeline? The shit going down has been horrendous and infuriates me.
Will they take action? Who knows. Are they aware of it? Yes.

https://goo.gl/Wjxjau
Looks like I got my answer for Trump. Number 6 on the second list/12th overall.

What a fucking piece of shit. That land doesn't belong to them. Full stop. They have no rights to be building anything on it, much less shit that will fuck up the environment.

To at least disguise my hatred for this guy, at the very least, I actually like some of the first 8 promises: it addresses the fact that America is owned by corporate interests and gets out the crooks who have fucked up the system so badly... at least in theory. I'd appreciate it if someone could point out the negative impacts, because I don't have any context for the American system. At first glance, it does seem like a good thing.

I also like him getting rid of NAFTA/TPP. NAFTA fucks up Canada so much already that I want us out of it-- even though our fucking neoliberalist government won't ever withdraw, despite the millions of dollars we lose from American lawsuits over us protecting our goddamn land/sovereignty...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JES
NAFTA has been shown to have little effect and what little effect is a net positive. I dunno why people keep making it an issue but it's pretty much a partisan issue now. TPP is a different story, but the details are so vague/we don't really know what'll happen/tons of false information that that's still kind of a mystery to be honest.






I know some people won't want to hear it but..... globalization isn't going away, like ever. Look at something like Brexit and the negative effects on the economy it's had because they decided to cut "globalist" ties and free trade. The push against it generally comes off as more xenophobia and fear of lack of control over the economy which are legit concerns, but people need to understand that we live in a global economy now and it's not like the 1800's where a country can just control everything economically. The world has evolved.
 

Hogg

grubbing in the ashes
is a Site Content Manageris a Social Media Contributoris a Community Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris an Administratoris a Tournament Director Alumnus
Tiering Admin
To at least disguise my hatred for this guy, at the very least, I actually like some of the first 8 promises: it addresses the fact that America is owned by corporate interests and gets out the crooks who have fucked up the system so badly... at least in theory. I'd appreciate it if someone could point out the negative impacts, because I don't have any context for the American system. At first glance, it does seem like a good thing.
Term limits are one of those things that sound GREAT on paper, but in practice aren't actually always the best. There are three problems with strict term limits. The first is that legislators tend to get better over time. The majority of their first legislative session is rarely all that productive, because there's a huge learning curve, and it takes time to learn the ins and outs of Washington. The second is that it means there's no built-in responsibility to their electorate if there is no re-election. Theoretically, a legislator will be unwilling to go against her electorate to advance her own interests because she will plan to seek re-election down the road; with strict term limits, that isn't an issue, so someone can run a completely false campaign and not have to worry about actually following up with any campaign promises once in office. The third problem is that legislators end up passing bills that sound good in the short term but have negative long term consequences because, frankly, they don't give a shit about the long term - there is no incentive to do longer term research and planning, both because they're not going to be in office to care about it, and because the next batch of legislators to take their place will probably just end up scrapping their bill and starting anew.

The net result is actually granting MORE power to lobbyists and "Washington elite," because as they don't get elected into their positions, they end up being the only people around Washington for long periods of time, and there is no disincentive to stop legislators from working with them.

I'm not opposed to term limits completely, by the way - I think that the best solution would be moderate term limits, where being elected to a legislative office is never a lifetime position, but where legislators also stick around long enough to actually get things done. I'm not sure what the best actual number is, but if we're talking about six-year terms, then a term limit of around three terms feels about right to me.
 
Last edited:
NAFTA has been shown to have little effect and what little effect is a net positive. I dunno why people keep making it an issue but it's pretty much a partisan issue now. TPP is a different story, but the details are so vague/we don't really know what'll happen/tons of false information that that's still kind of a mystery to be honest.

I know some people won't want to hear it but..... globalization isn't going away, like ever. Look at something like Brexit and the negative effects on the economy it's had because they decided to cut "globalist" ties and free trade. The push against it generally comes off as more xenophobia and fear of lack of control over the economy which are legit concerns, but people need to understand that we live in a global economy now and it's not like the 1800's where a country can just control everything economically. The world has evolved.
I'm all for globalisation, don't get me wrong. And in theory, NAFTA is great too! But the problem is when YOUR COUNTRY IS GETTING FUCKED IN THE ASS (with no lube!) and there's nothing you can do about it, except bend over and let other countries decimate your resources, land, destroy the natural ecosystems, and stomp all over Indigenous treaty land without a second fucking thought. Fuck that shit. The exact same thing will happen with TPP which is why people dislike it so much. (Oh and we want to continue getting free movies I guess, haha)

Hogg, thanks a million for your clarification there. Why not have it match presidential terms? (Four years, right?)
 
  • Like
Reactions: JES

Hogg

grubbing in the ashes
is a Site Content Manageris a Social Media Contributoris a Community Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris an Administratoris a Tournament Director Alumnus
Tiering Admin
The best place to look at why we ended up with six-year terms for the Senate would be the Federalist Papers. Madison's essays in particular touched on this. His arguments for the length of terms, which were eventually adopted, was that by having senate terms longer than presidential terms (but staggered so that re-elections occurred every two years) you would have a more stable government, controlling turnover in the legislature and allowing senators to take control of measures over longer periods of time. It would also mean that senators would not be entirely beholden to public opinion, as he was concerned that things like compromise, which is healthy for government, looks bad over the short term but good over a longer term. By always having an influx of new senators (via the staggered elections every two years) but allowing each senator to remain for a minimum of six years, he argued that we would have the best balance of new ideas and a stable legislature.

Of course, that was almost two hundred and thirty years ago, and we are in a very different political environment than when Madison and Hamilton wrote the Federalist Papers in 1787. It is possible that what they recommended is no longer the ideal. However, I do think that their basic arguments have merit.
 

Adamant Zoroark

catchy catchphrase
is a Contributor to Smogon
I'm all for globalisation, don't get me wrong. And in theory, NAFTA is great too! But the problem is when YOUR COUNTRY IS GETTING FUCKED IN THE ASS (with no lube!) and there's nothing you can do about it, except bend over and let other countries decimate your resources, land, destroy the natural ecosystems, and stomp all over Indigenous treaty land without a second fucking thought. Fuck that shit. The exact same thing will happen with TPP which is why people dislike it so much. (Oh and we want to continue getting free movies I guess, haha)

Hogg, thanks a million for your clarification there. Why not have it match presidential terms? (Four years, right?)
Holy shit, calm down, grandpa. You're spewing the same shit about sovereignty that brought Britain to fuck themselves in the ass (with no lube!) with Brexit. Maybe instead you could propose renegotiating NAFTA (especially regarding Chapter 11 which seems to be the most contentious issue), but straight-up leaving a free trade zone is not going to be good for your economy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JES

Bughouse

Like ships in the night, you're passing me by
is a Site Content Manageris a Forum Moderator Alumnusis a CAP Contributor Alumnusis a Tiering Contributor Alumnusis a Contributor Alumnus
double post because I can

I've read this about 6 times and I still can't get through it without laughing:

Those who know Bill "Spaceman" Lee aren't shocked to hear about the former Boston Red Sox pitcher's gubernatorial bid in Vermont. Observers have long thought Lee’s head is in the clouds: In 1971, Lee, while being interviewed by reporters in the Fenway Park locker room, abruptly switched the conversation from baseball to the Apollo 15 moon landing (hence the nickname, “Spaceman”).

In 1998, the Spaceman ran for president as the nominee of the Rhinoceros Party. His platform included bulldozing the Rocky Mountains so Alberta, Canada, could receive more sunlight. His slogan was, “No guns, no butter. Both can kill.”

Now, his name (nickname included) is on the Vermont ballot, this time as the gubernatorial nominee of the Liberty Union Party—the same party that once nominated Bernie Sanders in a failed gubernatorial effort. Lee has also changed up his pitch: "So far left, we're right." He promises that if elected, he will not do much.

Will the Spaceman win the race for governor? Probably not. According to Vermont Public Radio, he is currently polling at 2 percent. On the other hand, that might be enough to swing the race to Republican Phil Scott, who is neck-and-neck with Democratic nominee Sue Minter.
source: http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...-initiatives-downticket-votes-measures-214400
 

Soul Fly

IMMA TEACH YOU WHAT SPLASHIN' MEANS
is a Contributor Alumnus
a black muslim immigrant, with a brother who is the sitting democratic president supports trump...

lmfao I wanna know how he swung that shit. this is cognitive dissonance on 7 levels minimum.
 

TheValkyries

proudly reppin' 2 superbowl wins since DEFLATEGATE
Because Barack didn't support Malik's founding of an organization in their father's name. Malik resented him for it. The end. How dramatic of a tale it was. All right there in that article posted by Bughouse.
 
This oughtta be an interesting week. It's been a few days and Hillary continues to lead on average in the polls. Granted, we need more data to truly gage whether the new source of emails will have a sustantial impact. I personally don't think so, however.
I think Clinton made a wise call by demanding the FBI release what it has immediately; it makes it look like she has nothing to hide. It also seems sketchy that Comey jumped the gun, and the heat is coming at him from both sides.

Edit: Happy Halloween!
 
Last edited:

Hogg

grubbing in the ashes
is a Site Content Manageris a Social Media Contributoris a Community Contributoris a Tiering Contributoris an Administratoris a Tournament Director Alumnus
Tiering Admin
FiveThirtyEight updated their polls-plus model of the Presidential election this morning. Hillary still has a pretty commanding lead, but Trump has pulled closer than he has been since the first debate. As these have consistently been the most accurate and statistically rigorous polling models for the past eight years, I'm inclined to trust them more than any other poll aggregator - they show their math and their polling sources, and make the data exportable so you can come to your own conclusions if you don't trust theirs.

To put things into terms familiar to everyone here, Hillary Clinton has more or less had control of the game after an excellent performance the first debate, and by the second debate it was looking like Trump's only chance of coming back, short of a massive choke, was to get a late-game Ice Beam freeze. However, things tightened up in the last few turns following the third debate. She still has a pretty good chance of winning, but now she has to land an Iron Tail to bring Trump down, instead of being able to coast to a safer victory.
 

verbatim

[PLACEHOLDER]
is a Live Chat Contributoris a Battle Simulator Moderatoris a Battle Simulator Admin Alumnusis a Community Leader Alumnus
Please don't link infowars. It's the personal webpage for conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, who, among other things, has personally claimed that the US government directly committed,
  • The Oklahoma City Bombing
  • 9/11
  • Aurora Colorado shootings
  • Sandy Hook Shootings
  • A tornado in Oklahoma in 2013?

When a shooter by the name of Jared Lee Loughner killed many people and almost U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Gifford (the target) in Arizona, Alex Jones called it a false flag operation. It then was later revealed that Loughner claimed to have been heavily inspired by several Alex Jones documentaries, blaming the Government for 9/11.


The company that airs his network show makes most of their money off of him convincing his followers to buy gold coins and MRE's from them.
He makes shit up to scare people for a living.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 2)

Top