General US Politics

[Phoenix Wright]

the fact that you vote trump after having voted obama tells me you don't really vote on platform, but who you like better.

i think that's a fundamentally flawed way to vote.

I don't post much here to begin with, but I'm trying to come here less as well. Without criticizing anyone here, political discussion here is just the same hyper partisan politics I see everywhere else. Two sides with their own..

to be fair, when the majority of posts from the right are from someone who rarely makes sense and another who cries librul agender till the cows come home, it's difficult to have a discussion.

if balc commented more i'm assuming i'd enjoy it more at least. but it appears he'll put his two cents in and then dip, which i can't really blame him for if we're being honest

[Lord Raven]

I don't post much here to begin with, but I'm trying to come here less as well. Without criticizing anyone here, political discussion here is just the same hyper partisan politics I see everywhere else. Two sides with their own views, hardly any middle ground, no opinions can be changed. I try to present my views so people can see where I'm coming from, and I try to see where others are coming from.

might have a lot to do with the fact that our liberals are insanely liberal and our conservatives are insanely conservative

i mean sure we've tried but if you look at other threads you'll see how frustrating this is, and this isn't just an issue with SF, so much as the internet

and yes if you look at certain other posts in this thread they don't really make points so much as shit on a "liberal agenda"

[Person123]

Seems the RNC convention has concluded, and the protests were much smaller than what people were expecting.

I wonder how the DNC convention will turn out. Sanders did bend the knee to Clinton before the convention, but I wonder if that'll actually keep things from escalating.

[blah the Prussian]

Naw, it doesn't.

Eventually, there will be enough Arabs everywhere that want us dead that they'll just convince every country to act against us.

We're Jews, we're not allowed to be liked.

Who? I mean, at this point it's just Iran that's really a threat, right? Syria is too busy being torn apart, same with Iraq, Jordan had a reconciliation years ago, and Egypt is also friendly right now, although admittedly that could change. It seems to me that the whole "surrounded with countries that hate you" mostly ended in the 80s; your neighbors are either allies or no threat.

[eclipse]

might have a lot to do with the fact that our liberals are insanely liberal and our conservatives are insanely conservative

i mean sure we've tried but if you look at other threads you'll see how frustrating this is, and this isn't just an issue with SF, so much as the internet

and yes if you look at certain other posts in this thread they don't really make points so much as shit on a "liberal agenda"

Stubborn moderate here. I dislike both Trump and Clinton, but I feel like I'm one of the few that will actually Do Something about it, and vote for neither. I don't care if it looks like I'm throwing my vote away, I can say with good conscience that I didn't vote for either of them. Perhaps third party won't win outright this election. But I think if those who dislike both sides actually follow what I'm doing, there will be a noticeable shift to a third party.

[HF Makalov Fanboy Kai]

I don't post much here to begin with, but I'm trying to come here less as well. Without criticizing anyone here, political discussion here is just the same hyper partisan politics I see everywhere else. Two sides with their own views, hardly any middle ground, no opinions can be changed. I try to present my views so people can see where I'm coming from, and I try to see where others are coming from.

It's been a long time since I've voted; I haven't voted since 2008, when I voted for Obama. At lot has changed since then, such as changing states, but I intend to start voting again; starting with this year. I don't agree with him on everything, but I'm planning to vote for Trump. I have my reasons for doing so; I'm sure someone will ridicule or insult me for this, but that's just how it is. I've already said before that I can't vote for Hillary Clinton in good conscience; I don't trust her on anything, and I don't like some of the stuff I see come from her campaign. If the election had come down to her and someone like Cruz...I'd rather not imagine it.

My vote won't make much difference since my current state already goes red, but voting is a right I should start expressing again.

well Political extremes are political extreme's, there isn't too much that can be done about those, while adapting politics myself as a hobby two years ago, i have realized that maybe i should try to lighten up more when i discuss my views, but i understand some subjects are hard to relax on.

using myself as an Example, i have sadly become paranoid of certain people because of my sexuality, when that is a subject i tend to lose sight of whats important and say something that can sound absolutely ridiculous or offensiveness towards one that looks at things the other way, which leads to further bad times, i do wish to try to pretend this in the future, although it would be easier if i could be more confident in my future in the first place.

But i do get you when you try to be neutral, according to this political scale quiz thing i took, it labeled me around in the middle of "left" and "right" but it did put me around below half way on "authoritarianism" so i suppose that's in the middle? Of course I have only taken up politics as a hobby two years ago as i mentioned before, so maybe that could change later in my life.

With that said, you should always vote and i approve of you voting.

Stubborn moderate here. I dislike both Trump and Clinton, but I feel like I'm one of the few that will actually Do Something about it, and vote for neither. I don't care if it looks like I'm throwing my vote away, I can say with good conscience that I didn't vote for either of them. Perhaps third party won't win outright this election. But I think if those who dislike both sides actually follow what I'm doing, there will be a noticeable shift to a third party.

third party, while i don't believe I'd ever vote them currently, if it did come down to the aforementioned Hillary vs Cruz situation, I'd have to go with Third party as well from a huge clash of interests between two groups i wouldn't be able to stand, so I understand your position here, voting third party is still better then literally not voting.

Edited July 22, 2016 by HF Makalov Fanboy Kai

[Life]

Who? I mean, at this point it's just Iran that's really a threat, right? Syria is too busy being torn apart, same with Iraq, Jordan had a reconciliation years ago, and Egypt is also friendly right now, although admittedly that could change. It seems to me that the whole "surrounded with countries that hate you" mostly ended in the 80s; your neighbors are either allies or no threat.

Realistically, Israel is in the best spot it's been in since inception.

However, we're also getting slammed by BDS groups in Europe led by *gasp* Arabs and other people that hate us. Soda Stream recently shut down a factory in the West Bank where 600 Palestinians lost paying jobs because BDS managed to convince people not to buy Soda Stream's products.

The issue is that groups like BDS don't care about the Palestinians. They care about hurting Israelis. And since they know that military force doesn't work, they're aiming for our wallets by perpetuating a lot of lies and mistruths in order to convince people that Israel is evil. Milo Yiannopolis has claimed that he cannot in good support take groups like "Queers for Palestine" seriously when 96% of Palestinians believe that homosexuality should be illegal and a jailable offense. Compare that to Israel that hosts one of the biggest Pride parades in the world where OiTNB stars come to party.

[Moblin Major General]

Compare that to Israel that hosts one of the biggest Pride parades in the world where OiTNB stars come to party.

From a country whose most practiced religion condones stoning for it, it's pretty surprising to hear that Israel accepts LGBT so widely. Not unwelcome, but unexpected.

[Excellen Browning]

The unfortunate thing is that the safety of your home country hinges on this election, and that you could get easily screwed by Trump or Hillary.

his home country is canada

[tuvarkz]

Are you a misogynist? Serious question.

Nope. I do not hold any particular hatred towards people that happen to have XX as their 23rd chrosome pair and not XY.

Regarding Alexcircuit's argument

-Trump and wanting to be president

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/20/politics/john-kasich-donald-trump-vice-president/

It's Kasich's word against Trump's. And Kasich swore an oath to endorse the Republican nominee, and he's not standing by it. Sounds to me like he's about as salty as Ted Cruz is.

-Pence

He's a pick to appease the Republican base, Trump's still the guy in charge. And the link posted? It still says that smoke is not good for people.

-Cabinet

-While Ben Carson is indeed an evolution denier, at least the's not of the kind that only resorts to the bible. His arguments are nevertheless wrong, but he's not the kind that will just stick to 'It's wrong because the Bible says so.' I assumed Ben was going to the Surgeon General spot, though. And honestly, as long as facts are not rewritten, painting a heroic view of the US's history is not something I'll disagree on.

-Chris Christie and Marijuana. This may or may not be an issue for people, but let it be reminded that while marijuana may have lesser long term effects than tabacco or alcohol, it has more potent immediate effects than either.

Past

-I've checked on the Apprentice winners, as I don't know of other specific people that have worked with Trump. S2 winner is dead, I have no notice about Bret Michaels, but the rest have, if not a direct endorsement, speaken in favor of Trump running for president.

Ego

-I find it hard that 'politically incorrect' Trump will speak against 4chan/8chan's /pol/ boards (And to note, for precision, it's 'western culture supremacist' rather than 'white supremacist'-/pol/ holds no noticeable hatred for slavs, and latinos are often a strong topic of discussion on the board with strong arguments on both sides), and given his actual ties to the Jewish community (unless you are willing to believe a conspiracy theory that comes from these same boards), there's little reason to believe that Trump holds actual anti-semitic ties. (And had /pol/ wished to make the image actually anti-semitic, they'd have gone for a different angle). And the infographic was clear bait, and it forced the media to admit that 90% of black killings were made by other black people. https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/258584864163500033

Bigotry

-Outside of that article that has been stated as unreliable, Trump hasn't ever spoken against black people

-Illegal immigrant latinos are about as responsible for giving legal immigrants a bad reputation

-Comparing Muslims and latino immigrants is apples to tomatoes-Islam is an ideology (as all religions are) and not an inherent trait of a person that cannot be changed

Global Warming

Agreed on the issue, but I'm of the opinion that humanity can pull itself of whatever hole it digs itself into

Taxes

-A tax cut to favor companies of all sizes investing in the US may just work too. Long terms effects of this are a wild card, and given that small companies could use the leeway, I'm in favor of this.

Foreign Policy

-I'd see a good argument to giving Japan and South Korea nukes. Having each major first world/second world country hold nukes would be a good way to deter nuclear missile exchange if war breaks out.

-Mexico: They are gonna pay for the wall and the border's gonna be secured, of course it's gonna make them mad

-War crimes: Outside of the children, it's largely likely that ISIS's families are about as radicalized as them, even if they don't take an active part. I don't see a point in keeping a standard to which the enemy won't adhere to either, because this isn't necessarily about righteousness. It's about ISIS opposing the interests of America.

-Outside of dealing with ISIS, Trump has mentioned that he wishes to stop having so much investment in having American armies deployed across the world. Clinton would easily wage war for profit.

Bible Pandering

-Against the pro-'refugee' Clinton, from countries whose majority Muslim population have strong views against homosexuals Trump is by comparison better for gays. And Trump is not against gays http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/06/flashback-trump-defends-gays-clintons-2000/ he rather seems to be neutral on the matter.

-In addition, the Clinton Foundation http://serenesforest.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=56082&page=81#entry4419372 (Post where I've spoken about it earlier) gives a significant amount of expenses in 'Salaries and Benefits' and 'Other expenses'. Given how much Saudi Arabia has donated to it, it's not unthinkable that some of that money gets diverted directly into Hillary's hands.

Qualifications

-Clinton, while not prosecuted, was mentioned to be extremely negligent in the management of what was confidential information, which is a big red flag. Not to mention her recounting of a defense of a child rapist (which makes her a morally bankrupt person)

-She got into First Lady by merits of Bill Clinton, into the Senate in NY, which has been a Democrat stronghold, she'd have to had thrown that one in purpose in order to not become a Senator there

Bullying

-People play it rough, and the strongest country in the world needs a tough President. Heidi Cruz has had more than a few unfavorable shots, and stating her as ugly might as well be an objective statement. He mentioned that Cruz's dad met with JFK's killer, not that he directly helped him. And Trump has gotten direct attacks too. But he swore an oath. Even if said oath was made to prevent Trump from going third party if he lost, and wasn't foreseeing his nomination. And Cruz is salty-he knows that had he not gone against Trump as his poll numbers went up, he'd likely be the VP pick by now.

And name-calling is a perfect memetical tactic. Sayings like that get easily transmitted and remembered (And politifact isn't entirely free from bias). It's efficient propaganda. And 'captured and tortured' doesn't make for a war hero, as McCain did not go above and beyond duty. A soldier is expected to endure hardship, and to not betray his army.

In terms of party divison, the NeverTrump movement is basically dead by now, and Trump should have little issue seeing how he's been getting the support of more and more Republican legislators.

Edited July 22, 2016 by tuvarkz

[Life]

his home country is canada

Actually, not entirely correct.

I am a Canadian citizen (due to birth) but both an Israeli citizen and resident. I cannot legally vote in Canadian elections while I live in Israel, despite being a citizen (because a voter must be a resident).

I've also lived in Israel for five years which is basically my total adult life (I moved just after turning 20) so it's fair to call my home country Israel.

Edited July 22, 2016 by Pharoahe Monch

[Time the Crestfallen]

I've been doing my research on the Republican Party Platform and the platform issues as far as I can tell are:

-Ban on abortion

-Revoking the same-sex marriage laws

-No background check for guns

-Allowing parents to apply their LGBT children for conversion therapy

-Banning women from combat roles

-Give federal parks back to the states

-Address pornography as a 'public health crisis'

-Prevent/Restrict cohabitation by unmarried couples

[spoiler=Sources]

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/news/a46621/republican-party-platform-2016/

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/13/us/politics/republican-convention-issues.html?_r=0

So before I start making judgments, how much of this is legit and how much of it is either lies or taken out of context? I'm doing my own research, but maybe you guys picked up on something I missed.

Edited July 22, 2016 by Phillius

[blah the Prussian]

Realistically, Israel is in the best spot it's been in since inception.

However, we're also getting slammed by BDS groups in Europe led by *gasp* Arabs and other people that hate us. Soda Stream recently shut down a factory in the West Bank where 600 Palestinians lost paying jobs because BDS managed to convince people not to buy Soda Stream's products.

The issue is that groups like BDS don't care about the Palestinians. They care about hurting Israelis. And since they know that military force doesn't work, they're aiming for our wallets by perpetuating a lot of lies and mistruths in order to convince people that Israel is evil. Milo Yiannopolis has claimed that he cannot in good support take groups like "Queers for Palestine" seriously when 96% of Palestinians believe that homosexuality should be illegal and a jailable offense. Compare that to Israel that hosts one of the biggest Pride parades in the world where OiTNB stars come to party.

But is that really an existential threat? Basically, if America terminated its alliance with Israel right now would that be an existential threat?

[Moblin Major General]

But is that really an existential threat? Basically, if America terminated its alliance with Israel right now would that be an existential threat?

To America, yes. Unless God wants to punish Israel right now, being against it is never a good thing for any country. Probably why Europe is pretty fucked right now.

[tuvarkz]

I've been doing my research on the Republican Party Platform and the platform issues as far as I can tell are:

-Ban on abortion

-Revoking the same-sex marriage laws

-No background check for guns

-Allowing parents to apply their LGBT children for conversion therapy

-Banning women from combat roles

-Give federal parks back to the states

-Address pornography as a 'public health crisis'

-Ban women from serving combat roles in the military

-Prevent/Restrict cohabitation by unmarried couples

[spoiler=Sources]

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/news/a46621/republican-party-platform-2016/

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/13/us/politics/republican-convention-issues.html?_r=0

So before I start making judgments, how much of this is legit and how much of it is either lies or taken out of context? I'm doing my own research, but maybe you guys picked up on something I missed.

They aren't the party's unified voice at large, but at most they are of a small faction if not of individual Republicans. Haven't heard anything about 3, 4, 6 (I do not know what 6th would entail, though), or 9 though. To note 7th was only called for in Utah (And the feminist side of the left may be against pornography as well, although not for the same reasons). I have heard about Republicans being against women serving in combat roles (And to note, there's plenty of argument against it-As a rule of thumb, on average women have far lesser physical specs than men do, not to mention the current psychological differences.)

[Life]

But is that really an existential threat? Basically, if America terminated its alliance with Israel right now would that be an existential threat?

Bibi likes to use fearmongering and that's not OK with a lot of the population but the fact of the matter is that we have neighbours that would like us dead.

If America terminated its relationship with us, we'd be in a bad spot but would probably get into bed with China (which is happening right now but at a slow pace).

[Moblin Major General]

I've been doing my research on the Republican Party Platform and the platform issues as far as I can tell are:

-Ban on abortion

-Revoking the same-sex marriage laws

-No background check for guns

-Allowing parents to apply their LGBT children for conversion therapy

-Banning women from combat roles

-Give federal parks back to the states

-Address pornography as a 'public health crisis'

-Ban women from serving combat roles in the military

-Prevent/Restrict cohabitation by unmarried couples

1. Yes

2. Yes

3. Only the most far-right Libertarians

4. That violates civil rights, only the .01% of the 0.1% would want that on those grounds alone

5. 50/50

6. Possibly, one of the flaws of wanting States Rights

7. The Evangelical minority are really pushing for this

8. See 5

9. Not sure, but possible

My thoughts on the list:

1. Can't, Supreme Court ruled in favor of it

2. See 1

3. Bad idea, conversely a slippery slope if enacted

4. Is the even ethical, like WTF

5. I'm not too keen on it, but still, feminism

6. I don't want to even think what would happen to the environment

7. It's a problem, definitely, but not for the reasons the right considers it to be.

8. See 5

9. The privacy of their own home. Don't do it.

[ping]

-Mexico: They are gonna pay for the wall and the border's gonna be secured, of course it's gonna make them mad

Why exactly should Mexico pay for it? It's not like they ordered it... Serious question btw, I have really no idea what other arguments than "Donald commands them" could be made.

-War crimes: Outside of the children, it's largely likely that ISIS's families are about as radicalized as them, even if they don't take an active part. I don't see a point in keeping a standard to which the enemy won't adhere to either, because this isn't necessarily about righteousness. It's about ISIS opposing the interests of America.

"They did it first!" is an amazing justification. The only thing that would accomplish would be creating legions of new potential ISIS recruits - after all, the USA would very convincingly prove that they are indeed the land of the devil and leading a war of extermination against the muslimic peoples.

-People play it rough, and the strongest country in the world needs a tough President. Heidi Cruz has had more than a few unfavorable shots, and stating her as ugly might as well be an objective statement. He mentioned that Cruz's dad met with JFK's killer, not that he directly helped him. And Trump has gotten direct attacks too. But he swore an oath. Even if said oath was made to prevent Trump from going third party if he lost, and wasn't foreseeing his nomination. And Cruz is salty-he knows that had he not gone against Trump as his poll numbers went up, he'd likely be the VP pick by now.

And name-calling is a perfect memetical tactic. Sayings like that get easily transmitted and remembered (And politifact isn't entirely free from bias). It's efficient propaganda. And 'captured and tortured' doesn't make for a war hero, as McCain did not go above and beyond duty. A soldier is expected to endure hardship, and to not betray his army.

All this name-calling really doesn't make Trump "tough". It just makes him a schoolyard bully on a larger scale.

[Phoenix Wright]

no but see even bullies have power.

trump is a keyboard warrior irl

[tuvarkz]

Why exactly should Mexico pay for it? It's not like they ordered it... Serious question btw, I have really no idea what other arguments than "Donald commands them" could be made.

"They did it first!" is an amazing justification. The only thing that would accomplish would be creating legions of new potential ISIS recruits - after all, the USA would very convincingly prove that they are indeed the land of the devil and leading a war of extermination against the muslimic peoples.

All this name-calling really doesn't make Trump "tough". It just makes him a schoolyard bully on a larger scale.

The US has a trade deficit with Mexico, and to boot Mexico is the source of the illegal immigration issue in the US. Obviously, this won't be a matter of having Mexico write a check to the US. Instead, there will be import taxes, increased fees on visa obtaining/renovation, etc. that will go out of the Mexican pockets indirectly and into funding the construction of the wall.

Issue is, there are already potential ISIS recruits, and it's easily more than half of the muslim population in the middle east/north africa. They support the practice of the barbaric sharia law, and they likely share similar ideology to the active members of ISIS, and this is going to drag them out into the light. It's fairly clear that there's little to do regarding religious zealots that support these kinds of things, and having them display their colors is only going to be beneficial to disposing of them. Of course, if the rest of the Muslim population decides that they'd rather die alongside their radical fellows rather than reform their religion or change their religion, they are free to do so. (Although they'd be better off abandoning muslim majority areas if they become apostates-there's plenty of muslims that believe that apostasy should be punished by death)

And showing that they can't deal with a bully proves they (the other Republicans that were running for nominees) aren't prepared to deal with the likes of Putin and others.

no but see even bullies have power.

trump is a keyboard warrior irl

I'll agree, Trump knows quite well how to shitpost irl and has proven extremely succesful at it.

Edited July 22, 2016 by tuvarkz

[eclipse]

They aren't the party's unified voice at large, but at most they are of a small faction if not of individual Republicans. Haven't heard anything about 3, 4, 6 (I do not know what 6th would entail, though), or 9 though. To note 7th was only called for in Utah (And the feminist side of the left may be against pornography as well, although not for the same reasons). I have heard about Republicans being against women serving in combat roles (And to note, there's plenty of argument against it-As a rule of thumb, on average women have far lesser physical specs than men do, not to mention the current psychological differences.)

Since you're the one arguing for the Republican candidate, what do you think are the values the Republicans hold? Preferably with sources.

[Phoenix Wright]

https://www.gop.com/platform/

[Tryhard]

I'm interested to know if the US media reports on stories like this, considering they like to publicise terrorist attacks.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/20/us-airstrike-allegedly-kills-56-civilians-in-northern-syria

[Moblin Major General]

I'm interested to know if the US media reports on stories like this, considering they like to publicise terrorist attacks.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/20/us-airstrike-allegedly-kills-56-civilians-in-northern-syria

Casualties of War, the Defense Department says. It's sad and kind of sickening, but terrorists hide in places where civilian casualties are inevitable. Unlike Dresden, there is no clear line between the usual snafus of urban combat and war crimes. If there were, our leaders still wouldn't face war crimes because that would force the US to scale down its involvement in global affairs, which screws a huge number of people over, especially Western Europe, Israel, South Korea, and Japan.

[tuvarkz]

Since you're the one arguing for the Republican candidate, what do you think are the values the Republicans hold? Preferably with sources.

Clarification: Do you intend the individual factions within Republicans and what they largely have in common, or the Republicans as a whole as led by Trump? Because, honestly, particularly when taking into account both neocons and alt-rights there'd be a lot to specify in each case, while Trump's movement clearly holds a few specific values above them all.