Jump to content
Tygo

United States Presidential Election

Candidates  

142 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. Who do you think SHOULD win?

  2. 2. Who do you think WILL win?

    • Bernie Sanders
    • Hillary Clinton
    • Donald Trump
    • Ted Cruz
    • Marco Rubio
    • Ben Carson
      0
    • John Kasich
      0


Recommended Posts

+Paraliel+    8035

I don't think a political thread is the place for image replies and snarky over-simplifications of points you disagree with. If you disagree then tell me why and don't be a snark-flavored pussy.

I didn't over simplify anything. You said Donald Trump was an "ok pick" because he wouldn't be allowed to do anything crazy and could possibly help the economy. Yes, America needs some economic help but not at the sacrifice of alliances with other nations and public distrust with the government as well as an effective waste of a spot in terms of other key issues. I don't need to spend the next 8 years hearing about this wall in Mexico or increased deportation talk that will realistically never happen. I'd rather put someone in who can actually bring key issues to the forefront and actually do something that matters. You acknowledge that Donald Trump is relatively crazy, so you know this at least at some extent but also underplay the amount of damage having an actually racist president will do to the US.

 

That's why I'm snarky, because your thought made no sense and is actually completely damaging and ignorant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Paraliel+    8035

Political debate etiquette only extends to people who actually think about the things they post, edgemaster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
iDunnoBro    822

 

I don't think a political thread is the place for image replies and snarky over-simplifications of points you disagree with. If you disagree then tell me why and don't be a snark-flavored pussy.

I didn't over simplify anything. You said Donald Trump was an "ok pick" because he wouldn't be allowed to do anything crazy and could possibly help the economy. Yes, America needs some economic help but not at the sacrifice of alliances with other nations and public distrust with the government as well as an effective waste of a spot in terms of other key issues. I don't need to spend the next 8 years hearing about this wall in Mexico or increased deportation talk that will realistically never happen. I'd rather put someone in who can actually bring key issues to the forefront and actually do something that matters. You acknowledge that Donald Trump is relatively crazy, so you know this at least at some extent but also underplay the amount of damage having an actually racist president will do to the US.

 

That's why I'm snarky, because your thought made no sense and is actually completely damaging and ignorant.

 

 

See, it's kind of hard for me to believe you didn't over-simplify anything if you later felt you had to expand on it(this post).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Paraliel+    8035

 

 

I don't think a political thread is the place for image replies and snarky over-simplifications of points you disagree with. If you disagree then tell me why and don't be a snark-flavored pussy.

I didn't over simplify anything. You said Donald Trump was an "ok pick" because he wouldn't be allowed to do anything crazy and could possibly help the economy. Yes, America needs some economic help but not at the sacrifice of alliances with other nations and public distrust with the government as well as an effective waste of a spot in terms of other key issues. I don't need to spend the next 8 years hearing about this wall in Mexico or increased deportation talk that will realistically never happen. I'd rather put someone in who can actually bring key issues to the forefront and actually do something that matters. You acknowledge that Donald Trump is relatively crazy, so you know this at least at some extent but also underplay the amount of damage having an actually racist president will do to the US.

 

That's why I'm snarky, because your thought made no sense and is actually completely damaging and ignorant.

 

 

See, it's kind of hard for me to believe you didn't over-simplify anything if you later felt you had to expand on it(this post).

 

You can substitute that entire post for what I said earlier and you'll get the same meaning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Paraliel+    8035

And the debate forum died because of a bunch of pseudo-intellectuals who had no idea what they were talking about kept posting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
iDunnoBro    822

 

 

 

I don't think a political thread is the place for image replies and snarky over-simplifications of points you disagree with. If you disagree then tell me why and don't be a snark-flavored pussy.

I didn't over simplify anything. You said Donald Trump was an "ok pick" because he wouldn't be allowed to do anything crazy and could possibly help the economy. Yes, America needs some economic help but not at the sacrifice of alliances with other nations and public distrust with the government as well as an effective waste of a spot in terms of other key issues. I don't need to spend the next 8 years hearing about this wall in Mexico or increased deportation talk that will realistically never happen. I'd rather put someone in who can actually bring key issues to the forefront and actually do something that matters. You acknowledge that Donald Trump is relatively crazy, so you know this at least at some extent but also underplay the amount of damage having an actually racist president will do to the US.
 
That's why I'm snarky, because your thought made no sense and is actually completely damaging and ignorant.

 

 
See, it's kind of hard for me to believe you didn't over-simplify anything if you later felt you had to expand on it(this post).

 

You can substitute that entire post for what I said earlier and you'll get the same meaning.

 


Meaning? Yes, but I'd never know why or how you came to that conclusion. Only your worthless, base feelings that contribute nothing to the discussion. Posting nothing would've been more productive.

 

Of course, it's starting to look as that's the proper course of action for me and this conversation if I ever want to squeeze out a productive discussion out of this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Tygo    14141
You're literally doing more damage and derailing to this discussion but getting upset over a fucking picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+rei+    34993

If the argument for a candidate is ''He won't be allowed to do anything too crazy", I don't think there's much that needs to be said because it sort of implies that the platform he is running on is crazy.

 
Except my argument was "He won't be allowed to do anything crazy, and would also at least do some good regarding the economy."

threatening and alienating major trading partners is the opposite of good for the economy
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+rei+    34993

Don't really dislike any of the republicans

So of a field of someone who views spousal rape as legal and fine, the two guys who think climate change is in no way human caused, and a proponent of profitized prisons, no one to dislike there!

(And that's ignoring the homophobia and sexism)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wumbologist    14205
Trump will be the best on trade. And the wall will happen.

Prepare yourselves folks.
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Sophocles    3325

I'd dispute that Trump would be good for the US economy, even ignoring his crazy offensive remarks. Running a business is distinctly different from politics. You need to be able to actually strike a deal, whip votes, obtain political support for your ideas - all things that he's shown to be lacking so far, or at best has no real experience with.

I also read an article just today (but correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not American) that he has no support among the Republican think thanks and none of them want to be associated with him because of how controversial he is. He's yet to actually release a list of people who would advise him and his cabinet, which is pretty important to make informed decisions - so I don't see how he'd work well with 'economist', when he has difficulty actually finding economic advisors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Paraliel+    8035

Trump will be the best on trade. And the wall will happen.

Prepare yourselves folks.

I can never tell if this is a troll or not
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dog-whistle politics is political messaging employing coded language that appears to mean one thing to the general population but has an additional, different or more specific resonance for a targeted subgroup. The phrase is often used as a pejorative, because of the inherently deceptive nature of the practice and because the dog-whistle messages are frequently distasteful to the general populace. The analogy is to a dog whistle, whose high-frequency whistle is heard by dogs but inaudible to humans.

 

n her book Voting for Jesus: Christianity and Politics in Australia, academic Amanda Lohrey writes that the goal of the dog-whistle is to appeal to the greatest possible number of electors while alienating the smallest possible number. She uses as an example Australian politicians using broadly appealing words such as "family" and "values", which have extra resonance for Christians, while avoiding overt Christian moralizing that might be a turn-off for non-Christian voters

 

i was maybe  redundant with tactics but hes basically targeting his speech towards racist white americans with a lot of the "keep america great" etc rhetoric

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Laser Cat    5612

It's more of a regular whistle than a dog whistle when it come to trump, there has been zero subtlety .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wumbologist    14205

only so many white racist redneck hillbilly incest closet kkk uneducated people in this country


i dont see him getting much of the minority or millenial votes

I believe every state that's voted so far has gotten record turnout. That's largely because of Trump. People have been underestimating how much support he can get the entire time he's been running and he's proven them wrong in each state thus far.

 

Yes the racist billionaire is an "ok pick"

I can understand criticizing someone if you believe they're racist, but I'm confused why it appears that you're using billionaire in a seemingly derogatory way. 

 

I'd dispute that Trump would be good for the US economy, even ignoring his crazy offensive remarks. Running a business is distinctly different from politics. You need to be able to actually strike a deal, whip votes, obtain political support for your ideas - all things that he's shown to be lacking so far, or at best has no real experience with.

I also read an article just today (but correct me if I'm wrong, I'm not American) that he has no support among the Republican think thanks and none of them want to be associated with him because of how controversial he is. He's yet to actually release a list of people who would advise him and his cabinet, which is pretty important to make informed decisions - so I don't see how he'd work well with 'economist', when he has difficulty actually finding economic advisors.

o.o

Trump_the_art_of_the_deal.jpg

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Tygo    14141

 

Yes the racist billionaire is an "ok pick"

I can understand criticizing someone if you believe they're racist, but I'm confused why it appears that you're using billionaire in a seemingly derogatory way. 

 

It's more "that guy is racist and has a lot of money/power to do horrible things to innocent people because of the color of their skin or their religion."

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Tygo    14141

Running the country is not the same as running a business so can we stop that conversation before it starts? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wumbologist    14205

 

 

Yes the racist billionaire is an "ok pick"

I can understand criticizing someone if you believe they're racist, but I'm confused why it appears that you're using billionaire in a seemingly derogatory way. 

 

It's more "that guy is racist and has a lot of money/power to do horrible things to innocent people because of the color of their skin or their religion."

 

What things do you think he's going to do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
»Tygo    14141

 

 

 

Yes the racist billionaire is an "ok pick"

I can understand criticizing someone if you believe they're racist, but I'm confused why it appears that you're using billionaire in a seemingly derogatory way. 

 

It's more "that guy is racist and has a lot of money/power to do horrible things to innocent people because of the color of their skin or their religion."

 

What things do you think he's going to do?

 

Use that money to gain political power, set the country back a few billion with a stupid wall and impossible deportation witch hunts, and piss off the nation who owns all of our debt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ammit    5159

trump in addition to his shitty personal politics is rich because he was born into it. don't forget he also had to file bankruptcy for 4 of his businesses, which while not completely his fault show a pretty clear lack of foresight wrt to the economy and businesses he was getting into. also i'm pretty sure trump's has next to nothing concrete in terms of his policies outside of putting up a wall to mexico and making them pay for it. considering i'm further left than sanders none of the candidates are exactly ideal for me, but sanders is the closest candidate to my personal politics i've seen, and i'm willing to vote for hillary in the general if it comes to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Urthor    10234

Trump's apparently spent very little, his outlays are basically the rallies and the unavoidable back office staff, and minimal organisation.  Overall he's spent far less than 100 million and probably less than 50 million so far, which if you consider the reports that he's worth at most 1-2 billion and not 5-10 like he claims, makes  sense.  

 

Bernie has spent far more

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×