2016 US Election


Off-Topic Discussions

5,151 to 5,200 of 7,079 << first < prev | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | next > last >>

CrystalSeas wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
And to be pedantic, a write in vote for Clinton won't be counted unless a tie forces the counting of write in votes.

In my state, all write-in votes are tallied and added to the election results before the election board certifies the election. You cannot ignore them.

Perhaps your state has different laws, but it's not likely. All ballots and all votes need to be accounted for.

a number of states have given up and stopped counting after the results wouldn't matter (ie one candidate is ahead 12,000 votes and there are only 10,000 people in Banjo County)

In 2008 florida couldn't tell who had won their election for weeks, fortunately they were irrelevant (unlike 2000)


Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Pawns, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:
a number of states have given up and stopped counting after the results wouldn't matter (ie one candidate is ahead 12,000 votes and there are only 10,000 people in Banjo County)

That may be true for reporting preliminary results, but I doubt it's true for official results, which even in uncomplicated elections sometimes take several weeks to complete the counting.


CrystalSeas wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
And to be pedantic, a write in vote for Clinton won't be counted unless a tie forces the counting of write in votes.

In my state, all write-in votes are tallied and added to the election results before the election board certifies the election. You cannot ignore them.

Perhaps your state has different laws, but it's not likely. All ballots and all votes need to be accounted for.

Certification however is an after the fact process that takes place weeks after election day. Write ins are not counted when electoral votes are tallied that night. And certification only counts the number of write-ins, it doesn't go through each one unless a recount is in process.


Ignoring for a moment the PotUS/VPotUS ticket, maybe this tweet from Sanders will motivate some reluctants to vote for their Dem Senate candidate.


Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:
Ignoring for a moment the PotUS/VPotUS ticket, maybe this tweet from Sanders will motivate some reluctants to vote for their Dem Senate candidate.

That position would go to a Democrat more senior than Sanders who is an Independent again. Ryan is just honking off.


Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:
Ignoring for a moment the PotUS/VPotUS ticket, maybe this tweet from Sanders will motivate some reluctants to vote for their Dem Senate candidate.
That position would go to a Democrat more senior than Sanders who is an Independent again. Ryan is just honking off.

Sanders has (for more than a decade) caucused with the Democrats and has appropriate seniority. He's currently the "Ranking Member" (senior member from the minority party) in the Budget Committee, so, although it's not impossible that someone like Sen. Leahy would opt out of his position on the Judiciary committee and ask for Budget instead,.... but it's very unlikely.

I think Ryan has the right of it.


Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Pawns, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Write ins are not counted when electoral votes are tallied that night. And certification only counts the number of write-ins, it doesn't go through each one unless a recount is in process.

A couple points:

Electoral votes are not tallied until the Electoral College meetings in December. And at that point, the people casting votes are the people who have been certified by the election boards in each state.

What you're saying is absolutely true for preliminary results the night of the election. But it is not true for the official results, which are what get certified and which are what are used for the Electoral College votes.

And, as I said, in my state, each write in vote is enumerated by the local election board. I can actually go back and see how many votes Mickey Mouse got in each election.

Your state may have different laws that allow votes to be left unaccounted for and it may not require the same level of transparency.

Dark Archive

Rednal wrote:

That's definitely one of the subjects that's harder for people to agree on. Quite a few people I know really do believe that abortion is effectively murder - and while the adoption system isn't perfect, it would be far better than killing someone because you don't want to raise them. (Of course, it's different if the pregnancy puts the mother's life in danger.)

So... that's not something I expect the pro-life side to concede very easily. Regardless of what someone thinks about the subject, I don't think it's wrong to say that it's fairly divisive.

In other news, Trump is pushing hard on his Election Fraud angle, despite the evidence suggesting that it pretty much doesn't happen on any statistically relevant scale. Of course, his campaign's been ignoring reality for months, so... *Shrugs*

Check out project veritas which undercovers and documents corruption of the left including voter fraud. Unfortunately, it happens, and it is almost universally a Democrat thing. There are votes being cast for dead people and for people that don't vote. Overseas absentee ballots from military personnel are often "lost" or don't arrive by the deadline to be counted. Illegals not only vote on their own, but are bused into battleground districts by the DNC to vote. A DNC staffer in New York is on record on cmaera talking about bussing illegals around to different districts to vote. Of course, this can all be pretty much stopped with voter id laws, which is why the Democrats oppose them so vehemently.


8 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha.

Dark Archive

Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:
Ignoring for a moment the PotUS/VPotUS ticket, maybe this tweet from Sanders will motivate some reluctants to vote for their Dem Senate candidate.

Having a self proclaimed socialist as head of the budget committee is extremely disturbing. How many times does socialism have to fail, bringing misery and death to millions each time, before the left gives up on it? Isn't the definition of insanity trying the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result?


8 people marked this as a favorite.
Cory Stafford 29 wrote:
How many times does socialism have to fail, bringing misery and death to millions each time, before the left gives up on it?

Once would be nice. The Scandiavian countries do quite well out of it -- their standard of living is better than ours.

Of course, if you don't know the difference between "socialism" and "communism," you might be confused. But in that case, I would hope you'd have the good grace not to post about things you don't understand.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, Pawns, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Cory Stafford 29 wrote:
How many times does socialism have to fail, bringing misery and death to millions each time, before the left gives up on it?

You mean like Norway and Denmark and Sweden?


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Cory Stafford 29 wrote:
Rednal wrote:

That's definitely one of the subjects that's harder for people to agree on. Quite a few people I know really do believe that abortion is effectively murder - and while the adoption system isn't perfect, it would be far better than killing someone because you don't want to raise them. (Of course, it's different if the pregnancy puts the mother's life in danger.)

So... that's not something I expect the pro-life side to concede very easily. Regardless of what someone thinks about the subject, I don't think it's wrong to say that it's fairly divisive.

In other news, Trump is pushing hard on his Election Fraud angle, despite the evidence suggesting that it pretty much doesn't happen on any statistically relevant scale. Of course, his campaign's been ignoring reality for months, so... *Shrugs*

Check out project veritas which undercovers and documents corruption of the left including voter fraud. Unfortunately, it happens, and it is almost universally a Democrat thing. There are votes being cast for dead people and for people that don't vote. Overseas absentee ballots from military personnel are often "lost" or don't arrive by the deadline to be counted. Illegals not only vote on their own, but are bused into battleground districts by the DNC to vote. A DNC staffer in New York is on record on cmaera talking about bussing illegals around to different districts to vote. Of course, this can all be pretty much stopped with voter id laws, which is why the Democrats oppose them so vehemently.

Just so we all know what we're talking about here, Project Veritas is James O'Keefe's latest project and should be taken with all the credibility that implies.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

I'll reiterate.

Hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha hahahahaha.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

O'Keefe + Veritas

Orwellian newspeak is alive and well.


And in other news, Melania Trump says that Donald was 'egged on' to say the things he did. ...Even if I believed that, which I don't, that's not much of a defense. You're saying he can be easily convinced to talk about committing crimes. That's not a good attribute for a President.

She also questioned if they investigated the backgrounds of the accusers. (They did. News organizations went and talked to their families, friends, even ex-dating partners about whether they'd said anything at the time, and quite a few said they had, albeit not publicly.)


I was egged on by the rogue once in my third edition D&D game when I played a barbarian. It didn't end well for me, but the rogue was happy to not worry about traps.


9 people marked this as a favorite.
Cory Stafford 29 wrote:


Check out project veritas which undercovers and documents corruption of the left including voter fraud. Unfortunately, it happens, and it is almost universally a Democrat thing.

No, it is not.

You do not get a pass on having access to the sum total of all human knowledge at your finger tips and still believe anything this far from reality.

WHY on earth would voter fraud only be a democratic thing?
What evidence is there that its only a democratic thing?

Quote:
There are votes being cast for dead people and for people that don't vote. Overseas absentee ballots from military personnel are often "lost" or don't arrive by the deadline to be counted. Illegals not only vote on their own, but are bused into battleground districts by the DNC to vote.

Voter fraud exists and is a problem

in person voter fraud is very rare and not a problem. 31 claims out of billions cast

Those. Are. not. the. same thing.
Voter ID laws, at best, target in person voting fraud. ALMOST ALL voter fraud is done by mail.

Take a look at the requirements to vote by mail

Quote:
A DNC staffer in New York is on record on cmaera talking about bussing illegals around to different districts to vote.

You should be able to link the video then.

The republicans are projecting because They've been caught on video admiting that the ID laws were there to give them an advantage

Quote:
Of course, this can all be pretty much stopped with voter id laws, which is why the Democrats oppose them so vehemently.

No.

The laws are vehemently opposed by anyone that genuinely respects democracy because they are a blatant attempt for government to decide who their voters are rather than voters deciding who their government is. The laws were written to allow ID that was disproportionately used by the republican core constituency (ie, old white people) and not allow ID disproportionately possessed by democratic groups (minorities and students) without regard for the quality of the ID.

A fishing liscense would let you vote, but a student ID with your picture would not.

The odds that the republicans accidentally picked 30 forms of ID that favor their constituents but excluded their opponents is 1 in a number legally required to be narrated by carl sagan.

Republicans as the court that struck down the laws put it, used surgical precision to pick the kinds of id that their followers were likely to use. Linky, with the full decicion available on pdf

Denying that this was an attempt at election rigging requires a level of banality bordering on parody.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Thomas Seitz wrote:
I was egged on by the rogue once in my third edition D&D game when I played a barbarian. It didn't end well for me, but the rogue was happy to not worry about traps.

I egged a house, once.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm going to vote for Hillary Clinton because she is a modern centrist Democrat in the style of her husband and the current president, both of whom did (imo) an excellent job.

I don't care about her personality. Is she arrogant? Does she lie? Kinda, I guess, but not enough for me to care. What I *do* care about is what kind of people she would appoint to federal agencies, what sort of people she'd nominate to the Supreme Court, what laws she would sign and what laws she would veto. Otherwise known as how she would do her actual job. I'm not picking someone to drink beer with, I'm picking an executive to run a vast, complex, and important organization. I have every reason to think that, on the things I care about, she would make the same sorts of decisions as Obama or Bill Clinton, decisions I basically support.

That said, if you prefer Jill Stein or Bernie Sanders or anyone else take a look at your state. I live in Oregon, which Nate Silver estimates has an almost 97% chance of going to Clinton. If you live in Oregon too, voting for a hard left candidate has basically no chance of empowering Trump. What it *does* have a chance to do is signal to the Democratic party that if they want your vote next time they need to run a more left wing candidate. Low voter turnout can send the same message. That's a totally rational and sensible way to behave if Clinton is unacceptably right wing for you, or even if she is more or less acceptable but you want to poke the DNC leftwards.

If you live in a competitive state you're going to have to face a harder choice. Nudging the party to the left is all well and good, but if you (or more accurately you and other voters like you) split the vote and Trump wins your state then you've shot yourself and others in the feet. Maybe that's worth it to you, maybe it's not, but there is no use pretending that voting for an alternate candidate does have consequences, potentially good, potentially bad.


Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Quark Blast wrote:
CrystalSeas wrote:
Quark Blast wrote:


I will be voting for Bernie. Not interested in being all afraid and/or righteous and voting for one of the likely (virtually certain) winners. So, obviously I'm not comfortable with either Trump or Clinton.
What I find interesting is that your behavior is indistinguishable from that of a person who IS comfortable with either Trump or Clinton.
How so?
Because you're pretty much advocating for the same result. Your write-in vote, won't even BE READ, unless your state comes in at a very close tie.

Worse, since Sanders hasn't filled out paperwork to be a write-in candidate in any state, writing him in accomplishes nothing at all, not even as a protest vote. Such a vote won't be counted; it's the same as not voting for PotUS at all. If you want to make a protest vote (or vote to help a third-party hit the percentage needed to receive Federal funding & be in debates), vote for Stein... or Johnson or McMullen or one of the other write-ins registered in your state.

Quark Blast: I'd personally much rather you vote for Clinton to stop Trump, but if you're going to vote for someone else, at least pick a choice that will be counted.

Ok, so I don't vouch for any of this, but I was bopping about on Facebook reading about various communist things and watching videos of kittens raised by huskies and such*, and I run across a conversation between some Paizonian that I friended but don't know who they are and Crimson Jester. It was about this article:

Apparently Bernie IS registered as a write-in in nearly all states

I had heard from some Green Party types that the whole "Write-In Bernie" campaign was a Machiavellian ploy by the Hillbots to siphon votes from Dr. Stein (irony, huh?), so I read through the comments and find the same accusation there. I also find a comment by somebody claiming to be friends with the author and the two of them disseminated the article honestly, but incorrectly. I don't know (or care), but then I was led to another article:

The Write-In Vote - What you NEED To Know!

Again, I don't vouch for any of this, but if the second article is to be belived, you can write-in Bernie and not have your vote tossed in: Alabama, Iowa, New Hampshire (Live free or die!!!), New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Wisconsin. Parenthetically, I wonder if that's why Vermin Supreme (a Massachusetts resident, I believe) spends so much time campaigning in New Hampshire.

I, personally, don't care Citizen Blast who you vote for or if you vote at all, but I thought of you while looking at the articles, so I thought I'd share.

---
*I remember, not too long ago, before I joined Facebook, I used to read more books.


Ring,

My state is going for Trump. I dunno what to do about that... :p

Also Captain, I thought you egged a ship.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

My friends egged a minivan but I was making out with my girlfriend (and future wife) in the backseat.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Nice to know. Also TMI.


Thomas Seitz wrote:

Ring,

My state is going for Trump. I dunno what to do about that... :p

Move


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Thomas Seitz wrote:
Also TMI.

I disagree.


Thomas Seitz wrote:

Ring,

My state is going for Trump. I dunno what to do about that... :p

Weep at the folly of your fellow citizens? Drink? I'd suggest voting for Clinton on the theory that the larger the mainstream Democratic voting block is the more likely it is that the DNC will decide your state might be competitive in future and start spending more serious money there to make that happen.

Unless you live in West Virginia, then just write in "lizard people" and drink.


Ring_of_Gyges wrote:
Unless you live in West Virginia, then just write in "lizard people" and drink.

No fair! You guessed right! :p

Hatti,

I would but I live rent free in a house I didn't have to pay for, with food I don't have to pay for, and utilities I don't pay for. So unless you know a place like that, I'm kind of stuck here.

Don Doodle,

You may do that but my brain disagrees more with that image.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ring_of_Gyges wrote:


Unless you live in West Virginia, then just write in "lizard people" and drink.

That would be like identifying Trump as "the orange one" or hillary as "the female"

His name is Hisskanagths , and he needs your vote to make america reptilian again.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm pretty sure some of my southern part of the state brethren identify Hillary as a "Coal killing b*&&$ with billions" and Trump as "The guy that will get us our jobs!"


Thomas Seitz wrote:
Ring_of_Gyges wrote:
Unless you live in West Virginia, then just write in "lizard people" and drink.

No fair! You guessed right! :p

Hatti,

I would but I live rent free in a house I didn't have to pay for, with food I don't have to pay for, and utilities I don't pay for. So unless you know a place like that, I'm kind of stuck here.

Don Doodle,

You may do that but my brain disagrees more with that image.

I will have you know we're both very attractive, with my wife compared favorably to a Barbie doll, and myself to Brad Pitt from Legends of the Fall, Eddie Vedder, Weird Al Yankovic, Antonio Banderas, or Jesus Christ Superstar. :-)


The assassination threats for Hilary are really depressing. Our first black president had to have a large security detail because of this and now the (most likely) first female president is going to have to have bolstered security as well. Why can't my white male brethren let someone else steer the ship for once?


Thomas Seitz wrote:
I'm pretty sure some of my southern part of the state brethren identify Hillary as a "Coal killing b~#*! with billions" and Trump as "The guy that will get us our jobs!"

That looks hard to fit on the ballot...

THIS is where those jobs went

Its not like we've stopped producing coal


Spastic Puma wrote:
The assassination threats for Hilary are really depressing. Our first black president had to have a large security detail because of this and now the (most likely) first female president is going to have to have bolstered security as well. Why can't my white male brethren let someone else steer the ship for once?

Because only white males are real Americans. So by the Constitution, no one else qualifies.


Spastic Puma wrote:
The assassination threats for Hilary are really depressing. Our first black president had to have a large security detail because of this and now the (most likely) first female president is going to have to have bolstered security as well. Why can't my white male brethren let someone else steer the ship for once?

The assasination threats are mild compared to threathening wholesale civil war.


Hatti,

You don't have to tell me that. I know this. I'm one of the people that understand that Appalchian coal country is dying BECAUSE of outside factors that are both economic and lifestyle changes. Not to mention the ole "coal barons" are convincing mine workers that it's not their fault.

Captain,

Still not good enough.

Silver Crusade

CrystalSeas wrote:
Cory Stafford 29 wrote:
How many times does socialism have to fail, bringing misery and death to millions each time, before the left gives up on it?
You mean like Norway and Denmark and Sweden?

While they certainly provide a greater social net than the US, political scientists don't describe Scandinavian countries as socialist. Think Ikea. Huge difference inthe scale of government control.


Ikea furniture always gives me splinters...


Ajaxis wrote:
CrystalSeas wrote:
Cory Stafford 29 wrote:
How many times does socialism have to fail, bringing misery and death to millions each time, before the left gives up on it?
You mean like Norway and Denmark and Sweden?
While they certainly provide a greater social net than the US, political scientists don't describe Scandinavian countries as socialist. Think Ikea. Huge difference inthe scale of government control.

OTOH, the Scandinavian countries are a lot closer to the model Sanders is looking towards than whatever Cory's talking about.


Actually, I feel Melania's interview deserves more of a look. Here's Slate's take on it.

Quote:
So what did I learn from this evening’s cable news event? Melania has been less ubiquitous than her husband, Ivanka, and the boys over the past 18 months, and thus seems somehow less wretched than they do. But don't be fooled: This same woman, in a Fox News interview airing Tuesday, states that, while reporting on accusations against Trump can only occur in the context of a media conspiracy, it is fair game to look into accusations against Bill Clinton because the Clintons “are asking for it” and “started” it. Her husband must be proud.


thejeff wrote:
Ajaxis wrote:
CrystalSeas wrote:
Cory Stafford 29 wrote:
How many times does socialism have to fail, bringing misery and death to millions each time, before the left gives up on it?
You mean like Norway and Denmark and Sweden?
While they certainly provide a greater social net than the US, political scientists don't describe Scandinavian countries as socialist. Think Ikea. Huge difference inthe scale of government control.
OTOH, the Scandinavian countries are a lot closer to the model Sanders is looking towards than whatever Cory's talking about.

They all got pretty honked off at Sanders referring to them as Socialist though.


CBDunkerson wrote:

McCain promises GOP will indefinitely block ANY Clinton SCOTUS nominees

The whole Republican party needs to go. They've become actively opposed to democracy.

Now I may be wrong here but the idea of our democratic system is the majority votes in who they wan to do the job right? so if the president is in office that means ideally that the majority wanted them to do the job. so wouldn't this literally be working against democracy and the wants of the majority of Americans? (I think I put that simply enough)


What Hillary Clinton Privately Told Goldman Sachs

I haven't gotten around to reading them myself, but I ran across this part:

"'We’re in a time in Syria,' she said, 'where they’re not finished killing each other . . . and maybe you just have to wait and watch it.'"

and was reminded of our discussion in the Syria intervention thread on what I dubbed the Luttwalk Thesis.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Vidmaster7 wrote:
Now I may be wrong here but the idea of our democratic system is the majority votes in who they wan to do the job right? so if the president is in office that means ideally that the majority wanted them to do the job. so wouldn't this literally be working against democracy and the wants of the majority of Americans? (I think I put that simply enough)

The democratic process that voted in Obama also voted in the GOP members of Congress to block him at every turn. No one said we were a sensible bunch. Probably Clinton becomes president, who knows if Trump has poisoned the GOP brand enough to give the Democratic party control of Congress? We may get the same stalemate after the election. What does democracy demand then?

If the people of Arizona don't like McCain they can vote him out of office next month, if they don't he's got as much of a democratic claim to be representing the people as anyone else. The US Constitution is basically a big list of ways to create gridlock, if you like that sort of thing you call it 'checks and balances'.

Republicans need to confirm someone to the Supreme Court not because democracy demands it but because having a functioning government is in the national interest. If voters don't punish them for putting the party's interests ahead of the national interest then the voters deserve the dysfunctional government they get.

The optimistic view would be that McCain is bluffing as a negotiating tactic, Congress will confirm *someone*, they just hope that by threatening obstruction they'll get someone more in line with their preferences. I quite understand if one is reluctant to be optimistic about the GOP's ability to get its act together...

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Ajaxis wrote:
CrystalSeas wrote:
Cory Stafford 29 wrote:
How many times does socialism have to fail, bringing misery and death to millions each time, before the left gives up on it?
You mean like Norway and Denmark and Sweden?
While they certainly provide a greater social net than the US, political scientists don't describe Scandinavian countries as socialist. Think Ikea. Huge difference inthe scale of government control.

What about France then ?


Pan wrote:
GreyWolfLord wrote:
Snowblind wrote:

Speaking of the wall...

Paraphrasing and taking liberties here (a lot of liberties)...

Trump: Its going to cost 4 billion...they say 10, but I know how to build walls, and if you are smart...4 billion...4 to 6 billion... 6 billion...maybe 8 billion...'bout 10 billion...10 to 12 billion.

Expert testimony and federal data: If you use the lowest figure, which is a 35 foot high wall, construction will cost *meticulous details*, adding up to 25 billion. Maintenance for 7 years will double that, and this isn't even including getting the property to build this wall on in the first place.

Far more effective than walls are towers and machine gun nests. Even North Korea doesn't have a specific Wall it's entire border. It has a fence, a mine field, and lots of people with guns.

Probably be far more effective simply to put towers with machine gun nexts every mile to two miles. Add in a minefield and you'd have illegals going the same way they do on the Korean border. It probably would cut down a LOT more than a wall would.

Of course, you'd have to live with the thousands of deaths you caused (especially for the first one or two years) as you'd probably kill a lot of people.

The question would be how many would be Americans simply crossing over the Mexico/US border to other way as well?

Other thoughts, the most memorable wall along the border is the One China built...it's pretty well known. How well did that do to stopping invasions?

Also, if the US built a wall, would it be visible from Space. I think it would be longer then the Great Wall of China...though I'm not positive on that aspect.

Are you really advocating policing the border with lethal force? At this point I cant tell if you are serious or not anymore.

No, I'm not advocating it. I'm pointing out that building a wall is not as effective as other means that other nations utilize to keep people away from their borders. If a nation is TRULY serious about keeping people from their borders, a wall is perhaps not only a bad choice for economic reasons, but also bad for the simple purpose it is built for.

I was pointing out that even nations which have a very strong anti-immigrantion (incoming out outgoing) policy, don't build walls per se, but have far more stringent methods which are FAR more effective than a very expensive wall.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
Ring_of_Gyges wrote:


Unless you live in West Virginia, then just write in "lizard people" and drink.

That would be like identifying Trump as "the orange one" or hillary as "the female"

His name is Hisskanagths , and he needs your vote to make america reptilian again.

I'm sorry, but Mr. Hisskanagths definitively lost in the primary to Trump. He even endorsed Trump and started phonebanking in support. If Hisskanagths wants to run as a write-in, he needs to at the minimum acquire a different HooMahn® LifeSuit™.

HooMahn® and LifeSuit™ are properties of the BotanyBay 500 Company, and available at fine locations throughout the Orion Arm of the Milky Way.


thejeff wrote:
Ajaxis wrote:
CrystalSeas wrote:
Cory Stafford 29 wrote:
How many times does socialism have to fail, bringing misery and death to millions each time, before the left gives up on it?
You mean like Norway and Denmark and Sweden?
While they certainly provide a greater social net than the US, political scientists don't describe Scandinavian countries as socialist. Think Ikea. Huge difference inthe scale of government control.
OTOH, the Scandinavian countries are a lot closer to the model Sanders is looking towards than whatever Cory's talking about.

I believe Sweden is the model he used for many of his examples of how things could be done effectively in the US.

He was totally honest about it as well. He said it would be an ideal...but the chances of him getting something like that passed through the US congress was similar to not a chance in hell.


Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

What Hillary Clinton Privately Told Goldman Sachs

I haven't gotten around to reading them myself, but I ran across this part:

"'We’re in a time in Syria,' she said, 'where they’re not finished killing each other . . . and maybe you just have to wait and watch it.'"

and was reminded of our discussion in the Syria intervention thread on what I dubbed the Luttwalk Thesis.

IF she said that, she's probably right.

I may not support her, and will NOT vote for her (or Trump) but she is probably one of the smartest people currently involved with the US government in any fashion (not just smartest woman, smartest of anyone, male or female).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ring_of_Gyges wrote:
Vidmaster7 wrote:
Now I may be wrong here but the idea of our democratic system is the majority votes in who they wan to do the job right? so if the president is in office that means ideally that the majority wanted them to do the job. so wouldn't this literally be working against democracy and the wants of the majority of Americans? (I think I put that simply enough)

The democratic process that voted in Obama also voted in the GOP members of Congress to block him at every turn. No one said we were a sensible bunch. Probably Clinton becomes president, who knows if Trump has poisoned the GOP brand enough to give the Democratic party control of Congress? We may get the same stalemate after the election. What does democracy demand then?

If the people of Arizona don't like McCain they can vote him out of office next month, if they don't he's got as much of a democratic claim to be representing the people as anyone else. The US Constitution is basically a big list of ways to create gridlock, if you like that sort of thing you call it 'checks and balances'.

Republicans need to confirm someone to the Supreme Court not because democracy demands it but because having a functioning government is in the national interest. If voters don't punish them for putting the party's interests ahead of the national interest then the voters deserve the dysfunctional government they get.

The optimistic view would be that McCain is bluffing as a negotiating tactic, Congress will confirm *someone*, they just hope that by threatening obstruction they'll get someone more in line with their preferences. I quite understand if one is reluctant to be optimistic about the GOP's ability to get its act together...

If he's bluffing as a negotiating tactic, he's remarkably bad at it. Normally you give some hint as to what you actually want. "We'll shoot the hostage, unless ..." rather than "We're going to shoot the hostage." If he'd said something about "The kind of extreme left candidates we expect Clinton to pick", that might work.

Now, it's quite possible it's just a campaign promise with no real meaning or intent beyond firing up the base.

5,151 to 5,200 of 7,079 << first < prev | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / 2016 US Election All Messageboards