2016 Election Thread

[TheLeviathan]

 

In fairness......I understand this vote. I think it is probably the wrong choice, but I understand it.

 

it would be like the US NE finally seceding, and allowing the South to try to actually pay for itself.....

 

Exactly, it's not dissimilar to our politics, just playing out between countries rather than individuals.  I like their idea of helping out countries that need it (wealth redistribution) but at some point the ones asking for help need to get their stuff together too.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Exactly, it's not dissimilar to our politics, just playing out between countries rather than individuals.  I like their idea of helping out countries that need it (wealth redistribution) but at some point the ones asking for help need to get their stuff together too.

It's a fair point to make but man, the EU could crumble if things play out badly in the next few years. If a large economy stumbles, what does Germany do? They can't take on the burden of, say, Italy.

 

And if Germany is forced to reevaluate their status, the whole thing falls to pieces. And the global economy crashes at that point. Any (further) destabilization of the EU will have dire consequences to the world.

[TheLeviathan]

 

It's a fair point to make but man, the EU could crumble if things play out badly in the next few years. If a large economy stumbles, what does Germany do? They can't take on the burden of, say, Italy.

 

And if Germany is forced to reevaluate their status, the whole thing falls to pieces. And the global economy crashes at that point. Any (further) destabilization of the EU will have dire consequences to the world.

 

You're right, maybe we should all band together, march to Italy and Greece, and slap some damn sense into them.  

 

Germany has been the good guy in Europe for a long time now and they are getting very, very little from their efforts.  Hell, they get mostly scorn, which is crazy to me.

 

It might be an interesting way for both the right and the left in this country to see how their positions on socialism/wealth redistribution really works.  There are a lot of assumptions at play that, so far, the EU is proving to be folly.

[Badsmerf]

Levi I'm interested in what you believe is proving to be folly. I haven't taken a huge interest in all foreign politics and policy. I've an idea on certain matters, but haven't studied it at any depth. My new job has changed that a lot. It's a much more global perspective. Decisions over seas affect new a lot more now so I've been leasing more about the political and economic structures abroad.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Levi I'm interested in what you believe is proving to be folly. I haven't taken a huge interest in all foreign politics and policy. I've an idea on certain matters, but haven't studied it at any depth. My new job has changed that a lot. It's a much more global perspective. Decisions over seas affect new a lot more now so I've been leasing more about the political and economic structures abroad.

 

Two primarily come to mind: 1) That those sharing their wealth will be appreciated and recognized and 2) That those receiving the shared wealth will use it to improve their condition.  

 

Germany and others have been actively doing everything in their power, largely with little to gain, to boost up other nations and have continued to be portrayed as bad guys.  Greece, in particular, was harsh despite them pouring billions into their economy.  

 

On the second point, Greece was given enormous amounts of money and the response was basically to do nothing.  The same problems persisted and no effort was made to change the ongoing poor decisions.  They just took the money and doubled down on the mistakes that were keeping them in trouble.

 

It's not a given that giving money to those that need it results in a better world.  In fact, it appears to be MUCH more complicated than that.

[Squirrel]

Just read this. I think it's a very thorough and thoughtful and well-researched article. Love it when it gets to the part where the author says 'You're probably eyerolling now.' I hope y'all don't stop reading there. And there's even a poutine joke in there for North!

[twinsnorth49]

Just read this. I think it's a very thorough and thoughtful and well-researched article. Love it when it gets to the part where the author says 'You're probably eyerolling now.' I hope y'all don't stop reading there. And there's even a poutine joke in there for North!

Yowsers! $825 grand!! That's a lot of poutine!!

[PseudoSABR]

 

Just read this. I think it's a very thorough and thoughtful and well-researched article. Love it when it gets to the part where the author says 'You're probably eyerolling now.' I hope y'all don't stop reading there. And there's even a poutine joke in there for North!

I know we've talked about this before, but, IMO, the resilience of the Hillary-as-liar narrative thread is buttressed by misogyny, or at the very least a gendered double-standard.  Largely baseless accusations stick to Hillary far longer than they do for any male politician in recent memory.  Even her husband, Bill, a demonstrable fibber, is hardly equated with lying as much as she has been.   

[TheLeviathan]

When you read the headline, do you even need to be told who and why it was perpetrated?

 

No?  Yeah, me either.....

[PseudoSABR]

Interesting article I read today in context of earlier conversations: I worked in the CIA under Bush. Obama is right to not say "radical Islam."

[TheLeviathan]

 

Interesting article I read today in context of earlier conversations: I worked in the CIA under Bush. Obama is right to not say "radical Islam."

 

I agree, you won't hear me criticize Obama for it.  I understand his motives.  I find very little to gain from the strategy itself, or abandoning it.  

 

What I will sharply criticize is everyone else who isn't the President (or another influential senior official) who can't accept reality.  The truly violent are a fringe, but they are just a reflection/byproduct of a deeper need for the religion to reform itself.  That is an issue.

 

The solution isn't banning the religion or it's peaceful people from our shores.  Nor is the solution to be found in bending over backwards to make a terrorist a confused macho homophobe rather than an Islamic terrorist.  Both are preposterous responses to this ongoing problem.  And more people died again today as a result of it.

 

We need to end the scourge and help the religion heal peacefully.

[ashbury]

The solution isn't banning the religion or it's peaceful people from our shores.  Nor is the solution to be found in bending over backwards to make a terrorist a confused macho homophobe rather than an Islamic terrorist.  Both are preposterous responses to this ongoing problem.  And more people died again today as a result of it.

I'm not clear which antecedent you intended for that last 'it'. You're not saying people die because we use one term instead of another?

 

Yes, more people died today because of this ongoing problem. That is not relevant to the point you're making about what to call the problem. The article cited above makes clear why the terminology matters; it's because of the people who aren't the problem.

[Badsmerf]

You're reading too far into the "it" ashbury. He is referring to the continuation of the radical ideology leading to death.

 

I absolutely hate the ignorance oozing from the gop about using that term. Obama is listening to his military advisors. Why isn't that clear? Bush did the same! It's not productive, it alienates a religion, it creates a barrier with our country and culture to the rest of the Muslim world, and is 100% avoidable. It's a non issue to any reasonable American.

 

Making an issue out of this is a problem. The people doing it needed to be castrated by the rest of the media. It would be like calling north Korea a radical Asian state, or Venezuela a volatile American country. Islam is an identity for a lot of people in the world, much the same as our country is ours.

[formerly33]

 

Interesting article I read today in context of earlier conversations: I worked in the CIA under Bush. Obama is right to not say "radical Islam."

To add to this, why didn't Trump call for Obama's resignation when he failed to issue a formal statement calling the Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood shooting "radical Christian terrorism"?

[TheLeviathan]

 

Making an issue out of this is a problem. The people doing it needed to be castrated by the rest of the media. It would be like calling north Korea a radical Asian state, or Venezuela a volatile American country. Islam is an identity for a lot of people in the world, much the same as our country is ours.

 

For the record, you're right about what I was referring to with "it" - violent, radical Islam.

 

At the end of the day, I'm not sure Obama's or anyone else's words on this matter much.  That he does or doesn't say it doesn't make or break this issue for me.  Nor do I believe it does for anyone in the Islamic faith.  So, for me, I don't care if he doesn't say it.  I also don't buy that not saying it makes a difference.  It's the more general belief about the causes that I care about.  

 

On that issue, I'm confident Obama recognizes that a strain of Islamic faith is at root in this, his actions demonstrate as much.  I'm less confident the political side of the aisle he represents understands the problem as a collective group.  Nor does the GOP, they're ass-backwards as usual.  
 

What disappoints me is the left, where we should be looking to for rationality and progressiveness, we're instead finding nonsense.  And I worry that the GOP is "winning" this issue because they at least appear to accept reality, albeit it a racist, reprehensible twist.  That can't happen, but it is.

[TheLeviathan]

 

To add to this, why didn't Trump call for Obama's resignation when he failed to issue a formal statement calling the Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood shooting "radical Christian terrorism"?

 

That's a pretty bad false equivalency there.  Still, it's accurate and I'd have been ok with it.  It'd just be nice if either side had a shred of credibility on how they label and respond to things.

[PseudoSABR]

 

That's a pretty bad false equivalency there.  Still, it's accurate and I'd have been ok with it.  

Wha? Isn't it one or the other?

[Badsmerf]

You might not think it matters, but if top level military intelligence does... I'm going with them. Its not as simple of a phrase as you make it seem. If it was, Obama and Bush wouldn't have been advised not to use it.

 

Again, we are fighting a faceless enemy that thrives in the lowest weakest of places. It relies on fear, hate, power, and wickedness. We (the West) cannot fight this alone. The people in this region need to stand up for themselves and take responsibility. We can't do that for them. The longer they allow this to fester, the harder it is going to be to eradicate it. Drop all the bombs and deploy all the soldiers you want, it isn't helping. It only gives these people someone to fight, a target, an enemy, propaganda.  

 

Reforming Islam would be a great answer, if it were possible. That can't come from the outside. Look at Christianity. They stopped killing people a long time ago, but the Pope only recently declared Gay people don't deserve to die by public stoning. But, the Christian voices against violence became louder and condemned those seeking war under God.

 

To get back on topic, Clinton is much more capable of address this crises than Trump. She is also putting blame on leaders in the Middle East like Saudi Arabia. I'd really like to see sanctions put on them for their role in all of this. Screw the price of fuel, we'll get over it. There has to be a way to punish them without crippling the global economy. 

[PseudoSABR]

To get back on topic, Clinton is much more capable of address this crises than Trump. She is also putting blame on leaders in the Middle East like Saudi Arabia. I'd really like to see sanctions put on them for their role in all of this. Screw the price of fuel, we'll get over it. There has to be a way to punish them without crippling the global economy. 

So much this.  And we should punish them regardless, as the world-wide economy would be just fine without their oil in the long term, even though the vested-interests would take a huge hit (good).  The world market would, of course, look to other energy sources once the price of oil rose high enough (hence the recent, nonsensical drop of oil prices). I say cease trade with countries that do not punish the funding of terrorism by their citizens (and officials) whatever the costs.  It cannot be the job of American military might to safeguard the investments of so few. 

[DaveW]

Yeah, Hillary calling out the Saudis has been a very welcome (and long overdue) thing. They have been playing puppet master for far too long and have a ton of blood on their hands in these matters.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Wha? Isn't it one or the other?

 

No, it's both.  It's a false equivalency to imply there is some kind of widespread "christian terrorism" happening.  Or that radical, violent Christianity is even a threat or much of a thing at all.  Or, as is often the case, to state it that way to try to level other religions with Islam.

 

We're just weeks removed from a fairly substantial effort to paint the Orlando shooter as being about a macho homophobe and not an Islamic radical.  (or, even on this very thread, to paint reprehensible harassment as an equivalent to a club full of murdered people)  Why even do that?  I'd argue the motivation is a lot like the one to try and wedge "Christian terrorist" into the conversation: to create a false equivalency.

 

So it is both.  The term itself may be literally accurate, but is motivated by a desire to create a false equivalency in meaning.

[TheLeviathan]

 

You might not think it matters, but if top level military intelligence does... I'm going with them. Its not as simple of a phrase as you make it seem. If it was, Obama and Bush wouldn't have been advised not to use it.

 

Again, we are fighting a faceless enemy that thrives in the lowest weakest of places. It relies on fear, hate, power, and wickedness. We (the West) cannot fight this alone. The people in this region need to stand up for themselves and take responsibility. We can't do that for them. The longer they allow this to fester, the harder it is going to be to eradicate it. Drop all the bombs and deploy all the soldiers you want, it isn't helping. It only gives these people someone to fight, a target, an enemy, propaganda.  

 

Reforming Islam would be a great answer, if it were possible. That can't come from the outside. Look at Christianity. They stopped killing people a long time ago, but the Pope only recently declared Gay people don't deserve to die by public stoning. But, the Christian voices against violence became louder and condemned those seeking war under God.

 

To get back on topic, Clinton is much more capable of address this crises than Trump. She is also putting blame on leaders in the Middle East like Saudi Arabia. I'd really like to see sanctions put on them for their role in all of this. Screw the price of fuel, we'll get over it. There has to be a way to punish them without crippling the global economy. 

 

I get the impression the Big Bad America meme is fairly established over there for those that want it.  I'd also suggest whatever words Obama uses probably have far, far less impact than all the reprecussions of drone strikes.  ISIS doesn't need Obama speeches to recruit or spread their message.  Every casualty from a drone strike probably works a helluva lot better.

 

The problem in the Muslim world is that the reformers do need our support.  They are hunted, killed, intimidated, and terrorized before any sort of movement can happen.  I posted the stats earlier about just how significantly backwards the moral priorities are in that part of the world, too.  We're a long way from that reformation and the further away we are, the more cover it gives these groups as well.  

 

I'm glad Clinton is calling out one of the financial backers of the radicalization, but it also speaks to part of the problem.  We need to be doing exactly what Obama is doing (work with the nations in that region), but many of those nations foster their own forms of violent, backwards radicals.  So we're in a constant state of damned if you do, damned if you don't.  And we will be until Islam gets itself fixed.

[Craig Arko]

Entrepreneurism is alive and well.

 

http://www.startribune.com/missouri-gop-governor-candidate-sells-isis-hunting-permits/384916201/

[PseudoSABR]

Five thirty eight/Nate Silver released their General Election forecast today.

[TheLeviathan]

I was just about to post that!  Those guys are pretty damn reliable.

[Badsmerf]

Not surprising. I think Clinton gets 52 percent to trumps 41 and Johnson gets the other 7. And i think she crushes him in electoral votes. The guy just supported water boarding and more.... to cheering i might add. What the hell is wrong with people? It's been shown to be ineffective because captives will say anything they think will make it stop, even false information. There are better strategies.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Not surprising. I think Clinton gets 52 percent to trumps 41 and Johnson gets the other 7. And i think she crushes him in electoral votes. The guy just supported water boarding and more.... to cheering i might add. What the hell is wrong with people? It's been shown to be ineffective because captives will say anything they think will make it stop, even false information. There are better strategies.

 

I still think this election has enough wildcards in it to not get confident.  He's been saying obnoxiously stupid things for months and spending almost no money....and winning.  

[Craig Arko]

Possible shooter on a military base:

 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-andrews-air-force-base-shooter-20160630-story.html

[Mike Sixel]

 

Possible shooter on a military base:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-andrews-air-force-base-shooter-20160630-story.html

 

But I'm told shootings won't happen if we are all armed, or something like that.....I have friends that post FB memes every time there is a shooting in an area with gun control, I doubt I'll see any posts from them today about this....

[Craig Arko]

Since I have never and will never own a gun (okay, maybe a set of 18th century dueling pistols) I fully expect to be assassinated by some radicalized Mennonite some day.