2016 Election Thread

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Active NBA players or all players retired and active?

We can break them into two groups but at this point, I feel every option is on the table.

 

#QuestForTruth

[TheLeviathan]

 

You don't seem very confused.  By the way I better edit my stat.  More then 99.8% of white people don't support school shootings.  Enough people have questioned it that it is clear that many think a heck of a lot of white people support school shootings, I find that disgusting but oh well.

 

If that was your point, it may be one of the worst possible ways I could imagine making it.

 

What's your measure for "don't support"?  If it's "stopping them from happening", we seem to be at a stalemate with the Arab world.  Neither one of us are doing a whole hell of a lot on either front.  I don't know what the perception in the Arab world is of suicide bombings, do you have some actual stats on that and not something you just pulled out of thin air?

 

It sort of helps your argument if you at least present the effort to be accurate and not just making stuff up.

[PseudoSABR]

 

Understood, so you happen to be in complete agreement with my "racist" statement?  You were implying that you and others probably were disagreeing with it.  Let the record show that despite a lot of people really really wishing they were disagreeing with me NOBODY has disagreed with me, and in this case it appears you are offended that I suggested that you disagreed with me.  Please don't call me racist, please don't imply I am racist it's disgusting.

You've had plenty of opportunity to clarify your comment as not limited to the White race, yet you haven't. (That's all you had to do.  The implication that non-whites are not against school shootings has been disagreed with time and again in this thread).  Honestly, I don't care whether you are or are not racist; I don't care whether your beliefs rise to the standard of racism.  I'll continue to assert that supporting policy that insulates white privilege has the same result.  Republicans may evade the racist label, but hardly makes their policies any better for the poor and non-white.

 

My point is NOT to call you racist.  My point is stop complaining when what you say invites that implication.  If you (or anyone) think Syrian refugees are so dangerous that we should condemn them to homelessness or pass the burden to some other country or state, expect some backlash. 

[mikecgrimes]

 

What is your source for this stat? I, personally, would like to read which article or study it comes from to get a better understanding how/why it was formulated and how it will be used. And, from another personal standpoint, I think it's horrible that it isn't 100%. (But I guess that would account for the shooters themselves, who obviously are in favor of school shootings.) And, in such an event, a school shooting, I would think the stat should read that 100% of all humanity (not just whites) should not only not support it, but be absolutely horrified at school shootings. So, I'm curious from which study/article this came from, and what was the purpose of such of study. If it so clearly stated that such a percentage of white people are against school shootings, what is the percentage of other races and ethnic groups who also do not support school shootings? And why the need for the author or researcher to separate this into race/ethnicity? I just find this curious, is all, and want to know more about the origins of this stat.

 

No study, just disagreement when I said more then 99.99%  Yeah of course it's a made up stat, but unless you think it's under 99.8% who cares.

[mikecgrimes]

 

You've had plenty of opportunity to clarify your comment as not limited to the White race, yet you haven't. (That's all you had to do.  The implication that non-whites are not against school shootings has been disagreed with time and again in this thread).  Honestly, I don't care whether you are or are not racist; I don't care whether your beliefs rise to the standard of racism.  I'll continue to assert that supporting policy that insulates white privilege has the same result.  Republicans may evade the racist label, but hardly makes their policies any better for the poor and non-white.

 

My point is NOT to call you racist.  My point is stop complaining when what you say invites that implication.  If you (or anyone) think Syrian refugees are so dangerous that we should condemn them to homelessness or pass the burden to some other country or state, expect some backlash. 

 

I understand you might have missed the post I originally replyed to, but in that post it was the white race that was singled out.  It was more of a matter of fact response to an odd post simply stating that we don't support school shootings.  Maybe the confusion is that it's such common sense it shouldn't require being pointed out.  Of course the fact that everyone is questioning me rather then the original poster tells me a lot.

[Craig Arko]

No study, just disagreement when I said more then 99.99%  Yeah of course it's a made up stat, but unless you think it's under 99.8% who cares.

People who value honesty?

[USAFChief]

 

Although the victims of each are just as dead.

That they are.  As are the victims of drunk drivers.

 

That doesn't mean they are victims of the same thing, nor does it imply the solutions are alike.

 

And it certainly doesn't mean accusations of racism are de facto accurate.

 

 

[DaveW]

Since the Paris attacks, around 245 Americans have been murdered with guns. About two Paris attacks. Every week. All year. Every year.

(35 per day in 2014)

 

It's pretty clear "we" as a whole don't care about gun deaths.

[PseudoSABR]

 

I understand you might have missed the post I originally replyed to, but in that post it was the white race that was singled out.  It was more of a matter of fact response to an odd post simply stating that we don't support school shootings.  Maybe the confusion is that it's such common sense it shouldn't require being pointed out.  Of course the fact that everyone is questioning me rather then the original poster tells me a lot.

Thanks for acknowledging that it's reasonable for people to read your post in a negative light.   (For my part, I couldn't understand why you're defending the white race as a whole, I thought you might be suggesting something like ala Ben Carson, but here that it would be white people who would be more likely to literally take out a shooter than some other people. Go reread your post (# 788), you just weren't very clear).

 

The post you replied to mentioned that it's white citizens who are doing the school shooting (Dave's post # 785))--not to suggest that the White Race is more likely to commit mass murder, but rather that the Republican fear of Syrians is NOT really based in a rational fear of violence, but in something else.  The point being, if you're not afraid of your heavily armed neighbors (white or not), you have no business being afraid of impoverished refugees.   So the barring of Syrian refugees has a lot more to do with xenophobia (or racism as some might say) than actual security from harm.   

[PseudoSABR]

 

That doesn't mean they are victims of the same thing, nor does it imply the solutions are alike.

It also doesn't mean that the solutions can't be unalike.  I think what really rubs me the wrong way is the notion that people-like-us-never-do-these things. (Not that you're suggesting that.) I think as individuals we too easily divorce ourselves from global problems, and shrug off any shared responsibility in the conditions which beget violence.  

 

I think if we did a lot better job both domestically and abroad of giving a crap about the people on the margins, we might have less seemingly irrational violence.  There's a kind of willful ignorance, in that we refuse to acknowledge the conditions that foster terror far away and allow gun violence to continue to take so many lives right around the corner.  I know not everyone agrees, but I think both result from a social disease. The more the conversation goes towards how crazy these people are, the less we seem to do about what goes to address or curb the phenomenon (of terrorism or gun violence). 

[twinsnorth49]

 

.  There's kind of willful ignorance, in that we refuse to acknowledge the conditions that foster terror far away and allow gun violence to continue to take so many lives right around the corner.  

It's also even more wilfully ignorant that we deny or in most cases refuse to acknowledge,  we're responsible for creating many of those conditions that foster terror.

[PseudoSABR]

 

It's also even more wilfully ignorant that we deny or in most cases refuse to acknowledge,  we're responsible for creating many of those conditions that foster terror.

Amen.

[USAFChief]

My entry into this thread started in response to this post:

 

"The amount of racist bile coming out of the GOP nominations lately (an their supporters) in regards to the Syria refugees makes me seriously ashamed to be an American."

 

I agreed with mike in  objecting to that categorization.  Both in general, and in the specific case of Syrian refugees.

 

It's not helpful to call the GOP "racist."  In fact, it's lazy, hurtful, and ends up preventing constructive discussion.

 

In the specific case of the Syrian refugees, there are legitimate reasons to be concerned, and legitimate reasons to ask "why are we responsible?"

 

There may be good answers to those questions, but asking them is not racist.

 

 

[USAFChief]

 

It's also even more wilfully ignorant that we deny or in most cases refuse to acknowledge,  we're responsible for creating many of those conditions that foster terror.

Are the victims of gun violence in school also responsible for creating many of those conditions?

 

If not, perhaps we can acknowledge that calculated acts of organized terrorism are not like random acts of senseless violence. 

[twinsnorth49]

 

Are the victims of gun violence in school also responsible for creating many of those conditions?

 

If not, perhaps we can acknowledge that calculated acts of organized terrorism are not like random acts of senseless violence. 

I think in many cases the conditions which lead people to senseless acts of violence and terrorism can have similarities. I think both can stem from a sense of isolation and desperation. The roots are similar, not the end goal necessarily.

 

Are the victims themselves directly responsible? Are you and I directly responsible? I wouldn't go that far, but we are part of the broader system that doesn't seem to be doing enough to enact change in these type of things. It's hard to know how to do that though, I think conversations like these play a part, and who we choose as our elected officials and the mandate we provide them.

[PseudoSABR]

 

My entry into this thread started in response to this post:

 

"The amount of racist bile coming out of the GOP nominations lately (an their supporters) in regards to the Syria refugees makes me seriously ashamed to be an American."

 

I agreed with mike in  objecting to that categorization.  Both in general, and in the specific case of Syrian refugees.

 

It's not helpful to call the GOP "racist."  In fact, it's lazy, hurtful, and ends up preventing constructive discussion.

 

In the specific case of the Syrian refugees, there are legitimate reasons to be concerned, and legitimate reasons to ask "why are we responsible?"

 

There may be good answers to those questions, but asking them is not racist.

Of course asking legitimate questions doesn't make anyone a racist.   But that's not my reading of the debate.

 

Maybe I'm wrong but the GOP doesn't seem legitimately open to dialogue on the issue.  They don't seem to be asking questions, and if they are, they seem rhetorical.   

 

If we choose to exclude Syrians for what we believe to be good reasons and allow others in no better a position than us to take in the refugees, I think we need to live with that choice.  That we did choose ourselves over another group, and let some group like us bear the burden.  Call it whatever you will.  But we have a right to be ashamed by our society when it chooses that path. 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

Are the victims of gun violence in school also responsible for creating many of those conditions?

 

If not, perhaps we can acknowledge that calculated acts of organized terrorism are not like random acts of senseless violence.

 

On the contrary, school/church/theater shootings are quite calculated also.

 

 

EDIT: though I think you were referring to the everyday gun violence Dave was talking about. Sorry about that, Chief.

I think I need to step out of this conversation for my sanity.

[DaveW]

 

My entry into this thread started in response to this post:

 

"The amount of racist bile coming out of the GOP nominations lately (an their supporters) in regards to the Syria refugees makes me seriously ashamed to be an American."

 

I agreed with mike in  objecting to that categorization.  Both in general, and in the specific case of Syrian refugees.

 

It's not helpful to call the GOP "racist."  In fact, it's lazy, hurtful, and ends up preventing constructive discussion.

 

In the specific case of the Syrian refugees, there are legitimate reasons to be concerned, and legitimate reasons to ask "why are we responsible?"

 

There may be good answers to those questions, but asking them is not racist.

 

But the GOP leaders are being racist, Trump is pushing the "every Muslim needs to register and be in a database" angle, You know who else did that? The ****ING NAZIS. Most times comparing anything to Hitler/nazi germany is out of line, but in this case, it's extremely relevant.

 

Rubio is basically saying that anywhere Muslims congregate should be shut down (Mosques etc) I'm not making any of this up, these are all things said by them, and endorsed by a large number of their followers.

 

They (Trump, Rubio, Christie) all of those governors are being racist, ugly, bigots. That is the reality, I'm sorry if that by calling them what they are is "hurtful" I find their acts, and their followers to be much more hurtful. We should be ashamed (I already am) that not only are some of our "leaders" spouting this bile, but that a good chunk of their followers are agreeing.

 

Disgusting.
 

As far as how/why are we responsible? Uh, did you forget the disaster that was the Iraq war? Do you really think that had nothing to do with the destabilization of the entire region and thus the rise of ISIS?

Lastly I will repeat again: Since 9/11, 750,000 refugees have come to the USA, 0 of them have carried out a terrorist act. Hell, every single person involved in the Paris attacks had a EU Passport!

[DaveW]

 

 

 

 

Maybe I'm wrong but the GOP doesn't seem legitimately open to dialogue on the issue.  They don't seem to be asking questions, and if they are, they seem rhetorical.   

 

 

They aren't asking any questions whatsoever! They are cashing in on people's fears and insecurities by using their platform to more or less **** all over an entire segment of the population. It's disgusting.

[Craig Arko]

I'm really only willing to buy into one race. For the heck of it, let's call it 'human.'

[DaveW]

 

Are the victims of gun violence in school also responsible for creating many of those conditions?

 

If not, perhaps we can acknowledge that calculated acts of organized terrorism are not like random acts of senseless violence. 

Victims? No.

Society? Absolutely we are responsible for creating many of those conditions.

[mikecgrimes]

 

People who value honesty?

 

So by using a # I'm a liar?  The # would have to be wrong for it to be a lie or not honest.  I guess calling me racist didn't work so we're on to the next cheap shot.  If you disagree with that number say something. 

[Brock Beauchamp]

Everyone has had their say and the conversation has descended into bickering.

 

Let's move on from the "99.99% white people" conversation, please. It's going nowhere.

[Squirrel]

 

Everyone has had their say and the conversation has descended into bickering.

Let's move on from the "99.99% white people" conversation, please. It's going nowhere.

 

This moderator agrees with that owner.

[Shane Wahl]

Can I ask you this, and it seemingly applies to, like, all of you (and me):

 

Is it even remotely sane for intelligent people to have not formed and developed a robust 3rd and 4th party that serves to actually have a viable, human-based debate of actual relevant issues? I would think these would be akin to the Green party (I still stand by my Nader-LaDuke activities in 2000 as a 19-year-old . . . ) and the Libertarian party, but clearly not them specifically.

 

If these alternatives are not actually available for whatever reason, then isn't the rational alternative to our current system the smashing of that system?

 

[Shane Wahl]

(you can't vote out the Dems and Reps, so forget that possibility)

[Mike Sixel]

 

Can I ask you this, and it seemingly applies to, like, all of you (and me):

 

Is it even remotely sane for intelligent people to have not formed and developed a robust 3rd and 4th party that serves to actually have a viable, human-based debate of actual relevant issues? I would think these would be akin to the Green party (I still stand by my Nader-LaDuke activities in 2000 as a 19-year-old . . . ) and the Libertarian party, but clearly not them specifically.

 

If these alternatives are not actually available for whatever reason, then isn't the rational alternative to our current system the smashing of that system?

 

yes, I think moving to a parliamentary system would re-introduce compromise to the system.....

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

yes, I think moving to a parliamentary system would re-introduce compromise to the system.....

Ten years ago, I thought this idea absurd.

 

Now, it may be the only fix for the current system, which is so broken I don't see a way to fix it (but let's not forget that this system is broken in part because voters have turned more polarized and fed this insanity).

 

The system isn't entirely to blame for our problems. A large part of the problem, maybe even the majority of the problem, is because voters continue to radicalize by creating their own echo chambers and burying their heads in the sand.

 

If you dogmatically support either the right or the left, you're contributing to the problem by electing more and more extremist politicians. The right has gone more extreme than the left but not everything can be blamed on the GOP and Tea Party. Much of the left has abandoned the center as well, just not to the extreme (or in the same numbers) as the right.

[Badsmerf]

The 2 parties would never allow that to happen. They have to much money and too much influence. They have polarized to divide the country into 2fairly even groups.

 

It's going to take a political revolution to change it. I'm only 30 so a little too young to be the one to do it. But I plan on trying at some point in my life.

[diehardtwinsfan]

 

Can I ask you this, and it seemingly applies to, like, all of you (and me):

 

Is it even remotely sane for intelligent people to have not formed and developed a robust 3rd and 4th party that serves to actually have a viable, human-based debate of actual relevant issues? I would think these would be akin to the Green party (I still stand by my Nader-LaDuke activities in 2000 as a 19-year-old . . . ) and the Libertarian party, but clearly not them specifically.

 

If these alternatives are not actually available for whatever reason, then isn't the rational alternative to our current system the smashing of that system?

 

Come to the dark side my friend.