or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Trump is #2 in GOP Field
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Trump is #2 in GOP Field - Page 415

post #6211 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by venividivicibj View Post

we already went over this, with logical reasons, quotes, etc and you never responded.

I did respond, though I'm not sure I was able to keep up with the thread as long as you might have liked. Unfortunately I can't always devote the time to arguing on the internet that it surely deserves.

The observation I was making wasn't whether these voting rules are arguable one way or the other, but whether the exaggerated and nasty way the Democrats frame the issue harms the legitimacy of the democratic process.
post #6212 of 8748
Is it bad if the "damning" pieces of those wall street speeches that I have seen actually make me agree with Hillary more?

I'm sure the Bernie Bros wouldn't be fans, but I saw an article that was like "here are the things that would be huge problems for Hillary...if she weren't running against a total nutjob" and all of the points seemed factually and theoretically correct.

Even that "public vs private persona" question she dodged with Lincoln is something I am good with. Sure, politicians can't come out and say that they are being intentionally non-transparent, but we all know they do it, and I think most people could see why that behavior is actually beneficial. But then again, I'm also not someone who is totally put off by the secrecy surrounding TPP negotiations...
post #6213 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibonius View Post

It's pretty obvious that the DNC preferred Clinton, and no shit, of course they would. The Democratic National Committee wanted the actual Democrat to be President? Astonishing.

But it's not at all obvious that they actually did anything. They discussed some tactics, but I haven't seen where any of it translated into inappropriate activity much less fraud or corruption. Certainly they weren't equally advocating for Sanders, but it's not really obvious that they had any obligation to do that.

You might want to investigate what their own party rules say about this.

As to who the DNC preferred...they're not supposed to have a preference and that would be the point. From Munoz doing fundraising for Hillary during the primaries (why I don't know as she's never had a problem there) to Hillary's lawyer advising the DNC on how to respond to Bernie's charges of non-neutrality, I'm pretty convinced Bernie is correct when he alleged the DNC was not following its own rules.
post #6214 of 8748

Can someone explain what is so bad about Hilary's speeches to Wall St?


Edited by venividivicibj - 10/13/16 at 8:32am
post #6215 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Odd you never seem to notice when I hold the right to task.

My problem is so many Canadians are fucking asshats when it comes to the US and I think they pretty much live in glass houses. General enough?

I think we had this convo before and the idea is quite banal anyway so I don't think you'll be surprised by what I'm about to say. It bears reminding that Anglo-Saxon Canadians have had difficulty defining themselves outside of the label "not-American" so it can lead to a very naive attempt at separating themselves from the specifics (i.e. the manners and manifestation of Anglo-Saxon culture in the USA) of a culture with which they share a general structure (Anglo-Saxon culture itself).
post #6216 of 8748
For example, they pointed to this quote as evidence that she somehow didn't believe that wall street was to blame for the financial crisis and that she would attack them only for political reasons:
Quote:
That was one of the reasons that I started traveling in February of ‘09, so people could, you know, literally yell at me for the United States and our banking system causing this everywhere. Now, that’s an oversimplification we know, but it was the conventional wisdom. And I think that there’s a lot that could have been avoided in terms of both misunderstanding and really politicizing what happened with greater transparency, with greater openness on all sides, you know, what happened, how did it happen, how do we prevent it from happening? You guys help us figure it out and let’s make sure that we do it right this time.

There's nothing in there that I disagree with.

Of course simply pointing the finger and beheading all of the banks is an oversimplification. We need the banks. For all of the shit the banks do, they also provide a lot of very important services. And the banks need to be a part of fixing themselves...there need to be internal incentives to do things right, you can't just slap a mandate on them and hope they follow it.
post #6217 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by otc View Post

For example, they pointed to this quote as evidence that she somehow didn't believe that wall street was to blame for the financial crisis and that she would attack them only for political reasons:
There's nothing in there that I disagree with.

Of course simply pointing the finger and beheading all of the banks is an oversimplification. We need the banks. For all of the shit the banks do, they also provide a lot of very important services. And the banks need to be a part of fixing themselves...there need to be internal incentives to do things right, you can't just slap a mandate on them and hope they follow it.

I think the major problem some folks have is basically she stumps against Wall St. but then takes their money by the millions and we all know she's a friend of Wall St. Now, I have no problem with the second two things but the first grows irksome. The fact so many of her supporters manage the doublethink perfectly also dismays me.
post #6218 of 8748

Too lazy to investigate  but in what way did the RNC maintain neutrality on Trump compared to the DNC's treatment of Bernie?

post #6219 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Numbernine View Post

Too lazy to investigate  but in what way did the RNC maintain neutrality on Trump compared to the DNC's treatment of Bernie?

Now, now, people don't like it when I do that.
post #6220 of 8748

Yeah but they like me better than you

post #6221 of 8748
Good point.

frown.gif
post #6222 of 8748
Apparently this is real.

post #6223 of 8748
Or suggesting that people in finance are the ones who actually know what's going on:
Quote:
There’s nothing magic about regulations, too much is bad, too little is bad. How do you get to the golden key, how do we figure out what works? And the people that know the industry better than anybody are the people who work in the industry.

Yes, the "revolving door" idea can be problematic...but so is trying to regulate without knowledgeable professionals.

As an example, I'd point to Tom Wheeler, head of the FCC. He may have come from a telecom and lobbyist background (and even got the John Oliver insult treatment a few years ago), but he's shown that he's completely willing to put forth regulatory schemes that the big telco players *do not like*

There's a difference between corruption in the revolving door and people coming from industry and being willing to actually play the regulator's role. Heck, I've worked for and against the same clients at different times--I'm perfectly capable of doing good work for whoever pays my bills, without thinking I have to fudge the numbers in favor of my old boss.
post #6224 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by indesertum View Post

are you serious?

all the conservative networks talk about is hillary and her emails and benghazi every single day for the past two years. and bill's affairs every single hour for the past month or two.
only there's really one actual conservative network and the rest of them are on some far right conspiratorial bs.


what is there not to downplay? most everything has been debunked. all the conspiracy theorists have been talking about the same thing over and over again. there's no new investigation. there's no real information. the newest emails haven't shown a smoking gun like assange said they would. several private cybersecurity firms even showed evidence that the emails were obtained by two separate russian groups.

and it doesnt matter if it turns out it's some dumb bullshit like obama being a muslim or a kenyan. at least john mccain had the decency and intellect to realize what complete bullshit that was

it just get repeated further down the line so much it's accepted as truth. heard so many times today about how the new emails show that

1) hillary is illegally controlling super PACs
2) hillary's email scandal violates Executive Order 13526 and 18 U.S.C Sec. 793(f) and makes her ineligible for office
3) how the emails show the clinton foundation while knowing SA and qatar provided support to sunni extremists
4) how hillary got debate questions ahead of time
5) how hillary and the DNC conspired to keep Bernie out

only that's the same exact bullshit i've been hearing about for the past year. all of those things have their own snopes article. that's how much they've been talked about. all you literally have to do is google them and find either articles talking about how the original authors retracted their statement, a fact checking website, a snope article or if you're in the deep end of conspiracies something only conspiracy blogs or breitbart and friends talking about it who clearly dont have a dog in the race with tons of evidence to support their new theory

a concerted effort as if all the media are all one monolithic company who's controlled wholly by a single entity? you dont think it has to do with any of the amazing bs coming out of trump's mouth?

of course there's a concerted effort. when the presidential candidate is caught on camera spewing creepy sexist comments, every other hour there's a new person stepping up to say trump sexually attacked them, should all the media outlets just forgo reporting news and instead go after hillary who doesn't have any new news?

it's insane that even after all this you're trying to pin it on a vast media conspiracy that is in this solely because they're pro democratic and anti republican as if the news coverage has nothing to do with things that are actually happening in the real world

you think all the media corporations are just completely fabricating brand new bull shit about trump to keep the coverage on hillary on the down low?

just mindboggling how much blind hatred there is

With all of the partisanship here, this is probably the most nonsensical post I've read in a while. And no, I don't think the media is "fabricating" these allegations about Trump. They should cover Trump. They've been doing a good job of covering Trump, the problem is the way they've covered Hillary. Fox cannot compete with ABC/NBC/CBS, Hollywood, almost every educational institution, etc. It's not possible. Your presumption is that "well Fox talks about Hillary so everything is even-Steven!" I'm not in the habit of making personal insults here, but if you really believe that there is no media effort to protect Hillary, you are senile.

Quote:
Originally Posted by venividivicibj View Post

Can someone explain what is so bad about Hilary's speeches to Wall St?

“My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, sometime in the future.”

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/after-donald-trumps-defeat-the-us-will-have-to-contend-with-a-war-between-the-states-2016-10-13

Do you find anything troubling there?
post #6225 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ataturk View Post

How does that compare with the Democrats' constant, hysterical claims of voter suppression over things like voter ID and early voting laws? "Cut from six weeks before the election to four weeks!? Racist!"

How does it compare?

Fraud is next level. Blaming fraud for a loss, especially preemptively, is calling into question the basic fairness of elections and the rule of law. There's a difference between saying "hey these people are trying to use the law to prevent you from voting" and "voting doesn't matter because the results are fraudulent." Especially stating the latter before any votes have been cast.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Trump is #2 in GOP Field