2016 Presidential Election

[zabu of nΩd]

100k? I thought ISIS was like 40k strong at best?

See this http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-of-200000-claims-kurdish-leader-9863418.html
and page 45 of this http://economicsandpeace.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Global-Terrorism-Index-2015.pdf

Are you talking about ISIS or the US Military?

I'm familiar with your conspiracy theory about ISIS. The problem with conspiracy theories is that anyone who subscribes to one could be assumed to be in on a conspiracy to spread the theory.

 

[Dak]

I'm familiar with your conspiracy theory about ISIS. The problem with conspiracy theories is that anyone who subscribes to one could be assumed to be in on a conspiracy to spread the theory.

I was just talking about the US military being present in much of the globe and also taking in people from other countries (often trying to get citizenship) etc., as well as the concept of blowback for military adventurism. But it's also not a conspiracy theory that material support for "moderate Syrian rebels" has wound up in the hands of ISIS one way or another if that's what you were talking about.

 

[rms]

See this http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-of-200000-claims-kurdish-leader-9863418.html
and page 45 of this http://economicsandpeace.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Global-Terrorism-Index-2015.pdf

"Group who wants western support for defeating ISIS claims they are 7x as strong as Western organizations claim to get said support"

 

[Baroque]

Methinks you doth protest too much. In an otherwise thoroughly documented article by a widely acclaimed journalist you are jumping on the semantics of absolutely accurate generalizations.

Definitely not "absolutely accurate" since I am a liberal/moderate who does not hold those same beliefs, nor have I heard any other liberal express them. There are many definitions of "generalization" and if you're using the one I think you're using, "absolutely accurate generalizations" is an oxymoron.

Trying to create a strawman out of anecdote with a red herring.

That was half of what you quoted from the article though, you chose to quote an "anecdote" which implies that you agreed with it, so I replied to that.

I don't know about "public help requested from Putin, but otherwise you are correct. The point is that the Hillary Camp has behaved no more reasonably than the Trump Camp, despite considering themselves the "pro-science"/"pro-intellectual" side of politics.

Again I would not make this generalization. I've seen Trump supporters working at NASA, they're a small vocal minority, but they exist. Usually the older crowd that has been working on missions since Voyager/Apollo. They're definitely pro-science though. I don't think the entire "Hillary Camp", of which I'm not a part, would make that generalization.

I just ignore most of these sorts of articles, they're full of poor logic. was just responding to what you chose to quote from it.

 

[Einherjar86]

This statement is exactly the type of strawman you throw around that absolutely falls apart in seconds. Saying "liberals do x" is a strawman unless you give examples of liberals that do x. I've never once heard a single liberal describe liberals as a “reality-based community"...

Don't you think this is implied, though? I mean, what's the alternative to a "reality-based community"? If asked if their party, in general, is "reality-based," do you think liberals would say no...?

But don't worry, 11 people think the 19th Amendment should be repealed

If I may, since you seem very shaken up by this... I posted it not because it's a widespread phenomenon, or even because I fear it might actually happen. I shared it because I feel that it reflects an unspoken kernel of Trump's base. Most of them would never voice it aloud, so no - it isn't "news" in that regard. But I would still suggest that it comprises some deep tendency, or impression, of their cultural attitude.

 

[Dak]

Definitely not "absolutely accurate" since I am a liberal/moderate who does not hold those same beliefs, nor have I heard any other liberal express them. There are many definitions of "generalization" and if you're using the one I think you're using, "absolutely accurate generalizations" is an oxymoron.

That was half of what you quoted from the article though, you chose to quote an "anecdote" which implies that you agreed with it, so I replied to that.

A generalization about a group is not accurate because of an anecdote? Okay. I quoted the summation at the end because it was too long of an article to quote all of the evidence, which presents a significant amount of group think and unquestioned regurgitating of half-truths to outright lies to protect and support Clinton during this election cycle. If I asked most Clinton supporters if the FBI found that she broke the law in her handling of her State Department emails they would say no. If I asked most non-Trump supporters whether or not he called Mexicans rapists I imagine I'd get a lot of answers in the affirmative. Cases in point.

Again I would not make this generalization. I've seen Trump supporters working at NASA, they're a small vocal minority, but they exist. Usually the older crowd that has been working on missions since Voyager/Apollo. They're definitely pro-science though. I don't think the entire "Hillary Camp", of which I'm not a part, would make that generalization.

I just ignore most of these sorts of articles, they're full of poor logic. was just responding to what you chose to quote from it.

The number of Trump supporters working at NASA doesn't have anything to do with the way that Democrats perceive their party/speak about their party in comparison to Republican voters (particularly Trump supporters).

http://www.aol.com/article/news/201...-trumps-support-base-is-comprised-o/21581163/
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/11/us/politics/hillary-clinton-basket-of-deplorables.html

Of course your lone perspective of your beliefs and a couple of NASA Trump voters disproves a generalization, but party leaders pandering to their bases do not support it.

 

[Dak]

It's amazing how much better Trump is with a teleprompter .

 

[Baroque]

Be honest, would you even want trump to moderate this forum? He'd be all egotistical and an ass about it. Ban people for no reason and shit.

 

[arg]

Trump as a mod would be awesome. We could be as racist and misogynistic as we please and he wouldnt give a shit. Hell, he'd even join in and we'd have lots of laughs. The only people who'd be banned are silly hard lefties like crimsonfloyd and the forum would be better for it

 

[Baroque]

Gonna be honest myself, I do agree with him about building a fucking wall and getting rid of Obamacare. I mean let immigrants in, sure, but force them to do it the right way and document the shit out of them. We need fingerprints and photos and names at the very least. Also I'm a bottle of wine deep so yeah.

 

[Satanstoenail]

Trump would be the best moderator. He knows moderators. Nobody does better moderating than Trump. His moderation would be the best moderation.

 

[Elric of Melniboné]

Trump as a mod would be awesome. We could be as racist and misogynistic as we please and he wouldnt give a shit. Hell, he'd even join in and we'd have lots of laughs. The only people who'd be banned are silly hard lefties like crimsonfloyd and the forum would be better for it

He would probably like stupid music and ban people for liking different music than him.

 

[Baroque]

Trump would listen to fucking Five Finger Death Punch

 

[Dak]

He has entered to metal but I can't place it. Definitely not FFDP.

 

[Einherjar86]

Gonna be honest myself, I do agree with him about building a fucking wall and getting rid of Obamacare. I mean let immigrants in, sure, but force them to do it the right way and document the shit out of them. We need fingerprints and photos and names at the very least. Also I'm a bottle of wine deep so yeah.

We already document the shit out of the ones that come in legally, especially refugees.

 

[Dak]

 

[Baroque]

We already document the shit out of the ones that come in legally, especially refugees.

So make them all come in legally. That's all I'm saying.

 

[Baroque]

Trump needs a sense of humor though, insulting SNL because they made fun of him, please. That's their job, they make fun of every presidential candidate every election, and they made fun of Hillary also. At least he could come up with a way to make fun of them back, his best response was an insult.

 

[arg]

We already document the shit out of the ones that come in legally, especially refugees.

We should also only let them in if they can financially support themselves and NOT grant them access to federal or state funds or health services unless they pay.

EVERYONE ALWAYS FUCKING FORGETS THAT

 

[Baroque]

We should also only let them in if they can financially support themselves

Canada already does this so why not.