You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
#4901 Re: The Garden » 2016 Presidential Election Thread » 527 weeks ago
"83 percent say economic benefits are skewed to the rich
66 percent say they don't apply for minimum-wage jobs because the pay is too low
The unemployed are spending just 11.7 hours a week looking for work.
More than half — 51 percent — say they haven't had a job interview since 2014."These are issues for Republicans. What you're quoting here is what the Republicans are responsible for. With the house and senate, where has been a real bill to address this? They certainly have not raised minimum wage. They have not stopped corporate welfare. They have not implemented an outsourcing tax...because they are against all of these things. Trump wants to LOWER the minimum wage. We're paying republican salaries to literally obstruct, do nothing, and in Ted Cruz's case, read Doctor Seuss on the senate floor. We almost had the grand bargain, but republicans fucked it up... A bill that would have given them a victory... But they decided to become the party of no instead and make Obama a one term president.
I could not agree with you more. I'm all for compromise....something that helps everyone in some way. It's time to face it....the GOP wants to have their cake and eat it too. It's funny how the GOP hates welfare except for when it is for corporations...who are....let's face it....GOP=corporations.....corporations=GOP.
#4902 Re: The Garden » 2016 Presidential Election Thread » 527 weeks ago
mitchejw wrote:....and if/when Trump gets elected all of these numbers will suddenly be accurate? All economics problems will be solved?
This just all sounds like someone who made up their minds 8 years ago....that nothing good could possibly happen....ever again....until a Republican is back in office.
I just don't understand any of this....
Republicans....for the last 8 years....have intentionally been doing harm to our economy. INTENTIONALLY! Shutting down the federal government...accomplishing NOTHING.
And what exactly is it that you're trying to accomplish....do you really think the unemployment rate could get down to 0? How would you define that anyway? Are we trying to get back to a time where children ages 12-18 are also employed in some form?
Again, I ask you, what the fuck do you care about the unemployment rate? How does it effect you? Who gives a shit about any of it honestly...it means nothing...other than political talking points....
Generic Republican says, "the unemployment rate is 4.9%...just think about how low it would be if a Republican were in office."
Generic Republican says, "the unemployment rate is 4.4%....just think about how low it would be if a Republican were in office."
Generic Republic says, "the unemployment rate is 7%...and those damn liberals are too lazy to get a job...."
It just never ends....it's circular logic. I honestly believe that Republicans loath public sector/government corruption, but when it comes to private corruption/collusion/monopoly...they will turn a blind eye every time.
It matters because it isn't accurate. It doesn't feel like 4.9% unemployment because it isn't.
If it's not accurate now....perhaps it never will be....
perhaps we really have no idea....
and let's think about this....if the unemployment is at 9%....that's 9 out of 100 people "bitching as you call it....
There are plenty of minimum wage jobs out there for everyone....hmmm....I wonder why no one is biting.
#4903 Re: The Garden » 2016 Presidential Election Thread » 527 weeks ago
....and if/when Trump gets elected all of these numbers will suddenly be accurate? All economics problems will be solved?
This just all sounds like someone who made up their minds 8 years ago....that nothing good could possibly happen....ever again....until a Republican is back in office.
I just don't understand any of this....
Republicans....for the last 8 years....have intentionally been doing harm to our economy. INTENTIONALLY! Shutting down the federal government...accomplishing NOTHING.
And what exactly is it that you're trying to accomplish....do you really think the unemployment rate could get down to 0? How would you define that anyway? Are we trying to get back to a time where children ages 12-18 are also employed in some form?
Again, I ask you, what the fuck do you care about the unemployment rate? How does it effect you? Who gives a shit about any of it honestly...it means nothing...other than political talking points....
Generic Republican says, "the unemployment rate is 4.9%...just think about how low it would be if a Republican were in office."
Generic Republican says, "the unemployment rate is 4.4%....just think about how low it would be if a Republican were in office."
Generic Republic says, "the unemployment rate is 7%...and those damn liberals are too lazy to get a job...."
It just never ends....it's circular logic. I honestly believe that Republicans loath public sector/government corruption, but when it comes to private corruption/collusion/monopoly...they will turn a blind eye every time.
#4904 Re: The Garden » 2016 Presidential Election Thread » 527 weeks ago
You make the mistake of thinking the average voter is as smart as you. He should be polling 20% going by what you hear about him, but he's actually doing alright. He's telling people what they want to hear. Some of it true, some of it less true. Lies don't matter for the Hillary supporters, why would they for Trump supporters? And he's consistent. He never concedes, never stops hammering the point. People like a man that doesn't apologize. It gives an aura of certainty and strength. Our politicians know all about that, only they are limited by the conventional rules of the game. Trump isn't. He can go anywhere, say anything. Appeal to anyone. Facts? Who cares. Politics has never been about facts. It's about perception.
I believe it. 100 million people are silent voters in the US. Trump is bringing out a lot of those, Hillary is bringing none. Probably losing a fair bit compared to Obama. That picture of her walking up the stairs is a great symbol, she's literally being propped up in every way. That's what the media don't get. People already mistrust them, so any piece on Trump will just gain him publicity. 60% of Americans don't believe the media in the last gallup. With Trump that number has likely spiked. Who was it that said, 'Barring a dead girl or a live boy, any publicity is good publicity'? He's using their best weapon against hem. Look at those rallies, he's doing a stadium tour. And all the while the media is desperate to show that he is actually losing badly. Protesting a bit hard, no? 3 months left and they're already firing all cylinders. They're scared.
I think fear of admitting you support Trump is a very real phenomenon. Trump is crushing Hillary in anonymous polls. And think about all those people not voting. It's because they have lost faith. Donald Trump is rebuilding that faith by the day. That's more powerful than any political platform. The hardcore democrat or republican core is not deciding this election, nor is the intellectual elite. This is the time for the downtrodden, bitter and angry.
lmao are you kidding me with this? Did you photo shop this yourself?
#4905 Re: The Garden » 2016 Presidential Election Thread » 527 weeks ago
Hillary is a liar that will do ANYTHING to get elected.
She is in scandal after scandal weather it be Bengazi, Emails, the Clinton Foundation, being for TPP before being against it, in bed with the shady DNC that rigged the election to her, and a huge fucking liar. That said she would be much better than Obama, but Obama is more likeable. Clinton comes off as a huge bitch. Obama seems cool, just clueless. Like he is smart and dumb at the same time.
So is Trump...I'm sorry but you can't accuse one and turn a blind eye to the other...
Trump doesn't pay his workers, backs out of contracts after the work is done, has sweat shops around the globe, declares bankruptcy to get out of taxes....and lies out his ass with the best of them.
#4906 Re: The Garden » 2016 Presidential Election Thread » 527 weeks ago
misterID wrote:Randall Flagg wrote:So we have to prove her mishandling of classified information resulted in harm? I guess as long as i don't plow into anyone, I can drive drunk.
This is what I did for 7 years - protect classified information. The opinion of some journalist trying to defend Clinton is meaningless to me. There is no such thing as incorrectly classified. If it originates on a secure system, it's classified until the originating authority declassifies it under protocol.
She encouraged her employees to scrub markings and send classified information over an unsecure, unclassified network. End of discussion.
If you want to ignore it or have wave it, just say you don't care. Don't try to pretend she didn't violate the law.
Those were not democratic leaning sites. No one was protecting her, it was fact checking, and it is very telling that you took that position when presented with the facts. And now you want to dismiss human error misclassifying articles as confidential, while others were retroactively classified. Okay... And its pretty disingenuous of you to ignore an independent journalist, while at the same time only listening to journalists who want to attack and destroy her. That's very hypocritical.
No, I'm saying my opinion is more valid on this very unique subject than a journalist who spent a week writing an article. Hillary was sure to yuck it up and toss plenty of misinformation into the public discourse. Nothing was retroactively classified. That's now how classification works. I know this because I have an intimate and personal relationship with this very unique situation. Information is deemed classified if it originates on a classified system (all the drone images her aides shared is de facto classified because all drone systems operate on a classified network). Information is also automatically classified when you combine several key facts into one document. Saying I'm going to Afghanistan is fine. Saying I'm going to Afghanistan at 1300 tomorrow on flight 4576 departing LAX and Landing in Kandahar at 1430 local time is classified.
There isn't some magic button that makes something classified. There's not a man in a suit in a backroom with a stamp that marks things Secret or Top Secret. That's now how information classification works. Clinton knowingly had aides take classified information, remove their "Secret" markers, and send them to her. That is a crime. That she turned over information to her lawyer (to protect her) who lacks a clearance, where said information had classified material is against the law.
That our standards of what is classified are too stringent or that something didn't have a big red mark on it at the time is not part of the discussion. If you knew how our classification system works, you'd know this, but instead you read articles by someone who doesn't even know what color cable a Secret network runs on (may seem trivial to you, but huge deal in the government) and allows Clintons lies and distortions to affect your article.
I have no reason to continue discussing this point with you, other than to show you that maybe there are people out there more informed than you are. Clinton broke the law. The FBI said she acted recklessly and mishandled classified information. Any citizen would be charged for that. Clinton is able to walk around and continue to lie. Feel free to lookup the fact checkers and how they rate Clinton on this issue.
But it's done and over with. She won't be charged and nothing will change that. Feel free to think she did nothing wrong and it was all a conspiracy, or recognize she broke the law and there are 21 year old kids whose name isn't Clinton doing hard time for mishandling information in the same manner she did. I know, cause I helped send them there.
Just curious...and I admit that these things are at best loosely related....but do you hold the Bush/Cheney administration to the same standards?
They didn't leak information - but they sure did lie a lot - or spread misinformation as you call it.
#4907 Re: The Garden » 2016 Presidential Election Thread » 527 weeks ago
Question to the democrats/independents here....
In an alternate universe of 2016 and Reagan entered the race with the country in the current shape its in.....would you vote for him?
Oh geez....ya know....this is a tough one James....
I was born in the midst of the Reagan era....but I do have concerns....
First, I do not believe that the president has that much control over the economy....I do believe their reactions to the "good times" and the "bad times" yield consequences decades beyond their respective eras.
Things I give him credit for (as I would give any president).....
1) Any president who actually tries to compromise with the minority party is a true leader to me. Those who do not actually cause their own parties' long term harm. Obama did this.
2) He had the balls and the chance to implement a tax policy that was an immediate catalyst for growth. Which it was....but the long term consequences were unintended at best....I've been reading lately that, ironically, the 1964 Republican nominee started this wave in motion. At the moment, I cannot recall his name....but I watched his speech on TV the other night. Honestly, makes me feel this whole thing is cyclical....but I digress.... Maybe Bernie could have the same effect? Coincidentally, the last Republican to lose in an extreme way....so in about a decade we'll have the next Nixon?
3) Almost everyone looks back on the 1980s quite fondly.....I must admit.....it appears to be a decade bursting with creativity artistically. I will forever be grateful for that 
My criticisms:
1) The economic policy he implemented was short sighted....most economists agree that there are times to raise taxes....the economy is booming....eventually the private sector is flooded with currency that was once controlled by the government. Eventually, even saturated. Then shit occurs in the private sector that is every bit as corrupt as the communists. Sub-cultures form that are every bit as destructive as any repressive government. Problem? Conservatives herald corruption in the private sector and scream from the mountain tops when it comes from government. An unfortunate blind spot....
2) I cannot reconcile this idea that deficit spending, tax cuts, and defense spending is a conservative idea. Reagan won the elections convincingly, only to engage in policies that are the opposite of what we were supposed to expect based on what he said. A big reason I bring this up is, Republicans are constantly guilty of accusing Dems of doing this....when in fact, Reagan did the same thing. It's a policy that yielded great results for him and his era....but an hypocrisy that I do not yet forgive or forget. Especially in these times when I've witnessed the Republicans engage in 8 consecutive years worth of tantrums that resulted in federal government shut downs, down grades in government credit ratings and normal, regular people suffering. The Repubs have shown me over the last 8 years that they stand for nothing.
Off the cuff....those are some of my thoughts....
#4908 Re: The Garden » 2016 Presidential Election Thread » 527 weeks ago
It's over. When a candidate is already speaking in such terms, they're not even trying to win but instead wanting to just hurry up and lose.
Donald Trump told CNBC on Thursday he will either win with his frank and uncensored style of campaigning or
enjoy a "very, very nice long vacation."Republicans have long hoped Trump will pivot on his behavior, but in the "Squawk Box" interview, he said:
"I'm a truth teller. All I do is tell the truth. And if at the end of 90 days, I've fallen short because I'm somewhat
politically correct even though I'm supposed to be the smart one and even though I'm supposed to have a lot of
good ideas, it's OK. I go back to a very good way of life."http://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/11/gop-pres … trump.html
Today's gaffe was claiming Obama is the founder of ISIS.
What's tomorrow's gaffe? Claiming Hillary was the second gunman on the grassy knoll?'
He's intentionally tanking the election.
I have thought that for a long time now....I think Trump got what he wanted out of all of this...he never had any intention of winning. This gives him more notoriety, makes him relevant again for when he goes back to private life. Can you imagine the next reality show he's a part of?
I've only been eligible to vote since the Kerry/Bush election...and I've never voted Republican....but he really that party serious harm. Maybe this is what the needed....and undeniable reset button.
#4909 Re: The Garden » 2016 Presidential Election Thread » 527 weeks ago
Simplistic point of view. Hilarious. You dream of having half of the intelligence I have. Someone in love with Hillary thinks I'm simplistic. Classic. Thanks for the laugh. Really.
You're starting to sound like Trump.
#4910 Re: Guns N' Roses » On this day in 1988... » 528 weeks ago
Good album for it`s time but overrated as shit Nighrain, Brownstone, SCOM and RQ are songs I would call " great", Jungle, Easy and PC are catchy, the rest ranges from mediocre to completely forgettable.
I only knew one person who has ever said something like this and he was a HUGE Nirvana/Cobain fan.
I have to ask if appetite doesn't do it for you 1) what does? 2) why are you here?
Hard choice Loften, I also chose it's so easy in part bc of the unreleased video and that amazing intro that makes you want to smash something.
