Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
2016 Presidential Election Thread: TRUMP vs. Hillary SMACKDOWN 2016 Presidential Election Thread: TRUMP vs. Hillary SMACKDOWN
View Poll Results: The 45th President of the United States of America will be
Hillary
332 46.63%
TRUMP
190 26.69%
In to watch it burn
161 22.61%
Bastard
73 10.25%
im tryin to tell you about ****in my wife in the *** and youre asking me these personal questions
57 8.01%

09-17-2016 , 05:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by spaceman Bryce
As far as I know we are, although hitler disagreed. He was quite vehement about it. In the end it could be said hitler killed more white people than anyone in history.
Hey, I'm Czech too! Na zdraví!
09-17-2016 , 05:53 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerodox
Why a bigger military? To be more certain that we'll always (or at least for longer) be able to defend ourselves and all those who we defend. E.g., I'd say China could soon become a challenge for the U.S. We are defending much of S.E. Asia against potential Chinese imperialism, though our presence there largely started because of Japanese imperialism.

Russia could be a threat in the future. We're defending Europe against Russia.

Other threats like N. Korea. I don't perceive them as a massive threat, but we have to manage all of the above.

Add in the potential of militant Islamic expansion.

I do think that our focus should be on smart military things, drones, smart bombs, spycraft, etc. That said, we still need old school stuff like aircraft carriers and aircraft.

What the right number ($B to spend) is, I don't know, but I'd be happy with more, much like I'd be happy with more police in my neighborhood, though I don't know exactly how many more.

Where to get the money while lowering taxes? Take it straight from the entitlements. Isn't that just the mirror image of what most Democrats want to do?

The biggest point I'd like to raise re taxes is that trickle down does actually work. Of course this has been debated at length in academic and non-academic circles. The point is that more money in private hands means more jobs, more productivity, more benefits for everyone, including the poor. That's my main reason for voting Republican over Democrat.
V-O-O-D-O-O

Also, can I nominate "entitlement" as an official dog-whistle?
09-17-2016 , 05:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by vixticator
Variance and Mets are on the Trump train, I bet you didn't see that coming!
IDK if youve been in the POG politics thread. But if you havent, dont. And if you have, dont do it again.
09-17-2016 , 06:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DVaut1
...


I realize this is bad politics and I'm probably alone on an island on this but HRC should seriously consider doing the same.
No, not at all. That **** was ugly and Roveian.
09-17-2016 , 06:32 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pokerodox
I haven't read about this Kansas and Louisiana news. Does anyone know what National Review said about it? I'll check there and elsewhere and see if I find anything interesting.
Sweet christ this is why under my veil of bleeding-heart leftyism I'm actually a psychopathic meritocratic elitist.

pokerodox ain't allowed to vote no more. Also, sterilization.

You don't get to advocate taking formula out of poor babies' mouths and top that off with a, "What's all this ballyhoo about Kansas?"
09-17-2016 , 06:46 AM
fwiw i cant speak for any place other than the UK, but imo the reason we think drumpf is a bad candidate for president is not that we are worried that our one-sided traid dealzzz will be torn up, its that he is literally a reality tv game show host. and literal reality tv game show hosts should not lead countries. its just a general belief we have over here

eg you will never catch us voting simon cowell for prime minister regardless of what trade deals he promises
09-17-2016 , 06:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV
IDK if youve been in the POG politics thread. But if you havent, dont. And if you have, dont do it again.
I clicked there about a year ago. Mistakes were made.
09-17-2016 , 07:06 AM
I'm missing the strategy that led Trump to finally admit President Obama was born in America. Was it just part of a very weak effort to get the black vote? If so, its backfiring miserably. I don't know why he just didn't leave it up in the air, along with his tax returns and virtually all of his policies.
09-17-2016 , 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by seattlelou
You guys remember Neicheman? He was great for fleshing out statistical data. I could just respond to him with half an answer and he would respond back with s spreadsheet.
Neicheman was also a big proponent of the idea that the GOP should go even harder on white resentment as an electoral strategy, something that was widely derided, often by me. But he may be proven prescient in the end.
09-17-2016 , 07:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisV
IDK if youve been in the POG politics thread. But if you havent, dont. And if you have, dont do it again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vixticator
I clicked there about a year ago. Mistakes were made.
I have a pet theory, and it's total pop psych -- but I'm pretty confident that 2p2 -- has high levels of intelligent, socially awkward, obsessive types that enjoy games and activities (e.g., poker, the POG forum) that can be engaged in with very low complex social requirements. Particularly the high volume posters who are going to dominate the conversation.

Basically, I'm suggesting a lot of people here are on the autism spectrum/Aspergersy.

The result is high levels of rigid thinking leading toward authoritarianism. Seems to me like while Trump and the Trump style is almost exemplified and noteworthy for its offensiveness to more intelligent and educated groups, you can predict the one group of smarter/educated people where it might land well are the typical high-functioning autistic types and you're going to find a lot of them on 2p2 or other places like this (e.g., NeoGAF) with a high population of male posters somewhere on the spectrum. The comirbidity between passions like video games and poker, past political movements like Ron Paul and GamerGate, and then now Trump has to be really high. I've pointed this out before that an astonishingly high number of Ron Paul supporters (e.g., 30-40%) have migrated from RP to Trump -- given the ostensible stark differences. But once you see the common thread as like "socially awkward, nihilistic dudes" then it's easy to see the appeal of Trump and hardcore libertarianism to a single set of people. Gamergate is probably a little easier to deduce of how Trump threaded the needle on a bunch of angry bros.

And then in the end here: anywhere where those kinds of guys congregate, you're going to get high levels of "wtf did I just click on?!" political commentary.

Last edited by DVaut1; 09-17-2016 at 07:43 AM.
09-17-2016 , 07:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kukraprout
I mean all your quotes are completely in the spirit of the policies of use of nuclear weapons for every president since we've had nukes. No president or major presidential candidate has ever put specific conditions on when the us would or wouldn't use nuclear weapons.
09-17-2016 , 08:06 AM
Breitbart definitely benefits from a Trump win. With a Clinton victory, the site is basically what its been for most of its existence. Sure there will be plenty of faux scandals, but that's not really any different than with Obama. If Trump wins, an important battle will have been won, but the war will still be far from over. Lord Trump vs Congressional Cuckservatives will play right into their strengths. Not to mention how easily they'll keep the younger fascists clicking with HAHAHAHA CHECK OUT THESE LIBTARD FEMINIST SJWs ON TWITTER ALL BUTTHURT OVER MR PRESIDENT DONALD J TRUMP SAYING HE'LL PROBABLY PULL AMERICA OUT OF THE UN!

A really frightening thought I've been having about a Trump win goes back to Siculamente's pathetic argument about President Trump not having unchecked power. Whether or not Trump actually has the political capital to actually build the wall or really go full-on deporting illegals there are going to be millions of Americans feeling quite emboldened on those issues. They voted for a wall and to kick out the Mexicans and Trump won and there ain't no Washington pussy congress that's going to tell them that ain't happening. Most of those losers are harmless outside of their right to vote, others not so much.
09-17-2016 , 08:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chippa58
I'm missing the strategy that led Trump to finally admit President Obama was born in America. Was it just part of a very weak effort to get the black vote? If so, its backfiring miserably. I don't know why he just didn't leave it up in the air, along with his tax returns and virtually all of his policies.

My completely unfounded speculation is that it was the product of some alchemy between KellyAnne Conway's polling/political training and Trump's publicity/media skills.

- Conway looks at the polls and realizes that:

(a) Trump's biggest weakness relative to traditional Republicans is with college educated whites and women, and putting the birther thing "to rest" can help bring at least some of them back into the fold.

(b) Hillary polls well with black voters, but the support is not as robust as it was for Obama in '08 and '12. So, you muddy the waters just a little bit, remind people of how nasty the '08 primary did get at times, and hope to depress turnout just a bit. If Trump actually gains some votes, great, but I don't think that is the larger goal.

I also think Conway probably took a page from the classic Republican campaign strategy of attacking your opponents' perceived strengths rather than their weaknesses. It seems counterintuitive, but can be effective b/c it can catch your opponent off guard and neutralize your own weakness in a particular area (for example: Swiftboating)

- Trump listens to Conway's case, and figures out a way of packaging the message in a way that allows him to get some free media for other topics and not look like he is apologizing for past behavior, so he plays ball.
09-17-2016 , 08:10 AM
Is "Washington, PC" a thing in the derposphere? It should be.
09-17-2016 , 08:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DVaut1
The comirbidity between passions like video games and poker, past political movements like Ron Paul and GamerGate, and then now Trump has to be really high. I've pointed this out before that an astonishingly high number of Ron Paul supporters (e.g., 30-40%) have migrated from RP to Trump -- given the ostensible stark differences. But once you see the common thread as like "socially awkward, nihilistic dudes" then it's easy to see the appeal of Trump and hardcore libertarianism to a single set of people. Gamergate is probably a little easier to deduce of how Trump threaded the needle on a bunch of angry bros.

And then in the end here: anywhere where those kinds of guys congregate, you're going to get high levels of "wtf did I just click on?!" political commentary.
Syre, many of them are all of this, although in the specific case of VMF, I wouldn't lump him with the GameGate people. Probably not even socially awkward (relative to the group you're talking about). He's just an odd cat. His primary shtick is concern trolling. Well named is right that his Trump loyalty is primarily driven by fear of Muslims. He does have this patriarchal type worldview, while largely subscribing to feminist ideas (yes, simultaneously). I have no idea about where he lies on the spectrum .It wouldn't surprise me if he's just normal. But the key to understanding him is a complete lack of intellectual curiosity, combined with unthinkable naivety.

And, well I don't disagree with your diagnosis as far as which said the plurality of young Trump voters, there are lot of folks that don't match your description. The same holds for many of his older voters. Racial animus or misogynistic views are the primary driving force, among the group as a whole, but the extent varies wildly within the group.

And, believe it or not, some of them don't really hold any of these grievances. They just support Donald Trump because he's a Republican and so are they. It's a mistake to I think they became a republican after carefully looking at both party platforms, as opposed to a vestigal cultural marker. The feedback loops in these social networks are impossible to escape for those who lack the tools needed to break free. I'm not making excuses for them per se, but any analysis which disregard these sociological factors is necessarily incomplete.
09-17-2016 , 08:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by VarianceMinefield
you are saying sued, not lost a settlement here, and not providing any details, so i assume the details might not be so great for your case here
How do you lose a settlement?
09-17-2016 , 08:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigoldnit
My completely unfounded speculation is that it was the product of some alchemy between KellyAnne Conway's polling/political training and Trump's publicity/media skills.

- Conway looks at the polls and realizes that:

(a) Trump's biggest weakness relative to traditional Republicans is with college educated whites and women, and putting the birther thing "to rest" can help bring at least some of them back into the fold.

(b) Hillary polls well with black voters, but the support is not as robust as it was for Obama in '08 and '12. So, you muddy the waters just a little bit, remind people of how nasty the '08 primary did get at times, and hope to depress turnout just a bit. If Trump actually gains some votes, great, but I don't think that is the larger goal.

I also think Conway probably took a page from the classic Republican campaign strategy of attacking your opponents' perceived strengths rather than their weaknesses. It seems counterintuitive, but can be effective b/c it can catch your opponent off guard and neutralize your own weakness in a particular area (for example: Swiftboating)

- Trump listens to Conway's case, and figures out a way of packaging the message in a way that allows him to get some free media for other topics and not look like he is apologizing for past behavior, so he plays ball.

Good post, I always enjoy reading your insights. I thought the campaign's handling was ok and this had to be addressed for the reasons you outlined. The press was absolutely livid with the way he handled it which was probably a bad idea but no staff completely eliminate the candidates deep desire to grift.
09-17-2016 , 08:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by vixticator
SqredII is the only one I believe, at all. There's been a ton of people in the past several months itt saying they were voting for Clinton as life long Republicans. But, they are almost all lying.
Thank you. It's pretty simple really. A Donald Trump Presidency is a direct threat to the status quo, both at home and abroad. Any true conservative's first and foremost concern should be the stability and continuity of government and social institutions, and also, to perhaps even a larger degree, the proper world order. In America we have been blessed since WWII with the luxury of picking from candidates ideologically, without having to be concerned that either had a strong chance of upending our country and world.

Every major candidate of either party over AT LEAST the last one hundred years, viewed through this prism, would be preferential to Donald Trump. And yes, I am including McGovern and Goldwater in that list.

Last edited by SqredII; 09-17-2016 at 09:07 AM.
09-17-2016 , 09:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorKeeed
I mean all your quotes are completely in the spirit of the policies of use of nuclear weapons for every president since we've had nukes. No president or major presidential candidate has ever put specific conditions on when the us would or wouldn't use nuclear weapons.
You can argue that about the one where he says that nuking Europe is not off the table: that could be interpreted as just standard policy (stated horribly). But pulling off of alliances and letting everyone have nukes definitely isnt. "Somebody hits us within ISIS — you wouldn`t fight back with a nuke?" isnt either. Both are idiotic and dangerous.

He is clueless about geopolitics, loves simplistic solutions to complex problems, and has a fascination with nukes. A guy like that should not be allowed to be made president anywhere.
09-17-2016 , 09:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by VarianceMinefield
any thoughts on hillarys past of trying to discredit woman who were sexually assaulted? you think she is the one who cares what happens to people of any kind? shes a POS, the hillary campaign is running on nothing
Don't pretend you actually care about women.
09-17-2016 , 09:49 AM


09-17-2016 , 09:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by VarianceMinefield
isnt it innocent until proven guilty in this country? or did you want to change that law?
So you pretend to care about women because Hilary did something something. No trial. Just you read something somewhere and decided she hates sexual assault victims.

But Trump actually paid millions (edit:apparently hundreds of thousands from a different discrimination case) after a racial discrimination suit brought by the government. His company instructed its employees to mark black tenant applicants with a code--"no. 9" or "C." They were directed away from non-white buildings. And now you want to apply "innocent until proven guilty"?

Obviously you are lying about that being an important standard for you. And you've already shown that you are bigoted against any Muslim person. Nobody believes you're on the fence about this. You love Trump because he mirrors your view of the world: A deeply racist, deeply stupid view.

Why are you so pants-wet over the prospect of admitting it?

Last edited by 13ball; 09-17-2016 at 10:17 AM.
09-17-2016 , 10:16 AM
Infotards
09-17-2016 , 10:28 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by VarianceMinefield
Ill need to ask her later to be clear, but i think people have seen hillary and trump for years and have some opinions, none good for hillary and some so-so feelings to even good for trump

i know at this point i wont vote for hillary, reading the history of her intimidating sexual assault victims was the final straw

she stands on nothing, shes not a good person, shes corrupt and a liar



maybe she voted reagan, id need to ask her, i know she was registered democrat and voted the party the last 6 elections.

you also missed my question and response to you last night
Gee, I doubt any of us called this based on your very first post.
09-17-2016 , 10:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmallflush


Here is an African American executive for Trump, Lynne Patton, defending him. The music is actually quite moving, as was the picture of Trump kissing a tiny black child.

It's interesting how people are often much more complex than we might imagine.
LOL remember when you pretended to be a Bernie supporter?

      
m