BruceVC

Geez, I cant believe people may consider Trump a better debater than Hilary Trump does make me laugh sometimes but he also constantly reminds me how insecure he is .....we live in an age where its considered inappropriate for Billionaires to boast about how rich they are Especially with this " anti-wealthy people " sentiment and the issues around the income gap Look at Gates and Mark Zuckerberg, there philanthropy is what defines them....not the fact they keep telling strangers how rich they are?

I'm confused by this statement - are you saying that people who voted to leave the EU are either racist, or are voting for other reasons (such as protecting their economy) and are now reaping what they have sown with tension rising between communities? Thereby being responsible for the actions of racists because of their vote?. How's it going for you in Sweden? I hear there are now roughly 50 or so 'no-go' areas there where the police are afraid to patrol, need to escort ambulances, and wear bullit proof vests while doing so. Assuming you are white (and clearly not a racist) I expect you would have no trouble walking through these areas with female family/friends? I'm sure they'd have no trouble in summer western clothing, mixing with the locals, proving they arn't racist. The obligatory disclaimer: I'm a former teacher who dedicated his life (successfully) for 5 years to inclusion and diversity, working with adults from all walks of life, and from every corner of the globe. Oh no you playing the Sweden card, remember the rule. When people in the EU or UK criticize Sweden its because Sweden is blamed for " being too liberal and not accepting you cant integrate Muslims " But Sweden actually does try to integrate people in a meaningful and sincere way....the issue with refugees is normally from people in countries like the UK, its a bit of unnecessary resistance to people who just want a better life in a place like London? Granted the refugees do come places like Afghanistan and Pakistan, have no understanding of Western culture, dont respect Western women, believe in Sharia law, until recently claimed the UK was the enemy, could actually be extremists and end of the day will resent you for perceived attacks on Islam but apart that I dont see the real issue? And yes you are spot on about why the UK voted for Brexit. The people who voted to leave are racist and are now not sure how to actually leave and refugees are still arriving? You could say the UK is conflicted but lets be honest, British people are at there finest when they are unhappy ...so this BREXIT outcome should be seen as catharsis?

I told you not to get too excited. November is a long way way in election time: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-poll-idUSKCN10G2BQ Okay, you right I musnt make assumptions ....unless I am absolutely sure she will win and of course I cannot say that with 100 % certainty

Meshugger can I honest with you, you are misunderstanding the real point behind the whole " dont objectify women " I can explain it to you but only if you are sincere about what women mean when they say that and how as men we should rationalize it

I hear you but this discussion is directly about people not accepting historical facts, it is a personal debate but how can this type of debate not be towards each other? Question on forum rules, if a person says the Holocaust didnt happen and a Jewish forum member became understandably annoyed and the two people started arguing who would be seen as in breach of the rules?

Fighter dont worry about people thinking you are a hypocrite because you are attracted to men in speedo's Your sexual orientation is not the concern or business of anyone but you I wish I had a swimmers build, I would prefer that look than a body builder....which I dont have either

What charges do you feel would be fair and reasonable?

Okay I see where you going You not talking about " normal " communication, you are suggesting this communication could be about a form of empathy or consciousness that theoretically connects everything living or inanimate It reminds of the very interesting theory about the holographic paradigm, you should enjoy this link, its a deep concept http://itotd.com/articles/227/the-holographic-paradigm/ Get stoned before you read this, I find some good weed always makes these perspectives more interesting and believable

Oh thats rich coming from you Hiro

I'll be honest, the chance of the USA being destroyed internally is as likely as suggesting Mexico could invade the USA, defeat the USA militarily and make the USA part of Mexico Its theoretically possible but highly unlikely

So for me communication must be tangible to be real? In other words even if you say its a metaphor I'm confused by how that is a relevant metaphor ? So for example what in the universe is the same as how humans communicate?

"You could make a very strong case that Hitler was not aware of the Holocaust and that he never gave any direct orders." Learn to read historian. In the historical movie Conspiracy Hitler was not in the actual meeting where top Nazis like Eichmann agreed on the final solution so for argument sake lets say you right and Hitler didnt give direct orders http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0266425/ Its irrelevant to the actual criticism that people have and that is about the Holocaust and the genocide the Nazis attempted. Hitler would have still been charged with numerous war crimes. So for me whether Hitler actually said " kill all the Jews " is not the point as most of the top Nazis were going to charged with war crimes for various offenses This applies to Milosevic and the crimes committed by Serbia in places like Bosnia and Kosovo, of course the Serbs should'nt be compared to the Nazis. Thats unfair but they did commit certain crimes against the Croats and Bosniaks and Milosevic made no effort to control, for example, how Serbian paramilitaries behaved, he deserved to be charged in the Hague because he had responsibility as leader of Serbia Its not a mystery?

How do we communicate with the universe? The universe isn't sentient or has intelligence...so how do you define communication?

GD do you think its okay to not vote for any party because your fundamental view of something is not an objective of any party? I didnt vote in the local election in SA this week, my first time ever. But many people are upset or critical with me for not voting like some of my family and friends who now refuse to discuss SA politics with me because " I didnt bother to vote so that means I dont really care "

That is a interesting article, it raises some relevant points but I dispute the core message or several core points for example " The media bear a lot of responsibility for the creation of Trump, and treating all Republican presidential candidates as if they’re a danger to American society is just one way they’ve done it. It’s unlikely that the media are going to en-masse recognize their bias, but perhaps if the Trump campaign has taught the media anything, it’s to ratchet down the rhetoric so that words mean something again " What amazes me is that even in the USA the media gets unfairly blamed or there contribution towards a certain social dynamic is exaggerated The media did not create Trump or encourage his rise to the Republican candidacy, this is a spurious assessment. Trump was strategic and had his 5-6 political objectives right from the beginning, the media would naturally discuss any view any candidate may have but because Trump was so contriversial of course he had media focus You cannot blame the media for reporting on a story, if anything Trump used the media to gain significance Also Romney was no where seen globally in the same negative light as Trump, the worst and most memorable thing he must have said was the 47 % comment about people wanting handouts from government. So yes he was seen as a wealthy, callous elitist but he never created the offense Trump has Romney was not the problem for the GOP, he never was .....Trump has created the real issues The problem is as the column pointed out, Romney was portrayed as this terrible, anti-American villain. As was McCain, Bush before him, Dole before him, Reagan before them. The media is so closely aligned with the left that every Republican candidate is described as the biggest threat to the future of the country since Hitler and so on. The problem is now we have a candidate who might actually deserve that description and no one is listening because the media has ruined it's own credibility. People read how terrible Trump is and think they've heard it all before. It's like the boy who cried wolf. When the wolf actually shows up no one believes him. I understand the criticism but I think its unfair or inaccurate, for example ask any other forum member living outside the USA what they thought about Romney and how the media in their country portrayed him I'll be surprised if most people will say he was seen as a villain or as controversial as Trump?

That is a interesting article, it raises some relevant points but I dispute the core message or several core points for example " The media bear a lot of responsibility for the creation of Trump, and treating all Republican presidential candidates as if they’re a danger to American society is just one way they’ve done it. It’s unlikely that the media are going to en-masse recognize their bias, but perhaps if the Trump campaign has taught the media anything, it’s to ratchet down the rhetoric so that words mean something again " What amazes me is that even in the USA the media gets unfairly blamed or there contribution towards a certain social dynamic is exaggerated The media did not create Trump or encourage his rise to the Republican candidacy, this is a spurious assessment. Trump was strategic and had his 5-6 political objectives right from the beginning, the media would naturally discuss any view any candidate may have but because Trump was so contriversial of course he had media focus You cannot blame the media for reporting on a story, if anything Trump used the media to gain significance Also Romney was no where seen globally in the same negative light as Trump, the worst and most memorable thing he must have said was the 47 % comment about people wanting handouts from government. So yes he was seen as a wealthy, callous elitist but he never created the offense Trump has Romney was not the problem for the GOP, he never was .....Trump has created the real issues

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngWiQ25cZU0 The crying baby incident, this a good example of how Trump in this case unintentionally offends women He doesn't realize how he comes across

I'm doing the same thing actually. The issue is that it's costing me about 4 months worth of work per year before you factor in books and all that stuff. It could be worse and blah blah blah but it's pretty god damn awful as it is and it feels like my life is a Springsteen song. KP, the best solution and the obvious one is for you to join the military for a few years. It would be the best thing for you but I understand this is not feasible as you have commitments to your mom?

Sold out? No he made the inevitable and predictable decision, Trump cant do most of what he claimed he can do WOD. Some things he can do but most of the big things like the Trump Wall wont happen Its okay in a way, rather find out now about his demagoguery than get much more disappointed later But if you think you have issues with populism, check this radical political party in SA and the false promises made to black people who support them http://www.timeslive.co.za/politics/2016/05/11/Mngxitama-%E2%80%98Slave-mentality%E2%80%99-EFF-doesn%E2%80%99t-believe-%E2%80%98blacks-can-actually-farm-and-feed-the-nation%E2%80%99

He was killed in 1992 and they still sent him to the Hague? Harsh! You funny

You come up with the most random things but they make me laugh Especially because I remember Arkan, he was one of the most brutal Serb paramilitaries ....he was killed in 1992 before he was sent to the Hague

I heard what Eastwood said, it was insensitive and irrelevant He should try to refrain from these types of comments and having dialogues with empty chairs

GD does this mean the Libertarian party will become a permanent political party and voting option going forward in the USA? Like Amentep said they are already a permanent political party. But not a very large or wealthy one. The LP relies almost entirely on individual contributions and membership dues. But as far as becoming an actual political force in the US, maybe, maybe not. A good performance in this election will help. Ballot access is a huge undertaking for the LP. It requires a lot of money and a lot of man hours. If Johnson/Weld can pull in 5% of the popular vote the LP candidate in 2020 will automatically be on the ballot. That is big. But 5% of the vote would not be all that impressive with two weak candidates like we have now. 10% or better or even winning one State would go a long way to carving out a niche as the real "3rd Party". That would change the dynamic in other areas too. Right now some 3k political positions in the US are held by Libertarians. But not one at the Federal level or in any State Senate and only four in State Houses. That has to change. Success for Johnson/Weld would look like this IMO: 1) Get into the debates. If this doesn't happen, nothing else does. 2) Perform well enough there to raise brand awareness. Too many people still don't know who or what the party stands for. I would say most Americans like the Democrats on some things and the Republicans on others. The LP message of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness Free from Government Intrusion (or assistance) might be just the mix folks will respond to.3) Get at least 5% of the popular vote. Hopefully a lot more. 15% to 20% would make the news everywhere and that will help with candidacies in congressional, state and local elections in 2018. This has happened before. The Republicans in 1854, the Progressive Party in 1912 and The Reform Party in 1992. The former went on to win the Presidency and most of Congress in 1860. The latter two flamed out and were gone within 10 years. The LP won't disappear they way they did but it may implode back to a movement no one gives a crap about. I'm hoping it follows the path of the Republicans. Right now the LP is the only and I do mean ONLY party that is talking about limited government and out of control spending right now. It is the only party talking about disentangling ourselves from combat in the middle east. That needs to happen. We need that voice on the national stage. I do not want to see the Republicans go the way of the Whigs. I'd like to see all three healthy and competitive. The Green Party too. The Democrats have long since abandoned their voters. They have never had full ballot access but if they did they should have a voice also. Well I think its a worthwhile endeavor to support them, I dont think you can give too much attention to this type of campaign I'm glad there is another political party you identify with. As I said earlier I watched an interview with guys from LP and they seemed very sincere and candid

I do hope that they do invoke some sort half unknown protocol and disown him and put forward their own candidate, like Kasich. That way people will know that no true dissent is allowed, even if the guy got more votes than any republican candidate in history. Ron Paul? ****ed Bernie Sanders? ****ed Donald Trump? ****ed Give or take a few years and you guys will experience fire and blood beyond your wildest comprehension all while being smug on your humanities degrees, sipping a latté outside your governmental offices. Don't worry, the guys on whose interest you are working for with all the money, power and connections have already transferred their assets to New Zealand, Malta and other safe havens where they can relax during the storm. //EDIT: whops, i forgot what i was going to originally post. Enjoy! At least they are dropping any pretense now. This is taken out of context, the " media " like CNN is more supportive of Hilary but there are numerous reasons for this like the fact Trump constantly attacks the media and has been very rude to many journalists Ah yes. The perfect reason for abandoning the ethics of your profession "He was mean to me". If you dealt with a customer who was rude and difficult would you use information you gained from their IT systems to help their competition? Somehow I think not. Thats an exaggeration of how the media houses like CNN have treated Trump, for example that guy in the video Jake Trapper has a good relationship with Trump and often Trump gives him one on one interviews But the bias towards Trump IMO is where Trump will say something silly or controversial and its really gets discussed and debated ....and sometimes it just seems excessive

GD does this mean the Libertarian party will become a permanent political party and voting option going forward in the USA?