Pidesco

No one knows how to look at something critically. Either you can look at things critically because you have literally no stake in the subject matter, or you have a stake in the subject matter and then you are not critical, even if you are unaware of your bias. You have no conscious control over it, either way. Although, after saying that, I would argue that the ideal conditions under which one would be unbiased are hypothetical conditions that never happen when you are making a judgment.

“When life itself seems lunatic, who knows where madness lies? Perhaps to be too practical is madness. To surrender dreams this may be madness. Too much sanity may be madness, and maddest of all: to see life as it is, and not as it should be!” "I once got so drunk I woke up in a bathtub next to a girl I had Microeconomics with. She looked so beautiful with her smeared makeup and the smell of vodka and pineapple was pleasant. I have never felt such love for anyone since." -KP I don't like quotes because the ones I usually post are obscene. Yes, in the sense that it's even more blatant about how corrupt they are. At least try to not look like a piece of **** and all that. Well, yeah, I guess that's surprising. One would think they'd be more competent about hiding this stuff.

Is anyone actually surprised about the content of the leaks? Does anyone actually think that the Republican or the Democratic parties used to function differently at one point? The difference between Nixon and any other President isn't that he was corrupt, it's just that he was the one who was caught.

Everyone that has ever played a game with a RNG has experienced this. It's usually all in your head.

My problem with Trump isn't him in and of himself, but rather the people that support him. He rose to political prominence on a platform of fascism and racism, and a scary percentage of the American population says that that is what they want for their country. Look also at the Brexit vote, which instantly brought the racists out of the woodwork in the UK. I hope you understand that Trump doesn't make "off color" comments. He makes straight up horrible statements as part of his political platform. Calling Mexicans rapists and murderers is absolutely abhorrent and not an "off color comment"

My question is, given that Trump has repeated sexist, racist, and fascist statements to his name, and he is a cartoon example of an evil 1 percenter, who the hell doesn't hate him, and why?

And she replied that men belong on the dining room table?

You seem to forget that this is Ted Cruz that you're talking about. Few people display such dishonest character traits such as he does. Which is why I included the word "appear".

It certainly is a calculated move. After Trump crashes and burns, the GOP will double down and say that Trump just wasn't conservative enough. Cruz will take the opportunity to point to this moment and say "look how conservative and morally principled I am!" However it still was kind of the moral thing to do and I that strikes me as completely against character for a guy like Cruz.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuGd-N1aBkc Trump made Ted Cruz appear to take a moral stand. Is this an accurate measure of how vile Trump is?

The bit that seems to be plagiarized appears to be too big of a train of thought and with too many of the same the words to be a "speech template" or a sound byte like "world peace". In any case, the point isn't that this woman stole the other woman. The question is rather one of competence regarding the Trump campaign. Why would they let something like this through any kind of vetting process? Again, it appears that everything in the campaign is being run off the cuff.

I always proofread what I write and always miss a bunch of things anyway. I'm pretty damn good at proofreading other people's writing, though.

The Republican "strategy" has been to double down on everything for a long time. "This thing we did didn't work? We'll do it again like children throwing a tantrum, then." See Benghazi, for example.

Given the rickroll I can only assume Trump's campaign managers are taking the opportunity to troll everyone.

What the speech wasn't missing was plagiarizing of a speech by Michelle Obama. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/19/melania-trump-republican-convention-plagiarism-michelle-obama Also, they took care to include a Rickroll.

Doesn't matter. By your philosophy you could simply turn even $1000 into more than a million, just by investing in an index fund. I assume any index fund will do, as you don't need to be intelligent or successful to realize which one of those you'd even need. As WoD said a page or two back: Successful people are not afraid to fail. I'll go one further and say that successful people also don't make up BS excuses for why they weren't successful before they are. Either put your money where you mouth is, or realize you're full of it. Or, continue to bask in your willful ignorance, thinking things that are patently untrue and ignoring the realities all around you that prove such. It's not a philosophy, it's a fact. If you start life rich enough to live off interest, getting richer is easy.

Unfortunately, I don't have 100 million dollars to invest. https://www.ifa.com/calculator/?i=sp500&g=100000000&s=1/1/1978&e=6/30/2016&gy=true&af=true&aorw=false&perc=false

Lots of people inherit a million or two dollars. Lots of people get fronted similar amounts of money by their parents when they start out. Extremely few turn that money into billions as Trump has. You are uninformed or a fool if you don't see that. He didn't inherit 1 or 2 million dollars, he inherited a lot more. The money Trump got from his dad was enough to net him billions of dollars as long as he invested it in some index fund back in the 70s.

The idea that Clinton is more corrupt than any other politician is hopelessly naive. Seems to me like Barnes is a guy with an agenda if he singles out Clinton for corruption. She is a politician in a major party, of course she is corrupt. Stating that she is more corrupt than any other politician is either stupidity or a deliberate attack. Given that her opposition is a textbook example of corruption, I also don't see a point in singling out Clinton for corruption.

http://www.vox.com/2015/9/2/9248963/donald-trump-index-fund http://www.alternet.org/story/156234/exposing_how_donald_trump_really_made_his_fortune%3A_inheritance_from_dad_and_the_government's_protection_mostly_did_the_trick Here ya go.

Trump isn't particularly successful. He was just born really rich.

Ubisoft killed the Rainbow Six style tactical shooter, and no one cared.

Trump seems to me like someone who has demonstrated the power of winging it when you have billions of dollars behind you. I don't know if he is intelligent or not but his success in business doesn't seem to corroborate his intelligence. I also don't think the way he behaves is an act he has been performing for the past 30 years.

Was Trump/Pence's logo commissioned by Cornholio?

A Trump victory could make everywhere a very interesting place. As in "may you live in interesting times" special kind of interesting.