US Elections 2016

[Rostere]

"How to hack an election"

 

BTW. Apparently the AZ voter database is vulnerable to simple SQL injection. Go figure. No wonder so many people had their party affiliation mysteriously changed.

[Volourn]

"In a call to MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” Clinton pointed to the New York Daily News’s front page, a tabloid that had the blaring headline “Bernie’s Sandy Hook Shame” on Wednesday.

In the story, the daughter of the school principal killed in the Sandy Hook shootings criticizes Sanders for opposing an effort to allow mass shooting victims to sue gun manufacturers.

 

“That he would place gun manufacturers' rights and immunity from liability against the parents of the children killed at Sandy Hook is just unimaginable to me,” Clinton said in the call."

 

Oh. She's one of THOSE idiots. Anyone who thinks that should be allowed is plain old fashion evil, nazi, pathetic, and has  absolutely no common sense.

[Bartimaeus]

Yeah, and anyone who commits reckless driving (or does any other type of malfeasance with a vehicle) should cause the car manufacturer to be held liable for charges. I think Bernie's a little too hard on guns already, but at least he's got an ounce of common sense here. Hillary's ridiculous.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Good, this shows she's afraid of the Bern. As she should be.

[Malcador]

Yeah, and anyone who commits reckless driving (or does any other type of malfeasance with a vehicle) should cause the car manufacturer to be held liable for charges. I think Bernie's a little too hard on guns already, but at least he's got an ounce of common sense here. Hillary's ridiculous.

Well not like they would win the suit. One of those things that sounds cool but won't make a lick of change.

[Zoraptor]

"Oh. She's one of THOSE idiots."
 

Volo, I think we need to dispel the notion that Hillary doesn't know what she's doing. She knows exactly what she's doing.

 

What she's doing is what might loosely be termed intellectually dishonest political posturing, she has not the slightest intention of allowing gun manufacturers to be sued, knows it would never fly even if she had and Bernie's reasons for publicly opposing it are spot on; they're just not politically expedient in (urban, they may well play well in upstate) New York. It's not idiotic. Evil, nazi and pathetic, on the other hand...

[Valsuelm]

She's not an idiot, but she is thoroughly insane. Sometimes these two different things have the same result.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Saw this on Twitter, so true:

 

 

 

David Frum Verified account 

‏@davidfrum

The immigration issue elevated Trump. Now Trump's own flaws are bringing him down. How to save the enforcement cause, post-Trump?

 

 

The Anti-Gnostic ‏@Anti_Gnostic · 13h13 hours ago

 

@davidfrum Trump is it. If he doesn't win, then your kids get to raise their kids in Northern Brazil and pay kidnap insurance premiums.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

She's not an idiot, but she is thoroughly insane. Sometimes these two different things have the same result.

Search for "Marco Rubio Pasta".

[BruceVC]

 

 

• Trump :  We will deport all 11 million illegal, mostly Latino's,  citizens :  Never been done before

As far as I know (and I welcome correction on this point), there's no such thing as an illegal citizen in the US. Naturalized citizens would have to be denaturalized to be deportable and citizens by birth can only renounce their citizenship, not be denaturalized. Legally at least (I know they're are cases where the courts have due to judicial error deported people).

 

You are pretty much correct.

 

Put simply, they aren't 'illegal citizens', they are illegal aliens. It's one of many things Bruce has wrong.

 

He's often like a 3rd grader who hasn't been paying attention to the math teacher telling an astrophysicist how to go about their calculations, then having the audacity to double down when the astrophysicist nicely explains why he's wrong.

 

Calling me a 3 rd grader is rich coming from you Vals, you the guy who believe 9/11 was committed by the USA to itself  

 

And you call me uninformed  

[Valsuelm]

 

She's not an idiot, but she is thoroughly insane. Sometimes these two different things have the same result.

Search for "Marco Rubio Pasta".

 

 

So it's not just a local joke...

[Valsuelm]

 

 

 

• Trump :  We will deport all 11 million illegal, mostly Latino's,  citizens :  Never been done before

As far as I know (and I welcome correction on this point), there's no such thing as an illegal citizen in the US. Naturalized citizens would have to be denaturalized to be deportable and citizens by birth can only renounce their citizenship, not be denaturalized. Legally at least (I know they're are cases where the courts have due to judicial error deported people).

 

You are pretty much correct.

 

Put simply, they aren't 'illegal citizens', they are illegal aliens. It's one of many things Bruce has wrong.

 

He's often like a 3rd grader who hasn't been paying attention to the math teacher telling an astrophysicist how to go about their calculations, then having the audacity to double down when the astrophysicist nicely explains why he's wrong.

 

Calling me a 3 rd grader is rich coming from you Vals, you the guy who believe 9/11 was committed by the USA to itself  

 

And you call me uninformed  

 

Yes Bruce, you are generally uninformed about near everything you ever talk about, as for the most part all you ever do is parrot the talking points of propaganda source X. Parroting something, talking point or thought process given to you, is not being informed. Also, cognitive dissonance, the natural result of swallowing the diet of pure B.S. you yum up so often, is not a positive asset.

 

I easily spent over ~200 hours researching 9/11 some years back, watching footage, interviews, documentaries directly/indirectly related to the event, reading all sorts of stuff, and re-watching much of what I'd already seen. I even had the opportunity to speak with people who were in the buildings as well as that were in the military responding to the event that day (I've lived very close to a military installation that was directly involved in that event). I've spent much more than that ~200 hours contemplating all that I took in.

 

The truth in regards to that event is a very ugly and hard pill to swallow. It is a pill that most people will not want to swallow, and most will ignore. The truth is also quite complex. It is not as simple as '9/11 was committed by the USA to itself'.

 

This is not something I wish to discuss with you, as frankly it would be a waste of my time. You are probably the most close minded person and one of the least truly informed people on this forum (at least of the folks who post here regularly). Ironically, and even somewhat tragically for yourself, you believe the opposite.

 

You have my sincere pity.

Edited April 7, 2016 by Valsuelm

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

• Trump :  We will deport all 11 million illegal, mostly Latino's,  citizens :  Never been done before

As far as I know (and I welcome correction on this point), there's no such thing as an illegal citizen in the US. Naturalized citizens would have to be denaturalized to be deportable and citizens by birth can only renounce their citizenship, not be denaturalized. Legally at least (I know they're are cases where the courts have due to judicial error deported people).

 

You are pretty much correct.

 

Put simply, they aren't 'illegal citizens', they are illegal aliens. It's one of many things Bruce has wrong.

 

He's often like a 3rd grader who hasn't been paying attention to the math teacher telling an astrophysicist how to go about their calculations, then having the audacity to double down when the astrophysicist nicely explains why he's wrong.

 

Calling me a 3 rd grader is rich coming from you Vals, you the guy who believe 9/11 was committed by the USA to itself  

 

And you call me uninformed  

 

Yes Bruce, you are generally uninformed about near everything you ever talk about, as for the most part all you ever do is parrot the talking points of propaganda source X. Being able to parrot something, talking point or thought process given to you, is not being informed. Also, cognitive dissonance, the natural result of swallowing the diet of pure B.S. you yum up so often, is not a positive asset.

 

I easily spent over ~200 hours researching 9/11 some years back, watching footage, interviews, documentaries directly/indirectly related to the event, reading all sorts of stuff, and re-watching much of what I'd already seen. I even had the opportunity to speak with people who were in the buildings as well as that were in the military responding to the event that day (I've lived very close to a military installation that was directly involved in that event). I've spent much more than that ~200 hours contemplating all that I took in.

 

The truth in regards to that event is a very ugly and hard pill to swallow. It is a pill that most people will not want to swallow, and many will ignore is even there. The truth is also quite complex. It is not as simple as '9/11 was committed by the USA to itself'.

 

This is not something I wish to discuss with you, as frankly it would be a waste of my time. You are probably the most close minded person and one of the least truly informed people on this forum (at least of the folks who post here regularly). Ironically, and even somewhat tragically for yourself, you believe the opposite.

 

You have my sincere pity.

 

No  Vals  9/11 is actually not that hard to understand, the attack on the US is well documented and understood by most people....outside of conspiracy theorists like yourself 

 

And despite the fact Al-Qaeda has admitted committing 9/11 people like you dismiss the facts because  " you know something no one else knows " 

 

But I have also no interest in discussing 9/11 with you, I find your views equally as exasperating as you find mine

 

You should  stick to things that you really are an expert on  Vals like your views on the US Constitution....you really understand the US Constitution hey Vals, you similar to  Gromnir   when it comes to the Constitution, well informed and insightful. Oh wait....you not really 

[Meshugger]

 

 

 

"It makes no sense to break up the big banks" - Guy whose family are bankers

 

Is Bruce from a family of bankers? That would actually make oodles of sense.

 

 

He even has a family member in prison for some sort of Wall Street scandal.  

 

No not Wall Street scandal, inside trading. But his actions were condemned unequivocally by all, no one made excuses. You can work in the financial sector and be ethical and not break the law

 

But yes Vals many members of my family are involved in the financial sector but that has got nothing to do with  my real concern about this suggestion to break-up the banks or implement restructuring in the financial sector in the USA 

 

You ask what has not been implemented before from Trump or Sanders....many things they suggest are radical and never been implemented before..in fact conventional wisdom is vociferously against most of these idea....lets see

 

• Sanders :  Restructuring of the  financial sector in the USA : Never been done before Wrong, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_Legislation
• Sanders :  Extreme taxing of the wealthiest Americans :  Never been done before  Wrong, scroll down to 1948 and look at the tax rate http://taxfoundation.org/sites/default/files/docs/fed_individual_rate_history_nominal.pdf
• Trump :  We will bulld a wall between the USA and Mexico :  Never been done before Wrong, the chinese great wall was built
• Trump :  We will deport all 11 million illegal, mostly Latino's,  citizens :  Never been done before Wrong, it was done in already in the 50's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Wetback
• Trump : We block all Muslims coming to the USA: Never been done before Wrong, the immigration act of 1924 effectively banned all immigration from Africa and Asia until 1965 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924

 

I can on and on if you want but I think you get my point 

 

 

I can already forsee an "But that's not exactly what i meant"-answer.

Edited April 7, 2016 by Meshugger

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

"It makes no sense to break up the big banks" - Guy whose family are bankers

 

Is Bruce from a family of bankers? That would actually make oodles of sense.

 

 

He even has a family member in prison for some sort of Wall Street scandal.  

 

No not Wall Street scandal, inside trading. But his actions were condemned unequivocally by all, no one made excuses. You can work in the financial sector and be ethical and not break the law

 

But yes Vals many members of my family are involved in the financial sector but that has got nothing to do with  my real concern about this suggestion to break-up the banks or implement restructuring in the financial sector in the USA 

 

You ask what has not been implemented before from Trump or Sanders....many things they suggest are radical and never been implemented before..in fact conventional wisdom is vociferously against most of these idea....lets see

 

• Sanders :  Restructuring of the  financial sector in the USA : Never been done before Wrong, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass%E2%80%93Steagall_Legislation
•  
• Sanders :  Extreme taxing of the wealthiest Americans :  Never been done before  Wrong, scroll down to 1948 and look at the tax rate http://taxfoundation.org/sites/default/files/docs/fed_individual_rate_history_nominal.pdf
•  
• Trump :  We will bulld a wall between the USA and Mexico :  Never been done before Wrong, the chinese great wall was built
•  
• Trump :  We will deport all 11 million illegal, mostly Latino's,  citizens :  Never been done before Wrong, it was done in already in the 50's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Wetback
•  
• Trump : We block all Muslims coming to the USA: Never been done before Wrong, the immigration act of 1924 effectively banned all immigration from Africa and Asia until 1965 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924
•  

 

I can on and on if you want but I think you get my point 

 

 

I can already forsee an "But that's not exactly what i meant"-answer.

 

Sorry Meshugger but I just can't  have a serious debate with someone who uses a justification that " because the Chinese built a wall  over 2000  years ago this is somehow relevant in the year 2016 to  the political  and social dynamics the US grapples with  " 

 

 

No offense but you either trolling or woefully ignorant, either way I wont engage in this level of intellectual discourse.  We can debate other topics but not this one

[Meshugger]

Dismissal with cherrypicking one point and answer with empty statements like "the current year", ergo you have absolutely no counterargument and weasel yourself out with gratulating yourself on your own self-percieved intelligence. Step up your game, even a child can spot this level of dishonesty.

Edited April 7, 2016 by Meshugger

[Valsuelm]

Sorry Meshugger but I just can't  have a serious debate with someone who uses a justification that " because the Chinese built a wall  over 2000  years ago this is somehow relevant in the year 2016 to  the political  and social dynamics the US grapples with  " 

 

 

No offense but you either trolling or woefully ignorant, either way I wont engage in this level of intellectual discourse.  We can debate other topics but not this one

On this too you are wrong. While the Chinese did indeed build a wall over 2000 years ago, the majority of what is today considered the 'Great Wall of China' was built during the 14th-17th centuries, under the Ming Dynasty.

 

There have been walls built all over throughout history, and in modern times. They vary in their efficaciousness.

 

Fact is that there's currently already a wall along much of the U.S. border with Mexico, and there was supposed to be an expansion of it, however that (along with enforcement of much of the border in general) has been quashed under the Obama administration. There are currently walls all over, one is somewhat famously between Israel and the West Bank (which is expanding as we speak).

 

I could go on.

 

Truly, you have no idea what you are talking about. Frankly, I do not think you are capable of serious debate with anyone. Serious debates require honesty and an ample level of knowledge on a subject. You are too dishonest with yourself, and have never so far as I've ever seen demonstrated an ample level of knowledge on anything you've ever discussed on these forums. Again and again people point out where you're wrong, and again and again you pretend it doesn't happen.

[Blarghagh]

Okay, this one's gone double the allowed amount but now it's time to close it. Someone can make a new one if they want.