The US Election, Part XI

[Volourn]

"Congratulations America, you put GamerGate into the White House"

 

Is that supposed to hurt us? Because, THANKS.

 

DON'T MISS WITYH GAMERS AND THEIR GAMES YOU SJW NAZI PIECES OF CRAP!!!

[licketysplit]

I recommend Sam Harris' podcast on this with Andrew Sullivan, no matter your stance on the election. They let emotion get the better of them is spots, but still very insightful. 

 

https://www.samharris.org/podcast/item/the-most-powerful-clown

 

At least they bring up more nuanced arguments than the media clowns. 

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

Just out of curiosity, how's Thiel a racist?

 

"He supported Hogan who called his daughter's boyfriend the n word. Plus he supports Trump who is racist, sexist and homophobic which means he can't be gay and must hate women as well as hating pocs. He also hates free speech because he and Hogan [plus the jury that awarded Hogan more than he asked for] put Gawker out of business and media should be protected [when targeting those I dislike]. He's alt right [gak] and just a horrible rich white guy whose policies would target the poor who include a lot of pocs"

 

Slight paraphrasing, of course, but I've seen all those 'arguments' made.

 

My response would normally be an eye roll and quote of Cicero's devastatingly casual response 'narratus tepidarius frater' which so infuriated Mark Anthony, if it weren't so emblematic of everything that went wrong on the 'progressive' side. Hypocritical, unappealing to anyone who isn't already convinced yet appears to be effective because the only opinions valued by those saying it are people who already agree with them. As someone who actually is pretty left it's about the most stupid tactic I can imagine, it's already failed and continuing use of it just suggests that lessons will not be learned.

 

Yes, Thiel is racist because he supports Trump and Trump is racist because he's supported by racists. It's the perfect ouroboros of the "progressive" mind.

[Barothmuk]

The narrative has been set:

 

https://twitter.com/WDFx2EU8/status/798050268688437248People are calling for a bloody revolution.

Meanwhile in the real world liberals are blaming the "Berniebros" for Trump's win and are dismissing class rhetoric as the concern of "single-issue voters" who don't care about PoC, women, LBGTQ people etc. Edited November 15, 2016 by Barothmuk

[Elerond]

 

 

That picture seems to be more against Trump than in support of him. As one of the reasons why people say they supported Trump was that he is against political correctness and this picture implies that first three members in his administration have been selected because of political correctness and not because of said people's abilities.

[Volourn]

That woman helped him win the election. She clearly got where she is because of her abilities.

[Ganrich]

That woman helped him win the election. She clearly got where she is because of her abilities.

Indeed, and the media has glossed over the fact that she was the first female campaign manager in a successful Presidential election. Sexism.

[Longknife]

 

That woman helped him win the election. She clearly got where she is because of her abilities.

Indeed, and the media has glossed over the fact that she was the first female campaign manager in a successful Presidential election. Sexism.

 

 

Can you guys believe all those sexist, bigoted democrats didn't want him to win so his campaign manager wouldn't succeed? Hard to believe how hateful some people are!

[Meshugger]

 

The narrative has been set:

 

https://twitter.com/WDFx2EU8/status/798050268688437248People are calling for a bloody revolution.

Meanwhile in the real world liberals are blaming the "Berniebros" for Trump's win and are dismissing class rhetoric as the concern of "single-issue voters" who don't care about PoC, women, LBGTQ people etc.

 

 

Since the term "BernieBro" is a manufactured one by a think-tank employed by the Clintons to smear voters for Bernie as misogynists, i prefer not to use it. But, anyways, the BernieBros are the Trotskies to them and are treated as traitors since they have to gall to claim that the system is ****ed on a broader scope. They will be first against the wall before the enemy.

[Zoraptor]

 

 

 

That picture seems to be more against Trump than in support of him. As one of the reasons why people say they supported Trump was that he is against political correctness and this picture implies that first three members in his administration have been selected because of political correctness and not because of said people's abilities.

 

 

I'm pretty sure they'd say that it's a successful PR person, a self made billionaire and a prestigious surgeon who happened to be a woman, gay, and black respectively and were picked for their accomplishments alone. OTOH I'm also pretty sure they weren't actually the first three members of his team anyway.

 

And, of course, if Hillary won and had picked a woman, a homosexual and a poc the same people making the pic would be shouting political correctness, whatever their qualifications. Nature of the game.

[BruceVC]

"Congratulations America, you put GamerGate into the White House"

 

Is that supposed to hurt us? Because, THANKS.

 

DON'T MISS WITYH GAMERS AND THEIR GAMES YOU SJW NAZI PIECES OF CRAP!!!

Oh yes that makes loads of sense volo, we want to find meaningful similarities between GG and the Trump presidency because GG was a huge success....right volo   

[Raithe]

[redneckdevil]

Obviously ****tards didn't pay attention in social studies here when they were younger when it was explained how presidential election worked and function.

The popular vote don't mean ****, it was designed as the electoral votes meaning the most so that every citizen felt no matter where they are, their votes counted. Otherwise people from 3 states could dictate the direction of the country and the other states felt like their voice wasn't heard.

 

Now WHAT IS the problem and was not original designed, is the winner take all way the states are operating. Each state had assigned amount of electoral voters and by math, each candidate be assigned so many voters to how many the state had. Democrates in California wouldn't get ALL 55 voters and maybe a lil over half. BUT wait there's more!

https://youtu.be/i_thvwaKryY

Now think about third party candidates, theybreally feel they have no voice at all, BUT if we get rid of the winner takes all votes that all the states adopted later on, we would actually see 3rd party actually having votes and taking away from other party votes they mass amountvas they do today.

 

The system was actually a lot better and a helluva lot less confusing before they adopted that policy, which they can drop at anytime and I still don't know why they haven't.

 

Since for the mass majority of the time, popular and electoral votes always matched up except in 4 chances (3 really, 1 was just a govt total **** you to Andrew Jackson) to motivate voters, they gave the impression that their individual vote maters and is important, which isn't a lie but more of u thinking it's directly for the president but instead it does matter but in a smaller scale so that voters everywhere could be on a more level playing field.

 

Sorry rants over, I'm not getting into politics but it's just frustrates me that the ignorance is being so blantant out there. It's like read a ****ing book on the ****! Confused, pissed off? Instead of assuming what u think is what's right, look that **** up other than on media and Wikipedia sites. No, go to a ****ing library and pick u up a encyclopedia and sit down and quietly read mother ****er!!!

 

Now I'm waked and baked and had a ****ty week AND I'm gonna take my own advice and go look this **** up so I'm not just sprouting stoned high comments.....

 

Carry on

[Blarghagh]

I think that's the point, redneckdevil.

 

(Also, IMO Wikipedia is more trustworthy than most encyclopedias as long as you go the extra mile and verify or add to their sources. I'm an armchair archeologist, it stuck because I was a dinosaur nut as a kid, and I've yet to find an encyclopedia that isn't riddled with errors or outdated information about the subject. I use that as an example because it's something I can recognize mistakes and false information in, but I have no reason to believe the same doesn't hold true for any other subject and I just can't notice. Wikipedia as a user-generated platform has its flaws and can get screwed over on subjective or divisive topics and you're better off finding your own sources at all times, but **** the idea that old school paper encyclopedias are better.)

[Volourn]

"Oh yes that makes loads of sense volo, we want to find meaningful similarities between GG and the Trump presidency because GG was a huge success....right volo    :shrugz:"

 

It was. Look at all the butthurt and entertainment it gave me. It was bIGLY successful.

[Fighter]

Wasn't Hillary C. nominated using the same kind of system within her own party that people are complaining about now?

Edited November 15, 2016 by Fighter

[Hurlshort]

I think that's the point, redneckdevil.

 

(Also, IMO Wikipedia is more trustworthy than most encyclopedias as long as you go the extra mile and verify or add to their sources. I'm an armchair archeologist, it stuck because I was a dinosaur nut as a kid, and I've yet to find an encyclopedia that isn't riddled with errors or outdated information about the subject. I use that as an example because it's something I can recognize mistakes and false information in, but I have no reason to believe the same doesn't hold true for any other subject and I just can't notice. Wikipedia as a user-generated platform has its flaws and can get screwed over on subjective or divisive topics and you're better off finding your own sources at all times, but **** the idea that old school paper encyclopedias are better.)

 

Really?  Huh, I mean I get the outdated information, but I'm surprised to hear they are riddle with errors.  I tend to caution my students against relying on any one source for all their information, and as you said, verify the sources when looking at wikipedia.  Trying to convince students to not use wikipedia is an exercise in futility, so it is better to get them to think critically about what they find.

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

 

The narrative has been set:

 

https://twitter.com/WDFx2EU8/status/798050268688437248People are calling for a bloody revolution.

Meanwhile in the real world liberals are blaming the "Berniebros" for Trump's win and are dismissing class rhetoric as the concern of "single-issue voters" who don't care about PoC, women, LBGTQ people etc.

 

 

Since the term "BernieBro" is a manufactured one by a think-tank employed by the Clintons to smear voters for Bernie as misogynists, i prefer not to use it. But, anyways, the BernieBros are the Trotskies to them and are treated as traitors since they have to gall to claim that the system is ****ed on a broader scope. They will be first against the wall before the enemy.

 

Sanders better stay out of Mexico.

[Amentep]

Wasn't Hillary C. nominated using the same kind of system within her own party that people are complaining about now?

 

Similar but not the same as I understand it.  The Democratic party has Super-Delegates to the Democratic convention, so while the primary elections will determine which delegates or sent (or in what proportion for non-Winner-takes-all states), the Super-Delegates can, potentially, swing the party away from the vote of delegates.  No such entity exists in the Electoral College (and shouldn't, IMO).

[Wrath of Dagon]

Yes, the Democrat primary is even a far worse, much less democratic system than the Electoral College, but it's fine so long as it gives the right result.

 

Some very good analysis here, almost all true: http://observer.com/2016/11/americas-emerging-nationalism-crisis/

 

I would only add that we need American nationalism, not ethno-racial nationalism, and the Republican party needs to become the party of working people, not corporate fat cats, and not just white working people either.

Edited November 15, 2016 by Wrath of Dagon

[Guard Dog]

 

YES, YES, YES! This one says it all!

[BruceVC]

 

YES, YES, YES! This one says it all!

 

GD !!!  Thats uncalled for 

 

 

I enjoyed one of  those two videos you posted, the first one summarized nicely how most people misread the rise of Trump and how wrong the general media was 

 

The second video wasn't nice, not sure why  you would post  a video of a whole lot of people crying and clearly upset?

 

Also a South African company predicted accurately Brexit and Trumps success, they ignored the polls and used there own predictive method of who would win ....it seems genuine, what do you guys think?

 

 

http://www.yesafrica.biz/lifestyle/tech/south-africa-based-company-claims-to-have-predicted-trump-victory

[Guard Dog]

The truth is Bruce if the US Federal Government actually operated the way it was intended to the Presidential and Congressional elections would only be about Foreign Policy and the amount of regulation applied to business that operated over multiple State lines. It would be more about choosing administrators rather than leaders. Starting with FDR then hitting the gas under Johnson, Nixon, Bush II, and Obama that Federal Government has usurped all this power it was NEVER supposed to have and the American left has cheered it on the whole way because the left is all about forcing itself on everyone else. 

 

Now this terrible machine they have built is in the hands of someone they hate. Who didn't see that coming?

 

Edit: I see what you mean. The second link was not the one I meant to post. I was going to e-mail that one to someone. Got them mixed up. 

Edited November 15, 2016 by Guard Dog

[Guard Dog]

 

That or you don't understand how little actual power the President has. It's still too much though.

[Pidesco]

Properly enforced regulation should fix the issue of too much power.