Politics 2017 part V

[Guard Dog]

Oddly enough, I interviewed a brewer in Ensenata who grew up in San Diego and had recently moved his whole family to Mexico for the business. There are also a lot of Americans who buy land in Mexico, slowly build houses on it, and then retire there.

 

The whole us vs. them mentality people like to have with Mexico is bizarre. As Trump said, half a trillion in trade every year and 1 million people cross that border every day. 

Especially around Cabo San Lucas. Have you ever been there? It's like someone moved Bolinas down to Mexico only everyone speaks English. But it is turning into a tourist trap which will ruin it i'm sure..

[Amentep]

Great Wall of China actually worked great for a very long time. China fell through betrayal, not because the wall was breached. Much like we're daily betrayed by our own government.

 

Edit:

 

Iyo, the lifetime costs to dealing with Mexico's "societal problems", the very same problems that Mexico itself cant fix, would be less than the one time cost of a wall?

 

To be fair though, there is no 'one time cost of a wall'. Once built, it'll have to be maintained just like any other structure or it'll fall apart eventually due to weather, seismic events, etc..

 

EDIT: took so long to respond I was beaten to it.  For shame.

 

Would be dwarfed by the cost savings in manpower needed to patrol a wall instead of open space. And the cost of the wall and its maintenance are dwarfed by what illegal aliens are costing us now.

 

 

I'm not saying there couldn't be cost savings in other areas.  There could also be unexpected cost increases - particularly if people willingly try to undermine/destroy sections of the wall. 

 

I was just challenging the idea that it was a one time fixed cost; build it and forget it.

[Guard Dog]

This Russia election thing is a steaming pile of BS. Hacking into the DNC is NOT... I repeat NOT NOT NOT "stealing the election". The DNC is PRIVATE ENTITY. They are in no way involved in administering elections nor tallying results. If we found out they were, now THAT would be a story.

 

So yes they did have their servers hacked and a bunch of embarrassing correspondence leaked. Sucks to be them. It is a crime and it's reasonable to refer it to the FBI. But here's the thing, their IT security is THEIR business. Get a better server and security next time. And if your e-mails embarrass you perhaps the solution is to exercise a modicum of professionalism in how you handle yourself and how you treat and speak of your colleagues, opponents, and those dirty peasants (voters) you want to vote for you but think you are better than. Don't be a jerk, don't collude with the media to sabotage one of your own candidates or rig a debate and this wouldn't be an issue.

 

And none of it resulted in the theft of a single vote. To "steal" a US election would be practically impossible. There are 50 states, each with their own system, many unique to that state. There are 3144 counties in the US, each with it's own election staff. Even if some of them could be hacked (itself a near impossibility since most use paper ballots) you couldn't get enough. You couldn't stuff the ballot boxes because if more votes are cast than there are voters it will be noticed. Even if you were using shill voters you would need tens of thousands to turn even close a state.

 

If the Russians did hack the DNC, fine. Do something about that. But don't call is "stealing the election" it's nothing of the sort.

[HoonDing]

Trump is the healthiest man on Earth. Just look at him.

[Leferd]

I don't think I, or the informed persons involved with the investigation have made the claim of Russia "stealing the election" or of hacking voting machines and the like.

 

To quote DNI James Clapper's testimony:

 

[Gromnir]

 

Oddly enough, I interviewed a brewer in Ensenata who grew up in San Diego and had recently moved his whole family to Mexico for the business. There are also a lot of Americans who buy land in Mexico, slowly build houses on it, and then retire there.

 

The whole us vs. them mentality people like to have with Mexico is bizarre. As Trump said, half a trillion in trade every year and 1 million people cross that border every day. 

Especially around Cabo San Lucas. Have you ever been there? It's like someone moved Bolinas down to Mexico only everyone speaks English. But it is turning into a tourist trap which will ruin it i'm sure..

 

back when the housing market collapsed ~2008, a few o' our friends who were retiring sudden found their homes worth less than half what they s'posed, and other savings depleted.  couldn't retire comfortable in the usa.  so they moved to mexico.  is apparent a number o' communities south o' the border which sprang up specific to appeal to folks in similar straights. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Meshugger]

If anything, the KGB is quite happy on what they achieved years back. 

[Guard Dog]

@Leferd: OK, influence then. What exactly did they influence? Do you think revealing the Clinton Campaign was colluding with the media or that the DNC was trying to sabotage Sanders came as a surprise to anyone? Do you think finding out Clinton thinking rules don't apply to hear some some kind of earth shattering revelation. Or finding out that Podesta, Mook, Margolis or Palmerei are all snotty **** changed anything? None of that made Trump any more desirable and none of it made Clinton less repulsive. Some 130M votes were cast for those two. I would bet better than half of those were cast against the other candidate rather than for one of them.

 

Substitute in any other... well almost any other candidate from either side and the whole story changes. The man on the street stuff seems to ferret out the dummies but I think most Americans are pretty well informed. Nothing revealed by Wikileaks came as a surprise to anyone. Regardless of where it came from.

 

Heck even if the Russians bought campaign ads it wouldn't have mattered. We are so inoculated to them it's like people living next to an airport. After a time you don't even hear the planes anymore.

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

 

 

wE KNOW mexicans ar egreta at making countries greta - it explains why so many of them flee Mexico. Mexicans know that Mexico sucks hence why they are desperate to become Amerikans. Amerika > Mexico. PERIOD.

sadly, such simple reasoning would lead to the conclusion o' mexico>USA.

 

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016/01/05/more-mexicans-leave-the-us-than-come-across-the-border

 

obviously the issues ain't as simple as vol believes, but for many mexican immigrants to the USA, illegal or otherwise, mexico has become an increasing attractive option. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Fake news straw man. Trump didn't say anything about "net Mexican migration". The professor is putting words in his mouth, then claiming Trump is wrong. Plus the author is obviously an open borders advocate, and left leaning Pew studies are always suspect. It's also notable that they chose the period of the worst US economy for their study, when many people lost their jobs and had to move back to Mexico where cost of living is much less.

 

Edit: US takes 1 million permanent immigrants each year and 20% of all the world migrants, yet even people who qualify to immigrate in Mexico have to wait 20 years!

For example, married children of U.S. citizens from Mexico must wait more than 20 years for a visa to become available, and Filipino siblings of U.S. citizens currently wait about 25 years.

https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/why-don’t-they-just-get-line So yeah, no one wants to come here!

 

you clear don't understand strawman if you are raising a trump issue in the present circumstances.  vol didn't mention trump.  Gromnir didn't mention trump.  vol suggested the flow o' mexicans coming into america shows usa>mexico.  we noted how such reasoning would lead to the conclusion o' mexico>usa 'cause mexican immigrants are leaving the usa at a higher rate than they is arriving, and the linked study claims such has been the case for a number o' years.  wanna talk' bout trump instead? make up an irrelevant issue and then attempt to refute it? *chuckle*  clear don't get straw man.

 

I said the linked article is strawman because they assume what Trump meant, then argue against that, instead of what he actually said. As far as definitively refuting Pew, I can't do that because there is no credible data available, so they can get away with claiming anything. It's certainly true that many more people want to come here than can get in, which I proved above.

 

regardless, the the data clear covered more than simple the recent economic downturn. suggest otherwise means you yet again didn't bother to read or didn't understand.

It covered 2009-2014, the period of high unemployment and slow growth. Illegal migration surged in 2015 and 2016, and has now fallen like a rock because of the credible threat of enforcement. Edited May 12, 2017 by Wrath of Dagon

[Malcador]

Wonder if they will ever get Trump off Twitter.

[Leferd]

What are the facts?

 

There were two hacking entities known by US Intelligence to have explicit ties to the Kremlin engaged in cyber-attacks targeting the DNC and RNC. Selected documents with a clear preference for one party over the other are then sent to and released by WikiLeaks and other entities that are opposed to establishment interests.

 

The Russian Government also employs a propaganda army of internet trolls and media influencers to engage in information warfare promoting certain candidates and positions that are seen as being more friendly to Russian government interests, while at the same time attacking candidates and supporters in opposition. Where's Oby, btw? I miss that guy.

 

Via the use of hard and soft power, the Kremlin's goal is to disrupt and destabilize adversarial powers that are against the interest of Putin's Russia, i.e., The USA, NATO, and the EU.

 

Exactly how much influence the Kremlin was able to achieve is difficult to quantify, but their actions certainly helped put Brexit and Trump over the top, and helped the National Front in France gain significant traction.

 

If you haven’t done so, read this.

 

https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf

 

Excerpt:

 

KEY JUDGMENTS

 

Russian efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election represent the most recent expression of Moscow’s longstanding desire to undermine the US-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of effort compared to previous operations. We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump. We have high confidence in these judgments.

 

· We also assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence.

 

· Moscow’s approach evolved over the course of the campaign based on Russia’s understanding of the electoral prospects of the two main candidates. When it appeared to Moscow that Secretary Clinton was likely to win the election, the Russian influence campaign began to focus more on undermining her future presidency.

 

· Further information has come to light since Election Day that, when combined with Russian behavior since early November 2016, increases our confidence in our assessments of Russian motivations and goals. Moscow’s influence campaign followed a Russian messaging strategy that blends covert intelligence operations—such as cyber activity—with overt efforts by Russian Government agencies, state-funded media, third-party intermediaries, and paid social media users or “trolls.” Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin.

 

· Russia’s intelligence services conducted cyber operations against targets associated with the 2016 US presidential election, including targets associated with both major US political parties.

 

· We assess with high confidence that Russian military intelligence (General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate or GRU) used the Guccifer 2.0 persona and DCLeaks.com to release US victim data obtained in cyber operations publicly and in exclusives to media outlets and relayed material to WikiLeaks.

 

· Russian intelligence obtained and maintained access to elements of multiple US state or local electoral boards. DHS assesses that the types of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in vote tallying.

 

· Russia’s state-run propaganda machine contributed to the influence campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and international audiences. We assess Moscow will apply lessons learned from its Putin-ordered campaign aimed at the US presidential election to future influence efforts worldwide, including against US allies and their election processes.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Russia was pulling for Trump while the American media was pulling for Clinton. Seems fair to me.

[Leferd]

Russia was pulling for Trump while the American media was pulling for Clinton. Seems fair to me.

So you support hostile Russian activity in undermining American democracy over the free excercise thereof of the press?

 

Glad to know where you stand as an American.

[Chilloutman]

 

Russia was pulling for Trump while the American media was pulling for Clinton. Seems fair to me.

So you support hostile Russian activity in undermining American democracy over the free excercise thereof of the press?

 

Glad to know where you stand as an American.

 

free press, i chuckle a lot

[Gromnir]

 

 

 

 

wE KNOW mexicans ar egreta at making countries greta - it explains why so many of them flee Mexico. Mexicans know that Mexico sucks hence why they are desperate to become Amerikans. Amerika > Mexico. PERIOD.

sadly, such simple reasoning would lead to the conclusion o' mexico>USA.

 

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016/01/05/more-mexicans-leave-the-us-than-come-across-the-border

 

obviously the issues ain't as simple as vol believes, but for many mexican immigrants to the USA, illegal or otherwise, mexico has become an increasing attractive option. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Fake news straw man. Trump didn't say anything about "net Mexican migration". The professor is putting words in his mouth, then claiming Trump is wrong. Plus the author is obviously an open borders advocate, and left leaning Pew studies are always suspect. It's also notable that they chose the period of the worst US economy for their study, when many people lost their jobs and had to move back to Mexico where cost of living is much less.

 

Edit: US takes 1 million permanent immigrants each year and 20% of all the world migrants, yet even people who qualify to immigrate in Mexico have to wait 20 years!

For example, married children of U.S. citizens from Mexico must wait more than 20 years for a visa to become available, and Filipino siblings of U.S. citizens currently wait about 25 years.

https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/why-don’t-they-just-get-line So yeah, no one wants to come here!

 

you clear don't understand strawman if you are raising a trump issue in the present circumstances.  vol didn't mention trump.  Gromnir didn't mention trump.  vol suggested the flow o' mexicans coming into america shows usa>mexico.  we noted how such reasoning would lead to the conclusion o' mexico>usa 'cause mexican immigrants are leaving the usa at a higher rate than they is arriving, and the linked study claims such has been the case for a number o' years.  wanna talk' bout trump instead? make up an irrelevant issue and then attempt to refute it? *chuckle*  clear don't get straw man.

 

I said the linked article is strawman because they assume what Trump meant, then argue against that, instead of what he actually said. As far as definitively refuting Pew, I can't do that because there is no credible data available, so they can get away with claiming anything. It's certainly true that many more people want to come here than can get in, which I proved above.

 

regardless, the the data clear covered more than simple the recent economic downturn. suggest otherwise means you yet again didn't bother to read or didn't understand.

It covered 2009-2014, the period of high unemployment and slow growth. Illegal migration surged in 2015 and 2016, and has now fallen like a rock because of the credible threat of enforcement.

 

so, wod indulged in strawman to point out strawman?  *chuckle* regardless, technical the article linked ain't even strawman as the premise were phrased as "if" trump were referencing mexico. is one o' the inherent flaws o' overdependence 'pon logic.  the premise itself were sound enough. 

 

also, the data covering the immigration issue ain't gonna get much more definitive than numbers released by the US government and Mexican government.  again, show how methodology were wrong.  first you expressed the problem as a leftist bias.  now is a suggestion there simple is no credible data available... which we will recall the next time you claim numbers of or costs related to illegal immigration.  got a long memory.

 

oh, and the linked pew study addressed more than 2009-2014.  please recheck.  they got data going back much further.  gonna give you one more chance to correct your own error.

 

"Russia was pulling for Trump while the American media was pulling for Clinton. Seems fair to me."

 

one can hope this were just another wod hyperbolic brain spasm. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited May 12, 2017 by Gromnir

[Wrath of Dagon]

From your link

The Pew Report looks at the years between 2009 and 2014. It combines Mexican survey data on the entry of Mexicans and their families – including American children – with U.S. census data on Mexican entries to the United States. The report is designed to overcome the limitations of national statistics that typically ignore departures.

As far as data reliability, US data is simply the US census. Even Americans don't like to answer the intrusive census questions, but have to under penalty of law. Is it credible that an illegal alien who's already breaking the law really going to admit to the US government that not only is he illegal, but there are another 15 illegals living in his two room apartment? Every time there's a census major cities raise hell because they claim illegals are undercounted which costs them representation and per capita funding.

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

Russia was pulling for Trump while the American media was pulling for Clinton. Seems fair to me.

So you support hostile Russian activity in undermining American democracy over the free excercise thereof of the press?

 

Glad to know where you stand as an American.

 

Releasing Podesta's weird emails is not undermining democracy. It's only informing the American people, which our own press refuses to do.

[Namutree]

What are the facts?

 

There were two hacking entities known by US Intelligence to have explicit ties to the Kremlin engaged in cyber-attacks targeting the DNC and RNC.

Fake News: Those making the claim have a vested political interest, are known to lie to the public for political purposes in the past, have presented the public with ZERO hard evidence, and are also known for being incompetent; getting massive amounts of information wrong. No intelligence agency has actually checked to see if Russians of any variety (much less Kremlin connected) engaged in cyber attacks since the DNC refused to allow the FBI to do so. What investigation has been done on the matter was done by a private company known as Crowdstirke. A company known to be incompetent and having a vested interest in the well being of Ukraine. Totally unreliable source of information, and even they didn't establish that these "Russians" (zero hard evidence that Russians of any kind did anything; VPNs are NOT proof) have ties to the Kremlin. That is 100% speculation. Do not take speculation as facts.

 

TL;DR: Moronic liars with an anti-Russian bias make a claim based on guesswork and a game of telephone with moronic liars with an anti-Russian bias.

 

 

Until actual HARD EVIDENCE has been released to the public; any claim the intelligence community makes regarding Russia should be considered a lie by default.

[Gromnir]

From your link

The Pew Report looks at the years between 2009 and 2014. It combines Mexican survey data on the entry of Mexicans and their families – including American children – with U.S. census data on Mexican entries to the United States. The report is designed to overcome the limitations of national statistics that typically ignore departures.

As far as data reliability, US data is simply the US census. Even Americans don't like to answer the intrusive census questions, but have to under penalty of law. Is it credible that an illegal alien who's already breaking the law really going to admit to the US government that not only is he illegal, but there are another 15 illegals living in his two room apartment? Every time there's a census major cities raise hell because they claim illegals are undercounted which costs them representation and per capita funding.

 

so, as we stated already, you never bothered to look at the pew report which were linked.  you got a real issue with not actual reading stuff.  is a serious flaw.

 

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/11/19/more-mexicans-leaving-than-coming-to-the-u-s/ph_2015-11-19_mexican-immigration-01/

 

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/11/19/more-mexicans-leaving-than-coming-to-the-u-s/ph_2015-11-19_mexican-immigration-02/

 

"To calculate estimates of how many Mexicans left Mexico for the U.S., this report also uses U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey (2005-2013) and the Current Population Survey (2000-2014), both adjusted for undercount, which ask immigrants living the U.S. their country of birth and the year of their arrival in the U.S."

 

etc.

 

as stated numerous times in the study, the focus were 'pon reasons why mexican immigrants were leaving the US.  the interviews o' immigrants returning to mexico were from 2009-2014, but again, the study contemplated and addressed the flow o' mexican immigration going back significantly further than 2009.

 

you really gotta learn to use reading skills.  check author qualifications. etc.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Wrath of Dagon]

I read the article, I saw no reason to read some worthless study based on fictional data "corrected for undercount". Besides, the claim for net migrant outflow was based on the 2009-2014 period, even if they studied other periods as well. But the outflow period was my point.

[Gromnir]

I read the article, I saw no reason to read some worthless study based on fictional data "corrected for undercount". Besides, the claim for net migrant outflow was based on the 2009-2014 period, even if they studied other periods as well. But the outflow period was my point.

you are becoming comical.  heck, you can't even read color coded graphs we linked as the net outflow started in 2005.

 

you said:

 

"It's also notable that they chose the period of the worst US economy for their study, when many people lost their jobs and had to move back to Mexico where cost of living is much less."

 

to which Gromnir responded how The Pew Study provided data going back further than the recent economic downturn.

 

you denied. you never bothered to actual look at or read the pew study.  you even admitted you saw no reason to bother looking at the pew study, the study Gromnir kept referencing.

 

*shrug*

 

the pew study included the worthless and "fictional" immigration numbers provided by the US Census and homeland securitygoing back, in some instances, decades.  likewise, the study includes immigration data from the mexican government as far back as 1990, which no doubt is equal fictional.  the only fuzzy numbers we can see is the extrapolation o' the reasons why mexicans were returning to mexico from 2005 to present.  poll 1000 families is meaningful, but without seeing the questions presented and getting more details 'bout how the 1000 families were chosen, Gromnir is not certain how much faith to put into pew's conclusions 'bout the Reasons mexican immigrants has returned.  however, the baseline immigration numbers is not fuzzy.  US census and homeland security. Mexican government.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Wrath of Dagon]

The Pew graph title itself makes my point : "Net Migration to the U.S. From Mexico Below Zero After the Great Recession"  The bar graph shows net migration was -20,000 between 2005 and 2010, but does not specify which year it started. Almost certainly it only turned negative in 2008. If anyone is illiterate around here, it's you.

 

Edit: Btw, even accepting the Pew study, net migration from Mexico is not negative. This is because they're counting American born children of migrants as outflow. So they come here, multiply, then some of them leave with their children, but it's not all the same people that came in. And the children are American citizens, so they can return at any time.

Edited May 12, 2017 by Wrath of Dagon

[Gromnir]

The Pew graph title itself makes my point : "Net Migration to the U.S. From Mexico Below Zero After the Great Recession"  The bar graph shows net migration was -20,000 between 2005 and 2010, but does not specify which year it started. Almost certainly it only turned negative in 2008. If anyone is illiterate around here, it's you.

 

Edit: Btw, even accepting the Pew study, net migration from Mexico is not negative. This is because they're counting American born children of migrants as outflow. So they come here, multiply, then some of them leave with their children, but it's not all the same people that came in. And the children are American citizens, so they can return at any time.

you still have not read the study, eh?  alternative facts your way to daylight, is that the goal?  contrary to your statements, the data collected and presented goes back further than the recent economic downturn.  example: "The second chapter (of the pew report) uses U.S. Census Bureau data to examine characteristics of Mexican immigrants residing in the U.S. in 1990 and 2013." 

 

your initial complaint were ridiculous.  yeah, pew used the 2009-20014 timeframe for their study o' reasons why mexicans were moving back to mexico 'cause that is the period o' time when more mexicans were returning to mexico. duh.  fact o' a US economic downturn does not change the fact o' the underlying numbers.  do you got evidence o' a return to net positive mexico-to-usa immigration? the recent improvement in the economy has not benefited lower middle-class and lower class americans, so seems unlikely the situation for mexican immigrants has improved much, but knock yourself out looking for alternative numbers.

 

you made a mistake.  again.  heck, you failed to even read what were being discussed, which should be baffling but ain't.  even so, am suspecting you is gonna try and turn this into an endurance thing.

 

*shrug*

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

 

you still have not read the study, eh?  alternative facts your way to daylight, is that the goal?  contrary to your statements, the data collected and presented goes back further than the recent economic downturn.  example: "The second chapter (of the pew report) uses U.S. Census Bureau data to examine characteristics of Mexican immigrants residing in the U.S. in 1990 and 2013."

I said the study showing net outflow was for 2009-2014, same as the article you linked said, not that Pew never studied immigration before 2009. Trying to get last word through endurance is your thing, not mine.

[Malcador]

Hmm, gonna have to find the Manning and Snowden threads