The New American Politics thread

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by peter12

You really are a Manichean, aren't you.

Get stuffed with your dime store philosophical garbage. That stuff may impress those posers at the Fraser Institute but to anyone else with a brain in their head it is a backhanded insult. I don't see any of this as a good versus evil battle like you retired political scientists do, I view this as deciding who can be trusted to do the right thing for the greatest number of people.

She has lied about being broke, about trying to join the Marines, about being named after Edmund Hillary, about having immigrant grandparents.

What politician or rich prick for that matter hasn't stretched the truth about their back story? Also, these stories need some context to be properly discussed, and not just dismissed as flat out lies. If you want to run through them one at a time, I'm game, but it doesn't establish much except that you'll pin the slightest thing on Clinton but ignore the same type of crap from Trump.

[/quote]And Bosnia? It was the centre of her husband's foreign policy. It was an incredibly historical moment.[/QUOTE]

Ah yes, the Clintonian Foreign Policy Doctrine. What a pivotal moment in US and world history. The reality is that Bosnia was a blip on the foreign policy radar. The Clinton foreign policy was based on extension of humanitarian aid, which is what lead to the establishment of the Clinton Foundation - a direct extension of Clinton's foreign policy vision. The Dayton Agreement was hardly the massive pillar of Clinton's foreign policy legacy. If anything his legacy was how to practice diplomacy and use peacekeeping without getting bogged down in military engagements.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Pence agreeing with Trump, Putin is "unarguably" a better leader than Obama. Someone should show them the economic situations of both countries, but why make Obama look good and Putin terrible?

https://twitter.com/CNN/status/773983851421003776

[nik-]

Leaders of the right in the US on their knees in praise of the Russian ex-KGB pseudo dictator and the right wingers are loving it.

What a time to be alive.

[peter12]

Get stuffed with your dime store philosophical garbage. That stuff may impress those posers at the Fraser Institute but to anyone else with a brain in their head it is a backhanded insult. I don't see any of this as a good versus evil battle like you retired political scientists do, I view this as deciding who can be trusted to do the right thing for the greatest number of people.

Man, it really doesn't take much to set you off, does it?

What politician or rich prick for that matter hasn't stretched the truth about their back story? Also, these stories need some context to be properly discussed, and not just dismissed as flat out lies. If you want to run through them one at a time, I'm game, but it doesn't establish much except that you'll pin the slightest thing on Clinton but ignore the same type of crap from Trump.

I loathe Trump. I've said it many times. My only comment was that Clinton was/is/will always be an inveterate liar.

Ah yes, the Clintonian Foreign Policy Doctrine. What a pivotal moment in US and world history. The reality is that Bosnia was a blip on the foreign policy radar. The Clinton foreign policy was based on extension of humanitarian aid, which is what lead to the establishment of the Clinton Foundation - a direct extension of Clinton's foreign policy vision. The Dayton Agreement was hardly the massive pillar of Clinton's foreign policy legacy. If anything his legacy was how to practice diplomacy and use peacekeeping without getting bogged down in military engagements.

Was this before or after he fired a cruise missile into a country's only supply of pharmaceuticals to avoid domestic political scrutiny?

Honestly, you can dislike Trump AND Clinton.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by peter12

Man, it really doesn't take much to set you off, does it?

I loathe Trump. I've said it many times. My only comment was that Clinton was/is/will always be an inveterate liar.

Was this before or after he fired a cruise missile into a country's only supply of pharmaceuticals to avoid domestic political scrutiny?

Honestly, you can dislike Trump AND Clinton.

Don't try and play dumb now. Labeling someone a Manichaean then trying to run away from it? Man up and own your insults.

You're right, you can dislike both Trump and Clinton, and I do. Both are reprehensible characters IMO, but having said that they are the only two options we have to vote for. And no, I'm not going to be a fool and waste my vote on a candidate that has no chance of winning, not when there is a possibility of doing serious damage to our foreign relations with important allies when we need them most. I may not like someone, but I can recognize who is capable of getting a job done with the best intent in mind. I would think a political scientist would understand that the cult of personality is not a mechanism that should be allowed to influence the decision of what candidate to vote for, no?

Loved your distillation of Clinton's foreign policy down to one cruise missle and a weak RW talking point. Well done.

[2Stonedbirds]

Originally Posted by nik-

Leaders of the right in the US on their knees in praise of the Russian ex-KGB pseudo dictator and the right wingers are loving it.

What a time to be alive.

Putin is teaching master class chess and Trump is sitting there yelling "KING ME."

[KootenayFlamesFan]

So the Trump campaign isn't even sure what/who the interview is for?

Kevin Cirilli‏@kevcirilli
Trump campaign spokeswoman says that they thought Larry King interview was going to be on King's podcast -- not RT.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by peter12

Man, it really doesn't take much to set you off, does it?




I loathe Trump. I've said it many times. My only comment was that Clinton was/is/will always be an inveterate liar.



Was this before or after he fired a cruise missile into a country's only supply of pharmaceuticals to avoid domestic political scrutiny?

Honestly, you can dislike Trump AND Clinton.

Seriously man. That didn't happen. You're smarter than that.

You really think Clinton could go to his military commanders, fabricate intelligence, and then tell them to randomly fire three quarters of a billion dollars worth of missiles so the American public might forget about him lying to Congress? Seriously? Was 9/11 an inside job? Moon landing a hoax?



Some people will do anything to find a Clinton scandal

[Mr.Coffee]

The Aleppo thing for Johnson is a bit of a joke. We're talking one mis-step (has there been others? I haven't seen), compared to Clinton who's a person that should have been indicted or Trump who... I mean come on.

It's not even close here. So Johnson doesn't know what the Aleppo is, but that's a raindrop compared to the ocean of stupidity and ongoing mistakes by the Trump campaign. Trump's campaign has been such a colossal cluster #### it's difficult to even remember all the stupid things in their entirety.

Lastly, I doubt Trump could even point out where Iran is on a map, let alone claim that he knows what the Aleppo in a coherent sentence, let alone... let alone... let alone... come on.

Originally Posted by peter12

Clinton has a history of humble-brags/egregious self-aggrandizing by placing herself at the fulcrum of important historical moments.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ire-in-bosnia/

hahaha okay, Trump's brand and entire identity for decades has been bragging, boasting and extreme piles of arrogance.

Personally I'd be more onboard with the humble brag approach to self promotion but that's maybe the Canadian in me. Trump's style just seems so unintelligent.

Originally Posted by nik-

Honestly though, if it came down to it and the US told China to get ####ed over the debt it owes, what do you think would happen?

A new country (likely, several) would become the base of manufacturing for products to the US if China started strong arming trade and China would be left holding its dick. Clothing has already moved out of China for the most part.

National debt on a US scale with the US economy and military power isn't real. Especially when that debt is owed to a passive aggressive trade partner.

Wouldn't the problem or concern be, though, that China is transforming from a country that just manufactures things and distributes them worldwide to a country of a large, growing and important middle class that can be sold products to themselves? That have some wealth with a large population? I mean that's why American companies are all trying to diversify and move into China, it's the old "big growth" play for major American corporations.

So if the States does what you say, how does that impact American companies? Big American companies, that still do employ lots of Americans and still do have huge ties to the American economy? Also, maybe the States don't want to piss off a country like China, because in fact they do want that big Chinese middle class to sell stuff to. Not an expert on this stuff, just random thoughts here.

[Buster]

The Johnson thing is a remarkable piece of straw-grabbing if I've ever seen one.

The dude literally mis-interpreted the question. Happens all the time. I blame it more on the phrasing of the question by the interviewer who was equally clueless.

And he didn't follow-up with an admission of anything than that he didn't understand the question. It's one of the stupidest non-stories of the entire election campaign.

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

The Aleppo thing for Johnson is a bit of a joke. We're talking one mis-step (has there been others? I haven't seen), compared to Clinton who's a person that should have been indicted or Trump who... I mean come on.

Well there was the time he didn't know who Harriett Tubman was. Also there's his support for the TPP despite not actually knowing what it does. There was the fact that he didn't even know his own running mate's feelings on hate crime legislation.

http://fusion.net/story/345167/gary-...t-know-aleppo/

I'm probably more up-to-date than many of my peers on political topics both domestic and abroad, because I go out of my way to keep track of it, but I sure as hell know what Aleppo is, and someone attempting to become leader of the strongest military in the world should know at least as much as I do.

Libertarian ideals are all well and good until you realize that US can't just pull out of its foreign entanglements that easily. You can't just ignore what's happening in the rest of the world, to US allies, because that's part of what we've signed up for when we decided to play world police. Johnson runs on a platform of stripping regulations, cutting taxes as low as possible, and legalizing marijuana, but his knowledge beyond those topics, and especially on foreign policy, is superficial.

While he's vastly more qualified than Trump--that's not saying very much. And Jill Stein couldn't even manage to land in the right city in Ohio.

Like it or not, there's one candidate that has a combination of experience and knowledge of foreign and domestic policy, and it's Clinton. She's far from perfect, but she's dramatically more qualified than any other horse in this race.

[Caged Great]

As much as some people might hate it, Hillary is at least competent. Everyone else is bordering on being variations of Ralph Wiggum or in Trump's case Nelson Muntz, although Muntz had some redeeming qualities.

[ernie]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Lastly, I doubt Trump could even point out where Iran is on a map, let alone claim that he knows what the Aleppo in a coherent sentence, let alone... let alone... let alone... come on.

Pfft. He knows the best maps and best ways to point out countries. A lot of smart people say he does.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by KootenayFlamesFan

So the Trump campaign isn't even sure what/who the interview is for?

Kevin Cirilli‏@kevcirilli
Trump campaign spokeswoman says that they thought Larry King interview was going to be on King's podcast -- not RT.

Ahh the old "no good scenario" situation. Either they willingly went on RT, which is well known as the mouthpiece for the Kremlin, which shows gross ignorance. Or, as they now claim, they were "tricked" into giving an interview that went on RT, which shows massive incompetence. Choose wisely Trump campaign!

[puffnstuff]

I just saw the spin that he was doing it as a 'favour' for his 'friend' King. And there were more clarifications of what he really meant when he said the things he said. Never mind just the fact checking, someone should also compile a list of the 'What he really meant'.
Heres a wild thought, maybe have him say, the first time, what he really means.

The debates are going to be hilarious.

[taco.vidal]

Originally Posted by New Era

Get stuffed with your dime store philosophical garbage. That stuff may impress those posers at the Fraser Institute but to anyone else with a brain in their head it is a backhanded insult. I don't see any of this as a good versus evil battle like you retired political scientists do, I view this as deciding who can be trusted to do the right thing for the greatest number of people.

Good on you for calling him out and calling a spade a spade.

[Buster]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Ahh the old "no good scenario" situation. Either they willingly went on RT, which is well known as the mouthpiece for the Kremlin, which shows gross ignorance. Or, as they now claim, they were "tricked" into giving an interview that went on RT, which shows massive incompetence. Choose wisely Trump campaign!

This is largely the same spin Clinton uses vis-a-vis the email scandal.

[Buster]

Reason has had great coverage of the election (which is no surprise).

http://reason.com/archives/2016/09/0...y-clinton-a-fr

What must have been most off-putting was Clinton's performance. For the first time, a small part of me was forced to concede that Clinton might be one of the few politicians in the country awful enough to lose a general election to Trump. She must have felt something went wrong as well because for the first time in 278 days she held a formal press conference, on a tarmac in New York.

By the end, Clinton had answered a total of four questions, not one of them challenging or enlightening in any genuine way. Two softballs allowed her to pontificate about foreign policy. One question was about the horserace, and one about the unfair treatment she receives from the media.

Clinton said during the press conference: "I have been somewhat heartened by the number of articles recently pointing out the quite disparate treatment of Trump and his campaign compared to ours. I don't understand the reasons for it." That's probably because it's a complete fantasy propagated by partisans and now internalized by the media as a reality.

[fatso]

People need to stop saying things like "if I did what Clinton did, I'd be in jail" and "Hillary is an inveterate liar". It's not true and not productive.

The reality is that Trump shouldn't even be allowed on the debate stage with her. Regardless of his views, he has zero political experience or service, is intentionally uninformed, and cannot formulate a coherent thought. It's an absolute joke that he is even a candidate, let alone won his party's nomination.

There may be plenty of reasons to dislike Hillary based on her public service record, but trying to engineer that they're equally (or close to equally) bad choices is disingenuous at best.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by fatso

People need to stop saying things like "if I did what Clinton did, I'd be in jail" and "Hillary is an inveterate liar". It's not true and not productive.

The reality is that Trump shouldn't even be allowed on the debate stage with her. Regardless of his views, he has zero political experience or service, is intentionally uninformed, and cannot formulate a coherent thought. It's an absolute joke that he is even a candidate, let alone won his party's nomination.

There may be plenty of reasons to dislike Hillary based on her public service record, but trying to engineer that they're equally (or close to equally) bad choices is disingenuous at best.

Good answer. Good answer. I like the way you think. I’m gonna be watching you.