The 2016 US American Election Thread

[Red Slinger]

I kind of liken it more to someone claiming that the Earth is flat. Probably not worthy of interacting with them as they are clearly not subject to reason. But I feel a little uncomfortable silencing them entirely as it only feeds their persecution complex.

While I find it somewhat frustrating that these conversations get off topic trying to convince someone that the Earth is indeed spherical, I also find oddly interesting trying to understand what makes a guy like this tick. Is he stupid, pyschologically unbalanced, trolling, head trauma?

I think the answer is the same on the internet as if you had met this person IRL: You don't willingly engage and you keep your distance because he's clearly unbalanced. Unfortunately, he got exactly what he is probably looking for: attention. So, let's not engage him and if he wants to spout off he can. Nobody here is changing his mind about anything.

[Izzle]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

Who becomes the arbiter of what constitutes a stupid post?

If they posted in that manner they would get quickly banned.

The standard of quality is the responsibility of the entire board, not just certain posters with dissenting viewpoints. Those who continually encourage or antagonize the "trolls" are as destructive to the quality of conversation as the troll themselves.

I suppose, the moderating team needs to look at the posting quality of an individual in its entirety and make that determination. They make a difference when they nip it in the bud. This is not to say that they're not doing a good job. Moderation can be thankless, but I applaud them for doing this voluntarily.

Dissenting opinions are fine, but what if the base for these opinions are from extreme right wing outlets and are thoroughly debunked? Should they be allowed to continue.

Anyways, I'll leave this thread topic as this is far too off-topic. I will contribute this news article. Its a pretty good read: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/17/op...&_r=1&referer=

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Gozer

Your comment reminded me of this (long read);
http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-reason...e-talks-about/

That's a depressingly good article. Depressingly because it's on Cracked.

To those ignored, suffering people, Donald Trump is a brick chucked through the window of the elites. "Are you #######s listening now?"

It's like I said earlier in this thread (somewhere). It's a shame that legitimate gripes got sucked into the whirlwind of racism and misogyny and will probably be dismissed in the future as a result of association with Trump.

[ResAlien]

Jesus Christ there is a simple fix here. The report button exists for a reason. Report it, if it's an issue the mods will address it. If they don't then it's clearly been deemed allowable.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Newest Trump cult conspiracy theory: Pamela Anderson was sent to London to poison Julian Assange. So on the one hand I want this election to badly end, at the same time I'm gonna miss the conspiracies.

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by Izzle

Dissenting opinions are fine, but what if the base for these opinions are from extreme right wing outlets and are thoroughly debunked? Should they be allowed to continue.

That's kind of what I'm getting at though.

Let them believe what they want to, they've already made up their mind. If we stop engaging the trolling, it gets pretty boring for them.

They are either forced into the actual conversation, or leave.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Newest Trump cult conspiracy theory: Pamela Anderson was sent to London to poison Julian Assange. So on the one hand I want this election to badly end, at the same time I'm gonna miss the conspiracies.

They're not going away

[Senator Clay Davis]

Good news, polls aren't rigged anymore and CNN must not be failing either

Donald J. TrumpVerified account ‏@realDonaldTrump 5m5 minutes ago
Wow, new polls just came out from @CNN Great numbers, especially after total media hit job. Leading Ohio 48 - 44.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...50035539865600

[jammies]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

Who becomes the arbiter of what constitutes a stupid post? .

The mods. Just like they currently decide who gets suspended, or banned.

CP isn't the government. It's not a freedom of speech argument, it's an argument about what kind of content a private discussion site does and does not want to encourage. It's like arguing you have the right to come over to my house, give me a Watchtower pamphlet, and then sit in my living room discussing how I'm going to burn with Satan for as long as you feel appropriate. My kicking you out is not an attack on free speech, and neither is any other limitation of your "right" to speak in or on someone else's private property.

Right now you can't swear on CP. You can't post scantily clad pictures of women. You can't personally insult other posters. There are rules, and if you don't abide by them, there are consequences. This would be no different. In any event, the point is moot because the mods can't limit posts, so it's just a wistful dream.

Anyway, enough of the off-topic for me. Although it's still infinitely better than more incoherent, disingenuous "Shrillary" talk.

[Looch City]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Good news, polls aren't rigged anymore and CNN must not be failing either



https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...50035539865600

All polls are rigged.*

*Except ones that show Trump is winning.

[Izzle]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

That's kind of what I'm getting at though.

Let them believe what they want to, they've already made up their mind. If we stop engaging the trolling, it gets pretty boring for them.

They are either forced into the actual conversation, or leave.

I see your point now. I would have to agree. Cheers.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by jammies

CP isn't the government. It's not a freedom of speech argument, it's an argument about what kind of content a private discussion site does and does not want to encourage. It's like arguing you have the right to come over to my house, give me a Watchtower pamphlet, and then sit in my living room discussing how I'm going to burn with Satan for as long as you feel appropriate. My kicking you out is not an attack on free speech, and neither is any other limitation of your "right" to speak in or on someone else's private property.

Sure it is. They can't speak to their issues in your house. It is by definition a limitation on their freedom of speech. It just happens to be a perfectly reasonable limit, in light of the countervailing benefit to society achieved by allowing people to exclude others from their property.

The same goes for a forum. There are any number of reasons why the moderators don't want X topic discussed, or don't want it discussed in a certain way, that might be economic (e.g. advertisers wouldn't want to support the site), or from a utilitarian perspective they think stopping a person from posting will result in an overall better discourse which will encourage more posting on the whole. But it's perfectly reasonable to disagree with any conclusion they might reach on that front.

It seems to me that allowing guys like Itsmagic and Illuminaughty to post in spite of being a beer short of a six pack is a better option than banning them, particularly in light of the existence of the ignore feature, which though an imperfect solution does provide some balance. Also, I just never like the idea of anyone unilaterally deciding whose opinions are too crazy for others to hear, even if there are good reasons they should have that authority.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Even now I bet you most Americans have no idea about any of the specifics of NAFTA. They clearly don't about TPP, 70% either don't know or haven't read anything about it. I also hear so much blame on job losses because of trade deals, but very little due to the biggest cause by far which is technology and automation. Even China is losing manufacturing jobs to automation now. Better to blame bad trade deals because you can blame specific individuals instead of technology, where it's a lot harder to single someone out for blame.

From Canada's perspective, I'm highly skeptical of TPP and would probably prefer to see it defeated. But I think it's probably to the benefit of the US, by virtue of the fact that the US is by far the economic power of the signatories and it throws up a certain amount of firewall between those smaller economies and China, making them more dependant on the US for goods. It's just so weird that nobody is vocally advocating for it right now there; I can't remember any deal that's been such a PR disaster where it's so quickly become poison for all sides to touch. I feel like Clinton would probably love for it to get resolved during the lame-duck session and see it passed while being able to say that she personally opposed it.

[puffnstuff]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Good news, polls aren't rigged anymore and CNN must not be failing either



https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...50035539865600

All the pollsters should put out a fake poll showing numbers Trump likes, he can then claim they arent rigged. Then put out the real numbers and see what happens. It would amuse me greatly.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Clearly Trump supporters can be easily triggered, so we need to give them safe spaces

Amy Schumer was faced with booing and walkouts in Florida over the weekend after she made jokes about Donald Trump.

Around 200 people left her show at the Amalie Arena in Tampa after the controversial comic called the Republican candidate an “orange, sexual-assaulting, fake-college-starting monster”.

According to the Tampa Bay Times, Schumer covered issues ranging from the election to gun control, an issue she’s spoken out about before following the shooting that took place at a screening of her film Trainwreck in 2015.

At one point in the show, Schumer asked a Trump supporter, “preferably one with sleeves”, to come onstage and explain why they were picking him. A local man got up and explained the decision was about not liking Clinton.

“Do you get worried at all with how impulsive he is?” she reportedly said to him. “Do you worry he’ll be impulsive and get us in a lot of ####ing trouble we can’t get out of?”


As audience members booed, Schumer responded: “Of course, we’re in Florida, you’re going to boo. I know you’re here to laugh, but you choose how you’re going to live your life, and it’s just too important. Just so you know, from now on, if you yell out, you’re gonna get thrown out.”

https://www.theguardian.com/culture/...ida?CMP=twt_gu

[peter12]

Originally Posted by nik-

That's a depressingly good article. Depressingly because it's on Cracked.



It's like I said earlier in this thread (somewhere). It's a shame that legitimate gripes got sucked into the whirlwind of racism and misogyny and will probably be dismissed in the future as a result of association with Trump.

There are enormous issues related to American democracy that are not being addressed. It is too bad that many people, on both sides, refuse to actually investigate why so many people are supporting Trump.

Instead they decide to focus on scattered media reports, which is honestly just providing a distorting picture.

[Kavvy]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Clearly Trump supporters can be easily triggered, so we need to give them safe spaces



https://www.theguardian.com/culture/...ida?CMP=twt_gu

It sounds like she turned a portion of a comedy show into a political stump speech without jokes.

Booing at a comedy show which isn't funny isn't a reflection on trump supporters.

[HockeyIlliterate]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Clearly Trump supporters can be easily triggered, so we need to give them safe spaces



https://www.theguardian.com/culture/...ida?CMP=twt_gu

Meh, Amy Schumer isn't the slightest bit funny and her hypocrisy is grating. I'm surprised that anyone showed up to her show at all.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Kavvy

It sounds like she turned a portion of a comedy show into a political stump speech without jokes.

Booing at a comedy show which isn't funny isn't a reflection on trump supporters.

Yeah, Schumer sucks.

[PsYcNeT]

I'm pretty sure 90% of all stand-up I've seen this year (live and specials) has been 50% jokes and 50% being unable to comprehend why people are voting for Trump.

Just look at all the newest specials on Netflix. David Cross, Patton Oswalt, Jim Jeffries all have new specials where the majority is just visible pain at the thought of a Trump presidency. Not surprised Schumer is taking the same shots.