The 2016 US American Election Thread

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by Izzle

The simple answer to the first question is really that when you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.

I dont know where I heard it, but its not something I thought of.

ETA: Red Slinger has it right too. One cannot "lose" their rights.

I'm a few pages behind here, but I wanted to comment on this, because I think this has a lot to do with the state of the US right now.

http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/html/ic.../krupnick.html
http://www.pbs.org/speak/speech/prejudice/women/

A few interesting studies, just focusing on the breakdown of time speaking in a group discussion. Men tend to dominate conversation. I've seen other versions of this study (I can't find them for the life of me right now, I can't seem to find the right google search terms for it, I guess) where in rooms where women spoke 30% of the time, men later viewed it as both genders spent equal time speaking--when women actually spoke 50% of the time, men later said they believed that women dominated the conversation.

Similarly, in the second debate, despite Trump's complaints that they allowed Clinton to speak more--he actually held the edge in time speaking (by only a minute or so, to be fair). Equal speaking time was viewed by him as her dominating the conversation.

To bring that to this current debate, the rift in America between beliefs and races: I think that white people are terrified at the idea of a black first family--a step towards equality feels to them like an an attack. And just the same way with Hillary Clinton, especially men are so worried of the idea of a woman having power over them, they see a strong woman as oppressive.

It's a really insightful point--equality looks like oppression when you're used to having the upper hand, and I think that answers a whole lot of why this country is so divided.

[octothorp]

So about Trump inviting Malik Obama to the debate...

According to allegations, he's had a lot of wives including one teenager, abuses his wives, has a possibly bogus charity that never actually registered for charitable status (until called on it), was a Democrat supporter who just recently switched to the Republicans, and has been friends of a vicious authoritarian dictator. I can see why these two get along.

I'm guessing he's playing the Libya angle here, but man, it's hard to make sense of the logic behind this.

[Drak]

Originally Posted by octothorp

So about Trump inviting Malik Obama to the debate...

According to allegations, he's had a lot of wives including one teenager, abuses his wives, has a possibly bogus charity that never actually registered for charitable status, was a Democrat supporter who just recently switched to the Republicans, and has been friends of a vicious authoritarian dictator. I can see why these two get along.

I'm guessing he's playing the Libya angle here, but man, it's hard to make sense of the logic behind this.

Seems really odd. Does Trump know he's up against Hillary and not Obama?

[comrade]

Originally Posted by Drak

Seems really odd. Does Trump know he's up against Hillary and not Obama?

Obama told Trump to stop whining today (maybe yesterday). Do you really expect Trump to show restraint and focus on what's important?

[Sluggo]

Imagine if Trump suggested a term limit on Supreme Court justices. He would get riots in the streets even before the election.

[octothorp]

Actually it kinda makes sense that Trump thinks he can say "look at my black muslim friend here!" on one hand and look all open-minded and tolerant, while at the same time say, "hey, remember that Obama's brother is a Kenyan Muslim!" *wink*

I still think the optics are terrible.

[Senator Clay Davis]

So two things about this: One, Trump actually has a higher net favorability than someone. Progress! Two, the Pence number shows how badly the GOP dicked this election up. I think Cruz still loses to Hillary, but pretty much anyone else would have won.

Matt McDermottVerified account
‏@mattmfm
Favorability ratings (Bloomberg):
M. Obama +29
B. Obama +11
B. Clinton +3
Pence +9
Kaine +2
Dems +1
H. Clinton -5
Ryan -9
Trump -25
GOP -26

https://twitter.com/mattmfm/status/788689391531229184

[photon]

Rubio with a good stance on Wikileaks stuff.

[Fuzz]

That's kinda funny though. "We have bad secrets too!"

[ernie]

Hey Marco, I appreciate the sentiment but it's a little late. You probably shouldn't have put yourself in the muck in the first place. That would have been, in the end, a lot easier than trying to climb out of it. And of course the only reason you are trying to climb out of it is because Trump is killing GOP chances in Florida. Including your own.

[dobbles]

Originally Posted by AcGold

This is the textbook on shutting down a conversation

1. It's not real
2. It's a conspiracy that's impossible
3. "Do you really believe"

those buzzwords of conspiracy and believe are a pretty strong tell someone has made up their mind way before critical thought.

Originally Posted by AcGold

Yet another buzzword to kill discussion. "Debunked"

Conspiracy theorist
Do you really believe
Nutbag
Tinfoil hat
Debunked

Just a few of the fun ways to instantly discredit someone and end critical thought before it starts. I'm far from a genius political scientist but I do have a degree in psychology and studied linguistics for years. It's easier to dismiss something than actually have to think about it even if it's not true.

Originally Posted by AcGold

Hypothetical is the very meaning of not real

It's the fact that you use the word conspiracy, it's a buzzword that ignores all preposition and counterpoint

What does beleiving have to do with anything. What does it matter who believes what? That's an incredibly easy way to diminish an argument. Something happened or it didn't.

I like how you waited for your buddy so you could have it two on one. Now three on one, the point stands. You'll do everything but discuss it. I'm not saying the video is true whatsoever, simply that there are about 15 or so buzzwords and tactics in the modern lexicon that ends all debate before it starts.

Originally Posted by AcGold

I have watched plenty of Flat Earth videos. I've got their documents and I tested their calculations. I've spent hundreds of hours studying astrophysics and the Flat Earth theories actually corroborate a lot of Einsteinian theories of relativity.

That being said it's clear you have given very little actual thought and research into either topic.

Mmm...false equivalence. I'm going to write this down so I can follow your script for ignoring critical thought.

1. Use buzzwords
2. Groupthink
3. False equivalence

Am I missing something? Is ad hominem number 4? I bet it is.

Originally Posted by AcGold

Hypothetical is the very meaning of not real

It's the fact that you use the word conspiracy, it's a buzzword that ignores all preposition and counterpoint

What does beleiving have to do with anything. What does it matter who believes what? That's an incredibly easy way to diminish an argument. Something happened or it didn't.

I like how you waited for your buddy so you could have it two on one. Now three on one, the point stands. You'll do everything but discuss it. I'm not saying the video is true whatsoever, simply that there are about 15 or so buzzwords and tactics in the modern lexicon that ends all debate before it starts.

(emphasis added)

We get it, you think that people are using evil 'buzzwords.' You seem smart enough to realize this, but I feel it needs added: just because you label something as a buzzword doesn't magically dismiss the merit of the argument.


Regarding the videos in general:
To me the video was laughable. Only one of the 3 people wanted anything to do with the ideas. The latter 2 that they introduced both just sat there listening to the undercover reporters spout off a crazy long winded rant about doing these terrible things and then just said something along the lines of 'yeah, I'll get back to you on that.' The Foval guy obviously went into some pretty good detail on how to do it. Others have said he was most likely baited into speaking hypothetically (which based on the past videos by this guy would seem likely) but I actually got the impression listening to him that he had some sort of Napoleon complex. He pretty much constantly had to talk about how awesome he was and how he always has to do everything. Just seems like he probably isn't an actual fixer as I doubt they go around boasting that much. (I get all my information on how fixing works by watching Ray Donovan on Showtime BTW)

Another point that has been brought up about the video is that if there wasn't any merit, the guy wouldn't have been fired. I feel that argument to be weak. We saw when O'Keefe released the ACORN videos in 09 that people were fired and disciplined based on initial reaction only to later find out they really weren't guilty of doing anything wrong. Unfortunately in the 24 hour news era, and an era that wants to see heads roll for every minor issue, it is in organizations best interests to just cut ties as soon as possible regardless of guilt.

[puffnstuff]

Is buzzword a buzzword?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Using buzzwords demonstrates your cognitive dissonance.

[troutman]

[CaptainCrunch]

Buzzword the greatest word ever created when your stoned. Buzzzzzzword, buuuuuzzzzzword, BUZWRD.

Not that I would know that.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by dobbles

Regarding the videos in general:
To me the video was laughable. Only one of the 3 people wanted anything to do with the ideas. The latter 2 that they introduced both just sat there listening to the undercover reporters spout off a crazy long winded rant about doing these terrible things and then just said something along the lines of 'yeah, I'll get back to you on that.' The Foval guy obviously went into some pretty good detail on how to do it. Others have said he was most likely baited into speaking hypothetically (which based on the past videos by this guy would seem likely) but I actually got the impression listening to him that he had some sort of Napoleon complex. He pretty much constantly had to talk about how awesome he was and how he always has to do everything. Just seems like he probably isn't an actual fixer as I doubt they go around boasting that much. (I get all my information on how fixing works by watching Ray Donovan on Showtime BTW)

I think there is a lot more credibility to the accusations of violence than the ones about voter fraud based on the footage. There is a lot less room for interpretation for that with based on Foval being pretty blunt about his involvement.

Obviously these allegations need a lot more detailed investigations to determine if there are criminal charges warranted or if they are valid.

These guys aren't just randoms either. Creamer is a guy who is very connected, and has visited the White House at least 100+ times and met with Obama on multiple occasions.

[Red Slinger]

I think this hits the nail on the head.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/17/tech...hp-toplead-dom

The press takes him literally, but not seriously; his supporters take him seriously, but not literally.

And here's an amazing coincidence. A recent book cataloged all the synonyms for bull####, and one of the oldest dates back to the 1400s. It originally referred to trickery and scamming, although its meaning has evolved to include general nonsense and insignificance. That word: trumpery.

[photon]

Trump bashes the San Antonio mayor who said that the police officers that wore Trump hats while on duty would be disciplined for violating policy, says she should be ashamed of herself multiple times and says "I assume she's a Democratic mayor".

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/loc...ds-9982020.php

[photon]

Conway mentions Trump's five point plan to defeat Islam, oops!

https://thinkprogress.org/conway-tru...m-36e37c212358



She also says they invited Obama's half brother because "we're inclusive".

Another day, another horcrux

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/1...te-2016-229983

Trump was talking about open borders in 2013, Clinton should bring that up when Trump talks about her talking about open borders in the past.

http://www.businessinsider.com/donal...conomy-2016-10

[Drak]

Fox News moderator for tonight's debate. Should be, interesting...