He's racist yes, as was almost every President the US has ever had. There is a difference between racism and fascism. Racism is bad enough without needing to rebrand it.Originally Posted by Loki
He's racist yes, as was almost every President the US has ever had. There is a difference between racism and fascism. Racism is bad enough without needing to rebrand it.
I'd like some evidence of any US president in the last several decades explicitly discriminating against African Americans in their personal lives. I'd also like to see how many found themselves in constant agreement with white supremacists. There's a reason the white supremacists here view Trump as the "great white hope", the first since George Wallace.
Hope is the denial of reality
No one is actually suggesting the douche get jailed for not standing for the national anthem. Meanwhile out there in liberal land they do want to jail people for hate speech, they do want to bring back fairness doctrine and do want to put people in prison for violating campaign finance reform laws.
I think we agree in principle, Loki. I think that Trump is dangerous, but not in the 'burn down the Reichstag' dangerous. He can (and indeed has) poison politics and bring some very ugly nativism to the fore. But I think that it is unlikely that if Trump is a one-off, our institutions or our body politic would be irretrievably wounded. Furthermore, I question whether mainstream parties are really saying that his behavior is okay. Yes, I understand that he has won the lukewarm endorsement of a lot of Republicans, but there is far more party disunity over this candidate than I can remember seeing since I started paying attention to politics. Many Republicans in elected office continue to have terrible things to say about Trump and find his language and positions deplorable. That is hardly a ringing endorsement from a mainstream party.
I am optimistic that both parties are stronger than populist demagogues who challenge reasonable discourse. I am confident our public discourse and political institutions can weather this storm, even if Trump were elected. That isn't to say there wouldn't be damage, but it wouldn't be irretrievable.
Lewk, nowhere in my post did I single out conservatives as being particularly guilty of any of the crimes I accuse Trump of. I think you can find plenty of liberal and conservative politicians who dabble in each of the problems I highlight as emblematic of Trump's approach, but I believe that their take on it is milquetoast in comparison.
"When I meet God, I am going to ask him two questions: Why relativity? And why turbulence? I really believe he will have an answer for the first." - Werner Heisenberg (maybe)
You're looking at them to label liberals even though most liberals think that's crazy as well (not to mention that what you described isn't even actually liberal, but whatever).
I am a liberal and I think most of what you described is ridiculous as well.
Of course this point makes the outrage over Clinton criticising trump supporters ridiculous too, 'liberals' are constantly being called all kind of shit.
Keep on keepin' the beat alive!
This is where Lewk's inability to look at distinctions is really a shame.
They call themselves Progressives, with all of the self awareness of stone. All of the things they want is regressive in nature. So we call them Regressives. For example the want racially segregated dorms, lo and behold, they are getting them.
Brevior saltare cum deformibus viris est vita
Like the "safe space" nonsense were the precocious dears want to attend a university and get such rigorous debate that nobody can offend them.
Or the Black Lives Matter protestors in London recently who invaded and shut down an airport - of whom all were wealthy, middle class white students and there wasn't a single black person in the protest.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...ction=politics
Health-records though, that's another matter entirely.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
If his tax return is really 12,000 pages long then the IRS seriously needs reforming ...
I think the HuffPo editor may not be 100% impartial this year...
Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar,rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.
It does because the US taxation system is bonkers but I believe that's the total of all his tax filings.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Unless he's 1200 years old that's still unacceptable.
A lot of liberals don't make a point to disassociate themselves from these self described liberals. Where as conservatives bend over backwards to disassociate the crazies that claim to be conservatives (real racists).
Let's be clear it isn't ALL liberals that believe in this but it is the bleeding edge of the new generation. Its on college campuses and it is rampant.
Are these the same idealistic conservatives 2/3 of whom believe Obama is a Kenya-born Muslim or the 2/3 who support a ban on Muslims entering the country? Or the ones who tolerate the alt right?
Hope is the denial of reality
Of what possible relevance would his age be? And again, this is not just personal income taxes. It's myriad business filings too, including everything under the main holding company as well as the side-ventures which for some reason or other were not put under that umbrella.
Last night as I lay in bed, looking up at the stars, I thought, “Where the hell is my ceiling?"
See Fuzzy's post. Also, itemized tax reports for people who trade a lot with stocks etc. end up being very long, I believe.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Regarding age, Aimless said it was the total of all his filings. If he was 1200 years old at 10 pages per annual return that'd be 12,000 pages.
I suppose if they were to use super tiny text and compact fonts that would work.
I'm actually not sure it's his entire tax record.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
I don't believe 2/3rds of conservatives believe Obama is a Kenya-born Muslim. Also the ban for religious reasons is stupid. It should be based on geographic considerations which is going to likely be similar in effect. Ultimately America has no obligation to let anyone into the country.
http://www.rollcall.com/news/politic...k-obama-muslim
http://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-g...muslims-219877
Unfortunately, facts aren't on your side.
Hope is the denial of reality
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
Our joint tax return is 13 pages, and we don't have shit to file for. Trumps business related itemized holdings and massive loses listed out as his tax lawyers create (or fail to create as he is being audited) loophole after loophole would easily be novel length.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
Hope is the denial of reality
Your one poll doesn't mean squat. In fact your specific claim was 'conservatives 2/3 of whom believe Obama is a Kenya born Muslim.' I guarantee you if you asked the same population the birth country and religion of Obama without adding the terms Muslim and Kenya you won't get 2/3rds or anything close to it.
The other item that people forget that not everyone is honest. You'll get more accuracy on elections since being viewed as up in the polls is a positive for a candidate so there is little reason to lie about it however for other things where a lie helps their political viewpoint you might see it.
For example if you took a look at 1,000 self-identified Obama supporters and asked them "Do you think George Bush murdered <insert fictional name> to hide the truth about the Iraq war" what percentage do you think will answer with Yes despite it being completely fictional? You could do the same thing with 1,000 self identified Trump supporters expect ask "Do you think the Clinton's murdered <insert fictional name here" and I bet you would also get a decent number saying yes. Why do they respond that way? Because it is in their perceived self-interest to push more dirt on their political 'enemy.'
Do you believe Hillary Clinton had Vince McMahon murdered [] yes [] no [] IT WAS ME AUSTIN IT WAS ME ALL ALONG
In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
Nessus!
Good news on the polling stuff: for the first time EVER, in my entire adult life, as a registered voter, I've been solicited by a reputable polling agency! Quinnipiac called me twice, and on their second try (because I had caller ID on my new cell phone service), I was able to participate in their survey.
Their questions were pretty mundane, trying to figure out if I was a "likely voter", and which demographic group I belonged to (by age, race, sex, income, education). I supposed they were trying to figure out party loyalty, because they asked questions based on a binary choice (Clinton vs Trump, Democrat vs Republican) first, and then added choices for Johnson and Smith.
I was disappointed when the pollster couldn't tell me what the sample size was, if it was based on time or numbers of participants, or who funded the survey. Later, I heard that polls conducted over Labor Day weekend didn't really mean much.....
No wonder the Presidential Debate Committee has decided that Johnson and Smith don't have the "poll numbers" to be on the debate stage. What a crock.
Last edited by GGT; 09-17-2016 at 04:43 AM.
The split in a four-way vs. two-way has been funky in 'swing' states this season, so it makes sense they'd cover those bases!
In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
But the polls didn't always use a four-way option. I have no idea how an "average" of polls makes any sense, when half of the candidates weren't part of the polling process to begin with.
No facts aren't on your side. That's a fraction of a fraction, those links refer to Trump supporters while the primaries hadn't finished yet. The first link doesn't even have numbers to do maths. The second link actually has numbers unlike the first and it says that 1007 of 6433 surveyed support Trump. The two thirds figure comes from not two thirds of conservatives, but two-thirds of the less than one-sixth of registered voters that are Trump supporters. Then the question asked was not "should Muslims be banned from entering the country" but instead "two thirds do not have a favorable view of Muslim Americans", which compared to 35% of overall voters responding that way. There is a world of difference between not holding a favorable view and supporting a blanket ban on entering the country.
So your "fact" was in fact a "lie".
I think the fact that you have 13 pages for shit all is an indication some reform might be needed.
But I would have thought business filings would have been separate from personal filings and so wasn't thinking that would be included in this argument. Here at least a Limited Company is not part of your personal filings, it has its own tax return.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
