THE DEBATES 2016

pjhawks

Free said:

mrussel1 said:

And won a strong majority of the pledged delegates. If there were no SD's, she would have won the night she clinched California. These facts escape some.

Do I really need to point this out again. Voter suppression in nearly half of states. Including CA, the one you think she clinched, yet took over a month to count?
CA, 1 of the 5 last state primary vote in June, taken place the day after AP announced Hillary was the preemptive candidate?
No, no cheating or rigging there. The combination of voter suppression, SDs, repealing Obama's rule of not allowing big lobbyists from being campaign donars in an effort to get money out of politics? A disgraced DWS forced to step down from the DNC only to be promoted to special campaign manager of HRC? Half-empty high school gymnasiums for Hillary rallies compared to Bernie's tens of millions attending each of his rallies?

I can go on...

Bernie only got 13 million total votes in the primaries - so according to you pretty much every single person who voted for Bernie attended the rallies and most more than 1? umm ok there chief.

Godfather.

benjs said:

Godfather. said:

mrussel1 said:

Godfather. said:

Go Beavers said:

Discussing abortion is only a losing situation for her. Trump is totally ignorant about it and will say whatever in the moment and a lot of his followers are equally ignorant.

and you are voting for Hillary ? ignorant is sometimes self describing. why wouldn't you vote for one of the other people ?
because Hillary has so much "experience" ?



Godfather.

Yes, it's exactly why. And Trump is an incompetent fool, that's another good reason. The third is that the other candidates don't have a chance. So it seems pretty easy when you think through it rationally.

after a lot of thought and 8 hours of sleep whom ever we vote for and what ever reasons why we do we are right as long as we vote.
trying to convince others that we are right is usually a waste of time.

Godfather.

You've been consistently condescending in your treatment of anyone supporting Clinton. Nice of you to wash your hands of calling any supporter of Clinton a sheep for literally months, by doing an about face in your typical fashion by now saying that "every vote is a great vote".

Also, proposing that conversation for the sake of educating and learning is a waste of time is effectively to admit that "ignorance is bliss". Worse than that, when you take bidirectional conversation out of the picture, it means that the most resonant remaining news source is the mainstream media which you've condemned oh so much for its lack of truthfulness. Which is it? Do you want sheep, or do you want honestly educated people? And when honestly educated people's opinions are in disagreement with your fear-induced isolationist stances, are you willing to accept that maybe the populace aren't as stupid as you think, and share or value different stances from your own?

well actually I'm just tired of reading the senseless babble spewed on this topic, I know who I'm voting for and reading all the crap on here will not change my mind.
an opinion different than the AMT folks (not all but many) means having to defend yourself from insults...you guy's are just cool internet warriors ! in real life outside the train i bet you all hide in your safe places.

Godfather.

mrussel1

pjhawks said:

Free said:

mrussel1 said:

And won a strong majority of the pledged delegates. If there were no SD's, she would have won the night she clinched California. These facts escape some.

Do I really need to point this out again. Voter suppression in nearly half of states. Including CA, the one you think she clinched, yet took over a month to count?
CA, 1 of the 5 last state primary vote in June, taken place the day after AP announced Hillary was the preemptive candidate?
No, no cheating or rigging there. The combination of voter suppression, SDs, repealing Obama's rule of not allowing big lobbyists from being campaign donars in an effort to get money out of politics? A disgraced DWS forced to step down from the DNC only to be promoted to special campaign manager of HRC? Half-empty high school gymnasiums for Hillary rallies compared to Bernie's tens of millions attending each of his rallies?

I can go on...

Bernie only got 13 million total votes in the primaries - so according to you pretty much every single person who voted for Bernie attended the rallies and most more than 1? umm ok there chief.

And.... the city of Chicago metro has 10MM people total. Ergo, at every rally a crowd larger than the metro Chicago area would show up for it. That is mighty impressive, especially at a New Hampshire rally..

Bentleyspop

Halifax2TheMax said:

Free said:

Quack, quack, quack, quack! QUACK!

Hey no baiting

PJ_Soul

what dreams said:

PJ_Soul said:

what dreams said:

mrussel1 said:

what dreams said:

mrussel1 said:

DarthMaeglin said:

One of my fears coming out of these debates is that Clinton may well plunge us (ok, I'm Canadian, so you Americans, really) into another Cold War with Russia, given her rhetoric against Putin and his hackers. At least we'll have to pray it stays cold.

One other point of interest was how often it's being said "nowhere in history" has such-and-such happened, when some things could only have been possible in the last couple decades (such as Russians hacking Clinton's email, or Trump's refusal to commit to accepting the election results-how often was that a question in previous debates, especially since Al Gore?).

A cyber war is already happening. It won't be a military war.

Invading Ukraine isn't Cold War-ish? I have no problem with a hard posture toward Russia right now. They're not to be trusted.

Of course. I'm not saying there won't be proxy wars. Just saying I don't think it will be a direct military conflict.

I was really responding to the idea that it's the US and Clinton reviving the Cold War. My view is that Russian behavior is largely to blame for that.

Yes indeed. I guess I'm an idiot. I thought everyone understood that Russia isn't exactly angelic.

Huh? I didn't say anything about anyone being being an idiot. I was just responding to a post where someone said Clinton is going to revive the Cold War with her rhetoric about the hacks. I'm just pointing out that the tension with Russia pre-dates the hacks. She's right to say Putin doesn't want her as president because she and NATO won't let Russia run amok in Eastern Europe. I hope she continues to remind Americans what's going on there. It's an important foreign policy issue. I still can't believe we let them get away with that territory grab.

What? I was agreeing with you, lol.

Gern Blansten

Godfather. said:

benjs said:

Godfather. said:

mrussel1 said:

Godfather. said:

Go Beavers said:

Discussing abortion is only a losing situation for her. Trump is totally ignorant about it and will say whatever in the moment and a lot of his followers are equally ignorant.

and you are voting for Hillary ? ignorant is sometimes self describing. why wouldn't you vote for one of the other people ?
because Hillary has so much "experience" ?



Godfather.

Yes, it's exactly why. And Trump is an incompetent fool, that's another good reason. The third is that the other candidates don't have a chance. So it seems pretty easy when you think through it rationally.

after a lot of thought and 8 hours of sleep whom ever we vote for and what ever reasons why we do we are right as long as we vote.
trying to convince others that we are right is usually a waste of time.

Godfather.

You've been consistently condescending in your treatment of anyone supporting Clinton. Nice of you to wash your hands of calling any supporter of Clinton a sheep for literally months, by doing an about face in your typical fashion by now saying that "every vote is a great vote".

Also, proposing that conversation for the sake of educating and learning is a waste of time is effectively to admit that "ignorance is bliss". Worse than that, when you take bidirectional conversation out of the picture, it means that the most resonant remaining news source is the mainstream media which you've condemned oh so much for its lack of truthfulness. Which is it? Do you want sheep, or do you want honestly educated people? And when honestly educated people's opinions are in disagreement with your fear-induced isolationist stances, are you willing to accept that maybe the populace aren't as stupid as you think, and share or value different stances from your own?

well actually I'm just tired of reading the senseless babble spewed on this topic, I know who I'm voting for and reading all the crap on here will not change my mind.
an opinion different than the AMT folks (not all but many) means having to defend yourself from insults...you guy's are just cool internet warriors ! in real life outside the train i bet you all hide in your safe places.

Godfather.

yeah...you're voting for Cheeto Hitler and proud of it. Looks like he's going to get stomped....but maybe you'll get lucky and all the polls will be wrong.

PJ_Soul

HughFreakingDillon said:

so, if the american people are so tired of the status quo of garbage candidates, why did they nominate two? as ridiculous a process as the primaries may be, your country gets to choose your representatives to run. canada does not. for better or worse.

I'd definitely say that's for the better. We do elect the people who choose the candidates. They represent us, and so far they have all done a pretty decent job in selecting reasonable people, whether you love them or hate them. No Canadian PM candidate has ever been a nightmare because we seem to still understand that you don't vote in crazy people who wouod choose a leader like Palin or Huckabee or whatever other nutcase you want to choose from the bowl of elected nuts South of the border. Good enough for me, and very well worth it in order to avoid primaries.

Godfather.

Gern Blansten said:

Godfather. said:

benjs said:

Godfather. said:

mrussel1 said:

Godfather. said:

Go Beavers said:

Discussing abortion is only a losing situation for her. Trump is totally ignorant about it and will say whatever in the moment and a lot of his followers are equally ignorant.

and you are voting for Hillary ? ignorant is sometimes self describing. why wouldn't you vote for one of the other people ?
because Hillary has so much "experience" ?



Godfather.

Yes, it's exactly why. And Trump is an incompetent fool, that's another good reason. The third is that the other candidates don't have a chance. So it seems pretty easy when you think through it rationally.

after a lot of thought and 8 hours of sleep whom ever we vote for and what ever reasons why we do we are right as long as we vote.
trying to convince others that we are right is usually a waste of time.

Godfather.

You've been consistently condescending in your treatment of anyone supporting Clinton. Nice of you to wash your hands of calling any supporter of Clinton a sheep for literally months, by doing an about face in your typical fashion by now saying that "every vote is a great vote".

Also, proposing that conversation for the sake of educating and learning is a waste of time is effectively to admit that "ignorance is bliss". Worse than that, when you take bidirectional conversation out of the picture, it means that the most resonant remaining news source is the mainstream media which you've condemned oh so much for its lack of truthfulness. Which is it? Do you want sheep, or do you want honestly educated people? And when honestly educated people's opinions are in disagreement with your fear-induced isolationist stances, are you willing to accept that maybe the populace aren't as stupid as you think, and share or value different stances from your own?

well actually I'm just tired of reading the senseless babble spewed on this topic, I know who I'm voting for and reading all the crap on here will not change my mind.
an opinion different than the AMT folks (not all but many) means having to defend yourself from insults...you guy's are just cool internet warriors ! in real life outside the train i bet you all hide in your safe places.

Godfather.

yeah...you're voting for Cheeto Hitler and proud of it. Looks like he's going to get stomped....but maybe you'll get lucky and all the polls will be wrong.

LOL !! it could happen...are you worried ?

Godfather.

pjhawks

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

so, if the american people are so tired of the status quo of garbage candidates, why did they nominate two? as ridiculous a process as the primaries may be, your country gets to choose your representatives to run. canada does not. for better or worse.

I'd definitely say that's for the better. We do elect the people who choose the candidates. They represent us, and so far they have all done a pretty decent job in selecting reasonable people, whether you love them or hate them. No Canadian PM candidate has ever been a nightmare because we seem to still understand that you don't vote in crazy people who wouod choose a leader like Palin or Huckabee or whatever other nutcase you want to choose from the bowl of elected nuts South of the border. Good enough for me, and very well worth it in order to avoid primaries.

Rob Ford was the Mayor of your biggest city. that alone should keep you from patting your own country on the back for your political choices.

HughFreakingDillon

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

so, if the american people are so tired of the status quo of garbage candidates, why did they nominate two? as ridiculous a process as the primaries may be, your country gets to choose your representatives to run. canada does not. for better or worse.

I'd definitely say that's for the better. We do elect the people who choose the candidates. They represent us, and so far they have all done a pretty decent job in selecting reasonable people, whether you love them or hate them. No Canadian PM candidate has ever been a nightmare because we seem to still understand that you don't vote in crazy people who wouod choose a leader like Palin or Huckabee or whatever other nutcase you want to choose from the bowl of elected nuts South of the border. Good enough for me, and very well worth it in order to avoid primaries.

we also don't have the polarization that exists in the states. the political air space that exists between our major parties is WAY smaller than that of the US.

Cliffy6745

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

so, if the american people are so tired of the status quo of garbage candidates, why did they nominate two? as ridiculous a process as the primaries may be, your country gets to choose your representatives to run. canada does not. for better or worse.

I'd definitely say that's for the better. We do elect the people who choose the candidates. They represent us, and so far they have all done a pretty decent job in selecting reasonable people, whether you love them or hate them. No Canadian PM candidate has ever been a nightmare because we seem to still understand that you don't vote in crazy people who wouod choose a leader like Palin or Huckabee or whatever other nutcase you want to choose from the bowl of elected nuts South of the border. Good enough for me, and very well worth it in order to avoid primaries.

we also don't have the polarization that exists in the states. the political air space that exists between our major parties is WAY smaller than that of the US.

A country with about 10% of the population of the US is obviously going to have significantly different politics...

HughFreakingDillon

Cliffy6745 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

so, if the american people are so tired of the status quo of garbage candidates, why did they nominate two? as ridiculous a process as the primaries may be, your country gets to choose your representatives to run. canada does not. for better or worse.

I'd definitely say that's for the better. We do elect the people who choose the candidates. They represent us, and so far they have all done a pretty decent job in selecting reasonable people, whether you love them or hate them. No Canadian PM candidate has ever been a nightmare because we seem to still understand that you don't vote in crazy people who wouod choose a leader like Palin or Huckabee or whatever other nutcase you want to choose from the bowl of elected nuts South of the border. Good enough for me, and very well worth it in order to avoid primaries.

we also don't have the polarization that exists in the states. the political air space that exists between our major parties is WAY smaller than that of the US.

A country with about 10% of the population of the US is obviously going to have significantly different politics...

I don't think population size has much to do with it. it's all relative. I think it's mostly to do with cultures. the US culture is much more ingrained in its history with religion and taking the book at face value. canada is much less rooted in that.

Who Princess

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

so, if the american people are so tired of the status quo of garbage candidates, why did they nominate two? as ridiculous a process as the primaries may be, your country gets to choose your representatives to run. canada does not. for better or worse.

I'd definitely say that's for the better. We do elect the people who choose the candidates. They represent us, and so far they have all done a pretty decent job in selecting reasonable people, whether you love them or hate them. No Canadian PM candidate has ever been a nightmare because we seem to still understand that you don't vote in crazy people who wouod choose a leader like Palin or Huckabee or whatever other nutcase you want to choose from the bowl of elected nuts South of the border. Good enough for me, and very well worth it in order to avoid primaries.

we also don't have the polarization that exists in the states. the political air space that exists between our major parties is WAY smaller than that of the US.

Polarization is much more extreme than in the past, mostly due to gerrrymandering by state legislators that guaranties the dominance of one party.

mrussel1

Who Princess said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

so, if the american people are so tired of the status quo of garbage candidates, why did they nominate two? as ridiculous a process as the primaries may be, your country gets to choose your representatives to run. canada does not. for better or worse.

I'd definitely say that's for the better. We do elect the people who choose the candidates. They represent us, and so far they have all done a pretty decent job in selecting reasonable people, whether you love them or hate them. No Canadian PM candidate has ever been a nightmare because we seem to still understand that you don't vote in crazy people who wouod choose a leader like Palin or Huckabee or whatever other nutcase you want to choose from the bowl of elected nuts South of the border. Good enough for me, and very well worth it in order to avoid primaries.

we also don't have the polarization that exists in the states. the political air space that exists between our major parties is WAY smaller than that of the US.

Polarization is much more extreme than in the past, mostly due to gerrrymandering by state legislators that guaranties the dominance of one party.

I think the rise of the right wing media, starting with Limbaugh in the 90's, led to the current polarization. This led to left and right wing websites that cater to the all the worst tendencies of each wing. You can live your entire life simply reading or listening to things that reinforce your existing bias, never challenging your conclusions. It's quite sad actually.

Who Princess

mrussel1 said:

Who Princess said:

Polarization is much more extreme than in the past, mostly due to gerrrymandering by state legislators that guaranties the dominance of one party.

I think the rise of the right wing media, starting with Limbaugh in the 90's, led to the current polarization. This led to left and right wing websites that cater to the all the worst tendencies of each wing. You can live your entire life simply reading or listening to things that reinforce your existing bias, never challenging your conclusions. It's quite sad actually.

Yes, and unfortunately I have family members who choose to get all their political information that way. It's depressing.

dignin

mrussel1 said:

Who Princess said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

so, if the american people are so tired of the status quo of garbage candidates, why did they nominate two? as ridiculous a process as the primaries may be, your country gets to choose your representatives to run. canada does not. for better or worse.

I'd definitely say that's for the better. We do elect the people who choose the candidates. They represent us, and so far they have all done a pretty decent job in selecting reasonable people, whether you love them or hate them. No Canadian PM candidate has ever been a nightmare because we seem to still understand that you don't vote in crazy people who wouod choose a leader like Palin or Huckabee or whatever other nutcase you want to choose from the bowl of elected nuts South of the border. Good enough for me, and very well worth it in order to avoid primaries.

we also don't have the polarization that exists in the states. the political air space that exists between our major parties is WAY smaller than that of the US.

Polarization is much more extreme than in the past, mostly due to gerrrymandering by state legislators that guaranties the dominance of one party.

I think the rise of the right wing media, starting with Limbaugh in the 90's, led to the current polarization. This led to left and right wing websites that cater to the all the worst tendencies of each wing. You can live your entire life simply reading or listening to things that reinforce your existing bias, never challenging your conclusions. It's quite sad actually.

I blame the internet. As great as it is, it has some major downsides.

Gern Blansten

dignin said:

mrussel1 said:

Who Princess said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

so, if the american people are so tired of the status quo of garbage candidates, why did they nominate two? as ridiculous a process as the primaries may be, your country gets to choose your representatives to run. canada does not. for better or worse.

I'd definitely say that's for the better. We do elect the people who choose the candidates. They represent us, and so far they have all done a pretty decent job in selecting reasonable people, whether you love them or hate them. No Canadian PM candidate has ever been a nightmare because we seem to still understand that you don't vote in crazy people who wouod choose a leader like Palin or Huckabee or whatever other nutcase you want to choose from the bowl of elected nuts South of the border. Good enough for me, and very well worth it in order to avoid primaries.

we also don't have the polarization that exists in the states. the political air space that exists between our major parties is WAY smaller than that of the US.

Polarization is much more extreme than in the past, mostly due to gerrrymandering by state legislators that guaranties the dominance of one party.

I think the rise of the right wing media, starting with Limbaugh in the 90's, led to the current polarization. This led to left and right wing websites that cater to the all the worst tendencies of each wing. You can live your entire life simply reading or listening to things that reinforce your existing bias, never challenging your conclusions. It's quite sad actually.

I blame the internet. As great as it is, it has some major downsides.

Same here...too easy to get bad information.

PJ_Soul

pjhawks said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

so, if the american people are so tired of the status quo of garbage candidates, why did they nominate two? as ridiculous a process as the primaries may be, your country gets to choose your representatives to run. canada does not. for better or worse.

I'd definitely say that's for the better. We do elect the people who choose the candidates. They represent us, and so far they have all done a pretty decent job in selecting reasonable people, whether you love them or hate them. No Canadian PM candidate has ever been a nightmare because we seem to still understand that you don't vote in crazy people who wouod choose a leader like Palin or Huckabee or whatever other nutcase you want to choose from the bowl of elected nuts South of the border. Good enough for me, and very well worth it in order to avoid primaries.

Rob Ford was the Mayor of your biggest city. that alone should keep you from patting your own country on the back for your political choices.

Why in the hell should I consider my whole country because of one city's mayor getting on drugs? Don't be ridiculous.

PJ_Soul

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

so, if the american people are so tired of the status quo of garbage candidates, why did they nominate two? as ridiculous a process as the primaries may be, your country gets to choose your representatives to run. canada does not. for better or worse.

I'd definitely say that's for the better. We do elect the people who choose the candidates. They represent us, and so far they have all done a pretty decent job in selecting reasonable people, whether you love them or hate them. No Canadian PM candidate has ever been a nightmare because we seem to still understand that you don't vote in crazy people who would choose a leader like Palin or Huckabee or whatever other nutcase you want to choose from the bowl of elected nuts South of the border. Good enough for me, and very well worth it in order to avoid primaries.

we also don't have the polarization that exists in the states. the political air space that exists between our major parties is WAY smaller than that of the US.

That is true, especially when it comes to social issues. Even the evangelical PM Harper wouldn't go anywhere near trying to criminalize abortion or gay marriage; it never came up. Despite his religion, he fully understood that Canadians aren't interested in going backwards with our civil rights, nor in allowing religious beliefs into politics.

PJ_Soul

HughFreakingDillon said:

Cliffy6745 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

PJ_Soul said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

so, if the american people are so tired of the status quo of garbage candidates, why did they nominate two? as ridiculous a process as the primaries may be, your country gets to choose your representatives to run. canada does not. for better or worse.

I'd definitely say that's for the better. We do elect the people who choose the candidates. They represent us, and so far they have all done a pretty decent job in selecting reasonable people, whether you love them or hate them. No Canadian PM candidate has ever been a nightmare because we seem to still understand that you don't vote in crazy people who wouod choose a leader like Palin or Huckabee or whatever other nutcase you want to choose from the bowl of elected nuts South of the border. Good enough for me, and very well worth it in order to avoid primaries.

we also don't have the polarization that exists in the states. the political air space that exists between our major parties is WAY smaller than that of the US.

A country with about 10% of the population of the US is obviously going to have significantly different politics...

I don't think population size has much to do with it. it's all relative. I think it's mostly to do with cultures. the US culture is much more ingrained in its history with religion and taking the book at face value. canada is much less rooted in that.

I agree - I think the difference lies largely in religion and the willingness of the people to allow religion to dictate politics. Canada is much more like Western Europe in that sense. The idea of the separation of Church and State is something most Canadians actually believe in and pretty much adhere to, whereas Americans seem to have somehow allowed that to fly right out the window.