Donald vs Hillary

[sharkman]

44 minutes ago, Icebound said:

Sure.  legitimate issues that should be dealt with within the context of human rights.  But Leadership's rhetoric counts.  And when the Leadership legitimizes bigotry against certain people or classes of people... then there are always somebody with a slogan on a t-shirt ready to take up the cause....  

There has been a surge in hate crimes following Brexit in the UK, and you can be pretty sure to see something similar.  For the people on the receiving end, yes, "civilization" is seemed to be ending.

 

Trump did not legitimize bigotry.  His comments, when taken in context, were not even bigoted for the most part.  What you have is the left wing media foaming at the mouth as they tried(and failed) to bring down his campaign.

[bush_cheney2004]

8 minutes ago, Icebound said:

 Carter was in a de-facto war state with Iran because of the Hostage issue.   Syria is not.

Syria is in the middle of a civil war.   If refugees want to travel, Justin Trudeau will welcome them in Canada.    Keep Syrians out of the USA please.

 

Quote

Sure you can ban anybody you want.  It does not make sense, but you can do it.   But a blanket ban on Syrians was not proposed.  It was a ban specifically on Muslims.  Nobody said anything about banning Christian Syrians?

 

Ban them all....that will pass legal muster.

[BC_chick]

3 hours ago, Derek 2.0 said:

I agree.......minus FOX. FOX is the only network that gave both sides the same treatment.......for others to suggest FOX (wholesale) was in the bag for Trump is laughable, they (namely Bill O'Reilly, Chris Wallace, Dana Perino, Brent Humme, Charles Krauthammer and of course, Megyn Kelly) were very tough on Trump, Trump complained numerous times about FOX interviewers and hosts)

 

Trump is his own worse enemy, but the mainstream media, aside from being proven to sandbag Sanders, without a doubt was unfair to Trump

Many people kept saying that the media was only exposing Trump's own words and actions.  While this is true, I couldn't help but think what they could come up with if they spent as long combing over every bad thing HRC said and did in the last 30 years.  They could've come up with just as much shyte on her, easily.  She's a walking contradiction.  

But they didn't.  Every day I read CNN, Huffington Post and other media outlets and they were shameless in their character assassination of Trump while staying mum about concerns facing Clinton's integrity and character.  

I still think she's more qualified than him but she is not the champion they made her out to be.  She is very corrupt and in many ways what is wrong with Washington.

It all came back to bite them.  I truly do blame the DNC and the media for Trump's presidency.

 

[kimmy]

5 hours ago, Bonam said:

Maybe Trump will repeal and replace Obamacare with universal single payer

The plan is for medical savings accounts!   These will be great for all those underemployed Rust Belt workers who put Trump in the White House, because with all their disposable income, they'll easily be able to save enough to cover catastrophic medical expenses!

 -k

[Derek 2.0]

42 minutes ago, BC_chick said:

 I truly do blame the DNC and the media for Trump's presidency.

 

Exactly, as I said earlier, the blame can be put squarely on both party's establishments......for them, this was suppose to be Bush vs Clinton..... 

[kimmy]

4 hours ago, Derek 2.0 said:

 W Bush held a majority in the Congress, Senate and the SC......actual social conservatives, unlike Trump, and the World didn't end.

I'd suggest that first off, the Republican Party, pre-Obama and pre Tea-Party, were more moderate and willing to compromise than the ones who've come onboard in 2010 and later. And also that they weren't fighting "the culture war" to the extent they are today, because at that time they were happier about the overall state of "the culture war".

It's not a question of the world ending, it's just a matter of a lot people being hurt for no good reason.

4 hours ago, Derek 2.0 said:

 Trump won this election through populism, and I would think this trend will continue.........with that, I wouldn't be the least surprised if many of these red meat social issues will be handed over to the States (as was intended by the Founding Fathers).Without a doubt, he could fill upwards of four Supreme Court seats, the current vacant spot, Reagan's last pick and both of Bubba Clinton's picks based on age alone, resulting in a 7 of 9 seat Republican majority......which, as I said to Argus in another thread, will preclude activist judges from the bench, instead maintaining strict Constitutional judges. 

If Americans want new laws, elect lawmakers.......

Trump will just smile and wave; it'll be Congress and state legislatures that undo all the legal progress gay people have made in the past decade.

 

4 hours ago, Derek 2.0 said:

He'll defend the 2nd Amendment.......I would expect tepid support of "Religious Freedom" laws at States levels, likewise opposition to late term abortion....

Well that certainly wouldn't appease Mike Pence, or the Republican Congressmen, or the Republican Senators.

Likely what'll happen is that 5 minutes after Trump's new Justice is sworn in, some state is going to introduce a law that says life begins at conception (Mississippi Personhood Amendment v2.0, perhaps) with the express hope of ending up in front of the Supreme Court so that Roe v Wade gets overturned.

 -k

[Derek 2.0]

2 minutes ago, kimmy said:

It's not a question of the world ending, it's just a matter of a lot people being hurt for no good reason.

Again, I think you're swallowing too much of the fear mongering put forward by Clinton and the DNC, and media

......I just don't see a anti-gay social conservative crusade coming out of a Trump White House.

8 minutes ago, kimmy said:

it'll be Congress and state legislatures that undo all the legal progress gay people have made in the past decade.

Like what? Religious bakers not under threat of legal action for refusing to cater gay weddings? 47 year old men no longer being able to transform and identify as 8 year old girls to access washrooms?

 

This is a populace President........if Americans want such rights, they'll have them, if not, these very small minority groups will be shit out of luck. 

13 minutes ago, kimmy said:

Well that certainly wouldn't appease Mike Pence, or the Republican Congressmen, or the Republican Senators.

Likely what'll happen is that 5 minutes after Trump's new Justice is sworn in, some state is going to introduce a law that says life begins at conception (Mississippi Personhood Amendment v2.0, perhaps) with the express hope of ending up in front of the Supreme Court so that Roe v Wade gets overturned.

 -k

 

It could happen.......I think more likely the defunding of Planned Parenthood, none the less, if such issues revert back to States, I think that is a good thing...

[kimmy]

15 hours ago, sharkman said:

I doubt he'll be delivering conservative red meat, since he isn't a conservative. 

He isn't, but Pence is, most of the Republican Congress is, most of the Republican Senate is, his new Supreme Court Justice will be, and an awful lot of state governors are.
 

15 hours ago, sharkman said:

To all the "sky is falling" crowd, it's time to buck up.  Keep calm and carry on.  Whining and moaning about Trump is useless, regardless of what the typical left wing sites are saying.  Trump is not going to bring about the downfall of civilization, and the sun will come up tomorrow.   

Right now they have this "we are building bridges!" "we are reaching out to find common ground!" "we are healing the country!" "we are uniting around our shared values!" phase going on. That lasts until January 20, 2017.  Starting January 23, 2017, it's going to be pretty much non-stop war on everything conservatives hate, from abortion to gay rights to environmental protection to the public school system. That'll continue for 21 months, during which there'll be a brief period before the midterm elections where they pay lip-service to the idea of "healing this divisiveness in our great land", then it'll be right back to red meat.

They really don't have to "reach out" or "unite the country" at all, because for at least 2 years and probably 4 they have all the levers of power and basically a blank check to implement everything on the social conservative wishlist, and there's really nothing anybody can do about it.

That might sound melodramatic, but that's the facts, and looking around some of the right-wing media today there's no shortage of people rubbing their hands with glee at all the things they can do with their new unopposed power.

 -k

[Smallc]

3 hours ago, Hal 9000 said:

Look, out tax structure is slightly different, but lets not pretend that we pay less taxes (outright and hidden) than the US.  I'm sure you know this though - right?

I know it's easier to make things up, but the difference is not as big as you think.  Just under 27% of the US economy is taken in tax.  Just over 32% of the Canadian economy is taken in tax.  Considering the Canadian total includes healthcare for all...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP

[Smallc]

3 hours ago, sharkman said:

Trump did not legitimize bigotry.  His comments, when taken in context, were not even bigoted for the most part.  What you have is the left wing media foaming at the mouth as they tried(and failed) to bring down his campaign.

Lol for the most part.

[bush_cheney2004]

President Trump should do whatever the Congress will support.  Obama had two years of party control and he wasted it on the health care fiasco that is now exploding in his face and helped to defeat Hillary Clinton.   Good job !

[Hal 9000]

7 hours ago, kimmy said:

 

It's not a question of the world ending, it's just a matter of a lot people being hurt for no good reason.

 

 

 

 -k

Well then, I guess you haven't been listening to Lawrence O'Donnell, because thats exactly what he's saying

[kimmy]

12 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

Well then, I guess you haven't been listening to Lawrence O'Donnell, because thats exactly what he's saying

I'm sure we can find lots of ridiculous comments from all over the media spectrum.

 -k

 

 

[kimmy]

7 hours ago, Derek 2.0 said:

Again, I think you're swallowing too much of the fear mongering put forward by Clinton and the DNC, and media

......I just don't see a anti-gay social conservative crusade coming out of a Trump White House...

I think we'd agree that Trump himself doesn't have principles aside from getting laid and getting paid.  But Pence certainly does, and we know his feelings on the subject. And the Congress, and many of the Senators.  Trump's not going to fight his own party over issues that he doesn't actually care about.

7 hours ago, Derek 2.0 said:

Like what? Religious bakers not under threat of legal action for refusing to cater gay weddings? 47 year old men no longer being able to transform and identify as 8 year old girls to access washrooms?

This is a populace President........if Americans want such rights, they'll have them, if not, these very small minority groups will be shit out of luck.

Easy to make fun of examples like that, but if bakers get to discriminate, then why not restaurants, hotels, taxis? There will be states that make that argument.

Imagine your employer transferred you to a new state where your spouse is no longer legally your spouse, or your adopted child is no longer legally your child? 

7 hours ago, Derek 2.0 said:

It could happen.......I think more likely the defunding of Planned Parenthood, none the less, if such issues revert back to States, I think that is a good thing...

Let's face it, overturning Roe v Wade is likely as well. And large numbers of Republicans will settle for nothing less, and won't be mollified by any half-measure from Trump. Trump's not going to fight his own people over this.

People who advocate for defunding Planned Parenthood never have any suggestion over how the non-abortion services Planned Parenthood provides. When Texas defunded Planned Parenthood, the first thing they noticed was a spike in births to low-income women. When Indiana defunded Planned Parenthood, the first thing they noticed was a spike in the rate of HIV.

 -k

[dialamah]

Quote

But Pence certainly does, and we know his feelings on the subject. And the Congress, and many of the Senators.  Trump's not going to fight his own party over issues that he doesn't actually care about.

I was talking to a co-worker who's a lot more interested and knowledgeable than I am in politics.  He thinks Pence will the "President" in all but name (unless Trump gets assassinated).

[sharkman]

34 minutes ago, kimmy said:

I think we'd agree that Trump himself doesn't have principles aside from getting laid and getting paid.  But Pence certainly does, and we know his feelings on the subject. And the Congress, and many of the Senators.  Trump's not going to fight his own party over issues that he doesn't actually care about.

Easy to make fun of examples like that, but if bakers get to discriminate, then why not restaurants, hotels, taxis? There will be states that make that argument.

Imagine your employer transferred you to a new state where your spouse is no longer legally your spouse, or your adopted child is no longer legally your child? 

Let's face it, overturning Roe v Wade is likely as well. And large numbers of Republicans will settle for nothing less, and won't be mollified by any half-measure from Trump. Trump's not going to fight his own people over this.

People who advocate for defunding Planned Parenthood never have any suggestion over how the non-abortion services Planned Parenthood provides. When Texas defunded Planned Parenthood, the first thing they noticed was a spike in births to low-income women. When Indiana defunded Planned Parenthood, the first thing they noticed was a spike in the rate of HIV.

 -k

Kimmy, it looks like you are going to see a conservative bogeyman under every rock.  Trump is the president, not Pence.  He is not a republican, not a conservative and not a christian.  He's an alpha male that will not be dictated to.  Yes I know that social conservatives have their christmas lists ready to give to Trump, but the guy has been a democrat more than anything else.  Predicting the overturn of Roe v Wade is really tin foil hat territory.  

[Wilber]

Quote

But when moderator Chris Wallace pressed him on whether he wanted the ruling overturned, Trump said, "That will happen, automatically in my opinion," because he would get to nominate potentially several justices to the court.

Why is it you guys insist on maintaining that Trump is really going to do exactly the opposite of what he said he was going to do?

[segnosaur]

19 minutes ago, sharkman said:

Kimmy, it looks like you are going to see a conservative bogeyman under every rock.  Trump is the president, not Pence.  He is not a republican, not a conservative and not a christian.  He's an alpha male that will not be dictated to.  Yes I know that social conservatives have their christmas lists ready to give to Trump, but the guy has been a democrat more than anything else.  Predicting the overturn of Roe v Wade is really tin foil hat territory.  

Kimmy already addressed that issue.

Nobody claimed that Trump was going to be "dictated to". Her claim (one that I think is realistic) is that Congress will act to restrict gay rights, and Trump doesn't care about the issue to any degree to intervene. Being an "alpha male" would only be useful if its an issue that he actually cares about.

(I could also suggest that labeling Trump an "alpha male" may be incorrect. He is certainly brash and egotistical, but he also seems to be easily swayed and prone to manipulation. He's also a guy who got his twitter account taken away by his handlers.)

[segnosaur]

9 minutes ago, Wilber said:

Why is it you guys insist on maintaining that Trump is really going to do exactly the opposite of what he said he was going to do?

Probably because Trump has said so many contradictory things that its easy to cherry pick the statements that happen to line up with what the reader things best suits things.

[dialamah]

1 minute ago, segnosaur said:

I could also suggest that labeling Trump an "alpha male" may be incorrect. He is certainly brash and egotistical, but he also seems to be easily swayed and prone to manipulation. He's also a guy who got his twitter account taken away by his handlers.

Totally agree with this; people who react without thinking are easier to manipulate than those who think before they act.   Reactivity tends to drive people away, too; over time, the true "alpha" people in his administration might just effectively sideline him.     

 

[segnosaur]

20 hours ago, Hal 9000 said:

I for one am refreshed by the Trump presidency.  The Americans have said they're not going to vote for a woman simply because there is a woman to vote for,

Nope, instead you had a large block of voters who voted against Clinton because she was a woman.

...they stood up against criminality in the White House...

No, they didn't.

Trump (or at least the organizations that he is in charge of) have been charged multiple times. For example:

- Trump's organization was charged multiple times for racist activities

- The Trump foundation had to pay a fine for improperly contributing to the election campaign of the Florida attorney general. (One that I might add who had the responsibility to investigate wrongdoings at Trump University).

And those are just the cases where Trump has actually been convicted or admitted to wrongdoing. Then there is also the case of fraud over Trump University (which is an ongoing case, so we can't say he was "convicted", but it doesn't look good for him), and other cases of the misuse of Trump Foundation charity money (e.g. buying a painting of himself.)

By comparison, what do we have against Hillary? Certainly no convictions. Claims that she mishandled classified documents, but even the Republican head of the FBI said likely wouldn't have resulted in a conviction. Given a choice between someone who has actually had convictions against them (i.e. Trump) and someone who hasn't had convictions against them (Clinton), I'd say the more criminal one is Trump.

So no, Americans didn't "stand against criminality in the white house". Either through ignorance or apathy they select the person who actually had a worse record of criminal behavior.

(and lets face it, the FBI knows she's a criminal-so should we)

The fact that you imagine she is a criminal doesn't actually mean she is a criminal, or that the FBI actually knows something.

[/quote]they've stated that they do in fact want some sense of order, that jobs and infrastructure are important...[/quote]

You see, that's the problem... Its understandable that people want jobs. But voting for Trump is the wrong way to accomplish that. Granted, when Trump makes the claim he'll cancel trade deals to "bring jobs back" it may sound tempting to some poor sap who just got layed off from his factory job. But the world economy is complex, and such simplistic solutions will likely result in failure. High-paying rust belt jobs are just not coming back, even if the U.S. becomes isolationist/protectionist; technology has moved on. Instead, Trumps isolationist trade policies will drive up prices and harm American exports.

As for infrastructure, keep in mind that Clinton had a plan to invest billions into infrastructure projects. Trump's plan? Tax cuts. The problem is, the private sector isn't really that interested in public works like roads, bridges.

http://www.crfb.org/blogs/hillary-clinton-releases-infrastructure-plan

https://www.wired.com/2016/11/trumps-plan-american-infrastructure-get-people-spend-trillion-dollars/

So if someone did care about infrastructure, they would have voted for Clinton.

that they disagree with "regime change"

Then why vote for Trump? Trump supported both the invasion of Iraq, and military action against Libya. The main difference between Trump and Clinton in these maters is that Trump lied about things afterwords (e.g. claiming he "never supported the Iraq invasion", even though we have him on tape saying the opposite.)

So Trump might be just as hawkish as Clinton, only without the knowledge or experience that Clinton seems to have.

...they'd rather get along with Russia than antagonize them

Some people might consider that appeasement, especially if Russia is pursing aggressive policies (such as annexing neighboring territory).

...that borders and security do in fact matter, so on and so forth.

The fact that people might consider borders and security important doesn't mean that Trump's plans will be useful and/or effective.

There is more going on in the world than gay marriage, overpriced healthcare and the dream of free education and the Americans have said as much.

You're right... there is more than just gay rights, health care and education. The problem is, people are looking at the issues and incorrectly thinking "Trump is Better" when he's not.

The way I see it, Trump supporters largely fall into 2 categories... the ignorant and the disgusting.

The disgusting people are the racists, homophobes, misogynists ,  and religious hypocrites. The ones that put up confederate flags at Trump rallies, or chant "Jew-S-A", the ones that want to end gay marriage, or praise jebus and vote for Trump even though he is much further from being a "good christian" (in terms of charitable works and actual church attendance) than Hillary was.

The ignorant people are the ones who claim that Trump will somehow make things better, even though (as I've shown above) their belief is largely based on ignorance.

[sharkman]

42 minutes ago, segnosaur said:

Kimmy already addressed that issue.

Nobody claimed that Trump was going to be "dictated to". Her claim (one that I think is realistic) is that Congress will act to restrict gay rights, and Trump doesn't care about the issue to any degree to intervene. Being an "alpha male" would only be useful if its an issue that he actually cares about.

(I could also suggest that labeling Trump an "alpha male" may be incorrect. He is certainly brash and egotistical, but he also seems to be easily swayed and prone to manipulation. He's also a guy who got his twitter account taken away by his handlers.)

Look, you're just seeing what you want to.  The facts on the ground are real.  Congress won't touch gay rights because they are basically enshrined in the constitution and they'll get voted out if they try.  They're going after Obamacare.  There is also over 200 billion dollars in profits that corporations(including the likes of Starbucks and Apple) are keeping out of the country lest they be taxed at the current rate of 35%.  Trump wants to give them a one time deal of 10% to bring that money into the US economy and start revving things up.  He also wants to lower business tax rates, and along with the burden of Obamacare, will see businesses free to hire and invest more.  It's the economy stupid, to quote Bill Clinton.

  Then Trump is indeed an Alpha male.  His bombastic comments on immigration, Muslims, Hillary, women he doesn't like, and all the rest should be proof enough.  But believe what you want.  It's funny, when Harper came into power the liberals all claimed he was coming after gay rights, etc.  And Harper, a REAL conservative, proved them all wrong.  Trump is neither a conservative nor a republican.  He's already got a chip on his shoulder from all of the republicans that wouldn't support him, and suddenly he's going to embrace a right wing agenda?  Dream on.

[-TSS-]

I'm sure Trump doesn't mind but it left a bit of a bad taste in the mouth about the election that Trump won only because of the electoral system, not because he would have received more votes than his rival, which he couldn't do. It might be that in the next four years he will be reminded time and again that he doesn't have a "proper mandate"

On one hand the elctoral system favours the Republicans which win in smaller rural states which are naturally more Republican-leaning and are overrepresented in the elctoral college in relation to their true size-

On the other hand demographic changes favour the Democrats and in the future it will become more difficult for the Republicans to win elections.

g

 

[segnosaur]

3 minutes ago, sharkman said:

Look, you're just seeing what you want to.  The facts on the ground are real.  Congress won't touch gay rights because they are basically enshrined in the constitution and they'll get voted out if they try.  

Whether something is "enshrined in the constitution" is partly dependent on how the supreme court votes. If (for example) congress drafts a law to make gay marriage an issue for the states to decide (so we get a patchwork of states with and without gay rights) and the supreme court says it's constitutional, then that becomes the law of the land.

As for "getting voted out if they try"... congresscritters don't necessarily do things according to the will of the people. They often pander to their core group of supporters, which in the case of your average republican is a religious nutjob with a bible in their hand and a gun in the other. Heck, look at opinion polls that show most Americans favor stricter gun laws and that most believe that global warming is an issue that needs to be addressed. Yet that hasn't stopped Republican politicians from fighting against firearm regulations and/or claiming global warming is a hoax.

They're going after Obamacare.  There is also over 200 billion dollars in profits that corporations(including the likes of Starbucks and Apple) are keeping out of the country lest they be taxed at the current rate of 35%.  Trump wants to give them a one time deal of 10% to bring that money into the US economy and start revving things up.

Companies like Apple sell their products world-wide. (In the last quarter, Apple got more revenue from Europe+Asia than they did from America). A trade war between the U.S. and the rest of the world will not necessarily turn out beneficial for the U.S., as those other countries will also make efforts to keep production local, and Apple may want to concentrate on areas that aren't isolationist.

He also wants to lower business tax rates, and along with the burden of Obamacare, will see businesses free to hire and invest more.  It's the economy stupid, to quote Bill Clinton.

It is estimated that Trump's tax plans will cost the government anywhere from $2.6 trillion to $10 trillion. Its unlikely economic growth will be able to compensate.

There is nothing wrong with tax cuts per se. But they're not a panacea.

 

Then Trump is indeed an Alpha male.  His bombastic comments on immigration, Muslims, Hillary, women he doesn't like, and all the rest should be proof enough.

That doesn't make him an alpha male. It makes him a vulgar bigot. You don't have to be an "Alpha male" to be a bigot.

But believe what you want.  It's funny, when Harper came into power the liberals all claimed he was coming after gay rights, etc.  And Harper, a REAL conservative, proved them all wrong.

There are a few key differences between Canada and the U.S. that make that comparison irrelevant.

- On average, the Canadian political system is skewed to the left compared to the U.S. So even someone who would be considered a hard-core conservative in Canada might find themselves more at home in the Democratic party than the Republican party, if policies only were the issue.

- Even if conservatives wanted to attack gay rights, Canada's multi-party system would make it an uphill battle. (In the U.S., with its 2 party system, an anti-gay republican politician has a much greater chance of maintaining his seat.)

Trump is neither a conservative nor a republican.  He's already got a chip on his shoulder from all of the republicans that wouldn't support him, and suddenly he's going to embrace a right wing agenda?  Dream on.

During the election, he proposed: supreme court nominations that would restrict abortion, suggested "voter fraud" was an issue, claimed he would protect gun rights, etc. Those are all pretty central to the right wing agenda. Plus, you also have the fact that Trump is planning on nominating right-wing judges to the supreme court. Regardless of how Trump may feel about homosexuals, he's not going to be able to control how the supreme court judges vote once they're appointed. So in an effort to restrict abortion, he may be creating a monster that will affect a whole range of civil rights.

[sharkman]

It was the US that led Canada with transgendered rights.  What does your crystal ball say about that?  Canada may be to the left, but we didn't see that coming at all.  Furthermore, abortions are a different issue and can't be tied to gay rights.  The morning after pill is making the abortion unneeded, and Hillary's support of partial birth abortion was poorly thought out.  Gay rights are not going away, the US is swinging the other way with transgendered rights.

On the alpha male issue, do some reading up on body language.

I can see that the liberals around here are going to behave the same way they did when *scary* Harper came to power.  In about a year when you've repeated yourself a 100 times or so and Trump is still busy fixing the economy and starting to think about getting re-elected, you people may or may not calm down.  Whatever, believe what makes you happy.

Edited November 10, 2016 by sharkman