2016 US Presidential Race - Mod Warning in OP

oscarBravo

Manach wrote: »

... so likewise any post's opinion hostile to the Republicans can be dismissed as DNC smoke and mirrors?

If it's offered as a response to a request for actual GOP policy positions, I guess so.

Overheal

walshyn93 wrote: »

New evidence on Hillary. Hillary attacks Sanders on guns to misdirect. Sanders laps it up and throws it right back. Gun fight ensues.

No one talking about emails. A politician that actually wanted to win would ignore the gun comment and remind the people that their frontrunner will likely be indicted before the election.

Will she? Is Bernie suddenly privy to more information than the public? The FBI is performing an investigation. If they indict her they indict her. It is irresponsible of him to jump the gun and assume he is judge and jury and knows what the FBI will do or the courts will do.

Congressional hearings against Hillary: 13

Indictments: 0

Overheal

walshyn93 wrote: »

Politifact doesn't understand hyperbole.



What Cruz actually said: "Here, we have Thanksgiving, we have Christmas, we have the 4th of July. Every year in Iran, they celebrate Death to America day."

So here we have a fact checking organisation twisting someone's words to make their statement false. He was never equating them. He was juxtaposing them. Difference.

Here's their explanation:



Their verdict?



Yeah, I'm going to continue to take the fact checkers with a grain of salt. He never said there was a formally designated holiday, just that they celebrate it. And if the Iranian government didn't condone these protests they surely wouldn't allow them.

Actually that's totally accurate: he said "Iran celebrates Death to America Day". It's about as accurate as saying "We celebrate tax day"

Overheal

walshyn93 wrote: »

I gave you some policy positions, but it's more to do with rhetoric than policy since in 8 years they haven't improved the lives of any group be they blacks, women or hispanics. They've done a lot of talking about it though. It's the rhetoric rather than the policy that is used to divide people into bloc votes. If these groups ever achieved parity with white Christian men they would become independent voters. That would kill the Democratic party since independents can be swayed by Trump-like populism which the Republicans would no doubt become adept at if it were politically beneficial.

Taking a non-literal interpretation of a true statement and using it to brand a person a liar isn't mental gymnastics? You have to say that Cruz said something other than what he said for it to be untrue.

So you're saying no ones lives have been improved in 8 years even though we've had an economic recovery, slashed fuel prices in half, women's birth control is protected in their health insurance, pre-existing conditions don't disqualify your 6 year old child from getting coverage as an adult because he had cancer, the democrats in particular are defending the right of women to govern their own bodies, Latinos have seen increased college enrollment and significantly lower unemployment since the 2008 economic crash. So factually, you're telling porkies. That's before you look at policies that improve everyone's lives, such as protection of a free and open internet or preventing your health insurance from dropping you if your medical expense becomes too great.

And pray tell, how is a Republican going to improve your life more significantly than a Democrat if you identify as black, Latino, or female? By increasing border patrol checkpoints inside the USA? Defunding women's health clinics and trying to legislate against the right to abortion? Anything to address why blacks, per capita, are incarcerated at a much higher rate than whites for the exact same crimes and charges?

walshyn93

Overheal wrote: »

Will she? Is Bernie suddenly privy to more information than the public? The FBI is performing an investigation. If they indict her they indict her. It is irresponsible of him to jump the gun and assume he is judge and jury and knows what the FBI will do or the courts will do.

Congressional hearings against Hillary: 13

Indictments: 0

I'm saying he should be drawing attention to it. He doesn't need to be judge and jury or know what the FBI will do to create media attention for this. It's in his interests and if he believes he's the best man for the job then it's in the country's interest as well.

walshyn93

Overheal wrote: »

So you're saying no ones lives have been improved in 8 years even though we've had an economic recovery, slashed fuel prices in half, women's birth control is protected in their health insurance, pre-existing conditions don't disqualify your 6 year old child from getting coverage as an adult because he had cancer, the democrats in particular are defending the right of women to govern their own bodies, Latinos have seen increased college enrollment and significantly lower unemployment since the 2008 economic crash. So factually, you're telling porkies. That's before you look at policies that improve everyone's lives, such as protection of a free and open internet or preventing your health insurance from dropping you if your medical expense becomes too great.

And pray tell, how is a Republican going to improve your life more significantly than a Democrat if you identify as black, Latino, or female? By increasing border patrol checkpoints inside the USA? Defunding women's health clinics and trying to legislate against the right to abortion? Anything to address why blacks, per capita, are incarcerated at a much higher rate than whites for the exact same crimes and charges?

Yeah, let's all stand and applaud our favourite guy for overseeing the never ending economic cycle's return.

Can you get away from the DNC talking points please?

"letting women decide to do with their own bodies". Please god stop. Roe v Wade is decades old and not going anywhere. Planned Parenthood gets defunded when it doesn't play by the rules.

"Slashed oil prices." **** me I know they say Obama is a Muslim but he's not a Saudi oil emirate.

Increased college enrollment in ... 2015. In 2017 we'll be talking about Latinos and everyone else in massive amounts of student loan debt.

Obamacare has its merits but is a gift to the insurance companies. It's so insurance company friendly it should make any self-respecting socialist vomit. Go look at Donald Trump's reforms for Obamacare, they're brilliant.

Fed's cheap money has created 2 bubbles. Tech and student loans. Only economic illiterates think that Obama has been successful on the economy. Wages have stagnated. Largely due to the abundance of foreign workers.

But more importantly, as to the bolded, the Republicans don't have to answer for those because they don't hold themselves out as having the solutions. They look to treat everyone the same rather than giving people a leg up because of some fantasy called white privilege. I'd like you to tell me the Democratic answers to those since they're the party of the minorities.

InTheTrees

walshyn93 wrote: »

Can you get away from the DNC talking points please?

Go look at Donald Trump's reforms for Obamacare, they're brilliant.

If they're so brilliant maybe you could try and explain them to us?

walshyn93

InTheTrees wrote: »

If they're so brilliant maybe you could try and explain them to us?

Make insurance companies compete across state lines. Introduce a loser-pays system for malpractice lawsuits. That's two of the top of my head. They're brilliant because no bought and paid for politician would ever do it. The insurance companies just wouldn't have it. They spent millions lobbying to prevent it.

Overheal

walshyn93 wrote: »

I'm saying he should be drawing attention to it. He doesn't need to be judge and jury or know what the FBI will do to create media attention for this. It's in his interests and if he believes he's the best man for the job then it's in the country's interest as well.

So you're suggesting he put spin on the issue.

I think you misunderstand what type of character Bernie Sanders has. I'd much rather if elected he similarly not abuse the stature of his office to hand down judgements in the court of public opinion. He's got this figured out, you clearly do not.

As for Planned Parenthood I will direct you to the Sanctity of Life thread in Christianity: they have been playing by the rules, they have not done anything to infringe the funding mechanisms in place for a women's health provider. No federal dollars go to abortion. The investigations have largely turned up squat. I've been following the issue for 6 months so before you jump in, read the thread.

I'm not sure why the price of gas upsets you so much either: gas was $4 before the election. I can fill up today for $1.66. That's without drill baby drill, that's without keystone. That's with hydraulic fracking, clean coal, and solar energy initiatives. We are seeing the payoffs of switching to alternative fuel vehicles. We are actually doing a decent job of sweating out middle eastern oil interests with economics as opposed to war. The only people upset about this are the Koch Brothers and their paid-for politicians.

And if you're upset about a student loan debt, I have news for you: it was completely avoidable, by providing subsidized tuition paid for by upper/middle class taxes, or as Sanders proposes taxes on Wall Street speculation, because what happens to most people who become graduates? They become upper middle class or better. Our economy can't grow if everyone has to enter massive unsecured debt to succeed. We have also done nothing to break up the Too Big To Fail banks and they are now far larger than they were when the economy collapsed.

walshyn93

Overheal wrote: »

So you're suggesting he put spin on the issue.

I think you misunderstand what type of character Bernie Sanders has.

As for Planned Parenthood I will direct you to the Sanctity of Life thread in Christianity: they have been playing by the rules, they have not done anything to infringe the funding mechanisms in place for a women's health provider. No federal dollars go to abortion. The investigations have largely turned up squat. I've been following the issue for 6 months so before you jump in, read the thread.

I'm not sure why the price of gas upsets you so much either: gas was $4 before the election. I can fill up today for $1.66. That's without drill baby drill, that's without keystone. That's with hydraulic fracking, clean coal, and solar energy initiatives. We are seeing the payoffs of switching to alternative fuel vehicles. We are actually doing a decent job of sweating out middle eastern oil interests with economics as opposed to war.

No, I understand Sanders character perfectly well. He's a Jeremy Corbyn and we all know how effective he was in preventing the airstrikes in Syria. He's not a leader. He won't do what's necessary. He thinks its more important to appear honest and upstanding and principled than to win an election. All he has to do is shed light on the ongoing investigation. He risks losing the nomination and potentially the White House to a criminal.

I don't think you understand the oil issue at all to be honest. Saudi's have increased production. The US and certainly not Obama had nothing to do with it. Trying to give the Dems the credit for low oil prices is pathetic.

InTheTrees

walshyn93 wrote: »

They're brilliant because no bought and paid for politician would ever do it.

The house of representatives are all bought and paid for so how will it pass congress then?

Overheal

And why are Saudis producing more? Because we are consuming less. Don't oversimplify this, our energy independence is growing and in order to try and crash our natural gas markets before they fully mature, Saudi Arabia has been flooding the market with cheap oil.

http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/15/investing/us-energy-independence/

I've had a lot of interest in that area because my internship is engineering natural gas regulators. Our business is tied into the demand for natural gas. The Saudi response has put pressure on the NGV industry but it continues going forward.

walshyn93

InTheTrees wrote: »

The house of representatives are all bought and paid for so how will it pass congress then?

It doesn't work like that. They're not all paid for by the same people.

InTheTrees

walshyn93 wrote: »

I don't think you understand the oil issue at all to be honest. Saudi's have increased production. The US and certainly not Obama had nothing to do with it.

No. Not True.

The drop in oil prices over the last few years has been due to increased US production.

https://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MCRFPUS1&f=M

walshyn93

Overheal wrote: »

And why are Saudis producing more? Because we are consuming less. Don't oversimplify this, our energy independence is growing and in order to try and crash our natural gas markets before they fully mature, Saudi Arabia has been flooding the market with cheap oil.

http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/15/investing/us-energy-independence/

I've had a lot of interest in that area because my internship is engineering natural gas regulators. Our business is tied into the demand for natural gas. The Saudi response has put pressure on the NGV industry but it continues going forward.

If you want to give Obama credit for moving towards energy independence that's fair and I applaud him for it. But to say he's responsible for low oil prices is stretching it.

InTheTrees

walshyn93 wrote: »

It doesn't work like that. They're not all paid for by the same people.

Not the "same people" huh?

I thought it was Insurance Companies?

So you think politicians will go for it then? This nonsensical garbage plan that republicans have been trying to foist on the US public as an "alternative" since the 1990's?

InTheTrees

walshyn93 wrote: »

If you want to give Obama credit for moving towards energy independence that's fair and I applaud him for it. But to say he's responsible for low oil prices is stretching it.

The US increased production which resulted in lower prices.

You were incorrect that it was due to the Saudis.

walshyn93

Overheal wrote: »

Actually that's totally accurate: he said "Iran celebrates Death to America Day". It's about as accurate as saying "We celebrate tax day"

It's rhetoric. It's a fact that they celebrate the day they took over the embassy. It's a day of flag burning, allah akhbars and shouting death to America. Pulling up a politician for using rhetoric is defining what is true and what is untrue far too narrowly to be fair.

Overheal

walshyn93 wrote: »

If you want to give Obama credit for moving towards energy independence that's fair and I applaud him for it. But to say he's responsible for low oil prices is stretching it.

Not at all. If gas was $4.50 who would take the blame? You know it.

Overheal

walshyn93 wrote: »

It's rhetoric. It's a fact that they celebrate the day they took over the embassy. It's a day of flag burning, allah akhbars and shouting death to America. Pulling up a politician for using rhetoric is defining what is true and what is untrue far too narrowly to be fair.

No it's the whole purpose of fact checking, because rhetoric has a habit of becoming "fact". That be used rhetoric and not fact earned him a mostly false ruling, opposed to completely false or pants on fire.

As for oil production both the US and OPEC have increased production, it's an economic war. OPEC is trying to dry up our domestic energy extraction so we will return to relying on more imports.

walshyn93

InTheTrees wrote: »

The US increased production which resulted in lower prices.

You were incorrect that it was due to the Saudis.

Please go.

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/commodity/crude-oil
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/saudi-arabia/crude-oil-production
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/crude-oil-production

walshyn93

Overheal wrote: »

No it's the whole purpose of fact checking, because rhetoric has a habit of becoming "fact"

As for oil production both the US and OPEC have increased production, it's an economic war. OPEC is trying to dry up our domestic energy extraction so we will return to relying on more imports.

If you look at the charts I posted you'll see that US production increased gradually and the price remained stable. Saudis ramped up production and the price tanked. I understand the Saudis game. That doesn't mean Obama is directly responsible for reduced oil prices.

Trying to use the oil prices to score party political points is dishonest.

Overheal

walshyn93 wrote: »

If you look at the charts I posted you'll see that US production increased gradually and the price remained stable. Saudis ramped up production and the price tanked. I understand the Saudis game. That doesn't mean Obama is directly responsible for reduced oil prices.

Trying to use the oil prices to score party political points is dishonest.

And yet it was largely the efforts of the Obama administration over several years to push us further toward energy independence, you can't really discredit that. At the end of the day: you tried to argue that people are no better off than since 2008 and I think it's been easy to demonstrate how absurdly base such a claim is.

InTheTrees

walshyn93 wrote: »

Please go.

I think you should too.

Its shows steady US increase since 2009 until just before christmas this year.

Which is also confirmed by the link I posted.

:cool:

walshyn93

InTheTrees wrote: »

Not the "same people" huh?

I thought it was Insurance Companies?

So you think politicians will go for it then? This nonsensical garbage plan that republicans have been trying to foist on the US public as an "alternative" since the 1990's?

The insurance companies essentially wrote Obamacare. They got their little provisions snuck in there. That's how they get their way, not necessarily by buying every member of congress.

walshyn93

Overheal wrote: »

And yet it was largely the efforts of the Obama administration over several years to push us further toward energy independence, you can't really discredit that. At the end of the day: you tried to argue that people are no better off than since 2008 and I think it's been easy to demonstrate how absurdly base such a claim is.

No I never said that "people" are no better off. I'm saying that the Democrats have made their voting blocs no better off. Difference. Very big difference. College enrollment among Latinos is up, but since it was at rock bottom it's not hard to see an uptick. Hardly a coup for minorities.

BTW, what's the Latino college graduation rate?

27% to 42% for whites. So what really is the benefit to saddling Latinos with college debt when the vast majority of them never finish. Its this selective citing of statistics that is the hallmark of the Democrats. They're only focused on creating soundbites.

Overheal

walshyn93 wrote: »

No I never said that "people" are no better off. I'm saying that the Democrats have made their voting blocs no better off. Difference. Very big difference. College enrollment among Latinos is up, but since it was at rock bottom it's not hard to see an uptick. Hardly a coup for minorities.

BTW, what's the Latino college graduation rate?

So I guess you're not articulating yourself clearly: what is the reason it's negative to "bloc" voters into relativistic categories? Don't you want to ensure that you pay attention to and respect the most constituents possible? Trump was bad mouthing Muslims at his rally the other night while Muslims were in attendance - having previously tried to argue he has Muslim friends, Islam isn't the enemy, etc.

I mean if you are saying Bernie needs to roll up his sleeves to win, but paying attention to voter blocs is bad, isn't that somewhat hypocritical?

KingBrian2

walshyn93 wrote: »

Politifact doesn't understand hyperbole.



What Cruz actually said: "Here, we have Thanksgiving, we have Christmas, we have the 4th of July. Every year in Iran, they celebrate Death to America day."

So here we have a fact checking organisation twisting someone's words to make their statement false. He was never equating them. He was juxtaposing them. Difference.

Here's their explanation:





Their verdict?



Yeah, I'm going to continue to take the fact checkers with a grain of salt. He never said there was a formally designated holiday, just that they celebrate it. And if the Iranian government didn't condone these protests they surely wouldn't allow them.

America has its own version of the religious right that burns Korans and espouses overthrowing regimes. Islam bashing was very popular long before Trump stood for president. As far back as Phelps and those other deeply conservative minded Southerners in Florida influencing Washington DC they put off negotiations with Iran for a decade.

walshyn93

Overheal wrote: »

So I guess you're not articulating yourself clearly: what is the reason it's negative to "bloc" voters into relativistic categories? Don't you want to ensure that you pay attention to and respect the most constituents possible? Trump was bad mouthing Muslims at his rally the other night while Muslims were in attendance - having previously tried to argue he has Muslim friends, Islam isn't the enemy, etc.

I mean if you are saying Bernie needs to roll up his sleeves to win, but paying attention to voter blocs is bad, isn't that somewhat hypocritical?

I said it perfect the first time you just didn't read.

It's bad for the people in said blocs because they get pandered to more but when the political party you vote for becomes politically dependent on fixing your problems, it creates an incentive to perpetuate those problems while maintaining the appearance of helping. Like I said before if all minorities achieved parity minorities would vote for Dems and Reps in equal measure. Dems can't have that. The Dems would never want a constitutional amendment to protect gay marriage, abortion or anything else like that because if it was constitutionally protected they wouldn't be able to whip up fear about the republicans taking them away.

As an election strategy its brilliant. Me pointing it out isn't hypocritical.

walshyn93

KingBrian2 wrote: »

America has its own version of the religious right that burns Korans and espouses overthrowing regimes. Islam bashing was very popular long before Trump stood for president. As far back as Phelps and those other deeply conservative minded Southerners in Florida influencing Washington DC they put off negotiations with Iran for a decade.

Way to spin it. Totally skews the reality of the situation. I think one person wanted to burn the Koran but he was hounded by both sides.

I'm not one for interventionist foreign policy but if that regime has committed genocide or is harbouring terrorists there's a case to be made.