2016 US Presidential Race - Mod Warning in OP

Manach

Few things in life are inevitable. The rise of the Nazis was not the forgone conclusion. Thus some form of resistance might have encouraged other social actors (conservatives, officer corp, industries, frighten middle classes) not to regard the Nazis as some form as petty nationalists promising to make the country great again, but for what they really were. That is one lesson to draw from the 20thC European history, not to assume that the mechanisms of a powerful state will always in the hands of those who are aware of checks/balances of power.

walshyn93

MightyMandarin wrote: »

Listen to the boos in the audience last night when Hillary tried to attack Bernie and defend her speaking fees.

He doesn't need to attack Hillary on anything. Bringing up her record as a proponent of the Iraq war, her super PAC support despite her 'complaints' against Campaign Financing, her ties with Wall St., her flip-flopping on several issues and rebutting her self-labelling as a 'progressive', is all he needs to do.

Hillary is the slimiest candidate in the race, aside from Cruz and Trump. When asked was she a part of the establishment, she said 'I can't be a part of the establishment because I'm a woman'. Stuff like that makes my blood boil. Her tactics of late have been disgusting. The people voting for her are the Democrat equivalent of Trump/Cruz supporters: un-informed or unintelligent people, or bandwagoners on the 'feminist/social justice warrior/black lives matter' train.

If Bernie Sanders had balls and knew about the story in this video he could have ruined her right then and there. She opened herself up to a slam dunk and she knew it which is why she tried to keep talking and talking. Watch this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12mJ-U76nfg

walshyn93

MightyMandarin wrote: »

Just because he's a brain surgeon, doesn't mean that Carson hasn't got some stupid thoughts. I remember he insinuated that the Holocaust could've been prevented if the jews had more guns, which meant that we should protect the 2nd amendment. For all his soft speak and renowned professional life, Carson doesn't appear any more intelligent than Cruz and Trump imo.

Yeah you keep clinging onto that belief champ. The man is a literal brain surgeon. 99% chance he's smarter than everyone on here.

According to Cruz' liberal Democrat professor Alan Dershowitz (also a Clinton supporter) at Harvard Law School he was the most gifted student he ever taught. So another person who's likely smarter than everyone else here.

Trump went to Wharton. Pretty big deal. Not sure how he got on there but he graduated back when college was hard. There might be someone on here who's smarter than Trump but it's not that likely. He's incredibly street smart and has got the better of most of the people he's come up against one way or another.

J Mysterio

walshyn93 wrote: »

Yeah you keep clinging onto that belief champ. The man is a literal brain surgeon. 99% chance he's smarter than everyone on here.

According to Cruz' liberal Democrat professor Alan Dershowitz (also a Clinton supporter) at Harvard Law School he was the most gifted student he ever taught. So another person who's likely smarter than everyone else here.

Trump went to Wharton. Pretty big deal. Not sure how he got on there but he graduated back when college was hard. There might be someone on here who's smarter than Trump but it's not that likely. He's incredibly street smart and has got the better of most of the people he's come up against one way or another.

Academic skill, common sense and empathy are all seperate abilities.

Brian?

walshyn93 wrote: »

Yeah you keep clinging onto that belief champ. The man is a literal brain surgeon. 99% chance he's smarter than everyone on here.

So smart he believes in the literal interpretation of the bible? He may be a phenomenally gifted doctor, but you have to admit there are some serious gaps in his knowledge.

Canadel

walshyn93 wrote: »

The man is a literal brain surgeon. 99% chance he's smarter than everyone on here.

When it comes to brain surgery yes. When it comes to everything else no.

walshyn93

Canadel wrote: »

When it comes to brain surgery yes. When it comes to everything else no.

Brain surgery is a learned skill. You need the building blocks to learn it well. One of those is intelligence.

Overheal

On the hazards of blind belief in medical or scientific "expertise" as an anecdote

https://news.vice.com/article/this-canadian-lab-spent-20-years-ruining-lives?utm_source=vicenewsfbads

Actually Walsh you're fighting a straw man since nobody said he wasn't intelligent (a brain surgeon after all) but he's no intellectual. Perhaps diving into medical textbooks cost him his common sense.

walshyn93

Brian? wrote: »

So smart he believes in the literal interpretation of the bible? He may be a phenomenally gifted doctor, but you have to admit there are some serious gaps in his knowledge.

So what? That's his religious upbringing, it has nothing to do with his intelligence. America is a very religious country so it's safe to say the majority of highly intelligent people believe in God.

walshyn93

Overheal wrote: »

On the hazards of blind belief in medical or scientific "expertise" as an anecdote

https://news.vice.com/article/this-canadian-lab-spent-20-years-ruining-lives?utm_source=vicenewsfbads

Actually Walsh you're fighting a straw man since nobody said he wasn't intelligent (a brain surgeon after all) but he's no intellectual. Perhaps diving into medical textbooks cost him his common sense.

No. Loads of people are saying he's not intelligent. And that vice article has less than nothing tk do with Ben Carson or this discussion.

What you're doing is moving the goalposts to "intellectual".

Overheal

walshyn93 wrote: »

No. Loads of people are saying he's not intelligent. And that vice article has less than nothing tk do with Ben Carson or this discussion.

Sure it does: the belief that because Carson can perform brain surgery fallibly causes one such as yourself to believe he is some type of Stephen Hawking level of intelligence or something - which he clearly is not. Being skillful in one area of his life does not make him the rain man of politics. He isnt inherently more qualified to be president than his rivals because he knows about neurosurgery. But people hear that and blindly assume he's a genius level expert. A dangerous fallacy.

I'm not moving the goalposts to point out he's not an intellectual: that reinforces the point that he believes in the literal interpretation of the bible. And that pyramids are ancient granary silos. Etc.

Overheal

walshyn93 wrote: »

So what? That's his religious upbringing, it has nothing to do with his intelligence. America is a very religious country so it's safe to say the majority of highly intelligent people believe in God.

But isn't that just a bandwagon fallacy? And I doubt most intelligent people even if they believe in the existence of God would accept the literal interpretation of the bible.

K-9

walshyn93 wrote: »

No. Loads of people are saying he's not intelligent. And that vice article has less than nothing tk do with Ben Carson or this discussion.

What you're doing is moving the goalposts to "intellectual".

Garret Fitzgerald was very intelligent and an intellectual, yet many thought he was a poor leader and indecisive. Being an excellent brain surgeon or head of their class doesn't necessarily make them good President material.

Brian?

walshyn93 wrote: »

So what? That's his religious upbringing, it has nothing to do with his intelligence. America is a very religious country so it's safe to say the majority of highly intelligent people believe in God.

It had everything to do with his intelligence. Despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, he believes the earth is only a few thousand years old.

I seriously question the judgement of anyone with such a deeply held belief. what else will they misjudge? Blind faith, such as this, is a very dangerous thing.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Overheal

You'd have to ask a Democrat.

As for the concepts behind the Bible being a living document, that's more appropriate for the Christianity forum. It is certainly fitting the description of a living document, but whether or not that's a good thing is up for your own interpretation. In my view it's a hypocritical stance as its held by most believers: the text is both the immutable word of God, and yet totally revisable.

I don't understand why, if you merely believe in the existence of an all-powerful divine being sitting on a cloud in Heaven, you're still seen as a rational, intelligent person. But believe that the same divine being created the Earth, and you're a nutcase.

That's a blunt cludgeon. I could still accept for example a scientist that believes all that is was created by god, etc. and they could still be an expert on thermodynamics or mechanics or chemistry. Where it gets silly is when you think that the Earth is only 6000 years old, fossils are tricks by the devil or whatever, and evolution is too complicated therefore tortoises just showed up one day.

Where that becomes a problem for a national leader is an inclination to oversimplistic thinking, which begets many problems we now face because cause and effect are never considered. Take for instance the invasion of Iraq: "God told me to end the tyranny in Iraq" (GWB). We jump to the conclusion that Iraq has chemical WMDs (this gets ironic later). We go in, guns blazing, shredding through tanks and personnel like butter with ultra-dense, poisonous depleted-uranium munitions. We bomb apartments, homes, churches, schools to rubble. We find no WMDs. We don't stay for the rebuilding effort (because nobody planned for it properly). We don't take care of our vets (because they aren't budgeted for). And now the Iraq landscape in places is littered with radioactive slag, birth defect rates are out of control, causing mass destruction in a sense to the ecology of Iraq and its people, which in turn just breeds the next enemy to fight. Perhaps its a bit of an extrapolation on my part, but I won't sponsor or elect a leader who exhibits they are incapable of complex or interconnected thought.

Manach

Historically given the self proclaimed rationist leaders in the past century whose only moral compass has been to dominate at all cost on the road to Utopiawhich were opposed in part by others who still had a notion of absolute rights and wrongs based on an echo of religious faith then something can still be said for a theistic viewpoint. The works of the historian Burleigh cast a spotlight on this, for instance in his book Moral Combat.

On intelligence : my sneaking admiration of Clinton stems in part from her being a lawyer: as it is not the absolute but the perceive measure of right is how the legal system operates.

Overheal

On intelligence : my sneaking admiration of Clinton stems in part from her being a lawyer: as it is not the absolute but the perceive measure of right is how the legal system operates.

That's the thing about running to be a leader in our democracy though: we want someone who understands our values, right/wrong, not just what they can get away with under our system. It's not about knowing what loopholes you can skirt through because they are making these laws, don't we want them making laws that makes it more difficult, for instance, to be an immoral scumbag?

Fr Tod Umptious

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Reminds me of poor Al Gore on the Ophra (sp) show back in 2000.

Ophra (sp) - Al what's your favourite book.

Al - The Bible.

General public - A f##k off Al and stop pandering.

Overheal

On the lighter side in case you missed it

Black Swan

walshyn93 wrote: »

Yeah you keep clinging onto that belief champ. The man is a literal brain surgeon. 99% chance he's smarter than everyone on here.

Not sure how a brain surgeon by virtue of his education, training, and experience qualifies him in the slightest for the highest public office in US government, as well as Commander-In-Chief the most expensive and powerful military in the world. Of course those that favour Carson as 2016 president will spend all their time challenging the qualifications of the other Republican and Democrat candidates to occupy the Oval Office, but merely disqualifying the opposition does not qualify Carson in the slightest.

Black Swan

According to Trump the US Military needs to get stronger, when today it's the strongest by far on the planet, and has an extraordinary annual military budget that exceeds PRC 3 times, Russia 7 times, and is more than all 25 EU nations combined. Former 5-star general and US President Dwight D Eisenhower (Republican) warned the American people about the power and influence of the Military Industrial Complex (coined the term), but no one was listening then or now.

5-Star General Eisenhower: "I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity."

Former teenage military high school student now presidential candidate Trump: “You know the thing I’ll be great at that people aren’t thinking? And I do very well at it. Military. I am the toughest guy. I will rebuild our military. It will be so strong, and so powerful, and so great. It will be so powerful and so great that we’ll never have to use it. Nobody’s going to mess with us, folks. Nobody.”

Does anyone see the craic?

MadYaker

I generally wouldn't have much time for republican candidates, but I like John Kasich, his reasonable and sensible positions and ideas make a nice change from the madness of Trump and Cruz. He has experience too and seems like somebody who if elected could bridge the divide between the two parties. It's a shame he doesn't get half as much attention as the crazies.

AbusesToilets

Black Swan wrote: »

According to Trump the US Military needs to get stronger, when today it's the strongest by far on the planet, and has an extraordinary annual military budget that exceeds PRC 3 times, Russia 7 times, and is more than all 25 EU nations combined. Former 5-star general and US President Dwight D Eisenhower (Republican) warned the American people about the power and influence of the Military Industrial Complex (coined the term), but no one was listening then or now.

5-Star General Eisenhower: "I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity."

Former teenage military high school student now presidential candidate Trump: “You know the thing I’ll be great at that people aren’t thinking? And I do very well at it. Military. I am the toughest guy. I will rebuild our military. It will be so strong, and so powerful, and so great. It will be so powerful and so great that we’ll never have to use it. Nobody’s going to mess with us, folks. Nobody.”

Does anyone see the craic?

The US military is probably the weakest it has been in decades. Smallest number of troops since WW1. Aging equipment that has not been replaced properly after 15 years of combat. Massively expensive weapons programs that are years behind schedule and which are not close to delivering an operational product, not to mention serious questions about their actually usefulness. Serious lack of money for unit training, continued promotion of substandard leaders.

The budget numbers may be massive but the reality on the ground is that the US is facing serious difficulties in meeting its potential duties, at a time when such situations are propagating.

Black Swan

MadYaker wrote: »

...somebody who if elected could bridge the divide between the two parties.

Today I seriously doubt that any of the 2016 presidential candidates will be interested, or otherwise capable to "bridge the divide between the two parties." The warning issued by national co-founder and 2nd president John Adams has reached fruition today by the two parties:
"There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution."

What's worse than the 2-party system is 1-party control, where one party controls both houses of Congress as well as the presidency, and then begins to stack the US Supreme Court with justices favouring its biased political platform, reducing and/or eliminating checks-and-balances on the power of government.

walshyn93

K-9 wrote: »

Garret Fitzgerald was very intelligent and an intellectual, yet many thought he was a poor leader and indecisive. Being an excellent brain surgeon or head of their class doesn't necessarily make them good President material.

That's beside the point. I'm not claiming Carson is presidential material I'm claiming he's more intelligent than people give him credit for. Certainly more intelligent than about 90% of the people who habitually call him dumb. It's a common trait of idiots to not recognise intelligence in other people.

walshyn93

Brian? wrote: »

It had everything to do with his intelligence. Despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, he believes the earth is only a few thousand years old.

I seriously question the judgement of anyone with such a deeply held belief. what else will they misjudge? Blind faith, such as this, is a very dangerous thing.

It has something to do with the introduction to certain ideas at a certain point in your mental development. Certain ideas can become ingrained at an early age and the rest of ones world view twists itself to support it. It's an evolutionary defence mechanism to teach children that cliffs and lions are dangerous but with religion and dogma can have unintended consequences. Some are more susceptible than others but it's not directly related to intelligence. He's essentially a very easily influenced man who finds it hard to accept change which is why I wouldn't support him for president, nor would I necessarily call him stupid.

walshyn93

Black Swan wrote: »

According to Trump the US Military needs to get stronger, when today it's the strongest by far on the planet, and has an extraordinary annual military budget that exceeds PRC 3 times, Russia 7 times, and is more than all 25 EU nations combined. Former 5-star general and US President Dwight D Eisenhower (Republican) warned the American people about the power and influence of the Military Industrial Complex (coined the term), but no one was listening then or now.

5-Star General Eisenhower: "I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity."

Former teenage military high school student now presidential candidate Trump: “You know the thing I’ll be great at that people aren’t thinking? And I do very well at it. Military. I am the toughest guy. I will rebuild our military. It will be so strong, and so powerful, and so great. It will be so powerful and so great that we’ll never have to use it. Nobody’s going to mess with us, folks. Nobody.”

Does anyone see the craic?

I always find it funny how people especially in Ireland criticise America for having such a large military.

But on a different day on a different topic in a different mood you could ask them "what would happen if Ireland was invaded?" and without a hint of irony they'll say "America would probably save us". That's the same for most of the world. America pays for our security. We should probably be a bit less harsh on them for it.

walshyn93

Black Swan wrote: »

Not sure how a brain surgeon by virtue of his education, training, and experience qualifies him in the slightest for the highest public office in US government, as well as Commander-In-Chief the most expensive and powerful military in the world. Of course those that favour Carson as 2016 president will spend all their time challenging the qualifications of the other Republican and Democrat candidates to occupy the Oval Office, but merely disqualifying the opposition does not qualify Carson in the slightest.

Once again, someone confuses moral support for a person with actual support for their candidacy. Just because I say he's probably a good guy and probably very smart doesn't mean I want him as president. I think Obama is a smart guy and Cruz is definitely smarter, I don't want either of them as president.

Black Swan

AbusesToilets wrote: »

The budget numbers may be massive but the reality on the ground is that the US is facing serious difficulties in meeting its potential duties, at a time when such situations are propagating.

I've read this story going all the way back to Ronald Reagan's justification for the Cold War arms race against the CCCP (Союз Советских Социалистических Республик). Although the face of the du jour enemy may change, it occurs every presidential race.

Given that the military "budget numbers may be massive," and there is no "may be" when the budget is compared with the nations of the world, including those that may challenge the US today (or tomorrow), what is the solution? I hear a lot of podium polemics coming out of the mouths of Democrat and Republican 2016 candidates, but they are only words without any substance based upon verifiable experience.

Anecdotally speaking, I've been going on interviews lately, and the smart interviewers ask for verifiable job-related experiences, and then follow-up to verify such experiences with employers, and give very little weight to what comes out of my mouth. What I am hearing and reading from the 2016 presidential candidates, no matter the party, is mostly mouth.

Is this the best-of-the-best that the US has to offer for 2016 president from its 319 million people? If so, it's beginning to look like Chance Gardner (Peter Sellers, "Being There," 1979) could be elected US president someday. He did walk on water at the end.