2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

InTheTrees

oik wrote: »

Jesus wept. Apparently I should just spell it out for you.

If Trump nominates a judge, any judge, and that judge doesn't vote to overturn the decision the blame will be placed on the judge, not Trump.

You accused me of lacking comprehension skills but yours aren't very sharp yourself. You should hold off on your accusations in future.

You're not grasping an important fact. He's not going to nominate a judge who is pro-ssm.

InTheTrees

oik wrote: »

You accused me of lacking comprehension skills but yours aren't very sharp yourself. You should hold off on your accusations in future.

I never accused you of anything.

oik

You're not grasping an important fact. He's not going to nominate a judge who is pro-ssm.

There's a whole raft of facts you're failing to grasp. Like the fact that the US supreme court has never in its history voted to revoke a right under the Equal Protections clause meaning that SSM - barring some extremely unpopular and unprecedented move - is settled law.

InTheTrees

oik wrote: »

Like the fact that the US supreme court has never in its history voted to revoke a right under the Equal Protections clause meaning that SSM - barring some extremely unpopular and unprecedented move - is settled law.

The Supreme court can over turn a previous decision. Trump has said he would like it left to the states.

Additionally, there's campaign finance reform issues, abortion, and gun control to be considered.
There are a lot of reason conservatives dont want liberals to be appointed to the supreme court. Which means they'll try and keep a tight hold on trump's nominations.

oik

The Supreme court can over turn a previous decision. Trump has said he would like it left to the states.

Additionally, there's campaign finance reform issues, abortion, and gun control to be considered.
There are a lot of reason conservatives dont want liberals to be appointed to the supreme court. Which means they'll try and keep a tight hold on trump's nominations.

Clearly you think you're the only one who understands how the law works. Your barely conceal conceit doesn't do you any credit. Everyone knows a court can overturn decisions. I'm telling you they have never taken away a right under the Equal Protection clause and it's frankly paranoid to think they will.

Trump has already released the names of 11 potential nominees. 5 have previous anti-LGBT records and the other 6 have no record either way. All are conservative. Generally a good thing imo. 9 unelected people should generally not be overextending their powers and creating laws.

As for campaign finance reform, that's something I used to be in favour of, until I realised the only reason Wall Street favourites the Democrats want it is because the media (with the exception of FOX) is effectively an arm of the Democratic party in all but name. Campaign finance reform just means granting even more power to these massively powerful and highly distrusted (10% approval ratings) corporations. The only way I'd support campaign finance reform is if major news channels had to be impartial, but that's stepping on the 1st amendment twice.

Overheal

KingBrian2 wrote: »

I've already mentioned that the Democrats have failed to deliver any benefits to African Americans or indeed many Americans across the country. The elite can slag the lwr classes as much as they like. The more they do the more the extremists will come out. Trump has energized a huge number of people. He won the GOP candidacy and he is up against poor opposition. All I have been saying this entire time is that Trump's notoriety has been greatly exaggerated.

None of which answers the question at hand. You're still just deflecting. It seems you have no answer to the question, which leads one to wonder why you would make the claim in the first place.

Overheal

oik wrote: »

Do you know all those immigrant jobs that "Americans don't want to do any more"? Do you know who used to do those jobs?

So inner city blacks are suddenly going to end up in rural agriculture picking crops? Doing construction work for less than the minimum wage? No benefits? That appears to be your insinuation, which is pretty ridiculous.not to mention there are real economic setbacks to deportation that don't include all of the social fallout of removing 11 million people.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-18/here-s-what-the-u-s-economy-would-look-like-if-trump-deported-undocumented-immigrants

It still doesn't clearly answer the original claim that Trump is somehow good for African Americans. It's probably a big part of why they don't support him beyond all that much.

oik

So inner city blacks are suddenly going to end up in rural agriculture picking crops? Doing construction work for less than the minimum wage? No benefits? That appears to be your insinuation, which is pretty ridiculous.not to mention there are real economic setbacks to deportation that don't include all of the social fallout of removing 11 million people.



It still doesn't clearly answer the original claim that Trump is somehow good for African Americans. It's probably a big part of why they don't support him beyond all that much.

How about doing construction work for more than the minimum wage? Blacks used to do almost all the construction work in the southern united states. It was a black profession. What happened?

I made no such insinuations. Your debating style is basically to just put words in the opponent's mouth. I know you thought you were being witty, but I've no time for that BS

If Trump was a Democrat he'd be winning the black vote regardless of his policies. He's an an automatic disadvantage and he's overperforming compared to past republicans.

Overheal

oik wrote: »

How about doing construction work for more than the minimum wage? Blacks used to do almost all the construction work in the southern united states. It was a black profession. What happened?

Do you have proof illegal workers in construction make above the minimum wage; that blacks used to do almost all the construction work in the southern US or that construction was a "black profession?"

InTheTrees

oik wrote: »

Clearly you think you're the only one who understands how the law works. Your barely conceal conceit doesn't do you any credit.

"Your barely conceal conceit"?

Seriously?

InTheTrees

oik wrote: »

Trump has already released the names of 11 potential nominees. 5 have previous anti-LGBT records and the other 6 have no record either way. All are conservative.

So trump will appoint conservative judges? And this in your opinion is "genius stuff" is it?

InTheTrees

oik wrote: »

If Trump was a Democrat he'd be winning the black vote regardless of his policies. He's an an automatic disadvantage and he's overperforming compared to past republicans.

No he isn't.

No other candidate in modern history has had less support from African Americans than trump.

conditioned games

InTheTrees wrote: »

No he isn't.

No other candidate in modern history has had less support from African Americans than trump.

Mitt Romney got 2% while Trumps support among Blacks jumped up to 20% after visit to black church in Flint. I'd be surprised if Clinton shows up to first debate given how sick she is.

Overheal

conditioned games wrote: »

Mitt Romney got 2% while Trumps support among Blacks jumped up to 20% after visit to black church in Flint. I'd be surprised if Clinton shows up to first debate given how sick she is.

Pneumonia doesn't take very long to recover from, given rest it can be gone in days.

As for that bump in the polls? Down to 5.2%

http://cesrusc.org/election/

conditioned games

Overheal wrote: »

Pneumonia doesn't take very long to recover from, given rest it can be gone in days.

As for that bump in the polls? Down to 5.2%

http://cesrusc.org/election/

'' pneumonia" oh ya that's very believable. That would explain all her health related problems over the past 3 months. Hope she gets better soon.

Count Dooku

With so massive outspending in advertisement

Clinton nearly cries why she is not 50 points ahead

It looks like she doesn't really understand that she is the worse possible candidate from Democratic Party

Overheal

conditioned games wrote: »

'' pneumonia" oh ya that's very believable. That would explain all her health related problems over the past 3 months. Hope she gets better soon.

Some of the speculation is ridiculous and belongs in CT.

Black Swan

Count Dooku wrote: »

With so massive outspending in advertisement

Clinton nearly cries why she is not 50 points ahead

Yes Hillary Clinton has had to spend millions USD to reach potential voters, but this has been common practice during past presidential election years. Nothing unusual there. But this has not been the case for Celebrity Apprentice (President) Donald Trump, who cries and cries with his supporters about how the so-called biased news media has been critical towards Trump with their extraordinary coverage, especially when he so frequently says "outrageous" and "sensationalist" things that draw the media to give him air time and print. Of course those few of us that have read page 56 of Trump's 1987 The Art of the Deal, know that Trump has been successfully manipulating the press in accordance with his Deals playbook plan to get extraordinary air time and print for free. The words "outrageous" and "sensationalist" things to say to manipulate the press are on that page.

Peist2007

Overheal wrote: »

Would you like that in spoken word, prose, musical duet? I really don't understand why it's necessary to hear her read aloud what is written.

I will ignore all of your responses to this post unless they are in the form of youtube vlogs of yourself in your bedroom with a wooly hat on. #HowYourLogicSoundsWhen you have to defend your camp by saying that, you've pretty much admitted defeat.

So, nothing? I don't think it is too much to ask of a candidate to hear them set out their policies. Are you saying there is no footage anywhere of Clinton setting out what her plans are as President? I'm not interested in what a team of people came up with with the help of PR Firms on her website.

You saying there is nothing out there? Amazing.

Peist2007

Suryavarman wrote: »

Hahahahahaha. You should check out the issues section of Hillary Clinton's website where she goes into great detail on many policy areas.

Hillary cannot even use emails. I hardly think she designed her website. I am sure the right people were employed to ensure that every word on that site garners votes. You know what i am asking for - any footage of Hillary setting out policy? Simple request, not sure why you were laughing manically above. Guess you must be really invested in this. Post up some links there

daithi7

Sorry if this has been covered already, but when,(date& time) exactly is the first US presidential debate? & can we see it in Ireland on cnn, cnbc or wherever??

Thanks for info on this,
Looking forward to the big pow wow:))

Peist2007

Overheal wrote: »

Some of the speculation is ridiculous and belongs in CT.

It is annoying that using the words "CT" nowadays seems to be an argument to the contrary nowadays. Hillary collapsed at the 9/11 function after weeks of denying anything was wrong from a health perspective. Then she lied about the nature of her collapse. She spent that weekend shaking hands and hugging people whilst diagnosed with pneumonia. And you think asking questions of her health can be countered with the standard "CT" response? Perfectly valid questions about a candidate who is looking more and more ill as this campaign continues.

Still waiting for some links of Clinton setting out her policy from you. They are starting to look conspicuous by their absence.

oscarBravo

Peist2007 wrote: »

Still waiting for some links of Clinton setting out her policy from you. They are starting to look conspicuous by their absence.

Her policies are on her website. Demanding to see them presented in a format of your choosing doesn't mean she doesn't have policies. What are you trying to prove, exactly?

Black Swan

Peist2007 wrote: »

Still waiting for some links of Clinton setting out her policy from you. They are starting to look conspicuous by their absence.

oscarBravo wrote: »

Her policies are on her website. Demanding to see them presented in a format of your choosing doesn't mean she doesn't have policies. What are you trying to prove, exactly?

"Conspicuous by their absence" is clearly an erroneous statement. There are several vids spoken by Hillary Clinton that outlines her economic policies, etc. For example, Clinton addresses her economic policies beginning about 11:00 in a Michigan speech. Obviously oral speeches do not go into great depth. More details are offered on her site as oscarBravo states, as well as evaluations of her polices by research institutes.

Peist2007

oscarBravo wrote: »

Her policies are on her website. Demanding to see them presented in a format of your choosing doesn't mean she doesn't have policies. What are you trying to prove, exactly?

A format of my choosing? Her presenting them herself please on camera? That doesnt exist? You realise how utterly laughable that is?

Peist2007

Black Swan wrote: »

"Conspicuous by their absence" is clearly an erroneous statement. There are several vids spoken by Hillary Clinton that outlines her economic policies, etc. For example, Clinton addresses her economic policies beginning about 11:00 in a Michigan speech. Obviously oral speeches do not go into great depth. More details are offered on her site as oscarBravo states, as well as evaluations of her polices by research institutes.

Nope just want to see Hillary set things out herself. Thanks for the link. Will have a look through that tonight.

Suryavarman

Peist2007 wrote: »

A format of my choosing? Her presenting them herself please on camera? That doesnt exist? You realise how utterly laughable that is?

I'm sure if you weren't so lazy you'd be able to find videos of the dozen or so debates where she discusses policy.

Black Swan

Peist2007 wrote: »

Nope just want to see Hillary set things out herself. Thanks for the link. Will have a look through that tonight.

There are several speeches by Hillary Clinton easily accessed on the web from late 2015 through the present day that addresses her economic, foreign, immigration, education, etc., policies, so I do not understand why you are having difficulty finding them. Many of them are also transcripted so that they can be easily checked word-for-word. There are several vid interviews between her and known media anchors, also transcripted. Personally, I find her speeches boring and unimaginative, but at least she does not frequently insult persons that differ from her by gender, race, colour, creed, disability, or national origin as Donald Trump frequently has, especially during Trump's GOP primary campaign.

oik

Her policies are on her website. Demanding to see them presented in a format of your choosing doesn't mean she doesn't have policies. What are you trying to prove, exactly?

Clinton has abandoned policy as a means to winning the election and and switched to persuasion tactics. "He's racist sexist etc." She changed tactic around July or so, and it worked. I don't blame her because policy doesn't really win elections, soundbites and in Trump's case framing him as someone to be feared is her best chance of winning.

That's why she doesn't really talk policy as much any more. It's a smart move because the majority of people don't really listen.

oik

Does anyone believe that Hillary's policies, on her website or otherwise are any indication of what she'll do as president?


She reluctantly dropped the TPP, but does anyone believe she won't just come in as president and say "well we've changed the TPP to make it better for workers so now I feel as though I can pass it"?

At least Trump has been against these type of trade deals since the 80's

oik

So trump will appoint conservative judges? And this in your opinion is "genius stuff" is it?

You're having trouble reading

oscarBravo

oik wrote: »

Does anyone believe that Hillary's policies, on her website or otherwise are any indication of what she'll do as president?

History tells us that presidents generally implement 70-75% of their campaign promises once elected.

InTheTrees

oik wrote: »

You're having trouble reading

Why dont you try and make a point instead of throwing out insults?

oik

Do you have proof illegal workers in construction make above the minimum wage; that blacks used to do almost all the construction work in the southern US or that construction was a "black profession?"

Blacks are not illegal workers so why would they be paid less than minimum wage?

Can't post links

Youtube: "Thomas Sowell - Reducing Black Unemployment" about 4 minutes in.

From Sowell's article on the matter in the National review:

Low-income minorities are often hardest hit by the unemployment that follows in the wake of minimum-wage laws. The last year when the black unemployment rate was lower than the white unemployment rate was 1930, the last year before there was a federal minimum-wage law. The following year, the Davis-Bacon Act of 1931 was passed, requiring minimum wages in the construction industry. This was in response to complaints that construction companies with non-union black construction workers were able to underbid construction companies with unionized white workers (whose unions would not admit blacks).

There's another video I can't find which goes into more detail on the extent to which blacks dominated the construction in the south.

oik

History tells us that presidents generally implement 70-75% of their campaign promises once elected.

Most of them were not forced to promise things they didn't want to by an old communist.

oik

Why dont you try and make a point instead of throwing out insults?

It's not an insult. You've misread/misinterpreted deliberately or otherwise my posts multiple times. Why should I waste my effort responding?

Christy42

oik wrote: »

Most of them were not forced to promise things they didn't want to by an old communist.

Yes but neither was Hillary.

Sanders is not a communist. This is just the old US thing of being scared of socialists under the bed and using communism to avoid any actual discussion with the left.

oik

Yes but neither was Hillary.

Sanders is not a communist. This is just the old US thing of being scared of socialists under the bed and using communism to avoid any actual discussion with the left.

You didn't have to take the communist thing literally. I thought it was obvious I was joking. But the fact is she did have to move very far to the left, especially on TPP and she will be assuring her donors and lobbyists that her pivot on TPP will be reversed in office once she finds a suitable excuse.

Suryavarman

oik wrote: »

Does anyone believe that Hillary's policies, on her website or otherwise are any indication of what she'll do as president?


She reluctantly dropped the TPP, but does anyone believe she won't just come in as president and say "well we've changed the TPP to make it better for workers so now I feel as though I can pass it"?

At least Trump has been against these type of trade deals since the 80's

Trump being wrong for over 30 years isn't better than Clinton being wrong for 6 months.

oik wrote: »

Blacks are not illegal workers so why would they be paid less than minimum wage?

Can't post links

Youtube: "Thomas Sowell - Reducing Black Unemployment" about 4 minutes in.

From Sowell's article on the matter in the National review:

Low-income minorities are often hardest hit by the unemployment that follows in the wake of minimum-wage laws. The last year when the black unemployment rate was lower than the white unemployment rate was 1930, the last year before there was a federal minimum-wage law. The following year, the Davis-Bacon Act of 1931 was passed, requiring minimum wages in the construction industry. This was in response to complaints that construction companies with non-union black construction workers were able to underbid construction companies with unionized white workers (whose unions would not admit blacks).

There's another video I can't find which goes into more detail on the extent to which blacks dominated the construction in the south.

Referring to the way things were in 1930 as a way to back up your claims is a pretty poor way of going about things.

oik wrote: »

You didn't have to take the communist thing literally. I thought it was obvious I was joking. But the fact is she did have to move very far to the left, especially on TPP and she will be assuring her donors and lobbyists that her pivot on TPP will be reversed in office once she finds a suitable excuse.

She hasn't moved far to the left. She rebranded her college policy and abandoned support for TPP in its current guise. That isn't a move worth talking about.

Peist2007

Suryavarman wrote: »

I'm sure if you weren't so lazy you'd be able to find videos of the dozen or so debates where she discusses policy.

So, nothing. Noted

Peist2007

Black Swan wrote: »

There are several speeches by Hillary Clinton easily accessed on the web from late 2015 through the present day that addresses her economic, foreign, immigration, education, etc., policies, so I do not understand why you are having difficulty finding them. Many of them are also transcripted so that they can be easily checked word-for-word. There are several vid interviews between her and known media anchors, also transcripted. Personally, I find her speeches boring and unimaginative, but at least she does not frequently insult persons that differ from her by gender, race, colour, creed, disability, or national origin as Donald Trump frequently has, especially during Trump's GOP primary campaign.

Several. Ok. Link?

Well that's all well and good, but I want one where she describes her minimum wage policy while bouncing on a spacehopper while wearing a Fez. I mean if we can't even find that then how are we meant to take her seriously?

Count Dooku

oscarBravo wrote: »

Her policies are on her website.

It is not policies - it is promises. The only details what I found was to return US companies from Ireland and impose populist tax on millionaires.
The rest is usual populist waffling before elections.

Peist2007

Count Dooku wrote: »

It is not policies - it is promises. The only details what I found was to return US companies from Ireland and impose populist tax on millionaires.
The rest is usual populist waffling before elections.

Yeah the website is just spin. Those who think those are actual policies are mistaken.

Peist2007

Deleted User wrote: »

Well that's all well and good, but I want one where she describes her minimum wage policy while bouncing on a spacehopper while wearing a Fez. I mean if we can't even find that then how are we meant to take her seriously?

If we could find any that would be great. No need for theatrics. The fact that i am here 24 hours later still requesting links shows just how much sh1te is talked on this thread with zero to back it up.

oscarBravo

Peist2007 wrote: »

Yeah the website is just spin. Those who think those are actual policies are mistaken.

Careful with that open mind, your brains might fall out.

Can you give us an example of a video (or a campaign website) that meets your criteria, by another candidate for high office? You might explain how, precisely, it meets your definition of "actual policies" as distinct from "just spin".

Overheal

daithi7 wrote: »

Sorry if this has been covered already, but when,(date& time) exactly is the first US presidential debate? & can we see it in Ireland on cnn, cnbc or wherever??

Thanks for info on this,
Looking forward to the big pow wow:))

Monday. Facebook to broadcast afaik

Overheal

oik wrote: »

Do you have proof illegal workers in construction make above the minimum wage; that blacks used to do almost all the construction work in the southern US or that construction was a "black profession?"

Blacks are not illegal workers so why would they be paid less than minimum wage?

Can't post links

Youtube: "Thomas Sowell - Reducing Black Unemployment" about 4 minutes in.

From Sowell's article on the matter in the National review:

Low-income minorities are often hardest hit by the unemployment that follows in the wake of minimum-wage laws. The last year when the black unemployment rate was lower than the white unemployment rate was 1930, the last year before there was a federal minimum-wage law. The following year, the Davis-Bacon Act of 1931 was passed, requiring minimum wages in the construction industry. This was in response to complaints that construction companies with non-union black construction workers were able to underbid construction companies with unionized white workers (whose unions would not admit blacks).

There's another video I can't find which goes into more detail on the extent to which blacks dominated the construction in the south.

Could you find a video of someone reputable reading that for me? All I see are words. Anyone could have typed them. Besides where is your link? You don't have a link? Wha

Amerika

Overheal wrote: »

http://gawker.com/the-collected-quotes-of-donald-trump-on-the-blacks-1719961925

“Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day.”

“Laziness is a trait in blacks.”

Oh yeah, it's hard to see why he has such glowing support from the Klu Klux Klan.

Not the link, but who is the actual source of these supposed quotes? And a little background to the source, if you'd please.

(And I heard tell Hillary had people bumped off who threatened her and her husband's ambitions... you know, just to keep in the mood of your post. They even have a name for it... Arkansas Flu)

Amerika

Black Swan wrote: »

Donald Trump talks out of both sides of his mouth from his political pulpit, condemning US corporations importing foreign goods, while at the same time he personally profits from selling his Signature Collection in America with goods MADE IN CHINA and MADE IN MEXICO.

Please find me a manufacturer in the US that still makes this stuff.