Jump to content


Photo

US presidential election


  • Please log in to reply
240 replies to this topic

#1 Sotha

Sotha

    Vertical Contest Winner

  • Active Developer
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5659 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 11:40 AM

Exciting times, and the US presidential elections are just behind the corner. Anyone up for some politics discussion?

What do you think about the whole thing? In a democracy the people get the president they deserve? What about the rest of the world?

Is the era of facts, numbers and rationality replaced by the era of emotion, shouting and populism? It does not need to *be* right as long as it *feels* right?

Is this the next Brexit? People are pissed off, and they angrily vote to get things worse for themselves.

What do you think happens next week? In addition to a brief stock market panic, that is...
Clipper
-The mapper's best friend.

#2 lowenz

lowenz

    Uber member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2004 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 12:03 PM

"Exciting" with those 2 alternatives?

Knowing ALL that social engineering shaping around the elections? :P

 

You've got some gut, Sotha! This turn is pure demagocy, by the book! :D

 

And here in Italy we've got the *SAME* situation, only temporal-shifted (Berlusconi=Trump is now too old, the right demagogue scepter is inherited by Matteo Salvini with all the other disgusting characters around. And Matteo Renzi entourage is equally disgusting but in a different fashion).


Edited by lowenz, 04 November 2016 - 12:13 PM.

  • Ladro likes this

Task is not so much to see what no one has yet seen but to think what nobody has yet thought about that which everybody see. - E.S.


#3 lowenz

lowenz

    Uber member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2004 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 12:04 PM

About demagogy, waiting for @demagogue :laugh:  opinion!


Edited by lowenz, 04 November 2016 - 12:05 PM.

Task is not so much to see what no one has yet seen but to think what nobody has yet thought about that which everybody see. - E.S.


#4 Destined

Destined

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 1663 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 12:16 PM

Well, there is one quote I like very much regarding politics: "The main argument against a democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter." And this is exactly how I see most democracies right now. Unfortunately, in the US you have a lot of stupid or un-/misinformed or just uninterested people who are to vote a person who will then have a LOT of power. In Germany, at least the individual people do not have that much power. So, I am mainly scared and excited what will happen, regardless of who wins. But, sadly, all I can do is watch...



#5 grayman

grayman

    Master Builder, Coder

  • Active Developer
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12852 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 01:02 PM

Usually, in these election years, the phrase "I can't wait until it's over" is oft-heard.

 

Not this year. If Trump wins, and if the Republicans hold on to Congress, the craziness will never be over. The misogynists, the racists, and those who've felt left behind will think they have a mandate to do whatever they want, and will not stop short of violence. We'll enter a phase where the country will go backwards, undoing legal, environmental and social gains made in the past. Supreme Court openings will be filled with conservatives who will waste no time tearing apart the society we've grown up in.

 

We've already seen it here in North Carolina with open hostility against women, the poor, and the LGBQT community. The latest estimate is that we've lost $1B in revenue due to a stupid, unnecessary bathroom law, of all things. I expect that sort of mentality at a national scale should the Republicans take over the country.

 

Clinton, on the other hand, is highly mistrusted. Whether she wins or not, Trump's call that she be "locked up" has been heard by the Trump Crazies, and the Republicans will mount one investigation after another to try to stuff her in prison. Not a healthy way to run a country. The Crazies are already convinced the election is rigged, even though there's no evidence other than a few cases over the past 40 years of elections. (The more obvious face of election fraud is the 20 or so states with Republican governments that have implemented new voter laws to throw roadblocks in the way of minorities and the poor, who tend to vote Democratic. And don't get me started on gerrymandering, which both parties do when they're in power.)

 

We're in for a wild ride regardless of who wins.

 

This country can't come up with two reasonable people to run against each other in a general election? People who can overcome partisan hatred and bickering and actually guide the government to solve the REAL problems we all face? I hope we do better in 4 years, but by then it's possible that most everything is hopelessly screwed up and the only people 'winning' are the NRA and the 1%.


  • Anderson likes this

#6 duzenko

duzenko

    Uber member

  • Active Developer
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2071 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 01:19 PM

What are the three REAL problems you face in the US? I'm curious.

#7 Anderson

Anderson

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 1169 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 01:26 PM

It kind of matters foreign policy wise for Eastern Europe, but we can shoot anyway, thanks for the training.

Spoiler

 

If Trump wins - a perpetual grindlock with Congress is in order. At least it's unlikely he'll win again if he does win this year because he won't be able to push through half of what he says I reckon. Let the best one win I guess. Good luck.

 

Most likely for comparison purposes, it's going to be like this Brexit thing. Things don't change overnight.

 

Btw, anyone remembers how nobody thought someone like Trump could be president back then? (Patrick Bateman in American Psycho 2000 ) 

 


Edited by Anderson, 04 November 2016 - 01:32 PM.

 "I really perceive that vanity about which most men merely prate — the vanity of the human or temporal life. I live continually in a reverie of the future. I have no faith in human perfectibility. I think that human exertion will have no appreciable effect upon humanity. Man is now only more active — not more happy — nor more wise, than he was 6000 years ago. The result will never vary — and to suppose that it will, is to suppose that the foregone man has lived in vain — that the foregone time is but the rudiment of the future — that the myriads who have perished have not been upon equal footing with ourselves — nor are we with our posterity. I cannot agree to lose sight of man the individual, in man the mass."...

 

 

- 2 July 1844 letter to James Russell Lowell from Edgar Allan Poe.

 


#8 lowenz

lowenz

    Uber member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2004 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 01:27 PM

Usually, in these election years, the phrase "I can't wait until it's over" is oft-heard.

 

Not this year. If Trump wins, and if the Republicans hold on to Congress, the craziness will never be over. The misogynists, the racists, and those who've felt left behind will think they have a mandate to do whatever they want, and will not stop short of violence. We'll enter a phase where the country will go backwards, undoing legal, environmental and social gains made in the past. Supreme Court openings will be filled with conservatives who will waste no time tearing apart the society we've grown up in.

 

We've already seen it here in North Carolina with open hostility against women, the poor, and the LGBQT community. The latest estimate is that we've lost $1B in revenue due to a stupid, unnecessary bathroom law, of all things. I expect that sort of mentality at a national scale should the Republicans take over the country.

 

Clinton, on the other hand, is highly mistrusted. Whether she wins or not, Trump's call that she be "locked up" has been heard by the Trump Crazies, and the Republicans will mount one investigation after another to try to stuff her in prison. Not a healthy way to run a country. The Crazies are already convinced the election is rigged, even though there's no evidence other than a few cases over the past 40 years of elections. (The more obvious face of election fraud is the 20 or so states with Republican governments that have implemented new voter laws to throw roadblocks in the way of minorities and the poor, who tend to vote Democratic. And don't get me started on gerrymandering, which both parties do when they're in power.)

 

We're in for a wild ride regardless of who wins.

 

This country can't come up with two reasonable people to run against each other in a general election? People who can overcome partisan hatred and bickering and actually guide the government to solve the REAL problems we all face? I hope we do better in 4 years, but by then it's possible that most everything is hopelessly screwed up and the only people 'winning' are the NRA and the 1%.

Can you explain me why such a respectable, decent person like Sanders (or so it seems to be) can be thrown away in favour of.....theatrical persons ( euphemism )?


Edited by lowenz, 04 November 2016 - 01:29 PM.

Task is not so much to see what no one has yet seen but to think what nobody has yet thought about that which everybody see. - E.S.


#9 grayman

grayman

    Master Builder, Coder

  • Active Developer
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 12852 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 01:27 PM

Problems:

 

Aging infrastructure, economic inequality, cost of health care, medicare insolvency, social security insolvency, proliferation of guns, attention to global warming.

 

Sanders:

 

He has a large following, and reasonable ideas, but he was overwhelmed by the Clinton machine and a Democratic National Committee that favored Clinton. He's also very anti-"big banking" and anti-"big pharma", and I suppose the money was there to suppress his message.


  • Melan and Anderson like this

#10 Springheel

Springheel

    Creative Director (retired)

  • Admin
  • 37693 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 01:42 PM

He has a large following, and reasonable ideas, but he was overwhelmed by the Clinton machine and a Democratic National Committee that favored Clinton. He's also very anti-"big banking" and anti-"big pharma", and I suppose the money was there to suppress his message.

 

 

There are also people who might like him, but didn't think he was electable, as a self-described "socialist", which is a dirty word to a large number of Americans.


  • Peanut likes this
TDM Missions:   A Score to Settle   *   A Reputation to Uphold   *   A New Job   *    A Matter of Hours
 
Video Series:   Springheel's Modules   *   Speedbuild Challenge   *   New Mappers Workshop  *   Building Traps

#11 lowenz

lowenz

    Uber member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2004 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 01:51 PM

 

There are also people who might like him, but didn't think he was electable, as a self-described "socialist", which is a dirty word to a large number of Americans.

Maybe suggest to this large number that "socialism" is not a synonymous of "hideous egalitarianism"? :D


Edited by lowenz, 04 November 2016 - 01:52 PM.

Task is not so much to see what no one has yet seen but to think what nobody has yet thought about that which everybody see. - E.S.


#12 lowenz

lowenz

    Uber member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2004 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 01:58 PM

He's also very anti-"big banking" and anti-"big pharma", and I suppose the money was there to suppress his message.

 

It will be always a mystery to me why a person can hate "big overwhelming states" (Hobbes' Leviathan!) but love "big banks" that can literally determine the life and death of millions :v


Task is not so much to see what no one has yet seen but to think what nobody has yet thought about that which everybody see. - E.S.


#13 Anderson

Anderson

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 1169 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 02:03 PM

 

It will be always a mystery to me why a person can hate "big overwhelming states" (Hobbes' Leviathan!) but love "big banks" that can literally determine the life and death of millions :v

It's easy to imagine. The masses are easy to sway in that regard.

I disagree that banks, jews have conspiracies against us and are huge evil entites or something. It's ridiculous. If you take a credit than obviously it's the debitor's fault, not the creditor that he has to later force the debt paid. Society doesn't work in any other way. What's up with this utopia?


 "I really perceive that vanity about which most men merely prate — the vanity of the human or temporal life. I live continually in a reverie of the future. I have no faith in human perfectibility. I think that human exertion will have no appreciable effect upon humanity. Man is now only more active — not more happy — nor more wise, than he was 6000 years ago. The result will never vary — and to suppose that it will, is to suppose that the foregone man has lived in vain — that the foregone time is but the rudiment of the future — that the myriads who have perished have not been upon equal footing with ourselves — nor are we with our posterity. I cannot agree to lose sight of man the individual, in man the mass."...

 

 

- 2 July 1844 letter to James Russell Lowell from Edgar Allan Poe.

 


#14 Melan

Melan

    Contest Winner, Wordsmith

  • Campaign Dev
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4451 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 05:20 PM

As far as I am concerned, this election has produced two suitable presidential candidates, Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. Both of these gentlemen represent certain aspects of America's former greatness, and both have good ideas about getting the country back on track again. Their confrontation would have been a true battle of competing visions, although they share a certain old-fashioned blue-collar appeal which is common to both of them (their bases overlap), and which separate them from the majority of the US political class.

 

Regrettably, this battle of ideas could never take place, because Sanders was thrown under the bus by his own party establishment using underhanded and most likely illegal means. Trump had to fight his own as well, and he emerged bloodied but alive from that confrontation. This is the difference now, and he remains the only viable candidate representing some sort of alternative to the elites pushing for unlimited globalisation, the rising influence of unelected interest groups subverting democracy to enrich themselves, and increasing thought control in public and private life -- all phenomena which Hillary Clinton not only agrees with but seemingly embodies.

 

Donald Trump is a crass and vulgar man, the archetype of "the American Businessman". Nevertheless, he is at least someone with human vices, which makes him the least bad candidate still standing. As Republicans go, Donald Trump is a rather centrist one: he is far less hawkish than George W. Bush (or Hillary Clinton), he has a moderate 'Main Street over Wall Street' view on economic topics, and he isn't a religious fundamentalist. His most controversial position is on mass immigration, where I am in full agreement with him: it is a clear and present danger to western societies, and should be severely curtailed.

 

The most promising thing about Trump, however, is precisely the hatred he seems to invoke in the ruling elites. That's good, because these groups need an occasional reminder about the ultimate source of their powers, and their accountability to the voters. In fact, it is precisely the disturbing degree of unity they have demonstrated when facing the prospect of a Trump presidency that is showing these groups to be "different branches of the same tree" - suddenly, politicians and newspapers who were supposed to be mortal enemies are all singing the same tune? That, right there, is the problem, especially when things are going in a bad direction. The political centre has morphed into an increasingly corrupt and repressive oligarchy, stifling political competition while showing less and less respect and responsibility towards the society it is supposed to serve.

 

It is a much larger problem than Trump can solve, but at least he recognises it, and has ideas to solve it (his proposed limitations on campaign finance and conflicts of interest for govt. representatives are promising). I expect that if he wins, he will face a hard battle against bitter and resourceful enemies, which will occupy most of his presidency. He will be a much weaker president than Hillary, who would have all the levers of power in her hands, and eager support to do what she pleases. That prospect, to me, is far more scary than a guy with a taste for crass Twitter comments and gilded furniture.


  • lowenz, duzenko, nbohr1more and 1 other like this
Come the time of peril, did the ground gape, and did the dead rest unquiet 'gainst us. Our bands of iron and hammers of stone prevailed not, and some did doubt the Builder's plan. But the seals held strong, and the few did triumph, and the doubters were lain into the foundations of the new sanctum. -- Collected letters of the Smith-in-Exile, Civitas Approved

#15 jaxa

jaxa

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 1399 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 05:21 PM

There is only one thing that really matters in this election: the Supreme Court. The next President could pick as many as 3 to 4 Justices and change the balance of power on the Court. Everything else they do is less meaningful. Anderson already mentioned the gridlock, which is an important check on what a President can do. A Republican House and Democratic Senate make gridlock much more likely. But the President can pick Supreme Court Justices and have them confirmed by the Senate. If they refuse to confirm anybody or filibuster, you can expect to see a government shutdown, and potentially a reckoning in the mid-term.

 

If Clinton wins, the damage to the conservative ideology as a result of the Supreme Court shift could be catastrophic. Even if she wins only a single term, you should expect to see 2 Justice picks, and possibly 3. With careers usually spanning decades, these picks are far more significant than the choice of President. There is one vacancy left by the deceased Antonin Scalia. Clarence Thomas is 68, Stephen Breyer is 78, Anthony Kennedy is 80, and the notorious RBG is 83. Scalia was 79 when he died. You do the math (some actually have, with actuarial tables).

 

A Fourth consecutive Democratic Presidential term is historically unlikely, but entirely possible because of demographic trends. After Mitt Romney's loss in 2012, Republican strategists warned that the party faces a demographic crisis or time bomb. Hispanics are more likely to lean Democratic, the proportion of white voters is shrinking, and today's younger voters of all stripes are leaning left. A 2016 Trump loss could be interpreted as the Republican party ruining its chances of winning the Presidency at a time when a.) the Democrats were somewhat vulnerable because of winning two terms, b.) the Democratic nominee is historically unpopular (has a historically low favorability rating despite leading in the polls), c.) the Republicans were handed some of the best dirt possible in the form of the email scandal, and later the #PodestaLeaks, and d.) support for the Republican Party at the national level is projected to decline due to the demographic trends (although their hold on the House is solid for now).

 

The "soul searching" that was supposed to take place after Mitt Romney lost may reemerge in the event of a Trump loss given the fact that a political outsider with huge liabilities and an unprecedented attitude/approach came out and wrecked the party. The demographic trends will have to be taken seriously. It is quite possible for the Republican Party to become a party that wins majorities of hispanic and black voters, but not without serious changes.

 

If Trump wins (around 35.8% chance according to FiveThirtyEight), Republicans will have been handed a historic reprieve and saved from what could become their biggest failure ever. It would also validate Trump's strengths as a candidate who can energize voters that have little patience with Washington, and would show the fragility of the Democratic coalition, laid bare in various leaks showing strong internal opposition to Bernie Sanders. Clinton got certain union endorsements that she should not have (decided by leaders rather than members) and got favorable treatment from the DNC. She got much more coverage in the news media and was taken seriously from start to finish. A Clinton loss would make all of that meaningless, save for causing derision after the initial stunned silences and disbelief following a Trump win. The aftermath could involve a shift to the left and more good news for the Republicans.

 

Whichever candidate wins, their influence on the Supreme Court will be felt for decades at a time when the nation is grappling with big and divisive social issues, and has just made gay marriage the law of the land by Court decision. Losing this term would be a blow.

 

There is a small chance of an Electoral College tie. The Utah-based candidate Evan McMullin is actually running on this remote possibility.


Edited by jaxa, 04 November 2016 - 05:55 PM.

  • lowenz likes this

#16 jaxa

jaxa

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 1399 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 05:44 PM

I edited that post like 8 times.

 

More interesting than the Presidential election are the ballot initiatives:

 

https://ballotpedia....ballot_measures

 

2016 is a great time for weed legalization because younger and more liberal voters tend to come out in Presidential elections rather than mid-terms. Sure, some older voters support it, but if you look at it by age group, you can see the decline:

 

(2015)

 

18 to 34 years old: 71%

35 to 49 years old: 64%

50 to 64 years old: 58%

65+ years old: 35%

 

Assuming that most of the people who support it in their 20s and 30s continue to support it when they are in their 50s and 60s, support for legalization will continue to climb in the coming decade(s).



#17 lowenz

lowenz

    Uber member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2004 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 06:39 PM

"the rising influence of unelected interest groups subverting democracy to enrich themselves, and increasing thought control in public and private life -- all phenomena which Hillary Clinton not only agrees with but seemingly embodies."

 

Ehm.

 

What if I say that democracy HAS the precise goal of defending NOT the "people" but the interest group that the people can subscribe to? THAT is the real (legit? It's a tough argument) goal of liberal democracy. And the american democrats embodies this "magnetic" incarnation of democracy, not the "sharing" democracy à la "Deus Ex Invisible War" Denton utopia final :D

 

I'm a bloody marxist? :P Maybe, but the only democracy I can willingly subscribe is the "Denton" one  :laugh:


Edited by lowenz, 04 November 2016 - 06:42 PM.

Task is not so much to see what no one has yet seen but to think what nobody has yet thought about that which everybody see. - E.S.


#18 Arcturus

Arcturus

    Advanced Member

  • Development Role
  • PipPipPip
  • 1645 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 07:05 PM

It's astonishing to me how many people see Trump suitable for the most important office in the world. This troglodyte makes George W. look like an intellectualist.

He knows nothing about the world, probably hasn't read a book since school, yet people seem to think he will solve their problems? He knows that Kim Kardashian "has a fat ass" but hasn't heard the word Brexit a month before the referendum? He wants to cut taxes, but increase military spending? Well, he has to be an economic expert, cause he's "good with money", right? Building a 1000 miles long concrete wall on the border with Mexico as a flagship idea? That alone should turn this guy into a laughing stock. Harassing naked teenage girls in a dressing room? No problem for Mr Trump.

He's like a narcissistic ten-year-old boy trapped in a body of an old man. A poor man's idea of a successful person.

 




  • Springheel and lowenz like this

It's only a model... /// My channel on YouTube


#19 lowenz

lowenz

    Uber member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2004 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 07:07 PM

Donald Trump is a crass and vulgar man, the archetype of "the American Businessman". Nevertheless, he is at least someone with human vices, which makes him the least bad candidate still standing. 

In Italy we've got Berlusconi, same archetype.....and because of that we've got for 10 years a totally liable to be blackmailed never-grown-up guy only interested in vicious young girls using him as a big big wallet :v


Edited by lowenz, 04 November 2016 - 07:07 PM.

Task is not so much to see what no one has yet seen but to think what nobody has yet thought about that which everybody see. - E.S.


#20 lowenz

lowenz

    Uber member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2004 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 07:10 PM

Harassing naked teenage girls in a dressing room? No problem for Mr Trump.

The problem, in fact, it's quite the opposite: 'cause he's mentally a child - like you say - the teenage girls own him by the balls.

In Italy we know really well the reality of these wannabe "elder Casanova(s)".....such losers.


Edited by lowenz, 04 November 2016 - 07:13 PM.

Task is not so much to see what no one has yet seen but to think what nobody has yet thought about that which everybody see. - E.S.


#21 lowenz

lowenz

    Uber member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2004 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 07:15 PM

He's like a narcissistic ten-year-old boy trapped in a body of an old man. A poor man's idea of a successful person.

+1


Task is not so much to see what no one has yet seen but to think what nobody has yet thought about that which everybody see. - E.S.


#22 nbohr1more

nbohr1more

    Darkmod PR, Wordsmith

  • Development Role
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9424 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 08:39 PM

Until Julian Assange rescinds the implication, I am forced to suspect that the 6 folks
who were investigating the DNC and Clinton Foundation (who died within the span of 3 weeks
leading up to the DNC nomination) were all killed by Hillary's team.

SETH RICH?

https://twitter.com/...0048128/photo/1

The fact Julian has a 10yr accurate record of exposing government corruption should have made
his implications newsworthy but the major news media wont cover him because their staff reside
in many pages of very leaked emails where this case is being made.

Lest any calls of "Russian" fabrication be levied, the emails have been DKIM verified by Google and there is
a large monetary bounty for anyone who can prove such DKIM validations can be forged.

The current leaks pretty plainly show that the Clinton team has been coordinating with SuperPACs,
media, foreign donors, and other people who should NEVER communicate with them according to FEC
regulations. While apologists may say that they have crossed their t's to keep things technically
legal (very dubious) they have violated the spirit of the law so far it boggles the mind.

Much to the chagrin of her left-leaning base, Hillary is very clearly a war-hawk who already has
designs on continued engagement in the Middle-East. She somehow feels that once in power she'll
be able to complete the process she began as SoS and solve the last of the loose ends in her
plan. Whether her actions over there are of her own designs or are at the behest of the Saudis
remains to be seen but this is another case where there is a convenient "coincidence" that her
sponsors benefit from her agenda.




Jan. 14, 2016: The Inspector General for the intelligence community Charles McCullough tells members of Congress that several dozen additional classified emails have been identified in Clinton’s stash,
including some with a higher classification than top secret, regarding highly sensitive programs.

These were the Special Access Programs (SAP) that you hear about.
Things so secret they are never even supposed to be on a machine connected to any network.
Some you literally have go through several layers of physical security to view them in a controlled room.
You have to be read onto these programs, meaning even if you have the highest security clearance possible,
you still cannot access these unless the person/group in charge of them determines that there is a need for you to have access.
These are things like nuclear missile silo locations, identities and locations of our spies across the world, the most secret shit imaginable.
Even as Secretary of State, she was not supposed to even know about these, let alone have them on her unsecured private server in her basement.


What was she doing with "Above Top Secret" SAP details?




Is Clinton competent? That's a complex thing to answer. She clearly knows how to fund-raise and understands
the law\policy fairly well. Her own staffers claim she lacks instincts and some common-sense.
She makes smart decisions and reckless ones. She has gaffs that often stem from her committing to a policy
stance then forgetting about it and then changing her stance later.

I would be much more inclined to vote for her if the media would spend even 1% of it's time attacking her
but knowing that she'll have utter control over the 4th estate is terrifying. She gets away with some pretty
astounding stuff already. Once she has the presidency, there is nothing she could do that would see the light
of day. Total media blackout of negative press.


So, do I vote for Trump to avenge our 6 whistle-blowers and possibly eject the corruption caused by the Clintons?

That's a pretty tough pill to swallow.

Trump is almost certainly connected to numerous crime families in both the Italian and Russian mafia.

He's obvious an unsavory character and also about on-par with George Bush in terms of intellect.
While he's got more support from Tea Party Republicans than traditional ones, he'll certainly have enough
consensus between the groups to pass large amounts of right-leaning legislation. In the most benign form,
he will be pushing to abolish Federal laws in favor of having States control their own laws. In reality,
he'll probably be cowed into enacting the draconian agenda of the Religious Right who have put their man Pence
on the line for him. This is especially concerning with the vacancies in the Supreme Court. We could
see some major regressions to the separation of Church and State there.

Trump will likely go for a fiscal vision that looks like the EU austerity measures (eg. what Germany was doing to Greece)
and starve the Government sector in favor of privatization. The only variance on that is Private Prisons
where he seems to be leaning towards returning those to Government control. Welcome to even more broken bridges,
under-funded schools, contaminated water systems, and sagging electrical grids.

Trump may not be that bright, but he's screamingly isolationist. This means that he's very unlikely to engage in wars
unless he somehow spurs conflict by (for example) pissing off the Emirates causing a war over Oil trade.
The silver lining there is his belief in Tariffs and traditional trade terms over the Globalization model
of "free trade" which is nothing more than a ruse by the big business interests to drive down wages world-wide
to crush unions and workers rights.

I doubt Trump would get a renewal after a 4yr tenure. He'd be far too polarizing and will do things that become
overwhelmingly unpopular.

So when choosing between two criminals? Probably best to stay with one that you know will be gone sooner than later.


Who will I vote for?

Neither.

Jill Stein exists!

Voting for a 3rd party candidate is the best chance we have to improve the options in the next election.
It will raise their standing in the general political sphere and force some provisions and funding to go their way.

What the US citizens need to wake-up to is that First-Past-the-Post voting is an obsolete setup that breeds corruption
and partizan cronyism.

Hopefully, we can get at least one candidate up to the 15% minimum to start the process. Otherwise it's imperative that citizens
be evangelized to pressure their representatives to reform voting rules. Do protests, get media exposure, etc... whatever it
takes to get the microscope onto the issue or else "the lesser of two evils" will become less and less metaphorical every election cycle.

It's already bad enough in the current race...
  • Melan, duzenko and Peanut like this
Please visit TDM's IndieDB site and help promote the mod:

http://www.indiedb.c...ds/the-dark-mod

(Yeah, shameless promotion... but traffic is traffic folks...)

#23 jaxa

jaxa

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 1399 posts

Posted 04 November 2016 - 08:49 PM

What the US citizens need to wake-up to is that First-Past-the-Post voting is an obsolete setup that breeds corruption
and partizan cronyism.

 

Maine is voting on switching to ranked voting for various races.

 

http://bangordailyne...rty-candidates/


Edited by jaxa, 04 November 2016 - 08:52 PM.

  • nbohr1more likes this

#24 freyk

freyk

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 748 posts

Posted 05 November 2016 - 02:58 AM

In any Dutch election i use my own opinions and several online election-choice tools, to create my final vote.

Such like, for this time, https://usa.electioncompass.org/en/ (englisch/spain site, from a dutch development team) 

(email not needed)

 

If i was a American, i voted for Clinton.


Edited by freyk, 05 November 2016 - 05:30 AM.


#25 Obsttorte

Obsttorte

    Scripting guru, Mapper

  • Active Developer
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5818 posts

Posted 05 November 2016 - 04:56 AM

His most controversial position is on mass immigration, where I am in full agreement with him: it is a clear and present danger to western societies, and should be severely curtailed.

 

 

This is something I never understood. Why is mass integration a danger to western societies? There are many (or a few very loud) persons here in germany who claims this all the time, too. But I never heard one good reason for that statement.
 


FM's: Builder Roads, Old Habits, Old Habits Rebuild
WIP's: Several. Although after playing Thief 4 I really wanna make a city mission.
Mapping and Scripting: Apples and Peaches
Sculptris Models and Tutorials: Obsttortes Models
My wiki articles: Obstipedia
Let's Map TDM YouTube playlist: ObstlerTube
Texture Blending in DR: DR ASE Blend Exporter

End of shameless self promotion.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users