U.S Presidential Election (2016)

A place for more serious off-topic discussion and debates.
User avatar
Posts: 116
Joined: November 2013
RIFA wrote:The reason why I think arguing with him is pointless is because whenever he got asked real fundamental and direct questions (see prince for example) he dodged them by spinning it around whatever akv said. So yeah...
Congratulations for making the effort to write more than a sentence. :clap: Now then, what exactly are you talking about? prince0gotham's question? This dude?
Demo wrote:
prince0gotham wrote:what?

and i wasnt calling names, rather suggesting that nothing is 0 or 100% political or apolitical
I truly have no idea what you meant to say with this post.
I was trying to talk to him, but it appeared he didn't understand what I was saying, and in turn I didn't understand what he was trying to say. There was no effort made to continue the dialogue, so I moved on. As far as I'm concerned, if people are not willing to make an effort, they are not worth the time. I make an exception with you here because I sense an aura of attitude and feelings surrounding you, so it might be interesting to see you handle yourself outside of your mental cocoon of lazy snarks.
He's been polite but his politeness is very similar to Trump's. I'd rather talk to someone who admits acting "bad" and is okay with it than to someone that is polite and dodges relevant questions thrown at him while also being low-key passive aggressive. That's shady behavior at best.
Thing is, I don't think I act "bad". We probably have different understandings of the term. I don't think I've dodged relevant questions either, in fact I've been replying to almost every post in this thread since I've joined in, so that's you being dishonest. At the very least, I'm glad we can agree that I was polite, as opposed to some around here, including yourself. I would argue that your behavior, the use of one-liners, is a clear form of passive-aggressiveness.

User avatar
Posts: 21411
Joined: June 2010
Location: All-Hail Master Virgo, Censor of NolanFans
Demo wrote:I would argue that your behavior, the use of one-liners, is a clear form of passive-aggressiveness.
No need to argue and it's not even passive. It's borderline aggressive. I admit. According to you, I should not be okay with that. Which is why I'm so happy right now you're not the president of my country.

It seems to me like your ideal society is one which conforms to your own understand of how things should work.

Which is exactly the main problem people have with Trump. He is not experienced + he is not educated in most areas which leads to having deformed views + huge ego > thinks that society should conform to his views > poor decision making > gets criticized > ego getting hurt even more + ignorant stubbornness > enforcing his own ideas > fascism.

Sure there's quite a few steps to reach that point but the simple fact that a guy that has a check for the first two things gets a pass as the president of the most influential country in the world is scary/dangerous. Also, people voting someone just because he's just as ignorant as them and "part of the common folk" is retarded in it's own way.

User avatar
Posts: 116
Joined: November 2013
RIFA wrote:According to you, I should not be okay with that.
That's not true, this is a straw man. According to me, you should not be OK with knowingly acting dumb. I never said anything about being aggressive. That's a different topic of discussion.
Which is why I'm so happy right now you're not the president of my country.
Nor do I wish to be the president of Romania, thank you very much. :lol:
It seems to me like your ideal society is one which conforms to your own understand of how things should work.
I have a hard time with the term "ideal society", the connotations with idealism don't sit well with me, as I am not an idealist. I would say that a "better society" is one which conforms to my understanding of how things should work, indeed. Isn't that the case with every one us? Each of us has an idea of how society should look like, some have it in broader terms and some have it in more specifics, but we all want to live in a society which conforms with our understanding of how things should work.
Which is exactly the main problem people have with Trump. He is not experienced + he is not educated in most areas which leads to having deformed views + huge ego > thinks that society should conform to his views > poor decision making > gets criticized > ego getting hurt even more + ignorant stubbornness > enforcing his own ideas > fascism.
I'll briefly address your points:
• Having political experience is not a job prerequisite to being the president of the US.
• Education is acquired. What's more important here is who Trump surrounds himself with, his advisers, who do most of the analysis on any subject presented to the president.
• Huge ego is a big bonus in management, but I do see where you're coming from - it's a big pain in the ass a lot of times.
• We all want society to conform to our views.
• I don't understand how you can make a "poor decision making" claim, since becoming a billionaire is a consequence of making good decisions in life, and he's not president yet so judgement on his presidential decisions should be reserved.

And, BAM! Fascism. What you did here is basically reductio ad absurdum :)
Also, people voting someone just because he's just as ignorant as them and "part of the common folk" is retarded in it's own way.
There are many reasons why people voted for Trump. I sure hope you're not suggesting that all Trump voters are ignorant and voted for him because they value ignorance.

User avatar
Posts: 21411
Joined: June 2010
Location: All-Hail Master Virgo, Censor of NolanFans
Demo wrote:Nor do I wish to be the president of Romania, thank you very much. :lol:
Aaaaaand I should have stopped reading here because you got baited into acting just like Trump and reminded me of an ol' pal, Tykjen. I'm going to ignore your snark comment regarding someone's country (the negative connotation is obvious) and I'll pursue feeding into your trolling.
Demo wrote:I have a hard time with the term "ideal society", the connotations with idealism don't sit well with me, as I am not an idealist. I would say that a "better society" is one which conforms to my understanding of how things should work, indeed. Isn't that the case with every one us?
"I'm not an idealist but my society is the better society". And to answer your question... no. That isn't the case with every one of us.
Demo wrote:• Having political experience is not a job prerequisite to being the president of the US.
I'm sorry? No job in this world has strict prerequisites. And 99,9% of the jobs can be obtained by anyone. Also, being a president of a country isn't really job as it is a commitment. What you said doesn't excuse the lack of experience in general, not just political.
Demo wrote:• Education is acquired. What's more important here is who Trump surrounds himself with, his advisers, who do most of the analysis on any subject presented to the president.
Which so far are all of them kind of nuts and old ass office heads that are responsible for some of the horrible decisions made in the US government in the last 2 decades. On top of that... what the hell does "education is acquired" even means? Elaborate on this. I have a feeling what you're trying to say but I wanna make sure.
Demo wrote:• Huge ego is a big bonus in management, but I do see where you're coming from - it's a big pain in the ass a lot of times.
When you're managing Nike yes. When you're managing a country responsible not only for it's citizens then no. Also, ego comes in many ways. It's one thing to suffer from Kanye West ego, another to have Martin Luther King's ego.
Demo wrote:• We all want society to conform to our views.
As I previously said... No. There are plenty of reasonable rational people out there that acknowledge how harmful and idiotic that is.
Demo wrote:• I don't understand how you can make a "poor decision making" claim, since becoming a billionaire is a consequence of making good decisions in life
Oh really? Let's look at a couple of billionaires that made good decisions in life. At least one of them is tied to Trump.
Image
Image
Image
Image
Demo wrote:There are many reasons why people voted for Trump. I sure hope you're not suggesting that all Trump voters are ignorant and voted for him because they value ignorance.
Not all of course. Most? Definitely. If it makes sense for you, they value ignorance because they're ignorant. They can relate to it because it exists in them. They do not know Trump is ignorant nor that they are ignorant. So yeah. Most? Definitely.

User avatar
Posts: 116
Joined: November 2013
Ruth wrote:I mean, sure, if a person has to shout out loud "I'm a racist!!" for you to finally believe he's one, then okay. He might not be. Let's ignore every little thing he said, because he has women in his office.
No, I don't propose we ignore everything Trump said because he has women in his office, but I also am very cautious when forming an opinion about a person based on character assassination pieces from the media. I can actually say in good conscience that the mainstream media is very biased and corrupt, since there is actual strong unedited evidence (wikileaks for example) to support this claim. I cannot say the same regarding Trump, unless you provide me with actual evidence. I do not consider a Telegraph article to be actual evidence, it is a biased proxy for delivering information. You might be surprised with the level of manipulation that goes into writing articles in order to influence public opinion.
I don't think you get to decide what's offensive for the majority of women.
You're right, I don't think so either. However, I do think I have a voice in trying to figure out why people find X,Y,Z offensive, and perhaps contribute in developing tools to overcome the feeling of being offended. The feeling of being offended is a state of mental weakness, and we are not doing ourselves any favors if we don't try to do something about that. We're all human, we all get offended. The question is how resilient you are and what steps you take to improve your position. But really, I feel that this is a whole new topic of discussion.
Just as I wouldn't be able to judge men or people of color or any other kinds of groups, unless it's very openly obvious. You'll never have to live out your life as a female, I will, and as a relatively young person, I can already attest to quite a bit of sexism I've had to deal with (still not as bad as some girls, which is absolutely terrible), which always affects you, whether you're being rated numbers or you're being told to never pursue career you might want, because your intelligence will never compare to that of a man, and that your only job should be looking after kids and household.
That's unfortunate, and I do wish changes will occur in your environment. You can try to voice your opinions more often, do not be afraid of non-physical confrontations, be open to ideas that contradict your world view and basically... Use your wit. You can make a change, however small.
You can look up dictionaries as many times as you want to prove what you consider to be offensive
I was arguing that being offensive does not equal sexism. These are two different things, and that is an important distinction to make.

Posts: 8437
Joined: August 2012
That's not just my environment, that's the point. A lot of people, no matter where they're from, their education, their "class" (if we want to use this term) have to deal with all sorts of malice directed at them on a daily basis, with women, people of color and lgbt people being the most vulnerable. It's a systemic issue, you telling me I should voice my opinions more often, which is what I'm doing right now, without suggesting ways on how to educate other people to be more welcoming of those opinions, sounds more like a parent who has to teach a child to defend himself, because an idea of teaching kids not to be violent towards each other doesn't even cross other parents' minds.

The media isn't some sort of a god, it cannot create a demon out of someone who absolutely isn't one. The fact that Trump just keeps succumbing to all sorts of shit, minor or not, and just "allows" the evil media to twist it against him just proves how undiplomatic he is. This kind of behavior opens up more than a million of possibilities to manipulate him into any kind of thing you want, you mentioning it's more important with what kind of people he surrounds himself just proves that. I'd argue that given the modern political climate, having knowledge in politics and history is more than welcome. It's ridiculous to suggest otherwise, of course, technically it's not required, but in this way you're just putting yourself in a favorable
place for others to eventually eat you alive. Or shit all over everything on your own, you can pick one.

Besides, going back to sexism, when people offend each other, we have to go deeper, to the roots of such offence. A one time occurrence may not necessarily mean you're evil, we're all human after all. But if it goes on and on, even if it's directed at an individual, rather than a group of them, where does it stem from? Ignorance? I would argue such excuse can only be valid for subtler situations, like being oblivious to minor cultural sensitivities because you'd never really been exposed to it before, or being ignorant due to your environment, upbringing, which is sexistic. You couldn't choose your upbringing, but the people who before you may have. Or the generation before. You may not act out of your personal hatred, but if you go back throughout history that may have affected your environment, you'll find a cause for this. It's systemic. If it's supposed critique of an individual that supposedly has nothing to do with the qualities of that person that can't be changed, and if it keeps repeating, even if it's a different individual, you have to ask yourself whether it's not so sexistic after all. You might hate someone because that person is dumb, or you might dislike someone because of their looks, but if you keep noticing a pattern in others over and over again, and you act on it, be it a rude joke or something more vile than that, maybe it would be the perfect time to admit that the problem lies in yourself rather than those people. Does this still not count as sexism?

User avatar
Posts: 116
Joined: November 2013
RIFA wrote:Aaaaaand I should have stopped reading here because you got baited into acting just like Trump and reminded me of an ol' pal, Tykjen. I'm going to ignore your snark comment regarding someone's country (the negative connotation is obvious) and I'll pursue feeding into your trolling.
Whew, the attitude. Take a crack at Trump, free of charge. Might lighten you up a bit :lol:
"I'm not an idealist but my society is the better society". And to answer your question... no. That isn't the case with every one of us.
I may have needed to put a big "subjectively speaking" disclaimer to make things clearer, but I thought that was a given. I was not implying that an objectively better society is one that conforms to my view of the world. Does that make more sense to you now?
being a president of a country isn't really job as it is a commitment. What you said doesn't excuse the lack of experience in general, not just political.
Every job is a commitment, be it a bathroom cleaner at McDonald's or the president of a country. So, I would say being a president of a country is a job as much as it is a commitment. I'm not sure lack of experience needs to be excused in the first place, unless of course there is some established qualitative mechanism that judges the performance of presidents and can give convincing conclusions on how past experience play a role. I'm unaware of such a mechanism.
Which so far are all of them kind of nuts and old ass office heads that are responsible for some of the horrible decisions made in the US government in the last 2 decades.
I am actually quite encouraged by Trump's pick for Sec of Defense :clap:
On top of that... what the hell does "education is acquired" even means? Elaborate on this. I have a feeling what you're trying to say but I wanna make sure.
In the sense that there's nothing to stop Trump from taking a crash course in Middle Eastern history, while in office, should he choose to do so.
Oh really? Let's look at a couple of billionaires that made good decisions in life. At least one of them is tied to Trump.
That's guilt by association. Trump isn't one of these individuals. We can argue that they made bad decisions that led them to this place, but Trump isn't in that position.
Not all of course. Most? Definitely. If it makes sense for you, they value ignorance because they're ignorant. They can relate to it because it exists in them.
It makes sense to me that some people who are ignorant are attracted to ignorant people and relate to them based on ignorance. But, I'm sure you will agree that we are all ignorant about one thing or another, and not all of us poor ignorant souls actually value ignorance. Question is, which % of the ignorant actually value ignorance? You seem to have an answer, though I'm skeptical about how you got to this answer.

User avatar
Posts: 9212
Joined: August 2009
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/artic ... net-search
President-elect Donald Trump will meet with Exxon Mobil Corp. Chief Executive Officer Rex Tillerson on Tuesday in New York as he widens his search for his secretary of state.

Trump spokesman Jason Miller didn’t give any details about the reason for the meeting, but a person familiar with the transition said Tillerson, 64, is under consideration to be the nation’s top diplomat. Kellyanne Conway, a senior adviser to Trump, said Sunday that the president-elect had begun expanding the list of candidates for the post and that he is “very fortunate to have interest among serious men and women.”

Alan Jeffers, an Exxon spokesman, declined to comment.

Among other foreign policy priorities, Trump has vowed to overhaul the U.S. relationship with Russia, which has been in a deep freeze since President Vladimir Putin’s annexation of the Crimea region of Ukraine in 2014. More recently, U.S. intelligence agencies under President Barack Obama’s administration have accused the Russian government of interfering in the U.S. presidential election through hacking attacks.

Tillerson steered Exxon’s historic 2011 deal with Kremlin-controlled oil explorer Rosneft that gave the U.S. driller access to Russia’s vast Arctic, deepwater and shale-oil deposits. But shortly after the venture discovered a billion-barrel crude field in the Kara Sea, the U.S. and European Union imposed sanctions to punish Russia for supporting separatists in eastern Ukraine and for the annexation of Crimea. The sanctions didn’t force Exxon to surrender drilling rights in Russia but did require it and all other U.S. and EU companies to halt their most ambitious projects.
Such an anti establishment pick. Draining the swamp indeed.

User avatar
Posts: 19209
Joined: June 2012
Location: stuck in 2020
Image


Locked