The Politics Thread (PLAY NICELY!)

It's been pretty interesting though. Usually people just live in their bubbles thinking "the other side" is insane. At least now one can imagine the logic involved in getting to that insanity.

I'd join in if I were any good at writing coherent pieces of text before others have already posted four of five other walls of text. Looking up the data sources for kiwi's last graph and ending up on a website that offers a chance to win a free handgun just for joining their newsletter was a bit surreal.

I live in Ottawa and I was locked in my building when the terrorist shooting at Parliament Hill happened more than a year ago, complete with false rumours of multiple other shootings happening in the nearby shopping mall. And telling my spouse who was out of town to stay out of town. That was pretty scary. But not once did I think: "Gee, I wish I had a button to cause instant death. That would make me feel safe.". So yeah, no minds being changed by a mere Internet discussion for sure, but I do think it helps with the understanding and hopefully decreases the polarized state of things a bit.

Anyway, I wish I was any good at writing coherent pieces of text, as is evidently sorely needed.

yeah denim hit the nail on the head there. it's way better to discuss/debate/argue than not to talk at all. not talking at all is what leads to wars would you believe it.

What's even worse is only ever talking to people who just totally agree with you.

Or dismissing the other side's opinions without bothering to check the premise behind them.

Clearly a premise out of 'my' world. Just knowing there are other worlds is a start.

I didn't write that, there are quotes for a reason. And can you stop with the overarching hyperbole? Because no you can't justify gunning down multiple people in the US, that is illegal and you know it... So why even bring it up? Running around the town killing people is not self defense, and it's not hard for a jury to differentiate.

A child knows there are other worlds. The ability to see the world through another's lens is a difficult task, but easily manageable by anyone who is willing.

Implying that your opposition cannot or will not see through another's point of view is short sighted and a deflection from the actual discussion.

I'll just let your words be your words, I can't honestly tell anymore how to exactly understand them. I can think of more than one implied meaning.

So instead, have some, at least to me, funny failure of jeb bush making glorious tweets:
http://mashable.com/2016/02/16/jeb-bush-gun-tweet/?utm_cid=mash-com-Tw-main-link#JuJEvTYT4GqO

So you've given up trying to understand? Great. Looks like we can go home, Kiwi.

I understand your reasoning, I just disagree with it in multiple ways.

Not understanding you and not agreeing are different things.

"I can't honestly tell anymore how to exactly understand them"

Huh.

https://vine.co/v/ivw1WwiDJje

"Them" refers there to the words of your last post specifically. Which is already a meta-discussion post which indicates this discussion has no point anymore, it probably never had one.

He's not that bad. The media is portraying him as some radical right wing fascist bigot.

He's not.

I can't stress this enough: the elitists on BOTH SIDES are TERRIFIED of Trump winning the white house. That should raise some eyebrows. Ted Cruz is being painted as a Christian bigot with vague and naive hopes for the US, but he's not scaring the establishment because they know he can be controlled.

Trump is something new.

Basically, he IS what politicians on both sides have been talking about being for years: free from special interests and lobbyists and so on. He is beholden to no one - which means (theoretically) that he can do what he says he will do. This is so radically different from pretty much every other candidate (Ben Carson excluded). It gives him an edge because, unlike everyone else, he can KEEP HIS PROMISES without financial or political backlash. That's HUGE.

Aa an example, Obama promised a **** ton of BS both times he was elected and he's done basically none of it. In some instances he even went away from his promises. No more war? Look, have Libya and Syria.

This isn't a trend that is localised to one party, either. Both sides have trust issues when it comes to election year promises. Trump has walked in and said, screw you guys. I can do what all these lumbering idiots have said for years, and I can do it WITHOUT their help. Vote for me.

Is he taking it to the extreme? Sure! I think he is making fun of the Republicans with some of his more....interesting...announcements. (Build a big wall, round up the Muslims, etc.). He's only saying what's been said before by various politicians - he's just adding hyperbole to it by speaking his mind.

Watching some of his interviews from the first Bush election were interesting because he was very supportive of the establishment back then. It's as if 25 years of experience with them has given him some insight into how they work.

if you don't qualify as fascist wanting to throw out and place beyond a wall one race and label and detain in camps also throw out and otherwise strip of rights another unilaterally within your country when human races don't even exist and you're even trying to label one group not based on origins but on religious beliefs .... then how DO you qualify fascist???

I think you're defining fascism solely as totalitarianism and omitting totally populism and nationalism in your understanding. if you use the trinity that defines fascism : Trump is a textbook fascist. and I don't think he would deny it himself were he given a dictionary.

lots of politicians look at it as a trait of value rather than a diminisher once they've looked up the definition. The Le-Pen family is quite at ease with their fascist label.

and how can he possibly come off as "not... that... bad" ???

that's a Ben Carson quote.
http://gawker.com/ben-carsons-fake-stalin-quote-came-from-a-ring-wing-fac-1759025587
(the end of the vid but what the heck the rest of the article is funny too x) )

Trump ™ © quote.

you've been watching their side of the "debates" a lot I see.

Well sure the media does that, usually just by letting Trump speak for himself.

Indeed it should. Maybe they are scared of the damage he'll cause if he should actually try to push his insane claims into reality.

Funny, I'd feel a plus like that would go to Bernie Sanders. He is the one driving his campaign by donations from common people after all

Also on the argument "Trump knows how to run a company" I read a German Article a few days ago.
It's about how Trump got to be as rich as he is and how some of the things he did actually failed pretty hard.
A summary:
- When Trump started his campaign he claimed to own 8.7 billion dollars. Since then he usually just rounds up to say "10". Independent sources are doubtful of that: Forbes lists him on rank 121 in the US with 4.5 billion dollars.
- At the start of his carrier he started with 200 million dollars in his hands, thanks to his rich father.
- Trump is quite good at screwing over the state. His first deal at 27 was a broke hotel he bought up and turned into a successful one. Thanks to his political network he saved 60 million dollars in taxes on it.
- He sued the town New York out of 164 million dollar taxes about his "Trump Tower".
- Among other there were also illegal, uninsured, workers from Poland involved in the construction of that Trump Tower.

There is a long list of bad failed projects:
- Trump Airlines
- Trump - The Game. Basically "Trump"-Monopoly.
- Trump Casinos. That group had to go insolvent 4 times over the years 1991, 2004, 2009 and 2014. Trump left the place in 2009 and let others clean up the mess.
- Trump Vodka
- Trump Steaks
- Trump University. Turned out to be nothing more than a money making scheme, basically Trump-Informercials. NY's Attorney General sued Trump over this for 40 million dollar

His fathers success apparently was also based on projects that involved a lot of state-money.
I guess Trump is just trying to take "screw the state over taxes" to the next level. How to do that better than by going for President xD

So all in all he didn't exactly was successful at everything. He just had enough money to start with and the willingness the screw over taxpayers if necessary.

Here the full version, albeit in German, google translate might help if you want to read it's full form: http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/un...rheit-hinter-trumps-milliarden-a-1077765.html

If Trump in the end goes "I am actually just a comedian making reality satire" I'll send you a free beer.

I'm really sad/reassured (can't decide) they didn't include le Pen in there.

We have our first poll showing Bernie ahead of Clinton nationally.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...rails-sanders-by-three-points-nationally.html

About two weeks sooner than Obama started being up ahead 8 years ago*

*Relative to the Iowa Caucus. The 2016 Iowa Caucus happened on February 1st; the 2008 one happened on January 3rd. Obama polled ahead of Clinton nationally beginning with a poll conducted from January 31-February 2nd