1. #3081
    Quote Originally Posted by Zombergy View Post
    Cause these assclown candidates spend months roaming around reciting their stump speeches when they should have to go head to head multiple times covering every issue in unscripted barely-moderated fashion.

    They get a 10 word question with a 60 second response time and another 60 second rebuttal which is nothing more than a game of "how can I trim sections of my stump speech to fit in a 60 second block".

    Its garbage.

    These jackasses should have to stand there and have everything thrown at them.

    And it would be great if they had to suffer some sort of real consequence for telling lies during debates and/or not fully answering questions because the answers damage them.
    I'm not saying the process can't be improved upon; just that the process was no different in this election than in previous elections. It would be nice if there could be real consequences for politicians lying during elections. Other than calling them out on it, there is no option. You can thank the Supreme Court for that one. Also it was a unanimous opinion, so we can't lay the blame solely on the liberal or conservative justices.

    If you want some reading material.

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinion...3-193_omq2.pdf

    Later the law that brought this case was struck down in district court. The judge stated.

    We do not want the government (i.e., the Ohio Elections Commission) deciding what is political truth — for fear that the government might persecute those who criticize it. Instead, in a democracy, the voters should decide.
    So it is up to us to decide the truthfulness of any statement.

  2. #3082
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Clintons campaign is run by idiots. Seriously, since the start their decisions have left me utterly confused and bewildered. Between their terrible decisions and her missteps that she shouldn't be making (basket of deplorables, or whatever) given how long she's been in this game, she deserves to still be challenged by a putz with a similarly incompetent campaign like Trump.
    It makes you think both sides are trying to lose this election. Like there's something bad going down in the next 4-8 years and nobody wants to be left holding the bag.

  3. #3083
    Merely a Setback PACOX's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ██████
    Posts
    26,284
    Catching a bad cold doesn't make the country look weak except to nations we don't care about anyway.

    Remember we had a president in a wheelchair

    Resident Cosplay Progressive

  4. #3084
    Quote Originally Posted by Hammerfest View Post
    So? It could be a longer-term deception.
    I don't think so to be honest. People are not going to be sympathetic for a person that is too weak to be Commander in Chief. Reagan and Roosevelt wouldn't survive in today's mass media climate as candidates.

  5. #3085
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Lenonis View Post
    Just get to what your point is. I'm not playing forum games.

    Some gay people don't want to get involved with religious marriage. Some gay people don't believe in marriage as an institution period. Some gay people think marriage is part of the evil patriarchy or whatever. Some gay people don't believe in marriage as they are homophobic.

    Now -- go back and replace "gay" with "straight" and you have an equally valid statement.

    So, please do tell me what your point is and how it relates to the point I've been trying to make?
    My point is that being against gay marriage does not necessarily makes one an homophobe. It's offtopic anyway so who cares.

  6. #3086
    Quote Originally Posted by pacox View Post
    Catching a bad cold doesn't make the country look weak except to nations we don't care about anyway.

    Remember we had a president in a wheelchair
    That was a long time ago when radio was the dominant medium for the country.

  7. #3087
    The Unstoppable Force Theodarzna's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    24,166
    Quote Originally Posted by Djalil View Post
    My point is that being against gay marriage does not necessarily makes one an homophobe. It's offtopic anyway so who cares.
    Adding -phobe to everything is just really dumb now and overplayed.
    Quote Originally Posted by Crissi View Post
    i think I have my posse filled out now. Mars is Theo, Jupiter is Vanyali, Linadra is Venus, and Heather is Mercury. Dragon can be Pluto.
    On MMO-C we learn that Anti-Fascism is locking arms with corporations, the State Department and agreeing with the CIA, But opposing the CIA and corporate America, and thinking Jews have a right to buy land and can expect tenants to pay rent THAT is ultra-Fash Nazism. Bellingcat is an MI6/CIA cut out. Clyburn Truther.

  8. #3088
    Herald of the Titans DocSavageFan's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    86th Floor, Empire State Building
    Posts
    2,501
    Quote Originally Posted by Matchles View Post
    I don't have a problem with moderators fact checking on the fly. Despite saying he won't do so, Wallace will probably be fine.Even though he is on Fox, he is actual somewhat of a journalist. There were better choices though. I think John Dickerson should have gotten a debate.
    Chris Wallace will be an order of magnitude more objective than John Dickerson imo.

    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...ar.single.html

  9. #3089
    Titan Lenonis's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    14,390
    Quote Originally Posted by DocSavageFan View Post

    I called someone stupid and got a minor infraction for it...I just realized that the person I was referring to at that time was you. BTW, please accept my apologies.
    *shrug* Doesn't bother me any. I don't even remember it. I've been called far worse on these forums.

  10. #3090
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,912
    Quote Originally Posted by DocSavageFan View Post
    The LGBTQ community has nothing to fear if Trump gets elected.
    Yes they do. Trump is running on, amongst other things, an anti-gay agenda. It was just linked. If Trump is to be taken at his word, the LBGT community has reason to fear this. If Trump is not to be taken at his word, then he's useless as a candidate.

  11. #3091
    Titan Lenonis's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    14,390
    Quote Originally Posted by DocSavageFan View Post
    The LGBTQ community has nothing to fear if Trump gets elected.
    That's not only a blatant lie, but a dangerous one at that. Let's do a simple true/false thought exercise.

    True or false:
    Trump as president will nominate SCOTUS justices that will defend and uphold gay rights?
    Trump as president will veto any GOP sponsored bill that hinder/undo/etc. gay rights?
    Trump as president will issue executive orders continuing expanding gay rights in federal domains (like Obama has done)?

  12. #3092
    Herald of the Titans DocSavageFan's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    86th Floor, Empire State Building
    Posts
    2,501
    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    Yes they do. Trump is running on, amongst other things, an anti-gay agenda. It was just linked. If Trump is to be taken at his word, the LBGT community has reason to fear this. If Trump is not to be taken at his word, then he's useless as a candidate.
    The FUD is strong with you.

  13. #3093
    Titan Lenonis's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    14,390
    Quote Originally Posted by Djalil View Post
    My point is that being against gay marriage does not necessarily makes one an homophobe. It's offtopic anyway so who cares.
    Being against gay marriage does make someone a homophobe.

    Being against all marriage or being against religious marriage doesn't.

    However, to your point, yes -- the reasons matter. However it's still an obvious conclusion that a majority of conservatives/GOP members are against gay marriage. There is a mountain of polling on this.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by DocSavageFan View Post
    The FUD is strong with you.
    How is it FUD when Trump himself declared he'd overturn the gay marriage ruling?

    You can't just handwave that away as pandering to his base as there is no evidence that he won't go through with it to continue to pander to his base...

  14. #3094
    The Undying Breccia's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    39,912
    Quote Originally Posted by DocSavageFan View Post
    The FUD is strong with you.
    No, but the Politifact is.

    But remember, he's running as a Republican. The GOP continues to be against the LBGT community. And Trump is its current head. He cannot be pro-gay, and head of the GOP by its current stance on the issue.

    Or looked at another way: could Trump run as a Republican, but be openly for gay rights? How would that work out for him?

  15. #3095
    Herald of the Titans DocSavageFan's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    86th Floor, Empire State Building
    Posts
    2,501
    Quote Originally Posted by Lenonis View Post
    How is it FUD when Trump himself declared he'd overturn the gay marriage ruling?

    You can't just handwave that away as pandering to his base as there is no evidence that he won't go through with it to continue to pander to his base...
    And how is that Hillary won't do the same thing given she openly opposed gay marriage as recently as 2013 and may have done so to pander to her base? You can't just handwave that away as there is no evidence that she won't revert to her prior position. See how that works?

  16. #3096
    Quote Originally Posted by DocSavageFan View Post
    And how is that Hillary won't do the same thing given she openly opposed gay marriage as recently as 2013 and may have done so to pander to her base? You can't just handwave that away as there is no evidence that she won't revert to her prior position. See how that works?
    There is when official party stances are involved.

    Spoilers: they are.

  17. #3097
    Titan Lenonis's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    14,390
    Quote Originally Posted by DocSavageFan View Post
    And how is that Hillary won't do the same thing given she openly opposed gay marriage as recently as 2013 and may have done so to pander to her base? You can't just handwave that away as there is no evidence that she won't revert to her prior position. See how that works?
    As Edge mentioned the attempt at false equivalency falls apart super fast when you consider the parties they belong to.

    EDIT -- the attempts to paint the GOP as the pro-LGBT party this election cycle is so baffling to me I can't help but think people are just joking around...

  18. #3098
    Quote Originally Posted by DocSavageFan View Post
    And how is that Hillary won't do the same thing given she openly opposed gay marriage as recently as 2013 and may have done so to pander to her base? You can't just handwave that away as there is no evidence that she won't revert to her prior position. See how that works?
    Party platform guides a candidate more than any beliefs they may or may not hold at the time. I'm really not voting for Hillary when I cast my vote in the near future, I'm voting for the platform. The republican party platform scares the hell out of me, and the thought that some of the anti-lgbt stuff present in it might become law is terrifying.

  19. #3099
    Herald of the Titans DocSavageFan's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    86th Floor, Empire State Building
    Posts
    2,501
    [QUOTE=Breccia;42295224]No, but the Politifact is.
    And I can quote many instances where he supported the LBGT community...Politifact should have given him a "flip-flop" just like they did with Hillary.

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...-sex-marriage/

    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    But remember, he's running as a Republican. The GOP continues to be against the LBGT community. And Trump is its current head. He cannot be pro-gay, and head of the GOP by its current stance on the issue.
    Your logic is twisted. He can certainly be pro-gay despite what the party platform says...you apparently haven't been paying attention.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/11/us...can-party.html

    Quote Originally Posted by Breccia View Post
    Or looked at another way: could Trump run as a Republican, but be openly for gay rights? How would that work out for him?
    He would likely lose support from a portion of the Republican base...which has already happened.

  20. #3100
    Titan Lenonis's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    14,390
    Quote Originally Posted by Algy View Post
    Party platform guides a candidate more than any beliefs they may or may not hold at the time. I'm really not voting for Hillary when I cast my vote in the near future, I'm voting for the platform. The republican party platform scares the hell out of me, and the thought that some of the anti-lgbt stuff present in it might become law is terrifying.
    Tim Kaine is probably the best example of this at the moment around abortion. He's catholic and personally is strongly pro-life. However he recognizes that his party maintains a pro-choice platform and thus in his political life that is how he acts.

    It's really quite remarkable as most politicians seem to struggle to differentiate their personal beliefs vs those of their constituents and/or party.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •