Republican Election 2016 - Donald Trump Megathread [OFFICIAL]

[Fadeslol]

You don't get it. You claim that media lie, and then use media to get your information. And then say that people don't use their brains. Read this again. And again. And again. See the point?

Conspiracy theorists always believe themselves enlightened and everyone else brainless sheeple... But it is actually the other way around, isn't it?

How can u dismiss an Audio Clip? Yes the media lies but u can't just dismiss the audio. The whole point is, you dismiss the Audio because its "Russian Media" when clear as day the guy is talking.

- - - Updated - - -

To be fair that psycho says things that fit Fadeslol's political opinion, so it must be fact.

BS because Dead you and I had major conversations before and i admitted you have been right about shit. We disagree alot, on alot of shit actually but yet i still respect your opinion.

[Nihilist74]

Yes we do, its called FOX/CNN/MSNBC/ABC. Our media lies to cover for our govt.

The media says whatever it takes to get the most money they can from sponsors which is very much a capitalist endeavor. The state has nothing to do with it.

[Cooper]

When you're citing literal Russian state propaganda, and asking others to engage in critical thought, you need to go have a bit of a sit-down and do some serious self-reflection, dude.

Well, the best propaganda would be printing a story that is true.

I mean, healthy skepticism is good and all, and obviously not all sources are equal in their credibility, but to suggest that somebody citing a low credibility source must not be able to think critically - based only on the source - isn't thinking critically either. It's classic ad hominem.

Even the National Enquirer prints something that is true once in a while.

For example: I don't know the specifics of how the Soviet media handled the situation (though I'm fairly certain it wasn't like this) but suppose, in 1960, there was an article in Pravda that the Soviet Union had shot down an American U2 spy plane in Soviet airspace and captured the pilot. The fact that the source is Pravda doesn't make the story any less true.

Not to lend any support to conspiracy theories, I just think that post is incredibly hypocritical.

[Cthulhu 2020]

You don't get it. You claim that media lie, and then use media to get your information. And then say that people don't use their brains. Read this again. And again. And again. See the point?

Conspiracy theorists always believe themselves enlightened and everyone else brainless sheeple... But it is actually the other way around, isn't it?

The people who consider themselves "enlightened" and not sheeple are just the opposite - they are, and only think that way because they chose to reject one shepherd and follow another shepherd named Alex Jones.

[Fadeslol]

Oh, the guy said that! If that guy also said that dinosaurs never went extinct and, instead, left the Earth on spaceships, you would also believe it, wouldn't you?

Great, there we go. Our Govt said it was the Russians,provides no proof and yet we take the word of them. Thats the whole point i'm trying to make.

- - - Updated - - -

The people who consider themselves "enlightened" and not sheeple are just the opposite - they are, and only think that way because they chose to reject one shepherd and follow another shepherd named Alex Jones.

No, i take all in and form my own opinion. That's why, even though i hate TYT i watch them just to get the other side.

[Edge-]

Same people that said we had WMD in Iraq right?

What same people? Who are you talking about?

Yea lets give no proof but claim its the Russians. Great Situation

I'm assuming we're back to this election now, but what proof would you want? It's not like they're going to just release all their information, and this is being corroborated by private security firms looking into it who are seeing similar clues that point to Russia.

Ex Intelligence official alligns himself with Current ones also

I have no clue what you are trying to say.

its not Russian state-sponsored propaganda article i'm worried about.

But that's the issue, that's the source of the audio. Literally, the audio was recorded and released by Russian state-sponsored propaganda.

The Audio clip, there the guy clear as day said i was at a meeting in washington and it came from the inside, not the Russians.

You mean the audio that was recorded and posted by Sputnik? You know, the Russians? The former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan that, by his own word was denied entry to the US on September 5, 2016? Yes, he's the most reliable of sources.

You dismiss the whole thing because our media wont report on it or show the clip and they will.

The reason media aren't reporting on it is for the same reason I, a non-journalist, am not taking it seriously. Because it's painfully easy bullshit to debunk as conspiracy theory nonsense once you take 10 seconds to look into the sources behind it all.

Again its not about the article, its about the Audio clip.

I listened to it, I have no reason to trust this man and take him at his word.

[Fadeslol]

The media says whatever it takes to get the most money they can from sponsors which is very much a capitalist endeavor. The state has nothing to do with it.

In theory that's how it should work but we don't have real media, we lost our 4th branch of govt else would could fix this country so fast. If the media and the people keep the govt in check, it's game over. Start with breaking up 2 party system. No more parties on ballots, instead have just names.

[Wells]

No, i take all in and form my own opinion. That's why, even though i hate TYT i watch them just to get the other side.

Hate-watching doesn't make you better informed. Its just an exercise in confirming your hatred.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Companies that can't compete without using illegal labor should fail. I agree most whites are lazy, but I'm a white cook. I road a bike 3 miles to work/3miles home every day for three years in Arizona summer/winter; whether it was 125f at 4pm in the afternoon after working a 12 hour shift with no break, or at 5am when the wind blows so cold my hands would freeze in the pitch dark of night.

Working a physical job takes conditioning, conditioning mexicans understand because they come from a place that paid them 10$ a day for 16 hours of manual labor. The problem is even though I respect mexicans and owe them much for teaching me what I know now, they drive the wages down. They will take minimum wage for a job that is worth much, much more. Businesses take advantage of this, and those professions/trades lose their intrinsic value.

Skinny white 20-year olds failing at physical labor isn't shocking, and isn't an argument for undocumented workers.

The point is that simply kicking them out isn't the solution.

And they are typically paid minimum wage at least to make it look official. Plus there was a comprehensive study that showed that illegal immigrant labor has both positive and negative push and pull on wages... and ultimately the effect cancels out to zero. However the H1-B visa program DOES greatly push wages down, and this is the program that Trump wants to expand on so he can get even more H1-B visa workers. They're skilled laborers who will do skilled labor for 1/3 the salary of Americans, pushing people out of middle class jobs.

[May90]

Great, there we go. Our Govt said it was the Russians,provides no proof and yet we take the word of them. Thats the whole point i'm trying to make.

There is consensus among a large number of experts that it is likely Russian work. There is no 100% proof of that, hence there is some doubt - however, when the overwhelming number of security experts familiar with the matter tell me that the hackers were Russians, together with me having lived in Russia and knowing what kind of government there is there, I say, "Yes, I agree, likely it was Russians". I don't know for sure, and I will never claim it as a fact, until I see some strong evidence. And that's pretty much everyone's stance: we assume that it is Russians, based on the opinions of experts, but we don't know with 100% certainty.

On the other hand, you follow some shady media sources providing you with some random text or audio files and claiming that those files belong to person X and mean Y. You don't question the validity of those files, because they align with your bias. You seriously compare the overwhelming consensus of experts to some random guy talking on Youtube, and then claim that those who don't do the same do not use their brain.

One doesn't need to be scientist to see that your position is incredibly intellectually dishonest and just, well, not thought through.

[Cthulhu 2020]

No, i take all in and form my own opinion. That's why, even though i hate TYT i watch them just to get the other side.

Ever heard of confirmation bias?

[Fadeslol]

What same people? Who are you talking about?



I'm assuming we're back to this election now, but what proof would you want? It's not like they're going to just release all their information, and this is being corroborated by private security firms looking into it who are seeing similar clues that point to Russia.



I have no clue what you are trying to say.



But that's the issue, that's the source of the audio. Literally, the audio was recorded and released by Russian state-sponsored propaganda.



You mean the audio that was recorded and posted by Sputnik? You know, the Russians? The former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan that, by his own word was denied entry to the US on September 5, 2016? Yes, he's the most reliable of sources.



The reason media aren't reporting on it is for the same reason I, a non-journalist, am not taking it seriously. Because it's painfully easy bullshit to debunk as conspiracy theory nonsense once you take 10 seconds to look into the sources behind it all.



I listened to it, I have no reason to trust this man and take him at his word.

1) The same people, int officials that said Iraq has WMD and proven to be false.
2) Don't claim its the Russians hacking and not give proof. Show how they did it.
3) Sorry i hate this keyboard "Ex Intelligence officer who aligns himself with current ones also, meaning who has contacts, who finds out info."
4) Who cares who it was released by. Hillary said Wikileaks are backed by the Russians so that means don't look at them?
5) It's not my most reliable sources, its a source. That's the whole point. Now If people say its coming from Washington, and we can't provide proof its the Russians, lets look at whos doing it from within.
6) And you're taking word its the Russians when our govt lied before. So our Govt is now making Conspiracy Theories right?
7) And we have no reason to trust our govt when they lied to us before. Show us the proof.

- - - Updated - - -

Hate-watching doesn't make you better informed. Its just an exercise in confirming your hatred.

I don't agree with all their opinions, but i still want to hear the other side and not stay close-minded. But everytime Cenk said something, they constantly bring up race race race and just turns me off. Thats why i gotta watch Jimmy lately. If i hated the other side i would be anti 1st amendment which im not. I'm pro 1A and 2A

[Wells]

I don't agree with all their opinions, but i still want to hear the other side and not stay close-minded. But everytime Cenk said something, they constantly bring up race race race and just turns me off. Thats why i gotta watch Jimmy lately. If i hated the other side i would be anti 1st amendment which im not. I'm pro 1A and 2A

Don't even know where to start with the Russian nesting doll of weird-dumb

[May90]

1) The same people, int officials that said Iraq has WMD and proven to be false.

You know, people, even professional, make mistakes. Their opinion, if wrong, is still worth more than an opinion of some random person that claims that everybody lies, everything is rigged, etc.

[Fadeslol]

There is consensus among a large number of experts that it is likely Russian work. There is no 100% proof of that, hence there is some doubt - however, when the overwhelming number of security experts familiar with the matter tell me that the hackers were Russians, together with me having lived in Russia and knowing what kind of government there is there, I say, "Yes, I agree, likely it was Russians". I don't know for sure, and I will never claim it as a fact, until I see some strong evidence. And that's pretty much everyone's stance: we assume that it is Russians, based on the opinions of experts, but we don't know with 100% certainty.

On the other hand, you follow some shady media sources providing you with some random text or audio files and claiming that those files belong to person X and mean Y. You don't question the validity of those files, because they align with your bias. You seriously compare the overwhelming consensus of experts to some random guy talking on Youtube, and then claim that those who don't do the same do not use their brain.

One doesn't need to be scientist to see that your position is incredibly intellectually dishonest and just, well, not thought through.

Yes take our word for it, we know it bah bah bah. U can get the Proof easily, the NSA has the power.
Same people that constantly lied before. Instead of getting into Iraq with WMD. Blame the Russians, start WW3.
Its on just 1 person, its multiply people saying that. I'm trying to point out the "one source" and you're dismissing it. I'm not saying holy shit this 1 guy said its true so it happened, but we have people said its from inside the govt.

[DeadmanWalking]

Polling Data shows a spike in Latino voters.

[Fadeslol]

You know, people, even professional, make mistakes. Their opinion, if wrong, is still worth more than an opinion of some random person that claims that everybody lies, everything is rigged, etc.

Just like Gulf of Tonkin too right? We know its a lie also. Provide proof and we can take it from there. Its just to deflect Wikileaks away from the Media since "Its the Russians! Its the Russians!"

[May90]

Yes take our word for it, we know it bah bah bah. U can get the Proof easily, the NSA has the power.
Same people that constantly lied before. Instead of getting into Iraq with WMD. Blame the Russians, start WW3.
Its on just 1 person, its multiply people saying that. I'm trying to point out the "one source" and you're dismissing it. I'm not saying holy shit this 1 guy said its true so it happened, but we have people said its from inside the govt.

Again, same fallacy: you claim that the government lies, then take something said "from inside the government" as a proof of anything. Or is it only lies when it doesn't align with your preconceptions?

And I exactly explained that I do not take their word for it. Have you even read what you quoted? I think the government should be more open about their evidence, and as long as the evidence isn't presented, I will always reserve the final judgment for later.

Just like Gulf of Tonkin too right? We know its a lie also. Provide proof and we can take it from there. Its just to deflect Wikileaks away from the Media since "Its the Russians! Its the Russians!"

Saying that you know it is a lie doesn't make it a lie. Wrong judgment based on the limited amount of information is not a lie, it is a mistake. How about you go ahead and prove that it was a lie and not a mistake?

[Edge-]

1) The same people, int officials that said Iraq has WMD and proven to be false.

Yes, but because they were wrong once doesn't mean they're wrong every time. If you're never going to trust your intelligence agencies, just cut them. But if they're right the majority of the time and only screw up every once in a while, trust is reasonable.

Then again, they haven't claimed definitely that it's Russia. They're saying there is evidence to suggest that it is.

2) Don't claim its the Russians hacking and not give proof. Show how they did it.

I can't, I don't have any. And that's not how intelligence agencies work.

3) Sorry i hate this keyboard "Ex Intelligence officer who aligns himself with current ones also, meaning who has contacts, who finds out info."

But...he's not? He seems to be going against the public stances of intelligence agencies.

4) Who cares who it was released by. Hillary said Wikileaks are backed by the Russians so that means don't look at them?

Um, the qualifications of the source matter. If Bob Woodward walked up to you on the street and said that he had proof of government corruption, most folks would believe him at this point. If the crazy homeless guy wearing womens underwear for a hat comes up to you on the street and said the same thing, even if for some strange reason he's right, nobody is going to take him seriously.

And Wikileaks? What does that have to do with this. Hillary is saying it's Russia but we don't know. But we literally know that Sputnik is a state-run propaganda site. Like...how are you even connecting those two.

5) It's not my most reliable sources, its a source. That's the whole point. Now If people say its coming from Washington, and we can't provide proof its the Russians, lets look at whos doing it from within.

No...it's not. It's Russian state-run propaganda. How on earth can you treat that like a source but instantly refuse to believe anything from our government? Your last bit makes no sense either.

6) And you're taking word its the Russians when our govt lied before. So our Govt is now making Conspiracy Theories right?

Yep, I am. I'm aware that the government lies and I do my best to be skeptical, but I take the Reagan approach, trust but verify. I have no reason to implicitly distrust our government, but I also have no reason to implicitly trust them in all things. So I maintain a reasonable level of trust with some skepticism layered on top. Like a cracker of trust with some skepticism spread.

And no, that's not a conspiracy theory of an intelligence agency is telling you something and they're usually spot on.

7) And we have no reason to trust our govt when they lied to us before. Show us the proof.

So you distrust anything forever if it lies to you only once?

[Fadeslol]

Again, same fallacy: you claim that the government lies, then take something said "from inside the government" as a proof of anything. Or is it only lies when it doesn't align with your preconceptions?

And I exactly explained that I do not take their word for it. Have you even read what you quoted? I think the government should be more open about their evidence, and as long as the evidence isn't presented, I will always reserve the final judgment for later.

What i'm saying is, they go like "this happened, this happened, this happened etc." bah Obamacare is free, you can keep your doctor etc. Bush wmd in Iraq etc.
Lieing. Straight and Simple.

If they go its the Russians, give us 10-20 things on how its the Russians. Ok now lets deal with the Russians but nope they can't put out the truth.
If it was the Russians, how come we didn't go to the UN???? Because we can't provide proof.

You have people that are not at the top called Whistleblowers. Like Snowden for example. We know how the NSA works because of him