• Obama: Trump's 'wacky' behavior should not become normalized
    62 replies, posted
[QUOTE=TomatoFlakes;51022178]While true, this should never become the de-facto argument. "The other guy is worse!" is a horrible defense.[/QUOTE] Yeah but the thing is that's the only choices you poor sods seem to have.
[QUOTE=Nebukadnezzer;51023522]i'd rather have the buffoon.[/QUOTE] And why do you want a bigoted manbaby in charge of one of the most powerful countries in the world?
[QUOTE=Nebukadnezzer;51023522]i'd rather have the buffoon.[/QUOTE] a buffoon with access to nukes there must be some part of you that believes this is a fucking terrible idea
[QUOTE=Nebukadnezzer;51023522]i'd rather have the buffoon.[/QUOTE] No one here wants to fall into the idea that we can let corruption slide, of course. And no one wants to see someone using shady methods to reach the presidency. But there's a time for Pragmatism and a time to stand up for your morals and ideals. If you think that your ideals and morals are important and rigid enough to allow a man who has admitted openly hes not against using nukes, and has also gone on and on about praising Putin. A man noted for heavy press censorship elimination of his political rivals and illegally invading his neighbors. If thats the person you want to have for president because your beliefs hold that no one openly corrupt should win, than so be it. But if you want to act Pragmatically so The USA doesnt fall behind on the world stage and truly become corrupt and a pariah, then dont fall for the rhetoric of a demogauge and vote for clinton or write a name in for God's sake.
[QUOTE=eirexe;51023271]I just looked at orban and fico, and one seems like your typical right wing conservative and the other one is your typical social democrat, if you could explain exactly what's up with them it would be great, because I have looked them up and ofund nothing. Orban is even part of the European People's party, and sure, the Spanish People's Party is bad, but it does not seem extreme that is if they are anything to go by. Yes I know there's a resurgence of the far right in Europe, but they have not won any terrain.[/QUOTE] I don't know about Fico, but Orban is certainly pretty far right and his government is one of the most worryingly authoritarian in the EU. One of the most concerning things they've done is rewritten the electoral system to gerrymander the whole country and make it extremely difficult for another party to ever win power again. They've also stripped the supreme court of some of its key powers. This article is a pretty good summary: [url]http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/06/hello-dictator-hungary-orban-viktor-119125[/url] "When laws criminalizing homelessness, curtailing political advertizing, foreclosing the possibility of gay marriage and restricting judicial review were found unconstitutional, Orbán used his parliamentary supermajority to simply add the measures to the new constitution."
[QUOTE=Lambeth;51022160]Trump lies more[/QUOTE] Trump never lies, he's just very sarcastic. :v:
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;51022217]Clinton is shady but she's prepared, [B]has advanced knowledge in foreign policy[/B] which is essential to getting deals through the door and has actual political experience You're getting more corruption but a leader who actually leads opposed to a buffoon who says the first thing that comes up in his head[/QUOTE] No, it would be a continuation of the same idiotic, hypocritical and shortsighted warhawk foreign policy practiced by Bush and Obama, among others. She was one of the key players behind the intervention in Libya, and look what chaos has happened there. Not to mention her weird comments about Iraq being a "businness opportunity" and how "we must destroy Syria for Israel". And now these scary comments where she has implied the possibility of going into war with Russia of all things. There's also the risk she might undo the progress made by Obama in the USA-Iran relations due to her close affiliation with Saudi-Arabia (which, by the way, makes her no friend of the rest of womenkind). Here's the thing about the US foreign policy: Liberty does not equal the existence of elections and the freedom of speech and so on, but rather it's a [I]state of consciousness[/I]. To be blunt, the people in the middle east have not yet developed such consciousness to sufficient degree, as evidenced by the fact that they are largely ruled by oligarchies and autocratic governments. First of all, there's too much thinking in that region that a particular religion, namely Islam, should be heavily intertwined in politics. Secondly, with few exceptions like Iran, there's very little national consciousness that causes the people to see themselves as the "The Libyan People" or "The Iraqi People" and so on. Instead, the middle eastern people are still largely still trapped in a tribal consciousness, which is not conductive to formation of modern democracies. Thirdly, there's much "strong leader syndrome" among the people that causes them to expect some charismatic leader to come take away their problems, instead of taking responsibility for themselves and their nations and their governance. This is why they are not free. It's not up to the United States or someone else to free these people. It's not even possible to accomplish, since while the evil dictator might perish by bombs, no amount of bombs can change the collective state of consciousness in these countries. The people in the middle east must choose to liberate themselves. No one else can do it for them. In a sense, the dictators in these countries could be seen as kind of substitute teachers through whom the universe symbolically says to the people: "If you don't free yourselves, overcome your differences and take responsibility for yourselves and your society, someone will indeed come to take responsibility for you, as you would seem to want". The people must either choose to overthrow the dictator and pass the test, or they can fail the test by continuing to suffer under that dictator until they've had enough of this experience. For an outsider to come in to depose the dictator is not a beneficial act of kindness, but instead an act robbing away this growth opportunity. Instituting a democracy upon a people by force will not be enough in itself to free them, as democracy without the accompanying consciousness of liberty will inevitably slide back into tyranny. Then the people will have to take the "dictator test" again, meaning that all those lives lost through the US President playing Rambo were completely in vain. Then there's the matter of supplying arms to insurgent groups opposing dictators. Those are freedom fighters, aren't they? Surely they are evidence that that consciousness of liberty is starting to form among the people, therefore we should give them weapons and material support? WRONG! You see, such groups are almost always [I]aspiring power elites[/I] trying to overthrow [I]the established power elite[/I], rather than some grassroots movement dedicated to liberty (like I said in another HRC centric thread). By giving weapons to such groups, you are giving these weapons to groups that have no reverence to human life, and who often end up using these weapons against the US and its allies. Where do you imagine groups like ISIS got their weapons? I know that the United States did gain it's liberty through armed revolt, but this is an exception. In vast majority of cases it has only lead to another form of tyranny. The bloodbath of the French Revolutiion is good example of this, as is the Bolshevik revolution. If the American Revolution wasn't helmed by such exceptional people, the same would indeed have happened to the United States (King Washington? Shudder.). This causes the people(?)/government of the US to have a bit of a blind spot in terms of armed revolts, and thus there's a kind of a reasoning that if there's an armed group opposing someone like Assad or Gaddafi, then surely it must be a similiar movement, with it's own George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, and therefore they should be given support. If you ask me, only grassroots movements, and preferably only those committed to non-violence, should be given any support. Sorry for the long rant. Incidentally, it's not really directed specifically at you, fruxodaily.
It gravely concerns me that this sort of behaviours is not just tolerated in US, but worldwide. Did humanity took insanity pills?
Considering how many people hate the direction america is taking there's no reason to vote hillary. Literally none at all besides 'not trump' which is only an argument for a certain subset of people, not even the left wing as a whole
[QUOTE=FinalHunter;51024840]And what exactly does that zinger mean?[/QUOTE] He means that even clever people can get caught up in a cult of personality like Donald Trump's, and if clever, well-informed people can fall for his groundless rhetoric, less clever people might fall for it even more easily.
[QUOTE=Conscript;51024833]Considering how many people hate the direction america is taking there's no reason to vote hillary. Literally none at all besides 'not trump' which is only an argument for a certain subset of people, not even the left wing as a whole[/QUOTE] Trump's policies are really just that bad. He wants to double down on corn ethanol, which republicans have been calling a failed technology and government waste for years (and it is). He wants to get rid of the EPA, increase fracking, expand coal, and loosen methane regulations. It wasn't that long ago we had a thread here about methane leaks developing in rivers due to fracking in Australia and some Green rep lighting the river on fire. He wants to loosen water restrictions in drought stricken areas because he doesn't believe droughts are a thing and flow restrictors/air injectors "ruin his hair". He wants to cut taxes but increase spending. His plan accelerates our deficit growth. He criticizes Obama on his immigration policies but even Fox News said Trump's current plan is basically a continuation of Obama's policy sans the wall. The wall will cause major ecological damage, make us import more produce from cartels, and hurt one of the fastest growing markets in the United States (Rio Grande Valley) where we're actually exporting tech to Mexico. His plan is totally mental. None of the pieces fit together. His policy in one area undercuts policy in another in cases where he has a distinct plan, and the stuff he hasn't defined very well isn't likely to be any better than the stuff that he has since pretty much everything he's planned is just that dumb. The only thing he's maybe better than Clinton on is guns, but he still wants to take away those rights for people on government watch lists like Clinton, and unlike Clinton his rhetoric implies a substantial expansion of those watch lists. Muslim? Good luck. Friend or family of a suspected member of terrorism? Also fucked. Clinton is a terrible candidate, but a good chunk of the democratic platform is pretty ok or even good. Trump is a terrible candidate, the republican platform is pretty much garbage, and Trump doesn't seem to give a shit about following the republican platform, or even his own policies when he makes a plan.
[QUOTE=eirexe;51023271]I just looked at orban and fico, and one seems like your typical right wing conservative and the other one is your typical social democrat, if you could explain exactly what's up with them it would be great, because I have looked them up and ofund nothing. Orban is even part of the European People's party, and sure, the Spanish People's Party is bad, but it does not seem extreme that is if they are anything to go by. Yes I know there's a resurgence of the far right in Europe, but they have not won any terrain.[/QUOTE] I think that smurfy's post covers Orban, so here's Fico: [quote]Many blamed the anti-immigrant rhetoric of Prime Minister Robert Fico for the rise of the extreme right. Fico, a left-wing populist, had repeatedly vowed to protect Slovakia from an influx of Muslims, even though Slovakia is not on the main routes that refugees and migrants take to get from the Balkans to Germany—and few, if any, of them want to live there. Fico said Slovakia would take in 200 Syrian refugees—as long as they were Christian.[/quote] [url]http://europe.newsweek.com/rise-euro-right-and-slovakian-neo-nazis-436738?rm=eu[/url] [quote]“The only way to eliminate risks like Paris and Germany is to prevent the creation of a compact Muslim community in Slovakia,” said Fico, Slovakia’s prime minister from 2006 to 2010 and again since 2012. [...] Fico has said his government monitors “every single Muslim” in the country and that “Slovak citizens and their security is of higher priority than the rights of migrants.” The security threat for Slovaks is “immensely high,” he warns. With the general election on March 5, Fico’s fixation on migrants has drowned out most other issues. His center-left Smer party has released just five sentences by way of an official election platform. So far, it’s working. Smer gained some 7 percentage points in opinion polls in the second half of 2015, topping out at around 40 percent support at the turn of the year. If that translated into votes on election day, it would enable Fico to return at the head of another single-party government.[/quote] [url]http://www.politico.eu/article/slovakia-fico-migrants-refugees-asylum-crisis-smer-election/[/url] [quote]He hopes the time is coming when Greece will be expelled from the Schengen area, as it has no business being there, he also said, as quoted by the TASR newswire. When asked as to whether this is being discussed at the EU level, the PM said that, unofficially, everybody is convinced about it. “We just cannot put up with a member country that has openly given up on safeguarding the Schengen area borders. Schengen is of no use then,” he said. At any rate, the summit on Sunday is not the best place to address the issue, he added.[/quote] [url]http://spectator.sme.sk/c/20065099/prime-minister-fico-wants-greece-to-leave-schengen.html?piano_t=1[/url] [quote]The big screens behind him read "Chranime Slovensko" (we're protecting Slovakia). "I can tell you we will never - under a quota system - bring one single Muslim to Slovakia," Mr Fico says, his voice rising. "And we will never - not even voluntarily - create a self-contained Muslim community, because it would represent a serious security risk." At this the arena breaks into thunderous applause. It is the only ovation in his five-minute speech.[/quote] [url]http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35718831[/url] [quote]Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico said Tuesday that the EU is “committing a ritual suicide” with its migration policy. “If it takes until late 2016 or 2017 for Europe to set up its planned border and coast guard force, the EU will have killed itself,” Fico said in an interview with Czech newspaper Pravo.[/quote] [url]http://www.politico.eu/article/slovak-pm-eu-migrant-policy-is-ritual-suicide/[/url] [quote]“It may look strange but sorry... Islam has no place in Slovakia,” he said on May 25. He added that if anyone claims that Slovakia wants to be multi-cultural, they go against the very essence of the country. He fears that the arrival of thousands of Muslims “who will push through their case” would threaten the Cyrilo-Methodian traditions, on which Slovakia has been built. [/quote] [url]http://spectator.sme.sk/c/20180121/as-eu-presidency-looms-fico-goes-anti-muslim-again.html?piano_t=1[/url] [quote]Some members of the Islamic community in Slovakia are contemplating leaving the country in light of recent developments, said Slovakia's Islamic Foundation Chairman Mohamad Safwan Hasna at a meeting with President Andrej Kiska in Bratislava's Presidential Palace on Thursday. Hasna said that some of them have already left Slovakia, moving to western European countries. "Our people are nervous, some of them have left. There are not many of them, I don't want exaggerate the situation. Some of them are thinking about leaving. They're mostly doctors, engineers, and technically savvy people", explained Hasna. "Everybody is nervous, but I strongly believe that the last declarations weren't meant for real and that the situation will calm down after the general election", added Hasna. He mentioned that apart from Kiska, no other representative of state has initiated a meeting with the Islamic community in Slovakia. According to Hasna, the rhetoric of politicians isn't very opportune. "I think that one needs to pay attention to one's words, as they can have powerful effects", emphasised Hasna.[/quote] [url]http://enrsi.rtvs.sk/articles/news/97876/some-muslims-leaving-slovakia-amid-countrys-changing-mood[/url] Hardly a typical social democrat. He might have a bit softer tone than Orban, Zeman or the PiS (who rendered their constitutional tribunal useless), but I think that even Trump wouldn't go this far.
[QUOTE=Conscript;51024833]Considering how many people hate the direction america is taking there's no reason to vote hillary. Literally none at all besides 'not trump' which is only an argument for a certain subset of people, not even the left wing as a whole[/QUOTE] so you're okay with destroying the livelhoods of thousands because "Trump"
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;51025210]so you're okay with destroying the livelhoods of thousands because "Trump"[/QUOTE] It's a win-win election for conscript. If Trump wins and is only a mild disaster then it's a pokein the eye of the (((globalists))) and if it is a complete disaster, well, that is America getting what it deserves.
I think you guys are fucked regardless of who wins the presidential race.
[QUOTE=EskillV2;51026092]I think you guys are fucked regardless of who wins the presidential race.[/QUOTE] I don't really see why, Clinton isn't going to fuck up the US - she may not make things a whole lot better but I doubt she's going to make them that much worse.
[QUOTE=phaedon;51025196]I think that smurfy's post covers Orban, so here's Fico: [URL]http://europe.newsweek.com/rise-euro-right-and-slovakian-neo-nazis-436738?rm=eu[/URL] [URL]http://www.politico.eu/article/slovakia-fico-migrants-refugees-asylum-crisis-smer-election/[/URL] [URL]http://spectator.sme.sk/c/20065099/prime-minister-fico-wants-greece-to-leave-schengen.html?piano_t=1[/URL] [URL]http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35718831[/URL] [URL]http://www.politico.eu/article/slovak-pm-eu-migrant-policy-is-ritual-suicide/[/URL] [URL]http://spectator.sme.sk/c/20180121/as-eu-presidency-looms-fico-goes-anti-muslim-again.html?piano_t=1[/URL] [URL]http://enrsi.rtvs.sk/articles/news/97876/some-muslims-leaving-slovakia-amid-countrys-changing-mood[/URL] Hardly a typical social democrat. He might have a bit softer tone than Orban, Zeman or the PiS (who rendered their constitutional tribunal useless), but I think that even Trump wouldn't go this far.[/QUOTE] What a fucking joke of two people. Indeed, orban reminds me a bit of our people's party except more extreme (our people's party misinterpreted the constitution and literally brought a "psycologist" to the senate that stated that homosexuals are more likely to come from rape amongst other things), good thing our fucking senate has absolutely no power.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;51025210]so you're okay with destroying the livelhoods of thousands because "Trump"[/QUOTE] The current direction means turning the middle class into proles and crushing globalization for native workers, not to mention sending more of the lower class to die in pointless wars for an empire we're fatigued with. There is no white male or russian boogeyman big enough for anyone to vote for a neoliberal hawk bankrolled by banks and the global minded elites of other countries. We need a system that puts the nation first because the fundamental inequality in our day is the gap in ability between labor and capital to cross borders. Raidyr is right on one thing, current polarization that's probably related to globalization exposing weaknesses is forcing us to address the race and class issue which can only be a good thing
[QUOTE=Conscript;51026584]The current direction means turning the middle class into proles and cursing globalization for native workers, not to mention sending more of the lower class to die in pointless wars for an empire we're fatigued with. There is no white male or russian boogeyman big enough for anyone to vote for a neoliberal hawk bankrolled by banks and the global minded elites of other countries. Raidyr is right on one thing, current polarization that's probably related to globalization exposing weaknesses is forcing us to address the race and class issue which can only be a good thing[/QUOTE] and please tell me how Trump isn't beholden to the globalist overlords and will free you from your oppression and shackles [editline]9th September 2016[/editline] specifics, not some trite bullshit with some flowery prose talking about the proletariat and the bourgeois, real specifics.
[QUOTE=MetalGear;51022125]Says the same guy who endorses Hillary. Whenever she speaks, you can't tell if she's a fucking lying or not. And I think the rest of the foreign leaders see that too[/QUOTE] The trick to know if someone is lying is to read their facial expressions; unless they are known for having facial spasms... oh wait.
[QUOTE=MetalGear;51022125]Says the same guy who endorses Hillary.[/QUOTE] I'm 99% sure that was just a tradition like pardoning a turkey every Thanksgiving or something. We all know Obama's real political affiliation is "whatever, just not Trump"
[QUOTE=lavacano;51026706]I'm 99% sure that was just a tradition like pardoning a turkey every Thanksgiving or something. We all know Obama's real political affiliation is "whatever, just not Trump"[/QUOTE] I mean she was his Secretary of State he probably genuinely wants her to be president.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;51026758]I mean she was his Secretary of State he probably genuinely wants her to be president.[/QUOTE] Sure, but every time I listen to the man, it's not so much he's trying to get everyone to vote for Clinton as he's trying to get everyone to not vote for Trump. He might say some nice things about Clinton here and there, but it feels more like he's just saying "c'mon guys, she's not [i]that[/i] bad" for a minute before going on about how Trump really is that bad. Then again, I may be projecting my own opinion of "as long as Trump doesn't win" onto him.
[QUOTE=sweetbro;51022533][URL]http://www.politifact.com/personalities/hillary-clinton/[/URL] [URL]http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/[/URL] politifact scorecards say it all "b-but politifact is b-biased liberal media!!"[/QUOTE] Politifact has historically stretched the truth to push an opinion as fact.
[QUOTE=1legmidget;51024890] He wants to loosen water restrictions in drought stricken areas because he doesn't believe droughts are a thing and flow restrictors/air injectors "ruin his hair".[/QUOTE] Source on that? Even for Trump standards, this sounds really stupid.
[QUOTE=Sir Whoopsalot;51028984]Source on that? Even for Trump standards, this sounds really stupid.[/QUOTE] [URL]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3358633/The-Donald-s-bad-hair-day-Trump-hits-water-regulations-mean-t-wash-famous-locks-properly.html[/URL] Alternate source: [url]http://time.com/4146809/donald-trump-epa-water-hair/[/url]
The american public put themselves into this situation. They voted for hillary and trump. My question is, how did this happen? If the majority hate these two, why are they running for president?
[QUOTE=ridinmybike;51031165]The american public put themselves into this situation. They voted for hillary and trump. My question is, how did this happen? If the majority hate these two, why are they running for president?[/QUOTE] Because only a minority of voters vote in the private primaries of the two parties. After that, the majority is left with whatever the minority picked. To be honest, that's not really a problem in most democratic countries - political parties are generally private organisations. However, since the system is FTFP, and this is voting for one particular person, candidates that people dislike can be picked and will pick up significant votes simply because of the party they're aligned behind.
[QUOTE=Trebgarta;51022131]I dont get this attitude. Hillary Clinton isnt considerably more shady than any other, its American Politics. How many times has Obama "lied", did you keep a track record? I bet youd want another term of his though.[/QUOTE] What the fuck? She's a complete shill and if you're going to turn a blind eye to that you have no place in this in this discussion at all. Obama only hid it so well because he's a very skilled orator. Why should we have to make concessions on who we elect to our leadership? This isn't voting in the principal for the local school district, we're voting in the head of our entire country. Jimmy Carter 2016.
[QUOTE=space1;51032581]What the fuck? She's a complete shill and if you're going to turn a blind eye to that you have no place in this in this discussion at all. Obama only hid it so well because he's a very skilled orator. Why should we have to make concessions on who we elect to our leadership? This isn't voting in the principal for the local school district, we're voting in the head of our entire country. Jimmy Carter 2016.[/QUOTE] So you'd rather Trump be president? Because like it or not its going to be either clinton or him. You can either vote for someone that does shady shit but knows how to run a country or you can vote for an ignorant egotistical businessman.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.