• The Second Debate Probably Didn’t Help Trump, And He Needed Help
    51 replies, posted
Trump did okay this debate, which is scary because he's still a terrible candidate. He got his hits in, Hillary got some of hers, but she missed some easy ones. "Everything he said is wrong" got old quickly, especially with her not explaining why. For instance, she could have ripped him apart on his "Why didn't you fix it?" statement in so many ways, but she didn't. She stayed of the defensive pretty much the entire time, and that was a terrible mistake. She did try to talk policy which is fair, because Trump's policy is god-awful to anyone who knows even the slightest thing about economics. He rants about the deficit and about the debt but he wants major tax cuts and deregulation which would only increase these things, as well as decrease our quality of life. A race to the bottom with China is not where we want to go, but apparently some people just [I]want[/I] industrial-age working conditions. :why:
Imagine if Gary Johnson wins and catches everyone off guard So many people won't know who the fuck he is because the media isn't circlejerking over him
[QUOTE=Kylel999;51183783]Imagine if Gary Johnson wins and catches everyone off guard So many people won't know who the fuck he is because the media isn't circlejerking over him[/QUOTE] Despite the fact that he seems like a genuinely good guy, he's a Libertarian. That's an automatic lose in my book.
Why do people like Gary Johnson, he wants to privatise [b]literally[/b] everything.
Libertarians are fools. It's trickle-down economics times a million, the same economic model that has put America in the mess it is today, that is responsible for the poverty, the class inequality, the crime in the country. More of the same doesn't suddenly make a country successful - You're removing regulations, worker protections, social security, and expecting corporations to treat employees fairly out of the goodness of their hearts? Ridiculous. Gary Johnson may appear to be socially progressive, but he's a hypocrite.
God only knows. Johnson is an objectively terrible candidate policy-wise.
Can't wait till this election is done with. It's just one giant shit show after another.
[QUOTE=Richardroth;51184320]Can't wait till this election is done with. It's just one giant shit show after another.[/QUOTE] I'm curious what'll happen with the alt-right after this is over. Hopefully they fracture and fall apart, with most rejoining reality, and the remaining hardcore supporters retreat back to /pol/.
[QUOTE=Rossy167;51183999]Why do people like Gary Johnson, he wants to privatise [b]literally[/b] everything.[/QUOTE] Because it seems libertarians get massive boners over having the right to privatize everything. Though I've often noticed these are the same people bitching about the price of bottled water, so I dunno. [editline]10th October 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;51185260]I'm curious what'll happen with the alt-right after this is over. Hopefully they fracture and fall apart, with most rejoining reality, and the remaining hardcore supporters retreat back to /pol/.[/QUOTE] My worry is that if they do fracture and split, they'll just form a new group that's somehow more militaristic in their beliefs and their support for the candidate that's willing to pander to that can of mixed nuts.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;51185260]Hopefully they fracture and fall apart, with most rejoining reality[/QUOTE] No way, they're too fanatical [QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;51185260]the remaining hardcore supporters retreat back to /pol/.[/QUOTE] This will happen
[QUOTE=archangel125;51184057]Libertarians are fools. It's trickle-down economics times a million, the same economic model that has put America in the mess it is today, that is responsible for the poverty, the class inequality, the crime in the country. More of the same doesn't suddenly make a country successful - You're removing regulations, worker protections, social security, and expecting corporations to treat employees fairly out of the goodness of their hearts? Ridiculous. Gary Johnson may appear to be socially progressive, but he's a hypocrite.[/QUOTE] The sad thing is, he was governor of my state and I can't recall anything that he's done here. :v:
[QUOTE=Zero-Point;51185586]The sad thing is, he was governor of my state and I can't recall anything that he's done here. :v:[/QUOTE] I doubt Libertarians can get anything done, they're seen as heathens by the right for their social policy and morons by the left for their economic policy.
[QUOTE=Rossy167;51185664]I doubt Libertarians can get anything done, they're seen as heathens by the right for their social policy and morons by the left for their economic policy.[/QUOTE] Know my pain. I'm like 2/3 Green and 1/3 Libertarian. If the conversation is about social policy, people think I sound like an insane luddite who wants to replace all vaccinations with fuckin' crystals or something. If the conversation is about economics, people assume I'm an edgy fifteen year old AnCap who jerks it to a photo of Ayn Rand five times a day. Trying to debate politics with strangers on the internet is bad times for everyone.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;51183812]Despite the fact that he seems like a genuinely good guy, he's a Libertarian. That's an automatic lose in my book.[/QUOTE][QUOTE=Rossy167;51183999]Why do people like Gary Johnson, he wants to privatise [b]literally[/b] everything.[/QUOTE][QUOTE=archangel125;51184057]Libertarians are fools. It's trickle-down economics times a million, the same economic model that has put America in the mess it is today, that is responsible for the poverty, the class inequality, the crime in the country. More of the same doesn't suddenly make a country successful - You're removing regulations, worker protections, social security, and expecting corporations to treat employees fairly out of the goodness of their hearts? Ridiculous. Gary Johnson may appear to be socially progressive, but he's a hypocrite.[/QUOTE]Actual pretty much a libertarian here, no we don't want to "privatize everything" so please, keep the talking out of your asses to a minimum. Just because some of us are hard-line on the "free market will fix errythang!" schtick doesn't mean all of us are, but universally we favor less regulation rather than more because we don't believe in the government micromanaging people's lives. Why? [I]Authoritarian dictatorships scare the shit out of us[/I] and any step toward that, even a reasonable little one, makes us grip the table with a concerned expression like we're about to experience a 9.0 earthquake. I have seen archangel125 in particular bitch about the corruption in my government and now you're saying we're fools for wanting less of that? We have these concerns for a fucking reason. Gary Johnson is pretty light on the libertarian thing anyway, and so far this is the kind of shit people start and end with when discussing [I]his actual policy:[/I] [QUOTE=mcharest;51184079]God only knows. Johnson is an objectively terrible candidate policy-wise.[/QUOTE]God only knows what the fuck you think "objectively" means. Even if he was 100% big-L Libertarian and wanted to turn the entire country into some cyberpunk corporatocracy [B]I must remind everyone here that the president is not a monarch, nothing he or she says or wants to do is even remotely possible without the consent and approval of congress. Period.[/B] This is all on top of the simple fact that no, he doesn't want to do all of that and no, he isn't going to abolish social security or whatever dumb bullshit you think he wants to do. (actually he wants to maintain the solvency specifically so it doesn't collapse and fuck over the people on it right now) I know we're easy to pick on but for fuck's sake if you're going to be sanctimonious and pretend like you're the smartest people in the room (you're not by the way) [I]at least[/I] understand how our actual government works.
[QUOTE=Rossy167;51185664]I doubt Libertarians can get anything done, they're seen as heathens by the right for their social policy and morons by the left for their economic policy.[/QUOTE] To be fair though a huge chunk of the American right really don't care about Libertarian economics regarding things like the budget and policy. They only pretend to. They'll talk all day about cutting taxes and reducing spending but if you look at the last few decades, they love raising spending AND cutting taxes.
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;51185820]To be fair though a huge chunk of the American right really don't care about Libertarian economics regarding things like the budget and policy. They only pretend to. They'll talk all day about cutting taxes and reducing spending but if you look at the last few decades, they love raising spending AND cutting taxes.[/QUOTE]That's because our government is corrupt and our society is filled with morons, unfortunately this is just the way things seem to work. When it all comes tumbling down, either gradually or spectacularly, we'll vow never ever to let that happen again and we'll mean it. Then we'll all grow old, die, and the next generation will come along and they'll have never experienced what a colossal fuckup we endured so their attitudes will be a little different, as will be the case for their children and their children's children. Eventually society will become complacent and our misfortune will be some silly shit that happened a long time ago, and then they'll make all of the mistakes our grandparents made. All we can hope to do is keep taping this shitty mess together and hope it lasts another generation, maybe fix it up here and there, but the end result seems to be inevitable.
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;51185803][I]Authoritarian dictatorships scare the shit out of us[/I][/QUOTE] I don't think the EPA is going to set up prison camps anytime soon. And a totally free market will just lead to corporate dominance possibly on-par with an authoritarian government. Without regulations, they would also destabilize the climate worse than we are, and you can bet Governments will start turning authoritarian when society starts to crumble as a result.
libertarian policies have been tried in america for donkeys years and the experiences shows that they're usually dismal failures that fail to either improve economic prosperity or individual liberty
Frankly if you think regulations in the corporate environment are baby steps to authoritarian dictatorships, you're a bit paranoid. Corporations aren't people and clipping their wings to stop the most egregiously unethical practices (like cutting corners wrt safety, workers rights, and responsible marketing) is not the same as nor on the same slippery slope as dictating what private citizens can and can't do. Libertarians seem to trust corporations implicitly while being scared shitless of their elected representatives
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;51186155]I don't think the EPA is going to set up prison camps anytime soon. And a totally free market will just lead to corporate dominance possibly on-par with an authoritarian government. Without regulations, they would also destabilize the climate worse than we are, and you can bet Governments will start turning authoritarian when society starts to crumble as a result.[/QUOTE]What is this completely stupid horseshit? Here, I answered you and I'll even do you a solid by helping your tired little eyes see the most important part:[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;51185803][I]Authoritarian dictatorships scare the shit out of us[/I] and any step toward that, [B][U][I]even a reasonable little one,[/I][/U][/B] makes us grip the table with a concerned expression like we're about to experience a 9.0 earthquake.[/QUOTE] I know you fucking read it, it was in the same goddamn sentence that you quoted from. [QUOTE=Dr. Ethan Asia;51186725]Frankly if you think regulations in the corporate environment are baby steps to authoritarian dictatorships, you're a bit paranoid.[/QUOTE]They are. Every single step to regulate is one step away from "absolute freedom" and one step toward "not freedom." What's so hard to understand about this? Surely it isn't such advanced political theory that you're completely unable to grasp it, and as I demonstrated above you're missing a critical aspect of my statement and I'm pretty sure you're doing it on purpose. Furthermore in a completely free market? Bailouts wouldn't exist. We're pretty much universally against any measure to protect corporations from insolvency and [U]especially[/U] against measures that protect them from competition. You're misunderstanding our position and you demonstrate so here:[QUOTE]Libertarians seem to trust corporations implicitly while being scared shitless of their elected representatives[/QUOTE] [B]We don't trust corporations, we trust [U]consumers.[/U][/B] Corporations are held to the same dog-eat-dog standard under a free market as everyone else is, so if a big company or big bank needs money to keep from going under then tough shit maybe they shouldn't have sucked at their job. Sure some libertarians and anarcho-capitalists take it to the extreme and up and declare that [I]all[/I] regulations are inherently terrible and shouldn't be tolerated while most of us are suspicious but are willing to relax when they show promise. I personally think the EPA (an often cited agency for whatever idiotic reason) does a fine job of providing a service to citizens in keeping the environment safe, as do a great many other people and yes, even ""No Roads" Johnson" agrees with this position. You've brought up worker protections and other aspects of positive regulations that do good things for society at large, this is another example of things a lot of libertarians (even some "big L" ones) wouldn't touch and indeed wouldn't [I]want[/I] to touch. My big problem with unions is they're political entities that get involved in local elections, which has historically bred corruption both in them and in city governments and I think that shouldn't be a thing. (corporate personhood shouldn't be a thing either, it's an example of corporate-based corruption in government which I'm against and a form of protectionism which I'm also against) I know you and Someguy thought your posts were sick zingers but I'll be honest with you, it just showed me you're just shitposting because if you had kept reading [I]for merely a few more words[/I] you would have seen the word "reasonable" and understood what I meant. Tell me, am I really supposed to show you some respect here? When you can't even do me a solid and read a sentence fully? Frankly if you can't do that then you don't get to talk shit. I'll be going away for a couple of days, but I'll be honest with you I don't expect to see any improvement over this dumb shitposting you've placed in front of me when I come back.
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;51189562]They are. Every single step to regulate is one step away from "absolute freedom" and one step toward "not freedom." What's so hard to understand about this? Surely it isn't such advanced political theory that you're completely unable to grasp it, and as I demonstrated above you're missing a critical aspect of my statement and I'm pretty sure you're doing it on purpose.[/quote] this the great tragedy of libertarianism - the fact that it cannot discriminate these actions. everything is roughly hewn into "that which makes us free" and "that which makes us not free" with their associated value judgements. somehow the idea that individual freedom (and its maximisation) is the sole rule of ethics and government. to put it very bluntly, freedom isn't the only good thing in life. libertarianism is much like the rightwing version of college communism - it offers the followers (fraudulent) intellectual security and justification for views which aren't backed up by observations of reality. in the same way that marxism condenses all of life and experience down to the economics of the class struggle, it also likes to give the followers a sense of moral superiority over the masses who follow the donkey or the elephant [quote][B]We don't trust corporations, we trust [U]consumers.[/U][/B] Corporations are held to the same dog-eat-dog standard under a free market as everyone else is, so if a big company or big bank needs money to keep from going under then tough shit maybe they shouldn't have sucked at their job.[/quote] the problem is that this historically never really worked in the 19th century when no food regulations existed you could stretch out flour with chalk powder, use substandard ingredients, etc without anybody being the wiser for it. purified cocaine and heroin was sold over counters as medicine for children without regulatory agencies you are forced to rely on reviews and consumer watchdog groups which (in an environment without strong regulations) are susceptible to being bought out or influenced by the entities whose services they review. consumers can't (and don't) spend all of their time researching companies and regulatory agencies whose regulatory agencies might be bought out. the second big problem is natural monopolies. it's generally very difficult to displace a natural monopoly [quote]Frankly if you can't do that then you don't get to talk shit. I'll be going away for a couple of days, but I'll be honest with you I don't expect to see any improvement over this dumb shitposting you've placed in front of me when I come back.[/QUOTE] as a minor aside, you seem to block out the arguments of people you don't like - with the excuse that the other person is shitposting. rather than calling everybody a dumb shitposter (which seems to be half the time in your instance) it might be more prudent to spend more time thinking up of increasingly elaborate hyperbole that serves as a replacement for an actual argument
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;51189562]I know you fucking read it, it was in the same goddamn sentence that you quoted from. [/QUOTE] You realize that sentence makes you seem extremely paranoid, right? You sound like "It's horrible that there's a law requiring people to wear seat belts to prevent themselves from becoming flying projectiles, next thing you know the government will legally require drivers to get a license to even drive. Soon we'll have no freedoms left under this tyrannical rule." Perhaps that isn't your intent, but that's what it comes off as. Further, as shit as the government is, you need only look at the working conditions for outsourced labor in third-world countries to see how little companies actually care about the people working for them, and how they would happily treat their employees in the states if not for the laws.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.