• Announcements

    • Robin

      Welcome!   03/05/2016

      Welcome, everyone, to the new 910CMX Community Forums. I'm still working on getting them running, so things may change.  If you're a 910 Comic creator and need your forum recreated, let me know and I'll get on it right away.  I'll do my best to make this new place as fun as the last one!
The Old Hack

Political Discussion Thread (READ FIRST POST)

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Troacctid said:

Chicago, MLA, and Associated Press style guides all say to use one space after a period. There's no reason whatsoever to use two. I will fight you.

 

3 minutes ago, The Old Hack said:

The Moderator: But not in this thread, please.

See you in the grammar thread.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a feeling that watching tonight's debate is going to be a lot like watching a train wreck. Horrifying, but so incredibly odd that you can't look away.

Hell, the pre-debate coverage is already that way. Why are CNN and MSNBC treating it like ESPN's College Gameday?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, CritterKeeper said:

You poke fun, but I have heard, over and over, Trump supporters who basically say, "I know Trump will be a disaster, but I feel like destroying the whole system is better than letting it continue!"  They basically are choosing the Giant Meteor.  It saddens me that so many people have so little faith in humanity and the future, that they honestly want to destroy what we've built up.

For some of us, sadly, it's a question of which major candidate will bring the lesser disaster - particularly in the long term.

Usually it's a question of whether there's enough difference in how bad a disaster each is likely to bring, to even matter. In this case I am of the opinion that the answer to THAT question is a very solid "yes".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I found the most disturbing was the insinuation that he will not accept a final vote total that goes against him in the election and instead will insist that his defeat could only come about via massive electoral fraud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about how he condemned the practice of ripping babies from the womb just a few days before birth? Apparently Trump thinks that a C-section is a type of abortion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Troacctid said:

How about how he condemned the practice of ripping babies from the womb just a few days before birth? Apparently Trump thinks that a C-section is a type of abortion.

Or he thinks that babies with invariably fatal, miserably painful birth defects should have to be born to a short life of suffering horribly, their paents acutely aware of every minute of it, instead of being quckly and safely euthanized before that point arrives.  Because ain't nobody doing late-term abortions just for convenience's sake.  (Oh, unless maybe they wanted to do it when it was a little cluster of cells, but couldn't afford to travel to where such services are safe and legal....but doctors generally set the limits to at most the point of viability, so even if someone sought an abortion "moments before birth" on a healthy fetus, it's not going to happen....)

Hmm, I fear most discussions in this area become far too heated far too quickly.  I think it would be fascinating to have an polite, open and honest discussion about it, but such is almost never the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dick Morris (Full disclosure a conservative source these days) has observed several times that Trump gets in trouble for the things he said, but Clinton gets in trouble for the things she did...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Vorlonagent said:

Dick Morris (Full disclosure a conservative source these days) has observed several times that Trump gets in trouble for the things he said, but Clinton gets in trouble for the things she did...

Strongly disagree. Trump has done many, many bad things; Clinton gets in trouble even when she doesn't do anything. Relevant John Oliver: 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Troacctid said:

How about how he condemned the practice of ripping babies from the womb just a few days before birth? Apparently Trump thinks that a C-section is a type of abortion.

It sounds like a stereotypical bit of absolutist hyperbole to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a some what lighter note, I now have found a name for sirrah Trump, thanks to Howard Tayler's screamingly funny blog post "My people are not sportsball people."

Kumquat Pretender

Context:

Quote

And the game is interrupted by heraldic noise from the Kumquat Pretender, who seeks to become emperor. NOT WHY I WATCH SPORTSBALL, YO.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Vorlonagent said:

I'm saying we've thrown these aspects of US greatness out as fundamentally flawed and are now wondering why the US is faltering.  It's in vogue to favor of government nannies interfering in our lives to try to make everything "fair" and "nice". 

Not bad.  A 7 paragraph rant with only one possible insult phrase.  (Underlined and bold above). Better than I do most of the time.  See post right above this and my frequent use of the term "scum suckers" with regards to a select class of over the phone and email spammers.  Just for what it's worth I agree with your 7 paragraphs, just pointing out the danger of terms that might, repeat might, be classed as insulting.  I took Hack to task over his pinging me in a PM for

 

SJW

but not

 

Right wing loon

back during the Sad/Rabid Puppies "debate" on the Hugo awards.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mlooney said:

Not bad.  A 7 paragraph rant with only one possible insult phrase.  (Underlined and bold above). Better than I do most of the time.  See post right above this and my frequent use of the term "scum suckers" with regards to a select class of over the phone and email spammers.  Just for what it's worth I agree with your 7 paragraphs, just pointing out the danger of terms that might, repeat might, be classed as insulting.  I took Hack to task over his pinging me in a PM for

  Hide contents

SJW

but not

  Hide contents

Right wing loon

back during the Sad/Rabid Puppies "debate" on the Hugo awards.

 

I apparently missed that debate.  Or most of it anyway if one post I'm thinking of came from that.  I'm probably happier. 

"Government nannies" was intended to connote the common-usage phrase "nanny state", so I thought it would pass muster.  

OTOH, letting my invective stray toward insult phrases is a bad habit I'll want to keep a closer reign on.  I've gone over that line at least once here.  I much prefer to live or die by my reasoning in any event. 

It's not like being one of very few conservatives on a liberal board is a new experience...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Vorlonagent said:

It's not like being one of very few conservatives on a liberal board is a new experience...

While I am also a conservative, I'm really not happy about tomorrow's choices.  The be brutal, right now I would rather have Hillary than sirrah Trump.  One of the things that is making me slightly less worried about tomorrow is that my go to odds site has had sirrah's chances falling all day.  Still to high, but a downward trend is, for him at least, freaking good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mlooney said:

While I am also a conservative, I'm really not happy about tomorrow's choices.  The be brutal, right now I would rather have Hillary than sirrah Trump.  One of the things that is making me slightly less worried about tomorrow is that my go to odds site has had sirrah's chances falling all day.  Still to high, but a downward trend is, for him at least, freaking good.

I'm less worried by Trump, but it's definitely a pick-your-poison election. 

With Ms. Clinton, I believe her life is on a self-destructive path and I don't want her taking the US along for the ride.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Vorlonagent said:

With Ms. Clinton, I believe her life is on a self-destructive path and I don't want her taking the US along for the ride.

With the House in Republican hands and it being a toss up on the Senate, there is limited amount of damage she can do.  Other than get us into a war with Russia, which while not a zero chance thing, it isn't real high odds either.  To be honest, at least to me, less than the chances of me getting a lamictal rash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, mlooney said:

With the House in Republican hands and it being a toss up on the Senate, there is limited amount of damage she can do.  Other than get us into a war with Russia, which while not a zero chance thing, it isn't real high odds either.  To be honest, at least to me, less than the chances of me getting a lamictal rash.

That's if Ms. Clinton chooses to allow the Constitution to limit her options.  President Obama didn't always.

That's before we talk about contributions to the Clinton Foundation altering US policy...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Vorlonagent said:

That's if Ms. Clinton chooses to allow the Constitution to limit her options.  President Obama didn't always.

That's before we talk about contributions to the Clinton Foundation altering US policy...

All presidents push up against their Constitutional limits about as hard as they can, but it slanders most of them to say they didn't stay within its limits.  You may disagree where those limits *should* be, but that's not the same thing at all.  They do have habit of changing their own opinions on where those are from their time in Congress.  Aside: have we had a President other than Taft who sat on the Supreme Court?  It'd be interesting to see if they switched back.  Obama is still fairly young and a former Constitutional Law professor....

And contributions affect policy?  Say it isn't so. 

Seriously with the bloody obvious influence exerted by donors to political campaigns, we're supposed to get worked up over contributions to a charity?  If donors to the Clinton campaign, or people paying them actual speaking fees, aren't getting more for their money than donors to the charity, the Clintons must be paragons of virtue as politicians go.  But nobody wants to call much attention to that sort of thing, might encourage campaign finance reform or something.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no evidence of any Clinton Foundation quid pro quo. I remember this because there was that huge news story where the AP did loads of research and came up empty-handed. It was a whole big thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, there's a long, long history of accusations being leveled against Senator Clinton, thorough investigations being conducted, often by her opposition, and them turning up nothing, yet the accusations get a hundred times the media coverage as the exonerations get.  If she were really as crooked as Trump claims, you'd think they'd have been able to prove at least one crime by now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My big issue with Hillary is she's not likely to change the current status quo and we really need it. Even a proper democracy needs the right balance of corruption to operate correctly and that includes things like supporting education, healthcare, and infrastructure to ensure plenty of productivity to milk.

I'm pretty sure if Trump change our status quo it's be for the worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, she's probably going to change the status quo in a lot of ways. Presidents can't unilaterally pass legislation, but they can sign executive orders and appoint federal officials, including, this term, at least one Supreme Court Justice. So she can effect some real changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now