• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

US President 2016 - the Great Horse Race

Keith&Co. said:
Will Wiley said:
Funny...you think a President is good because he killed children. He just didn't kill as many children as another President. Repulsive
Click to expand...
Nope. Doesn't look like that's what he thinks. Looks like there's a period in there. (He killed fewer children) is a discrete statement from (go down as a great president).
No one said 'great president BECAUSE he killed children.
Except you.
Click to expand...
Thank you for pointing that out.
 
Cheerful Charlie said:
In August and September, polls showed Trump soundly beating Clinton in Texas. But some polls since October now have Trump barely ahead, well within the margin of error.

http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-texas-president-trump-vs-clinton 2%, 3%, 4%.

With 3 weeks to go, this is interesting indeed. Could Trump actually lose in Texas?
Click to expand...
Needless to say, but I'll do it anyway, losing Texas to Clinton is a 76 EV swing. It paves a road to make it possible for Trump to fail in passing 100 EVs.

More importantly, if and its a big if the polls are that tight in Texas, there are a lot of house seats to be lost by the Republicans in that state. The Democrats feel the suburbs are the road to win the House, I've always felt that Texas was the second road to the House majority.
 
Hasn't Texas historically been a blue state until relatively recently?
 
Jimmy Higgins said:
... losing Texas to Clinton is a 76 EV swing. It paves a road to make it possible for Trump to fail in passing 100 EVs.
Click to expand...

To die-hard trumpsuckers, Trump getting <100 EVs would be proof positive of a rigged election that Trump should actually have won, because that is IMPOSSIBLE without cheating.
 
Sarpedon said:
My goodness, it took you two, three weeks to come up with that response?

If what you want is an admission that I can't prove there are nazi sympathizers attending the convention, you have it, I can't prove it.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the retraction. That's the point I was reacting to, that's the point you didn't want to respond to. I had to keep putting the question to you until you ran out of excuses and finally addressed it.

Sarpedon said:
I suspect that there are, because of the similarities in ideology that I carefully explained.
Click to expand...

Well, "carefully explained" is a funny way of saying "glossed over with equivocations and terms designed to obscure what I'm actually saying."

And your careful vagueness wasn't the topic I was addressing. Just your admittedly false assertion of nazi sympathizers at libertarian conventions.
 
Last night I came to the realization that everything Donald Trump says makes perfect sense once you realize that he lives in The Upside Down.

Think about it.


Trump 2016: Stranger Things Are Happening!
 
Jason Harvestdancer said:
Well, "carefully explained" is a funny way of saying "glossed over with equivocations and terms designed to obscure what I'm actually saying."

And your careful vagueness wasn't the topic I was addressing. Just your admittedly false assertion of nazi sympathizers at libertarian conventions.
Click to expand...

I find it amusing that you think the wild conspiracy theories you peddle have more grounding in reality than my observation that racism is endemic in far right political movements.

Given the fact that you outright deny the existence of right wing racist groups (i.e. the Alt-Right), I can't say that I care much for your opinion on the matter, as you obviously not informed or honest. Its one thing to deny that the libertarian party is a racist group; there's nothing intrinsically racist about it, the fact that some people attracted to it often also have racist ideals is probably purely incidental. However, by going further, and denying the existence of right wing racist organizations that clearly exist, shows a level of untruthfulness that is suggestive that your motives are suspect. It would be one thing if you denied that libertarianism was racist, while vigorously condemning other racist groups. But to deny that there are racist libertarians, while also denying that right wing racist groups exist, is very suspicious.

And yes, I am conflating racist with neo nazi. I don't care enough about either group to care about whether I am insulting them or not.
 
Neo-nazis are usually racists but racists aren't necessarily neo-nazis, ideologically speaking. There is overlap, but pushing that meme too far simply makes one less credible. After all, there is the religious right, the tea party crazies and blue-haired elders who listen to Rush. Not to mention crazies like the Alex Jones brigade, neo-confederates and angry militia wannabes. Trying to slap a single pejorative, neo-nazis on the rich field of ideological idiocy is fruitless.
 
Racism is basically dividing society into two groups, and declaring that you only support the group that contains you.

Libertarianism is a particular case of the same thing, wherein the group you support contains only one person.

Both ideologies tend to get watered down to 'the more like me you are, the less I despise you'. So it's not surprising that the two ideologies tend to have a large area of overlap in their membership.
 
Racism has a wide variety. of positions. From racism light (when they move in the neighborhood goes to hell), to dogmatic white power type racists (send them back to Africa). Again, there is a wide spectrum here.
 
Yes, I understand the distinction, and no, I don't care. Why should I respect the doubtless rich and fascinating diversity of a bunch of people who won't respect anyone else's diversity? Anti-government movements have been tainted by racists ever since the government started trying to prohibit racism in the public sphere. The only purpose I have for respecting their distinctions I might have would be if I could exploit those differences to get them to fight each other. Which seems fruitless because of the aforementioned amorphousness of the group.

Besides that, delving into the sewer that is racist thought in the USA is not worth my time.
 
Sarpedon said:
The only purpose I have for respecting their distinctions I might have would be if I could exploit those differences to get them to fight each other.
Click to expand...

Have you noticed what's happening to the Republican Party?
 
Sarpedon said:
Given the fact that you outright deny the existence of right wing racist groups (i.e. the Alt-Right), I can't say that I care much for your opinion on the matter, as you obviously not informed or honest.
Click to expand...

I did not deny them, I said I hadn't heard of them until Hillary mentioned them. If you're going to reference what I have written, please do so accurately. Or at least read what I have written before you reference it.
 
bilby said:
Racism is basically dividing society into two groups, and declaring that you only support the group that contains you.
Click to expand...

I disagree--racism can have more than two and those groups are divided into support, neutral, oppose.
 
Loren Pechtel said:
bilby said:
Racism is basically dividing society into two groups, and declaring that you only support the group that contains you.
Click to expand...

I disagree--racism can have more than two and those groups are divided into support, neutral, oppose.
Click to expand...
Um, he said 'racism is basically...' You're arguing that the oversimplification is overly simplistic?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom