2016 USA Presidential election thread I: The warm-up

[Andalusian girls]

and antagonizing the people you're trying to convince is going to work? no offense, but this sounds like the equivalent of those guys trying to get a date by putting the person down until their ego is so crushed they'll go out with you.

changing someone's beliefs isn't something that's done in a day, or sometimes even a week. sometimes it's just not possible at all, but belittling them isn't going to get you anywhere, it's just going to make them balk. if you calmly explain your reasoning and stay consistant with it, you may get through to them enough to change their position, or at least consider your own. as soon as you pull the holier than thou card though, you're going to slam that door shut.

and personally, i don't think respect is something that needs to be "earned". i give my respect freely until a person shows that they don't deserve it, i dont try to look down on them because they haven't proven themselves to me yet. could you imagine a world where everyone treated others without respect until they "proved" themselves to each other? don't think i'd like to deal with that, myself.

well said

[archibaldcrane]

Bernie supporters don't need to change their beliefs, they simply need to vote for the candidate who is closest to the things they believe in.

It's really that simple.

[Sho]

Bernie supporters don't need to change their beliefs, they simply need to vote for the candidate who is closest to the things they believe in.

It's really that simple.

Pretty much this.

[Blubbartron]

Bernie supporters don't need to change their beliefs, they simply need to vote for the candidate who is closest to the things they believe in.

It's really that simple.

I'm still baffled by the fact that you can state this and not acknowledge the conundrum of discerning between where a politician's beliefs actually are and what things they simply said to get nominated. Everyone agrees that politicians run to the left or right in order to get nominated and then hurry back to the center for the general election. So if both Trump and Hillary are lying about their beliefs, how do we know who's closest to our beliefs?

[Greatguardian]

and antagonizing the people you're trying to convince is going to work? no offense, but this sounds like the equivalent of those guys trying to get a date by putting the person down until their ego is so crushed they'll go out with you.

changing someone's beliefs isn't something that's done in a day, or sometimes even a week. sometimes it's just not possible at all, but belittling them isn't going to get you anywhere, it's just going to make them balk. if you calmly explain your reasoning and stay consistant with it, you may get through to them enough to change their position, or at least consider your own. as soon as you pull the holier than thou card though, you're going to slam that door shut.

and personally, i don't think respect is something that needs to be "earned". i give my respect freely until a person shows that they don't deserve it, i dont try to look down on them because they haven't proven themselves to me yet. could you imagine a world where everyone treated others without respect until they "proved" themselves to each other? don't think i'd like to deal with that, myself.

The difference between Hilldogs and Bernouts is rarely a difference in core beliefs. I occupied wall st (yeahhh, namedrop hipster lib cred). I also voted Hillary in the primary. Would I like to see an America with universal health care and tuition-free higher education? Hell yeah. But I have enough self-awareness to realize that I'm only one of 300 million people living in this country, and tens of millions of those people - who have just as much a right as I do to decide the future of our nation - don't want to do that right now.

So what can I do? I can decide that my being right is all that matters and try my darnedest to knock down the sheeple lined up against me so that they can't stand in my way of reshaping America in my image. Or I can treat these people and their positions with a modicum of respect and try to reach a mutually acceptable compromise that creates meaningful, if minor, progress for my agenda one election cycle at a time.

Or, you know, I could pretend these people don't exist and that any electoral losses on my side are engineered by a corporate illuminati hellbent on brainwashing poor people and suppressing liberal voters. Whatever floats your boat.

[D44kpunk]

I'm still baffled by the fact that you can state this and not acknowledge the conundrum of discerning between where a politician's beliefs actually are and what things they simply said to get nominated. Everyone agrees that politicians run to the left or right in order to get nominated and then hurry back to the center for the general election. So if both Trump and Hillary are lying about their beliefs, how do we know who's closest to our beliefs?

nah just ignore that, it's all good.

america, land of settling

The difference between Hilldogs and Bernouts is rarely a difference in core beliefs. I occupied wall st (yeahhh, namedrop hipster lib cred). I also voted Hillary in the primary. Would I like to see an America with universal health care and tuition-free higher education? Hell yeah. But I have enough self-awareness to realize that I'm only one of 300 million people living in this country, and tens of millions of those people - who have just as much a right as I do to decide the future of our nation - don't want to do that right now.

So what can I do? I can decide that my being right is all that matters and try my darnedest to knock down the sheeple lined up against me so that they can't stand in my way of reshaping America in my image. Or I can treat these people and their positions with a modicum of respect and try to reach a mutually acceptable compromise that creates meaningful, if minor, progress for my agenda one election cycle at a time.

Or, you know, I could pretend these people don't exist and that any electoral losses on my side are engineered by a corporate illuminati hellbent on brainwashing poor people and suppressing liberal voters. Whatever floats your boat.

basically you're saying you would vote for bernie but he's too radical for america and won't win so you're not going to. you've accepted a sad fate i'm surprised you'd be an activist at all

[Greatguardian]

I'm still baffled by the fact that you can state this and not acknowledge the conundrum of discerning between where a politician's beliefs actually are and what things they simply said to get nominated. Everyone agrees that politicians run to the left or right in order to get nominated and then hurry back to the center for the general election. So if both Trump and Hillary are lying about their beliefs, how do we know who's closest to our beliefs?

idk man if only one or more of these candidates had decades of history in public life from which to draw some sort of conclusion based on patterns of past behavior.

[Dotsudoku]

seriously.

the we don't know who she really is! non-point isn't deserving of respect at this point. It's tired and invalid. If you don't know what kind of administration she'd have, it's because you don't want to.

[Blubbartron]

seriously.

the we don't know who she really is! non-point isn't deserving of respect at this point. It's tired and invalid. If you don't know what kind of administration she'd have, it's because you don't want to.

The problem is I do think I know what kind of administration she would have, and it's far more conservative, and far more militaristic than I'm comfortable with. At that point, I'm willing to risk the gamble on an unknown who said some prescient shit years before running for office, and is willing to acknowledge the corporate and political corruption that's ruining the country when no one else says boo about it.

[Gredival]

and antagonizing the people you're trying to convince is going to work? no offense, but this sounds like the equivalent of those guys trying to get a date by putting the person down until their ego is so crushed they'll go out with you.

changing someone's beliefs isn't something that's done in a day, or sometimes even a week. sometimes it's just not possible at all, but belittling them isn't going to get you anywhere, it's just going to make them balk. if you calmly explain your reasoning and stay consistant with it, you may get through to them enough to change their position, or at least consider your own. as soon as you pull the holier than thou card though, you're going to slam that door shut.

No, the point is nothing is going to work. I've written pages complete with cited sources both defending Hillary and pointing out Bernie's flaws (unelectable, more dishonest in his campaigning, just as much a "politician" as HRC, unable to deliver on platform, flat out terrible policy positions)

You know what happens? No response, then two or three pages later when it's "safe" the people I called out come back to dump more irrelevant spiel about how they just can't "trust" Hillary so they can't vote for her.

So I'm done trying to convince anyone. I'm just here now to point out idiocy for my own entertainment.

and personally, i don't think respect is something that needs to be "earned". i give my respect freely until a person shows that they don't deserve it, i dont try to look down on them because they haven't proven themselves to me yet. could you imagine a world where everyone treated others without respect until they "proved" themselves to each other? don't think i'd like to deal with that, myself.

The way society functions, one can impute that certain persons are worthy of respect by nature of their position. For example, a licensed physician by the very nature of their profession should be given deference with respect to medical opinions.

By those same rules, I can impute that Bernie or Busters are definitively NOT worthy of my respect. By their very position they have positively identified themselves to be politically naive, overly idealistic, or both. So no, I wouldn't given them any respect. Just like how they refuse to give HRC any because there's one speech she gave at Goldman Sachs that they didn't get to hear.

Oh, also? If someone needs me to explain what's correct nicely to change their mind, then they aren't worthy of my respect either. Rightness and wrongness aren't contingent on manners.

[Minions]

The problem is I do think I know what kind of administration she would have, and it's far more conservative, and far more militaristic than I'm comfortable with. At that point, I'm willing to risk the gamble on an unknown who said some prescient shit years before running for office, and is willing to acknowledge the corporate and political corruption that's ruining the country when no one else says boo about it.

So what you are saying is, Trump is less conservative than Clinton? Cause them are the the options.... I don't know if you noticed, but Trump is pretty much willing to "destroy" the free market, ban muslims, all hispanics are illegals and are sent here from Mexico to commit crimes.... and women are disgusting because they use the bathroom. These don't exactly seem like a bastion of liberal ideals.

[Greatguardian]

basically you're saying you would vote for bernie but he's too radical for america and won't win so you're not going to. you've accepted a sad fate i'm surprised you'd be an activist at all

I agree with many of Bernie's policy positions in theory (though he's still a retard on Nuclear energy). That doesn't mean I'd vote for him. Candidates are more than the sum of their policy platforms. I don't think Bernie would make a very effective president. His complete and utter inability to compromise is antithetical to the position. Presidents don't govern in a vacuum. Voters don't have the luxury of pretending the other 50% of the country doesn't exist when making decisions about how to best further their agenda.

[Krandor]

all hispanics are illegals

I find it amusing that people still somehow believe this, or the even more entertaining versions where he apparently he hates all people of color.

[Blubbartron]

So what you are saying is, Trump is less conservative than Clinton? Cause them are the the options....

I think Trump is an unknown quantity. It's a gamble to vote for him, but if the sure thing looks shitty, even a gamble can seem better.

So far, the only argument that even remotely holds weight is the SCOTUS argument. Everything else has been bullshit. The fact that Hillary Clinton would be nominating upwards of 3-4 justices is absolutely huge, and she's definitely more likely to nominate socially liberal judges. The thing I haven't made up my mind on is whether or not her nominations would have more rational opinions on how to interpret the constitution (living document or writing in stone), and their opinions on corrupting influences in politics (namely money). My gut tells me that Hillary's nominees would be DNC shills in the same way that justice Clarence Thomas is a GOP shill (although shills aren't generally silent, so maybe there's a better word). But this is getting into quasi-conspiracy shit. The only real, honest answer is no one knows for sure what happens.

[Greatguardian]

The only correct answer is Justice Barack Hussein Obama. First black President to also be a Justice of the United States. That's worth at least two more Nobel prizes.

[Tyrath]

Trump isn't a for sure shitty looking option? What am I reading?

[Minions]

I find it amusing that people still somehow believe this, or the even more entertaining versions where he apparently he hates all people of color.

Are you disputing his stupid comments, or just don't believes what he says? lol.

“When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending the best,” he said during the announcement. “They're not sending you, they're sending people that have lots of problems and they're bringing those problems. They're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime. They're rapists and some, I assume, are good people, but I speak to border guards and they're telling us what we're getting."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015...prised-by.html

or how about
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b0c818f618904b

"Sadly, the overwhelming amount of violent crime in our major cities is committed by blacks and hispanics-a tough subject-must be discussed."
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...90428675796992

Personally he says all kinds of outrageous shit. The fact people even entertain him as a candidate blows my mind. If hes elected, enjoy standing in quicksand.

[Psion]

No, the point is nothing is going to work. I've written pages complete with cited sources both defending Hillary and pointing out Bernie's flaws (unelectable, more dishonest in his campaigning, just as much a "politician" as HRC, unable to deliver on platform, flat out terrible policy positions)

You know what happens? No response, then two or three pages later when it's "safe" the people I called out come back to dump more irrelevant spiel about how they just can't "trust" Hillary so they can't vote for her.

So I'm done trying to convince anyone. I'm just here now to point out idiocy for my own entertainment.



The way society functions, one can impute that certain persons are worthy of respect by nature of their position. For example, a licensed physician by the very nature of their profession should be given deference with respect to medical opinions.

By those same rules, I can impute that Bernie or Busters are definitively NOT worthy of my respect. By their very position they have positively identified themselves to be politically naive, overly idealistic, or both. So no, I wouldn't given them any respect. Just like how they refuse to give HRC any because there's one speech she gave at Goldman Sachs that they didn't get to hear.

Oh, also? If someone needs me to explain what's correct nicely to change their mind, then they aren't worthy of my respect either. Rightness and wrongness aren't contingent on manners.

Well, it might help if you cut the pages down to a couple paragraphs when possible i mean, the longer your post the more likely it is someones going to go td;lr and simply ignore it because it's too much of a pain to respond to everything in your post. it might help to pare it down to a more easy to digest paragraph or two, maybe make one point at a time and give them time to digest and respond to it. once you break out the essay post, people start having flashbacks to english class and mentally run away screaming.

Also, what happens when you meet a licensed physician who's a bernie or buster? am i the only person who goes around and interacts with other people without first asking them their profession so i can accurately judge whether they're worthy of my respect? i dunno, it just seems too much work to me to go around trying to find out everything about a person before deciding they've "earned" my respect on something. id rather just treat them respectfully and respectfully debate with their arguments instead of blowing them off out of hand because they're a burger flipper or homeless or have a different political viewpoint from me. once i start setting standards for someone to be treated with respect, i build a wall between myself and others, and i feel like we have too many walls dividing us all already.

[Byrthnoth]

In the day to day, I mostly interact with highly educated people and know only one of those people who covertly supports Bernie. I have, however, overheard two undergrad conversations on the bus in support of Bernie. I also have one facebook friend that supported Bernie pretty vehemently until two weeks ago or so. Beyond that, my only interaction with Bernie supporters is on BG. Sum up those interactions and you get a fairly unflattering profile of my Berniebros.

That said, their votes count as much as mine in the general election so it makes more sense to try and encourage them to vote for Hillary than to point out how retarded they are.

[Greatguardian]

Also, what happens when you meet a licensed physician who's a bernie or buster? am i the only person who goes around and interacts with other people without first asking them their profession so i can accurately judge whether they're worthy of my respect? i dunno, it just seems too much work to me to go around trying to find out everything about a person before deciding they've "earned" my respect on something. id rather just treat them respectfully and respectfully debate with their arguments instead of blowing them off out of hand because they're a burger flipper or homeless or have a different political viewpoint from me. once i start setting standards for someone to be treated with respect, i build a wall between myself and others, and i feel like we have too many walls dividing us all already.

Re-read his post.