2016 USA Presidential election thread I: The warm-up

[Serra]

White woman or African American -- which is worse to the south?

[Tyrath]

I don't know. I just don't think it will be enough to turn them blue.

Not that I see Carson actually making it as the nominee.

[Aksannyi]

African American woman.

Deep South Kryptonite. Get Condi Rice on the ballot.

[Gredival]

White woman or African American -- which is worse to the south?

I think a lot of them would still vote for Hilary because they would associate it with voting for her husband.

[Gabai]

People saying they like Ben Carson? Do people not know about his views on how "men who go into prison come out gay"? I would normally blow it off as a "republican" thing to say, but the dude has a Ph.d. He should know better. =\

Dude also pretty openly rejects evolution in the year 2015 and is staunchly religious. I'd rather a number of other GOP candidates get to the general than him.

[Gredival]

“The pattern we’ve seen under President Obama, disregarding the law, is really one of the most troubling aspects of this presidency, When he disagrees with the law…he simply refuses to comply with it.”

— Cruz, quoted by The Hill, in January 2014: thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/195190-cruz-obama-administration-has-been-lawless

“Today, judicial lawlessness crossed into judicial tyranny, Today, for the first time ever, the government arrested a Christian woman for living according to her faith. This is wrong. This is not America. I stand with Kim Davis. Unequivocally. I stand with every American that the Obama Administration is trying to force to chose between honoring his or her faith or complying with a lawless court decision.”

— Cruz, quoted by the Dallas Morning News today, on the Kentucky clerk who refuses to issue marriage certificates to gay couples: http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.c...ivocally.html/

[Tyrath]

Amusing but nothing shocking there lol.

[kuronosan]

People are fucking stupid. I'm so tired of hearing that the decision "has no law".

Yes it does. It's the fucking constitution. The interpretation is that gay people are protected citizens and now have the same rights women, blacks, (and next, new immigrants) fought to obtain. It's not "forcing people to go against their faith". It's telling people to be a fucking decent person and do the job they're being paid to do.

If you can't do that job, quit and do something else. Go work in a church, I don't give a shit. Just don't work in a government building and think your religion allows you the right to deny other citizens their rights.

I think I saw it on Facebook of all places, but someone posted "What if you saw this sign" and it showed a paper that read something like "According to my religion I cannot serve you because you aren't wearing head covering, and that is sacred to the Muslim faith. I will assist you once you return with proper attire". On-fucking-point. This is just a paltry political agenda and I'm frankly sick to death of all this stupid "I STAND WITH DAVIS" shit.

No you don't. You stand with bigoted bullshit and she should be removed from her office. You know, the same way people wanted Obama removed from office for violating the constitution and killing "American terrorists".

[thetruepandagod]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/muslim-f...lines-alcohol/

[Tyrath]

Same shit. Don't do the job if your religion doesn't allow you to do it to the best of your abilities. But I am sure she will get far more leeway because she's POC and SJWs will be all supporting her.

[Salodin]

She did have something worked out, her coworkers just handled the alcohol requests. One of em probably got annoyed about the extra work load and files the complaint though.

[kuronosan]

Same shit. Don't do the job if your religion doesn't allow you to do it to the best of your abilities. But I am sure she will get far more leeway because she's POC and SJWs will be all supporting her.

Except the point is the double standard.

[zoobernut]

Same shit. Don't do the job if your religion doesn't allow you to do it to the best of your abilities. But I am sure she will get far more leeway because she's POC and SJWs will be all supporting her.

First I don't think that it is ok for someone to perform a job that they can't handle. If you can't lift enough weight or perform the duties necessary for the job then you shouldn't be doing that job. Though it is important to keep an eye on employers and make sure that we are not opening a way for them to discriminate against people based on protected aspects of who they are.

And finally to me there is a difference between a government job where tax payer dollars are paying you to uphold various laws and a private sector job where you are not working on tax payers dime.

I think the answer here is that the company being private and she not being an elected official, they should have a lot more fluidity in how they handle the situation. Rather than letting her go they should give her the option to move into a different role that puts her in an area in the company that does not interfere with her religion rather than firing her.

[Churchill]

Ask Europe if this is how it starts.

[Ksandra]

I read a good article about religious exemptions and what is allowed in jobs and what is not, and it made a lot of sense to me. Basically, religious exemptions can only be made if they don't create extreme hardships to the customers/company. So like in the Muslim example, it was an easy fix and therefore should be granted.

Now, the article was made before Davis's verdict, and was actually defending her because her claim at the time was not that she'd refuse to issue licenses, but that she didn't want her name on the paperwork. She was willing to have it removed for both straight and gay couples. According to the article, that would have been an easy fix and should have been granted. At some point though, her defense switched to not wanting to issue licenses at all, which is a hardship because of her position.

I do think it makes a lot of sense. I mean, if a Muslim wants time to pray to Mecca, I think they should be allowed to if it is not going to affect the workflow too much.

Note: the article I read had a lot of legal jargon so it could have been giving me wrong info or I misunderstood it.

[Gredival]

The law imputes an obligation on an employer to "reasonably accommodate" the religious obligations of its employees unless doing so creates an "undue hardship." What and what does not constitute an undue hardship is a question of fact that must be evaluated in a case by case basis.

Shifting around employees' work duties is usually not a big deal so long as it does not mean that the employee can still perform the "essential functions" of his/her job. Davis is dead in the water on this issue though because her stance is so extreme there's no way it doesn't create such a hardship; basically to accommodate her, you have to effectively deny all homosexuals seeking marriage licenses in the county. Effectively, an essential function of her position must be eliminated because she objects to it.

[Ksandra]

The law imputes an obligation on an employer to "reasonably accommodate" the religious obligations of its employees unless doing so creates an "undue hardship." What and what does not constitute an undue hardship is a question of fact that must be evaluated in a case by case basis.

Shifting around employees' work duties is usually not a big deal so long as it does not mean that the employee can still perform the "essential functions" of his/her job. Davis is dead in the water on this issue though because her stance is so extreme there's no way it doesn't create such a hardship; basically to accommodate her, you have to effectively deny all homosexuals seeking marriage licenses in the county. Effectively, an essential function of her position must be eliminated because she objects to it.

Exactly how I understood it. There is no "double standard" as people mentioned above. I read that some people suspect Davis' lawyers convinced her to switch from "just take my name off" which wouldn't have gone viral to " no licenses for the gays" because they figure she's get a huge payout from conservative Christians donating to her. I think they based this in past actions by the same lawyers.

[Gredival]

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/Poll...5-35c0cdab26c6

Trump leads Clinton, Sanders, and Biden in head-to-head for general election. Even though it's a generic country-wide poll, I'd argue it's an incredibly bad sign given that the swing states voters are likely to be among those most receptive to his message.

* Trump 45%, Clinton 40%. (There is a 20-point Gender Gap; Trump leads by 18 points among seniors.)
* Trump 44%, Sanders 40%. (Trump leads by 10 among independents and by 6 among moderates.)
* Trump 44%, Biden 42%. (Trump leads by 10 among the best educated; Biden leads by 17 among the least educated.)
* Trump 44%, Gore 41%. (Trump leads by 12 among men and by 18 among voters age 50+.)

[tyven]

THIS TRAIN SLOWS DOWN FOR NO ONE

[Charismatic]

Ask Europe if this is how it starts.

I think I love you even more now.