Countdown to Extinction: The 2016 Presidential Election

[Madiel]

I am honored to be the bête noire of this thread.   

Actually, I seemyself offering merely the other POV among Karl's postings and others of like mind.  You guys have me out numbered by probably ten to one.  And yet you whine about the one nay-sayer.

Actually, I'm nearly as annoyed with Karl as I am with you. A fact that Karl has, unlike you, picked up on quickly, and is apologising for. Not BLOODY GLOATING about.

Seriously, you think this is funny? Or praiseworthy? You think endless spewing of links does you some kind of credit? You think that being disliked, bordering on being a troll, is a great place to be?

Is your head swimming with some kind of notion of "blessed are you if they persecute you"? That only applies if they "persecute" you for your faith. Not for being a jerk.

I participate in internet message boards because I'm interested in discussion. I am, in fact, particularly interested in discussion with people who have views different to mine and who are capable of standing up for those views and making me think.

But what do you offer? You couldn't stand up for your views. I'm going to remind you again, I actually agreed with your views on a particular issue related to corporations, whereupon you (TWICE) performed the reflex action of opposing me, just because you had thrown me in the category of "Democrat"  and therefore anything I said must be wrong. Even when it was the same thing you'd said a few posts earlier.

That's not standing up for your views. That's a kind of mindless tribal allegiance that I despise, including when I witness it in people whose views are similar to my own.

The world is going to pot precisely because it is filled with people like you, on both sides, who think the whole thing is a fucking game with a fucking scoreboard. Instead of being interested in analysis and solutions, all you're interested in is "winning".  And because you felt that you were "losing", you decided to resort to peppering your "opponents" with links to show just how big and strong your team is.

It doesn't seem to occur to you that there could be any possible reason for you being outnumbered. Because, hey, it's all about teams. It's not about people trying to actually figure out the right answer to anything, and maybe the majority of people agreeing on a particular point because they're right.

It is of course possible for the majority to be wrong on something. There are certainly examples of that floating around. But you're not trying to convince us your a prophet crying in the wilderness, begging us to correct course. No, your tactic is to disengage from actual discussion altogether and try spamming us.

Frankly it's pathetic. And if you think that it's worthy of cheerful little winks and smiles (which you've attempted to use as some kind of defusing tactic quite a few times over the course of the thread), then my estimation of you just took a few more hits. This is not some amusing little joke. This is about the leadership of one of the most influential countries in the world. Fucking take it seriously.

[Herman]

I am honored to be the bête noire of this thread.   

Actually, I see myself offering merely the other POV among Karl's postings and others of like mind.  You guys have me out numbered by probably ten to one.  And yet you whine about the one nay-sayer.

Good point.

About your laughing at "European Liberals". I have lived in the US quite a while, and as a consequence I can't help but care about what happens in the US. I'm not looking forward to large portions of the US population getting shafted by a con man with a track record as crooked as the Pisa Tower. That will make them only angrier.

The other thing is, Trump is saying he's going to cancel everything Obama did to slow climate change, get out of NATO and 'renegotiate' tread deals. That is going to affect every single person on the planet, even though only a fraction of the entire US population is going to vote for Trump.

Third point, all the populist and nativist movements internationally are interconnected. Trump is taking a leaf out of several EU continental populist movements, and of course he is encouraging voters to do the Brexit thing. Politics isn't local anymore  -  if that has ever been the case.

[Brian]

Fortunately I consider myself young at heart.

But my 91-year-old father has said he would be "nauseated" at the thought of a Donald Trump presidency.

I would only fear for the future of this country as I never have in all my 68 years. If Trump wins, a buffoon and lecher who has no knowledge of or respect for the Constitution, and who will disappoint his followers the most as soon as he abandons them. If Clinton wins, an experienced and knowledgeable if flawed candidate whom Republicans will hound with threat of indictments and impeachment from day one. At this point I can only see the inevitable and irrevocable decline of a once-promising and often great nation.

The questions Hillary and Paul Ryan will need to address are:
1. How do we de-escalate this crisis of delegitimizing the basic processes of government?
2. How do we re-integrate poor whites as educated, opportunity-getting members of society?

No doubt Hillary will be diving into nerdy policy goals like community college retraining, job skills programs, big hires from big infrastructure spending (which Republicans will oppose), etc. But the bigger problem is #1, and that will only come when everyone in Washington agrees to do their jobs and exhibit basic respect for the need to get along and cooperate and collaborate. Hillary has said she plans to reach out to Republicans; indeed, her election strategy was predicated on this. But based on comments from Ted Cruz, John McCain, and of course You-Know-Who, the Republicans may be more willing to burn the whole national rule of law down than concede even one Supreme Court seat.

And Brahms also defended Johann Strauss, so there. So does a musicologist friend of mine who calls him the greatest composer who ever lived. Moi, I am as nauseated by his waltzes as my father is by the prospect of a Trump presidency.

Since this thread needs a bit of levity, I think I'll just post my current listening:



Now, it is also true that occasionally I will be a bad boy and get full on dessert, or just pour out a little bowl of chocolate chips and eat them as if that's a snack. Johann Strauss may be similar! But - let me try to bridge the gap between your musicologist friend and reality - at what he intended to do, and at his chosen vocation, he's the best there ever was. The way melodies spill out of him fills me with jealousy. And boy, Anton Karas bringing his Third Man sound to "Tales from the Vienna Woods," sounds so great to these ears

[Parsifal]

Trump has latched onto a real problem in the U.S. which is present in the rest of the developed world. A "globalized" economy which has led to stagnating or dwindling wages and salaries for the great majority, with direction of wealth to a tiny investor class. I find it astonishing that anyone believes that Donald Trump has any desire to change this, or to do anything but to increase his own wealth and/or prestige.

[Brian]

Fox News has now apologized for the inaccurate "Hillary indictment" story from yesterday.

[Karl Henning]

Fox News has now apologized for the inaccurate "Hillary indictment" story from yesterday.

Zowie.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Fox News has now apologized for the inaccurate "Hillary indictment" story from yesterday.

But that's equivalent to the lawyer who makes an obviously tendentious statement about the opposing side, and is forced to withdraw after the judge sustains the objection. The intent is still to plant a seed in the jury's mind.

[drogulus]

Most important word in that headline is "reportedly".  Cinton-nites see partisan enemies everywhere (not the only trait she and her supporters share with Nixon and his).  For them. there is no possiblity that their candidate might have a character problem.

     Yes, it's reported. Hillary has been the subject of reports and leaks to the extent that one might conclude she has partisan enemies in Trumpland, Russia and the alt-right media that merged with the Trump campaign operation. Is the FBI an outpost of, let's say not quite conspirators, but conspiracy sympathizers? Where do you draw the line? It may be that the FBI and Russo-Trolls, the Ryan-McConnell Repubs and the Breitbartians are acting in an uncoordinated way that produces the appearance of an anti-democratic conspiracy larger than it actually is. That leaves questions that will probably remain unanswered for years.

A "globalized" economy which has led to stagnating or dwindling wages and salaries for the great majority, with direction of wealth to a tiny investor class.

     I belong to a big class of tiny investors, not a tiny class of big investors. I could throw my lot in either direction. I've chosen to go with the side my bread is buttered on. Just as with Trump it's all about meeeeeeee. Where we differ is about how self interest is defined, not only how I can thrive but what kind of world I want to thrive in, given the available choices about the path forward.

[zamyrabyrd]

Sanantonio, your contribution to this thread has devolved into saying:
"See?!"
"See?!"
"See?!"
"See?!"
"See?!"
"See?!"
"See?!"
"See?!"
In the frankly deluded belief that this will make a difference. Or constitutes discussion.

And yours are:
"Yawn!"
"Yawn!"
"Yawn!"
"Yawn!"
"Yawn!"
"Yawn!"
"Yawn!"
"Yawn!"

[Karl Henning]

Most important word in that headline is "reportedly".  [Clinton]-nites see partisan enemies everywhere (not the only trait she and her supporters share with Nixon and his).  For them. there is no [possibility] that their candidate might have a character problem.

This is in large part a strawman, as you blithely fail to acknowledge any number of times when not I alone have acknowledged that Clinton is a flawed candidate.

[Karl Henning]

In an opinion piece headed "The GOP must decide whether to be sane," Jennifer Rubin uses the phrase "lunacy in a prom dress."

I don't know if she qualifies as a Clinton-nite.  Maybe anyone who opposes El Tupé is to be disregarded as a partisan enemy.

[San Antone]

This is in large part a strawman, as you blithely fail to acknowledge any number of times when not I alone have acknowledged that Clinton is a flawed candidate.

I don't know, Karl, but here's one of your posts with a link to an article alleging that the FBI investigation was "bullshit"

Apologies, but the word is there in the headline:

The real Clinton email scandal is that a bullshit story has dominated the campaign

I guess that is you not seeing partisan enemies everywhere, or at least at the FBI.

[Karl Henning]

868 polling places in southern states have been closed for the 2016 election.  It is believed that these closures disproportionately affect minority voters.

[zamyrabyrd]

I am honored to be the bête noire of this thread.   
Actually, I see myself offering merely the other POV among Karl's postings and others of like mind.  You guys have me out numbered by probably ten to one.  And yet you whine about the one nay-sayer.

I hear ya, man, you're not alone.
Did ya ever hear the saying "Don't bother us with facts"?
Or the Stockholm Syndrome?
Or the uselessness of convincing cult members?
I actually thought it over the top when reading about the Clinton occult connection but it has just come out in Wikileaks that John Podesta was interested in Spirit Cooking with Marina Abramovic!!!
http://www.dailywire.com/news/10501/wikileaks-podesta-may-have-attended-occultic-pardes-seleh
I also remember back in the Clinton's presidency reports of a weird Christmas tree in the White House that had all manner of occult and weird symbols on it. This can be searched up.
If it croaks like a witch, it is probably someone who does travel on a broom.

[(poco) Sforzando]

Since this thread needs a bit of levity, I think I'll just post my current listening:

Now, it is also true that occasionally I will be a bad boy and get full on dessert, or just pour out a little bowl of chocolate chips and eat them as if that's a snack. Johann Strauss may be similar! But - let me try to bridge the gap between your musicologist friend and reality - at what he intended to do, and at his chosen vocation, he's the best there ever was. The way melodies spill out of him fills me with jealousy. And boy, Anton Karas bringing his Third Man sound to "Tales from the Vienna Woods," sounds so great to these ears

I think this thread has had ample levity, but more of a bitter and not a confectionary nature.

But since you are now digressing and I love digressions as much as life itself (cf. Swift: "A Digression in Praise of Digressions," or the passage in "Catcher in the Rye" where Holden tells us his favorite parts in speech class were where the speaker gets completely off topic), I admit my friend is also an expert on such composers as Verdi and Boulez, and so his bizarre remark has often struck me as more than a trifle bizarre - though I know he does love "Fledermaus." But truly, is JS such a great melodist? That Blue Danube theme, rhythmically so stiff and symmetrical? and so many others like it? I would be far more jealous of Chopin, Tchaikovsky, or even Puccini as melodists.

I do, however, like to freeze a couple of squares from a 70% Ghirardelli bar and have them as a snack. Much preferable in my mind to semisweet.

(Back to part 1 of your post later, but I wanted to address the more significant paragraph first.)

[San Antone]

In an opinion piece headed "The GOP must decide whether to be sane," Jennifer Rubin uses the phrase "lunacy in a prom dress."

I don't know if she qualifies as a Clinton-nite.  Maybe anyone who opposes El Tupé is to be disregarded as a partisan enemy.

Of course there are real reasons to oppose Donald Trump, although I don't find in Rubin's posts the best arguments.  There are also real reasons to oppose Hillary Clinton.  But when Clinton supporters allege that the email story is "bullshit" or that the foundation corruption is non-existent, or irrelevant, or attempt to distract attention away from it by pointing to WikiLeaks and Putin - it begins to look like Democratic partisans blaming it all on something like a vast rightwing conspiracy.

[Karl Henning]

And you're all full up with conspiracies from the El Tupé side, I can see that 

[(poco) Sforzando]

And yours are:
"Yawn!"
"Yawn!"
"Yawn!"
"Yawn!"
"Yawn!"
"Yawn!"
"Yawn!"
"Yawn!"

Thank you for elevating the level of discourse.

[San Antone]

Clinton supporters would have more credibility if they said something like, "Yes, Clinton was reckless and possibly criminal with her unsecured server, and there are many troubling aspects to the nexus between the Clinton Foundation and her tenure at the State Dept. but I agree with her views on most policies and vastly prefer her to Trump."

As opposed to minimizing the emails and lying and foundation corruption and DNC conniving against Sanders, etc. while they maximize every flaw in Trump.

[Karl Henning]

. . . while they maximize every flaw in Trump.

Lading sugar atop the Froot Loops, to be sure.