Countdown to Extinction: The 2016 Presidential Election

[Todd]

Yeah, right!

Yes, right.

Which ones? Give us three places.

Which powers? Name three.

Where to? Name three places.

Into threes today?  Tell you what, I'll use one of your tactics: Google it.

[Florestan]

Yes, right.

As Trump-ish as it gets.

Into threes today?  Tell you what, I'll use one of your tactics: Google it.

Except that I gave you real conventions and locations.

But hey, shouldn´t I have known better than getting into a controversy with you?

[Parsifal]

A question. Has Todd ever been persuaded by any argument or acknowledged the validity of a viewpoint not identical to his own, ever?

[Pat B]

Trying to rewind past the ad hominems:

This is a handbook sophism. The most pressing problem now is not whether Romania is a reliable ally (which we have been, are, and will be till the end), but whether Turkey is.

He said Turkey is more important (specifically with regards to naval access to the Black Sea), not that it is more reliable. What's going on in Turkey is deplorable, but from a strictly military perspective, losing it as an ally would make it more difficult to defend Romania, among other objectives. It's a tough situation and it almost seems like part of Erdogan's game is essentially bargaining -- or perhaps shopping around.

On the other hand, the U.S.'s history of trying to work with dictatorships hasn't always been successful, and Turkey's war with the Kurds was already a strain.

There are a lot more questions than answers. Unfortunately I don't have much confidence in either major Presidential nominee to even match Obama on this stuff.

[Todd]

A question. Has Todd ever been persuaded by any argument or acknowledged the validity of a viewpoint not identical to his own, ever?

Here's a bigger question for you: Does anyone actually come here to be persuaded on political matters?

[Todd]

Unfortunately I don't have much confidence in either major Presidential nominee to even match Obama on this stuff.

No question about that.  Obama has been generally good at foreign policy, with only Syria and Libya being notable blunders.  I have serious reservations about how he has pursued drone warfare and anti-terrorism as it pertains to US law, and I have minor concerns on the same subjects as it pertains to international law, and his deployment of missile defense systems has been too hasty, but in comparison with Trump or Clinton, he is a bastion of cautious, careful, intelligent planning and action.

[Scion7]

Obama has been generally good at foreign policy...

Yikes.

[Pat B]

Peter Thiel said culture wars are a distraction, and Ivanka Trump called for equal pay and better child care for working mothers. Should I cross-check those with the Republican platform?

[arkiv]

https://www.youtube.com/v/LbOPf28STNo

[Herman]

He'll be very presidential when he needs to be.

The most presidential president since Lincoln, as he put it modestly.

[North Star]

https://www.youtube.cm/v/LbOPf28STNo

Remember to not vote Democrats, because they're evil, and to "get the products Alex Jones and his family trust", such as Super Male Vitality^TM and Brain Force^TM ("Even our own chemists can't believe the quality and power we've achieved with Brain Force, the newest flagship product from Infowars Life. Quite frankly, people are freaking out over how powerful this product really is!") "while supporting the growth of our expanding media operation."

[snyprrr]

No question about that.  Obama has been generally good at foreign policy, with only Syria and Libya being notable blunders.  I have serious reservations about how he has pursued drone warfare and anti-terrorism as it pertains to US law, and I have minor concerns on the same subjects as it pertains to international law, and his deployment of missile defense systems has been too hasty, but in comparison with Trump or Clinton, he is a bastion of cautious, careful, intelligent planning and action.

I see what you did there!

Folks, this right'cheer is the most brilliantly Pythonesque Post of All-Time!!

Remember to not vote Democrats, because they're evil, and to "get the products Alex Jones and his family trust", such as Super Male Vitality^TM and Brain Force^TM ("Even our own chemists can't believe the quality and power we've achieved with Brain Force, the newest flagship product from Infowars Life. Quite frankly, people are freaking out over how powerful this product really is!") "while supporting the growth of our expanding media operation."

No, you really need to check out God Like Productions.com


Thank me l8tr

Yikes.

Is anyone as giddy as I am this morning? LOL!!

Scion,- what? can't you see Todd is laughing all the way to the bank. Please re-read that Post. It's brilliant. "with only Syria and Labia being the notable blunders." Oh, Todd, I'm sending you my hernia bills!! "bastion" "generally good"

ahhhh, Carlin would give you a medal! 0:)

[snyprrr]

VAN JONES


oy vey!!

[Madiel]

Here's a bigger question for you: Does anyone actually come here to be persuaded on political matters?

No. I have a different forum I go to for that.

[Todd]

Peter Thiel said culture wars are a distraction, and Ivanka Trump called for equal pay and better child care for working mothers. Should I cross-check those with the Republican platform?

As your President, I will do everything in my power to protect our LGBTQ citizens from the violence and oppression of a hateful foreign ideology, believe me. 

[Unscripted:] And I have to say as a Republican, it is so nice to hear you cheering for what I just said.  Thank you.

No. I have a different forum I go to for that.

More than one I would hope.  I tend to rely more on books and long-form articles in somewhat specialized periodicals.

[Madiel]

It's nice he's going to protect LGBTQ citizens from a hateful foreign ideology, but frankly social media indicates to me that the hateful ideology most LGTBQ Americans are worried about is homegrown, in your own Bible Belt.

[Todd]

It's nice he's going to protect LGBTQ citizens from a hateful foreign ideology, but frankly social media indicates to me that the hateful ideology most LGTBQ Americans are worried about is homegrown, in your own Bible Belt.

Probably, but the bigger thing here is that Trump is the first Republican presidential nominee to speak openly about the subject in an acceptance speech.  His unscripted blurb, no doubt thought out ahead of time, is a nice addendum.  I've long held out hope that some Republican would start to try to go after the support of richer gay people.  There are some small, longer standing groups (eg, Log Cabin Republicans) and apparently DC has a small cadre of very rich gay Republicans, but a more concerted effort is needed.  Republicans will never attract the majority or even significant minority of gay voters, but it should angle for the rich ones.  I understand that religious and cultural conservatives are still fighting gay marriage in some areas, and will for years to come, but the culture wars are a distraction, and Republicans need to start chipping away at traditional Democrat groups, primarily based on economic policies.  It will take many cycles, but it has to start somewhere.

[Madiel]

Republicans will never attract the majority or even significant minority of gay voters

Frankly, if it went back to being a party of small government instead of being a party of the Christian Right, it very well could be attracting a big slice of gay voters.

Some of the best arguments for gay marriage have come from Republicans (and their equivalents here in Australia). A retired politician here, from the right wing of our politics but socially moderate, has been excellent at articulating a view that her side of politics should embrace people wanting to support each other in family units rather than relying on government to support them and should not get hung up on the precise makeup of the family unit in question.

[Todd]

Frankly, if it went back to being a party of small government instead of being a party of the Christian Right, it very well could be attracting a big slice of gay voters.

Religious conservatives make up a powerful group, and they do tend to vote, so they do have sway.  Small government conservatism is something of a phantom.  It's great rhetorically, but not so good for vote getting (Social Security is basically untouchable), nor for maintaining a massive military machine.

I've always approached gay marriage from a liberty standpoint.  The state (in the most generic sense possible) has no business telling consenting adults whom they should marry.  That's more libertarian than conservative, but it's not hard to get some conservatives to go along with that.

[Ken B]

Frankly, if it went back to being a party of small government instead of being a party of the Christian Right, it very well could be attracting a big slice of gay voters.

Some of the best arguments for gay marriage have come from Republicans (and their equivalents here in Australia). A retired politician here, from the right wing of our politics but socially moderate, has been excellent at articulating a view that her side of politics should embrace people wanting to support each other in family units rather than relying on government to support them and should not get hung up on the precise makeup of the family unit in question.

Exactly, on all points. I have long argued pro gay marriage is the conservative position. This does seem to get traction with the non religious.