Countdown to Extinction: The 2016 Presidential Election

[Madiel]

I am sorry to bring this up again

You really aren't. On the contrary, you bring up the fact that Clinton has been endorsed by Planned Parenthood as regularly as possible, without any prompting. We were talking about the economy, and yet somehow that's an opportunity to talk about abortion again.

[zamyrabyrd]

You really aren't. On the contrary, you bring up the fact that Clinton has been endorsed by Planned Parenthood as regularly as possible, without any prompting. We were talking about the economy, and yet somehow that's an opportunity to talk about abortion again.

Sorry, this thread is about the elections. And I really do despise the subject of abortion. I wish not to hear about it 24/7.

[Madiel]

Sorry, this thread is about the elections. And I really do despise the subject of abortion. I wish not to hear about it 24/7.

But you're the only person who brings it up!!

[zamyrabyrd]

But you're the only person who brings it up!!

She and Kaine made it a central issue of their campaign.

[San Antone]

You're painting a tendentious picture, and of course there are a number of measures by which the economy is much stronger (this isn't the Soviet Union, it's a free market, so, certainly, there are many moving parts).

Now, one allows room for your pessimism about Clinton's election. But there is absolutely nothing, in what we know of the deliberately obfuscatory El Tupé's business activity, to give us even the least indication that he is to be trusted with money.

You're allowed your pessimism w/r/t Clinton.  I don't buy any of this faith-based optimism in El Tupé—not in his business dealings, not in his character—it puzzles me that you find anything in what he says which is remotely trustworthy.  You cannot.  So your whole support of that buffoon is some pitiful blend of blind hope in a demonstrated liar and cheat, and entrenched hatred of Clinton.

First, I have always thought that linking the economy to a president is questionable.  Economic trends generally are slow developing and include many variables beyond what any president can claim credit or accept blame for.

Second anyone who trusts Hillary Clinton has a problem themselves with objectivity.  I just think Trump is better on the issues I care about and will work better with a Republican Congress than Clinton.  I don't trust any candidate's promises, and would hope no intelligent person would.  Remember, "if you like your current doctor or plan you won't have to change; and premiums will not go up?"

[Madiel]

She and Kaine made it a central issue of their campaign.

But it's you that keeps making it an issue of this thread. While saying you don't want to hear about it 24/7.

Over and over again.

Ignorance may be the reason the moniker "Planned Parenthood" is taken at face value. Their foundress, Margaret Sanger was a unashamed racist. Her "planning" was to reduce the birth rates of Black people. As the abortion rate seems to be high in that community, she is succeeding.

Hillary Clinton is endorsed by Planned Parenthood, a VERY bad organization founded by the arch racist Margaret Sanger who wanted to restrict births in the Black community. They peddle the same schlock as this woman in her article, that they are really concerned with preventing unwanted pregnancies, but MOST of their VERY lucrative business comes precisely from abortion.

PP depicts abortion, their MAIN million $ business, like a walk in the park.

You are obsessed. Over and over, you tell us that Clinton is unacceptable because she's been endorsed by Planned Parenthood and you tell us about how Planned Parenthood is about abortion.  You drag the subject up when no-one else here, in this thread, is talking about it. I did a search. We have search facilities here you know.

So turning around and acting as if it isn't one of your favourite subjects is just disingenuous. You absolutely love talking about it, just so you can express your horror and disgust again and again. It's the little thrill that you get from reminding everyone how awful "those people" are.

[zamyrabyrd]

First, I have always thought that linking the economy to a president is questionable.  Economic trends generally are slow developing and include many variables beyond what any president can claim credit or accept blame for.
Second anyone who trusts Hillary Clinton has a problem themselves with objectivity.  I just think Trump is better on the issues I care about and will work better with a Republican Congress than Clinton.  I don't trust any candidate's promises, and would hope no intelligent person would.  Remember, "if you like your current doctor or plan you won't have to change; and premiums will not go up?"

Exactly, if percentage points go up, we can thank our Great Leader! He brought us out of Egypt! The debt, however, is the dinosaur in the room. How can the US claim it is "progressing" when it is owing so much money? I don't think Hill ever brought up the subject of the debt. There comes a point when a horse "just upped and died" after being bled out so much.

[zamyrabyrd]

But it's you that keeps making it an issue of this thread. While saying you don't want to hear about it 24/7.
Over and over again.
You are obsessed. Over and over, you tell us that Clinton is unacceptable because she's been endorsed by Planned Parenthood and you tell us about how Planned Parenthood is about abortion.  You drag the subject up when no-one else here, in this thread, is talking about it. I did a search. We have search facilities here you know.
So turning around and acting as if it isn't one of your favourite subjects is just disingenuous. You absolutely love talking about it, just so you can express your horror and disgust again and again. It's the little thrill that you get from reminding everyone how awful "those people" are.

This doesn't deserve an answer.

[Madiel]

This doesn't deserve an answer.

ROFL. It doesn't need an answer. Because it's unarguable. It's based entirely on your own behaviour.

I'm not even arguing about whether your perception of Planned Parenthood is correct. What I'm saying is that the only person who feels the need to bring the subject up is you. So saying that you are "sorry to bring this up again"... it's just not tenable that your regret is genuine.

We get it. We know your view. Feel free to not bring it up ever again, and then we can all have a thread that is abortion-discussion-free.

Or you can keep hammering us all over the head with the evils of Planned Parenthood and their endorsement of Hillary, but don't do it with this false apology about how you don't really want to mention it but we somehow forced you.

[Madiel]

To give myself at least some protection from your ridiculous arguments, you're now on my Ignore list. I'm sure that will make both of us happier. I'll have less cause to read your random illogical sprays, and you'll have one less person calling you to account for your shit.

It can't possibly get any better than "this doesn't deserve an answer", which I'm fairly sure translates to "crap, I can't think of anything to say to wriggle out of this". That's the pinnacle, so I should retire on a high.

[zamyrabyrd]

To give myself at least some protection from your ridiculous arguments, you're now on my Ignore list. I'm sure that will make both of us happier. I'll have less cause to read your random illogical sprays, and you'll have one less person calling you to account for your shit.
It can't possibly get any better than "this doesn't deserve an answer", which I'm fairly sure translates to "crap, I can't think of anything to say to wriggle out of this". That's the pinnacle, so I should retire on a high.

You have such a lovely vocabulary. I must have touched a raw nerve...

[Karl Henning]

Well, back to The Great Entertainer:

Despite being spoon-fed softball questions — "Are you going to bring jobs back?" — and standing in front of an audience of supporters, Trump struggled to stay anywhere close to a coherent message, repeatedly rambling in answers and seeming more interested in settling personal grievances than talking about the issue at hand.

I just think Trump is better on the issues I care about and will work better with a Republican Congress than Clinton.

I admire the optimism.  We have no indication that El Tupé "works with" anyone.

[San Antone]

Well, back to The Great Entertainer:

Despite being spoon-fed softball questions — "Are you going to bring jobs back?" — and standing in front of an audience of supporters, Trump struggled to stay anywhere close to a coherent message, repeatedly rambling in answers and seeming more interested in settling personal grievances than talking about the issue at hand.

I admire the optimism.  We have no indication that El Tupé "works with" anyone.

Well, Paul Ryan has that impression after his meetings with Trump.  I am more willing to trust Ryan in this regard, than, well, anyone.

Oh, and speaking of spoon fed questions, Hillary avoided the press for over a year and regualrly insists on seeing the questions before a televised interview.  And the shows she goes on are entertainment not news, like the Steve Harvey show.

But of course, you parrot the mainstream media's coverage of Trump (a press that has admitted to working against him*) and see Hillary through rose-colored glasses.  I get it.



* In a recent piece the Times' "Mediator," Jim Rutenberg, not only acknowledged the Trump candidacy has led to objectivity being tossed out the window, he seemed to ratify the fact as good journalism. To do otherwise, he wrote, "would also be an abdication of political journalism's most solemn duty: to ferret out what the candidates will be like in the most powerful office in the world."

[Karl Henning]

...  Remember, "if you like your current doctor or plan you won't have to change; and premiums will not go up?"

One of the most pertinent remarks I have heard on the implementation of the Affordable Care Act is, that it's like a boat in which several passengers are hacking holes in the hull, and then complaining that the vessel leaks.

Call it just an opinion, but:

Yes, Obamacare needs tweaks — but it's been a policy triumph

[Karl Henning]

Oh, and speaking of spoon fed questions, Hillary avoided the press for over a year and [regularly] insists on seeing the questions before a televised interview.  And the shows she goes on are entertainment not news, like the Steve Harvey show.

But of course, you parrot the mainstream media's coverage of Trump (a press that has admitted to working against him*) and see Hillary through rose-colored glasses.  I get it.

I'm also parroting Fox's Megyn Kelly.  Oops.

[San Antone]

One of the most pertinent remarks I have heard on the implementation of the Affordable Care Act is, that it's like a boat in which several passengers are hacking holes in the hull, and then complaining that the vessel leaks.

Call it just an opinion, but:

Yes, Obamacare needs tweaks — but it's been a policy triumph

Any person between the ages of 21 and 35 not covered by their employer (e.g. high tech entrepreneurs) or on their parent's plan, who, prior to a federal mandate to buy insurance, probably chose not to invest in what they perceived as an unnecessary expense at that stage of their lives.  Now, they have the worst of both worlds.  Because the only plan thay can afford has such high deductibles, usually between $4K-$8K, they have to pay a new "tax", i.e. the premiums, and still face huge out of pocket expenses.

That cannot be blamed on Republicans who have been against Obamacare from the get-go, but on the program's primary policy ingredient, the mandate.  An article the Sup. Ct. should of struck down, and something for which John Roberts will never live down.

Tweaks?  Well, not hard to understand when a 2500 page law gets forced down Congress's throat over a weekend, in which most were not even allowed to read the document before voting.

Obamacare has turned unintended consequences into his legacy.

[San Antone]

I'm also parroting Fox's Megyn Kelly.  Oops.

If you read the original article instead of the media's spin of it, you'd see she first points out Hillary's problem in this regard:

"MEGYN KELLY: They're both in their own version of a 'presidential protection program.' Where you say she designed her situation so she's not in a place where she feels uncomfortable or anything unexpect could come at her. That's why she sat for a half an hour with Mary J. Blidge, the singer. That's why she did Entertainment Tonight this evening. That's why when she went on the Steve Harvey Show she had all the questions in writing in advance, and feigned surprise as the questions they were asked.

And Donald Trump, with all due respect to my friend at 10:00, will go on Hannity and pretty much only Hannity and will not venture out to the unsafe spaces these days, which doesn't exactly expand the tent for either one of them."

[Karl Henning]

You're eager to discount the opposing opinion as spin. I get it.

The fact does not change that El Tupé lives in a more protective bubble than Clinton.  (Acknowledging — what is not new for the present writer — that for probably all the primaries and the beginning of the general campaign, Clinton refused to face the press.)

And that all that is necessary to have bad press for El Tupé, is to print or otherwise broadcast his words.  As he says them.

[Zeus]

On Obama Fiscal Policy:

1) Obama inherited a massive financial market crisis, caused in large part by lax financial regulation.
2) Due to automatic stabilizers in fiscal policy (lower tax receipts, higher expenditures) and a few modest stimulatory packages, the federal deficit skyrocketed immediately after Obama's election (before actually), but the deficit has been falling since then
3) Federal debt-to-GDP in the US is the same in 2016 as it was in 2009.

That strikes me as an excellent overall fiscal performance. It reminds me of the fact that the deficit was reduced to a surplus under Clinton 1. The GOP complains bitterly about fiscal prudence, but as soon as they get elected the deficit and debt skyrocket and the Democrats are left to clean up the mess. 

There is much that can be said about rising income and wealth imbalances, health care in the US, the trade deficit, etc. These are topics which would need to be analyzed carefully. This is probably not the proper forum. Regardless, on any topic you might choose, Trump is not the answer.

Trump, at best, knows how to complain. He knows nothing about how to fix. He is a complainer and a grenade thrower who's administration would be a non-stop soap opera. There is no coterie of more moderate handlers (a la Pence or Ryan) who could convert a Trump presidency into anything but a domestic and international fiasco.

Trump belongs on the Jerry Springer show, not in the White House. Shame on the GOP for picking such a loser!!

[San Antone]

You're eager to discount the opposing opinion as spin. I get it.

The fact does not change that El Tupé lives in a more protective bubble than Clinton.  (Acknowledging — what is not new for the present writer — that for probably all the primaries and the beginning of the general campaign, Clinton refused to face the press.)

And that all that is necessary to have bad press for El Tupé, is to print or otherwise broadcast his words.  As he says them.

LOL.  Trump lets it all hang out, being self-protective is what his staff wishes he'd be.  The only reason his candidacy still has any traction is because so many people are opposed to another four years of rule by a political insider.