USA 2016 Presidential Election Thread

[Sharpe's Fox]

If you threaten not to turn out it will inevitably drag Clinton leftward in the main event, like the Sanders campaign and Corbyns original intention was anyway. Clintons campaign will change with the times and won't be static in its policies like Trumps will.

[Carl the Llama]

Yes you did Carl, it's not as dramatic a quote as you think and quite a widely held belief among political commentators who have actually watched the debates.

I doubt you would be able to see past the froth and red mist to judge though, who do you actually think has been winning the Republican debates if not Trump?

Oh definitely Trump, but that's because in an American 'political debate' you win by making a big pompous show of yourself; apparently America isn't interested in the pragmatism of your policies as long as you can reduce them to punchy one-liners for the crowd to shout back at you in rallies that look more like religious gatherings.  The louder your voice the less interested they are in your content.  So much so even his fanatics repeat his lines wrong - watch the brilliant guy with the placard declare with utmost confidence that China is going to pay for the wall :

 

So yeah, him being the winner says everything.  If you honestly can't see what a joke he is then I have to kindly ask you to stop bothering me for an opinion in your posts, how ironic that you accuse me of having biased views.

[Guest MattP]

So you do agree he's won them then? You really do go the long way around to argue against your own points.

If you've read my posts you'll see I've consistently said Sanders and Trump are joke candidates, although I suspect you can't see that as you're more obsessed with throwing accusations around at anyone who dares say a good thing about Trump more wilfully than a chimp holding it's own excrement.

[Carl the Llama]

So you do agree he's won them then? You really do go the long way around to argue against your own points.

If you've read my posts you'll see I've consistently said Sanders and Trump are joke candidates, although I suspect you can't see that as you're more obsessed with throwing accusations around at anyone who dares say a good thing about Trump more wilfully than a chimp holding it's own excrement.

Well It just amazes me that it can legitimately be classed as a 'victory' in the first place - the fact is very clear that he's getting the most votes so he's clearly reaching people but I find that thought very disturbing because it means that if they all agree with him then there's a lot of energetic hand-waving resentment aimed at nobody in particular bubbling under the surface in the States.

[Guest MattP]

You are imposing your own values on the debate, you simply can't do that.

I can't stand Corbyn but when you watch Labour leadership debates you couldn't argue he didn't win them just because I disagreed.

It's the same with Trump, the audience are the judges and he's winning.

[Carl the Llama]

You are imposing your own values on the debate, you simply can't do that.

I can't stand Corbyn but when you watch Labour leadership debates you couldn't argue he didn't win them just because I disagreed.

It's the same with Trump, the audience are the judges and he's winning.

I'm not saying he didn't win them, I'm saying the parameters for a victorious performance leave me ill at ease.

[leicsmac]

With an alternative of Trump I think that is a pretty empty threat at best.

 

You'd think so, but the overall idea seems to be short term pain for long term gain, eg. get someone like Trump in now, and then seek the bigger change they desire further down the line when everyone sees what he's done.

 

Of course the big flaw in that is there's no guarantee such a swing would happen, nor that they could make it happen, so it would be a huge gamble with the short term futures of a lot of already disadvantaged people who would suffer further under a Trump presidency. So it's ridiculous.

[ozleicester]

guess its fortunate that the US no longer runs the world, if Trump is their next option.

[Guest MattP]

guess its fortunate that the US no longer runs the world, if Trump is their next option.

 

Yeah I'm sure if you were a innocent Syrian in Aleppo currently having the choice between being raped, tortured or murdered because of your religion or sexuality or carpet bombed by the people the World has left to save us you'd be delighted Putin is pulling the strings.

 

But as long as the big bad USA ain't doing it it's all good eh?

[ozleicester]

Yeah I'm sure if you were a innocent Syrian in Aleppo currently having the choice between being raped, tortured or murdered because of your religion or sexuality or carpet bombed by the people the World has left to save us you'd be delighted Putin is pulling the strings.

 

But as long as the big bad USA ain't doing it it's all good eh?

 

its entirley possible that we arent still living in 1988, and there are other world forces than the good ol US and the evil Ruskies

[Carl the Llama]

its entirley possible that we arent still living in 1988, and there are other world forces than the good ol US and the evil Ruskies

Well yeah, now we have the malicious Eurozone too.

[Guest MattP]

its entirley possible that we arent still living in 1988, and there are other world forces than the good ol US and the evil Ruskies

 

So you are ok with Russia's actions then? I have to think if a Western nation were carpet combing civilians and re-aligning the World's borders through force you might have a somewhat different opinion.

 

I could be wrong though.

[leicsmac]

its entirley possible that we arent still living in 1988, and there are other world forces than the good ol US and the evil Ruskies

 

Sorry Oz, it's fair enough but I'm going to continue to worry about the two nations with 90% of the worlds nuclear firepower between them.

[Carl the Llama]

Sorry Oz, it's fair enough but I'm going to continue to worry about the two nations with 90% of the worlds nuclear firepower between them.

North Korea and Iran?

[ozleicester]

So you are ok with Russia's actions then? I have to think if a Western nation were carpet combing civilians and re-aligning the World's borders through force you might have a somewhat different opinion.

 

I could be wrong though.

 

------------ QUOTE ----------

its entirley possible that we arent still living in 1988, and there are other world forces than the good ol US and the evil Ruskies

-----------------------------

I presume you are talking the Chinese then?

Wonderful, I'm so excited.

 

- Thats a fine edit. 

 

And then a good old fashioned adhominen, based on bullsh*t.

[ozleicester]

Sorry Oz, it's fair enough but I'm going to continue to worry about the two nations with 90% of the worlds nuclear firepower between them.

 

That could be a concern, but theyve got this stuff figured out, they arent going to use them... well unless a total headcase gets into power on both sides... oh, wait.

[Guest MattP]

------------ QUOTE ----------

its entirley possible that we arent still living in 1988, and there are other world forces than the good ol US and the evil Ruskies

-----------------------------

I presume you are talking the Chinese then?

Wonderful, I'm so excited.

 

- Thats a fine edit. 

 

And then a good old fashioned adhominen, based on bullsh*t.

 

I started with that and then decided after posting the question about Russia was more important. You can answer both questions if you really want to. (I'm baffled to how the above equates to "ad hominen" btw).

 

Are you happy with Russia dictating global policy and redrawing the World's borders now?

 

Would the thought of the Chinese being the World's dominant military power excite you?

 

Or you could just brush it off as bullshit and ignore it, which sadly appears to be becoming a common theme on here these days when people don't want to answer an question.

[ozleicester]

I started with that and then decided after posting the question about Russia was more important. You can answer both questions if you really want to.

 

Are you happy with Russia dictating global policy and redrawing the World's borders now?

 

Would the thought of the Chinese being the World's dominant military power excite you?

 

Or you could just brush it off as bullshit and ignore it, which sadly appears to be becoming a common theme on here these days when people don't want to answer an question.

 

Are you happy with the world situation curently, the wars and suffering that has been going on for the past 50 years thanks to the US world domination?

 

Countries the US has bombed...

• Korea and China 1950-53 (Korean War)
• Guatemala 1954
• Indonesia 1958
• Cuba 1959-1961
• Guatemala 1960
• Congo 1964
• Laos 1964-73
• Vietnam 1961-73
• Cambodia 1969-70
• Guatemala 1967-69
• Grenada 1983
• Lebanon 1983, 1984 (both Lebanese and Syrian targets)
• Libya 1986
• El Salvador 1980s
• Nicaragua 1980s
• Iran 1987
• Panama 1989
• Iraq 1991 (Persian Gulf War)
• Kuwait 1991
• Somalia 1993
• Bosnia 1994, 1995
• Sudan 1998
• Afghanistan 1998
• Yugoslavia 1999
• Yemen 2002
• Iraq 1991-2003 (US/UK on regular basis)
• Iraq 2003-2015
• Afghanistan 2001-2015
• Pakistan 2007-2015
• Somalia 2007-8, 2011
• Yemen 2009, 2011
• Libya 2011, 2015
• Syria 2014-2015

And i think from what i read you posting, you seem to be concerned for your safety in your own little town, makes me question if you are happy with the US being the world police?

[Guest MattP]

Are you happy with the world situation curently, the wars and suffering that has been going on for the past 50 years thanks to the US world domination?

 

Countries the US has bombed...

• Korea and China 1950-53 (Korean War)
• Guatemala 1954
• Indonesia 1958
• Cuba 1959-1961
• Guatemala 1960
• Congo 1964
• Laos 1964-73
• Vietnam 1961-73
• Cambodia 1969-70
• Guatemala 1967-69
• Grenada 1983
• Lebanon 1983, 1984 (both Lebanese and Syrian targets)
• Libya 1986
• El Salvador 1980s
• Nicaragua 1980s
• Iran 1987
• Panama 1989
• Iraq 1991 (Persian Gulf War)
• Kuwait 1991
• Somalia 1993
• Bosnia 1994, 1995
• Sudan 1998
• Afghanistan 1998
• Yugoslavia 1999
• Yemen 2002
• Iraq 1991-2003 (US/UK on regular basis)
• Iraq 2003-2015
• Afghanistan 2001-2015
• Pakistan 2007-2015
• Somalia 2007-8, 2011
• Yemen 2009, 2011
• Libya 2011, 2015
• Syria 2014-2015

And i think from what i read you posting, you seem to be concerned for your safety in your own little town, makes me question if you are happy with the US being the world police?

 

You make it sound like all those wars were a disaster, some of them obviously were but some stopped genocide and saved many lives, there are statues of Bill Clinton in Kosovo, you won't find a statue of Obama in Syria in twenty years. Many of the "wars" there you mention where at the request of the host government.

 

Want to also whack up a chart of all the conflicts and wars Russia has been involved in since the 50's as well?

 

You've avoided the question nicely though, I hope the World turns into the paradise you dream of as the USA and the West takes a back seat in World politics, I have a feeling though you'll end up being very disappointed.

[Guest MattP]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Russia

[Guest MattP]

And don't accuse me of just being concerned for my safety in my own little town when you'll happily turn a blind eye to thousands being slaughtered providing it's not the West commiting it.

[leicsmac]

North Korea and Iran?

 

 

I started with that and then decided after posting the question about Russia was more important. You can answer both questions if you really want to. (I'm baffled to how the above equates to "ad hominen" btw).

 

Are you happy with Russia dictating global policy and redrawing the World's borders now?

 

Would the thought of the Chinese being the World's dominant military power excite you?

 

Or you could just brush it off as bullshit and ignore it, which sadly appears to be becoming a common theme on here these days when people don't want to answer an question.

 

Can I take this one on Matt?

 

The Chinese aren't going to be anywhere near a dominant military power because of the aforementioned nuclear weaponry. It's the same idea regarding them holding a lot of US debt; if they demanded the dough and the US said "make me", what could they actually do to get the money without going down a path that would eventually result in them getting annihilated?

 

I think international relations is still all about who holds the biggest stick.

 

Additionally, I think what smarts regarding foreign policy (and I think I made this point earlier) is that Russia and China are looking to flex their geopolitical muscles, but at least they're not dressing up in some ridiculous parable about 'making a better world' dressed up as moral superiority. They make it pretty clear that they're being cvnts, but honest cvnts. That doesn't necessarily make things any better, but at least you know where you stand.

[Guest MattP]

 

 

Can I take this one on Matt?

 

The Chinese aren't going to be anywhere near a dominant military power because of the aforementioned nuclear weaponry. It's the same idea regarding them holding a lot of US debt; if they demanded the dough and the US said "make me", what could they actually do to get the money without going down a path that would eventually result in them getting annihilated?

 

I think international relations is still all about who holds the biggest stick.

 

Additionally, I think what smarts regarding foreign policy (and I think I made this point earlier) is that Russia and China are looking to flex their geopolitical muscles, but at least they're not dressing up in some ridiculous parable about 'making a better world' dressed up as moral superiority. They make it pretty clear that they're being cvnts, but honest cvnts. That doesn't necessarily make things any better, but at least you know where you stand.

 

Of course you can, the nuclear weapon argument is one that leaves us at the top table for the minute but people are changing and a lot in the West seem to be that naive these days they think we could still carry on as normal without them and demand the same things from countries like Russia and China, unlikely of course but it's not beyond total possibility that we elect leaders that would give up our capablilities over the next 50 years or so.

 

You can already see China flexing it;s muscles through investment, they are basically becoming the new colonial masters of African with what they have done over the last twenty years and no one seems to have noticed.

 

I'd actually say Putin is putting on that act you speak of, he is still claiming to the contrary of anyone else but Assad that he is striking against ISIS when in reality he's just wiping out all the anti government rebels to leave the rest of the World between a choice of backing Assad or ISIS to make sure his buddy can stay in the leaders chair, the advantage also being a continued destablised Turkey and Kurdish populations.

[ozleicester]

You make it sound like all those wars were a disaster, some of them obviously were but some stopped genocide and saved many lives, there are statues of Bill Clinton in Kosovo, you won't find a statue of Obama in Syria in twenty years. Many of the "wars" there you mention where at the request of the host government.

 

Want to also whack up a chart of all the conflicts and wars Russia has been involved in since the 50's as well?

 

You've avoided the question nicely though, I hope the World turns into the paradise you dream of as the USA and the West takes a back seat in World politics, I have a feeling though you'll end up being very disappointed.

 

Who's avoiding questions? i dont see your answers anywhere

 

And don't accuse me of just being concerned for my safety in my own little town when you'll happily turn a blind eye to thousands being slaughtered providing it's not the West commiting it.

 

yup, attack the man with lies again,     i dont even know where you get the idea that im anti west or "pro east"

[Guest MattP]

yup, attack the man with lies again,     i dont even know where you get the idea that im anti west or "pro east"

 

 

I'm happy to leave that one open to everyone else to judge.