The Ameяican Government Thread

RECESSIONTIME · July 14, 2016, 7:14pm

Razor: I hope you are aware that all that free shit Shillary is promoting for the DNC platform to pander to berners are in fact non-binding. All that free college and $15/hr stuff is non-binding. This was addressed by bernocrats on reddit. It’s like how Obama promised to close down gitmo and how that never materialised or how he said he wouldn’t be influenced by super PAC money in 2008. What is hilarious is how Sanders endorsed this crook without any binding agreements. The DNC didn’t even bother to pretend it was going to do anything about the TPP. Anyway, just thought I’d inform you. I don’t expect you or your ilk to change your mind and it won’t matter because Trump is going to win.

Azure · July 14, 2016, 7:31pm

Raz0r:

Azure:

Raz0r:

Jimbo13:

Snowden is hero whistle blower and every Liberal should be ashamed about the way the Obama administration (and Hillary will) has pursued him. Snowdens detractors seem to be ignorant of two facts regarding his leaks.

Snowden notified congress months before he leaked anything, fully attempting to notify them through proper channels of the impropriety.

Snowden did not go to the press until after Director of National Intelligence James Clapper LIED, Committed perjury thus committing a crime claiming the NSA was not engaging in mass surveillance.

Congress was fully entitled to be informed, there is no justification for lying to congress in this scenario and Snowden was duty bound to report it.

The executive branch/NSA had no right or business hiding this fact from congress, period.

Yes, he did great. But yes, he broke the law.

I don’t blame Obama for wasting political capital on pardoning him. I wait for a president down the line to do that. I think Snowden should have faced the charges. You know the risks you take even when you’re doing a common good and he ran. I’m not saying I would not have done the same, but you gotta know that your life has a probability of becoming forfeit.

But this is precisely the attitude that prevents MORE people from acting on their conscience.

If society as a whole was more accommodating to people breaking unjust, which is to say non-law laws, we’d be far closer to having a genuinely good, fair, honest nation.

There are whistle blower protection laws in place last time I checked, but I don’t think that covers classified information. I’m no lawyer, though. So take this with a grain of salt.

History is full of people who accepted the consequences of their choices. Snowden should be no different. Yes, it sucks but that’s how life has always been when you go against the establishment. If the principle isn’t worth giving your life over to, is it really worth defending?

Why would you give your life, rather than fight against the unjust laws, and their proponents.

If the Founding Fathers had done that, we’d still be England.

Fuck accepting unjust consequences dictated by evil assholes leveraging villainy as rule of law.

chadouken · July 14, 2016, 10:08pm

How awesome would it be if Stein was the first female President of the United States of America? Not Hillary.

Raz0r · July 14, 2016, 10:25pm

How new to politics do you think I am? Of course I know it’s non-binding, just like a second term isn’t guaranteed.

Jimbo13 · July 14, 2016, 10:47pm

But with Hillary being a compulsive liar you can’t count even an attempt at anything non-binding.

ES_Curse · July 15, 2016, 12:19am

It’s pretty much the main reason myself and many Bernie supporters aren’t jumping ship to Hillary. Her consistency is so poor that no one thinks she’ll enact a policy they agree with. She can talk all she wants, but doesn’t have the record to show she’s capable of putting her money where her mouth is.

Also, she’s utterly screwed if Democrats don’t take back Congress. A Republican majority would vehemently oppose anything that comes from her, even worse than the situation with Obama. She’s going to use the Executive Order function, and a lot of people are uneasy about giving a complete sociopath that kind of power.

Jimbo13 · July 15, 2016, 12:24am

Were all screwed regardless unless a third party starts polling competitively. I am sure the civil unrest would be so great at a Clinton election she would not be able to govern, riots, states would start talking secession, general strikes etc. and to a lesser degree imo trump would spur the same.

I favor this, seeing the GOP and DNC completely collapse would make me smile and give me hope for humanity, neither are fit for purpose.

Xvideos · July 15, 2016, 12:42am

DONALD TRUMP: ‘I wish I had time’ to play Pokémon Go

Raz0r · July 15, 2016, 12:44am

He should spend his time learning US & international policy.

Dragonfave723 · July 15, 2016, 1:49am

ES_Curse · July 15, 2016, 2:03am

the only reasonable choice has arrived
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOCqQsVRIV0

Spirit_Juice · July 15, 2016, 2:13am

I’m just going to vote for this guy in November:

http://images.akamai.steamusercontent.com/ugc/581280502677166228/8B680ADFBB455370ADFEA2E6CD314CD337B2734A/

Xvideos · July 15, 2016, 5:45am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IS3OboC5Vg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrSGuxJL8Pw

Jimbo13 · July 15, 2016, 6:27am

Most days I am not real enthusiastic about admitting I am voting for Trump or have much of a defense for him other than he’s not Hillary and exhibits common sense, and might be a good manager whom listens to advice and doesn’t want to micro-manage.

But then there are days like today when Islam kills 80 people and it’s real simple, Hillary wants to import these people. Trump wants to keep them out…

https://cdn.meme.am/instances/250x250/65500894.jpg

VASaga · July 15, 2016, 6:35am

Yeah. I definitely hope people vote Trump over Shillary.

Just cant believe its come to this point though. Never thought I’d fully support Trump cause sometimes I think he is a god damn moron but other times I’m like he spits so much common sense lol

He has that Alex Jones effect.
But atleast I can say Alex Jones actually cares about people and I hope Trump does too.

AcidicEnema · July 15, 2016, 6:55am

For those who are for Trump, but embarrassed about talking to people about it, Scott Adams has a good FAQ on how to do so.

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/146157026376/how-to-un-hypnotize-a-rabid-anti-trumper

When you encounter a rabid anti-Trumper, ask her what are the biggest concerns of a potential Trump presidency.

If “Supreme Court nominee” is one of the top objections, discontinue your persuasion for ethical reasons. This person has put some thought into the decision and has a legitimate opinion that is at least partly based on reason. I don’t recommend changing that person’s mind.

But if a person’s main objections to Trump include any the following four reasons, I would consider it ethical to apply persuasion.

Objection 1: Trump is a loose cannon who might offend other countries and maybe even start a nuclear war.

Objection 2: Trump is terrible at business because he has several bankruptcies.

Objection 3: Trump is a racist.

Objection 4: Trump is anti-women and anti-LGBT

If any of those four objections are behind an anti-Trumper’s opinion, you have ethical license to persuade, so long as you are sticking to facts and adding context. I’ll show you how to do that with each objection.

Objection 1: Trump is a loose cannon who might offend other countries and maybe even start a nuclear war.

Persuasion: Trump has five decades of acting rational in business dealings, and getting along with people all over the world, including China and Russia. By now you would have heard stories of Trump being a loose cannon in his business dealings if such a thing had happened. We are hearing no stories of that nature. And people don’t suddenly change character at age 70. (That last sentence is the important one.)

How risky is Trump? Consider that Trump has never had an alcoholic beverage. He was against the Iraq war. He doesn’t want boots on the ground in Syria. He wants a strong military to discourage war. Trump personally gains nothing from war, but he has a lot to lose, including every building with his name on it.

Putin already seems to like Trump. They are similar characters in terms of their persuasion talents. And it wouldn’t hurt to be on good terms with Russia while we go after ISIS. Trump seems to have that relationship covered.

Trump has been negotiating with the Chinese for years, with no problems yet. And the Chinese leaders are not children. They got their positions by being great deal-makers, like Trump. They might not want to negotiate against Trump, but they aren’t afraid of his personality type. Trump often tells us that his first bid in any negotiation is super-aggressive. China knows it too. They are not naive. They can tell the difference between a negotiator and a madman.

Objection 2: Trump is terrible at business, as proven by his several bankruptcies.

Persuasion: Ask how many bankruptcies Trump has had. Most people say between 5-10. Then ask how many entities Trump has his name on. The answer is about 500. Then ask if that is a good performance for an entrepreneur who is often trying things in new fields.

(Asking questions in that fashion is good persuasion technique. It removes the adversarial frame and gives the person a sense of coming to a new conclusion without pressure.)

Then explain how licensing works. Trump puts his name on various products and he gets paid even if the product or company does poorly in the end. That’s an example of Trump taking the LEAST risk in a deal. The other parties take larger risks and frequently fail. Trump gets paid either way. All parties to the deals have lawyers who review everything. Trump isn’t taking advantage of people with his licensing deals. Licensees are knowingly accepting the riskier side of the deal because they also have the biggest potential upside.

Trump doesn’t like risk. We see it in lots of ways. For example, Trump has never been in a physical fight. He asked his wives to sign prenups. He creates separate entities so some can go bankrupt without bringing down the rest. He licenses his name so he gets paid even if the company buying the license does not make a profit. And he diversifies his portfolio to reduce exposure to any one risk.

Based on everything we see, Trump consistently tries hard to avoid risk in everything he does. And people don’t change character at age 70.

The exceptions to Trump’s risk-avoidance include some of the provocative stuff he is saying during the campaign. That behavior looks risky to most observers, but it was exactly what got him the Republican nomination. Evidently, Trump takes risks when doing so makes sense.

Objection 3: Trump is a racist.

Trump has never mentioned race beyond pointing how how many African-Americans and Latinos support him. Ask your anti-Trumper to offer evidence otherwise. Then point out…

Mexico is a country, not a race.

Islam is open to all races.

If the topic of Judge Curiel comes up, point out that all human beings are biased by their life experiences. Ask anti-Trumpers if they think Curiel would be comfortable at his next family gathering if his verdict favors Trump. (Notice the question form of persuasion again.)

Acknowledge that Trump was offensive when he attacked the judge’s parental connections to Mexico. But note that it is also good persuasion and good legal strategy. It puts the judge in the tough spot of either siding with Trump or appearing biased if he does not.

Then point out that only the Democrats are talking about race. And all of that race talk has been divisive. Trump has literally never said a negative thing about race during this election.

(Professional pundits will talk about Trump’s so-called “racist dog-whistles,” but normal voters do not mention it. They don’t know what it means.)

Objection 3.1: But Trump wants to discriminate based on religion!

Persuasion: Clarify to the subject of your persuasion that Trump only wants to discriminate against non-citizens. That is literally the job description of a president.

For context, point out that Islam is unique among religions in that it includes an order from God that Muslims should overthrow any government that is not compatible with Islam. Moderate Muslims around the world ignore that part of the religion, but refugees are coming from places where it is considered mandatory.

I don’t think other religions have a mandatory requirement to overthrow the government. So comparisons to other religions are nonsense. And the job of the president includes knowing when to make exceptions.

If you think we can screen Muslim immigrants well enough to stop all of the terrorists and future revolutionaries, just think about any job in which you had coworkers. Remember how incompetent some of them were? Those are the types of people screening immigrants. Does that feel safe to you?
Objection 4: Trump is anti-women and anti-LGBT

Persuasion:

Trump is the only candidate calling out Islam for its followers’ views on women and the LGBT community.

Trump wants women to have the right to own guns to protect themselves.

Trump is the only candidate concerned about crimes against women that are perpetrated by illegal immigrants from Mexico.

Trump has a long business record of promoting women to executive positions in his company. He was doing it years before it was fashionable.

The women in his personal life – including his ex-wives – seem to like him.

Trump is offensive in the way he has talked about women. But keep in mind that Trump has offended nearly everyone at some point.
The way to know your persuasion is working is that your subject will change the topic instead of addressing your point.

Example:

You: Mexico is not a race.

Subject: Well, Trump also had bankruptcies.

Don’t allow the topic to change. Instead, say again whatever you said just before it did. Make each point about three times, with slightly different wording each time. After the third restatement of your point, without an objection from your subject, allow the topic to change. It means you won

Spirit_Juice · July 15, 2016, 7:11am

The fact that Trump and Hillary are our choices for the next POTUS makes it pretty hard to argue against that our voting system, a first past the post system, is not severely flawed.

Raz0r · July 15, 2016, 2:30pm

That list was useless.

Jimbo13 · July 15, 2016, 7:00pm

If you find things completely accurate useless. Any hesitancy I have about Trump is based in reality, for example I have a strong contempt for imminent domain, I worry he may escalate the drug war on Marijuana in states that have legalized and I fully acknowledge he is not the most knowledgeable and lacks experience.

These issues are dwarfed in comparison to the corrupt liar criminal that is Hillary Clinton, no contest. Trump might be bad on these issues for me, I know Hillary is.

Azure · July 15, 2016, 7:03pm

So: Vote for Satan, or the court jester.

Fuck this shit.