Elections 2016 GOP/Democratic March 15th Primaries

[Execute]

You'd have to ask one of these Trump supporters, especially the Sanders-Trump converts, why they are prepared to "roll the dice".
From over here (Oz) at least, there's no way I see things in the US being so bad I'd make that call.

It's not bad at all. I seriously think people are so comfortable these days that they make shit up so they can get angry. They don't actually have real problems.

 

[Jack V Savage]

ankther classic spin: ducks accountability for 3 posts, then accuses opponent of ducking question from previous post.

What are you talking about? Where did I duck accountability, you liar?

Did Clinton vote for a war that killed a million innocent people?
Did Obama expand this war and kill thousands of innocent people?

She voted to authorize Bush to make the decision to go into war if necessary (which passed the Senate 77 to 23--presumably you think if it had been 76-24, Bush would have decided that he didn't have a strong enough mandate or something). So clearly, it's her fault that there was a war.

Do you want to answer my questions now are you going to continue to be a dishonest weasel? The war never would have happened if Nader hadn't put personal glory over country, would it? And it would have happened regardless of what Clinton did, right? Your alleged deep concern about the war is totally exposed as fake by your Nader fandom. It's all just cheerleader shit for you. You don't give a fuck about people's lives.

And, no, the war has tapered down under Obama. Are you not aware of that? What do you think he should have done differently? I'm guessing that you're ducking that one either because you realize that any option would have some bad effects and he's probably taken the best of a lot of bad possibilities or you simply know nothing about the issue.

 

[Fawlty]

It's not bad at all. I seriously think people are so comfortable these days that they make shit up so they can get angry. They don't actually have real problems.

This is what I don't understand about the outrage of the right. The factions of the right agree on pretty much every aspect of every policy, and only seem to disagree on the tone of the rhetoric. How are they fractured? And with nearly every measurable aspect of quality of life improving, how the hell is our country supposedly falling apart? (The left are also creating too much outrage, but I think I understand that)

 

[Anung Un Rama]

What are you talking about? Where did I duck accountability, you liar?



She voted to authorize Bush to make the decision to go into war if necessary (which passed the Senate 77 to 23--presumably you think if it had been 76-24, Bush would have decided that he didn't have a strong enough mandate or something). So clearly, it's her fault that there was a war.

Do you want to answer my questions now are you going to continue to be a dishonest weasel?

And, no, the war has tapered down under Obama. Are you not aware of that? What do you think he should have done differently? I'm guessing that you're ducking that one either because you realize that any option would have some bad effects and he's probably taken the best of a lot of bad possibilities or you simply know nothing about the issue.

We're getting there, but first congrats in admitting Hillary is complicit in the deaths of 1,000,000 people. Far more egregious than an economic plan that favors the rich at the expense of the poor and middle class.

Now, to Obama, are you denying that he expanded the war into Pakistan, Yemen, Libya, Syria, and Afghanistan?

 

[Jack V Savage]

We're getting there, but first congrats in admitting Hillary is complicit in the deaths of 1,000,000 people.

You're lying again and ducking my questions after I answered yours, further demonstrating what a dishonest piece of shit you are. Stop pretending to care about human life when you're clearly a sociopath.

 

[ucunc156]

You guys are both being pretty disingenuous here.

Jack, don't root cause back to nader running, taking votes away from gore, and then saying iraq would have never happened if Nader didn't run. That consequence was totally not something we could see coming. You might have imagined the country worse off under bush, but not necessarily see that iraq war would have happened. Also, don't deny that obama has killed many innocent people under the drone actions. There may not be a better way, but it doesn't change the fact that it happened.

AUR, Jack is right, in the end hillary clinton's vote didn't make a difference either way. I can't imagine you would be voting for her now even if she didn't vote that way. Also, if thats the case, would you not vote for any candidate that runs because they made the mistake in voting for the war? On Obama, I too would have liked to see a ramp down, but I will say drone attacks are better than boots on the ground.

 

[Jack V Savage]

This is what I don't understand about the outrage of the right. The factions of the right agree on pretty much every aspect of every policy, and only seem to disagree on the tone of the rhetoric. How are they fractured? And with nearly every measurable aspect of quality of life improving, how the hell is our country supposedly falling apart? (The left are also creating too much outrage, but I think I understand that)

One thing to note is that most of the "right" does NOT agree with the main GOP priorities (tax cuts for the rich and dismantling the safety net) and a lot of the right is not as militant as the party. I get that Trump is also offering even bigger tax cuts for the rich, but he's de-emphasized that aspect of the platform. That's the real split in the party--folks who don't really care about policy but resent ethnic and cultural minorities and intellectuals vs. folks who primarily care about upward redistribution of wealth and play to the other group to get votes.

You guys are both being pretty disingenuous here.

Nothing disingenuous in my posts.

Jack, don't root cause back to nader running, taking votes away from gore, and then saying iraq would have never happened if Nader didn't run. That consequence was totally not something we could see coming.

As you say, we couldn't necessarily see that specific consequence, but we could have foreseen bad consequences. And that was, for me and a lot of the left, a learning experience. Anung is willfully ignoring the lesson because he doesn't really care about policy. He sees voting as joining someone's fan club rather than trying to affect policy.

You might have imagined the country worse off under bush, but not necessarily see that iraq war would have happened. Also, don't deny that obama has killed many innocent people under the drone actions. There may not be a better way, but it doesn't change the fact that it happened.

I haven't denied anything real (though, Anung has ridiculously exaggerated the numbers here). My point--again, trying to steer toward substance rather than Anung's usual dishonest character assassination--is that foreign policy involves hard choices, and any option leads to negative results. If you have no position that you're willing to advance, your criticism is useless and likely disingenuous. Every single policy decision (including the decision to do nothing)--and this goes for everything, not just foreign policy--carries tradeoffs. No honest person focuses solely on the bad aspects of a tradeoff with no discussion of alternatives. Did we kill thousands of innocent people in WWII? Yep. Would isolationism have been better for humanity?

 

[Anung Un Rama]

You're lying again and ducking my questions after I answered yours, further demonstrating what a dishonest piece of shit you are. Stop pretending to care about human life when you're clearly a sociopath.

You didn't answer my question, you dodged it. Now, did Obama kill thousands of innocent people via his expanded War on Terror?

 

[Jack V Savage]

You didn't answer my question, you dodged it. Now, did Obama kill thousands of innocent people via his expanded War on Terror?

If you want to have a real discussion, answer my questions. What are you so afraid of?

 

[Fawlty]

One thing to note is that most of the "right" does NOT agree with the main GOP priorities (tax cuts for the rich and dismantling the safety net) and a lot of the right is not as militant as the party. I get that Trump is also offering even bigger tax cuts for the rich, but he's de-emphasized that aspect of the platform. That's the real split in the party--folks who don't really care about policy but resent ethnic and cultural minorities and intellectuals vs. folks who primarily care about upward redistribution of wealth and play to the other group to get votes.

When has a faction of the right complained about tax cuts for the rich? If that has occurred I have completely missed that, and it means I've been stereotyping them for a long time.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

If you want to have a real discussion, answer my questions. What are you so afraid of?

Lmao! Did Obama kill thousands of innocents people under his expanded war on terror/ drone program or not?

 

[Jack V Savage]

When has a faction of the right complained about tax cuts for the rich? If that has occurred I have completely missed that, and it means I've been stereotyping them for a long time.

I don't know that individuals have complained, but that's what the ire at the party is. They make all these big promises, and then when they're in office, their sole priority is cutting taxes for the rich. Some of them like it, but a lot don't. A plurality of Republicans want higher taxes on corporations AND (separately) on the rich.

And Anung, do you want to tell me if you think the Iraq War would have happened without Clinton's 77th vote and if it would have happened if not for Nader's stunt candidacy? Also, do you want to say what you think Obama could do to reduce the loss of innocent lives in the Middle East? No?

 

[Fawlty]

I don't know that individuals have complained, but that's what the ire at the party is. They make all these big promises, and then when they're in office, their sole priority is cutting taxes for the rich. Some of them like it, but a lot don't. A plurality of Republicans want higher taxes on corporations AND (separately) on the rich.

Sounds like I have some reading to do, because that is almost the opposite of my assumptions.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Sounds like I have some reading to do, because that is almost the opposite of my assumptions.

Found this right away. I've seen other stuff along the same lines.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/168521/taxes-rise-half-say-middle-income-pay.aspx

And, again, it's not that Trump isn't offering the same terrible policies; it's just that people think that that's the part he's bullshitting about, while Rubio was more likely to be sincere about that stuff and bullshitting about immigration and Muslims.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

Quack quack Jack.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Quack quack Jack.

That's the most substantive post you've made in this thread. Want to stop ducking my questions now? Or at least explain why you're so scared to answer them?

 

[Anung Un Rama]

That's the most substantive post you've made in this thread. Want to stop ducking my questions now? Or at least explain why you're so scared to answer them?

You're still on the hook to admit that Obama killed thousands of innocent people with his expanded war on terror/ drone program. After you acknowledge that we can discuss your rationalization of it.

 

[Jack V Savage]

You're still on the hook to admit that Obama killed thousands of innocent people with his expanded war on terror/ drone program. After you acknowledge that we can discuss your rationalization of it.

LOL! I answered your stupid questions, and you ducked mine, and are trying to ask more stupid ones. Just step up to the plate and try to deal with an issue honestly for once. It's fun.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

LOL! I answered your stupid questions, and you ducked mine, and are trying to ask more stupid ones. Just step up to the plate and try to deal with an issue honestly for once. It's fun.

Okay, I must have missed it. Humor me and admit that Obama killed thousands of innocent people with his expanded war on terror/ drone program and then we can talk about what's going on with you.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Okay, I must have missed it.

You missed it?

OK. I asked whether you think the Iraq War would have happened even if Clinton voted against it, and if you think it would have happened if Nader hadn't thrown the election to Bush.

And then I asked what better alternative you think Obama has had.

Looking forward to you not ducking and pretending not to have seen the questions!