Ah the old ambitious Hillary trope. Good to see you again.

Does it matter that Trump just specifically asked Russia to hack classified United States documents and release them publicly?

My sense is that it won't because (1) he can play it off as a joke if needed and (2) Clinton does not have strong moral authority on classified information because of the email scandal.

But it is still JULY and we already have one candidate asking foreign governments to attack the United States to help him win the election. How the hell will we make it to November?

I think Trump's goal has been to get the notoriety from running, but not actually win the election. He's been saying and doing things to get kicked out of the race, but it's backfired and he's actually picking up more and more followers.

So, joking or not, he's getting coverage and that's all he cares about getting.

While they're at it, they can hack into his tax returns too.

Trump is encouraging a foreign government to hack US secrets, says he will "overturn" the gay marriage decision, wants to ban people based on their religion, wants to build a wall to keep immigrants out, wants to bring back waterboarding and "worse", but Hillary is basically the same, so I'm voting for Jill Stein.

The sentiment I've seen from the angry far left on my facebook wall and on reddit is that they "tried to do things the positive way", and now they've been cheated out of that, they'd rather burn everything down in a negative way, via Trump (either by direct vote or vote for a third party if they want to support Stein whatever), than have Clinton as president. I saw one guy say he'd take a Trump-led nuclear war over a Clinton presidency.

Nice real world you interact with.



for comparison's sake:



From a sheer numbers perspective, there are more Trump supporters who are against the Emancipation Proclamation than there are Bernie supporters willing to vote for Trump, but in the word of 'gotta hear both sides' the two sides are completely equivalent.


Not sure about that. Once you get to the point of relying on views cherrypicked from random subreddits you're just seeking out a strawman.

...at least our angry, disaffected young men aren't killing priests??

And I bet you almost all of them are privileged, white Hipsters who won't suffer the worst consequences of a Trump presidency. It's easy to ask for things to be blown up when you know you won't be in the blast radius.

I did describe them as the "angry far left". And other polls reflect that anger, especially when the polls focus on younger people.

Poll: Nearly half of Sanders' millennial supporters would vote third-party | TheHill

I don't think that will impact November much, since a lot of these young people didn't even bother to vote at all in the primaries and won't bother in November either. There is a loud "burn it all down" sentiment among some of these young people, but I think for the vast majority of them, that sentiment doesn't go any further than yelling at people online.

Oh yeah I didn't mean that to come across as critical of you. It was directed at the people you were talking about.

I do think it is interesting that the demographics of Hillary's strongest supporters are generally the people who would be most impacted by a Trump victory, and the demographics of the "Let Trump win, fuck the world" group would be least impacted by a Trump presidency.

What whiny little bitches disappointed Sanders supporters can be...

Kodos, tell us about Pence

Would be interested in seeing this after the convention.

Yours?

Who knows what Trump really wants to or can do, but I think the millennial group might be the most impacted (for better or worse, I guess). For one, changes in Obama care will deeply impact the under 25 and non-employee insured. Also, lack of student loan restructuring and min wage hikes. Perhaps biggest would be mass deportation, both Latin America and overstayed visas.

it all reminds me of this:

Richard Vernon: You just bought yourself another Saturday.
John Bender: Ooh, I'm crushed.
Richard Vernon: You just bought one more.
John Bender: Well I'm free the Saturday after that. Beyond that, I'm going to have to check my calendar.
Richard Vernon: Good, cause it's going to be filled. We'll keep going. You want another one? Just say the word say it. Instead of going to prison you'll come here. Are you through?
John Bender: No.
Richard Vernon: I'm doing society a favor.
John Bender: So?
Richard Vernon: That's another one right now! I've got you for the rest of your natural born life if you don't watch your step. You want another one?
John Bender: Yes.
Richard Vernon: You got it! You got another one right there! That's another one

American. The Bernie Bro variety, anyway.

Yep. They'll be fine. Their black, LGBT and Muslim brothers and sisters on the other hand...

Oh, they'll be impacted, but it won't be a disaster as it is for others.

I'd love to, but live in Connecticut.

So, what then? You're too good to use your alien-on-high vantage point to look at another state?

So this happened...

Trump urges Russia to hack Clinton's email - POLITICO

And this

@MareikeAden
I asked @realDonaldTrump:"Would you as president want to recognize #Crimea as Russian, lift sanctions?" - "Yes we would be looking at that"

So Putin/Russia good. Erdogan good. Muslims bad. Mexicans bad.

I'm sure I'm missing some.

Saddam law and order tactics good.

#NeverClintrump We don't need a criminal and we don't need a con man.

You're right. That is the only one. In a state she handpicked to set herself up in because she knew it was a Dem and Bill Clinton stronghold. And the one notable achievement she apparently made as senator was to vote for the Iraq war.

Interesting that we would hand that person the most powerful position in the government. Can't wait.

Shoe fits...

So she has won one election in her life. So why is the idea of her flipping her position after winning an election going on her tombstone? That's what I'm missing.

2, technically. Election and re-Election to the Senate. 1 less than Barack Obama when he became President (election and re-election to the Illinois State Senate and then election to US Senate), and the same as George W. Bush prior to becoming President (election and re-election as Governor of Texas).

But yeah, it's another double standard.

Oh, I'm with you. There are reasons to criticize Clinton, but under-qualified is laughable. I was just responding to this idea that she has a history of changing her positions after elections when she actually has only had one opportunity to do so.

I know. I was just deflecting the other upcoming charge that was undoubtedly going to result from indicating that she had 2 election victories.

And she was still a pretty liberal Senator. People act like she was a Ben Nelson blue dog or she did a complete 180 on her campaign promises. Not true at all.

And ironically, Hillary's platform is far closer to what she would actually get done than Bernie's platform is to what he would get done. And it's not even close.

Chinese response to Tienanmen good.

So does the thing with Russia move the needle for any Trump supporters here? Or do we hate each other more than we care about national security?

The concept of her flipping her position to suit whatever best fits her political ambitions is a well discussed notion, and you know it. When she is President, she won't do what is good for the people. She will do what is politically expedient and which will help her get re-elected in 2020.

Wouldn't that mean that she at least did right by a majority of people that vote?

I'd be shocked if it moved anything at all. I'd rather see Putin in the WH than HRC or Obama for that matter.

Probably wouldn't mind him there instead of Trump either frankly.

I hope you're just being flippant here.

There's a reason we're not a direct democracy - catering to whims of the mob is like catering to a whining child. Neither stops to consider the repercussions of getting what they want. They want their instant gratification, damn everyone else.

A real leader has to make hard decisions that can potentially piss a lot of people off, but is necessary for the future stability of the people they lead (and accept the fact that sometimes, they're dead ass wrong). A real leader sticks to their convictions, re-election and the size of their lobbyists wallets be damned (and again, can accept the fact that sometimes, they're gonna be dead ass wrong). Neither Hillary nor Trump (nor pretty much any modern politician) fits the bill.

It was more a way of stating that doing the right thing has different meanings for different people. Just as an extreme example, how do you think Jon and I define the right thing?

LOL

On the other hand, someone who refuses to compromise their vision, and who thinks that their one way of looking at things is inherently correct and that everyone else is beneath them wouldn't make a very effective president.

Biden killed it. I would've voted and volunteered for him.

Once again, I've never understood the fascination with people who don't believe they're right.

If you think you're wrong then why are you holding position X in the first place?

It's not so much believing you're right, as it being willing to compromise some of your values in the furtherance of others. Which takes a certain amount of pragmatism to at least acknowledge that there's other valid opinions on things.

But I think it's also possible to recognize that on most issues, there's people out there smarter than you (or more experienced in a particular area) that think you're wrong.

Bloomberg has credibility in attacking Trump's business acumen.

Looking forward to Trump's reply.

Bloomberg and Cuban are actual billionaires unlike Trump.

I find this strategy intriguing. Most of the primetime DNC has been used to build up and soften Hillary, so you run out Bloomberg, who is essentially a better Trump, to do the attacking from an"independent" point of view.

Hillary is the "sane" choice ... is he saying that Donald is insane?

Yes, he is saying that.

Lenny Kravitz is really the best we could do here?

Hey, he played the Super Bowl.. 18 months ago..

*nods solemnly, marks vote, and wonders what Reagan would have thought*

Donald bashing night.

Well I think he sucks.

That word doesn't mean what he thinks it does.

Ok, that Obama intro video was fantastic.

Depends on "the things". If you don't like pepperoni but I do, that's cool.

For what it's worth, I'm not disagreeing here either. I probably didn't convey it as well as I should have, but being willing to change is also a Big Deal. But...you change your position for the right reasons. You get your feedback from actually qualified people, you make a decision, you hope it's the right one.

Problem is, most politicians move their position based on 1) what will keep them in office, 2) what keeps donors money flowing in. Doing what's actually good for the people you're supposedly serving takes a verrrrry distant third.

I still can't believe he doubled down on "Are You Gonna Go My Way" with a similarly lyric-less "Fly Away". I mean that shit is like some sort of contemporary church music song in it's simplicity and repeated refrain.

The Soviet Union is an evil empire, and I really like them!

Jon likes a Communist who worked in the KGB is a revelation. Perhaps professing his adoration for Mao is coming next week.

This election is getting the right to support the Russians and the left to turn into Joseph McCarthy. What a time to be alive.

1) "good for the people" in these assertions nearly always means "good for the subset of the population I and those of my ideological bent have chosen to identify as "Real America."

"The people" aren't a monolithic entity whereby what's good for one is good for all. Republicans love them some upper class tax cuts, but what usually pays for that is either debt or cutting the social safety net and playing "makers and takers."

The tax cuts work out well for people who pull down six figure incomes, but the much larger percentage of the population for whom the social safety net represents the difference between poverty and disaster? Usually not so much.

2) "Politically expedient," phrased another way: "Politics is the art of the possible." If you're acting in a politically expedient fashion, that typically means you're doing what you can, rather than choosing to die heroically on Ideological Purity Beach.

Maybe in pursuing what you think is possible you have to leave behind what you really want, and maybe somebody feels betrayed by that, but you know what? The thing about politics?

The folks like Jon who think that any compromise at all from 100% "my way or go fuck yourself" is the end of the Republic and a sign of spineless toad-fuckers are people who, more often than not, aren't going to get any of what they want.

And that works all along the ideological spectrum. If you put out, as your First Principle, that you're not going to negotiate, that you're not going to bend on anything I want because your ideological viewpoint is that I'm evil incarnate bent on destroying Mom and apple pie, where is my incentive to work with you? On anything?

By that logic, if I don't plant myself firmly athwart the road and say "No; YOU move," then I'm guilty of the same spineless toad-fuckery. It's just toad-fuckery you'd be able to live with because, after all, it isn't as if you thought anything I stood for was worthwhile.

And that's how the Republic grinds to a halt, when "I got mine, go fuck yourselves" are the words of House Reagan.

Because if the issue isn't an existential threat to America, most smart people are willing to wait a little bit for their position be proven demonstrably true. On the other hand, if you believe that allowing gay people to get married, Obamacare, and countless other things were going to bring about the end times, after a while you lose credibility.

And Stalin was our ally to defeat a more serious enemy.

Putin is less a communist at this point than most of the identifiable (D) candidates or personalities. My biggest knock on the KGB is their historic employers.

There isn't much you can come up with that I wouldn't find preferable to the domestic left.

Examples?

On her core issues, such as support for children, she's been consistent since the 70s.


Apart from being a foreigner, he's pretty much your ideal candidate. Authoritarian, ends-justify-the-means and pretty much thinks everyone outside his country (and many in it) aren't worth a bucket of warm spit.

The fact that he grew up a communist is a red herring. If anyone looks at how Putin has run Russia and thinks he's anything other than a Authoritarian Capitalist, I really don't know what to say.


Oh, I think George W. Bush did fine.


The Democrats need to do more on this, and having surrogates with actual business success do it instead of Hillary is a good thing.

Trump's business acumen, like most things about him, has very little behind it.

It's been amazing watching these 2 conventions. Watching the RNC I would believe America is in the toilet and heading for the sewers. The speakers said almost nothing about Donald Trump, just spent days railing against Hillary. The DNC speakers until last night barely mentioned Trump, and really just spent a few sentences trashing him. Mostly talking about Hillary's accomplishments (and their own). Odd times.

I saw the tail end of his set when he opened for GNR last week and surprisingly thought it was good.

Bush never struck me as a strict-policy guy like Sanders. He was more about broad themes. Though it's kind of hard to evaluate him in that way because his whole presidency was defined by an event and how he reacted to it. (Edit: Which is part of what I was saying before a about a president's list of policy positions not necessarily being the most important thing. Responding to the unexpected is probably more important, and it's where a president really defines his or her legacy.)

Yep. He was fantastic. The contrast in speakers between the DNC and RNC is incredibly stark (I know I'm biased). Just great speaker after great speaker at the DNC (well, Tim Kaine wasn't that good, but he was competent and spawned an army of nice-guy dad comments on Twitter, so good I guess).

President Obama just killed it with that speech, portraying a Reagan-esque optimism he has in America. Made me so proud in what my country has accomplished.

And, speaking of, it was interesting to see the Democrats being the party of patriotism, values, for the troops, chanting "USA" - this is what Donald Trump has done to your party, Republicans; the Democrats just took some of your best stuff as smooth as silk.

Surprisingly for me, I actually think this article from Red State pretty much sums up the past 2 weeks of conventions fairly well.

Trump Knows the Mood of the Country Better than the Democrats, Who are Blowing It at Their Convention | RedState

I feel like the Democrats haven't yet made the case of Hillary as trustworthy. Whether one thinks she is or not, the Republicans have basically been hammering the Clintons for over 20 years for one reason or another, so it's not surprising where she's at. I don't know how one speech changes that. I guess we'll see.

It's like RedState has unlearned all the lessons from Ronald Reagan.

So, this outrages you too then?

Post reporter barred, patted down by police, at rally for Trump running mate - The Washington Post

Trump revokes Post press credentials, calling the paper ‘dishonest’ and ‘phony’ - The Washington Post

Report what I tell you, or stfu?

This.

Also, wrong track isn't comprised of a single ideological group. Some people are pissed at the things Trump is pissed at, but others are pissed at the GOP or corporate America or the cops or... Politically, there's no room to out anger Trump, as the GOP primary showed. The only space is less angry. It may not work, but trying to out anger Trump is certainly a losing strategy.

Im just glad the DNC isn't unhappy and loves America and waved American flags. It's not the impression I've had of them for the last 12 years. Good to see them coming around.

Make up call for the opening night of the convention.

Oh yay! Now it's the Democrats hate America trope! We're trotting them all out this week.

Well since it's obvious that the Republicans hate America, it's projection :D

That one went away?

There hasn't been a more destructive force allied against the United States in its entire history than what the Democratic Party has turned into.

If the truth hurts, that's just too damned bad.

To be fair, you're not exactly Mr. Positive when discussing the state of the U.S.A. I used to think that the Dems mostly were the side that pushed the "America sucks" narrative (which makes sense, since progressives generally want to change things). But that's definitely shifted some. The Sanders side of the Democratic party was definitely the most negative about the U.S., and they lost. The Trump side of the Republican party was the side that was most negative about the U.S., and they won.

So Democrats are worse than the Russians were with their nuclear arsenal? Got it.

I certainly won't argue with you on that point.

And that's significantly due to the misguided/evil (take your pick, case by case I suppose) efforts of the Ds, who've done their dead level best to destroy the nation beyond all recognition.

Do you really feel the need to ask whether I'd prefer that to the slow painful death we've ended up with?

If the Soviets had taken us out, in hindsight it looks like it might have been a mercy killing.

Spasibo, comrade.

well hadn't heard too much from/about Tim Kaine since being named VP, but good thing the Republican Party of North Carolina spotted this:

Whoops! NC Republicans 'shame' Tim Kaine for flag pin honoring son in the military | abc11.com

Boy, those NC Republicans sure are doing a bang up job this year.

I have a suspicion that this is exactly the type of person the KGB turned during the Cold War.

Jon = Matthew Rhys

Nah.

During the Cold War era things weren't nearly in this bad a shape.

There's a part of me that feels like the rhetoric comparing Hitler to Trump is kind of offensive, or at least hypocritical, considering that it's based on Trump hypothetically killing lots of Muslims, but the folks I know who are most vocal and insistent about the horror of the idea have pretty much given Obama and the Dems a free pass on killing real, actual Muslim people for the last 8 years.

How about not making it an either/or? Gary Johnson and Bill Weld think Trump's deportation plan is eerily similar to Kristallnacht and also think Obama needs to stop killing innocent Middle Eastern people with drones. Condemning both allows you to avoid the typical "Well if you think he's bad at least he didn't do this" false left/right paradigm.

Well, it certainly seems like their creation of a victim culture is effective. Too bad, I'm sure you are missing some good things in your world that the big bad boogeyman hasn't destroyed.

Yeah, I certainly don't have a problem with that line of thinking, as I'll probably be voting green again, but most of my Dem friends don't even bother to recognize the confliction.

It's insane how much many of my friends and family hold these political parties so dearly and with no hint of shame change their views on wars, trade, privacy... based on what the D/R candidate is saying that election cycle.

*If you were a heterosexual white male.

I do wonder if the Internet has finally broken political discourse, without trying to sound all HOT TAEK or hyperbolic. Message boards, social media and even legitimate news channels seem to be 24/7 just garbage and propaganda from both sides of the aisle. Even people I seem to think are intelligent, well balanced individuals that largely I would hold similar viewpoints as aren't immune from posting barely disguised partisan garbage. The actual media seems nothing more than clickbait and more than willing to shape the race the way they want it and promote the stories that gets them more views. Does Hilary hate America and will she let ISIS jihadis butcher your children? Is Trump an evil racist demagogue who will start WW3? Tune in at 10pm to find out!

This may be no more than a hysterical rant but fuck, it's not even August yet. And I want to go live on a mountain somewhere until it's all over already.