2016 US Presidential Election

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates


Mutex
Posts: 1470
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Mutex » Wed Aug 03, 2016 3:13 pm UTC

You gotta nuke somethin'.

User avatar
trpmb6
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 6:27 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby trpmb6 » Wed Aug 03, 2016 3:14 pm UTC




I'm not a trump supporter, but even I can understand that questions about nuclear weapons would certainly be an important part of a foreign policy Q&A. What kind of treaties exist, what are their purpose, what brought about their existence, etc. To me it is surprising it was only brought up three times.
(terran/protoss/zerg/fascist fuck)

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 8529
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Zohar » Wed Aug 03, 2016 3:25 pm UTC

There's a difference between saying "Please tell me all the limitations on nuclear weapons usage in general", and "Why can't we use nukes in this specific case?"

That someone should even consider nuclear weapons usage shows... well, a real misunderstanding of how global politics work. I'm sure every elected president (other than sitting ones I suppose) have a lot to learn, but this seems to me as something they should know ahead of time.
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6578
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Thesh » Wed Aug 03, 2016 3:34 pm UTC

Honestly, while I don't find it hard to believe, Joe Scarborough is a hack, and any unnamed source coming from him should be taken with a grain of salt.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Aug 03, 2016 3:35 pm UTC

The nukes things is...eh. It's not *wrong* to ask why not, but Trump's general lack of caution does put his comments in a certain light. He's certainly no strategic genius.

Izawwlgood wrote:I know it's just a conspiracy theory, but the notion that Trump is just a plant to tear apart the Republican party is looking more and more plausible.


Meh, they've been tearing themselves apart for a while now. It's not a Trump specific thing, even if Trump is particularly bad.

sardia wrote:Working class white men have been receptive to Republican's message on cultural grievances since Romney, maybe even the Tea Party.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... -like-him/
The key predictors of being a Trumper is being a noncollege working class white man who is very concerned about immigration, Muslims, and minorities. Roughly 20%* of the country shares some aspects of this, aka the real Americans.

*http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/only-20-percent-of-voters-are-real-americans/
**https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/02/donald-trump-just-reminded-america-that-the-only-loyalty-he-respects-is-to-donald-trump/


That 20% isn't 'some aspects of this', if my memory is accurate(article isn't loading for some reason). That's the number of people with ALL aspects of this. Each of those factors individually is larger, and thus, his support is even more significant. Someone who really dislikes minorities and immigration probably isn't overly bothered by a little muslim-hatred, even if it's not his pet peeve.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 2106
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Sableagle » Wed Aug 03, 2016 3:40 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:I hope Trumps Secret Service detail is on their toes.
Considering that OC SEAL Team Two just told him to show some respect, they may be quite nervous at the moment, yes.
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

Drumheller769
Posts: 733
Joined: Mon May 11, 2009 7:46 pm UTC
Location: ♞♞♞

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Drumheller769 » Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:04 pm UTC

The Great Hippo wrote:Arguing with the internet is a lot like arguing with a bullet. The internet's chief exports are cute kittens, porn, and Reasons Why You Are Completely Fucking Wrong.

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 8529
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Zohar » Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:18 pm UTC

Thesh wrote:Honestly, while I don't find it hard to believe, Joe Scarborough is a hack, and any unnamed source coming from him should be taken with a grain of salt.

Yeah, I thought about that after posting. I just saw a West Wing episode where CJ says "if you tell me an unnamed source's quote we'll just assume you made it up".
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Wed Aug 03, 2016 5:28 pm UTC

Zohar wrote:
Thesh wrote:Honestly, while I don't find it hard to believe, Joe Scarborough is a hack, and any unnamed source coming from him should be taken with a grain of salt.

Yeah, I thought about that after posting. I just saw a West Wing episode where CJ says "if you tell me an unnamed source's quote we'll just assume you made it up".


Some smart questions asked by Washington Post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/postever ... ge%2Fstory


Most importantly:

3) Who was the expert?! As Spoiler Alerts has frequently noted, Trump’s foreign policy team runs the gamut from incompetent to nonexistent. At the beginning of the clip, former CIA director Michael Hayden confirms that none of his peers is talking to Trump. So just who was the foreign policy expert who talked to him? Logically, the set of foreign policy experts who talk to both Trump and Scarborough can’t be that large, so I suspect that this information will be puzzled out pretty soon.


Healthy skepticism should be given to this nuclear claim.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 2106
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Sableagle » Wed Aug 03, 2016 5:56 pm UTC

Well, the Washington Post has a different idea of what's important than the Sun (proprietor: Rupert Murdoch).

What the Sun thought was worth a two-page spread this week is NSFW. I think they found a couple of spare column inches in one corner for something about McCain, in very small print.
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby morriswalters » Wed Aug 03, 2016 6:05 pm UTC

:lol:

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4582
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby LaserGuy » Wed Aug 03, 2016 6:13 pm UTC

Rumors are circulating (again) that the RNC is contemplating a coup to remove Donald Trump after a disastrous week. Their options are quite limited at this point if Trump doesn't voluntarily step down though.

User avatar
Quizatzhaderac
Posts: 1798
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Space Florida

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Quizatzhaderac » Wed Aug 03, 2016 6:31 pm UTC

Maybe they should form the Republicen party?
The thing about recursion problems is that they tend to contain other recursion problems.

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 8529
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Zohar » Wed Aug 03, 2016 6:44 pm UTC

Republikahns!
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Wed Aug 03, 2016 6:57 pm UTC

LaserGuy wrote:Rumors are circulating (again) that the RNC is contemplating a coup to remove Donald Trump after a disastrous week. Their options are quite limited at this point if Trump doesn't voluntarily step down though.


The time for a coup was at the RNC. Paul Ryan and Priebus lost their chance. Its August, the election is literally in 3 months.

Priebus didn't fight against Trump when the time was right. Now he has no time left and is forced to keep Trump happy.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
eran_rathan
Mostly Wrong
Posts: 1841
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 2:36 pm UTC
Location: in your ceiling, judging you

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby eran_rathan » Wed Aug 03, 2016 6:59 pm UTC

Zohar wrote:Republikahns!


go one further - Republikhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan!

Image
"Does this smell like chloroform to you?"
"Google tells me you are not unique. You are, however, wrong."
nɒʜƚɒɿ_nɒɿɘ

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6797
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby sardia » Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:53 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
LaserGuy wrote:Rumors are circulating (again) that the RNC is contemplating a coup to remove Donald Trump after a disastrous week. Their options are quite limited at this point if Trump doesn't voluntarily step down though.


The time for a coup was at the RNC. Paul Ryan and Priebus lost their chance. Its August, the election is literally in 3 months.

Priebus didn't fight against Trump when the time was right. Now he has no time left and is forced to keep Trump happy.

They have the option to campaign individually but the GOP calculated that it's more damaging to ditch Trump.

elasto
Posts: 3756
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby elasto » Wed Aug 03, 2016 8:43 pm UTC

Unsurprisingly, the Khan controversy has not hit his core support:

McKee, who regularly watched Trump rallies in full on the One America News Network, a niche rightwing competitor to Fox News, added: “[Khan] shouldn’t have been attacking Trump. Trump didn’t vote for the war. Hillary did.”

Mike Rutledge from Chantilly, Virginia echoed these thoughts. “I really didn’t find any offensive thing about what he said.” The Trump supporter also scoffed at the idea that some considered the Republican nominee’s comments about Ghazala Khan to be cruel.

“I think we are too soft on the word cruel,” said Rutledge. “Michael Vick’s dogfighting was animal cruelty. He didn’t just go up to dogs and say I’d like to hear what your mom had to say. There’s a huge difference between cruelty and what Donald Trump did.”

Others simply brushed it off as Trump’s plain speaking. To Valerie Mansberger of New Bloomfield, Pennsylvania who was attending Trump’s rally Monday night outside Harrisburg Pennsylvania in the suburb of Mechanicsburg, the Republican nominee just “said what he believes and I know he didn’t mean anything by it”. She thought he was “a straight shooter” and that “all Trump supporters and all people who truly know him know his heart is for us”.

The only voter to be hesitant about Trump’s comments was Connie Althouse of Shermans Dale, Pennsylvania. Speaking before the Mechanicsburg rally on Monday night, she said she found Trump’s comments on the Khans and John McCain to be “very disrespectful”. However, Althouse, a devout opponent of Hillary Clinton was still pretty sure that she would vote for Trump “unless he says something that really is a turnoff”. She continued: “I can’t tell you what it is and I’ll know when I hear it.”

Many though hadn’t even followed the news, shrugging it off with comments like “I hadn’t heard that.” One, Ridge Heiges of Shermans Dale, asked the Guardian: “Did he say some bad stuff or what?” On hearing about the controversy, Heiges said “That’s pretty terrible” but then shrugged it off. “In politics there is always going to be the wrong thing said by everybody. Everybody’s said terrible things.”

User avatar
Vahir
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 7:20 pm UTC
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Vahir » Wed Aug 03, 2016 8:56 pm UTC

the Republican nominee just “said what he believes

and I know he didn’t mean anything by it”.


...What?

Trump supporters are wasting their lives, their real calling is olympic-level mental gymnastics.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Wed Aug 03, 2016 10:54 pm UTC

sardia wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:
LaserGuy wrote:Rumors are circulating (again) that the RNC is contemplating a coup to remove Donald Trump after a disastrous week. Their options are quite limited at this point if Trump doesn't voluntarily step down though.


The time for a coup was at the RNC. Paul Ryan and Priebus lost their chance. Its August, the election is literally in 3 months.

Priebus didn't fight against Trump when the time was right. Now he has no time left and is forced to keep Trump happy.

They have the option to campaign individually but the GOP calculated that it's more damaging to ditch Trump.


Unfortunately for them, Trump calculated that as well, and is using it as leverage against the establishment. All Trump has to do is throw a temper-tantrum whenever the Republicans don't do what he wants, and they'll bend to his will.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6797
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby sardia » Wed Aug 03, 2016 11:53 pm UTC

Trump shows he's not completely incompetent by matching Hillary in fundraising.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/04/us/po ... .html?_r=0
He's got grassroots street cred, we give him that. Probably helps that his core voters are actually quite wealthy.

User avatar
Mighty Jalapeno
Inne Juste 7 Dayes I Wille Make You A Hero!
Posts: 11265
Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 9:16 pm UTC
Location: Prince George In A Can
Contact:

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Mighty Jalapeno » Thu Aug 04, 2016 3:30 am UTC

One of my (former) Facebook friends described Trump as "a little rough around the edges" and "only against ILLEGAL immigration", whereas Hillary was stealing the presidency high atop a pile of literal corpses.

...

People shouldn't be in charge of voting for things.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6797
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby sardia » Thu Aug 04, 2016 5:34 am UTC

Trump voters are desperate to stop cultural grievances against whites.


http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/g ... ion-226652
In other news, Gary Johnson breaks from libertarians to say we should intervene to deal with racism in the country.

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6578
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Thesh » Thu Aug 04, 2016 5:39 am UTC

sardia wrote:Trump shows he's not completely incompetent by matching Hillary in fundraising.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/04/us/po ... .html?_r=0
He's got grassroots street cred, we give him that. Probably helps that his core voters are actually quite wealthy.


Well, the bulk of Trump's money was raised through the RNC. Most of Hillary's was raised through her campaign.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6797
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby sardia » Thu Aug 04, 2016 1:09 pm UTC

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the ... -problems/
The system isn't rigged, if it was we could arrest the trouble makers. The real problem is the voters.
1. Geographic sorting — Voters tend to cluster near other people who share their cultural and political values, and the parties’ coalitions have become far more geographically isolated in recent decades. In the 1960 Kennedy-Nixon election, 52 percent of the nation’s voters lived in states decided by 5 percentage points or less. In the 2012 Obama-Romney race, just 17 percent of all voters lived in such states.

2. Straight-ticket voting — Voters are splitting their tickets — voting for a Republican for one office and a Democrat for another — at lower rates than we’ve seen in decades. They’re just not making distinctions between parties’ presidential and congressional candidates like they used to. The decline of local news readership probably plays a role — after all, these outlets have traditionally provided an avenue for candidates to build a personal brand independent of their party’s.

3. Primaries have become the new general elections — The Cook Political Report currently rates just 37 of 435 House seats as competitive this fall, less than 9 percent of the House. As a result, primary elections have become tantamount to general elections in the vast majority of seats. Because primaries are held on many different dates, they tend to generate less national attention and attract disproportionate shares of hardcore, ideological party activists to the polls.

4. Congress grinds to a halt — The enormous pressure to please narrow, extreme and grossly unrepresentative bases of primary voters has straitjacketed members who would otherwise be willing to collaborate across the aisle, ditch talking points or behave in a way that reflects their true conscience. No one wants to risk alienating their base unnecessarily for fear of becoming the next Eric Cantor.

5. Anger at politicians grows — Every year, legions of candidates take to the airwaves with trite tropes about how “Washington is broken” and how they can fix it, in most cases by just fighting the other party harder. But most candidates end up contributing to the very problem they’re decrying. When no one gets anything they want and Congress can’t address basic problems, voters grow even more disillusioned with D.C. and hungrier for an outsider.

The politicians are responding rationally to their incentives while voters are increasingly irrational.

User avatar
ahammel
My Little Cabbage
Posts: 2135
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:46 am UTC
Location: Vancouver BC
Contact:

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby ahammel » Thu Aug 04, 2016 2:17 pm UTC

sardia wrote:The politicians are responding rationally to their incentives while voters are increasingly irrational.

My take away from that wasn't that voters are any more or less rational. Its just that there are getting to be fewer and fewer competitive races, which makes small group of die-hards are disproportionately more powerful.
He/Him/His/Alex
God damn these electric sex pants!

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Aug 04, 2016 2:20 pm UTC

Summary of this election:

Spoiler:
Image


We're all voting against candidates. Not for them. Clinton has a few more "for" voters than "against Trump" voters. But... it looks like most people are voting "against" the candidates these days.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 8529
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Zohar » Thu Aug 04, 2016 2:47 pm UTC

I think that's a misleading way to look at elections. You will probably never find a candidate you agree with 100%. There's probably never someone you have no criticisms for, and the difference between the candidates is degrees (though as parties become more extreme so do the gaps between two opponents' positions). If you limit your vote to the person who represents your views, you're not likely to vote. When voting, we choose a candidate who we think can create a future closer to our own.

Also, I wouldn't trust a chart that doesn't include numbers or sampling size. For instance, they present only two options (for candidate or against opponent), but neither of the candidates' bars add up to 100%. I've seen some extreme data manipulation in the past, I just don't trust a graphic designer's choice to represent a data analyst's results.
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Aug 04, 2016 3:19 pm UTC

sardia wrote:http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/g ... ion-226652
In other news, Gary Johnson breaks from libertarians to say we should intervene to deal with racism in the country.


That's pretty normal for Johnson. He's been a fan of the CRA and so forth before. Not really a break, just his usual position.

User avatar
Quizatzhaderac
Posts: 1798
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Space Florida

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Quizatzhaderac » Thu Aug 04, 2016 3:29 pm UTC

Sableagle wrote:What the Sun thought was worth a two-page spread this week is NSFW.
It turns out that actually is of serious journalistic value.

Those pictures were taken in 1995, Mrs. Trump was not legally able to work in the US until 1996.

Which probably makes Mrs. Trump guilty of visa fraud.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:People shouldn't be in charge of voting for things.
Yes, people are responsible for 100% of the things wrong in politics, but what's the alternative, dolphins?
The thing about recursion problems is that they tend to contain other recursion problems.

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 8529
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Zohar » Thu Aug 04, 2016 3:31 pm UTC

Quizatzhaderac wrote:but what's the alternative, dolphins?

Oh fuck I sure hope so!
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6797
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby sardia » Thu Aug 04, 2016 3:35 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
That's pretty normal for Johnson. He's been a fan of the CRA and so forth before. Not really a break, just his usual position.

I guess the real issue with libertarians is how they justify the civil rights act or other thorny self inflicted problems of principle. Like in theory, libertarians say the Fed is bad but that doesn't match up with reality.

KnightExemplar wrote:Summary of this election:

Spoiler:
Image


We're all voting against candidates. Not for them. Clinton has a few more "for" voters than "against Trump" voters. But... it looks like most people are voting "against" the candidates these days.
I understand your point, but your graph doesn't show that, at least doesn't show a statistically significant difference. Ooh, the people who voted for Hillary also are voting against Trump. Big surprise.

ahammel wrote:
sardia wrote:The politicians are responding rationally to their incentives while voters are increasingly irrational.

My take away from that wasn't that voters are any more or less rational. Its just that there are getting to be fewer and fewer competitive races, which makes small group of die-hards are disproportionately more powerful.

You're reversing cause and effect here. Races aren't competitive because voters have sorted themselves geographically into noncompetitive district's.
The small group of ideological die hards only matter because voters don't care about primaries. We had posters in this thread complain about the lack of voice in the general election while completely ignoring the primary.
All of this is laid at the feet of the voter.

In other news, I think TV ads are 75% a scam consultants use on politicians. You'd probably be better off investing in a ground game and buying Uber rides in swing district's.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 2106
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Sableagle » Thu Aug 04, 2016 3:36 pm UTC

Quizatzhaderac wrote:Which probably makes Mrs. Trump guilty of visa fraud.
Awkward. :lol: :D :lol:
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Aug 04, 2016 3:37 pm UTC

Quizatzhaderac wrote:
Sableagle wrote:What the Sun thought was worth a two-page spread this week is NSFW.
It turns out that actually is of serious journalistic value.

Those pictures were taken in 1995, Mrs. Trump was not legally able to work in the US until 1996.

Which probably makes Mrs. Trump guilty of visa fraud.


Huh. That's way more interesting that "OH GAWD, look, she was NAKED. We will now publish pictures for your perusal, so you can judge her more effectively".

But yeah, I don't think Trump actually gives two craps about visa rules.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6797
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby sardia » Thu Aug 04, 2016 3:56 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:
Quizatzhaderac wrote:
Sableagle wrote:What the Sun thought was worth a two-page spread this week is NSFW.
It turns out that actually is of serious journalistic value.

Those pictures were taken in 1995, Mrs. Trump was not legally able to work in the US until 1996.

Which probably makes Mrs. Trump guilty of visa fraud.


Huh. That's way more interesting that "OH GAWD, look, she was NAKED. We will now publish pictures for your perusal, so you can judge her more effectively".

But yeah, I don't think Trump actually gives two craps about visa rules.

Nobody except anti immigrants care about visa rules. And most of the time, they only denounce Hispanics. Oh and Muslims/refugees too. They aren't going to protest or harass white people who overstay they visa.

User avatar
Zohar
COMMANDER PORN
Posts: 8529
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:45 pm UTC
Location: Denver

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Zohar » Thu Aug 04, 2016 3:58 pm UTC

sardia wrote:Nobody except anti immigrants care about visa rules. And most of the time, they only denounce Hispanics. Oh and Muslims/refugees too. They aren't going to protest or harass white people who overstay they visa.

Whaaaaaaaa??? But that would be... hypocritical! Impossible!
Mighty Jalapeno: "See, Zohar agrees, and he's nice to people."
SecondTalon: "Still better looking than Jesus."

Not how I say my name

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 2106
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Sableagle » Thu Aug 04, 2016 4:28 pm UTC

Ain't that a bit racist?
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Aug 04, 2016 4:45 pm UTC

sardia wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:
Quizatzhaderac wrote:
Sableagle wrote:What the Sun thought was worth a two-page spread this week is NSFW.
It turns out that actually is of serious journalistic value.

Those pictures were taken in 1995, Mrs. Trump was not legally able to work in the US until 1996.

Which probably makes Mrs. Trump guilty of visa fraud.


Huh. That's way more interesting that "OH GAWD, look, she was NAKED. We will now publish pictures for your perusal, so you can judge her more effectively".

But yeah, I don't think Trump actually gives two craps about visa rules.

Nobody except anti immigrants care about visa rules. And most of the time, they only denounce Hispanics. Oh and Muslims/refugees too. They aren't going to protest or harass white people who overstay they visa.


In my Asian (Phillipeno)-immigrant family, there's a lot of effort spent making sure our various family members follow the Visa rules so that they can become a US Citizen (or at very least, can come back to the US and visit).

Can't speak for other cultures. But there is a sense of pride there, that no matter how insane the rules are we follow them. Trump has been trying to court this group of "legitimate" immigrants. The "wall" is an analogue to enforcing the already existing rules, and Trump always says he will include a big door for legal immigrants (at least, that's how I think my pro-Trump family interprets his rhetoric)

If this Visa-Fraud case has any truth to it, it may damage his standing among his supporters who care about immigration reform.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Quizatzhaderac
Posts: 1798
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Space Florida

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Quizatzhaderac » Thu Aug 04, 2016 5:34 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:In my Asian (Phillipeno)-immigrant family, there's a lot of effort spent making sure our various family members follow the Visa rules so that they can become a US Citizen (or at very least, can come back to the US and visit).

Can't speak for other cultures. But there is a sense of pride there, that no matter how insane the rules are we follow them. Trump has been trying to court this group of "legitimate" immigrants. The "wall" is an analogue to enforcing the already existing rules, and Trump always says he will include a big door for legal immigrants.

If this Visa-Fraud case has any truth to it, it may damage his standing among his supporters who care about immigration reform.
It seems to me there's two groups of people that want strict immigration enforcement; which I'll call the the "Lawful" and the "Racist". Trump has done a pretty good job of walking the line between the two.

But a significant (ly loud) portion of his base doesn't care when rich white women break immigration laws, and I doubt they really care that your family honors the law.
The thing about recursion problems is that they tend to contain other recursion problems.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests