US Presidential Election 2016

[LJS]

 

31 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

and J.K.Rowling and those words are things which LJS fundamentally disagrees with, as you perhaps don't know that.

Corrected for you

31 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

While you're presumably thinking he'd be nodding along in agreement with that...?

You'd be right. My neck is aching with all the nodding I've been doing.

31 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Wake the fuck up. Even you don't do what you highlight here, you vote nashie FFS.

 

pleasant as ever, Neil (a bit like your hero Mr Trump)

[eFestivals]

15 minutes ago, LJS said:

 

Corrected for you

You'd be right. My neck is aching with all the nodding I've been doing.

pleasant as ever, Neil (a bit like your hero Mr Trump)

So what's divisive and what's not has nothing to do with division, and everything about your self regard.

Which, funnily enough, is you fully accepting the whole point of all of the posts I've made in this thread, and.calling out zahidf for talking bollocks.

Now, perhaps ask mummy for dot to dot puzzles for Xmas? Given how slow you've been you must need more training. 

[LJS]

3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

So what's divisive and what's not has nothing to do with division, and everything about your self regard.

My self regard? What has my self regard (whatever that is supposed to mean) got to do with anything?

3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Which, funnily enough, is you fully accepting the whole point of all of the posts I've made in this thread,

Of course it does. You're in top form this morning

3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

and.calling out zahidf for talking bollocks.

Oh I did that too did i? 

3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Now, perhaps ask mummy for dot to dot puzzles for Xmas? Given how slow you've been you must need more training. 

Another incisive point from Neil. You're on fire today. -  Oh,sorry it's just your pants.

[eFestivals]

23 minutes ago, LJS said:

My self regard? What has my self regard (whatever that is supposed to mean) got to do with anything?

Of course it does. You're in top form this morning

Oh I did that too did i? 

Another incisive point from Neil. You're on fire today. -  Oh,sorry it's just your pants.

You regard your want of division to not be divisive.

You just as good as said it.

Ffs lol

[eFestivals]

Ps - another thing to be saved for the Scottish Indy thread - that LJS is onside with jk about unity.

[lost]

I'd like to expand on the point I made last night regarding the KKK and the democrats now I'm not in the pub and that its so unbelievable they may have some democrat supporters:

ps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln

Quote

Abraham Lincoln was an American politician and lawyer who served as the 16th President of the United States from March 1861 until his assassination in April 1865. Lincoln led the United States through its Civil War—its bloodiest war and perhaps its greatest moral, constitutional, and political crisis. In doing so, he preserved the Union, abolished slavery, strengthened the federal government, and modernized the economy.

Lincoln returned to Springfield and resumed his successful law practice. Reentering politics in 1854, he became a leader in building the new Republican Party, which had a statewide majority in Illinois. In 1858, while taking part in a series of highly publicized debates with his opponent and rival, Democrat Stephen A. Douglas, Lincoln spoke out against the expansion of slavery, but lost the U.S. Senate race to Douglas.

In 1860, Lincoln secured the Republican Party presidential nomination as a moderate from a swing state. Though he gained very little support in the slaveholding states of the South, he swept the North and was elected president in 1860. Lincoln's victory prompted seven southern slave states to form the Confederate States of America before he moved into the White House - no compromise or reconciliation was found regarding slavery and secession.

 

If you look at US history. The republicans ended slavery and democrats were the party of the slave owners, now obviously modern day politics is completely different but its similar to Thatcher in this country where by generations will never vote Tory over here, there is a similar thing with certain families in the deep south and the republicans for ending slavery.

I believe house of cards is hinting at this with Frank and his wife being democrats from south Carolina.

[zahidf]

Is donald trump a racist and bigot with a lassiez faire attitude to sexual assault, and a hair trigger temperment?

Yes.

If you vote for someone like that, then im not sure how you expect other people to react. Its like voting BNP because they mended your fence once.

 

Also, if it walks, talks and acts like a facist...

Edited November 12, 2016 by zahidf

[kaosmark2]

Prejudice 

Derived from "pre" and "judge" 

Meaning to "judge before" 

Often coming from judging off a single characteristic, eg. Colour, gender, sexuality, voting choice. 

Generally considered an unpleasant trait.

 

[zahidf]

 

[eFestivals]

41 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Is donald trump a racist and bigot with a lassiez faire attitude to sexual assault, and a hair trigger temperment?

Yes.

If you vote for someone like that, then im not sure how you expect other people to react. Its like voting BNP because they mended your fence once.

 

Also, if it walks, talks and acts like a facist...

Trump is all those things in your first line. He's also a lot more.

We all choose to put aside some negatives with people to concentrate on the parts we might like.

I'm not excusing how people weighed things up with Trump to then support him, I'm simply pointing out that the negatives didn't outweigh the positives with plenty.

Meanwhile, if walks, talks and acts like a wish-wash then he's probably not the single thing some want to see.

[zahidf]

3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Trump is all those things in your first line. He's also a lot more.

We all choose to put aside some negatives with people to concentrate on the parts we might like.

I'm not excusing how people weighed things up with Trump to then support him, I'm simply pointing out that the negatives didn't outweigh the positives with plenty.

Meanwhile, if walks, talks and acts like a wish-wash then he's probably not the single thing some want to see.

That is a LOT of negatives to ignore. I would say too many myself. But then, thats just my opinion.

[zahidf]

33 minutes ago, kaosmark2 said:

Prejudice 

Derived from "pre" and "judge" 

Meaning to "judge before" 

Often coming from judging off a single characteristic, eg. Colour, gender, sexuality, voting choice. 

Generally considered an unpleasant trait.

 

'I hate black people'

'kill the fags'

'People who vote for a racist campaign are probably racist'

 

Yup, all the same

 

So your parents tell you they are voting BNP from now on because they promised to fox their fence. You ok with it?

Edited November 12, 2016 by zahidf

[kaosmark2]

16 minutes ago, zahidf said:

'I hate black people'

'kill the fags'

'People who vote for a racist campaign are probably racist'

 

Yop, all the same

The difference there is the expression of the prejudice.

"black people are probably criminals" 

"I hate gays" 

"trump voters should be rounded up into a gas chamber"

All unacceptable, but the incitement to mass murder is the worst one there.

My point is that prejudice comes in lots of forms, and that creating your own while attempting to fight a more longstanding form of prejudice is both hypocritical and tactically ineffective. 

Edited November 12, 2016 by kaosmark2

[pink_triangle]

2 hours ago, zahidf said:

Is donald trump a racist and bigot with a lassiez faire attitude to sexual assault, and a hair trigger temperment?

Yes.

If you vote for someone like that, then im not sure how you expect other people to react. Its like voting BNP because they mended your fence once.

Again the question is why did many vote for a black man in 2008 and 2012? Could different factors be involved? Again in a 2 person race you can't look at the candidate in isolation without looking at the opponent.

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, zahidf said:

That is a LOT of negatives to ignore. I would say too many myself. But then, thats just my opinion.

Yes, it would have been the same for me, as it was for millions others. However the side we supported didn't do a good enough job to persuade cage rest.

[LJS]

This is worth a read, a thoughtful & insightful analysis of Trump's victory.

https://medium.com/@SnoozeInBrief/an-analysis-of-donald-trumps-election-win-and-the-prospects-for-his-presidency-f6a87eef6d70#.v55pptrec

[pink_triangle]

1 hour ago, LJS said:

This is worth a read, a thoughtful & insightful analysis of Trump's victory.

https://medium.com/@SnoozeInBrief/an-analysis-of-donald-trumps-election-win-and-the-prospects-for-his-presidency-f6a87eef6d70#.v55pptrec

Also I don't know if anyone does podcasts but fivethirtyeight, npr politics and Ken rudin political junkie all do good analysis and are pretty neutral.

Also some interesting analysis about how one of the main reasons people are becoming more politically polarised is because how its becoming a lot easier to filter out different political viewpoints and live in a echo chamber.

 

[zahidf]

 

[lost]

Johnathan Pie:

 

[feral chile]

9 hours ago, eFestivals said:

Yep.

People do what they think is best for them.

You know, like voting for the guy who says he'll ensure they get a better job, or whatever.

In a world of imperfect choices, people still have a make a choice.

 

Really? Haven't the tories been trying to turn the clock back 50 years for at least the last 50 years?

And Corbyn is trying to turn the clock back 40 years, with a divisive line of all the UK's problems are caused by the rich, who he intends to (democratically) rob?

Are you claiming all of the moral high ground for all of the UK now....?

While you happily vote nashie, wanting to turn it back to a time of a mythical independent Wales that never existed? PMSL.

You realise every time you accuse me of wanting to claim the higher ground, you're actually confirming what you think the higher ground is?

As for wanting to look out for Welsh interests, if Plaid were spouting the same stuff as Trump, there's no way I'd vote for them. if they were spouting some of the stuff I've heard Welsh activists say, I wouldn't vote for them. It's only because most of their policies are socialist that I'll vote for them. Although I'm broadly sympathetic to the arguments in favour of political independence, that's not why I vote for them. I did vote for devolution, however.

Here you go, potted history of Plaid/Welsh independence.

http://www.politics.co.uk/reference/welsh-independence

Welsh Independence

Background

Wales was last an independent principality in 1282, when Edward I of England finally defeated the Prince of Wales, Llywelyn the Last, after years of on-off warfare and manoeuvring. Edward named his son as Prince of Wales in 1301 to seal his victory.

The late 13th Century saw a series of unsuccessful revolts against English rule, and from 1400 to 1409, Owain Glyndwr waged a war of independence against England, reclaiming the title Prince of Wales for a time.

However, Wales was not formally incorporated into the English state until the 1536 Act of Union, under Henry VIII. As well as abolishing the power of the local marcher lordships, the Act banned the use of the Welsh language in official proceedings and documents - excluding much of the population from public life. Wales was subjected to English law and permitted to send Members of Parliament to Westminster.

Nonetheless, the Welsh language survived, and throughout the following centuries stood at the heart of Welsh nationalism, supported by a persistent cultural distinctiveness and shared sense of history. The second half of the 19th Century and early 20th Century saw Welsh nationalism, along with many other European nationalisms, begin to grow, generating unsuccessful home rule movements in the 1890s and again in 1910.

But at the same time, industrialisation and the decline of the Welsh language (50 per cent of the population was wholly Welsh-speaking in 1901, compared to 43 per cent by 1911) was thought to be eroding 'authentic' Welsh culture itself, to the alarm of the nationalists.

In 1925, the Plaid Genedlaethol Cymru (National Party of Wales, later shortened to Plaid Cymru) was founded, but the domination of the Labour Party in industrial Wales left political, as opposed to cultural, nationalism on the margins until the 1950s. During that decade, Wales' staunch support for the Labour Party left it unrepresented during years of Conservative rule - exemplified by the decision to flood the Tryweryn Valley, which was not supported by a single Welsh MP.

Efforts were made by the Conservative Government in 1955 to foster a sense of Welsh identity, with the establishment of Cardiff as its capital, and the new reference in Acts of Parliament to "England and Wales", rather than just England. In 1964, the Labour Government established the Welsh Office and a separate Secretary of State for Wales in the Cabinet, creating a new context for the governance of Wales.

Plaid Cymru achieved a modest share of the vote in the 1959 general election, and won its first Parliamentary seat in 1966, securing more seats in later elections.

The Labour government of 1974-1979 promoted the cause of Welsh devolution within the UK, impressed by the German federal model and alarmed at the emerging wealth gap between London and the south east and the rest of the country. However, the 1979 referendum saw the proposed Welsh Assembly comprehensively rejected by a vote of 956,330 to 243,048.

Devolution was off the agenda during the Thatcher-Major Conservative governments, but remained a Labour commitment that was executed shortly after the 1997 election.

The September 1997 referendum produced a narrow majority in favour of devolution of 559,419 (50.3 per cent) to 552,698 (49.7 per cent). The Welsh National Assembly - a body without primary lawmaking or tax-raising powers, and excluded completely from large 'reserved' areas of policy-making kept at Westminster - was established under the Government of Wales Act 1998.

Controversies

Welsh independence is generally regarded to have generated less popular support than Irish and Scottish nationalism, which some say is a reflection of Wales' longer integration with England.

Plaid Cymru has been unable to consolidate its position as the dominant political force in all but a few parts of north and west Wales, and although it is the official opposition in the Welsh National Assembly, its numbers of Assembly Members fell from 17 to 12 in the 2003 election. However, four years later Plaid did manage to take three more seats from Labour in the 2007 election, although the latter remains the largest party in the Assembly.

Plaid Cymru has been accused of having an ambiguous position on full Welsh independence: it only adopted independence as an objective in 2003, during a highly divisive party conference, after years of promoting the more vague aim of 'full national status'. Former Plaid Cymru leader Dafydd Wigley was famously emphatic that his party had "never ever" demanded independence. The refusal of leader Ieuan Wyn Jones in 2000 to support the adoption of independence as an objective led to many Plaid Cymru separatists leaving to form Cymru Annibynnol (Independent Wales Party).

Therefore, popular Welsh political nationalism is largely limited to the goal of winning more power from Westminster. Much of the perceived lack of enthusiasm for devolution shown in the 1997 referendum may have been because of the weak powers proposed for the National Assembly, compared to those proposed for the Scottish Parliament.

However, the translation of Welsh national sentiment into votes has also been hampered by the longstanding dominance of the Labour Party in the populous Welsh industrial heartlands. Much of the energy that might have gone into a campaign for independence is today channelled into the campaign for greater powers for the Assembly.

Subsequently, support for an independent Welsh state, separate from the UK, remains a minority cause.

Nevertheless, the leader of the Plaid group at the National Assembly, Ieuan Wyn Jones, has acknowledged that questions continue to be asked about Welsh independence and the party has recently launched the WalesCan website to provide a forum for debate and discussion about "how a future independent Wales would look."

Statistics

Political party groups in the National Assembly for Wales

Labour – 30 seats
Welsh Conservative – 14 seats
Plaid Cymru – 11 seats
Welsh Liberal Democrats - 5 seats

Source: Electoral Commission

Quotes

“Could Wales flourish as an independent nation? We think that Wales can. We have recently celebrated the first ten years of devolution – but we believe that the next ten years will be the real decade of change. Wales and her people are ready and willing to ask the difficult questions – and also to come up with the solutions.”

Plaid Cymru - 2013

 

 

Edited November 12, 2016 by feral chile

[LJS]

Yeah, crooked Hillary!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-37956018

[zahidf]

 

[pink_triangle]

42 minutes ago, LJS said:

Yeah, crooked Hillary!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-37956018

The trouble is if scandal removes him from office, his deputy is worse.

[zahidf]

Ever wonder how people lived with slavery, Jim Crow and lynching but looked the other way? Look around right now. This is how they did it.They did it by "going on with their lives". They did it by being polite, not rocking the boat. They did it by unifying behind overt racists.

[feral chile]

17 hours ago, LJS said:

This is worth a read, a thoughtful & insightful analysis of Trump's victory.

https://medium.com/@SnoozeInBrief/an-analysis-of-donald-trumps-election-win-and-the-prospects-for-his-presidency-f6a87eef6d70#.v55pptrec

Might well be prophetic too.