Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

1…5354565859…314

Comments

  • #1652
    K-9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,313 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Peist2007 wrote: »
    I saw that speech. Hence why i was able to disregard it. Extremely unimpressive.

    In fairness you asked for a policy speech, you got one. Whether it is impressive to you or not is a subjective thing dependent on political views.

    Trump seems to have a taxation policy, I might not agree with it but he has one which he spoke about at length.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • #1653
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 42,964 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Peist2007 wrote: »
    I saw that speech. Hence why i was able to disregard it. Extremely unimpressive.

    Any reason why?
    Amerika wrote: »
    I can’t watch the video, but looking at the header regarding 'Foreign Policy,' I have to ask... Is she touting undermining the sacrifice of servicemen and women by reaching out to the Taliban in Afghanistan while they were killing American troops? Does she tout supporting the withdrawal of American troops in Iraq which led to the creation of ISIS? Does she tout supporting the Muslim Brotherhood (a designated terrorist organization in Egypt, UAE and Saudi Arabia) throughout the Middle East and in the United States which undermined American Muslim allies? Did she tout refusing to designate the Boko Haram as a foreign terrorist organization in Nigeria? Did she tout undermining the democratic Iranian Green Revolution in 2009? And does she tout supporting the Iran Nuclear deal? Quite some foreign policy accomplishments, wouldn't you say?

    No idea. It's 40 minutes long so I can't watch it right now.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • #1654
    Peist2007
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,257 ✭✭✭Peist2007


    K-9 wrote: »
    In fairness you asked for a policy speech, you got one. Whether it is impressive to you or not is a subjective thing dependent on political views.

    Trump seems to have a taxation policy, I might not agree with it but he has one which he spoke about at length.

    In fairness i didnt ask someone to google "Hillary policy" and send me the results. If you think that is a policy speech then the movie Idiocracy is actually coming to pass.

    Here are some snippets from the highlight feed as that speech went on:

    "Choice between a fearful or stronger US"

    "Trump is mentally unfit for office"

    "Nothing more important than national security"

    "Trump should not get nuclear codes"

    "Trump believes America is weak"

    "Trump has threatened to abandon allies"

    "Trump praises dictators like Putin"

    "Trump won't make America stronger at home"

    "Kremlin would celebrate a Trump win"

    "Trump doesnt understand concept of nuclear war"

    "Trump likely to lead US into conflict"

    "Trump could lead to economic crisis"

    "Trump's muslim ban plays into ISIS hands"

    "Trump insults people who have served"

    "Trump has America all wrong, it is great""

    See what i mean?


  • #1655
    B_Wayne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,039 ✭✭✭B_Wayne


    Peist2007 wrote: »
    I saw that speech. Hence why i was able to disregard it. Extremely unimpressive.

    And the biggest criticism of Hilary tends to be that she goes into too much information in debates. Trump on the other is zero information of anything credible.


  • #1656
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    ancapailldorcha wrote: »
    US conservatives have been spectacularly wrong about guns long enough that I can't afford their opinions any legitimacy.
    There are about 240 million Americans over the age of 18. There are about 270 million civilian firearms in America. We have always been a law abiding gun culture nation built around the rights provided us in the 2nd Amendment. Unless you are talking about a massive gun confiscation, that will not change. So, what are conservatives so spectacularly wrong about?


  • Advertisement
  • #1657
    Peist2007
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,257 ✭✭✭Peist2007


    ancapailldorcha wrote: »
    Any reason why?


    Its not a speech on policy. At least not a valid one in my opinion. More platititudes, soundbites and little about Hillary's plans as to what she will do when President. As i said, in terms of being a speech on policy, very unimpressive. Any other examples?


  • #1658
    Peist2007
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,257 ✭✭✭Peist2007


    B_Wayne wrote: »
    And the biggest criticism of Hilary tends to be that she goes into too much information in debates. Trump on the other is zero information of anything credible.

    Going into specifics is not something Hillary is well known for so not a clue what you're on about to be honest. Hillary is very non-specific.


  • #1659
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    ancapailldorcha wrote: »
    No idea. It's 40 minutes long so I can't watch it right now.
    "No idea" if she touted what I asked? You actually typed that with a straight face?


  • #1660
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 42,964 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Amerika wrote: »
    There are about 240 million Americans over the age of 18. There are about 270 million civilian firearms in America. We have always been a law abiding gun culture nation built around the rights provided us in the 2nd Amendment. Unless you are talking about a massive gun confiscation, that will not change. So, what are conservatives so spectacularly wrong about?

    Opposition to gun control laws that would allow law abiding Americans access to firearms while preventing those who might use them to cause harm from accessing them.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • #1661
    Suryavarman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,583 ✭✭✭Suryavarman


    Peist2007 wrote: »
    Going into specifics is not something Hillary is well known for so not a clue what you're on about to be honest. Hillary is very non-specific.

    Hahahahahaha. You should check out the issues section of Hillary Clinton's website where she goes into great detail on many policy areas.


  • Advertisement
  • #1662
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    ancapailldorcha wrote: »
    Opposition to gun control laws that would allow law abiding Americans access to firearms while preventing those who might use them to cause harm from accessing them.

    We currently have over 20,000 gun control laws in effect (federal, state and local) in the US. Perhaps conservative just feel we already have enough.


  • #1663
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,859 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Amerika wrote: »
    We currently have over 20,000 gun control laws in effect (federal, state and local) in the US. Perhaps conservative just feel we already have enough.
    It's laughable really. Suggest to a conservative that gun control should be tightened - "we have enough gun control". Suggest to the same conservative that black people should be randomly subjected to invasive searches as a deterrent to carrying guns - he's all for it.


  • #1664
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 42,964 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Amerika wrote: »
    We currently have over 20,000 gun control laws in effect (federal, state and local) in the US. Perhaps conservative just feel we already have enough.

    Given that tens of thousands of people in the US are killed every year by them, I'd disagree.

    The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.

    Leviticus 19:34



  • #1665
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    Amerika wrote: »
    We currently have over 20,000 gun control laws in effect (federal, state and local) in the US. Perhaps conservative just feel we already have enough.

    20,000 laws? Wow, that's only 10,000 less than people who get killed by guns in the US every year!


  • #1666
    Suryavarman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,583 ✭✭✭Suryavarman


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    It's laughable really. Suggest to a conservative that gun control should be tightened - "we have enough gun control". Suggest to the same conservative that black people should be randomly subjected to invasive searches as a deterrent to carrying guns - he's all for it.

    It's almost as if the real concern isn't public safety but something else entirely...


  • #1667
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    It's laughable really. Suggest to a conservative that gun control should be tightened - "we have enough gun control". Suggest to the same conservative that black people should be randomly subjected to invasive searches as a deterrent to carrying guns - he's all for it.

    I think more accurately... conservatives think that white, black, brown, yellow, and red people (I hope I'm not leaving anyone out) should be randomly subjected to invasive searches if you fit a gang-type profile as a deterrent to carrying guns in cities or towns that experience a high level of gun violence... if so authorized by city/town authorities. And if you can legally carry a gun, there should be no problem.


  • #1668
    K-9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,313 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    Amerika wrote: »
    There are about 240 million Americans over the age of 18. There are about 270 million civilian firearms in America. We have always been a law abiding gun culture nation built around the rights provided us in the 2nd Amendment. Unless you are talking about a massive gun confiscation, that will not change. So, what are conservatives so spectacularly wrong about?

    The NRA don't help things by trying to scare the bell out of people.

    The New Yorker had a great podcast with the guy beind the Mike the gun guy blog, and he'd some very interesting things to say about them as a guy who loves guns, owns a gun shop and is an instructor.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • #1669
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    ancapailldorcha wrote: »
    Given that tens of thousands of people in the US are killed every year by them, I'd disagree.

    Then if you lived here you would be most comfortable in Chicago, New York City, Los Angles, Washington DC, Miami or Philadelphia, as they have some of the toughest gun control laws in the US. But wait, something isn’t kosher... they also have some of the highest gun crime rates. I’m so confused. :confused:


  • #1670
    Suryavarman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,583 ✭✭✭Suryavarman


    Amerika wrote: »
    I think more accurately... conservatives think that white, black, brown, yellow, and red people (I hope I'm not leaving anyone out) should be randomly subjected to invasive searches if you fit a gang-type profile as a deterrent to carrying guns in cities or towns that experience a high level of gun violence... if so authorized by city/town authorities. And if you can legally carry a gun, there should be no problem.

    So if a city has a huge issue with gun crime then you support stricter gun laws to act as a deterrent to carrying guns in that city?


  • #1671
    Suryavarman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,583 ✭✭✭Suryavarman


    Amerika wrote: »
    Then if you lived here you would be most comfortable in Chicago, New York City, Los Angles, Washington DC, Miami or Philadelphia, as they have some of the toughest gun control laws in the US. But wait, something isn’t kosher... they also have some of the highest gun crime rates. I’m so confused. :confused:

    All of those have lower violent crime rates and homicide rates than Atlanta which is located in a state with some the most lax gun laws in the nation. Do you have any evidence to suggest that those city's gun laws contribute to their crime rates?

    New York is a poor example considering it has one of the lowest homicide rates among large and medium size cities in the nation.


  • Advertisement
  • #1672
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Suryavarman wrote: »
    So if a city has a huge issue with gun crime then you support stricter gun laws to act as a deterrent to carrying guns in that city?

    No, I think we already have enough gun laws. I would support a Stop and Frisk policy in those cities, though.

    - - - - - -

    I foresee a new breakaway thread in the near future... "Gun Control in the US - again - round 45" ;):)


  • #1673
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Suryavarman wrote: »
    All of those have lower violent crime rates and homicide rates than Atlanta which is located in a state with some the most lax gun laws in the nation. Do you have any evidence to suggest that those city's gun laws contribute to their crime rates?

    New York is a poor example considering it has one of the lowest homicide rates among large and medium size cities in the nation.
    Enough with the 'crime rates' please, and stick with violent gun crimes.


  • #1674
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,859 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Amerika wrote: »
    I think more accurately... conservatives think that white, black, brown, yellow, and red people (I hope I'm not leaving anyone out) should be randomly subjected to invasive searches if you fit a gang-type profile as a deterrent to carrying guns in cities or towns that experience a high level of gun violence... if so authorized by city/town authorities.

    Sure. And it's purely by chance that Arab-looking people are "randomly" chosen for extra security screening in airports.

    "Gang-type profile" indeed. Again, laughable - unless, of course, you're non-white someone who fits a gang-type profile. Then it's not so funny.


  • #1675
    Suryavarman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,583 ✭✭✭Suryavarman


    Amerika wrote: »
    Enough with the 'crime rates' please, and stick with violent gun crimes.

    Why? I thought we need lax gun laws because guns prevent crime? Are you saying that guns don't prevent crime now?


  • #1676
    Suryavarman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,583 ✭✭✭Suryavarman


    Amerika wrote: »
    No, I think we already have enough gun laws. I would support a Stop and Frisk policy in those cities, though.

    - - - - - -

    I foresee a new breakaway thread in the near future... "Gun Control in the US - again - round 45" ;):)

    So you have no problem with people being stopped and searched in the streets because they're black. But you do have a problem with laws that prevent criminals from owning guns?


  • #1677
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Sure. And it's purely by chance that Arab-looking people are "randomly" chosen for extra security screening in airports.

    "Gang-type profile" indeed. Again, laughable - unless, of course, you're non-white someone who fits a gang-type profile. Then it's not so funny.
    When was the last time you were in a inner city of the US. People of all colors here belong to gangs. Most are not hard to identify by appearance, dress, and tattoo as being gang related. I was in Philadelphia the other week. I saw gangs of several ethnicities.

    And I was "randomly" searched in Miami airport. Last time I wear a NY Jets shirt there. TSA agent asked me... Are you crazy? :)


  • #1678
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Suryavarman wrote: »
    So you have no problem with people being stopped and searched in the streets because they're black. But you do have a problem with laws that prevent criminals from owning guns?

    Already answered above.


  • #1679
    Suryavarman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,583 ✭✭✭Suryavarman


    Amerika wrote: »
    Already answered above.

    No it wasn't. I'll repeat myself:

    So you have no problem with people being stopped and searched in the streets because they're black. But you do have a problem with laws that prevent criminals from owning guns?


  • #1680
    Amerika
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,175 ✭✭✭Amerika


    Suryavarman wrote: »
    No it wasn't. I'll repeat myself:

    So you have no problem with people being stopped and searched in the streets because they're black. But you do have a problem with laws that prevent criminals from owning guns?

    Yes it was answered. We seem to have hit an impasse. I think it best to agree to disagree at this point.


  • Advertisement
  • #1681
    Suryavarman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,583 ✭✭✭Suryavarman


    A recent poll found that in North Carolina, Trump supporters have a better opinion of David Duke than they have of Hillary Clinton:
    By a 30/23 spread, Trump voters in North Carolina say they have a higher opinion of David Duke than they do of Hillary Clinton.

    This result isn't surprising given the strong racist sentiment among Trump's base.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement