2016 US Presidential Election

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

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

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

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Mar 31, 2016 5:19 pm UTC

And that strikes you as what, moderate?

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

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Mar 31, 2016 5:21 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:And that strikes you as what, moderate?


Crazy. It strikes me as crazy.

You can't put dumbass crazy on the left / moderate / right spectrum. You just can't. Trump has no concept of ideological consistency or purity. And to be fair to the voters: I think a lot of people are tired of the standard left / right debate going on and are therefore intrigued by what Trump offers: a complete demolition of the political spectrum.

Ideological purity is bad (Rand Paul, Cruz and Sanders as prime examples). Its nice for supporters who can't stand contradictions, but in the practical world, you need to be a mold-able candidate and shift your opinions a bit to help herd the masses to your side. On the other hand, a complete lack of ideology at all only means you don't believe in anything, and no one knows what issues you'll actually take a stance on.
Last edited by KnightExemplar on Thu Mar 31, 2016 5:25 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

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

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Mar 31, 2016 5:25 pm UTC

I doubt very much that Trump is dumb. Evil, sure. Dumb? Nah. He's not ahead by accident. Not for this long. It's intentional strategy, and his opponents are not complete idiots.

He's doing this because it works, and because he has no moral qualms about doing so.

But, if you insist that Trump is beyond categorization(a curious view), consider that if he were not there, Cruz would likely be winning, and I certainly wouldn't place Cruz as a moderate candidate. He only appears so relative to Trump. So, either way, the idea that the system ensures moderation seems doubtful.

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

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Mar 31, 2016 5:26 pm UTC

On the classical left-right spectrum, anti-trade is left and pro-single payer is left. Categorically, that makes Trump a socialist.

And that just makes my head hurt. Cruz is certainly to the right of Trump in my eyes.

Tyndmyr wrote:I doubt very much that Trump is dumb. Evil, sure. Dumb? Nah. He's not ahead by accident. Not for this long. It's intentional strategy, and his opponents are not complete idiots.


I think he's dumb. I don't give the title of "evil" to many people. A broken clock is correct twice a day, and all that.

Trump's "intelligence" is in the way he talks. He's charismatic and a pretty face. He knows how to persuade people using absolutely no substance at all. That's a nifty trick, but that doesn't change the fact that he's utterly ignorant about anything political.

In Dungeons and Dragons terms, he's a high-charisma persuasive guy who doesn't really understand what is going on. He can persuade people to follow him, but that doesn't mean he actually understands things.
Last edited by KnightExemplar on Thu Mar 31, 2016 5:31 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

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

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Mar 31, 2016 5:30 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:On the classical left-right spectrum, anti-trade is left and pro-single payer is left. Categorically, that makes Trump a socialist.

And that just makes my head hurt. Cruz is certainly to the right of Trump in my eyes.


The classical left/right spectrum does not entirely embody what makes someone a moderate or an extremist. Frequently, moderates are going to agree on a number of topics, even across the left/right divide. Sure, they may have different views on national defense, but it's unlikely that either candidate will be a hardcore pacifist, who believes in no violence or military ever. Such a view would make one extreme, even if it's not heavily identified with either party.

Trump's extreme, even if he doesn't adhere to the usual rules. Well, especially because he doesn't adhere to the usual rules. That's what makes someone extreme.

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

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Mar 31, 2016 5:33 pm UTC

Calling for America to adopt Canada's single-payer health care system is literally a page out of Bernie Sander's playbook, an issue so left that Hilary Clinton is against it.

Donald Trump wrote:As far as single-payer, it works in Canada, works incredibly well in Scotland


You can't categorize this guy. You really can't. He's against The Affordable Care Act (right-wing), but wishes to adopt a far more leftist philosophy like Single Payer.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

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

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Mar 31, 2016 5:37 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:Calling for America to adopt Canada's single-payer health care system is literally a page out of Bernie Sander's playbook, an issue so left that Hilary Clinton is against it.

Donald Trump wrote:As far as single-payer, it works in Canada, works incredibly well in Scotland


You can't categorize this guy. You really can't. He's against The Affordable Care Act (right-wing), but wishes to adopt a far more leftist philosophy like Single Payer.


Well, yes. Clinton is fairly moderate.

If you mean that Trump is a bad republican, you might have a pretty good argument. But he's not some special undescribable snowflake. An extremist is one who take far out, unconventional views. You don't have to be strictly partisan to be an extremist.

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

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Mar 31, 2016 5:40 pm UTC

I can agree that giving nukes to South Korea and Japan and punishing women who seek abortions (holy shit!! I'm against abortion but did he really say that?) is an "extreme" viewpoint.

But I attribute that to Donald simply not caring about the issues. He really doesn't care about forming an opinion, and says whatever is on his mind. An extremist doesn't backtrack like Donald does. Take Cruz, who has held the same viewpoints for his entire Senatorial career. That's more what an extremist is like.

Donald may take unconventional viewpoints, but that's because he completely lacks any analysis and lacks moral fiber. And if his personal morals don't line up with the extreme things he's saying... I really can't categorize the guy as an "extremist".

If anything, he's an extreme demagogue. He knows what to say that will make him popular and what will make others around him look dumb. But that's about the fullest extent of his analysis. He literally gives no fucks about consistency or ideology.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
K-R
Posts: 1564
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 6:42 pm UTC
Location: Australia

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby K-R » Thu Mar 31, 2016 5:56 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:Trump's...a pretty face.
...

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

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Mar 31, 2016 6:05 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:I can agree that giving nukes to South Korea and Japan and punishing women who seek abortions (holy shit!! I'm against abortion but did he really say that?) is an "extreme" viewpoint.

But I attribute that to Donald simply not caring about the issues. He really doesn't care about forming an opinion, and says whatever is on his mind. An extremist doesn't backtrack like Donald does. Take Cruz, who has held the same viewpoints for his entire Senatorial career. That's more what an extremist is like.

Donald may take unconventional viewpoints, but that's because he completely lacks any analysis and lacks moral fiber. And if his personal morals don't line up with the extreme things he's saying... I really can't categorize the guy as an "extremist".


He's also inconsistent, yes. And perhaps amoral. But also an extremist. One does not need to be moral or consistent to be an extremist.

Also, ya, holy shit on that "pretty face" bit. Uh, no.

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

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Mar 31, 2016 6:06 pm UTC

K-R wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:Trump's...a pretty face.
...


Lol. From this context it looks bad, but I think I was working towards the D&D analogy of high-charisma character. But... yeah. That's one way of looking at my post for sure. Not the angle I was intending for...
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 2154
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 Mar 31, 2016 6:14 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:The only thing that he has any consistency on is build a wall and make Mexico pay for it.
That, hating women, insisting Europe's already been overrun because we don't carry guns and don't make Muslims wear crescent moon badges on their clothes, wanting to shut down or confiscate all Muslim-owned businesses and drive the Muslims out of the country or into forced-labour camps, claiming to be really good at everything ...
Dum Old Turnip wrote:Nobody is bigger or better at the military than me.
... carrying a blonde ferret (on his head) everywhere he goes and always looking like he hates the people he's addressing, the people he's discussing or both.
Zohar wrote:You don't know what you're talking about. Please spare me your quote sniping and general obliviousness.

CorruptUser wrote:Just admit that you were wrong ... and your entire life, cyberspace and meatspace both, would be orders of magnitude more enjoyable for you and others around you.

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

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby morriswalters » Thu Mar 31, 2016 6:18 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:I can agree that giving nukes to South Korea and Japan and punishing women who seek abortions (holy shit!! I'm against abortion but did he really say that?) is an "extreme" viewpoint.
Really?

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6817
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby sardia » Thu Mar 31, 2016 6:22 pm UTC

leady wrote:proportional voting is more likely to spit out extreme block candidates though over fptp

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/don ... tic-rules/
Not proportional voting, FPTP on the district level. Aka no winner take all states. Under the alternate rules, Trump wouldn't be so far ahead.

Edit, wow this thread moves fast.

Killerofsheep
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2014 3:35 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Killerofsheep » Thu Mar 31, 2016 6:25 pm UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:And that strikes you as what, moderate?


Crazy. It strikes me as crazy.

I'm pretty sure the technical term for someone who doesn't conform to the left/right spectrum is populist, could be wrong

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

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Mar 31, 2016 6:28 pm UTC

Killerofsheep wrote:I'm pretty sure the technical term for someone who doesn't conform to the left/right spectrum is populist, could be wrong


Well, that's more about popularity than conformity. One could also call Trump a populist, if one believes that his speeches indeed have a lot of pull with the masses.

A populist is only noted for giving people what they want and enjoying support from the masses, though. It doesn't necessarily mean any specific stance with regards to the political spectrum.

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

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby morriswalters » Thu Mar 31, 2016 7:41 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:A populist is only noted for giving people what they want and enjoying support from the masses, though. It doesn't necessarily mean any specific stance with regards to the political spectrum.
Isn't that precisely what Trump is doing? He is simply taking advantage of the inherent power of an established political party, much in the same way Sanders is.

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

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Mar 31, 2016 7:42 pm UTC

He is a populist, sure. Or at least, it's what he's trying for. There's a significant dislike of him as well. But that's orthagonal to if someone is an extremist or not.

User avatar
Quizatzhaderac
Posts: 1827
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:28 pm UTC
Location: Space Florida

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Quizatzhaderac » Thu Mar 31, 2016 9:04 pm UTC

leady wrote:I do love that the british media is all over trumps remarks on abortion this morning, when there is a sodding great big island off our west coast that does precisely that, even the bits we nominally run
Since you're here, let me ask you about, let me ask you about abortion in Britain, the text seems to suggest that only in cases where the mother is in special danger or the child is expected to be handicapped is abortion protected.

What would happen to a woman who got an abortion for another reason?
Tyndmyr wrote:But he's not some special undescribable snowflake.
He's describable, one just needs to use more than more number (position on the left to right scale) to describe him.
KnightExemplar wrote:Donald may take unconventional viewpoints, but that's because he completely lacks any analysis and lacks moral fiber. And if his personal morals don't line up with the extreme things he's saying... I really can't categorize the guy as an "extremist".
It doesn't completely explain him, but he's know to be a big fan of the foot in the door technique
The thing about recursion problems is that they tend to contain other recursion problems.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 2154
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 Mar 31, 2016 9:05 pm UTC

Populism: the art of keeping people too busy chanting "One of us! One of us!" to notice the self-serving lies you mix in with your re-affirmations of their pre-existing opinions.
Zohar wrote:You don't know what you're talking about. Please spare me your quote sniping and general obliviousness.

CorruptUser wrote:Just admit that you were wrong ... and your entire life, cyberspace and meatspace both, would be orders of magnitude more enjoyable for you and others around you.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 2154
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 Mar 31, 2016 9:20 pm UTC

Quizatzhaderac wrote:
leady wrote:I do love that the british media is all over trumps remarks on abortion this morning, when there is a sodding great big island off our west coast that does precisely that, even the bits we nominally run
Since you're here, let me ask you about, let me ask you about abortion in Britain, the text seems to suggest that only in cases where the mother is in special danger or the child is expected to be handicapped is abortion protected.
I've never had one myself but as far as I know that clause about mental health is pretty inclusive. Convince two doctors you'd be happier not having the baby. They're obliged to talk over your options with you and offer you counselling, which seems pretty reasonable.

Here's what our National Health Service* has to say on the matter:
Abortion: where to go

Abortion is legal in Great Britain at any time up to 24 weeks of pregnancy. The majority of abortions are carried out before 13 weeks, and most of the rest before 20 weeks.

There are some exceptions. If the mother's life is at risk, or if the child would be born with a severe physical or mental disability, an abortion may be carried out after 24 weeks.

It's rare for anyone to be refused an abortion. A doctor may have moral objections to abortion, but if that’s the case they should refer you to another doctor or nurse who can help. It can be difficult to get later abortions, so the earlier you seek help the better.

By law, two doctors have to agree that you can have an abortion. Usually this is the first doctor you see and a second doctor who will perform the abortion, or one who works at the contraceptive clinic or hospital.


There's probably some legal phrase about the presumption in the favour of the patient's decision or something, but generally we prefer not to land women or girls with unwanted babies.

* It's still called that, even though Terrifyingly, according to the World Health Organisation definition the UK no longer has a NHS, according to column in a recent edition of a newspaper:
The Health & Social Care Act 2012 has devolved responsibility to Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs). The CCGs have no legal obligation to provide you with anything beyond emergency care - this may not be the case at present but it means that there is no legal guarantee that they will continue to do so.
It has opened up the NHS to unlimited privatisation.
The Private Finance Initiative (PFI) was touted as the largest hospital building programme in the history of the NHS. The outcome has been that PFI hospitals with an original cost of around £11.5 billion will actually cost up to £80 billion with the difference going to private consortia. Across all infrastructure, PFI will end up costing an extra £250 billion.
Zohar wrote:You don't know what you're talking about. Please spare me your quote sniping and general obliviousness.

CorruptUser wrote:Just admit that you were wrong ... and your entire life, cyberspace and meatspace both, would be orders of magnitude more enjoyable for you and others around you.

User avatar
duckshirt
Posts: 567
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 1:41 am UTC
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby duckshirt » Thu Mar 31, 2016 11:29 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Well, that's more about popularity than conformity. One could also call Trump a populist, if one believes that his speeches indeed have a lot of pull with the masses.

A populist is only noted for giving people what they want and enjoying support from the masses, though. It doesn't necessarily mean any specific stance with regards to the political spectrum.


Populism: politics of the mob

20 years ago Trump was a moderate liberal in the Reform Party who wasn't saying dumb or controversial things. Fivethirtyeight has tracked how his positions have moved to the right in recent years, but like KnightExemplar said he still have some views that would be classified as left.

His political career is similar to a quote from George Wallace, antagonist in the movie Selma who was governor of Alabama and won several states as President running on a third party platform appealing to racism:

"You know, I tried to talk about good roads and good schools and all these things that have been part of my career, and nobody listened. And then I began talking about n*****s, and they stomped the floor!"
lol everything matters
-Ed

User avatar
Lazar
Landed Gentry
Posts: 2151
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 11:49 pm UTC
Location: Massachusetts

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Lazar » Thu Mar 31, 2016 11:47 pm UTC

George Wallace with some Huey Long mixed in.
Exit the vampires' castle.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10340
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby addams » Fri Apr 01, 2016 8:18 am UTC

Sableagle wrote:
Spoiler:
Quizatzhaderac wrote:
leady wrote:I do love that the british media is all over trumps remarks on abortion this morning, when there is a sodding great big island off our west coast that does precisely that, even the bits we nominally run
Since you're here, let me ask you about, let me ask you about abortion in Britain, the text seems to suggest that only in cases where the mother is in special danger or the child is expected to be handicapped is abortion protected.
I've never had one myself but as far as I know that clause about mental health is pretty inclusive. Convince two doctors you'd be happier not having the baby. They're obliged to talk over your options with you and offer you counselling, which seems pretty reasonable.

Here's what our National Health Service* has to say on the matter:
Abortion: where to go

Abortion is legal in Great Britain at any time up to 24 weeks of pregnancy. The majority of abortions are carried out before 13 weeks, and most of the rest before 20 weeks.

There are some exceptions. If the mother's life is at risk, or if the child would be born with a severe physical or mental disability, an abortion may be carried out after 24 weeks.

It's rare for anyone to be refused an abortion. A doctor may have moral objections to abortion, but if that’s the case they should refer you to another doctor or nurse who can help. It can be difficult to get later abortions, so the earlier you seek help the better.

By law, two doctors have to agree that you can have an abortion. Usually this is the first doctor you see and a second doctor who will perform the abortion, or one who works at the contraceptive clinic or hospital.


There's probably some legal phrase about the presumption in the favour of the patient's decision or something, but generally we prefer not to land women or girls with unwanted babies.

* It's still called that, even though Terrifyingly, according to the World Health Organisation definition the UK no longer has a NHS, according to column in a recent edition of a newspaper:
The Health & Social Care Act 2012 has devolved responsibility to Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs). The CCGs have no legal obligation to provide you with anything beyond emergency care - this may not be the case at present but it means that there is no legal guarantee that they will continue to do so.
It has opened up the NHS to unlimited privatisation.
The Private Finance Initiative (PFI) was touted as the largest hospital building programme in the history of the NHS. The outcome has been that PFI hospitals with an original cost of around £11.5 billion will actually cost up to £80 billion with the difference going to private consortia. Across all infrastructure, PFI will end up costing an extra £250 billion.[/quote
]

oh, Good Grief!
That is Terrifying, Sableagle;

In the US our most vulnerable people are put into the care of Private Non-Profits.
Hospice: End of life care, is one example.
I know this to be true from first hand experience.

During the dying process a human being is about as helpless as a person can be.
Each individual nurse and doctor is responsible to themselves and God, but not to the Government.

With my own little ears I heard the Hospice nurse tell me she does Not work for the Government,
she works for Money. They take Government money. They will take anyone's money.

But; They are private and they don't waste money.
I was under the care of a bunch of mean bastards.

The Private Hospice was given 7 to 10 thousand dollars each month
from the Government to provide care and medicine for me.

They did not do either. They would not provide a cheep Anti-Emetic!
I will NOT willingly allow myself to be one of their victims, again.

Please do not allow your people to be harmed and abused for the $bill.
The USA shamelessly adores the $bill. Please, be better than that.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.