[POLL] United States Presidential Elections 2016

[Lizard]

Oh my Trump. This was quite a 🤬 up.

That is the French ambassador to the US btw.

 

[Dotini]

This morning our President intoned that, "ISIS is contained." This on the heels of our triumph in the Kurdish border town and over Jihadi John.

Given the recent bombings of the Russian airliner, downtown Beirut, and now central Paris, his victory lap seems premature at best.

 

[ukfan758]

Oh my Trump. This was quite a 🤬 up.

That is the French ambassador to the US btw.

Trump is a :censored:ing idiot and should resign from the race immediately.

 

[Dotini]

Trump is a :censored:ing idiot and should resign from the race immediately.

No doubt. But I predict his crushing lead over the Republican field will only increase.

 

[Jordan]

Oh my Trump. This was quite a 🤬 up.

That is the French ambassador to the US btw.

Trump's Tweet is from January:

http://www.mediaite.com/online/that-donald-trump-paris-gun-control-tweet-was-from-back-in-january/

 

[Lizard]

Trump's Tweet is from January:

http://www.mediaite.com/online/that-donald-trump-paris-gun-control-tweet-was-from-back-in-january/

And what difference does that make? Except that it's not recent.

 

[Jordan]

And what difference does that make? Except that it's not recent.

Well, considering the tweet is being presented as an extremely callous response to today's attacks in Paris, it makes quite a difference. I was quite shocked and offended by it myself until I looked into it further.

 

[Lizard]

Well, considering the tweet is being presented as an extremely callous response to today's attacks in Paris, it makes quite a difference. I was quite shocked and offended by it myself until I looked into it further.

It makes no difference.

It was still a tweet about what was recent terrorist attacks.

 

[GTPorsche]

It was a tweet on the attack in January which has no relevance to what occurred today.

 

[Lizard]

It was a tweet on the attack in January which has no relevance to what occurred today.

Yes and your point is?


I don't get how people are missing it. It was a tweet about a terror attack. The fact it wasn't recent has no relevance.

 

[Carbonox]

Yes and your point is?


I don't get how people are missing it. It was a tweet about a terror attack. The fact it wasn't recent has no relevance.

The fact people are presenting it as a response to what happened yesterday to get an outraged reaction from the crowd, is quite a problem.

 

[TenEightyOne]

The fact people are presenting it as a response to what happened yesterday to get an outraged reaction from the crowd, is quite a problem.

It's a pretty tasteless comment from a self-presented public figure regardless of which attack he said it about. He's also wrong, France doesn't have gun laws that are notably different from many other west European countries - they're not actually as "tough" as other countries around them (comparison here).

 

[Johnnypenso]

Yes and your point is?
I don't get how people are missing it. It was a tweet about a terror attack. The fact it wasn't recent has no relevance.

I guess you won't be very happy with this "actor", using yesterday's terror attack to mock U.S. gun laws. At least this one is actually relevant to the current situation:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollyw...es-paris-terror-mock-u-s-gun-laws-mid-attack/

 

[TenEightyOne]

I guess you won't be very happy with this "actor", using yesterday's terror attack to mock U.S. gun laws. At least this one is actually relevant to the current situation:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollyw...es-paris-terror-mock-u-s-gun-laws-mid-attack/

The difference between a second-rate comedian and the guy you just linked is that the former is aiming to become POTUS, that position comes with certain expectations of decorum - at least on the world stage if not in the United States.

 

[HatchbackFlak]

Trump is just proving a point. Ofcourse you all are going to ignore his posts that mourn the people who died. All of you will realize the mistake you've made once someone other than Trump turns this country into some "safe-space" where freedom wont be an option.

 

[Johnnypenso]

The difference between a second-rate comedian and the guy you just linked is that the former is aiming to become POTUS, that position comes with certain expectations of decorum - at least on the world stage if not in the United States.

Get out of town!! No way!! Trump is running for President...why doesn't he tell somebody?! And this other guy is a second rate comedian?? How could I miss that?

 

[A2K78]

Aewsome!!!

 

[TenEightyOne]

Isn't this the same guy whose Foxrantings you just posted in the Paris thread?

 

[Sanji Himura]

Look who didn't want to talk about the Paris attack during the CBS debate (Hint: it wasn't Hillary):

http://news.yahoo.com/bernie-sanders-doesn-t-want-010914423.html

 

[BobK]

Look who didn't want to talk about the Paris attack during the CBS debate (Hint: it wasn't Hillary):

http://news.yahoo.com/bernie-sanders-doesn-t-want-010914423.html

Nor was it Sanders. According to the article, it was strategist Mark Longabaugh.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Look who didn't want to talk about the Paris attack during the CBS debate (Hint: it wasn't Hillary):

http://news.yahoo.com/bernie-sanders-doesn-t-want-010914423.html

Despite that title it doesn't say anywhere in the article that Sanders didn't want to talk about it...

 

[Johnnypenso]

Yes, I'm sure Bernie knew nothing about it and the advisor was acting completely independently. Of course putting Bernie in such an awkward situation by refusing to discuss the hottest issue of the day will surely get him fired today.

 

[Pupik]

Oh, Trump. Why not tell the good people of Beaumont, Texas why you'd like to build a wall around northern Mexico instead of a floodwall to prevent hurricane damage...Something everyone there could use?

Nope! Gotta prod the cattle, instead.

Look who didn't want to talk about the Paris attack during the CBS debate (Hint: it wasn't Hillary):

http://news.yahoo.com/bernie-sanders-doesn-t-want-010914423.html

Yeah, it really sucks when any presidential candidate would like to have facts at hand before presenting an opinion.

 

[Lizard]

I guess you won't be very happy with this "actor", using yesterday's terror attack to mock U.S. gun laws. At least this one is actually relevant to the current situation:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollyw...es-paris-terror-mock-u-s-gun-laws-mid-attack/

Not the greatest of things to say tbh.
Sorry you aren't getting cheap points out of me.

Although as @Pupik linked above he did the same thing now. Just in a speech not a tweet.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Despite that title it doesn't say anywhere in the article that Sanders didn't want to talk about it...

I didn't imply that it was one particular candidate themselves. Bernie has a lot to answer for his campaign manager's tirade, fair enough, but I certainly didn't mean to imply that it was a candidate that didn't want to talk about Paris. Obviously the next debates will focus on foreign policy (as it should).

 

[A2K78]

I'm arguing against Rand Pauls position of not keeping the discrimination laws for the private sector. Like I originally said before you two tried to derail the topic was the government needs to regulate. There is no way around it.

Government shouldn't be regulating anything, that include discrimination. That said call for regulating discrimination only demonstrate the contempt for both freedom of association and private property.

 

[ukfan758]

Government shouldn't be regulating anything, that include discrimination. That said call for regulating discrimination only demonstrate the contempt for both freedom of association and private property.

Well then that could open the door to allowing the entire deep south to tolerate discrimination against non-whites...

 

[Johnnypenso]

Well then that could open the door to allowing the entire deep south to tolerate discrimination against non-whites...

There are already more than enough laws on the books to take care of all the broad strokes of discrimination, IMO we don't need the federal or state/provincial government to micromanage every situation that arises. In this day and age of micro sized recording devices, both video and audio, how is someone going to escape being detected as a racist goon for very long? IMO that fact that the interentz aren't absolutely flooded with endless videos and audio clips of rampant, widespread and blatant discrimination tells me it's not as rampant and widespread as people believe it is.

 

[FoolKiller]

I feel like you guys are arguing for discrimination based on religion, sex, or race.

I'm not arguing for it. I'm arguing against laws against it. It is a massive difference. Thinking something should be allowed is not the same as condoning. I abhor racism, sexism, and all the other isms and phobias. I don't think you should force someone to perform labor with their own body when they don't want to, whatever their reason.

If it takes government regulation to rid the world of ignorance then all be it.

There's your mistake. You think government can rid the world of thought. It can't. It makes it hide in back rooms and whispers. It stays out of sight, but it continues on, only you can't see it happening and you can't react to a business that does it.

You guys will never get the kind of society you want unless there is a major disaster or war that destroys the governments of the world.

Don't act as if we are dumb enough to think that change wouldn't take time. We don't think one president will change it all. If true change began today I doubt we would finally see a government that applies the non-aggression principal to everything they do before I die.

Seriously, there will always be government regulation

No one denies that. Government has proper roles. Thought control is not one of them. Forced labor is not one of them.

and deregulation is just another way of saying, destroy the environment, exploit our people so a handful of us can have it all! Without regulation half the United States would be a polluted wasteland by now. Look at the smog in China as just one example.

So, you have very little faith in people to find their way to doing the "right" things? You don't think that the people that managed to run undo up protesters and lobby for regulation could get people to do the same thing without government force?

You think that regulation is keeping things in a good state? There are tens of thousands of pages of regulations and people still feel that things are screwed up enough to yell about it.

And if you are worried about people being exploited for the benefit of others then consider who financially supports the politicians. The 99% don't get invited for rounds of golf, in-air meetings on Air Force One, or dinner at the White House. They also don't have the ability to attend $1,000 dinners during campaigns.

Well then that could open the door to allowing the entire deep south to tolerate discrimination against non-whites...

If your stereotype is true then they already do. They just can't do it in view of the regulators.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Well then that could open the door to allowing the entire deep south to tolerate discrimination against non-whites...

When the adverse is actually true by way of Affirmative Action and college admission standards? Sorry, but I couldn't help but continue the thought.