[POLL] United States Presidential Elections 2016

[Imari]

Okay, good for you. But why is the death rate going up??

You're just fishing now.

One data point does not make a trend. It's interesting and odd that the death rate has gone up with no apparently obvious cause. Then again, statistics being statistics sometimes things line up like that and you have a bad year. If the next year or two are similarly bad, then there's something to look into.

I'm sorry that you apparently think that life is doom and gloom and we're all going to die sobbing in the gutter. I think that says more about you than about the world. People see what they want to see, and what they usually want to see is themselves reflected.

 

[BobK]

Okay, good for you. But why is the death rate going up??

I haven't a clue. Therefore I'm not going to make any bizarre suppositions about everyone being on drugs etc.

 

[Rallywagon]

Odd.... I smoke bud like I'm in a Cheech and Chong movie. Sadness, depression or even boredom are not even close to a reason. Same with my occasional mushroom trip. I also happen to be in a decent IT career and a happy marriage and lead a mostly health lifestyle... Talk about painting broad generalizations with a big brush.
I mean, if you are going to just toss out reasons, wouldnt... Idk... Fast food be a better scapegoat?

 

[DK]

“The view from the Trump team is the intelligence world has become completely politicized,” “They all need to be slimmed down. The focus will be on restructuring the agencies and how they interact.”

http://www.wsj.com/articles/lawmake...umps-dismissal-of-u-s-intelligence-1483554450

The last president who wanted to slim down the CIA got his head blown off. The CIA has admitted it withheld evidence of the JFK assassination from from official congressional investigation. Today the US intelligence community consists of some 16+ organizations under a central Director of National Intelligence. DNI Clapper was supposed to have briefed Trump on what he knows, but has postponed the meeting.

And now he's admitted the possibility that Russia hacked a variety of targets.

Maybe he wants to be able to drive around care-free in a drop-top...and maybe the GOP establishment have grabbed him by the gonads now.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Intelligence agencies have published (excerpts from) their case against Putin:

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-...-officials-hacking-case-against-putin/8167552

 

[mustafur]

Why do these media claim hacked election, it sounds like they hacked voting machines which we know they didn't, it's incredibly misleading.

And the fact the soo called hacking involved information that showed how corrupt the DNC was I don't see a single problem with it, maybe they should protect their information better.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Why do these media claim hacked election, it sounds like they hacked voting machines which we know they didn't, it's incredibly misleading.

Because it's an easy, quantifiable term. You say "hacking", and people know what you're talking about. A more accurate way of describing it would be to say that news stories were fabricated for the purposes of swaying public opinion towards or against a particular candidate in an attempt to influence the outcome of the election in favour of a preferred candidate.

Maybe we need to create a new name for it. I suggest "burgle-burgle-larceny".

 

[ryzno]

A more accurate way of describing it would be to say that news stories were fabricated for the purposes of swaying public opinion towards or against a particular candidate in an attempt to influence the outcome of the election in favour of a preferred candidate.

Citation required... Fabricated?!

 

[Dotini]

For over a hundred years, the US has delighted in subverting elections, assassinating leaders and effecting regime changes in other countries around the world. How can anyone possibly be shocked when the shoe is on the other foot?

 

[Famine]

Russia in 'not wanting an American president who would absolutely go to war with them' shock.

 

[Lizard]

Russia in 'not wanting an American president who would absolutely go to war with them' shock.

You really believe that? Clinton has been in politics long enough to know that would not be a good idea despite her image.


Of all the people to believe it as well.

 

[Dotini]

Russia in 'not wanting an American president who would absolutely go to war with them' shock.

Yes, I am so happy the witch HRC has been defeated. Her machinations in Ukraine, Libya and the Middle East were irritating me.

 

[Famine]

You really believe that?

It doesn't matter what I believe. It matters what the Russian government believes - if indeed they did try to influence the election.

If they did, the question is why they did it. Why would they want Trump over Clinton? What about Trump's behaviour, statements and actions make him a preferable alternative to Clinton? What about Clinton's behaviour, statements and actions make her a less preferable alternative to Trump. Answer that and you answer what their reason behind wanting to influence the election is - and bearing in mind that it was quite risky and Putin is not an 11 year old boy, "for the lulz" isn't a particularly likely reason.

So if they tried to influence the election against Clinton, there's a plan involved. After all, as a great man once said, "Russians don't take a dump, son, without a plan."...



Incidentally, Clinton was the DNC's preferred candidate to such an extent that they destroyed their own processes and reputation to rig their own election for her. When she was flagging in the polls, they wheeled in the sitting President to speak up for her - a man who had absolutely pilloried her just eight years previously - in an almost unprecedented move. He flew her on Air Force One between campaign appointments, in an absolutely unprecedented move.

Right now, that sitting President - who clearly bends over backwards for the Democrats, who bend over backwards for Hillary - is almost literally poking the Russian bear with a stick - while the fat, orange, racist buffoon who'll replace him is courting them.

 

[Dotini]

• 
  Preferable to war with Russia.

 

[Joey D]

You really believe that? Clinton has been in politics long enough to know that would not be a good idea despite her image.

Honestly, yes, I fully believe Clinton would have led the country down a path that meant war or at least a conflict with Russia and I think it would have been done over Syria. As Secretary of State, I think Clinton did an appalling job with foreign affairs so nothing makes me believe that she would have been any better as President.

And just because you've been in politics a long time doesn't mean you know what you're doing, it just means you were able to lie well enough to get people to give you money and vote for you.

 

[Rage Racer]

The evidence of RT interfering the elections (page from the report):

 

[ryzno]

I'll just leave this here...

 

[mustafur]

You really believe that? Clinton has been in politics long enough to know that would not be a good idea despite her image.


Of all the people to believe it as well.

It's clear the establishment on both sides has been pushing America back to Cold War relations with Russia for years, Clinton was going to advocate for No fly zones in Syria which means if Russia disobeyed, the US would shoot them down, do you think that is a smart strategy for International stability?

This is proven further from the DNC and GOP establishment both showing Butthurt over the election by deflecting to Russia ''hacking'' and forcing sanctions, it's incredibly reckless but luckily Putin is seeing though the Butthurt for now.

and Look at the American Establishment press(the ones that donate massive amounts to establisment candidates) they are shoving Russian Fear down everyones throat, America has serious Corruption issues that need fixing over anything else at this point in time.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Look at the American Establishment press(the ones that donate massive amounts to establisment candidates) they are shoving Russian Fear down everyones throat

I think the issue is more that people are concerned that the pendulum will swing too far in the opposite direction. Trump seems to be somewhat flippant about relations with Russia at times, and while softening America's stance may be necessary to promote a good relationship, I think people are justifiably concerned that things will go to far.

For example, how do you think Trump would have responded to MH17? He's been full of glowing praise for Putin, but the joint investigation into the shoot-down concluded that it was carried out by pro-Russian insurgents operating with material support from Moscow. Would Trump have glossed over that and tried to put distance between Putin and the insurgents? And if so, how would the American people feel about such tacit support for Moscow's actions?

 

[mustafur]

I think the issue is more that people are concerned that the pendulum will swing too far in the opposite direction. Trump seems to be somewhat flippant about relations with Russia at times, and while softening America's stance may be necessary to promote a good relationship, I think people are justifiably concerned that things will go to far.

For example, how do you think Trump would have responded to MH17? He's been full of glowing praise for Putin, but the joint investigation into the shoot-down concluded that it was carried out by pro-Russian insurgents operating with material support from Moscow. Would Trump have glossed over that and tried to put distance between Putin and the insurgents? And if so, how would the American people feel about such tacit support for Moscow's actions?

It was clear that wasn't supposed to be done on purpose if they knew that a passenger plane was going to fly in a War Zone to save money, now not to defect blame but the Airliner is just as responsible for putting lives at risk for profits.

I mean America has done the same thing before to an Iranian Passenger plane before and it was their military not funded Rebels.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

It was clear that wasn't supposed to be done on purpose if they knew that a passenger plane was going to fly in a War Zone to save money, now not to defect blame but the Airliner is just as responsible for putting lives at risk for profits.

Don't be ridiculous.

 

[mustafur]

Don't be ridiculous.

Responsibility is a two way street, if you put your self in a dangerious position you can't fully expect to not be in trouble.

 

[xyloscissor]

Responsibility is a two way street, if you put yourself in a dangerious position you can't fully expect to not be in trouble.

I thought Ralph Nader cleared all that up by putting the responsibility on whoever has the most money.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Responsibility is a two way street, if you put your self in a dangerious position you can't fully expect to not be in trouble.

And I suppose that when a woman gets assaulted, it was her fault for dressing provocatively? That's victim blaming.

MH17 was flying at cruising altitude, far out of range of any conventional weapons. Nobody had any reason to believe that the separatists had access to Russian military-grade anti-aircraft weapons; until the day of the tragedy, the military flights that had been shot down around Donbass were believed to have been brought down by conventional weapons.

You are right on one count, though: the responsibility does need to be portioned out. There are two parties who are responsible - the people who fired the missile, and the people who gave them that missile in the first place. There's only one place they could have gotten it from.

 

[mustafur]

And I suppose that when a woman gets assaulted, it was her fault for dressing provocatively? That's victim blaming.

Call it what you want but being in a dangerious area means dangerious results can happen otherwise it wouldn't be dangerious, in this case there was irresponsibility on the plane company to take that route.

MH17 was flying at cruising altitude, far out of range of any conventional weapons. Nobody had any reason to believe that the separatists had access to Russian military-grade anti-aircraft weapons; until the day of the tragedy, the military flights that had been shot down around Donbass were believed to have been brought down by conventional weapons.

You are right on one count, though: the responsibility does need to be portioned out. There are two parties who are responsible - the people who fired the missile, and the people who gave them that missile in the first place. There's only one place they could have gotten it from.

Was any international Law broken with the arms supplied?

Because I know there wasn't and if you want to be equal on this America is far worse with it's Cluster bomb Program with the Saudis in Yemen.

 

[TenEightyOne]

It was clear that wasn't supposed to be done on purpose if they knew that a passenger plane was going to fly in a War Zone to save money

Wrong thread really... but many many airlines flew in that zone, MH17 and many others were way above the NOTAM ceiling

 

[ryzno]

Sounds really convoluted, especially considering how much weight the drown would have to hold, so you'd have to design a light weight umbrella to be carried that could sustain when heavy rain or hail hits. Then you'd have to make a controller and system that could fly and maintain said flight at your slow walking speed...talk about a waste of engineering.

Well someone has gotten a step closer to my waste of engineering. A self maneuvering drone that uses facial recognition to know when to move. Guess what? It can move at a very slow pace, stop and continue on. Do you know what it was made for? It's a video recorder for the user who wants the ultimate hands free selfie or live stream of whatever they are doing. And it can even be programed to stay at a set distance and it can also be folde up for easy transport. So while you think my idea is delusional and a waste of time, it just got one step closer to being reality. I saw about it on Fox Buisness at the Consumer Electronics Show 2017. And I believe it starts at $200. Wa-la, cheaper than paying someone to walk around with you every day. And as my original point was, it would provide more manufacturing jobs(that y'all would be happy to see go to another country). And I'll take your waste of engineering comment as a compliment. A lot of inventors were told "your idea is stupid, it'll never work". And your comment about the Amazon drone is reaching or straws to have an argument against me. What use is an umbrella a couple of hundred feet in the air? And they can easily be programed to be aware of their surroundings. Try again. This "dumb" redneck, is smarter than y'all think!!!

You mention being unable to pay for a carrier if you don't have a job, but that's not true. Not having a job is not the same thing as not having money. If you save money as you work, then you will still have money even if your job vanishes.

Again, y'all think of the perfect scenario. I don't have a spare dollar to save or invest. My investment is weekly repairs to my van that in turn, makes me money.

You still down to create something big @xyloscissor?!

 

[xyloscissor]

I am indeed, I always look for the next deal I can come up with. While I feel your plight all too clear(imo correct me if wrong) this drone thing is right up my alley.

Just imagine how many cool shots I can take of myself skiing the craziest part of the rockies where I live? oooooooh yeahhhh babe.

I don't like the downsides so I hope you realize that much.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Well someone has gotten a step closer to my waste of engineering. A self maneuvering drone that uses facial recognition to know when to move. Guess what? It can move at a very slow pace, stop and continue on. Do you know what it was made for? It's a video recorder for the user who wants the ultimate hands free selfie or live stream of whatever they are doing. And it can even be programed to stay at a set distance and it can also be folde up for easy transport. So while you think my idea is delusional and a waste of time, it just got one step closer to being reality. I saw about it on Fox Buisness at the Consumer Electronics Show 2017. And I believe it starts at $200. Wa-la, cheaper than paying someone to walk around with you every day. And as my original point was, it would provide more manufacturing jobs(that y'all would be happy to see go to another country). And I'll take your waste of engineering comment as a compliment. A lot of inventors were told "your idea is stupid, it'll never work". And your comment about the Amazon drone is reaching or straws to have an argument against me. What use is an umbrella a couple of hundred feet in the air? And they can easily be programed to be aware of their surroundings. Try again. This "dumb" redneck, is smarter than y'all think!!!

how would it provide more manufacturing jobs? Do you know how drones are created. I'm an engineering student and I see this stuff first hand all the time. It doesn't create more jobs. The fact that people without the know just assume this is silly. The reason I told you it was convoluted, is it takes a lot of effort to build a drone for one that has the specific controllers to actually do what that one does. Holding a recorder or having one built in, isn't special because those are getting smaller even still with great quality. Plus I've seen these drones prior, this is the most advanced sounding.

Who was saying the umbrella would be a couple hundred feet in the air, you do realize drones don't have to operate at that level. Also try what again? Do you know how much effort it takes to do what you're saying, no one is saying it can't be done or hasn't been done. What was said is that most wouldn't bother because it's not a demand or solving some engineering problem. If someone wants one, then sure someone will build for the right price. But to mass produce...nah.

No one is saying you're dumb, but when you see or read something really quick and then come to some sort of simple conclusion that it can be done, and people shouldn't have these types of jobs, and since it can be done a la more manufacturing jobs for the needy blue collar middle class. It's nice for someone to come along and say you might want to calm down a bit first and actually get more info.

 

[ryzno]

I am indeed, I always look for the next deal I can come up with. While I feel your plight all too clear(imo correct me if wrong) this drone thing is right up my alley.

Just imagine how many cool shots I can take of myself skiing the craziest part of the rockies where I live? oooooooh yeahhhh babe.

I don't like the downsides so I hope you realize that much.

I feel you. Just wish I had enough money to buy one and an idea of how to program something. Considering I build/fix things for a living when I'm not driving, I could easily figure a way to install an umbrella and make it work in my spare time. Oh well, someone will get rich off my idea. And our locations would definitely hinder communication and testing.

What was said is that most wouldn't bother because it's not a demand or solving some engineering problem.

Hover-boards were never in demand and it didn't create any technology, it used existing technology, the inventor is a millionaire now. And who runs the machines that build the drones? But I know this is going no where with you, so good day.