Political Debate Thread

[Big Smooth one3]

Keep in mind my observations and formed opinion about the media is strictly internet based, I do not turn my T.V. on very often nor watch the news daily.

I was reading through your response thinking "What am I missing here?" and then came across this bit. Honestly, it would make sense that the way you consume information vs. me vs. anyone else is a big reason behind the gap in our individual perceptions. I have really come to enjoy Twitter (though I hear the kids don't think its cool anymore ), but I don't go there for political reporting. I used Facebook back when I was in high school and the early years of college when it was exclusive to .edu email addresses but don't go there much anymore, but I assume that is even more polarized when it comes to "news" links/stories. I am unfamiliar with the claims that google manipulated its algorithms, and while I will hold my reservations about the full extent of what you wrote, I don't think I have enough awareness of the issue to comment otherwise.

I would agree that the vast majority of "news" that comes through those social channels is nothing more than click bait - I think that is partially what you are saying, but correct me if I'm wrong. I, on the other hand, consume my news through the national nightly news broadcast (DVR daily), a few morning shows here-and-there (mostly Morning Joe, not Today or any of that shit), and the newspaper (though not daily). When you spoke about the unfair treatment by media, I had assumed you meant by the major news outlets, which is what I have heard most from hardline conservatives before. I look at that in a similar way to the other topics we're discussing - I don't see it, but if so many others do, then there has to be some degree of credibility to that side. I am a constant skeptic, whether it's in regards to consuming news media or trying to make a purchase on Amazon, so I would like to think that I am decently reasonable about these things, but who knows...

I see everything little thing about Donald Trump blown out of proportion, if the man so much as says hello in the wrong tone it's on the news the next day "Donald Trump very derogatory towards multi-racial reporter" and then it goes through the ringer down to some of most extreme liberal sites and their headlines are "Trump Racist to Mexican reporter, wants to build wall and throw her on the other side". (obviously that is made up and a stretch, but I make my point). .

I get some kind of odd enjoyment out of being able to empathize with someone who has different beliefs and perspectives than mine. I say that because I can 100% see why you would believe this, and that doesn't mean your 100% wrong, either. You already said that your in for Trump, and once you make a commitment to something - not even necessarily just talking about politics - its only human nature to defend that position. No qualms from me whatsoever on that, I'm the same way, just not with this one issue.

So having said that, here are a couple of quick examples the types of things Trump says that I feel should rightfully draw concern/criticism/push-back/etc. and/or questions about his political beliefs and what he would do as President:

Re:John McCain "He's not a war hero -- he's a war hero because he was captured. I like people that weren't captured"

I think it's a pretty widely held belief that John McCain is a hero, if for nothing else than the fact he went to war for our country. The fact that he was captured is irrelevant to me when determining the amount of heroism he acted with in going to battle for us. I have no clue why he would insult a vet like this, regardless of whether they are a sitting Senator or work at the corner store.

Re:American Muslims during 9/11 "Hey, I watched when the World Trade Center came tumbling down. And I watched in Jersey City, New Jersey, where thousands and thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down"

Just an outright lie that, again, I have no idea why he would say...

Re:Healthcare "Everybody’s got to be covered. This is an un-Republican thing for me to say . . . I am going to take care of everybody. I don’t care if it costs me votes or not. Everybody’s going to be taken care of much better than they’re taken care of now."

Including this one as an example of why, if I'm a die-hard registered Republican, I can't stand what's going on in my party. The Republican candidate for President is a man who, set aside everything else about him, was a registered Democrat for the majority of his life and openly, publicly, and financially has supported Democratic candidates in the not-so-distant past...which leads to this one from only 8 years ago...

Comments on Hillary Clinton in 2008 "Hillary is smart, tough and a very nice person, so is her husband. Bill Clinton was a great president. They are fine people. Hillary was roughed up by the media, and it was a tough campaign for her, but she's a great trooper. Her history is far from being over."

There are others that I would argue are inappropriate/inflammatory/etc., but I am trying to see the other perspective and don't want to initiate any bickering, so I tried to pick a couple that I feel are more straight forward and relevant to some of the comments I've made in this thread.

I might have a slightly different outlook on this because I live in a very liberal place.

That's a interesting point because I am in nearly the complete opposite environment. 90% of the people I interact with are old, white men who bitch and moan about everything that isn't exactly how they want it - which is often "that damn Obama" and "those damn liberals" - and are completely unwilling to accept any other point of view. So as a result, I have just stopped talking about politics or anything of the like because I have zero interest in getting into an argument with those types of people. It may be why I was so hesitant to talk about anything of substance here, because I by no means consider myself a liberal and hate when I get pigeonholed into that merely because I don't fully agree with everything some on the right believe.

You are free to have a different opinion than I do, that is part of what makes this Country great. It doesn't offend me in the slightest.

What irritates the hell out of me is that more people can't take a step back and realize the truth in this statement. The 2-party system, while infinitely frustrating lately, has been a proven model for governing, but it requires both sides to make the other strive to be better instead of tearing each other down for political gain - after all, we're all passionate about this stuff because it's our country these people are asking us to allow them to run, not any one political party/agenda.

[m121c]

I have really come to enjoy Twitter (though I hear the kids don't think its cool anymore ), but I don't go there for political reporting.

I actually dislike Twitter, never got into it, I just like to look at things that go on. It's interesting on how we consume the information, I see this huge Bias and you do not, I think it really shows where the real agenda is maybe at? Maybe information on the News is more fair and transparent to things on the internet because of the demographic differences? I mean, it's going to be easier to manipulate people on the internet, especially social media because it's in your face all the time you know? If you are watching T.V. you have to actually be tuned in to a channel like CNN or something, and at that point the assumption can already be made that you are interested so no manipulation/bias is needed? IDK just some food for thought.

Even the news I have watched on youtube of some of the debate shows and such, I find it to be a more liberal bias. I know my local news is for sure a liberal bias when I watch it, they are more transparent but you can tell. Maybe it's just because my views are different and I'm just not agreeing with they are saying? 2 major news outlet online is the Washington and Huffington posts, HUGE liberal bias. Can not stand them...

Anyways moving on. The points you made about Trump and past quotes, I agree with you, they are worrisome a bit. I am a bit skeptic of his recent liberal -> conservative switch over 2 term presidency, and I really think he is a terrible short minded speaker. He reminds me some old boy that would sit around a diner drinking coffee with other old boys, you know those guys that could care less what they say how they say it, and don't give a friggen heck about what people think? Simple is one way to put it, maybe rough around the edges? That's kind of what he reminds me of. To add to that, I don't think he is a perfect conservative candidate or even a "good" one. What I do like is his views of what our problems are, and most of the policy. I believe more importantly it's not Trump himself that could make this a good presidency, it's the possible appointed team/cabinet that could make up his administration that I believe could be a power house A Team.

In contrast, Hillary has a history of putting people into political positions solely based on favors for friends and business relations. Do we want a bought cabinet of people and Clinton friends with possibly corrupt and twisted agendas? Do we really want another Loretta Lynch?

I do want to address a couple of the quotes.

Re:John McCain "He's not a war hero -- he's a war hero because he was captured. I like people that weren't captured"

I agree this is flat out wrong. Disrespectful and a question of character. However, it is important to note that McCain and Trump have had a personal feud in the past, and that could be a motive to what he said. I just wanted to throw that little tid-bit out there so you can kind of see the context. It's not an excuse of any kind though, no matter how much you dislike the guy you are in the wrong to say something like this. Quote below is from the same interview.

"Well, I'm not a fan of John McCain. He's doing a terrible job for the vets," Trump replied. " I go around, Matt, on the circuit and I see so many vets and I see families crying before me. They can't see doctors. They're waiting in reception rooms for five and six days—"

Again, not giving him an excuse or ignoring it, I just want to make a case as to why he might of said that.

Re:American Muslims during 9/11 "Hey, I watched when the World Trade Center came tumbling down. And I watched in Jersey City, New Jersey, where thousands and thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down"

If you have a few minutes watch the videos linked below. It's widely speculated that in fact it is true that some celebrations and attacks after 9/11 took place by many radical muslims in the area, thousands upon thousands might be a little exaggerated but to say it's entirely false would be further from the truth. See this is where I start to get into the bias media thinking.. because I believe your left agenda news outlets ignore such stories as this, because they know they can be proved wrong and then they can't slander Donald Trump as some muslim hating crazy hitler, it actually helps him and supports the issues he claims we have.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cd52KkFwQWQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5BtQgTGOI4

I know youtube isn't really the most credible source being it from private and personal accounts... but one is from the One America News Network and the other is a merely a recording from CNN.

Re:Healthcare "Everybody’s got to be covered. This is an un-Republican thing for me to say . . . I am going to take care of everybody. I don’t care if it costs me votes or not. Everybody’s going to be taken care of much better than they’re taken care of now."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... ernment-r/

A good read. Trump says that a private plan for the lower 25% who can not afford private insurance would have a government based program to help them still get healthcare. The way I understand it, it's kind of a foodstamp/welfare but for healthcare. If he believes in this though, could he support universal health care at point? Possibly, but is that what he meant in that interview at the moment? I don't think so.

DonaldTrump.com goes over his issues and policy pretty well, although last time I looked this lower 25% government healthcare assistance program was not on the site, which is interesting. None the less, can you start to see how some of his words are twisted and manipulated? It's hard to even find quotes of the guy that are within context.

Hopefully I'm not coming off as trying to persuade you to vote one way or the other here, I don't want to do that at all, wanting to get my way of thinking across.

[Big Smooth one3]

Hopefully I'm not coming off as trying to persuade you to vote one way or the other here, I don't want to do that at all, wanting to get my way of thinking across.

Firstly - no, not at all, I genuinely appreciate the different perspective.

Maybe information on the News is more fair and transparent to things on the internet because of the demographic differences?

I'm responding quickly here before the response to this that I know is coming. I didn't intend to say that the news media I watch is completely objective or unbiased at all times, and I would imagine most on the right would suggest that TV news is more liberally biased than any other means of communication (assumption). I have watched the NBC nightly news since I started doing so with my Dad at a young age (bring back Brian Williams, damnit), but I by no means buy into everything they cover or whatever perspective they may offer. I actually have a saying with my wife that the middle segment on that broadcast - after 1st commercial break - has become the "how you can die in American toady" segment. A lot of what they do, especially since Brian was removed from his executive producer position (I think that was the title), comes off to me as transparently attention baiting, which is annoying, but I'm just watching to see what happened in the world today - and frankly, would like if they covered more of the news and less of the narrative/backstory/fallout from something.

What I do like is his views of what our problems are, and most of the policy.

I think the first part of your sentence is where he is winning big with supporters, and if those are the issues they care about most, then great, that's the way this game is supposed to work. The second part of your sentence is what I would like to hear him talk more substantively about - his policy. He is unquestionably great at pointing out the issues and including those in speeches with broad strokes of how he alone can fix them, but as an independent, I would love to hear him actually talk about some of the details. Ultimately, I will end up delving into those details on both sides before voting, but I can't see how it would be a bad thing for him to start getting that message out to the undecideds.

I believe more importantly it's not Trump himself that could make this a good presidency, it's the possible appointed team/cabinet that could make up his administration that I believe could be a power house A Team.

This was a "saving grace" type of idea to me with Trump earlier in his campaign, but the way his operation has run gives me pause. I believe he is on campaign manager 2 now (forgive me if title is wrong), and we have heard a lot about his reluctance to side with advisors over the suggestions of his family members. Don't get me wrong, family is #1 and it's admirable that he has what appear to be well regarded kids, but we are talking about running for the highest public office in the most powerful country on earth.

I read the whole quote re: McCain and understand the feuding between the two, but the good bits he said about wanting to help the vets in need was completely overridden by his "not a hero" rhetoric. It seems like he shoots himself in the foot all the time, even when what he is saying would play well with independent voters, but he just can't resist making everything personal - which makes me wonder how that style will play when dealing with other global heads of state and the cultural differences in communication between what we're used to and what is the norm in their society. That is probably taking a bit too big of a leap to judgement, but it isn't confidence inspiring to me, at least.

I will have to check out the videos you posted regarding the 9/11 "celebrations." I'll hold off on pushing back too much on that since I haven't taken the time to watch yet, but I still don't think anything in there could possibly convince me that there were thousands of people cheering in the streets of Jersey City. If there were, it makes no sense why almost no-one would back up his claim. Again, to me, this is an easy situation of believing "the most likely scenario."

Thanks for taking the time to include some information on his healthcare views. The quote I used was moreso to point out the "Unrepublican Republican Presidential Candidate" contradiction, but point taken. These are the types of things I would rather hear him talk about in a stump speech than just off-the-cuff rambling about whoever he thought insulted him that day, but I guess that method plays well since he's gotten this far.

I have no clue if anyone else even reads these, but I'm enjoying the conversation. Like I mentioned above, I don't feel like you're pushing me towards Trump, I think you're just explaining why you think he's the best candidate, and I can appreciate that.

[Snopro704]

Anybody going to see "Hillary's America"? I am today and I'm really looking forward to it!

[dearnhardtfan7]

Man I love Chad Ward haha

[Hi Im Skyqe]

LOL AND THEY CHEER FOR IT

[Big Smooth one3]

Interesting read...

http://mashable.com/2016/08/03/trump-nu ... IYQfarYEqW

[m121c]

So I'm going to go on a little rant but it's not targeted at anyone's comments or views in here, just me venting.

the Republican presidential candidate asked a foreign policy expert why the U.S. can't launch nuclear weapons

They came as a reponse to the report from MSNBC's Joe Scarborough - citing an unnamed source - that Trump repeatedly asked why the U.S. can't use nukes.

"What really concerns me," he continued, "is the idea of a narcissist walking around with nuclear authenticators.

1. I can't take a political based media site seriously when they don't proof read their articles and they misspell "response".
2. Notice: Unnamed source. We have no only caught the media lying, not only have caught the media twisting words, not only have we caught the media manipulating, we have caught them aligning with the DNC to be FOR Hillary. So if you want to slam Donald Trump for something he has said or asked, you better come up with a source, a REAL source.
3. The left is constantly misusing terms to slam anyone on the right (Hypocritical I would say). They misuse the hell out terms, and to me it's insulting to people who actually suffer from these conditions. For instance narcissist or any of the "phobia's" they come up with. This should bother people, a phobia is not something you want to have. It's insulting to say that the American majority on the right is "Xenophobic" when people have REAL phobia's would argue they are hardly phobic of anything. See a phobia is more like a curse, you don't know why you are afraid, but it can make normal life very tough depending how bad it is and what you are deathly afraid off. Trump has an ego the size of his own Tower, but to proclaim he is a narcissist (that has to medically be diagnosed btw) is wrong. Egotistical would be a better word, self-centered maybe. Narcissist? No.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCHQPCXbt1w

Within his interview with MSNBC, which from my understanding, is where this nuclear talk started from. Side note: BTW. has anyone asked Hillary about nukes? Maybe about her money from the Saudi Arabian Kingdom? No? Has anyone asked the DNC about the emails? About the wall out side the DNC? About the bought actors and reserved seats effectively pushing delegates out their seats because they were for Bernie? What about the white noise machines? How about Hillary's rumored health problems? Nothing about Hillary calling the mother of one of the fallen from Benghazi a liar? You would think with Trumps comments about the muslim father and wife, the media would be irrupting right? Trending maybe? Nope. I guess it's kind of hard to ask her or her campaign any questions when they run from interviewers (Former DNC Chairman) and when Hillary hasn't held a Press conference in 240+ days. Or how about how she ignores the tough questions her followers give her at rallyies? Oh sorry.. those were not approved for Madam Clinton /sidenoterant

This is my frustration with the current election. Hate Trump for what he has said, but how can you support Hillary if you don't know what she has said because the media is protecting her? Trump may say some question things, but at least he is open to discussion, he doesn't shy away from what he thinks. This tells me his believes in what he is saying, it's not just a parties hands shoved up his ass like a puppet.

Now my response to this interview regarding Nukes with the clearly biased, pushy, and rude interviewer (Seems like a trend with Trump interviews.. Notice Hillary gets a bit pampered?)

1. Trump is exactly right, why would you ever take something off the table when there are nations in this world that HATE US. It's like, why would you disarm the American populous when we have a rampantly open border full of violent drug crime, or there is a very high number of domestic terrorism that happens within our borders? *Sarcasm* Yup, we have enemies near that despise our existence, better put our weapons away and promise to never use them */sarcasm*

2. No comments on how Trump states it would be a long, slow, and well thought out decision before he were to pull that trigger. He even says he would never want to use a Nuke, but he just states that he would never take the card of the table for anyone. Yet the headline the next day would be: "Trump says he would use nukes on Europe".

MATTHEWS: OK. The trouble is, when you said that, the whole world heard it. David Cameron in Britain heard it. The Japanese, where we bombed them in 45, heard it. They`re hearing a guy running for president of the United States talking of maybe using nuclear weapons. Nobody wants to hear that about an American president.

Maybe because MSNBC's headline will be that will completely be out of context and say "Trump says he doesn't see why we should use nukes, Says he would even consider bombing Europe". He is just stating why would we take ours off the table, when other nations have them. Either EVERYONE'S goes, or ours stay. Simple as that. The interviewer at the end even goes as far as to call them "threats". You can't even script this shit..

How about how Hillary lied on national television in her 60 minutes interview with Fox New's Chris Wallace? Someone actually had the balls to ask her about the hearing of Directory Comey and how it clearly showed her lying, and SHE LIES?! Seriously, are you kidding me. You were caught with your pants down, red handed, and clearer than Bill getting a blowie from Miss Lewinsky, and you think you can still lie about it?!

I want to point out this article written after the interview by CBS. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-cli ... were-they/

This is where again, I see bias. The headline for one, If it were Trump, it would read "Trump lies on 60 Minutes about lying to the American Public". Am I wrong? So much for equality... Second, they couldn't do ONE article with out bringing in Trumps comments about the muslim family. They wrote an entire article about her lying, but never actually stated she lied.

This was an answer Comey gave:
"Secretary Clinton answered every question the FBI asked and there is no reason for the FBI to believe Secretary Clinton lied"

Did he say she DIDN'T lie? No. He said there was no reason to believe. I'll repeat, No reason to believe. I guess we can just conclude factually that she didn't lie to the FBI... oh and how about that lie to the American people CBS? Or are you not focused on that...

Maybe some democrats need to believe in order to vote for Hillary that Trump is worse than her in terms of character and morals? Therefore, they believe it all? I don't know.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/obama-con ... le/2003653

I want to touch on this point made by Obama. Alright again, Obama is showing his distaste for the American people. Funny how he thinks that our government runs so good... when the very government he administrates couldn't make a 5 million dollar website for his baby "obamacare" work correctly. (btw does that seem kind of self-centered or "narcissistic" to name a policy after yourself?). He states go to any country where the government doesn't work and then you will realize you want good government. Here is the thing, I can't think of any country in the world that is as free and less dependent on the government as the United States. So yes.. a country that has a bad government WILL BE BAD. Kind of common sense, the more the control the government has, and the worse that government is, the worse the nation will be.

It is proven, government's are widely inefficient, they can not be trusted, and they should be given as less control as possible in terms of the people.

Our government for instance. Social Security is turning into a quickly failing program because our government can't keep it's greedy hands out of it. Obamacare made healthcare premiums expensiveness across the board. Welfare and related programs are widely abused and taken advantage of. Our public education for young people from K-12 suffers in funding terribly. Our federal mandated school lunches by the FLOTUS herself is a terrible failure. We can not even provide a safe and secure southern border. We spend tax payer dollars inefficiently so our POTUS and family can go on several vacations to Hawaii at the expense of millions of dollars. We spend tens of millions of dollars on useless government programs that we aren't even allowed to know about, much less actually have a say in. All the while our infrastructure is getting out dated, needing work, and we are spending more money on helping other nations defend themselves.

Sorry for the long winded rant.

[m121c]

@Peter's video.

You would think that video would make headlines.. It should be trending. Nope.. Probably never will.

Again this is just my opinion of the overly clear bias and liberal agenda.

Maybe its just because Im against the agenda idk. Im sure left wing people find conservatives to be biased and I dont see it because I agree with conservates more often then not.

[Big Smooth one3]

btw does that seem kind of self-centered or "narcissistic" to name a policy after yourself?

Still making my way through the post, but for the sake of clarity, "Obamacare" was not a term began by the man himself, and obviously not the actual name for ACA. I have issues with the policy itself, but the relevance of the term "Obamacare" can probably be more attributed to conservative opponents trying to link the plan with him than some egotistical move to insert his name into a major national public policy.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/2 ... 64012.html

[m121c]

Ah okay, you're right. However, he has sense embraced the term and used it. But, I was wrong in thinking he made it up himself in a egotistical manner.

Source: http://content.usatoday.com/communities ... 6OnF8g8KnM

Lastly, I reread my post and I made a ton of typing errors I was typing fast my bad. Hopefully some parts aren't difficult to read.

[TeamHavocRacing]

Remember that dude Chynna?

[Sweendoggy]

Everyone in America should be given an equal share of women.

[SMR 510RR]

Everyone in America should be given an equal share of women.

I'm interested, please go on...

[TeamHavocRacing]