Debate PEDs? Cancelling SNL? [A politics thread]

[Absol-lutelty awesome!]

I believe they continue to vote Dem because of their "they're racist, we aren't!" Rhetoric, and also due to support of groups such as BLM etc etc...

Concerning trump, he is not wrong concerning his comments on illegal immigrants being a serious issue. Over 70% of women who cross the border are raped by an illegal immigrant, or while they are on their way to cross illegally, that is fact.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5806972

Illegals are far too much of a concern to be ignored. Concerning the pulse night club, did anybody here about this?

http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2016/10/17/wikileaks-podesta-laments-it-wasnt-a-white-man-who-committed-san-bernardino-terror-attack-n2233236

Pretty deplorable from Podesta and aides and they call trump an islamophobe.

In my opinion, social justice should not be as much of a strife in a presidency than issues like combat and economy, but that is just me.

I just had to edit my post. Everyone, watch these videos.

Now.

I mean it.

And

This was an undercover investigation. I cannot believe what I am hearing guys... this is very wrong.

Edited October 19, 2016 by Absol-lutelty awesome!

[mde2001]

Okay, way too much stuff has been said for me to cover and a lot of it has been straying from the original points of discussion in this thread- although that is always the nature of politics. So I'm not really responding to individuals in general here but more stuff that has been said.

Others have covered this, but it is no-one's right to tell someone else how and when they should come out about a sexual abuse. It doesn't matter whether it was a long time ago, that doesn't make the assault any less real. There's a reason why they're all coming out at once, and its because he has created an environment where they can speak and be taken seriously. This is actually incredibly common all over the world. Just look at some of the stuff that's been going on about sexual abuse in the church recently. With things such as Royal Commissions, victims are being given an opportunity to speak out, and opportunity that they had been denied up until this point. Until they are given such opportunities, people don't take them seriously and if they ever take it to a court challenge they would be overwhelmed by the economic dominance of the abuser. While it is likely some of the allegations are false, I find it incredibly hard to believe every single one of them is made up, especially given their actions are backed up by Trump's words.

Tweets do matter, no so much from the supporters and I can't blame Trump for some idiots trying to get rid of a woman's right to vote, but the things he posts himself matter. Through them he reveals how impulsive he is and it is also a way of communicating without any advice from his aides. His impulses are nasty, egotistical and aggressive, and he's shown himself to be a bully with really thin skin.

Similarly, using the GOP website as a fact checker on Hillary Clinton's emails and saying it is more reliable Politifact is kind of ridiculous. One of them is running in the race and has an interest in the outcome of the election while the other is an independent fact checker that is considered pretty reliable by all sides of politics.

Clinton and Obama's refusal to use the phrase Islamic terrorist isn't an issue. Pretty much every expert on the politics of the region agree that by making the association between terrorism and Islam, you are strengthening the issue there. If people don't recognise it as an outlier group of people who don't represent the views of proper Islam, is causes more discrimination and Islamophobia and Islamophobia makes ISIS stronger. The best way to radicalise a group of young Muslims is to have a society that is so toxic to them that they have nowhere left to turn. Trump and his supporters are going around acting like they're denying an issue exists when what they are actually doing is trying to make the situation better. Trump is Islamophobic. Nowhere in that article you linked did it prove Clinton wanted it to be a white man, she just wished it hadn't been someone who identified as a Muslim, because she knew the right would use it as a weapon against a peaceful religion.

Finally, in regard to those ground breaking video you linked, I honestly can't take them seriously. James O'Keefe (they guy who runs it) is a conspiracy theorist with a good camera and a blatant disregard for the law. Whenever he finds a small fact he'll blow it out of proportion to a level where any research he might have done in the first place. In almost every case the shocking news he's reported has been found to have been wildly exaggerated or false. Honestly, I get why people are going to take these videos seriously, but seriously, why would you. If the Democrats have been frauding the elections for 50 years then why have they lost so often? They hated Bush, they wouldn't have let him have a second term if it was a thing.

[FairFamily]

For the timing of the sexual abuse charges I don't find them strange to be honest, I mean I saw similar things happen with the pedofilic priests case happen. One testimony happened after the other. All decades in the past.

For the mail issue to me while it smells a bit fishy it doesn't really matter. Either she purposely set things up to evade court and then she is a crook that can't be trusted. Or she is so incompetent that she can't follow policy, can't buy a secure email server, does not check if her employees do the job, can't handle modern technology, ... . All those honest mistakes make her look more and more incompetent. Both cases are really not favorable for her presidency.

[Swimming95]

Pretty much what mde said about everything. O'keefe is known for making false and heavily edited videos that don't reflect the full reality and are used to fit his false narrative. He had done this in the past with ACORN and planned parenthood. Until real unedited footage is provided (he has a link to "unedited" footage that still has many cuts) I take his videos with a mountain of grains of salt.

As far as the email server: it was much more a systemic issue of the state department and less so only a problem with Clinton. Previous secretaries had similar enough systems. I do completely agree it is a mistake but I suppose we disagree on how much of one it is.

[Tacos]

I'm not here to refute a bunch of points and support a bunch of others, but here to discuss one single one. I'm not heavily in to politics, but I am in to defending people. This hypothetical is not 100% accurate, but is the best representation I can produce of the scenario through multiple testimonies I've heard and my best assumption as to how a victim would feel.

So let's present a hypothetical situation. A woman works in an office in a tower owned by a man , heralded by many as one of the most powerful and wealthiest men in the world. She's never spoken personally with the guy, but she knows most importantly that she's working under his roof. It's closing time, and she gets on an elevator to leave. The door opens and there he is, the owner of the building and CEO of the company, and by association, her boss. She politely nods and he flashes her a toothy grin. The door to the elevator closes and begins its descent. About half-way down, the CEO throws himself on to her, violently groping her between her thighs and in unspeakable places. She's uncomfortable, she's shaken, and she's trying to pull herself away. He goes for her lips, and in that moment, the elevator opens, and she breaks into a sprint to leave the building. She drives away as fast as her wheels can take her. She finally arrives in the parking lot of her apartment and stares down at where she'd been assaulted. She'd been violated. She feels disgusting. She's scared. She's hurt. Should she return to work tomorrow? What will she say to her co-workers? What's her next course of action. It's all uncertain to her. Should she call the police? She ponders the thought before deciding she shouldn't, skeeved by the thought of dealing with the police questioning. What was she wearing? Was she asking for it? Is she sure it was him, because they've definitely met the CEO before and he seemed like a great guy? With defeat, she throws herself into the shower to clean herself. She's been in there for two hours. She keeps scrubbing but she still feels as if she's dirty. Nothing is working. Her mind drifts to a hypothetical. So what if the case goes through? How many money-hungry attorneys will flock to his side to defend him against such a slanderous woman. She finally gets out of the shower and completely wraps herself in her duvet, refusing to leave for a few days. She returns to work, and continues this cycle of disgust, attempted cleanse, and remorseful wrapping daily.

Twenty years later, she's got a new job that she doesn't enjoy, but she finds it better than working in the building of her assailant. She's still single, as whenever she attempts to get intimate, she feels incredible discomfort. Sex has never been the same for her. Neither has anything else. She knows that the man who sexually assaulted her is in the running to be the leader of the country. Because of this, she's made an attempt to avoid news outlets. She's afraid that if she sees his face plastered across her television, she'll be bombarded with flashbacks and relive the agony. Twenty years later and she's still shaken by it.

One day, she enters the office in which she works and hears some whispers from some co-workers. She walks to her desk, located just next to where her co-workers are chatting. She listens in, hearing them discuss that the same man who assaulted her, the man who is running to be the leader of their country, has just had audio-evidence leaked in which he bragged about sexually assaulting women. She immediately runs to the bathroom and shuts herself in a stall. The last thing she'd wanted was to hear his name again. She sits on the cold seat of the toilet and shuts her eyes. She remains seated until her mind wanders.

If he's bragging about this, perhaps there are others like me? With this thought, she steels herself and stands up. She neither feels empowered, nor does she feel entitled. She feels as if she is about to do the right thing. There is a case now. She has reason to be believed. And she will not sit down and let another woman suffer through what she has. And she is not the only one.

Sound familiar? Perhaps now you'll see why they're "all suddenly claiming" sexual assault.

[Chevaleresse]

I believe they continue to vote Dem because of their "they're racist, we aren't!" Rhetoric, and also due to support of groups such as BLM etc etc...

Concerning trump, he is not wrong concerning his comments on illegal immigrants being a serious issue. Over 70% of women who cross the border are raped by an illegal immigrant, or while they are on their way to cross illegally, that is fact. http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5806972

Illegals are far too much of a concern to be ignored. Concerning the pulse night club, did anybody here about this? http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2016/10/17/wikileaks-podesta-laments-it-wasnt-a-white-man-who-committed-san-bernardino-terror-attack-n2233236

Pretty deplorable from Podesta and aides and they call trump an islamophobe.

In my opinion, social justice should not be as much of a strife in a presidency than issues like combat and economy, but that is just me.

I just had to edit my post. Everyone, watch these videos.

Now.

I mean it.

And

This was an undercover investigation. I cannot believe what I am hearing guys... this is very wrong.

dude, did you even read that article? It's about IMMIGRANTS being assaulted on their way to cross the border, mostly perpertated by people along the way. It's not "the illegals are raping our women!" like you're trying to spin it. Not even close, and it's kind of terrible to spin it like that to further a political message.

Also not sure what point you're trying to make with the second article. It's kind of the opposite of Islamophobia to refuse to associate the insane radicals with the main body of the religion.

[Eviora]

I think Michelle Obama put it best in her recent speech. The people who even now support Trump despite the way he treats women are showing us who they really are. They'll do mental gymnastics to avoid it, but a vote for Trump is an endorsement of that kind of behavior - and I'll take that one step further. Those who refuse to take sides, who want to distance themselves from politics, and those who value sending some squeak of a message to no one by voting for a candidate who obviously can't win endorse the same behavior through their apathy. A refusal to stand up for the women in their lives in addition to for non-white people, disabled peopled, Muslims, and members of the LGBT community, is a statement made through action that those people aren't worth standing up for. Trump told us at the second debate that the man in the video wasn't him, but it isn't on a stage in front of a nation that we're most likely to reveal who we really are. We do that through smaller interactions, through the way we treat people on a day to day basis, the way we speak in the locker room, and, yes, the way we vote when no one is looking.

More and more people are coming to realize that they're not willing to stand by idly, or indeed, to lend a hand, as a man who so clearly has so little regard for women seeks the highest office in the land. As they step away from him, the ones who stay - and Trump himself - are bound to cry foul, because now it is becoming increasingly clear not only that they're unlikely to win, but that in throwing their support to him, they've made a statement about how they view others and perhaps even themselves. That can be a hard thing to admit to. So they don't want to admit it. They deny it, claim the whole thing to be a sham, because they don't want to face the fact that they may well be exactly what Hillary called them - deplorable. It's a desperate tactic, and one that won't work, because the rest of us are not fooled.

Of course, all that is just the opinion of some crazy girl. =p

Edited October 19, 2016 by Eviora

[Kurotsune]

Concerning trump, he is not wrong concerning his comments on illegal immigrants being a serious issue. Over 70% of women who cross the border are raped by an illegal immigrant, or while they are on their way to cross illegally, that is fact.

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5806972

Illegals are far too much of a concern to be ignored. Concerning the pulse night club, did anybody here about this?

Just wanted to comment on these two things because you're twisting the truth on this one.

Specifically:

" Over 70% of women who cross the border are raped by an illegal immigrant, or while they are on their way to cross illegally, that is fact."

Nope sir, that is not in fact, a fact.

The very link YOU provided states as much with the sentence -

Rape can be perpetrated by anyone along the way, including guides, fellow migrants, bandits or government officials, according to Fusion. Sometimes sex is used as a form of payment, when women and girls don’t have money to pay bribes.

Both highlighted lines reveal the issue within your statements - While they are indeed raped by other immigrants, not ALL 70% are, and in fact, the article heavily implies they are more often than not "raped" as payment to pass the border to begin with.

This is important because that is the crux of your point about immigrants being bad, but immigrants are the victims in this scenario, since the women being raped themselves are illegal immigrants.

And while that certainly reveals an issue with immigrants, it's definitely not that they're harming american citizens - But that american citizens, alongside other people, are abusing the fact that harming those people is instead not punished by law, and using that to gain advantage over them.

As for your videos, they're so full of bullshit. Undercover investigation? Most of these recordings could've been made by anyone under the claim of being "a super duper secret agent of the Clinton propaganda!!" naturally no one knows about dude 1, whose job is to make priests cry on camera. Dude 1 doesn't exist.

Trump is much more likely to create slander videos with preposterous statements on Hillary Clinton - As his campaign itself is based on being preposterous than Hillary is of manipulation an election that she has, for the majority of its duration, already won.

As for the video segments, not only can sentences be removed from context and misconstrued on purpose, the audio can also be altered while keeping it more or less in-sync with the footage. Your videos don't really prove anything other than someone has a lot of time on their hands.

Also Clinton is just as crappy a candidate as Trump is, y'all should just vote for a do-over or something.

[Absol-lutelty awesome!]

Ok wow, that is a lot of misunderstanding in such a small space. I guess this is what politics feels like.

1. Never claimed a GOP fact check was more reliable than politifact, I just stated that I can find fact checkers too. I did the research on my own, and the emails and the reddit post are all correlating in a bit of a fishy way. There was the bleachbit email, 2014, in July, concerning "VERY VIP" email. This question was asked after there were requests made for Clinton to turn over all her records. The email scandal at this point can't be defended in my eyes, I can read dates 20/20. The subpoena was issued on march 5th 2015, there was then action taken on march 25-31st by the IT crew, including deletion and smashing devices that were requested.

If you need a politifact check, here.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/oct/09/donald-trump/donald-trump-says-hillary-clinton-deleted-33000-em/

They STILL state the emails were deleted march 25-31st AFTER the subpoena was issued. If this is investigated, whoever ordered this deletion is going away for a very long time.

What we do know is that it is impossible that all deleted emails are just yoga and work related. Such a small number of confidential emails were still found in what WAS turned over (which means someone should still be in trouble, but, ya know! Carelessness.. and all)

I would not be surprised if there were confidential emails amongst the deleted. It is still illegal that these were removed after the subpoena to begin with!

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/how-hillary-clinton-aide-destroyed-phones-2016-9?client=safari

This was posted in September, after the Wikileaks dumps that showed the IT workers doing such suspicious work. Now, you might wonder, why oh why would someone who destroyed something under subpoena request gain immunity?

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/09/09/us/politics/hillary-clinton-emails-investigation.html

Who knows?

2. About Islamic terror, I'm sorry, but if you won't name the enemy you shouldn't be fighting. Whether it causes profiling, or escalation, I doubt. He is just using a politically correct name to "kinda" indentify those who are KILLING people, let me remind you. After 9/11 and the various other mass scale attacks, islamaphobia is guaranteed. We cannot stop it from occurring when people are being murdered by a terror group. What we can do is educate them. By actually naming who we are fighting, perhaps? Food for thought. Calling nazis "extreme germans" would be the same. We have a regime, led by leaders who use idealism to incite reasons for combat, and we have to be so careful not to profile them! (Sarcasm)

There is a difference between someone who is actively trying to shoot you, and those who aren't. It is their communities' responsibility to provide unity in the Islamic world, not us. Abu Bakr, why must you be gone?

Inspiring hate is not always why they attack. Many are raised into believing it is the true way of Allah, and misunderstanding and blatant lies is the way of a terror regime. They blank out what's really in the Qur'an and scribble what they say is true everywhere.

3. Fairfamily, it apparently is a big deal, because there are very serious charges. Think on that a second and we can poke a bush until something pops out together some more.

4. TurtleCat, I am so sorry, but please think of it this way. If you were using an unsecured, unmonitored server to send information THAT ONLY EQUAL OR SUPERIOR EYES are allowed to see across this unsecured server, you have made more than a small screw up. It's called secret for a reason, not a "everyone come find out!!" You can't just set up an unmonitored server and send classified info around.

5. On the undercover investigation, wonderful. If it is NOT proved to be wrong, what then? Don't discredit someone's secretly recorded words until they are proven to be edited or false. That video is not something that can be so easily discredited when there are attacks on trump supporters all the time, and now we have people saying there are mentally ill people being paid to physically attack a group of political supporters? And that wasn't even the worst part. I agree on the voter fraud part however, but just because one party won doesn't mean it didn't happen on one side or the other. Don't forget that. When people lose their jobs, the comments don't seem so false, especially when the investigation was a year long. I'll pay attention and we can see who is correct.

6. Tacos, good friend, I read your post and I do understand it. I will not discredit the idea, because I had thought it over a while and came to the conclusion that possibly a group of women had assembled to come forward at the same time as a "final push" idea. However, when witnesses present, and their family call them liars, I won't be so quick to accept them and pat them on the head with a "we believe you", especially with the octopus comment that was ripped as if by script from another case a few years before in another country.

7. Murdoc, look here, I never said "illegals are raping our women" (which illegals so happen to do to citizens of the United States)

I stated that women on their way to cross the border (more than often illegally) are at a very very high risk of being physically attacked. Have you heard of a "coyote" before? Sometimes they take things other than payment by force... now, ask yourself this, if we would completely lock down our border, would these happenings decrease? And would the women who actually are citizens as you somehow managed to think I was referring to, are raped by an illegal, would it have happened if we would have done our job and established a border long ago? Think.

8. Nope, not a spin. Podesta was hoping for this to be a white man, so much in fact, that he was frustrated. He wanted to use it as a political attack and scream "homophobia" obviously. We already know that gays are murdered overseas, the fact that this threat is here and he was more disappointed by his race than his actions is extremely deplorable of him. The fact that they would not call them Islamic terrorists despite stating allegiance before blowing so many people away says more than his race. Think on that too. Podesta should be ashamed that he was more concerned with his race than his actions. Those people aren't coming back. Ever.

9. Trump's claim on the tape was that it was just locker room talk, not that he didn't do it. Get that straight. He wasn't "bragging", he was being an idiot and speaking out of his ass. This tape to me is less of a "words speak louder than actions" and more of a "Trump why would you even say this?" Until I have confirmation that Trump treats women like dogs and pigs, I'll continue to say actions speak louder than words.

10. Of course it reveals his character. It shows that he is a very proud man with some crude talk. If he didn't do any of the things in the tape, as there was no confirmation that any of these things he said were actually done, then I can honestly think of it as disgusting, but not defining. Actions speak louder than words, especially ones from 10 years before, with zero proof of anything being done to anybody. I'm not defending him in the slightest, but don't say it defines him 10 years later with, still, zero proof that any of this actually happened. I actually find it almost sad someone would try to make such disgusting false claims. What is even more characterizing is that more than half of all allegations of rape are false! Those actions against people speak pretty loudly about certain portions of the female community. Another ten percent cannot even be proved true or false. When a woman brings forward real proof, and a person who was there doesn't come forward a very short time later and call them a blatant liar, I'll be all ears. Until them, I'm on the fence. Policy and economic reform is more important than something someone said ten years previous to their life changing political campaign that will be what everyone remembers them for, especially when none of the claims can be proven true or false at this point at all.

http://www.mediaradar.org/research_on_false_rape_allegations.php

Here is a fun multi study.

Now. We have a set of candidates tonight.

We have 3 options.

1. Hillary is crushed into tiny pieces and cannot even speak after being shut down like the last debate after throwing the first blow. So much for the "when they go low, you go high" bull.

2. Trump gets baited and babbles on camera, looks like an idiot, loses by a landslide.

3. A dead heat occurs where the last stretch will be the roughest.

Any commentary? I'm not trying to be mean, I promise, I just get really tired of all this political bull sometimes and wish it could all just be less sugar coated.

I hope this (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/clinton-campaign-used-benghazi-as-distraction-from-email-scandal/article/2604251) is brought up at some point. I can't believe they would take this so lightly too. Thanks Podesta.

Edited October 19, 2016 by Absol-lutelty awesome!

[Swimming95]

Lol. Way too much that's incorrect in your post. I will try to take a stab at it later when I get home but I probably won't be able to scratch the surface of all of the incorrect information. I can only hope that sometime in the future, when this is over you are able to look at this again with fresh eyes.

[Absol-lutelty awesome!]

Lol. Way too much that's incorrect in your post. I will try to take a stab at it later when I get home but I probably won't be able to scratch the surface of all of the incorrect information. I can only hope that sometime in the future, when this is over you are able to look at this again with fresh eyes.

Alright, if your eyes are so perfectly clear and your obvious superiority is so very evident, tell me exactly why and how I am wrong, on each so obviously misinformed point. I will defend my every position until there is absolute proof that they are all incorrect. Can't wait to hear how you defend the fact, and I will restate, fact that the emails were deleted after a subpoena was issued to turn over all of them. Even the glorious fact checkers agree. Check out politifact, they deny Clinton had intent specifically, due to a lack of evidence, but it is FACTUAL that the emails were deleted after the subpoena was issued. Whoever it might have been who ordered this mass deletion, they are in very very deep trouble regardless.

Edited October 19, 2016 by Absol-lutelty awesome!

[Felicity]

Politics remind of high school drama. Unreliable info, a divisive couple, immaturiity, level headed people being largely ignored and of course the fact that it is absolutely mesmerising to outsiders who have nothing to do with it, like me.

Snl is independent, dunno what trump thinks he can really do and hes picking a fight he is set to lose.

[Eviora]

I don't think you understand how evidence works, Absol, considering your eagerness to answer concerns with a swarm of assumptions. If you're looking for absolute proof of much of anything, you're going to be looking for a long time. And the fact that you freely admit you'll cling to your opinions until presented with the sort of logic that only exists in a vacuum is a testament to your unwillingness to listen to practical reason. You're basically declaring that you aren't worth arguing with. So I won't bother. Enjoy your alternate reality.

[FairFamily]

@Eviora Saying a vote for Trump is a vote for his sexual behavior is a rather crude opinion. It completely ignores his views or Hillaries views on other subjects. It's even anti-democratic. Imagine if you changed all the voting billet from "Who do you want for president?" to "Are you a woman hater?". I mean that would just be ridiculous but that's what it would boil down to.

@Absol-lutelty awesome! it is relevant but not for the elections in my personal opinion. Incompetence is not something president can have neither is bad intentions. So pure for the presidential race it wouldn't matter to me.

@Dobby The Elf with independant do you mean not state sponsored because in that case snl still can have interest in who it discredits more just for other reasons. Like the higher ups don't like Trumps agenda or bashing Trump earns more viewers.

[Absol-lutelty awesome!]

I don't think you understand how evidence works, Absol, considering your eagerness to answer concerns with a swarm of assumptions. If you're looking for absolute proof of much of anything, you're going to be looking for a long time. And the fact that you freely admit you'll cling to your opinions until presented with the sort of logic that only exists in a vacuum is a testament to your unwillingness to listen to practical reason. You're basically declaring that you aren't worth arguing with. So I won't bother. Enjoy your alternate reality.

Sorry, but my sugar coat is gone now. Prepare yourself. Apparently, according to you, holding my decisions that are completely my own to hold until they are proven incorrect is now something negative. Let me ask you something honestly, is flip flopping because someone just so happened to bash your opinion something that leads to you being not worth speaking with? Shows plenty of your character there, because unlike you, I'll stick to my guns until someone can provide proof that I am without a doubt incorrect. Now, concerning my dearest "swarm of assumptions", is it so illogical to draw a conclusion based directly on what I'm observing? Oh, I suppose I was taught incorrectly in school wasn't I?

At least, unlike you, I'm evidently willing to find out what is the absolute truth and what is not, because I have a sense of what matters in this world. I am quick to respond because this /is/ my opportunity for myself to see my opinions and ideas tested. Practical reason is based on facts, didn't you know? Practical reason, just so happens to be defined by those who seek to define it by giving someone a reasonable arguement, and when I provide stats that just do happen to be real world as well as recommended fact checkers, is my reasoning not in fact well based? Is it so deeply wrong to actually stick by what you believe? I am worth arguing with, especially if you can provide me some evidence. Go on, I am waiting.

That is, unless, you would prefer to stop attempting to belittle me for my thought process and beliefs and step away from your fantasy world. I don't live in a land of unicorns and unstable arguments, I prefer a hard cold talk with someone who is ready to give me a reason why I'm so out of touch. Let's put your character to the test and see if you so happen to be willing to come to me, and reason with me using evidence instead of allegations. Shows a lot when you critic people's character and format, and then discredit them as somehow unworthy due to themselves being rational. You are the exact reason that I am the way I am, because facts speak louder than anything else.

Come on. Let's see you put down the glass and uncross your legs, come over here, and provide me a cold hard base instead of just stating that I live in an alternate reality, where facts so happen to be what arguments are based on.

Now, that the personal attacks are out of the way, my millimeter thick sugar coat is back up.

Who wishes to watch the debate tonight? I would love to hear you guys analyze it and compare it with my notes. It's always beautiful to be exposed to another way of thinking.

Isn't that right, Eviora?

-----

FairFamily, I find it amazing that you are willing to be on both sides at the same time.

That's a very very interesting point of view... in fact, I might call it well informed due to how you tend to pursue what is seen in your own eyes of what a president should be. In fact, I 100% agree. If someone cannot handle their job, why give them a higher position?

However, a question.

If someone proves over time their incompetence is something they have tended to and fixed, do you believe they should be more seriously considered, or criticized and allow their reactions to determine if they are competent, as well as their intentions?

Just wondering a bit about who I'm with here

Edited October 19, 2016 by Absol-lutelty awesome!

[Bluewolf]

I know a thrown out of proportion conspiracy video when I see and those are most certainly up that alley.

I mean on a scale of 1 to "ALIENS" this is a "the pyramids were used as grain silos"

I do enjoy all of this "not right" rhetoric. It's not right or it's seriously messed up.

2. About Islamic terror, I'm sorry, but if you won't name the enemy you shouldn't be fighting. Whether it causes profiling, or escalation, I doubt. He is just using a politically correct name to "kinda" indentify those who are KILLING people, let me remind you. After 9/11 and the various other mass scale attacks, islamaphobia is guaranteed. We cannot stop it from occurring when people are being murdered by a terror group. What we can do is educate them. By actually naming who we are fighting, perhaps? Food for thought. Calling nazis "extreme germans" would be the same. We have a regime, led by leaders who use idealism to incite reasons for combat, and we have to be so careful not to profile them! (Sarcasm)

1. You misunderstand the American people, or moreover, how people in general work. There is not an if, and, nor but about this: people will be profiled. You know what else we're fighting against? Public shooters. You know, that thing that has escalated quite a bit in the last few years. I don't see anybody calling them "White people who have no home training". And how come after all these shootings we haven't called these people terrorists? "Oh no, Freddy just has mental issues" and is DEFINITELY not a terrorist. But the second you officially label Muslims as terrorists don't you dare act surprised to see a rise in violence. Our enemy is People, not the religion. And if you knew anything about Islam, you'd understand that the practices ISIS does are nowhere near what the Quran says. "The Quran says to do bad things" yeah well I don't see you stoning your mom for making you clean your room if your Christian so don't even try that mess.

3. Fairfamily, it apparently is a big deal, because there are very serious charges. Think on that a second and we can poke a bush until something pops out together some more.

2. There are no charges. She was found to not have done anything indictment worthy. No one is going to jail. It's been discussed and concluded.

4. TurtleCat, I am so sorry, but please think of it this way. If you were using an unsecured, unmonitored server to send information THAT ONLY EQUAL OR SUPERIOR EYES are allowed to see across this unsecured server, you have made more than a small screw up. It's called secret for a reason, not a "everyone come find out!!" You can't just set up an unmonitored server and send classified info around.

3. Refer back to #2

5. On the undercover investigation, wonderful. If it is NOT proved to be wrong, what then? Don't discredit someone's secretly recorded words until they are proven to be edited or false. That video is not something that can be so easily discredited when there are attacks on trump supporters all the time, and now we have people saying there are mentally ill people being paid to physically attack a group of political supporters? And that wasn't even the worst part. I agree on the voter fraud part however, but just because one party won doesn't mean it didn't happen on one side or the other. Don't forget that. When people lose their jobs, the comments don't seem so false, especially when the investigation was a year long. I'll pay attention and we can see who is correct.

4. I don't even...ok. That is a logical l fallacy, burden of proof to be exact. If my outlandish claim can't be proved wrong, it must be valid. But if I told you that Emma Stone dresses up as a green frog a rides a unicycle in her basement, you'd be less likely to believe me. Again with those videos, where is the guy with the big hair who says "Aliens!" when you need him. I'm not gonna even spend anymore time on that.

7. Murdoc, look here, I never said "illegals are raping our women" (which illegals so happen to do to citizens of the United States)
I stated that women on their way to cross the border (more than often illegally) are at a very very high risk of being physically attacked. Have you heard of a "coyote" before? Sometimes they take things other than payment by force... now, ask yourself this, if we would completely lock down our border, would these happenings decrease? And would the women who actually are citizens as you somehow managed to think I was referring to, are raped by an illegal, would it have happened if we would have done our job and established a border long ago? Think.

5. Yet again that makes no sense, whatsoever.

Soooo....our concern has switched to women who cross the border illegally being sexually assaulted or attacked by coyotes. And the people who sexually assault these illegal women are other illegal immigrants...?

1) This is Mexico, you leave your house you get bit by a coyote. I don't see people in North Carolina becoming shut-ins because of mountain lions.

2) This little thing with the raping just keeps flip-flopping. I don't understand where people thing that rape is a purely Mexican trait. Rape will still happen to women all across the country. Whether if it's a white, mexican, black, asian, or whatever man. [Women get raped by illegal immigrants, therefore, Illegal immigrants are major contributing cause to rape] is one of the most illogical syllogisms I've ever seen.

These are problems that cannot simply be resolved by closing up shop. THAT is true cowardice and a failure of the American people and government to be honestly introspective with itself and ask "What can we fix for OURSELVES." instead of blaming everyone else likes its done for centuries.

8. Nope, not a spin. Podesta was hoping for this to be a white man, so much in fact, that he was frustrated. He wanted to use it as a political attack and scream "homophobia" obviously. We already know that gays are murdered overseas, the fact that this threat is here and he was more disappointed by his race than his actions is extremely deplorable of him. The fact that they would not call them Islamic terrorists despite stating allegiance before blowing so many people away says more than his race. Think on that too. Podesta should be ashamed that he was more concerned with his race than his actions. Those people aren't coming back. Ever.

6. And what? The solution is to nuke any all Arab sates? To persecute those who follow a certain religion despite being citizens of this country? "Sometimes you have to do the hard thing" The hard thing is admitting that bad people do horrible things to any kind of person without thought of the greater impact. That is reality. To say pin bad things on the existence of certain kinds of people is shying away from the hard truth. It didn't even need to be a white guy, enough white guys have shot up schools and stores already these past 3 years.

9. Trump's claim on the tape was that it was just locker room talk, not that he didn't do it. Get that straight. He wasn't "bragging", he was being an idiot and speaking out of his ass. This tape to me is less of a "words speak louder than actions" and more of a "Trump why would you even say this?" Until I have confirmation that Trump treats women like dogs and pigs, I'll continue to say actions speak louder than words.

7. Well I like to sniff fresh dog poop but that can't be confirmed because I only said it non-jokingly. His actions? What has this man done that the American people have benefited from? And don't say jobs because if I recall correctly those workers didn't get paid.

10. Of course it reveals his character. It shows that he is a very proud man with some crude talk. If he didn't do any of the things in the tape, as there was no confirmation that any of these things he said were actually done, then I can honestly think of it as disgusting, but not defining. Actions speak louder than words, especially ones from 10 years before, with zero proof of anything being done to anybody. I'm not defending him in the slightest, but don't say it defines him 10 years later with, still, zero proof that any of this actually happened. I actually find it almost sad someone would try to make such disgusting false claims. What is even more characterizing is that more than half of all allegations of rape are false! Those actions against people speak pretty loudly about certain portions of the female community. Another ten percent cannot even be proved true or false. When a woman brings forward real proof, and a person who was there doesn't come forward a very short time later and call them a blatant liar, I'll be all ears. Until them, I'm on the fence. Policy and economic reform is more important than something someone said ten years previous to their life changing political campaign that will be what everyone remembers them for, especially when none of the claims can be proven true or false at this point at all.

8. Ok wait so when some law dropout conspiracy theorist releases a bogus video of a voice that is supposedly Hillary's voice saying some stuff, all of that defines her?

So, Hillary is held to a different standard than her opponent. What he says is to be taken lightly and what she says condemns her as the devil. And Trump has the never to say this election is unfair.

Ok, fine then. Prove to me that Hillary is the spawn of Satan and bring me her spiked tail and THEN I will believe your claims.

Also he has no plausible policy and his economic reform is detrimental because America is a country, not a casino.

1. Hillary is crushed into tiny pieces and cannot even speak after being shut down like the last debate after throwing the first blow. So much for the "when they go low, you go high" bull.

2. Trump gets baited and babbles on camera, looks like an idiot, loses by a landslide.

3. A dead heat occurs where the last stretch will be the roughest.

Any commentary? I'm not trying to be mean, I promise, I just get really tired of all this political bull sometimes and wish it could all just be less sugar coated.

I hope this (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/clinton-campaign-used-benghazi-as-distraction-from-email-scandal/article/2604251) is brought up at some point. I can't believe they would take this so lightly too. Thanks Podesta.

Yeah there was no crushing to pieces of anyone, especially not Hillary.

And no matter what Trump does, he will 1) Look like an idiot and 2) Lose. It's not like it's a secret anymore. That's...pretty much the end of the possible outcomes of this debate. It'll be fun to watch though.

Personally I hope his comments about altering the 14th amendment are brought up. Because any Congress would totally let you get away with that.

[Swimming95]

I included links at least to most of the email stuff previously. We can agree to disagree on how big of a mistake it was but there is no evidence for anything leading to an indictment or further charges at this time. I apologize for using vox so much, these were headlines I remembered and investigated the sources of. I also wanted to be quicker in order to respond to a lot of points. I also apologize if some of these points bleed into each other.

1) I said in my link that timing of when the emails are deleted. I'm contesting why you think they were after the subpoena. It was shown that they were only affected emails that were supposed to be already deleted. If you have distrust of the FBI,DOJ,Clinton, then that's fine but there is currently no evidence to support your claims of malicious intent.

2) It was not found that Clinton originated any confidential information. People testified there it was the non-backdated confidential emails that had incorrect confidential markings.

3) It was not found that there is any proof that her server got hacked (of course that doesn't prove it didn't but wanted to put that out there).

4) As I said, it was a systemic issue in the state department and not something with Clinton in particular.

5) I don't think you understand what the reddit user was asking about (if it was a staffer). It wasn't how to modify the emails maliciously though a lot of users tried jumping on it. It could've also been how to scrub names or other personal information (phone numbers, email addresses, etc).

6) I also don't think you understand what getting immunity means. It allows a person to talk without fear of retribution. Its not an admission of guilt or anything wrong. Similar to taking the 5th, its purely to avoid self incrimination. It is a great tenent of our laws.

7) In general you are making a lot of assumptions about the email server. I get that you don't trust her but please do not try to not pass off conspiracy theories as facts.

8) http://www.vox.com/2016/6/28/12046626/phrase-islamic-radicalism-meaningless-counterproductive Really? you think the problem is not racially profiling people? Comparing this to Nazi and extreme German is completely miscontruing the picture. It is not a war with Islam, it is a war with ISIS. While there may be overlap at the extremes, one does a much better job at describing teh situation.

9) At least with immigrants, at majority are those who overstay green cards and visas. Closing borders won't actually stop this unless we just prevent anyone from entering or leaving the country full stop.

10) The Pulse club shooting and the NY metro area bombins were domestic not foreign terror. I don't think its possible to weed out every single citizen unless you are proposing internment camps, armbands, or fun tech.

11) Its also crazy to think a test would be enough to identify terrorists. Nothing prevents them from lying about their religious views. Racial profiling in general has also been found to be unconstitutional and ineffective with stop and frisk.

12) If you want to believe a conspriacy theorist (O'keefe) go ahead. It has been proven that he alters his videos to hide the meaning and to prove his narrative. He is not a reliable source. Please look up his lawsuits about ACORN and planned parenthood.

13) They weren't claiming to be paid to attack trump supporters. The claim is that they were paid to go to protests about Trump. Not to incite violence. Asking questions and wearing provocative tshirts is hardly a shocking and trully disturbing thing.

14) There is no evidence of widespread voter fraud. In the past 16 years it was found to be 35 cases out of 836,000,000 votes. http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/10/17/13306590/trump-voter-fraud-skittles-debunked

15) I didn't realize there was a way to trademark types of sexual assault. Unless there is, it having similarities is really not a mark against the claim. Also, there have been verifiers of at least one of the other claims of sexual assault (the PEOPLE magazine one http://www.vox.com/identities/2016/10/18/13320496/donald-melania-trump-sexual-assault-people-natasha-stoynoff-witnesses). Let me know when all 15+ current allegations are disproven. The idea is not 100% belief but the ability to investigate as though there is. It is completely false that over half of claims are unfounded. http://www.vox.com/identities/2016/10/19/13326436/donald-trump-people-magazine-sexual-assault-myths-victims-natasha-stoynoff

16) Its also false that immigrants have a higher incidence of sexually assaulting citizens. Correcting for gender its actually in line or even less (referring to a study in Germany at least). http://www.vox.com/2016/9/20/12986886/donald-trump-jr-terrorist-skittles-wrong

17) It's amazing how wrong you are on the Podesta email and are somehow able to glean 100% context and fact from that email. You have the complete wrong interpretation about wanting it to be a white man. The only crazy thing that came out of the email leaks is his amazing risotto recipe. Everything else (for the most part) is taking things out of context and applying one's own malintent. Also slightly combined with that there is evidence that some of the leaks were doctored but that strays a lot from the point of this point and borders on other conspiracy theories.

18) So does constantly demeaning women in every other interviewer, his comments to Megyn Kelly, the 3AM tweeting, etc. not count as treating women like dogs or pigs?

It seems like you are more than welcome to find fault in Clinton without FACTUAL evidence yet ignore anything with Donald without FACTUAL evidence. Though it also seems like you are bordering on conspiracy theory for other parts and would really recommend against tauting those as fact. At a certain point, there really isn't much more for me to say beyond copying what Evi said and hoping that when this is over, we can all calm down about this

[Eviora]

Aw, you wanna talk to me! Before I can engage in any meaningful conversation, though, there's a little snag I need to get over. You see, I'm totally convinced that no humans named Donald Trump appeared in the second debate, but that instead, a Reptilian posed as Trump and argued with Hillary Clinton. Could you please disabuse me of that little notion? I'll need absolute proof, of course.

[Cyanna Cyril]

@Dobby: I like your first statement; I wish it were less true though >.< On the second, it may be "independent," but it has a general liberal bias in its comedy/jokes. And there's the theory that most elections are based on popularity of name and how positive/negative the associatations with the name are, rather than actually knowing anything. So if a person's "news source" is SNL, they'll likely never vote Trump. (Within the context of the theory)

@Eviora: I agree with fair's statement about your post. Moreover, if you're going to completely disavow people's opinions, then you shouldn't be arguing in the first place as you'll eventually create just as much of an alternate reality for yourself except with your own opinions rather than theirs. Advice: always be open to what people say whether or not you agree with it. If you don't agree with it, every now and then try to figure out why they do agree with it. Also, please don't be so snide with Absol, he's too young in my opinion to really be getting into politics and he's trying his best to articulate his views and reasons/sources to the best of his ability.

Also, I really don't think 50% of the US is deplorable. If that were true, then why should Hillary want to rule the nation of deplorables, if they're so far gone in their racism, sexism, blah blah blah?

@Mde: I don't think we can agree on the issues you brought forth. Mainly wanted to just say I don't agree with most of what you mentioned for various, personal reasons, but honestly I respect that you believe differently. Agree to disagree I suppose.

@Tacos: Wonderful story, but is what normally happens to every abuse victim? I'd really hope this isn't the typical example, but I also believe that in this situation, she made the mistake of not seeking any help or counsel for what happened, especially immediately after the incident, and that refusing to get assistance and allowing it to govern her life for 20 years is her fault. The abuse is not her fault. The trauma it may cause is not her fault, but the failure to address the abuse or trauma in a meaningful way is her decision and her fault. This is not a popular opinion from what I understand, but it's my opinion from various experiences and from information of various sources. And truly, I sympathize with anyone going through this sort of event; it should never happen. Some victims can come to terms with it on their own, but others need extra support to handle it. And again, I wanted to reiterate that I really wish these claims were not public to prevent more harm coming to these women, and I'd rather know they're getting some sort of assistance to overcome it than having their names dragged across national television to support a political agenda.

[Tacos]

@Tacos: Wonderful story, but is what normally happens to every abuse victim? I'd really hope this isn't the typical example, but I also believe that in this situation, she made the mistake of not seeking any help or counsel for what happened, especially immediately after the incident, and that refusing to get assistance and allowing it to govern her life for 20 years is her fault. The abuse is not her fault. The trauma it may cause is not her fault, but the failure to address the abuse or trauma in a meaningful way is her decision and her fault. This is not a popular opinion from what I understand, but it's my opinion from various experiences and from information of various sources. And truly, I sympathize with anyone going through this sort of event; it should never happen. Some victims can come to terms with it on their own, but others need extra support to handle it. And again, I wanted to reiterate that I really wish these claims were not public to prevent more harm coming to these women, and I'd rather know they're getting some sort of assistance to overcome it than having their names dragged across national television to support a political agenda.

Like I said, it's not 100% accurate. It was more just meant to present a perspective of a woman who felt as if she couldn't speak about it. To be fair, I wrote this in like 10 minutes before I went to school and ran late as a result so I probably could have put more effort in to it, but I think you got the point.

[Eviora]

@Cyanna

Always be open to other opinions, huh? Say I'm talking to a Neo Nazi who believes all Jews should be rounded up and executed. Should I be open to that opinion?

Edited October 20, 2016 by Eviora

[Cyanna Cyril]

Like I said, it's not 100% accurate. It was more just meant to present a perspective of a woman who felt as if she couldn't speak about it. To be fair, I wrote this in like 10 minutes before I went to school and ran late as a result so I probably could have put more effort in to it, but I think you got the point.

Yes, I understand this can happen. When it does happen it's horrible, and I hope you understand why I don't really like seeing it all over the news, especially when it seems to be used more as political jabs than anything else. I believe there are so many better ways to reach resolution, but if it does provide them some closure, good for them. They've still got a long way to go to recovery, and I hope they get that rather than unneeded attention and popularity or notoriety.

Eviora:

@Cyanna

Always be open to other opinions, huh? What if I'm talking to a Neo Nazi who believes all Jews should be rounded up and executed. Should I be open to that opinion?

Yes you should listen to the opinion, but hopefully you have enough common sense and knowledge to understand why this is absolutely horrible opinion. And part 2 of the advice, why do these people even believe it? That's honestly going to give you a lot of insight into people that you'd never consider if you don't ever listen to their arguments.

Edited October 20, 2016 by Cyanna Cyril

[FairFamily]

@Absol-lutelty awesome! Well you said it yourself they have proven they removed their element of incompetence so yeah they get full trust back. However proving you removed your lack of incompetence is difficult, let's take Hillary as example. She needs more the just use the government mail server. She needs to show that she corrected her awareness to what content is classified, what content is most likely to be upclassified, knowledge of protocols, inspecting work statusses, ... . The list is long. So it will take some effort and time but in the end they can get that trust back.

@Eviora Do you mean reptillian litteraly or figuratively (like a liar/faker)?

Edited October 20, 2016 by FairFamily

[Eviora]

@Cyanna

I imagine there would be some story behind holding such a repugnant opinion. But, frankly, I don't care what that story is. I don't have the time to individually examine everyone who believes something so depraved. The moment they take action to progress that opinion into a reality the value of their action supersedes whatever is going through their heads.

@FairFamily

Literally. This is an exercise in the limits of proof, of course.

[Cyanna Cyril]

@Cyanna

I imagine there would be some story behind holding such a repugnant opinion. But, frankly, I don't care what that story is. I don't have the time to individually examine everyone who believes something so depraved. The moment they take action to progress that opinion into a reality the value of their action supersedes whatever is going through their heads.

Ahh, I never said they were taking action. And you should care about the stories of others, or else you'll fail to understand so many people. I also didn't say it had to be every time; you're not a philosopher with infinite time to ponder the great questions of why people do.

Food for Thought: If "The moment they take action to progress that opinion into a reality the value of their action supersedes whatever is going through their heads." were applied to the Hillary email situation, wouldn't her intent in the matter be mute? (Opinion: It's fine to use this email server instead of the government secure server for classified documents. Reality: It's not okay to use a personal server for that. Result: ???)