United States Presidential Election, 2016

[Logan]

Hear me now peasants the one true god as shown himself, and we most now go to him as he prepares his awesome powers for us.

The cheese fries is coming and we its loyal servants of the holy cheese most answer the call. All the fries will provide the lord a form to take, we most not let this go by us.

For the cheese lord has come and he demands that we eat him.

Hopefully this helps with the mood.

I'm down. At least we can prove cheese is real.

 

[Aleksandr]

No offence, but...why do I get the feeling you either don't understand or can't justify half of the things you just said there? It reads like you quoted a conservative commentator verbatim rather than came to those conclusions on your own.

First off, her corruption is well documented - the shady dealings of the Clinton Foundation, covering up abuses by Bill Clinton, the mysterious deaths connected with the DNC leaks, conniving with the Democratic Party leadership to sabotage Sanders's campaign, etc. Her "foreign policy experience" is something frequently brought up by her supporters, yet her incompetence has gotten Americans killed in Benghazi, has turned Libya into a chaotic hellhole, and has helped bring about the European migrant crisis. Not to mention her shady connections to ISIS, the House of Saud, and others. Thanks to WikiLeaks we get new information on her activities about every other day now.

And yet she is apparently not satisfied, as she also says she wants to intervene in Syria and establish a no-fly zone. That would lead to war with Russia and the Syrian government, starting WW3. And for what? To support some so-called "moderate" terrorists, at least on the surface. Of course the real reason probably has more to do with the fact that the Western globalist elites want to both eliminate the world's last major traditional, mostly non-leftist country (Russia), and also use this as the opportunity to bring about a one-world government.

On the other hand, Trump has already made it clear that he opposes more neocon wars and wants to work together with Putin.

 

[Arian Korzak]

I'm not sure, given that what I listed is common knowledge. First off, her corruption is well documented - the shady dealings of the Clinton Foundation, covering up abuses by Bill Clinton, the mysterious deaths connected with the DNC leaks, coniving with the Democratic Party leadership to sabotage Sanders's campaign, etc. Her "foreign policy experience" is something frequently brought up by her supporters, yet her incompetence has gotten Americans killed in Benghazi, has turned Libya into a chaotic hellhole, and has helped bring about the European migrant crisis. Not to mention her shady connections to ISIS, the House of Saud, and others. Thanks to WikiLeaks we get new information on her dealings about every other day.

And yet she is apparently not satisfied, as she also says she wants to intervene in Syria and establish a no-fly zone. That would lead to war with Russia and the Syrian government, starting WW3. And for what? To support some so-called "moderate" terrorists, at least on the surface. Of course the real reason probably has more to do with the fact that the Western globalist elites want to both eliminate the world's last major traditional, mostly non-leftist European country (Russia), and also use this as the opportunity to bring about a one-world government.

On the other hand, Trump has already made it clear that he opposes more neocon wars and wants to work together with Putin.

I'm not sure if that picture is amusing or not...

 

[Kaane]

On the other hand, Trump has already made it clear that he opposes more neocon wars and wants to work together with Putin.

I agree with you until this point. As I've said it before, it's also quite clear he wants to increase funding for the military and "renegoatiate" trade deals and other agreements with China that would probably lead to its economic collapse. He's basically focusing on one "enemy" instead of both.

 

[Aleksandr]

I agree with you until this point. As I've said it before, it's also quite clear he wants to increase funding for the military and "renegoatiate" trade deals and other agreements with China that would probably lead to its economic collapse. He's basically focusing on one "enemy" instead of both.

Perhaps, and there is some concern among right wing circles that the fact that Trump has not been assassinated yet may indicate that he is just controlled opposition, but given Clinton's record and reputation compared to Trump's, the possibility of a nuclear WW3 with my home country seems vastly higher to me with her than with Trump.

Apparently even Jill Stein of the Green Party has recently supported the Trump campaign, saying that she believes Clinton must not win.

 

[Outlander]

Perhaps, and there is some concern among right wing circles that the fact that Trump has not been assassinated yet may indicate that he is just controlled opposition, but given Clinton's record and reputation compared to Trump's, the possibility of a nuclear WW3 with my home country seems vastly higher to me with her than with Trump.

Apparently even Jill Stein of the Green Party has recently supported the Trump campaign, saying that she believes Clinton must not win.

Fun Fact: Trump said he wouldn't take nukes off the table when dealing with conflicts in Europe.

 

[The Captain]

Fun Fact: Trump said he wouldn't take nukes off the table when dealing with conflicts in Europe.

So we're fudged either way, great.

 

[Arian Korzak]

Fun Fact: Trump said he wouldn't take nukes off the table when dealing with conflicts in Europe.

I feel kinda saddened everyone has to have weapons of mass destruction just to prevent world war, for now that is.

 

[Jason Vaiken]

So we're fudged either way, great.

Russia has moved short-range nuclear missiles to their border alongside Lithuania and Poland. They are doing this to scare the crap out of Europe due to only the French and British having nuclear capabilities.

 

[Cainhurst Crow]

How did we get here? Seriously, is there a spread sheet somewhere that lays out how we got to this travesty? A serial sexual assaulter and the shadiest woman in politics vying for the highest office in America.

Its called "nobody cares about primary elections" and "less then 50% of americans vote."

 

[Arian Korzak]

Its called "nobody cares about primary elections" and "less then 50% of americans vote."

Well that would explain it wouldn't it.

 

[Jabonicus]

Correction: Free will is the choice to do good or bad. You misinterpreted what I said.

God made free will, which not only has created evil, by your definition, but allows it to flourish. Alongside this, as proof of God creating something evil, he hath made Hell. According to the Bible, all against him are cast away from his "eternal love" to perish eternally, not matter what changes are made. A place of eternal punishment simply cannot be 'good.'

Now, god may have made morals, which is still questionable to me, but here's a question for you.

Would you kindly define consciousness, in your own terms?

 

[Cainhurst Crow]

On the subject of traditional family, I think it holds merit. Statistics show when you have parents of a children in a stable, healthy relationship with one another, raising their children in a stable environment, that they grow up to be better members of society then those raised in unstable homes, with parents who have extremely or sometimes violent conflicts with one another, or who suddenly get divorced but react poorly to both each other or to stress, because those who do not react well to stress are often the ones who turn to abuse, which is a significant factor in developmental issues. Basically, a traditional family unit, or at least the ideal unit of two parental units who don't fight and children they raise well, is currently the best modus operendi for raisng good children into healthy adults with a good sense of emotional and psychological stability. That is simply what the statistics say.

However, it is foolish to say that the traditional family is restricted to just heterosexual people. Homosexual or even Transgender parents are no different then normal parents. They can be stable, loving, and raise good children, or they can be over-emotional, easily stressed, and highly toxic to their children as well, just as any other heterosexual parent can. The moment you begin trying to quantify the gender of the parents into the equation, you begin to run into the issue of trying to observe a statistical phenomena that simply is not present, when looking at the hard facts of the matter. Broken homes as a general rule result in broken people being raised there. But there's nothing that says one form of gender or sexual orientation leads to a more broken home then another, nor that one is significantly more stable then the other.

People are people, as simple as that sounds its the truth. Every person is capable of being a horrible fuck up or a good human being, regardless of what they identify as. All that matters if they know how to raise a person with a firm guiding hand, but give them room to develop or diverge as their own individual person as they get older.

 

[Cainhurst Crow]

Actually the bible is not so much guidlines as it is a historical book, people always seem to assume we use it as a guidbook. Also, God cannot be (by reason and evidence alone) proven or disproven.

That is, an infinitesimally stupid outlook to take. You believe a human being can survive over a century inside a whale, and that a person was turned into a pillar of salt. Or that there was a man capable of flying and that one of the apostales was so bothered by this that he begged god to take away his flight, which he did, and led to the man being stoned.

 

[Arian Korzak]

God made free will, which not only has created evil, by your definition, but allows it to flourish. Alongside this, as proof of God creating something evil, he hath made Hell. According to the Bible, all against him are cast away from his "eternal love" to perish eternally, not matter what changes are made. A place of eternal punishment simply cannot be 'good.'

Now, god may have made morals, which is still questionable to me, but here's a question for you.

Would you kindly define consciousness, in your own terms?

Correction: Hell existed so those who chose, by revolting against him, would go there. They chose that.

God made free will, which not only has created evil, by your definition, but allows it to flourish. Alongside this, as proof of God creating something evil, he hath made Hell. According to the Bible, all against him are cast away from his "eternal love" to perish eternally, not matter what changes are made. A place of eternal punishment simply cannot be 'good.'

Now, god may have made morals, which is still questionable to me, but here's a question for you.

Would you kindly define consciousness, in your own terms?

Correction: Hell exists for those who revolt against God, they made their choices willingly that sent them there. Consciousness is complex and difficult for me to explain because I have always had difficulty with words and language.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

Not to backseat moderate here, but this thread is about the presidential election. If you want to debate religion, please make a new thread.

 

[Arian Korzak]

That is, an infinitesimally stupid outlook to take. You believe a human being can survive over a century inside a whale, and that a person was turned into a pillar of salt. Or that there was a man capable of flying and that one of the apostales was so bothered by this that he begged god to take away his flight, which he did, and led to the man being stoned.

Not entirely sure about everything you said, the way you said it just didn't make sense, can you rephrase that? As for "Infinitely stupid outlook to take" I would like to ask why you believe that? Clearly miracles occur as long as you believe everything on this earth is real. And no human can ever have any reasonable hope to comprehend the universe in its entirety, so miracles aren't foolish at all.

 

[Arian Korzak]

Not to backseat moderate here, but this thread is about the presidential election. If you want to debate religion, please make a new thread.

Sorry, I will cease discussing this in this thread.

 

[Gamov]

Her "foreign policy experience"....

Is at least something that exists and is tangible against Trump, whose "foreign policy" - when asked in an MSNBC interview who he "consistently consults with" on such issues - consists of such notable gems as:

“I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things."

So by that logic, I have a marvelous grasp on foreign policy as well. I believe I've said a lot of things in my life, too.

Now to scrounge up enough money to run for President. Because, you know, saying a lot of things is apparently the only qualification one needs to have all the answers to all the problems.

The man has no foreign policy. He has no "great plan" to "make America great again.". What he is is an arrogant, overblown egotistical narcissist who wants to line his pockets and entertains delusional fantasies (I assume anyway) of people calling him "Mr. President". And on top of that, he damn near idolizes Putin (source quotes).

Now, my history might be a little hazy, but the last time Europe had a leader with a case of idol worship like this, some dude called Hitler looked at what some other dude named Mussolini was doing in Italy at the time, and managed to take that example and start a world war. Oh, he also kinda murdered a couple million people for no greater reason than their religion/sexual orientation/place of birth/mental health issues.

But history can't repeat itself, I guess.

Trump is not in this election for the office. He's not in it for the country. He's in it to feed his own grotesque demigod complex and soak up unwarranted praise from the "poorly educated" masses - whom he absolutely LOVES, by the way - who are literally the only people on the planet (aside from misogynistic, bigoted, homophobic racists) who could reasonably support anything this man has said or done over the course of this Barnum & Bailey style sideshow "election campaign" he's been running.

 

[Arian Korzak]

Is at least something that exists and is tangible against Trump, whose "foreign policy" - when asked in an MSNBC interview who he "consistently consults with" on such issues - consists of such notable gems as:

“I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things."

So by that logic, I have a marvelous grasp on foreign policy as well. I believe I've said a lot of things in my life, too.

Now to scrounge up enough money to run for President. Because, you know, saying a lot of things is apparently the only qualification one needs to have all the answers to all the problems.

The man has no foreign policy. He has no "great plan" to "make America great again.". What he is is an arrogant, overblown egotistical narcissist who wants to line his pockets and entertains delusional fantasies (I assume anyway) of people calling him "Mr. President". And on top of that, he damn near idolizes Putin (source quotes).

Now, my history might be a little hazy, but the last time Europe had a leader with a case of idol worship like this, some dude called Hitler looked at what some other dude named Mussolini was doing in Italy at the time, and managed to take that example and start a world war. Oh, he also kinda murdered a couple million people for no greater reason than their religion/sexual orientation/place of birth/mental health issues.

But history can't repeat itself, I guess.

Trump is not in this election for the office. He's not in it for the country. He's in it to feed his own grotesque demigod complex and soak up unwarranted praise from the "poorly educated" masses - whom he absolutely LOVES, by the way - who are literally the only people on the planet (aside from misogynistic, bigoted, homophobic racists) who could reasonably support anything this man has said or done over the course of this Barnum & Bailey style sideshow "election campaign" he's been running.

"I have a good brain and I've said a lot fo things."

Oh dear...I'd practically forgotten about that. Not such a good speaker.