UPNetwork  

Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > Debate

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 04-21-2016, 04:56 PM   #1301
deoxys
Fog Badge
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger View Post
I dunno what to think of Trump's comments.

Someone digest it for me and I'll swallow the chyme.
Trump has always been weird politically. He was a reformist, a democrat, a republican, he has bounced back and forth between all of them, he led the charge on the birther movement... It's hard to say. I think the answer is simply that he probably isn't very interested in LGBT politics (aside from basically saying 'leave LGBT people alone to their own devices' a multitude of times) and is more worried about riding a nationalistic wave to victory thank anything.

Or maybe he is trying to ride the Republicans who support him to the left to some degree. It's hard to say.
deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2016, 07:08 PM   #1302
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
"Isn't very interested" is probably the best way to describe it. Because I can't tell if his statement was pro-LGBT or not. On the positive, he's saying LGBT are free to go where they self-identify the closest to. On the negative, he's giving a pretty half-arsed economic argument against Unisex bathrooms.

Ted Cruz's counter statement is even more baffling. He's almost certainly going to be anti-gay. So by criticizing Trump, is he actually supporting Unisex bathrooms...? This is what I'm confused over.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2016, 09:09 PM   #1303
deoxys
Fog Badge
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppleganger View Post
"Isn't very interested" is probably the best way to describe it. Because I can't tell if his statement was pro-LGBT or not. On the positive, he's saying LGBT are free to go where they self-identify the closest to. On the negative, he's giving a pretty half-arsed economic argument against Unisex bathrooms.

Ted Cruz's counter statement is even more baffling. He's almost certainly going to be anti-gay. So by criticizing Trump, is he actually supporting Unisex bathrooms...? This is what I'm confused over.
I'm almost positive Ted Cruz, if asked, would just tell you that men should go in the men's room and women should in the women's room and that there is no such thing as being trans, because God doesn't make mistakes.
deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-21-2016, 10:37 PM   #1304
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by deoxys View Post
because God doesn't make mistakes.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-22-2016, 01:21 PM   #1305
Shuckle
Problematic Fave
 
Shuckle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by deoxys View Post
I'm almost positive Ted Cruz, if asked, would just tell you that men should go in the men's room and women should in the women's room and that there is no such thing as being trans, because God doesn't make mistakes.
But wait, isn't that a Lady Gaga lyric...you know, Lady Gaga, who is part of the Jewish atheist liberal elite and an Illuminati member! She wants to destroy country music and American ideals.
__________________
Shuckle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2016, 12:16 AM   #1306
Heather
Naga's Voice
 
Heather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: somewhere gay idk
Posts: 3,279
I see someone else noted the contradiction in Teump's statement with the bathrooms. Er, well, contradiction might not be the best word but I just finished Professor Layron vs Pheonix Wright so! The contradiction in question of course, lies in his opinions about unisex restrooms. Talking of discrimination might sound good, but as a trans person myself, I disagree with that portion. Not only are they well liked in the trans community, enough to warrant apps for the purpose of locating them, unisex/family restrooms have their uses for everyone, cis or trans. While I assume none of you are parents yet, though correct me if I am wrong, it's not uncommon that a father is out with their daughter or a mother is out with her son, but the parent doesn't trust the kid to use a private restroom just yet for whatever reason, and the other parent isn't present. Not only is a family restroom important, it actually becomes vital for every public place if North Carolina is going to keep up this law. Simply put, parents in these situations any take the kid into their bathroom, or go into the kid's bathroom, because either way, someone doesn't belong. In other words, the Mathemetician's Answer is no solution without unisex restrooms...which, given that a fair amount of transfolk make use of such facilities when possible, renders the NC Law useless. Now, I know you're saying that the bathroom police will be lenient, but in principle, family restrooms make the NC law break down from its foundation. In other words, while Trump appears to oppose the NC law, he lacks the understanding to truly fight the issue. The sword of his wit is dull at best. He may truly oppose it, but with such a poor showing, it may be just that: a show.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveTheFishGuy View Post
Quoth the Honchkrow (nevermore!).
Fizzy Member Post: Catherine Park
Heather is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2016, 07:23 AM   #1307
Snorby
Snackin'
 
Snorby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,754
No one said he was intelligent or his position was well thought out. The point is this is a huge step away from the "BAN THE MUSLIMS AND KICK OUT THE MEXICANS" Trump who'd be prevalent up until recently. The only consistency is the failure to grasp the details of the situation, which I think is a hallmark of any Trump position.
__________________

Click on Fawful for my ASB squad summary. Other links coming soon.
Snorby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2016, 09:00 AM   #1308
phoopes
Double Dragon
 
phoopes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,776
I get to vote tomorrow! Even with how much of a circus this election cycle has been I'm still excited to vote for the first time in a national primary.
__________________
phoopes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2016, 02:05 PM   #1309
Miror
Marsh Badge
 
Miror's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,755
So Kasich and Cruz's campaigns have reportedly come to an agreement that they're going to cede certain states to one another, with Kasich letting Cruz go for Indiana, while Cruz lets Kasich alone in Oregon and New Mexico. Looks like since Cruz is finally backed against the wall and unable to mathematically obtain the nomination, he figured that working with Kasich to get to a contested convention is his and their best chance to stop Trump.
__________________
Miror is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2016, 02:06 PM   #1310
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
It's bizarre. If they haven't been secretly doing this for months they're probably lying, but to announce it publicly is monumentally stupid.
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2016, 08:04 PM   #1311
Jerichi
プラスチック♡ラブ
 
Jerichi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 蒸気の波の中
Posts: 14,766
#contestedconvention
__________________


私のことを消して本気で愛さないで 恋なんてただのゲーム 楽しめばそれでいい
閉ざした心を飾る 派手なドレスも靴も 孤独の友達

asbwffb

[jerichi]
Jerichi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2016, 08:51 PM   #1312
Heather
Naga's Voice
 
Heather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: somewhere gay idk
Posts: 3,279
I think it's time we face the reality-both the RNC and DNC are operated like private companies. That means people are in charge of it and they have the final say on who gets nominated. They largely take suggestions from the public via primaries/caucuses, but ultimately if the people in charge see a nomination as a bad decision, they are within their rights to say no. Of course, that does mean that people can tell that corporation to sod right the hell off. While the party corporation has the say, the people ultimately hold the right to give those decisions a consequence.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveTheFishGuy View Post
Quoth the Honchkrow (nevermore!).
Fizzy Member Post: Catherine Park
Heather is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2016, 09:17 PM   #1313
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
It has been over 60 years since an American presidential election was something besides "Democrat vs. Republican." The American people, and we are all included in this, have either forgotten how to vote outside the two parties or else are too apathetic to lead the charge. Everyone is waiting for a messiah to show up, but no one is willing to take the first step and be that messiah. We are too educated for our own good on this matter -- everyone has a defeatist attitude about running. "I'll never win," "no one knows who I am," the Man will make sure I never make it outside the city," etc. But without a third-party nominee to actually vote for --

And don't say Jill Stein again, Rangeet!

-- we have no option but to vote Democrat, vote Republican, or effectively abstain. (Whether literally abstaining or whether casting a throwaway vote.)

I don't know when the deadline is for running for president.

I don't know how many signatures a person needs.

I don't know where they must go or who they must talk to.

And while Google makes finding all of these answers easy, I will wager that none of us knows the answers without looking them up. All of us Americans are failures when it comes to this problem. Candidates just magically appear out of the sky for us to vote upon, but none of us actually bothers to try to run or to encourage a friend or family member to run. No, not literally "none" of us, but I'll wager a good 99% of the country. I'll wager only 1% can proudly boast that they or a loved one has attempted to run for president.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2016, 09:59 PM   #1314
Doppleganger
我が名は勇者王!
 
Doppleganger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Emina Isle
Posts: 14,198
Send a message via AIM to Doppleganger
I have no proof, but would bet that if you polled Democrats and Republicans, Republicans would overwhelmingly believe that there should only be two parties, while Democrats would overwhelmingly be in favour of multiple parties.

This should be a bit intuitive - conservatives, who grew up with the two-party system, also grew up with the notion that two-party is the natural order of the world. They would fear multiplicity as in Europe. For Republicans, the two-party system fits very neatly into the "us versus them" duality. Democrats, currently (still) a party best defined as !Republican, would like to divide itself into politically successful groups that are closer aligned to the special interests that gather under one umbrella only out of necessity.

Would be a pretty neat experiment. The Constitution doesn't mention political parties, so my forecast is if you tried to gather signatures for an amendment to the constitution that "The United States shall only have two official political parties - Democrat and Republican" and explain it's just a codification of what's dominated politics for the past 100 years, Republicans would be for it, while Democrats wouldn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
Everyone is waiting for a messiah to show up, but no one is willing to take the first step and be that messiah.
It's going to be Skrillex.

No, seriously.
__________________
あなたの勇気が切り開く未来
ふたりの想いが見つけだす希望
今 信じあえる
あきらめない 心かさね
永遠を抱きしめて
Doppleganger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2016, 10:17 PM   #1315
Snorby
Snackin'
 
Snorby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,754
The intrinsic issue with what you're saying, Talon is that the vast majority of Americans are either completely unqualified to run the country or don't have the cash on hand to even start a campaign. Usually both. I do know without looking it up that my family isn't he only one in the US where I would be the first person to go to get a College Education. I also know without looking it up that it costs several million dollars to even begin a legitimate run at President of the United States, and that to run a feasible 3rd Party Campaign without having already filed with the DNC or the RNC you'd realistically need to be in by March. I don't know if that's the hard deadline or just when it stops being feasible, but I do know that March is by an large when people say you shouldn't expect any new people to hop in.

It's not the 1800s anymore. You can't become President by being an uneducated everyman of below average wealth like Lincoln did.

That's not even to mention the fact that 15% of Americans are immigrants and therefore can't run no matter what. Even more haven't lived here for 14 years, and almost all people aren't realistically able to risk their job and current livelihood to up and run for President.

You can't just blame the two party system on the American people not understanding the political process well enough and not believing in themselves enough. There are very real barriers that prevent the vast, vast majority of the American populace from running, of which defeatism and lack of understanding of the political process are the least challenging to overcome.
__________________

Click on Fawful for my ASB squad summary. Other links coming soon.
Snorby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2016, 05:50 AM   #1316
Muyotwo
Dominator of Bike Levels
 
Muyotwo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
It has been over 60 years since an American presidential election was something besides "Democrat vs. Republican."
That's a bit revisionist, as Ross Perot managed about 20% of the popular vote in the 1992 election, which was the strongest third party finish since 1912- and that was with him hemming and hawing a bit about whether or not he should run. He even debated with Clinton and Bush in the first three debates, which may seem unthinkable now, but if Trump ran as an independent it's quite likely that he would find himself in a similar position.
__________________
The Kim Il Sung of ASB.
Muyotwo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2016, 02:32 PM   #1317
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muyotwo View Post
That's a bit revisionist.
Way to presume agenda, fucking Christ.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2016, 04:10 PM   #1318
Heather
Naga's Voice
 
Heather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: somewhere gay idk
Posts: 3,279
I do think that departing from the two-party system would be great! Moving towards a system that requires coalition efforts is much healthier. As it is now all the Republicans or Democrats have to do is make up a thing and have more people than the other party and it'll mostly go through because party lines, not to mention how not being 100% with your party in everything gets you called a sellout which causes massive groupthink where dissension or otherwise rational thought on both sides gets squelched.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveTheFishGuy View Post
Quoth the Honchkrow (nevermore!).
Fizzy Member Post: Catherine Park
Heather is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2016, 04:15 AM   #1319
Muyotwo
Dominator of Bike Levels
 
Muyotwo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
Way to presume agenda, fucking Christ.
I wasn't assuming agenda, I just thought it was kinder than just saying "That's not accurate".
__________________
The Kim Il Sung of ASB.
Muyotwo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2016, 05:21 AM   #1320
Emi
Barghest Barghest Barghe-
 
Emi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 12,068
Send a message via Skype™ to Emi
One possibility that has come up is the idea of a 4-man race for the Presidency: a scenario in which Trump and Sanders don't get the nominations and both of them run as Independent. I think it would be pretty interesting and rather unprecedented, since both Trump and Sanders show strong enough support that its possible that they could still be serious contenders even with a Clinton / Kasich match-up as an aside.

It doesn't negate what you're still voting for, essentially, is Republican vs Democrat, but it would be a surprising turn.
__________________
Emi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2016, 12:48 PM   #1321
deoxys
Fog Badge
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emi View Post
One possibility that has come up is the idea of a 4-man race for the Presidency: a scenario in which Trump and Sanders don't get the nominations and both of them run as Independent. I think it would be pretty interesting and rather unprecedented, since both Trump and Sanders show strong enough support that its possible that they could still be serious contenders even with a Clinton / Kasich match-up as an aside.

It doesn't negate what you're still voting for, essentially, is Republican vs Democrat, but it would be a surprising turn.
I have mentioned this in the past, and it would be interesting to have 4 candidates instead of three because it would cut into chunks of both the dems and the GOP, but it won't happen. I doubt Bernie will do an independent run given he has said a few times in the past that he would support her if she was the nominee, but Trump... yeah, he could easily be a wildcard. The establishment might do everything in their power to stop a nomination despite him sweeping last night. I still question if he will have enough votes going into the convention, I'm pretty sure it's not even mathematically impossible to secure the required delegate number, given Kasich and Cruz stealing the evangelical and moderate GOP votes away from him, but I can't say for certain.

Who even knows anymore. It's impossible to know what will happen at the GOP convention. Unfortunately, the democrats are just one giant let down this season. Hillary is so fucking uninspiring, but she is going to be the nominee anyway. I worry for her chances against almost any republican in the general. And I apologize for not being optimistic for Bernie, but thre is zero point at this point. He is down a few hundred delegates with less than 15 states to go, and delegates are split proportionally. He would need to win something like 60-40, at the very least, in every single remaining state, and he got crushed harder in PA and NY than he was supposed to.
deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2016, 12:56 PM   #1322
Rangeet
Foot, meet mouth.
 
Rangeet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beyond the Wall
Posts: 4,362
Send a message via MSN to Rangeet Send a message via Skype™ to Rangeet
However, Bernie will still be speaking- and doing stuff- at the convention. The more delegates he gets from now, the larger his role might be, to the point where he might even be able to get a victory at the convention. Weirder shit has happened.
__________________
Spoiler: show
Rangeet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2016, 01:57 PM   #1323
deoxys
Fog Badge
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rangeetsuper View Post
However, Bernie will still be speaking- and doing stuff- at the convention. The more delegates he gets from now, the larger his role might be, to the point where he might even be able to get a victory at the convention. Weirder shit has happened.
The only way he could get a victory, if he maintains the current gap, is if almost every superdelegate swapped over to him, which would cause an uproar, as they are supposed to align with the majority vote.

Or, she doesnt have enough delegates going in, and it's a contested convention, and somehow on the second count the majority of delegates change their vote to Bernie. Which... is unlikely considering she only needs like 200 more.
deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2016, 06:13 PM   #1324
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Sanders held a rally in town today, at the university gymnasium. So he hasn't given up, clearly, as there's no other reason for him to visit West Lafayette. But I would say he has no realistic chance of clinching the nomination at this point.

Cruz presented legislation before the House today that would strengthen Comcast's monopoly in most markets and weaken the FCC's oversight. He also has tapped ex-CEO of Hewlett-Packard, Carly Fiorina, to be his running mate. This is a 2-for-1 deal that ensures exactly none of my Republican friends will vote for Cruz. One reports he already has literally no one left to vote for who is running.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2016, 08:21 PM   #1325
Snorby
Snackin'
 
Snorby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,754
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
This is a 2-for-1 deal that ensures exactly none of my Republican friends will vote for Cruz. One reports he already has literally no one left to vote for who is running.
Interesting. Why not Kasich, do you know? Is Kasich too "moderate" for his tastes or does he have some other beef with him?
__________________

Click on Fawful for my ASB squad summary. Other links coming soon.
Snorby is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > Debate


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:57 AM.


Design By: Miner Skinz.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.