GOP Primary Megathread II—Electoral Boogaloo

[Arlenton]

He will probably fuck the GOP over as we know it.

That is precisely the point. Democrats love Trump. He makes the GOP look horrible and makes Hillary look good by comparison (not a compliment).

I doubt this, but either way it doesn't really matter.

[Murovanka]

So it's heroic to say ugly, awful, bigoted, nasty, divisive things in a race for one of the most powerful positions in the entire world so long as you're sincere about them? A rather low bar for heroism, don't you think? I see the same level of bravery in dive bars every weekend at about 1 a.m.

Hiding your true feelings won't help anyone. We see it everywhere with everyone, people avoiding subjects and not saying what they really think. It's what many in the right do, it's what many Muslims do. Afraid to say what they think about homosexuality, about gender equality, about the separation of state and religion because we, the liberals and the media, give them labels- extremist, terrorist, radical- and based on that everything else they say is rendered invalid.

They're thinking is not wrong, morality is subjective, and I believe we need these so-called 'divisive, awful, bigoted' voices representing this vast silent majority so that we can debate and argue with them, instead of using the media and labels with strong negative connotations to shut them down.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

So it's heroic to say ugly, awful, bigoted, nasty, divisive things in a race for one of the most powerful positions in the entire world so long as you're sincere about them? A rather low bar for heroism, don't you think? I see the same level of bravery in dive bars every weekend at about 1 a.m.

Hiding your true feelings won't help anyone. We see it everywhere with everyone, people avoiding subjects and not saying what they really think. It's what many in the right do, it's what many Muslims do. Afraid to say what they think about homosexuality, about gender equality, about the separation of state and religion because we, the liberals and the media, give them labels- extremist, terrorist, radical- and based on that everything else they say is rendered invalid.

They're thinking is not wrong, morality is subjective, and I believe we need these so-called 'divisive, awful, bigoted' voices representing this vast silent majority so that we can debate and argue with them, instead of using the media and labels with strong negative connotations to shut them down.

And I couldn't disagree more. You're arguing in favor of escalating the situation. I'm arguing in favor of de-escalating it.

[Murovanka]

And I couldn't disagree more. You're arguing in favor of escalating the situation. I'm arguing in favor of de-escalating it.

Escalating what. Tensions? They already exist. Suppressing them will just perhaps exacerbate the problems.

Think about it, a cleric says: "Amputations are the best form of punishment for thievery as prescribed in our holy book." Instead of demonizing him (as leading women in abrahamic faiths are the minority), calling him an 'extemist' and tell him how barbaric and primitive he is, we actually argue. Show statistics that it doesn't deter crime, point out the roots of the problem of crime, show how not cutting off limbs may actually make these people more useful in future. Make him think, and even if he doesn't change his mind, perhaps people watching might. Would that perhaps be more successful in changing the way of thinking, as opposed to suppressing such voices?

[Yumyumsuppertime]

And I couldn't disagree more. You're arguing in favor of escalating the situation. I'm arguing in favor of de-escalating it.

Escalating what. Tensions? They already exist. Suppressing them will just perhaps exacerbate the problems.

Think about it, a cleric says: "Amputations are the best form of punishment for thievery as prescribed in our holy book." Instead of demonizing him (as leading women in abrahamic faiths are the minority), calling him an 'extemist' and tell him how barbaric and primitive he is, we actually argue. Show statistics that it doesn't deter crime, point out the roots of the problem of crime, show how not cutting off limbs may actually make these people more useful in future. Make him think, and even if he doesn't change his mind, perhaps people watching might. Would that perhaps be more successful in changing the way of thinking, as opposed to suppressing such voices?

Great. The tensions already exist. Why make them worse? Radical jihadists aren't impressed by the rhetoric, or cowed by it. The only people affected negatively are Muslims here and abroad who want nothing more than to live out their lives in peace, working their jobs, raising their children, and doing the best that they can to get by. Now they're being pulled into this nonsense, resulting in an increase in hate crimes against Muslims, and a likelihood of increased radicalization of previously moderate followers. It's a terrible idea. You don't resolve disagreements by screaming even louder and coming up with more creative insults. That's a child's approach.

[Teemant]

Sarcasm? The Democrats generally stick with promoting solar and wind and pretty much nothing else in regards to energy, I suppose too many hippies have bad memories of 3 mile island.

Sanders wants to ban nuclear power completely.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/ ... nergy.html

What is the big deal about Three Mile Island anyways? Nobody died. It is the one of the most over hyped things in history. "Nuclear power is so dangerous look at Three Mile Island!"

Yeah, nuclear reactor melted down. Turned nuclear meltdowns are not that deadly after all. You just need a adequate containment structure.

Three Mile Island proves how safe US reactors are, even when everything went wrong nobody died.

Banning nuclear power is like the worst strategy ever.
With more nuclear power humans could slow climate changes even more. More nuclear power is the answer.

I think that the coal industry is behind anti-nuclear power movements.

[Murovanka]

Great. The tensions already exist. Why make them worse? Radical jihadists aren't impressed by the rhetoric, or cowed by it. The only people affected negatively are Muslims here and abroad who want nothing more than to live out their lives in peace, working their jobs, raising their children, and doing the best that they can to get by. Now they're being pulled into this nonsense, resulting in an increase in hate crimes against Muslims, and a likelihood of increased radicalization of previously moderate followers. It's a terrible idea. You don't resolve disagreements by screaming even louder and coming up with more creative insults. That's a child's approach.

Constructive debate should be avoided in favour of social cohesion? Yeah, we have this situation in Singapore. To preserve the Greater Morality of religious peoples (Christianity and Islam mainly) gays cannot have sex here. A concert was cancelled as some singer encouraged homosexuals to show their affection to their loved ones. Should this happen in Europe too? So much restriction on freedom of speech and subjugation of 'traditional minorities' "religious freedom"?

I'm not too sure what you mean by nonsense, moderates, terrible ideas, creative insults... please be a bit more specific, but I get where you're coming from. Those billions of peaceful Muslims, am I right? Truth is, Islamic modernism looks like this and perhaps at times like this. As I said, morality is subjective, Islamic morality as described in the Qu'ran is not inferior in any way- how could it be, who can judge? The problem arises when we portray our values as superior in front of these billions of peaceful Muslims, and in this way we and the media (you and I included) are attacking their beliefs and making them feel vulnerable. I've watched debates online, when asked about these questions they have two options: give an honest answer, after which they will have to face tons of abuse and labels as 'extremist' or 'terrorist', or avoid and go around the question, after which they'll be labeled as 'double tongued' and 'dishonest'.

The problems start when we look down on certain beliefs and ways of thinking, as we won't even listen to those voices. May I remind you that the right-wing of today was pretty much the norm before the 60s, and homosexuality was still classified by the US Psychiatry Assoc as a disorder?

PS: You're right about me being a child, but I don't see the problem with that. Do you?

[Saiwania]

As I said, morality is subjective, Islamic morality as described in the Qu'ran is not inferior in any way- how could it be, who can judge? The problem arises when we portray our values as superior in front of these billions of peaceful Muslims, and in this way we and the media are attacking their beliefs and making them feel vulnerable.

I know that what the Qur'an advocates is inferior, I am absolutely certain of this in my heart. I've drawn my conclusions from looking at Islam's long history of aggression towards non-Muslims both past and present and Islam's full condoning of atrocities in order to give itself an unfair advantage over all other faiths and cultures.

Unlike the left in the US and Europe which is content to cave into Islamists out of cowardice or in attempts to be more inclusive or "tolerant," the right is actually willing to push back against Islam with vigor or at least take common sense steps to prevent Sharia law from becoming more popular than it has to, such as restricting immigration from Muslim majority countries.

It would seem to me that the left is motivated to bring in the entire third world's immigrants from constantly feeling shame for western civilization's past history of colonialism and exploitation of the Americas, Africa, and Asia, but the right takes the opposite approach in celebrating our ascension to the top in economic status as something worth celebrating.

Because the right has no guilt, we are the ones who are the most willing and able to defend and advance western culture and interests from outside forces which want it to collapse such as Islamic fundamentalism. For the right, the problems of the world are external, while for the left, they look inward for problems needing solutions. The far left would be quick to say that it is the US' fault for 9/11 because our foreign policy happened to be too pro-Israel for example, whatever it is- we are to blame and must suffer to fix it according to their world view.

[Trumpostan]

It would seem to me that the left is motivated to bring in the entire third world's immigrants from constantly feeling shame for western civilization's past history of colonialism and exploitation of the Americas, Africa, and Asia, but the right takes the opposite approach in celebrating our ascension to the top in economic status as something worth celebrating.

That is because our 'ascension' to top economic status is almost entirely derived from centuries of colonial exploitation which in fact continues to this very day by one sided trade agreements which benefits the western world and local African elites and does not at all benefit ordinary Africans and people in the Middle East.

The colonial era resonates still because it locked in the advantages gained from centuries of merciless exploitation. And because of all the artificial countries created by Britain and France which will never be stable because they deliberately ignored ethno-tribal-cultural reality. Divide-and-rule echoes to this day.

You see, free trade and privatization are an unmitigated disaster for most countries, yet the right keeps pushing these Reaganesque-Thatcherite terrorist economic policies. And yes, I just called it terroristic. The policies only benefit the rich, banks and corporations. Executive paychecks skyrocket and workers wages remain flat.

TLDR version: there is nothing heroic about the right wing.

And maybe you should not have forgotten about christian colonizers of the Americas who decimated the original population.

[Ashmoria]

I support trump for a better America... with Hilliary Clinton as president.

You realize the GOP is more pro nuclear, right?

Marco Rubio is very pro nuclear. Hillary will not say because many Democrats hate nuclear power.

what has mr Rubio said about nuclear power?

[Khadgar]

Sarcasm? The Democrats generally stick with promoting solar and wind and pretty much nothing else in regards to energy, I suppose too many hippies have bad memories of 3 mile island.

Sanders wants to ban nuclear power completely.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/ ... nergy.html

What is the big deal about Three Mile Island anyways? Nobody died. It is the one of the most over hyped things in history. "Nuclear power is so dangerous look at Three Mile Island!"

Yeah, nuclear reactor melted down. Turned nuclear meltdowns are not that deadly after all. You just need a adequate containment structure.

Three Mile Island proves how safe US reactors are, even when everything went wrong nobody died.

There's a very loud and uninformed anti-nuclear lobbying movement. Well misinformed really, some of the leaders of the movement deliberately inflate the number of deaths caused by Chernobyl and act like that was a completely standard reactor design.

[Teemant]

It would seem to me that the left is motivated to bring in the entire third world's immigrants from constantly feeling shame for western civilization's past history of colonialism and exploitation of the Americas, Africa, and Asia, but the right takes the opposite approach in celebrating our ascension to the top in economic status as something worth celebrating.

That is because our 'ascension' to top economic status is almost entirely derived from centuries of colonial exploitation which in fact continues to this very day by one sided trade agreements which benefits the western world and local African elited and does not at all benefit ordinary Africans and people in the Middle East.

The colonial era resonates still because it locked in the advantages gained from centuries of merciless exploitation. And because of all the artificial countries created by Britain and France which will never be stable because they deliberately ignored ethno-tribal-cultural reality. Divide-and-rule echoes to this day.

You see, free trade and privatization are an unmitigated disaster for most countries, yet the right keeps pushing these Reaganesque-Thatcherite terrorist economic policies. And yes, I just called it terroristic. The policies only benefit the rich, banks and corporations. Executive paychecks skyrocket and workers wages remain flat.

TLDR version: there is nothing heroic about the right wing.

And maybe you should not have forgotten about christian colonizers of the Americas who decimated the original population.

The thing that is holding Africa back is corruption and huge debts. No need to blame west.

West doesn't have free trade with Africa. But if they want to compete they must have free trade because whatever they produce is too expensive to sell (can't compete with prices) without free trade.

[Pulau Singapura]

Hello fellow people on the right side of the political spectrum! I am a centre-right, and proud of it.

[Pulau Singapura]

Sanders wants to ban nuclear power completely.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/ ... nergy.html

What is the big deal about Three Mile Island anyways? Nobody died. It is the one of the most over hyped things in history. "Nuclear power is so dangerous look at Three Mile Island!"

Yeah, nuclear reactor melted down. Turned nuclear meltdowns are not that deadly after all. You just need a adequate containment structure.

Three Mile Island proves how safe US reactors are, even when everything went wrong nobody died.

Banning nuclear power is like the worst strategy ever.
With more nuclear power humans could slow climate changes even more. More nuclear power is the answer.

I think that the coal industry is behind anti-nuclear power movements.

You seriously want stuff like Fukushima to happen everywhere?

[Khadgar]

That is because our 'ascension' to top economic status is almost entirely derived from centuries of colonial exploitation which in fact continues to this very day by one sided trade agreements which benefits the western world and local African elited and does not at all benefit ordinary Africans and people in the Middle East.

The colonial era resonates still because it locked in the advantages gained from centuries of merciless exploitation. And because of all the artificial countries created by Britain and France which will never be stable because they deliberately ignored ethno-tribal-cultural reality. Divide-and-rule echoes to this day.

You see, free trade and privatization are an unmitigated disaster for most countries, yet the right keeps pushing these Reaganesque-Thatcherite terrorist economic policies. And yes, I just called it terroristic. The policies only benefit the rich, banks and corporations. Executive paychecks skyrocket and workers wages remain flat.

TLDR version: there is nothing heroic about the right wing.

And maybe you should not have forgotten about christian colonizers of the Americas who decimated the original population.

The thing that is holding Africa back is corruption and huge debts. No need to blame west.

West doesn't have free trade with Africa. But if they want to compete they must have free trade because whatever they produce is too expensive to sell (can't compete with prices) without free trade.

You don't actually know anything about Africa do you?

[Pulau Singapura]

That is because our 'ascension' to top economic status is almost entirely derived from centuries of colonial exploitation which in fact continues to this very day by one sided trade agreements which benefits the western world and local African elited and does not at all benefit ordinary Africans and people in the Middle East.

The colonial era resonates still because it locked in the advantages gained from centuries of merciless exploitation. And because of all the artificial countries created by Britain and France which will never be stable because they deliberately ignored ethno-tribal-cultural reality. Divide-and-rule echoes to this day.

You see, free trade and privatization are an unmitigated disaster for most countries, yet the right keeps pushing these Reaganesque-Thatcherite terrorist economic policies. And yes, I just called it terroristic. The policies only benefit the rich, banks and corporations. Executive paychecks skyrocket and workers wages remain flat.

TLDR version: there is nothing heroic about the right wing.

And maybe you should not have forgotten about christian colonizers of the Americas who decimated the original population.

The thing that is holding Africa back is corruption and huge debts. No need to blame west.

West doesn't have free trade with Africa. But if they want to compete they must have free trade because whatever they produce is too expensive to sell (can't compete with prices) without free trade.

Africa also has the terrorism problem and the black vs white problem.

[Teemant]

The thing that is holding Africa back is corruption and huge debts. No need to blame west.

West doesn't have free trade with Africa. But if they want to compete they must have free trade because whatever they produce is too expensive to sell (can't compete with prices) without free trade.

You don't actually know anything about Africa do you?

I do.

I'm just pointing out that after World War 2 Europe was destroyed and lost colonies as a result of this. But still Europe has managed to get way ahead compared to African nations. I'm sure that colonialism didn't play huge role in European rebuilding.

I'm sure that the only thing that is holding Africa back is corruption and undemocratic leaders.

[Novus America]

Banning nuclear power is like the worst strategy ever.
With more nuclear power humans could slow climate changes even more. More nuclear power is the answer.

I think that the coal industry is behind anti-nuclear power movements.

You seriously want stuff like Fukushima to happen everywhere?

Fukushima resulted in 39 NON FATAL injuries, only 2 radiation related. Unlike US reactors like Three Mile Island, there were inadequate containment facilities. The Onagawa power plant was closer to the earthquake and Tsunami than Fukushima. Yet had adequate containment facilities so was fine.

So your argument is silly. Just as silly as the Chernobyl arguement. Both prove that reactors with poor containment structures can be a problem. Three Mile Island and Onagawa proved containment structures work. All US reactors have insanely strong containment structures.

[Agramistania]

You seriously want stuff like Fukushima to happen everywhere?

Fukushima happened because of a tsunami. Maybe it is better to bann building houses next to oceans?

[Novus America]

You realize the GOP is more pro nuclear, right?

Marco Rubio is very pro nuclear. Hillary will not say because many Democrats hate nuclear power.

what has mr Rubio said about nuclear power?

"clean, safe nuclear energy is another promising option to diversity Florida’s energy portfolio" for one.

http://energyfuse.org/energy-policy-201 ... rco-rubio/

[Novus America]

Sanders wants to ban nuclear power completely.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/ ... nergy.html

What is the big deal about Three Mile Island anyways? Nobody died. It is the one of the most over hyped things in history. "Nuclear power is so dangerous look at Three Mile Island!"

Yeah, nuclear reactor melted down. Turned nuclear meltdowns are not that deadly after all. You just need a adequate containment structure.

Three Mile Island proves how safe US reactors are, even when everything went wrong nobody died.

There's a very loud and uninformed anti-nuclear lobbying movement. Well misinformed really, some of the leaders of the movement deliberately inflate the number of deaths caused by Chernobyl and act like that was a completely standard reactor design.

Unfortunately they are similar and often overlap with the anti-GMO and anti-vaccine types.

Too bad Mr. Sanders has shown just how misinformed his energy policy is. Banning nuclear power would result increased pollution and habitat destruction. Also he clearly knows nothing about energy dustribution and the differences between peak and base loads.

[Novus America]

It would seem to me that the left is motivated to bring in the entire third world's immigrants from constantly feeling shame for western civilization's past history of colonialism and exploitation of the Americas, Africa, and Asia, but the right takes the opposite approach in celebrating our ascension to the top in economic status as something worth celebrating.

That is because our 'ascension' to top economic status is almost entirely derived from centuries of colonial exploitation which in fact continues to this very day by one sided trade agreements which benefits the western world and local African elited and does not at all benefit ordinary Africans and people in the Middle East.

The colonial era resonates still because it locked in the advantages gained from centuries of merciless exploitation. And because of all the artificial countries created by Britain and France which will never be stable because they deliberately ignored ethno-tribal-cultural reality. Divide-and-rule echoes to this day.

You see, free trade and privatization are an unmitigated disaster for most countries, yet the right keeps pushing these Reaganesque-Thatcherite terrorist economic policies. And yes, I just called it terroristic. The policies only benefit the rich, banks and corporations. Executive paychecks skyrocket and workers wages remain flat.

TLDR version: there is nothing heroic about the right wing.

And maybe you should not have forgotten about christian colonizers of the Americas who decimated the original population.

He is saying the left is anti-west. You do not counter his points but respond with a cliche BS anti western rant. Thus making the left look bad and anti-west...

You say your nation is to parody Trump, but in reality your comments are an unintentional parody of the left.

You are a left wing version of Trump. Your extremism hurts your cause and makes your side look bad...

[Pulau Singapura]

Hey, Was just wondering, are you guys centre-right or far right?

[Novus America]

Hey, Was just wondering, are you guys centre-right or far right?

This is not a right wing thread. There is another thread for that.

[Pulau Singapura]

Hey, Was just wondering, are you guys centre-right or far right?

This is not a right wing thread. There is another thread for that.

Isnt the GOP a right wing party, with the Dems being the left?