US Gen. Election Thread VI: You've Got E-Mail

[Novus America]

Well fascism does advocate public control of large parts of the economy and statist economic policies which many socialists also do. Not that this makes socialists fascists, but fascism being third position overlaps with the "left" and "right" both.

Fascism can do that, but does not necessarily, unlike socialism. Nazi Germany, for example, allowed private industry to exist so long as they met goals and objectives set by the government.

Again I said they have some overlap but are not the same. And a substantial portion of the Nazi economy was state owned. Though Nazi is weird off shoot of Fascism, not conventionally fascist, though has a similar economic approach.

And most modern socialists are willing to allow some private industry to exist.

Obviously fascism and socialism are not the same, but again there is overlap on some parts.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Just remember Trump had a 2% chance of getting the nomination according to Nate

At least I could take comfort in Pussygate.

What about Weinergate?

[Gauthier]

Well, hopefully Trump will do something fuck ass stupid again.

The terrible thing is, had Comey not started this shitstorm over the Abedin emails, this weekends news coverage would have likely been about Trump telling his voters to commit voter fraud and that one senator who implied Hillary Clinton aught to be shot

The FBI knows Trump is the best chance at being an actual secret police.

[Neo Bretonnia]

However, while I do not support proclaiming someone a "criminal" and demanding their imprisonment before they are even indicted, that does not mean I support ignoring reliable evidence of wrongdoing on his part, and considering it a reflection of his character. One can, for example, think he is a misogynistic pig who seems to think sexual harrassment and assault are permissible, as per his own words and the words of women he allegedly harrassed and assaulted, while keeping in mind that he may or may not be ever found criminally guilty of anything.

Nobody's talking about ignoring evidence, reliable or otherwise. The notion that a person is innocent until proven guilty is a philosophy that says that only the court (either civil or criminal) has access to the evidence, legal knowledge and (hopefully) wisdom to declare someone's guilt. It's a philosophy that leaves no room for mob justice. To assert that Trump is a criminal based on what we've heard, in the absence of a court hearing, is contrary to that philosophy, no matter how compelling the evidence may seem...

...which is fine if that's the opinion you want to express, but you just can't claim the shield of "innocent until proven guilty" for one person but ignore it for someone else. Comey never said that Clinton did no wrong. He only recommended charges not be pursued. That's not the same thing as declaring her innocent after a thorough investigation. He went on to list, in detail, exactly where she lied, where she went wrong and why.

For the record, I agree that Trump is a pig and is most likely guilty of acts that are legally actionable. I also believe that of Clinton. While legally both people are innocent until proven guilty, I am of the opinion that if both were to be dragged into court for their actions, they'd both come away with guilty verdicts, all other things being equal.

Also, the FBI is not "still looking into it". During an entirely different investigation, they found e-mails that might be related to Clinton's private server controversy, but they don't actually know for sure, and it's just as likely that those e-mails are redundant or completely irrelevant.

They may be redundant or irrelevant, but the only way to find out is by the FBI "still looking into it." So yes, they are.

[Ebliania]

At least I could take comfort in Pussygate.

What about Weinergate?

Fuck Weinergate, it gave Trump the election

[Novus America]

Even if all the swing states may start leaning Trump again (For some fucking reason, I am so tired of this god damn rollercoaster on this map), I SERIOUSLY doubt Trump wins every single swing state. The likelihood of that just seems so slim.

Ive said it before, and I'll say it again:
Clinton's ground game will help her edge out Trump in right races, while the good numbers coming out of Nevada, Florida, and NC should be padding in case of a slight loss of support.

Clintons will win. She just needs to win a handful of swing states, Trump needs basically all of them. Clinton is way ahead on electoral votes.

[Camicon]

Fascism can do that, but does not necessarily, unlike socialism. Nazi Germany, for example, allowed private industry to exist so long as they met goals and objectives set by the government.

Again I said they have some overlap but are not the same. And a substantial portion of the Nazi economy was state owned. Though Nazi is weird off shoot of Fascism, not conventionally fascist, though has a similar economic approach.

And most modern socialists are willing to allow some private industry to exist.

Obviously fascism and socialism are not the same, but again there is overlap on some parts.

Not meaningful overlap, though. Most every political ideology agrees that the state has a valid reason to exist, even if they disagree with exactly what that reason is. Overlap, but not meaningful.

[PaNTuXIa]

What about Weinergate?

Fuck Weinergate, it gave Trump the election

You don't want Trump to win?

[Gauthier]

Fuck Weinergate, it gave Trump the election

You don't want Trump to win?

Anyone who isn't a rich white cis-het male doesn't want Trump to win.

[Great Franconia and Verana]

Democrats also have done much better than expected in Nevada, which is also a state Trump wants to win badly.

I still think the race with tighten even further on 538, but according to Nate Silver himself, it's likely that will be mainly a backlog of poll from the weekend, while the trend may reverse itself heading into E-Day.

Nevada looks like we'll be a Clinton victory. Ohio and Iowa I am giving him though I doubt he can win PA, MI, and WI since he really hasn't never led there that much. Florida, while he has closed the gap, I still give to her only because Hispanic turnout is better than expected and early voting suggests Democrats are at par with Republicans.

Still, it will be close in these swing states despite the polling.

My current prediction is in my signature, but it was made just at the height of the media furor over Comey and the Abedin emails, so I may have to edit it.

[Washington Resistance Army]

You don't want Trump to win?

Anyone who isn't a rich white cis-het male doesn't want Trump to win.

So what you're saying is most of his supporters don't want him to win?

[Ebliania]

You don't want Trump to win?

Anyone who isn't a rich white cis-het male doesn't want Trump to win.

I doubt it, given his high level of support among working class whites.

[Liriena]

...which is fine if that's the opinion you want to express

The opinion I want to express is that Clinton, technically speaking, is not a criminal, and neither is Trump. She was certainly careless on the issue of her private e-mail server, and he is a toxic waste of a living being, but to seriously label them as "criminals" would be wrong.

[Novus America]

Exactly.

Private industry exists only to serve the state (or, as fascist might say "the good of the people")

Private industry is allowed to exist so long as it does not impede the aims of the party. The people don't factor into it. So it goes with every other aspect of civil society, in a fascist state.

At least in theory the party in the Fascist state is supposed to be representative of the people as a whole. That is where the term fascism comes from you know. Fascism is collectivist. The idea that you can easily break one twig, but not a bunch tied together.

[Gauthier]

Anyone who isn't a rich white cis-het male doesn't want Trump to win.

So what you're saying is most of his supporters don't want him to win?

They just want the Establishment to burn, fuck the consequences.

[Zurkerx]

Nevada looks like we'll be a Clinton victory. Ohio and Iowa I am giving him though I doubt he can win PA, MI, and WI since he really hasn't never led there that much. Florida, while he has closed the gap, I still give to her only because Hispanic turnout is better than expected and early voting suggests Democrats are at par with Republicans.

Still, it will be close in these swing states despite the polling.

My current prediction is in my signature, but it was made just at the height of the media furor over Comey and the Abedin emails, so I may have to edit it.

I think he can win at most 260 electoral votes. However, I currently see it the way you do though I give her Florida.

[Corrian]

Fuck Weinergate, it gave Trump the election

You don't want Trump to win?

Nobody sane wants Trump to win.

[Gauthier]

Anyone who isn't a rich white cis-het male doesn't want Trump to win.

I doubt it, given his high level of support among working class whites.

While somehow oblivious to his history of stiffing employees and small businesses.

[IceBuddha]

So, at what point did you guys say "I'm not voting for Trump"? What specific characteristics do you find objectionable?

For me, it was a combination of the following:

1. Him saying he would cut taxes, reduce the debt, raise trade barriers, boost military spending and not change entitlements. That is not possible and is just snake oil for ignorant people. This wasn't just an errant statement or two either, he presented a tax plan which he claimed would do this, and when the experts told him it wouldn't, he said they were wrong.

2. Some of his statements on foreign policy were mind boggling and ignorant. The moment I said "fuck this" is when he suggested that NATO was obsolete and that maybe he wouldn't honor Article 5 if allies didn't pay tribute to the US. He has this weird obsession with our allies "ripping us off", which is based on a grain of truth (that some of our allies don't spend enough on defense), but shows an utter lack of understanding and knowledge about world history and foreign affairs. He reduces foreign policy to a set of economic transactions and simplistic, child-like solutions ("let's bomb the shit out of them", for example).

3. Climate change is supposedly a hoax concocted by the Chinese. I'm ripping up the Paris agreement on day one. Nuff said there.

4. His authoritarian mindset, inflated ego, bad temper and lack of self control are worrying. He's a thin-skinned loose cannon who can't take criticism and enjoys censoring people. His admiration of authoritarian leaders is also troubling to me, it shows me how he thinks about politics and leadership.

[Novus America]

Again I said they have some overlap but are not the same. And a substantial portion of the Nazi economy was state owned. Though Nazi is weird off shoot of Fascism, not conventionally fascist, though has a similar economic approach.

And most modern socialists are willing to allow some private industry to exist.

Obviously fascism and socialism are not the same, but again there is overlap on some parts.

Not meaningful overlap, though. Most every political ideology agrees that the state has a valid reason to exist, even if they disagree with exactly what that reason is. Overlap, but not meaningful.

Meaningful is debatable but the point is fascism takes aspects of both the right and left. That was its very reason for forming. And fascism is collectivist, not individualist. Where the left also tends towards collectivism in most cases.

Though the left right thing is inherently flawed in the first place.

[Neo Bretonnia]

Anyone who isn't a rich white cis-het male doesn't want Trump to win.

Except these folks.

And these.

Oh, and these ladies.

These black women were sent death threats for making a pro-Trump by the tolerant and open minded American Left.

So I'm not sure your statement is all that accurate *shrug*

[The Emerald Dawn]

So, at what point did you guys say "I'm not voting for Trump"? What specific characteristics do you find objectionable?

For me, it was a combination of the following:

1. Him saying he would cut taxes, reduce the debt, boost military spending and not change entitlements. That is not possible and is just snake oil for ignorant people. This wasn't just an errant statement or two either, he presented a tax plan which he claimed would do this, and when the experts told him it wouldn't, he said they were wrong.

2. Some of his statements on foreign policy were mind boggling and ignorant. The moment I said "fuck this" is when he suggested that NATO was obsolete and that maybe he wouldn't honor Article 5 if allies didn't pay tribute to the US. He has this weird obsession with our allies "ripping us off", which is based on a grain of truth (that some of our allies don't spend enough on defense), but shows an utter lack of understanding and knowledge about world history and foreign affairs. He reduces foreign policy to a set of economic transactions and simplistic, child-like solutions ("let's bomb the shit out of them", for example).

3. Climate change is supposedly a hoax concocted by the Chinese. I'm ripping up the Paris agreement on day one. Nuff said there.

4. His authoritarian mindset, inflated ego, bad temper and lack of self control are worrying. He's a thin-skinned loose cannon who can't take criticism and enjoys censoring people. His admiration of authoritarian leaders is also troubling to me, it shows me how he thinks about politics and leadership.

When he said "I'm running for president" I said "That's going to suck if it ever occurs."

I've watched in undiminishing horror as it has become increasingly possible.

[Liriena]

You don't want Trump to win?

I don't know about Ebliania, but I for one would very much rather not see the world's superpower fall into the hands of a racist, misogynistic, anti-LGBT, authoritarian and capricious con man, along with a religious fundamentalist vicepresident, and a loose coalition of neo-nazis, white supremacists, misogynists, reactionaries, ultranationalists and weak-willed, sycophantic conservatives.

[Novus America]

Even if all the swing states may start leaning Trump again (For some fucking reason, I am so tired of this god damn rollercoaster on this map), I SERIOUSLY doubt Trump wins every single swing state. The likelihood of that just seems so slim.

Exactly.

[Corrian]

So, at what point did you guys say "I'm not voting for Trump"? What specific characteristics do you find objectionable?

For me, it was a combination of the following:

Him announcing his presidency.