TRUMP is seriously dangerous

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

slouching

Postby IanEye » Tue Dec 08, 2015 3:04 pm

tapitsbo » Tue Dec 08, 2015 12:56 pm wrote:
Hillary is way closer to deep power.
Wasn't she the head of the State Department during the incubation of Islamic State?


"As to the timing of this, look, yes, I could have gotten on a plane and rushed over and started shuttling, and it wouldn't have been clear what I was shuttling to do. We have now had a series of discussions with our -- first at the G-8. I've been in constant contact with others, including with the Egyptians here a couple of days ago. We have been in contact with the Siniora government. Of course, I have been in constant contact with the Israeli government. And then I was just at the U.N.

But I have no interest in diplomacy for the sake of returning Lebanon and Israel to the status quo ante. I think it would be a mistake.

What we're seeing here, in a sense, is the growing -- the birth pangs of a new Middle East.

And whatever we do, we have to be certain that we are pushing forward to the new Middle East, not going back to the old one."

- Condi Rice 2006
User avatar
IanEye
 
Posts: 4865
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 10:33 pm
Blog: View Blog (29)

Re: TRUMP is seriously dangerous

Postby tapitsbo » Tue Dec 08, 2015 3:08 pm

Conception, gestation, incubation... of course the genesis was not with Clinton personally, but what jobs has Trump occupied that even approached this?

point taken, though
Last edited by tapitsbo on Tue Dec 08, 2015 3:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
tapitsbo
 
Posts: 1824
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:58 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

the smooth transition of power

Postby IanEye » Tue Dec 08, 2015 3:20 pm

I would imagine the transition from Rice to Clinton was fairly smooth.
User avatar
IanEye
 
Posts: 4865
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 10:33 pm
Blog: View Blog (29)

Re: TRUMP is seriously dangerous

Postby Luther Blissett » Tue Dec 08, 2015 3:58 pm

Will Congress Use Trump’s Racist Rhetoric to Create Second Class Americans?

If you thought Donald Trump’s divisive, bigoted and blatantly racist rhetoric was just a reflection of the silliness we always face during primary campaigns, think again. This bigotry is not only dominating the news cycle and winning Trump Republican primary votes. It’s directly trickling into to new legislation that Congress is currently considering — legislation that will effectively create two classes of Americans. Americans with Middle Eastern or Muslim background, and Americans without that background.

Here’s how: Congresswoman Candice Miller (R-MI) introduced a bill (H.R.158), set for a House vote today, that revises the Visa Waiver Program. That program enables citizens to travel within 38 countries including the U.S., Europe, Japan, and South Korea, without a visa. Miller’s bill changes the program by excluding dual-nationals from Iran, Syria, Iraq, and Sudan or anyone who has travelled to those countries in the past five years from the program. So if you are an Iranian-Brit or Syrian-Brit who grew up in the UK and haven’t set foot in Iran or Syrian for the past 30 years, you would be barred from the program simply because of your country of origin.

But it gets worse.

Precisely because the visa waiver program is based on reciprocity, it will very likely trigger reciprocal restrictions from Europe and participating countries. So if the US, for instance excludes Iraqi-Europeans from the program, Europe would likely exclude Iraqi-Americans from the program in turn.

And then suddenly, Congress’s actions will have led to the creation of two-classes of American passport holders.

America knows, of course, all too well what it means when Americans are legislated to be unequal in the eyes of the law. This is discriminatory, it is draconian, and it is a dangerous slippery slope.

But the bill is more than just about visa waivers. If the principle of inequality it espouses is established, then it may be visa waivers today, but right to education tomorrow.

Here’s how it began.

The bill is modeled off of legislation introduced in the Senate by Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Jeff Flake (R-AZ) which would bar individuals who have travelled to Iraq or Syria since the start of the Syrian civil war in March 2011 from coming to the United States under the Visa Waiver Program.

The effort to close certain loopholes in the program gained momentum in the aftermath of the Paris attacks, and the subsequent effort by House Republicans – prodded on by most of the GOP Presidential candidates – to pass legislation to block the U.S. from accepting Syrian refugees.

That legislation passed the House and, alarmingly to some senior Democrats, attracted almost fifty House Democrats who crossed lines to support it. Concerned that the political pressure was too great to hold off that bill from passing into law above the President’s veto, thanks in no small part to toxic rhetoric from the likes of Donald Trump, some lawmakers calculated that they could dampen the appetite for xenophobic retribution by pursuing restrictions on the Visa Waiver Program.

While there were legitimate “loopholes” in the program, even the Feinstein and Flake bill went too far in the eyes of some organizations, particularly Arab American and civil liberties groups, who criticized it as disproportionately affecting Arab Americans and penalizing people who had engaged in humanitarian work.

The bill that was produced by House Republicans, however, goes far beyond what Senators Feinstein and Flake had initially proposed in the Senate. They upped the ante with a new proposal; instead of merely barring people who travelled to the primary states where ISIS operates, Iraq and Syria, they added provisions to include states designated as State Sponsors of Terrorism–which adds Iran and Sudan, but not, for instance, the country where fifteen of the nineteen 9/11 hijackers came from, Saudi Arabia.

However, they went even further than that and decided to also add a whole new category to restrict: individuals who are dual-nationals of these countries – Americans who also hold another passport.

The bill now looks destined for passage as senior Democrats have signed off on it–despite its glaring problems. What remains to be seen is whether the Senate passes its own version that leaves out the egregious sections and those can be stripped out in conference. Or, the provision may be added as a rider to the Appropriations bill that must pass in order to keep the government running. Whether the sections targeting people based on their nationality remains intact will be decided in negotiations on the final bill.

Among the victims in San Bernardino was an Iranian-American woman who had left the country in the 1980s to escape persecution against her as a Christian. Among the very first first-responders who arrived on the scene that day was an Iranian American who serves as a SWAT team embedded-medic, honing combat training he learned serving in Iran’s military during the Iran-Iraq war.

If Rep. Miller’s bill passes, and if the EU reciprocates as it likely will, then these two American heroes will be relegated to second class citizens.

And that will probably just be the beginning of America’s journey back into an era it had worked so hard to escape.
The Rich and the Corporate remain in their hundred-year fever visions of Bolsheviks taking their stuff - JackRiddler
User avatar
Luther Blissett
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:31 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: TRUMP is seriously dangerous

Postby stefano » Tue Dec 08, 2015 4:48 pm

Luther Blissett » Tue Dec 08, 2015 6:43 pm wrote:Is it generally accepted here that Hillary has the most institutional oligarchic / plutocratic power backing her? Why her as a figurehead? Wouldn't a Trump as figurehead carry the greatest effect?


Clinton definitely has the most backing, and she's definitely the next president of the US for that reason. The real spending hasn't started yet. Trump as a figurehead wouldn't carry the greatest effect at all - he'd be a disaster for the rich. There is still such a thing as diplomacy, and having Trump as figurehead would be like appointing a salesman for a company (this is essentially the role of a head of State in a Western democracy, more so the big arms exporters) who goes out of his way to alienate customers. The only money backing Trump is from people like the Kochs, whose businesses are based on breaking down US labour, not on growing markets abroad; or Adelson, whose businesses similarly don't depend on international relations. And Clinton won't really be a figurehead in the Obama or Reagan mould - the Clinton Foundation has some real clout, and while the Clintons may not be super-rich by the standards of the people they have dinner with, those people need them to grow their businesses - or at least any alternative facilitators look uncertain in comparison.

Trump came with this Muslim bullshit at this time because some polling expert in his employ told him that, after the California thing, the US electorate is ripe for that kind of message, and striking a chord with the evangelicals could get people to the polls who stayed at home rather than vote for Romney last time - the out-of-touch banker from the weird sect. The expert might be right - Trump has been playing it in such a way that he could turn out some of those voters - but not, I think, without pissing off enough libertarian Republicans and energising enough Democrats to win it for Clinton. That probably won't matter, though: ultimately it's all about money and Clinton has the money.
User avatar
stefano
 
Posts: 2672
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:50 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: TRUMP is seriously dangerous

Postby Elvis » Tue Dec 08, 2015 5:13 pm

General Patton » Tue Dec 08, 2015 7:13 am wrote:If you take every message as literal instead of looking at it's effects it's hard to understand it's persuasive effect.


That's an excellent reminder, and I'm always interested in what you have to say, and how you say it, so I offer this in the spirit of thanks. (I wouldn't bother if I didn't respect your writing.)
“The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.” ― Joan Robinson
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 7563
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: TRUMP is seriously dangerous

Postby backtoiam » Tue Dec 08, 2015 5:28 pm

Here comes a possible internet torpedo....trump thinks this internet is recruiting young people that want to join ISIS. Trump has the clout right now in the American peoples mind to convince them to accept just about anything too. Guess we will see where this goes.........



Donald Trump wants to close up the Internet



Hours after Donald Trump suggested the U.S. ban Muslims from entering the United States, the leading Republican presidential candidate said America should also consider “closing the Internet up in some way” to fight Islamic State terrorists in cyberspace.

#DonaldTrump advocates closing up the Internet 2 stop the process of thought/free speech. So Communist China-like. pic.twitter.com/hRab3xpVcK
— NotBuffytheVMPslayer (@NotBUFFY_VS) December 8, 2015

Trump mocked anyone who would object that his plan might violate the freedom of speech, saying “these are foolish people, we have a lot of foolish people.”

“We have to go see Bill Gates,” Trump said, to better understand the Internet and then possibly “close it up.”

Trump characterized the problem of Internet extremism by saying, “We’re losing a lot of people because of the Internet.”

The Internet has taken center stage in both the 2016 presidential race and the Obama administration’s current fight against ISIS. Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton urged tech companies to “deny online space” to terrorists. Clinton then anticipated and waved away presumed First Amendment criticisms.

“We’re going to hear all the usual complaints,” she said on Monday, “you know, freedom of speech, et cetera. But if we truly are in a war against terrorism and we are truly looking for ways to shut off their funding, shut off the flow of foreign fighters, then we’ve got to shut off their means of communicating. It’s more complicated with some of what they do on encrypted apps, and I’m well aware of that, and that requires even more thinking about how to do it.”

The Obama administration spoke about cyberspace in a Sunday night speech from the Oval Office. The president said he would “urge high-tech and law enforcement leaders to make it harder to use technology to escape from justice.”

While less explicit and extreme a statement than Trump’s, many observers took Obama’s statement to be about outlawing strong encryption.

Here's Trump's complete statement on his proposal to crack down on the Internet due to ISIS:

We have kids that are watching the Internet, and they want to be masterminds. And then you wonder why we lose all these kids, they want to be masterminds; they're young, they're impressionable, they want to join ISIS.

And we have our anchors—I think I've got 'em mostly stopped, have you noticed that, they don't say it as much—but they say, the 'young mastermind', oh he's brilliant. I don't think he's got a high IQ. In Paris, I called him the guy with the dirty, filthy hat. 'K? Not a smart guy, a dummy. A mastermind? Bing bing bing, starts shooting everybody.

The press has to be responsible; they're not being responsible. We're losing a lot of people because of the Internet. We have to see Bill Gates and a lot of different people who really understand what's happening and maybe, in some ways, closing that Internet up in some ways.

Somebody will say, 'Oh, freedom of speech, freedom of speech.' These are foolish people, we have a lot of foolish people. We've got to maybe do something with the Internet because they're recruiting by the thousands, they're leaving our country, and then when they come back, we take them back.

'Where were you?' 'I was fighting for ISIS.' 'Oh, come on back. Go home, enjoy yourself.' When they leave our country and they go to fight or go to ISIS, they never can come back.

Update 10:33pm CT, Dec. 7: Added complete quote of Donald Trump's statement on the Internet and theoretical ISIS recruits who return to the U.S.

Photo by Gage Skidmore/Flickr (CC BY SA 2.0)
http://www.dailydot.com/politics/trump- ... -some-way/
"A mind stretched by a new idea can never return to it's original dimensions." Oliver Wendell Holmes
backtoiam
 
Posts: 2101
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 9:22 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: TRUMP is seriously dangerous

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Dec 08, 2015 5:58 pm

Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: TRUMP is seriously dangerous

Postby stillrobertpaulsen » Tue Dec 08, 2015 6:10 pm

backtoiam » Tue Dec 08, 2015 4:28 pm wrote:Here comes a possible internet torpedo....trump thinks this internet is recruiting young people that want to join ISIS. Trump has the clout right now in the American peoples mind to convince them to accept just about anything too. Guess we will see where this goes.........

Donald Trump wants to close up the Internet

http://www.dailydot.com/politics/trump- ... -some-way/


It goes nowhere until Senor Combover starts accumulating delegates. At that point, you might start seeing this kind of rhetoric as being moderate compared to when he's really unhinged.

If he actually gets elected, I may just move to Canada, cuz there's no way I'll be able to access RI (among other reasons to get the fuck out of the USA). At this point, I still think there's no possible way he could win. I really hope I'm right.
User avatar
stillrobertpaulsen
 
Posts: 2414
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 2:43 pm
Location: Gone baby gone
Blog: View Blog (37)

Re: TRUMP is seriously dangerous

Postby OccultariSafari » Tue Dec 08, 2015 6:27 pm

backtoiam » Tue Dec 08, 2015 5:28 pm wrote:Here comes a possible internet torpedo....trump thinks this internet is recruiting young people that want to join ISIS. Trump has the clout right now in the American peoples mind to convince them to accept just about anything too. Guess we will see where this goes.........



Donald Trump wants to close up the Internet



Hours after Donald Trump suggested the U.S. ban Muslims from entering the United States, the leading Republican presidential candidate said America should also consider “closing the Internet up in some way” to fight Islamic State terrorists in cyberspace.

#DonaldTrump advocates closing up the Internet 2 stop the process of thought/free speech. So Communist China-like. pic.twitter.com/hRab3xpVcK
— NotBuffytheVMPslayer (@NotBUFFY_VS) December 8, 2015

Trump mocked anyone who would object that his plan might violate the freedom of speech, saying “these are foolish people, we have a lot of foolish people.”

“We have to go see Bill Gates,” Trump said, to better understand the Internet and then possibly “close it up.”

Trump characterized the problem of Internet extremism by saying, “We’re losing a lot of people because of the Internet.”

The Internet has taken center stage in both the 2016 presidential race and the Obama administration’s current fight against ISIS. Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton urged tech companies to “deny online space” to terrorists. Clinton then anticipated and waved away presumed First Amendment criticisms.

“We’re going to hear all the usual complaints,” she said on Monday, “you know, freedom of speech, et cetera. But if we truly are in a war against terrorism and we are truly looking for ways to shut off their funding, shut off the flow of foreign fighters, then we’ve got to shut off their means of communicating. It’s more complicated with some of what they do on encrypted apps, and I’m well aware of that, and that requires even more thinking about how to do it.”

The Obama administration spoke about cyberspace in a Sunday night speech from the Oval Office. The president said he would “urge high-tech and law enforcement leaders to make it harder to use technology to escape from justice.”

While less explicit and extreme a statement than Trump’s, many observers took Obama’s statement to be about outlawing strong encryption.

Here's Trump's complete statement on his proposal to crack down on the Internet due to ISIS:

We have kids that are watching the Internet, and they want to be masterminds. And then you wonder why we lose all these kids, they want to be masterminds; they're young, they're impressionable, they want to join ISIS.

And we have our anchors—I think I've got 'em mostly stopped, have you noticed that, they don't say it as much—but they say, the 'young mastermind', oh he's brilliant. I don't think he's got a high IQ. In Paris, I called him the guy with the dirty, filthy hat. 'K? Not a smart guy, a dummy. A mastermind? Bing bing bing, starts shooting everybody.

The press has to be responsible; they're not being responsible. We're losing a lot of people because of the Internet. We have to see Bill Gates and a lot of different people who really understand what's happening and maybe, in some ways, closing that Internet up in some ways.

Somebody will say, 'Oh, freedom of speech, freedom of speech.' These are foolish people, we have a lot of foolish people. We've got to maybe do something with the Internet because they're recruiting by the thousands, they're leaving our country, and then when they come back, we take them back.

'Where were you?' 'I was fighting for ISIS.' 'Oh, come on back. Go home, enjoy yourself.' When they leave our country and they go to fight or go to ISIS, they never can come back.

Update 10:33pm CT, Dec. 7: Added complete quote of Donald Trump's statement on the Internet and theoretical ISIS recruits who return to the U.S.

Photo by Gage Skidmore/Flickr (CC BY SA 2.0)
http://www.dailydot.com/politics/trump- ... -some-way/


Ok, now this is just comical. "Call Bill Gates!" What about Gore? I thought he was the father?! What an absolute knob.

This guy is a total ass and will never sniff the oval office. This whole "election" seems like a bag job for Clinton the entire time in my eyes. The opposition the right has put up in this is laughable, all across the board. Also, Sanders makes way too much sense to ever get elected by the money.

In some perverse way I'm starting to like the guy for the glaring spotlight he is shining on how absurd American politics have become.
User avatar
OccultariSafari
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2015 10:20 am
Location: Malkuth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: TRUMP is seriously dangerous

Postby General Patton » Tue Dec 08, 2015 7:51 pm

Elvis » Tue Dec 08, 2015 4:13 pm wrote:
General Patton » Tue Dec 08, 2015 7:13 am wrote:If you take every message as literal instead of looking at it's effects it's hard to understand it's persuasive effect.


That's an excellent reminder, and I'm always interested in what you have to say, and how you say it, so I offer this in the spirit of thanks. (I wouldn't bother if I didn't respect your writing.)


Thanks Elvis, I do try to keep an eye on my grammar but don't always have the time to proofread. My larger is that Donny T is throwing out rhetorical tricks left and right, the GOP pundit class is completely ignoring how well he's playing people because they think he's dumb. It's very easy to troll people when they think they are in control and smarter than you, it's an indirect way of controlling them. It's a cold world out their. We gotta stick together.
штрафбат вперед
User avatar
General Patton
 
Posts: 959
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 11:57 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: TRUMP is seriously dangerous

Postby General Patton » Tue Dec 08, 2015 7:57 pm

stefano » Tue Dec 08, 2015 3:48 pm wrote:
Clinton definitely has the most backing, and she's definitely the next president of the US for that reason. The real spending hasn't started yet. Trump as a figurehead wouldn't carry the greatest effect at all - he'd be a disaster for the rich. There is still such a thing as diplomacy, and having Trump as figurehead would be like appointing a salesman for a company (this is essentially the role of a head of State in a Western democracy, more so the big arms exporters) who goes out of his way to alienate customers. The only money backing Trump is from people like the Kochs, whose businesses are based on breaking down US labour, not on growing markets abroad; or Adelson,


Trump's power comes from using the media for his own ends, not directly buying advertising time. When he does advertising, he relies on internet viral marketing and incorporates dank memes from his followers. This is a whole new ball game.

but not, I think, without pissing off enough libertarian Republicans and energising enough Democrats to win it for Clinton. That probably won't matter, though: ultimately it's all about money and Clinton has the money.


Do Republican libertarians actually vote? All 20 of them?
штрафбат вперед
User avatar
General Patton
 
Posts: 959
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 11:57 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: TRUMP is seriously dangerous

Postby Elvis » Tue Dec 08, 2015 8:18 pm

General Patton » Tue Dec 08, 2015 4:51 pm wrote:
Elvis » Tue Dec 08, 2015 4:13 pm wrote:
General Patton » Tue Dec 08, 2015 7:13 am wrote:If you take every message as literal instead of looking at it's effects it's hard to understand it's persuasive effect.


That's an excellent reminder, and I'm always interested in what you have to say, and how you say it, so I offer this in the spirit of thanks. (I wouldn't bother if I didn't respect your writing.)


It's very easy to troll people when they think they are in control and smarter than you, it's an indirect way of controlling them. It's a cold world out their.


:rofl2

That does remind me of some advice a friend gave me about selling on eBay: "Never appear smarter or better than your bidders."

I think it's one reason so many people liked George II, and one reason Karl Rove picked him — he's comfortably dumb.
“The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.” ― Joan Robinson
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 7563
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: TRUMP is seriously dangerous

Postby stefano » Wed Dec 09, 2015 2:35 am

General Patton » Wed Dec 09, 2015 1:57 am wrote:Trump's power comes from using the media for his own ends, not directly buying advertising time. When he does advertising, he relies on internet viral marketing and incorporates dank memes from his followers. This is a whole new ball game.

He's a hit with his followers, yes. But exactly the same things that resonate with them drive other people away, and the more they hear about him the more they won't vote for him or will want to vote against him. Clinton's people already probably have good TV ads that they made portraying him as a dangerous lunatic. You will be seeing those constantly next year and that's where the game is won. Sanders's supporters will go out and vote Clinton because the alternative is too ghastly to contemplate, and your non-insane Republican supporters are just going to stay at home.

Assuming Trump wins the nomination - I still think he's just too much of a liability and the GOP backers will slip Rubio in there. But then Trump's usefulness to the Clinton campaign is such that the big players might get him in. The primaries in the US are a weird business, I really don't understand them.

General Patton » Wed Dec 09, 2015 1:57 am wrote:Do Republican libertarians actually vote? All 20 of them?

Ha. Yeah, I think quite a few voted in 2012 who wouldn't vote for Trump.
User avatar
stefano
 
Posts: 2672
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 1:50 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: TRUMP is seriously dangerous

Postby justdrew » Wed Dec 09, 2015 2:53 am

"TRUMP calls for new Star Wars movie to be banned and never shown, source media to be destroyed"

:jumping:

tweet about it now #grandmofftrump
By 1964 there were 1.5 million mobile phone users in the US
User avatar
justdrew
 
Posts: 11966
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 7:57 pm
Location: unknown
Blog: View Blog (11)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 163 guests