2016 Politics Thread - Enter At Your Own Risk - All Politics & Dumb Opinions Here

[trixstar]

"But people will vote 15 times," Trump continues to plants seeds that the election is "rigged."

lol

[NeilCO]

Originally Posted by trixstar

Being smart doesn't mean you understand what people actually need.

True, but having a degree from the top ranked school in public policy likely gives him a deeper understanding of public policy than the average joe. I don't have an MPP, but it's my understanding that they study in depth various policies that have been tried, the results of those policies, etc. He has, at the very least, given much more thought to policies and their effects than most.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NeilCO]

Originally Posted by quackhead

From a liberal university. Can you understand that?

From the top ranked public policy program in the country.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JohnRyno]

Originally Posted by NeilCO

I will never understand anti-intellectualism. He has an advanced degree on this topic, so somehow he has LESS credibility?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's not particularly complex. Higher education is a luxury, so I could see why people from a disadvantaged background would resent it. At some point, the paranoid theory of U.S. universities serving as liberal indoctrination factories gained traction, and has become mainstream.

Those subscribing to the theory tend not to have experience with higher education, so there is an element of ignorant fear. It's far easier to anchor oneself to dogmatism and the paranoid style of politics, than risk the uncertainty that accompanies intellectual exploration.

Interestingly enough, both major candidates hold degrees from elite, Ivy League institutions.

[jewcer2k5]

Originally Posted by babyfaceposey

Also I have worked since I was 15, with only 8 months of unemployment in almost 20 years. The money I saved over the years covered my living costs for 8 months. I would gladly lose the almost 20 years of money I have put into social security if they would phase it out. People need to start taking responsibility for their lives and stop living off the government and expecting a handout. Flat tax across the board no matter how much someone makes, no right offs what so ever. No tax money coming back when you file your taxes. Just because someone only makes 20k a year and has 3 kids, doesn't mean they should be getting 10k back in taxes. Having kids was a choice, you can't afford the cost of a kid, then don't have them.

Which do you prefer...

Flat tax or consumption tax?

[trixstar]

Also here's more on Trump's new tax plan

Forbes Welcome

[xavieronly1]

Originally Posted by trixstar

Also here's more on Trump's new tax plan

Forbes Welcome

Good idea if you make a living from flipping cards. Bad idea if you make a living from flipping burgers.

[trixstar]

So trump just suggested assassinating a possible president

Trump on Clinton: "If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do folks." Adds, "Though the second amendment folks, maybe there is..."

[zachtruitt]

A degree from a "liberal" university (let's be honest, most people would kill for a degree from Berkeley) is way better than a "degree" from Liberty "University" or Phoenix.

[trixstar]

People actually criticizing Berkeley when it ranks as one of top public Universities in the world year after year are people you can't even have a rational conversation with.

[ssbledsoe]

Originally Posted by NeilCO

I will never understand anti-intellectualism. He has an advanced degree on this topic, so somehow he has LESS credibility?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Attacking his degree, bad form. Attacking his argument structure open game. The very first tweet provides his conclusion "just about the worst possible way". Any real intellectual knows how to properly craft an argument, and you don't start with, "this is bad and here's why." You immediately lose a portion of your audience with those words. Furthermore, it's not how the scientific method works. Then again, it's also what you get when you attempt to have academic/intelligent conversations in 140 characters or less.

[NeilCO]

Originally Posted by ssbledsoe

Attacking his degree, bad form. Attacking his argument structure open game. The very first tweet provides his conclusion "just about the worst possible way". Any real intellectual knows how to properly craft an argument, and you don't start with, "this is bad and here's why." You immediately lose a portion of your audience with those words. Furthermore, it's not how the scientific method works. Then again, it's also what you get when you attempt to have academic/intelligent conversations in 140 characters or less.

I agree that attacking his argument or its structure is fair game. I believe I was taught in law school to start arguments with the conclusion first. I can't really remember, but most judges do. Whether that's good form for a Twitter argument, I don't really have an opinion. I still struggle to understand Twitter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[xavieronly1]

Originally Posted by ssbledsoe

Attacking his degree, bad form. Attacking his argument structure open game. The very first tweet provides his conclusion "just about the worst possible way". Any real intellectual knows how to properly craft an argument, and you don't start with, "this is bad and here's why." You immediately lose a portion of your audience with those words. Furthermore, it's not how the scientific method works. Then again, it's also what you get when you attempt to have academic/intelligent conversations in 140 characters or less.

It is from twitter. You expect to read a well written research paper? You are not attacking his argument; you are attacking how he presents his information.

[ssbledsoe]

Originally Posted by NeilCO

I agree that attacking his argument or its structure is fair game. I believe I was taught in law school to start arguments with the conclusion first. I can't really remember, but most judges do. Whether that's good form for a Twitter argument, I don't really have an opinion. I still struggle to understand Twitter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As someone who is published in academic texts/journals, I can resoundingly say that you do not start with your conclusion. Hell, the very definition of the word conclusion makes that abundantly clear.

Originally Posted by xavieronly1

It is from twitter. You expect to read a well written research paper? You are not attacking his argument; you are attacking how he presents his information.

Precisely my point. Trying to have academic/intelligent discussions on a media platform that limits the person to 140 characters is ignorant and an "intelligent" person should know better. Unless of course you're just hoping to spread propaganda or create buzz...

[NeilCO]

Originally Posted by ssbledsoe

As someone who is published in academic texts/journals, I can resoundingly say that you do not start with your conclusion. Hell, the very definition of the word conclusion makes that abundantly clear.







Precisely my point. Trying to have academic/intelligent discussions on a media platform that limits the person to 140 characters is ignorant and an "intelligent" person should know better. Unless of course you're just hoping to spread propaganda or create buzz...

"Conclusion" in this case refers to the conclusion you've drawn from your research and analysis, not the conclusion (meaning "end") of your argument/paper/whatever.

I don't doubt that you were taught to save your conclusion for the end of your academic papers, and that the form has worked well for you. People write successfully using many different forms all the time. In any case, I don't think it's relevant to this guy's Twitter rant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ssbledsoe]

Originally Posted by NeilCO

"Conclusion" in this case refers to the conclusion you've drawn from your research and analysis, not the conclusion (meaning "end") of your argument/paper/whatever.

I don't doubt that you were taught to save your conclusion for the end of your academic papers, and that the form has worked well for you. People write successfully using many different forms all the time. In any case, I don't think it's relevant to this guy's Twitter rant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Actually, it's completely relevant if you're looking for an unbiased opinion. But, of course, I'm fairly certain neither the D's or R's are actually interested in anything unbiased.

Anyways, I'll wander off so everyone can continue spreading their preferred propaganda, faux intellectualism, and BS. Good day all...

[Addison]

Originally Posted by babyfaceposey

Yes, but you are misleading people. Discretionary spending is only 29% of total spending. Discretionary spending is 1.1 Trillion. Mandatory is 2.45 trillion. With social security, unemployment and labor costing 1.25 trillion. Medicare and healthcare costs 985 billion. Military spending is right around 16% of the total budget. You probably new all this, but many will not fact check and take a graph that someone posts as total budget. Want to cut the budget by trillions? How about the ponzi scheme that is social security.

Again, Trump's tax plan results in an estimated $10T+ deficit over the next decade. Say $1T per year. To cover it, you need to generate revenues through taxes or cut spending. He ain't doing the tax route, so let's cut.

Let's say total budget is $3.5T between mandatory and discretionary.

Let's say Defense is +- $1T. Not getting touched by the Don's tiny digits. His plan would increase it...

SSC programs are $1.25T or so. Nixing them is political suicide for every politician, so no chance Don would/could cut that.

Call medicare and healthcare an even $1T. Republicans have tried to repeal the ACA 60 times and have failed. Trump's plan would add, conservatively, $300B to the budget and tens of millions would lose coverage. Counter productive and going the wrong way. Either way, the $1T is probably off the table any way. More $$$, more uninsured: Donald Trump's health-care plan

$1T + $1.25T + 1T = $3.25T. Got a yuuugeee $250B to cut.

But then you're cutting stuff like NASA research and infrastructure. Not only is it not enough to cover the $1T/year deficit increase under Trump, it isn't exactly stuff we need to/should cut.

...Just a few raw numbers but doesn't look like his tax plan is feasible. He must have built a wall around arithmetic.

[xavieronly1]

Originally Posted by ssbledsoe

Precisely my point. Trying to have academic/intelligent discussions on a media platform that limits the person to 140 characters is ignorant and an "intelligent" person should know better. Unless of course you're just hoping to spread propaganda or create buzz...

I don't see where he said he wanted to have a academic/intelligent discussion on Twitter. You are putting words in his mouth now.

[fezziwig]

Originally Posted by quackhead

From a liberal university. Can you understand that?

This may come as surprise to you, but not everyone at Berkeley -- student or faculty -- is liberal.

John Yoo has been a law professor at Berkeley since the early 1990s. Mr Yoo was a member of the GW Bush administration, and author of the legal opinions used by that administration to justify waterboarding and other violations of the Geneva Convention.

[cadillac540]

Originally Posted by trixstar

So trump just suggested assassinating a possible president

Trump on Clinton: "If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do folks." Adds, "Though the second amendment folks, maybe there is..."

LOL way to take things out of context.

[NeilCO]

Originally Posted by xavieronly1

I don't see where he said he wanted to have a academic/intelligent discussion on Twitter. You are putting words in his mouth now.

Exactly. Claiming that someone's Twitter point is invalid because it wasn't presented in your preferred format is just bizarre.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[callou2131]

I am middle class with 1 kid. My family combined makes a little over 90k a year. In Maryland that is middle class. Under trumps plan, I would save about 8k a year.under Hillary's plan I would pay about 3k more a year. 11k a year is the difference in whether my son goes to a crappy public school or a good charter school.

[Athey49]

Originally Posted by cadillac540

LOL way to take things out of context.

In what other way can one take that?

[corndog]

Generally, a person with "liberal" views will denounce those who do not subscribe to the earth being 4.5 billion years old, man-made climate change, evolution, a fetus is not a person, etc.

I disagree, but completely understand why people can have those opinions.

[NeilCO]

Originally Posted by Athey49

In what other way can one take that?

He may have simply been advocating for assassinating a Supreme Court justice. Or even just whatever government employee would come to take our guns in Trump's doomsday world. But he never really "says" anything. He just floats ideas and smirks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk