Beecher Networks - Web Development, Hosting & Domains
Page 28 of 29 FirstFirst ... 1826272829 LastLast
Results 541 to 560 of 579

Thread: Trump

  1. #541
    Banned KrisLetang's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    572
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    13
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    145
    Thanked in
    82 Posts
    I don't think a Jewish person could get elected president. Bloomberg or anyone else. I honestly do not.

  2. #542
    Capped Player DannyInvincible's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Derry
    Posts
    11,524
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,404
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,738
    Thanked in
    2,284 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by KrisLetang View Post
    I don't think a Jewish person could get elected president. Bloomberg or anyone else. I honestly do not.
    Why's that? Sanders was Jewish and, even though his Jewish heritage was reported and became a relatively minor "matter of note", I don't think there was that big a deal made out of it. Or was there? Maybe I missed it (and obviously he wasn't actually elected), but I didn't get a sense people thought it his background could cost him the presidency if he'd received the nomination.

  3. #543
    First Team
    Joined
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,181
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    80
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    919
    Thanked in
    602 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by KrisLetang View Post
    I don't think a Jewish person could get elected president. Bloomberg or anyone else. I honestly do not.
    Quote Originally Posted by DannyInvincible View Post
    Why's that? Sanders was Jewish and, even though his Jewish heritage was reported and became a relatively minor "matter of note", I don't think there was that big a deal made out of it. Or was there? Maybe I missed it (and obviously he wasn't actually elected), but I didn't get a sense people thought it his background could cost him the presidency if he'd received the nomination.
    Agreed - when he was still in the race, he was consistently polling a few points better than Clinton against Trump, which should have been enough to overcome the voter suppression tactics, the Fake News interference of the Russian bots and, admittedly, Trump's better management of the Swing States to win Electoral College.

  4. #544
    Banned. Children Banned. Grandchildren Banned. 3 Months. Charlie Darwin's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,577
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,890
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,310
    Thanked in
    3,368 Posts
    I'd agree the Trump constituency would be loath to elect a Jewish person alright.

  5. #545
    Banned KrisLetang's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    572
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    13
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    145
    Thanked in
    82 Posts
    Sanders is the first to win a presidential primary ever. Goldwater was a Methodist or something. I don't think Sanders is religious at all. But again, he would not have won the Presidency.

  6. #546
    First Team
    Joined
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,181
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    80
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    919
    Thanked in
    602 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by KrisLetang View Post
    Sanders is the first to win a presidential primary ever. Goldwater was a Methodist or something. I don't think Sanders is religious at all. But again, he would not have won the Presidency.
    And that supposition is based on what? The consistent 10-15 point lead he held over Trump in polls from February to June of 2016?

  7. #547
    Banned KrisLetang's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    572
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    13
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    145
    Thanked in
    82 Posts
    Those polls are meaningless AF. You do know he was trailing Clinton right? The morning of the election? CNN posted the now infamous graphic "Likely Election winner odds: Clinton 91%...>Trump 9%." at 3 PM election day.

  8. #548
    Banned. Children Banned. Grandchildren Banned. 3 Months. Charlie Darwin's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,577
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,890
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,310
    Thanked in
    3,368 Posts
    Yet Clinton could have won the election, which sort of backs up Sam's point.

  9. #549
    Capped Player DannyInvincible's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Derry
    Posts
    11,524
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,404
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,738
    Thanked in
    2,284 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin View Post
    I'd agree the Trump constituency would be loath to elect a Jewish person alright.
    It's not as if they're a majority though. They'd have been loath to vote for Obama too, but he still got elected twice.

    Quote Originally Posted by KrisLetang View Post
    Sanders is the first to win a presidential primary ever. Goldwater was a Methodist or something. I don't think Sanders is religious at all. But again, he would not have won the Presidency.
    Were you only talking about religious Jews then (rather than cultural Jews)? You've still not actually answered the question as to why you think a Jew could never be US president.

    I would suggest that it's probably your own reluctance to answer questions posed to you that makes it difficult for you to have adult conversations with those with whom you disagree.

  10. #550
    First Team
    Joined
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    2,181
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    80
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    919
    Thanked in
    602 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by KrisLetang View Post
    Those polls are meaningless AF. You do know he was trailing Clinton right? The morning of the election? CNN posted the now infamous graphic "Likely Election winner odds: Clinton 91%...>Trump 9%." at 3 PM election day.
    Actually the polls close to election date were more accurate than people seem to realise - the last batch had Clinton ahead overall by 3-6 points - she won the popular vote by 2.1% and the late swing state polls showed Trump ahead or within margin of error in the key swing states he won. I saw those polls over the weekend and went into Election Day with a feeling of dread that Trump might pull it off, even though the Liberal Echo Chamber was, yes, in denial. So it was more the interpretation of the polls that was off, not the polls themselves. And overall in the polls, Clinton's lead over Trump was always smaller and softer than Sanders. So again, had Sanders won the Democratic nomination he would probably have won the General and if a 75-year-old, little-known, unpolished, uncharismatic, self-described Democratic Socialist Jewish candidate can come so close, then to say that America will never elect a Jewish president is as silly as saying that America will never elect an African-American president (particularly one with Hussein as his middle name)

  11. Thanks From:


  12. #551
    Banned KrisLetang's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    572
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    13
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    145
    Thanked in
    82 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by DannyInvincible View Post
    It's not as if they're a majority though. They'd have been loath to vote for Obama too, but he still got elected twice.



    Were you only talking about religious Jews then (rather than cultural Jews)? You've still not actually answered the question as to why you think a Jew could never be US president.

    I would suggest that it's probably your own reluctance to answer questions posed to you that makes it difficult for you to have adult conversations with those with whom you disagree.
    I think there is antisemitism from certain voting blocks on the Dems side that would make it tough. I think that's why Bloomberg never ran. He really looked into it, and he surely has the money. I think a Jewish republican could get elected. Eric Cantor was the first Jewish Maj Whip I believe for example. Yes, I know he lost eventually. Bloomy changed to independent at some point.

    Another foaming at the mouth Trump critic, noted New York Times scribe Glenn Thrush suspended over sexual harassment claims from many women......They wont have any males left at that paper soon.

  13. #552
    Banned KrisLetang's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    572
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    13
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    145
    Thanked in
    82 Posts
    Also if it would be so easy why don't you guys think Chuck Schumer runs for president? He is the most power hungry and camera hungry person in the Senate IMO. He has a famous cousin who could help with the campaign. Dem's love Hollywood stars. He checks all the boxes, good fundraiser, anti Gun, pro immigration. Pro Abortion. Long time stable marriage. What could be keeping him from running?

  14. #553
    Capped Player DannyInvincible's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Derry
    Posts
    11,524
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,404
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,738
    Thanked in
    2,284 Posts
    No-one said it would be easy; I don't doubt anti-Semitism is still quite prevalent in many areas of the US. People have just been suggesting that it wouldn't be as impossible for a Jew to become US president as you appear to think it would be.

    I'm not familiar with Chuck Schumer, but you imply that he hasn't put himself forward because he assumes or "knows" he wouldn't stand a chance on account of his presumably Jewish background, but if it is such an obvious "truth" that a Jew would have no chance of success, why did Sanders waste his time campaigning at all? He's evidently not a stupid man.

    And it's pro-choice; not "pro-abortion". The latter term is a totally disingenuous term used to misrepresent or smear those who advocate choice. I don't know anyone who advocates abortion. The idea is that women ought to be trusted to make decisions regarding their own bodies and reproduction. Anti-natalism (the umbrella under which a pro-abortion position would fall) is very much a fringe philosophy.

  15. #554
    Banned KrisLetang's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    572
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    13
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    145
    Thanked in
    82 Posts

  16. #555
    Capped Player DannyInvincible's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Derry
    Posts
    11,524
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,404
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,738
    Thanked in
    2,284 Posts
    What about her? She seems content to "reappropriate" the term, which is fine, but she still makes an explicit distinction between being pro-choice and being pro-abortion, in accordance with her interpretation of what those terms mean.

    I also sense that her usage of the term "pro-abortion" happens to mean something slightly different from the intended import when it is used by someone who is hostile to choice in order to smear those who are pro-choice, as the latter example of the term's usage is almost invariably a wholly disingenuous attempt to frame or mischaracterise those who are simply pro-choice as being "evil/immoral" advocates for "murdering babies".

    I've come across Tarico before and her writings in advocacy of choice and on the hypocrisies of the anti-choice movement are very compelling and welcome, but it still doesn't change the fact that an anti-natalist position that advocates or encourages abortions (as opposed to a position that advocates a woman's choice to have an abortion if she wishes to undergo the procedure or to not have an abortion if she doesn't wish to have one) isn't a mainstream one.

    To clarify, I don't personally know anyone who espouses such a pro-abortion stance.

  17. #556
    Banned KrisLetang's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    572
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    13
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    145
    Thanked in
    82 Posts
    Allright, I just showed 6 Jewish people this thread. 3 males, 3 females. 2 said yes, one said yes with caveats too numerous to mention, 2 said no and one said maybe and added that you "mansplain things something awful". Which I agree with.

  18. #557
    Banned. Children Banned. Grandchildren Banned. 3 Months. Charlie Darwin's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    18,577
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,890
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,310
    Thanked in
    3,368 Posts
    Classic foot.ie.

  19. #558
    International Prospect bennocelt's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Basel (Allschwil)
    Posts
    5,829
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    4,823
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    436
    Thanked in
    335 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by DannyInvincible View Post

    And it's pro-choice; not "pro-abortion". The latter term is a totally disingenuous term used to misrepresent or smear those who advocate choice. I don't know anyone who advocates abortion. The idea is that women ought to be trusted to make decisions regarding their own bodies and reproduction. Anti-natalism (the umbrella under which a pro-abortion position would fall) is very much a fringe philosophy.
    Ah now Danny, have you not seen Ruth Coppinger foaming at the mouth when the subject comes up.

  20. #559
    Banned KrisLetang's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    572
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    13
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    145
    Thanked in
    82 Posts
    Interesting note on fundraising:

    The DNC had it's worse fundraising month since 2003.
    RNC cash on hand as of 10/31: $42.5 Million.
    DNC cash on hand as of 10/31: $5 Million but with $3.2 million in debt. (from Julie Bykowicz twitter feed.)

    Dave Levinthal: "A noteable driver: When Trump fundraises--and he does so frequently--It's often for the RNC or a joint Trump/RNC political committee."

    I'm surprised by all this. Are Dems keeping their wallets shut BC they don't see anyone in charge of the party anymore? You would really think they would be able to capitalize on some of DT's stupid tweeting, etc...
    Last edited by KrisLetang; 21/11/2017 at 4:33 PM.

  21. #560
    Capped Player DannyInvincible's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Derry
    Posts
    11,524
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    3,404
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    3,738
    Thanked in
    2,284 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by KrisLetang View Post
    Allright, I just showed 6 Jewish people this thread. 3 males, 3 females. 2 said yes, one said yes with caveats too numerous to mention,
    Said "yes" to what question exactly? Any chance you could briefly elaborate on or summarise what they said?

    2 said no and one said maybe and added that you "mansplain things something awful". Which I agree with.
    Were they referring to me? Based on what exactly? One or two of my posts? Heh, OK... And their relationship or connection to you mightn't have coloured their opinion of someone having an argument with you in any way?

    Are you even a woman? I'm pretty certain you're not, but, even if you are, I wasn't aware, so I could hardly be guilty of mansplaining. Isn't mansplaining when a man knowingly talks down to a woman because he condescendingly presumes a lack of knowledge or insight on her part on account of her womanhood? He has to think he's talking to a woman for it to be mansplaining surely.

    It's a bit condescending and dismissive to belittle my thoughts like that, purely on the basis that I'm a man explaining his point of view, no? Seeing as you say you agree with the accusation, which things specifically have I supposedly been "mansplaining something awful"? The "pro-choice"/"pro-abortion" thing? It's certainly odd and somewhat jarring to be accused of mansplaining on that matter when I'm the one asserting a woman's right to bodily and reproductive autonomy against an apparent ignorant misrepresentation/attack (which is what your distortion boils down to) from a man. You are a man, aren't you? And it's a particularly rich accusation in this instance coming from someone who previously accused me of being incapable of adult conversation, which is a pretty condescending thing to say in itself.

    Mansplaining is clearly not what I have done here, where I have inferred a lack of knowledge or insight on your part on account of a lazy and erroneous accusation you made in respect of those who are pro-choice and so I am correcting you on that display of what was either ignorance or disingenuousness. I would remind you of the words of Ralph Waldo Emerson, who once advised, "Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted."

    In this instance, the accusation of mansplaining just seems like a convenient ad hominem attack to try and undermine what I'm saying. It's an accusation that is difficult to successfully refute because it's purely based on someone's subjective perception and I am a man, after all, who was clarifying an evident misunderstanding/misrepresentation. In what manner could I have clarified the distinction between "pro-choice" and the more malicious term "pro-abortion" (which I could only assume you did not understand, seeing as you misused the term "pro-abortion" when "pro-choice" would have been the appropriate term, unless you were being wilfully disingenuous, of course, which would be bad faith on your part and not mine, if so), without being accused of mansplaining?

    Quote Originally Posted by bennocelt View Post
    Ah now Danny, have you not seen Ruth Coppinger foaming at the mouth when the subject comes up.
    I'm pretty sure Coppinger is simply pro-choice, in line with the position of her party/alliance. Where has she suggested she's pro-abortion or anti-natalist in the sense I've outlined in post #555?

Page 28 of 29 FirstFirst ... 1826272829 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Trump lets off Miss America
    By First in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 26/12/2006, 8:37 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •