text
stringlengths 2.16k
161k
|
|---|
<s>[INST]>>{dukbcaaj} : ‘Trump Could Be the Next Hitler!’ Says the Increasingly Fascist Left>>{barbe_du_cou} : Sorry OP, but /r/politics has strict criteria for upvoting brietbart, in that it must be sufficiently focused on Hilary Clinton. And before you comment about how it isn't fair, know that this is the same standard used for upvoting Iranian, Russian and Venezuelan propaganda articles.>>{strikes_again_haha} : I dont get this. Pol pot, stalin, mao, hitler were all leftists. When the right goes full retard its a marriage of elite class, business class, and religion which perfectly describes the current breed of globalists....who have been pushed out of the gop and exist only on the left.>>{Fuckoutmyface} : You have been temporarily banned from participating in /r/politics. This ban will last for 1 days. You can still view and subscribe to /r/politics, but you won't be able to post or comment. Note from the moderators: You have been banned for not being in love with our Communist Lord, Bernie Sanders. Please take some time to read the rules before your ban expires.>>{tenparsecs} : DUMP TRUMP!! TRUMP WILL FUCKING KILL ALL THE MINORITIES DEATH SQUADS DEATH CAMPS GENOCIDE!!!!! HE'S FUCKING HITLER!!!! HE'S FUCKING HITLEEEEERRRRRRR!!!!!!!! Wait wait stop violently protesting against him!! Be more rational about how I talked about Trump to you, I mean, I totally condone violence, cmon, that's not right, guys! ;)>>{Fenrir-Greyback} : Didn't Ben Carson talk about how Hitler would never have gotten to power if the Jews had been armed.>>{aledlewis} : Trump, has all the makings of a tremendous dictator. The best.>>{aledlewis} : Yeah. Which sounds like an endorsement of violence against Trump.>>{aledlewis} : Hitler was a leftist? LOL. All of the communists he hunted down and killed would be surprised. Love this right-wing revisionism. Just own him. He's yours.>>{strikes_again_haha} : National socialism was the creed of the nazi party. Communism is different from socialism...technically. socialism is the people own the means of manufacture, communism is the state owning the means of manufacture.>>{ChomskysChekist} : I see the new tactic is to make terms up and hope that it sticks. No shame to breitbarts game I suppose.>>{liberationation} : They see the regressive left as their own form of fascism, instead of Secret Police and prison camps, you have PC Police and safe spaces. Which is why they so love Trump, because he's the ultimate troll.>>{ChomskysChekist} : Ironically it's only the right wing actually using the state to suppress individual freedom and free speech.>>{liberationation} : Eh the left is using other institutions (particularly schools), even Obama has spoken out against it. I think this will be one positive takeaway (not that it negates all the negative…), that PC hysteria is pretty much dead, especially if Trump wins.>>{ChomskysChekist} : Not that I disagree but a common fallacy with right wingers is that they are so obsessed with the left, they can't see the monster under their own bed. You guys want to pass laws and use the legal process to repress free speech. That eventually involves the ever growing police and surveillance State. I don't like regressive and intersectionalist liberals but clean up the authoritarian monster under your bed before worrying about some PC nuts>>{liberationation} : I'm not right wing, and I recognize their problems to.>>{trcsteve} : What are you talking about...have you SEEN the videos of people just losing their minds trying to shut down free speech on campuses that host Milo Yiannopolous? That is the left going increasingly fascist.>>{trcsteve} : How is the right using the state to suppress free speech?>>{trcsteve} : No he's not. The state owned manufacturing. That is socialism and therefore leftist. You have been taught that fascism=right wing. When in truth, fascism is neither left nor right. In the case of Hitler, the political ideology was socialist.>>{ChomskysChekist} : State owned manufacturing is called State capitalism. Socialists do bot believe in capitalism period. You are used to authoritarian state capitalist regimes call themselves socialist in name only.>>{ChomskysChekist} : The pledge of allegiance, mad about merry Christmas, enhanced surveillance state against "code" language. Just to name a few.>>{trcsteve} : > The pledge of allegiance I see no reference to Congress passing legislation forcing anyone to cite the pledge of allegiance. There are local fights about people wanting to remove God from it, but those originate on the left, and the left is using the courts(the state) to change that. > Mad about merry Christmas. I see no referance to any state involvement when I do a search on this subject. > enhanced surveillance state against "code" language. Now this one is a beauty, because "code" language is a term used by both sides to imply either racism or intent. I am unaware of some sort of "Code" word surveillance unless you are talking about the system put in place to flag red if words like "assasinate" and "president" are said in the same paragraph. And I'm sorry to tell you, enhance surveillance was bipartisan. The ones that railed against it most were the liberetarians which mostly lean right.>>{trcsteve} : Oh, no...in fact he is doing the world a great service by illustrating how bat shit insane some on the left go when you say something they disagree with. How they hate the idea of free speech and will do anything to shut it down because sticks and stones may break my bones but names are MURDER! (your words are murder is an actual claim by a college activist)>>{trcsteve} : > Milo isn't "doing the world a great service," he's fear-mongering. How is Milo fear mongering?>>{trcsteve} : Interesting. I think it's rather good journalism to point out that college professors and upper administration officials are being forced out of their positions by some of these students. And a lot of what he does is mocking and trolling because what these kids need is a little sunlight and a little ridicule to maybe prepare some of them for some kind of non-protestor job after college.>>{z9nine} : That's business. Don't like how your board does it? Get support, vote them out, and put yours in. Just don't get butthut when someone does it to you.>>{trcsteve} : Students have much freedom when it comes to who is teaching them. They can transfer, they can choose a college they like. But when you let the students control the curriculum, you have lost control of your institution. You can't compare a college to a fortune 500 company, and students are not employees.>>{trcsteve} : > Colleges aren't the government, neither are the students. Colleges are business that provides a service to the students. If those that pay for said service don't want certain things supported or said they can boycott the business. The students are doing this by protesting. First of all, many colleges are supported by taxpayer dollars so they are not all free entities. Second, you boycott a business by not buying their stuff. So transfer to a place you like and take your money with you if you want to boycott. It's a false comparrison. > They are not violating anyone's speech. Yes, yes they are. The Supreme court has long held that a scheduled speaker's right to speak supercedes the rights of ANYONE who wants to shut that person up as long as their words are not enciting a riot...like... "burn this bitch down." You block the doors to an event, it's illegal (and before you take the argument about campus, many of these events happen off campus). If it is proven that you entered an auditorium with the expicit intention to disrupt the speaker, it is illegal. If you steal someone's hat and burn it, it is illegal. Get your facts straight before you start whipping out free speech as justification for the actions of these grown adults who are acting like children. BTW, you're reacting like I triggered you. Did I trigger you, pumpkin?>>{z9nine} : No, students are stakeholders. Which are more important. Without them a entity won't function. They have more power over how it's run than anyone else. The adage The Customer Is Always Right is true. If your customers don't like what you offer you either change or fall aside. The problem is that we have run our state schools like a business instead of a learning institution. Because of that the customers make the decisions. As someone that deals with customers in a daily basis, 98% of them a fucking idiots that can't tell there asshole from teir elbow.>>{trcsteve} : > No, students are stakeholders. Which are more important. Nope...you completely misunderstand business and boycotts. If you don't like what apple is doing, don't buy an Iphone. If you are an allumn, and you buy a building...great, you get your name on it and maybe negotiate before the grant. But students are not stockholders. They are consumers. They have absolutely NO say in how the college is run. They get to go elsewhere or have their voices heard if that is the stucture of the college. [As someone that deals with customers in a daily basis, 98% of them a fucking idiots that can't tell there asshole from teir elbow.] Do you have any idea how much you sound like a jaded elitist prick? No wonder you empathize with those who are professional victims. You ARE one! Suck it up and grow a pair. Stop blaming your decisions on everyone else.>>{z9nine} : I didn't say the were Stockholders I said they were Stakeholders. There is a difference. You may think that just not buying a product will change, it doesn't always work like that. Sometimes you have to disrupt the system to create change. If you always try to change the system from within, eventually the system changes you. >[As someone that deals with customers in a daily basis, 98% of them a fucking idiots that can't tell there asshole from teir elbow.] Do you have any idea how much you sound like a jaded elitist prick? No wonder you empathize with those who are professional victims. You ARE one! Suck it up and grow a pair. Stop blaming your decisions on everyone else. I am not a professional victim. I deal with the general public 10-12 hours a day 5 days a week. Try doing that for a while a see how you feel. I don't call them out on it most of the time because I want to keep my job. But believe me, they are idiots.[/INST]['>>{dukbcaaj} : ‘Trump Could Be the Next Hitler!’ Says the Increasingly Fascist Left', ">>{barbe_du_cou} : Sorry OP, but /r/politics has strict criteria for upvoting brietbart, in that it must be sufficiently focused on Hilary Clinton. And before you comment about how it isn't fair, know that this is the same standard used for upvoting Iranian, Russian and Venezuelan propaganda articles.", '>>{strikes_again_haha} : I dont get this. Pol pot, stalin, mao, hitler were all leftists. When the right goes full retard its a marriage of elite class, business class, and religion which perfectly describes the current breed of globalists....who have been pushed out of the gop and exist only on the left.', ">>{Fuckoutmyface} : You have been temporarily banned from participating in /r/politics. This ban will last for 1 days. You can still view and subscribe to /r/politics, but you won't be able to post or comment. Note from the moderators: You have been banned for not being in love with our Communist Lord, Bernie Sanders. Please take some time to read the rules before your ban expires.", ">>{tenparsecs} : DUMP TRUMP!! TRUMP WILL FUCKING KILL ALL THE MINORITIES DEATH SQUADS DEATH CAMPS GENOCIDE!!!!! HE'S FUCKING HITLER!!!! HE'S FUCKING HITLEEEEERRRRRRR!!!!!!!! Wait wait stop violently protesting against him!! Be more rational about how I talked about Trump to you, I mean, I totally condone violence, cmon, that's not right, guys! ;)", ">>{Fenrir-Greyback} : Didn't Ben Carson talk about how Hitler would never have gotten to power if the Jews had been armed.", '>>{aledlewis} : Trump, has all the makings of a tremendous dictator. The best.', '>>{aledlewis} : Yeah. Which sounds like an endorsement of violence against Trump.', ">>{aledlewis} : Hitler was a leftist? LOL. All of the communists he hunted down and killed would be surprised. Love this right-wing revisionism. Just own him. He's yours.", '>>{strikes_again_haha} : National socialism was the creed of the nazi party. Communism is different from socialism...technically. socialism is the people own the means of manufacture, communism is the state owning the means of manufacture.', '>>{ChomskysChekist} : I see the new tactic is to make terms up and hope that it sticks. No shame to breitbarts game I suppose.', ">>{liberationation} : They see the regressive left as their own form of fascism, instead of Secret Police and prison camps, you have PC Police and safe spaces. Which is why they so love Trump, because he's the ultimate troll.", ">>{ChomskysChekist} : Ironically it's only the right wing actually using the state to suppress individual freedom and free speech.", '>>{liberationation} : Eh the left is using other institutions (particularly schools), even Obama has spoken out against it. I think this will be one positive takeaway (not that it negates all the negative…), that PC hysteria is pretty much dead, especially if Trump wins.', ">>{ChomskysChekist} : Not that I disagree but a common fallacy with right wingers is that they are so obsessed with the left, they can't see the monster under their own bed. You guys want to pass laws and use the legal process to repress free speech. That eventually involves the ever growing police and surveillance State. I don't like regressive and intersectionalist liberals but clean up the authoritarian monster under your bed before worrying about some PC nuts", ">>{liberationation} : I'm not right wing, and I recognize their problems to.", '>>{trcsteve} : What are you talking about...have you SEEN the videos of people just losing their minds trying to shut down free speech on campuses that host Milo Yiannopolous? That is the left going increasingly fascist.', '>>{trcsteve} : How is the right using the state to suppress free speech?', ">>{trcsteve} : No he's not. The state owned manufacturing. That is socialism and therefore leftist. You have been taught that fascism=right wing. When in truth, fascism is neither left nor right. In the case of Hitler, the political ideology was socialist.", '>>{ChomskysChekist} : State owned manufacturing is called State capitalism. Socialists do bot believe in capitalism period. You are used to authoritarian state capitalist regimes call themselves socialist in name only.', '>>{ChomskysChekist} : The pledge of allegiance, mad about merry Christmas, enhanced surveillance state against "code" language. Just to name a few.', '>>{trcsteve} : > The pledge of allegiance I see no reference to Congress passing legislation forcing anyone to cite the pledge of allegiance. There are local fights about people wanting to remove God from it, but those originate on the left, and the left is using the courts(the state) to change that. > Mad about merry Christmas. I see no referance to any state involvement when I do a search on this subject. > enhanced surveillance state against "code" language. Now this one is a beauty, because "code" language is a term used by both sides to imply either racism or intent. I am unaware of some sort of "Code" word surveillance unless you are talking about the system put in place to flag red if words like "assasinate" and "president" are said in the same paragraph. And I\'m sorry to tell you, enhance surveillance was bipartisan. The ones that railed against it most were the liberetarians which mostly lean right.', '>>{trcsteve} : Oh, no...in fact he is doing the world a great service by illustrating how bat shit insane some on the left go when you say something they disagree with. How they hate the idea of free speech and will do anything to shut it down because sticks and stones may break my bones but names are MURDER! (your words are murder is an actual claim by a college activist)', '>>{trcsteve} : > Milo isn\'t "doing the world a great service," he\'s fear-mongering. How is Milo fear mongering?', ">>{trcsteve} : Interesting. I think it's rather good journalism to point out that college professors and upper administration officials are being forced out of their positions by some of these students. And a lot of what he does is mocking and trolling because what these kids need is a little sunlight and a little ridicule to maybe prepare some of them for some kind of non-protestor job after college.", ">>{z9nine} : That's business. Don't like how your board does it? Get support, vote them out, and put yours in. Just don't get butthut when someone does it to you.", ">>{trcsteve} : Students have much freedom when it comes to who is teaching them. They can transfer, they can choose a college they like. But when you let the students control the curriculum, you have lost control of your institution. You can't compare a college to a fortune 500 company, and students are not employees.", '>>{trcsteve} : > Colleges aren\'t the government, neither are the students. Colleges are business that provides a service to the students. If those that pay for said service don\'t want certain things supported or said they can boycott the business. The students are doing this by protesting. First of all, many colleges are supported by taxpayer dollars so they are not all free entities. Second, you boycott a business by not buying their stuff. So transfer to a place you like and take your money with you if you want to boycott. It\'s a false comparrison. > They are not violating anyone\'s speech. Yes, yes they are. The Supreme court has long held that a scheduled speaker\'s right to speak supercedes the rights of ANYONE who wants to shut that person up as long as their words are not enciting a riot...like... "burn this bitch down." You block the doors to an event, it\'s illegal (and before you take the argument about campus, many of these events happen off campus). If it is proven that you entered an auditorium with the expicit intention to disrupt the speaker, it is illegal. If you steal someone\'s hat and burn it, it is illegal. Get your facts straight before you start whipping out free speech as justification for the actions of these grown adults who are acting like children. BTW, you\'re reacting like I triggered you. Did I trigger you, pumpkin?', ">>{z9nine} : No, students are stakeholders. Which are more important. Without them a entity won't function. They have more power over how it's run than anyone else. The adage The Customer Is Always Right is true. If your customers don't like what you offer you either change or fall aside. The problem is that we have run our state schools like a business instead of a learning institution. Because of that the customers make the decisions. As someone that deals with customers in a daily basis, 98% of them a fucking idiots that can't tell there asshole from teir elbow.", ">>{trcsteve} : > No, students are stakeholders. Which are more important. Nope...you completely misunderstand business and boycotts. If you don't like what apple is doing, don't buy an Iphone. If you are an allumn, and you buy a building...great, you get your name on it and maybe negotiate before the grant. But students are not stockholders. They are consumers. They have absolutely NO say in how the college is run. They get to go elsewhere or have their voices heard if that is the stucture of the college. [As someone that deals with customers in a daily basis, 98% of them a fucking idiots that can't tell there asshole from teir elbow.] Do you have any idea how much you sound like a jaded elitist prick? No wonder you empathize with those who are professional victims. You ARE one! Suck it up and grow a pair. Stop blaming your decisions on everyone else.", ">>{z9nine} : I didn't say the were Stockholders I said they were Stakeholders. There is a difference. You may think that just not buying a product will change, it doesn't always work like that. Sometimes you have to disrupt the system to create change. If you always try to change the system from within, eventually the system changes you. >[As someone that deals with customers in a daily basis, 98% of them a fucking idiots that can't tell there asshole from teir elbow.] Do you have any idea how much you sound like a jaded elitist prick? No wonder you empathize with those who are professional victims. You ARE one! Suck it up and grow a pair. Stop blaming your decisions on everyone else. I am not a professional victim. I deal with the general public 10-12 hours a day 5 days a week. Try doing that for a while a see how you feel. I don't call them out on it most of the time because I want to keep my job. But believe me, they are idiots."]</s> |
<s>[INST]>>{pilihansesaat} : How much does Trump claim his golf courses are worth? It depends who needs to know.>>{0ne_Word} : All I could think of as I read that title was this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BX3bN5YeiQs>>{Altwaal} : Even Dems freaked about Bill getting female interns if Hillary wins.>>{drucifer27} : She's also had a nonstop whirlwind of mostly negative press over the past 3 weeks, and she's still maintaining leads in almost every poll. But that storm is subsiding and she's got a powerhouse lineup of speakers at the convention next week who will be making her out to be the greatest leader in a generation, while the RNC is looking to be an unmitigated disaster. Look for her numbers to rebound heartily in the coming weeks.>>{axelrods_shoe} : She's collapsing. If she doesn't rebound shortly, she will lose>>{AllHailKingJeb} : I mean they should be he took advantage of Monica it would be sad to see other young women taken advantage of like that. But that's probably not why.>>{heuheu} : Had consensual sex with most powerful man in the world. "taken advantage of.">>{turtledan87} : That's generally how being a business man works? "Everything is worth what it's purchaser will pay for it">>{AllHailKingJeb} : Do you have a point at all. You're aware of course that Monica herself has said he took advantage of her.>>{KopOut} : And her lead in the swing states (according to this article) has grown by 2 points, up 40% over last month...>>{NotFooledbyFools} : Trump just fucked himself. Taxman is gonna come a knockin'.>>{AllHailKingJeb} : Censorship sucks. Why do you wanna be a censor?>>{jpmon} : I can't believe how White this convention crowd is. It's ridiculous>>{janzeera} : Just ask him. Unless, of course, you're an accessor...>>{Mizukiiii} : This is common for pretty much every business. There is a calculated valuation for tax purposes and a different valuation for prospective buyers in case of a merger/acquisition.>>{trogon} : Yeah, it looks like some counties need to do some property reassessments.>>{johnthebold2} : Maybe if Trump didn't say so much dumb shit he wouldn't get beatbup on so much.>>{Ddog312} : Not to mention she outspent him 7 to 1!>>{Agedwithaview} : TIL Donald is much more skilled at talking out of both sides of his mouth than I gave him credit. I think I agree that nothing illegal is involved but you have to give props to him for pushing the envelope..... I am curious which numbers he uses when talking to lenders....>>{DrewChambersDC} : Powerhouse lineup like the mother of Michael Brown 😂>>{Byzantine279} : But for the love of god don't let the tax guy see the 2nd one.>>{Mizukiiii} : Is it really pushing the envelope if everyone does it? The past 3 companies I have worked for all have two separate books.>>{Kissing_Toast} : And she increased her lead from 5 points to 7 in those states that she is outspending him in. So basically she is losing some votes in Texas and Alabama?>>{Kissing_Toast} : > The old joke is that Hillary's poll numbers never go up Except for those [four times her numbers went up during primary polling](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_democratic_presidential_nomination-3824.html) and [four times during general election polling](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html)>>{whatnowdog} : I would like to see the tax laws changed so that a company's tax filing is what they show in their financial statements to shareholders. Trump must be a bad businessman if he paid $150 million plus a lot of money for improvements for the Doral but now says it is only worth $75 million. To all the Trump supporters this is why you pay more taxes because the rich get out of paying their fair share.>>{drucifer27} : And like...Bill Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, President Obama, and Michelle Obama.>>{Stuart98} : Because daily caller articles are worthless? Salon, breitbart, redstate, etc are also worthless. HuffPo's been banned before. The sub already bans blogs.>>{bobnojio} : That's not how any of this works You need to realize that goodwill style pricing/additives aren't taxable You buy a company? It has 3 million in assets (computers, desks, etc). Then you pay for the goodwill - customer accounts/information, staff, and "profit" Nobody would want to sell for pure asset value, because that's what they have now. Goodwill is priced, but not taxable>>{_tx} : Goodwill doesn't even exist in IFRS only US GAAP. That said, the simplest difference is that book value generally is historically based and adjusted for depreciation.>>{drucifer27} : Jesus, the persecution complex is strong with this one. Can't handle a dissenting argument? Don't post. >The problem is she isn't blowing him away. Exactly. See my original post. She's been battered by a constant stream of negative press for several weeks. That'll take a toll on your ratings. But that shitstorm has subsided somewhat and the convention is next week. She'll more than likely be leading him by blowout margins by the first week of August if historical polling trends hold true.>>{Kissing_Toast} : Clinton's 2 points are statistical noise, Trump's 3 points aren't?>>{boogietime} : But I thought she was going with the "I'm a political outsider" routine? Or is that over since Sanders bent a knee?>>{heuheu} : http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2014/05/monica-lewinsky-speaks >> Maintaining that her affair with Clinton was one between two consenting adults, >> But I will always remain firm on this point: it was a consensual relationship.>>{Kissing_Toast} : That makes no sense on several levels. RCP doesn't care how many polls there are to make an average. If there aren't any new polls coming out, they keep using the old ones.>>{bobnojio} : Exactly It's not on the books, but it's STILL something you pay when you buy the company>>{OhGreatItsHim} : he cant break 40%. The last few weeks was Trumps chance to make a break out and he did nothing with it. If he cant make gains after the last few weeks she has had then I dont really know how he can in the future.>>{OhGreatItsHim} : she's built a campaign infrastructure that can help her and down ballet people while trump hasnt opened many campaign offices.>>{_tx} : Kinda. But more if the other way around. When you buy a company you're buying the pv of some period of future cash flows which if you're buying it, should be more than book. We create goodwill to account for the excess of price over book. The way you worded it makes it sound like goodwill is created by the selling company which isn't technically correct. And accountants like to be technically correct>>{SoTiredOfWinning} : Same with me. If its the IRS asking than it ain't worth shit!>>{AllHailKingJeb} : Yes, he didn't rape her, he just took advantage of her. It's different, but still sad.>>{StoopKidLeavingStoop} : I would rather go with someone who has no charisma than someone who would probably destroy our country's reputation and relationships with other countries should they be elected.>>{heuheu} : How did he take advantage of her? Explain.>>{KalpolIntro} : Do you only pay attention when the post is about a "silver bullet"?>>{squidbillie} : Dem checking in. I'm not "freaked".>>{AllHailKingJeb} : He was in a position of power over her. He convinced her to have sex with him and then threw her under the bus by lying about it and disavowing their romance. Or what she thought was their romance. What he lead her to believe was their romance. It's about the power differential. Do you not understand this dynamic and why it is immoral?>>{heuheu} : Ah, I see, so your reasoning for "taken advantage of" was taken from a page right out of the 3rd wave feminist playbook in which grown women are children and not adults capable of making their choices. I see.>>{AllHailKingJeb} : It's not about grown women being children. It's about it being unethical to have sex with people with whom you have a vast power differential and a position of authority over... I really hope you can think about that a bit.. Even if you want to pretend to not understand or something. Are you a trumper? You're talking like a trumper.>>{Kissing_Toast} : The trendline since September is Clinton -1 and Trump -4 See, I can also pick two random points in time and declare that the "trendline".>>{AfroMidnite} : It's not radical feminism to say that when someone in a position of power has sex with their direct subordinates it's an abuse of that power. If a general is banging one of his soldiers, the general will get in more trouble no matter how consensual it is. Duh.>>{heuheu} : Dude, unethical does not = "taken advantage of" this is where your mistake is. Listen, 3rd wave feminism is in rapid decline and nobody takes it seriously for a reason. And this is exactly why. This argument that women don't want/like to sleep with powerful men is fucking absurd. This idea that a woman sleeping with a man with a higher social status than her is being "taken advantage of" is even more absurd. So yeah, exactly as I suspected you're using 3rd wave feminist arguments which literally nobody even slightly educated takes seriously. That's all I wanted to confirm.>>{Kissing_Toast} : > down ballet people Now I'm imagining Evan Bayh in a tutu>>{OhGreatItsHim} : This isnt the UK. This election isnt the Brexit. The polls dont show a razor thin margin.>>{SanDiegoDude} : I saw a comment from a previous intern on another subreddit regarding that picture. All of those internships are unpaid, so virtually all of those interns' living expenses are being paid for by rich parents, including paying for their kiddos to live in or near DC, a very pricey area to rent in.>>{18544920} : Good thing Bernie is still in the race, if Hillary number is still dropping then these super delegates better fucking do what it is necessary to beat Trump>>{eamus_catuli} : On July 18, 2012, Barack Obama held a 2.6% lead on Mitt Romney in national polling. On July, 18, 2008, Obama held a 4.1% national polling lead on John McCain. On July 18, 2004, George W. Bush *trailed* John Kerry by 2%. A 4% lead this early is actually a great position to be in.>>{18544920} : He only endorsed Hillary to be able to speak at the convention, Hillary is still presumptive nominee, it's not delusional to think there is still possibility Bernie could end up becoming the next Democratic nominee. It's all up to supers, if they knew what is good for America, they'd use their brains.>>{Wetzilla} : A large portion of the ads purchased with that money haven't run yet, since they made the ad buys early to save some money.>>{AllHailKingJeb} : It's been wrong to sexually take advantage of people you have authority over since long before third wave feminism.>>{eamus_catuli} : >It should be a landslide. I disagree with anybody who thinks a landslide is possible in a national election nowadays. The electorate is just far too polarized for that to happen and far too many people simply vote along party lines. Democrats or Republicans could nominate a gorilla for President, and I firmly believe that the ape would immediately get the support of 33% of the voting public. Not to mention the fact that the media hates a landslide - as it attracts fewer eyeballs to the "horserace". They'd do anything in their power to make the ape look somewhat respectable so as to keep it close. Gotta get ratings!>>{heuheu} : It comes directly from the 3rd wave feminist playbook, along with every other bullshit social theory you can find floating around. Back during the early days of 3rd wave feminism feminists started looking for a wave to expand the definition of rape//sexual assault and this is one piles of shit born out of that. Along with "stare rape" and a few other crazy things. Again, nobody takes it seriously. Unethical and he should have known better? Yes, she was taken advantage of? No, not in a million years.>>{heuheu} : It's wrong if you used that power to coerce someone to have sex with you. Bill didn't coerce her, as she's said multiple times. Meaning no, you are wrong and will remain wrong.>>{Borigrad} : Yes, it's incredibly unethical for a person in a position of power to have sex with subordinate, there is no one with more power than the President. There is absolutely no way to determine what would of happened to Monica Lewinsky had she said no, she could be fired, black balled, given extra stressful jobs or be punished in other ways. The fact you can't understand that, is hilarious.>>{heuheu} : Again, unethical? Yes, taken advantage of? No. She's said multiple times she was not coerced or forced in any way. This isn't tumblr, this argument isn't going to work here.>>{kstinfo} : That Billy has had his willy in a knot since Monica is beyond belief.>>{eamus_catuli} : >There is no other explanation than that she is a fucking terrible candidate. There's actually a quite good explanation - the race has just begun, for christ's sake! You're comparing a final result after months of campaigning, stumping, debates, etc. to a race where we haven't even had party conventions yet. I just showed you that Obama led McCain by 4% on this very same date in 2008. By your own logic, he was a terrible fucking candidate.>>{AllHailKingJeb} : Sigh. You should really think about this more. Seriously. There's a reason nobody but MRAs think the way you do. You've been hanging around redpillers too much. I can't explain it any more really.. Don't have sex with people you have immense authority over. It's wrong. It's like coercion, just because of the power differential. They might not even feel like they can say no. They might be afraid to. Afraid they would lose their job or suffer other consequences. Plus on top of all that he lied to her.>>{heuheu} : Not an MRA, but solid attempt at that ad hominem because your argument is horrible. So let me just repeat this one more time. Unethical? Yes, taken advantage of? Absolutely not. This is not tumblr, your arguments do not work here. She has said multiple times she was not coerced or forced in any way, and you throwing out a string of labels and strawmen isn't going to change these basic facts. Your cult has no power here. You don't even know what a redpiller is, which tells me everything I need to know about you.>>{AllHailKingJeb} : Why do you think it was unethical? You seem hung up on the language "taken advantage of" what does that mean to you? What does it mean to you to take advantage of someone or be taken advantage of? I haven't made any strawmen and I'm not making any ad Homs either. I did call you an MRA but I can't make an ad him because you haven't made any arguments really other than calling me a 3rd wave feminist.. Just tell me why you think it was unethical and what "taken advantage of" means to you.>>{heuheu} : >> Why do you think it was unethical? Because he was the president and a married man. >> You seem hung up on the language "taken advantage of" what does that mean to you? What does it mean to you to take advantage of someone or be taken advantage of? I reject literally every single attempt by feminism to expand or change the definitions of rape or sexual assault or anything related to consent. >> I haven't made any strawmen and I'm not making any ad Homs either. I did call you an MRA but I can't make an ad him because you haven't made any arguments really other than calling me a 3rd wave feminist.. Didn't call you a 3rd waver, I said your argument was from 3rd wave feminism. >> Just tell me why you think it was unethical and what "taken advantage of" means to you. I explained what unethical is. Taken advantage of to me means coerced or put in a position where she could not refuse. A consensual sexual relationship is not being taken advantage of.>>{AllHailKingJeb} : I didn't describe it as sexual assault or rape though. Why is it wrong for the President to have sex with a young intern? What if she was afraid of saying no? Anyone can always say no. By your definition there's no such thing as taking advantage of anyone ever. Is that not taking advantage of a position of authority?>>{heuheu} : >> Why is it wrong for the President to have sex with a young intern? Because he is her superior, you seem to be misunderstanding me. I'm not saying the potential for being taken advantage of isn't there, I'm saying it does not apply to this case and she's already said this. >> What if she was afraid of saying no? Anyone can always say no. By your definition there's no such thing as taking advantage of anyone ever. Again, she has soundly refuted this argument and confirmed this wasn't the case. I am not saying the potential isn't there, I am saying this case is not an example of that. >> Is that not taking advantage of a position of authority? No, it's not unless you can prove she was coerced in any way, which she's already refuted.>>{AllHailKingJeb} : No, she said he DID take advantage of her. That's her own words.>>{heuheu} : She's talking about the fucking aftermath, dude. Read the next fucking line. He absolutely scapegoated and took advantage of his position in the aftermath.>>{heuheu} : She very, very clearly is. Even so, I'd argue she was an adult capable of making her own choices, she knew what she was doing and she is every bit as much to blame as he was.>>{AllHailKingJeb} : Learn to read. You're not serious at all I'm done.>>{turtlewink} : i thought the resident redditors liked to complain about how reddit doesn't represent the majority. You types are making this too easy, c'mon...>>{cynicallad} : It's not a feminist argument. I'm a straight guy. If my sexy, powerful lady boss hit on me I'd be flattered, probably down, but the thought of "If I don't do this my career might be fucked" would also occur to me. The whiff of coercion makes it questionable. It's got nothing to do with me being a child.>>{Neglectful_Stranger} : He apparently took advantage of more women than just Monica.>>{AllHailKingJeb} : It seems very likely that he did. I just think maybe just looking on this one very public very obvious case we can see a big problem with how the Clintons treat people. Bill pretended to care about Monica and tossed her aside like a used condom. She's human and that's fucking awful. Even if ALLLLL of the other accusations are false.. Hillary never did say a word of support for Monica. She stood by Bill in his treating Monica this way. Bill's treatment of Monica was very public and it seems to me like he should also have made a public apology for it. This is how a Clinton treats someone he is supposedly FOND of. How do they treat everyone else, then? It's awful to think this will be the way the President will treat Americans. They have shown no remorse. We are so fucked.>>{HolyRomanPrince} : I mean... does his gear even work properly anymore?>>{jonnyp11} : >Mr Clinton "took advantage of her", she said, but she insisted that the relationship was completely consensual. >She said: "Sure, my boss took advantage of me, but I will always remain firm on this point: it was a consensual relationship. >"Any 'abuse' came in the aftermath, when I was made a scapegoat in order to protect his powerful position That's your own citation disagreeing with you, and agreeing with him. You indeed do have severe reading comprehension issues if you can't understand these simple statements. The relationship was immoral and unprofessional, but consensual, and the advantage was taken by throwing her under bus to protect himself.>>{AllHailKingJeb} : Not at all, no. But you'll just believe whatever you want anyway that's the way the Clinton cult works.>>{jonnyp11} : I like how you responded to being told you have reading comp issues by answering a question that doesn't exist. Says the guy who doesn't believe/understand the article he linked as a source>>{blancs50} : PDE5 inhibitors work wonders, assuming his heart is healthy enough for sex.>>{jonnyp11} : Great ~~rebuild~~ rebutle (autocorrect), I applaud your debate skills, and reading comprehension>>{AllHailKingJeb} : Are you still talking? Why? Do you have no shame?>>{jonnyp11} : Coming from the guy disagreeing with his own sources? I'm having fun laughing as you squirm>>{gaeuvyen} : Just give Bill male interns, or Rosie O'donnel.>>{gaeuvyen} : He should really ask his doctor if his heart is healthy enough for sex.[/INST]['>>{pilihansesaat} : How much does Trump claim his golf courses are worth? It depends who needs to know.', '>>{turtledan87} : That\'s generally how being a business man works? "Everything is worth what it\'s purchaser will pay for it"', ">>{NotFooledbyFools} : Trump just fucked himself. Taxman is gonna come a knockin'.", ">>{janzeera} : Just ask him. Unless, of course, you're an accessor...", '>>{Mizukiiii} : This is common for pretty much every business. There is a calculated valuation for tax purposes and a different valuation for prospective buyers in case of a merger/acquisition.', '>>{trogon} : Yeah, it looks like some counties need to do some property reassessments.', '>>{Agedwithaview} : TIL Donald is much more skilled at talking out of both sides of his mouth than I gave him credit. I think I agree that nothing illegal is involved but you have to give props to him for pushing the envelope..... I am curious which numbers he uses when talking to lenders....', ">>{Byzantine279} : But for the love of god don't let the tax guy see the 2nd one.", '>>{Mizukiiii} : Is it really pushing the envelope if everyone does it? The past 3 companies I have worked for all have two separate books.', ">>{whatnowdog} : I would like to see the tax laws changed so that a company's tax filing is what they show in their financial statements to shareholders. Trump must be a bad businessman if he paid $150 million plus a lot of money for improvements for the Doral but now says it is only worth $75 million. To all the Trump supporters this is why you pay more taxes because the rich get out of paying their fair share.", '>>{bobnojio} : That\'s not how any of this works You need to realize that goodwill style pricing/additives aren\'t taxable You buy a company? It has 3 million in assets (computers, desks, etc). Then you pay for the goodwill - customer accounts/information, staff, and "profit" Nobody would want to sell for pure asset value, because that\'s what they have now. Goodwill is priced, but not taxable', ">>{_tx} : Goodwill doesn't even exist in IFRS only US GAAP. That said, the simplest difference is that book value generally is historically based and adjusted for depreciation.", ">>{bobnojio} : Exactly It's not on the books, but it's STILL something you pay when you buy the company", ">>{_tx} : Kinda. But more if the other way around. When you buy a company you're buying the pv of some period of future cash flows which if you're buying it, should be more than book. We create goodwill to account for the excess of price over book. The way you worded it makes it sound like goodwill is created by the selling company which isn't technically correct. And accountants like to be technically correct", ">>{SoTiredOfWinning} : Same with me. If its the IRS asking than it ain't worth shit!", '>>{KalpolIntro} : Do you only pay attention when the post is about a "silver bullet"?']['>>{Altwaal} : Even Dems freaked about Bill getting female interns if Hillary wins.', ">>{AllHailKingJeb} : I mean they should be he took advantage of Monica it would be sad to see other young women taken advantage of like that. But that's probably not why.", '>>{heuheu} : Had consensual sex with most powerful man in the world. "taken advantage of."', ">>{AllHailKingJeb} : Do you have a point at all. You're aware of course that Monica herself has said he took advantage of her.", '>>{AllHailKingJeb} : Censorship sucks. Why do you wanna be a censor?', ">>{Stuart98} : Because daily caller articles are worthless? Salon, breitbart, redstate, etc are also worthless. HuffPo's been banned before. The sub already bans blogs.", '>>{heuheu} : http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2014/05/monica-lewinsky-speaks >> Maintaining that her affair with Clinton was one between two consenting adults, >> But I will always remain firm on this point: it was a consensual relationship.', ">>{AllHailKingJeb} : Yes, he didn't rape her, he just took advantage of her. It's different, but still sad.", '>>{heuheu} : How did he take advantage of her? Explain.', '>>{squidbillie} : Dem checking in. I\'m not "freaked".', ">>{AllHailKingJeb} : He was in a position of power over her. He convinced her to have sex with him and then threw her under the bus by lying about it and disavowing their romance. Or what she thought was their romance. What he lead her to believe was their romance. It's about the power differential. Do you not understand this dynamic and why it is immoral?", '>>{heuheu} : Ah, I see, so your reasoning for "taken advantage of" was taken from a page right out of the 3rd wave feminist playbook in which grown women are children and not adults capable of making their choices. I see.', ">>{AllHailKingJeb} : It's not about grown women being children. It's about it being unethical to have sex with people with whom you have a vast power differential and a position of authority over... I really hope you can think about that a bit.. Even if you want to pretend to not understand or something. Are you a trumper? You're talking like a trumper.", ">>{AfroMidnite} : It's not radical feminism to say that when someone in a position of power has sex with their direct subordinates it's an abuse of that power. If a general is banging one of his soldiers, the general will get in more trouble no matter how consensual it is. Duh.", '>>{heuheu} : Dude, unethical does not = "taken advantage of" this is where your mistake is. Listen, 3rd wave feminism is in rapid decline and nobody takes it seriously for a reason. And this is exactly why. This argument that women don\'t want/like to sleep with powerful men is fucking absurd. This idea that a woman sleeping with a man with a higher social status than her is being "taken advantage of" is even more absurd. So yeah, exactly as I suspected you\'re using 3rd wave feminist arguments which literally nobody even slightly educated takes seriously. That\'s all I wanted to confirm.', ">>{AllHailKingJeb} : It's been wrong to sexually take advantage of people you have authority over since long before third wave feminism.", '>>{heuheu} : It comes directly from the 3rd wave feminist playbook, along with every other bullshit social theory you can find floating around. Back during the early days of 3rd wave feminism feminists started looking for a wave to expand the definition of rape//sexual assault and this is one piles of shit born out of that. Along with "stare rape" and a few other crazy things. Again, nobody takes it seriously. Unethical and he should have known better? Yes, she was taken advantage of? No, not in a million years.', ">>{heuheu} : It's wrong if you used that power to coerce someone to have sex with you. Bill didn't coerce her, as she's said multiple times. Meaning no, you are wrong and will remain wrong.", ">>{Borigrad} : Yes, it's incredibly unethical for a person in a position of power to have sex with subordinate, there is no one with more power than the President. There is absolutely no way to determine what would of happened to Monica Lewinsky had she said no, she could be fired, black balled, given extra stressful jobs or be punished in other ways. The fact you can't understand that, is hilarious.", ">>{heuheu} : Again, unethical? Yes, taken advantage of? No. She's said multiple times she was not coerced or forced in any way. This isn't tumblr, this argument isn't going to work here.", '>>{kstinfo} : That Billy has had his willy in a knot since Monica is beyond belief.', ">>{AllHailKingJeb} : Sigh. You should really think about this more. Seriously. There's a reason nobody but MRAs think the way you do. You've been hanging around redpillers too much. I can't explain it any more really.. Don't have sex with people you have immense authority over. It's wrong. It's like coercion, just because of the power differential. They might not even feel like they can say no. They might be afraid to. Afraid they would lose their job or suffer other consequences. Plus on top of all that he lied to her.", ">>{heuheu} : Not an MRA, but solid attempt at that ad hominem because your argument is horrible. So let me just repeat this one more time. Unethical? Yes, taken advantage of? Absolutely not. This is not tumblr, your arguments do not work here. She has said multiple times she was not coerced or forced in any way, and you throwing out a string of labels and strawmen isn't going to change these basic facts. Your cult has no power here. You don't even know what a redpiller is, which tells me everything I need to know about you.", '>>{AllHailKingJeb} : Why do you think it was unethical? You seem hung up on the language "taken advantage of" what does that mean to you? What does it mean to you to take advantage of someone or be taken advantage of? I haven\'t made any strawmen and I\'m not making any ad Homs either. I did call you an MRA but I can\'t make an ad him because you haven\'t made any arguments really other than calling me a 3rd wave feminist.. Just tell me why you think it was unethical and what "taken advantage of" means to you.', '>>{heuheu} : >> Why do you think it was unethical? Because he was the president and a married man. >> You seem hung up on the language "taken advantage of" what does that mean to you? What does it mean to you to take advantage of someone or be taken advantage of? I reject literally every single attempt by feminism to expand or change the definitions of rape or sexual assault or anything related to consent. >> I haven\'t made any strawmen and I\'m not making any ad Homs either. I did call you an MRA but I can\'t make an ad him because you haven\'t made any arguments really other than calling me a 3rd wave feminist.. Didn\'t call you a 3rd waver, I said your argument was from 3rd wave feminism. >> Just tell me why you think it was unethical and what "taken advantage of" means to you. I explained what unethical is. Taken advantage of to me means coerced or put in a position where she could not refuse. A consensual sexual relationship is not being taken advantage of.', ">>{AllHailKingJeb} : I didn't describe it as sexual assault or rape though. Why is it wrong for the President to have sex with a young intern? What if she was afraid of saying no? Anyone can always say no. By your definition there's no such thing as taking advantage of anyone ever. Is that not taking advantage of a position of authority?", ">>{heuheu} : >> Why is it wrong for the President to have sex with a young intern? Because he is her superior, you seem to be misunderstanding me. I'm not saying the potential for being taken advantage of isn't there, I'm saying it does not apply to this case and she's already said this. >> What if she was afraid of saying no? Anyone can always say no. By your definition there's no such thing as taking advantage of anyone ever. Again, she has soundly refuted this argument and confirmed this wasn't the case. I am not saying the potential isn't there, I am saying this case is not an example of that. >> Is that not taking advantage of a position of authority? No, it's not unless you can prove she was coerced in any way, which she's already refuted.", ">>{AllHailKingJeb} : No, she said he DID take advantage of her. That's her own words.", ">>{heuheu} : She's talking about the fucking aftermath, dude. Read the next fucking line. He absolutely scapegoated and took advantage of his position in the aftermath.", ">>{heuheu} : She very, very clearly is. Even so, I'd argue she was an adult capable of making her own choices, she knew what she was doing and she is every bit as much to blame as he was.", ">>{AllHailKingJeb} : Learn to read. You're not serious at all I'm done.", ">>{turtlewink} : i thought the resident redditors liked to complain about how reddit doesn't represent the majority. You types are making this too easy, c'mon...", '>>{cynicallad} : It\'s not a feminist argument. I\'m a straight guy. If my sexy, powerful lady boss hit on me I\'d be flattered, probably down, but the thought of "If I don\'t do this my career might be fucked" would also occur to me. The whiff of coercion makes it questionable. It\'s got nothing to do with me being a child.', '>>{Neglectful_Stranger} : He apparently took advantage of more women than just Monica.', ">>{AllHailKingJeb} : It seems very likely that he did. I just think maybe just looking on this one very public very obvious case we can see a big problem with how the Clintons treat people. Bill pretended to care about Monica and tossed her aside like a used condom. She's human and that's fucking awful. Even if ALLLLL of the other accusations are false.. Hillary never did say a word of support for Monica. She stood by Bill in his treating Monica this way. Bill's treatment of Monica was very public and it seems to me like he should also have made a public apology for it. This is how a Clinton treats someone he is supposedly FOND of. How do they treat everyone else, then? It's awful to think this will be the way the President will treat Americans. They have shown no remorse. We are so fucked.", '>>{HolyRomanPrince} : I mean... does his gear even work properly anymore?', '>>{jonnyp11} : >Mr Clinton "took advantage of her", she said, but she insisted that the relationship was completely consensual. >She said: "Sure, my boss took advantage of me, but I will always remain firm on this point: it was a consensual relationship. >"Any \'abuse\' came in the aftermath, when I was made a scapegoat in order to protect his powerful position That\'s your own citation disagreeing with you, and agreeing with him. You indeed do have severe reading comprehension issues if you can\'t understand these simple statements. The relationship was immoral and unprofessional, but consensual, and the advantage was taken by throwing her under bus to protect himself.', ">>{AllHailKingJeb} : Not at all, no. But you'll just believe whatever you want anyway that's the way the Clinton cult works.", ">>{jonnyp11} : I like how you responded to being told you have reading comp issues by answering a question that doesn't exist. Says the guy who doesn't believe/understand the article he linked as a source", '>>{blancs50} : PDE5 inhibitors work wonders, assuming his heart is healthy enough for sex.', '>>{jonnyp11} : Great ~~rebuild~~ rebutle (autocorrect), I applaud your debate skills, and reading comprehension', '>>{AllHailKingJeb} : Are you still talking? Why? Do you have no shame?', ">>{jonnyp11} : Coming from the guy disagreeing with his own sources? I'm having fun laughing as you squirm", ">>{gaeuvyen} : Just give Bill male interns, or Rosie O'donnel.", '>>{gaeuvyen} : He should really ask his doctor if his heart is healthy enough for sex.']['>>{0ne_Word} : All I could think of as I read that title was this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BX3bN5YeiQs', ">>{drucifer27} : She's also had a nonstop whirlwind of mostly negative press over the past 3 weeks, and she's still maintaining leads in almost every poll. But that storm is subsiding and she's got a powerhouse lineup of speakers at the convention next week who will be making her out to be the greatest leader in a generation, while the RNC is looking to be an unmitigated disaster. Look for her numbers to rebound heartily in the coming weeks.", ">>{axelrods_shoe} : She's collapsing. If she doesn't rebound shortly, she will lose", '>>{KopOut} : And her lead in the swing states (according to this article) has grown by 2 points, up 40% over last month...', ">>{jpmon} : I can't believe how White this convention crowd is. It's ridiculous", ">>{johnthebold2} : Maybe if Trump didn't say so much dumb shit he wouldn't get beatbup on so much.", '>>{Ddog312} : Not to mention she outspent him 7 to 1!', '>>{DrewChambersDC} : Powerhouse lineup like the mother of Michael Brown 😂', '>>{Kissing_Toast} : And she increased her lead from 5 points to 7 in those states that she is outspending him in. So basically she is losing some votes in Texas and Alabama?', ">>{Kissing_Toast} : > The old joke is that Hillary's poll numbers never go up Except for those [four times her numbers went up during primary polling](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_democratic_presidential_nomination-3824.html) and [four times during general election polling](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html)", '>>{drucifer27} : And like...Bill Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, President Obama, and Michelle Obama.', ">>{drucifer27} : Jesus, the persecution complex is strong with this one. Can't handle a dissenting argument? Don't post. >The problem is she isn't blowing him away. Exactly. See my original post. She's been battered by a constant stream of negative press for several weeks. That'll take a toll on your ratings. But that shitstorm has subsided somewhat and the convention is next week. She'll more than likely be leading him by blowout margins by the first week of August if historical polling trends hold true.", ">>{Kissing_Toast} : Clinton's 2 points are statistical noise, Trump's 3 points aren't?", '>>{boogietime} : But I thought she was going with the "I\'m a political outsider" routine? Or is that over since Sanders bent a knee?', ">>{Kissing_Toast} : That makes no sense on several levels. RCP doesn't care how many polls there are to make an average. If there aren't any new polls coming out, they keep using the old ones.", '>>{OhGreatItsHim} : he cant break 40%. The last few weeks was Trumps chance to make a break out and he did nothing with it. If he cant make gains after the last few weeks she has had then I dont really know how he can in the future.', ">>{OhGreatItsHim} : she's built a campaign infrastructure that can help her and down ballet people while trump hasnt opened many campaign offices.", ">>{StoopKidLeavingStoop} : I would rather go with someone who has no charisma than someone who would probably destroy our country's reputation and relationships with other countries should they be elected.", '>>{Kissing_Toast} : The trendline since September is Clinton -1 and Trump -4 See, I can also pick two random points in time and declare that the "trendline".', ">>{Kissing_Toast} : > down ballet people Now I'm imagining Evan Bayh in a tutu", '>>{OhGreatItsHim} : This isnt the UK. This election isnt the Brexit. The polls dont show a razor thin margin.', ">>{SanDiegoDude} : I saw a comment from a previous intern on another subreddit regarding that picture. All of those internships are unpaid, so virtually all of those interns' living expenses are being paid for by rich parents, including paying for their kiddos to live in or near DC, a very pricey area to rent in.", '>>{18544920} : Good thing Bernie is still in the race, if Hillary number is still dropping then these super delegates better fucking do what it is necessary to beat Trump', '>>{eamus_catuli} : On July 18, 2012, Barack Obama held a 2.6% lead on Mitt Romney in national polling. On July, 18, 2008, Obama held a 4.1% national polling lead on John McCain. On July 18, 2004, George W. Bush *trailed* John Kerry by 2%. A 4% lead this early is actually a great position to be in.', ">>{18544920} : He only endorsed Hillary to be able to speak at the convention, Hillary is still presumptive nominee, it's not delusional to think there is still possibility Bernie could end up becoming the next Democratic nominee. It's all up to supers, if they knew what is good for America, they'd use their brains.", ">>{Wetzilla} : A large portion of the ads purchased with that money haven't run yet, since they made the ad buys early to save some money.", '>>{eamus_catuli} : >It should be a landslide. I disagree with anybody who thinks a landslide is possible in a national election nowadays. The electorate is just far too polarized for that to happen and far too many people simply vote along party lines. Democrats or Republicans could nominate a gorilla for President, and I firmly believe that the ape would immediately get the support of 33% of the voting public. Not to mention the fact that the media hates a landslide - as it attracts fewer eyeballs to the "horserace". They\'d do anything in their power to make the ape look somewhat respectable so as to keep it close. Gotta get ratings!', ">>{eamus_catuli} : >There is no other explanation than that she is a fucking terrible candidate. There's actually a quite good explanation - the race has just begun, for christ's sake! You're comparing a final result after months of campaigning, stumping, debates, etc. to a race where we haven't even had party conventions yet. I just showed you that Obama led McCain by 4% on this very same date in 2008. By your own logic, he was a terrible fucking candidate."]</s> |
<s>[INST]>>{kae7} : This notification popped up suddenly. What does it means? Which sensor ?>>{pmrr} : These are badly used placeholders the developer had intended to be proper messages that would tell you the problem. Googling for those constants doesn't come back with much, which would suggest it's a new issue and possibly a bug that has/will be fixed with an iOS point update (I'm assuming it's Apple). Is it happening frequently?>>{NotSwedishBacon} : It's the sensor which detects which sensor has failed /s>>{Damnmorrisdancer} : I agree. It's bad software practice from the developers. Nothing to do with your physical iPhone.>>{Notcow} : It appears that you may need to recalibrate some sensors. Apparently there is a way to do this within the Compass app. http://www.macworld.com/article/2055384/how-to-recalibrate-the-motion-sensors-in-your-iphone-5s.html >You can try to fix...by force-quitting and relaunching Compass to trigger the calibration screen, and you’ll have the best luck if you calibrate at least several feet away from any other magnetic or electronic devices Let me know the result.>>{Iammattieee} : Looks like something you would see if you're in the iOS beta.>>{dojomann} : But surely it needs a sensor sensor sensor? It's sensors all the way down...>>{squarefrog} : It's common to use these as references to a string localisation file. If for some reason the file is not included, then the references are used instead. Very easy to overlook unfortunately as the compiler doesn't flag it up.>>{ChadMoran} : There's a good chance these are keys for an I18n/L10n file that is filled up by someone else for localization. Chances are whoever was supposed to fill out the localization file didn't do so. Developer did the right thing here.>>{FictionaI} : I don't have any info on your problem, but was just curious if you would link your wallpaper? Thank you.>>{xtrumpclimbs} : Cars have this kind of double checks in the sensors, for instance for the exhaust (lambda sensor has a sensor that usually gives errors in VAG cars).>>{codevil} : I know that Google is known to have better engineering than Apple but I didn't know that Apple engineering was *this* bad.>>{NotSwedishBacon} : Haha VAG cars, makes me chuckle every time.>>{LastGuardianStanding} : It's the assistive touch you have active. Try disabling and re-enabling the feature.>>{mrtherapist} : Or turn the phone off then back on instead of doing a bunch of troubleshooting for a random glitch that probably happened because the phone hasn't been rebooted in a month.>>{dilln} : Maybe the developer is responsible for updating the localization file>>{emersonlakeandlagoon} : It's so bad that people fill up the stores to buy equipment that costs twice as much as the competition. I'm posting this from a two and a half year old 6+ and I also have a six year old MacBook Air.>>{exjr_} : Wait, OP, is this a 7? Some 7 and 7+ actually tell you when the home button fails, and is most likely telling you that>>{SimShade} : Might get downvoted since my comment offers no help, which I truly apologize for... but, wallpaper?>>{branvan859} : *someone dies in the street after being run over by a bus* "That's so sad. That's a cute dress though. I wonder where she got that.">>{LeCroqueMitaine} : Go to Apple store they will fix it for free. It's not normal !>>{SimShade} : lmao Damn, miscellaneous notifications now equate to demises. Have an upvote for making me chuckle.>>{apanopticon} : It looks like artwork associated with the last Radiohead album. Check out their instagram.>>{jeremec} : It's just a missing localized string. Not a placeholder per say. That's probably the string lookup key.>>{dilln} : How come? A lot of devs just update it themselves with new strings in the copy deck>>{mrcaptncrunch} : Buggy software with memory leaks actually can cause issues and just rebooting helps. Let me guess, user?>>{AlexMeanberg} : I work in IT, and I was making a joke. Sorry you did not like 🙇>>{mrtherapist} : Development actually. Nothing worse than someone demanding server length uptimes from a phone they play Clash of Clans on. Reboot and give the system a refresh then talk to me about bugs. Why bug fix some fringe problem relating to having the device on for a month without rebooting when there are more important bugs?>>{Notcow} : He didn't ask how to fix it, he asked "what does it mean." I like to know the cause of errors too, in case it happens again. If the solution I posted solves the problem, great, was just a problem with the Compass app. If it doesn't, back to looking for solutions. Maybe his phone storage is going bad. Or his SD card is about to kick it.>>{mrcaptncrunch} : 😓 So many people complain with the same thing, it's hard sometimes.>>{AlexMeanberg} : I agree. Chances are, you're already putting out several other fires, when silly bugs like that pop up.>>{DanBennett} : Unlikely, as that error has language strings. OPs error does not.[/INST]['>>{kae7} : This notification popped up suddenly. What does it means? Which sensor ?', ">>{pmrr} : These are badly used placeholders the developer had intended to be proper messages that would tell you the problem. Googling for those constants doesn't come back with much, which would suggest it's a new issue and possibly a bug that has/will be fixed with an iOS point update (I'm assuming it's Apple). Is it happening frequently?", ">>{NotSwedishBacon} : It's the sensor which detects which sensor has failed /s", ">>{Damnmorrisdancer} : I agree. It's bad software practice from the developers. Nothing to do with your physical iPhone.", '>>{Notcow} : It appears that you may need to recalibrate some sensors. Apparently there is a way to do this within the Compass app. http://www.macworld.com/article/2055384/how-to-recalibrate-the-motion-sensors-in-your-iphone-5s.html >You can try to fix...by force-quitting and relaunching Compass to trigger the calibration screen, and you’ll have the best luck if you calibrate at least several feet away from any other magnetic or electronic devices Let me know the result.', ">>{Iammattieee} : Looks like something you would see if you're in the iOS beta.", ">>{dojomann} : But surely it needs a sensor sensor sensor? It's sensors all the way down...", ">>{squarefrog} : It's common to use these as references to a string localisation file. If for some reason the file is not included, then the references are used instead. Very easy to overlook unfortunately as the compiler doesn't flag it up.", ">>{ChadMoran} : There's a good chance these are keys for an I18n/L10n file that is filled up by someone else for localization. Chances are whoever was supposed to fill out the localization file didn't do so. Developer did the right thing here.", ">>{FictionaI} : I don't have any info on your problem, but was just curious if you would link your wallpaper? Thank you.", '>>{xtrumpclimbs} : Cars have this kind of double checks in the sensors, for instance for the exhaust (lambda sensor has a sensor that usually gives errors in VAG cars).', ">>{codevil} : I know that Google is known to have better engineering than Apple but I didn't know that Apple engineering was *this* bad.", '>>{NotSwedishBacon} : Haha VAG cars, makes me chuckle every time.', ">>{LastGuardianStanding} : It's the assistive touch you have active. Try disabling and re-enabling the feature.", ">>{mrtherapist} : Or turn the phone off then back on instead of doing a bunch of troubleshooting for a random glitch that probably happened because the phone hasn't been rebooted in a month.", '>>{dilln} : Maybe the developer is responsible for updating the localization file', ">>{emersonlakeandlagoon} : It's so bad that people fill up the stores to buy equipment that costs twice as much as the competition. I'm posting this from a two and a half year old 6+ and I also have a six year old MacBook Air.", '>>{exjr_} : Wait, OP, is this a 7? Some 7 and 7+ actually tell you when the home button fails, and is most likely telling you that', '>>{SimShade} : Might get downvoted since my comment offers no help, which I truly apologize for... but, wallpaper?', '>>{branvan859} : *someone dies in the street after being run over by a bus* "That\'s so sad. That\'s a cute dress though. I wonder where she got that."', ">>{LeCroqueMitaine} : Go to Apple store they will fix it for free. It's not normal !", '>>{SimShade} : lmao Damn, miscellaneous notifications now equate to demises. Have an upvote for making me chuckle.', '>>{apanopticon} : It looks like artwork associated with the last Radiohead album. Check out their instagram.', ">>{jeremec} : It's just a missing localized string. Not a placeholder per say. That's probably the string lookup key.", '>>{dilln} : How come? A lot of devs just update it themselves with new strings in the copy deck', '>>{mrcaptncrunch} : Buggy software with memory leaks actually can cause issues and just rebooting helps. Let me guess, user?', '>>{AlexMeanberg} : I work in IT, and I was making a joke. Sorry you did not like 🙇', '>>{mrtherapist} : Development actually. Nothing worse than someone demanding server length uptimes from a phone they play Clash of Clans on. Reboot and give the system a refresh then talk to me about bugs. Why bug fix some fringe problem relating to having the device on for a month without rebooting when there are more important bugs?', '>>{Notcow} : He didn\'t ask how to fix it, he asked "what does it mean." I like to know the cause of errors too, in case it happens again. If the solution I posted solves the problem, great, was just a problem with the Compass app. If it doesn\'t, back to looking for solutions. Maybe his phone storage is going bad. Or his SD card is about to kick it.', ">>{mrcaptncrunch} : 😓 So many people complain with the same thing, it's hard sometimes.", ">>{AlexMeanberg} : I agree. Chances are, you're already putting out several other fires, when silly bugs like that pop up.", '>>{DanBennett} : Unlikely, as that error has language strings. OPs error does not.']</s> |
<s>[INST]>>{JuanFutbol} : Results slow in Puerto Rico as voters face long lines: "But the local party told MSNBC that the Sanders campaign had requested fewer stations.">>{dirk-41} : Shameful hypocrisy on the part of the Sanders campaign. This kind of voter suppression by a campaign should not be tolerated.>>{xspace_ghostx} : *mic drop* Even Demorats are jumping ship and drowning in this disaster.>>{Clgrv} : I've had a similar type of protector with those button things and it was a complete piece of shit. I might've had a dodgy one, so it's purely anecdotal, but it put me off ever trying them again.>>{iameatingwatermelon} : Poor Clinton. Everyone seems to be getting tired of being thrown under the bus. Why can't they just be more patient with her?>>{thisxisxlife} : I did use one of them. They were so so. It may have been the particular screen that I used, but the buttons would work like 85% of the time. However, the area of the screen that the buttons were supposed to trigger, wouldn't work if I actually tapped it. If I'm not being clear: for example the bottom left corner of the phone would emulate the top left hand corner of the screen. If the bottom left didn't work (that 15% of the time) I would give up and tap the actual top left hand corner of the screen, but for whatever reason that part of my screen was kind of "disabled" or just very unresponsive. Tl;dr my experience was that it was shoddy at best. It's fun for a while, but if it's not functional it's not a huge deal to live without.>>{Funkbass} : Idea: you should be able to force touch a ringing alarm notification to choose the amount of time to snooze for.>>{Bronson15} : I liked mine when I had it. Only issue was every time I pressed the "123" button it would trigger the back button.>>{dmd} : I've never used a screen protector on an iPhone since 3, and have never had a single scratch. I'm not sure what the point of them is any more.>>{rdevaughn} : Time to test the limits of the Clintonistas' cognitive dissonance, in 3... 2... 1...>>{third_najarian} : Except Earnest also said: >He's in a tough spot, and he's the one who will be in a position to defend his actions in the face of significant criticism from a variety of legal experts, including individuals who served in senior Department of Justice positions in administrations led by presidents in both parties. Which means it's possible Obama just thinks Comey is inept.>>{Simoni_Deo} : The only station needed is the one with the truth.>>{WithoutCaution} : I'm not coherent enough to operate the alarm functions as they are now when I wake up. If I were alert enough to use force touch to change the snooze time, I'd just turn the damn thing off and get up.>>{suseu} : The Problems With Using The Terrorist Watch List To Ban Gun Sales>>{Sevigor} : Oh the shills are trying their hardest to downvote this.>>{vswr} : This is what I was thinking. I'm barely able to push the lock button to snooze it....can't even pick it up to see the screen to snooze.>>{TheEarsHaveWalls} : It still needs a snooze time adjuster for when I set it in the first place. Current snooze is like 9 minutes right? I'd like to change it to 5 or 10 if I wanted to.>>{yee12367222} : Does Trump have a nickname for Sanders yet? Might I suggest Suppressor Sanders?>>{IbanezDavy} : It's because they are sexists. That must be the only logically conclusion anyone anywhere can draw ^^^/s>>{kiarra33} : It's a pretty big deal when Obama turns on you, he's probably finally getting tired if her dragging his legacy threw the mud...>>{treyhunna83} : Lol. Nah we like our stable fully updated phones. 😂>>{IbanezDavy} : Or competent enough...and Obama apparently is confident enough in Comey not to have to defend him much.>>{FThumb} : We'll accuse him of what we're guilty of. Let's see if anyone runs with it. "It's too crazy. No one is that stupid!" MSNBC: BREAKING: Sanders Hates Democratic Process - Asks Officials To Cut Polling Stations By 2/3rds!!>>{fer_d} : Funny, because the other 99.99% of the Hill's anti-CLinton articles are just stellar.>>{ronnieww3} : I think he went with Crazy Bernie. He could have done better but it works.>>{iameatingwatermelon} : They are also all child rapists who work for Russia.>>{Sevigor} : > dragging his legacy threw the mud... It honestly is getting to the point where she really is doing that.>>{tryingtobeobjective3} : Reports from the ground completely contradict the claim just aired on MSNBC, and say that the Hillary campaign was the one that didn't have enough poll workers More background info http://heavy.com/news/2016/06/puerto-rico-primary-election-fraud-voter-suppression-polling-places-workers-certified-bernie-sanders/ *edited to add pics from one of the polling places http://imgur.com/kELRsg5 http://imgur.com/a/WbIj4 from @KurtHackbarth and @RamonFebus>>{regalager1986} : Doesn't really look any different than the $25 tempered glass I just got from the Verizon store when I bought my 6S>>{Engineer_daddy91} : Find a way to do it without taking away due process.>>{ltrout99} : My 7+ is jailbroken and just as stable as it was before I jailbroke it.>>{Kallure} : Not hyper glass. However, as a former Zagg user who switched over to a TechArmor tempered glass protector, I can speak to at least those and say I will never go back to Zagg.>>{deeprogrammed} : It's an idea that sounds good at first but doesn't make sense when you look at the specifics. I hope Trump backs away from this idea>>{AgoraiosBum} : The letter itself is pretty bland. The media and everyone's reaction to it is what is way out of proportion.>>{treyhunna83} : Debatable. Its cool til it 'breaks'. 😂>>{AreWeNotDoinPhrasing} : Because most people don’t sit at home and leave their phone on a desk all day. If it ever goes into a pocket it will get micro scrathes.>>{ltrout99} : I legit read that twice and i kept reading it as stable. Thanks for pointing that out. 😂>>{third_najarian} : If Obama openly criticized Comey everyone would say he's interfering with an ongoing investigation.>>{mclumber1} : Hard to do. If a person is dangerous enough to take away their right to own a gun, then they should be arrested and charged with a crime.>>{yourconscienceondrug} : Disposition Matrix Terrorist Watch List No Fly List WTF is all this bullshit? Why are we simply saying, ok obama, we know you do not have evidence to convict or even indict these people, but go right ahead and skip due process and take away their rights or kill them regardless - that is *exactly* what is happening.>>{rrobe53} : What if we just make people promise super hard to be cool.>>{Hailtothething} : It's not that anything is wrong with Zagg. It's just that tech armor does the same thing, maybe even better, for a 1/3rd the price.>>{Engineer_daddy91} : Bingo. You can't just arbitrarily put people on a secret list and take away their rights.>>{Kallure} : Nothing particularly wrong with them. I just prefer the tempered glass one I picked up from TechArmor. It was actually considerably cheaper and has held up beautifully. I never used the glass Zaggs though, only the "stickers". So I guess more what I'm saying is I prefer the glass over the stickers.>>{AreWeNotDoinPhrasing} : Oh okay, that makes sense. I ways lazy when I bought my new 6s+ and just got a zagg from verizon. I know I overpayed but didn’t know if the was something better.>>{NexusCoder} : Lmaoo yeah im sure sanders wants to suppress votes sounds like propaganda if you ask me but from who I wonder. Hillary or Trump?>>{its_richard1} : Been jailbreaking since iphone 4 and none of my devices have fucked up lol you just install stupid shit>>{Jas9191} : Honest question - is preventing a sale for a short, reasonable period of time such as 7 days violating the constitution or due process? I see it as a pretty reasonable compromise. Law enforcement could get a notice saying "such and such from this list or this program just attempted to buy a gun" and theyd have 7 days to process that info and act or move on.>>{IbanezDavy} : *ssshhh...I don't think there are correct answers in this scenario. People will be butt hurt regardless...shhhhhhhh...*>>{JuanFutbol} : It's not that he wants to suppress votes. He doesn't have the staff in place to work at all the polling stations. Hypocritical of his campaign to preemptively claim fraud though if this is true.>>{treyhunna83} : Thaz a lie. U dont even have to install "stupid shit" things break and fuck up with any tweak. reputable or not. I had issues with well known tweaks Like tiny bar, paid tweaks like callbar and etc. random Tweaks for modding icons to notifications would fuck with each other and fuck up my phone. My jb stint wasnt all bad. But it definitely wasnt that great either. Its overrated to me. Never again.>>{kiarra33} : Yep but he really wanted her president to preserve his legacy lol... Now if she wanted to nominate Obama for a supreme court positions of even better head of the UN (he's be so good) It would make sense. Right now though the scales are tipping to the reputation of the 90s, scandals and corruption from the Clinton dragging Obama down. Like the Lewinsky scandal all over again...>>{kiarra33} : They seem like good friends but threw wiki leaks I learned that apparently Obama is jealous of Bill Clinton ( I thought it would be the other way around) and holds Hillary in contempt. I have no idea why he's jealous of Bill but that's what it said.>>{Jas9191} : Who did he kill? I know about drone strikes and all that but were talking about gun buyers and it seems like you just threw that in there.>>{Espryon} : Yes, making sure that Hillary Clinton and her campaign don't defraud another so called "Democratic Process" is "Hating the Democratic Process". Considering all the voter fraud and corruption that surrounds HRC and her campaign even working polling stations, I'm not suprised that Bernie requested this. i am surprised that he didn't say anything about it or that the media didn't report on it. In my county in PA, we had 15 people that were turned away illegally and/or given provisional ballots in my county by polling workers that supported Hillary Clintons Campaign. My local Bernie group doubts that they will ever have their votes recorded because of HRC and her corrupt campaign. They were planning to vote for Bernie Sanders.>>{tryingtobeobjective3} : Funny how Roberto Plats didn't mention anything about the Bernie camp wanting less polls when he announced the poll reduction a week ago>>{IbanezDavy} : From Clinton staffers. Personally, Bill's economy was better, but I still like Obama more. He has that swag you gotta appreciate.>>{Engineer_daddy91} : I believe yes it is, whether a court would agree is debateable. A waiting period just makes it harder for a law abiding citizen to exercise a right. I'm against waiting periods for the same reason I'm against voter id's, literacy tests and poll taxes. While they don't outright take away the right to vote they make it unnecessarily difficult.>>{kiarra33} : But is that why Obama's jealous of Bill? You can't try and have the same economy as the 90s, the worlds different now. Obama seems like a way nicer guy then Bill, in so many ways. I mean Bill was better friends with Donald then Barack that says enough for me, he just hang around really sleazy people.>>{JuanFutbol} : Right, I'm not sure why anyone would think that cutting polling stations helps either candidate, especially Clinton since both AZ and PR are primaries where she was winning by a lot going into the election. I just found it interesting considering his team was claiming fraud over the polling stations.>>{Wallach} : This seems to match up with reports from his own campaign that were warning Sanders about their staffing resource issues in PR last month: http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc-quick-cuts/watch/sanders-faces-criticism-from-pr-staffers-686810179995>>{mclumber1} : If they really were a terrorist trying to buy a weapon, wouldn't the fact they were just (temporarily) denied the gun sale tip them off?>>{IbanezDavy} : > But is that why Obama's jealous of Bill? I don't think a couple of emails between Clinton campaign officials are the best source to even judge this.>>{CircularFileWorthy} : It's been submitted repeatedly to this place today, but it keeps getting buried or deleted. They don't want anyone to know. Instead it's all Russia this and Russia that, like it's 1982.>>{JuanFutbol} : It actually lines up with reports that he was under staffed in PR.>>{ivsciguy} : It *was* terrorism. It just wasn't Islamic terrorism.>>{Maculate} : It doesn't matter. Everybody should be upset about people making it hard to vote. There was a lot of evidence in this election that higher turnouts favored Sanders, correct or not. But really instead of focusing on, oh, but it affects both parties, can we please just be upset about people fucking with our democracy? Jesus Christ.>>{yourconscienceondrug} : Who did he kill? He's killed thousands. [Here are a few.](http://dronecenter.bard.edu/the-disposition-matrix/) The [Disposition Matrix](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposition_Matrix) >The Disposition Matrix, informally known as a kill list, is a database of information for tracking, capturing, rendering, or killing suspected enemies of the United States government. Developed by the Obama Administration beginning in 2010, the "Disposition Matrix" goes beyond existing kill lists and is intended to become a permanent fixture of American policy. The process determining criteria for killing is not public, but has been heavily shaped by presidential counterterrorism adviser and CIA director John Brennan.>>{Espryon} : Because Bernie isn't funded by big banks, special interests, and people that want to get bills passed to ciphon jobs, taxes, etc to foreign countries and defraud our Democratic Process? (Jeez, I don't know). When was Bernies last Wall St. Speaking engagement or speech to a big bank during the campaign?>>{Esteway} : Man the Sanders campaign must be making some good Kool Aid.>>{ImJustAPatsy} : This is a great way to accomplish what needs to be done without violating due process. In fact, the Republicans put a bill on the floor with a 72 hour delay that would notify the FBI and allow them to investigate and go to the courts to block the sale if need be, and the Democrats voted it down in 2015.>>{Espryon} : Is Bernie funded by big banks, special interests, private corporations, and multi-million dollar celebrities?>>{cjorgensen} : And if you know someone is a bad guy, you still might want to wait for proof before arresting him. Or even if you have proof, you might want to see if he can lead you to someone bigger. Making sure he can't get a gun just lets him know the jig is up.>>{kiarra33} : This was from a progressive writer who worked on the Obama campaign and has connections within the white house. I will find the email it's pretty horrible. Essentially he says people just use the Clinton's for money. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/36689>>{SingularityCentral} : A few thousand American citizens on the list? The NRA and gun rights advocates are really taking a hard line. How many of those few thousand citizens are on the list by mistake? A few hundred or less? How many of those mistaken additions try to buy a firearm? A few dozen or less? We are talking about inconveniencing a few dozen or less citizens? Holy shit, this argument couldn't possibly be more academic.>>{SingularityCentral} : Uh... restraining orders? People lose their right to a firearm all the time when a restraining / protective order is issued but no crime has occurred.>>{Esteway} : Bernie wants everyone to be able to vote as long as they're voting for him.>>{1989Batman} : No. Nor is he supported by like ten million viewers, either.>>{Zukb6} : Please ask the people who attended the NV Democratic Convention how accurate/honorable the reporting from MSM was. Go ahead. Ask me.>>{SingularityCentral} : That is silly. If you are not planning some attack or crime why would you need a gun right now this second? Plenty of self defense weapons are not firearms, like blades, and you can always postpone the hunting trip that you should have planned ahead for anyway. If a law abiding citizen cannot wait a few days they are just impatient. Besides, waiting periods have been upheld repeatedly by the courts, it is a reasonable restriction on the right. Just like time, place, and manner restrictions on free speech are routinely upheld as reasonable.>>{Espryon} : Is Bernie rigging elections, breaking federal law, or paying Super-PACS to censor reddit?>>{Espryon} : Those who count the votes decide everything Joseph Stalin It doesn't matter that she appears to have more votes. Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin had more votes than his opponent. Does that make it a democratic process?>>{dkliberator} : Just like he didn't believe republicans in Congress weren't trying to obstruct him.>>{1989Batman} : Bread lines are a good thing Bernie Sanders.>>{drpetar} : This already exists.....except for 3 days. The NICS check (run by the FBI) is allowed to delay the approval for 72 hours is something looks fishy. I've had mine delayed in the past for an unknown reason.>>{SingularityCentral} : And they wouldn't have the gun they are looking for. And the FBI would be tipped off to them. And they may freak out and try to run for it. I don't see a big downside here. If they are buying the gun they would be close to carrying out an attack anyway, so if they freak out and try to carry it out without their weapons they are much more likely to botch it.>>{Espryon} : But Putin, who captured a reported 64 percent of the vote, finds himself in unfamiliar circumstances. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/russians-voting--and-watching/2012/03/04/gIQA3j6CqR_story.html I wonder if HRC will get close to Vladimir Putin totals.. hmm>>{suseu} : [Quite a lot probably.](http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/07/politics/no-fly-mistakes-cat-stevens-ted-kennedy-john-lewis/index.html)>>{SingularityCentral} : This story lists 3-4 anecdotal accounts of mistaken no-fly list snafus, several from ten years ago which is the timeframe 538 cited as being the most problematic for the list. It provides zero hard numbers. And these anecdotes are about boarding planes, not buying guns.>>{loondawg} : It’s funny, sometimes American journalists talk about how bad a country is, that people are lining up for food. That is a good thing! In other countries people don’t line up for food: the rich get the food and the poor starve to death. - Bernie Sanders>>{KennyCanHe} : Their internal polls, poll precincts. If there is a heavily supported Bernie Precinct trouble happens with the voting system but when there is a heavily supported Hillary Precinct it's smooth sailing. It's not hard to rig a party vote when no one gets majorly punished(kicked off-site + bickering at worst) for it, even after getting caught.>>{SingularityCentral} : The courts, and it is incredibly easy to get a restraining order against someone. Yes, it is due process in the strictest sense, but a temporary restraining order is insanely easy to have imposed. Lots of judges just impose it out of course because they want to be better safe than sorry. And a lot of judges just see that parties do not like each other and impose it as an adult version of sending children to separate rooms for time out.>>{suseu} : Sorry, I skimmed your comment + had this article at hand as it popped in my rss feed as "updated"... Yeah, hard data for your question probably does not exist. You can try digging through sources for [this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Fly_List#Weapons_purchases_by_listed_persons) but I doubt it will be any useful.>>{Jas9191} : I see the voting thing as cimpletely different because the ONLY time that right matters is when you go to vote so its infringed then its completely undermined whereas the right to bear arms is useable all day every day.>>{JuanFutbol} : Did you even read the explanation? He didn't have the staff in place to observe all the polling locations. He's out of money and low on staff.>>{JuanFutbol} : That's actually not true. The big reason Sanders has been competitive is because of caucuses, the lowest turnout election format.>>{tryingtobeobjective3} : here's a picture from the scene http://imgur.com/kELRsg5 from the twitter of @kurthackbarth he was actually there>>{Zukb6} : Yes but that does not prove that the Sanders campaign was responsible for the decrease in polling locations.>>{vegetarianrobots} : >That is silly. If you are not planning some attack or crime why would you need a gun right now this second? The issue isn't what constitutionally guaranteed right(s) is/are being infringed on it's that they are being infringed on at all. The due process of law needs to be followed. If these individuals are truly a clear and present threat why are they allowed to roam free in society at all? Warrants need to be issued, arrests made, charges formally brought to court. We don't need to encourage McCarthyism style witch hunts. >Plenty of self defense weapons are not firearms, like blades, A knife even in skilled hands is not a very good tool for self defense. Anything to do with hand to hand combat almost always defaults victory to the larger combatant. It takes a whole lot of skill and ability to defeat and opponent with 50lbs on you. This is why there are weight classes in combat sports. Besides that pepper spray and mace is highly ineffective as are stun gun. Police style tazers can be effective but are single shot and both prongs must make good contact to work. >and you can always postpone the hunting trip that you should have planned ahead for anyway. If a law abiding citizen cannot wait a few days they are just impatient. A right delayed is a right denied. Once again if these people are legitimately dangerous they need to be arrested. >Besides, waiting periods have been upheld repeatedly by the courts, it is a reasonable restriction on the right. Just like time, place, and manner restrictions on free speech are routinely upheld as reasonable. That's true. But these are wait periods longer than current ones. Not to mention there is no clear way to remove yourself from the list nor have I heard of any one being able to remove themselves from it.>>{SingularityCentral} : It would take me longer to get a permit to exercise my first amendment right to protest than it would for me to get an AR 15. A right delayed is not a right denied. That might be a nice sound bite line but it is horseshit. The second amendment is not an unlimited license to acquire a firearm on demand. Besides, we are talking about inconveniencing a minute fraction of people, maybe a few dozen or less in a year, if that. Drawing a line in the sand here is so hard line and academic that it defies understanding.>>{JuanFutbol} : Ok, so you are actually a conspiracy theorist then? Good to know it's not worth actually trying to discuss with you. You also didn't refute the point that higher rumor doesn't actually hurt Hillary.>>{SingularityCentral} : I mean, I would not be very worried if we inconvenienced 10k citizens a year with mistaken addition to the list. That is such a small fraction of people in a country of 330 million it is silly. And besides, we are only talking about an inconvenience, not a lifelong jail sentence. And I bet more people each year are falsely sentenced to long prison terms than are accidentally placed on the terror watch list.>>{tryingtobeobjective3} : they weren't, just trying to add context it defies logic that the candidate in need of a big comeback would want less people to vote>>{Zukb6} : I agree also since when do they listen to Sanders? This is ludicrous.>>{vegetarianrobots} : Once you open the door to these rights be violated shutting it again will be very hard. We've seen how our government and it's agencies have abused the recently given powers from the Patriot Act so why would we expect any less from this?>>{KennyCanHe} : https://www.reddit.com/r/WashingtonForSanders/comments/4c44k9/today_my_precinct_committee_officer_left_our/ Just read the story they didn't punish her at all even though she gave up her position because she knows she's in the wrong, and doesn't even get punished for what she did.>>{KennyCanHe} : I've heard of a similar case in Hawaii as well, but Bernie supporters don't make a fuss when they've won a state.>>{Downbound92} : Which campaign do you think is more likely to want to have volunteers monitoring every vote counting? Who needs the 60 delegates in Puerto Rico more?>>{SingularityCentral} : Slippery slope is what you are hanging your hat on? That argument can be trotted out for any restriction on gun rights or any other right whatsoever. It was made when automatic weapons were banned and has not materialized in a forced round up of all American firearms. Reasonable restrictions need to be imposed and stopping suspected terrorists from purchasing AR 15's and FAL's and the like is reasonable on its very face. Btw, the appeals and high courts seem to think assault weapons bans are reasonable given today's denial of cert and the earlier appeals decision.>>{fer_d} : Nothing on this site is believable. But I am not sure if Hillary benefits with low turnout. Bernie generally wins on Caucus, which have the lowest turnout from all types of primaries. And Clinton had the clear and large advantage there. Polls were about 70% to 30%.>>{fer_d} : Are they committing fraud on the polls too? Because the results are very consistent with them with one big surprise, and that was one that Bernie won, not Clinton.>>{vegetarianrobots} : >Slippery slope is what you are hanging your hat on? >That argument can be trotted out for any restriction on gun rights or any other right whatsoever. It was made when automatic weapons were banned and has not materialized in a forced round up of all American firearms. We have already seen this happen for the 4th Amendment with the Patriot Act and the use of Prism and Stingray. We've seen this in action in New York, California, and Connecticut for the 2nd Amendment. And now you want it for the 5th and 14th Amendments...? >Reasonable restrictions need to be imposed and stopping suspected terrorists from purchasing AR 15's and FAL's and the like is reasonable on its very face. Should be now begin to treat all suspects as guilty until proven innocent? Should we arrest anyone with drug paraphernalia on their social media? If these individuals are actually dangerous shouldn't we arrest them? Beyond that the San Bernardino shooters bypassed these laws already set in place in California. The attackers in Paris and Brussels did the same. >Btw, the appeals and high courts seem to think assault weapons bans are reasonable given today's denial of cert and the earlier appeals decision. Or they didn't want to attempt a ruling on such a heavy issue without a full bench. Bottom line is these are assaults on the fundamental civil rights of every American protected by the Constitution and it's Amendment’s. If you are in favor of civil right you should be against them if only for the defense of due process and the 5th and 14th Amendments.>>{fer_d} : This is an article *from 2012*, so not biased from the current election. It explains why exit pools have many problems with sampling bias. Basically, you cannot get an accurate sampling of all voters due to a number of factors. In any case, even if pretend exit polls were perfect, according to them, Bernie would still be losing. >Response bias is a more intuitive problem. Sometimes people just don't want to take your test. So while sampling bias occurs because of the survey administrator, response bias occurs because of the voter. During that same exit poll I helped with in rural Minnesota, a lot of people declined to take my test. I think, though I'm not sure, that part of it was that it was obvious I was from the college and many conservatives in town did not like the college. So then, this would result in fewer conservatives in the survey pool, messing up the final results. Bernie voters are clearly more enthusiastic, so they would be more likely to agree on answering pools. These pools are also usually done by young people, and they would likely attract more younger people to answer than older ones. https://www.quora.com/How-are-exit-polls-done-and-how-reliable-are-the-results-of-the-exit-poll I wanted Bernie, but will not delude myself and pretend he lost because of fraud.>>{JuanFutbol} : Yes, the people in charge of these decisions ARE a great source.>>{The_Brass_Dog} : So the government can just arbitrarily limit rights? I guess you'd be okay with the government making disagreeing with them illegal? I mean, you could just apply for a permit to say what you want about them, but there is a 5 year wait and a $100 application fee.>>{The_Brass_Dog} : We only want to violate the rights of a *few* people, what the hell are you guys getting mad at anyway? It's just some asshole gun owners.>>{SingularityCentral} : Very nice distillation of my points. I can play that game as well. "C'mon guys, the suspected terrorists have just as much right to get a firearm on demand as anyone else. They should be allowed to buy a gun unless they are actually incarcerated at the time. Freedom!">>{SingularityCentral} : That is a nicely constructed strawman you got there. Does it scare the crows away? There is nothing arbitrary about the proposed legislation. And yes, you already need permits to exercise free speech rights. Try having a protest in front of any government building at any level of government without one and see what happens.>>{SingularityCentral} : We already stop people who do not have a conviction from buying or even possessing weapons. Restraining orders get handed out to accused criminals and non-criminals in civil cases as a matter of routine. They almost always require someone relinquish the firearms they have and prohibit someone from purchasing or acquiring new ones. It may come from the court, but judges issue the orders without thinking and without anything that looks like due process until well after the fact, and only if the order is challenged. This is not an assault on American freedoms, it is an extension of a law enforcement tool, the need for which is becoming clearer by the day.>>{The_Brass_Dog} : So you believe that people suspected of a crime should have their rights taken away? So if the government accuses you of being 'anti-american' it should have the right to strip away your right to due process and throw you in a internment camp?>>{vegetarianrobots} : Then revise it to function like restraining orders. These lists aren't even publicly available. Anything that denies any rights based on secret lists outside of a court of law are bad news.>>{SingularityCentral} : Yes I definitely think that should be the case. That is the next logical step from preventing people on the terrorist watch list from buying a semi automatic rifle, internment camps for un-American behavior. Keep throwing up the sensationalism and strawman arguments>>{SingularityCentral} : Restraining orders are difficult to fight and given out ex parte all the time. They are far more draconian and effect far more people than your fears about the terrorist watch list. We will never agree on gun legislation obviously, but it is painfully clear to quite a few Americans that the current regime is woefully inadequate to impede violent crime or terrorist attacks. Tighter gun restrictions is going to have to be a necessary element in shoring up our law enforcement and counter terrorism capabilities. If we have a Paris style attack with coordinated shooters holy hell is going to rain down on the NRA and Republican party for impeding efforts like this.>>{vegetarianrobots} : >Restraining orders are difficult to fight and given out ex parte all the time. They are far more draconian and effect far more people than your fears about the terrorist watch list. Our whole Justice and law enforcement system needs an overhaul. I that I think we agree. >We will never agree on gun legislation obviously, but it is painfully clear to quite a few Americans that the current regime is woefully inadequate to impede violent crime or terrorist attacks. Tighter gun restrictions is going to have to be a necessary element in shoring up our law enforcement and counter terrorism capabilities. Our violent crime and homicide rates have been in decline for over two decades. [Looking at the trends in violent crime rates and homicide rates we see that America has been experiencing a decline in violent crimes and homicides for over 20 years.](https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/tables/1tabledatadecoverviewpdf/table_1_crime_in_the_united_states_by_volume_and_rate_per_100000_inhabitants_1994-2013.xls) [Further more if we look at the historical data we see that America is currently at the lowest violent crime and homicide rates in over 40 years.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States) [And of this decline is occurring despite record gun sales in America adding millions of guns each year to the mix.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/05/gun-sales-hit-new-record-ahead-of-new-obama-gun-restrictions/) >If we have a Paris style attack with coordinated shooters holy hell is going to rain down on the NRA and Republican party for impeding efforts like this. But that attack occurred despite France having these measures you're fighting for in place.>>{The_Brass_Dog} : You believe that the federal government should be able to strip someone of their rights because they are on a watchlist... A list compiled by the government stripping people of their rights. It's not a strawman, it's literally what you're arguing.>>{SingularityCentral} : US violent crime rates are down over the last two decades, which is great. But they are still far above other similarly situated industrialized nations. Many factors play into this reality: societal, economic, cultural, legal, and yes access to firearms is a factor in our inflated rate of homicides when compared to other nations. And yes, it did happen in France despite the controls, which proves that a foolproof security apparatus is not possible, as no one should think it is. The intelligence failure in that attack was pretty impressive. Now how many mass shootings have happened in France in the last 8 years? Because in the US we have had more than 20. Now, if a true sleeper cell of paramilitary trained terrorists was operating in the United States they might be able to do some unbelievable damage with a lot less effort as the ability to get guns in the United States is so wide open. Kudos to our counterterrorism forces for stopping such efforts, but just like in France, they are far from perfect and will miss one of these plots sooner or later. If / when that happens the political hellstorm will be unbelievable.>>{vegetarianrobots} : >US violent crime rates are down over the last two decades, which is great. But they are still far above other similarly situated industrialized nations. Many factors play into this reality: societal, economic, cultural, legal, and yes access to firearms is a factor in our inflated rate of homicides when compared to other nations. Firearms is the least of these. When you compare crime rates among nations poverty is consistently the key factor. Rich nations with guns have little crime while poor nations without gun have a lot of crime. Even in America we see this when comparing communities or even states. Gun control does not equal crime control. >And yes, it did happen in France despite the controls, which proves that a foolproof security apparatus is not possible, as no one should think it is. The intelligence failure in that attack was pretty impressive. Now how many mass shootings have happened in France in the last 8 years? Because in the US we have had more than 20. >Now, if a true sleeper cell of paramilitary trained terrorists was operating in the United States they might be able to do some unbelievable damage with a lot less effort as the ability to get guns in the United States is so wide open. Kudos to our counterterrorism forces for stopping such efforts, but just like in France, they are far from perfect and will miss one of these plots sooner or later. If / when that happens the political hellstorm will be unbelievable. I'll agree that our law enforcement are not prepared for a real coordinated event. However by your own argument say that nothing is fool prove. Where there is a *will* there is a *way*. If we leave the *will* but remove the *way* then a new *way* will be found. We need to attack the *will* not the *way*. If we take away our citizens civil rights out of fear that terrorist and their ilk will abuse them then we are simply sending the message that their tactics work.[/INST]['>>{suseu} : The Problems With Using The Terrorist Watch List To Ban Gun Sales', '>>{Engineer_daddy91} : Find a way to do it without taking away due process.', ">>{deeprogrammed} : It's an idea that sounds good at first but doesn't make sense when you look at the specifics. I hope Trump backs away from this idea", '>>{mclumber1} : Hard to do. If a person is dangerous enough to take away their right to own a gun, then they should be arrested and charged with a crime.', '>>{yourconscienceondrug} : Disposition Matrix Terrorist Watch List No Fly List WTF is all this bullshit? Why are we simply saying, ok obama, we know you do not have evidence to convict or even indict these people, but go right ahead and skip due process and take away their rights or kill them regardless - that is *exactly* what is happening.', '>>{rrobe53} : What if we just make people promise super hard to be cool.', ">>{Engineer_daddy91} : Bingo. You can't just arbitrarily put people on a secret list and take away their rights.", '>>{Jas9191} : Honest question - is preventing a sale for a short, reasonable period of time such as 7 days violating the constitution or due process? I see it as a pretty reasonable compromise. Law enforcement could get a notice saying "such and such from this list or this program just attempted to buy a gun" and theyd have 7 days to process that info and act or move on.', '>>{Jas9191} : Who did he kill? I know about drone strikes and all that but were talking about gun buyers and it seems like you just threw that in there.', ">>{Engineer_daddy91} : I believe yes it is, whether a court would agree is debateable. A waiting period just makes it harder for a law abiding citizen to exercise a right. I'm against waiting periods for the same reason I'm against voter id's, literacy tests and poll taxes. While they don't outright take away the right to vote they make it unnecessarily difficult.", ">>{mclumber1} : If they really were a terrorist trying to buy a weapon, wouldn't the fact they were just (temporarily) denied the gun sale tip them off?", ">>{ivsciguy} : It *was* terrorism. It just wasn't Islamic terrorism.", '>>{yourconscienceondrug} : Who did he kill? He\'s killed thousands. [Here are a few.](http://dronecenter.bard.edu/the-disposition-matrix/) The [Disposition Matrix](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposition_Matrix) >The Disposition Matrix, informally known as a kill list, is a database of information for tracking, capturing, rendering, or killing suspected enemies of the United States government. Developed by the Obama Administration beginning in 2010, the "Disposition Matrix" goes beyond existing kill lists and is intended to become a permanent fixture of American policy. The process determining criteria for killing is not public, but has been heavily shaped by presidential counterterrorism adviser and CIA director John Brennan.', '>>{ImJustAPatsy} : This is a great way to accomplish what needs to be done without violating due process. In fact, the Republicans put a bill on the floor with a 72 hour delay that would notify the FBI and allow them to investigate and go to the courts to block the sale if need be, and the Democrats voted it down in 2015.', ">>{cjorgensen} : And if you know someone is a bad guy, you still might want to wait for proof before arresting him. Or even if you have proof, you might want to see if he can lead you to someone bigger. Making sure he can't get a gun just lets him know the jig is up.", ">>{SingularityCentral} : A few thousand American citizens on the list? The NRA and gun rights advocates are really taking a hard line. How many of those few thousand citizens are on the list by mistake? A few hundred or less? How many of those mistaken additions try to buy a firearm? A few dozen or less? We are talking about inconveniencing a few dozen or less citizens? Holy shit, this argument couldn't possibly be more academic.", '>>{SingularityCentral} : Uh... restraining orders? People lose their right to a firearm all the time when a restraining / protective order is issued but no crime has occurred.', '>>{SingularityCentral} : That is silly. If you are not planning some attack or crime why would you need a gun right now this second? Plenty of self defense weapons are not firearms, like blades, and you can always postpone the hunting trip that you should have planned ahead for anyway. If a law abiding citizen cannot wait a few days they are just impatient. Besides, waiting periods have been upheld repeatedly by the courts, it is a reasonable restriction on the right. Just like time, place, and manner restrictions on free speech are routinely upheld as reasonable.', ">>{drpetar} : This already exists.....except for 3 days. The NICS check (run by the FBI) is allowed to delay the approval for 72 hours is something looks fishy. I've had mine delayed in the past for an unknown reason.", ">>{SingularityCentral} : And they wouldn't have the gun they are looking for. And the FBI would be tipped off to them. And they may freak out and try to run for it. I don't see a big downside here. If they are buying the gun they would be close to carrying out an attack anyway, so if they freak out and try to carry it out without their weapons they are much more likely to botch it.", '>>{suseu} : [Quite a lot probably.](http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/07/politics/no-fly-mistakes-cat-stevens-ted-kennedy-john-lewis/index.html)', '>>{SingularityCentral} : This story lists 3-4 anecdotal accounts of mistaken no-fly list snafus, several from ten years ago which is the timeframe 538 cited as being the most problematic for the list. It provides zero hard numbers. And these anecdotes are about boarding planes, not buying guns.', '>>{SingularityCentral} : The courts, and it is incredibly easy to get a restraining order against someone. Yes, it is due process in the strictest sense, but a temporary restraining order is insanely easy to have imposed. Lots of judges just impose it out of course because they want to be better safe than sorry. And a lot of judges just see that parties do not like each other and impose it as an adult version of sending children to separate rooms for time out.', '>>{suseu} : Sorry, I skimmed your comment + had this article at hand as it popped in my rss feed as "updated"... Yeah, hard data for your question probably does not exist. You can try digging through sources for [this](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Fly_List#Weapons_purchases_by_listed_persons) but I doubt it will be any useful.', '>>{Jas9191} : I see the voting thing as cimpletely different because the ONLY time that right matters is when you go to vote so its infringed then its completely undermined whereas the right to bear arms is useable all day every day.', ">>{vegetarianrobots} : >That is silly. If you are not planning some attack or crime why would you need a gun right now this second? The issue isn't what constitutionally guaranteed right(s) is/are being infringed on it's that they are being infringed on at all. The due process of law needs to be followed. If these individuals are truly a clear and present threat why are they allowed to roam free in society at all? Warrants need to be issued, arrests made, charges formally brought to court. We don't need to encourage McCarthyism style witch hunts. >Plenty of self defense weapons are not firearms, like blades, A knife even in skilled hands is not a very good tool for self defense. Anything to do with hand to hand combat almost always defaults victory to the larger combatant. It takes a whole lot of skill and ability to defeat and opponent with 50lbs on you. This is why there are weight classes in combat sports. Besides that pepper spray and mace is highly ineffective as are stun gun. Police style tazers can be effective but are single shot and both prongs must make good contact to work. >and you can always postpone the hunting trip that you should have planned ahead for anyway. If a law abiding citizen cannot wait a few days they are just impatient. A right delayed is a right denied. Once again if these people are legitimately dangerous they need to be arrested. >Besides, waiting periods have been upheld repeatedly by the courts, it is a reasonable restriction on the right. Just like time, place, and manner restrictions on free speech are routinely upheld as reasonable. That's true. But these are wait periods longer than current ones. Not to mention there is no clear way to remove yourself from the list nor have I heard of any one being able to remove themselves from it.", '>>{SingularityCentral} : It would take me longer to get a permit to exercise my first amendment right to protest than it would for me to get an AR 15. A right delayed is not a right denied. That might be a nice sound bite line but it is horseshit. The second amendment is not an unlimited license to acquire a firearm on demand. Besides, we are talking about inconveniencing a minute fraction of people, maybe a few dozen or less in a year, if that. Drawing a line in the sand here is so hard line and academic that it defies understanding.', '>>{SingularityCentral} : I mean, I would not be very worried if we inconvenienced 10k citizens a year with mistaken addition to the list. That is such a small fraction of people in a country of 330 million it is silly. And besides, we are only talking about an inconvenience, not a lifelong jail sentence. And I bet more people each year are falsely sentenced to long prison terms than are accidentally placed on the terror watch list.', ">>{vegetarianrobots} : Once you open the door to these rights be violated shutting it again will be very hard. We've seen how our government and it's agencies have abused the recently given powers from the Patriot Act so why would we expect any less from this?", ">>{SingularityCentral} : Slippery slope is what you are hanging your hat on? That argument can be trotted out for any restriction on gun rights or any other right whatsoever. It was made when automatic weapons were banned and has not materialized in a forced round up of all American firearms. Reasonable restrictions need to be imposed and stopping suspected terrorists from purchasing AR 15's and FAL's and the like is reasonable on its very face. Btw, the appeals and high courts seem to think assault weapons bans are reasonable given today's denial of cert and the earlier appeals decision.", ">>{vegetarianrobots} : >Slippery slope is what you are hanging your hat on? >That argument can be trotted out for any restriction on gun rights or any other right whatsoever. It was made when automatic weapons were banned and has not materialized in a forced round up of all American firearms. We have already seen this happen for the 4th Amendment with the Patriot Act and the use of Prism and Stingray. We've seen this in action in New York, California, and Connecticut for the 2nd Amendment. And now you want it for the 5th and 14th Amendments...? >Reasonable restrictions need to be imposed and stopping suspected terrorists from purchasing AR 15's and FAL's and the like is reasonable on its very face. Should be now begin to treat all suspects as guilty until proven innocent? Should we arrest anyone with drug paraphernalia on their social media? If these individuals are actually dangerous shouldn't we arrest them? Beyond that the San Bernardino shooters bypassed these laws already set in place in California. The attackers in Paris and Brussels did the same. >Btw, the appeals and high courts seem to think assault weapons bans are reasonable given today's denial of cert and the earlier appeals decision. Or they didn't want to attempt a ruling on such a heavy issue without a full bench. Bottom line is these are assaults on the fundamental civil rights of every American protected by the Constitution and it's Amendment’s. If you are in favor of civil right you should be against them if only for the defense of due process and the 5th and 14th Amendments.", ">>{The_Brass_Dog} : So the government can just arbitrarily limit rights? I guess you'd be okay with the government making disagreeing with them illegal? I mean, you could just apply for a permit to say what you want about them, but there is a 5 year wait and a $100 application fee.", ">>{The_Brass_Dog} : We only want to violate the rights of a *few* people, what the hell are you guys getting mad at anyway? It's just some asshole gun owners.", '>>{SingularityCentral} : Very nice distillation of my points. I can play that game as well. "C\'mon guys, the suspected terrorists have just as much right to get a firearm on demand as anyone else. They should be allowed to buy a gun unless they are actually incarcerated at the time. Freedom!"', '>>{SingularityCentral} : That is a nicely constructed strawman you got there. Does it scare the crows away? There is nothing arbitrary about the proposed legislation. And yes, you already need permits to exercise free speech rights. Try having a protest in front of any government building at any level of government without one and see what happens.', '>>{SingularityCentral} : We already stop people who do not have a conviction from buying or even possessing weapons. Restraining orders get handed out to accused criminals and non-criminals in civil cases as a matter of routine. They almost always require someone relinquish the firearms they have and prohibit someone from purchasing or acquiring new ones. It may come from the court, but judges issue the orders without thinking and without anything that looks like due process until well after the fact, and only if the order is challenged. This is not an assault on American freedoms, it is an extension of a law enforcement tool, the need for which is becoming clearer by the day.', ">>{The_Brass_Dog} : So you believe that people suspected of a crime should have their rights taken away? So if the government accuses you of being 'anti-american' it should have the right to strip away your right to due process and throw you in a internment camp?", ">>{vegetarianrobots} : Then revise it to function like restraining orders. These lists aren't even publicly available. Anything that denies any rights based on secret lists outside of a court of law are bad news.", '>>{SingularityCentral} : Yes I definitely think that should be the case. That is the next logical step from preventing people on the terrorist watch list from buying a semi automatic rifle, internment camps for un-American behavior. Keep throwing up the sensationalism and strawman arguments', '>>{SingularityCentral} : Restraining orders are difficult to fight and given out ex parte all the time. They are far more draconian and effect far more people than your fears about the terrorist watch list. We will never agree on gun legislation obviously, but it is painfully clear to quite a few Americans that the current regime is woefully inadequate to impede violent crime or terrorist attacks. Tighter gun restrictions is going to have to be a necessary element in shoring up our law enforcement and counter terrorism capabilities. If we have a Paris style attack with coordinated shooters holy hell is going to rain down on the NRA and Republican party for impeding efforts like this.', ">>{vegetarianrobots} : >Restraining orders are difficult to fight and given out ex parte all the time. They are far more draconian and effect far more people than your fears about the terrorist watch list. Our whole Justice and law enforcement system needs an overhaul. I that I think we agree. >We will never agree on gun legislation obviously, but it is painfully clear to quite a few Americans that the current regime is woefully inadequate to impede violent crime or terrorist attacks. Tighter gun restrictions is going to have to be a necessary element in shoring up our law enforcement and counter terrorism capabilities. Our violent crime and homicide rates have been in decline for over two decades. [Looking at the trends in violent crime rates and homicide rates we see that America has been experiencing a decline in violent crimes and homicides for over 20 years.](https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/tables/1tabledatadecoverviewpdf/table_1_crime_in_the_united_states_by_volume_and_rate_per_100000_inhabitants_1994-2013.xls) [Further more if we look at the historical data we see that America is currently at the lowest violent crime and homicide rates in over 40 years.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States) [And of this decline is occurring despite record gun sales in America adding millions of guns each year to the mix.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/05/gun-sales-hit-new-record-ahead-of-new-obama-gun-restrictions/) >If we have a Paris style attack with coordinated shooters holy hell is going to rain down on the NRA and Republican party for impeding efforts like this. But that attack occurred despite France having these measures you're fighting for in place.", ">>{The_Brass_Dog} : You believe that the federal government should be able to strip someone of their rights because they are on a watchlist... A list compiled by the government stripping people of their rights. It's not a strawman, it's literally what you're arguing.", '>>{SingularityCentral} : US violent crime rates are down over the last two decades, which is great. But they are still far above other similarly situated industrialized nations. Many factors play into this reality: societal, economic, cultural, legal, and yes access to firearms is a factor in our inflated rate of homicides when compared to other nations. And yes, it did happen in France despite the controls, which proves that a foolproof security apparatus is not possible, as no one should think it is. The intelligence failure in that attack was pretty impressive. Now how many mass shootings have happened in France in the last 8 years? Because in the US we have had more than 20. Now, if a true sleeper cell of paramilitary trained terrorists was operating in the United States they might be able to do some unbelievable damage with a lot less effort as the ability to get guns in the United States is so wide open. Kudos to our counterterrorism forces for stopping such efforts, but just like in France, they are far from perfect and will miss one of these plots sooner or later. If / when that happens the political hellstorm will be unbelievable.', ">>{vegetarianrobots} : >US violent crime rates are down over the last two decades, which is great. But they are still far above other similarly situated industrialized nations. Many factors play into this reality: societal, economic, cultural, legal, and yes access to firearms is a factor in our inflated rate of homicides when compared to other nations. Firearms is the least of these. When you compare crime rates among nations poverty is consistently the key factor. Rich nations with guns have little crime while poor nations without gun have a lot of crime. Even in America we see this when comparing communities or even states. Gun control does not equal crime control. >And yes, it did happen in France despite the controls, which proves that a foolproof security apparatus is not possible, as no one should think it is. The intelligence failure in that attack was pretty impressive. Now how many mass shootings have happened in France in the last 8 years? Because in the US we have had more than 20. >Now, if a true sleeper cell of paramilitary trained terrorists was operating in the United States they might be able to do some unbelievable damage with a lot less effort as the ability to get guns in the United States is so wide open. Kudos to our counterterrorism forces for stopping such efforts, but just like in France, they are far from perfect and will miss one of these plots sooner or later. If / when that happens the political hellstorm will be unbelievable. I'll agree that our law enforcement are not prepared for a real coordinated event. However by your own argument say that nothing is fool prove. Where there is a *will* there is a *way*. If we leave the *will* but remove the *way* then a new *way* will be found. We need to attack the *will* not the *way*. If we take away our citizens civil rights out of fear that terrorist and their ilk will abuse them then we are simply sending the message that their tactics work."]['>>{Funkbass} : Idea: you should be able to force touch a ringing alarm notification to choose the amount of time to snooze for.', ">>{WithoutCaution} : I'm not coherent enough to operate the alarm functions as they are now when I wake up. If I were alert enough to use force touch to change the snooze time, I'd just turn the damn thing off and get up.", ">>{vswr} : This is what I was thinking. I'm barely able to push the lock button to snooze it....can't even pick it up to see the screen to snooze.", ">>{TheEarsHaveWalls} : It still needs a snooze time adjuster for when I set it in the first place. Current snooze is like 9 minutes right? I'd like to change it to 5 or 10 if I wanted to.", '>>{treyhunna83} : Lol. Nah we like our stable fully updated phones. 😂', '>>{ltrout99} : My 7+ is jailbroken and just as stable as it was before I jailbroke it.', ">>{treyhunna83} : Debatable. Its cool til it 'breaks'. 😂", '>>{ltrout99} : I legit read that twice and i kept reading it as stable. Thanks for pointing that out. 😂', '>>{its_richard1} : Been jailbreaking since iphone 4 and none of my devices have fucked up lol you just install stupid shit', '>>{treyhunna83} : Thaz a lie. U dont even have to install "stupid shit" things break and fuck up with any tweak. reputable or not. I had issues with well known tweaks Like tiny bar, paid tweaks like callbar and etc. random Tweaks for modding icons to notifications would fuck with each other and fuck up my phone. My jb stint wasnt all bad. But it definitely wasnt that great either. Its overrated to me. Never again.']['>>{xspace_ghostx} : *mic drop* Even Demorats are jumping ship and drowning in this disaster.', ">>{iameatingwatermelon} : Poor Clinton. Everyone seems to be getting tired of being thrown under the bus. Why can't they just be more patient with her?", ">>{rdevaughn} : Time to test the limits of the Clintonistas' cognitive dissonance, in 3... 2... 1...", ">>{third_najarian} : Except Earnest also said: >He's in a tough spot, and he's the one who will be in a position to defend his actions in the face of significant criticism from a variety of legal experts, including individuals who served in senior Department of Justice positions in administrations led by presidents in both parties. Which means it's possible Obama just thinks Comey is inept.", '>>{Sevigor} : Oh the shills are trying their hardest to downvote this.', ">>{IbanezDavy} : It's because they are sexists. That must be the only logically conclusion anyone anywhere can draw ^^^/s", ">>{kiarra33} : It's a pretty big deal when Obama turns on you, he's probably finally getting tired if her dragging his legacy threw the mud...", '>>{IbanezDavy} : Or competent enough...and Obama apparently is confident enough in Comey not to have to defend him much.', '>>{iameatingwatermelon} : They are also all child rapists who work for Russia.', '>>{Sevigor} : > dragging his legacy threw the mud... It honestly is getting to the point where she really is doing that.', ">>{AgoraiosBum} : The letter itself is pretty bland. The media and everyone's reaction to it is what is way out of proportion.", ">>{third_najarian} : If Obama openly criticized Comey everyone would say he's interfering with an ongoing investigation.", ">>{IbanezDavy} : *ssshhh...I don't think there are correct answers in this scenario. People will be butt hurt regardless...shhhhhhhh...*", ">>{kiarra33} : Yep but he really wanted her president to preserve his legacy lol... Now if she wanted to nominate Obama for a supreme court positions of even better head of the UN (he's be so good) It would make sense. Right now though the scales are tipping to the reputation of the 90s, scandals and corruption from the Clinton dragging Obama down. Like the Lewinsky scandal all over again...", ">>{kiarra33} : They seem like good friends but threw wiki leaks I learned that apparently Obama is jealous of Bill Clinton ( I thought it would be the other way around) and holds Hillary in contempt. I have no idea why he's jealous of Bill but that's what it said.", ">>{IbanezDavy} : From Clinton staffers. Personally, Bill's economy was better, but I still like Obama more. He has that swag you gotta appreciate.", ">>{kiarra33} : But is that why Obama's jealous of Bill? You can't try and have the same economy as the 90s, the worlds different now. Obama seems like a way nicer guy then Bill, in so many ways. I mean Bill was better friends with Donald then Barack that says enough for me, he just hang around really sleazy people.", ">>{IbanezDavy} : > But is that why Obama's jealous of Bill? I don't think a couple of emails between Clinton campaign officials are the best source to even judge this.", ">>{CircularFileWorthy} : It's been submitted repeatedly to this place today, but it keeps getting buried or deleted. They don't want anyone to know. Instead it's all Russia this and Russia that, like it's 1982.", ">>{kiarra33} : This was from a progressive writer who worked on the Obama campaign and has connections within the white house. I will find the email it's pretty horrible. Essentially he says people just use the Clinton's for money. https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/36689", ">>{dkliberator} : Just like he didn't believe republicans in Congress weren't trying to obstruct him."]['>>{JuanFutbol} : Results slow in Puerto Rico as voters face long lines: "But the local party told MSNBC that the Sanders campaign had requested fewer stations."', '>>{dirk-41} : Shameful hypocrisy on the part of the Sanders campaign. This kind of voter suppression by a campaign should not be tolerated.', '>>{Simoni_Deo} : The only station needed is the one with the truth.', '>>{yee12367222} : Does Trump have a nickname for Sanders yet? Might I suggest Suppressor Sanders?', '>>{FThumb} : We\'ll accuse him of what we\'re guilty of. Let\'s see if anyone runs with it. "It\'s too crazy. No one is that stupid!" MSNBC: BREAKING: Sanders Hates Democratic Process - Asks Officials To Cut Polling Stations By 2/3rds!!', ">>{fer_d} : Funny, because the other 99.99% of the Hill's anti-CLinton articles are just stellar.", '>>{ronnieww3} : I think he went with Crazy Bernie. He could have done better but it works.', ">>{tryingtobeobjective3} : Reports from the ground completely contradict the claim just aired on MSNBC, and say that the Hillary campaign was the one that didn't have enough poll workers More background info http://heavy.com/news/2016/06/puerto-rico-primary-election-fraud-voter-suppression-polling-places-workers-certified-bernie-sanders/ *edited to add pics from one of the polling places http://imgur.com/kELRsg5 http://imgur.com/a/WbIj4 from @KurtHackbarth and @RamonFebus", '>>{NexusCoder} : Lmaoo yeah im sure sanders wants to suppress votes sounds like propaganda if you ask me but from who I wonder. Hillary or Trump?', ">>{JuanFutbol} : It's not that he wants to suppress votes. He doesn't have the staff in place to work at all the polling stations. Hypocritical of his campaign to preemptively claim fraud though if this is true.", '>>{Espryon} : Yes, making sure that Hillary Clinton and her campaign don\'t defraud another so called "Democratic Process" is "Hating the Democratic Process". Considering all the voter fraud and corruption that surrounds HRC and her campaign even working polling stations, I\'m not suprised that Bernie requested this. i am surprised that he didn\'t say anything about it or that the media didn\'t report on it. In my county in PA, we had 15 people that were turned away illegally and/or given provisional ballots in my county by polling workers that supported Hillary Clintons Campaign. My local Bernie group doubts that they will ever have their votes recorded because of HRC and her corrupt campaign. They were planning to vote for Bernie Sanders.', ">>{tryingtobeobjective3} : Funny how Roberto Plats didn't mention anything about the Bernie camp wanting less polls when he announced the poll reduction a week ago", ">>{JuanFutbol} : Right, I'm not sure why anyone would think that cutting polling stations helps either candidate, especially Clinton since both AZ and PR are primaries where she was winning by a lot going into the election. I just found it interesting considering his team was claiming fraud over the polling stations.", '>>{Wallach} : This seems to match up with reports from his own campaign that were warning Sanders about their staffing resource issues in PR last month: http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc-quick-cuts/watch/sanders-faces-criticism-from-pr-staffers-686810179995', '>>{JuanFutbol} : It actually lines up with reports that he was under staffed in PR.', ">>{Maculate} : It doesn't matter. Everybody should be upset about people making it hard to vote. There was a lot of evidence in this election that higher turnouts favored Sanders, correct or not. But really instead of focusing on, oh, but it affects both parties, can we please just be upset about people fucking with our democracy? Jesus Christ.", ">>{Espryon} : Because Bernie isn't funded by big banks, special interests, and people that want to get bills passed to ciphon jobs, taxes, etc to foreign countries and defraud our Democratic Process? (Jeez, I don't know). When was Bernies last Wall St. Speaking engagement or speech to a big bank during the campaign?", '>>{Esteway} : Man the Sanders campaign must be making some good Kool Aid.', '>>{Espryon} : Is Bernie funded by big banks, special interests, private corporations, and multi-million dollar celebrities?', ">>{Esteway} : Bernie wants everyone to be able to vote as long as they're voting for him.", '>>{1989Batman} : No. Nor is he supported by like ten million viewers, either.', '>>{Zukb6} : Please ask the people who attended the NV Democratic Convention how accurate/honorable the reporting from MSM was. Go ahead. Ask me.', '>>{Espryon} : Is Bernie rigging elections, breaking federal law, or paying Super-PACS to censor reddit?', ">>{Espryon} : Those who count the votes decide everything Joseph Stalin It doesn't matter that she appears to have more votes. Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin had more votes than his opponent. Does that make it a democratic process?", '>>{1989Batman} : Bread lines are a good thing Bernie Sanders.', '>>{Espryon} : But Putin, who captured a reported 64 percent of the vote, finds himself in unfamiliar circumstances. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/russians-voting--and-watching/2012/03/04/gIQA3j6CqR_story.html I wonder if HRC will get close to Vladimir Putin totals.. hmm', '>>{loondawg} : It’s funny, sometimes American journalists talk about how bad a country is, that people are lining up for food. That is a good thing! In other countries people don’t line up for food: the rich get the food and the poor starve to death. - Bernie Sanders', ">>{KennyCanHe} : Their internal polls, poll precincts. If there is a heavily supported Bernie Precinct trouble happens with the voting system but when there is a heavily supported Hillary Precinct it's smooth sailing. It's not hard to rig a party vote when no one gets majorly punished(kicked off-site + bickering at worst) for it, even after getting caught.", ">>{JuanFutbol} : Did you even read the explanation? He didn't have the staff in place to observe all the polling locations. He's out of money and low on staff.", ">>{JuanFutbol} : That's actually not true. The big reason Sanders has been competitive is because of caucuses, the lowest turnout election format.", ">>{tryingtobeobjective3} : here's a picture from the scene http://imgur.com/kELRsg5 from the twitter of @kurthackbarth he was actually there", '>>{Zukb6} : Yes but that does not prove that the Sanders campaign was responsible for the decrease in polling locations.', ">>{JuanFutbol} : Ok, so you are actually a conspiracy theorist then? Good to know it's not worth actually trying to discuss with you. You also didn't refute the point that higher rumor doesn't actually hurt Hillary.", ">>{tryingtobeobjective3} : they weren't, just trying to add context it defies logic that the candidate in need of a big comeback would want less people to vote", '>>{Zukb6} : I agree also since when do they listen to Sanders? This is ludicrous.', ">>{KennyCanHe} : https://www.reddit.com/r/WashingtonForSanders/comments/4c44k9/today_my_precinct_committee_officer_left_our/ Just read the story they didn't punish her at all even though she gave up her position because she knows she's in the wrong, and doesn't even get punished for what she did.", ">>{KennyCanHe} : I've heard of a similar case in Hawaii as well, but Bernie supporters don't make a fuss when they've won a state.", '>>{Downbound92} : Which campaign do you think is more likely to want to have volunteers monitoring every vote counting? Who needs the 60 delegates in Puerto Rico more?', '>>{fer_d} : Nothing on this site is believable. But I am not sure if Hillary benefits with low turnout. Bernie generally wins on Caucus, which have the lowest turnout from all types of primaries. And Clinton had the clear and large advantage there. Polls were about 70% to 30%.', '>>{fer_d} : Are they committing fraud on the polls too? Because the results are very consistent with them with one big surprise, and that was one that Bernie won, not Clinton.', ">>{fer_d} : This is an article *from 2012*, so not biased from the current election. It explains why exit pools have many problems with sampling bias. Basically, you cannot get an accurate sampling of all voters due to a number of factors. In any case, even if pretend exit polls were perfect, according to them, Bernie would still be losing. >Response bias is a more intuitive problem. Sometimes people just don't want to take your test. So while sampling bias occurs because of the survey administrator, response bias occurs because of the voter. During that same exit poll I helped with in rural Minnesota, a lot of people declined to take my test. I think, though I'm not sure, that part of it was that it was obvious I was from the college and many conservatives in town did not like the college. So then, this would result in fewer conservatives in the survey pool, messing up the final results. Bernie voters are clearly more enthusiastic, so they would be more likely to agree on answering pools. These pools are also usually done by young people, and they would likely attract more younger people to answer than older ones. https://www.quora.com/How-are-exit-polls-done-and-how-reliable-are-the-results-of-the-exit-poll I wanted Bernie, but will not delude myself and pretend he lost because of fraud.", '>>{JuanFutbol} : Yes, the people in charge of these decisions ARE a great source.'][">>{Clgrv} : I've had a similar type of protector with those button things and it was a complete piece of shit. I might've had a dodgy one, so it's purely anecdotal, but it put me off ever trying them again.", '>>{thisxisxlife} : I did use one of them. They were so so. It may have been the particular screen that I used, but the buttons would work like 85% of the time. However, the area of the screen that the buttons were supposed to trigger, wouldn\'t work if I actually tapped it. If I\'m not being clear: for example the bottom left corner of the phone would emulate the top left hand corner of the screen. If the bottom left didn\'t work (that 15% of the time) I would give up and tap the actual top left hand corner of the screen, but for whatever reason that part of my screen was kind of "disabled" or just very unresponsive. Tl;dr my experience was that it was shoddy at best. It\'s fun for a while, but if it\'s not functional it\'s not a huge deal to live without.', '>>{Bronson15} : I liked mine when I had it. Only issue was every time I pressed the "123" button it would trigger the back button.', ">>{dmd} : I've never used a screen protector on an iPhone since 3, and have never had a single scratch. I'm not sure what the point of them is any more.", ">>{regalager1986} : Doesn't really look any different than the $25 tempered glass I just got from the Verizon store when I bought my 6S", '>>{Kallure} : Not hyper glass. However, as a former Zagg user who switched over to a TechArmor tempered glass protector, I can speak to at least those and say I will never go back to Zagg.', '>>{AreWeNotDoinPhrasing} : Because most people don’t sit at home and leave their phone on a desk all day. If it ever goes into a pocket it will get micro scrathes.', ">>{Hailtothething} : It's not that anything is wrong with Zagg. It's just that tech armor does the same thing, maybe even better, for a 1/3rd the price.", '>>{Kallure} : Nothing particularly wrong with them. I just prefer the tempered glass one I picked up from TechArmor. It was actually considerably cheaper and has held up beautifully. I never used the glass Zaggs though, only the "stickers". So I guess more what I\'m saying is I prefer the glass over the stickers.', '>>{AreWeNotDoinPhrasing} : Oh okay, that makes sense. I ways lazy when I bought my new 6s+ and just got a zagg from verizon. I know I overpayed but didn’t know if the was something better.']</s> |
<s>[INST]>>{advancedfurniture91} : Good for that fucker. I hate his stupid ass.>>{Trump-Tzu} : His entire existence revolves around using his wealth to buy politicians and influence the country.>>{satosaison} : I mean, OSF helps support the spread of democracy around the world, but sure, whatever the alt right blogs have led you to believe is probably true.>>{satosaison} : His pro-democracy education programs throughout Eastern Europe and Asia are bad for Putin.>>{sagan_drinks_cosmos} : Give it up. She's practicing the oath of office already.>>{advancedfurniture91} : This x 1,000,000 Soros is a bigger PoS than Putin. He has been using Hillary Clinton/USA to further his interests all over the world>>{TOMapleLaughs} : A lot of billionaires do this to varying degrees. What is it about Soros that's different?>>{the92jays} : Because Russia hates George Soros > Russia has banned a pro-democracy charity founded by hedge fund billionaire George Soros, saying the organization posed a threat to both state security and the Russian constitution. http://www.cnbc.com/2015/11/30/russia-bans-george-soros-charity-as-security-threat.html EDIT: oh, and in case there's any confusions, Russia is behind DCLeaks (which these are part of), just like the DNC leaks. [ThreatConnect Identifies DCLeaks As Another Russian-backed Influence Outlet](https://www.threatconnect.com/blog/does-a-bear-leak-in-the-woods/)>>{TOMapleLaughs} : How is Soros like Putin? If he was, you'd think Trump and Soros would be best pals. Are they?>>{Sidwill} : A foreign government is actively carrying out espionage for the Trump campaign. Amazing.>>{TOMapleLaughs} : Is there anything from legit sources on Soros being perhaps sinister? Or is everything against him coming from the alt-right? I'm growing confused on the alt-right's take on him, since he's apparently against certain elites, but somehow for an unnamed global elite at the same time? I don't get it.>>{satosaison} : Since the 90's he has been a favorite boogeyman for the Republican Party, since he is sort of the liberal equivalent of the Koch brothers, however, in more recent times, a lot of the negative focus has come from the alt-right, with him being variously described as part of the New World Order, or part of a global Jewish conspiracy (in overtly anti-Semitic tones). Most people don't know anything about him or his organization, except that they are somehow "evil" in a vague sense. I have a ton of friends at OSF (or formerly of OSF) and I think they are amazing people, and that the work they do effects positive change around the globe.>>{satosaison} : The friends that I have working with the organization basically travel around Eastern Europe and Asia working with local governments or political groups to help promote free democratic elections. You can imagine who that would rub the wrong way.>>{TOMapleLaughs} : > a lot of the negative focus has come from the alt-right, with him being variously described as part of the New World Order, or part of a global Jewish conspiracy (in overtly anti-Semitic tones). This is what I don't get. How could he be both part of this conspiracy while at the same time taking heat for his own [apparently anti-Semitic advocacy?](http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Politics-And-Diplomacy/Hacked-Soros-e-mails-reveal-plans-to-fight-Israels-racist-policies-464149) More direct question: At what point does the alt-right's mountain of bullshit cave in on itself?>>{satosaison} : I want to make sure we are clear here, no one accuses him of "anti-Semitic" advocacy. Many conservative Israelis have criticized him for being insufficiently pro-Israel. He is pro-Israel in a general sense, however, has raised challenges to the some anti-democratic Israeli practices, and is generally anti-Netanyahu.>>{TOMapleLaughs} : I've read plenty of commentary that accuses him of this, but perhaps that's also coming from the alt-right. I think the term "anti-Semitic" gets thrown around too much for sure, and if he's anti-Netanyahu, well, isn't that a bit justified? Benji seems like a bit of a whackjob at the best of times. But does this mean the alt-rights are owned by Benji as part of an alter-conspiracy? Or am I reaching?>>{satosaison} : The problem is that has always been the political ploy of the Israeli conservatives, to claim that criticism of Israel is "anti-Israeli" rather than encouraging debate about their policies.>>{ihavesensitiveknees} : One thing I've learned throughout this election is that good network security people are sorely needed.>>{TOMapleLaughs} : This is pretty much what I thought. This discussion deserves at least one of [these.](http://49yzp92imhtx8radn224z7y1.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Netanyahu-300x170.png)>>{vvingnut} : ...good suicidal network security people with poor ethics.>>{TOMapleLaughs} : From Ann Coulter? Yeah, 'nuff said.>>{basedOp} : Isn't this interesting. A benign, but important story that has nothing to do with Hillary Clinton, Trump, or any presidential candidate again downvoted. Look at all the downvotes. More evidence of vote brigading in r/politics by those affiliated with CTR and the Soros organization.>>{Uktabi68} : This should be interesting. A reported dem. who also funded the carlisle group with all the neocons.>>{TOMapleLaughs} : Does it really matter who the alt-right pundit is?>>{TOMapleLaughs} : No it's pretty clear since he said it all himself, however it's a definite spin job to turn him, a jewish holocaust survivor, 14yrs old at the time, into a nazi sympathizer. But we're living in an era where the conservative conscience has all but vanished, so context.>>{TOMapleLaughs} : To see how deep the alt-right conspiracy goes. /s>>{SpeedflyChris} : Yep, I now only browse /r/politics by "controversial" as it's mostly a list of all the interesting stories CTR want buried.>>{i_called_that_shit} : Exactly this. Controversial is the new Hot now that Sanders supporters no longer give af and CTR has greater numbers.>>{Halfrich} : 59% upvoted. Other 41% protecting Soros' corrupt ass. These are the same lefty nuts who complain about money in politics. lol. soulless and conscience free.[/INST]['>>{advancedfurniture91} : Good for that fucker. I hate his stupid ass.', '>>{Trump-Tzu} : His entire existence revolves around using his wealth to buy politicians and influence the country.', '>>{satosaison} : I mean, OSF helps support the spread of democracy around the world, but sure, whatever the alt right blogs have led you to believe is probably true.', '>>{satosaison} : His pro-democracy education programs throughout Eastern Europe and Asia are bad for Putin.', ">>{sagan_drinks_cosmos} : Give it up. She's practicing the oath of office already.", '>>{advancedfurniture91} : This x 1,000,000 Soros is a bigger PoS than Putin. He has been using Hillary Clinton/USA to further his interests all over the world', ">>{TOMapleLaughs} : A lot of billionaires do this to varying degrees. What is it about Soros that's different?", ">>{the92jays} : Because Russia hates George Soros > Russia has banned a pro-democracy charity founded by hedge fund billionaire George Soros, saying the organization posed a threat to both state security and the Russian constitution. http://www.cnbc.com/2015/11/30/russia-bans-george-soros-charity-as-security-threat.html EDIT: oh, and in case there's any confusions, Russia is behind DCLeaks (which these are part of), just like the DNC leaks. [ThreatConnect Identifies DCLeaks As Another Russian-backed Influence Outlet](https://www.threatconnect.com/blog/does-a-bear-leak-in-the-woods/)", ">>{TOMapleLaughs} : How is Soros like Putin? If he was, you'd think Trump and Soros would be best pals. Are they?", '>>{Sidwill} : A foreign government is actively carrying out espionage for the Trump campaign. Amazing.', ">>{TOMapleLaughs} : Is there anything from legit sources on Soros being perhaps sinister? Or is everything against him coming from the alt-right? I'm growing confused on the alt-right's take on him, since he's apparently against certain elites, but somehow for an unnamed global elite at the same time? I don't get it.", '>>{satosaison} : Since the 90\'s he has been a favorite boogeyman for the Republican Party, since he is sort of the liberal equivalent of the Koch brothers, however, in more recent times, a lot of the negative focus has come from the alt-right, with him being variously described as part of the New World Order, or part of a global Jewish conspiracy (in overtly anti-Semitic tones). Most people don\'t know anything about him or his organization, except that they are somehow "evil" in a vague sense. I have a ton of friends at OSF (or formerly of OSF) and I think they are amazing people, and that the work they do effects positive change around the globe.', '>>{satosaison} : The friends that I have working with the organization basically travel around Eastern Europe and Asia working with local governments or political groups to help promote free democratic elections. You can imagine who that would rub the wrong way.', ">>{TOMapleLaughs} : > a lot of the negative focus has come from the alt-right, with him being variously described as part of the New World Order, or part of a global Jewish conspiracy (in overtly anti-Semitic tones). This is what I don't get. How could he be both part of this conspiracy while at the same time taking heat for his own [apparently anti-Semitic advocacy?](http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Politics-And-Diplomacy/Hacked-Soros-e-mails-reveal-plans-to-fight-Israels-racist-policies-464149) More direct question: At what point does the alt-right's mountain of bullshit cave in on itself?", '>>{satosaison} : I want to make sure we are clear here, no one accuses him of "anti-Semitic" advocacy. Many conservative Israelis have criticized him for being insufficiently pro-Israel. He is pro-Israel in a general sense, however, has raised challenges to the some anti-democratic Israeli practices, and is generally anti-Netanyahu.', '>>{TOMapleLaughs} : I\'ve read plenty of commentary that accuses him of this, but perhaps that\'s also coming from the alt-right. I think the term "anti-Semitic" gets thrown around too much for sure, and if he\'s anti-Netanyahu, well, isn\'t that a bit justified? Benji seems like a bit of a whackjob at the best of times. But does this mean the alt-rights are owned by Benji as part of an alter-conspiracy? Or am I reaching?', '>>{satosaison} : The problem is that has always been the political ploy of the Israeli conservatives, to claim that criticism of Israel is "anti-Israeli" rather than encouraging debate about their policies.', ">>{ihavesensitiveknees} : One thing I've learned throughout this election is that good network security people are sorely needed.", '>>{TOMapleLaughs} : This is pretty much what I thought. This discussion deserves at least one of [these.](http://49yzp92imhtx8radn224z7y1.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Netanyahu-300x170.png)', '>>{vvingnut} : ...good suicidal network security people with poor ethics.', ">>{TOMapleLaughs} : From Ann Coulter? Yeah, 'nuff said.", ">>{basedOp} : Isn't this interesting. A benign, but important story that has nothing to do with Hillary Clinton, Trump, or any presidential candidate again downvoted. Look at all the downvotes. More evidence of vote brigading in r/politics by those affiliated with CTR and the Soros organization.", '>>{Uktabi68} : This should be interesting. A reported dem. who also funded the carlisle group with all the neocons.', '>>{TOMapleLaughs} : Does it really matter who the alt-right pundit is?', ">>{TOMapleLaughs} : No it's pretty clear since he said it all himself, however it's a definite spin job to turn him, a jewish holocaust survivor, 14yrs old at the time, into a nazi sympathizer. But we're living in an era where the conservative conscience has all but vanished, so context.", '>>{TOMapleLaughs} : To see how deep the alt-right conspiracy goes. /s', '>>{SpeedflyChris} : Yep, I now only browse /r/politics by "controversial" as it\'s mostly a list of all the interesting stories CTR want buried.', '>>{i_called_that_shit} : Exactly this. Controversial is the new Hot now that Sanders supporters no longer give af and CTR has greater numbers.', ">>{Halfrich} : 59% upvoted. Other 41% protecting Soros' corrupt ass. These are the same lefty nuts who complain about money in politics. lol. soulless and conscience free."]</s> |
<s>[INST]>>{ktwebb2} : Scarborough: Giuliani would be 'disastrous' pick for State>>{Ovedya2011} : The Clintons have always been slimy and corrupt. Yet for some reason people like them.>>{sl600rt} : but it's ok for people to keep saying trump is illegitimate, or that hillary should be president because popular vote? you didn't read, did you? for the article also contains criticism of trump.>>{sl600rt} : Clinton's spend a lot of time and money on PR. They even did polls and focus groups on what time of the year Bill should take a vacation while he was president.>>{mhwtexplode} : Secretary of State?, the one that deals with other countries? oh god no>>{whitepeoplerules} : Come on, I'm pretty sure we all know Giuliani isn't happening. Him and Christie both are going to get the cold shoulder. I like this new rumor about Huntsman Jr as SoS.>>{WorldNeedsSaddam} : When r/politics stops calling Trump an "illegitimate" while simultaneously saying that Hillary deserves to be president, we will stop revealing facts about her.>>{LeviathanfromMars} : Who is Scarborough by the way? Never mind.>>{ktwebb2} : Former GOP congressman and current host of a morning show on MSNBC.>>{Solario_ff14} : Because neither of the things in your first sentence are true.>>{ktwebb2} : Do you think Romney will be cold shouldered as well?>>{Solario_ff14} : The closure of the CGI was announced months ago, well before the election. But of course facts have never mattered for people who hate the Clintons.>>{PapaBat} : Honestly I hope you keep going. Keep abusing a woman who will never return to politics. That's a smart strategy for 2018 and 2020.>>{whitepeoplerules} : I hope he is. He lacks character. I would MUCH rather see Huntsman, as he is experienced and very moderate compared to most republicans.>>{DickButtwoman} : My bet is that Conway is going to win this one. And Conway was seen with Quayle, walking into Trump tower. A former VP, no matter how idiotic, will Trump all the rest. My bet is on Quayle, even though no one's talking about it.>>{PapaBat} : People think Trump is illegitimate because he lost the popular vote by millions. It wasn't even close like it was in Bush v. Gore. The massive amounts of circumstantial evidence that he is a traitor only adds fuel to the fire. If the situation were reversed, and Trump won the popular vote by 4 million, Hillary was appointed president instead, and foreign intelligence agencies (more than one in this case -- not just the UK) found evidence suggesting she was committing treason...you would be O.K. with that?>>{sl600rt} : the article talks about that. yes, of course they would have announced closing it, before the election when they thought they would win. too many conflicts of interest and too little time. yet... they have nothing but time now. if they really believed in what the CGI was doing. Why would they still go ahead with closing it? Jimmy Carter has been working for Habitat for Humanity for over 30 years. Even with him being 92, surviving brain cancer, and not being that rich. Carter believes in his work.>>{ktwebb2} : Quayle??? I guess you can count out a dark horse.>>{DickButtwoman} : Especially when that horse has terribly lost their mind.>>{ktwebb2} : Rudy! Can I interest you in ambassador to venezula?>>{black_krim} : It's gonna be Rohrabacher. Putin's very own congressman.>>{versusgorilla} : >The Trumps have always been slimy and corrupt. Yet for some reason people like them.>>{deaduntil} : I mean, I supported Romney as SOS among available candidates, but Huntsman is my favorite Mormon.>>{Guitata} : blowviator extrodinaire! He will stick up for anything his party proposes, while constantly bragging about his time in congress (which he had to disgracefully leave) and interrupting anyone on a panel on the show that speaks for more than 7 seconds. another narcissist.>>{Gonzanic} : Listen, the people have spoken (well, 40-something percent in any case) and they clearly want to burn the motherfucker down. And who better to oversee a calamity of historical proportions than the man who compounded a certain tragedy fifteen or so years ago, by having denied the reasonable requests of those people who do the actual "hero" work?>>{sl600rt} : Trump won the election according to the rules and if you take out california, he wins pop vote too. there is no evidence of trump collusion with the Russians on the elections. trump has some business interests in russia and with some russians. the russians allegedly wanted trump to win and showed some campaign staff emails. at no point did trump try to undermine the government, overthrow the government, or give aid to an enemy nation. let us not forget about the Clinton's and their foreign entanglements with the sunni monarchies of the middle east.>>{ktwebb2} : When I used to watch he always brought up his time in congress, lol.>>{mindlessrabble} : Giuliani could do to diplomacy what Scarborough has done to journalism! /s>>{staringinto_space} : i am definitely pulling for a moderate like huntsman or romney. It would drive the alt-right people crazy.>>{PapaBat} : >Yet for some reason people like them. I wouldn't go that far. People elected an insane bigot who supports our Putin over Clinton. Having said that, I already miss the days of having slimy and corrupt politicians lead us over this Orange Abortion we have now. At least they had basic levels of competence and intelligence.>>{PapaBat} : > and if you take out california, he wins pop vote too. LOL so Californians don't count as Americans anymore? It's better run than any of the welfare queen Trump states. Love how you have to completely remove the most populous state in the country in order for Trump to win. >there is no evidence of trump collusion with the Russians on the elections Yes there is. His team was in contact with the Russians during the election. According to the Guardian (the ones who broke the Snowden story and frequent U.S. critic): >The Guardian has learned that the FBI applied for a warrant from the foreign intelligence surveillance (Fisa) court over the summer in order to monitor four members of the Trump team suspected of irregular contacts with Russian officials. Why the fuck were they talking to them at all? Insane. >at no point did trump try to undermine the government, overthrow the government, or give aid to an enemy nation. Remains to be seen as the investigation continues. One thing we do know for sure, Trump is publicly promoting Russian interests over our own. Like abandoning NATO, turning on Merkel, abandoning the sanctions for Russia's illegal invasion of Crimea, Trump kissing Putin's ass every chance he gets, etc. >let us not forget about the Clinton's and their foreign entanglements with the sunni monarchies of the middle east. I don't remember Clinton gushing over any dictators on social media (i.e. "Will he be my best friend?" -- actual Trump comment about Putin from 2013). Please correct me if I'm wrong.>>{10390} : What was going on within Clinton Inc. stank.... We hope the incoming adminstration realizes that such fetid arrangements are unworthy of people who hold high public office, and are likely to do them irreparable political harm.>>{sl600rt} : instead of gushing over dictators. Clinton helped shape foreign policy that benefits sunni monarchs at the expense of Shias and the Western world. Bahrain's(sunni monarchs ruling over a shia majority) brutal crack down on their arab spring protests. the USA response under clinton and obama, was a 1 year delay in arm sales. while the bahrain crown prince can walk into Hillary's secstate office on a whim. they talked big about how hillary once went to china to talk about women's rights, and hillary is a champion of women's rights. yet has she ever told her sunni arab muslim donors to give women equality? no. crimea is gone, the time to have done something was before the vote to join russia happened. Obama's sanctions were more symbolic than effective. the proxy war on ukraine is basically a loss for Russia. as a lot of people died, but no land changed hands. a lot of people in europe don't like merkel. since they view her as the reason millions of illegal immigrants have flooded into europe. Germany isn't pulling their weight in NATO either. they're a rich nation, but their military is a joke. NATO is effectively the USA, UK, and France. There are a bunch of other nations, some too poor and small to be able to defend themeslves, and others only capable of defending themselves for a while. Only the UK and France could actually send military power to the USA's aid in North America or the Pacific. NATO members need to be less dependent on the USA.>>{sl600rt} : slimy is a matter of perspective, and there have always been people that view the clinton's as slimy since the 90s. corrupt is a matter of perspective, and legal standing. a lot of people view the clintons as corrupt, even though they have always just managed to skirt the threshold of getting into lasting legal trouble.>>{sl600rt} : trump never did it while in public office, so far. it is more acceptable to be slimy and corrupt while a private citizen. people in public office, elected or appointed, should be held to a high standard.>>{PapaBat} : So basically you're taking the Putin/Trump acolyte route and completely ignoring the overwhelming amount of experts and U.S. intelligence agencies actually sworn to protect us. Got it. Best of luck to you and that Chinese Hoax of a climate change too.>>{ScannerBrightly} : So you are going to base your actions off of an anonymous horde of internet users and their upvotes? Good luck with that!>>{ScannerBrightly} : > people to keep saying trump is illegitimate That's a currently hotly debated topic. It is ALSO orthogonal to anything to do with Hillary. Hillary could be dead right now and it would still be an active question as to if Trump is legitimate or if he colluded with Russia.>>{sl600rt} : trump is legitimate unless someone can prove he, or a third party acting independently, changed election results. trump isn't the first president to be accused of being in collusion to foreign interests. Jefferson with the French and Kennedy with the pope, for examples. hillary is/was a politician. the CGI was active while she was active in politics. it being closed is current event. so it deserves mentioning on r/politics, or just rename the subreddit r/wehatetrump or r/democrat[/INST][">>{ktwebb2} : Scarborough: Giuliani would be 'disastrous' pick for State", '>>{mhwtexplode} : Secretary of State?, the one that deals with other countries? oh god no', ">>{whitepeoplerules} : Come on, I'm pretty sure we all know Giuliani isn't happening. Him and Christie both are going to get the cold shoulder. I like this new rumor about Huntsman Jr as SoS.", '>>{LeviathanfromMars} : Who is Scarborough by the way? Never mind.', '>>{ktwebb2} : Former GOP congressman and current host of a morning show on MSNBC.', '>>{ktwebb2} : Do you think Romney will be cold shouldered as well?', '>>{whitepeoplerules} : I hope he is. He lacks character. I would MUCH rather see Huntsman, as he is experienced and very moderate compared to most republicans.', ">>{DickButtwoman} : My bet is that Conway is going to win this one. And Conway was seen with Quayle, walking into Trump tower. A former VP, no matter how idiotic, will Trump all the rest. My bet is on Quayle, even though no one's talking about it.", '>>{ktwebb2} : Quayle??? I guess you can count out a dark horse.', '>>{DickButtwoman} : Especially when that horse has terribly lost their mind.', '>>{ktwebb2} : Rudy! Can I interest you in ambassador to venezula?', ">>{black_krim} : It's gonna be Rohrabacher. Putin's very own congressman.", '>>{deaduntil} : I mean, I supported Romney as SOS among available candidates, but Huntsman is my favorite Mormon.', '>>{Guitata} : blowviator extrodinaire! He will stick up for anything his party proposes, while constantly bragging about his time in congress (which he had to disgracefully leave) and interrupting anyone on a panel on the show that speaks for more than 7 seconds. another narcissist.', '>>{Gonzanic} : Listen, the people have spoken (well, 40-something percent in any case) and they clearly want to burn the motherfucker down. And who better to oversee a calamity of historical proportions than the man who compounded a certain tragedy fifteen or so years ago, by having denied the reasonable requests of those people who do the actual "hero" work?', '>>{ktwebb2} : When I used to watch he always brought up his time in congress, lol.', '>>{mindlessrabble} : Giuliani could do to diplomacy what Scarborough has done to journalism! /s', '>>{staringinto_space} : i am definitely pulling for a moderate like huntsman or romney. It would drive the alt-right people crazy.']['>>{Ovedya2011} : The Clintons have always been slimy and corrupt. Yet for some reason people like them.', ">>{sl600rt} : but it's ok for people to keep saying trump is illegitimate, or that hillary should be president because popular vote? you didn't read, did you? for the article also contains criticism of trump.", ">>{sl600rt} : Clinton's spend a lot of time and money on PR. They even did polls and focus groups on what time of the year Bill should take a vacation while he was president.", '>>{WorldNeedsSaddam} : When r/politics stops calling Trump an "illegitimate" while simultaneously saying that Hillary deserves to be president, we will stop revealing facts about her.', '>>{Solario_ff14} : Because neither of the things in your first sentence are true.', '>>{Solario_ff14} : The closure of the CGI was announced months ago, well before the election. But of course facts have never mattered for people who hate the Clintons.', ">>{PapaBat} : Honestly I hope you keep going. Keep abusing a woman who will never return to politics. That's a smart strategy for 2018 and 2020.", ">>{PapaBat} : People think Trump is illegitimate because he lost the popular vote by millions. It wasn't even close like it was in Bush v. Gore. The massive amounts of circumstantial evidence that he is a traitor only adds fuel to the fire. If the situation were reversed, and Trump won the popular vote by 4 million, Hillary was appointed president instead, and foreign intelligence agencies (more than one in this case -- not just the UK) found evidence suggesting she was committing treason...you would be O.K. with that?", '>>{sl600rt} : the article talks about that. yes, of course they would have announced closing it, before the election when they thought they would win. too many conflicts of interest and too little time. yet... they have nothing but time now. if they really believed in what the CGI was doing. Why would they still go ahead with closing it? Jimmy Carter has been working for Habitat for Humanity for over 30 years. Even with him being 92, surviving brain cancer, and not being that rich. Carter believes in his work.', '>>{versusgorilla} : >The Trumps have always been slimy and corrupt. Yet for some reason people like them.', ">>{sl600rt} : Trump won the election according to the rules and if you take out california, he wins pop vote too. there is no evidence of trump collusion with the Russians on the elections. trump has some business interests in russia and with some russians. the russians allegedly wanted trump to win and showed some campaign staff emails. at no point did trump try to undermine the government, overthrow the government, or give aid to an enemy nation. let us not forget about the Clinton's and their foreign entanglements with the sunni monarchies of the middle east.", ">>{PapaBat} : >Yet for some reason people like them. I wouldn't go that far. People elected an insane bigot who supports our Putin over Clinton. Having said that, I already miss the days of having slimy and corrupt politicians lead us over this Orange Abortion we have now. At least they had basic levels of competence and intelligence.", '>>{PapaBat} : > and if you take out california, he wins pop vote too. LOL so Californians don\'t count as Americans anymore? It\'s better run than any of the welfare queen Trump states. Love how you have to completely remove the most populous state in the country in order for Trump to win. >there is no evidence of trump collusion with the Russians on the elections Yes there is. His team was in contact with the Russians during the election. According to the Guardian (the ones who broke the Snowden story and frequent U.S. critic): >The Guardian has learned that the FBI applied for a warrant from the foreign intelligence surveillance (Fisa) court over the summer in order to monitor four members of the Trump team suspected of irregular contacts with Russian officials. Why the fuck were they talking to them at all? Insane. >at no point did trump try to undermine the government, overthrow the government, or give aid to an enemy nation. Remains to be seen as the investigation continues. One thing we do know for sure, Trump is publicly promoting Russian interests over our own. Like abandoning NATO, turning on Merkel, abandoning the sanctions for Russia\'s illegal invasion of Crimea, Trump kissing Putin\'s ass every chance he gets, etc. >let us not forget about the Clinton\'s and their foreign entanglements with the sunni monarchies of the middle east. I don\'t remember Clinton gushing over any dictators on social media (i.e. "Will he be my best friend?" -- actual Trump comment about Putin from 2013). Please correct me if I\'m wrong.', '>>{10390} : What was going on within Clinton Inc. stank.... We hope the incoming adminstration realizes that such fetid arrangements are unworthy of people who hold high public office, and are likely to do them irreparable political harm.', ">>{sl600rt} : instead of gushing over dictators. Clinton helped shape foreign policy that benefits sunni monarchs at the expense of Shias and the Western world. Bahrain's(sunni monarchs ruling over a shia majority) brutal crack down on their arab spring protests. the USA response under clinton and obama, was a 1 year delay in arm sales. while the bahrain crown prince can walk into Hillary's secstate office on a whim. they talked big about how hillary once went to china to talk about women's rights, and hillary is a champion of women's rights. yet has she ever told her sunni arab muslim donors to give women equality? no. crimea is gone, the time to have done something was before the vote to join russia happened. Obama's sanctions were more symbolic than effective. the proxy war on ukraine is basically a loss for Russia. as a lot of people died, but no land changed hands. a lot of people in europe don't like merkel. since they view her as the reason millions of illegal immigrants have flooded into europe. Germany isn't pulling their weight in NATO either. they're a rich nation, but their military is a joke. NATO is effectively the USA, UK, and France. There are a bunch of other nations, some too poor and small to be able to defend themeslves, and others only capable of defending themselves for a while. Only the UK and France could actually send military power to the USA's aid in North America or the Pacific. NATO members need to be less dependent on the USA.", ">>{sl600rt} : slimy is a matter of perspective, and there have always been people that view the clinton's as slimy since the 90s. corrupt is a matter of perspective, and legal standing. a lot of people view the clintons as corrupt, even though they have always just managed to skirt the threshold of getting into lasting legal trouble.", '>>{sl600rt} : trump never did it while in public office, so far. it is more acceptable to be slimy and corrupt while a private citizen. people in public office, elected or appointed, should be held to a high standard.', ">>{PapaBat} : So basically you're taking the Putin/Trump acolyte route and completely ignoring the overwhelming amount of experts and U.S. intelligence agencies actually sworn to protect us. Got it. Best of luck to you and that Chinese Hoax of a climate change too.", '>>{ScannerBrightly} : So you are going to base your actions off of an anonymous horde of internet users and their upvotes? Good luck with that!', ">>{ScannerBrightly} : > people to keep saying trump is illegitimate That's a currently hotly debated topic. It is ALSO orthogonal to anything to do with Hillary. Hillary could be dead right now and it would still be an active question as to if Trump is legitimate or if he colluded with Russia.", ">>{sl600rt} : trump is legitimate unless someone can prove he, or a third party acting independently, changed election results. trump isn't the first president to be accused of being in collusion to foreign interests. Jefferson with the French and Kennedy with the pope, for examples. hillary is/was a politician. the CGI was active while she was active in politics. it being closed is current event. so it deserves mentioning on r/politics, or just rename the subreddit r/wehatetrump or r/democrat"]</s> |
<s>[INST]>>{MysticRay} : Days of Moderate Democratic Party 'Are Over,' Analyst Declares>>{MysticRay} : >This idea that we're going to be this moderate party that's going to move in this direction, that's going to throw blacks under the bus for criminal justice reform, or for prison expansion, that's going to throw workers under the bus for NAFTA—those days are over.>>{FUCK_REPUBLICANS1776} : Good, lets swing left as fuck and finally make this country into a place worth being arrogant about>>{tasslehawf} : Eh. It will be hard to unite. At least the republicans have racism and bigotry to unite them.>>{LackingLack} : I hope both parties DO get more sharply ideologically defined it would be a sign of political maturation in this country.>>{NotYouTu} : You do know that independent doesn't mean middle, right?>>{lebowskisfarmhand} : independents are a myth that takes up at most 12%. Yes, lets push moderate Reds to choosing sanity or insanity.>>{ricjames2016} : Wow, as a Republican I would love for Dems to go even further left. More landslide election wins!>>{P0NYP0UNDER} : Let's stop referring to it as "moderate" and call it what it is/was. Conservative. The Party has been center-right ever since Bill Clinton remade it. It may have been the correct move at the time but times have changed.>>{Burn_it_all_down} : I mean really who gives a flying fuck about other people?! who could rally behind them?>>{OhLookANewAccount} : Giving republicans any sense of relevancy in modern society has backfired horrifically.>>{OhLookANewAccount} : Yes, like Obama's landslide election win. Trump barely managed to get the 70k votes he needed to win... and he had to *beg* Russia to help him to do so. Imagine how much further America will go when it joins the rest of the first world in progress, united under Democratic ideals. Landslide wins that bury the regressive caveman republican ideals in the footnote of history. I can't wait.>>{EagenVegham} : I forgot, anyone that doesn't want full socialism is a conservative in the eyes or those on the far-left aren't they?>>{madcorp} : Moving farther left would be the death of the Democratic Party. The progressive left has already marginalized large swatches of moderates in swing states because they don't agree with everything they stand for.>>{drtoszi} : Nothing, the Hil-crats just trying to hype up their next Hillary by trying to hit every minority point possible. The sane Dems are too busy trying to save the party while these guys go to interviews.>>{OhLookANewAccount} : Luckily there are men and women who stand in the way. 3 million more men and women than the ones supporting the worst regressive policies of criminals and madmen. We stand and fight.>>{OhLookANewAccount} : Luckily there are 3 million more people who stand against that elimination. If it comes to destroying the foundations of America then American's will tear down the gold towers in which these traitors live and spill their blood in the streets. We are a nation of misbehaving patriots. We stand for human rights, and we are founded on the destruction of governments that seek to limit those rights. That is the blood in all of our veins, and is what will stop these criminals and madmen from tearing our country apart.>>{P0NYP0UNDER} : Not many people were advocating for socialism. Certainly not Bernie or his wing of the Party. Though that may be our future since millennials prefer socialism to capitalism. If you embrace an agenda that is conservative by modern standards (strengthening the military and using it often, support more oil pipelines, support trade agreements that greatly favor corporations at the expense of all else, etc) and swear off a liberal agenda such as single-payer health care, tax funded K-college public education, strengthening our unions and lessening our use of the military, then it stands to reason that you may be a conservative or a moderate conservative.[/INST][">>{MysticRay} : Days of Moderate Democratic Party 'Are Over,' Analyst Declares", ">>{MysticRay} : >This idea that we're going to be this moderate party that's going to move in this direction, that's going to throw blacks under the bus for criminal justice reform, or for prison expansion, that's going to throw workers under the bus for NAFTA—those days are over.", '>>{FUCK_REPUBLICANS1776} : Good, lets swing left as fuck and finally make this country into a place worth being arrogant about', '>>{tasslehawf} : Eh. It will be hard to unite. At least the republicans have racism and bigotry to unite them.', '>>{LackingLack} : I hope both parties DO get more sharply ideologically defined it would be a sign of political maturation in this country.', ">>{NotYouTu} : You do know that independent doesn't mean middle, right?", '>>{lebowskisfarmhand} : independents are a myth that takes up at most 12%. Yes, lets push moderate Reds to choosing sanity or insanity.', '>>{ricjames2016} : Wow, as a Republican I would love for Dems to go even further left. More landslide election wins!', '>>{P0NYP0UNDER} : Let\'s stop referring to it as "moderate" and call it what it is/was. Conservative. The Party has been center-right ever since Bill Clinton remade it. It may have been the correct move at the time but times have changed.', '>>{Burn_it_all_down} : I mean really who gives a flying fuck about other people?! who could rally behind them?', '>>{OhLookANewAccount} : Giving republicans any sense of relevancy in modern society has backfired horrifically.', ">>{OhLookANewAccount} : Yes, like Obama's landslide election win. Trump barely managed to get the 70k votes he needed to win... and he had to *beg* Russia to help him to do so. Imagine how much further America will go when it joins the rest of the first world in progress, united under Democratic ideals. Landslide wins that bury the regressive caveman republican ideals in the footnote of history. I can't wait.", ">>{EagenVegham} : I forgot, anyone that doesn't want full socialism is a conservative in the eyes or those on the far-left aren't they?", ">>{madcorp} : Moving farther left would be the death of the Democratic Party. The progressive left has already marginalized large swatches of moderates in swing states because they don't agree with everything they stand for.", '>>{drtoszi} : Nothing, the Hil-crats just trying to hype up their next Hillary by trying to hit every minority point possible. The sane Dems are too busy trying to save the party while these guys go to interviews.', '>>{OhLookANewAccount} : Luckily there are men and women who stand in the way. 3 million more men and women than the ones supporting the worst regressive policies of criminals and madmen. We stand and fight.', ">>{OhLookANewAccount} : Luckily there are 3 million more people who stand against that elimination. If it comes to destroying the foundations of America then American's will tear down the gold towers in which these traitors live and spill their blood in the streets. We are a nation of misbehaving patriots. We stand for human rights, and we are founded on the destruction of governments that seek to limit those rights. That is the blood in all of our veins, and is what will stop these criminals and madmen from tearing our country apart.", '>>{P0NYP0UNDER} : Not many people were advocating for socialism. Certainly not Bernie or his wing of the Party. Though that may be our future since millennials prefer socialism to capitalism. If you embrace an agenda that is conservative by modern standards (strengthening the military and using it often, support more oil pipelines, support trade agreements that greatly favor corporations at the expense of all else, etc) and swear off a liberal agenda such as single-payer health care, tax funded K-college public education, strengthening our unions and lessening our use of the military, then it stands to reason that you may be a conservative or a moderate conservative.']</s> |
"<s>[INST]>>{ki_no_akuma} : The Democrats’ inept resistance: Party leaders want Bernie Sanders to (...TRUNCATED) |
"<s>[INST]>>{roundwhole} : Woman Who Took 'Chance' Pic With Hillary In Woods Has Sick History With H(...TRUNCATED) |
"<s>[INST]>>{OozeNAahz} : Milo Yianopoulos...yeah, not about to click that link...>>{beencotstealin}(...TRUNCATED) |
End of preview. Expand
in Dataset Viewer.
No dataset card yet
New: Create and edit this dataset card directly on the website!
Contribute a Dataset Card- Downloads last month
- 3