House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

> But they wouldn't be able to get them, no matter how hard they demanded

I work in securities. My work emails must be archived. If I send work email from my personal email (a) that is potentially illegal and (b) I must promptly turn them over to my archives. If I refuse b, I face civil and potentially criminal censure.

Blows me away how finance has stricter controls than the people conducting bombing raids.

Fuzzy logic.

> In 1989 he reportedly said "Black guys counting my money! I hate it. The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day."

Last I checked, "Jewish" was not an ethnicity, but a belief system.

> He spent 5 years pushing the birther conspiracy even after Obama produced his birth certificate. He also implied that Obama was a Muslim despite his claims to the contrary.

Muslim is not a race. How is asking if the president was born in the US racist?

> He's implied several times that Obama sides with terrorists because of his upbringing.

Upbringing is a race?

> He started his campaign with this quote: "When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best.

Mexico is a country, not a race.

> He said a judge was unqualified to preside over a Trump University lawsuit because he was Mexican

Mexican is not a race. Louis CK is mexican.

> He uses language like "My African American", "The Muslims", and "The Hispanics".

African american is not a race. Charlize Theron is African American. Islam is not a race, it's a belief system. Hispanics - so he's racist against Spaniards or just mestizos?

> He refused to disavow David Duke on air until he "researched him more." He said he didn't know who he was, but it turns out there are numerous example of him mentioning David Duke in the past. He had primaries in southern states coming up, so publicly disavowing David Duke would have likely hurt him. Especially since David Duke has been campaigning for him. He did eventually disavow him after the media made a huge deal about it.

He did eventually disavow him, after agreeing with none of his views. Your point is?

> He repeatedly refers to Elizabeth Warren as "Pocahontas".

She has provided no documentation for her purportedly Native American heritage, even when pressed by the Cherokee.

> He said "They don’t look like Indians to me" about a Native American tribe that ran a competing casino.

How is that racist? I often say to my friends "I thought you were Japanese. You don't look chinese."

> He said "Maybe [the protester] should have been roughed up,” he mused. “It was absolutely disgusting what he was doing." about a Black Lives matter protester at his rally.

Way to dog whistle. He said his actions are deplorable, and he mentioned the (racist) name of the movement he was associated with.

> He said "I will say that people who are following me are very passionate,” Trump said. “They love this country and they want this country to be great again. They are passionate." when asked about supporters who beat a homeless Latino man because "they all need to be deported."

Was the homeless Latino man an illegal immigrant or a citizen? If he was an illegal immigrant, he should be deported.

In 1974, when Bill lost a bid for senate, Hillary called his campaign manager a "fucking jew bastard."

Hillary as First Lady called black men "super predators" that need to be "brought to heel."

Hillary Clinton started the birther conspiracy.

Hillary took part in a scripted joke with Bill de Blasio about "colored people time."

Hillary voted as a Senator to build a wall between Mexico and the United States.

Trump calls Elizabeth Warren "Pocahontas" because she lied about her ethnicity for support.

Unless the vote is decided by a handful of ballots, one must consider whether their vote has more utility as a protest ballot against the status quo.

The actual reason for all of this is because both major American political parties have discovered, as many corporations have over the past few years, that the only thing that matters when it comes to persuasion is appeals to one's identity and emotions directly. As it turns out, people don't give a crap about logic, reason, facts, deduction... our day-to-day lives are complex enough as it is, only a few of us can actually afford the time to research all of the media's claims, and thus, reactionary, controversial, attention-grabbing headlines (not full articles, who reads those anyways?) dictate what people believe is the truth.

So yeah, you and I look at that modal popup and think, "ew gross, why are you trying THIS hard to shove this negative image of your opponent down my throat, before I can even see a single fact about you and your campaign?", but I can totally see why they would do such a thing. People are very susceptible to being persuaded by these strong emotional accusations—it seems to me that the dialog is saying, "hey, you're not one of those filthy TRUMP supporters, ARE YOU? If not, prove it by clicking this button below." I believe that such a persuasive device is far more effective than either of us can imagine.