Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Untitled topic

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 766 posts

Re: undefined

#421

Post by empath75 »

blhack wrote: post #32
vinhboy wrote: post #17

Politics aside. What does it say about his judgement to continue investing in something that is statistically on track to fail. Not only that, but its also a toxic brand to attach yourself to. Or do we just put this in the "expensive new hobby" section and leave it at that. ---- Update: I want to hijack my own comment to ponder something. As someone with no money and no influence, I find it hard to think about how to…

Trump isn't nearly as far behind as you may think: http://graphics.latimes.com/usc-presidential-poll-dashboard/ Yes, this poll is an outlier because their methodology is very different than most other polls. Yes, Nate Silver has a very different outlook on the election, but Nate Silver was also not very reliable during the primary season (although that is, by his admission, because primaries don't have very good poll…

Nate silver personally hasn't had a good record of making predictions in the primary this year, but his model had trump winning through most of the primary season. He just didn't believe his own model.

Re: undefined

#422

Post by blisterpeanuts »

Jimmy wrote: post #379
AvenueIngres wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thiel has bachelor and JD degrees in Philosophy and Law from Stanford. I think it is a little bit preposterous to assume he holds his current views about Trump simply because he is too uneducated to think otherwise. >Maybe Thiel lacks education in history and pines for a glorious fictitious past, which is a core tenet of the trump campaign. And fascism. Maybe you are the one confusing narratives built around each can…

>Thiel understands that should Clinton win, there will be war Why is this?

Maybe because of Clinton's track record. While Sec. of State, she persuaded Obama to intervene in Libya, and in recent speeches she has suggested that the U.S. should take a more aggressive stance against Russian expansionism. She's more of a hawk than is either Obama or her husband. I would put her in roughly the same category of interventionism as Bush.

Re: undefined

#423

Post by empath75 »

easyd wrote: post #144

Everyone seems to think it's about maximizing his ROI or, less cynical, about economics. But here's a quote from Thiel's speech at the republican convention: "Instead of going to Mars, we have invaded the Middle East. We don't need to see Hillary Clinton's deleted emails: her incompetence is in plain sight. She pushed for a war in Libya, and today it's a training ground for ISIS. On this most important issue, Donald…

I agree that Hillary would likely be a terrible president, but as PJ Rourke said, 'she's wrong within the normal parameters'

A vote for trump is a vote to end the republic. I don't think we're at that point yet, no matter how bad Hillary is.

Re: undefined

#424

Post by speeder »

dickman3000 wrote: post #390
easyd wrote: post #144

Everyone seems to think it's about maximizing his ROI or, less cynical, about economics. But here's a quote from Thiel's speech at the republican convention: "Instead of going to Mars, we have invaded the Middle East. We don't need to see Hillary Clinton's deleted emails: her incompetence is in plain sight. She pushed for a war in Libya, and today it's a training ground for ISIS. On this most important issue, Donald…

Hasn't Thiel talked about how it's bad that women have the right to vote? Doesn't seem like he cares much about liberty here. Thiel strikes me as more of an authoritarian than libertarian, hence probably why he supports Trump. I mean ... why else would he support Trump? No sense in doing complicated mental gymnastics here.

I can explain a bit about this.

I am a libertarian-authoritarian mix myself.

Basically, I believe the best government is a local authoritarian government, where variables are known, and the ruler is close to the population, for example Singapore.

When you go stupid-big sized countries (like US, Brazil, Russia...), you have a problem: these countries have too much land and populations to manage efficiently.

In those cases, the ideal solution would be a libertarian FEDERAL government, while local governments (municipalities and states) can do "whatever" they want as long it doesn't put national security in danger.

That said, there are some authoritarian rules, that if applied to the whole country, aren't 100% bad, they are not ideal, but it might work, for example avoiding war, encouraging reproduction (specially among the elites), protecting your economy from external threats, reducing the economy internal mess (subsidies specially are problematic), and so on.

Re: undefined

#425

Post by fixxer »

int_19h wrote: post #312
fixxer wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True; I wonder what impact a 9 point poll-implied spread turning into 1-2 points in the ballot booth could have on future political activities by "alt right" candidates. It feels like many are treating this as a "beat Trump and save the world" situation without realizing that the underlying movement isn't likely going away. If Trump brings in a large enough group of non-voters, that will have long lasting impacts (pe…

It can still be "save the world" situation even when understanding this. Long-term, it would be nice to have a SCOTUS that would be more of a check on someone like Trump, and less of a rubberstamp.

I'd be happy with a SCOTUS that checks the executive branch in general. We're already in full-on rubber stamp mode and have been for 16 years, if not longer.

Re: undefined

#426

Post by golemotron »

golemotron wrote: post #392
DominikR wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm in Austria, it was a disgrace. All of media was attacking the right wing guy with no dissenting voices, and you have to be afraid of personal and professional consequences if you endorse him or say anything against the Socialist candidate they are trying to push. It's literally like in the Soviet Union, at least that's what my parents told me as they came from a Communist country.

Just like the US this year. This is not an exaggeration. Many people would have professional and personal consequences for supporting Trump in public. People like Peter Thiel and Scott Adams have enough money to not care. Scott isn't even endorsing him and he says that his speaking engagements have dried up. We may see a big difference between the polling and the election results this year. The Shy Tory Effect came t…

Even here. Downvoted for this simple observation. What have we become?

Re: undefined

#427

Post by AJ007 »

Everyone is over-weighting what Donald Trump says. This is a problem for both his supporters and antagonists. Between not paying back lenders and Trump University, I don't know whats left to claim credibility.

I think Thiel is hedging for both himself and as a proxy for Facebook. If Trump wins, Facebook gets the most favored corporation status currently awarded to Google. If Trump loses, Thiel perhaps assumes everyone will forget soon enough and Zuckerberg can diss-avow any Facebook connection.

Re: undefined

#428

Post by ThomPete »

dmode wrote: post #404

I hope the tech world shuns Thiel. This is what he is supporting http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/01/28/upshot/donald-... Specifically, look for his insults aimed at reporters and journalists. This man is unhinged and unqualified. He is currently riling up his followers by claiming that the election will be rigged. I am concerned the consequences of that message https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2016/1…

The real tragedy is how easily peoples attention are all about form not substance.

For all the crazy things Trump is saying he actually have some points that are far more important to discuss than whatever he said about women or journalists.

With Hillary you get a seasoned politician who is going to do what they have always been doing. Absolutely nothing. That's besides of course making a huge mess internationally. And a continued support for those specialt interests who pays for her campaigns.

With Hillary you get an absurd potential continuation of a two family dynasty having controlled this country for almost 40 years with only one interruption.

With Hillary you have a woman how is point her fingers at Trump for his taxes yet have done absolutely nothing to change the taxes and is herself using tax-havens where she channels all the money she and Bill make on international speeches, speeches they only have been paid for because they were politicians. Something the american people paid for and got nothing out of. (Not a single job created out of all that money they accumulated)

With Hillary you get both her support for Iraq and several other international faillures.

With Hillary you get a continuation of exactly what everyone agrees can't continue like this.

Go figure.

Re: undefined

#429

Post by idlewords »

Peter Thiel is a YCombinator partner, yet YC has steadfastly refused to disavow him. In a Twitter exchange with David Heinemeier Hansson, Paul Graham suggested that to do so would somehow be the equivalent of firing an employee for having a distateful political opinion.

YC's silence on a partner's outspoken support of Trump is disgraceful, and sends the most shameful message about our industry.

Re: undefined

#430

Post by colmvp »

mathetic wrote: post #326
jondubois wrote: post #285

I agree with Thiel about Trump. On the surface, individually, I think that Trump probably looks like a worse person than Hillary, but if you look at each candidate as the sum of their social connections - I think Hillary turns out to be much, much worse. Hillary Clinton is heavily influenced by big finance. That's where the bulk of her friends and her connections come from. Even her son in law is an investment banker…

It always amuses me how short political memory is. > At least Trump built houses and apartments for people. He didn't build his wealth by leveraging political power. All he said during the primary was that he was leveraging political power by donations in the past and his selling point was being self-funded. On top of that he didn't build his wealth. He inherited it while declaring bankruptcy several times along the…

> It always amuses me how short political memory is.

Indeed. So many Clinton supporters overlook her voting record and justify it despite some very questionable decisions.

Post reply on HN