581–590 of 766 posts
That's why if you wanted positive change, you should've voted Bernie Sanders.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a libertarian he believes in survival of the fittest, so a lot of his strategy involves "fuck shit up" and see what survives. Or just letting things sort themselves out.
I wonder what a world full of people who proactively "fuck shit up" would look like.
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.
It's disgraceful that you're trying to bully an organization based on the political opinions of one of their partners. You should be ashamed of yourself and of the damage you're doing to your country.
Alt-news folk backing Trump will have a heart attack upon seeing the steering committee head of Bildeburg back him.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Hasn't Thiel talked about how it's bad that women have the right to vote? I was curious about this, so I looked it up. From Thiel's writings on Cato Unbound: > Since 1920, the vast increase in welfare beneficiaries and the extension of the franchise to women — two constituencies that are notoriously tough for libertarians — have rendered the notion of “capitalist democracy” into an oxymoron. Later: > It would be ab…
He's saying he doesn't want to disenfranchise women or any particular class, he wants to disenfranchise everybody. He's framing the democratic political process as something that doesn't get anywhere and something that gets in the way of progress, so he prefers authoritarian power over the checks and balances of a democratic political system.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I haven't kept up, but have any of the accusations been proven yet? Last I checked they were all allegations.
When just two people are in the room, you won't find it possible to "prove" anything. But there is, of course, no reason to doubt the honesty of the women involved. Why wouldn't you trust them?
1. The accusers are being blackmailed into doing it. 2. Or they are being bribed by people wanting to influence the election. 3. Or they want to be famous. 4. Or they have a personal vendetta against Donald Trump.
There is a reason we have courts, trials and burdens of proof. And the convenient timing of some of these accusations doesn't help, either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There isn't a big dial labelled "regulations" that when you turn it up, the "economy" needle goes down. Business requires trust. Just as more and better deals happen when both parties believe that contracts will be enforced, when consumers can trust that the meat they're buying has been inspected, that there's no toxic materials in their mattresses, and that their bank deposits are insured, the whole engine of commer…
Some good points. I liked Obama 4 years ago when I was old enough to vote for president the first time. Now 4 years later, I'm liking Trump. But I still think social issues and even things like basic income, and using technology to do work sounds interesting. Trump says he'll tax goods made out of the US 30% more on import, he never said they had to be made by humans. I feel regulations increase the cost of business…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And this country voted for Richard Nixon twice. Once in a historic landslide. Do you feel that disqualifies Clinton from the presidency?
One wonders what Nixon's legacy would have been if he just hadn't gotten caught. He wasn't a complete fuckup, and did actually accomplish some worthy things, but Watergate casts a shadow over it all. Meanwhile, look at his opponent in 1960. JFK is practically revered as a saint because he had his brains blown out on national television. We largely forget or excuse his intense sex addiction, or that he very nearly pus…
Although some said he made anti-Semitic statements, he employed a Jewish Secretary of State, Kissinger who basically ran the international part of the presidency when Nixon was in the later states of the Watergate Investigation.
Over the advice of Defense and other advisors, he insisted on fully rearming a desperate Israel with a very, very impressive airlift during the Yom Kippur War (1973) when Israel was surprise attacked by Egypt and Syria on Yom Kippur.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When just two people are in the room, you won't find it possible to "prove" anything. But there is, of course, no reason to doubt the honesty of the women involved. Why wouldn't you trust them?
Because Donald Trump seems to call the accusations "completely fabricated". Why wouldn't you trust Donald Trump?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depends what you mean by electoral fraud. In the US, the only electoral fraud that has a significant impact is one where groups of voters are prohibited/prevented from voting. Pennsylvania is particularly vulnerable to that one due to very broad rules that allow people to question the legality of other people to vote. It's why Trump has been calling PA supports to do exactly that. Other types of fraud (ballot stuffin…
At least one presidential election has been decided by a margin so close that a few hundred votes made the difference. That's not so massive a scale that it couldn't happen.