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

The 2016 Election

blog.samaltman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 646 posts

Re: The 2016 Election

#111

Post by kybernetikos »

Waterluvian wrote: post #65
lhnz wrote: post #6

> We should all feel a duty to try to understand the roughly > half of the country that thinks we are severely misguided. > I don’t understand how 43% of the country supports Trump. > But I’d like to find out, because we have to include > everyone in our path forward. If our best ideas are to > stop talking to or fire anyone who disagrees with us, > we’ll be facing this whole situation again in 2020. > > That kind of…

Precisely. It doesn't mean that their perspective is guaranteed to be rational or free from ugly ideas. But it's a valid perspective.

What does validity mean in this context?

Re: The 2016 Election

#113

Post by rtx »

jowiar wrote: post #69
MrZongle2 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If money is speech (and SCOTUS tells us it is) and Thiel donates over $1 million to Trump's campaign, then he effectively is saying what Trump is saying." And wasn't this the argument made by those who supported the ouster of Brendan Eich from Mozilla?

I made it then, and I'm making it now. One of the best ways we can fix campaign finance is by holding campaign financiers responsible for what they're funding.

Why not make voters responsible.

Re: The 2016 Election

#114

Post by ebilgenius »

ryanSrich wrote: post #41
lhnz wrote: post #6

> We should all feel a duty to try to understand the roughly > half of the country that thinks we are severely misguided. > I don’t understand how 43% of the country supports Trump. > But I’d like to find out, because we have to include > everyone in our path forward. If our best ideas are to > stop talking to or fire anyone who disagrees with us, > we’ll be facing this whole situation again in 2020. > > That kind of…

It's definitely not a popular position. Just take a look at Twitter and you'll see people from both sides nearly calling for the death of the other. While not super surprising I've seen little discussion around the fact that your chances of being fired for supporting one of the candidates (you can guess who) publicly are pretty good. Especially when you work in the tech field. Which to me is really interesting becaus…

It's hard to have moderate, rational discussions in 255 characters

Re: The 2016 Election

#115

Post by mcherm »

adamnemecek wrote: post #63

As much as I hate Trump, I'm kind of hoping for him to win. Fundamentally, I think that 4 years of Trump might be better than 8 years of Hillary. Also, if Hillary wins, the DNC won't have to change. If Trump wins, in 2020, they will be forced to nominate maybe someone like Sanders. Trump winning will also really underscore how broken the US political system is and I'm hoping that him winning could be a catalyst for s…

I am tempted to respond to this and then I realize that I don't want HN to become yet another place for discussing partisan politics so I choose to hold my tongue (except for posting this sentence).

Re: The 2016 Election

#117

Post by teekert »

I'm not from the US but I'd vote for Trump. To me Hillary represent the imperial US, the economic Hitmen US, the could war US, the NSA US, the make sure Russia-Europe relations are poor US. She represents the elites, the Rothschilds, the banks, the family of secrets, the kill-list, the endless meddling in countries that have a lot of natural resources "for the common good". She represents Guantanamo bay, more drones and more trade agreements to sue poor countries if their companies behave poorly. She represents the lobbying culture, the Monsantos and the Bechtels.

I will be downvoted, I am already looked at as if I'm less intelligent than all the others at work. But I honestly think the 3rd world war is less likely to happen under Trump. He wants to talk normally to Putin. He represents a more US focused US imho and I am convinced the mainstream media hates him because they are in the pockets of the current rulers.

Re: The 2016 Election

#118

Post by jimjimjim »

Remember before commenting: please do not to think in absolutes. us or them. with me or against me. true believer vs burn the heretics.

it's a descent into tribal warfare where reason and logic give way to misunderstanding and escalation of perceived wrongs.

Re: The 2016 Election

#119

Post by rrego »

The only way I can see that someone can't understand why some people support Trump is because they have not made an attempt to understand the other side's positions. I agree with close to none of Trump's positions and abhor the man, but it is simply smug to dismiss his supporters (credit to Sam for not dismissing them as dumb).

1) Anti-Free trade. Bernie and Trump both were very popular with working class individuals who are out of work. Trade deals have definitely caused job loss for many workers. Many anti-NAFTA people blame it on causing the immigration from Mexico

2) Anti-Immigration. Job loss and racial identity are both at play here. Lack of homogeny in the country. Too much diversity etc.

3) Disgust with career politicians. They like how brash he is.

4) Lower taxes

etc.

FWIW, this is exactly the kind of post that shouldn't be on hacker news.

Re: The 2016 Election

#120

Post by DougN7 »

jowiar wrote: post #69
MrZongle2 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If money is speech (and SCOTUS tells us it is) and Thiel donates over $1 million to Trump's campaign, then he effectively is saying what Trump is saying." And wasn't this the argument made by those who supported the ouster of Brendan Eich from Mozilla?

I made it then, and I'm making it now. One of the best ways we can fix campaign finance is by holding campaign financiers responsible for what they're funding.

That is a very dark world where the minority need to legitimately fear the majority. No thank you.
Post reply on HN