The 2016 Election • Hacker News Board

Re: The 2016 Election

#491

Post by int_19h » Mon, Oct 17, 2016, 9:47 PM UTC

olalonde wrote: post #413

noir_lord wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

False equivalence though since Hillary isn't Trump, I don't like Hillary much either but I dislike her less than Trump. It's a lose/lose situation but the potential losses are large on one side than the other.

I understood the argument as "it's OK to blacklist people because of their political views if they are powerful " in which case it's fair to question whether that belief would hold for a different set of political views. As you might have guessed, I think blacklisting people based on their political views is a slippery slope and shouldn't be done even to powerful people (especially for political positions that are ac…

This seems to imply that all political views are equal.

They're not.

For example, "Jews are a race of parasites that should be exterminated" is a political view, very popular in some countries back in the day (and in some other countries even today).

I don't have any problem blacklisting people who believe in that, and act to make those beliefs a reality, even if the acts themselves are legal (e.g. funding a political campaign to gain power). Do you?

Re: The 2016 Election

#492

Post by douche » Mon, Oct 17, 2016, 9:49 PM UTC

swang wrote: post #339

postcarnival wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Trump threatened to jail his political opponent if elected. actually he said he would appoint a special prosecutor to the case which honestly should have been done a long time ago and based on the context of it is perfectly reasonable.

No. he actually said this: Clinton: "it's just awfully good that someone with the temperament of Donald Trump is not in charge of the law in our country." Trump: "Because you'd be in jail." Maybe, (surprise, surprise) Trump wasn't thinking it through and just wanted to get that quip in on Clinton but the language is clear: If Trump was in charge of the law in the US, Clinton would be in jail. Parse it all you want, b…

If you or I had destroyed evidence and lied to both Congress and the FBI repeatedly about it, I think we'd be in jail.

Clinton is becoming vaguely reminiscent of Julius Caesar, who had to repeatedly duck lawsuits by taking up governmental positions that carried freedom from prosecution.

Re: The 2016 Election

#493

Post by int_19h » Mon, Oct 17, 2016, 9:51 PM UTC

rtx wrote: post #446

brianwawok wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what leads you to believe that Trump is LESS of a warmonger than Hillary? I see lots of talks from Trump about "negotiate tough" (sounds good), but then a lot about "smash them up" (sounds not so peaceful). Doesn't seem very peace like.

Trump is not the one courting Kissinger

Trump is the one who said that Russian war planes overflying American warships should be shot down to teach a lesson.

I can't think of a better way to start WW3 in current climate.

Re: The 2016 Election

#494

Post by gjolund » Mon, Oct 17, 2016, 9:52 PM UTC

mejari wrote: post #468

gjolund wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If he were guilty, and if Clinton were the champion of feminism that she says she is, then why wouldn't they press charges?

What at all does Clinton have to do with these women pressing charges or not? As for why a woman might not press charges after a sexual assault, there are a multitude of reasons that have been discussed in plenty of related literature, I urge you to seek them out.

Hillary paints herself as the savior of all women, yet she can't convince a group of women who could literally win her the election to press charges?

Smells like bullshit to me.

Re: The 2016 Election

#495

Post by jubalfh » Mon, Oct 17, 2016, 9:53 PM UTC

> This submission has received a huge number of user flags. We've overridden flags and other software penalties for several of these stories already for being related to YC, but our primary duty is to the community and we have to let it protect itself from being ripped apart by politics.

Surely, you jest.

Re: The 2016 Election

#496

Post by int_19h » Mon, Oct 17, 2016, 9:53 PM UTC

rtx wrote: post #75

>unprecedented threat to America Hillary is an unprecedented threat to the world. But I guess Americans are so cut of from the rest of the world, it's hard for them to see things from others perspective. As a citizen of third world please don't unleash Hillary on us.

Please don't speak for "the rest of the world" - the rest of us didn't give you that prerogative.

As a citizen of Russia, I would vastly prefer Clinton on foreign policy. For all her flaws, she can keep Putin in check. Trump is more likely to prop his regime and keep it from collapsing for a while longer.

Re: The 2016 Election

#497

Post by DanBC » Mon, Oct 17, 2016, 9:54 PM UTC

gjolund wrote: post #455

DanBC wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where do they do the bragging?

Does it matter?

Yes. Someone bragging outside a work environment about who they support is fine. Someone bragging inside a work environment is less fine. Someone bragging about supporting Trump, in front of Mexican colleagues is even less fine.

Re: The 2016 Election

#498

Post by jubalfh » Mon, Oct 17, 2016, 9:54 PM UTC

Aqueous wrote: post #266

gizmo wrote: post #24

Except Thiel is saying many of the repugnant things that made Trump popular. - Thiel is passionately against all forms of political correctness, just like Trump. - Thiel believes that the 19th amendment destroyed democracy, because women vote in favor for anti-libertarian welfare measures. When faced with the choice between saving democracy and capitalism, Thiel chooses capitalism. Trump shares this antidemocratic se…

Assuming all of this is accurate, Thiel's thinking and actions are so full of contradictions and irrationality it's hard to understand how he became a billionaire. Just two that stick out right away: "- Thiel is passionately against all forms of political correctness, just like Trump." - unless he determines that the political incorrectness in question happens to affect him in some adverse way. See: Gawker. And yes,…

If being rational would correlate with getting rich, one would live in a rather interesting place.

Re: The 2016 Election

#499

Post by rtx » Mon, Oct 17, 2016, 9:55 PM UTC

kybernetikos wrote: post #282

rtx wrote: post #75

>unprecedented threat to America Hillary is an unprecedented threat to the world. But I guess Americans are so cut of from the rest of the world, it's hard for them to see things from others perspective. As a citizen of third world please don't unleash Hillary on us.

If the choice is between Hillary and Trump, I would expect Trump to do more damage to the world than Hillary. Everything about his behaviour so far has shown him to be easily baited and given to irresponsible escalation. These are not attributes that I would expect to go well with international politics. I find it surprising that Trump is portrayed as an isolationist candidate when personally I think the likelihood o…

That sounds like being transparent about your intentions and not using economic hitmen.

Re: The 2016 Election

#500

Post by douche » Mon, Oct 17, 2016, 9:55 PM UTC

Aqueous wrote: post #266

gizmo wrote: post #24

Except Thiel is saying many of the repugnant things that made Trump popular. - Thiel is passionately against all forms of political correctness, just like Trump. - Thiel believes that the 19th amendment destroyed democracy, because women vote in favor for anti-libertarian welfare measures. When faced with the choice between saving democracy and capitalism, Thiel chooses capitalism. Trump shares this antidemocratic se…

Assuming all of this is accurate, Thiel's thinking and actions are so full of contradictions and irrationality it's hard to understand how he became a billionaire. Just two that stick out right away: "- Thiel is passionately against all forms of political correctness, just like Trump." - unless he determines that the political incorrectness in question happens to affect him in some adverse way. See: Gawker. And yes,…

"- Thiel wants to restrict immigration to highly educated people. Just like Trump." - But also believes higher education is not so worthwhile that it should be required or even considered important for all Americans. See: Thiel Fellows

I'd be inclined to suppose that Thiel might say that he wants to restrict immigration to highly educated people because education correlates with intelligence. If you've already identified intelligence, you don't need to use education as a proxy rule-of-thumb.