Thought experiment: Would it be any different if we replaced Donald Trump with Hitler?
Should a company dissociate with a business partner/board member/investor because he supported an extremist's political campaign?
Shame on Y Combinator
61–70 of 1001 posts
Re: Shame on Y Combinator
#62So Trump has a lot of problems, but it looks like he is not corrupt. Hillary, on the other hand, is fully with corruption. I really don't like/agree with YC priorities (I'm not an American, which is even more disturbing to see someone that laughs about killing others country president been endorsed/elected)
[deleted]
Re: Shame on Y Combinator
#63Thought experiment: Would it be any different if we replaced Donald Trump with Hitler? Should a company dissociate with a business partner/board member/investor because he supported an extremist's political campaign?
[deleted]
Re: Shame on Y Combinator
#64I am not sure why endorsement of a political candidate is sometimes equated with 100% parity on every single belief of that particular candidate. It is entirely possibly that some people support Trump because of his crass and divisive rhetoric, and it's also entirely possible that some people support Trump because of his stance on trade. Is it really anyone's place to demand that another voter change the list of prio…
Some particular beliefs are critical. If a candidate is perfect and a genius, but for example is against (for example) women voting, this is critical for endorsement, even though he may be perfect in every other sense.
Likewise, if your friend is from a different party than you, you may still be friends, but if he is a member of the KKK I guess that draws the line. Tolerance is not supposed to be infinite.
What people are finding out is that the line is different for everyone. And of course, its the election for President. Everything gets blown out of proportion.
Re: Shame on Y Combinator
#65It puzzles me how come in USA people are considering only 2 candidates to chose from. At this stage it looks like people are not voting for the candidate they agree with, they are choosing the candidate they disagree with the most and then voting for the other one. This is only 1 step better than how it used to be in USSR where people had an option to chose essentially only 1 party. (sure officially there were more parties, as there are more candidates in USA, but it wasn't a real option in reality). Still far away from European democracies where each election you have multiple parties competing.
Re: Shame on Y Combinator
#66I am not sure why endorsement of a political candidate is sometimes equated with 100% parity on every single belief of that particular candidate. It is entirely possibly that some people support Trump because of his crass and divisive rhetoric, and it's also entirely possible that some people support Trump because of his stance on trade. Is it really anyone's place to demand that another voter change the list of prio…
Some particular beliefs are critical. If a candidate is perfect and a genius, but for example is against (for example) women voting, this is critical for endorsement, even though he may be perfect in every other sense. Likewise, if your friend is from a different party than you, you may still be friends, but if he is a member of the KKK I guess that draws the line. Tolerance is not supposed to be infinite. What peopl…
Why? Unless the candidate will have the power to prevent women from voting he can hold any beliefs he wants in general.
There is a good reason why we have separation of power and why we have a complex political system in which even the president needs political capital to do things.
That said i think it's highly unlikely that there will be such hypothetical candidate that i can agree with on 99% 90% or even 50% of the issues and they'll be say a member of the KKK.
Re: Shame on Y Combinator
#67So Trump has a lot of problems, but it looks like he is not corrupt. Hillary, on the other hand, is fully with corruption. I really don't like/agree with YC priorities (I'm not an American, which is even more disturbing to see someone that laughs about killing others country president been endorsed/elected)
Are you joking? Trump is _transparently_ corrupt. The Trump Foundation exists to serve as a tax shield, funneling donor money to Trump and his family personally. C.f. the allegations of corruption toward Clinton and the Clinton Foundation, which are laughably indistinct and incomparable. If corruption is what you care about, then Hillary Clinton is _inarguably_ the superior candidate.
Re: Shame on Y Combinator
#68HN admins - if you're going to shut this one down as well, could I appeal to you to at least give a reasoning why? Killing posts like these without for example dang providing at least a quick reasoning why leaves a bad taste in my mouth...
Not an admin, just a user, but read https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. There's nothing very interesting in vilifying Thiel.
On the contrary, the fact that we had, and continue to have numerous threads, and thousands of comments means it is very interesting to the community.
Re: Shame on Y Combinator
#69So Trump has a lot of problems, but it looks like he is not corrupt. Hillary, on the other hand, is fully with corruption. I really don't like/agree with YC priorities (I'm not an American, which is even more disturbing to see someone that laughs about killing others country president been endorsed/elected)
How is it corrupt to laugh about killing a dictator/murderer in a publicly-known military action? It might be in bad taste, but it's not corrupt.
Also, you should read more about Trump: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/06/ho...
Re: Shame on Y Combinator
#70Thought experiment: Would it be any different if we replaced Donald Trump with Hitler? Should a company dissociate with a business partner/board member/investor because he supported an extremist's political campaign?
Comparing political candidates to Hitler is a rather lazy thought experiment.