The 2016 Election • Hacker News Board

Re: The 2016 Election

#641

Post by adrienne » Thu, Oct 20, 2016, 12:17 AM UTC

gjolund wrote: post #452

mejari wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because no one has pressed charges? I don't see how that's relevant. People can be guilty of things they haven't been proven to do in a court of law. I'm not saying he should be thrown in jail without due process, I'm pointing out that he himself has admitted to committing sexual assault, so it seems wrong to have a caveat of "allegedly".

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

...well, because the statute of limitations has run out on a lot of the things we know he's done? I mean, among about a billion other reasons why women don't report sexual assault by powerful men who can ruin their lives.

Re: The 2016 Election

#642

Post by colemickens » Thu, Oct 20, 2016, 4:01 AM UTC

zeveb wrote: post #422

colemickens wrote: post #385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's repeatedly threatened to throw journalists in jail that wrote things he didn't like. He threatened, on stage, in a Presidential debate, to unilaterally throw his political opponent HRC in jail. He is already contesting the results of the Democratic election weeks before it has even happened. And that's just what he's said. The fascist overtones are present in a variety of other ways. He makes minority groups sca…

> He threatened, on stage, in a Presidential debate, to unilaterally throw his political opponent HRC in jail. To object to that is to beg the question of whether she belongs in jail or not. I won't take a position on that, but it should be obvious that being a political candidate doesn't grant one immunity from prosecution for improperly divulging classified information (or for sexual assault, for that matter; I can…

No, it's not. First of all, just like Benghazi, she's already been investigated by her political opponents and they've come up empty-handed. Second of all, Trump didn't call for her to be prosecuted; he claimed he would single-handedly lock her up of his own authority.

To object to literal fascism is to acknowledge that we live in a Constitutional Democracy and have an actual legal and judicial system which is not to be subverted by a unilateral Executive branch actor who has a short temper and a grudge. You know, basic separation of powers principals that are fundamental pillars of our Democracy.

But then again, this is the party that has illegally obstructed the nomination for the Scalia's replacement for the last 9 months, and will continue to do so for the next 3 _AND_ has already proclaimed that they will obstruct HRC's nominations as well...

So it's nothing new to disregard the Constitution for the Republicans at this point, I guess.

Re: The 2016 Election

#643

Post by PlainsWight » Fri, Oct 21, 2016, 4:04 PM UTC

moultano wrote: post #515

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…

>> - 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 sentiment. This needs a citation, because whenever I've seen people say this, they cite this this essay https://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/04/13/peter-thiel/educa…

Moldbug believes that some ethnic groups are genetically predisposed to being better slaves. If you think he came to that conclusion after a dispassionate evaluation of all available evidence, I have a bridge to sell you.

Re: The 2016 Election

#644

Post by PlainsWight » Fri, Oct 21, 2016, 4:33 PM UTC

moultano wrote: post #531

gizmo wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moldbug believes that white people are the intellectual superiors of black people. That's supremacy. It's on his blog and in the medium post you linked. He isn't fooling anybody with his explanation of how that belief isn't racist or supremacist.

He also believes that Asians and Jews are on average the intellectual superiors of "white" people, so it's not clear to me how that's "white" supremacy. He's very clear that he separates the scientific question from the moral one. The belief that intelligence is largely genetic is fairly mainstream and supported by a large body of evidence. If he is committed to treating all groups of people with equal respect, that…

Usually, when one is reading a text, especially one written for persuasion, the first question to ask is, "what is the author trying to say?" Reasonable people can disagree about what that is, so to suggest that we're not doing society favors by applying critical reasoning is wrong at best, disingenuous at worst.

You wouldn't accuse someone of reading The Raven as not being literally about a bird as failing civilization.

Re: The 2016 Election

#645

Post by dllthomas » Mon, Oct 24, 2016, 7:34 AM UTC

Latty wrote: post #636

dllthomas wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> third party candidates are never going to happen More than two parties will never be stable unless elections are other than FPTP. But which two parties has changed more than once through US history. I don't see a reason it couldn't possibly happen again.

Sure. And? Swapping a party around doesn't really solve any of the underlying problems. It may help a little in the short term, but FPTP encourages not only two parties, but the kind of polarisation that leads to the republican party as they stand now, pushed incredibly far to the right.

Fair point. I think people often underestimate the benefit of short term help, but short term help that only arrives on a long-term timeline should rightfully be discounted.

That said, if control shifts anytime soon to a current leading third party, I (weakly) expect electoral issues would be addressed - it's hard to drop something you've made so much noise about (though certainly not impossible).

Re: The 2016 Election

#646

Post by tedajax » Tue, Oct 25, 2016, 8:34 PM UTC

douche wrote: post #562

tedajax wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously I feel like I'm taking crazy pills on HN the way people are apologizing for Trump in this thread. This is a man that has sexually assaulted women and actively campaigned on kicking out all the "others". Trump is not worthy of defense.

The whole sexual assault angle is bizarre to me, because there is no moral high ground to seize here. It's not like Bill Clinton was a monk and kept his Johnson in his pants during his years in the limelight. And it's not like Hillary didn't discredit and do her part in persecuting women who stood up and blew the whistle on his indiscretions. Yeah, Trump is a frigging billionaire who officiated at Miss Universe conte…

I'm sorry I'm replying 7 days after your post but I came back to this comment to check something and noticed you'd posted a reply. I say all this to say...

One candidate has sexually assaulted women. One candidate has most certainly not.

If you don't see a moral high ground to seize there you are being deliberately obtuse. In fact I'd go as far to call you a hateful moron.