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

House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 486 posts

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#151

Post by matt_m »

losvedir wrote: post #73
mindcrime wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly can't understand how anybody is considering voting for Clinton or Trump. If this world was anything close to reasonable, Gary Johnson would win in a landslide. shrug

As a Gary Johnson supporter myself, I freely admit that he has some extreme policies that can turn off a lot of voters. But what really frustrates me is how many people I've heard from that do prefer him but are afraid to vote for him because of the spoiler effect. I keep (wishful thinking) envisioning a scenario where he gets just enough votes that all of a sudden everyone on the fence realizes that maybe he could w…

Rather than just hoping for critical mass for one candidate, it would be nice to switch to something like ranked-choice voting (it's used at the local level already in some places like San Francisco I think). It's hard to advocate voting for 3rd parties with our current system, where causing the least-preferred candidate to win is by far the most likely outcome.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#152

Post by monocasa »

comex wrote: post #98
mkopinsky wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where did he accuse anyone of that? All he asked for is a citation.

Their comment is referencing Correct The Record, a pro-Clinton PAC which, according to a popular but false Reddit rumor, employs commenters to anonymously spread propaganda. See also: https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/4xcwjb/what_i... Edit: At the time of this edit, three replies have asked for a citation on "false", so I may as well put it here. Barrier Breakers 2016, the subject of the original The Dai…

> but false

Any citation for that?

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#153

Post by tanderson92 »

minikites wrote: post #117
mindcrime wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly can't understand how anybody is considering voting for Clinton or Trump. If this world was anything close to reasonable, Gary Johnson would win in a landslide. shrug

The world is reasonable to reject him as a candidate. https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/09/gary-johnson-libertarian-... Prisons: >Johnson accepted at least $9,000 in campaign donations from a prison company that ultimately won a state contract. By the time he left office, New Mexico led the country in for-profit prisons, housing 44 percent of its inmates in private facilities. Only Alaska, with 31 percent, came close.…

Worth mentioning that Jacobin approaches things from a very left of center perspective. There may be many HN readers who are Libertarian and disagree ideologically with the Jacobin view of the world (I happen to agree with it)

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#154

Post by sctb »

takeda wrote: post #40

And she still will be elected, because this year we had to have joke candidates on both sides. I guess it's probably the best time to vote 3rd party.

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12536086 and marked it off-topic.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#155

Post by monochromatic »

mindcrime wrote: post #44
takeda wrote: post #40

And she still will be elected, because this year we had to have joke candidates on both sides. I guess it's probably the best time to vote 3rd party.

I honestly can't understand how anybody is considering voting for Clinton or Trump. If this world was anything close to reasonable, Gary Johnson would win in a landslide. shrug

I usually do like the Libertarian candidate better than the other options... but not this year.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#156

Post by dang »

Mao_Zedang wrote: post #130
alecco wrote: post #113

The original HN post got flagged and removed from HN homepage. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12533757 250 points (more than this post at the moment)

Be nice to see an explanation from our moderating overlords

You mean your moderating servants? At the time, there were multiple posts of the same story competing for attention, so a mod marked all but one as a dupe. But then that surviving one got heavily flagged. We reduced them at one point (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12534542) but the flags kept coming.

I think what's going on here (and what I just told the other moderators) is that this is one of those times when our standard practices around things like dupes and downweights—e.g. for political controversies—don't apply. This doesn't happen very often, perhaps once every couple weeks. In such cases the community will is unmistakeable, the story will keep coming up until it gets an airing, and our job is to let that happen.

I like it much better when we call these right from the beginning, but what are the odds that an r/conspiracy Hillary investigation would turn into a solid HN thread? Too small for the human eye, and no set of moderation rules can operate at that fine a grain.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#157

Post by douche »

Dagwoodie wrote: post #137

I have yet to see a single example of Trump's racism. It's an oft repeated cliche that has yet to be demonstrated by anyone. As much of a "clown" as trump might be, half of his labels are completely pulled out of thin air.

It's one of those blanket cliches that gets applied reflexively. For a not insignificant sliver of the population, "Republican" == "racist" is an axiom, all evidence for, against, or sideways be damned.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#158

Post by akhilcacharya »

Klathmon wrote: post #126
imron wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> huh? It's horrifying https://www.hillaryclinton.com/post/donald-trump-pepe-the-fr... Edit: In response to your edit, she's attacking a cartoon frog . In seriousness. Not only that, but she's trying to attribute characteristics to that frog that simply aren't any core part of why people post Pepe memes. All of that questions the sensibilities of her campaign. Basically her campaign is going all out trying to paint T…

Wow, not a single line on that page about what she believes, what she stands for.

That's because you can find that here:

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#159

Post by yolesaber »

Dagwoodie wrote: post #121
discodave wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The actual facts aside I happen to believe that facts are important in a Presidential race. Essentially your response is repeating talking points of the Trump campaign... which is OK, 1st amendment and all that but to pretend like you're making a constructive addition to the discussion / debate is folly. Right now America has a choice between Trump, a racist, mysoginist demagogue who has never held a public office…

Since when is a long tenancy in a public office a good thing? What happened to strong morality and doing the right thing when nobody is looking? Hillary broke the law [0], plain and simple, and she isn't being punished because well, she is a powerful life-long politician with many friends in high places. At least Nixon had the moral decency to resign when it was clear he wasn't right to lead by example. The simple tr…

>At least Nixon had the moral decency to resign when it was clear he wasn't right to lead by example.

Yes, it was because Nixon had moral fiber. Not because he negotiated a deal with Ford to pardon him immediately and preemptively, thus saving him the humiliation of impeachment and legal repercussions.

Re: House panel looking into Reddit post about Clinton's email server

#160

Post by akhilcacharya »

imron wrote: post #95
brown9-2 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and the mention of the Pepe meme on her official website mentioning a meme on her website is disqualifying?

> huh? It's horrifying https://www.hillaryclinton.com/post/donald-trump-pepe-the-fr... Edit: In response to your edit, she's attacking a cartoon frog . In seriousness. Not only that, but she's trying to attribute characteristics to that frog that simply aren't any core part of why people post Pepe memes. All of that questions the sensibilities of her campaign. Basically her campaign is going all out trying to paint T…

> because that's really all they have left at this point

It's really not, the reason why they keep hammering it home is because his vocal support among the fringes is unprecedented in the modern era.

They've got plenty of things to attack him on - which they do.

Post reply on HN