General Primary Discussion Thread

Originally posted by Q99
Paycheck withholdings basically screw Immigrants over. Ditto sales tax.

That'd work.

Both of their actual business success could be attacked, but that's nothing new and their supporters already know about that aspect of Trump*, but it seems a fairly solid approach.

*Just like with Hillary, if there's a 'flaw' but it's one everyone knows and doesn't care about, it is not going to be the opposition's silver bullet.

So before you claimed they paid tax, then I stomped on that and you regressed, now its paycheck withholding screw over illegal immigrants.

So I forgot are we supposed to help law breakers and alienate law abiding citizens?

😂

You didn't stomp on anything.

Yea I did

Deez Nuts is undoubtedly the best candidate on the table right now.

Trump is coming and so is the Great Wall of America (Trump).

Oh, interesting, Five Thirty Eight came out with an article / three person discussion about what it would take for Bernie to win.

To start with, a shock to the Clinton campaign (one bigger than the e-mail thing, they note), would be needed. Second, he definitely needs more support among African Americans- like I've been saying- and that this lack of support puts him at a major disadvantage in South Carolina.

Silver thinks the best chance is if Hillary bows out and Biden takes his place, while Micah argues that a three-way Hillary-Biden-Bernie is the path that gives Sanders the best shot- but Biden is unlikely to do that unless there's a crisis on Clinton's campaign.

Pretty much everyone agrees that Sanders needs to improve among the other major Democrat demographics to win.

For once we agree

Hilary is barely surviving now, soon as her first debate comes and she gets destroyed in Iowa, Biden will come in and clean up.

There is no Hilary presidency ever to be.

Fate has spoken.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
So before you claimed they paid tax, then I stomped on that and you regressed, now its paycheck withholding screw over illegal immigrants.

What regressed? Employees standardly withhold part of paychecks for the purpose of paying taxes. It is how a big chunk of taxes are taken and it's done automatically, did you not know that?

So I forgot are we supposed to help law breakers and alienate law abiding citizens?

Here's the thing, if all it takes to turn a lawbreaker into a law abiding citizen is a check box, and their actual behavior is entirely like that of a law abiding citizen in all other respects, it's a distinction without difference- and it doesn't alienate most law abiding citizens, 65% are in favor of a path to citizenship. The majority of citizens are on this side.

If a law is made making your presence in your state illegal, you'd be just as much a lawbreaker as they are now, but it doesn't mean you're actually doing anything bad, would it?

It's often a distinction without a difference. Making them legal citizens doesn't harm us, it doesn't harm them, and most of them have already proven they make darn good citizens. So yea, let them in, that's the American way.

That poll is bs. I sure as hell didn't participate, did you?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
That poll is bs. I sure as hell didn't participate, did you?

😐

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Why Romney as Secretary of State? He has literally zero foreign policy experience.

As though that is a requirement...

The "has no foreign relations experience" and "has no executive experience" are both bullshit arguments. As though they are not surrounded by the world's best minds and literally consult with dozens or even hundreds of people on any major decision. In fact, I am of the opinion (backed by stories from former aides), that modern US presidents make no important executive or foreign relations decisions. More like they undergo a delphi method and the president is just the mouth piece of that methodology.

Let's review/recall 2008: everyone jumped all over Obama for having no executive or foreign relation experience. They jumped all over Palin for having limited foreign policy experience (and she used Russia as her justification for why she does).

So why disparage a man that is a successful global business man (As though his has no "foreign policy experience"😉? Makes no sense.

Basically, judge candidates and politicians on both their platforms and their track records, not their experience. As odd as it sounds, experience at the upper levels of government is almost completely meaningless.

Let's use Obama as a good example: he made good on many small promises and broke many of the extremely important ones. His foreign policy has been a mixed bag of success and failure but I'd give him the nod towards an overall positive..but not by much.

Compare Romney's foreign policies to Obama's 2 versions: his promises and his actual.

I bet you Obama's promises are somewhere between 2x and 3x better than Romney's platform, if we're being honest. But I'm not so sure Obama's actual performance is better than Romney's policies. 🙂

Originally posted by Bardock42
I'm not joking. You pretend like she has been committed of wrongdoing. When we really don't know anything yet. The 60 you bring up were flagged as potentially containing classified information (albeit at the lowest levels),

Oh please, what a load of ginormous apologetic bullshit.

I worked for the federal government and handled sensitive and classified information. My current job requires I have an even higher federal security clearance.

Almost a decade into handling sensitive and classified information, stuff that even comes remotely close to "sensitive" is supposed to be handled in a specific way.

What you're doing is similar to saying, "Hilary shouldn't be blamed for not being able to put on her own pants! It's so confusing and hard to do! Harumph!"

Handling sensitive and classified information is ridiculously basic to working in government.

1 incident? Okay, a minor mistake. 2? Maybe some behavioral changes need to be made. Perhaps some additional security awareness training (which is mandatory for all federal employees and government contractors, annually, who handle sensitive or classified information). 3 or more? Yeah, she should be fired and possibly even criminally investigated.

A gentleman that used to work in another department, when I worked at my previous job, leaked one thing and was criminally investigated. Granted, it turned out to be an accident but he didn't even get one chance. And he was fired. And he can't work in the federal government again.

So, please, enough with the apologetic bullshit regarding Hilary's dishonesty. Let's also not pretend that Hilary is the only person to be a slimey, shadey, lying, politician, who purposefully leaked and/or mishandled government information.

Seriously, from outsiders who have degrees, certifications, and years of experience in the government sector (that's not just me: any of my employees or peers in other departments agree with me), think this whole situation is frighteningly laughable. How is she getting away with this? Why even a private server to begin with (that's a huge flag, right there).

Originally posted by Bardock42
even if they did definitely contain classified information that does not mean Clinton did anything wrong yet.

That is incorrect. It does not matter what her intentions were (as you put it "doing anything wrong"😉, simply mishandling the data is grounds for criminal prosecution and dismissal from holding any government position ever again. They call this "black listing" and it prevents you from getting a job in the federal government and perhaps state and local governments.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Do you misconstrue words on purpose?. Or do you always miss the point and context?

Trump (Capitalist)

Vs

Sanders (Socialist)

Wake up and smell the coffee. That's how going down, you trying to dismiss it as no one trusts a Clinton or a Bush.

Now I see why we never get along, you in the wrong crowd. If you supported Sanders I would respect you.

Supporting A Clinton still? 😂

Actually, both of them are Capitalistic Socialists. American is a system of Capitalism and Socialism.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Oh please, what a load of ginormous apologetic bullshit.

I worked for the federal government and handled sensitive and classified information. My current job requires I have an even higher federal security clearance.

Almost a decade into handling sensitive and classified information, stuff that even comes remotely close to "sensitive" is supposed to be handled in a specific way.

What you're doing is similar to saying, "Hilary shouldn't be blamed for not being able to put on her own pants! It's so confusing and hard to do! Harumph!"

Handling sensitive and classified information is ridiculously basic to working in government.

1 incident? Okay, a minor mistake. 2? Maybe some behavioral changes need to be made. Perhaps some additional security awareness training (which is mandatory for all federal employees and government contractors, annually, who handle sensitive or classified information). 3 or more? Yeah, she should be fired and possibly even criminally investigated.

A gentleman that used to work in another department, when I worked at my previous job, leaked one thing and was criminally investigated. Granted, it turned out to be an accident but he didn't even get one chance. And he was fired. And he can't work in the federal government again.

So, please, enough with the apologetic bullshit regarding Hilary's dishonesty. Let's also not pretend that Hilary is the only person to be a slimey, shadey, lying, politician, who purposefully leaked and/or mishandled government information.

Seriously, from outsiders who have degrees, certifications, and years of experience in the government sector (that's not just me: any of my employees or peers in other departments agree with me), think this whole situation is frighteningly laughable. How is she getting away with this? Why even a private server to begin with (that's a huge flag, right there).

That is incorrect. It does not matter what her intentions were (as you put it "doing anything wrong"😉, simply mishandling the data is grounds for criminal prosecution and dismissal from holding any government position ever again. They call this "black listing" and it prevents you from getting a job in the federal government and perhaps state and local governments.

Well, I guess we'll see how it goes for her.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, I guess we'll see how it goes for her.

There's nothing to see. If something was going to happen, it would have happened before any of us knew anything about it. She knows she's in the clear. Double standards for oligarchical figureheads. 👆

Or maybe you're wrong.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Actually, both of them are Capitalistic Socialists. American is a system of Capitalism and Socialism.

Very good point, which is why I think it's going to come to them.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Or maybe you're wrong.

Uhh....

haha

No. Not even close.

She should not have had a personal server to conduct State relations. It should have been on an internal server that was secured to DoD Top Secret Spec.

This is extremely basic stuff, here.

Why was she even allowed a personal e-mail server to conduct State business? Can you explain that?

I mean, the reason is obvious...so she could do things that would be illegal for any other person. It's one of those..."everyone else has to follow the law but not special politician x" situations. Like I said, Hilary is not the only one like that.

I'd like to read a DoD document that justifies the handling of classified information on personal e-mail servers. If you have that evidence, let me know, and i'll concede she didn't break any rules or laws (don't bother...you won't find it. It's laughably against policy).

I guess if you're right she'll face consequences, so we'll see.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I guess if you're right she'll face consequences, so we'll see.

Originally posted by dadudemon
There's nothing to see. If something was going to happen, it would have happened before any of us knew anything about it. She knows she's in the clear. Double standards for oligarchical figureheads. 👆