PoliGAF 2015-2016 |OT3| If someone named PhoenixDark leaves your party, call the cops

Status
Not open for further replies.
Maledict said:
Do we have to go through the whole 'persuade Huelen to change her / his vote' thing again? It was done to death earlier, with no obvious impact at all, and it seems like we're just repeating exactly the same conversations for no point again.

Huelen has a vote, their method for voting is at least as a rational as half the people out there, there's only so much we can talk about a single vote surely? ;-)
Click to expand...

I'm honestly not trying to convince Huelen one way or the other. Vote trump if that's who you align with the most. I've never actually heard a policy Huelen supports though.
 
Fenderputty said:
So then what issues are important to you?
Click to expand...

This election? It's honestly hard to say. I mean, going back to quizzes for example, they ask you on issues, and I have so many fill ins. How is that relevant? It's hard to find a candidate you agree with on most things, at least for me.

I mean, purely for example and not saying these are my main or all concerns for our country, is there a candidate that believes that government shouldn't have any stake in marriage and that it should be civil unions for all (and that civil unions and other non married pairs have more rights like adoption, visitation stays for hospitals, etc), that would actually use Kennedy's Executive Order No. 11110 (never got repealed, why the fuck is no president bold enough to use it?), would privatize social security, change the healthcare act slightly to be more inclusive for lower-middle class, and pump an assload more money to the space program? Because I have not found one yet.

Executive Order No. 11110 Is a huge one for me. Anyone who is bold enough to use it gets my vote. I believe in Executive Order No. 11110. Yes even Clinton, because as far as issues go, Executive Order No. 11110 is huge.
 
HUELEN10 said:
This election? It's honestly hard to say. I mean, going back to quizzes for example, they ask you on issues, and I have so many fill ins. How is that relevant? It's hard to find a candidate you agree with on most things, at least for me.

I mean, purely for example and not saying these are my main or all concerns for our country, is there a candidate that believes that government shouldn't have any stake in marriage and that it should be civil unions for all (and that civil unions and other non married pairs have more rights like adoption, visitation stays for hospitals, etc), that would actually use Kennedy's Executive Order No. 11110 (never got revealed, why the fuck is no president bold enough to use it?), would privatize social security, change the healthcare act slightly to be more inclusive for lower-middle class, and pump an assload more money to the space program? Because I have not found one yet.

Executive Order No. 11110 Is a huge one for me. Anyone who is bold enough to use it gets my vote. I believe in Executive Order No. 11110. Yes even Clinton, because as far as issues go, Executive Order No. 11110 is huge.
Click to expand...

The silver standard and privatize social security?
Civil unions for all?

I need more popcorn.
 
HUELEN10 said:
This election? It's honestly hard to say. I mean, going back to quizzes for example, they ask you on issues, and I have so many fill ins. How is that relevant? It's hard to find a candidate you agree with on most things, at least for me.

I mean, purely for example and not saying these are my main or all concerns for our country, is there a candidate that believes that government shouldn't have any stake in marriage and that it should be civil unions for all (and that civil unions and other non married pairs have more rights like adoption, visitation stays for hospitals, etc), that would actually use Kennedy's Executive Order No. 11110 (never got revealed, why the fuck is no president bold enough to use it?), would privatize social security, change the healthcare act slightly to be more inclusive for lower-middle class, and pump an assload more money to the space program? Because I have not found one yet.

Executive Order No. 11110 Is a huge one for me. Anyone who is bold enough to use it gets my vote. I believe in Executive Order No. 11110. Yes even Clinton, because as far as issues go, Executive Order No. 11110 is huge.
Click to expand...

Wait. Maybe I'm confused. Wasn't 11110 the Silver Standard one?

But yeah, that is an eclectic combination of views. It's no surprise you'd have a hard time finding one candidate, and instead get a mix of people from both parties.
 
HUELEN10 said:
This election? It's honestly hard to say. I mean, going back to quizzes for example, they ask you on issues, and I have so many fill ins. How is that relevant? It's hard to find a candidate you agree with on most things, at least for me.

I mean, purely for example and not saying these are my main or all concerns for our country, is there a candidate that believes that government shouldn't have any stake in marriage and that it should be civil unions for all (and that civil unions and other non married pairs have more rights like adoption, visitation stays for hospitals, etc), that would actually use Kennedy's Executive Order No. 11110 (never got revealed, why the fuck is no president bold enough to use it?), would privatize social security, change the healthcare act slightly to be more inclusive for lower-middle class, and pump an assload more money to the space program? Because I have not found one yet.

Executive Order No. 11110 Is a huge one for me. Anyone who is bold enough to use it gets my vote. I believe in Executive Order No. 11110. Yes even Clinton, because as far as issues go, Executive Order No. 11110 is huge.
Click to expand...

Uhh, this executive order?
 
EskimoJoe said:
Wait. Maybe I'm confused. Wasn't 11110 the Silver Standard one?

But yeah, that is an eclectic combination of views. It's no surprise you'd have a hard time finding one candidate, and instead get a mix of people from both parties.
Click to expand...

And besides Executive Order No. 11110, those aren't even most of the important issues for me.

The civil union thing is fairly important for me as I think it would lead to more rights for more people and more inclusivity to all if done correctly, but I recognize that it is not realistic.
 
HUELEN10 said:
that would actually use Kennedy's Executive Order No. 11110 (never got revealed, why the fuck is no president bold enough to use it?)
Click to expand...
Because it's already in use, it delegates an authority to the Secretary of Treasury. An authority that no longer means anything because of other legislation.
 
benjipwns said:
Because it's already in use, it delegates an authority to the Secretary of Treasury. An authority that no longer means anything because of other legislation.
Click to expand...

Not for the use that a lot of us want to see, the start of the death of the Federal Reserve.

I say this, and no, I am not a libertarian either; don't agree with most of the core policies.
 
HUELEN10 said:
And besides Executive Order No. 11110, those aren't even most of the important issues for me.

The civil union thing is fairly important for me as I think it would lead to more rights for more people and more inclusivity to all if done correctly, but I recognize that it is not realistic.
Click to expand...
What are the most important issues for you then?
 
HUELEN10 said:
And besides Executive Order No. 11110, those aren't even most of the important issues for me.

The civil union thing is fairly important for me as I think it would lead to more rights for more people and more inclusivity to all if done correctly, but I recognize that it is not realistic.
Click to expand...

See, I've never understood the that position on marriages and civil unions, even though I see it all the time. Summed up, when I hear people make that argument, I hear them say "I think there should be some form of civil bond recognized by the government that is open to all people to use, and infers upon them certain rights, tax benefits, etc. In addition, if people desire to have some sort of 'religious marriage' they can do that if they want to, through their church. It would be upon that church to decide who gets to be 'married' by them, but it would grant no one any new significant rights, since those are done by the civil ceremony through the state."

To which, all I can think of to respond is "How do you think it works now?"
 
HUELEN10 said:
This election? It's honestly hard to say. I mean, going back to quizzes for example, they ask you on issues, and I have so many fill ins. How is that relevant? It's hard to find a candidate you agree with on most things, at least for me.

I mean, purely for example and not saying these are my main or all concerns for our country, is there a candidate that believes that government shouldn't have any stake in marriage and that it should be civil unions for all (and that civil unions and other non married pairs have more rights like adoption, visitation stays for hospitals, etc), that would actually use Kennedy's Executive Order No. 11110 (never got revealed, why the fuck is no president bold enough to use it?), would privatize social security, change the healthcare act slightly to be more inclusive for lower-middle class, and pump an assload more money to the space program? Because I have not found one yet.

Executive Order No. 11110 Is a huge one for me. Anyone who is bold enough to use it gets my vote. I believe in Executive Order No. 11110. Yes even Clinton, because as far as issues go, Executive Order No. 11110 is huge.
Click to expand...

No, because candidates either believe only a man and a woman should be joined, even on a state level outside of a spiritual one, and the rest feel changing the term now isn't inclusive and is demeaning. The SC already responded to this though, so it's moot. The only candidates that don't want to add religious protections so bigots can still treat homosexuals differently are candidates on the left.

Why do you want to privatize social security? What's the goal here? People can already add money for retirement into 401K's and other stocks. Privatizing SS would just mean people can't retire during an economic downturn because they're SS funds would go.

Executive order 11110? Are you one of those people who think our money being backed by nothing is bad?
 
HUELEN10 said:
Not for the use that a lot of us want to see, the start of the death of the Federal Reserve.

I say this, and no, I am not a libertarian either; don't agree with most of the core policies.
Click to expand...
Executive Order 11110 was revoked by Reagan's Executive Order 12608. Congress had already revoked the legislative authority behind it and it was part of Reagan's EO's that were striking all the no longer in effect EO's off the books.

The U.S. has never given anything but silver in exchange for silver certificates. And silver isn't directly exchangeable for federal reserve notes even before the Nixon Shock.
 
Heulen, do the isidewith test and expand all sections of questions. It might take a while. The quiz benji posted is garbage. Sorry benji.
 
Anyway, maybe HUELEN's an Objectivist.

Do you feel that Mozart may have been a Red?

Do you remember the names of the characters in Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead and can keep them apart and remember what they do? Other than maybe Roark and Rearden. Who had something to do with steel.

Do you actually read Roark and Galt's speeches?
 
SourShoes said:
Heulen, do the isidewith test and expand all sections of questions. It might take a while. The quiz benji posted is garbage. Sorry benji.
Click to expand...
I never said it wasn't, just an alternative one. It's also been around since 2000.

I think they've tweaked isidewith to increase your match %, ontheissues still lets me, for example, score under 35% with basically everyone. Even with things like 70% agreement on social issues with Bernie, etc.
 
Ugh, I wish I had all day to watch the meltdowns and conspiracy theories. I just had my 2nd interview (and was offered a 3rd!) for a job I really, really need.

So, from what I've read now, the Data Director admits to saving the data. He admits that NGP VAN called him before he could call it in. And...somehow this is all DWS' fault. Am I...am I understanding that correctly?

Okaaaaaay.
 
Qg7vEl0.jpg

If you expand and answer all the available questions, isidewith seems pretty damn accurate.
 
"Good for Bernie. The DNC is nothing more than an arm for the Clinton Campaign."—@JimWebbUSA

DNC better watch out, Jim Webb once killed a man.
 
Yup, DNC is acting like arm of Clinton campaign. First debate buried during football game. 3rd debate buried during star wars opening weekend.
 
image.php
First, I owe a debt of gratitude to Cerium, for his avatar, as it never fails to get me fired up in the mornings, and I urge him to keep it, at least until the primaries are over ;).

So, NGP VAN's buggy software was at the root of this whole debacle, and the CEO, Stu Trevelyan (@stutrev), re-tweeted tweets from @HillaryClinton (e.g. "Everyone deserves a champion in their corner. That's been my life's work—and it's why I'm running for president.") and @ReadyforHillary (e.g. "Become a recruiter today"); could this be any more obvious as a manufactured scandal, just in time for Saturday's debate?

According to the insightful comments on the Slashdot account, a Bernie staffer had previously reported the issue, which may well have also given Hillary's staff access to Bernie's data (how convenient!), and when the bug re-occured, the employee that was fired, may have just been trying to gauge the level of access Hillary's staff would have had access to.

Nice try though, but it won't discourage actual Bernie supporters, in the slightest, and I reckon it might take up a mere five minutes, of the debate, and Bernie will get back to the real issues, facing Americans everyday, plus, his hat-trick of excellent news; 2+ million individual campaign contributions, a "clear choice and bold stand" endorsement from the members of the 700k strong Communications Workers of America union, and an overwhelming endorsement from Democracy for America, receiving over 88% of the 227k votes cast :).

Did anyone get the chance to see the video of that constructive multi-faith gathering, I posted?

Daniel B·;189660947 said:
Regardless of your faith or politics, I would highly recommend watching the following Inter-Faith Roundtable meeting, held in Masjid Muhammad, the "Nation's Mosque":



Not to detract from the powerful message, that, as a nation, we need to come together to fight bigotry and reject demagogues (Trump gets a good thrashing), it features a minor miracle (clue H2O) ;).
Click to expand...

The inspiring story, of the snapshot I took, as described by Congressman Keith Ellison, was when, a few years back, Ramadan happened to coincide with Yom Kippur, and how the Muslim and Jewish congregations came together, and broke fast.
 
Crab said:
Be fair to Webb, he's not even the most irrelevant guy running for the presidency when chumps like Gilmore are still going.
Click to expand...

Very true. I actually knew who Webb was before he ran for president. I don't even know what Gilmore looks like. I'm trying to imagine and all I that pops in my head is "0%".
 
Daniel B·;189804728 said:
Nice try though, but it won't discourage actual Bernie supporters, in the slightest, and I reckon it might take up a mere five minutes, of the debate, and Bernie will get back to the real issues, facing Americans everyday
Click to expand...

I mean, a terrorist attack knocked him off his stump speech at the last debate for like, 30 seconds. So, if he's able to talk about something other than those evil millionaires and billionaires for 5 minutes I'd be legit shock.
 
RustyNails said:
Yup, DNC is acting like arm of Clinton campaign. First debate buried during football game. 3rd debate buried during star wars opening weekend.
Click to expand...

i'm making the 4th debate thread, which will at least be on a Sunday.

which is great, since that means there will be more eyeballs.

and it'll be on Jan 17 so there won't be NFL playoffs to distract us oh wait.
 
AnotherNils said:
i really do question what the logic behind keeping the position is. It seems like a political liability. Is he that hard up for money? Does he think resigning to focus on his campaign will make him look like a quitter? I'm perplexed.
Click to expand...
He does seem hard up for money. After donating a mere $7, I get at least 2 emails a day from his campaign asking for more.
 
AnotherNils said:
i really do question what the logic behind keeping the position is. It seems like a political liability. Is he that hard up for money? Does he think resigning to focus on his campaign will make him look like a quitter? I'm perplexed.
Click to expand...

I'm coming to the conclusion that Rubio is just lazy and dumb. At this point I don't know how else you explain it.

The three other senators in the GOP race were all there to vote on it. Granted, only one of those three is actually relevant in the race, but that one relevant guy happens to be a Harvard Law debate champion. I don't know how the fuck you explain away this shit when Cruz hounds you for it in the next debate.
 
-sigh-

If the Sanders campaign remains cut off, it's pretty much time to start migrating to the Clintonmobile.

giphy.gif
 
Who's got time for governing the country with all this fantasy football going on? Your small dollar donation can help Marco Rubio win his Draft Kings tournament.
 
Daniel B·;189807638 said:
Or, it's a sign they recognise Bernie's making a huge impact, and they're getting Jeb desperate :).
Click to expand...

Regardless of how desperate/not desperate the DNC actually is, you can't run a campaign when you can't contact anyone new. Unless Sanders gets access back within a few days, his campaign is effectively dead. No point in jeopardizing resources that can go against the Republicans at the point. I mean, I'd hang around for a few days to wait and see, but I doubt that anyone in charge is in a rush to complete the audit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
UK PoliGAF |OT3| - Strong and Stable Government? No. Coalition Of Chaos!
37 38 39 40 41
2K
254K
firehawk12 replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2016 |OT16| Unpresidented
395 396 397 398 399
20K
1M
PKrockin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2016 |OT15| Orange is the New Black
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
The Technomancer replied
Top Bottom