Jump to content

Political Discussion Thread (With Rules)


Simon

Recommended Posts

My signature changed when I injured my left middle finger (lefthanded) to where I couldn't use it much without pain for near 6 months, it hurt to write so the the latter half of my last name turned into mangled scribble, just to get my signature over with. Oddly, for my finger, one day I woke, and it simply didn't hurt anymore.  I have no idea why, but didn't complain.

 

I'm also a southpaw, and I'm firmly convinced that the last bit of my signature getting mangled is due to me training myself not to touch the pad on really bad signature capture devices.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if I ever recall two candidates for President who obviously loathe their opponent so completely. They absolutely detest the opposition, with the intensity of a supernova.

 

 

There have been some pretty nasty campaigns in the past. (Although this article was written in 2008.  It may need updating after this year.)

 

Calling your opponent a "hideous hermaphroditical character which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman."

"Are you prepared to see your dwellings in flames... female chastity violated... children writhing on the pike? GREAT GOD OF COMPASSION AND JUSTICE, SHIELD MY COUNTRY FROM DESTRUCTION."

Saying a candidate's wife was a "dirty black wench", a "convicted adulteress" and said she was prone to "open and notorious lewdness".

Describing your opponent as a "horrid-looking wretch, sooty and scoundrelly in aspect, a cross between the nutmeg dealer, the horse-swapper and the nightman."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There have been some pretty nasty campaigns in the past. (Although this article was written in 2008.  It may need updating after this year.)

 

Calling your opponent a "hideous hermaphroditical character which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman."

"Are you prepared to see your dwellings in flames... female chastity violated... children writhing on the pike? GREAT GOD OF COMPASSION AND JUSTICE, SHIELD MY COUNTRY FROM DESTRUCTION."

Saying a candidate's wife was a "dirty black wench", a "convicted adulteress" and said she was prone to "open and notorious lewdness".

Describing your opponent as a "horrid-looking wretch, sooty and scoundrelly in aspect, a cross between the nutmeg dealer, the horse-swapper and the nightman."

In most of those pre-mass-media campaigns, the candidates themselves participated very little. Lincoln rarely left Illinois during the 1860 campaign, for example. It was expected that the candidates themselves would remain aloof from what their supporters were doing. Most of whom had never seen the man they were promoting, and hadn't even read what remarks of theirs were being published. A candidate like Donald Trump, while not entirely new, is an alarming development (although again the most fanatical of his followers are even worse).

 

And now he has gone on record (in, of all places, Gettysburg) as saying he will sue every woman who has accused him of assaulting them. If he can get away with that, the implication would be that for most purposes assault is legal -- provided the perpetrator is rich and powerful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adding to the 'it's been a while since the last time' list:

 

McMullin has a real chance of being the first 3rd party candidate to win electoral votes in 48 years.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/21/politics/evan-mcmullin-utah/index.html

 

Fascinating.

 

Apart from anything else, it suggests that there is potential for the major parties to deliberately use "3rd party" proxies to split their opponents' votes in key states.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In most of those pre-mass-media campaigns, the candidates themselves participated very little. Lincoln rarely left Illinois during the 1860 campaign, for example. It was expected that the candidates themselves would remain aloof from what their supporters were doing. Most of whom had never seen the man they were promoting, and hadn't even read what remarks of theirs were being published. A candidate like Donald Trump, while not entirely new, is an alarming development (although again the most fanatical of his followers are even worse).

 

And now he has gone on record (in, of all places, Gettysburg) as saying he will sue every woman who has accused him of assaulting them. If he can get away with that, the implication would be that for most purposes assault is legal -- provided the perpetrator is rich and powerful.

 

It would certainly be within his rights to try to sue, but it would also be very unwise. At the very least, the discovery phase would involve subpoenas for all of the raw footage for the Apprentice, and Trump would open himself up to explaining about his all of his sexual encounters under oath. Even if he did sue, he'd need to prove that the statements were libelous, that is, his reputation was ruined by their claims that matched his recorded statements. It's one of the reasons that the New York Times (and now, the lawyers for these women, apparently) have basically said, "Bring it on!"

 

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/10/23/lawyers_for_trump_accusers_say_they_are_not_afraid_of_lawsuit_threats.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obama is funny. Whoever wins, I'm going to miss that.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/24/politics/barack-obama-darrell-issa-comments/index.html

 

The President said Issa had always been friendly to him -- during the annual White House Christmas party. Obama said some GOP lawmakers tell him they're "praying for you" during the holiday party photo-line.

 

"I don't question the sincerity they are praying for me," Obama said, before mimicking their prayer: "Please change this man from the socialist Muslim."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No question Barak Obama has wit and charm. In an era of pervasive media scrutiny of politicians, that was a factor in his electoral success. Both of the current candidates will be a big step down in that department.

 

I judged the current candidates on originality, execution, and showmanship.

 

No, wait. That's "Dance Fever".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if I ever recall two candidates for President who obviously loathe their opponent so completely. They absolutely detest the opposition, with the intensity of a supernova.

Supposedly they were pretty good friends before this. Maybe Jefferson and Adams as a precedent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...