TTLG|Thief|Bioshock|System Shock|Deus Ex|Mobile

View Poll Results: How long will Trump be President?

Voters
144. You may not vote on this poll
  • 1 Term (4 Years)

    26 18.06%
  • 2 Terms (8 Years)

    51 35.42%
  • 1st Term Impeachment/Assassination

    50 34.72%
  • 2nd Term Impeachment/Assassination

    4 2.78%
  • I don't know what's going on!

    13 9.03%
Page 35 of 558 FirstFirst ... 5101520253031323334353637383940455055606570758085135285535 ... LastLast
Results 851 to 875 of 13942

Thread: ✮✮✮ !Trump Dump! ✮✮✮

  1. #851
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Tarantula View Post
    New DNC leaks. First one I saw: looks like when it comes to "those RAYCISSS Republicans are Gerrymandering!" argument, it's a case of stones and glass houses.
    Both parties gerrymander. It's common knowledge, and commonly understood to be none too great. The only reason no one does anything about it is because, well, you're not going to be able to get both sides of the aisle to agree on a solution, and it's just so goddamn convenient for everyone involved.

    Only the pundit dipshits scream "OLOL LOOK AT WHAT THE OTHER SIDE IS DOING" while waving their collection of strawmen about make a big deal out of it from a specific party perspective.

  2. #852
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Quote Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
    When I first started voting, I considered myself a centrist Republican. Hell, my very first election, I voted Bush. While I've drifted more and more towards the Democrat side of the aisle as I've gotten older, I honestly don't think that my politics have changed by any huge degrees. It feels more like everything else has drifted to the right, leaving me in a position that's now considered very left.

    [...]

    20-30 years ago, I'd be considered pretty centrist, slightly right leaning. These days? If I were to post this on Facebook, I can guarantee you it wouldn't even be five minutes before someone accuses me of being a radical leftist Marxist.

    I've heard something like this quite a lot over the past 15 years or so: http://www.stonekettle.com/2011/12/e...-i-havent.html

  3. #853
    Quote Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
    Both parties gerrymander. It's common knowledge, and commonly understood to be none too great. The only reason no one does anything about it is because, well, you're not going to be able to get both sides of the aisle to agree on a solution, and it's just so goddamn convenient for everyone involved.

    Only the pundit dipshits scream "OLOL LOOK AT WHAT THE OTHER SIDE IS DOING" while waving their collection of strawmen about make a big deal out of it from a specific party perspective.
    You mean like all the people on this forum who believe that only Republicans do it? Who might just be the target audience for that post? If if they werent that makes it better how?



    Also take a look at this picture. Cross check the names on this list against those appointed to high political positions under Obama and see if you notice something.


  4. #854
    And...holy shit.....

    https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/20280

    Hi all, Can we set up a time for a very brief call to go over our process for handling donations from donors who have given us pay to play letters? Want to make sure we have a robust process in place to make sure that donations that come in from those donors, in any form, get put into the operating account. Let me know when would be a good time for you all. Thanks, Jackie

  5. #855
    verbose douchebag
    Registered: Apr 2002
    Location: Lyon, France
    Who are these people who only think Republicans are crooked? Anyone with a functioning brain can see that your whole setup is fucked on both sides of the aisle. The whole thing is bought and paid for. About the only sport in it any more is to compare rhetoric.

  6. #856
    Member
    Registered: Oct 2002
    Location: London / London / London
    Quote Originally Posted by Goldmoon Dawn View Post
    I was born on October 17th, I was married on October 19th, and my mother passed away last October 18th
    Eep, yeah that sounds like a bit of a mindfuck...

  7. #857
    Quote Originally Posted by faetal View Post
    Who are these people who only think Republicans are crooked? Anyone with a functioning brain can see that your whole setup is fucked on both sides of the aisle. The whole thing is bought and paid for. About the only sport in it any more is to compare rhetoric.
    You for starters, every time DNC corruption is mentioned your first instinct is to complain about how it's still somehow not relevant and not as bad as the RNC.

    If you actually believe what you just wrote that's a significant retraction of your position from this time last year.


    Anyways got another gem from Colin Powell:




    And another one: The DNC had software which allows them to re-write state voter rolls a year.

    Funny....back at the time a lot of people on the Bernie facebook sites were complaining about showing up to the polls only to find out they'd been de-registered.




    There's also another file, located in a folder named "CNBC" which seems to have an indication of insider trading. Not visible in this screen but the correlation is also suspicious. The numbers vary significantly from how a typical equity analysis is one which provides an expected trading range and are rarely this accurate.

    Last edited by Tony_Tarantula; 14th Sep 2016 at 14:08.

  8. #858
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    What exactly do your posts prove, Tony? That most people consider Hillary to be a weak candidate, that our politicians can be overly candid in private, and the Democrats have a long list of rich donors?

    WELL SLAP MY ASS, AND CALL ME SHOCKED!

  9. #859
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    Colin Powell's email account is hacked, and the findings within are, quite possibly, the most beautiful things I've yet read regarding our two candidates, and the politics of the day.

    "Everything Clinton touches she kind of screws up with hubris."

    "Donald Trump is a national disgrace and an international pariah."

    A more accurate and succinct analysis of both you will not find.

  10. #860
    verbose douchebag
    Registered: Apr 2002
    Location: Lyon, France
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Tarantula View Post
    You for starters, every time DNC corruption is mentioned your first instinct is to complain about how it's still somehow not relevant and not as bad as the RNC.

    If you actually believe what you just wrote that's a significant retraction of your position from this time last year.
    Well since my stance on US politics has been more or less "the whole thing is fucked" for at least 10 years, I'm certain you are talking shit.
    If the Democrats are better than the Republicans, it's by such a small amount that it's scarcely worth mentioning other than them having preferable rhetoric perhaps.

    Not sure why I'm having this conversation with you tbh, since you pretty much just filter everything anyone says into embellished talking points for you to creatively re-frame to rail against.

    Every other thing you say goes along the lines of "this is for all of those people who think The Republicans are Satan and The Democrats are infallible perfect beings" *pastes YouTube link of someone from Breitbart or similar giving their opinion*. (irony of copying your style of argument intentional)

    Be less absurd.
    Last edited by faetal; 14th Sep 2016 at 17:58.

  11. #861
    Member
    Registered: Mar 1999
    Location: I can't find myself
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Tarantula View Post
    Subject Line: SEC Letters and Donations

    SEC Pay-to-play rule

    Hmm. Maybe it's like these things are connected and they're talking about ensuring that donors that are also registered investment advisors are being tracked properly in order to avoid violating the pay-to-play rule.

  12. #862
    Fafhrd, maybe....but I find it interesting how consistently you you're willing to jump through literally any mental hoop to conclude that there's nothing to see here. Given what we know so far about how the US political parties operate I find your conclusion to be possible but extremely unlikely.

    Quote Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
    Colin Powell's email account is hacked, and the findings within are, quite possibly, the most beautiful things I've yet read regarding our two candidates, and the politics of the day.

    "Everything Clinton touches she kind of screws up with hubris."

    "Donald Trump is a national disgrace and an international pariah."

    A more accurate and succinct analysis of both you will not find.
    Complaining about not getting his speaking fees aside, I don't think anyone's ever come out of an email leak looking as good as Colin Powell has.


    Every other thing you say goes along the lines of "this is for all of those people who think The Republicans are Satan and The Democrats are infallible perfect beings" *pastes YouTube link of someone from Breitbart or similar giving their opinion*. (irony of copying your style of argument intentional)
    Your projection is hilarious. Go through my link history, and notice that I cite sources like HuffPo, Guardian, and Salon far more frequently than I do Breitbart. That should probably tell you something both about how inaccurate your perceptions are and about how far gone American Democrat loyalists are.



    Regarding the earlier point of "It is just Russian propaganda!"....I have to ask, why on earth would they leak documents rather than holding them? The Russians don't expect it to influence the election because they already regard the United States elections as being completely rigged, so leaking them now is a complete waste of a valuable asset. Their interest would be to hold onto them and use the threat of release to pressure Hillary into adopting favorable policy positions. It would be a far more viable position because the DNC and Clintons have proven themselves to be pliable to the right combination of threats and "donations".

  13. #863
    Member
    Registered: Oct 2002
    Location: London / London / London
    Are you calling Faetal an American Democrat Loyalist?

  14. #864
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Tarantula View Post
    Fafhrd, maybe....but I find it interesting how consistently you you're willing to jump through literally any mental hoop to conclude that there's nothing to see here. Given what we know so far about how the US political parties operate I find your conclusion to be possible but extremely unlikely.
    The opposite could be said of you. You've shown a willingness to go to great lengths to present things in as damning a light as possible.

  15. #865
    verbose douchebag
    Registered: Apr 2002
    Location: Lyon, France
    No projection, just generalisation. Your entire platform for political discourse sits on an assumption of polar extremes. You are arguing against people who don't exist half of the time. The people who think the democrats are infallible and republicans are satan? All in your mind, sorry. Still, keep posting, it's regular entertainment if nothing else.

  16. #866
    Member
    Registered: Jun 2009
    Location: The Spiraling Sea
    Donald Trump unveils economic plan...


  17. #867
    Member
    Registered: Mar 1999
    Location: I can't find myself
    Fafhrd, maybe....but I find it interesting how consistently you you're willing to jump through literally any mental hoop to conclude that there's nothing to see here. Given what we know so far about how the US political parties operate I find your conclusion to be possible but extremely unlikely.
    Occam's Razor is a mental hoop now? What's more likely: in an e-mail thread titles 'SEC Letters and Donations' the phrase 'pay-to-play' is used, they are using pay-to-play colloquially and the DNC is actually having people who are bribing them send them letters specifying that fact (because I know when I'm bribing people in government, I'm sure to leave as obvious a paper trail as possible). OR, since these are professional political people, and since the only connection between the SEC and campaign finance is the previously linked pay-to-play rule (which is literally officially called the 'Pay-to-play Rule') that what they are talking about are the Pay-to-Play Recordkeeping Requirements.

    Quote Originally Posted by Renzatic View Post
    The opposite could be said of you. You've shown a willingness to go to great lengths to present things in as damning a light as possible.
    Seriously. Tony thinks that the Clintons and DNC are both so hyper-competent that they can have people killed while under constant scrutiny from the Republican party and repeated investigations and congressional hearings and come through it without a single criminal charge being filed, but also so incompetent that they'd have the people working for them writing openly in e-mails about the best way to take bribes. Classic conspiracy theory mentality.

    This also points to the problem with Wikileaks, where dumping huge swathes of information for the average joe who has no context for or understanding of the information can read tends to feed conspiracy theories and make the government more opaque, instead of more transparent.

    If Wikileaks were a closed database that only journalists and academics and lawyers and other actual experts had access to, it would be far more useful because you'd have people whose job it is to take arcane expert level stuff and parse it into the important stuff that non-experts can understand being the ones doing it.

  18. #868
    Want to make sure we have a robust process in place to make sure that donations that come in from those donors, in any form, get put into the operating account.

    When you claim this is about record keeping that is a prime example of the mental gymnastics I'm talking about. In what universe does this sound like they're talking about "record keeping requirements"? If you want to use Occam's razor they're talking about how to make sure that the money gets where it's going. To go to a slightly more complex level than Occam's razor the phrase "in any form" implies that they're discussing the need to make sure that any laundered donations make their way into an account the DNC can use for its needs.

    This also points to the problem with Wikileaks, where dumping huge swathes of information for the average joe who has no context for or understanding of the information can read tends to feed conspiracy theories and make the government more opaque, instead of more transparent.
    Please tell me some more about how a compliance person at Microsoft knows so much more than somebody who has actual government experience and a security clearance.

    Had I written anything similar in an email while I had contract responsibility, I would have been dragged down to CID and questioned on suspicion of quid pro quo violations

    Not to mention that this is a stunning reversal from how you felt about these matters when Bush was in office where you thought the US government needed to be more transparent. Or is transperency only something that other people do? Besides which it's a great example of argument from incredulity. You are making the exact same logical argument used to attack critics of illegal US torture: that average people should just STFU because only the bureaucrats doing the torture understand why we need to do it, and they say it's really important to national security that we torture people.
    Last edited by Tony_Tarantula; 19th Sep 2016 at 10:12.

  19. #869
    Member
    Registered: May 2003
    Location: Minecraft
    Quote Originally Posted by Vae View Post
    Donald Trump unveils economic plan...
    I notice you've completely ignored my request for evidence regarding your claim that Hillary is suffering from a neurological disorder. Do you intend to provide any, or are you just going to quietly back away from it and hope everyone forgets about it?

  20. #870
    Member
    Registered: Oct 2002
    Location: London / London / London
    CALM DOWN TONY

  21. #871
    Moderator and Priest
    Registered: Mar 2002
    Location: Dinosaur Ladies of the Night
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Tarantula View Post
    Not to mention that this is a stunning reversal from how you felt about these matters when Bush was in office where you thought the US government needed to be more transparent. Or is transperency only something that other people do? Besides which it's a great example of argument from incredulity. You are making the exact same logical argument used to attack critics of illegal US torture: that average people should just STFU because only the bureaucrats doing the torture understand why we need to do it, and they say it's really important to national security that we torture people.
    Right. Because if you argued for a more transparent government in the past, then it should be obvious that if you don't support the indiscriminate dumping of data that includes everything from private conversations among our politicians, to their home addresses and personal cell phone numbers, all the way over to the names and personal information of rape victims in some random police documentation, you're some kind of hypocrite. It's all or nothing in Tony Land!

  22. #872
    Member
    Registered: Jun 2009
    Location: The Spiraling Sea
    Quote Originally Posted by driver View Post
    I notice you've completely ignored my request for evidence regarding your claim that Hillary is suffering from a neurological disorder. Do you intend to provide any, or are you just going to quietly back away from it and hope everyone forgets about it?
    I've ignored nothing but your willful obtusity...

    Quote Originally Posted by Vae View Post
    At this time, I am simply making a statement...and in time, I will almost certainly be proven correct. This will result with you, driver, Pyrian, and everyone else in the entire world recognizing this as true.
    Once again, the proof will be revealed in time...Just like how I stated last year that Trump will win the presidency, long before he ever became the Republican nominee.

  23. #873
    Member
    Registered: Mar 1999
    Location: I can't find myself
    Quote Originally Posted by Tony_Tarantula View Post
    When you claim this is about record keeping that is a prime example of the mental gymnastics I'm talking about. In what universe does this sound like they're talking about "record keeping requirements"? If you want to use Occam's razor they're talking about how to make sure that the money gets where it's going. To go to a slightly more complex level than Occam's razor the phrase "in any form" implies that they're discussing the need to make sure that any laundered donations make their way into an account the DNC can use for its needs.
    "Laundered donations" another brilliant deductive leap by Tony! Now the DNC is laundering money! Hey genius, campaign contributions are not only made in the form of money. If an investment bank wants to let a political campaign use some office space in their building? That's a campaign contribution, and one that requires the campaign to track it under the pay-to-play rule. A registered investor buys a ticket to a fundraising event? Campaign contribution. Requires a pay-to-play declaration. Given all the types of campaign contribution and the levels of tangential relationship to potential government contractors exist, you'd have to be incredibly fucking stupid to think that the DNC wouldn't be as on top of this record keeping as is humanly possible in order to avoid investigation by both the SEC and FEC.

    Please tell me some more about how a compliance person at Microsoft knows so much more than somebody who has actual government experience and a security clearance.

    Had I written anything similar in an email while I had contract responsibility, I would have been dragged down to CID and questioned on suspicion of quid pro quo violations
    Oh, please tell us again about your mysterious government contractor days. Were they working for the Securities and Exchange Commission? No? How about the Federal Election Commission? The RNC? The DNC? The CBO? No? Then you know precisely fuck all more about it than I do. Do you know why if you used the phrase 'pay-to-play' in an e-mail it would get you in trouble? Because you did not work in campaign finance and it was not a term of art for your position or profession. This is professional correspondence between people whose entire careers are political law and campaign finance. They are using 'pay-to-play' as a professional term of art, not a colloquialism.

    TL;DR: I can know more about it than you because I am capable of drawing logical conclusions based on context clues and 10 minutes of googling. Things that you clearly are either unable or unwilling to do.

    Not to mention that this is a stunning reversal from how you felt about these matters when Bush was in office where you thought the US government needed to be more transparent. Or is transperency only something that other people do? Besides which it's a great example of argument from incredulity. You are making the exact same logical argument used to attack critics of illegal US torture: that average people should just STFU because only the bureaucrats doing the torture understand why we need to do it, and they say it's really important to national security that we torture people.
    No it's not. I want government transparency, and I want that transparency to be parsed by experts who actually know what laws may or may not be being violated, instead of Joe Dumbfuck who searches a phrase and then posts to 100 right-wing conspiracy blogs that HERE FINALLY IS THE SMOKING GUN THAT WE'RE ALL LOOKING FOR without knowing what that phrase actually fucking means. I want government transparency to lead to signal, not noise. Wikileaks, especially now, is all about making noise. There's a reason that more positive good was done by Edward Snowden initially giving the intel he stole to Glenn Greenwald and other journalists than was done by Chelsea Manning's blanket data dump to Wikileaks (setting aside the Arab Spring and how much of that could actually be attributed to the Manning leaks, and how much good it actually did).

  24. #874
    Member
    Registered: Sep 2001
    Location: Land of the crazy
    The problem with that idea is the so called "experts" would just filter and interpret/spin the information to suit their biases or the agenda of their superiors. For the DNC emails, any expert who is knowledgeable enough to do what you're looking for is going to be an experienced insider with one of the major parties and therefore is going to be highly partisan. For national security topics, our past experience has been that the individuals we rely on to filter & interpret information to determine what's suitable for public release are overwhelmingly inclined to protect "state secrets". Even journalists, e.g. NYT.

    Experts are neither impartial nor infallible, and even if they were, conspiracy theorists aren't going to believe them anyway. Putting the source information into the public domain is the way to go.

  25. #875
    Member
    Registered: May 2004
    Even if it wasn't impossible, why would you need to convince the conspiracy theorists?

Page 35 of 558 FirstFirst ... 5101520253031323334353637383940455055606570758085135285535 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •