News Breaking Down the 2016 POTUS Race Contenders & Issues

  • Thread starter Thread starter bballwaterboy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    2016 Issues Race
AI Thread Summary
Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are currently the leading candidates for the 2016 presidential election, with their character and qualifications being significant issues among voters. The crowded field includes 36 declared Republican candidates and 19 declared Democratic candidates, with many others considering runs. Major topics of discussion include nationalism versus internationalism and the stability of the nation-state system versus global governance. Recent polls show Trump as the front-runner, although his support has decreased, while Carly Fiorina has gained traction following strong debate performances. The election cycle is characterized as unusual, with many candidates and shifting public opinions on key issues.
  • #451
  • Like
Likes russ_watters and jim hardy
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #452
:headbang:
WWGD said:
Specially bad for Sanders, whose main claim to fame is precisely being different, being above the usual politics.

I heard on the radio this morning that Sanders has the popular vote but that Clinton has more “superdelegates”
to me this is equivalent to gerrymandering, why should anyone persons vote count more then anyone else's vote?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering

The problem with politics is that its so political!...:headbang:
 
  • #453
gjonesy said:
:headbang:

I heard on the radio this morning that Sanders has the popular vote but that Clinton has more “superdelegates”
to me this is equivalent to gerrymandering, why should anyone persons vote count more then anyone else's vote?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superdelegate

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering

The problem with politics is that its so political!...:headbang:
In what sense does Sanders have the popular vote?
As the Democratic party allocates the (pledged) delegates proportionally by state, there is no gerrymandering in play.
 
  • Like
Likes Evo
  • #454
gjonesy said:
:headbang:

I heard on the radio this morning that Sanders has the popular vote but that Clinton has more “superdelegates”...

Time to tune in another station. Clinton leads Sanders by 2.7M votes after the NY primary out of 18M total votes cast.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/democratic_vote_count.html
 
  • #455
Samy_A said:
In what sense does Sanders have the popular vote?
As the Democratic party allocates the (pledged) delegates proportionally by state, there is no Gerrymandering in play.

I didn't state that, I stated that it was equivalent to gerrymandering. "Superdeligate votes" are worth more. They have a weighted advantage. And its what I heard on my way to work this morning. Sanders has gotten more voters in several state primary's. Like New Hampshire for example. Again why should anyone persons vote carry more weight then anyone else's? This happened to Al Gore against Bush. Al Gore got the American popular vote Bush won the electoral college vote.

Several voting districts have yet to be added, Nevada, Alaska, Maine for example. I wouldn't declare Hillary the winner just yet. On the popular vote that is. In delegates she has Clearly beaten Sanders.

http://www.bing.com/search?q=Alaska democratic primary&qs=n&form=QBRE&pq=alaska democratic primary&sc=6-25&sp=-1&sk=&cvid=3FB3DEB3B4C348529377FB1830ABB084

http://www.bing.com/search?q=Maine democratic primary 2016&qs=n&form=QBRE&pq=maine democratic primary 2016&sc=4-29&sp=-1&sk=&cvid=5415EA8FCCFB47FB9061663C132FB4B0

http://www.bing.com/search?q=Washington democratic primary 2016&qs=n&form=QBRE&pq=washington democratic primary 2016&sc=4-34&sp=-1&sk=&cvid=CF43B16E1C444BD39245291820257041

In fact it really wouldn't matter If Sanders beat Clinton by a landslide in the popular vote as long as she gets more delegates, she will win the nomination.
 
Last edited:
  • #456
gjonesy said:
...Several voting districts have yet to be added, Nevada, Alaska, Maine for example. I wouldn't declare Hillary the winner just yet.
Sanders can't win anymore, mathematically. Doesn't matter what happens in the remaining states.
 
  • Like
Likes Evo
  • #457
mheslep said:
Sanders can't win anymore, mathematically. Doesn't matter what happens in the remaining states

When it comes to pledged votes, (you know how this works obviously), the popular votes count, how ever your district votes is how a delegate (has to support) that candidate. superdelegates can vote anyway they want. If say the vote is split 49.6 for Sanders and 49.4 for Clinton in a district where you have 21 delegates and 14 are pledges by district Sanders could get 7 Clinton could get 7 but let's say the other 7 are superdelegates 5 go to Clinton 2 to sanders...Clinton wins the state. The popular vote has no affect what so ever.
 
  • #458
gjonesy said:
When it comes to pledged votes, (you know how this works obviously), the popular votes count, how ever your district votes is how a delegate (has to support) that candidate. superdelegates can vote anyway they want. If say the vote is split 49.6 for Sanders and 49.4 for Clinton in a district where you have 21 delegates and 14 are pledges by district Sanders could get 7 Clinton could get 7 but let's say the other 7 are superdelegates 5 go to Clinton 2 to sanders...Clinton wins the state. The popular vote has no affect what so ever.
The concept "wins the state" has no special significance in the democratic primary (it has in the electoral college, for all but two states). The pledged delegates are allocated proportionally in each state.
The superdelegates indeed can do whatever they want.
Had Sanders won more pledged delegates than Clinton, it may well have been the same scenario as in 2008. Clinton started with an advantage in superdelegates, but when it became clear that Obama will win in pledged delegates, superdelegates started to switch sides.
Of course this is pure speculation for 2016, as Sanders is trailing in popular vote and in pledged delegates.
 
  • #459
If Bernie Sanders cannot win California, he should drop out. Even though I'd support him over Hillary Clinton, I'd lose respect for him if he kept running in the race knowing there's no path to the nomination. He would just be wasting everybody's time. The superdelegates argument, at this point, is glib.. It assumes that every single one of Hillary's superdelegates will shift to Sanders. He ran a great campaign. He raised awareness for numerous issues. It's just not his time this year.
 
  • Like
Likes Evo
  • #460
Jobs is the principal issue for at least one portion of the population.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/05/04/news/economy/america-left-behind-white-men/index.html
Nearly one-quarter of white men with only a high school diploma aren't working. Many of these men, age 25 to 64, aren't just unemployed ... they aren't even looking for a job, according to federal data.

I'm not sure how Trump, Clinton or any of the candidates would actually 'bring jobs back' to the US. US businesses have moved where labor is cheaper, and the rest of the industrialized world produces goods in competition with the US.

China didn't force US companies to move jobs to China, US companies were quite willing.

A hundred and some years ago, the US had tariffs on import to protect US industry. Now, with 'free' trade, businesses produce in low cost markets in order to sell at greater profit. This scenario leads to an erosion of the economic base supporting a consumption economy.
 
  • Like
Likes Hornbein
  • #461
Astronuc said:
I'm not sure how Trump, Clinton or any of the candidates would actually 'bring jobs back' to the US
Is that to say you don't like some the ideas long put forward to create jobs and growth, or disagree they can work?

Some general commentary from an economist:

http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/john.cochrane/research/papers/cochrane_growth.pdf

...
Regulation
The vast expansion in regulation is the most obvious change in public policy accompanying America’s growth slowdown. Most recently, under the Dodd-Frank act and the ACA or Obamacare, these two large segments of the economy have seen radical increases in 5 regulatory intervention. But environmental, labor, product, and energy regulation have all increased dramatically as well...
Economic regulation has left behind the rule-of-law framework that many Americans suppose governs their affairs. In the popular imagination, regulation is about rules, and there are just too many of them. In many areas, however, the regulations are so vast, so complex, selfcontradictory and so vague, that they basically give the regulators free rein to do what they want. In many cases, there is not a set of rules that you can read and comply with. You need to ask for preemptive permission from a regulator, who determines if your project can go ahead. Delay in getting needed approval is as good as denial in many cases. Projects that cost millions cannot bear years or often decades of delay in getting approvals...

and

...the U.S. economy is simply overrun by an out-of-control and increasingly politicized regulatory state. If it takes years to get the permits to start projects and mountains of paper to hire people, if every step risks a new criminal investigation, people don’t invest, hire or innovate. The U.S. needs simple, common-sense, Adam Smith policies...

Specifically, Trump favors an end to US corporate taxes. The US has the "third Highest Corporate Tax Rate among 173 Nations". That's a good way to retain US jobs in the US, and Obama's own commission, https://www.fiscalcommission.gov/sites/fiscalcommission.gov/files/documents/TheMomentofTruth12_1_2010.pdf , which he ignored, called for substantially lowering the corporate tax.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #462
mheslep said:
Is that to say you don't like some the ideas long put forward to create jobs and growth, or disagree they can work?
No, I was wondering what their proposals are.

How about we cut/eliminate all taxes, but send a bill for the current debt, apportioned by wealth of the individual or institution? The individual or institution can then work out a payment plan.
 
  • #463
Astronuc said:
No, I was wondering what their proposals are.

How about we cut/eliminate all taxes, but send a bill for the current debt, apportioned by wealth of the individual or institution? The individual or institution can then work out a payment plan.
Different topic from how to create jobs, but ok.

Apportioned by wealth, not income? Yes that would include grabbing the assets of the very wealthy like Soros, of Trump. It would also grab assets from the retired, the disabled. Of college savings for kids. "From each according to hide ability, to each according to their needs" has never worked out well.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_each_according_to_his_ability,_to_each_according_to_his_needs
 
  • #464
GOP Senator Calls for 'Adult' Third-Party Presidential Candidate
https://gma.yahoo.com/gop-senator-calls-adult-third-party-presidential-candidate-142117698--abc-news-topstories.html

I think there are a lot of folks who would like to see a third alternative.
 
  • #465
I can't think of anyone who could win the election outright as a third-party candidate. The best he/she could hope to do is win enough states to block any candidate from getting a majority in the Electoral College, which would throw the election to the Republican-controlled House of Representatives. If they then elected a "never-Trump Republican in third-party disguise", Trump and his supporters would surely be enraged, and seek revenge in the next House election cycle.
 
  • Like
Likes mheslep
  • #466
Astronuc said:
GOP Senator Calls for 'Adult' Third-Party Presidential Candidate
https://gma.yahoo.com/gop-senator-calls-adult-third-party-presidential-candidate-142117698--abc-news-topstories.html

I think there are a lot of folks who would like to see a third alternative.
Yep, that's me.
 
  • #467
jtbell said:
I can't think of anyone who could win the election outright as a third-party candidate. The best he/she could hope to do is win enough states to block any candidate from getting a majority in the Electoral College, which would throw the election to the Republican-controlled House of Representatives.
That isn't the way I'd see it going. I'm envisioning something similar to 1992, where Clinton won what looked like an Electoral College landslide despite only earning 43% of the popular vote. With 19% of the popular vote, Perot earned zero electors.

The winner take all electoral college turns weak pluralities into landslides and makes getting the election to the House very difficult.

We Republicans may end up with the exact same dilemma as we faced in '92: Should I vote for the moderate/independent, maybe accomplishing nothing more than ensuring a Clinton victory?

[Late edit] Perhaps you realize how long of a shot that is and you were just pointing out the only shot...
 
Last edited:
  • #468
russ_watters said:
Yep, that's me.
You want a third alternative, or you are the third alternative? :biggrin:

I think you should step up Russ.
 
  • #469
Astronuc said:
GOP Senator Calls for 'Adult' Third-Party Presidential Candidate
https://gma.yahoo.com/gop-senator-calls-adult-third-party-presidential-candidate-142117698--abc-news-topstories.html

I think there are a lot of folks who would like to see a third alternative.
I think there are a lot of *senators* who would like a 3rd party alternative, one in which they are likely to gain a cabinet post or have leverage for their pet pork project. Actual voters, that's another story. GOP turnout in the primaries has broken records, going from 1.1 million in Ohio 2008 to 2 million now (far higher than the Ohio Democratic turnout). From the outcome, we know those voters did not turn out to write-in their senator.

http://www.npr.org/2016/03/16/47068...far-outstripping-democrats-in-primary-turnout
 
  • Like
Likes jim hardy
  • #470
mheslep said:
I think there are a lot of *senators* who would like a 3rd party alternative, one in which they are likely to gain a cabinet post or have leverage for their pet pork project. Actual voters, that's another story. GOP turnout in the primaries has broken records, going from 1.1 million in Ohio 2008 to 2 million now (far higher than the Ohio Democratic turnout). From the outcome, we know those voters did not turn out to write-in their senator.

http://www.npr.org/2016/03/16/47068...far-outstripping-democrats-in-primary-turnout
The NPR article links to http://www.electproject.org/home/voter-turnout/voter-turnout-data
http://www.electproject.org/2016P

I was wanting to tally the votes in caucuses and primaries to see what the popular vote this year might look like. The problem with some caucuses is that the reported vote count is just the number of precinct delegates, not the true number of people who participated and voted.
 
  • #471
russ_watters said:
That isn't the way I'd see it going. I'm envisioning something similar to 1992, where Clinton won what looked like an Electoral College landslide despite only earning 43% of the popular vote. With 19% of the popular vote, Perot earned zero electors.
Or 2000. If Ralph Nader hadn't been on the ballot in Florida, Al Gore probably would have won the White House instead of Bush 43.

I agree that sort of scenario is more likely than throwing the election into the House.
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters
  • #472
Keep an eye on this guy

http://www.hoover.org/research/new-american-grand-strategy

Daily Beast reports of a move to draft him

CALL OF DUTY
04.07.16 11:15 PM ET
The Secret Movement to Draft General James Mattis for President
Gen. James Mattis doesn’t necessarily want to be president—but that’s not stopping a group of billionaire donors from hatching a plan to get him there.

Just might see a Bullmoose party this year . That Doris Goodwin book Astro linked in TIL thread gives a feeling of prescience.
 
  • #473
If you want to sub-break down the Trump candidacy, I think there's a lesson to be learned here. Ultimately, at the end of the day, I think the people's vote counts, and if you're running for president and get the majority of the popular vote, then there's a good argument you should be president no matter how kooky you are.

What we saw with Trump, though, was a rare and unexpected phenomenon. He was able to basically hijack the republican party by silently slithering into the initial 17 candidate debates. Hahaha, it's Donald Trump, this should be fun. Well, he basically turned the whole thing into a TV game show or virtual reality series and, IMO, ran an illegitimate "collateral" campaign as TV game show host alongside the legitimate race of the legitimate "politicians." These are two separate things, but because the RNC entertained Trump as a legitimate candidate in the beginning, the whole enchilada got f-d up and they didn't know how to walk it back.

You don't want a bricklayer wiring your electrical system. I don't want a greedy, reality show businessman "politicking" for my country oversees. Give him a job as the "minister of finance" or Treasury Secretary advisor or something. That's all he's good for. And let him have it if he proves he's capable. He's no president, though. I don't want a guy who's tag line is "You're fired" with his finger on the button.

Even Ronald Reagan the actor served as governor of California for a while. To have a president in office with zero political experience is scary.

I think the lesson from this should be that there's a requirement of some minimum form of political experience in order to get the support of a major political party. Trump didn't qualify for this and the RNC screwed up. If you don't have that experience then go ahead and run as an independent candidate and good luck to you.
 
  • Like
Likes Evo
  • #474
"The economic disasters of socialism and communism come from assuming a blanket superiority of those who want to run a whole economy." --Thomas Sowell

There's dissenting opinions on the "Smartness of crowds" vs "Dumbness of crowds"
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/wisdom-crowds.html
In the early 1900s, British scientist Sir Francis Galton thought he was proving the ignorance of the masses when he noted that no one got the right answer at a country-fair competition in which entrants were asked to guess the exact weight of an ox. What Galton failed to realize was that the median of all the guesses produced close to the right answer—and showed the "wisdom of the crowd."
http://p2pfoundation.net/Wisdom_of_Crowds
The Wisdom of Crowds generally breaks down when information sharing/group think starts to skew and bias people towards errors. ...
...When aggregation is used in the wrong way, drowning out individual creativity and difference, what results is not wisdom, but Groupthink or the Dumbness of Crowds.

Watching the Indiana returns i noticed Trump got almost as many votes (587K) as Sanders and Clinton combined(628K).
"People who are very aware that they have more knowledge than the average person are often very unaware that they do not have one-tenth of the knowledge of all of the average persons put together. In this situation, for the intelligentsia to impose their notions on ordinary people is essentially to impose ignorance on knowledge." --Dr. Thomas Sowell

MIght be we plain folks have been brainwashed by the merchants of discontent and Trump is another Pied Piper .
MIght be we plain folks are on to something.

As a very NON intellectual person, i say "One plays the hand one was dealt."
Republicans were dealt Trump.
They need to just "Deal with it."

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...ump-wont-be-president-says-barack-obama-video
 
  • Like
Likes Dotini
  • #476
Presidential candidates apparently get a national intelligence briefing, usually after the parties convention.

Apparently, some in the intelligence community are reluctant, or otherwise averse, to give a briefing to Trump.
 
  • #478
Astronuc said:
Presidential candidates apparently get a national intelligence briefing, usually after the parties convention.

Apparently, some in the intelligence community are reluctant, or otherwise averse, to give a briefing to Trump.

Trump is not accepting the "foreign policy consensus," says Putin is a "strong leader", and believes torture yields valuable information and so his intel briefings will be challenging, it says here:

http://www.northjersey.com/news/trump-in-line-to-receive-top-u-s-intelligence-secrets-1.1569064
Once Trump, known for his off-the-cuff speeches and constant tweets, becomes the Republican nominee for the White House in July, he'll be entitled to updates based on the President's Daily Brief, a compilation of top-level classified intelligence about global events.

It's a prospect giving pause to some officials, who wonder how Trump will react to the information and whether he might inadvertently let some sensitive information slip out, according to several who asked not to be identified because they don't want to be seen as taking sides in the political campaign.

"We will absolutely have no problem keeping it private. Nobody can hold information better than Mr. Trump," Hope Hicks, a spokeswoman for Trump's campaign, said when asked about the briefings. "We look forward to asking questions."

While every Republican and Democratic nominee since the 1950s has received such briefings, providing them to Trump is going to be a unique experience for intelligence professionals, said Michael Hayden, who served as director of the CIA from 2006 to 2009 and participated in the sessions for Democrat Barack Obama and his Republican challenger, Arizona Sen. John McCain, in 2008.

"My life experience had me brief, or see others brief, candidates who are familiar with and accepting of the post-World War II American foreign policy consensus," Hayden, who is now with the Chertoff Group in Washington, said in an interview. "None of that appears to apply to Mr. Trump. This is going to make this series of briefings particularly challenging and exciting."

During the Republican primary season, Trump has at times questioned the U.S. role in NATO, called Russian President Vladimir Putin "a strong leader," and said he's "in that camp" that believes torture yields valuable information from detainees.

Hayden declined to speculate whether Trump can be trusted but said he would expect the Obama administration to give the Republican nominee the same briefings as his Democratic opponent.

The Democratic front-runner, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, is a veteran recipient of government secrets, although Republicans contend she broke the law because classified information was included in messages on her private e-mail system. The FBI is investigating the matter.

In addition to giving the presidential nominees top-level security clearances, Hayden said some of their top aides also would be cleared to receive the briefings.
 
  • #479
Dotini said:
candidates who are familiar with and accepting of the post-World War II American foreign policy consensus,"

So "...fundamentally transform America..." was just a line?
 
  • Like
Likes mheslep
  • #480
jim hardy said:
So "...fundamentally transform America..." was just a line?
"Fundamentally transform America" is a line used by Obama, but also hinted at in the noises and inchoate plans of both Sanders and Trump. I highly doubt any individual is going to fundamentally transform America. But the people can do that. In the French Revolution, the middle classes forced regime change and guillotined the elites and the bankers. In the current situation, the media and political class is in a panic and the middle classes on both left and right are as angry as boiled owls. So yes, rebellion if not revolution is in the air.
 
Last edited:
  • #481
Dotini said:
"Fundamentally transform America" is a line used by Obama, but also hinted at in the noises and inchoate plans of both Sanders and Trump. I highly doubt any individual is going to fundamentally transform America. But the people can do that. In the French Revolution, the middle classes forced regime change and guillotined the elites and the bankers. In the current situation, the media and political class is in a panic and the middle classes on both left and right are as angry as boiled owls. So yes, rebellion if not revolution is in the air.
18th century France had little by way of "middle class", which was largely an American creation. The mob and the Jacobins killed aristocrats, clergy, scientists, rich, poor, and generally anyone who they just didn't like at the moment, finally killing the leader of the mob (Robespiere), shortly after he created his own deity mythology for followers to worship.

If there is a revolution model to follow, I'm going with the American.
 
  • #482
The eminent British historian Paul Johnson has written a brief essay on Trump, why the alternatives are not satisfactory, making an interesting argument with which I am sympathetic. Too bad The Donald can't go forth and speak likewise.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/currentevents/2016/03/23/when-excess-is-a-virtue/#10173ff34b5f
THE MENTAL INFECTION known as “political correctness” is one of the most dangerous intellectual afflictions ever to attack mankind. The fact that we began by laughing at it–and to some extent, still do–doesn’t diminish its venom one bit...

The insidious thing about PC is that it wasn’t–and isn’t–the creation of anyone in particular. It’s usually the anonymous work of such Kafkaesque figures as civil servants, municipal librarians, post office sorters and employees at similar levels. It penetrates the interstices of society, especially those where the hierarchies of privilege and property are growing. ...

Nowhere has PC been more triumphant than in the U.S. This is remarkable, because America has traditionally been the home of vigorous, outspoken, raw and raucous speech. From the early 17th century, when the clerical discipline the Pilgrim Fathers sought to impose broke down and those who had things to say struck out westward or southward for the freedom to say them, America has been a land of unrestricted comment on anything–until recently. Now the U.S. has been inundated with PC inquisitors, and PC poison is spreading worldwide in the Anglo zone.

For these reasons it’s good news that Donald Trump is doing so well in the American political primaries. He is vulgar, abusive, nasty, rude, boorish and outrageous. He is also saying what he thinks and, more important, teaching Americans how to think for themselves again...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes russ_watters and jim hardy
  • #483
Sanders looking for a win in WV.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/white-house-dreams-fade-sanders-seeks-west-virginia-181344516--election.html

However,
Among those voting in the West Virginia Democratic primary, about a third said they would support Trump over either Clinton or Sanders in November. An additional 2 in 10 say they wouldn't vote for either candidate. But 4 in 10 said also said they consider themselves to be independents or Republicans, and not Democrats, according to exit polls.

Jobs and the coal industry are the big issues in WV and other parts of the Appalachian Mountain area

Trump has been declared winner of the GOP primary in WV with about 76% of the vote with 72% of precincts reporting. Cruz is barely ahead of Kasich.

Trump has about 62% of the vote in the Nebraska GOP primary with about 61% of precincts reporting. Cruz is a distant second, and Kasich an even more distant third.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #484
Astronuc said:
Sanders looking for a win in WV.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/white-house-dreams-fade-sanders-seeks-west-virginia-181344516--election.html

However:
About your quote:
Among those voting in the West Virginia Democratic primary, about a third said they would support Trump over either Clinton or Sanders in November. An additional 2 in 10 say they wouldn't vote for either candidate. But 4 in 10 said also said they consider themselves to be independents or Republicans, and not Democrats, according to exit polls.
Doesn't that indicate that the concept of open primaries becomes problematic once one of the parties has chosen a candidate?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #485
mheslep said:
The eminent British historian Paul Johnson has written a brief essay on Trump, why the alternatives are not satisfactory, making an interesting argument with which I am sympathetic. Too bad The Donald can't go forth and speak likewise.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/currentevents/2016/03/23/when-excess-is-a-virtue/#10173ff34b5f

Later in that article Paul Johnson claims that post office sorters are fostering political correctness. ?
 
  • #486
mheslep said:
The eminent British historian Paul Johnson has written a brief essay on Trump and why the alternatives are not satisfactory.

Replace "Hail to the Chief " with "Fanfare for the Common Man" ?


Hornbein said:
Later in that article Paul Johnson claims that post office sorters are fostering political correctness. ?
I had to search the article for "sorters"
The insidious thing about PC is that it wasn’t–and isn’t–the creation of anyone in particular. It’s usually the anonymous work of such Kafkaesque figures as civil servants, municipal librarians, post office sorters and employees at similar levels. It penetrates the interstices of society, especially those where the hierarchies of privilege and property are growing. To a great extent PC is the revenge of the resentful underdog.
Quite a good paragraph i thought.
Self appointed "PC Police" wouldn't mind your business if theirs was worth minding.
 
  • Like
Likes mheslep
  • #487
The one big problem none of the [remaining] candidates are talking about
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/national-debt-trump-clinton-171558058.html

The debt, at $19.3 trillion, is four times larger, adjusting for inflation, than when Ronald Reagan lamented its size in his 1989 farewell address. Yet only one of this year’s presidential candidates, Republican John Kasich, had a plan for doing anything about it, and he left the race after winning a grand total of one state. The two front-runners – Republican Donald Trump and Democrat Hillary Clinton – have said little about the debt, except for Trump’s jarring suggestion that maybe Uncle Sam can save a few bucks by renegotiating the debt and paying back less than 100 cents on the dollar.
 
  • #488
jim hardy said:
Replace "Hail to the Chief " with "Fanfare for the Common Man" ?
I had to search the article for "sorters"

Quite a good paragraph i thought.
Self appointed "PC Police" wouldn't mind your business if theirs was worth minding.


Perhaps you can explain to me how post office sorters foster political correctness.
 
  • #489
Hornbein said:
Perhaps you can explain to me how post office sorters foster political correctness.

Not to demean hourly workers as non-thinkers (because i don't believe that's true),
but I think his point was PC is a trivial pursuit . See Melvile's Sub-Sub Librarian and Consumptive Usher, and Eric Hoffer's thoughts on a society run by clerks & scribes.
 
  • #490
Hornbein said:
Perhaps you can explain to me how post office sorters foster political correctness.
There may have been a specific incident of individual misconduct the writer was referring to, but rather than speculate we may have to just let it go.
 
  • #491
Hornbein said:
Perhaps you can explain to me how post office sorters foster political correctness.

I'd like to know too, since very rarely do those complaining about PC gone wild have any true, non-exaggerated examples that justify their sweeping statements.
 
  • #492
Tobias Funke said:
I'd like to know too, since very rarely do those complaining about PC gone wild have any true, non-exaggerated examples that justify their sweeping statements.
Would trigger warnings do it for you?
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters
  • #493
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/politically correct
Simple Definition of politically correct
  • : agreeing with the idea that people should be careful to not use language or behave in a way that could offend a particular group of people


Same government that funded a crucifix in a bottle of pee as art
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ
Piss Christ is a 1987 photograph by the American artist and photographer Andres Serrano. It depicts a small plastic crucifix submerged in a glass of the artist's urine. The piece was a winner of the Southeastern Center for Contemporary Art's "Awards in the Visual Arts" competition,[1] which was sponsored in part by the National Endowment for the Arts, a United States Government agency that offers support and funding for artistic projects, without controlling content.
arrests a guy who wants to deface a koran ?
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...pastor-terry-jones-arrested-article-1.1453195
Koran-burning Florida Pastor Terry Jones arrested in latest attempt at sacrilege
... Cops said they cuffed Jones and his associate pastor, Marvin Sapp, around 5 p.m., as the men were about to start the blaze. Each faces a felony charge of unlawful conveyance of fuel. Jones

You don't have to look very far.

http://thetruthwins.com/archives/20...-political-correctness-is-taking-over-america
The following are 20 outrageous examples that show how political correctness is taking over America…

#1 According to a new Army manual, U.S. soldiers will now be instructed to avoid “any criticism of pedophilia” and to avoid criticizing “anything related to Islam”. The following is from a recent Judicial Watch article

The draft leaked to the newspaper offers a list of “taboo conversation topics” that soldiers should avoid, including “making derogatory comments about the Taliban,” “advocating women’s rights,” “any criticism of pedophilia,” “directing any criticism towards Afghans,” “mentioning homosexuality and homosexual conduct” or “anything related to Islam.”

#2 The Obama administration has banned all U.S. government agencies from producing any training materials that link Islam with terrorism. In fact, the FBI has gone back and purged references to Islam and terrorism from hundreds of old documents.

#3 Authorities are cracking down on public expressions of the Christian faith all over the nation, and yet atheists in New York City are allowed to put up an extremely offensive billboard in Time Square this holiday season that shows a picture of Jesus on the cross underneath a picture of Santa with the following tagline: “http://www.theblaze.com/stories/atheists-post-anti-christmas-billboard-in-times-square-featuring-jesus-being-crucified-drop-the-myth/ ”

#4 According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, it is illegal for employers to discriminate against criminals because it has a “disproportionate” impact on minorities.

#5 Down in California, Governor Jerry Brown has signed a bill that will allow large numbers of illegal immigrants to legally get California driver’s licenses.

#6 Should an illegal immigrant be able to get a law license and practice law in the United States? That is exactly what the State Bar of California argued earlier this year…

An illegal immigrant applying for a law license in California should be allowed to receive it, the State Bar of California argues in a filing to the state Supreme Court.

Sergio Garcia, 35, of Chico, Calif., has met the rules for admission, including passing the bar exam and the moral character review, and his lack of legal status in the United States should not automatically disqualify him, the Committee of Bar Examiners said Monday.

#7 More than 75 percent of the babies born in Detroit are born to unmarried women, yet it is considered to be “politically correct” to suggest that there is anything wrong with that.

#8 The University of Minnesota – Duluth (UMD) initiated an aggressive advertising campaign earlier this year that included online videos, billboards, and lectures that sought to raise awareness about “white privilege“.

#9 At one high school down in California, five students were sent home from school for wearing shirts that displayed the American flag on the Mexican holiday of Cinco de Mayo.

#10 Chris Matthews of MSNBC http://newsbusters.org/blogs/rusty-weiss/2012/08/30/chris-matthews-and-msnbc-now-claim-word-chicago-racist#ixzz252qumTv7 that it is “racist” for conservatives to use the word “Chicago”.

#11 A judge down in North Carolina has ruled that it is unconstitutional for North Carolina to offer license plates that say “Choose Life” on them.

#12 The number of gay characters on television is at an http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/05/entertainment-us-glaad-idUSBRE8940FA20121005. Meanwhile, there are barely any strongly Christian characters to be found anywhere on television or in the movies, and if they do happen to show up they are almost always portrayed in a very negative light.

#13 House Speaker John Boehner recently stripped key committee positions from four “rebellious” conservatives in the U.S. House of Representatives. It is believed that this “purge” happened in order to send a message that members of the party better fall in line and support Boehner in his negotiations with Barack Obama.

#14 There is already a huge push to have a woman elected president in 2016. It doesn’t appear that it even matters which woman is elected. There just seems to be a feeling that “it is time” for a woman to be elected even if she doesn’t happen to be the best candidate.

#15 Volunteer chaplains for the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/police-chaplains-told-to-stop-invoking-jesus.html from using the name of Jesus on government property.

#16 Chaplains in the U.S. military are being forced to perform gay marriages, even if it goes against their personal religious beliefs. The few chaplains that have refused to follow orders know that it means the end of their careers.

#17 All over the country, the term “manhole” is being replaced with the terms “utility hole” or “maintenance hole”.

#18 In San Francisco, authorities have installed small plastic “privacy screens” on library computers so that perverts can continue to exercise their “right” to watch pornography at the library without children being exposed to it.

#19 You will never guess what is going on at one college up http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/college-allows-transgender-man-to-expose-himself-to-young-girls.html…

A Washington college said their non-discrimination policy prevents them from stopping a transgender man from exposing himself to young girls inside a women’s locker room, according to a group of concerned parents.

#20 All over America, liberal commentators are now suggesting that football has become “too violent” and “too dangerous” and that it needs to be substantially toned down. In fact, one liberal columnist for the Boston Globe is even proposing that football should be banned for anyone under the age of 14.

I maintain Johnson's point is PC's loudest adherents really aren't fit even to sort mail or stack library books . Let alone dictate public discourse.

What do you guys think he was saying ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes Bystander
  • #494
jim hardy said:
What do you guys think he was saying ?

It seems to me like Paul Johnson's crackpot personal theory. I'm used to seeing stuff like this on the Internet, but not published in a formerly reputable magazine.
 
  • #495
Tobias Funke said:
I'd like to know too, since very rarely do those complaining about PC gone wild have any true, non-exaggerated examples that justify their sweeping statements.
We may need to split this to a separate thread. There are two incidents active in the news right now that I wanted to point out:
-West Point Cadets making a black power salute.
-White high school girls forming the N-word on t-shirts.

Generally what has been happening lately (see also the half dozen campus incidents this spring) is someone commits a small pc offense and has their life destroyed over it. With one critical caveat: pc enforcement only applies to certain less favored groups/ideologies.
 
  • Like
Likes Bystander
  • #496
Hornbein said:
It seems to me like Paul Johnson's crackpot personal theory.
Argument from incredulity,
fair enough.

russ_watters said:
We may need to split this to a separate thread.
Not on my account. I've had my say.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2016-5-11_16-6-33.png
    upload_2016-5-11_16-6-33.png
    13.8 KB · Views: 423
  • Like
Likes Bystander
  • #497
Dotini said:
Would trigger warnings do it for you?

No. I don't see anything so outrageous about telling others that something might bother them. Everyone is still free to read or watch the material. It's certainly not an example of what Johnson calls "one of the most dangerous intellectual afflictions ever to attack mankind."

jim hardy said:
You don't have to look very far.

Some (most?) of those are questionable to say the least.

russ_watters said:
We may need to split this to a separate thread. There are two incidents active in the news right now that I wanted to point out:
-West Point Cadets making a black power salute.
-White high school girls forming the N-word on t-shirts.

Generally what has been happening lately (see also the half dozen campus incidents this spring) is someone commits a small pc offense and has their life destroyed over it. With one critical caveat: pc enforcement only applies to certain less favored groups/ideologies.

I'm not familiar with those two incidents so I can't really comment on them. I don't immediately see how they're related though. Certainly there are questionable decisions being made in the name of (misunderstood) political correctness, and it is terrible when someone is dogpiled at best and doxxed or even killed at worst for saying something judged to be out of line. I just don't think there's a reason to attribute that behavior to PC. Plenty of people had and still have their lives severely impacted for, say, suggesting that video games may have some misogynistic elements, or reporting corruption and abuse carried out by favored groups. Those people aren't from "less favored groups" as you would define them I'm sure.

I'm not debating the existence of isolated cases, but once again I was referring to sweeping statements like Johnson's "one of the most dangerous intellectual afflictions ever to attack mankind" that has resulted in a loss of Americans' ability to think. That's simply wrong.
 
  • #498
Let's get back to the topic or this thread will be closed.
 
  • #500
Finally we are getting down to core issues. :biggrin:

Mrs. Clinton has vowed that barring any threats to national security, she would open up government files on the subject [of UFOs], a shift from President Obama, who typically dismisses the topic as a joke. Her position has elated U.F.O. enthusiasts, who have declared Mrs. Clinton the first “E.T. candidate.”

...“I think we may have been” visited already, she said in the interview. “We don’t know for sure.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/11/us/politics/hillary-clinton-aliens.html?_r=0

It does beg the question, which are we more likely to see; proof of aliens, or Donald Trump's tax returns? :nb)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes lisab, Dotini and jim hardy

Similar threads

Replies
16
Views
3K
  • Poll Poll
Replies
10
Views
7K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
36
Views
1K
Replies
340
Views
31K
Back
Top