Trump v Clinton: who do you support?

[7bit]

Troll: .... Trump is all about internal US issues, unlike the previous presidents who wanted to fuck with the rest of the world. ....

Americans buy fuck american! Vote for Trump!

[Muirium]

So while you argue that "on average women earn less than men but thats not because of sexism or discrimination its because people do different jobs",
the reality is that people do different jobs partly precisely because of sexism or discrimination.

Basically you are right when saying we "already have equality , at least from an instutuonalised standpoint", but it is rather that we have equality only in an institutional perspective.

Bang on target! What's this curious feeling: completely agreeing with Kbdfr on something for a change? The strange things that happen when we stray onto bigger topics beyond keyswitches.

[fohat]

All the people who avoid questioning Clinton, are in favour of mass spying, and would vote for it.

As usual, Bernie is the clear and only choice.

http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-o ... al-rights/

But when the choice is down to holding your nose and choosing the lesser of 2 evils, that is *always* the Democrat.

[andrewjoy]

So while you argue that "on average women earn less than men but thats not because of sexism or discrimination its because people do different jobs",
the reality is that people do different jobs partly precisely because of sexism or discrimination.

Basically you are right when saying we "already have equality , at least from an instutuonalised standpoint", but it is rather that we have equality only in an institutional perspective.

Bang on target! What's this curious feeling: completely agreeing with Kbdfr on something for a change? The strange things that happen when we stray onto bigger topics beyond keyswitches.

All people are not the same, there is nothing stopping anyone doing any subject they chose, but the numbers do not lie , men and women chose different subjects because they have a choice, your never going to get it 50/50 and honestly whats the point ? Are you going to force women into a subject that has a higher percentage of men because you want them to have equal numbers represented, or similarly are you going to stop the man doing the subject he wants because there are too many men in a certain subject? That sounds like oppression to me.

And its only natural that a woman would want to take the caring of the children role , we are a sexually dimophic species afterall and women have a much higher nurturing instinct than men do. Should that mean they are forced to do this ? No but they CHOSE to do it exactly because they have the freedom to chose.

[Muirium]

Mmm hmm. Society is a fiction, just like Mrs. Thatcher said. Everyone is already free to do what they want. The poor and every other unprivileged group has only itself to blame. Tories have been mansplaining that for years. Nice to see you hitch your wagon to that posh boy train. The whole wide world becomes so clear once you put on those glasses.

But when the choice is down to holding your nose and choosing the lesser of 2 evils, that is *always* the Democrat.

Pretty much. What is horrifying is America's voting system. First past the post dooms the people to just this sort of thing. Entirely by design.

[fohat]

What is horrifying is America's voting system.

Our late-1700s pre-technology constitutional systems revolved around state governments because they were the largest manageable land areas for reasonable jurisdiction.

With the advent of rapid communication and transportation, state rivalries and competitions are generally counterproductive, and now that government-haters have seized the "states' rights" banner as their mark of authority for crippling the progress of the nation, the consequences (especially under a far-right-leaning Supreme Court) have been devastating.

Remedying the heinous gerrymandering that has been going on for the past couple of decades should be the first order of business, and restructuring or eliminating the Electoral Congress outright should be second.

[chuckdee]

I just can't get worked up about any of this anymore. Call me jaded.

Remedying the heinous gerrymandering that has been going on for the past couple of decades should be the first order of business, and restructuring or eliminating the Electoral Congress outright should be second.

I think we need to have some sort of intermediary. But the Electoral College is not it. But unfortunately, American's have too short of an attention span for that to happen. Gerrymandering, however... that's terrible, and what's even more terrible is that it was ever a part of the system.

[Muirium]

@Fohat: Even fairly drawn districts aren’t enough to make first past the post democratic. Winner takes all is the problem. Any chamber elected in single seat districts has the same problem of two party control, with one party overwhelming.

Here’s Britain’s election last year for example.

Screen Shot 2016-05-03 at 7.14.56 pm.png (9.17 KiB) Viewed 5470 times

Screen Shot 2016-05-03 at 7.15.04 pm.png (8.3 KiB) Viewed 5470 times

A little different, huh?

No significant gerrymandering over here. But still the same kind of result as your House of Representatives. Choose your lesser evil wisely. This isn’t democracy, this is an exercise of control over the voters.

Mind, the politicians you guys have right now are so awful that even Single Transferable Vote wouldn’t fix the heinous mess over night. Yet there is a link between the voting system and its winning candidates. America’s current godawful polarisation is the result of a dumb ballot that strangles every other colour of opinion.

[Redmaus]

So while you argue that "on average women earn less than men but thats not because of sexism or discrimination its because people do different jobs",
the reality is that people do different jobs partly precisely because of sexism or discrimination.

Basically you are right when saying we "already have equality , at least from an instutuonalised standpoint", but it is rather that we have equality only in an institutional perspective.

Bang on target! What's this curious feeling: completely agreeing with Kbdfr on something for a change? The strange things that happen when we stray onto bigger topics beyond keyswitches.

No one made them choose those jobs. I don't think someone taking gender studies should earn more than a doctor or lawyer.

Its up to them, quit acting like they are mindless women and not rational thinking people.

[fohat]

Winner takes all is the problem. Any chamber elected in single seat districts has the same problem of two party control, with one party overwhelming.

No significant gerrymandering over here. But still the same kind of result as your House of Representatives.

America’s current godawful polarisation is the result of a dumb ballot that strangles every other colour of opinion.

This is why elections should be taken out of the hands of the states and run, consistently, nationally, by non-partisan commissions.

And just in case I have not posted this here, or anyone has forgotten, this is a small easy-to-read book proposing simple solutions to complex problems:

http://www.businessinsider.com/john-pau ... nts-2014-6

[chuckdee]

So while you argue that "on average women earn less than men but thats not because of sexism or discrimination its because people do different jobs",
the reality is that people do different jobs partly precisely because of sexism or discrimination.

Basically you are right when saying we "already have equality , at least from an instutuonalised standpoint", but it is rather that we have equality only in an institutional perspective.

Bang on target! What's this curious feeling: completely agreeing with Kbdfr on something for a change? The strange things that happen when we stray onto bigger topics beyond keyswitches.

No one made them choose those jobs. I don't think someone taking gender studies should earn more than a doctor or lawyer.

Its up to them, quit acting like they are mindless women and not rational thinking people.

That shows that immaturity that was alluded to above. There are all sorts of biases in everyday life. Gender is one, but and Race is another obvious one. But there are all sorts of less than obvious ones also. And I've seen them at work personally in several cases. It's not just anecdotal, but you have to take your mind out of the personal responsibility rote response, and look at it in a more moderated term. Yes, personal responsibility does enter into it, but removing these biases does also. And too many people are too heavily weighted one way (diversity above all else) or another (its their choices about what jobs they take).

[fohat]

There are all sorts of biases in everyday life.
Gender is one, but and Race is another obvious one.
But there are all sorts of less than obvious ones also.

It is entirely understandable that bias is boiling over near the end of the first successful 2-term black president with the strong likelihood of his being followed a female president.

After the election, which, if we are very lucky and get solid Democratic congressional majorities as Trump takes the "Grand Old Party" down in flames with him, I predict an unprecedented outburst of hate crimes and domestic terrorism as the anti-abortionists and gun crazies go on a scorched-earth rampage in their fury and frustration.

[photekq]

There are all sorts of biases in everyday life. Gender is one, but and Race is another obvious one.

Have you considered that what you are perceiving is not solely the result of bias, but also the result of inherent differences between the races and sexes in both physical and mental biology?

In my own opinion, there are biases in every direction today. I don't see any group of people (in terms of sex and race) having a better position (in relation to any other group) as a result of the net biases that their group receives.

My flak jacket is already on in preparation for the responses I will inevitably receive.

[seebart]

My flak jacket is already on in preparation for the responses I will inevitably receive.

There are tons of biases based on all kinds of "subjects", most of them human "perceptions" of other humans and or cultures. I mean we have way more biases about ourselfs then say about animals or plants. Kind of says it all doesent it?

[fohat]

I don't see any group of people (in terms of sex and race) having a better position (in relation to any other group) as a result of the net biases that their group receives.

Yet you wonder why so many adults dismiss the opinions of teenagers.

[photekq]

Yet you wonder why so many adults dismiss the opinions of teenagers.

And I dismiss comments such as yours that contribute nothing constructive to conversation.

I'll expand on my words above with further explanation and sources once I have some more time, so that I may perhaps tempt you to consider my words more thoughtfully than you have done so far.

[fohat]

I'll expand on my words above with further explanation and sources once I have some more time, so that I may perhaps tempt you to consider my words more thoughtfully than you have done so far.

I will read your comments and consider them, as I always do.

You sometimes have interesting insights, and you clearly read and think.

Unlike your age-peer Redmaus, from whom I have never seen even the most minuscule scrap of wisdom or understanding of the political or social world.

[seebart]

Unlike your age-peer Redmaus...

You can tell peoples ages online fohat? I like to act like a child randomly, says nothing about my age or does it?

[chuckdee]

There are all sorts of biases in everyday life. Gender is one, but and Race is another obvious one.

Have you considered that what you are perceiving is not solely the result of bias, but also the result of inherent differences between the races and sexes in both physical and mental biology?

In my own opinion, there are biases in every direction today. I don't see any group of people (in terms of sex and race) having a better position (in relation to any other group) as a result of the net biases that their group receives.

My flak jacket is already on in preparation for the responses I will inevitably receive.

Ummm... not the ones I've seen.

I was offered less money for a position that I was taking than my friend, who'd already told me how much she made. When I confronted them, they said it was because she was older and had a family, though I was degreed in the specialty and she was not, and I had experience in it that was more than her experience that she'd had in the position.

In another case, it was a startup, and they said that the next person they hired had to be a minority, even if they were less qualified/not qualified.

There are examples both ways. And the only impetus we should have IMO, is to remove obstacles to a diverse group getting a chance, not be so focused on inclusion. And those obstacles, in general, are bias.

I'll expand on my words above with further explanation and sources once I have some more time, so that I may perhaps tempt you to consider my words more thoughtfully than you have done so far.

I will read your comments and consider them, as I always do.

You sometimes have interesting insights, and you clearly read and think.

Unlike your age-peer Redmaus, from whom I have never seen even the most minuscule scrap of wisdom or understanding of the political or social world.

If you are indeed correct, and both are of the younger generation, and espouse the opinions as stated, i.e. there is no bias or prejudice affecting inclusiveness and/or exclusion...

... I fear for our future.

[fohat]

You can tell peoples ages online fohat?

No, although my impression is that you are 40-something.

I do know that Redmaus is ~16 and that Photekq is ~18 because that's just how I am - I pay attention to these things.

A person's lifeline informs and colors how they navigate their way through life, and their understanding and expectations of others and of society as a whole.

Disclosure: Donald Trump and I share a birthday, although he is 6 years older than I am. Do I "respect" him as my "elder" - NO

As a child of the 1950s-1960s, and a very real candidate for slogging through the jungle in the Vietnam War, it is difficult for me to comprehend teenagers with right-wing attitudes. That is my prejudice. But as a lifelong student of history and society and art and literature, I have a long and deep understanding of the human race, and its history, as a whole. How many books have I read in my life? 1000? absolutely - 2000? probably - 3000? possibly.

As the father of teenage children, I "get it" - they are feeling the power of spreading their wings and they do not want to be held back.

Believe me, I get it. But do they "get it" ?

That is the far more important question.

[webwit]

As a child of the 1950s-1960s

As the father of teenage children

Dog.

[photekq]

If you are indeed correct, and both are of the younger generation, and espouse the opinions as stated, i.e. there is no bias or prejudice affecting inclusiveness and/or exclusion...

... I fear for our future.

Redmaus and I are a small minority in our age group. Our generation is the product of an very liberal education system and a similarly leaning mass media. We are, by all accounts, oddities, so you needn't worry about our future. I'll do that for you

[fohat]

and a similarly leaning mass media.

The mass media may "lean" left in the UK, but it has leaned hard-right in the US during your lifetimes.

[fohat]

Dog.

Yes, not by choice, really, but I was in my mid-late 40s when my kids were born.

[chuckdee]

and a similarly leaning mass media.

The mass media may "lean" left in the UK, but it has leaned hard-right in the US during your lifetimes.

What mass media are you observing? The MSM leans hard left, other than some few minority media (talk radio). Fox could be said to balance it. If Fox wasn't bat shit crazy in a lot of its coverage.

[ohaimark]

Cruz just quit. Trump will win the nomination. Hillary vs. Trump it is, god help us all.

On the flip side, perhaps an independent will run and break the power of both parties? Might be a pipe dream, but I can hope.

[fohat]

What mass media are you observing? The MSM leans hard left, other than some few minority media (talk radio).
Fox could be said to balance it. If Fox wasn't bat shit crazy in a lot of its coverage.

I live in the US.

I had to Google the term "MSM" and it said "main stream media" which I would describe, these days, as right-center.
But, of course, my concept of truly neutral reporting is NPR, which the right-wing nut-jobs like to call "left-ist".

And yes, the Fox TV channel is absolutely bat-shit right-wing crazy and has been one of the major contributors to the insanity of American politics for decades, along with AM talk radio.

[Redmaus]

I will read your comments and consider them, as I always do.

You sometimes have interesting insights, and you clearly read and think.

Unlike your age-peer Redmaus, from whom I have never seen even the most minuscule scrap of wisdom or understanding of the political or social world.

And yet you rarely give a detailed or logical counterargument, and would rather call me a "crazed republican".

I give detailed arguments, link sources, and give people sites to go to where they can make their own decisions on the matter. I look at politicians actual issues, and not the silly hype sites like salon which you link.

Age does not guarantee maturity. If you live in a liberal arts campus with no interaction to outside world for 60 years, you will most likely be liberal no matter what. I have been very civil in these threads and am able to admit it when I proven wrong or lose an argument. I cannot say the same for you.

Like Photekq said, we are anomalies. Most young people are liberal its really easy to be nice and tolerate everything. It is much harder to make choices that will pay off in the future or to deny someone.

Almost no media is right wing anymore, its all leaning toward the left. Even in Texas I see most media here leaning toward the left.

If you really want Clinton to win instead of Trump just because you hate the right, so be it I can't change that.

[Muirium]

I wouldn't have said this some months ago, but I'm pleased Indiana did the right thing yesterday and brought the red team's nomination chaos to a close. Now it's time for the real fun to begin!

Fingers crossed Hillary brings a Democratic congress on her coattails. And then to right the supreme court next year. Change that America's been due for a generation. If all that comes together thanks wholly to his sheer unpopularity, then Trump will have indeed made America great again!

[jacobolus]

What mass media are you observing? The MSM leans hard left, other than some few minority media (talk radio). Fox could be said to balance it.

Is this a joke? The “mainstream media” is almost entirely owned by rich corporate owners, and tends toward neoliberalism – a.k.a. Reaganism. The reporters themselves tend to be registered Democrats, but coverage is, at best, by the facts, when it’s not pure corporate ass-kissing.

There’s nothing that could be called “hard left” anywhere in the US mainstream media. The best you get is something like NPR and PBS, which could be called Democrat-leaning centrist in the modern US context, something roughly comparable in ideology to the Republican party of the 1950s–70s. No mainstream US publication would back the policies of FDR today. In the US political arena, the furthest any mainstream politician gets to the left is something like Bernie Sanders, and he would be right in the middle of any European center-left party.

Anyone with a “hard left” ideology in the US is considered completely crazy, and outside the bounds of political reality. These folks are stuck in fringe parties, where they end up associated with people who legitimately are crazy, making things a bit tough. There are some serious “hard left” folks left in socialist labor unions, obscure corners of academia, etc., but they have very little influence.

Or are you considering The Nation and Democracy Now and The Baffler to be “the” mainstream US media (ha ha ha)? [Note: these decidedly non-mainstream media outlets also aren’t “hard left” per se.]