Prelude to the Apocalypse

[quash]

Because there's no way in hell you're dumb enough to actually think Hillary has infiltrated both the entire Republican Congress

Where did I say, or even insinuate this?

and this very forum

Her Super PAC has posted on forums. It's been documented, proven. Forums were the proving ground for infiltrating opposition on the internet before social media existed.

My point is that you shouldn't underestimate the lengths to which these kinds of organizations will go to make it seem like there's nowhere left on the internet to discuss things. That's the entire point of their existence.

let alone not know the difference between objectivity and Objectivism.

I just wanted to be sure you were standing by your notion of objective reality, because there are few left wing schools of thought that do so (in fact, most of them reject it). So it's a little hard to see where you're coming from based on that alone.

[quash]

A businessman who was born sucking on a silver spoon, who has stiffed contractors out of their legitimately-earned wages, left other people holding the bag when all went to shit, who has never known what it's like to choose between paying a bill or buy groceries, who's never been downsized, and moreover, who benefitted even when his businesses went to shit, CARES ABOUT THE WELL-BEING OF THE COUNTRY SO MUCH, THAT HE'S WILLING TO TAKE ON THE BURDEN OF BEING PRESIDENT?

He cares about it enough to ensure that his family won't be left in a third world country.

I never claimed Trump to be a saint. Quite the contrary, he's a gambit of a businessman.

Compare that with Hillary, who has blood on her hands from Benghazi, Libya, Haiti, etc. Even if you extend her the benefit of the doubt and claim that she's just that inept and that every bad thing she's ever been in charge of has been purely accidental in nature, how is this in any way, shape, or form better than the alternative?

[quash]

To answer anyone wondering: "Why is he focusing so much on Syria/Russia/China and ignoring most everything else?", let me lay it out for you.

Trump isn't going to fix the economy. Neither is Hillary. Another crash is inevitable. Obama's done a good job of kicking the can down the road but it's coming to a head soon. I think regardless of who wins in November we'll be seeing a pretty serious drop in stock values followed by a real crash shortly afterwards.

We can talk taxes, unemployment and all of that, but the truth of the matter is that nobody is fixing anything any time soon. Any plan we're talking about now is going to be remarkably different once shit hits the fan. Not to say that this doesn't matter, but it's not important enough on its own to warrant discussing, particularly because of the role it plays in the larger picture of how things are going to play out against China in particular.

Social issues? Nobody is going to care about anything else if the US enters a war against Russia and/or China. This isn't going to be like Vietnam or any of the Bush Bugaloos. It will literally be a war of national survival.

The kind of moves being made against the US right now are absolutely astonishing. No president in recent times has taken such a weak approach to diplomacy. We let China do anything they want. We created ISIS and play dumb when confronted about it. We pushed a NATO member into Russia's sphere of influence.

How can you look at any of those things, nevermind all of them as part of a bigger picture, and tell me there isn't something going on in the highest echelons of government to start a global conflict? Does none of this seem even the slightest bit suspicious to anyone? That's not even getting in to the generals and admirals Obama's fired (because there's certainly no historical precedent set for this).

A large part of the problem is that most of this is rarely reported on in mainstream news, and when it is, it is almost always offered with no real context so as to prevent the viewer from having a comprehensive view of the situation. Which is why we have people erroneously believing that North Korea is the real problem in the Pacific, that Crimea was an unprovoked act of aggression, etc.

Nobody thinks it's even the slightest bit suspicious that the secretary of state during most of this time is now running for president, with the support of the media and even the incumbent president?

Nobody stops to think that maybe the guy that every rich person on the planet hates might just have a plan to prevent this from happening?

Maybe, just maybe, there might be something to how increasingly desperate and nervous the political establishment has become?

Conspiracy theory, I know. So was liberal bias in the media. So was voter suppression. So was x, y, and z. Nothing's going on, it's all in your head. Everything is fine.

[Ed Oscuro]

quash and Atheistgod1999 posts have this strange feature of repeating meaningless, aimless phrases in the most conspicuous manner. They're endearingly eccentric but not yet a threat to natural human conversationalists; a few more generations might start to iron out the bugs in these chatbots.

It's very, very foolish to believe that Trump either has a plan to save the economy (he doesn't know very much outside of a few zero-sum game parlor tricks, and he can't even run those well) or that he even can be counted on to care. Remember his talk about how the Brexit was going to help his businesses? That was natural Trump.

All Trump seems really enthusiastic about is singing songs about other peoples' blame and excusing himself from blame over even trivial things - and our Republican friends told us repeatedly that Obama was using the Bush legacy as a crutch for too long. By many measures Obama has managed to get the country out from under the specter of the Bush Administration, but Trump isn't doing that either, because why try to solve one problem when you can blame two Administrations instead? Hell, give him the right line and he'll blame Bill Clinton, LBJ, and maybe Reagan, FDR, and Lincoln for any messes he leaves in the White House. In terms of his actual track record, scaring everybody and lying about the brittleness of the nation hasn't improved things yet.

I don't want somebody making everybody fearful and making everything worse, I want somebody who actually has a plan to fix things. But Trump shows no willingness to be positive. This may well be the critical thing that saves our country from suffering under this deluded fascist and his horde.

In the meantime, Clinton's released her 2015 tax form. Trump demanded to see Obama's birth certificate. What has Trump done for us lately?
There's also the matter of all the hyperbole by the "we want everything our way" crowd who are repudiating Ronald Reagan's method of dealing with the Iranians, which has actually been a good arrangement for the US. Ironically, the $400M refund to the Iranians is actually an example where we have successfully renegotiated the terms, but we can't reduce that amount to $0 because it's not our money. Trump supporters have to choose (or, more likely, make a blind guess): Should Trump have blessed the arrangement because of the prospect of our getting deals in the future? Or should he have just decided to blow up the agreement, risking America's reputation for being a reliable partner? That would have all kinds of effects on our debt, ability to negotiate, be an exporter, and have international cooperation. The first option is the one that would be easier to swing in the world economy of today, and it's also the option that Trump is actually most familiar with - negotiating and making deals is, after all, how he supposedly made his fame and fortune. Unless, of course, your vision of America in the 21st century world is just stealing everybody else blind.

The bottom line on this is that Trump may have managed to outrun many creditors and get away with not paying contractors, but the only way Trump could "fix" the $400M payment would be by just refusing to pay it. Again, this is called stealing. There would be immediate and severe repercussions for business if he tried a stunt like that with one of our major trading partners. Trump's tactics of "threaten to sue for defamation" and "run the fuck away from your responsibilities" may work for a guy who can hide behind the skirts of his cronies when the going gets tough, but America doesn't do that. You can't be an absentee President of the country, and America has to retain its honor - thieves can't stand proud and tall.

[quash]

You call me aimless, and then build a strawman around things nobody has said and things I explicitly said I don't believe. Hilarious.

I don't mind differing views, I do mind a complete and total lack of self awareness. Like how BM still hasn't acknowledged the bias against Trump within the media and the Republican party (which he brushed off by saying that everyone's watching the debates and making the media money, as if this even an answer). Or how Ed still believes Democrats voted against invading Iraq.

I can get through to Bryan sometimes. The rest of you must love the taste of sand.

[Specineff]

Compare that with Hillary, who has blood on her hands from Benghazi, Libya, Haiti, etc. Even if you extend her the benefit of the doubt and claim that she's just that inept and that every bad thing she's ever been in charge of has been purely accidental in nature, how is this in any way, shape, or form better than the alternative?

Hillary doesn't claim I'm a criminal and a rapist because of my ethnicity, nor blames my country for the problems plutocrats like Trump have thrived in/caused for years. Also, check Giest118's list. There's your answer.

He cares about it enough to ensure that his family won't be left in a third world country.

Because if there's anyone who knows about the pain and sacrifice of living in a third world country, that's him, right? In his mind and that of those under his thrall, it may be so, but the country isn't going to shit, nor does it need his "expertise" to get back in shape.

[Bitter Almonds]

shrillary supported mass incarceration of people of color or, as she likes to call them, "superpredators." She's as big a bigot, if not worse, than trump. This is the same lowlife who praises renown war criminal, henry kissinger, who pretty much helped destroy Latin America's chance at autonomy and self-governance by instating brutal, murderous regimes.

[Ed Oscuro]

You call me aimless, and then build a strawman around things nobody has said and things I explicitly said I don't believe. Hilarious.

Let's not miss the point that quash hasn't got any argument against what I said. Let's also not miss where quash's excuse for this is that ultimately he supports Trump, without believing in Trump.

(For the record, I was laying out an argument which I think any would-be Trump supporter who believes in conspiracy and an inevitable war has to come to grips with, but it wasn't a direct response to any of quash's recent drivel which was not worth skimming.)

Like I said, bad chatbot.

Or how Ed still believes Democrats voted against invading Iraq.

Speaking of things nobody ever said...you remember Colin Powell made a presentation, right? You know that it's only the President who votes to go to war, right? At the end of the day the Bush Administration packaged and sold that war. You don't get to place the blame at Hillary's feet. And, of course, that other candidate guy gets off the hook because he never had any position of great responsibility.

Your utter daftness on full display, right here.

shrillary supported mass incarceration of people of color or, as she likes to call them, "superpredators." She's as big a bigot, if not worse, than trump.

No, speaking of double standards. The "superpredator" bit isn't Clinton's finest hour, but it's old news. It also wasn't anything like the wholesale slander of a race. This short article gives the context for it.

Compare that with Trump's actual history of discriminating against blacks looking to rent from him (or "colored" people, apparently, as their applications were marked), and of saying things like this:

I think that the guy is lazy. And it’s probably not his fault because laziness is a trait in blacks. It really is; I believe that. It’s not anything they can control.

This was, of course, another epic example of Trump seeking to deflect blame from his own failures; he was blaming black accountants at one of his failed casinos.

And let's not forget Trump's comment about Mexicans crossing the border. Some of them might be good people! Maybe that's in addition to being rapists.

But back to blacks and violence - Trump in 2013 goes far beyond Clinton in 1996.

Sadly, the overwhelming amount of violent crime in our major cities is committed by blacks and hispanics-a tough subject-must be discussed.

This view is far more extreme than the "superpredator" concerns about a new kind of criminal ever was. He also spoke at a time when we had years of statistics showing crime had fallen throughout the country at an unprecedented rate, instead of during a time when everybody was still worried about rising crime rates (as was the case in 1996).

[EmperorIng]

Congress is actually the only branch that can declare war. It's easy to forget that because the USA has been engaging in non-congressional wars for like 40 years. Tonkin Resolutions and all that.

[quash]

Let's not miss the point that quash hasn't got any argument against what I said.

Don't assume for a moment I don't have a response for every last thing presented in this thread; I just want to focus on what's most important.

Let's also not miss where quash's excuse for this is that ultimately he supports Trump, without believing in Trump.

I don't believe anyone can fix the economy. Not Trump, not Hillary, not anyone. All we're doing is delaying the inevitable with the dollar, the ECB, etc.

For the record, I was laying out an argument which I think any would-be Trump supporter who believes in conspiracy and an inevitable war has to come to grips with

Could have fooled me. But let's hear this one.

Like I said, bad chatbot.

You aren't funny. Stop trying to be.

And don't try to pull this "I never said that" bullshit. You linked the results of the resolution that showed over half of senate Democrats voted for the war to support your claim that they didn't. You then claimed that Obama didn't play an instrumental role in Syria and that it wasn't going to escalate, mere weeks before Obama announced that ground forces were being sent there.

Don't worry, you won't be able to backpedal against me. The aura of hubris that permeates your every word makes me want to vomit, especially when you are so clearly wrong and refuse to acknowledge it.

[Ed Oscuro]

Congress is actually the only branch that can declare war.

Ahh, right. Embarrassing! Apologies to quash for the ill-aimed attack too. (Dyslexia manifests in strange ways, doesn't it?)

Still it's important to understand that in practice that's not how it works, though like you say - the Tonkin resolution was a step in the slide of the real power to declare war away from Congress, just as the Iraq Resolution was another move away from the power. It's similar to the situation in place now with the budget, which was handed over to the Administration by Congress in the early 20th century.

Don't assume for a moment I don't have a response for every last thing presented in this thread; I just want to focus on what's most important.

What really matters in this election are insane conspiracy theories and pinning the blame for decade-old wars on the Democrats? Oh, okay.

Again, I'm not dropping the obvious rebuttal because maybe somebody else will notice it: You're not bringing any argument against what I said, mostly egotistically trying to redirect the conversation into obsessions that are mostly irrelevant to the current situation, as if what you think really matters, especially since you've tried to strip away all the context that allows history to be informative. Nevertheless I suppose it might be worthwhile to look at the mostly misunderstood history behind many of your beliefs, so I'll take a moment to look at that.

I don't believe anyone can fix the economy. Not Trump, not Hillary, not anyone. All we're doing is delaying the inevitable with the dollar, the ECB, etc.

This shows up one real weakness of the US election cycle: The Congressional system means that a President doesn't have the power, like a Prime Minster would, to actually enact policies to bring about those economic good times. You've admitted Trump has no economic benefit here, but I think you're also ignoring the strong plans the Democrats have. Clinton has signed on to enough of Bernie's planks to make me interested.

I can't write in much more depth about this if you don't agree that Obama has ensured that the country got back on track and also added many jobs - which is the real, unvarnished truth - and a pretty impressive job considering he has had very little support from Congress. And no, I'm not going to have a back and forth on this so that you can try to piss all over that legacy, just like I'm not going to get into an argument about Obamacare. This abuse of the facts reminds me of the "malaise" attack against Carter - a catchy phrase seen to capture the truth when the truth is rather different.

At the same time I agree there's some very important structural flaws in the economy. Good news: The Democratic platform actually is serious about fixing those! It might not get 100% of the way there, but as they say, perfection is the enemy of the good.

You linked the results of the resolution that showed over half of senate Democrats voted for the war to support your claim that they didn't.

Speaking of ancient history, I remember having to fight over that a while ago because some people still insist on misrepresenting what really happened. I don't remember more of it than what you've sketched out, so if you're volunteering to dredge it up I'd be interested to look at it again.

But there's probably a better way to understand that vote, which you still clearly don't understand. That the Resolution was not a typical declaration of war. It stipulated that Bush had to take certain steps proving diplomacy had failed before he could go to war. Of course, Bush didn't do that, and didn't let the arms inspectors finish their job; perhaps the drafting of the bill in this way was stupid, but the Administration still didn't adhere to the intent of the law.

You then claimed that Obama didn't play an instrumental role in Syria and that it wasn't going to escalate, mere weeks before Obama announced that ground forces were being sent there.

It's been a long time since this also, but I'd not be surprised if what actually was written went like this: People claimed that the US was about to launch a full-scale war. What actually happened, and what I probably was clear about as I am today, is that those forces were limited in scope, mostly training and supporting opposition fighters.

Let's not forget that the war started all the way back in 2011, Obama got roundly criticized from many sides for not doing more in the war including by most all Republicans like John McCain, there was Obama's embarrassing, supposedly failed "red line" policy which actually resulted in the destruction of tons of chemical weapons, and finally that there is a strong proxy war element with Russia gleeful to keep Al-Assad in power. In short, we got rid of one of the world's most densely packed stockpiles of chemical weapons because Putin and Al-Assad were afraid of us. Ultimately Putin and Al-Assad share most of the blame as they were the ones who resisted a political solution to what was initially a political situation, until it became an uncontained open war.

Since we're talking about Clinton, we can go back to her statement after that Iraq resolution you misunderstand so poorly to see what she thought about intervention and regime change:

My vote is not a vote for any new doctrine of preemption or for unilateralism or for the arrogance of American power or purpose, all of which carry grave dangers for our Nation, the rule of international law, and the peace and security of people throughout the world.

HuffPost has some important context behind all this.

You are having fun, like any armchair politician or general criticizing decisions people made in the fog of war, without the benefit of a decade of hindsight, I'm sure. Since you're fond of pointing out areas where I'm wrong, I would point out that personally I always was afraid that a Bush Administration would be bad, based mainly off the lack of understanding or reasoning behind many of his famous malapropisms. But soon after 9/11 I also voiced a concern that programs to create patriotism could be setting up a modern-day "Hitler Youth," which immediately after seemed a bit extreme, but here we are. In any case, I more or less instinctively understood that wars of choice were not a good thing, and that's probably how I viewed the Iraq War, as I remember my lack of enthusiasm and feeling of dislocation as I watched the CNN live coverage in March 2003.

[quash]

snip

This is clearly hitting you on a personal level, which I guess is to be expected. Believe it or not, I really don't want to be an asshole to anyone, so I'm not going to antagonize you over how this is affecting you.

I will, though, give you a piece of advice I hope you take to heart: don't give in to guilt tripping tactics, and don't believe for a moment that your identity isn't being leveraged for political gain. Go read some of the leaked DNC emails if you want to see what the people who claim to care about you really think. Pay attention to how certain groups lose political relevance once their oppression well runs dry (like how Democrats are selling gays down the river for Muslims as we speak). Think about why this is.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume by "your country", you aren't insinuating split allegiance. I hope your actions speak louder than your words in proving this. Frankly, I hope that is true of everyone here; I know I can put my money where my mouth is.

[rancor]

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume by "your country", you aren't insinuating split allegiance.

I noticed that as well, and it seems to be fairly common. "My country" is Mexico, but I'll stay here in Arizona / Texas where there's a bit less chance of being beheaded by drug cartels and there's a nice social safety net. Pride in a country they fight like hell to get away from and stay out of by any means necessary.

[Skykid]

This is the best US election ever. Fraud, corruption and idiocy laid even barer than the Dubya years.

I don't know why you're all so against Trump winning, the only difference will be a farmyard idiot in control of the country rather than an intelligent person with corrupt assholes pulling all the strings behind them.

It's been a fucking mess for decades anyway, and the shit river has long turned to a sea. The rest of the world only has contempt and disparaging views of the US political regime and its foreign policies in general - and that's largely irreparable - so we may as well have a laugh in the process.

Dubya was a laughing stock, and while Trump seems to possess a little more nouse than that buffoon, he still presents one of the greatest opportunities for presidential hilarity in the world's largest economy due to impulsive ill-informed chronic foot-in-mouth syndrome.

It's going to be a blast; I say let the hair nest do his thing and grab some popcorn.

[Specineff]

I noticed that as well, and it seems to be fairly common. "My country" is Mexico, but I'll stay here in Arizona / Texas where there's a bit less chance of being beheaded by drug cartels and there's a nice social safety net. Pride in a country they fight like hell to get away from and stay out of by any means necessary.

I won't beat around the bush and flat out ask you: You say that while living comfortably in Japan? Also, don't think I didn't read the post you promptly deleted in which you asked what kind of interest I had, as a hispanic man, in "protecting illegals that come across the border" after you were tired of having/seeing more white people come to Japan. I hate to throw the book at you, Rancor, but that's Grade-A hypocrisy.

You had your reasons to move to Japan. Respect mine for moving here and for not wanting to be labeled a criminal and rapist based solely on my country of origin by a presidential candidate.

To answer the questions you asked and the statements you made on that deleted post, no, I can't vote since I am not a citizen. No, the government of Mexico is not sending people here; legal and illegal immigrants do it out of their own volition. And in regards to your assertion that Trump's statement was only about the "government of Mexico forcing unwanted people to come here to the USA, (which somehow was taken out of context as usual, yeah. Sure. Yup.), I give you the original declaration:

https://youtu.be/Jaz1J0s-cL4?t=14s

"When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

Ergo, the vast majority of us are criminal scum by default, right?

I take pride on having learned English on my own, and getting good enough I've gotten paid to translate between that and my mother language; on teaching myself how to touch-type. I take pride on having started cleaning toilets and mopping floors (and not being ashamed of having to do so again when things got tough), and moving up the ladder to the point of working for a major national telecomm for seven incredible years. I made that happen. My country of birth isn't anything I could influence. However, when it comes down to basic human decency, I prefer not to be considered undesirable because of where my mother happened to be the moment her water broke. National pride has nothing to do with it.

I will, though, give you a piece of advice I hope you take to heart: don't give in to guilt tripping tactics, and don't believe for a moment that your identity isn't being leveraged for political gain. Go read some of the leaked DNC emails if you want to see what the people who claim to care about you really think. Pay attention to how certain groups lose political relevance once their oppression well runs dry (like how Democrats are selling gays down the river for Muslims as we speak). Think about why this is.

I know what politicians are. I'm aware of this.

However, let's stop for a moment this little game of "Compared To Hillary" that you've been playing for a few pages now. Let's pretend that we somehow prevent Hillary from ever being born. Bam. There. She never existed.

We still have a presidential candidate who built his campaign on, and states over and over, that people who come from Mexico are rapists and criminals, somehow being "sent" by that country (Ooooh, ConsPIRACY! Let's make them pay! Our problems are their fault!), with some being good people, by his assumption. Even if Hillary were to be caught eating barbecued babies sacrificed to Satan, it doesn't change the fact that he's making it okay to hate and scapegoat on people who were born in Mexico, regardless of how they feel about their country of origin. Capisce? So please, stop throwing curveballs with that split allegiance mention; that dodging tactic of yours got stale weeks ago.

EDIT: Consolidation.

[rancor]

I deleted my original post because I'm sure my opinion doesn't matter to you as much as yours doesn't matter to me. Anything posted in this thread isn't changing minds, and doesn't have any more value than a small pile of elephant shit. Ill just say that if you think me being here legally, and not wanting to see people here illegally is hypocrisy you may want to double-down on the English studies. Hypocrisy would be if I were here legally, and didn't want other people here legally - i.e. doing the same thing that I did. Hypocrisy. Again, if you followed the legal path to the US, why do you care about illegals? Shouldn't they have to go through the same legal processes that you did?

Ergo, the vast majority of us are criminal scum by default, right?

Congratulations. You are now a victim, and have the right to claim protected status. Will you be needing reparations as well? You should go ahead and apply for disability / SSI while you still can - but fuck America, right? Mexico is the place to be. You'll see me with my flag at the next La Raza rally.

I'm not claiming that the Mexican government is or isn't sending criminals to the US, I have no idea - but, a government sending the US its worst has happened before - read up on the Mariel boatlift if you've never heard of it. Everyone says Trump is completely loony with his conspiracy theories and such, but I'm old enough to remember when the same things were being said about presidential candidate Ross Perot - He was labeled completely insane at the time, and a good number of his "theories" and predictions have come to be true. Somethingsomething 1992 Bill Clinton... I feel like I've seen all of this before.

[quash]

I know what politicians are. I'm aware of this.

Are you really? Because it seems like you're taking advantage of the immediate benefits of supporting one party while neglecting the long term effects of it.

We still have a presidential candidate who built his campaign on, and states over and over, that people who come from Mexico are rapists and criminals

Some of them are. We can't really say for sure exactly how many because we don't really know how many people are in the US illegally.

Have a gentle, left leaning, but not completely gone analysis of this whole thing: http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... e43801.htm

somehow being "sent" by that country (Ooooh, ConsPIRACY! Let's make them pay! Our problems are their fault!)

At worst, the government is literally sending people. At best, the government is making conditions so awful that people are leaving by choice.

Even if Hillary were to be caught eating barbecued babies sacrificed to Satan, it doesn't change the fact that he's making it okay to hate and scapegoat on people who were born in Mexico, regardless of how they feel about their country of origin. Capisce?

He blames the US government before he blames anyone else. This is a common thread through basically all of his criticisms.

In any case, it's not as if there isn't a criminal, nationalist element within Mexican immigrant groups that calls for the reannexation of California and the southwest. I know because I grew up around them. It's also well documented and known, but rarely ever mentioned.

(On an interesting side note, the last time I visited San Diego there were ads for Mexican political parties on US radio stations. Don't ask me how that works.)

So please, stop throwing curveballs with that split allegiance mention; that dodging tactic of yours got stale weeks ago.

I literally brought that up once because of the ambiguous statement of "my country". And I ain't dodgin shit, esse.

[Specineff]

I deleted my original post because I'm sure my opinion doesn't matter to you as much as yours doesn't matter to me. Anything posted in this thread isn't changing minds, and doesn't have any more value than a small pile of elephant shit. Ill just say that if you think me being here legally, and not wanting to see people here illegally is hypocrisy you may want to double-down on the English studies. Hypocrisy would be if I were here legally, and didn't want other people here legally - i.e. doing the same thing that I did. Hypocrisy. Again, if you followed the legal path to the US, why do you care about illegals? Shouldn't they have to go through the same legal processes that you did?

Please re-read my post after calming down a little. Done? Okay. Here we go.

Donald trump affirms and has based a great majority of his campaign on the notion that people from Mexico are rapists and criminals. He didn't say illegals. At all. Okay? I am not advocating for illegal aliens. I'm against a presidential candidate who considers me a criminal, a rapist, undesirable, and someone who brings problems along, ONLY BECAUSE I'M MEXICAN.

No, Rancor. I'm calling hypocrisy on your behalf because you criticize people for wanting to be in the USA to have a better life, (regardless of how they feel about their country of origin), while you yourself left your country to do the same in Japan.

Congratulations. You are now a victim, and have the right to claim protected status. Will you be needing reparations as well? You should go ahead and apply for disability / SSI while you still can - but fuck America, right? Mexico is the place to be. You'll see me with my flag at the next La Raza rally.

Jesus, man. Calm down. I can feel the heat coming through the line across the ocean. Don't put words in my mouth and re-read my post above: Considering I worked hard to survive and get where I am, I don't think any handouts are needed. No, not fuck America; precisely, because the USA is a country where I can worship/not worship the deity of my choosing without being ostracized or killed for it, dress whichever way I want without getting shot at, and fuck anyone of any gender or orientation as long as they're of legal age, I don't want to see it at the whim of someone whose mantra is the destruction of one of the principles that has made the country function so well at least in theory. And why I want to stay and become a citizen as soon as it's possible for me.

I'm not claiming that the Mexican government is or isn't sending criminals to the US, I have no idea - but, a government sending the US its worst has happened before - read up on the Mariel boatlift if you've never heard of it. Everyone says Trump is completely loony with his conspiracy theories and such, but I'm old enough to remember when the same things were being said about presidential candidate Ross Perot - He was labeled completely insane at the time, and a good number of his "theories" and predictions have come to be true. Somethingsomething 1992 Bill Clinton... I feel like I've seen all of this before.

I can assure you that AFAIK, the current administration in Mexico is not sending, pushing, suggesting, training or otherwise directly causing people (best, worst, in-between) to come to the USA. There aren't enough resources to find, round up, or somehow just make their worst individuals jump the fence.

[rancor]

No, Rancor. I'm calling hypocrisy on your behalf because you criticize people for wanting to be in the USA to have a better life, (regardless of how they feel about their country of origin), while you yourself left your country to do the same in Japan.

Yes, but I'm here legally. And I don't advocate for people to come here illegally.

But, let me try to see it through your way of thinking:

Two people want a new car. Person "A" has the money for it, and person "B" doesn't. Person "A" buys the car. Although he could wait a few years and work and save, person "B" thinks he can steal one and get away with it. Person "A" thinks this is wrong, and therefore he is a "hypocrite" in your eyes...? Right? Everyone is entitled to a new Mercedes Benz, regardless of how they acquire it - right?

I'm sorry - I just can't follow that way of thinking. There are legal ways of doing things, and illegal ways of doing things. I'm here legally. You're in America legally. People in either country illegally shouldn't be, and should be deported.

[Specineff]

Are you really? Because it seems like you're taking advantage of the immediate benefits of supporting one party while neglecting the long term effects of it.

Can't vote. Not a citizen yet. No, not one party. One candidate, based (again) on his position against my ethnicity. Again, stop playing the "Compared to Hillary" game, Quash.

Some of them are. We can't really say for sure exactly how many because we don't really know how many people are in the US illegally.

And that's why we're going to paint them all with the same brush. Like that judge whose ethnicity causes a conflict of interest in the pursuit of justice for those Trump defrauded.

Have a gentle, left leaning, but not completely gone analysis of this whole thing: http://www.informationclearinghouse.inf ... e43801.htm

Back to square one: What is done is done, and the excuse that the media is the one distorting his words has worn out. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. Sorry, but adding "I think he has some days in which he's a good person" in the end doesn't undo me calling you all sorts of hateful, racist, baseless and ignorant adjectives.

At worst, the government is literally sending people. At best, the government is making conditions so awful that people are leaving by choice.

Prove it. Stats. Quotes. Mexican newspapers and websites, since they won't be tainted by liberal media of the USA. No, Quash; I don't want your hearsay. I want facts. Like that about illegal immigration from Mexico actually decreasing thanks to better life conditions there, enforcement of existing laws here, the recession, and a shift in the global economy:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 ... n-the-u-s/

http://time.com/4167626/donald-trump-te ... migration/

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2015/11/19/m ... o-the-u-s/

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/i ... in-the-u-s

No, I'm not going to ignore the large number. But surely that doesn't sound like a government is spending time, money and resources in sending people here.

He blames the US government before he blames anyone else. This is a common thread through basically all of his criticisms.

Doesn't change, minimize, or dilute the fact he still has a huge hateboner for us Mexicans, and equals ethnicity with criminal record.

In any case, it's not as if there isn't a criminal, nationalist element within Mexican immigrant groups that calls for the reannexation of California and the southwest. I know because I grew up around them. It's also well documented and known, but rarely ever mentioned.

Who are these loons? And what have they accomplished in that regard? Or in a way affects you and me? Moreover, what chance do they ever have of achieving their goal? Good thing their saber-rattling didn't affect you, just like the Flat Earth Society didn't affect me.

(On an interesting side note, the last time I visited San Diego there were ads for Mexican political parties on US radio stations. Don't ask me how that works.)

Could it be just like there are ads for Walmart and Home Depot in Mexican radio stations in border cities? You know, separate entities paying for airtime on the stations with the widest coverage and audience? Just like the Mexican consulate also pays for airtime on US radio and TV stations here in Phoenix to inform people of their services?

I literally brought that up once because of the ambiguous statement of "my country". And I ain't dodgin shit, esse.

I'm referring to your overall tactic of dodging facts and questions, then posing a different conundrum when holes are poked in your arguments. And seriously, at that point you should have figured out I'm from Mexico.

[Specineff]

Yes, but I'm here legally. And I don't advocate for people to come here illegally.

But, let me try to see it through your way of thinking:

Two people want a new car. Person "A" has the money for it, and person "B" doesn't. Person "A" buys the car. Although he could wait a few years and work and save, person "B" thinks he can steal one and get away with it. Person "A" thinks this is wrong, and therefore he is a "hypocrite" in your eyes...? Right? Everyone is entitled to a new Mercedes Benz, regardless of how they acquire it - right?

I'm sorry - I just can't follow that way of thinking. There are legal ways of doing things, and illegal ways of doing things. I'm here legally. You're in America legally. People in either country illegally shouldn't be, and should be deported.

And. I. NEVER. Mentioned. Illegals. When. I. Called. Out. Your. Position:

I noticed that as well, and it seems to be fairly common. "My country" is Mexico, but I'll stay here in Arizona / Texas where there's a bit less chance of being beheaded by drug cartels and there's a nice social safety net. Pride in a country they fight like hell to get away from and stay out of by any means necessary.

This sounds like you're referring to any immigrant, legal or otherwise. That's why I called it.

[greg]

Donald trump affirms and has based a great majority of his campaign on the notion that people from Mexico are rapists and criminals. He didn't say illegals. At all. Okay? I am not advocating for illegal aliens. I'm against a presidential candidate who considers me a criminal, a rapist, undesirable, and someone who brings problems along, ONLY BECAUSE I'M MEXICAN.

Specineff, perhaps you should actually listen to Trump's speeches instead of simply parroting what the loonies claim he said. It's like that dickbrain Chenk Uygur from The Young Turks who always has to rephrase what his opponents say, even though they didn't actually say that. Trump has praised Mexicans and their culture in his speeches even, to the cheers of pro-Trump Hispanics who attend his rallies. What he and anybody else has been saying all along is that the USA has a big enough problem with rapists and murders who are citizens or legal immigrants, and permitting illegal immigrants to come into the country who are rapists and murderers leads to more rapes and more murders that our criminal justice system wouldn't have to bother with otherwise if the country was allowed to block them from getting in. What started this all was when that one Mexican raped an murdered a girl after he'd already been deported multiple times.

Not all Mexicans are rapists and murderers. #Duh. Nobody is claiming this, especially not Trump. I've told you this before: if every Mexican who came into the USA were like you, legal or illegal, people wouldn't have much of a problem with Mexican immigrants. You yourself know the types who set up barrio ghettos that are dangerous to enter. You yourself know those undesirable types and you've even told me that you avoid them. In the Phoenix area, I remember when Valley West Mall became overridden with the barrio ghetto types and I'd get nasty stares for being white. What happened to that mall? Businesses couldn't survive there. My dad's truck got stolen in that parking lot. Its eventual demolition was used for the movie "Eight Legged Freaks." Now it's a Wal Mart. The same goes for Christown Mall. I did not feel safe there when my friend and I went there right before it closed down, and we got those "WTF are you whiteys doing here" stares by gangter-looking thugs. What happened to that mall? Businesses failed, and the mall is no more.

You know exactly the type of Mexican that people have in mind. You do not apply. There are proven statistics that show that a significant proportion of illegal Mexican immigrants are caught up with theft, murder, rape, pedophilia, and other crimes. The "open borders" philosophy that the likes of Clinton perpetuates is destroying countries. It's destroying Europe.

Rancor, myself, and others on here have immigrated to Japan legally and AFAIK, we obey the laws of this country. I can speak for myself at least that I am not breaking this country's laws. I have been made to swear oaths to uphold this country's laws for the jobs I have had. Comparing Rancor to illegal immigrants is unfair.

And here's the thing: anyone who legally immigrates to Japan with a work visa and breaks the law in a serious way gets their ass deported and can't ever come back. Australia is the same way. And you know what? If the USA was as strict on illegal immigrants as Mexico is on its own illegal immigrants, Mexicans would really have something to gripe about.

[Specineff]

Specineff, perhaps you should actually listen to Trump's speeches instead of simply parroting what the loonies claim he said. It's like that dickbrain Chenk Uygur from The Young Turks who always has to rephrase what his opponents say, even though they didn't actually say that.

https://youtu.be/Jaz1J0s-cL4?t=14s

I rest my case.

[rancor]

He didn't say illegals. At all. Okay? I am not advocating for illegal aliens. I'm against a presidential candidate who considers me a criminal, a rapist, undesirable, and someone who brings problems along, ONLY BECAUSE I'M MEXICAN.

If we're going by the minutia of whats said / not said, the beginning of that speech was "Mexico is sending.."

Were you sent by Mexico? No? Were any of your friends? Then his statement doesn't apply to you or anyone you know.
He also said that he has talked to many "border guards". I assume here that he's talking about the militarized police force that rides around on ATVs in the middle of the desert - not the guys that check your passport at the crossing. Where do you meet border guards? At the border, guarding places you most likely should not be. Why would you encounter a border guard? Because you're somewhere you shouldn't be.
Trump also says "they're not sending us the right people" which implies that there are "right people" in Mexico. Therefore he doesn't hate you "ONLY BECAUSE I'M MEXICAN."
Trump is a terrible orator. Obviously he believes there is some organized action to send undesirable Mexican nationals to the US. Again, I don't know if it's true or not - As I said earlier, it has happened in history - but like you, I don't believe the Mexican government is organized enough to put something like that into action. Having lived in Texas most of my life, I've been to several Mexican cities and honestly the government doesn't seem organized enough to collect due taxes.

But like Skykid said - the only reason I prefer Trump over Hillary is because I prefer his ineptitude and arrogance over her criminality and the favors she no doubt owes thousands of people if she gets into power. There's really no good choice in this election, but either way it goes its definitely going to be entertaining to watch from afar.

[quash]

Again, stop playing the "Compared to Hillary" game, Quash.

I stopped well before you asked me to, though I really don't see why we shouldn't be comparing our two choices for president.

And that's why we're going to paint them all with the same brush.

He literally said not all Mexicans are criminals.

Like that judge whose ethnicity causes a conflict of interest in the pursuit of justice for those Trump defrauded.

Yeah, Trump probably did willingly dupe people into attending a university he had no intention of funding. Again, he's no saint. But there is most certainly a conflict of interest with the judge, seeing as he's a member of a legal organization called La Raza (oh, but of course, it's not that La Raza, so it's all kosher. Just don't judge anyone that claims membership to the Kool Kidz Klub, either).

Back to square one: What is done is done, and the excuse that the media is the one distorting his words has worn out. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck. Sorry, but adding "I think he has some days in which he's a good person" in the end doesn't undo me calling you all sorts of hateful, racist, baseless and ignorant adjectives.

It is not hateful or racist (and certainly not baseless) to point out that immigrants from Mexico commit crime. For many, their residence in the country puts them in a dubious legal status to begin with.

I guess it's racist to say white people commit crimes too, then? Because I have no problem admitting that. And if it's crime statistics you want, it's crime statistics you'll get.

Prove it. Stats. Quotes.

I said at worst, meaning it's a possible worst case scenario, not that it's certainly the case. Maybe one of these days I'll dig down this rabbit hole, but right now I frankly have better things to do with my time.

Like that about illegal immigration from Mexico actually decreasing thanks to better life conditions there, enforcement of existing laws here, the recession, and a shift in the global economy

You think a native Californian doesn't know this already? Citizens aren't the only ones who can't afford to live in the state anymore.

Doesn't change, minimize, or dilute the fact he still has a huge hateboner for us Mexicans

He hates that he US government doesn't enforce the immigration laws it has on the books and that it lets American companies manufacture in Mexico with little to no penalties.

and equals ethnicity with criminal record.

Jesus Christ, that is literally not what he said. He said it is not limited to Mexico or even South America.

Who are these loons?

La Raza, Brown Berets, etc. A good portion of Mexicans who aren't associated with these groups seem to feel the same way, and, unfortunately, so do some of the politicians allowing them to stay in the country.

And what have they accomplished in that regard? Or in a way affects you and me? Moreover, what chance do they ever have of achieving their goal?

California is nearly a Hispanic majority state; I'd say they're well on their way to achieving this. If someone as smart as you gets this defensive over someone simply stating that immigrants commit crime, imagine how easy it'll be to control a bunch of idiots into fighting for a cause that works against their best interest.

Good thing their saber-rattling didn't affect you

Awfully presumptuous, don't you think?

I couldn't get a job in high school because I wasn't fluent in Spanish. I was told on several occasions that it was the reason I couldn't get an entry level job. Even if it was a lie, it's one with enough basis in reality that they felt comfortable using it on myself and others.

Could it be just like there are ads for Walmart and Home Depot in Mexican radio stations in border cities? You know, separate entities paying for airtime on the stations with the widest coverage and audience? Just like the Mexican consulate also pays for airtime on US radio and TV stations here in Phoenix to inform people of their services?

Seriously dude, stop with the false equivalencies. Home Depot isn't running for political office. The consulate is a function of the government, not a special interest. Moreover, there are laws that are supposed to prevent foreign political parties from advertising in the US, but I guess there's some loophole being used to run PRI ads in California.

I'm referring to your overall tactic of dodging facts and questions

I don't dodge anything. I will ignore things that are either irrelevant or not worth changing the subject for.

then posing a different conundrum when holes are poked in your arguments.

Nobody has poked a hole in anything. I offered cash to anyone who could poke a hole in some things I said earlier and nobody even tried.

And seriously, at that point you should have figured out I'm from Mexico.

How am I supposed to know? You could just as easily be from Ecuador, El Salvador, etc. and simply immigrated through Mexico.

[greg]

Rest your case all you want. You just proved my point. In that video link you just provided, Trump said that he isn't talking about all Mexicans. He specifically points out that there is a problem with criminals coming into the USA, whether it be Mexican criminals or Islamic dirtbags who will ruin the country.

This is what Trump said:

"When do we beat Mexico at the border? They’re laughing at us, at our stupidity. […] When Mexico sends its people they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you; they’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists, and some, I assume, are good people. But I speak to border guards and they tell us what we’re getting."

Read this article by a Puerto Rican about misconstruing Trump's words.

Oh, and what's this? Yes, this is an AZ Central article about Sonoran delegates who complained about Arizona cracking down on hiring illegals because they don't want them to come back to their hometowns in Mexico jobless and poor and causing a strain on unemployment. So basically, they don't want these people and want to shove them into the USA to let the Americans deal with them. They are angry that Mexicans are being forced to go back to Mexico! The audacity of this is ridiculous.

And I am not going to blame Mexico 100% for being a shitty country in which its citizens wish to flee in search of a better life. Corporate cronyism produced NAFTA which put millions of Mexicans out of work, and yet Americans complain about illegal immigrants from Mexico when it was our own crap that ruined their jobs. They want to do the same again with TPP. The only candidates who have been consistently against TPP were Sanders and Trump.

[Xyga]

Trump is like the guy who's going to the whores, though walking his dog at the same time, just in case he's asked by the local patrol or he bumps into someone who knows him.
And the other guys in the neighborhood, they know what he's doing, but they're customers too so they will support his dog walking version with all their might so that legally admissible alibi, as dubious as it is, will never fall apart.

[quash]

Because I sense this false equivalency in the pipeline, I'll preemptively put it to bed:

"But quarsh, u r immigrent 2!"

My legal status is a tricky one. I'm closer to an expat than an immigrant, but I don't have many of the luxuries afforded to an expat. For starters, I am forbidden from taking residence in the country I live in: I can't own property, I can't even use my time here under this legal status towards becoming a Japanese citizen (not that I'd ever want to, mind you).

Also, I am not only subject to Japanese law, but also to the SOFA between the US and Japan. The rule of thumb is that when the laws conflict, the stricter one wins. I technically can't drink in public, though no cop is going to bother me if I do.

The best part? I'm subject to double jeopardy. So once I've been tried in local courts and granted a sentence there, I get to do the same thing all over again within the military justice system. So I'm not even close to an illegal immigrant; I'm more like a super legal immigrant.

As for the reason I'm here, it's to do a job that Japanese are legally forbidden from doing. Note that I didn't say they don't want to do it, because a growing number of them do. But for reasons we should all be familiar with, they can't (for now).

And you know what? If it ever came to it, I say let Japan remilitarize and even give them nukes. China is completely disregarding the US because of our weak leadership, so why not let Japan handle things their way? It's not like we're doing a better job. And I say this as someone whose time in Japan would come to an end if this ever happened: my enjoyment of a host country comes secondary to its security.

[Mischief Maker]

He cares about it enough to ensure that his family won't be left in a third world country.

Wealthy oligarchs and their families in third world nations live very, very well, actually.

Everyone says Trump is completely loony with his conspiracy theories and such, but I'm old enough to remember when the same things were being said about presidential candidate Ross Perot - He was labeled completely insane at the time, and a good number of his "theories" and predictions have come to be true. Somethingsomething 1992 Bill Clinton... I feel like I've seen all of this before.

Yeah, remember all those companies Ross Perot bankrupted? Oh wait. No. He ran a profitable business. And he stayed on message and had a clear platform.

If you want a Ross-Perot-like candidate who has a long record of publicly making correct predictions that was Bernie Sanders.

Donald Trump, a scion to family fortune who golden parachuted his way from one failed business to another until on name recognition alone he failed all the way to the top? He's George Bush jr. part 2 and you know it.

So why am I settling for Hillary? Because every awful thing people say she MIGHT do, Donald Trump PROMISES to do.

[quash]

Yeah, remember all those companies Ross Perot bankrupted? Oh wait. No. He ran a profitable business.

He also had nowhere near the net worth to play such high stakes games with.

And he stayed on message and had a clear platform.

Which worked so well for him, right? He totally didn't get ignored by the press. Really makes you think.

He's George Bush jr. part 2 and you know it.

Actually, that's Obama. Oops.

So why am I settling for Hillary? Because every awful thing people say she MIGHT do, Donald Trump PROMISES to do.

Hillary is going to start a war with Russia and China; both of their respective heads of state have publicly stated this. But I'm a conspiracy theorist who knows nothing compared to some guy who read Marxist literature in college.