USA Election viewing

[tianamortiz]

is there any particular place I could go for a US election viewing party? My peruvian fiance is not really interested, but I would love to hang out with some fellow interested people to watch what could possibly be the end of the United States. Full disclosure, team Hilary.

[Willowycandelo]

If you live in Lima, you can come to the Democrats Abroad election night watch party at the Real Club in San Isidro, Castanos 505. There's a bar and food and it's pretty nice. There is a Democrats Abroad Peru FB page where I think you can RSVP, once they make the event public.

[Gordito54]

Team TRUMP might show up there eh?! There will be plenty of us in Lima that night and we will come make some Conservstive noise.

Put America FIRST!

[MarcoPE]

Trump wasn't my favorite primary candidate but Hillary is just so absolutely corrupt, its quite the election cycle..

[Polaron]

To all those to Bang the Drum for their so-called brother Trump let me quote Sophocles: "Foolishness is indeed the sister of wickedness."

[Gordito54]

Any one that is an American, and loves America, that votes for Clinton is slapping the constitution, the culture, and the future of America right in the face.

The woman wants to bring in more "refugees" and claim they will be vetted through background checks yet this individual in office now swears background checks don't work. Double standard? Certainly!

She also wants open borders. Anyone that wants open borders should send me their address and I'll come over, take what I want from your house as that's what these people will do as America is my home. And when the White House drops the fence surrounding it, we can talk.

America is already getting attacked from the left with limiting or trying to limit our 1st amendment right of freedom of speech and if she's placed in office, our first amendment will be pushed off the map along with our second amendment and America will once again enter into a civil war and I'll happily fight for my constitutional rights.

[Polaron]

In the first place America is a continent or if you prefer two continents not a country. And with regards to the remaining twaddle, Winfield Scott summed it up quite nicely: " Wayward sisters, depart in peace."

Of course when it comes to Trump, rockers may prefer a song by Joe Walsh, namely, " You Can't Argue with a Sick Mind."

[jumpinjack]

In the first place America is a continent or if you prefer two continents not a country. And with regards to the remaining twaddle, Winfield Scott summed it up quite nicely: " Wayward sisters, depart in peace."

Of course when it comes to Trump, rockers may prefer a song by Joe Walsh, namely, " You Can't Argue with a Sick Mind."

In the first place, America is not a continent. However there is a North America and a South America, choose your preferance.
It is genearally accepted that when one refers to America they are referring to the USA. Correct me if I am wrong but there is no other country on earth that has America in its name.

[ironchefchris]

This is one of the reasons I'm so glad not to be living in the US. Especially now with the seemingly perpetual election seasons. So much angst and irrational fear among the people there. Too bad they can't be more like the Peruvians who are more aware and don't get so emotionally bent out of shape over politics and politicians.

Lol at thinking that the election of Clinton, or any President, would mean they could single handily be able to repeal the Second Amendment or any other of the Bill of Rights. The same silly scare tactics were used during the '08 and '12 elections to scare the gullible into believing that Obama was gunna take yer guns away when all that happened was that gun sales increased during his eight years in office. Of course Obama has until January to actually repeal the Second Amendment and show up at your door, so.... It's complete and total ignorance of how the system works with it's three branches and checks and balances. Some people are so easily scared and manipulated because they fear change and the lessening of their influence due to changing demographics. It's so easy for politicians and pundits to push their buttons and play on those irrational fears, distract them from real issues, and get them to lash out.

Also have to lol at someone who fears Latino immigrants voluntarily expatriating to Perú or some other Latin American country. Jumping out of what they think is a frying pan and into the fire. Same with the unfounded fear of refugees. Using Trump Jr.s bowl containing 3 deadly Skittles analogy, it would be more accurate if the bowl contained close to 11 billion Skittles, enough to fill 1.5 Olympic-size swimming pools



To me this election seems best summed up by the 'South Park' choice of either voting for a Giant D..che or a Sh!* Sandwich. I get that even people who aren't as strongly emotionally invested have their preferences (even if not so much for someone, but against the other candidate winning) and I've got my preference between the two as well, but I'm not kidding myself into thinking that the sandwich is really anything more palatable or anything other than what it really is. Having to choose between the lesser of two evils is really the evil of a the choice between two lessers. I guess there's an actual difference, if only in ideologies (even though Trump is hardly an ideologue), but my expectations for meaningful change have been so lowered over the years that I've just turned apathetic.

Worst election. Ever.

[Polaron]

In the first place America is a continent or if you prefer two continents not a country. And with regards to the remaining twaddle, Winfield Scott summed it up quite nicely: " Wayward sisters, depart in peace."

Of course when it comes to Trump, rockers may prefer a song by Joe Walsh, namely, " You Can't Argue with a Sick Mind."

In the first place, America is not a continent. However there is a North America and a South America, choose your preferance.
It is genearally accepted that when one refers to America they are referring to the USA. Correct me if I am wrong but there is no other country on earth that has America in its name.

People in the United States are really quite sheltered and insulated from the reality that goes on in the rest of the world. Based on the amount of propaganda they are spoon-fed everyday it's sometimes difficult to fault them for their ignorance.


For example people in the United States are taught that there are seven continents and 4 oceans, namely Asia, Africa, Europe, North America, South America, Australia, and Antarctica. "Gringo" children are taught that the four oceans of the world are the Arctic, Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian oceans.


So it's understandable when they don't know that in many other parts of the world North America and South America are viewed as one single continent, not two. And they are taught that the fifth ocean is the Southern Ocean (or as Spaniards sometimes call it, the Glacial Antarctic Ocean).

Some US persons also insist on using the word America when referring to only the United States, usurping a term that applies just as much to over a dozen other countries.

Again this is not any viciousness on their part; instead it is a simple lack of education. It's not their fault that they are easily swayed by sound bites and snake oil salesmen.

Iron Chef I am with you and being glad that I don't live in the USA. I like seeing other equally legitimate points of view in the world which is increasingly more difficult for people living in the US. I hate that the choice this year is between a somewhat slippery Centrist woman who's the darling of corporations and a megalomaniac whose mental instability is exceeded only by his desire for power -- and the desire of his followers to convince themselves that they are, in fact, meaningful.

[Willowycandelo]

Team TRUMP might show up there eh?! There will be plenty of us in Lima that night and we will come make some Conservstive noise.

Put America FIRST!

What a surprise that a Trump supporter would threaten to come disrupt a perfectly nice Democratic event. Please don't.

[gringolandia]

Team TRUMP might show up there eh?! There will be plenty of us in Lima that night and we will come make some Conservstive noise.

Considering Trump is most definitely NOT a conservative, I question if you know what you're talking about.

[gringolandia]

Trump wasn't my favorite primary candidate but Hillary is just so absolutely corrupt, its quite the election cycle..

I disagree, but even if all the terrible things said about Hillary were actually true (which, for the most part, they're really not), I'd still prefer her over Trump. Much better to have a corrupt President than a crazy one, and Trump continues to demonstrate his instability every single day.

I dislike Hillary and wish I didn't have to support her, but given the alternative, I am forced to do exactly that. And after she wins my support for her ends.

What we really need to fix voting overall is to go to a system where instead of each person voting for just one person, each person lists the candidates they want to vote for in the order they desire. Then if no candidate gets 50% on the first count, the candidate with the least votes is dropped and the votes are counted again. Repeat until one candidate has a clear majority. This fixes the timeless problem of an unpopular candidate winning because two popular candidates with similar views split the vote. Finally, people would be able to vote for the candidates they truly support instead of voting for the lesser of two evils.

This thread is going to need to be moved over to Expat Conversations. It has diverged from anything even remotely informational.

[gringolandia]

People in the United States are really quite sheltered and insulated from the reality that goes on in the rest of the world. Based on the amount of propaganda they are spoon-fed everyday it's sometimes difficult to fault them for their ignorance.

For example people in the United States are taught that there are seven continents and 4 oceans, namely Asia, Africa, Europe, North America, South America, Australia, and Antarctica. "Gringo" children are taught that the four oceans of the world are the Arctic, Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian oceans.

Your assertion may or may not be true, but your particular examples fall far short as evidence. The definition of continent varies by convention, with there being anywhere from 4, 5, 6 or 7 continents (with there being two ways to count to six). I could just as ridiculously say "So it's understandable that in your insulated ignorance you don't know that in other parts of the world Europe, Asia and Africa are viewed as one single continent, not three." That would be silly.

Some US persons also insist on using the word America when referring to only the United States, usurping a term that applies just as much to over a dozen other countries.

Again this is not any viciousness on their part; instead it is a simple lack of education. It's not their fault that they are easily swayed by sound bites and snake oil salesmen.

Your snarkiness about a "lack of education" is not appreciated. While it can be argued that the words America and American have been misappropriated from the original 16th century usage, what's done is done. The words can, in some contexts, still refer to North, Central and South America together, but generally they refer to the US. When someone says "American cars are crap" there is no doubt anywhere in the world that the reference is to cars made in the United States, particularly if it is said in English (with the British being the ones who first coined the usage of Americans as referring to people in British America). You can blame the now prevalent usage of America and American on Imperialism, jingoism, or something along those lines, but blaming it on a "lack of education" is ridiculous.

[jumpinjack]

Here, here. Well said.

[ironchefchris]

Trump wasn't my favorite primary candidate but Hillary is just so absolutely corrupt, its quite the election cycle..

I disagree, but even if all the terrible things said about Hillary were actually true (which, for the most part, they're really not), I'd still prefer her over Trump. Much better to have a corrupt President than a crazy one, and Trump continues to demonstrate his instability every single day.

I dislike Hillary and wish I didn't have to support her, but given the alternative, I am forced to do exactly that. And after she wins my support for her ends.

What we really need to fix voting overall is to go to a system where instead of each person voting for just one person, each person lists the candidates they want to vote for in the order they desire. Then if no candidate gets 50% on the first count, the candidate with the least votes is dropped and the votes are counted again. Repeat until one candidate has a clear majority. This fixes the timeless problem of an unpopular candidate winning because two popular candidates with similar views split the vote. Finally, people would be able to vote for the candidates they truly support instead of voting for the lesser of two evils.

This thread is going to need to be moved over to Expat Conversations. It has diverged from anything even remotely informational.

If one is willing to agree and/or accept (if not like) the generalization that pretty much all politics and politicians are corrupt, then if one wasn't so much an ideologue or fervent party member it would seem to make sense to go with the politician who demonstrates competence and stability over incompetence and instability. Unless one is looking to see the system become less stable with hopes that it would be replaced by something better.

I like that idea how to select a candidate through multiple rounds of voting when necessary. I was thinking the other day how it would be interesting if there were four candidates to choose from instead of (realistically) just two. Say Ted Cruz representing the farther Right, someone like Jeb Bush or Chris Christie representing the Center-Right, Hillary representing the Center-Left (even though she's more Center-Right), and someone like Bernie Sanders or Dennis Kuccinich representing the farther Left. I think I like Gringolandia's idea better.

Is there no type of 'Republicans Living Abroad' counterpart that Trump supporters and other Republicans could go to and make some positive noise instead of the stated desire to crash the Democrat's viewing party to be negative?

[gringolandia]

Just FYI, here's a link to a Wikipedia article on instant-runoff voting (which also goes by various other names such as ranked choice voting): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting

There is a ballot initiative in the state of Maine this year to implement RCV (ranked choice voting). I really hope it passes, as that could turn into a wave of transformation as other states would see how well it works.

[Polaron]

People in the United States are really quite sheltered and insulated from the reality that goes on in the rest of the world. Based on the amount of propaganda they are spoon-fed everyday it's sometimes difficult to fault them for their ignorance.

For example people in the United States are taught that there are seven continents and 4 oceans, namely Asia, Africa, Europe, North America, South America, Australia, and Antarctica. "Gringo" children are taught that the four oceans of the world are the Arctic, Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian oceans.

Your assertion may or may not be true, but your particular examples fall far short as evidence. The definition of continent varies by convention, with there being anywhere from 4, 5, 6 or 7 continents (with there being two ways to count to six). I could just as ridiculously say "So it's understandable that in your insulated ignorance you don't know that in other parts of the world Europe, Asia and Africa are viewed as one single continent, not three." That would be silly.

Some US persons also insist on using the word America when referring to only the United States, usurping a term that applies just as much to over a dozen other countries.

Again this is not any viciousness on their part; instead it is a simple lack of education. It's not their fault that they are easily swayed by sound bites and snake oil salesmen.

Your snarkiness about a "lack of education" is not appreciated. While it can be argued that the words America and American have been misappropriated from the original 16th century usage, what's done is done. The words can, in some contexts, still refer to North, Central and South America together, but generally they refer to the US. When someone says "American cars are crap" there is no doubt anywhere in the world that the reference is to cars made in the United States, particularly if it is said in English (with the British being the ones who first coined the usage of Americans as referring to people in British America). You can blame the now prevalent usage of America and American on Imperialism, jingoism, or something along those lines, but blaming it on a "lack of education" is ridiculous.

Thanks for sharing your point of view. The beauty of it is that there's no requirement that my post be appreciated -- or that it elicit an emotional response.

[bigdaddy]

Trump is the Boogeyman under the bed, a polarizing figure equally disliked by the Republican establishment and the Democratic elite.
He's a pot stirrer (not to mention a prolific Tweeter) and me being a pot stirrer myself, have great admiration for this attribute.
He's shaken things up like never before.
My vote he shall get.

[Andywalters]

A 16 year old candidate or Stalin would probably "stir the pot" too but that doesn`t mean you would want them running for President. Incidentally that is what Trump reminds me of, a sulky teenager (no, i wont accept the result unless I win, and I`m going to take my ball home), don`t get me wrong I absolutely loved him in "The Apprentice" but it`s rather an embarassment for the US to have him run the other candidate so close. I`m an ex UK citizen so I haven`t followed the run in that closely but it strikes me that his policies are founded on xenophobia, fear mongering and outlandish statements
Having said that I don`t reaaaally care who wins as I doubt it will affect my life in the slightest, barring Donald accidentally leaning on the big red button!

[ironchefchris]

As someone who could be described as generally being anti-establishment, I have no problems at all with the idea of someone like Trump stirring the pot, questioning the status quo, or challenging the establishment and dominant paradigm.

My objections to Trump are more about practical matters related to the qualities I feel are necessary for the job of being President. Lack of competence, temperament of small child, the lack of respect he would get from world leaders (by anyone other than Putin, who doesn't respect him as much as own him), and the resulting impact it would have on views of the US, just to name a few.

I'm no fan of Hilary who is anything but a pot stirring challenger to the status quo, but Trump's just a master showman, con man, and flim-flam artist. Too many examples to list. He's really just as guilty as Hillary when it comes to corruption, his charitable organization, gaming the system, etc.. He's so thin skinned it would be so easy for another country to manipulate him. Even though I think Hillary's a perfect example of a lying, corrupt politician who can be trusted as far as she can be thrown, I don't question her on any of those things I find lacking in Trump. If the pot stirrer was someone who had the qualities I feel are necessary I'd support them.

I'm sure I'll be disappointed no matter who wins.

[windsportinperu]

Talking about politicians

It is opportune to mention this simple phrase made by Gandhi : ""I will not let anyone walk through my mind with their dirty feet.”

[MarcoPE]

Trump wasn't my favorite primary candidate but Hillary is just so absolutely corrupt, its quite the election cycle..

I disagree, but even if all the terrible things said about Hillary were actually true (which, for the most part, they're really not), I'd still prefer her over Trump. Much better to have a corrupt President than a crazy one, and Trump continues to demonstrate his instability every single day.

I dislike Hillary and wish I didn't have to support her, but given the alternative, I am forced to do exactly that. And after she wins my support for her ends.

You are free to disagree all you want...I think you are terribly mistaken, but you have a right to support whomever you'd like. Personally, I dislike a lot about Trump but I have watched this election consistently for the last 18 months or so (and very ready for an ending). I am one of those overly-educated males that Trump seemingly has no support from but the WikiLeaks are very telling of the corruption...Russia is the excuse to avoid having to answer the questions....in reality, not one of Hillary's people have actually DENIED the emails are credible. IMO, if Russia was going to falsify emails they would have made them a lot more "corruption-apparent" instead of this complex array of emails. What can we talk about next? ACA premiums increasing up to 116% in AZ and an average of 25% nationwide? The defecit at nearly $20T? The economy at a turtle-slow 1.5%? Yeah, the Democrats have done wonders for this country.... we have cities like Detroit and Baltimore that no longer have anything to do except collect benefits from the government because there are no jobs.

So before you ask, I used to be a very liberal Democrat but I realized that the math just doesn't add up. The number one reason I have somewhat reluctantly chosen to support Trump is based simply on checks and balances....If Hillary wins (which it looks like she may) there will be at least 2, possibly 3, Supreme Court Justice positions .... this is, contradicting ironchef, where the possibility of a change to the 2nd amendment is most likely...for example...if there is a Democrat Senate, and a Liberal Supreme Court (again at least 2 appointments to fill), it would be quite easy... afterall, didn't we have an amendment that prohibited alcohol?

Gringolandia, if you think what has been said about HRC is not true, you really need to evaluate your state of mental thinking....like her or not, this is a woman who has no comprehension of what it is like to be a "regular" citizen, she is crazily pandering for votes, and she will do whatever it takes to be the next President of the US. For Democrats, the ends justify the means. It does not matter if you lie cheat and steal, as long as we win....because we know. more than they, what is better for the people. Since my career is a researcher, I don't get my info from liberal, medium, or conservative sites but rather take an entire view of the least biased sources (in this election it is difficult....and yes, the media hates Trump)

[gringolandia]

the WikiLeaks are very telling of the corruption...Russia is the excuse to avoid having to answer the questions....in reality, not one of Hillary's people have actually DENIED the emails are credible. IMO, if Russia was going to falsify emails they would have made them a lot more "corruption-apparent" instead of this complex array of emails. What can we talk about next? ACA premiums increasing up to 116% in AZ and an average of 25% nationwide? The defecit at nearly $20T? The economy at a turtle-slow 1.5%? Yeah, the Democrats have done wonders for this country.... we have cities like Detroit and Baltimore that no longer have anything to do except collect benefits from the government because there are no jobs.

Gringolandia, if you think what has been said about HRC is not true, you really need to evaluate your state of mental thinking....like her or not, this is a woman who has no comprehension of what it is like to be a "regular" citizen, she is crazily pandering for votes, and she will do whatever it takes to be the next President of the US. For Democrats, the ends justify the means. It does not matter if you lie cheat and steal, as long as we win....because we know. more than they, what is better for the people. Since my career is a researcher, I don't get my info from liberal, medium, or conservative sites but rather take an entire view of the least biased sources (in this election it is difficult....and yes, the media hates Trump)

I have no reason to believe the leaked emails are fake, so I'm been assuming they are real. Some of them are rather damning and they clearly paint Hillary as the typical duplicitous politician, but every time something looks like a smoking gun for something illegal it turns out not to be. She's a politician. She's duplicitous. Perhaps because of the leaks we are seeing more of her particular duplicity than we'd normally see from other politicians, but I have no doubt that we'd find much the same (or worse) from just about all the politicians in D.C. She just gets to be the one we get all the dirt on right now because the Russians have decided to involve themselves in the US election (and this isn't just speculation, see this link for an easy to read explanation of just how clear the evidence against Russia is: http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a49791/russian-dnc-emails-hacked/) . So far that's the long and the short of it: she's as duplicitous as you'd expect a politician to be. But all the terrible crimes that she keeps getting accused of turn out to be just so much right wing fantasy. That's what I mean when I say most of the terrible things said about her are not true. Perhaps some truly damning email will come out in the next week, but I doubt it.

I agree that Obamacare sucks. But then again, what better alternative have the Republicans offered? I'd say this is a mess both parties own. I personally think that only bringing transparent free-market forces to bear can solve the problem (there is evidence it could cut medical costs by 70%), but the only party backing this idea is the Libertarians. Failing that, the next best alternative is expanding medicare access, as Hillary has suggested.

It is also true that the economy isn't humming along at a rapid pace, but considering where it was when Bush left office Obama has appeared to do a pretty good job. I use the word "appeared" intentionally. I think it is all smoke and mirrors, but for now at least the mirage of recovery is holding out. If there is a crisis of confidence I could see the whole economy crater even worse than in 2007, but so far that hasn't happened. Really, gotta give it to Obama for somehow steering the ship through these treacherous waters for this long. I frankly didn't think it could be done. Speaking of 2007, even though that occurred during Bush's watch, it was really the fault of both Dems (such as Bill Clinton) and Repubs (such as Phil Gramm), so again both parties own it. (Note: personally I would have preferred to let the banks go under with their stock-holders getting zero, and recapitalizing the banks only after putting completely new management in place (and putting the old management in prison),.. but neither GW Bush or Obama warmed to this idea)

The deficit is not $20T. You're thinking of the debt. The deficit (amount spent that exceeds revenue) has actually gone down significantly under Obama, though that doesn't actually mean very much and I think anyone who isn't a partisan will admit this is just one of those "luck of the draw" sort of things. As far as the debt being at $20T... yep! GW Bush increased the debt by 101%, and in his first seven years Obama increased it by 56%. Repubs controlled the House and Senate for all GW Bush's terms. Dems controlled House and Senate for most of Obama's first term, but Repubs took over the House for all of his second term and the Senate for the end of his second term. Looks like both parties are at fault again, but really the Republicans don't look so great here considering all spending bills must originate in the House (or at least you'd think that would be the case since the Constitution says so, but in cases where the House passes a bill and sends it to the Senate and the Senate then completely re-writes it before passing it, one might wonder).

Lots of problems here, and overall it looks like there's plenty of blame to spread around for both Republicans and Democrats.

I don't see Trump offering any solutions that might even have a chance of working. He hasn't offered much in the way of specifics in the first place, and in the cases he has it has been shown quite convincingly that they would not only fail, but make the problems worse. The guy is a clueless buffoon who knows just enough to somehow make any bad situation worse.

[ironchefchris]

The Wikileaks emails don't bother me at all and just confirm what I've pretty much knew all along. All they show is a typical politician acting like any other typical politician. It's wishful thinking to believe that Trump is somehow above corruption - he's just as involved only on the other side of the equation. You can't be a successful RE developer without greasing palms and otherwise contributing to corruption. Many in the country are just learning about Trump's corruption and gaming of the system, having only really known him from reality TV, but anyone from NY has known this about him for a long time - one of the reasons why Trump though winning throughout the rest of the state primary, lost in his hometown district. Mutual corruption. lying, and other 'things politicians do' on the part of both candidates isn't really an issue for me this election.

Wikileaks emails, corruption, politicians and the elite gaming the system, etc., is as shocking as Captain Louis Renault discovering there's gambling going on at Rick's Café Américain. I have no expectations that anyone running for higher office isn't corrupt to some degree or another, lies, panders to a constituency, etc.. I think most Peruvians would laugh at the idea of someone who believing that it's only one party that is filled with corrupt liars while the other side is as pure as freshly fallen snow. Politics is a dirty business.

Obamacare is far from perfect, but to solely blame it for rising health care costs is ridiculous considering how much compensation for health insurance C.E.O.'s and other executives have increased.




Hopefully Obamacare is just a flawed step on the ladder towards a single payer national health care system. Rome wasn't built in a day and it's going to take some time along with gradually shifting public attitudes to make the system better. I'm pretty confident that considering how much support a mid to late 70's Jewish Socialist received in the primaries that the US is now more open to adopting tenets of European style Democratic Socialism. This wouldn't have happened 20 years ago. Eventually the US will catch up to the rest of the first world and every other industrialized nation in the world and adopt a single payer system.

Re: MarcoPE suggesting "the possibility of a change to the 2nd amendment is most likely...for example...if there is a Democrat Senate, and a Liberal Supreme Court (again at least 2 appointments to fill), it would be quite easy... afterall, didn't we have an amendment that prohibited alcohol?" - it is a false comparison. The 18'th Amendment did prohibit alcohol, but there was never any Constitutional right that ever guaranteed the right to sell/possess/consume alcohol in the first place, like how the 2'nd Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms.

Every election cycle the National Rifle Association and politicians who would stand to benefit bring out the scare tactics and warn that if ...Dukakis/Clinton/Gore/Kerry/Obama/Clinton wins they are going to come and take your guns. Never happens. Not even close. All that happens is the gun and ammo manufactures see an increase in sales and profits. N.R.A. and gun lobbysists get paid more than they would if a Republican were in office, and the politicians who deal in fear mongering are rewarded with campaign contributions and other perks while feeding red meat to their constituents.

I was a gun owner when I lived in the US. I could see right through the fear mongering and never once was afraid that the gubmint was going to confiscate either of my two guns. The second Amendment is not in any danger of being repealed. Contrary to what MarcoPE suggested, it would be anything but "quite easy" to repeal. Though there is a desire to see guns controlled so that people have to pass background checks and certain types of weapons and ammo are not available to the public, there's no real demand from the US public to completely eliminate guns from society. There's nothing close to a majority in Congress or the Senate that would be able to get passed any repeal of the 2'nd Amendment. Perhaps there's a Congressperson or Senator who advocates for a repeal of the 2'nd Amendment, but if there is I'm not aware of them. Maybe MarcoPE or someone else can post a link that lists those in Congress who are advocating for not just gun control, but the actual repeal of the 2'nd Amendment, if he/they truly feel it is not only "most likely" to happen, but "it would be quite easy" to do. In over 200+ years, there have only been 27 Amendment's which includes the first 10, the Bill of Rights which were ratified very soon after the Constitution itself was ratified. Not only is it not quite easy to make changes to the Constitution, it's not all that common. There's no rational reason to believe or fear that Hillary (or any politician) is going to take away everone's guns because every single time the fear mongering has been used in the past it hasn't happened.

[ironchefchris]

[gringolandia]

Perhaps some truly damning email will come out in the next week, but I doubt it.

Oh bloody hell... I was supposed to say "knock on wood" after that, wasn't I...

Well, I guess we'll see if this latest flair up in the email server scandal (it is the herpes of political scandals) turns out to be much ado about nothing. Does seem odd that FBI Director Comey sent a letter to congress to let them know he was looking into new info, though. And just 11 days before the election.

[jumpinjack]

In this crazy election season, a little religion might be appropriate, so here is a short Bible study.
Thus sayeth the Lord in the new testament:
Jesus said: 'Goats on the left, sheep on the right' (Matthew 25:33).

Jesus also told Peter fish from the right side of the boat. They did and filled the boat with fish.
John 21:6 (NIV) ... He said, "Throw your net on the right side of the boat and you will find some." When they did, they were unable to haul the net in because of the large number of fish."

Origin of Left & Right...I have often wondered why it is that Conservatives are called the right" and Liberals are called the "left".
I stumbled upon this verse in the Bible: Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV) - "The heart of the wise leans to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."
Last point, if you go back far enough in the study of English you will find that the original meaning of the word "Left" means sinister.

[ironchefchris]

Another reason I'm glad not to be in the US now. Gone are the days when people merely had differing opinions on topics and how to best go about running the country and solving problems. Now the politicians and pundits have people so divided that instead of having civil discussion, they call each other "libtards" and "republicons" and other such silly labels and names.

No longer does your neighbor simply have a differing opinion, he now has to be considered as sinister or whatever the far left's term for those on the right is. Sadly, it's at the point where many people are easily manipulated by their favorite pundits and politicians into literally believing that those who disagree are retarded, sinister, evil, or some other such noise.

Don't think I've seen anything similar here, even among the very small percentage of Peruvians who are die hard loyalists to a party/candidate. They may firmly believe in their candidate, but they don't need to resort to putting anyone else down with silly insults or demonizing half the population simply because they have a different opinion.

[Polaron]

well said Chris

[gringolandia]

I have often wondered why it is that Conservatives are called the right" and Liberals are called the "left"

Ignoring the rest of the message since it was actually making me stupider just by reading it, the origin of "right" and "left" in politics occurred during the time of the French Revolution, when the aristocrats and supporters of the king sat to the right, and the commoners and revolutionaries to the left. I'd hope this knowledge would have been gained from a basic education, but if not one could at least find the answer from google in short order.

[Andywalters]

I agree with that ironchef, I saw this in the UK with the Brexit vote, people actually putting things on their facebook saying unfriend me if you vote differently to me and a lot worse, the vitriolic abuse of a differing opinion was astounding, obviously the media whipping things up didn`t help. I always say that when you have to resort to personal abuse or denigration of any kind you have lost the argument.....I`m no saint I have lost a few arguments this way when I was younger and more hot headed than now but to see it on such a large scale is sad. Debate, listen to the counter argument, refute,, then agree to disagree, change the subject and have a beer together!!! Leave the sh*t throwing to the experts!!!!

[jumpinjack]

I have often wondered why it is that Conservatives are called the right" and Liberals are called the "left"

Ignoring the rest of the message since it was actually making me stupider just by reading it, the origin of "right" and "left" in politics occurred during the time of the French Revolution, when the aristocrats and supporters of the king sat to the right, and the commoners and revolutionaries to the left. I'd hope this knowledge would have been gained from a basic education, but if not one could at least find the answer from google in short order.

I resent your innuendo and there is no need for it here. Besides, my explanation trumps yours. Yours has only been around a few hundred years mine goes back a few thousand years. But you are free to believe and Google up anything you want as am I.

[gringolandia]

As Daniel Patrick Moynihan said, "You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your own facts."

[ironchefchris]

I have often wondered why it is that Conservatives are called the right" and Liberals are called the "left"

Ignoring the rest of the message since it was actually making me stupider just by reading it, the origin of "right" and "left" in politics occurred during the time of the French Revolution, when the aristocrats and supporters of the king sat to the right, and the commoners and revolutionaries to the left. I'd hope this knowledge would have been gained from a basic education, but if not one could at least find the answer from google in short order.

I resent your innuendo and there is no need for it here. Besides, my explanation trumps yours. Yours has only been around a few hundred years mine goes back a few thousand years. But you are free to believe and Google up anything you want as am I.

lol. You resent the innuendo, yet your previous post was filled with nothing but innuendo that suggests anyone who is politically left of center is foolish and even "sinister."

Let he who is without sin cast the first innuendo.

Maybe instead of focusing on left/right Biblical metaphors as an absolute basis to define political terms, you should take an honest look at the current situation and consult the Bible to see what Jesus' positions really are when it comes to the poor and how we should treat them, the outcasts of society, commerce, taxes, and money in general, peace, love for your fellow man, mercy, compassion, feeding the hungry, caring for the sick, selling your possessions to help the poor, etc..

http://www.jesusisaliberal.org/
http://addictinginfo.org/2013/12/09/jes ... t-liberal/
http://reverbpress.com/discovery/spirit ... will-hate/

I'm no fan of Hilary, but take a look at Trump re: the seven deadly sins. How anyone who sincerely holds true Christian values can support him baffles me. I'm not saying they should therefore support or even vote for Clinton, but I couldn't see Jesus saying that he'd support Trump based on his values and actions. Just a guess, but I think he'd sit the election out, not lowering himself to deal with politics, even if one candidate seems more in line with his ideals than the other.

1 Gula (gluttony)
2 Luxuria/Fornicatio (lust, fornication)
3 Avaritia (avarice/greed)
4 Superbia (pride, hubris)
5 Tristitia (sorrow/despair/despondency)
6 Ira (wrath)
7 Vanagloria (vainglory)
8 Acedia (sloth)

I'm not trying to suggest that so called Crooked Hillary isn't crooked or otherwise not a flawed candidate, or that Republican values are wrong because they go against what Jesus preached. I get that many on the right aren't concerned about the poor or the sick and that there are differing points of view - and that's fine. I have no problem with Republicans/Conservatives holding strong opinions on the best way to govern, what America's role in the world should be, etc.. But I'm not into demonizing anyone, or suggesting they are "sinister," for holding views different than my own. Just pointing out that (imo) a lot of the Republicans who try to use religion/the Bible to suggest (or speak innuendos if you prefer) that God/Jesus is on their side and they support candidates who are following the laws of God and the desires of Jesus are mistaken.

Sorry to rain on your parade, but....

[gringolandia]

Good points, Ironchefchris.

With regard to friendships being ruined by political disagreements, I agree it is unfortunate and needless in many cases, but for me it comes down to *why* someone takes a particularly political position than the actual position itself

If someone says they'll vote for Trump only out of a fear that Clinton's supreme court picks will gut the 2nd Amendment, or if a Brexit supporter says British sovereignty must be restored, so be it.

However, if it becomes clear that their real motivations are racism, bigotry, or a general disregard for facts, then I think such people must be shunned, mocked, and otherwise ostracized from society because they can become a cancer that grows out of control.

[jumpinjack]

Good points, Ironchefchris.

With regard to friendships being ruined by political disagreements, I agree it is unfortunate and needless in many cases, but for me it comes down to *why* someone takes a particularly political position than the actual position itself

If someone says they'll vote for Trump only out of a fear that Clinton's supreme court picks will gut the 2nd Amendment, or if a Brexit supporter says British sovereignty must be restored, so be it.

However, if it becomes clear that their real motivations are racism, bigotry, or a general disregard for facts, then I think such people must be shunned, mocked, and otherwise ostracized from society because they can become a cancer that grows out of control.

Man you sure chugged that Kool Aid down with gusto.

[gringolandia]

The irony of referring to the Jonestown massacre is probably lost on you.

[Polaron]

Could that be attributable to a lack of education, perhaps?

[jumpinjack]

The irony of referring to the Jonestown massacre is probably lost on you.

No, "drinking the Kool Aid refers to the masses who tow the party line such as your oft repeated mantra "their real motivations are racism, bigotry, or a general disregard for facts". Google it.
Jonestown drank Flavor Aid. Talk about education, lol.

[gringolandia]

The irony of referring to the Jonestown massacre is probably lost on you.

No, "drinking the Kool Aid refers to the masses who tow the party line such as your oft repeated mantra "their real motivations are racism, bigotry, or a general disregard for facts". Google it.
Jonestown drank Flavor Aid. Talk about education, lol.

OMG please just stop. The Jonestown massacre did, in fact, use Flavor Aid, not Kool Aid. However that particular distinction was lost at the time and the phrase "to drink the Kool-Aid" does, in fact, refer to the Jonestown massacre (and as far as education goes, having studied this event multiple times in both in history and psychology classes, I actually knew all of this, including the Flavor Aid / Kool-Aid distinction, from memory).

You're just making yourself look silly. As the saying goes, you've been given enough rope to hang yourself, and you're proceeding to do exactly that.

[bigdaddy]

The irony of referring to the Jonestown massacre is probably lost on you.

No, "drinking the Kool Aid refers to the masses who tow the party line such as your oft repeated mantra "their real motivations are racism, bigotry, or a general disregard for facts". Google it.
Jonestown drank Flavor Aid. Talk about education, lol.

OMG please just stop. The Jonestown massacre did, in fact, use Flavor Aid, not Kool Aid. However that particular distinction was lost at the time and the phrase "to drink the Kool-Aid" does, in fact, refer to the Jonestown massacre (and as far as education goes, having studied this event multiple times in both in history and psychology classes, I actually knew all of this, including the Flavor Aid / Kool-Aid distinction, from memory).

You're just making yourself look silly. As the saying goes, you've been given enough rope to hang yourself, and you're proceeding to do exactly that.

Did your classes bring up the theory that it was a CIA medical experiment?

https://www.amazon.com/Was-Jonestown-CI ... 0889460132

[ironchefchris]

Not that it has anything to do with the current election, but since the convo's taken a turn (and one towards a locale in S. America) and like just about everyone else, I wish the election would be over and done with....

I have a weird interest in strange events from the 70's. I remember eventually reading about that potential CIA/Jonestown connection. Also studied the whole Patty Hearst/S.L.A story and came across suggestions that the S.L.A. also had connections to law enforcement and the CIA - that it was an COINTELPRO like op created by the CIA to discredit the radical left. Whole lot of weirdness, connections, and incompetence between the S.L.A. and law enforcement/CIA.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/pat ... y_20161021

http://www.maebrussell.com/Mae%20Brusse ... d%201.html

[gringolandia]

Did your classes bring up the theory that it was a CIA medical experiment?

https://www.amazon.com/Was-Jonestown-CI ... 0889460132

Of course! University studies routinely teach crackpot conspiracy theories as part of the core curriculum. I also studied how the CIA sets up expat websites to spy on subversives. Oops, I don't think I was supposed to say that.





Alright, I think I've had enough of this thread for a while. This election can't be over soon enough.

[MarcoPE]

LOL

[ironchefchris]

LOL

That's the spirit that will help bring the US together instead of stay divided!

Too bad things in the post-election US won't be like they are here where after a few days everybody just gets back to life as normal instead of spending their time hating on the half of the population with a different point of view.

[bigdaddy]

In the election post mortem, 3 things stand out to me.

First, the mainstream media overestimated the black/Latino vote/influence.
Blacks just couldn’t get behind a non-minority candidate such as HRC like they did with BHO and Latinos are too splintered as a group.
She didn’t bring the “wow factor” but she did bring the baggage.

Secondly, the MSM completely disregarded the common person Joe Six Pack white voters.
Their death and influence have been “greatly exaggerated” so the “white lash” after 8 years of a liberal black president played a role.

And thirdly, I suspect many Bernie voters didn’t or refused to get on the Hillary bus and voted for Trump or a 3rd party candidate instead.

[jumpinjack]

In the election post mortem, 3 things stand out to me.

First, the mainstream media overestimated the black/Latino vote/influence.
Blacks just couldn’t get behind a non-minority candidate such as HRC like they did with BHO and Latinos are too splintered as a group.
She didn’t bring the “wow factor” but she did bring the baggage.

Secondly, the MSM completely disregarded the common person Joe Six Pack white voters.
Their death and influence have been “greatly exaggerated” so the “white lash” after 8 years of a liberal black president played a role.

And thirdly, I suspect many Bernie voters didn’t or refused to get on the Hillary bus and voted for Trump or a 3rd party candidate instead.

Yeah buddy, better your big boy pants on.

[gringolandia]

That all may be true, but the polls are usually pretty good at tracking those things pretty accurately. Maybe they failed this time around to some extent, and I'm sure people will be looking into that.

The big question then is how could the polls been so off, to the point that neither Dems nor Repubs thought Wisconsin or Michigan were battleground states.

It seems like there were either a lot of people who don't typically vote who surprised everyone by coming out, or some people lied to the pollsters about how they were going to vote.

All I know is that I have never been more wrong about something as I was wrong about this. I was completely surprised by the results. I even thought the election was going to be called fairly early for Hillary. Ha! I'm so embarrassed to be an American right now. And I'm severing all ties with any "friends" who voted for the Orangutan-elect. Still debating what to do with family who supported him. Might have to grin and put up with them.

[ironchefchris]

Last night a talking head on one of the cable networks told a story about how he was talking to the owner of a local sandwich shop who said he had a lot of "leaners" come into his place. When he'd ask his customers who they were going to vote for, a lot of customers would 'lean in' close and and say "Trump" in a voice quiet enough so as not be heard by anyone else.

I wonder if perhaps there was a strategy by Trump/GOP to tell supporters to lie to pollsters or just not participate so as to give Clinton/Dems a false sense of security. Maybe it's as simple as the Trump base distrusting and loathing even the pollsters as part of their anti-establishment/DC attitude.

I was surprised but not at all upset by the results. This may be the best thing that could happen to the progressive movement in the US. Instead of a potential 8 years of more of the same, status quo, center-right establishment Hilary which would just delay any real progress or change, perhaps it's better to have things more rapidly get darker so we can get through to the light that much quicker. Maybe instead of running such a flawed and weak center-right candidate like Clinton, 2020 will see a more progressive, Bernie Sanders like candidate.

I'd like to see a progressive vs. the Ted Cruz wing duke it out in an ideological battle and see which way the country really wants to go, because I think given a choice with the same desire for real change and 'draining the swamp,' a lot of people who couldn't stomach Hilary, held their nose and voted Trump because they're tired of the establishment, would've voted for Bernie, or maybe next time around a fellow progressive.

I think the US is due for a one-term President. I'm not to sure that Trump will work well with the mostly establishment members of the GOP in Congress, nor them with Trump. Controlling the WH, House, and Senate may turn out to be them having enough rope to hang themselves. It will be entertaining to watch Trump try to build his folly/wall, or have to explain why it is he couldn't do it.

Since Trump originally offered Kasich the job with the offer that he could run both foreign and domestic policy, I really don't believe Trump is interested in performing the duties of the office. I can see him being more a figurehead who like Reagan will delegate, or perhaps he'll just hand over the reigns and be content fulfilling the ceremonial and televised aspects of the job.