Putin denies US election interference.... but praises Trump?? What is going on?
usablefiber 8699 5131 1034

So he says there is no interfering, no preferential candidate. However, he goes on to say that he understands trump.

We have heard everything from, putin "deliberately wants to sabotage Hillary" to "Trump is working for putin".

None of this makes any sense. Does the Russian government really have a vested interest in the outcome? I don't understand Russian politics.
November 05 at 22:47
  • Tarris1 21302 25376 16428
    Hillary clearly wishes to go to war with Russia. Putin does not want a war, hence his relative support of Trump .It's not particularly difficult to understand. Clinton is a disaster for Russia-US relations
    November 05 at 23:23
    • Administrator
      steve ca Canada 5859 169 55541
      The idea that Hillary wants to go to war with Russia is one of the falsehoods spread by Trump/the Kremlin. Hillary was in favour of the intervention in Libya, where the US reluctantly followed France's lead. Sarkozy was the most keen on intervening in Libya, which very much annoyed Russia (they lost another client/ally). Yet today Sarkozy is Putin's friend. Hillary would resist Putin's advances but has said she wants to work with allies and use diplomacy. Not everyone who opposes Putin is therefore a war monger.
      November 06 at 06:09
      • Tarris1 no Norway 21302 25376 16428
        She wants to impose a no-fly zone in libya and to fight against Assad which is clearly intended to upset Putin, i.e. get into a war in the middle east. This is not a false-hood, she said so herself. Furthermore, she wants to arm more rebels which is a disaster
        November 06 at 07:47
        • usablefiber us United States 8699 5131 1034
          This is what is so frustrating about the politics of foreign policy. The general population is simply too uniformed to see the full picture. It's just far too complicated for the average person to reach productive conclusions. Therefore, the validity of publicly stated policy proposals on Syria is hard to make sense of. The reality is there are no good military solutions for outside actors in Syria. However, Hillary clinton did not say that "the geneva convention is the problem", "bring back torture even if it doesn't work", and "you have to go after their families" in regard to Bombing Isis.

          ::Brace for impact::
          November 06 at 17:22
        • Administrator
          steve ca Canada 5859 169 55541
          She emphasized that any no fly zone would be achieved through diplomacy. She is far less likely to act on her own impulses than Trump. Will likely work closely with allies and have better relations with Merkel and others than Trump could achieve. International community is already involved in Syria and in "upsetting" Putin, and this will continue. Makes more sense than Trump's idea of "grabbing Iraqi oil" as payment for US troops.
          November 06 at 18:57
          • usablefiber us United States 8699 5131 1034
            I still find it mind boggling that anybody takes his "policy" propositions serious. The things that come out of his mouth are laughably ignorant. I can't believe that it's even being discussed. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills when I find myself in a discussion with his fans. I wouldn't vote for Trump if he ran for principal of my local high school.... Yet here he is within 2 points of leading the most powerful nation on the globe.

            How has he not been disqualified at this point? Am I missing something? Does the Republican Party know something I don't?
            November 06 at 19:23
            • Demolitionator us United States 6168 98
              To state it simply:
              1. Being the President is a serious job, therefore, it requires a serious person.

              2. Trump is not serious.

              3. Therefore, he will probably not be a good president.

              (This is not pro Hillary Clinton, I don't like her either).
              November 06 at 20:47
            • Tarris1 no Norway 21302 25376 16428
              It sounds like you've listened to too much liberal media. What comes out of his mouth is not ignorance, but truth with some degree of political rhetoric. What makes me say this is that you have absolutely zero examples to back up your claims; in other words, just more nonsense. Please point to specifics before you give shit to a presidential candidate, it's a little more productive.

              As for Steve's post. I agree that she might be working more closely with what she considers to be allies, but that's not the problem here. The US has worked closely with allies for many years and the middle east and north-east africa is in a worse situation than ever and this is mostly at the cost of the people in the area and American's lives and American tax payers money. Trump wants to change this by giving other countries more responsibilities and America less; he does not want the US to be the world police any longer.

              Hillary's wish to fight against Assad, put up no-fly zones - Russia wont agree with it -, arm Kurd rebels (which can create serious tension with Turkey) and others, and so on. Hillary's foreign policy is a disaster compared to Trump.

              I don't agree with all of Trump's domestic policies such as his protectionism, but as a whole he has the most appropriate policies to make America great again: lower taxes and less meaningless regulation, simplifying/reducing social security spending and so on.
              November 06 at 21:52
          • Prinz_Skogsvin gb United Kingdom 6511 13 2004
            A no-fly zone "achieved through diplomacy" indeed. That is a bit like a no-burglary zone "achieved" by posters on houses saying: THIEVES - YOUR MOMS WOULD NOT BE PROUD
            November 07 at 07:45
            • Prinz_Skogsvin gb United Kingdom 6511 13 2004
              My point is: to have a meaningful no-fly zone, you absolutely have to back it up with force. And yeah, it doesn't take a genius political thinker to see how that could lead to war - especially if you are messing with someone who has the means to hit you back.
              November 07 at 07:50
        • Demolitionator us United States 6168 98
          This Syrian war sounds like something out of the cold war: The Russians supporting a group that is fighting a group supported by the Americans. Somewhat similar to the Vietnam and Korean wars, and that is NOT a good thing. I am simply stating my opinion, and not trying to make a statement about foreign policy. This is a scary dilemma. If America supports the Syrian Rebels more, than there are more tensions between America and Russia, but if they don't, than the Syrian rebels might loose to the Assad Regime, which would be a horrific sight.
          November 06 at 20:45
      • scoreperfect us United States 498 9970 13075
        I thought this was a language site. Why is all the political bullshit polluting this site? Take it somewhere else Steve Kaufman!

        Daniel Léo Simpson
        San Francisco
        November 20 at 22:40
        • Demolitionator us United States 6168 98
          On the forums page it says you can talk about whatever you would like to.
          November 21 at 19:59
  • usablefiber 8699 5131 1034
    I find it difficult to believe that any candidate would actually want to start a war.
    November 06 at 00:43
    • Tarris1 no Norway 21302 25376 16428
      The most memorable presidents in history were the ones who were presidents during a war. No presidents would want to start one, but Clinton surely wants to be in one thus trying to trigger it without seeming to be the one to start it would be perfect for her; hence her proposed policies against Russia
      November 06 at 07:49
      • usablefiber us United States 8699 5131 1034
        Here is a quote from Mr Trump, with his "sound" conservative fiscal policy.

        "“I’m the king of debt. I’m great with debt. Nobody knows debt better than me,” Trump told Norah O’Donnell in an interview that aired on “CBS This Morning.” “I’ve made a fortune by using debt, and if things don’t work out I renegotiate the debt. I mean, that’s a smart thing, not a stupid thing.”
        Story Continued Below

        “How do you renegotiate the debt?” O’Donnell followed up.
        “You go back and you say, hey guess what, the economy crashed,” Trump replied. “I’m going to give you back half.”"

        Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/trump-kin...
        Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

        Here is a statement from 370 economists including 8 Nobel Prize winners saying that Trumps fantasy land finance plan would be a complete disaster for the economy. I'm assuming you didn't read that one.


        Lot's of very conservative economic voices in that article.
        November 07 at 10:00
        • Tarris1 no Norway 21302 25376 16428
          Any sane man would be willing to renegotiate debt in a time of crisis, it's basic common sense and it happens both on a national level and individual level all the time. This is sound policy and backed up by heaps of economic literature; punishment for default is extremely limited, especially for advanced economies.

          As for the second part, what 370 economists "say" is absolutely irrelevant. I agree with them that his protectionists policies are not going to have much effect, but the remaining thoughts on his policies are mostly questions of degree and statements without substance. And I have read that article before, but without any more details theres not much more to say. Hillary's policies are a disaster in comparison. Higher taxes, more social security spending, more regulation; no economist thinks that this would help America become great again, none; Clinton is also in support of more border control around Mexico.
          November 07 at 15:25
          • usablefiber us United States 8699 5131 1034
            "Higher taxes, more social security spending, more regulation;"

            ::palm in face::
            November 07 at 15:28
            • Tarris1 no Norway 21302 25376 16428
              Another post without substance, not surprised. You ready to rebut it or not? Posts like these are totally unnecessary
              November 07 at 16:17
    • Moderator
      ColinJohnstonov gb United Kingdom 52179 7605 1
      I assume you mean 'start a war with Russia'.
      November 06 at 11:02
      • Prinz_Skogsvin gb United Kingdom 6511 13 2004
        I think what history teaches us is that major wars are often stumbled into by cretin politicians who thought it was all a bit of a trivial lark that would be over by Christmas.

        It terrifies me to hear some people in public life blithely about "taking out Russian air bases in Syria", etc. They don't understand the military realities. Russia isn't as formidable as the Soviet Union at its military peak, but it is well capable of retaliating against military targets in Europe or North America with naval or air launched cruise missiles. Where do you go from there? Nuclear war?

        Donald Trump is a gorilla in a suit and tie.

        Hilary Clinton...yes well...I wouldn't trust her to run a chicken farm.

        Heaven help us.
        November 06 at 12:20
        • Maria2 gb United Kingdom 1208 25768 1209
          I love your analogies, Jay!
          ...or whatever you want to call 'em :-)
          November 06 at 13:02
          • Demolitionator us United States 6168 98
            Yes good analogies
            November 06 at 22:36
        • Moderator
          ColinJohnstonov gb United Kingdom 52179 7605 1
          "...would be over by Christmas."

          By the way, have you been watching the YouTube channel 'The Great War'?


          Starting from 2014, they have been doing weekly episodes on the war explaining what happened each week 100 years ago. They are excellent videos. There is also a German one


          I think the presenter of the German one is better, though the American presenter is really good too. Unfortunately the German one stopped a year ago.
          November 06 at 13:07
          • Moderator
            ColinJohnstonov gb United Kingdom 52179 7605 1
            Ok, I just wrote to them to see if they would provide transcripts and allow me to add their videos to the LingQ library.
            November 06 at 13:14
            • Prinz_Skogsvin gb United Kingdom 6511 13 2004
              There is so much good stuff on youtube. I am utterly mesmerised by Chris Hansen's work! (And, in some of the older cases, the raw full interview videos from later on down at the cop shop!)

              BTW Thanks for that link the other day to the Hugh M. nutcase! :-)
              November 06 at 13:36
            • Prinz_Skogsvin gb United Kingdom 6511 13 2004
              Yep, TCAP was from Hansen's time with NBC. He's now got an all new show - "Hansen vs Predator". Howlingly entertaining is that! :-D
              November 06 at 16:57
        • usablefiber us United States 8699 5131 1034
          I trust Hillary much more than Donald. I think cenk from TYT put it best.
          Trump is incompetent, knows nothing, doesn't know he knows nothing, and has the impulse control of a grease fire.

          If he is in power, he will screw something up big time. Brace for Impact.
          November 06 at 13:43
          • jaliscostate ee Estonia 95530 17507 24831
            from the many great american journalists you choose to quote Cenk from TYT....good lord.
            November 06 at 14:38
            • usablefiber us United States 8699 5131 1034
              I quote people when they make accurate claims. In this case he is 100% correct.
              November 06 at 14:52
            • Moderator
              ColinJohnstonov gb United Kingdom 52179 7605 1
              Interesting, what is your issue with Cenk? I am not a huge fan of him, but why is it bad to quote him?
              November 06 at 15:03
  • [[ktj200]] 331 9788 0
    watch the last snl sketch on youtube then
    you will know why
    November 06 at 14:41
  • aniad 934 0 0
    The politica of Russia is like in psychiatric hospital. Without the vodka impossible to understand.
    November 06 at 19:30
  • I prefer Donald to Hillary, Bernie to both of them and Vladimir to all of them.
    November 06 at 19:33
    • Wulfgar us United States 24601 3871 8496
      Ah, a big fan of oligarchy then? Go super rich boys, go!
      November 06 at 20:09
  • Demolitionator 6168 98
    I think that part of it is because Trump and Putin have similar political stances and foreign policies.
    November 06 at 20:36
  • Demolitionator 6168 98
    Donald Trump might want to make friends with Putin, as he has complemented him, and they seem very similar to me. This is in contrast with America supporting Syrian rebels and Kurds. If Trump gets elected, one thing is for sure: things will get weird.
    November 06 at 20:40
  • Lucas_Raimondi 0 0 742
    I know a lot of "no american" people, They are living in US, and have a life, kids, family there.

    We cannot close our eyes for some Comparison about :


    Build wall on Mexican border, make Mexico pay for it; allow legal immigration; triple number of ICE officers; deport all "criminal" aliens; defund sanctuary cities; end birthright citizenship; increase prevailing wage for H1-B visas

    Supports the DREAM act and a path to legalization for illegal immigrants that includes learning English and paying fines; toughen penalties for hiring illegal immigrants; voted for fence along Mexican border. Supports Obama's executive action.

    Minimum Wage:

    Comments all over the map. In Republican debate said wages are "too high", but later said $7.25 an hour is too low. "I think people should get more". Wants to let states set the minimum.

    Clinton proposes to increase the minimum wage to $12 nationwide.

    Position on Syria and Iran

    Prefer not to have boots on the ground; rather eliminate ISIS main funding; that is to destroy the oil extraction, refineries, etc. "Bomb the s**t out of them[ISIS controlled oil fields]" Trump has said he would reject the Iran nuclear deal and renegotiate it.

    Clinton supports a no-fly zone, as well as training Syrian rebels. She is for strong U.S. involvement in fighting ISIS, short of deploying boots on the ground. In favor of Iran agreement. As Secretary of State, laid the groundwork for sanctions on Iran and negotiations on the agreement.

    In my humble opinion, Trump as a President is dangerous.
    November 07 at 12:20
    • evgueny40 ru Russian Federation 1683 69907 5725
      I think Richard from England in my interview with him explained very objectively Trump's victory and his possible steps in the future, you can listen to it - "Trump's victory - a view from Great England":
      November 14 at 08:08
    • usablefiber us United States 8699 5131 1034
      The good news: The U.S. government was constructed specifically to limit the power of any 1 individual so there are many, many checks and balances in pace to prevent him from doing something crazy. If he does try to do something that would threaten national or world safety, He would be impeached by our legislative branch.

      He is gonna be played like a fiddle by the powers that be. The republican establishment will resist any of his policies that will actually help americans like Infrastructure spending, healthcare, and Job Creation. Trump called for an expansion to social security and medicare (most americans want this) and Paul Ryan is trying to jump on the opportunity of Republican supermajority to gut these. The U.S. Republican Party is a front for the corporate assault on the American working class folks and they will resist any policies that would force them to give up their wealth. They have gone so far off the cliff to the right. Trump is actually better than them.
      November 15 at 18:57
      • Prinz_Skogsvin gb United Kingdom 6511 13 2004
        I thought there was pretty much all-round consensus on infrastructure spending?
        November 15 at 19:34
  • sdom 15771 0 17369

    Putin, not putin, boy.
    November 13 at 19:26
    • usablefiber us United States 8699 5131 1034
      Eh, it's not necessary. He is only 170cm tall. Let's just pray the U.S. doesn't challenge the russian leader to a game of Hockey. We know how he single handedly scored 7 goals against the russian all stars. http://www.mediaite.com/online/vladimir-putin-i...
      November 15 at 18:25
      • sdom ru Russian Federation 15771 0 17369
        usablefiber, I don`t think your joke is funny. Really you need to go to Canada, boy.
        November 19 at 22:32
      • Administrator
        steve ca Canada 5859 169 55541
        His size is not a problem. It's his lack of skill. He couldn't make our 70 and over Vancouver old-timers team. The guy can hardly skate.
        November 20 at 00:07
      • Administrator
        steve ca Canada 5859 169 55541
        I believe Igor Larionov was 165 cm and he was phenomenal in the NHL.
        November 20 at 00:08
        • sdom ru Russian Federation 15771 0 17369
          Steve, I`m amasing about such turn in this discussion.
          To debate about President Putin`s height and his hockey skills is not just funny but foolish.
          The topic is "US election interference".

          By the way, don`t you think it`s a kind of discrimination (to discuss one`s height at none-antropological theme)?

          About Putin`s hockey: all adults understand it`s for hockey popularization in Russia.
          November 20 at 11:02
          • Prinz_Skogsvin gb United Kingdom 6511 13 2004
            In fairness, Donald T did make an issue of Marco Rubio's height during the earlier part of the campaign. I did find that pretty cheap to be honest - you don't judge a guy by his height!

            And I say that as someone who stands 6 foot 3 inches in my bear (sic!) feet, BTW.
            November 20 at 12:55
          • usablefiber us United States 8699 5131 1034
            lol sdom We are just kidding around. Putin is a world leader I'm sure he wouldn't be that upset to hear a few random people making jokes. I don't judge or respect world leaders on the basis of their athletic abilities. We like Obama here in the states, but we still poked fun of him when he threw out the first pitch at a baseball game and looked completely unnatural. Doesn't mean we don't respect him as our president. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ub2MVSahGxE
            November 20 at 19:18
            • sdom ru Russian Federation 15771 0 17369
              Ok, apology accepted.
              November 23 at 08:01
      • Dimethylamine us United States 6763
        Or Judo for that matter. I've been wanting to read his book on Judo. Hopefully, one day in Russian.
        November 23 at 16:55
  • scoreperfect 498 9970 13075
    I thought this was a language site. Why is all the political crap polluting this site? Take it somewhere else Steve Kaufman!

    Daniel Léo Simpson
    San Francisco
    November 20 at 22:40
    • Wulfgar us United States 24601 3871 8496
      He's made it clear that it's ok to discuss politics here. It's been going on for a long long time, and many people enjoy it. It's not a requirement though; you can just choose not to read political threads.
      November 21 at 01:42
      • Administrator
        steve ca Canada 5859 169 55541
        Agreed, as long as no foul language is used, or personal insults or other objectionable comments. Politicians are fair game and can be made fun of at will. Of course people commenting in the language they are learning are getting the most benefit.
        November 21 at 01:58
        • Demolitionator us United States 6168 98
          Hooray for free speech!
          November 21 at 20:01
        • usablefiber us United States 8699 5131 1034
          I wanted to add: I really enjoy the the ability to talk with people from all over the world about politics and international affairs. I've been able to talk to actual Russians about Russian politics, Japanese people about Japan, and Germans about Europe. Lingq is a very unique collection of curious learners from around the world. I would hate to be handcuffed by topical restrictions.
          November 21 at 20:11
        • scoreperfect us United States 498 9970 13075
          OMG I'm surrounded by little children. Ok, first: to Steve Kaufman. You've already been insulting so there goes that rule right out the window: Second, you children always think that "free speech" means you can express whatever you want, whenever you want, wherever you want. WRONG! When you grow up, you'll learn to discriminate on when and where that free speech can best be expressed. Expressing a concern for those who supported the losing candidate in the recent US election is fine - saying it from an actor on Broadway stage as a condescending lecture to the vice-president elect sitting in the audience is NOT fine. It's disrespectful to a patron coming to watch your show, it's disrespectful to the office of the vice-president elect of the United States. It's very childish, and it's what grown-ups call "rude". The WRONG place at the WRONG time for a message like that. Third: This is a language site. I pay money to come here everyday to learn Italian, German, and more recently Chinese. And I come to these forums to search for and learn about language tips, not to have to sift through headlines of topics of political crap from Canadians about US elections and bashing of our president-elect. It's shameful, it's wrong and it has NO place on ANY LingQ forum! This entire thread needs to be deleted and moved to any forum of your choice OUTSIDE the perimeters of what, until this week, I thought was a site exclusively for Language learning. How disappointing that Steve Kaufman seems to gleefully give his blessing to such pollution of what is otherwise a wonderful language-learning site. Shame....

          Daniel Léo Simpson
          San Francisco
          November 22 at 17:39
          • Administrator
            steve ca Canada 5859 169 55541
            There are members of our LingQ community who enjoy talking about politics on the forum, especially this "Open Forum", some in their native language and some in the language they are learning. This has always been OK, as has the regular wandering away from the main topic of a thread. We are not going to change this practice now. If you don't like this thread, or any other thread, you should unsubscribe, and let those that want to participate do so.
            When I said that I would control for insults, I meant insults to other participants, calling them names etc. We have had to delete threads that had insults, or even threats on them. This thread has not had any insults of other participants on it, if we ignore your reference to us all as children. Participants in this discussion are from a variety of countries and have expressed a wide range of opinion without insulting each other.
            As to showing disrespect to political leaders, I consider this to be a fundamental right or even duty in a society. Everyone is equal and no one should be taken too seriously, especially leaders who take themselves too seriously. Note that Pence didn't appear to be bothered by the lecture delivered to him at the theatre, unlike the childish tweet reaction of his boss.
            November 22 at 18:19
            • usablefiber us United States 8699 5131 1034
              I am simply astonished at Trump's inability to communicate to the American people. Instead of responding to the fears of devision and xenophobia with a pubic statement, he lashed out on twitter and outright ignored any unrest. He is a complete and utter toddler and he deserves any and all scorn on that front.

              With any luck he will impeached sooner than later and we can have an actual Adult like Mike Pence in charge, who as you mentioned, was able to respond with a thoughtful statement. I disagree wholeheartedly with Pence politically, but I would prefer to have an adult in the white house.
              November 22 at 18:57
            • scoreperfect us United States 498 9970 13075
              @Steve "As to showing disrespect to political leaders, I consider this to be a fundamental right or even duty in a society. Everyone is equal and no one should be taken too seriously, " Oh I get it - so it's okay to be rude and disrespectful to anyone because "everyone is equal and no one should be taken too seriously." haha - what kind of utter nonsense is that? "unlike the childish tweet reaction of his boss." Oh you think his response was childish? Is that what you think? But according to usablefiber's rational below, "The only reason it was "childish" was because he said something you didn't like.." Another would say it was the strength and loyalty of a LEADER who stood up for his "number 2". But it's really amusing in a way. You have your own incubator of little liberals here on your language forum - and you're welcome to them....
              November 22 at 21:47
            • Moderator
              ColinJohnstonov gb United Kingdom 52179 7605 1
              "if we ignore your reference to us all as children"

              I guess that is not soooooo bad and can probably be tolerated. I assume mild insults are ok in a discussion, and what you wouldn't tolerate are things like racist remarks, or explicit bullying of members.
              November 22 at 23:18
          • usablefiber us United States 8699 5131 1034
            Dude, just don't click on political threads. The only reason it was "wrong" or "rude" was because they said something you didn't like... so don't go see Hamilton, don't click on my threads. It's not that hard. Most of the thread here are about language anyways.

            There is no need to get this upset. You gotta let the world turn sometimes. The same thing happened to me the other day. I was watching Japanese from zero lessons on youtube and the teacher randomly started talking about politics and the Trump election. I don't want to worry about trump when I'm studying Japanese, so I just skipped that lesson. I didn't demand that the host stop talking politics. You can't let the world dictate your life because you just can't control it like that. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMV2YzwVPVI&t=201s
            November 22 at 18:24
          • Dimethylamine us United States 6763
            Oh look at the disgruntled condescending baby boomer calling us all children.

            If you are offended, your safe space is in the other direction. Steve's site, Steve's rules.
            November 23 at 18:07
            • Administrator
              steve ca Canada 5859 169 55541
              I think scoreperfect understands the rules here, and in fact is jumping in with his own political points, so we can revert to our "dialogue des sourds" on this subject, in other languages too, for those who feel up to it.
              November 23 at 18:23
  • scoreperfect 498 9970 13075
    oh wow, I just stumbled on this article today from my iPhone FoxNews app and how could I not post it? It's so connected with what I posted this morning. I usually don't like to post "articles" - I think posts should be written to reflect what I think, not what someone else said or wrote. But it so mirrors my position of my posts from this thread, I'll go ahead and do it - I only include the first couple paragraphs but the whole thing if you want to read it all is here:

    Michael Goodwin: Dear liberals, start practicing the empathy you preach

    By Michael Goodwin Published November 22, 2016 New York Post

    Elections have consequences and an obvious one now is your distress. Your grief over Hillary Clinton’s defeat is understandable, but your rage over Donald Trump’s victory is not.

    Yet instead of searching for the reasons, you embarrass the city by booing Mike Pence at “Hamilton.” You screech over Trump’s personnel picks and reflexively smear people you don’t know. Too often, your argument is “Shut up.”

    You are playing with fire by hardening the very polarization you decry. Please stop before you burn down the American house.

    By all means, mourn Clinton’s loss and the probability that you will never again see her name on a ballot. Her concession speech felt like “goodbye” and someone else will shatter the final glass ceiling.
    November 22 at 23:17
    • Moderator
      ColinJohnstonov gb United Kingdom 52179 7605 1
      On another note, I read on your profile and your website that you are a composer in San Francisco. Just out of interest, did you ever know Anne Crowden?
      November 23 at 00:31
    • usablefiber us United States 8699 5131 1034
      Is this some kind of a joke? I swear this country has gone crazy. How anybody in their right mind could watch the hamilton message to mike pence and think it in any way shape or form "rude", "bullying", or "out of place" is beyond me. Were conservatives going after Rock Musician Ted Nugent when he said Obama and Hillary should be hanged? It seems like rock in roll is the wrong place to be talking about politics and candidates...... ::crickets::.... because they don't care about anti Obama language.

      And on the flip side, People are concerned over trump appointing climate change deniers, alt right writers, anti LGBT advocates, and a war hawk that makes Dick Cheney look like Noam Chomsky (bolton)......yet this fox news writers' claim about "screeching liberals" is accepted as fair criticism?

      Do those concerns of minorities, muslims, hispanics, LGBT people mean nothing? Does the very real threat of Climate change mean nothing? Does it all amount to pure bluster? Are Trump supporters incapable of discerning overzealous political correctness from the very, very real concerns of our fellow countrymen with the rise in hate crimes?... (FBI fact, not made up)

      I do not mean to insult. I simply believe you are not being honest with yourself; that you are unable to really take a long hard look at prejudice and bigotry in this country with an open mind. As if the admission of some elements of unjust discrimination automatically makes a person with white skin culpable or less tough because they had it easier. It's why we get all this wonky reasoning about "the theater not being the time and place"... because we have to deflect from the real issue. You will not admit it and you will probably fire back in a different direction with insults towards me so go ahead and bring on the insults, but I sincerely encourage you to take a long, hard look at the frightening rhetoric of trump and why some people have legitimate fears. Yesterday we had an outright Nazi Rally in Washington DC with calls of "Hail Trump, Hail victory". That is sincerely not ok and far, FAR more unacceptable than what Hamilton did. It is not OK for American citizens to be afraid.

      There are absolutely times when the left goes too far and plays race or sexism cards when they shouldn't..... but this is not one of them.
      November 23 at 00:35
      • Moderator
        ColinJohnstonov gb United Kingdom 52179 7605 1
        "Yesterday we had an outright Nazi Rally in Washington DC with calls of "Hail Trump, Hail victory"."

        I read about that. There were 200 people there right? Damn, what losers. I have more Facebook friends than that, and I ain't a popular Kerl.

        [edit: just to be clear, I am trying to imply here that white supremacists and neo-nazis are irrelevant since they are so few in numbers. Two hundred people is nothing and from what I understand, the KKK has around 3000 members. Of course there are more, but they appear to be extremely small in number. They should simply be ignored. That is not to say that racism is irrelevant of course, since that is obviously ridiculous.]
        November 23 at 00:57
      • Tarris1 no Norway 21302 25376 16428
        Why don't you actually listen to what these people are saying instead of blindly reading liberal media's quotes out of context and divisionism? "Do those concerns of minorities, muslims, hispanics, LGBT people mean nothing? Does the very real threat of Climate change mean nothing?" If you actually listen to Trump, he has expressed concern for all of those groups many, many times throughout his campaigns; I predict Trump to have the greatest benefit for the african american community in US history. Trump is the most liberal and moderate republican president candidate and elect in the history of the republican party; what are you complaining about? As for climate change, that is something that should be up for debate and not simply taken as something we have to do all we can to fight.

        Trump is not a racist and he is not a sexist. "Hailing" something or someone is infinitely better than the violent protests that liberals have been doing the last couple of weeks, hailing harms nobody. The fear of liberals is self-imposed through thin-air just because they didnt get the president they voted, get over it is what I say.
        November 23 at 20:47
        • Moderator
          ColinJohnstonov gb United Kingdom 52179 7605 1
          "Why don't you actually listen to what these people are saying instead of blindly reading liberal media's quotes out of context and divisionism?"

          Is it really clear that usablefiber hasn't done this and just came to his/her/xer conclusions anyway?

          "As for climate change, that is something that should be up for debate and not simply taken as something we have to do all we can to fight."

          It is up for debate. When it is debated openly and honestly, the conclusion is inevitably that we have to do all we can to fight it. It is a shame that libertarians don't like that conclusion and will try to find reasons for inaction.
          November 23 at 21:15
          • Tarris1 no Norway 21302 25376 16428
            Yes, it is obvious when he constantly refers to racism or concerns of "minorities" when Trump has talked down at racists, been supporting LGBT community since the very beginning and so on. Trump has also been very clear that we need to work together since the very beginning which is the very opposite of the divisionism usablefiber claims. He also never gives specific examples, but rambles on about generalities.

            Show me anywhere it has been debated "openly and honestly", I have not seen any. The existence of climate change has been up for debate many times with the vast majority of supporters on it being affected by humans which I agree with. The next question is about extent which has been up for debate but here opinions vary anywhere between minor changes in the climate to doomsday prophecies; that is hardly sufficient to call for an all-out attack against it. It is also impossible to settle on a baseline climate state so how much less carbon we should release is also a debate. Then we have the most important question and that is concerning the costs of fighting climate change and whether we actually can do so. How much growth are we willing to sacrifice to reduce climate changes induced by humans? 1%? 2%? 3%? Even at a 1% sacrifice, we are potentially sacrificing 3x our current GDP per capita over 4-5 generations, that is huge. These costs are practically never debated. In addition, the benefits of climate changes are also overlooked (dry regions will potentially be closer to water sources for example). So I just dont see this open and honest debate that you're referring to.
            November 23 at 21:39
            • Moderator
              ColinJohnstonov gb United Kingdom 52179 7605 1
              The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the best example of this. The produce extremely detailed reports on climate change and their debates when making these reports are certainly open and honest. I have been involved in many refereeing processes in Science and I have never seen anything taken to this extreme in terms of openness and thoroughness.

              There reports have several volumes. Here is the report on the Science basis


              Here is their report on adaption to ongoing and inevitable future changes


              Here is their report on mitigation of future changes


              These documents are extremely detailed and contain most (probably all) of the things you mentioned above.

              In addition, all of these things (not just the basic science, but also mitigation and adaption) are debated at length in the scientific community outside of the IPCC and in many parts of the media it is reported on quite accurately. You can find out all about this online. It might be that none of this is reported honestly in the parts of the media you read, but I have no idea what you read or trust.
              November 23 at 22:26
            • Moderator
              ColinJohnstonov gb United Kingdom 52179 7605 1
              There are uncertainties for two reasons. Firstly, there is much left to be understood in climate science, so all predictions about the future are uncertain, especially far into the future. Climate science is quite well developed, and the models are very advanced and well confirmed observationally, so I don't expect these uncertainties to be so large, but of course there are there. Secondly, climate scientists cannot predict future climate change at all because this depends very much on how our emissions of greenhouse gases will change, which depends on many political and economics factors. Therefore, they can only do scenarios. That is, they can only predict future climate change given some assumptions about how our emissions change with time. All of this is taken into account and explained in the IPCC reports in excellent detail.
              November 23 at 23:15
    • Tarris1 no Norway 21302 25376 16428
      Word. The regressive left has been doing nothing but promoting divisionism, racism and hate for the last few months. Do they really think that this approach is going to stop the Trump train? Absolutely not. In fact, that is probably the largest reason why Trump won. People are sick of political correctness and all the other BS the left is trying to put through office
      November 23 at 20:49
      • usablefiber us United States 8699 5131 1034
        I'm sorry but you just don't know what you are talking about. You just don't.
        November 24 at 21:54
        • Tarris1 no Norway 21302 25376 16428
          November 24 at 23:23
          • usablefiber us United States 8699 5131 1034
            I think we have a miscommunication here. When we use the words racism I think you and me are talking about very different things. I'm not talking about idiot SJW's getting upset over comedians using ethnic slurs, offensive halloween costumes, or Paula Deen saying insensitive things towards black people. I agree with you that the media and the PC police often miss the mark and paint everything as racism. It can be over the top but it is simply a misguided response to bullying in my opinion.

            I am talking about systematic discrimination here in the United states. Particularly drug laws, dollar incentivized policing, and the private prison system; all of which overwhelming target black neighborhoods in the country where we have the highest prison population in the world, even more than China which has a population 4 times that of ours.

            Tarris, I don't know if you have been the U.S. recently, but if you ever get a chance to come to The U.S. please come to urban new jersey where I live and I will show you around, meet my friends, and see the neighborhoods here in Newark and now New Brunswick where I live today. I think if you could come see it for yourself you would see things differently.
            November 28 at 22:52
      • StephenTaiwan us United States 38784 1200
        Trump and Hillary both have their pros and cons(mostly cons). But the regressive left is absolutely horrible and disgusting. I understand what Tarris1 is saying.
        November 25 at 14:26
  • Wulfgar 24601 3871 8496
    Haha, I see the oligarchs have done a good job of dividing and conquering posters on this thread too. Oligarchs know no borders. They will help whoever keeps them in power. Legalized bribery in the US - almost everybody is against it, but we can't even come together to stop it. We are becoming more and more like the Russians every day. Oh the humanity!
    November 27 at 01:01
    • Etudiant1 se Sweden 2427
      "but we can't even come together to stop it." How many of you needed to fix it? 2000000 voters (maybe more) utterly ignored?
      November 27 at 20:01
      • Wulfgar us United States 24601 3871 8496
        It polls at over 90% approval, but our wonderful congress and supreme court won't do what the people want when it conflicts with what their masters want. When I say we can't come together, I mean the two worthless parties are too busy fighting each other to put pressure on their leaders to get this done.
        November 27 at 23:54
    • usablefiber us United States 8699 5131 1034
      Specifically for the issue of Money in Politics we need to stop drawing party lines and come together as a country. I wish Trump and Bernie came together just on this issue alone and mobilized both of their camps to fight back on citizen united.

      I think cynicism has played a tremendous role in the inaction of congress to help americans so their donors are now their constituents...... but If every American today called or wrote to their congressman and held them accountable with their vote, we would get some movement..... but that doesn't happen. Instead we get a country where 50% of the people don't bother to vote in the election.
      November 27 at 20:16
      • Etudiant1 se Sweden 2427
        "Instead we get a country where 50% of the people don't bother to vote in the election."

        I read this: The Democrat's lead in the popular vote is almost equal to the entire population of Philadelphia, Hillary Clinton may have ultimately lost the race for the White House, but the latest popular vote tally shows the Democratic presidential candidate won 1.7 million more votes than president-elect Donald Trump.

        How about those above (1,7 million)?

        Your election is very unique - or as this titlle says"Riggin ironic: More Americans voted for Clinton"
        November 27 at 21:06
    • usablefiber us United States 8699 5131 1034
      I basically agree that having division is very helpful for the donor class. There is a reason they campaign for both Democrats and Republicans.
      November 27 at 20:17