GOP Primaries/Caucuses Discussions, Jokes and Predictions

[Forty Two]

So will he or won't he nuke ISIS?

Actually; what the fuck is he even talking about?

It's actually pretty clear. No, not unless they hit us first.

You know, the gripe is that he won't "rule out" using nukes on ISIS. Neither will Hillary. So what? Hillary criticized Obama for ruling out the use of nukes against Al Qaida in Pakistan.

He didn't explicitly say that. He evaded the question or it was buried under some noise. Then he went on some rant.

He said he did not want to initiate nukes. Then he explained that everyone knows he's a counterpuncher, meaning he doesn't strike first. If you're good to him, he is good to you, but if you swing, he swings back. That's what he said. Something was buried under the noise, as you say, but in other conversations he has been clear on the position.

His is not unusual. Like I said -- Clinton criticized Obama for ruling out nukes against Al Qaida.

[Animavore]

So will he or won't he nuke ISIS?

Actually; what the fuck is he even talking about?

It's actually pretty clear. No, not unless they hit us first.

You know, the gripe is that he won't "rule out" using nukes on ISIS. Neither will Hillary. So what? Hillary criticized Obama for ruling out the use of nukes against Al Qaida in Pakistan.

He didn't explicitly say that. He evaded the question or it was buried under some noise. Then he went on some rant.

He said he did not want to initiate nukes. Then he explained that everyone knows he's a counterpuncher, meaning he doesn't strike first. If you're good to him, he is good to you, but if you swing, he swings back. That's what he said. Something was buried under the noise, as you say, but in other conversations he has been clear on the position.

His is not unusual. Like I said -- Clinton criticized Obama for ruling out nukes against Al Qaida.

I don't think he was clear at all. It came across as rambling nonsense designed to avoid answering the issue in a straight way he could be held accountable to later.

[pErvinalia]

e need to nuke ISIS, make it clear we won't tolerate their terrorism anymore and cow them into submission, or into utter oblivion

Except that won't happen. That's the type of thinking that got us into this mess in the first place.

[Hermit]

He's not wrong, though, about nuclear weapons being the greater, more immediate risk.

... a “limited” regional nuclear war between antagonistic nuclear nations India and Pakistan could result in 300 million deaths, with 6.5 million tons of black soot released into the atmosphere. It would be enough to block out the sun and change global temperatures by 1.3 degrees Celcius. For comparison, global temperature only changed seven-tenths of 1 degree from 1880-2010. Precipitation in some parts of the world would fall by 50 percent, and the growing season would not be long enough to sustain staple crops. Two billion people would die of starvation, Helfand said.

http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/201 ... ate-change

How stupid can one presidential candidate be? Turns out a nuclear war would solve two global problems: warming and over-population. Too many US voters swallow Trump's idiocies.

[Animavore]

How to inoculate people against Donald Drumpf's fact bending claims.

A potential Donald Drumpf presidency terrifies people worldwide. His racism, bullying, and enthusiasm for violence are a great concern for onlookers.

But we see a positive in Drumpf’s candidacy: We can improve our critical thinking by using him as an example of how people spread misinformation.

And there is no shortage of material to work with, given Drumpf’s firehose of falsehoods.

Politifact found that 78% of Drumpf’s statements were Mostly False, False, or “Pants on Fire” (the most extreme form of false). Fact-checking websites, parody videos, and even a debunking speech by former governor Mitt Romney have highlighted his misinformation.

But pundits and political scientists are mystified that this hasn’t hurt his level of support, with fact-checking efforts sometimes helping Drumpf and energising his supporters.

Full read: http://www.skepticalscience.com/inocula ... laims.html

[Animavore]

[Animavore]

[Forty Two]

He's not wrong, though, about nuclear weapons being the greater, more immediate risk.

... a “limited” regional nuclear war between antagonistic nuclear nations India and Pakistan could result in 300 million deaths, with 6.5 million tons of black soot released into the atmosphere. It would be enough to block out the sun and change global temperatures by 1.3 degrees Celcius. For comparison, global temperature only changed seven-tenths of 1 degree from 1880-2010. Precipitation in some parts of the world would fall by 50 percent, and the growing season would not be long enough to sustain staple crops. Two billion people would die of starvation, Helfand said.

http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/201 ... ate-change

How stupid can one presidential candidate be? Turns out a nuclear war would solve two global problems: warming and over-population. Too many US voters swallow Trump's idiocies.

Where do you get the idea that Trump suggested nuclear war would solve any problem?

[Forty Two]

Politifact found that 78% of Drumpf’s statements were Mostly False, False, or “Pants on Fire” (the most extreme form of false). Fact-checking websites, parody videos, and even a debunking speech by former governor Mitt Romney have highlighted his misinformation.
.

Full read: http://www.skepticalscience.com/inocula ... laims.html[/quote]

LOL -- a smug article that doesn't get that Politifact did not "find that 78% of statements were mostly false etc...." At most, Politifact found that 78% OF THE STATEMENTS THEY CHOSE TO REVIEW (a very small subset of all statements) were mostly false, false or pants on fire). Politifact decides what statements to review, and that's not a random decision. Further, their rating system allows for a great deal of subjective judgment. Whether something half true or mostly false is not a clear line. The Tampa Bay Times starts out with an anti-Trump mindset, and I take their ratings with a grain of salt.

Rather than kick around numbers, let's look at actual examples.

[Forty Two]

Let's see Oliver analyze the proposals of Sanders and Clinton in this way. LOL. And, I love how he just glosses over that Obama and Hillary both voted for 700 miles of wall already. They were both in favor of it. Which, of course, he just handwaves saying "that was terrible, but keep in mind that millions of people voted for Taylor Hicks on American Idol, so it's not that bad...." LOL

A big dumb thing that only gets more expensive over time. Funny. People love it when you make them pay for shit they don't want. Even funnier. Iust b wonder what previous government programs were enacted which got more expensive over time, and involved people paying for shit they didn't want? Man, if that's the criticism... lol

So, two Mexican Presidents, who are all in favor of Mexicans being allowed to stream across the border into the US, say that Mexico won't pay for the wall.

Trump said - "Mexico must pay for the wall and, until they do, the United States will, among other things: impound all remittance payments derived from illegal wages; increase fees on all temporary visas issued to Mexican CEOs and diplomats (and if necessary cancel them); increase fees on all border crossing cards of which we issue about 1 million to Mexican nationals each year (a major source of visa overstays); increase fees on all NAFTA worker visas from Mexico (another major source of overstays); and increase fees at ports of entry to the United States from Mexico [Tariffs and foreign aid cuts are also options]. We will not be taken advantage of anymore." Oliver, of course, just refers to the Trade Deficit with Mexico and pretends Trump never explained any other details.

Then Oliver jokes that the wall has to be built a little bit into the American side in places, because of the Rio Grande River. He jokes about a golf course in Brownsville which is on the other side of the wall, but still on the US side of the Rio Grande. How is this even a joke? First off, you always have to build fences a little bit on your side of a border, because you can't even put half a thickness of fence right on the border. Further, where Oliver is pointing to at the golf course in Brownsville, the worst that's going to happen is Mexicans can swim across the river and walk on the golf course.

Then the idiot interviewer asks a lady "you do realize that when you're golfing here you're not really in the US?" LOL. Of course the golf course is in the US. The wall is not the legal border. Fucking moron.

It's racist and xenophobic for the US to have a border barrier...but, no comment on Estonia building a border with Russia, Austria's border barrier with Slovenia, Hungary and Serbia, Macedonia and Greece, the peace lines in Northern Ireland, Slovenia and Croatia, Spain and Morocco (Ceuta and Melilla), Ukraine and Russia, and many other countries. The US seems to be the only country whose right to control its border is considered xenophobic and racist.

[Animavore]

Haters gonna hate.

[Forty Two]

Haters gonna hate.

Oliver is just stupid. He's making these Daily Show style jokes, but it's a poor imitation of Jon Stewart.

It's like his Donald Drumpf video. Oh, yeah, the guy's grandfather other ancestor changed his name on immigrating to the US, which was quite common for the late 1800s, early 1900s, for immigrants to blend in a bit better if their name was hard to pronounce or sound odd to the Anglo ear. Hilarious. Oh, my god. One of Trump's ancestors changed his name to Trump. Such a scandal. Funny.

[Animavore]

It was and is funny. In fact I have the add on on my browser which turns all instances of 'Trump' into 'Drumpf'.

[Forty Two]

It was and is funny. In fact I have the add on on my browser which turns all instances of 'Trump' into 'Drumpf'.

What's so funny about it? I mean, other than the ethnocentric that German names sound funny to English speakers, what's so funny about Drumpf? Would it be funny if his grandfather's name was Merkel and they changed it to Trump?

Why isn't Oliver demanding that Ted Cruz go by his actual real name, "Rafael?"

Is it funny that Bill Clinton's birth name was actually "Blythe?" Why not run around laughing and giggling referring to him as "Blythe?"

And, Hillary should be called Rodham, not Clinton. She actually changed her name too.

Trump, of course, was born Trump, and his father was born Trump. But, it's hilarious to call him Drumpf, because, well, German names sound funny. If it was a funny sounding Latino or Asian name, I'm sure the same joke would be front and center on Oliver's show.....

[Animavore]

Jesus! I've never seen someone so strenuously defend a joke vote in all my life. I've never seen a Brit give a serious case for the Raving Looney Monster Party, for instance. I mean I see Trump up there and I'm waiting for someone to pie him, pull his pants down and k8ck him up the hole with a giant, red boot that squeaks. Even by reality TV Show personality standards he's stretching his 15 minutes.

He doesn't deserve the time of day you're giving him.