As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

US Presidential Election: Wave Riders

ElkiElki get busyModerator, ClubPA mod
Don't act like assholes. If there's a certain view point that you can't bring yourself to argue against, then simply don't. If the current topic of the thread is not to your liking then talk about something else, but refrain from making "can we not []? posts. Feel free to not by yourself, and use the report button for rule-breaking posts. And don't be a gross asshole about politicians you don't like.

This is not a general politics thread. If it doesn't have anything to do with the general presidential election, don't post it.
  • No twitter dumps.
  • No image macros.
  • No satire sites.

smCQ5WE.jpg
«134567105

Posts

  • VariableVariable Mouth Congress Stroke Me Lady FameRegistered User regular
    Do we have reason to believe any attacks like this weekend will lead to movement for trump?

    sorry to be cold about it but people were talking about it last thread and I just don't know that it's actually true, especially considering it's Trump and not a standard republican. Who would flock to that dude in times of fear?

    BNet-Vari#1998 | Switch-SW 6960 6688 8388 | Steam | Twitch
  • BogartBogart Streetwise Hercules Registered User, Moderator mod
    If you're the kind of person that flocks hither and yon in times of fear then I'm guessing you flock to the person who promises the most security. Trump will promise security, hint at measures that will ensure that security perhaps at the cost of other people's liberty, which isn't as important as yours, and try to strike as many tough guy poses as he can.

    His policies in any area amount to little more than a promise to fix things once he's in charge, so any new problem is another thing he will promise to fix. Some bombs go off? He will fix that lickety split, don't you worry. He might gain some traction by painting Hilary as a continuation of Obama, who is in charge now, and thus nominally responsible for everything, and claiming that if Trump was in charge obviously this would never happen.

    I mean, I would expect this to convince no one at all except the very, very stupid or fearful, but it's not like everyone is treating Trump's claims with due care and attention.

  • HakkekageHakkekage Space Whore Academy summa cum laudeRegistered User regular
    Variable wrote: »
    Do we have reason to believe any attacks like this weekend will lead to movement for trump?

    sorry to be cold about it but people were talking about it last thread and I just don't know that it's actually true, especially considering it's Trump and not a standard republican. Who would flock to that dude in times of fear?

    I guarantee the issue of "calling it terrorism" by name will be an issue of overwrought wailing and gnashing of teeth

    Esp. With an additional pipe bomb now having been found in Elizabeth and the news reporting that FBI is looking into a possible terror cell, and Christie going right ahead and calling it "Clearly an act of terrorism"--expect to hear mocking fury and moral outrage that pussy footed liberals like noted lily livered Mayor DeBlasio did not immediately call it terrorism and instead called it an "intentional act".

    3DS: 2165 - 6538 - 3417
    NNID: Hakkekage
  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    edited September 2016
    Hakkekage wrote: »
    Variable wrote: »
    Do we have reason to believe any attacks like this weekend will lead to movement for trump?

    sorry to be cold about it but people were talking about it last thread and I just don't know that it's actually true, especially considering it's Trump and not a standard republican. Who would flock to that dude in times of fear?

    I guarantee the issue of "calling it terrorism" by name will be an issue of overwrought wailing and gnashing of teeth

    Esp. With an additional pipe bomb now having been found in Elizabeth and the news reporting that FBI is looking into a possible terror cell, and Christie going right ahead and calling it "Clearly an act of terrorism"--expect to hear mocking fury and moral outrage that pussy footed liberals like noted lily livered Mayor DeBlasio did not immediately call it terrorism and instead called it an "intentional act".

    I can see this being discovered to be done by a white guy they'll scramble over themselves to say it wasn't terrorism. No, sir. That goes double if they're a Trump supporter. Then it's a false flag operation and/or a "lone wolf."

    Harry Dresden on
  • ShadowhopeShadowhope Baa. Registered User regular
    Hakkekage wrote: »
    Variable wrote: »
    Do we have reason to believe any attacks like this weekend will lead to movement for trump?

    sorry to be cold about it but people were talking about it last thread and I just don't know that it's actually true, especially considering it's Trump and not a standard republican. Who would flock to that dude in times of fear?

    I guarantee the issue of "calling it terrorism" by name will be an issue of overwrought wailing and gnashing of teeth

    Esp. With an additional pipe bomb now having been found in Elizabeth and the news reporting that FBI is looking into a possible terror cell, and Christie going right ahead and calling it "Clearly an act of terrorism"--expect to hear mocking fury and moral outrage that pussy footed liberals like noted lily livered Mayor DeBlasio did not immediately call it terrorism and instead called it an "intentional act".

    I can see this was discovered to be done by a white guy they'll scramble over themselves to say it wasn't terrorism. No, sir. That goes double if they're a Trump supporter. Then it's a false flag operation and/or a "lone wolf."

    With a sad, tragic case of mental illness.

    Civics is not a consumer product that you can ignore because you don’t like the options presented.
  • DexterBelgiumDexterBelgium Registered User regular
    edited September 2016
    Shadowhope wrote: »
    Hakkekage wrote: »
    Variable wrote: »
    Do we have reason to believe any attacks like this weekend will lead to movement for trump?

    sorry to be cold about it but people were talking about it last thread and I just don't know that it's actually true, especially considering it's Trump and not a standard republican. Who would flock to that dude in times of fear?

    I guarantee the issue of "calling it terrorism" by name will be an issue of overwrought wailing and gnashing of teeth

    Esp. With an additional pipe bomb now having been found in Elizabeth and the news reporting that FBI is looking into a possible terror cell, and Christie going right ahead and calling it "Clearly an act of terrorism"--expect to hear mocking fury and moral outrage that pussy footed liberals like noted lily livered Mayor DeBlasio did not immediately call it terrorism and instead called it an "intentional act".

    I can see this was discovered to be done by a white guy they'll scramble over themselves to say it wasn't terrorism. No, sir. That goes double if they're a Trump supporter. Then it's a false flag operation and/or a "lone wolf."

    With a sad, tragic case of mental illness.

    EDIT: Sorry, re-considered, decided my addition did not in fact anything to the conversation.

    DexterBelgium on
  • NinotchkaNinotchka Registered User regular
    Guardian says police are looking for Ahmad Khan Rahami as a suspect. Naturalized citizen. No hope for it, we're going to be hearing all the bedwetting geese yawping about terrorism now.

  • Harry DresdenHarry Dresden Registered User regular
    edited September 2016
    http://www.vox.com/2016/9/15/12929262/wikileaks-hillary-clinton-julian-assange-hate
    Trump is a completely unpredictable phenomenon. You can’t predict what he would do in office,” Assange said. “Hillary was overriding the Pentagon’s reluctance to overthrow Muammar Qaddafi. ... She has a long history of being a liberal war hawk, and we presume that she’s going to proceed.”

    Assange clearly sees Clinton as a representative of the worst parts of the American empire. Moreover, he thinks that she, personally, would use the power of the US government to go after his organization.

    “Hillary Clinton is receiving constant updates about my personal situation; she has pushed for the prosecution of WikiLeaks,” he told ITV. “We do see her as more of a problem for freedom of the press generally.”

    In Assange’s telling, Clinton is an authoritarian imperialist who directly threatens the well-being of his organization and maybe even his person. No wonder Assange seems to think she’s worse than Trump.

    He says that like it's a good thing, and what we have have seen Trump do isn't exactly positive leadership material.

    image.jpg

    Harry Dresden on
  • JragghenJragghen Registered User regular
    https://www.siena.edu/news-events/article/clinton-41-trump-40-in-four-way-sunshine-state-race

    Clinton +1 in FL, phone poll, English/Spanish, conducted Sept 10-14.

    I'd consider this to be relatively good news, given the time conducted.

  • ShadowfireShadowfire Vermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered User regular
    http://www.vox.com/2016/9/15/12929262/wikileaks-hillary-clinton-julian-assange-hate
    Trump is a completely unpredictable phenomenon. You can’t predict what he would do in office,” Assange said. “Hillary was overriding the Pentagon’s reluctance to overthrow Muammar Qaddafi. ... She has a long history of being a liberal war hawk, and we presume that she’s going to proceed.”

    Assange clearly sees Clinton as a representative of the worst parts of the American empire. Moreover, he thinks that she, personally, would use the power of the US government to go after his organization.

    “Hillary Clinton is receiving constant updates about my personal situation; she has pushed for the prosecution of WikiLeaks,” he told ITV. “We do see her as more of a problem for freedom of the press generally.”

    In Assange’s telling, Clinton is an authoritarian imperialist who directly threatens the well-being of his organization and maybe even his person. No wonder Assange seems to think she’s worse than Trump.

    He says that like it's a good thing, and what we have have seen Trump do isn't exactly positive leadership material.

    image.jpg

    Meanwhile Trump has banned members of specific publications from attending events. Whatever, Assange...

    WiiU: Windrunner ; Guild Wars 2: Shadowfire.3940 ; PSN: Bradcopter
  • nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    I really do hate how people pretending if you call something terrorism first it's somehow an accomplishment

  • Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Registered User regular
    edited September 2016
    If this turned out to be a prank gone wrong, or an accident or something, nothing would happen, so there's zero reason for Trump not to cry terrorism when he hears about something like this. Either he turns out right, or he's wrong and he suffers zero negative consequences.

    Undead Scottsman on
  • ChiselphaneChiselphane Registered User regular
    If this turned out to be a prank gone wrong, or an accident or something, nothing would happen, so there's zero reason for Trump not to cry terrorism when he hears about something like this. Either he turns out right, or he's wrong and he suffers zero negative consequences.

    Of course! It's not like you'd be expected to correct yourself later, and if even if that expectation were there, it's perfectly fine to ignore it, or even state you knew it was a prank all along. You won't be called on it.

    Unless your name is Hillary.

  • MugsleyMugsley DelawareRegistered User regular
    Wait. "Liberal War Hawk" is a thing? Is that similar to Military Intelligence?



    Also, I guarantee that Trump will get a bump in NJ over this nonsense.

  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    edited September 2016
    If this turned out to be a prank gone wrong, or an accident or something, nothing would happen, so there's zero reason for Trump not to cry terrorism when he hears about something like this. Either he turns out right, or he's wrong and he suffers zero negative consequences.

    Of course! It's not like you'd be expected to correct yourself later, and if even if that expectation were there, it's perfectly fine to ignore it, or even state you knew it was a prank all along, or declare that it was actually your opponent who called it terrorism. You won't be called on it.

    Unless your name is Hillary.

    Added the hidden third option.

    Richy on
    sig.gif
  • PantsBPantsB Fake Thomas Jefferson Registered User regular
    Jragghen wrote: »
    http://m.imgur.com/a/AxOoG

    Weird coincidence.

    That seems too specific to be a coincidence.

    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • Giggles_FunsworthGiggles_Funsworth Blight on Discourse Bay Area SprawlRegistered User regular
    PantsB wrote: »
    Jragghen wrote: »
    http://m.imgur.com/a/AxOoG

    Weird coincidence.

    That seems too specific to be a coincidence.

    Maybe it's viral marketing gone wrong...?

  • override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    Ubisoft is really getting desperate with these marketing campaigns to get people playing the Divison again

  • DarkewolfeDarkewolfe Registered User regular
    While the Republican shibboleth of "Islamic Terrorism" is a uniquely bizarre one; I similarly don't see why we're so cautious to use the word "terrorism" as a shorthand, descriptive statement. This morning the FBI is looking for a US citizen who immigrated from Afghanistan who built a bunch of bombs straight out of the AQ magazine "how to build a bomb" section.

    There's a topic that SHOULD be discussed there, one that's gone on forever in the US, with varied problems resulting. Immigrants are disliked, causing them to ghettoize, which causes them to culturally integrate more slowly, which inevitably causes some sort of friction. In this case, refugees from a region that we've destabilized are showing up and not finding a great situation here due to being ostracized, which sometimes results in them radicalizing.

    We don't have to concede the subject to Trump. Isn't it a better debate to talk about how we can BETTER unite our communities to stop these sorts of things, rather than just abandon the topic to his position of "lock 'em out?"

    What is this I don't even.
  • milskimilski Poyo! Registered User regular
    Darkewolfe wrote: »
    While the Republican shibboleth of "Islamic Terrorism" is a uniquely bizarre one; I similarly don't see why we're so cautious to use the word "terrorism" as a shorthand, descriptive statement. This morning the FBI is looking for a US citizen who immigrated from Afghanistan who built a bunch of bombs straight out of the AQ magazine "how to build a bomb" section.

    There's a topic that SHOULD be discussed there, one that's gone on forever in the US, with varied problems resulting. Immigrants are disliked, causing them to ghettoize, which causes them to culturally integrate more slowly, which inevitably causes some sort of friction. In this case, refugees from a region that we've destabilized are showing up and not finding a great situation here due to being ostracized, which sometimes results in them radicalizing.

    We don't have to concede the subject to Trump. Isn't it a better debate to talk about how we can BETTER unite our communities to stop these sorts of things, rather than just abandon the topic to his position of "lock 'em out?"

    Until this morning it was not clear that he was an immigrant from afghanistan using AQ bombs. Without that knowledge, jumping to terrorism is the kind of thing that Trump does to look like he "called it" and push a narrative

    I ate an engineer
  • ForarForar #432 Toronto, Ontario, CanadaRegistered User regular
    edited September 2016
    I really do hate how people pretending if you call something terrorism first it's somehow an accomplishment

    Ugh, you just hit it on the head. It's the political equivalent of posting "FIRST" in a comment section. You haven't added anything, or shown any particular insight. You leaped to say the thing and then take credit for saying the thing, probably before even bothering to look into the matter.

    It's obnoxious on forums and even less sensible/dignified coming from adults in positions of power.

    Calling something what it is once verified information is available is entirely reasonable. It's not reasonable to call things what you think they might be and then find out if the facts back you up on that. Though people are right, in that Trump could call Hillary's breakfast an act of terrorism and most news networks wouldn't call him out on it.

    Forar on
    First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
  • RichyRichy Registered User regular
    PantsB wrote: »
    Jragghen wrote: »
    http://m.imgur.com/a/AxOoG

    Weird coincidence.

    That seems too specific to be a coincidence.

    Not really. NYC is a hugely popular setting for games, shows, movies, all sorts of things. Odds are good that something will happen in that city in real life that happened in a work of fiction previously.

    sig.gif
  • DarkewolfeDarkewolfe Registered User regular
    milski wrote: »
    Darkewolfe wrote: »
    While the Republican shibboleth of "Islamic Terrorism" is a uniquely bizarre one; I similarly don't see why we're so cautious to use the word "terrorism" as a shorthand, descriptive statement. This morning the FBI is looking for a US citizen who immigrated from Afghanistan who built a bunch of bombs straight out of the AQ magazine "how to build a bomb" section.

    There's a topic that SHOULD be discussed there, one that's gone on forever in the US, with varied problems resulting. Immigrants are disliked, causing them to ghettoize, which causes them to culturally integrate more slowly, which inevitably causes some sort of friction. In this case, refugees from a region that we've destabilized are showing up and not finding a great situation here due to being ostracized, which sometimes results in them radicalizing.

    We don't have to concede the subject to Trump. Isn't it a better debate to talk about how we can BETTER unite our communities to stop these sorts of things, rather than just abandon the topic to his position of "lock 'em out?"

    Until this morning it was not clear that he was an immigrant from afghanistan using AQ bombs. Without that knowledge, jumping to terrorism is the kind of thing that Trump does to look like he "called it" and push a narrative

    Agreed, I'm talking about the people still this morning insisting we stay away from the T word.

    What is this I don't even.
  • override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    I would be perfectly fine with Democrats calling it a "suspected act of terrorism" every time there's a bombing right off the bat if for no other reason than to defuse a talking point

    Not a suspected act of islamic terrorism right off the bat without evidence, but bombings are usually acts of some kind of terrorism

  • MugsleyMugsley DelawareRegistered User regular
    It took me way too long to realize that AQ is short for Al Qaeda and not Afghanistan Quarterly.

  • mRahmanimRahmani DetroitRegistered User regular
    Darkewolfe wrote: »
    While the Republican shibboleth of "Islamic Terrorism" is a uniquely bizarre one; I similarly don't see why we're so cautious to use the word "terrorism" as a shorthand, descriptive statement. This morning the FBI is looking for a US citizen who immigrated from Afghanistan who built a bunch of bombs straight out of the AQ magazine "how to build a bomb" section.

    There's a topic that SHOULD be discussed there, one that's gone on forever in the US, with varied problems resulting. Immigrants are disliked, causing them to ghettoize, which causes them to culturally integrate more slowly, which inevitably causes some sort of friction. In this case, refugees from a region that we've destabilized are showing up and not finding a great situation here due to being ostracized, which sometimes results in them radicalizing.

    We don't have to concede the subject to Trump. Isn't it a better debate to talk about how we can BETTER unite our communities to stop these sorts of things, rather than just abandon the topic to his position of "lock 'em out?"

    The problem is that the word "terrorist" has effectively just become a shorthand dogwhistle for "bad brown/Muslim person," the same way "welfare queen" is a dogwhistle for "bad black woman." Hard to have a rational discussion when half the audience is smiling and nodding that they understand what you "really meant."

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • belligerentbelligerent Registered User regular
    So it's okay to call terrorism pre-maturely, but if someone blames tensions on propaganda video, and was wrong, then that's a bad thing. The distorted media narrative with regards to clinton and literally everyone else is heartbreaking.

  • DarkewolfeDarkewolfe Registered User regular
    mRahmani wrote: »
    Darkewolfe wrote: »
    While the Republican shibboleth of "Islamic Terrorism" is a uniquely bizarre one; I similarly don't see why we're so cautious to use the word "terrorism" as a shorthand, descriptive statement. This morning the FBI is looking for a US citizen who immigrated from Afghanistan who built a bunch of bombs straight out of the AQ magazine "how to build a bomb" section.

    There's a topic that SHOULD be discussed there, one that's gone on forever in the US, with varied problems resulting. Immigrants are disliked, causing them to ghettoize, which causes them to culturally integrate more slowly, which inevitably causes some sort of friction. In this case, refugees from a region that we've destabilized are showing up and not finding a great situation here due to being ostracized, which sometimes results in them radicalizing.

    We don't have to concede the subject to Trump. Isn't it a better debate to talk about how we can BETTER unite our communities to stop these sorts of things, rather than just abandon the topic to his position of "lock 'em out?"

    The problem is that the word "terrorist" has effectively just become a shorthand dogwhistle for "bad brown/Muslim person," the same way "welfare queen" is a dogwhistle for "bad black woman." Hard to have a rational discussion when half the audience is smiling and nodding that they understand what you "really meant."

    I feel like we've empowered that dogwhistle by going too far the other direction and having "terrorist" be a word only one side uses, when we actually do have a growing problem with domestic terrorism threats.

    What is this I don't even.
  • PantsBPantsB Fake Thomas Jefferson Registered User regular
    Richy wrote: »
    PantsB wrote: »
    Jragghen wrote: »
    http://m.imgur.com/a/AxOoG

    Weird coincidence.

    That seems too specific to be a coincidence.

    Not really. NYC is a hugely popular setting for games, shows, movies, all sorts of things. Odds are good that something will happen in that city in real life that happened in a work of fiction previously.

    A city block in NYC is a very small area overall though. Its like an 1/8 of a mile long. A bomb going off in a popular video game in the exact same block, and then in real life when its a completely illogical location for a terrorist attack suggests to me a connection.

    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • Undead ScottsmanUndead Scottsman Registered User regular
    edited September 2016
    PantsB wrote: »
    Richy wrote: »
    PantsB wrote: »
    Jragghen wrote: »
    http://m.imgur.com/a/AxOoG

    Weird coincidence.

    That seems too specific to be a coincidence.

    Not really. NYC is a hugely popular setting for games, shows, movies, all sorts of things. Odds are good that something will happen in that city in real life that happened in a work of fiction previously.

    A city block in NYC is a very small area overall though. Its like an 1/8 of a mile long. A bomb going off in a popular video game in the exact same block, and then in real life when its a completely illogical location for a terrorist attack suggests to me a connection.

    Wasn't there more than one bomb? Does the second device correspond to anything?

    Undead Scottsman on
  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Class Traitor Smoke-filled roomRegistered User regular
    edited September 2016

    This is a good appeal to the younger left. But "Millennial" could be find+replaced with "liberal" with the arguable exception of high college costs (really, a lot of older people are heading back to college now too, since entry-level work requires a Bachelor's now because :rotate:)

    As someone born in '82, I'm not sure how well overtures like this connect with self-described Millennials. I certainly don't consider myself a Millennial so I have no idea.

    joshofalltrades on
  • BlindPsychicBlindPsychic Registered User regular
    Radical Islamic Terrorism is the magic phrase that renders all terrorists impotent, but only if its uttered by the President.

  • ImthebOHGODBEESImthebOHGODBEES Registered User regular
    Mugsley wrote: »
    It took me way too long to realize that AQ is short for Al Qaeda and not Afghanistan Quarterly.

    I thought it was Anarchists Quarterly. Which made me giggle thinking about anarchists having a regular magazine.

    Do you, in fact, have any builds in this shop at all?
  • Kid PresentableKid Presentable Registered User regular
    edited September 2016

    It's a good pitch full of good policy, though nothing new really that hasn't been on her website for all to read for ten months. That said, I'm consistently amazed at how frequently people find themselves turning around a bit on Clinton when I slap them in the face with her Actual Platform, so whatever helps get that out there.

    Kid Presentable on
  • TomantaTomanta Registered User regular
    edited September 2016
    Forar wrote: »
    [Though people are right, in that Trump could call Hillary's breakfast an act of terrorism and most news networks wouldn't call him out on it.

    To be fair, her eggs were a little overcooked and why hasn't she disclosed how crispy she likes her bacon? What is Hillary hiding?

    Tomanta on
  • jothkijothki Registered User regular
    Mugsley wrote: »
    Wait. "Liberal War Hawk" is a thing? Is that similar to Military Intelligence?



    Also, I guarantee that Trump will get a bump in NJ over this nonsense.

    Not necessarily, it depends on motive. Using government resources to solve collective action problems is a very liberal thing to do, it's just in this case that it's solving other countries' collective action problems.

  • ShadowhopeShadowhope Baa. Registered User regular
    edited September 2016

    It's a good pitch full of good policy, though nothing new really that hasn't been on her website for all to read for ten months. That said, I'm consistently amazed at how frequently people find themselves turning around a bit on Clinton when I slap them in the face with her Actual Platform, so whatever helps get that out there.

    There was a series of posts I saw on reddit a few days ago that highlighted that.

    Someone was saying "both sides are the same, I want this, this, this and this, neither side is promising what I want so I'm voting Trump." And someone did a point by point response, with links to Clinton's platform, interviews, and her personal history to show how Clinton actually did support all of the points that the first person was for. That if Clinton has been just saying and doing things in order to get elected, then she's been playing the long con since 1970 or so.

    There is plenty of good information out there. Ten minutes of reading Trump and Clinton's platforms on their websites and checking where they stand on Politifact really should make it clear that there's a substantial difference. And that's keeping in mind that Politifact gives "Mostly True" evaluations on statements like this one, on the strength of the "mixed messages" from the Trump/Pence campaign with regards to LGBT rights.
    Politifact wrote:
    Trump, meanwhile, has vowed that he "will do everything in my power to protect LGBT citizens" in his speech at the Republican National Convention. He often criticizes the Clinton Foundation for taking donations from governments that oppress gay men and women.

    But Trump opposes gay marriage and has said in interviews during the Republican primary that he would appoint judges that would reverse the Supreme Court ruling or allow states to decide.

    The Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights groups that endorsed Clinton, points out that Trump’s running mate is Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, who passed a 2015 law that allowed businesses to refuse to serve gay and lesbian customers based on religious freedom; the law was modified after an uproar.

    Based on large part on that, only Mostly True! It's a mixed message to be against gay marriage and to create laws designed to prevent LGBT people from being served, so long as you say that you'll also protect LGBT people. There's benefit of the doubt and there's what Politifact does. But still, even with that, Politifact makes it clear that Clinton is a far, far more truthful than Trump.

    Shadowhope on
    Civics is not a consumer product that you can ignore because you don’t like the options presented.
  • tbloxhamtbloxham Registered User regular

    This is a good appeal to the younger left. But "Millennial" could be find+replaced with "liberal" with the arguable exception of high college costs (really, a lot of older people are heading back to college now too, since entry-level work requires a Bachelor's now because :rotate:)

    As someone born in '82, I'm not sure how well overtures like this connect with self-described Millennials. I certainly don't consider myself a Millennial so I have no idea.

    As an 82, you're just barely a millenial by the most aggressive by the most aggressive standard. Kids from 78 to 82 are the remnants of a tiny mini generation which was going to be defined by the end of the cold war, but then the millenials came and stole our demographics with all their Internet nonsense. It's an odd time to have been born, as I know I'm not X and I'm definately not a millenial.

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
This discussion has been closed.