US Erection 12 *AND* 16 *AND* 20 *AND* 22 *AND* 24

The primary goal of this site is to provide mature, meaningful discussion about the Vancouver Canucks. However, we all need a break some time so this forum is basically for anything off-topic, off the wall, or to just get something off your chest! This forum is named after poster Creeper, who passed away in July of 2011 and was a long time member of the Canucks message board community.

Moderator: Referees

User avatar
Chef Boi RD
MVP
MVP
Posts: 28935
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:36 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by Chef Boi RD »

The Donald has had a difficult time for years getting financing for his business ventures on his own soil - American banks/lenders, due to his reputation of intentionally bankrupting/tanking his own companies, then buying them back cheap. The dude is dirty. Word is his financial backing has been coming from off shore - Russia, for awhile. Don is in bed with the Russkies, Mueller is building a case around this and will present it post midterms with the hope of the Dems getting control of Congress. Only congress can nail a president. The Don could murder someone then pardon himself. Only a Democratic Congress can impeach the Don
“Tyler Myers is my guy... I was taking to Scotty Bowman last night and he was bringing up his name, and saying he’s a big guy and big guy need big minutes to play, he is playing great for ya… and I agree with him… He’s been exceptional” - Bruce Boudreau
User avatar
Per
MVP
MVP
Posts: 9345
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:45 am
Location: Sweden

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by Per »

Danes are really pissed off by Fox network's fake news lies about Denmark:

https://www.thelocal.dk/20180814/comple ... -broadside
Whatever you do, always give 100 %!
Except when donating blood.
User avatar
UWSaint
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1065
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by UWSaint »

Per wrote: Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:51 am
Well, in the US, they do their best to limit the amount of people who vote. Thus voting on a normal week day with limited opening hours and far between poll stations. Many states, especially in the South, block ex-cons from ever voting again, etc, etc. Also, you have to register at a prior date in order to be able to vote, which complicates matters further.
Hi Per. I haven't engage in any political talk for years. Probably since the days of the other CC.

But I wanted to respond to my international friends.

* It isn't hard to register to vote in the United States. That people don't is a choice. Now if you think that people want to but can't, what are you saying about their capabilities?

* It isn't hard not to commit felonies. And if you do, voting rights are restored when your sentence is done. Until your sentence is complete, you can't exercise a lot of rights..... In a couple of states it takes longer than the completion of your sentence; your once-upon-a-time-home (if I am remembering correctly) of Iowa (neither the south nor a traditionally republican stronghold) is basically the most severe on this score, as many felons can permanently lose the franchise. FWIW, personally, I agree with disenfrachisement-while-serving-sentence as a policy matter. If you violate core and substantial components of the social compact (felonious crimes are those the elected representatives deem pose the greatest harm to society), you don't get to participate in making the social compact for awhile.

* It isn't hard to go to the polls on a Tuesday. You don't have to take off work. They are open more than 8 hours. And if you can't make it, some form of early voting is a feature in most states and absentee voting is always available.

* Yes, in some places, a polling place might be far away. And yes, this is a VERY BIG country with some sparsely populated areas -- these people (generally republican leaning) have a larger "cost" to getting to the polls (though the price of procuring a mail in ballot is the same). And at the margins, distance can mean some people decide it isn't worth their while to vote. Given early voting and absentee mail in options, the effects of this are mitigated. Isn't distance to the polling place an issue in every large country with rural populations?

* Last comment on this: policies have waxed and waned in the US in terms of ease of ballot access. Since the despicable Jim Crow laws were done away in the south (those laws passed by Democrats to keep blacks from voting, for my international friends' historical edification), though, the difference is that it is either easy to vote or very easy to vote.
Per wrote: Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:51 am
Voter ID? Yeah, [in Sweden] all voters must identify themselves, but we allow three methods:
1) presenting a valid photo ID
2) being recognised by an officer at the polling station that vouches for the identity of the voter
3) having another person with a valid photo ID signing an affadavit confirming the identity of the voter
In the US, many states use this system, but it is called "voter suppression".... (I think its perfectly sensible to have minimal integrity controls such as this in place).

Per wrote: Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:51 am I usually work at a polling station during elections, and I'd say 99% present a photo ID. The rest are friends or family of those working at the polling station, but even then they usually pull out their ID...
Good for you. I've done the same. But all those poor people that have to go to the polls!!!! What a cost on the franchise!!!!

And as for those "friends and family," the same thing was once very common in Chicago. Mrs. O'Leary had friends and family working in many Chicago precincts, in fact.... :shock:
Per wrote: Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:51 am
[All your stuff about Russia]
Trump is not dismantling liberal democracy with his policies. You can like his policies or disagree with his policies, but they are not illiberal (in terms of a challenge to the democratic state). The idea that he is some kind of fascist strongman is one born of imagination, not evidence. Moreover, American democratic institutions are *very* strong; it is the oldest form of this kind of government after all.

But I agree that there is more distrust in America's democratic institutions more today than since Nixon. Because of Trump Derangement Syndrome and conspiracy theories combining with the general vilification of conservatives that has been a 40 year project of the American left (not just wrong, but evil and dangerous; i.e., they will push grandma down the stairs and everyone will be homeless!!!!). That and the rapid decline of the press (and the rise of fake news -- both as Trump describes and as perniciously in the alternative press and the social media hovels on the right and the left).

It makes perverse sense -- if you believe that Trump is the end of democracy as we know it, then you want to remove the threat. Through undemocratic means, if necessary. (Personally, I am pretty certain that the Republic will survive fine until 2020 and that maybe Democrats ought to find/mold a couple of good candidates; you know, settle policy disagreements at the polls by finding a candidate with a message that resonates and without the baggage of CROOKED HILLARY).

The only thing I blame Trump for is that he is cavalier with facts. To the extent that people trust the press like the village trusts (or does not) trust Peter, this is bad long term. Because truth matters and truth is a democracy-stabilizing force.

---
Per wrote: Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:51 am Bonus: Sanders supporters who voted for Trump in three key swing states. If these Sanders supporters instead had refrained from voting, Hillary would be president of the United States. Think about it.

STATE - SANDERS PRIMARY VOTES - SANDERS VOTERS SUPPORTING TRUMP - SANDERS-TRUMP VOTERS (EST.) - TRUMP'S 2016 MARGIN OF VICTORY
Michigan ........ 598,943 .... 8% ..... 47,915 ... 10,704
Pennsylvania ... 731,881 ... 16% ... 117,100 ... 44,292
Wisconsin ....... 570,192 .... 9% ..... 51,317 ... 22,748
Source: 2016 National Popular Vote Tracker, U.S. Election Atlas, Brian Schaffner
BONUS -- these voters didn't want Hillary to be President. Consider than many Sanders voters are not socialist democrats (like Sanders), but were rejecting Clinton kleptocracy; or less pejoratively, "the establishment." Consider also that in Michigan and Wisconsin, these are open primary states. You don't have to be a democrat to vote in the democratic primary, and crossover primary voting exists.

Trump's biggest problems in 2016 to any voter who would consider voting R were two-fold: (1) his character (e.g., statements about women, impulsive constitution, etc.); (2) his experience (it was difficult to imagine him being President). (2) is no longer an obstacle -- and as is the case with most things causing anxiety, the then-future was scarier than the actual-present.
Hono_rary Canadian
User avatar
SKYO
MVP
MVP
Posts: 14992
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 10:34 pm

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by SKYO »

TRUMP is IMPEACHED...finally.






my future post.
Can the Canucks just win a Cup within the next 5 years.
User avatar
Cornuck
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 14965
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Everywhere

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by Cornuck »

UWSaint wrote: Tue Aug 14, 2018 1:22 pm The only thing I blame Trump for is that he is cavalier with facts. To the extent that people trust the press like the village trusts (or does not) trust Peter, this is bad long term. Because truth matters and truth is a democracy-stabilizing force.
For the most part, a good post - but this line stands out as the understatement of the year. :)

"Cavalier with facts"? The man lies constantly, always changes his story and blames others. These are not signs of a leader, from boy scouts to the presidency. He is having a tough time with the press because they don't know how to cover him - although the MSM is responsible for his rise to power through over coverage, he brands them as an enemy of the people. Mocks them at his rallies. Things like this do not help a democracy, no matter how strong it is.

He has made it his mission to break traditional alliances and pull of out agreements without much thought. This will hurt any administration going forward - how will other countries expect the US to keep their word?

As for voting - yes, it's not that hard. Not enough to keep 1/2 the people away from the polls. But there are numerous tricks employed to discourage those who do want to vote. Whether it is gerrymandering, voter caging, or other methods like fewer voting stations, etc - and of course the president was "cavalier with facts" by declaring that 3 million people voted illegally (while having no proof of such).

The midterms will be interesting.
Doc: "BTW, Donny was right, you're smug."
User avatar
UWSaint
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1065
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by UWSaint »

Cornuck wrote: Tue Aug 14, 2018 1:44 pm He has made it his mission to break traditional alliances and pull of out agreements without much thought. This will hurt any administration going forward - how will other countries expect the US to keep their word?
I don't think that pulling out of agreements is done without much thought. (I might quibble with "breaking" depending on which issue we are talking about, but that's definitional and uninteresting). I actually think these moves (Paris, trade generally, NATO dues, etc.) have been among the most intentional of his administration.

I think that Trump, right or wrong, is operating under the impression that it is not "trust" that keeps up relations between the US and other countries. It is mutual self-interest. And when the price of trust is greater than the cost America's self-interest (as Trump perceives it), trust (meaning "stay the course") is not worth it. So there's a renegotiation, and the answer will still be something that all parties will benefit from as compared to no understanding. But the US will benefit more, the other countries less than before.

I would call it using the United States' considerable leverage.

I've heard that Trump did this as a developer as well. Get to a deal. Quibble about something being done not as well as promised. Renegotiate. Pay less.

My point here is to be descriptive, not normative.

As for breaking alliances, which are broken? For all the hemming and hawing, which ally of the United States is no longer an ally because of something Trump has done?
Hono_rary Canadian
User avatar
Cornuck
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 14965
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Everywhere

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by Cornuck »

UWSaint wrote: Tue Aug 14, 2018 2:44 pm As for breaking alliances, which are broken? For all the hemming and hawing, which ally of the United States is no longer an ally because of something Trump has done?
At this point none. But you could say that most are strained, or not as close as there were just a few years ago. As for mutual self-interest? Yes - that is the bottom line with most alliances. Just my opinion, but I think global trade prevents global war. Upsetting the balance could lead to unforeseen circumstances - and whatever any of us think on this hockey board, we have no real answers.

As for trust? trump has none to offer, so he can only go with leverage. And if he's running the country like his businesses, then it's not likely to work out well. He is used to deals involving a 'winner and loser' - and not 'what is best for both sides'. He wants to 'win' a trade war (whatever that means), he will bully other nations like they're a painting contractor about to be stiffed. Will he end up enriching himself and then declare bankruptcy and walk away?

I think you give him far too much credit, and I likely give him too little. But he has not surrounded himself with the 'best people' to guide through these incredibly complex issues.
Doc: "BTW, Donny was right, you're smug."
User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
Posts: 18165
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by Topper »

Once again, the parallels come into clarity Donald, like Genius Jim, is playing the long game,making minor tweeks to the plan along the way, but staying the general course to the attain the end result.

Some are too short sighted to see, others are easily distracted by the media upping the signal to noise ratio. Either way, they are blind.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
User avatar
Cornuck
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 14965
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Everywhere

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by Cornuck »

Topper wrote: Tue Aug 14, 2018 3:23 pm ...is playing the long game.
So - for us 'blind folk' - what exactly is this stable genius' "long game"? :D To make the corporations even richer? To isolate the US? To divide the nation? The man is a failure, so I'm not convinced he knows what a long game is. I think he can see far ahead enough to know he's fucked over a business and to pull 'his' money out, so he can leave others holding the bag.
Doc: "BTW, Donny was right, you're smug."
User avatar
2Fingers
MVP
MVP
Posts: 7672
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 7:47 am

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by 2Fingers »

Cornuck wrote: Tue Aug 14, 2018 4:14 pm
Topper wrote: Tue Aug 14, 2018 3:23 pm ...is playing the long game.
So - for us 'blind folk' - what exactly is this stable genius' "long game"? :D To make the corporations even richer? To isolate the US? To divide the nation? The man is a failure, so I'm not convinced he knows what a long game is. I think he can see far ahead enough to know he's fucked over a business and to pull 'his' money out, so he can leave others holding the bag.
Give it up Per, his believers see only the truth they want to see.
User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 42928
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by Strangelove »

Reefer2 wrote: Mon Aug 06, 2018 9:48 am I do not know what to say.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-accuse ... 05093.html

Seriously this guy has some mental issues.

He says the State of California is diverting water to the pacific ocean and that is why they are having wild fires. And still so many people would vote for this guy. WOW. No condolences to the families that lost a loved one but blame everyone else for the fires.
He did not say “that is why they are having wild fires”.

He was suggesting the state’s environmental laws may be limiting firefighting efforts.

California’s environmental laws are designed to protect certain species of fish.

The amount of water that can be used to fight the wildfires is limited by these laws.

See, water from nearby lakes and reservoirs are normally scooped up and used in firefighting...

As for “condolences to the families” and whatnot:

TRUMP'S FULL REMARKS AT BEDMINSTER:
..............................................................................................................................................
--- THE TRANSCRIPT: “Before we start, I’d like to say a few quick words about the tragic fires in California. I’m monitoring the situation very close. My administration is in constant contact with everything going out in the state and with the local authorities and with the state authorities. On August 4, I declared a major disaster in the state and ordered federal assistance to supplement recovery efforts. It’s been a very tough situation taking place in California for a number of years. And we’re going to have some meetings about it, because there are reasons and there are thing you can do to mitigate what’s happening. We send our love and support and prayers to the families of those who have lost loved ones. They’ve never seen anything like it what’s happening."

-- “We’re deeply grateful to our incredible firefighters and first responders. They’re really brave people. I’ve been watching them go into areas where very few people would go. And some of them don’t come out alive. They’re risking their lives and they’re doing to contain these devastating fires so they can save our lives. My administration will do everything in our power to protect those in harm’s way."
............................................................................................................................................

Happy? :D
____
Try to focus on someday.
User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 42928
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by Strangelove »

Reefer2 wrote: Tue Aug 14, 2018 5:02 pm
Cornuck wrote: Tue Aug 14, 2018 4:14 pm
Topper wrote: Tue Aug 14, 2018 3:23 pm ...is playing the long game.
So - for us 'blind folk' - what exactly is this stable genius' "long game"? :D To make the corporations even richer? To isolate the US? To divide the nation? The man is a failure, so I'm not convinced he knows what a long game is. I think he can see far ahead enough to know he's fucked over a business and to pull 'his' money out, so he can leave others holding the bag.
Give it up Per, his believers see only the truth they want to see.
I've been away for awhile, but you now think Cornuck is a sock of... Per's?? :eh:

Just before I left you had suggested he is a sock of yours truly's.

http://www.canuckscorner.com/forums/vie ... 98#p311698

What gives Senior Sushi? :drink:
____
Try to focus on someday.
User avatar
Cornuck
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 14965
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Everywhere

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by Cornuck »

Strangelove wrote: Tue Aug 14, 2018 8:26 pm
Just before I left you had suggested he is a sock of yours truly's.
It's just been mayhem... Doc... MAYHEM! :D
Doc: "BTW, Donny was right, you're smug."
User avatar
Strangelove
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 42928
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:13 pm
Location: Lake Vostok

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by Strangelove »

Cornuck wrote: Tue Aug 14, 2018 8:32 pm It's just been mayhem... Doc... MAYHEM! :D
Well then thank God the doctor is in. Image
____
Try to focus on someday.
User avatar
Per
MVP
MVP
Posts: 9345
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:45 am
Location: Sweden

Re: US Erection 12 *AND* 16

Post by Per »

UWSaint wrote: Tue Aug 14, 2018 1:22 pm Hi Per. I haven't engaged in any political talk for years. Probably since the days of the other CC.
But I wanted to respond to my international friends.
Yay! My favourite republican enters the fray! :-)
We may not always see eye to eye on matters, which I guess is almost a prerequisite for a good debate, but you always raise the level of discourse here, so I truly appreciate having you back. :thumbs:
UWSaint wrote: Tue Aug 14, 2018 1:22 pm* It isn't hard to register to vote in the United States. That people don't is a choice. Now if you think that people want to but can't, what are you saying about their capabilities?
It is sad, isn’t it? But, yeah. A lot of people are quite bad at finding and following simple instructions. Yet voting should not just be for the well informed or well educated. In a democracy all people should have a say, even those that have a hard time googling how to register.
UWSaint wrote: Tue Aug 14, 2018 1:22 pm* It isn't hard not to commit felonies. And if you do, voting rights are restored when your sentence is done.
In 37 states.

Then there are two (Maine and Vermont) that have a more European approach and let felons vote.

In 7 states (Alabama, Arizona, Delaware, Mississippi, Nevada, Tennessee, Wyoming) an individual petition for pardon is required for some crimes (and can be denied) and in 4 states (Florida, Iowa, Kentucky and Virginia) an individual petition for reinstatement of voting rights is required for felons convicted of any crime.

I would agree that it isn’t hard not to commit felonies. But then I’m very much the type of person that goes by the book. I read instructions. My children roll their eyes as I read the ingredients on labels of food packages before buying them. People with a lack of schooling, lack of funds, lack of impulse control and lacking familiarity with local laws may find it harder.

In some cases there may also be a discrepancy between what is considered socially acceptable and what is legal. For instance I understand that more than 40% of Americans smoke marijuana while the possession of marijuana is a prosecutable crime in several states. In Florida, possession of less than 20 grams of cannabis is a first degree misdemeanor, with penalties of up to 1 year in jail and a driver's license revocation. Possession between 20 grams and 25 pounds is considered a felony in Florida. It can result in imprisonment of up to five years. Now, for those still using medieval measures, one ounce is roughly 28.3 grams, which means that anyone carrying an ounce of weed in Florida could face up to five years in prison and permanent loss of voting rights.

Now, I’m not an advocate for legalization of drugs, but when something that 40% of the population is doing on a fairly regular basis can lead to a lengthy prison term… following the law becomes much harder.

It is of note that 10% of the general population in Florida, and 25% of black men, lack voting rights.

It is implied that these laws are used to restrict black voting. I do not know if this is true, but from what I read drug use is as widespread among white Floridians as among black ones, but those convicted of possession are overwhelmingly part of the black population.

And Florida is a notorious swing state.
UWSaint wrote: Tue Aug 14, 2018 1:22 pm*
FWIW, personally, I agree with disenfrachisement-while-serving-sentence as a policy matter. If you violate core and substantial components of the social compact (felonious crimes are those the elected representatives deem pose the greatest harm to society), you don't get to participate in making the social compact for awhile.
In theory, this sounds reasonable. I would even be inclined to agree to that principle. In practice, it is a slippery slope.
As shown in the example of Florida, what constitutes a serious offense is not always self evident.

In countries that are less than exemplary democracies, stripping felons of rights is often a method to cripple the opposition. In both Russia and Turkey, the leading opposition figures have been convicted of financial crimes, such as corruption or tax fraud, and as a result cannot stand for election.

Did they commit those crimes? I don’t know. Maybe they did. Most western governments believe they didn’t. But the main point is that if you have laws that can strip people of the right to vote or run for office, there will be a temptation to use those laws to harm your opponents and secure your grip on power.

In the case Hirst vs United Kingdom the European Court of Human Rights in 2005 found that general rules for automatic disenfranchisements resulting from convictions to be against human rights. This ruling applied equally for prisoners and for ex-convicts.
UWSaint wrote: Tue Aug 14, 2018 1:22 pm* It isn't hard to go to the polls on a Tuesday. You don't have to take off work. They are open more than 8 hours. And if you can't make it, some form of early voting is a feature in most states and absentee voting is always available.

* Yes, in some places, a polling place might be far away. And yes, this is a VERY BIG country with some sparsely populated areas -- these people (generally republican leaning) have a larger "cost" to getting to the polls (though the price of procuring a mail in ballot is the same). And at the margins, distance can mean some people decide it isn't worth their while to vote. Given early voting and absentee mail in options, the effects of this are mitigated. Isn't distance to the polling place an issue in every large country with rural populations?

* Last comment on this: policies have waxed and waned in the US in terms of ease of ballot access. Since the despicable Jim Crow laws were done away in the south (those laws passed by Democrats to keep blacks from voting, for my international friends' historical edification), though, the difference is that it is either easy to vote or very easy to vote.
In 2014 the voter turnout in Sweden was a measly 82.14 %. The media debated whether it is time to make voting mandatory, as in eg Australia, since when nearly a fifth of eligible voters opt out of the process, the results are not really going to be representative of the will of the people.

In the 2016 US presidential elections 55.7% of the voting age population actually voted.

You say it is easy to vote in the USA, but then, why don’t people vote?

One argument I’ve heard is that a lot of people disliked both candidates, but hey, there were third party candidates! Just show up and make your voice heard! If the 44.3% who did not vote had all voted for the same third party candidate, that candidate would have won.

And it wasn’t just this election. It’s pretty much every US election. Mid term elections tend to have an even lower turnout. Often less than 40%. And thus a minority of voters get to decide who rules the most powerful nation on earth. It is a cause of great concern.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/20 ... countries/
UWSaint wrote: Tue Aug 14, 2018 1:22 pm
Per wrote: Mon Aug 13, 2018 7:51 am Voter ID? Yeah, [in Sweden] all voters must identify themselves, but we allow three methods:
1) presenting a valid photo ID
2) being recognised by an officer at the polling station that vouches for the identity of the voter
3) having another person with a valid photo ID signing an affadavit confirming the identity of the voter
In the US, many states use this system, but it is called "voter suppression".... (I think its perfectly sensible to have minimal integrity controls such as this in place).
I agree. What confuses me is the claim that many people in the US lack valid photo ID.
How do these people survive? Heck, the most common type of ID used in Sweden is your driver’s license. Most places I’ve been in the US, it is really hard to get by without a car. It puzzles me.

And really, people ask for photo ID for all kinds of services here in Sweden.
I don’t understand how you can get by without it.
Although, we can actually buy groceries without presenting it….. :wink:
Whatever you do, always give 100 %!
Except when donating blood.
Post Reply