91 thoughts on “Thread to discuss the 2nd presidential debate

  1. I’d vote for HRC, if I were American.

    It quite simply boils down to choosing the lesser of two evils.

  2. vjtorley: I’m not going to defend Trump, but I really do feel that if he is forced out, the media should urge Hillary to resign as well. She is no friend of women:

    It is not the media pushing for Trump to resign, it is Republicans who think he will hurt their chances politically. The fact he is an misogynistic creep is not news to anyone. For some of the base that is a feature not a flaw.

  3. I personally enjoy political carnage. the internet has increased the quantity of mud, but hasn’t changed the type.

    1884 Presidential Campaign Slogans
    Blaine, Blaine, James G. Blaine, The Continental Liar from the State of Maine – Grover Cleveland
    Refers to Blaine’s involvement in unethical business deals with the railroad industry and his behavior after they were exposed.

    Ma, Ma, Where’s my Pa, Gone to the White House, Ha, Ha, Ha – James Blaine
    Refers to the out of wedlock child Cleveland allegedly had fathered.

  4. vjtorley,

    What does this mean VJ, you think if Trump dropped out, it is because of the media? Not because of him being stupid, and people finding out about it?

    Media informs, it doesn’t force anyone to do anything.

  5. petrushka: https://mic.com/articles/153711/where-does-hillary-clinton-stand-on-marijuana-legalization-here-s-her-record#.Wm7885Bu3

    https://blog.mpp.org/medical-marijuana/hillary-clinton-changes-her-tune-on-marijuana-policy

    “When she came to the issue of whether it should be legal for adults to use, Clinton said that states like Colorado and Washington have already reformed and that they are “laboratories of democracy.” Clinton claims to be holding out on forming her opinion until she has the evidence from the two states. Her change of heart mirrors that of the Democratic Party, which, as of late, has become more amenable to the case for making marijuana legal for adults to use, medically or otherwise.”

    “Republican views on marijuana tend to be against legalization, with the opposite being true for Democrats. The most recent gallup polls showed only 35 percent of Republicans supporting legalization, with 65 percent of Democrats supporting it. Because of this, support for legalization is lowest in the south and Midwest, where most states are Republican, and highest on the east and west coasts, where the states tend to be Democratic.”

    http://www.republicanviews.org/republican-views-on-marijuana

  6. phoodoo:
    vjtorley,

    What does this mean VJ, you think if Trump dropped out, it is because of the media?Not because of him being stupid, and people finding out about it?

    Media informs, it doesn’t force anyone to do anything.

    It is not because he is stupid, it is because he behind in the polls and may hurt their own election chances.

  7. newton: it is because he behind in the polls

    …because he is stupid and more people are finding out.

    The media can tell people, but he wouldn’t be resigning because of the media. Unless the media is to be blamed for giving him microphones.

  8. phoodoo: …because he is stupid and more people are finding out.

    The media can tell people, but he wouldn’t be resigning because of the media.Unless the media is to be blamed for giving him microphones.

    Good point, but not voting for someone is not the same as wanting them to resign.Many Democrats hope Trump stays in and blows it up real good.

  9. newton:
    . . .

    “When she came to the issue of whether it should be legal for adults to use, Clinton said that states like Colorado and Washington have already reformed and that they are “laboratories of democracy.” Clinton claims to be holding out on forming her opinion until she has the evidence from the two states.
    . . . .

    In her private statements to bankers, Clinton’s position is quite different. She comes out strongly against marijuana legalization.

    Another example of the contrasts between her public and private positions. She lacks the integrity to be president.

  10. Patrick: In her private statements to bankers, Clinton’s position is quite different.She comes out strongly against marijuana legalization.

    Another example of the contrasts between her public and private positions.She lacks the integrity to be president.

    This is not the best of possible worlds, Hillary is a politician, however she is a member of a political party which supports medical and is moving toward recreational. Politicians respond to politics,

    Trump is completely unpredictable, he is a pathological liar, he is the member of a party which does not even support medical.

    As for integrity, any republican anointed by the House who still endorses Trump has proven to be sorely lacking in that quality.

    If your choice is between Trump and a third party, I think third party is your only ethical choice

  11. newton: If your choice is between Trump and a third party, I think third party is your only ethical choice

    No no. You’re forgetting my car. Just write it in. It’s more “fiscally conservative, socially liberal, and non-interventionist” than any of the human candidates. And it certainly knows as much about foreign policy as Gary Johnson.

  12. walto: No no. You’re forgetting my car. Just write it in.It’s more “fiscally conservative, socially liberal, and non-interventionist” than any of the human candidates.And it certainly knows as much about foreign policy as Gary Johnson.

    Was it born in America? Any foreign parts?

  13. Uh-oh. A birther.

    Hmm. How about the oak tree in my front lawn, then? It’s got all the stuff Patrick’s looking for in a President too!

  14. newton: This is not the best of possible worlds, Hillary is a politician, however she is a member of a political party which supports medical and is moving toward recreational. Politicians respond to politics,

    Clinton seems to consider herself above the law. I have no confidence that she will act in accordance with her party’s views.

    Trump is completely unpredictable, he is a pathological liar, he is the member of a party which does not even support medical.

    As for integrity, any republican anointed by the Housewho still endorses Trump has proven to be sorely lacking in that quality.

    I agree completely.

    If your choice is between Trump and a third party, I think third party is your only ethical choice

    Neither Trump nor Clinton have ever been among the ethical choices this election cycle. Despite some misgivings about a few of his positions, I’ll be voting for Gary Johnson.

  15. Patrick,

    Wait, you’re a single-issue voter, and that single issue is legal pot? And you only have “some misgivings about a few of his positions”? What about replacing income tax with a national sales tax, ignorance of pretty much everything about foreign policy, and dealing with global warming by moving to Mars?

  16. John Harshman:
    Patrick,

    Wait, you’re a single-issue voter, and that single issue is legal pot? And you only have “some misgivings about a few of his positions”? What about replacing income tax with a national sales tax, ignorance of pretty much everything about foreign policy, and dealing with global warming by moving to Mars?

    No, although I can see how I may have given that impression. I quoted Clinton’s position on marijuana legalization because of something petrushka said upthread.

    Johnson’s foreign policy positions are much more informed than the mainstream press gives him credit for. There’s a good article on it here.

    I haven’t heard the claim about moving to Mars before. If it’s from the same people talking about his foreign policy, I’d take it with a grain of salt.

    As far as replacing the income tax, that’s one area in which I disagree. He wants to do so without passing a constitutional amendment to repeal the income tax. That would just result in both taxes in another administration or two. He also pitches it as being revenue neutral, when what we really need to be doing is shrinking the size, cost, and impact of the federal government.

    In one sense I am a single issue voter, and that single issue is individual liberty.

  17. Patrick: In one sense I am a single issue voter, and that single issue is individual liberty.

    “Freedom of thought and speech without available means of gaining information and methods of sound analysis, are empty. Protection and security are meaningless until there is something positive worth protecting.” E.W. Hall

  18. Patrick: Clinton seems to consider herself above the law. I have no confidence that she will act in accordance with her party’s views

    A greater worry for me is what she might trade in compromises with the Republicans.

  19. Patrick,

    Sure, Gary “What is Aleppo” Johnson has a nuanced foreign policy. If you actually do want income tax replaced by a sales tax, and your only objection is procedural, then I suppose Johnson is your guy, and you are welcome to each other.

    As for moving to Mars, this:

    http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/09/gary-johnson-climate-change

    Here is the Johnson policy on global warming, which says, in essence, nothing:

    https://www.johnsonweld.com/environment

    Well, at least it isn’t a Chinese hoax. At various times, Johnson has both proposed and rejected a carbon tax; don’t know what his current policy is, as the web site doesn’t say.

  20. Patrick: Neither Trump nor Clinton have ever been among the ethical choices this election cycle. Despite some misgivings about a few of his positions, I’ll be voting for Gary Johnson.

    Sounds reasonable

  21. The sales tax is just about the worst tax there is–not counting poll taxes, I guess.

    Nice if your purchases are a very small portion of your income, though.

  22. walto: I don’t know.My oak tree is really more up Patrick’s alley.And Weld is on both tickets.

    Any vote not for Trump sounds reasonable to me. Gary Johnson seems a lot like your oak tree. Not presidential timber

  23. newton: Any vote not for Trump sounds reasonable to me. Gary Johnson seems a lot like your oak tree. Not presidential timber

    I think you’re right. I mean there’s no question that if Patrick could not vote for Johnson, he’d vote for Trump. That’s been clear for months.

  24. John Harshman:

    Sure, Gary “What is Aleppo” Johnson has a nuanced foreign policy.

    Johnson explained his Aleppo moment and took full responsibility. Not something you’d see Trump or Clinton do.

    If you actually do want income tax replaced by a sales tax, and your only objection is procedural, then I suppose Johnson is your guy, and you are welcome to each other.

    I don’t like either. It’s a matter of minimizing harm while the federal government is dramatically downsized. The privacy costs and political power of the IRS are significant problems.

    As for moving to Mars, this:

    http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/09/gary-johnson-climate-change

    Here is the Johnson policy on global warming, which says, in essence, nothing:

    https://www.johnsonweld.com/environment

    Well, at least it isn’t a Chinese hoax. At various times, Johnson has both proposed and rejected a carbon tax; don’t know what his current policy is, as the web site doesn’t say.

    My understanding is that he considered a carbon tax for a while then changed his mind based on rational arguments. Also something that neither Trump nor Clinton are known for. From the article you linked:

    He declared himself a “skeptic” when it comes to the idea “that government policy can address” climate issues and said a carbon tax “sounds good in theory, but it wouldn’t work in practice.”

    Being skeptical of the effectiveness of government programs seems reasonable given the historic evidence, particularly of unintended consequences, waste, and unfettered growth.

  25. I’m not convinced that global warming is an important political issue. It may have been 10 or 15 years ago, but the world economy has tipped in favor of wind and solar. It’s going much faster than I anticipated.

    We are already screwed by the past century. There’s no way to quickly undo warming. But the effects will slow down in 30 or 50 years. Some coastal cities will be lost, or become like New Orleans and the Netherlands, protected by dikes.

    But think of the construction jobs.

  26. Patrick: Being skeptical of the effectiveness of government programs seems reasonable given the historic evidence, particularly of unintended consequences, waste, and unfettered growth.

    An economist I know from another site just posted this in response to a similar claim:

    Harry wrote some variations on his silly theme of “Meeza hatesa gubmint!”:

    “The problem with the government running things is that they are so poor at it.”

    That is false. In cases of natural monopoly, where competition cannot stimulate efficiency and excellence, there is no evidence that government is any worse at running things than private managers, and plenty of evidence that it is better. In fact, when Maggie Thatcher privatized water supplies all over Britain, service deteriorated while costs rose. You are just objectively wrong.

    “Their inefficiency (and sometimes corruption) is hidden by lack of competition.”

    While the inefficiency and frequent corruption of private monopolists is hidden by lack of competition AND by absence of transparent oversight and accountability to the public.

    “Yet, monopolies like the railroads are equally corrupt because they can be.”

    And inefficient.

    “Bringing the running of such monopolies into the marketplace is, I think, the way to go.”

    Nope. Can’t be done because there is no way to reach an equilibrium price via market price signals.

    “However, what must be avoided is “government’s” setting the terms.”

    No, that’s nonsense, because only government is answerable to the people. No one else is competent, or has any incentive, to represent the people’s interests.

    “There is private running of the rolling stock in British railways. However, these arrangements are often criticized for poor performance, yet little appears to be done. This, I believe, is because it’s not a market situation.”

    And can’t be.

    “I would advocate a carefully written contract, that if not adhered to, is ended.”

    You mean, like the ones that enable private corporate managers to pocket billions while bankrupting their companies? Those carefully written contracts? “Oh, no! I took $345 million while destroying the enterprise, now my contract won’t be renewed!”

    “(Perhaps with such clauses as “90% of all trains run on time”.) I would also advocate no government committees setting the contracts. They should be set by a manager who takes the blame for arranging a bad contract and is fired.”

    See above. The private management takers don’t care if they get “fired” after they’ve already stuffed their pockets. We’ve seen it proved a thousand times, because their goal isn’t to get their contract renewed, but only to stuff their pockets.

    “I want no faceless civil servants doing anonymous things. I want everything in the open.”

    Then you want a contradiction in terms. ONLY faceless civil servants can do things in the open, because they ultimately answer to the people. It is faceless PRIVATE MANAGERS that can get away with doing anonymous things in secret.

    “I think that if contract management becomes part of the economy, there will soon be a pool of management companies who can do the job, from say handling local parks to running a country’s water system.”

    Fantasy. Anarcho-capitalist nonsense. The incompetence and corruption of private management companies given power over public services is proverbial. Compare the efficiency and honesty of GOVERNMENT-RUN BC Assessment to the incompetence and dishonesty of Saber Systems, the PRIVATE MANAGEMENT FIRM that botched the Pittsburgh assessments, blamed the resulting mess on LVT [land value taxes], and got it scrapped. Hello?

    “When a California “big one” hit Los Angeles it destroyed a section of the Santa Monica Freeway – perhaps the most travelled in the country. Hundreds of thousands of cars took to the surface streets to get past the gap. There was chaos. Two government engineers in charge gave the construction company a large incentive to get it repaired quickly. The company got to work and replaced the freeway in double-quick time which got the commuters off the streets.

    Hoorah!

    For not going through channels, the two engineers were fired.”

    As well they should have been. Aren’t you the one who just got finished saying he wanted everything in the open?

    “We really don’t want government involved in the regulation of monopolies.”

    Nonsense. No one else is competent to do it.

    “They are simply too inefficient.”

    More nonsense. If you look at electric power utilities across the USA, the most efficient ones, which provide the best service at the lowest cost, are government-run. Next are the government-regulated private monopolies. In dead last are the unregulated private monopolies. HELLO?

  27. newton: A greater worry for me is what she might trade in compromises with the Republicans.

    You don’t have to worry about that. Republicans in Congress have learned that compromise will cost them their seats.

  28. Mike Gene cracks me up:

    Donald Trump’s Atheism May Have Contributed to His Campaign’s Implosion

    As an atheist, Trump views the world as his playground, looking for as much pleasure and happiness as possible. After all, this is the only life he has. Power and money bring him more pleasure and one of his main pleasures is obviously sex. And Trump has a Richard Carrier-like obsession with sex. A lifetime of such carnal obsessions left Trump unprepared for his first Presidential debate, which began his slide in the polls.

    And:

    Trump simply comes across as a man who makes very little effort to control his urges, his emotions, his hungers. He derives his meaning in life from having power, having sex, and being noticed and acknowledged by the masses. Like Dawkins, he wants to be loved by large crowds. In other words, he is a post-Christian, modern, secular man without a larger Reality to constrain those urges.

  29. petrushka: I’m not convinced that global warming is an important political issue. It may have been 10 or 15 years ago, but the world economy has tipped in favor of wind and solar. It’s going much faster than I anticipated.

    We are already screwed by the past century. T

    We’re still screwing ourselves. We don’t know for sure where the ecological tipping point is.

    Trump promised complete deregulation of energy production. I would expect a Republican Congress to back him in that. I doubt that China and India would limit emissions if the U.S. went full tilt at increasing them.

  30. keiths: As an atheist, Trump views the world as his playground, looking for as much pleasure and happiness as possible. After all, this is the only life he has. Power and money bring him more pleasure and one of his main pleasures is obviously sex. And Trump has a Richard Carrier-like obsession with sex. A lifetime of such carnal obsessions left Trump unprepared for his first Presidential debate, which began his slide in the polls.

    Strange that he is supported by the God fearing.

    I think it isn’t so much about sex as it is domination of another person. Power.

  31. newton,

    Strange that he is supported by the God fearing.

    Yeah. Apparently Mike Gene’s “larger Reality” is failing to constrain their “urges” to vote for Trump.

  32. Tom English: I doubt that China and India would limit emissions if the U.S. went full tilt at increasing them.

    China is doing more than we are. They are producing solar cells, windmills, dams and researching a new generation of nukes. They are economically committed to carbon free power. They have personal motivations that go beyond global warming.

Leave a Reply