I like how he's now said he was joking... Last time I checked, jokes were meant to be funny. :rolleyes:

Trump's latest stunt - openly encouraging a foreign state to hack into his opponent's private e-mails - is yet another illustration of why this man should not be allowed anywhere near a position of power.

 

 

OMG Suedy, I credit you with a lot of intelligence so don't you see that he was only joking and having another dig at Hillary and her emails! He wasn't serious at all. He's said that yesterday.

He only days he was joking when he faces a backlash. He is a joke worthy of the name 'Trump'. You've just been Trumped!

OMG Suedy, I credit you with a lot of intelligence so don't you see that he was only joking and having another dig at Hillary and her emails! He wasn't serious at all. He's said that yesterday.

 

donald trump NEVER jokes. His face is a permenant upside-down smile because he doesn't understand banter or humour. It goes over his very very thick head.

 

Besides which, anybody in the whole world can make any horrific statement they want and go "only joking!" even when they're not. The man ho wants to rule the world and talk to foreign leaders in life-threatening situations needs to be able to make it absolutely plain that he means what he says, and be equally plain when he isn't.

 

"My dog's got no nose, how does h smell?" that is a joke.

 

"Donald Trump needs to be investiagted by the FBI and Russia needs to open up all his life-long emails to the world - only Joking!" see, that's not a joke. Not funny at all.

 

On the other hand Trump's refusal to open his tax affairs to scrutiny, as all senior politicians should and do, is a complete joke. He IS hiding things he doesn't want the voters to know about. If he wasn't he would publish them.

OMG Suedy, I credit you with a lot of intelligence so don't you see that he was only joking and having another dig at Hillary and her emails! He wasn't serious at all. He's said that yesterday.

As others have said, if he was joking, this is his first ever recorded joke. Given his age, that is a very long wait. This is supposed to be an election campaign for one of the most powerful positions on Earth. It's about time Trump recognised that.

I mean, I completely agree with the statements here about it being ridiculous and quite clearly not a joke and unsuitable as a comment during a presidential campaign, but I can't help but feel that it's yet another surprisingly clever move. Any backlash is going to feed into the already vast sense that Hillary is ''protected'' and or ''serving/served by'' the media and the whole well if you have nothing to hide... angle too.

 

Of course, once again, it's ludicrous and in any sane political landscape would rightly be a big negative against him. But this is 2016 and this is Trump so definitely doesn't qualify as sane.

This is just yet another embarrassing Trump reversal similar to the one on abortion that makes it ABUNDANTLY OBVIOUS to ANYONE WITH A BRAIN CELL (offence INTENDED Chris) that he is only in the race for himself, is making up policy on the fly, hasn't got a fucking clue what he is talking about and would make a terrible President.

 

Genuinely concerned at the moment.

This is just yet another embarrassing Trump reversal similar to the one on abortion that makes it ABUNDANTLY OBVIOUS to ANYONE WITH A BRAIN CELL (offence INTENDED Chris) that he is only in the race for himself, is making up policy on the fly, hasn't got a fucking clue what he is talking about and would make a terrible President.

 

Genuinely concerned at the moment.

 

And yet, thanks to the dumbing down of the population and the lack of investment in education, we have ended up with a lot of people without the critical facilities to discern that he is full of bullshit - an empty suit :(

BTW will THIS do?

This is just yet another embarrassing Trump reversal similar to the one on abortion that makes it ABUNDANTLY OBVIOUS to ANYONE WITH A BRAIN CELL (offence INTENDED Chris) that he is only in the race for himself, is making up policy on the fly, hasn't got a fucking clue what he is talking about and would make a terrible President.

 

Genuinely concerned at the moment.

 

While this is all true, again you're only looking at it from one perspective. If you're scared to death that you're never going to get a decent job or that you're going to end up on the street or that you're not going to be able to afford the basics to feed your family, it's possible to see all the things about Trump being a clown, while still thinking he's a lesser evil than sticking with the status quo which is (perceived to be) GUARANTEED to end in disaster.

 

If you were stuck in a burning building on the 4th floor, and someone came along claiming to be a firefighter, are you really going to do a rational analysis of whether they can be trusted, are you going to ask for their detailed plan of how they plan to get you out of the burning building, are you going to turn down their offer to help if you think they're not "credible"? Most people in that situation are going to figure that they have nothing to lose, and they have no choice but to take this slight chance of a way out, no matter what doubts they might have, since the alternative is certain death. And the tragedy is that, because the supposedly "mainstream" left-wing politicians around the world are still too terrified to upset the business lobby and the Establishment, they refuse to even acknowledge even the feeling that a lot of voters have that they're trapped in a burning building -- and, until the Left gets some guts, that means that populist right-wingers are going to continue to win by default purely because, for all their vile scapegoating of minorities, they are the only ones even giving people a glimmer of hope that things could improve for them.

I think all these people that are trying to stick their middle finger up to the "establishment" need to get their head out of their arses and realise that you know, sometimes, just sometimes, the "establishment" is the best option hey have at this time.

It's more to do with 10 years of misery and wanting to kick those who have done nothing about it, except rescue those who caused it at the expense of the weakest in society. It's all to do with lack of the ability to rationalise the causes (bankers and politicians who they voted for) and instead look for the traditional scapegoats. I don't have any sympathy with the gullible burning everybody's house down along with their own. I am IMMENSELY bitter about the situation I find myself and my family in, but I have the education and ability to see what caused it, and not victimise innocents.

 

People who take less than a passing interest in politics will believe anything they are told, and when that doesn't pan out they move on to the next batch of empty promises until there's nothing left to believe in and revolution is the final option. Any society that fails to take care of the poorest parts of it's society is doomed to failure in the long run. America has got away with it because it's rich enough for the poor to get some filter-down benefits, take those away and you have many millions armed with whatever guns they want to buy. Trump could be the final disastrous straw if he fails to deliver on benefits for the poor (and he will, because he has no policies to benefit the poor, his policies are all about making himself richer, and victimising others). Worst-case scenario, but then every powerful nation in history has in the end imploded and disintegrated. Not one single empire has lasted, and none ever will. Fair societies are the best-positioned to last longer than most.

While this is all true, again you're only looking at it from one perspective. If you're scared to death that you're never going to get a decent job or that you're going to end up on the street or that you're not going to be able to afford the basics to feed your family, it's possible to see all the things about Trump being a clown, while still thinking he's a lesser evil than sticking with the status quo which is (perceived to be) GUARANTEED to end in disaster.

 

If you were stuck in a burning building on the 4th floor, and someone came along claiming to be a firefighter, are you really going to do a rational analysis of whether they can be trusted, are you going to ask for their detailed plan of how they plan to get you out of the burning building, are you going to turn down their offer to help if you think they're not "credible"? Most people in that situation are going to figure that they have nothing to lose, and they have no choice but to take this slight chance of a way out, no matter what doubts they might have, since the alternative is certain death. And the tragedy is that, because the supposedly "mainstream" left-wing politicians around the world are still too terrified to upset the business lobby and the Establishment, they refuse to even acknowledge even the feeling that a lot of voters have that they're trapped in a burning building -- and, until the Left gets some guts, that means that populist right-wingers are going to continue to win by default purely because, for all their vile scapegoating of minorities, they are the only ones even giving people a glimmer of hope that things could improve for them.

 

I do appreciate that perspective -especially regarding the recent EU referendum - and am definitely not one of those who goes around with the unjustified moral superiority of believing that anyone who votes out of pure desperation for change *ANY change whatsoever* because of their situation is a closet racist or an idiot. In that way (because the comparisons are inevitable) Trump does appear to be cynically tapping into that disillusioned part of the electorate who feel left behind or ignored, but to me he is just beyond parody and genuinely dangerous for the world should he be elected as ‘leader of the free world’. Even considering what you say above, this must surely be enough to persuade those who are in that situation to grit their teeth and go for Clinton.

We’re knee-deep in the election cycle and for many of us, the candidates’ stances on LGBT issues are imperative. Let me tell you why I'm voting for Clinton. And I'm sure you all know I'm gay, so if you can't respect my very valid and researched reasons for supporting her in comparison to Trump (and yeah, Gary Johnson as well) then keep it to yourself unless you have an intelligent objection to make.

 

As someone who struggled to accept myself growing up, and then fought for his rights as an adult, I believe having a leader who is a fierce ally is essential. Someone who will fight for equality and inspire the next generation. I believe Hillary Clinton is this candidate.

 

Yes, when you hear “Hillary Clinton” and “LGBT rights,” her past comes up. As Clinton has said herself, it’s been an evolution. But just because someone hasn’t always been the biggest advocate in the past, doesn’t mean we should carry judgement against them into the future.

 

Below are 8 times Hillary Clinton showed she was a champion of the LGBT community.

 

-Her historic speech in Switzerland

 

Clinton delivered a major speech in Geneva on International Human Rights Day. She insisted that the international community acknowledge that “gay rights are human rights and human rights are gay rights,” and announced the first-ever U.S. policy aimed at aiding LGBT people around the world.

 

In her remarks, sh claimed using religion to justify homophobia was “not unlike the justification offered for violent practices towards women like honor killings, widow burning, or female genital mutilation. Some people still defend those practices as part of a cultural tradition. But violence toward women isn’t cultural; it’s criminal.”

 

And she addressed the global LGBT community directly:

 

“To LGBT men and women worldwide, let me say this: Wherever you live and whatever the circumstances of your life, whether you are connected to a network of support or feel isolated and vulnerable, please know that you are not alone.”

 

“People around the globe are working hard to support you and to bring an end to the injustices and dangers you face. That is certainly true for my country. And you have an ally in the United States of America and you have millions of friends among the American people.”

 

-When she urged President Obama to push harder against homophobic regimes in Africa.

 

A summit consisting of 40 governments and international bodies is being held in London to improve ties with the Libyan National Council, the umbrella group representing rebel Libyan forces, and in preparation for the intended aim of ending of the reign of Libyan leader Muammar. While outlets like Fox News attacked Clinton about “hiding” emails, there was actually some good that surfaced: One leaked message revealed she pushed the Obama Administration to press leaders in Africa to change their anti-LGBT policies.

 

It was not a safe position, either: As Clinton revealed in her memoir, Hard Choices, after she confronted Uganda’s President Yoweri Museveni about gay rights, he ridiculed my concerns.”

 

“Like many people in Uganda and around the world, I was appalled that the police and government had done little to protect [murdered activist] David [Cato] after public calls for his murder,” she wrote. “It was the result of a nationwide campaign to suppress LGBT people by any means necessary, and the government was part of it.”

 

-When she stood up for gay diplomats and State Department employees.

 

In 2009, while Clinton was Secretary of State she expanded the rights for the same-sex partners and families of U.S. diplomats, granting them the many of the same benefits as their heterosexual counterparts—including visas, diplomatic passports, and access to U.S. medical facilities abroad.

 

“Like all families, our Foreign Service families come in different configurations; all are part of the common fabric of our post communities abroad,” Clinton said in a staff memo. “At bottom, the department will provide these benefits for both opposite-sex and same-sex partners because it is the right thing to do.”

 

At a gathering of LGBT State Department staffers, she explained that “creating an LGBT-welcoming workplace is not just the right thing to do, it’s also the smart thing to do.”

 

In 2010, she ordered that the State Department’s equal employment opportunity policy explicitly protect against discrimination based on gender identity. She also made it easier for Americans to change the gender listed on their passport and made it possible for same-sex couples to obtain passports under the their married names.

 

-When she endorsed marriage equality

 

Yes, Secretary Clinton did not always champion the freedom to marry, but she made her support of it known loud and clear. In a 2013 video for the Human Rights Campaign, Clinton stated:

 

“LGBT Americans are our colleagues, our teachers, our soldiers, our friends, our loved ones – and they are full and equal citizens, and deserve the rights of citizenship. That includes marriage. That’s why I support marriage for lesbian and gay couples. I support it personally and as a matter of policy and law, embedded in a broader effort to advance equality and opportunity for LGBT Americans and for all Americans… To deny the opportunity to any of our daughters and sons solely on the basis of who they are and who they love is to deny them the chance to live up to their God given potential.”

 

At a town hall meeting last year, she addressed her shift on the issue.

 

“My views did evolve, and I think most people my age would say the same thing,” she said. “There might be some exceptions, but largely because of my strong opposition to discrimination of any sort and my personal relationships with a lot of people over the years, I certainly concluded that marriage equality should be the law of the land, and I was thrilled when the Supreme Court made it the law of the land.”

 

-When she fought to pass the Equality Act.

 

At a town hall meeting in 2015, Clinton expressed that passing legislation that would add sexual orientation and gender identity protections to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was her “highest priority.”

 

In July, she tweeted that “the Equality Act will mean full federal equality for LGBT Americans & stronger anti-discrimination protections for everyone. Past time.”

 

-Her vow to fight for an end to violence against trans people.

 

Clinton addressed the trans community in 2015, during a HRC board meeting. “We’ve got to address the crisis of transphobic violence. 2015 has seen the murder of at least 19 transgender women, primarily women of color. And nobody knows how much violence goes unreported or ignored,” she stated.

 

“We need to say, with one voice, that transgender people are valued, they are loved, they are us. They desire to be treated fairly and equally.”

 

-Hillary’s message to gay teens on Facebook.

 

When Humans of New York posted a photo of a somber teen on Facebook who declared, “I’m homosexual and I’m afraid about what my future will be and that people won’t like me,” Hillary quickly responded with a personal message.

 

“Prediction from a grown-up: You’re future is going to be amazing. You will surprise yourself with what you’re capable of and the incredible things you go on to do. Find the people who love and believe in you. There will be lots of them. –H”

 

-Her promise to the future.

 

Five Democratic presidential candidates are participating in the party's first presidential debate.

While Secretary Clinton has done quite a lot when it comes to the LGBT community, if she becomes president she’s made it clear her work is not done. On her website she outlines 24 pledges that elucidate the policies she would change or advance to help LGBT people. (Bernie Sanders has only advanced seven pro-LGBT policies).

 

One of them: outlawing conversion therapy.

 

“It is time to put an end to conversion therapy for minors,” Clinton tweeted. “We should be supporting LGBT kids—not trying to change them.”

 

SO. PLEASE. Tell me why I should f***ing vote for Donald Trump? Some of you have your head so far up your ass it's ridiculous. Please further explain to me how Hillary really had anything to do with Benghazi? If you actually READ all the reports you would know several republicans are more to blame than her, or are we just ignoring the chain of command because Clinton isn't a republican candidate? The only thing Hillary should take blame for is having classified emails on a private server. A SERVER, I might add, that not even the federal bureau of investigation could hack into until they asked her for access. Should she have NOT had those emails on a private server? Of course not. Did her having them on a private server endanger anyone? APPARENTLY NOT SINCE HER HOME FILES HAVE BETTER SECURITY THAN THE FBI'S.

 

I'm not sure what the argument is here. Hillary is a progressive candidate that has put EQUALITY at the top of her list. I encourage some of you dumb asses, aka Ethan and ironically named, Common Sense, to look at their stances on the f***ING ISSUES AMERICA IS CURRENTLY DEALING WITH. We are on the verge of a race war and you f***ing think a racist, xenophobic reality tv show host with NO political experience is the best choice? Seriously? f*** YOU. His administration wants to take away adopted children from gay parents, something that has a serious effect on me personally. And you think THAT is okay? He doesn't think gay marriage should be recognized because of Christian faith, yet he has been married 3 times? Oh and to immigrants he married because he judges women on physical attributes and a "oh I'm helpless" complex? Let me say this again... f*** YOU. He wants to place the highest tax increase on the middle class of ALL time, yet, lower taxes for the top 10 percent. You think THAT is great? If so, f*** YOU again.

 

You are supporting someone that wants to make it where I can LOSE MY f***ING JOB FOR BEING GAY. You think the best candidate is someone who thinks there isn't a gun issue when INNOCENT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN GUNNED DOWN 3X OVER, on a DAILY basis. You are supporting a candidate that says there is no racism when dozens of black people have been gunned down in the past 3 weeks to be found INNOCENT. How f***ing DARE you.

 

I SINCERELY hope you either find some higher education on an issue before you SPEAK upon it again. Your mom should have swallowed.

Edited July 31, 20168 yr by Tyler

i have to say this again: i just feel like some of you miss a crucial aspect to trump's popularity with working class whites when you focus solely on economic anxiety and not racism, or treat racism as an unfortunate byproduct of economic anxiety. it gravely misunderstands the nature of race relations in the US, because they aren't incidental to anything at all, not when they've been shaped by a couple centuries' worth of slavery. the post-war boom didn't end jim crow.

 

this is a good twitter thread to read to understand what i'm getting at.

i have to say this again: i just feel like some of you miss a crucial aspect to trump's popularity with working class whites when you focus solely on economic anxiety and not racism, or treat racism as an unfortunate byproduct of economic anxiety. it gravely misunderstands the nature of race relations in the US, because they aren't incidental to anything at all, not when they've been shaped by a couple centuries' worth of slavery. the post-war boom didn't end jim crow.

 

this is a good twitter thread to read to understand what i'm getting at.

 

I understand the history, but I suppose to me it makes more sense to view it as part of a global phenomenon (Brexit being an example obviously), where scapegoating of minorities has definitely grown in correlation with economic depression.

 

Also, another aspect is that the places where Trump looks set to make the biggest gains (when compared to Romney) are northern Rust Belt states, which don't have as much visceral racism in their recent history as the Deep South does.

I do wonder though - has scapegoating of minorities *actually* grown by all that much, or is it just that a mixture of social media, self-organisation and performative 'wokeness' from middle class white people with a platform has shone more of a spotlight on it when it happens? I get the feeling it's pretty much always been terrible, but things are just coming to more of a head as it's easier for small committed groups of extremists to win out when politics is this diffuse.

Racism and other isms died down during the era of PC and prosperity. It's no surprise to find it back, it was always simmering away in the background it was just that society found it unacceptable to verbalise it during that period. Well, now they have an excuse, and it's getting to be worldwide. History always repeats itself, human nature never changes. That said, I think the younger generation is more tolerant than all previous generations in recent history, probably thanks to social media and globalisation and that good ol' PC era.

 

From my point of view, I'm old enough to have been around during the Civil Rights movements of the 60's, the women's rights movements of the 70's, and the gay rights movements of the 80's, and I'm well aware of how easy it is not to have any rights at all, or have them taken away. Everybody HAS to continue to campaign and fight PEACEFULLY for what is right, otherwise those wanting to get rid of those rights will look for any excuse to promote all sorts of isms and phobias, just as Trump is now doing in order to get elected. The frightening reality is that once intolerant leaders looking for scapegoats get into power they target victims, and individuals in society who may not hold those views go along with it out of fear or self-preservation or greed. Guilt by inaction is just as bad as guilt by action.

 

In the end, people may go along with the ultimate extreme: genocide. It's not difficult to manipulate populations, happening now, happened recently, happened not-so-recently. I'm hopeful the checks and balances of America are strong enough to impeach Trump if he pisses around with the constitution and rights (see Nixon) and the anxiety of the US military is also encouraging that Trump may not be able to pass many of his nasty promises, but he easily could damage the USA and international co-operation in all sorts of unpredictable ways.

 

 

Racism never died down. White people just started congratulating themselves on not using the n word openly.

That said, I think the younger generation is more tolerant than all previous generations in recent history, probably thanks to social media and globalisation and that good ol' PC era.

 

It should be noted that it has been argued that the "younger generation" (I'm not sure whether I still form a part of this group!) are actually even MORE intolerant than the generation before - the difference being that they have shifted their intolerance to different groups. Here's an interesting piece looking at this, which notes that whilst the younger generation are more tolerant to groups such as gays and atheists, they are less tolerant towards Muslims, militarists, and most interestingly (and to my mind, surprisingly), communists. Of course, you might feel that intolerance towards those sorts of groups is justified, even to be encouraged, but enlightened intolerance is still intolerance.