Clinton will win easily

[RandyForRubio]

So now that we've seen Trump's 100 day plan, could somebody point out the racist, anti-LGBT, sexist, misogynistic parts of it?

Thanks.

 

[Siro]

So now that we've seen Trump's 100 day plan, could somebody point out the racist, anti-LGBT, sexist, misogynistic parts of it?

Thanks.

Oh yes, he's only a sexist if he makes it part of his official policy. That's not stupid.

 

[Stoked]

Oh yes, he's only a sexist if he makes it part of his official policy. That's not stupid.

If his policy is officially not those things isn't that a good thing? Despite him as a person?

 

[Siro]

If his policy is officially not those things isn't that a good thing? Despite him as a person?

No. It's irrelevant. Nobody was expecting him to make ***** grabbing day a new holiday.

 

[fishonjazz]

I wonder how many people will now look outside the false cage of "only 2 choices"

Everyone has always known that there are more than 2 choices. Its nothing new. We have always known about the option to vote someone other than the dem or repub. This election was probably the 2 worst candidates of all time and yet one of the two still won every single state.

Do you seriously think that there will be less support for the dem or repub candidate in future elections when the choices aren't nearly as bad?

Ya right. Next election a democrat or republican will win again and forever onward until there is an actual change to the system. Aint gonna happen cause voters actually vote a third party in.

 

[fishonjazz]

The misguided polls played their role. I know people that didn't vote because they didn't like either candidate and believed Clinton was going to win anyway. I wonder how many now wish they had done differently.

Sent from my HTC6535LVW using JazzFanz mobile app

I personally know many people who hated trump more than hillary who voted for stein or mccmullin that 100% regret that decision and if they could go back and do it again they would have voted hillary.
Many people i know figured that hillary was a shoe in to win the election so they voted their conscience or as a way to try to shake things up, figuring that there was no way that trump could win so clinton didn't need their vote.
Im betting that this type of thing happened all over the country.

Republicans were voting for their guy no matter what he said or did. (didn't trump actually say something about how he could say or do anything and not lose his voters? Basically calling them dumb blind sheep and being right about it. I think he said something like "i could kill someone in the middle of time square and my voters would still vote for me" cant remember the actual quote so i could be wrong)
Democrats figured they had the nomination already and so either didn't vote or decided to vote in way that would have little to no impact on anything. Big mistake

 

[Stoked]

Everyone has always known that there are more than 2 choices. Its nothing new. We have always known about the option to vote someone other than the dem or repub. This election was probably the 2 worst candidates of all time and yet one of the two still won every single state.

Do you seriously think that there will be less support for the dem or repub candidate in future elections when the choices aren't nearly as bad?

Ya right. Next election a democrat or republican will win again and forever onward until there is an actual change to the system. Aint gonna happen cause voters actually vote a third party in.

Define "less bad". Has there been an R or D nominee in the last 20 years that you were excited about?

Also the drum beat dismissing third parties is constantly beat based on "no chance". If people vote third party they have a chance.

I disagree that the R voters pulled the lever despite their misgivings. many of them stayed home and didn't vote. For someone yelling about the "silent majority" so much he under performed the robot Romney by 2 million votes. He was able to tap into the angry vote to replace some of the non voting Rs. He still lost the popular vote.

 

[LogGrad98]

can you expound on this with some references and examples?

I google this for you. It wasn't hard.

https://www.cwu.edu/~manwellerm/academic bias.pdf

From the abstract:

A multivariate analysis finds that, even after taking into account the effects of
professional accomplishment, along with many other individual characteristics, conservatives
and Republicans teach at lower quality schools than do liberals and Democrats. This
suggests that complaints of ideologically-based discrimination in academic advancement
deserve serious consideration and further study. The analysis finds similar effects based on
gender and religiosity, i.e., women and practicing Christians teach at lower quality schools
than their professional accomplishments would predict.

Here is an anecdotal one. In my daughter's poli-sci class the professor had a 2 hour lecture on why a conservative ideology is untenable for long-term survival of our culture 2 weeks before the election. When confronted about the opposite possibly being true she refused to allow discussion around the topic, turning instead to a new liberal topic (can't remember what she said it was).

But you are extreme left and in academia right now. You are the best example of this phenomenon, yet you cannot see it. Interesting.

 

[fishonjazz]

Define "less bad". Has there been an R or D nominee in the last 20 years that you were excited about?

Also the drum beat dismissing third parties is constantly beat based on "no chance". If people vote third party they have a chance.

I get what you are saying. Im just saying that im quite certain things will be no different in the next election. In fact, im quite sure there will be even less 3rd party votes than there were this time.

As far defining less bad.... Im saying not as bad as trump and hillary. The two worst of all time.

 

[Stoked]

I get what you are saying. Im just saying that im quite certain things will be no different in the next election. In fact, im quite sure there will be even less 3rd party votes than there were this time.

As far defining less bad.... Im saying not as bad as trump and hillary. The two worst of all time.

I agree, they probably wont. And that is entirely on us as the voting public.

 

[Ron Mexico]

So now that we've seen Trump's 100 day plan, could somebody point out the racist, anti-LGBT, sexist, misogynistic parts of it?

Thanks.

I like some of the stuff from his plan but if you want the list of things that might be related to what you are saying here it is:

There is some stuff in there that people are worried about and concerns people that he might be racist or do things to hurt various races:

THIRD, cancel all federal funding to Sanctuary Cities

* FOURTH, begin removing the more than 2 million criminal illegal immigrants from the country and cancel visas to foreign countries that won't take them back

* FIFTH, suspend immigration from terror-prone regions where vetting cannot safely occur. All vetting of people coming into our country will be considered extreme vetting.

As far as things concerned with LGBT rights and women's rights they fall under this statement:

cancel every unconstitutional executive action, memorandum and order issued by President Obama

Some of the executive actions that Obama has taken that he might go after are:
HIV Care Continuum
The White House counsel on Native American Affairs
Equal pay rights for Women
Strengthening Contracts against Sex Trafficking
Improving access to mental health services
Increasing Federal Employment of Individuals with Disabilities
White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for African Americans
Preventing and Responding to Violence Against Women and Girls
White House Initiative On Educational Excellence For Hispanics
Promoting Excellence, Innovation, and Sustainability at Historically Black Colleges and Universities

The list goes on from there, I got sick of writing them down. I am aware most of those will not be an issue and maybe none of them but those are some examples of things people are worried about and that he has said he might go after in his plan.

There are other things that are less of a concern but still worrisome with how they are carried out in the education sector and how that will effect inner city kids such as:

School Choice And Education Opportunity Act. Redirects education dollars to give parents the right to send their kid to the public, private, charter, magnet, religious or home school of their choice. Ends common core, brings education supervision to local communities. It expands vocational and technical education, and make 2 and 4-year college more affordable.
Repeal and Replace Obamacare Act. Fully repeals Obamacare and replaces it with Health Savings Accounts, the ability to purchase health insurance across state lines, and lets states manage Medicaid funds. Reforms will also include cutting the red tape at the FDA: there are over 4,000 drugs awaiting approval, and we especially want to speed the approval of life-saving medications.

There is the whole build a wall and force Mexico to pay for it thing.

He has the restore community safety act and has stated that might include bringing back stop and frisk that many feel targets black people.

There are some things that I like but there are some areas of concern from that list of the first 100 days along with things he has said in the past and things he has said during his campaign. I am willing to give him a chance and hope for the best but I am worried about some of these and other things he will go after. I am also concerned what groups the groups that supported him and how he will handle their uprisings.

 

[Deleted member 848]

I google this for you. It wasn't hard.

https://www.cwu.edu/~manwellerm/academic bias.pdf

From the abstract:

so how is this more skewed than the media. What did you mean by that-- and how would you measure that. What is this agenda that the intelligentsia have, and why. Why would academics lean towards liberalism

Here is an anecdotal one. In my daughter's poli-sci class the professor had a 2 hour lecture on why a conservative ideology is untenable for long-term survival of our culture 2 weeks before the election. When confronted about the opposite possibly being true she refused to allow discussion around the topic, turning instead to a new liberal topic (can't remember what she said it was).

This is incredibly unethical as a staff member, and any reputable decent university would discipline their faculty for refusing to allow proper discussion on any issue. If what you are saying is true, tell your daughter to report her professor and he or she will be dealt with accordingly.

Through several years of university i have never encountered a prof who did anything close to this.

But you are extreme left and in academia right now. You are the best example of this phenomenon, yet you cannot see it. Interesting.

and i have yet to meet a poster who throws around more assumptions than yourself. Yet you cannot see it. Interesting.