The Commons Bar Mk XIII - MHoC Chat Thread

Announcements Posted on
How helpful is our apprenticeship zone? Have your say with our short survey 02-12-2016
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RomanBowling33)
    try ebay
    Or cBay?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:


    This is incredible.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Well, yesterday the easiest way to shut up whiney liberals was once again demonstrated, being routed as a deplorable lead to those who were inevitably going to spend half an hour *****ing about Trump didn't, I guess they don't like it when the echo chamber breaks. Naturally it came with accusations of isms, phobias and oginies too

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    You're like a grumpy old man already. Congratulations.
    Can't blame me if they can't handle other opinions, I have calmly sat and pit up with their **** for the last three months.

    Was quite funny just now though, consistent 35-45k concurrent viewers on FB stream for over 5 minutes just to watch Trump take a few photos with the police and get on his plane.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Can't blame me if they can't handle other opinions, I have calmly sat and pit up with their **** for the last three months.

    Was quite funny just now though, consistent 35-45k concurrent viewers on FB stream for over 5 minutes just to watch Trump take a few photos with the police and get on his plane.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    You're not exactly good at handling other opinions yourself. Your consistent and total inability to accept any criticism of him whatsoever is tiresome.* The frustrating thing of course is that unlike so many of Trump's followers, you are a clever bloke and you are able to form your own opinions. You are capable of independent thought.

    Yet increasingly you have adopted the approach of 'the person/option I prefer is the best thing ever and the one I oppose is the worst thing ever'.

    You don't even really support Trump. You couldn't name me any of his actual policies that you agree with. You just think 'ah he's the more right wing option (even though he isn't actually particularly right wing) so he must be the best'. The fact that you, a fairly well educated individual can regard Donald Trump as a viable candidate, when his official health policy is 'to do so many good things', his official foreign policy is 'to knock out ISIS', and his official economic policy is 'to drastically cut taxes while drastically increasing spending' is deeply worrying.
    You completely and utterly fail to scrutinise or challenge him 100th of the amount you do to Clinton, yet you claim to be balanced.

    * The latest polls have Clinton 11 points ahead. It's far from over but it's not looking good for Trump at the moment.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    You're not exactly good at handling other opinions yourself. Your consistent and total inability to accept any criticism of him whatsoever is tiresome.* The frustrating thing of course is that unlike so many of Trump's followers, you are a clever bloke and you are able to form your own opinions. You are capable of independent thought.

    Yet increasingly you have adopted the approach of 'the person/option I prefer is the best thing ever and the one I oppose is the worst thing ever'.

    You don't even really support Trump. You couldn't name me any of his actual policies that you agree with. You just think 'ah he's the more right wing option (even though he isn't actually particularly right wing) so he must be the best'. The fact that you, a fairly well educated individual can regard Donald Trump as a viable candidate, when his official health policy is 'to do so many good things', his official foreign policy is 'to knock out ISIS', and his official economic policy is 'to drastically cut taxes while drastically increasing spending' is deeply worrying.
    You completely and utterly fail to scrutinise or challenge him 100th of the amount you do to Clinton, yet you claim to be balanced.

    * The latest polls have Clinton 11 points ahead. It's far from over but it's not looking good for Trump at the moment.
    The latest polls don't have her 11 ahead, ONE poll does, and only when H2H, and when done with a very small sample with a democratic skew, and democratic funding, by a person working for, you guessed it, the Democrats. On the whole the polls haven't moved, the wonderfulness thing about a revelation that comes as little surprise is that you think the polls are going to move a mile but nothing happens.

    Of course, really the last thing Clinton wants is polling showing a massive lead if it doesn't exist, ruins her GOTV.

    I also have not once claimed to be balanced, but then not once has the absence of an echo chamber stopped me saying something. Also worth noting that a Clinton win is far from the worst thing ever (Johnson or Stein would be far worse), it still gets Obamacare repealed, the GOP hold congress for the next 4 years, and Ryan or Pence or whoever else gets the nomination casually strolls into the white house in 2020.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Herald going with headline that fracking cannot be safely regulated.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    The latest polls don't have her 11 ahead, ONE poll does, and only when H2H, and when done with a very small sample with a democratic skew, and democratic funding, by a person working for, you guessed it, the Democrats. On the whole the polls haven't moved, the wonderfulness thing about a revelation that comes as little surprise is that you think the polls are going to move a mile but nothing happens.

    Of course, really the last thing Clinton wants is polling showing a massive lead if it doesn't exist, ruins her GOTV.

    I also have not once claimed to be balanced, but then not once has the absence of an echo chamber stopped me saying something. Also worth noting that a Clinton win is far from the worst thing ever (Johnson or Stein would be far worse), it still gets Obamacare repealed, the GOP hold congress for the next 4 years, and Ryan or Pence or whoever else gets the nomination casually strolls into the white house in 2020.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Why on earth would you want to repeal the ACA?

    Also fairly sure Clinton stated her intention to build on (politic speak, leave as is) rather than roll it back

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    Why on earth would you want to repeal the ACA?

    Also fairly sure Clinton stated her intention to build on (politic speak, leave as is) rather than roll it back

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Because it isn't affordable. And for Clinton to do so she needs Democrat majorities in both the house and Senate, or enough Republicans willing to break the party line. More specifically it's needed in the Senate. The specific way it was passed leads to automatic repeal after 10 years if loss making, Bush did it with his tax cuts too, and the Republicans are threatening it again this time if Trump wins. On the flip side, it cannot be filibustered. If the ACA is to survive the Democrats need the Congress as well as the White House.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    The latest polls don't have her 11 ahead, ONE poll does, and only when H2H, and when done with a very small sample with a democratic skew, and democratic funding, by a person working for, you guessed it, the Democrats. On the whole the polls haven't moved, the wonderfulness thing about a revelation that comes as little surprise is that you think the polls are going to move a mile but nothing happens.

    Of course, really the last thing Clinton wants is polling showing a massive lead if it doesn't exist, ruins her GOTV.

    I also have not once claimed to be balanced, but then not once has the absence of an echo chamber stopped me saying something. Also worth noting that a Clinton win is far from the worst thing ever (Johnson or Stein would be far worse), it still gets Obamacare repealed, the GOP hold congress for the next 4 years, and Ryan or Pence or whoever else gets the nomination casually strolls into the white house in 2020.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Not sure why you think she'd replace Obamacare with something more favourable to the right? And the GOP holding Congress is a MASSIVE assumption - the FiveThirtyEight forecast for instance makes the Democrats narrow favourites to gain the Senate, and they're definitely well above a 50% shot if Clinton wins the Presidency. Same with what'll happen in 2020 - there's a reason a mainstream candidate didn't win this time, and also plenty of reason to think that Clinton could lose some of her unpopularity in office, benefit from an incumbant bonus and do decently next time round.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    The latest polls don't have her 11 ahead, ONE poll does, and only when H2H, and when done with a very small sample with a democratic skew, and democratic funding, by a person working for, you guessed it, the Democrats. On the whole the polls haven't moved, the wonderfulness thing about a revelation that comes as little surprise is that you think the polls are going to move a mile but nothing happens.

    Of course, really the last thing Clinton wants is polling showing a massive lead if it doesn't exist, ruins her GOTV.

    I also have not once claimed to be balanced, but then not once has the absence of an echo chamber stopped me saying something. Also worth noting that a Clinton win is far from the worst thing ever (Johnson or Stein would be far worse), it still gets Obamacare repealed, the GOP hold congress for the next 4 years, and Ryan or Pence or whoever else gets the nomination casually strolls into the white house in 2020.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Pretty much sums you up.
    You don't even live in America yet you want 20 million people there to lose their access to healthcare? I seriously have to question both the judgement and intelligence of someone in Britain who genuinely wants to repeal the access to healthcare of people in a different country. The system is far more affordable than the previous system which left 40 million uninsured.


    * Casually strolls into the whitehouse? Trump is taking down the Republicans down with him. Hence Republicans en masse are disassociating with him in order to give themselves a chance in their own elections.
    Not to mention how infrequently an incumbent president is defeated.

    You also fail to acknowledge that Donald Trump wants a massive, controlling, interventionist state. The very thing you claim to be against yet not once have I seen you criticise him for that or even acknowledge it.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    Not sure why you think she'd replace Obamacare with something more favourable to the right? And the GOP holding Congress is a MASSIVE assumption - the FiveThirtyEight forecast for instance makes the Democrats narrow favourites to gain the Senate, and they're definitely well above a 50% shot if Clinton wins the Presidency. Same with what'll happen in 2020 - there's a reason a mainstream candidate didn't win this time, and also plenty of reason to think that Clinton could lose some of her unpopularity in office, benefit from an incumbant bonus and do decently next time round.
    As I said, unless she can get a voting majority in congress IT IS GONE in 4 years, or at least significant chunks of it. One would hope for the Congressional Republicans to cave would either require their desired changes to be implemented, or the major tax cuts Clinton is so against, preferring to trying to stop business leaving rather than making them want to stay.

    The thing about the incumbency advantage is it doesn't always work out that way, 4 years ago it didn't, Obama both winning fewer states and a smaller proportion of the popular vote, and he was young and healthy.

    For the "alt right" to win the nomination again in 2020 they need their candidate, if they're less bombastic they should still do fine, the grievances are likely to be no weaker in 4 years, if anything stronger. If the Republicans are smart they will actually be pandering a little to them, especially gvotershey're largely the new generation of voters

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    As I said, unless she can get a voting majority in congress IT IS GONE in 4 years, or at least significant chunks of it. One would hope for the Congressional Republicans to cave would either require their desired changes to be implemented, or the major tax cuts Clinton is so against, preferring to trying to stop business leaving rather than making them want to stay.

    The thing about the incumbency advantage is it doesn't always work out that way, 4 years ago it didn't, Obama both winning fewer states and a smaller proportion of the popular vote, and he was young and healthy.

    For the "alt right" to win the nomination again in 2020 they need their candidate, if they're less bombastic they should still do fine, the grievances are likely to be no weaker in 4 years, if anything stronger. If the Republicans are smart they will actually be pandering a little to them, especially gvotershey're largely the new generation of voters

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    So it's about the congressional race really. Right now I'd say the Senate is likely to go Democrat. The House should stay Republican, but isn't out of play if we see a Clinton landslide scenario.

    The incumbancy advantage doesn't suggest that a candidate will do better than they did the last time. It suggests the incumbant, even if they fall somewhat from their previous high, is normally still the favourite to beat the challenger. Hence it is indeed backed up by 2012, where Obama despite the healthcare controversy and relatively mediocre economic data defeated Romney without too much hassle.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    Pretty much sums you up.
    You don't even live in America yet you want 20 million people there to lose their access to healthcare? I seriously have to question both the judgement and intelligence of someone in Britain who genuinely wants to repeal the access to healthcare of people in a different country. The system is far more affordable than the previous system which left 40 million uninsured.


    * Casually strolls into the whitehouse? Trump is taking down the Republicans down with him. Hence Republicans en masse are disassociating with him in order to give themselves a chance in their own elections.
    Not to mention how infrequently an incumbent president is defeated.

    You also fail to acknowledge that Donald Trump wants a massive, controlling, interventionist state. The very thing you claim to be against yet not once have I seen you criticise him for that or even acknowledge it.
    How many ****ing times do you need telling that "you shouldn't support this candidate for reason x, instead I would expect you to support this other candidate that also wants to do x" is a fundamentally flawed argument. You shouldn't cut off your left arm because you will lose an arm, cut your right one off instead.

    Like Trump, and unlike Clinton, I do not believe that firearms manufacturers should be liable for the use of their products. Like Trump and unlike Clinton, I believe corporation tax should be coming down significantly. Like Trump and unlike Clinton, I believe that state lines should be removed from insurance providers. Like Trump and unlike Clinton I believe in equal pay for equal work, not equal pay for equal job. Like Trump, and I imagine unlike Clinton, I don't believe "gender identity" should be added to anti-discrimination law. Like Trump and unlike Clinton, I'm not a fan of farmer subsidies. Like Trump and unlike Clinton, I believe there should be cuts made rather than taxes raised.

    I could keep going, but I guess that's enough for now to blow the "I can't gibe a single policy" theory out of the water, we have eight now, and eight which also come with disagreeing with Clinton.

    Oh, and if you want to play "the aren't even an American and support x" game, tax hikes anybody?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    So it's about the congressional race really. Right now I'd say the Senate is likely to go Democrat. The House should stay Republican, but isn't out of play if we see a Clinton landslide scenario.

    The incumbancy advantage doesn't suggest that a candidate will do better than they did the last time. It suggests the incumbant, even if they fall somewhat from their previous high, is normally still the favourite to beat the challenger. Hence it is indeed backed up by 2012, where Obama despite the healthcare controversy and relatively mediocre economic data defeated Romney without too much hassle.
    Most predictions I'm seeing are giving a reduced majority in the house, and a toss up in the Senate. Perhaps an unfortunate third for the GOP given they hold 24 of the 34 seats that are up.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Most predictions I'm seeing are giving a reduced majority in the house, and a toss up in the Senate. Perhaps an unfortunate third for the GOP given they hold 24 of the 34 seats that are up.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    In absolute terms the Senate is a toss up, but there's a strong chance it's exactly a 50/50 in which case the Vice president has a deciding vote - and that looks much more likely to be Kaine than Pence.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Just saw the "fact checking" by NBC on yje second debate, it's hilarious, its basically all cases of saying "trump is lying because he's not quite quoting it word for word despite everybody knowing what he means"
    Attachment 586216

    Attachment 586218

    Although my favourite was AP and Trump saying Assad is attacking ISIS, despite their own reporting on it.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Just saw the "fact checking" by NBC on yje second debate, it's hilarious, its basically all cases of saying "trump is lying because he's not quite quoting it word for word despite everybody knowing what he means"
    Attachment 586216

    Attachment 586218

    Although my favourite was AP and Trump saying Assad is attacking ISIS, despite their own reporting on it.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    It's saying attachment not found.

    Is one of them were it says Hillary didn't acid wash her hard drives she used bleachbit ignoring what is actually meant by acid washed.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    How many ****ing times do you need telling that "you shouldn't support this candidate for reason x, instead I would expect you to support this other candidate that also wants to do x" is a fundamentally flawed argument. You shouldn't cut off your left arm because you will lose an arm, cut your right one off instead.

    Like Trump, and unlike Clinton, I do not believe that firearms manufacturers should be liable for the use of their products. Like Trump and unlike Clinton, I believe corporation tax should be coming down significantly. Like Trump and unlike Clinton, I believe that state lines should be removed from insurance providers. Like Trump and unlike Clinton I believe in equal pay for equal work, not equal pay for equal job. Like Trump, and I imagine unlike Clinton, I don't believe "gender identity" should be added to anti-discrimination law. Like Trump and unlike Clinton, I'm not a fan of farmer subsidies. Like Trump and unlike Clinton, I believe there should be cuts made rather than taxes raised.

    I could keep going, but I guess that's enough for now to blow the "I can't gibe a single policy" theory out of the water, we have eight now, and eight which also come with disagreeing with Clinton.

    Oh, and if you want to play "the aren't even an American and support x" game, tax hikes anybody?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    What a load of absolute fluff, but coming from you lately I expect little better.

    For a start, 'equal pay for equal work' is not a policy, it's a soundbite.
    Secondly Trump doesn't want cuts, to the contrary he wants to massively increase public spending and swell the size of the state. How do you square that with a massive reduction of taxes? You can't of course but logic and consistency have never been the friends of trump supporters. *Where has Clinton called for gender identity to be a part of anti discrimination law?

    And pray do tell me what Trumps health policy actually is because the most detail we have at the moment is that he wants to do 'so many good things'.

    You say you want cuts right? Well you do know trump has pledged extra spending on infrastructure, veterans, education, childcare, defence. His proposed expansion of the military alone would cost $450 billion according to the CRFB (a right wing fiscally conservative think tank). That's before we mention his plans to build a wall and monitor every mosque as well as putting inplace an extreme vetting system, all of which will cost a huge amount.

    *
    That's not even mentioning the sheer vagueness of his tax plans. At first he promised to tax small firms at just 15% before it was pointed out that this would cause high earners to masquerade as small businesses and has now been dropped.
    *
    So once again please tell me how he squares big tax cuts with huge spending increases.*
    Finally Trump promises to create 25 million new jobs, a mere 20 million more than forecast today without saying how or telling us how. It's like a campaign run by the far left, just promise everyone money, jobs happiness, motherhood and apple pie without having any idea on how to make good your promise.
    *
    * As I suspected you don't actually support his policies you just simply pretend his policies are what you want them to be rather than they actually are to make your tribal suppprt seem legitimate.

    *
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bornblue)
    snip
    You are wasting your time trying to have a rational debate with Jammy Duel and joecphillips on this issue. Nothing you say, no matter how well reasoned or how much evidence you have, is going to change their mind. They are either trolling or have been brain-washed, either way, don't pander to them. Engaging in rational opposition is a compliment neither Trump nor his supporters deserve. Let's just dismiss him as a buffoon, he isn't going to win so the less said about him the better.
 
 
 
Write a reply… Reply
Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. Oops, you need to agree to our Ts&Cs to register
  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: December 3, 2016
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Today on TSR
Poll
Would you rather have...?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Quick reply
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.