World, Writing, Wealth discussion

Ok, guys, the event is almost upon us. I know, it's cynical to say it - but the show was/is good and engaging. Really, you have everything here - from alleged non-compliance with confidentiality procedures and flood of e-mails, through alleged sexism, alleged Russians meddling, despise, fear of some and fervent support of others. No one's indifferent. Even kids in schools in countries thousands miles away from the US are in anticipation and familiar with Clinton and Trump.
Soon it'll be over.
So, friends in the US: do you prepare champagne or checking residency requirements in Canada? -:)

Please elect Clinton, I beg of you.

Think of the rest of us.

Thanks, Alexis representin' the Netherlands.

Lol.

Alexis wrote: "Please elect Clinton, I beg of you.

Think of the rest of us.

Thanks, Alexis representin' the Netherlands.

Lol."

Do I sense intervention in internal affairs of another country? -:)

Nik wrote: "Alexis wrote: "Please elect Clinton, I beg of you.

Think of the rest of us.

Thanks, Alexis representin' the Netherlands.

Lol."

Do I sense intervention in internal affairs of another country? -:)"

Nik, I can't handle another change in the political world. Brexit has left me bruised. As a believer in a more united world and a strong European Union (I blame the handsome teacher that taught international and EU law) it bothers me to see it all being threatened by this rise of really, alternative right nationalism, in so many western countries.

Yeah, those handsome teachers... -:)

Don't think nationalism is always bad, but share your concern though

I think Nationalism can become "bad" when people allow "pride of country" or their own self interests to rule their better judgment.

For example, I'm a big believer in international trade (one of the books that has made a big impression of me is actually not a textbook but The Choice: A Fable of Free Trade and Protection), and what I see now is that a lot of people are (legitimately) concerned about losing their jobs due to outsourcing to other countries or something like that.

However politicians play into those fears instead of highlighting the benefits of free trade: e.g. two countries produce the thing that they can do more efficiently ultimately means that both countries benefit and social welfare increases in both countries. The latter also has a great effect on international relations since countries that are doing well are less likely to need foreign aid and things like that.

I think that people are too focused on 1. All the jobs are going to China and 2. Immigrants, immigrants to really see how those two things really affect social and economic welfare. I understand a worker being too concerned with his own life to care about social welfare but to see politicians who aught to know better pretend that trade and a global economy are bad things bothers me.

Alexis wrote: "I think Nationalism can become "bad" when people allow "pride of country" or their own self interests to rule their better judgment.

For example, I'm a big believer in international trade (one of ..."

Sure, it can be bad, disastrous and ugly, if nationalism superimposes one nation over others...
International trade also is not one-sided. Of course, it has lots of merits, but it has downsides, which on a policy level should be addressed. An individual entrepreneur doesn't care about the grand pic. If he/she can fire all his 'expensive' employees in one place and replace them with much 'cheaper' ones in another part of the globe, where on top of that one doesn't need to care about environment protection or other stuff that much, they'd likely do it, but there need to be some policy addressing the 'side-effects'. Production migrates, the question whether trade, R&D and services replace it sufficiently.

Very interesting, Alexis! "The Choice " is a written as a Socratic dialogue to solve a fictional problem in international trade. I added it to my long list.

I wish I could be glib or wistful about it but I can't. If Trump is elected it will kill a part of my soul. I look at my beautiful, vibrant, intelligent, happy nieces and i ache to imagine what world they will grow up in. They are future women of color in a country that is decreasingly tolerant of womanhood and race. My fears are personal and also indicative of the fears expressed by so many people in this country today. Will we be shouted down on election day by people who want to hide their hatred behind a corrupt, bigoted, immoral businessman? I know, I know, people hate Hilary but she is flawed not the devil. She is not under investigation for the rape of a twelve year old child. She has never referred to to anyone as pigs or nasty. She has never referred to her own daughter, on the record, as (view spoiler)[a piece of ass. (hide spoiler)] Trump truly, truly frightens me.

I personally plan on voting Libertarian. That being said, I'd rather see Trump win. Hillary just has so much baggage, and now there's talk of an investigation into a DC pedophile ring headed by Jeffrey Epstien who is a close friend of the Clintons.

If Hillary wins, America is for sale to the highest bidder.

Anita wrote: "I personally plan on voting Libertarian. That being said, I'd rather see Trump win. Hillary just has so much baggage, and now there's talk of an investigation into a DC pedophile ring headed by Jef..."

Speaking of Epstein, it was at his mansion that Trump allegedly assaulted the twelve year old girl - with eyewitnesses. That is much worse than being friends with a pedophile.

https://www.usracing.com/odds/us-pres...

10/41 in favor of Clinton
2/1 against Trump

since Clinton will most likely carry California (see http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/11/02...), my current thinking is to throw my vote behind Jill Stein, Green, because they at least support an alternative to the current "first past the post" plurality voting method--the Green platform supports instant run-off--and they also support cutting the military budget by at least 50% (a laudable goal, but we have to be pragmatic about its implementation). There are other things that I don't quite agree on, but basically I'm in-line with their philosophy. They have a really detailed platform--unlike the others.

http://www.jill2016.com/platform

yesterday, my sister texted me and said that if the Green party gets 5% of the vote, then they'll get some federal funding.

Tara wrote: "I wish I could be glib or wistful about it but I can't. If Trump is elected it will kill a part of my soul. I look at my beautiful, vibrant, intelligent, happy nieces and i ache to imagine what wor..."

Hi Tara, the US establishment itself is more powerful than any president. I just don't see much changing either for the better or the worse with either candidate. (maybe I'll be surprised).

My expectation is that the establishment status quo will win the election regardless of who ends up in the white house.

How often have you seen politicians change their tune once they are in office, policies get watered down, or dropped altogether. Entirely new policies are brought into play, etc, etc...

As per the Harvard University study reported in the New Yorker here.

The authors of the study conclude (my bolding),

“In the United States, our findings indicate, the majority does not rule—at least not in the causal sense of actually determining policy outcomes. When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover … even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it.”

Alex G wrote: "There are other things that I don't quite agree on, but basically I'm in-line with their philosophy. They have a really detailed platform--unlike the others.

http://www.jill2016.com/platform

yesterday, my sister texted me and said that if the Green party gets 5% of the vote, then they'll get some federal funding...."

Hi Alex, I note from the Jill Stein policy platform the following elements

Justice for All:

[1] Enforce the Bill of Rights by protecting the right to free speech and protest, to be secure from unwarranted search and seizure and invasion of privacy, as well as our other Constitutional rights.

[2] Terminate unconstitutional surveillance and unwarranted spying, close Guantanamo, and repeal indefinite detention without charge or trial. Repeal the unconstitutional provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act that give the president the power to indefinitely imprison and even assassinate American citizens without due process.

[3] Repeal the Patriot Act that violates our constitutional right to privacy and protection against unreasonable search and seizure.

Are people on this site aware of the damage to the Bill of Rights that has been done during the Bush and Obama presidencies?

I hope that everyone is aware that the Patriot act was signed into law shortly after 9/11 by George W Bush, and directly empowered the rise of our current surveillance state in violation of the 4th amendment.

What people may be surprised by, is that at the end of 2011, Barack Obama signed the 2012 NDAA, which is the subject of clause [2] above.

Two good summaries of the 2012 NDAA are by Naomi Wolf and the American Civil Liberties Union

Food for thought - it strikes me that Jill Stein is, in many ways, a genuine anti-establishment, anti-status quo politician.

Graeme Rodaughan wrote: "Tara wrote: "I wish I could be glib or wistful about it but I can't. If Trump is elected it will kill a part of my soul. I look at my beautiful, vibrant, intelligent, happy nieces and i ache to ima..."

I actually agree with you but my fears are more entrenched. What bothers me is the fact that Trump has given people permission to let their misogyny and bigotry come to the forefront of not only the political but the social conversation. I worry about the erosion of the acceptance that we must at least pretend to be fair and civil. I worry about the rents and tears in the social fabric if someone as crude, lecherous and disturbingly, dangerously amoral as Trump is elected.

Hi Tara, agreed.

It's a very difficult situation.

I remain surprised that both major parties can't find better candidates.

As an outsider watching from the back fence, the whole campaign, including the primaries seem to have been about each candidate denigrating their opponents, and policies are largely invisible (I assume they do exist - just hard to see with all the muck that is being thrown).

I shake my head, and ask myself, is this the best that humanity can do?

The dominant emotion I feel about the process is sadness.

Graeme Rodaughan wrote: "Hi Tara, agreed.

It's a very difficult situation.

I remain surprised that both major parties can't find better candidates.

As an outsider watching from the back fence, the whole campaign, includ..."

GR needs a like button.

As a foreigner, I am reluctant to get too involved in thinking about this election (although I have a long-range prediction awaiting) but I do have a question.

How does anyone, in a 4-year period, write 650,000 emails????

And why put them on Weiners' server????

Ian wrote: "As a foreigner, I am reluctant to get too involved in thinking about this election (although I have a long-range prediction awaiting) but I do have a question.

How does anyone, in a 4-year period,..."

That's about 448 emails a day. Forgive me if I'm a bit skeptical about the numbers. As for putting them on Weiner's server it may have to do with the fact that his wife is a top -level Clinton official. That makes me think that Mrs. Weiner had Clinton's log-in information in order to handle correspondance. If she were not the only one to have that access it sure would explain the amount of emails. In fact, I'll bet the server could prove that multiple emails were being sent simultaneously from different IPOs - proof that more than one employee was logged in to Clinton's account(s). This could be a security or protocol breach if I'm not mistaken. Not the same as rape but not good.

I'm dying to hear your prediction!

You probably are not dying to hear my prediction. It was made about a year ago, and before the candidates had even begun to sort themselves out. I picked the Donald, not because I thought he was good, but because I thought too many were sick of the Dems and Clinton, that Bernie would not be able to beat the machine, and that the Donald would clean up the GOP as all there reasonable candidates split the sane vote.

And no, I did not think Hillary wrote that many, but if other stuff was filtering on, as you suggested, then that suggests there was a lot of scope for a major security leak.

Ian wrote: "You probably are not dying to hear my prediction. It was made about a year ago, and before the candidates had even begun to sort themselves out. I picked the Donald, not because I thought he was go..."

Ah - I see.

Champagne for me. It's an easy choice - Democracy or Nazism.

Ian wrote: "As a foreigner, I am reluctant to get too involved in thinking about this election (although I have a long-range prediction awaiting)"

(just thought that i'd put this bug to rest because i've seen this come up a number of times.)

we're all part of a global community. i don't believe that any reasonable person would want to deny any other human being an opportunity to express an opinion on their country. i certainly wouldn't and in fact i invite it. it's all part of a socratic dialogue.

blast away.

Alex G wrote: "Ian wrote: "As a foreigner, I am reluctant to get too involved in thinking about this election (although I have a long-range prediction awaiting)"

(just thought that i'd put this bug to rest becau..."

Agree and I also enjoy the perspectives of others.

Graeme Rodaughan wrote: "As per the Harvard University study reported in the New Yorker here.

The authors of the study conclude (my bolding),
“In the United States, our findings indicate, the majority does not rule—at least not in the causal sense of actually determining policy outcomes. When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover … even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it.”.."

Interesting study. Thanks for bringing it, Graeme.
If true, it also exemplifies the difference between subtlety of the West (Oligarchs rule, but who sees that behind the veil of 'democracy', 'majority' and other cute slogans?) and crudeness of the East (Oligarchs rule in the open and everybody knows that) -:)

Just to let you know (and I've been saying this to all my American friends) if the worst-case scenario should come to pass, I imagine Immigration Canada will be overwhelmed by people requesting visas and refugee status.

As such, I am have been toying with the idea of starting a coyote business to get all you folks feeling the US to settle in Canada. I intend to provide extremely low fees, snacks and water will be provided, and there will be NO funny business or any of that intimidation or human slavery bullshit! I plan to be the nicest coyote that ever existed, should it come to that :)

.... And you offer blondes, if I remember correctly -:)

Nik wrote: "If true, it also exemplifies the difference between subtlety of the West (Oligarchs rule, but who sees that behind the veil of 'democracy', 'majority' and other cute slogans?) and crudeness of the East (Oligarchs rule in the open and everybody knows that) -:)..."

That sums up my basic position.

There are two basic modes of control that rulers use with the ruled - deception and coercion. At the end of the day, the only thing that the rulers require is obedience.

Matthew wrote: "Just to let you know (and I've been saying this to all my American friends) if the worst-case scenario should come to pass, I imagine Immigration Canada will be overwhelmed by people requesting vis..."

Ask to be paid in gold and silver...

Tara wrote: "Ian wrote: "As a foreigner, I am reluctant to get too involved in thinking about this election (although I have a long-range prediction awaiting) but I do have a question.

How does anyone, in a 4-..."

So many places to jump in...I think I'll stay out of the politics for once and bring some light to the email question.

How can someone have/send so many emails? If you looked at the batch from the DNC leaks, there was some spam, and a lot of auto-generated emails when people gave money to the DNC. None of these people are writing 65,000 emails, that number includes the plethora of emails arriving in their inbox, probably never even being read. If someone sends an email about something said on CNN or Fox News or whatever, then everyone in the organization copies it and forwards it to everyone else, if for nothing else than to make everyone they work with think they're keeping on top of things.

I'm not sure anyone involved in this email mess thinks every one of those emails is serious, but the large numbers politicians throw out sure make the scandal sound serious. The large number of emails Wikileaks releases sure makes it sound like they landed on a serious treasure trove.

On a light note, just think about people in the future going to the Barack Obama Presidential Library and flipping through his emails, amazed at all the Viagra spam showing up in his inbox...:D

I can't wait to vote! :P

You must not live in an early voting state :D

NC just ended early voting with 44% of registered voters having cast their ballots already. The media keeps saying African Americans are not coming out for Clinton in the numbers that came out for Obama in 2008, and then people point out the record early voting figures and the numbers of African Americans that are waiting in line for up to two and a half hours to cast their votes.

It's kind of funny how there is all this talk about people staying home because of the two candidates, but it will be interesting to see if there is actually record turnout because of the zoo.

Wonder why the elections are spread over a few days.
Saw on TV the other day this 100 year old lady that had already voted in Florida(?), I think. Now NC appears to have voted.
Is the election date just some approximate advice? -:)

Nik wrote: "Wonder why the elections are spread over a few days.
Saw on TV the other day this 100 year old lady that had already voted in Florida(?), I think. Now NC appears to have voted.
Is the election date..."

i had no idea that there was early voting. that skews the voting patterns.

Here's some info on the early voting:

https://ballotpedia.org/Early_voting

Thanks, Jimmy, that pretty much clarifies the situ. And how early in advance can one vote?

I have a suspicion that a number of dead people will vote for both candidates...

Not the same dead people voting for both candidates - that would be shocking...

I guess if one early voted and died - then yes, it would be like the last electoral will -:)

Not quite the thread, but what happens if the winner dies after the votes are cast and before they are counted? After all, neither are in the first flush of health.
I really hope the answer isn't that we get to watch a re-run.

Hope the question remains theoretical..
Hypothetically, maybe a spouse inherits the chair? Bill is very experienced, while Melania has her own advantages -:) Anyway, some say spouses have more influence on political establishment than lobbies and sponsors

I feel like I'm choosing between global financial collapse (Hillary) or world war III (Trump). Both lead to apocalypse . . .

Hi Kevin,

Or vice versa... or, even both...

Kevin wrote: "I feel like I'm choosing between global financial collapse (Hillary) or world war III (Trump). Both lead to apocalypse . . ."

One of the above eventualities may lead to another, but hope nothing of the sort happens and whoever's elected will be a responsible dude. I believe none of the candidates is as bad as they are portrayed by the rival and some radical statements might not reflect their inner conviction .
Just in case ... any advice how to quickly turn a house into a bomb shelter? -:)

Vance wrote: "Not quite the thread, but what happens if the winner dies after the votes are cast and before they are counted? After all, neither are in the first flush of health.
I really hope the answer isn't t..."

Then, I believe that the VP nominee of that candidate will take over.

My sister told me that there's a push to get Bernie enough electoral votes such that no candidate has a simple majority and enough so that becomes in 3rd. According to the 12th amendment, it would then be voted on in the house of reps, each state getting 1 vote.

Graeme Rodaughan wrote: "I have a suspicion that a number of dead people will vote for both candidates..."

You keep making these Trump like statements, Graeme. I can only provide what I can find in journalism:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/t...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/t...

Here's the Trump side of the story:

http://thefederalist.com/2016/10/13/v...

Oh, I didn't think Graeme was entirely serious, but now I see what it's all about...
Well, in some places they indeed employ the described tactics, such as dead people voting and multiple vote in different locations for rigging elections. Hope nothing of the sort happens tomorrow or at least nothing beyond negligible..

There hasn't been any evidence of anything beyond negligible at best.

I can't bring myself to understand how this election is even contentious. I'm reminded of the 2004 election, and how my extended American family said things like "this election is a joke, we don't even know why its happening". And those days seem civilized and dignified compared to this one.