The 'Murrica Politics Thread

[Multipackwolf]

The problem is a lot of politicians don't seem to realize the gravity of being a president, and that you actually effect the lives of countless people, not from just their own country, but others as well. And that for every life that is impacted, do they seriously think that nothing will come from it? You drop a bomb on a country, do they seriously expect people to be like "Oh yeah, well I guess whoever died deserved it". What kind of bologna is that.
Then you also need to take into account not just the problems outside of your own country, but the ones inside it as well. I'm still hearing about mass shootings in America, and everyone is still acting surprised as if it's a thing that they would never expect to happen. And you know what half the world is doing? We look at it on the news and think, well, nothing interesting is happening, lets see what's on netflix.

I was looking into statistics, and the amount of gun related incidents in America compared to the rest of the world is staggering. You people have over 100,000 incidents per year relating to gun violence. The closest country to that, outside of a war zone, had a little under 100.. It escapes my logic as to how anyone could think that "Gun control" in the sense that you LIMIT the gun types you can get, not TAKE EVERY SINGLE GUN AWAY, is a bad thing.

You also have the problem of your debt. What was it at? Like some stupidly imaginable number? Please, for the love of god stop spending so much on military advancement and other things which the modern world would quite frankly be fine without.

And if other countries are telling you that you should be doing this stuff, you should probably take note of them.

Exactly. I wouldn't feel save if I knew EVERYONE around me could own a gun. And if they say the reason people want guns is selfdefence. If no one owns a gun you don't need guns to defend yourself. Also sometimes you see small kids that are like 9 or 10 years old shoot a gun! Who thought that was a good idea!? And you keep hearing at the news about the militarized police. Thing's like swatting. That only is because everybody can own a shooting weapon.

The best solution is just to remove gun's entirely. But I think it's just to late to stop it. How are you going to remove gun's if everybody owns them. You will need to check every house and place.

[123outerme]

Why remove guns? That's stupid. Hunting is a sport. Also this one time one of my friends had to mercy kill a deer that was hit by a car, but not dead. If you didn't have a firearm to do so, it would be extremely dangerous, since they have extremely powerful legs, even if they've been hit by a a car. Guns themselves pose no danger to humans, whether sitting on a table or in the hands of a respectable individual, so why take them away? That's dumb. Take guns away from mental patients and radical extremists, and that will solve our problems.

Why remove guns? That's stupid. Hunting is a sport. Also this one time one of my friends had to mercy kill a deer that was hit by a car, but not dead. If you didn't have a firearm to do so, it would be extremely dangerous, since they have extremely powerful legs, even if they've been hit by a a car. Guns themselves pose no danger to humans, whether sitting on a table or in the hands of a respectable individual, so why take them away? That's dumb. Take guns away from mental patients and radical extremists, and that will solve our problems.

Here where i live in the Netherlands you can own a gun. Primarily for sport shooting and hunting. But you need a cursus you get can't have a criminal history. you need a special card and you get checked a couple times a year. And there are lots of rules. It takes a lot of effort but you prevent harmfull people from getting weapons. If everybody can own a gun how are you going to keep them away from dangerous people? And how do you know who is dangerous?

[Multipackwolf]

Why remove guns? That's stupid. Hunting is a sport. Also this one time one of my friends had to mercy kill a deer that was hit by a car, but not dead. If you didn't have a firearm to do so, it would be extremely dangerous, since they have extremely powerful legs, even if they've been hit by a a car. Guns themselves pose no danger to humans, whether sitting on a table or in the hands of a respectable individual, so why take them away? That's dumb. Take guns away from mental patients and radical extremists, and that will solve our problems.

I never said remove guns, I said limit the gun types. Why exactly do you need an assault rifle to "Protect" yourself?
I've never heard of these "Protection Rifles" that most americans seem to think exist.

[unfaithful p1nkbr0]

Why remove guns? That's stupid. Hunting is a sport. Also this one time one of my friends had to mercy kill a deer that was hit by a car, but not dead. If you didn't have a firearm to do so, it would be extremely dangerous, since they have extremely powerful legs, even if they've been hit by a a car. Guns themselves pose no danger to humans, whether sitting on a table or in the hands of a respectable individual, so why take them away? That's dumb. Take guns away from mental patients and radical extremists, and that will solve our problems.

I never said remove guns, I said limit the gun types. Why exactly do you need an assault rifle to "Protect" yourself?
I've never heard of these "Protection Rifles" that most americans seem to think exist.

Girl, you have so little idea of what you're talking about. I'd start researching guns before you continue.

I'm afraid of 3 presidents: Trump, Hillary, Bernie.

Trump is the one with the most sense of the three loonies. But Still, a wall. To protect us. From mexicans. I mean, the internet hates this guy enough already, I dont' have to continue much

Hillary. If she can't even handle her own emails, how the hell can she handle running a country. That's not even to mention all the crazy crap she's done as a politician leading up this point. Again, research.

Bernie: I hope you guys don't like money. I hope you guys hate money so much you wish you were dirt poor, because a president who has such overreaching policies regarding money, without even a High School Level understanding of politics is going to doom this country financially... exponentially moreso than it already is. The last to little idiots only rely on the American voters lack of understanding to win. And by golly, do american voters only vote on "what feels good" not facts.

[Stuart98]

It sounds an awful lot like you're voting based on what Fox news says, which is worse.

[Stuart98]

Felt like I should probably explain why you are completely wrong.

Why remove guns? That's stupid. Hunting is a sport. Also this one time one of my friends had to mercy kill a deer that was hit by a car, but not dead. If you didn't have a firearm to do so, it would be extremely dangerous, since they have extremely powerful legs, even if they've been hit by a a car. Guns themselves pose no danger to humans, whether sitting on a table or in the hands of a respectable individual, so why take them away? That's dumb. Take guns away from mental patients and radical extremists, and that will solve our problems.

I never said remove guns, I said limit the gun types. Why exactly do you need an assault rifle to "Protect" yourself?
I've never heard of these "Protection Rifles" that most americans seem to think exist.

Girl, you have so little idea of what you're talking about. I'd start researching guns before you continue.

Largely true. An assault rifle is a term that makes for great media ratings, but when you get to defining it it all falls apart. More gun control is absolutely needed, but an assault weapons ban is not the answer.

I'm afraid of 3 presidents: Trump, Hillary, Bernie.

Trump will never be President of the United States. Nothing realistically will change that.
A Clinton presidency wouldn't be amazing and would be about the same as Obama's has been, unless she did something stupid and started WW3 with Russia.
You could not be more wrong about Bernie.

Trump is the one with the most sense of the three loonies. But Still, a wall. To protect us. From mexicans. I mean, the internet hates this guy enough already, I dont' have to continue much

The only times Trump makes sense is when he echoes progressive Democrats, like he did Tuesday saying that infrastructure spending would have been better than the Iraq war.

Hillary. If she can't even handle her own emails, how the hell can she handle running a country. That's not even to mention all the crazy crap she's done as a politician leading up this point. Again, research.

I'm no fan of Hillary, but I don't consider emailgate damning. Were mistakes made? Probably. But this wasn't a massive lapse of judgement. I'm more worried about her Iraq war vote and her actions in overthrowing Qaddafi in Libya. Domestically I see no evidence that she would be a worse President than Obama (Who is, while not an amazing president, not bad either).

Bernie: I hope you guys don't like money. I hope you guys hate money so much you wish you were dirt poor, because a president who has such overreaching policies regarding money, without even a High School Level understanding of politics is going to doom this country financially... exponentially moreso than it already is. The last to little idiots only rely on the American voters lack of understanding to win. And by golly, do american voters only vote on "what feels good" not facts.

Bernie's been a successful politician for three decades, he understands politics. I think what you mean is economics, but you're also wrong.

Fun fact: Bernie Sanders' healthcare plan would cost us $15 trillion over a ten year period. We currently spend about $30 trillion on healthcare over a 10 year period. In other words, we'd be saving trillions in a ten year period by adopting it. Taxes would go up, but we'd no longer be paying for private insurance and the average American family would save thousands on insurance under his plan. We spend twice as much as Canada and three times as much Britain on health care. Rectifying that won't somehow make us poorer.

Our infrastructure is crumbling. We spend billions on temporary measures. When Sanders says that he'd invest $1 trillion in permanent solutions to our crumbling infrastructure, he means invest.
See here: http://money.cnn.com/2013/02/12/news/ec ... -spending/
Not only would we create thousands, if not millions of new jobs, we'd also be saving ourselves money.

Also looks like you've got a two for one logical fallacy. You've got a faulty straw man by saying that Bernie's supporters only do so to feel good (dismissing the many legitimate reasons for which he has an overwhelming majority of his supporters), and you're coupling that with an ad hominem attack. That's bad, and you should feel bad.

[unfaithful p1nkbr0]

It sounds an awful lot like you're voting based on what Fox news says, which is worse.

I don't vote based on what Fox News Says. I watch all news stations equally... in fact, I watch Fox least of all the others. But, you know, let's all assume he watches that Fox News because he isn't a "Bernie Baby" millennial hipster who hates republicans for no other reason than because the Internet says so.

[unfaithful p1nkbr0]

Felt like I should probably explain why you are completely wrong.

1. We can agree on Trump. Moving on.

However, Right now, I'm too tired, too excited, too medicated, and far too concerned with other, far more interesting subjects than gathering up all my sources and information at 3am to have a debate with some kid on the internet. (who, by the way, lead off his entire tirade with an ad hominem, thank you very much.) There's a reason why I quit tumblr. Dealing with people who won't listen is already hard enough at my job. Dealing with people who are self-perpetuatingly ignorant is just attrocious. Work comes first. Internet Second. (and watching my money disappear due to taxes)

I'll leave you with this:


Also would like to add:
What happens in this thread, stays in this thread. You created a politics thread knowing well what the consequences were. I do not want this affecting anything outside this thread, got it?

[Stuart98]

Felt like I should probably explain why you are completely wrong.

1. We can agree on Trump. Moving on.

However, Right now, I'm too tired, too excited, too medicated, and far too concerned with other, far more interesting subjects than gathering up all my sources and information at 3am to have a debate with some kid on the internet. (who, by the way, lead off his entire tirade with an ad hominem, thank you very much.) There's a reason why I quit tumblr. Dealing with people who won't listen is already hard enough at my job. Dealing with people who are self-perpetuatingly ignorant is just attrocious. Work comes first. Internet Second. (and watching my money disappear due to taxes)

I'll leave you with this:


Also would like to add:
What happens in this thread, stays in this thread. You created a politics thread knowing well what the consequences were. I do not want this affecting anything outside this thread, got it?

You're right, I shouldn't have said that you have your opinions because you watch too much Fox news any more than you should have said that all Bernie supporters are idiots.

[Multipackwolf]

Felt like I should probably explain why you are completely wrong.

I never said remove guns, I said limit the gun types. Why exactly do you need an assault rifle to "Protect" yourself?
I've never heard of these "Protection Rifles" that most americans seem to think exist.

Girl, you have so little idea of what you're talking about. I'd start researching guns before you continue.

Largely true. An assault rifle is a term that makes for great media ratings, but when you get to defining it it all falls apart. More gun control is absolutely needed, but an assault weapons ban is not the answer.

I'm not saying an assault weapon ban is needed, I mean lets be honest, how many guns do you think are out there in America that are equally as deadly as an assault rifle but is not classified as one? Assuming the entire population has a gun, you're looking at how many guns? No, a gun ban itself isn't going make the slightest difference.
I'm also not saying get rid of all guns because guns are bad and blah blah blah.. Etc etc etc stupid moron person speech who doesn't know what they're saying. I mean, in America, it's literally in the law that says you can own a gun. AND lets be honest here, most of the gun related deaths would be from handguns. Simply because it's easy to conceal. And also lets be honest in getting people to all hand in their guns? Well that's just one way to make everyone hate you.

Here in Australia (now please don't assume I'm trying to say that Australia is somehow better, because I'm not, I'm simply pointing out the truth) we are able to obtain a gun. Any ordinary civilian is able to. But most people don't because well.. Nobody else has one do they? In fact most farmers in Australia would own a gun. But we never seem to hear of a farming going off and shooting people because bullets are expensive and running a farm is quite expensive as well. In any case, in order to obtain a gun, you either need a really good reason, eg, you're a farmer and you want one to protect your animals and crops from predetors. Or you can apply for one, go through about a gajillion tests to make sure you're perfectly sane (RIP ME) wait a few months, get a gun licence, be restricted to the gun range for the next few years before finally being anle to even take a gun home...

Bit extensive. But it works and very few people get shot. Now, that would obviously be unnacceptable in america, but a similar system with less checkpoints would probably be more effective then simply willy nilly saying you can't have these gun types. And the people who are against gun control, don't seem to completely understand how it would work instead of being like "You want this gun? $600 and it's yours. Thank you have a nice day."

But when it comes down to it, the only country that will decide on if they want to attempt to prevent mass shootings every other week, is America. No other country can step in and be like, you're doing it wrong. And I'm sure there are hundreds of other systems that would be perfectly acceptable in controlling the weapon types. Maybe if you're found to be absolutely perfectly, 100%, out-of-your-mind, nutcase insane you're still able to own a low caliber fire arm, I don't know.

Personally, none of the mainstream republicans make any sense to me. Trump, Carson, Cruz, Rubio, Bush, they all just seem to be religious fanatics, anti-science, or just plain crazy (or some combination of those). Their ideals are so anti-American that it's hard to take them seriously.

[Stuart98]

Personally, none of the mainstream republicans make any sense to me. Trump, Carson, Cruz, Rubio, Bush, they all just seem to be religious fanatics, anti-science, or just plain crazy (or some combination of those). Their ideals are so anti-American that it's hard to take them seriously.

The only people for whom they make any sense are as crazy as the candidates themselves are.

To be honest, every presidential election for the past decades is essentially a choice between the lesser of two evils. No wonder the voting turn-out is low compared to some western countries. The presidential race is like a race between two corporate horses. Most of the debates consist of lip-service, patriotic rhetoric, blame game,empty promises or personal attacks made by candidates of either party while the gap between the rich and poor keeps widening and the debt keeps increasing. While I agree that some candidates are worse than others (Trump springs to mind), both parties are full of it. Just my two cents.