?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
03 August 2016 @ 11:31 pm
How politics change  
10 months ago when I took isidewith quiz, Trump was much further down.
But now he moved closer to my views and is in the second place (after Gary Johnson).
Now Trump and I share 79% of views (was 69% back in October 2015).
It looks like Trump is doing what analysts predicted he would be doing: after winning Republican primaries he changed his rhetoric to embrace some popular Democratic and Libertarian views.

Hillary Clinton was at 67% and now she is down to 64%.
It's a wrong move after winning Democratic Primaries.
It looks like she does not want to win this elections.
:-)
 
 
 
Clean and soberanspa on August 4th, 2016 03:33 am (UTC)
How do you plan to vote?
Dennis Gorelikdennisgorelik on August 4th, 2016 04:02 am (UTC)
Most likely - Gary Johnson.
You can see that he shares most of my views at 93%.

How do you plan to vote?
Clean and soberanspa on August 4th, 2016 06:00 am (UTC)
It looks like I ain't gonna go at all. My state will vote Clinton. My county would vote Trump. Both are disgusting.
Dennis Gorelikdennisgorelik on August 4th, 2016 06:03 am (UTC)
Is Gary Johnson disgusting for you too?
Clean and soberanspa on August 4th, 2016 12:00 pm (UTC)
He is close to ideal to me, same as for you, but he does not stand a chance. Unfortunately.
Dennis Gorelikdennisgorelik on August 4th, 2016 01:05 pm (UTC)
> he does not stand a chance

Why wouldn't you vote for Gary Johnson anyway?
Why not show that he has support, so whatever candidate would win - would pay attention.
Clean and soberanspa on August 5th, 2016 02:47 pm (UTC)
What would it change? Besides, his numbers are negligent in polls. But I am seriously debating that with myself - between not voting and voting for him.
Dennis Gorelikdennisgorelik on August 5th, 2016 06:10 pm (UTC)
Extra vote that would prove that Libertarian ideas have support in the US electoral base.

Prove that you personally care, and therefore agreeing with you may help politicians to get elected.
That, in turn, would increase your influence on the behavior of US government.
Clean and soberanspa on August 5th, 2016 08:19 pm (UTC)
I am kind of sofa fighter. Besides, I do not believe that libertarian ideas would get any significant traction with the population.
Dennis Gorelikdennisgorelik on August 5th, 2016 11:53 pm (UTC)
> libertarian ideas would get any significant traction with the population.

That would be true if libertarians, like you, would keep ignoring elections.

This time libertarians actually have better chance, considering how pissed people are about both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.
Clean and soberanspa on August 6th, 2016 01:25 am (UTC)
Or, libertarian ideas are doomed, they will be never picked up by public seriously.
Dennis Gorelikdennisgorelik on August 6th, 2016 04:12 am (UTC)
My impression is that libertarian ideas are slowly growing in popularity over the years.
Why do you think they will be never picked up by public seriously?
Clean and soberanspa on August 6th, 2016 04:26 am (UTC)
I think it is growing amongst educated middle-class (as a way to protect themselves from government oppression and increasing ways of taxation). Majority of population would not accept libertarian ideas, as those are based on self-dependency and little government involvement. There are too many people expecting certain level of care from the government. For them idea of small government and some other ideas may look too radical.
Dennis Gorelikdennisgorelik on August 6th, 2016 04:31 am (UTC)
Libertarian ideas do not necessarily imply borderline anarchy.
There are different shades of libertarianism.

You do not have to cut government expenses 10x in one year. You can cut the expenses 5%/year.
Or even simply prevent from growing and let inflation handle it.

Of course general population would not accept 10x government expenses cut. But much softer measures - why not?
Clean and soberanspa on August 6th, 2016 04:44 am (UTC)
Даже 5% сокращение бюджета это очень серьезная штука. Я вообще не представляю как снять с иглы бесконечных бюджетных ресурсов всю систему. Нужна сильная ломка. На это хватит духу только у сильных людей, которые а) понимают как работает существующая система б) знают чем ее заменить. Мне кажется такое возможно только в результате каких-то сильных потрясений или как результат войны. Когда больного все равно надо будет резать.
Dennis Gorelikdennisgorelik on August 6th, 2016 05:13 am (UTC)
Естественный уровень увольнений - как минимум 10% в год.
Если просто перестать нанимать - можно очень многих сократить.
При этом, если оставшихся заставлять работать за ушедших, то желающих уволиться будет ещё больше.

А ведь ещё и частный сектор будет расцветать, и, соответственно, желающих работать на Дядю Сэма будет ещё меньше.

Было бы желание в обществе урезать эту подгнивающую бюрократическую систему.
Anatoli Dontsovlamantyn on August 4th, 2016 03:52 am (UTC)
Obama "sacrifices nothing" and had no experience (community organizer with $200K budget).
He promised to close Guantanamo. Not happened.

Trump used rhetoric to stir swamp and get attention.
He is capable to listen and make actual&good plan of actions.
Of course there will be no wall, but pressure on the neighbor to establish law and order and stop illegal immigration and flow of drugs.


> It looks like she does not want to win this elections.

The new recession is around of corner.
Bill Clinton's dot-com bubble exploded as soon as Bush moved into White House.
Obama's bubble (borrowing of $10T) will explode in Hillary's hands.
Dennis Gorelikdennisgorelik on August 4th, 2016 04:06 am (UTC)
> He promised to close Guantanamo. Not happened.

Obama also promised to end Iraq war. That did happen.
That is more important, than Guantanamo.

> Bill Clinton's dot-com bubble

Do you think Bill Clinton is responsible for that bubble?
Anatoli Dontsovlamantyn on August 4th, 2016 04:23 am (UTC)
> Obama also promised to end Iraq war. That did happen.

Really? He just gave small pause to bad guys to regroup and get half of Syria and half of Iraq.

"The U.S. Air Force has fired off more than 20,000 missiles and bombs since the U.S. bombing campaign against ISIS began 15 months ago, according to the Air Force, leading to depleted munitions stockpiles and calls to ramp up funding and weapons production."


> Do you think Bill Clinton is responsible for that bubble?

Absolutely. "It is economy, stupid" (c)
Dennis Gorelikdennisgorelik on August 4th, 2016 04:41 am (UTC)
> Really? He just gave small pause to bad guys to regroup and get half of Syria and half of Iraq.

That's mostly Iraq's problem now.
Why should that concern us?

There are no US troops fighting in Iraq anymore.

> "The U.S. Air Force has fired off more than 20,000 missiles and bombs since the U.S. bombing campaign against ISIS began 15 months ago, according to the Air Force, leading to depleted munitions stockpiles and calls to ramp up funding and weapons production."

Do you think Obama should not get involved into bombing campaign against ISIS?

> Absolutely.

What specifically did Bill Clinton do to cause that dot com bubble?
Anatoli Dontsovlamantyn on August 4th, 2016 05:06 am (UTC)
> That's mostly Iraq's problem now.
> Why should that concern us?

We are responsible for this mess.
Killing dictators like Hussein, Qaddafi, Assad is good thing.
But if we destroy something, we have to rebuild that.
As a moral obligation.

Otherwise we have to deal with huge wave of refuges, without language and working skills to contribute to new country.

"Hillary Clinton: U.S. should take 65,000 Syrian refugees"
For our leftist friend getting a cute girl on stage and mocking Trump was joy,
but for thousand raped German women it was not.
Dennis Gorelikdennisgorelik on August 4th, 2016 05:43 am (UTC)
> But if we destroy something, we have to rebuild that.

Even if Iraqis do NOT want the US to do that "rebuild"?

> Otherwise we have to deal with huge wave of refuges

It does not follow.

I agree that it's better to minimize the wave or refuges. But if US military involvement caused that wave of refugees, then continuing that military involvement would likely worsen the situation, not improve it.

> but for thousand raped German women it was not.

Is there any statistics that shows that thousand German women were raped by these refugees?
Anatoli Dontsovlamantyn on August 4th, 2016 05:13 am (UTC)
> What specifically did Bill Clinton do to cause that dot com bubble?

Clinton signed the Financial Services Modernization Act, commonly known as Gramm-Leach-Bliley, repealing the key components of Glass-Steagall.
Dennis Gorelikdennisgorelik on August 4th, 2016 05:33 am (UTC)
How could that Financial Services Modernization Act (1999) possibly affect Dot Com Bubble that started around ~1997?
Anatoli Dontsovlamantyn on August 4th, 2016 06:04 am (UTC)
Glass–Steagall was not really enforced already and FCMA just legalized things.

It not started bubble (there are always bubbles), but allowed it to grow to disproportional level.
He also signed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which exempted credit-default swaps from regulation. In 1995 Clinton loosened housing rules by rewriting the Community Reinvestment Act, which put added pressure on banks to lend in low-income neighborhoods.

Whatever happened (5 or 10 reasons) - Clinton was at the helm.
Dennis Gorelikdennisgorelik on August 4th, 2016 06:09 am (UTC)
I find it strange that you are blaming Bill Clinton for 2008-2009 housing bubble.
If Bill Clinton's decision to loose regulations was wrong - then Bush Administration had many years to fix that (and did not).


Edited at 2016-08-04 06:11 am (UTC)
rezkiy on August 4th, 2016 05:13 am (UTC)
I side with Gary Johnson, and everyone else is so much further down that they are not worth mentioning. I only remember that Clinton was last.
Dennis Gorelikdennisgorelik on August 4th, 2016 05:26 am (UTC)
So who are you going to vote for?
rezkiy on August 4th, 2016 05:33 am (UTC)
I vote for USCIS who make it so freaking complicated to file a citizenship application (although I am long ago eligible).

Given that I'm in California, Gary Johnson. Were I in a battleground state, it would have been Trump.
Dennis Gorelikdennisgorelik on August 4th, 2016 05:44 am (UTC)
Do you mean you still did not get your US citizenship because it's hard to file citizenship application?
rezkiy on August 4th, 2016 06:01 am (UTC)
correct. Green card renewal application is easier to complete.
Dennis Gorelikdennisgorelik on August 4th, 2016 06:04 am (UTC)
What is hard about filing US citizenship application?

I remember that getting original Green Card was much harder.
rezkiy on August 4th, 2016 06:24 am (UTC)
1. I am actually waiting till I have not been out of the country for five years _for sure_. Because I crossed the Mexican border, with no track record.

2. 12.7.A once I filed a tax return for like $100 to be returned to me and it was not accepted and I did not notice until a year later. I have no fucking clue what to do.
Dennis Gorelikdennisgorelik on August 4th, 2016 06:29 am (UTC)
> out of the country for five years _for sure_.

When would that be?

When, according to your own calculations, was the time you've been in the US for 5 years (as a permanent resident)?

> I filed a tax return for like $100 to be returned to me and it was not accepted

What does it have to do with US citizenship application?
rezkiy on August 4th, 2016 06:52 am (UTC)
12.7.A is a question on the application that I do not know how to answer precisely. I want to make sure I say everything precisely.

all that said, I recon one day I hire a lawyer and they will help me with that shit.
rezkiy on August 4th, 2016 06:53 am (UTC)
>> When would that be?

later this yer I believe. I will check the timestamps on photos.
rezkiy on August 4th, 2016 06:55 am (UTC)
>> When, according to your own calculations, was the time you've been in the US for 5 years (as a permanent resident)?

I got my LPR status in 2001. I was considering to abandon it but I reconsidered after MSFT made me an offer I could not refuse in 2004. I moved to US in 2004.
Dmitry Duginov: hatduginov on August 5th, 2016 12:59 am (UTC)
Mostly agree. And we actually discussed it today over beers. In NJ you can vote for Santa Claus, Hillary wins anyway. So, I'll probably vote for Johnson