Jump to content
Forums upgraded! Read more... ×
cn-nadc.net | North Atlantic Defense Coalition

daoide

NADC Assembly
  • Content Count

    46
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About daoide

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Cybernations Info

  • Nation Link
    http://www.cybernations.net/nation_drill_display.asp?Nation_ID=410737
  • Nation Ruler
    daoide
  • Nation Name
    dahoam
  • Resource One
    Iron
  • Resource Two
    Wheat
  1. daoide

    Republican National Convention

    @Gandorian: Thanks again for the reply and the sane political discussion, a rare occurrence nowadays. Agreed on scare tactics, agreed on limited immigration. Also agreed on governments' job is protecting its citizens. But saying: "no muslims" is not limiting immigration. With the NSA's and CIA's capabilities, plus however many agencies' we have, plus the almost unlimited surveillance, plus spying on basically everybody anytime, it should not be a problem to focus these powers on the threats that are in the country already and simultaneously protect the borders from the others. My point is not: allow everybody in. My point is: you just can't equal Muslim = bad, and that bringing up this equation repeatedly is racist and therefore I don't like it. Agreed again on voter turnout and your prediction. Will be a tight race. Let's see if Hillary can cheat her way to Florida - maybe the happy ties to the Bush dynasty pay off again for her. Legally she will not win. She very likely actually lost the primaries, given all the counts of reported election fraud. The DNCleaks, the convention and the incredibly blatant disregard for democracy in her own party will cost her dearly. And rightfully so. Trump is right (if only in that one point) calling her crooked. I didn't follow Sander's campaign too closely, so I can only guess here on the facts regarding college education you mentioned. I agree again, vocational training and a whole system of dedicated schools and employees supporting apprentices would be a huge benefit. Southern German example: they have 3 types of schools after elementary school. After grade 4 you can decide which one you want to attend. High school (5-13) for those with better grades, Middle school (5-10) for those with medium grades and Basic school (5-9) for the rest. Given your grades are sufficient, you can always switch between those. Only Highschool graduation allows you to go to college. Middle and Main school start apprenticeships in all trades, typically for 3 to 3.5 years. During that time you are attending another school, working at your job about 2/3 of the time, 1/3 at school. After that apprenticeship you graduate and are sufficiently equipped to work in your trade, either staying at the company that trained you or searching for a new employer. After that you can start a master's education, another 2 years. With that you can open your own business in this trade, train apprentices, and even go to college if you wish. I do not have any official numbers available, but I would guess that about 35-40% start a college education in Germany. And that although college is free. No cost except some general fees, a couple of hundred per year. Free college does not necessarily mean everybody will go there - after all you need a certain level of intelligence - but as you already said, it only works if the rest can attend something else, just like vocational training (which in turn benefits employers, they get cheap labor during the training, and skilled workers at the end). Regarding abortion: I have to compliment your well-written and thought out piece. But without getting into details, I'll stick to my opinion that this is not a political topic. I was raised catholic and still support the values. Even so I am convinced that it is not for the government to decide what a woman has to do or not to do with her body. I suggest we agree to disagree here. @Augustus: Very good, so you agree that there are similarities? Surely, he won't go out and start ordering all Muslims to be killed, right? Maybe just deport them? Or we could round them up in camps first, makes it easier... Sorry to go on your nerves here and also sorry for the agressiveness in my words, but how can you not see that this guy is freaking dangerous? Not his actions, there are none, but his words and level of harshness is unheard of in this country, making this racism acceptable in todays' society. And that's what I don't like one bit. I would not go so far to use Stalin as example, he was another level of asshole, but I would certainly compare HRC to any dictator / autocrat out there. Maybe Erdogan in Turkey right now is a good fit. I am not a fan of crooked Hillary either. So yes, Mulgrave has a valid point there. I am not sure what will happen, who will win, but I assume that the level of corruption is higher in the HRC camp, so they have better connections to cheat their way to the presidency. Will I like it? No. Will I like Trump? Neither. Tough times for us medium-smart but sane-minded people. Vote Quimby, that's the least bad option.
  2. daoide

    Republican National Convention

    Thanks for the reply, I'll try to clarify: I do not believe that all Republicans are racist. Same as I do not believe that all muslims are bad, all Christians are good or all Democrats are saints. This is not what I said and I do not want to imply that. I just want to point out, that the amount and intensity of hate speech has increased significantly from the start of the primaries, and that the reaction of the general public, the media, and the opposition has disappointingly been being less and less outraged about it. This is a path to racism that I think is dangerous. Correct, the statement about being against young families has a weak base, I apologize for that. I wanted to point out that the GOP had analyzed which target groups and demographics of voters they need to improve in, compared to 2012 - but they failed miserably in appealing to those voters. I should have clarified that millenials, first-time voters and not necessarily young families are one of those target groups. I have no idea how to improve education for school kids. How to make it fair or equal chances. Vouchers sound like a good idea, but I honestly have not enough insight into that topic. My not very elaborate argument above was targeting the horrendous costs of higher education. I am also not on board with Clinton's plan there. She just offered a great new deal for her banking buddies, not a real solution for the young adults. Both parties had a chance there to appeal to millenials, but failed. I strongly believe that higher education should be mostly free and available to everybody, given that one proves qualification for it. How to achieve that: no idea. That's what I would have hoped to hear about from either of the parties, none delivered. (Well, Bernie did kind of, but that's a different story) As for abortion: I understand that there are two very different opinions without a chance to compromise, and I won't really argue about that topic. Is abortion ethically acceptable? In some cases certainly, not in the majority of cases though. Is forcing a woman to have an unwanted child ethical? Certainly not. But that is not a political topic in my opinion, or at least nothing the federal government should get involved in. So please scratch that from my comment above. Thanks, vote Quimby!
  3. daoide

    Republican National Convention

    Supporting Law Enforcement is not racism, correct. 3 African Americans speaking at your convention is not prove of anti-racism either though. I am not implying that there was an isolated incident of white supremacy at the RNC. But it is blatantly obvious that - since the nominee entered the primary race - the language, tone and content of the GOP turned more and more to the far right. Deporting 12 million illegal immigrants. Ban all Muslims. Deport them too. And let's build a wall. It's not that these statements are absurd, it's frightening as how "ordinary" these statements are conceived now. There is no outrage in the "liberal media" about these lines anymore. There are no protests against this kind of hate speech. We all silently accept this and start thinking "it's okay, at least he didn't say to kill them all. It's not that bad, it's just words." Nope, over the course of the last year we witnessed how socially acceptable these remarks - and not just the remarks, but especially the actual stance behind these words - have become. The dangerous and frightening path is: gradually accepting more and more crass, radical statements. Until one day one of these people says something along the lines of "let's round them up and shoot 'em all". Hitler started his political career in a democracy. He was able to convince a lot of people that he will make Germany great again. His party got elected in a multi-party system, just above 40% of the vote was enough to claim almost the majority of seats in the parliament. With a couple of smaller parties he gained enough seats to run the country. From then on, he systematically got rid of opposition and free media. He started forbidding other parties, then hunted down politicians and incarcerated them. In the beginning he was painting himself as the savior of the nation. Gradually he started planting anti-semitic ideology. Speech after speech he would ramp up the harshness. This culminated with the staged "burning of the Reichstag", which he successfully blamed on the Jews. The end is well known. I'm not comparing Trump to Hitler. I'm just stating that standing by and watching racist remarks from getting ignored to getting laughed at to getting applauded is a dangerous path. Once it is acceptable to say that all Muslims are bad guys, then the difference to "all Jews are bad" is not that big anymore.
  4. daoide

    Republican National Convention

    Resident alien here, genuinely interested in politics, not allowed to vote in US though. I tried watching the coverage. I tried hard, really hard. I just can't. I switched from FoxNews to PBS, whenever e.g. the O'Reilly Report got too crazy and I needed some sanity inbetween. Switched back for another dose of craziness, but it's too much. Some thoughts: - yes, it's perfectly clear that this event is just a show, a circus (for both parties btw) - still, I would expect at least _some_ decency, discussion, actual content, actual programme - and not just blaring one-liners, hyping the crowd without saying anything - this will certainly be alike for the DNC in a few days - just the tone will change from far-right to we-love-all-refugees-and-you-too More thoughts: - what really got to me from the RNC is the extreme shift from 4 years ago - the GOP analyzed after 2012 how they lost to a president with low approval rates and concluded that they need to improve their appeal to young voters, femaler voters, latino voters to stand a chance in 2016 - however, after realizing this, they acted the complete opposite, driven by the far-right. - the agenda is against young families (against affordable education, against pro-choice, ...), against females (traditional views of wives in the kitchen, against pro-choice, ...) and latinos (against immigration reform, ...) - this strategy, to ignore the findings of the 2012 mistakes, was probably fueled by the need to get donors on board, who would not support a more realistic and modern, non-religious approach to those demographics. - so as a result, feeling that they are again out of touch with those key demographics, they decide to yell even louder, get angrier, drum up more drama. - which leads to a way more far-right position on all of those topics, which again makes the whole party look like outdated, antiquated fools, that lost a whole generation of millenials (although HRC also does not appeal to this generation). - so instead of seizing the opportunity and moving the party into a modern position, they made things worse and are now stuck between a rock and a hard place. - for the sake of their donors and some credibility amongst the dwindling supporters they can't go back on the known topics - they also can't get to more open approaches towards new topics, without forfeiting their credibility with their other supporters. So what do they do? That's what terrified me: they decide to not give a flying F and just be openly racist. On live TV. 'Might as well tell them voters how we really think.' Conservative views are valid opinions and there are loads of people supporting that direction. But what we saw and heard there was just a horrifyingly populist, propagandist demonstration of what to expect when those guys actually get to power. And then there's the candidates. Cruz would have been a nightmare. Surreal religious beliefs, hardliner in so many fields, not a good idea. Rubio would have been a disappointment. Prototype of the sleazy, slimy career-politician, that does everything he needs to do to get into power. Not for the people, just for him and his operation. Trump is amazing. Without 1 single word of content, without once saying what exactly he will do or won't do, he wins easily. Fascinating. Tell people what they want to hear and they'll believe what they want to be true. But certainly a horrifying situation, this guy. Pence is the one I fear most. Almost the same as Cruz, completely out of touch, and most likely acting president in case Trump wins. Kasich, Paul are the only candidates I had some respect for, due to their realistic views on topics. That doesn't win the primary crowds though, sadly. So, to sum up: The circus show is getting scarier than ever, because of candidates and speech / language. Driven by a horrible primary season, the contents shifted so far right, it's basically religious fanatics preaching from stage now. Most scary: accepting this kind of open racism on live TV and thus making it publicly acceptable. Will lead to bad things. tl;dr: I don't like it one bit.
×