Who's supporting Clinton?

This is a forum for discussing philosophical theories of government and social structure. It is not a venue for partisan rants or plugging favored candidates.

Re: Who's supporting Clinton?

Postby kudayta on October 1st, 2016, 4:39 pm 

Paul Anthony » Sat Oct 01, 2016 12:22 pm wrote:
kudayta » Sat Oct 01, 2016 12:23 pm wrote:Paul,

I hear a lot of right wing guys like you criticizing Common Core. What exactly is the problem with that? It does exactly what you request (outlines areas of study and set goals for content) without insisting on methods of instruction.

And mods, feel free to split this discussion off, if Paul's interested in discussing it.

"right-wing guys like you". I can't be sure, but I think there is an insult in there somewhere. :)

I try to help my grandchildren with their homework. They are ages 7, 8 and 11. Math was always my best subject and I am appalled by common core math. It most definitely includes methods of instruction - very illogical and overly complicated methods. At a time when kids are failing to learn math, this is a step backwards.

Naw, there's no insult in being right-wing. A lot of right wingers have gone off the rails in America as of late, but I think of you as more along the lines of George Will or Boris Johnson. We might disagree on stuff, but I wouldn't put a bullet in your head at first sight.

And as for the mathematical instructions, I see your point. I had an advantage on this growing up, my dad was an electrical engineer, yet despite this professional handicap he took great pride in his knowledge of history, philosophy, and science in general. He knew, off the top of his head, several different methods for arithmetic, and could date their development all the way back to the time of Pythagoras. The methods they use for arithmetic in Common Core are not illogical by any means, they're just not what you grew up with. I'm willing to bet that your own grandfather was taught the methods your grandchildren are taught. This specific complaint about "how they teach math today" has been going on for at least 50 years now. Observe:

User avatar
Active Member
Posts: 1216
Joined: 12 Nov 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Paul Anthony liked this post

Re: Who's supporting Clinton?

Postby Paul Anthony on October 1st, 2016, 5:27 pm 

Yes, there is some truth to your statement that methods have changed over time. I took math through Trig in HS... on the East Coast. Then I went to college on the West Coast, where I failed the Algebra qualifying exam.
It turns out, they had changed the TERMINOLOGY. I didn't have to re-learn the math, but I did have to learn the new vocabulary. Ironically, California called it THE NEW MATH back in 1964.

'cause Progressives hate it when things stay the same. :)
User avatar
Paul Anthony
Resident Member
Posts: 5682
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Location: Gilbert, AZ

Re: Who's supporting Clinton?

Postby hyksos on October 14th, 2016, 1:50 pm 

Okay so the "super-secret" minutes of Hillary's Goldman-Sachs speeches have been released by wikileaks.

I have reviewed them. Here are my observations and comments :

  • Hillary speaks to the bankers and financiers as a poll scientist. (One notorious poll scientist is Karl Rove) She talks about how her campaign can appeal to certain kinds of demographics , in order to pander and get their vote come November. The pollsters often refer to these groups by silly names. One of them they (not her) but they refer to as a "basket of losers". Hillary describes these people as having "low social mobility". I honestly do not know what "low social mobility" means precisely. But she carries on about how a certain message could be tailored to that group.
  • Hillary talks to the elite financiers about energy policy. As much as I can remember, she nearly repeats these points verbatim on television during the 2nd debate with Trump. Particularly in regards the energy question from the fat guy in the red sweater. (Ken Bone, who has become a sort of celebrity on social media now)
  • Clinton has been attacked for making a differentiation between having a public position and having a different "private position" on an issue. The reason this part of the Goldman-Sachs speeches was seized upon was because it appears to fit into the Rightwing conservative pundit narrative that "Hillary can't be trusted". On TV during the debate, Hillary explained this as something that was actually done by Abraham Lincoln. Trump and pundits tried to scoff this off. This scoffing was premature. Hillary did indeed refer to a particular incident with Lincoln from history during the speech.

All in all, I would definitely say there are no `bombshells` in the leaked Hillary speeches. For the morbidly curious, here is a secret speech Hillary gave to the National Multi-Housing Council in April of 2013.

But If Everybody's Watching, You Know, All Of The Back Room Discussions And The Deals, You Know, Then People Get A Little Nervous, To Say The Least. So, You Need Both A Public And A Private Position. You just have to sort of figure out how to -- getting back to that word, "balance" -- how to balance the public and the private efforts that are necessary to be successful, politically, and that's not just a comment about today. That, I think, has probably been true for all of our history, and if you saw the Spielberg movie, Lincoln, and how he was maneuvering and working to get the 13th Amendment passed, and he called one of my favorite predecessors, Secretary Seward, who had been the governor and senator from New York, ran against Lincoln for president, and he told Seward, I need your help to get this done. And Seward called some of his lobbyist friends who knew how to make a deal, and they just kept going at it. I mean, politics is like sausage being made. It is unsavory, and it always has been that way, but we usually end up where we need to be. But if everybody's watching, you know, all of the back room discussions and the deals, you know, then people get a little nervous, to say the least. So, you need both a public and a private position. And finally, I think -- I believe in evidence-based decision making. I want to know what the facts are. I mean, it's like when you guys go into some kind of a deal, you know, are you going to do that development or not, are you going to do that renovation or not, you know, you look at the numbers. You try to figure out what's going to work and what's not going to work.
User avatar
Active Member
Posts: 1907
Joined: 28 Nov 2014

Re: Who's supporting Clinton?

Postby SciameriKen on October 14th, 2016, 2:59 pm 

Correct me if I am wrong - but the speeches you are referring to are snippets found in Podesta's emails? Pieces that perhaps were being reworked or potentially reused? would it be fair to say you are actually analyzing only a small portion of the actual speech?
User avatar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1447
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Location: Buffalo, NY

Re: Who's supporting Clinton?

Postby hyksos on October 14th, 2016, 5:34 pm 

Yeah the Podesta emails were what I consulted. They attempted to highlight "bombshells" in the *gasp* , new and "shocking" revelations of the secret Clinton speeches.

Except nothing here is shocking. No bombshells.
User avatar
Active Member
Posts: 1907
Joined: 28 Nov 2014

Re: Who's supporting Clinton?

Postby TheVat on October 19th, 2019, 10:39 am 

Just a bit of 2019 closure (I'm sure all the RW partisans will be lining up this morning to apologize to Ms Clinton....):

A multiyear State Department probe of emails that were sent to former secretary of state Hillary Clinton’s private computer server concluded there was no systemic or deliberate mishandling of classified information by department employees, according to a report submitted to Congress this month.

The report appears to represent a final and anticlimactic chapter in a controversy that overshadowed the 2016 presidential campaign and exposed Clinton to fierce criticism that she later cited as a major factor in her loss to President Trump....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... story.html
User avatar
Forum Administrator
Posts: 7913
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills

Re: Who's supporting Clinton?

Postby bangstrom on October 19th, 2019, 2:11 pm 

The right wing nuts claim her real computer was in the Ukraine.
Posts: 831
Joined: 18 Sep 2014

Re: Who's supporting Clinton?

Postby kidjan on June 23rd, 2020, 7:13 pm 

SciameriKen » Thu Jul 21, 2016 8:28 pm wrote:
kidjan » Thu Jul 21, 2016 11:46 pm wrote:That's fine--just make sure you don't complain when a sexist sociopath with poor impulse control is literally the leader of the free world. Because it isn't just your vote--it's your words that matter here. Asking people to vote third party is literally inviting a Trump presidency.

The policy of fear once again. Vote for Clinton or else Trump is not the most inspiring slogan. I am voting for myself. Renaissance in America, its about time! That's my slogan

It's been nearly four years. I have to wonder if you still feel this flippant about your vote.
User avatar
Active Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: 25 Jul 2007
Location: Earth.
Forest_DumpTheVat liked this post


Return to Political Theory

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests