Waffentrager Posted October 23, 2016 Report Share Posted October 23, 2016 With the way Hillary seems to loathe Russia? I wouldn't bet on it. Putin's feelings towards Clinton seems to be likewise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Priory_of_Sion Posted October 23, 2016 Report Share Posted October 23, 2016 I think her career as SecState tells us she'll be much riskier in this regard than I'd be comfortable with. It wasn't pretty, and I'd agree it would be riskier than Obama's policies. However, I don't think you can make the argument that this means that she'll start shooting Su-34s out of the sky willy-nilly. Assad is not in favor of a caliphate, that is one of the big differences. SA wants to expand outside of their borders, if not by taking territory -- by spreading ideology. This is why they publicly (basically) supported ISIL, Nusra and other such terrorist groups. Assad is not a nice guy, but he is not as sinister. I'd argue he'd be tame under Russian control regardless, too much to sacrifice if he is not. I think Russia has a good chance of uniting Syria, Iraq, and Iran. Maybe even Turkey if they are lucky. Saudi Arabia is a wildcard and always has been. You could not support either one, but oh well. Putin's feelings towards Clinton seems to be likewise. Apparently this dates back to the 2011 Russian elections. Clinton said they were rigged, Putin said they weren't and accused Clinton of spurring protests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waffentrager Posted October 23, 2016 Report Share Posted October 23, 2016 Apparently this dates back to the 2011 Russian elections. Clinton said they were rigged, Putin said they weren't and accused Clinton of spurring protests. Makes sense. It's just repeating the same thing over and over. I think Russia has a good chance of uniting Syria, Iraq, and Iran. Maybe even Turkey if they are lucky. Saudi Arabia is a wildcard and always has been. Why unite when you can just annex, comrade? Priory_of_Sion 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted October 24, 2016 Report Share Posted October 24, 2016 So, what does everyone think of the chances of substantial civil unrest if Hillary and the Dems sweep the election and take control of all three branches of government?I think they're pretty high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donward Posted October 24, 2016 Report Share Posted October 24, 2016 The chances of civil unrest are high regardless of who wins. Belesarius 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted October 24, 2016 Report Share Posted October 24, 2016 The chances of civil unrest are high regardless of who wins. Yes, I think that's correct. I think the chances are lower if the people who feel like they have been whupped the past eight years get their guy elected, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SergeantMatt Posted October 24, 2016 Report Share Posted October 24, 2016 Highest chance scenario for civil unrest: If Hillary loses the popular vote but wins the electoral college. Priory_of_Sion, Ramlaen and Sturgeon 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Priory_of_Sion Posted October 24, 2016 Report Share Posted October 24, 2016 Highest chance scenario for civil unrest: If Hillary loses the popular vote but wins the electoral college. Especially if due to a faithless elector instead of not getting the right combination of states. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donward Posted October 24, 2016 Report Share Posted October 24, 2016 I'm waiting for neither candidate being able to lock up the 270 electoral votes, both coming in at 269 and the whole shooting match getting kicked over to the House of Representatives. Whereupon Paul Ryan and enough #NEVERTRUMP congressweasels give the race to Hillary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted October 24, 2016 Report Share Posted October 24, 2016 I'm waiting for neither candidate being able to lock up the 270 electoral votes, both coming in at 269 and the whole shooting match getting kicked over to the House of Representatives. Whereupon Paul Ryan and enough #NEVERTRUMP congressweasels give the race to Hillary. UTAH WANTS TO BELIEVE! http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-evan-mcmullin-could-win-utah-and-the-presidency/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belesarius Posted October 24, 2016 Report Share Posted October 24, 2016 So, what does everyone think of the chances of substantial civil unrest if Hillary and the Dems sweep the election and take control of all three branches of government? I think they're pretty high. No matter who wins, I wouldn't want to be a member of the Secret Service. Sturgeon 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter_Sobchak Posted October 24, 2016 Report Share Posted October 24, 2016 Highest chance scenario for civil unrest: If Hillary loses the popular vote but wins the electoral college. Fortunately, the odds of Hillary losing the popular vote are pretty damn slim. Belesarius 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter_Sobchak Posted October 24, 2016 Report Share Posted October 24, 2016 My favorite Trump quote to date: “When I drink my little wine — which is about the only wine I drink — and have my little cracker, I guess that is a form of asking for forgiveness, and I do that as often as possible because I feel cleansed,” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waffentrager Posted October 24, 2016 Report Share Posted October 24, 2016 Fortunately, the odds of Hillary losing the popular vote are pretty damn slim. The odds of Hillary loosing in anything is slim to none when pitted against Trump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramlaen Posted October 24, 2016 Report Share Posted October 24, 2016 I hope you guys are not basing your opinion on polls like the Arizona one that sampled D+34 in an R+5 state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ApplesauceBandit Posted October 24, 2016 Report Share Posted October 24, 2016 I hope you guys are not basing your opinion on polls like the Arizona one that sampled D+34 in an R+5 state. I wonder how that happens Sturgeon and T___A 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted October 24, 2016 Report Share Posted October 24, 2016 Yeah, I honestly think most of the polls are bullshit. Which doesn't mean Trump is leading or anything, it just means I have no idea please will this election stop please the pain oh god please no not two more weeks no Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ApplesauceBandit Posted October 25, 2016 Report Share Posted October 25, 2016 Mandela Effect in Action. The reality where Michael Moore hates Trump and the GoP is being overwritten by the reality where Michael Moore likes Trump. What's jarring is how short it's been since he said his thing about voting Trump being "legal terrorism". Ramlaen 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoooSeR Posted October 25, 2016 Report Share Posted October 25, 2016 Donward, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks and Lord_James 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronezhilet Posted October 25, 2016 Report Share Posted October 25, 2016 https://twitter.com/amyharvard_/status/790988224554373120 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronezhilet Posted October 25, 2016 Report Share Posted October 25, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulric Posted October 25, 2016 Report Share Posted October 25, 2016 So, what does everyone think of the chances of substantial civil unrest if Hillary and the Dems sweep the election and take control of all three branches of government? I think they're pretty high. I think the chances are rather low, primarily because conservative and right wing groups tend to be more civil than unrestful, while low level mass violence tends to come from left wing and progressive groups. However, god help us all if right wingers see fit to actually practice civil unrest on a large scale, because that will most likely end up being a civil war. Rioters tend to usually be impulsive people with no to few other preoccupations or social obligations. If we see right wing / conservative people rioting, that means that participating in social unrest is more important to them than things like there employment status, providing for a family, or maintaining a clean or cleanish criminal record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sturgeon Posted October 25, 2016 Report Share Posted October 25, 2016 I think the chances are rather low, primarily because conservative and right wing groups tend to be more civil than unrestful, while low level mass violence tends to come from left wing and progressive groups. However, god help us all if right wingers see fit to actually practice civil unrest on a large scale, because that will most likely end up being a civil war. You don't think there's a significant risk of violence from right-wing groups if Hillary and the Democrats sweep the Presidency, House, and Senate, and appoint Democratic justices to the SCOTUS, and thereby take control of every facet of government for eight years and possibly deal the death blow to the Republican party and conservative movement as we know it? I dunno, I don't really share your optimism. Jeeps_Guns_Tanks 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulric Posted October 25, 2016 Report Share Posted October 25, 2016 I think that there are a very few people that will initiate violence, but those that are inclined to violence will be much more motivated to act. This itself may not be enough to spark civil unrest and mass violence, but I can see several scenarios that could provide the necessary conditions for unrest to occur. Firstly, if these acts of violence occur with enough frequency and or intensity, it will bolster the motivation of some of the more reserved individuals. This may result in a positive feedback loop and escalation until a critical mass is reached. Secondly, there could be an event of an unprecedented nature that severely and negatively impacts the quality of life, or even the continuation of the everyday activities of enough people that they see fit to take action to rectify the cause of their discomfort. Either way, if these is violent demonstrations from the right, I think it will be a level of violence that this country has never seen before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulric Posted October 25, 2016 Report Share Posted October 25, 2016 I will say this, though. If Hillary and the the Dems sweep all three branches of government, if I were them, I would quickly develop a severe case of agoraphobia, lest I draw the scorn of Damocles. Sturgeon and Jeeps_Guns_Tanks 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts