Dang, I posted and used the wrong character for *quality so now I have to post again because the edited version doesn't pick up my Siftbot order. Siftbot, pay attention!

Lol, it's okay Faust, there's lots of people like you who struggle to pay attention to things if they're not shiny or exciting enough for you. You get bonus points though for proving you were just pretending to have a normal 'ugh, man that guy's monotone voice' conversation when actually you were interested in attacking his character for political reasons. Well done.

I agree that choosing between Hillary and Trump is like being forced to choose between being punched in the face and having your arm broken.

Why wouldn't you choose a third option?

Oh, that's right, because you get you arm broken anyway.

Exactly what do you think is going to change by not voting or voting 3rd party (effectively the same in the US)? All you're doing is basically allowing someone else to decide which shit sandwich you have to eat.

It's naive in the extreme.

If you really think there is no difference between Trump and Hillary, then go ahead and don't vote or vote Kermit the Frog or whatever.

But if you have been paying attention the last year or so, then you have to vote for the lesser of two evils. This isn't the time for grandstanding.

Let's put it this way. If you want political change in the US, do you think that's more likely if Trump gets elected?? Seriously?

I hate it when people don't pay attention to the safety instructions on planes. You can stop looking at your laptop or cellphone for a minute to learn what will save you life - AND MINE - if something goes wrong.

They also ought to include "In the event of an emergency landing, LEAVE YOUR FUCKING CARRY-ON BEHIND AND GET OFF THE PLANE, ASSHOLE."

Not only does it look like the DNC played foul, she picked Tim Kaine for her VP instead of a progressive candidate. It's like she and the whole party just said, fuck the progressives and all of Sander's supporters.

Unfortunately the media isn't paying attention to Jill Stein, and only noticing Gary Johnson, as she's the one who would most appeal to Sanders supporters and other progressives since the Democratic party seems to have moved to where Republicans were in the 80s while the Republicans make a huge shift even further and further to the right...

I'm starting to be genuinely afraid of America's future with Trump as President... hell, I'm worried for the world's future with Trump as President. I've got no skills that would allow me to move to Canada, the UK, New Zealand/Australia or any other place worth moving to.

Like I'd need another reason to not pay attention to the conversation.

I'm far enough away from these issues to admit that I don't have anything like concrete knowledge on the subject, but I feel like I should mention some of the more obvious counterpoints to some of the things he's said in this video. Otherwise I'd get that dirty echo chamber feeling, and no amount of showering seems to wash that away. Could be I'm just a masochist, though, who enjoys arguing.

I think there's racism in every culture. I think it's often much more subtle than described in the video, often even subconscious. I also think that modern western culture is among the least racist cultures to have ever existed, despite our many complaints.

I guess I'll talk about Libya first. The west (the white people he was talking about) is continuously demonized for supporting tyrants and the like. Yet when they participate in overthrowing a clear example of a extravagant super villain tyrant, they are demonized for that. I'm not saying they didn't have other motives, I'm just saying that it's an example of a tautology. No matter which choice they make they are labeled racist.

Now, when beleaguered folk make a desperate attempt to dangerously cross a sea, well knowing the risks they are incurring, it is again the fault of the Italians for not rescuing then with sufficient alacrity. Yes, many of them are coming from countries the west had a hand in destabilizing. But it would be pretty racist for you to demand that the Italian navy take full moral responsibility for the actions of other western nations, simply because they are white too. Also, if the only number you pay attention to is the number that drown, your bias is showing.

Next the issue of the Commonwealth. It seems absurd to expect the UK to treat former colonies populated by citizens that had moved there the same as former conquests that have since shrugged off the yoke of empire. The justifications for this discrimination would seem to be a combination of racism, cultural chauvinism and sober pragmatism. The latter two factors clearly scale with the gap between the culture of the colony in question and the home country, and probably ought to in some sense.

The incarceration thing is tougher to poke holes in, and clearly a much more touchy subject. Once could argue all sorts of justifications for why more members of ethnic minorities are apprehended, but it's nebulous and smells of bias and chauvinism, at best ending in a chicken vs egg conundrum. But once you're in police custody, I think can agree on demanding a higher level of equality of outcome. So I checked out a charity called Inquest who had compiled pretty comprehensive stats on police custody deaths since 1990. Here's a link: http://www.inquest.org.uk/statistics/bame-deaths-in-police-custody
To summarise, since 1990, ethnic minorities have made up a total of 153 out of 1557 deaths in police custody, or roughly 10%. Given that they currently make up 13% of the population, that seems to be well within an acceptable range of results, so I was confused at first. Then I thought maybe he had misspoken and had meant to say state custody, or inmate deaths. So again I looked for some numbers, and again Inquest had the most comprehensive data, broken down by year and ethnicity etc. Again here's a link: http://www.inquest.org.uk/statistics/deaths-in-prison
It shows 453 out of 3963 prison deaths are suffered by ethnic minorities. This seems almost perfectly in line with the 13% population of said minorities. So again, I'm a bit confused by the point he's making.

All of that said, I think I agree with the sentiment of his presentation, which perhaps confuses me even more.

@harlequinn Nothing says we only do one thing.

And the rest of us have a problem with the "I don't want congrats" line not because of bigotry or misinformation. We people who are paying attention to this narcissist see it as appalling bad taste that Donald makes this tragedy so baldly about how great he is. So soon after the event.

It is astounding to me that this needs to be explained. It is almost as if false narratives are being created here. Almost as if deliberate misdirection is being attempted.

Or maybe it is true misunderstanding, and the difference between bigotry and narcissism is truly something that can't be distinguished.

Well, now you know, right?

@ChaosEngine

I don't think this ad is aimed at Trump supporters -- I had the very same thought as you, that this would not sway them.

But Trump supporters are a tiny portion of the electorate. There are many people who haven't been paying attention. They haven't seen what we have seen.

So this will be news to them.

Well, that is the hope, of course.

I feel she is bad as Trump over her record. Racist? Check. Even Obama spit on her apology when she went to ask for forgiveness for her blatant racism, then exploded on him when he wasn't about to be a fool.

Chronic liar? Check. I know some embellishing is to be expected but there is a certain point when it becomes too much. Florida Governor Rick Scott is a great example of batshit crazy lying. Sarah Palin is too. Yet they never claimed to be under sniper fire, downplayed a massive federal investigation (because she tried to be shady because she is fucking stupid) and lied about their record every chance they got.

Homophobic? Of course we can't ask and won't tell...I mean if those faggots try to marry she won't support it unless it wins her an election...stupid faggots... Oh wait, definitely against LBGT. Check.

Bribed? Check...

Inciting? Check. If it serves a purpose sure.

I could go on and on. But to do so is to lessen my own validity. And if you aren't sure about those examples, don't ask me to cite them please. They are well-known and anyone not paying attention to their candidate of choice doesn't deserve a to be handed the information they should know...

How could you possibly rate any movie with Jennifer Lawrence as terrible. That would mean you're taking your attention away from Jennifer to pay attention to the movie. Clearly impossible.

Someone didn't pay attention in Trig class....

I was never paying attention when Fiorina was around.

What was her deal? Crazy?

@ChaosEngine

i think we agree more than we disagree.

example:
me:
"freedom of speech is the right to speak freely.
to espouse our opinions,philosophy and yes,our bigotry and prejudice,with legal immunity,but NOT social impunity."

you:
"As I've said before, the "dangers of PC" are vastly outweighed by the dangers of people using the so-called dangers of PC as an excuse for racist, sexist bullshit. This is how it works. They get to say their shit and we get to call them on it."

i was not accusing you of holding an extreme left ideology.i was simply pointing to the dangers of controlling speech.

in fact,just so you know i was paying attention,one of my favorite lines from you in regards to PC is "don't be a dick".

short and to the point.

the fault in our exchange may reside with me.
i am not "anti PC".
i am against those who hold a far more radical view than you do in regards to language,words,safe spaces,trigger warnings etc etc.who seek to demand,through political machinations,the legal impositions of certain words having legal consequences.

which is censorship.

i realize you are not part of this small (but growing) radical band of merry offendees,and you have stated so publicly and often.

my guilt lies in the fact that i will tag you to make a larger point.i basically used your comment to expand on the growing dangers of a small cadre of radical lefties who seek to control how we interact.

the reason i did this,and have in the past,is due to my perceptions of you being far more thicker skinned than most.when we are talking about people being offended easily,i need someone with a thicker skin to interact with to further my point.

that and i think you are decent dude.who is reasonable and rational.so even if there is a bit of assumption and presumption,you wont go full blown rage machine on me,and allow for a decent conversation.

so my apologies my man.
i tend to use your comments on PC to expand on a point that i find concerning.

You are so right, so lets not try. Everyone, just accept your place in society and please stop trying to make anything better.

Wait a second, that sounds a lot like the attitude that is so reviled by the socially irresponsible Republican party of late. Isn't that the problem with poor people? They just accept their lot in life and live off the welfare system.

The hypocrisy is everywhere.

It's like the magic trick where you hold something so tight that you don't even realize it is gone until you open your hand and see it hasn't been there for most of the trick. Keep paying for your security and the hope that you can get rich, don't pay attention to the people making it impossible for you to ever make it there.

No matter how well Obama did, vote for Sanders. At least you are trying. When you stop trying you are now part of the problem.