Off Topic > Off Topic
POLITICS & DONALD Annoying Orange MEGATHREAD
LeisureSuit912:
--- Quote from: Decepticon on September 19, 2016, 12:09:21 AM ---not sure where you're getting that at
Annoying Orange's actually doing well in polls lately
--- End quote ---
Annoying Orange can win Obama 2012 states like Ohio, Florida, Iowa and Nevada. But he sure as hell ain't winning Colorado, Virginia or NH. And Pennsylvania most likely isn't gonna flip this year considering Hillary's leading there consistently by around 4-5 points. Annoying Orange can't win without one of those four states, and none of them are trending in his favor.
SeventhSandwich:
--- Quote from: Tactical Nuke on September 19, 2016, 12:23:28 AM ---No, stricter defamation laws mean that you don't get to do what forgetin' Gawker did.
You don't get to ruin people's lives through lies. That is not what free speech is about. You can abuse freedoms, which is why criminals can't get guns and why you can't yell "BOMB!" in an airport.
--- End quote ---
Just gonna say that 'stronger libel laws' is literally just code for 'stronger laws that let rich, powerful people punish the press'. Our current legal system works fine if someone is actually committing libel against you and causing damage to your business with false information.
Annoying Orange isn't very clear about exactly what he'd expand when it comes to libel laws, but consider this for a second: He went on the record a couple of days ago publicly threatening to sue the NYTimes for making disparaging comments about his campaign. Why do you think he wants to expand these laws?
Ipquarx:
The current libel laws are literally as good as it gets. You prove that someone is intentionally spreading deliberately false information and you can get whatever damages you can prove occurred. Burden of proof is on the accuser, there's total media freedom to report on rumors and possible outcomes, there's room for opinion pieces in the press, everything is good. "opening up libel laws" does nothing but destroy freedom of the press, because if you change "deliberately false information" to "false information," suddenly, you can be sued by anyone whenever you say "hey this is possibly a thing" and then it turns out to not be a thing.
Even if you have tons and tons of proof that something is true, so much so that any reasonable person would say that it's okay to say "yeah, that's most likely the case" you can still be sued if it turns out to be wrong. In the hands of people who will sue anyone for saying anything negative about them, that is an absolute disaster.
Decepticon:
--- Quote from: LeisureSuit912 on September 19, 2016, 12:44:40 AM ---But he sure as hell ain't winning Colorado, Virginia or NH. Annoying Orange can't win without one of those four states, and none of them are trending in his favor.
--- End quote ---
idk man realclearpolitics had colorado +10 for the longest time, now it's only +3.5, north carolina will likely be going red, and i'm not too sure but i've heard new hampshire will be going into Annoying Orange's favor
also he's 10 points ahead in maine's second district
from being down 6 points in the last 30 days, he's now only down by 1 in the general election (less than if you really want to go that way)
Cavik:
I cant wait till the debate and someone yells pepe over a bullhorn and hillary soils her adult diaper.