Jill Stein, Green Party Candidate for President 2016

Here's an example of what I mean by disqualifying insincerity for me, the man speaks out of both sides of his mouth so much that I legitimately do not know what he really believes on almost anything:



I'm fine with changing positions, but this seems like wholesale pandering about one's stances.

This is Trump not Carson

I don't know why you keep bringing up Trump when the subject is Ben Carson.

You don't want to explain your claim that Carson is unintelligent and insincere beyond something to the effect of "that's just what I think."

OK

Actually, the subject is Jill Stein (and I enjoy your discussion, just pointing that out)

Carson was introduced to the thread by snood. Robert added his comment about Carson, and I commented as well. That discussion, at least, was about Carson.

There are different kinds of intelligence, and the judging of it is very subjective. One person's pedant is another's scholar; one person's bumbling clueless clown is another's brilliant business mogul.

And just for the sake of accuracy in the recalling of how the discussion has unfolded - I did introduce Carson to the discussion, but only to illustrate a point I was attempting to make about how we judge one's readiness (Jill Stein per the OP) to be POTUS.

I get it, but Robert tends to scold the rest of us for tangents and tell us to start a new thread. I'm fine with short or middle sized tangents, but that's me.

Maybe in one of the new schemes we can have a tangentopoli around some subjects.

I see Robert's point for the kind of debates we used to have, Thomas and Joe from Chicago et al, and also for ordinary stability of topic.

I sometimes like the flipping though.

Yep, don't have the time or will to try to convince anyone that Carson is unworthy of the presidency. It's a moot point (he's out) and my discussion of him was about how we evaluate candidates in general and not a debate on him or his candidacy. I'll freely admit that I my opinion on him in this thread has never risen above an ipse dixit, but it was not the central point I was making and was merely an example of my thinking toward that end (of making the point that beyond basic disqualifying dispositional criteria I don't have a lot of situational criteria, and political positions are the thing I most care about).

I guess you didn't believe me when I said "OK."

I am curious, is everybody suddenly having blank boxes on the youtube links in post? The reason I ask is that I seem to get a lot annoying hang ups which might not happen to all posters here.

On the current subject of judging if someone would be intelligent in their field but not necessarily intelligent in ways they should be to be president, I get what you were saying. I imagine there are a lot of lab genius's who don't have a lot of common sense much less the scope of knowledge needed to be leader of the US and deal with all kinds of different issues both domestic and abroad.

Yes, I have also noticed that ALL of the youtube boxes posted on Able2Know (A2K) are blank boxes. I thought it might have just been me experiencing this. Since you are asking this question, it may be occurring throughout the entire A2K. This has been occurring with me for approximately 2 to 3 days. Are there any other members experiencing this issue?

We think it's on YouTube's end - they may have changed something with their coding.

Thanks for answering.

I can't say since my dear departing iMac hasn't let me see embedded youtube links for months now, but I can still click on the link under the embedding frame. Usually people don't describe what they are linking, so it's a stab in the dark, as it were. I'm used to it now, and in my case it's not the fault of A2K, and I doubt it's youtube's fault either. Interesting though that it's happening more widely than on my peculiar device.

Anyone else watching the CNN town hall with Stein and Baraka?

Nope, but I wouldn't mind hearing about it.

Fascinating stuff. She and Baraka definitely have passionate convictions. (I'm not yet so numbed by the corrupt system that visions for a new way of doing things can't move me.) Probably the most dramatic moment in the questioning for me was when a young man asked Stein how she would be able to sleep at night if she helped elect Trump. She says she's not a politician, but her answer was sure slippery. She said Trumps words are scary, but Hillary's track record is scary, and that we can't be ruled by fear. The young man followed up by asking "Can you win in this corrupt system?" She was again ready with a torrent of high sounding words, but what she said boiled down to "If we vote our convictions and not our fears, yes, something could happen," She also referred to the 43 million young people who she would free from student debt - she implied that if they believed she would free them from debt, they would vote for her.

I know I've read about Baraka more than once over the years, but not lately and forget the details..
this link brings some of it back -
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/08/17/the-wild-beliefs-of-ajamu-baraka-jill-stein-s-green-party-running-mate.html