Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
MOD OP EDIT: Please put general conversations about Trump here. Anything that is not exceptionally deserving of its own OP on this topic will be merged into this discussion. And let's keep things relatively polite. Thanks.
Comments (24161)
To your point, the "typical conservatives" I know in the town where I grew up are not "good at divorcing people from subjects". They are very emotionally intelligent people. They comprise a very tight knit community of people who all have very similar values. As to "what they want", they want that tight knit community to remain in place. I don't agree with them politically, but this is the most balanced picture I can paint of them.
As I re-read the post I made, I realize this is anecdotal evidence, not "more than anecdotal". Oh well.
Moron.
Sorry. I figure some actual anecdotal observations are better than musings from across the pond.
Since it's the American election I just assumed we were talking about it.
I am reasonably confident that Biden will win the presidency, but much less confident that the Democrats will take control of the Senate, which IMO is a much bigger deal.
The US - along with their lesser partner in the UK - has a been a laboratory for neoliberal policy which they have actively pushed upon and enforced - by threats, exercised in many cases - all throughout the world. It pioneered the pauperization and casualization of workforce - a model which it has exported globally - the explosion of the financial sector from which billions of people are excluded even as it continues to eat up the world economy, has actively destroyed entire swathes of the Middle-East through either active slaughter or via support of murderous regimes like Saudi Arabia - the chief exporter of the Islamic 'extremist ideology' which is now infesting Europe and South East Asia like an open wound, continues to intervene and undermine democratically elected governments in South America for the sake of resource acquisition, and this is to say nothing of it's systematic murder and imprisonment of it's own citizens based on both the color of their skin and their being an economic underclass.
The cultural values it exports - on the back of its near monopoly of English speaking media, of which, incidentally, it pioneered the art of turning news into infotainment - is toxic and continues to toxify under Trump, and is an absolute poison to everyone who touches it, including communities around me. It's co-option of both 'freedom 'and 'democracy' have turned both words into sludge, and has stained them both, perhaps irredeemably, for the rest of the planet. It is among the leading carbon emitters on Earth and when it all turns into literal fiery hellscape - a future not far off, and already here in some places, including my own backyard - it will have been responsible for a great deal of it. And none of this - or at least almost none of it - will be different if Biden wins. Which, Jesus, it's actually looking close, which is an insane indictment on it's own, even if he does. The only other country that deserves as much vitriol directed it's way is China, whom, of course, the US has enabled every step of the way for the sake of cheap shoes.
And man, this isn't even the half of it. I realize bashing Americans on a predominantly American populated forum isn't exactly the ticket to becoming homecoming queen, but it's not so wild to hold that the US has been and remains a predominant a force of enormous ill in the world - and a force that is accelerating.
Quoting Bitter Crank
I don't happen to reside in a literal superpower state which has changed the course of the lives of billions for the worse.
Is China then a "shitty country filled with shitty people"?
It doesn't matter how you try to dress up your outburst. That you attempt a justification rather than just concede that it was an outburst is even worse. This is what makes you a bigot rather than just someone who lost it for a moment and said something bigoted.
The fact is, you attacked a people and tried to put yourself above them. You can't justify this with a critique of neoliberalism, any more than you can justify a hatred of Muslims with a critique of Islamism.
If China isn't the most malignant country on the face of the planet right now, it's certainly in the top two. But fine, if it's the 'shitty people' quip from which the charge of bigotry comes, then consider it retracted and restricted to the state and those with power over it and the institutions which reproduce it and them.
And yet, everyone seems to want to come live here. They're all lined up and pounding on the door, begging to be Americans. The population of the US has doubled in my life time.
As already stated elsewhere, your popularity problem is not that you challenge American policy, which seems entirely reasonable, especially on a philosophy forum. The problem is that you present your challenge in a consistently hysterical manner which undermines your credibility as a mod on a philosophy forum.
Do you wish to be a mod? Or a bomb thrower? Either might be a reasonable choice, but the two together doesn't work very well. I have the very same issue. I like rocking the boat way too much to be credible mod.
A mod should be more like a member of the Supreme Court, and less like a bomb throwing back bencher in the House of Representatives (or House of Commons).
Holding the whip is always more popular than being subject to it.
As for the rest - it would be my shame to be held 'credible' by people like you. Trust you to cite one of the most despotic and regressive of American institutions as an exemplar of behaviour.
I don't.
Quoting Michael
Same. The US is fucking terrifying.
So how it looks like now I have to admit I was wrong in my forecast that Biden will win. At least I got right that it would be a tight race. Have to learn not to believe that election polling is as accurate or trustworthy in the US as it is here.
Yet what was obvious that there wasn't much enthusiasm for Biden. Even if things would miraculously change, that is one thing apparent.
Biden is favoured to win Pennsylvania (though he doesn't need it) and Georgia is a toss up (though he doesn't need that either). You were right the first time.
If he doesn't win either (or NC) and if he wins all the others then he'll have 271. 2 faithless electors could still give it to Trump (and just 1 will put it to the House, which I believe has a Republican advantage in terms of number of states controlled which is how it would work). Who knows how the Supreme Court will rule on that.
I'm not considering the possibilty of cheating in my calculations. That would start a form of civil war, I expect. I doubt the establishment would allow it to happen albeit it's a definite possibilty.
Biden is likely gonna win NV, AZ, WI, and MI, which is enough to put him over the top with GA and PA as possible toss ups, though there will likely be a legal battle though I don't know how much of a case Trump can make there to throw out already counted mail ballots.
And yeah, I'll probably never trust a US poll again after this. Like mail in ballots and masks, Trump has politicized answering polls too. Honestly I can't really see how the US can survive like this. They're incredibly screwed as a nation.
Quoting Mr Bee
It will survive.
Except if on Wednesday 20th of January 2021 there are two inauguration ceremonies. Or something similarly utterly crazy.
Where you happen to reside is neither a virtue you can claim nor a vice you can be convicted of. Unless, of course, you chose to live in a shit hole country so that you could help make it a worse shit hole, then that would count against you--which, by the way, isn't your situation as far as I can tell.
As for your arraignment of the United States, I pretty much agree with it. Once one gets behind the official version, one finds an appalling history. Slavery, of course; genocide, obviously. But then there is the history of how working people (minimum 90% of the population) have been exploited, suppressed, and thoroughly misinformed about it all, and have been fed a false narrative which cripples critical thinking. Then there is the US as Global Power, another trail of tears.
Early on Wednesday afternoon, 11/4/20, it looks like Trump will prevail. And if he doesn't, Biden's presidency will not be any sort of national reformation.
Not too sure about that. Given the current economic situation and the fact that any sort of huge stimulus is pretty much dead, along with the likelihood of post election violence in a middle of a pandemic, it feels like something has to break.
Maybe wishful thinking is the problem.
What's the comparative success of commercial market research? I don't know whether they can reliably predict whether a new brand of apple sauce will fly or not.
I'm not sure which news outlet you are watching, but I only get mine from Associated Press and Reuters. Associated Press has Biden with 238 Electoral Votes and Trump with 214. Most of the votes are in with the exception of Pennsylvania (which has Trump leading). Even if they stay of the same color they are now, Joe Biden wins with 270.
Quoting Bitter CrankHere they have been rather close and usually exit polls are quite close to the end result. But you are right (even if we now knew the apple sauce already).
Of course the idea that people don't say who they are going to vote when polled is a genuine factor. For example here there came a surprise on how many voted for communists after the war as obviously it wasn't something many wanted to declare publicly (when the country just had fought a war against the Soviet Union, lost a lot of land and had massive amounts of internal refugees). Populist campaigns and totally new parties or movements can get the pollsters confused as people likely will be likely more pondering about going with a new party or not. And likely new segments of the population can either vote or old one's change their voting habits.
Quoting Mr Bee
This applies to either Biden or Trump, for different reasons, and things are already breaking. Public health efforts were sufficiently hobbled to prevent the pandemic from having free rein. At this point, Covid 19 is out of control. Forest fires. Near-term unsustainable policies that are unlikely to change under either presidency (CO2/methane emissions, for instance). Global warming -- the Arctic as prime example. ETC. Economic disaster? Already in progress for a large share of the population, and a bail out won't cure it.
A Trump supporter lying about who they will vote for, just to fuck with the pollsters? No! That could never happen.
Pretty much. As a guy who is all about optics, Trump wants to control the narrative and thinks that if he just proclaims victory enough, people would think he's won.
I would say that this is a scummy GOP tactic, but Democrats also do it too. Just look back at Iowa and Mayor Pete. Good times.
But tricking people into thinking you've won doesn't serve any purpose in itself, since the vote goes on and the actual result will get declared anyway. The obvious interpretation would be that the false claimant is a lying scumbug.
Well Trump's gonna contest the results in with his 6-3 SCOTUS and hopes they're as eager to dismantle democracy as he is. If enough people think he actually won then he thinks he could get away with it.
Every time you speak the credibility of this forum sinks another inch. Oh well, it's just a silly little forum, I'm being stupid to care, gotta agree there.
The sixties were far worse, and we're still here.
Trump isn't an ideologist, he's a business man. And renting his name is his business. And his name is supposed to be equivalent to being a winner. He can't afford to leave office as the loser who was fired, so he's crafting an alternate story line, the brave outsider who was cheated by the system etc.
I'm guessing we may see him start something like TrumpTV, his own media network. He'll go from being king to a king maker, a pretty common career path for politicians out of power. Think Rush Limbaugh on steroids, no direct power, but tons of influence.
Riots in the streets of major cities, heavy death toll in Vietnam, assassinations (and attempted assassinations) of leading political figures, massive cultural upheaval on almost every front, hyper-divisiveness etc. The Cuban Missile Crisis! A firestorm that came, and then went.
I think he plays more to his base group of supporters, looking for an uprising from them, by insinuating illegal activities such as voting after the deadline, adding stacks of illegitimate ballots, etc.. That's why his go-to phrase is they're trying to "steal" the election.
Were you there?
I have to disagree that a vote for Biden is a repudiation of Trump. A vote for Biden (or Trump, it doesn't matter) is to keep playing the same game and support "politics as usual". As long as Republicans or Democrats are running things, everything is going to continue getting shittier.
I really hope Biden gets elected so all those suckers (those idiots who think he is an actual choice that will make a difference) will see him run America further into the ground. I predict that when Biden's term expires, America will be fucked up so much worse, that Trump will look like Mother Teresa in comparison. (Just look at how Bush's tyranny, which was incomparably more horrific than anything done by Trump, has been virtually forgotten about because of how terrible things seem to be now).
If ever there was a time for the populace to make a stand against the status quo and vote en masse for a third party, it was this round. But alas, Americans en masse, are excruciatingly dumb and cowardly
They don't seem to be doing his bidding thus far. Take a hint, Donald.
So many of his tweets being blocked by Twitter now...
There was way more to the sixties than elections in the way of conflict. But speaking of elections...
Kennedy - killed in office
Johnson - refused to run again
Nixon - resigned in disgrace
As always. :wink:
EDIT: oh I see, no: Hippyhead.
I think one of the reasons such an unlikely person as Trump was so successful (note the past tense!) is that he's a perfect match for the needs of corporate media. Their business model depends on the use of drama to build audience and ad revenues. Trump provides drama in abundance, and they reward that service with billions of dollars of free advertising (round the clock coverage of his every utterance).
Point being, when we're getting all our information through a system built upon drama and profit, the end will always be near.
I get most of my news from NPR. It's been interesting to observe that they are obviously not Trump fans, but they do a 3 hour special every time he farts.
We've been suckered by a world class troll folks.
I suggest we do with Trump what we do, or should do, with trolls on the forum. Ignore him entirely. Ok, easier said than done, gotta admit, but that's the direction we should be aiming for.
A key problem is that even we Trump haters reward his behavior by giving him exactly what he wants, our attention.
That's been a revelation for sure. It's a common cliche that people are stupid, but the width and depth of it is still shocking when seen in the full light of day. I don't know why I am surprised really, given that every other person in traffic tailgates us, risking everyone's lives, for literally no reason at all. I think I might be one of the stupid people too, or 68 years should have cured me of being shocked at any of this. :-)
Perhaps Trump is a canary in the coal mine, alerting us to the fact that vast swaths of the American public have lost faith in our institutions, and are thus ready to reach for radical alternatives. Trump will soon be gone, but unless that faith is restored some version of him is likely to return.
Many have correctly observed that this is not limited to America, but is happening all over the world. I think that tells us something important, and will analyze further in another thread.
How fashionable! :-)
Agree to never talk U.S politics again and forget about it.
Oh dear, so sorry.
We have a similar situation. My wife and I are on the same page. But my wife's sister, whom she is VERY close to, inhales Fox News and believes every word. They're dealing with their divide well enough, but it is painful for my wife who truly hates Trump to a degree I've never seen her hate any other person on Earth.
Having someone in the family who finds Fox New credible has helped bring the reality of the situation home to me. Perhaps strangely, I don't resent the sister because her political views are so immature that, on this subject at least, I relate to her as one would an eight year old child. You know, I have no expectations, and so am not disappointed.
It's rational. She's Russian and wants the best for her country. The Democrats are the anti-Russia party, and there's the expectation of new sanctions and other economic problems that will likely get worse with Biden in charge.
Ignore Trump, Embrace His Base
If we're serious as Dems we should be looking for every possible point of agreement with Trump's base, every opportunity to show respect. Here's a few examples, perhaps you can add more.
1) IMMIGRATION: The population of the US had doubled in my life time. It's not unreasonable for people to be questioning (as I do) how much farther in that direction we wish to go. It's not unreasonable for people to desire that we have control over our borders. It's not unreasonable to consider that new people be allowed in the country based on their ability to make a contribution.
2) ABORTION: It's not unreasonable for people to wish to place limits on the killing of babies. We don't kill senior citizens when they become inconvenient, right?
3) GLOBALIZATION: It's not unreasonable for people to conclude that both political parties have done a poor job of managing the impact of globalization on American workers. By failing to protect the workers in the affected industries, we Dems have helped bring on "America First".
4) RADICALS: Both Dems and Repubs have shown considerable interest in candidates far outside the traditional American political mainstream. It's not just the other fellow who is doing this.
Readers are of course free to begin arguing with all of the above in a highly predictable manner. The price tag for clinging to such procedures is that we'll be forever trapped in divisiveness, and razor close elections, that we often won't win.
One of the factors that brought us Trump is a longstanding pattern of snotty Democratic disrespect towards conservatives, rural voters, working people etc. Hillary Clinton's "basket of deplorables" being the easiest example.
It's fun to parade around in our supposed moral and intellectual superiority, but one of the price tags for that is a Supreme Court stuffed with conservatives for the next generation.
Another troll! Jamalrob For President in 2024!!! :-)
Democrats nationwide: Count Every Vote
Republicans in states where Biden leads: Count Every Vote
Republicans in counties where Biden leads in otherwise Trump-centric states: Stop Counting Votes
Republicans in states where Trump leads: Stop Counting Votes
Aha, playing hard to get, a clever strategy which builds desire and demand. Make the people beg you. Brilliant!
The big rat is preparing to jump ship. :smile:
Quoting Hippyhead
Hah! We have a very similar situation in our family - sister-in-law is Trump supporter. We love her dearly. The crazy making thing (well OK, one of many crazy making things) is that she (and most Trump supporters) is not stupid - AND - she voted for Obama in 2012.
Go figure . . . .
Perhaps others will refer to him as ex-president after he leaves office. I'm sure he personally wouldn't like that.
One of our neighbours a few doors down likes our Boris.
We're selling up and moving.
Trump is the mother of all Trumps. Therefore @Jamalrob's wife is gay.
All of us are bright in some ways and stupid in others. Some people are just politically stupid.
Voting Republican doesn't equal being stupid. Jeb Bush was governor here in Florida for eight years and nothing bad happened. He's a very intelligent and reasonable person. He's more conservative than I am, but that doesn't freak me out, a diversity of views is healthy.
Trump is something else altogether. Trump isn't really a Republican at all. He has no convictions other than his own personal self interest. Evidence....
Quoting BallotPedia
https://ballotpedia.org/History_of_Donald_Trump%27s_political_donations
That's the thing that gets me. What made conservatives so convinced Trump is one of them? Most of all, what made religious conservatives think that? They espouse having these political and religious conservative principles, unlike their left-leaning foes according to them, but what about Trump is principled, other than his self-interest?
He ran as a Republican because he saw an opportunity at the time given the lack of appeal for all the other Republican candidates as people were growing more disillusioned with establishment politicians. Thus all the rhetoric about "draining the swamp". But it was all doing what Donnie does best, grifting. He's a bullshit artist.
I dunno. Perhaps they saw Trump accurately as a purely transactional actor, and concluded that he would deliver on his end of the bargain, which he did with the Supreme Court. They did a deal with the devil?
The best thing for Russia would be for putin to be mussolinied. Or, alternatively, gaddafied:
Could be, for some anyway. Depends on what level you're playing the political game at. But I do know some conservatives who deeply believe in him to this day.
Far more better if he would be sentenced to jail for the a) rampant corruption b) the killing innocent Russians to reignite the Chechen war. Yet that's not likely to happen.
But I guess that many Russians are happy that Putin annexed Crimea and South Ossetia to Russia and that he has played with the Americans. And have to say, he is one of the great politicians of our time. Even if I think he is a bit dangerous.
That's not going to happen. Someone just needs to blow the Cunt up.
Yea, well, this is a philosophy forum so we tend to think everything is about rational analysis. I think one of Trump's great gifts is that he's a clear minded realist, liberated as he is from any idealism. He's sees that human beings are like an M&M candy, with a thin hard shell of reason on the outside obscuring a much larger soft and squishy middle. You know, this forum too, driven primarily by emotional agendas.
I think we have to acknowledge the man has a great charismatic gift. Yes, he's a horrible human being who often sounds really stupid for sure, but truly gifted nonetheless.
Likely he will then be one of the most respected Russian leaders, even if "the intelligentsia" might have other ideas about him. You seem not to understand Russians at all.
And even if it's very unlikely, the real issue is that Russia can be a democracy and a functioning justice state even if it's not now. Putin indeed can go to jail. As one Russian opposition leader once said, even his watch that he wears is more expensive than his official annual salary could by.
Lack of understanding has never stopped him before.
CCP as well, I have a balanced outlook.
Is that not a new development since the advent of Trump-Russia collusion? I remember in 2017 thinking it strange that it was the Democrats not the Republicans who were making such a big deal about how Russia Is Bad.
Besides, the Russians I've met were very nice and warm people. Judge individuals, not people. And don't relate the people to the problems of their society as if there is something inherently wrong with the people themselves. Not the fault of the present people that earlier generations ended up with Marxism-Leninism.
For example, Mexicans are great, their society isn't so. But of course, if you dismantle the justice system and let criminals run amok, any society would be in the end similar.
I have nothing against the Russian people, I too have met and socialized with them.
I'm against the murderous, kleptocratic, plastic-surgery-ed Cunt and his cronies.
Also putin's effrontery to think he can rule that nation for so long, I'm agin' it.
So instead we should just preemptively concede to the conservatives on everything?
The common ground that Trump’s base and the progressive base have is that almost all of them are poor and suffering for the benefit of a handful of wealthy elites. That should be something that everyone can rally around. But no, doing anything about that would be socialism... much better to blame the Jews for letting Mexicans take all our jobs...
If you'd like to actually read my posts before commenting on them I wouldn't mind at all.
Ok, fair enough, maybe less than perfect writing on my part, which is not improved by my snarkiness.
I didn't mean to say we should automatically agree, but just that there are a number of points they make that are reasonable and merit respectful consideration. We don't have to agree to build the wall for example, but we can look them in the eye and say that their concerns about immigration are worth discussing.
If we want to ever have a solid reliable Democratic majority we have to de-demonize the conversations to the degree possible. The way to do that is to seek out every topic where we can have respectful conversations and focus our attention there.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/11/large-portion-electorate-chose-sociopath/616994/
I cast my vote that we do a find and replace on the forum database and remove all references to...
He Who Shall Not Be Named
Another couple days and it will be time to turn and walk away from this topic.
Right, even if Biden wins, this is the hard pill to swallow. No excuses this time, everyone knows who he is and they want more. He's a true reflection of American cultural values.
I believe that only about have the eligible voters voted last election. Trump got roughly half the votes. This would indicate that his support has gone from one quarter of the eligible population to one third, over his time in office. Unbelievable, America on self-destruct.
That was my understanding too, but I think it’s part of a longer term decline in relations. Reflecting that, American anti-Russian sentiment, which Russians are sensitive to, has been getting significantly worse since 2013, according to this Wikipedia article.
But probably not.
of half of the electorate. Would that it was less.
Incidentally, I recently went to see the movie Tenet here in Moscow. The audience found Kenneth Branagh’s cartoon Russian villain and the other Russian references hilarious.
Quoting StreetlightX
Indeed, I guess nothing except a resounding Trump victory could have made that happen. Even in that case, I actually find it impossible to imagine them confronting it at all.
As if Trump's popularity cannot have anything to do with and/or be helped by foreign interference and/or disinformation campaigns?
Must be FoReIGn InTeRfErEnCe
'I think the point is to make us despair. To see ourselves as... animal and ugly. To make us reject the possibility that God could love us.'
You know, I have been wondering if Hillary Clinton is secretly smiling over the nail biter race. After everyone treated the 2016 loss as her personal fault, this may be a kind of satisfaction.
I think we have to acknowledge that anyone who confuses obnoxious, whiny, and moronic with charismatic has had a fucked up upbringing.
On the flip side, once Trump is no longer President he loses any immunity to investigation and prosecution. An awful lot of people on both sides are going to be digging deep to find the biggest pile of dirt they can.
I have a very original slogan for the next four years...
Lock him up!
LOCK HIM UP!
LOCK HIM UP!
That would be a great outcome. He could run again over the cell block phone in his orange jump suit.
Why'd they drop him though? That doesn't seem in their interest. Much better to make him into a Martyr and keep him around as a "shadow president". Then you can wheel him out whenever you need justification for your obstructionism and keep his base on your side.
What kind of trouble might a humiliated narcissist cause during the transition?
Is the worst yet to come?
He's going to pardon himself, his family, and all his henchmen.
The biggest danger is that some armed right-wing groups will start some trouble, and Trump will praise and encourage them.
It's the most immediate danger to people on the ground, but in isolation it's unlikely to do damage to the institution. I think the stance of the GOP will have a far more lasting effect. If they further amplify the accusation of fraud, more and more people will believe it.
Trump will announce his candidacy for 2024 on FOX at the same time Biden is taking the oath of office on Jan 20.
You read it here first.
That's a danger for sure. But I'm as yet not willing to rule out some larger danger. I don't know what, but we shouldn't take it as a given that Trump will just whine and complain and then peacefully leave the White House. Some of his soap opera hysterics is just calculated show biz, but there's a not entirely stable person underneath the show biz. Losing this election is a very public humiliation. It's unclear to what degree his psyche can handle that.
I'm not trying to be a hysterical alarmist, but there is at least a possibility that the next 90 days could be the most dangerous period of the Trump presidency. He still has fully legal vast powers until Jan 20.
What if he tries to start some international crisis? What will the military chain of command do if Trump gives them some dangerous order? Remember, the military is all about chain of command, chain of command, chain of command. Who in that chain of command is going to stand up and say, "Nope, we ain't doing that"?
I dunno, hopefully this is worrying over nothing....
Wouldn't help him against state crimes, e.g. the NY investigation into his taxes.
A military officer needn't obey an unlawful order. I think this may provide enough wiggle room to refuse to nuke another country. Plus, Trump is isolationist to the core, and he still craves the love of his minions. Finally, he has this fantasy of running again in 2024.
That's true, and it's why we should embrace their taking it to the courts, where actual evidence is needed.
:100:
Quoting Kenosha Kid
:up:
Quoting Hippyhead
If the Trump Crime Family is not living in exile somewhere like Saudi Arabia or Turkey or Brazil or (Oleg Deripaska et al not withstanding) Russia, covIDIOT-1 aka "Individual-1" either will be convicted in (at least) New York State of multiple tax, banking, insurance & money laundering felonies by then or, more likely (hopefully), he'll be dead from COVID-19 and/or age & obesity related afflictions (or with a lone wolf MAGAt's full metal jacket).
Quoting Hippyhead
I suspect :eyes:
• Putin's Bitch makes a 4th appointment to SCOTUS upon the dutiful resignation of 72 year old Clarence Thomas (like 82 year old Anthony Kennedy did to make way for the much younger, more rightwing Kavanaugh) - Moscow Mitch won't be able to resist :shade: ...
• Putin's Bitch pardons his kids, Kushner & Pence ...
• then Putin's Bitch resigns so that Pence (à la Ford :point: Nixon) can pardon him ("self-pardon", GOP lawyers & senate allies will advise, is too risky) ...
• many US government systems across many agencies will undergo (are probably already undergoing) document-shredding and cyber-sabotage / hacking in order to intractably seize-up the transition to Biden's Administration
Yes, according to Dr. Fauci et al. :mask:
.
Can you pardon someone if he hasn't been charged with a crime? Seems a bit weird to me...
The censorship, the suppression polls, the propaganda, the deceit, the threats and violence—it may have an effect on many, but not on everyone. I have regained faith in humanity.
I hope Trump does something drastic during his remaining days, just so I can see an anti-Trumper’s head explode one last time.
No need to reiterate, we already know how your faith lies.
He’ll probably just continue to be an embarrassing sore...
Wall Street, CIA, Big Tech, military industrial complex, and Davos appreciate your vote.
I’m quite good, actually. Trump can run again.
And Russia appreciates your efforts in the last few years. Still a lot of work ahead though, stoking resentment over a stolen election and whatever else that will help to destabilize the nation.
I resigned to a Biden win long ago. But projections are just projections. There will still be recounts and litigation, not to mention another two months of left of President Trump.
Jyna called and the CCP are happy you devoured their propaganda platter.
... Can those get you drunk too? :starstruck:
:100: If there's one thing America hates more than a loser, it's a sore loser. Trump is destroying himself better than any of his opponents could.
:halo:
Luckily.
Don’t give up so easily, ssu. There are still 75 days left of the best American presidency to have graced this earth.
You mean 75 more days to enjoy the supreme smack down?
Sure. But I wager even you will be longing for a Trump presidency before long. The hopey-changey rhetoric and lullabies may have worked before, but will it prevail again?
What I am hearing you say is that you didn't like Donald Trump.
I'm torn :p
Nah. He was a dumbass wannabe dictator.
I fear more of the same, specifically the public relations politics, where an administration can get away with anything so long as it utters the fashionable bromides and ticks the right identity boxes. I think Biden's record with race and segregation and war and corruption and lies is well enough known to predict that it won't be the best of administrations.
Trump can't show his face, he's so naked in his failure. The next 70 days are going to be his worst nightmare come true, with the whole world literally watching him.
His only way out of the despair and to try to save face, is to try to make some sham of a legal challenge sound credible. Then when it fails in a few weeks time to grudgingly acknowledge the transfer of power and claim that he will be back in four years. He will need to save face with his base. The trouble is that this route will only dig a deeper hole as the US public hates a sore looser.
Tennessee, a Trump state.
That's a prediction about style. What bad thing will Biden actually get away with?
[Quote]I think Biden's record with race and segregation and war and corruption and lies is well enough known to predict that it won't be the best of administrations.[/quote]
You will judge it "not the best" no matter what happens. Make specific dire predictions you will stand by.
Drinking Trump tears right now, baby. :razz: :kiss:
Multiple court challenges are inevitable, but I'm skeptical there will be any acceptance. He will go to his grave asserting he's been robbed.
[Quote]The trouble is that this route will only dig a deeper hole as the US public hates a sore looser.[/quote]I wish that were true. His supporters will continue to believe everything he says. I wouldn't br surprised if he still has rallys.
Something something tiniest fiddle something something...
Yes, the style is and has been ruinous until now. Biden can lament corruption in Ukraine and meddle in their elections while his son rakes in millions from corrupt gas companies. This is the sort of politics I predict: whispering fashionable bromides in your ear while taking from your back pocket.
Why does that seem odd? I have no ability to predict future events, so why would you want to hear me try?
Also, I saw a rainbow this morning for the first time since April (I live in the desert). I swear to god, there was an actual rainbow about an hour after they called it.
The Biblical Jesus was unquestionably the opposite of the president’s character; he was all about compassion, pacifism and absolute charity. He clearly would not tolerate such superfluous wealth as the hoarding of tens of billions of dollars while so many others went hungry and homeless.
While many true Christians have rejected Trump’s presidency, regardless of his tempting conservative politics (e.g. his Pro-life professions), this very vocal and politically active ‘Christian’ element lauds Trump.
Apparently, so very angered by Democratic Party social liberalism, they promote, even praise, the figurative devil.
(I know I’d dread the possibly of being looked upon by Trump’s big money corporate drivers as a useful idiot, especially if I was a supporter who's struggling to make financial ends meet.)
Their apparent blindness to Trump being contrary to Christ’s teachings makes it seem to me they’ve sacrificed Jesus’s fundamentals on the altar of unyielding hard-conservative politics.
“Jesus Is My Savior, Trump Is My President”, Trump’s fanatic followers are chanting across America.
(Does Jonestown and the Peoples Temple Agricultural Project eerily come to mind, anyone?)
Perhaps worst of all, they make very bad examples of the faith, especially to young impressionable observers.
Not true at all. Most people didn't pick Biden in the primaries because they liked him, but because they thought he was "electable" and most people picked him in the general because he wasn't Trump. They made their decision not based on what they want, but on what they thought other people want.
How Trump garnered a significant portion of the Christian vote is very telling of the state of Christianity in America... too many years of the likes of Billy Graham and Oral Roberts.
It rained here for the first time since April too, and it’s such a gorgeous sunny post-rainy day that it feels like this must be a movie where the Big Bad is defeated and suddenly the sun comes out and the dead grass returns to life... and yeah, a big beautiful rainbow arches across the sky, though I didn’t get to see any here.
That's absurd. ~Trump carry's with it a set of related wants: judges with a broader view of civil rights, better cooperation with international partners, immigration reform, rescuing Obamacare, commitment to rule of law, and to the Constitution. These characteristics were present for all the Democratic candidates, so it made the most sense to me to support the Democrat most likely to win. (And given the closeness if the election, this appears to have been the right choice).
Not enough of the likes of Betrand Russell...
But then where will we discuss the trials?
The idea that people should expect of their head of state what they do of their spiritual leaders is a silly one. The same goes for the feeble daddy-figure sentiment about how a leader must be some infallible “unifier” and a “healer”. This sort of statism leads to the United States being one of the biggest public relations firm in the world.
The government should defend the liberty to practice whatever religion or creed one wants to, so long as it doesn’t infringe on the rights of others. It’s management and employees need not express any religious or pious overtures, for Christians or otherwise. Any paid actor can virtue signal.
I was hoping Trump’s presidency would expel this disease, like chemotherapy would a cancer—the reactionary response to him was suppose to be it’s death throes. But I fear it it has only strengthened it.
Don't you get it, a Trump figure would only give us more of the swamp, on LSD. The thing you hate is about as good as it gets in human civilisation. There are a few more liberal countries who have done better in their own way. But as for the US, the only direction the country will go with destructive leaders like Trump is downhill like Turkey, or Belarus.
It has barely stopped raining here for two months, I can barely remember what sunshine is like. We do get lots of rainbows though. I've been at the end of one on more than one occasion recently.
Yeah, it's very silly to expect the people in charge of the police, the military and foreign relations to be well informed and reasonable. What's the worst that could happen?
Quoting NOS4A2
And any paid actor can promise you the moon.
The Associated Press says he won.
I don't doubt they're right, and we're doing the happy dance of joy here too.
Just another reminder of how impatient we Americans are I guess. We just can't wait until the votes have actually been counted.
Anyway, who cares, on with the HAPPY DANCE OF JOY!!
Pretty much the same here in Europe. When the result is certain, it's over. Just be thankful that's after and not before the election like in some parts of the world. :wink:
I'm pretty sure that alot of non-Americans were impatient with the results as well, myself included. The electoral college system, the fact that the mail-in votes were not allowed to be counted in some states (like Pennsylvania) because Republicans made it that way but was in others (like Florida), and the fact that the media chose not to call the race earlier to seemingly get more ratings out of the story infuriated the hell out of me and kept me from sleeping for a week. Hopefully I don't ever have to follow another one of these elections again.
Oh too late.
Looks like your idea of a good record with race -- White House support for violent white supremacists; the assault and arrest of peaceful, lawful BLM protesters -- has already been used as toilet paper.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It was quite something to contrast Biden's eloquent, respectful, humble and optimistic speech with the idiotic cry-baby megalomania of Trump. The hard-working people who counted votes in the midst of a pandemic and under horrific conditions (Trump-supporting fascist scumbags who waved guns and yelled abuse at them) get a massive show of gratitude from Biden but accusations of fraud for counting Biden votes from Trump. "We are not enemies, we are Americans" is the polar opposite of Trump's approach to persecute and demonise anyone who deviates from whatever ridiculous thought just entered his miniscule brain.
It's also quite something to realise that Biden's speech wasn't particularly special; it just feels alien after a mere four years of Trump. Like I said earlier, Trump has lowered the standards for everyone, inculcating a new normal more horrifying than Covid 19: a normal of race hate, compulsive lying, childish retribution, misogyny, self-contradiction to the destruction of any meaning, abject incompetence, thwarted justice, and naked self-interest as a model of the highest level of service. I think the best hope is that, whatever Biden's limitations (including life expectancy), he will at least set a new new normal far above the cesspit that he has inherited, such that the next President, and the one after, and hopefully the one after that, will be anchored to a much less apocalyptic take on the presidency.
That said, the Republican voting trajectory would suggest maybe a brief respite (another GBSr perhaps) followed by something that, right now, seems inconceivable. From Reagan to Bush Jr to Trump... where next? Steve Bannon, maybe, with his Al Qaida-inspired take on government (agree or be beheaded).
Arizona was obviously premature, but when the remaining votes can't support one party, the other has won. That seems reasonable. If it's 100,000 to 80,000 and there are 15,000 votes remaining, you have the same winner no matter what those 15,000 votes say.
Quoting Hippyhead
As Charlie Brooker said, it's like taking a crap after four years of constipation. Politics is international, and when the leader of the most powerful country in the world is a vile, self-serving idiot, it rather thwarts the hopes of concerned world citizens. The Paris agreement being an example, but also just the general wave of white supremacy and fascism (viz. Brexit) that's got the west by the balls at the moment. Hopefully someone like Biden, who is at least saying the right sorts of things about the environment and about equality (which is more than Trump could manage), will be a positive influence worldwide. Maybe not, but it would be nice to see the kind of evil that Trump legitimised and personified recede.
Ah, I see, was that the case in Pennsylvania? I was following it for awhile but perhaps didn't make it that far.
Quoting Kenosha Kid
Ha! Yea, that pretty well nails it.
Sounds good to me. At that point, all discussion of Trump should end, or if we're going to talk about him after that it should be to investigate why we're still talking about him.
Likely this thread will go over 500 pages (as there are only 25 to go).
Not quite. Biden's lead is 41K, the uncounted votes number 68K. The modelling is more sophisticated than that; for instance, the uncounted votes are postal and postal votes overwhelmingly skewed towards Biden (which is why Trump thinks they ought to be illegal); the majority of the uncounted votes are also in blue-leaning counties, etc. My point was just that you don't need to wait until every count is voted to know who won.
Well yes, one can make various calculations and projections. I get that.
But why be fancy pants about it? Why not just wait until all the votes are counted?
It seems that Biden giving his victory speech before the votes have been counted just feeds in to the conspiracy theories. It's also a tad risky. All the professional pollsters have been wrong two elections in a row now.
Maybe we're all just a tad too found of cleverness?
On the one hand, some states might be prematurely called on the basis of modelling that might well be excellent, but not 100% certain; on the other hand you can be 100% certain of the winner without waiting for all the votes. You seem to be using the former as an argument against the latter. Even if we had the stringent condition of 100% certainty, we still don't need to wait for every vote, we merely need to wait until one person's lead exceeds the uncounted votes.
That’s not the case because the economy was doing great before it was subverted by worldwide lockdowns. The US is brokering peace in the Middle East. We get massive prison reform. We get deregulation. Turkey and Belarus could not do this. We hit Turkey and Belarus status (and worse; see gun death statistics in Chicago for instance) only in enclaves where democrats have always held power.
Ok, that makes sense. Is that what happened here?
I still think it would be smarter to simply wait until a deciding state officially announces a winner. Hey, it'll make for a longer party!
Agreed, I can't see the purpose in not waiting until it's unambiguous.
Not actually.
As you can observe from even this Forum, there's not much genuine excitement for Biden as there was when Obama came into power. Excitement breeds loyal following. Trump's thing was to be outrageous. Not the thing that people who voted for Biden want from Joe. I assume the only thing that his voters will give him slack if he gets more senile in public appearances and speaking, but not on the policy decisions the administration as a whole makes.
It's difficult to pin down exactly which parts of this are relevant to what you quoted. While there does seem to be plenty of excitement (don't get your news from internet forums), I feel like people are much less excited by the prospect of Biden than by ridding themselves of Trump. Either way, the point of what you quoted had nothing to do with people's feelings about the election; it was a reaction to hearing a president who can speak eloquently, humbly, respectfully, reasonably and positively after four years of hateful verbal diarhhoea, before remembering that actually used to be expected.
Half of the country is excited of Trump leaving. That's for sure. But come February 2021, just few months from now, that isn't the focus anymore. Then the fact is that Biden has to pick up from the situation that Trump has left the US.
Before that btw, we'll see an epic lame duck period with the last days of the Trump presidency.
Agreed.
Ah the simple pleasures of life! They are the most enjoyable: the first sip of a beer on a hot, dry day; a song that catches you when you need it; a kiss on the cheek when you're feeling lonely; a US president's speech that sounds reasonable, and even somewhat presidential, coming after years of verbal torture.... Hmmmmm.... :-)
Quoting NOS4A2
Hm?
Anyway, seems kind of odd that, out of millions of Americans, lots of cool people, Trump and Biden of all people would be the two candidates.
Mueller included this quote from the OLC memorandum: "Recognizing an immunity from prosecution for a sitting President would not preclude such prosecution once the President's term is over"
Mueller lays out a case for a potential indictment for Obstruction of Justice, that over 1000 former federal prosecutors signed off on as meeting necessary legal hurdles for an indictment.
Personally, I think it would be good for the country to proceed with the indictment, once he leaves office. By going through this, it will establish once and for all that a President is not above the law.
If prosecuted, I'd like to see Biden pardon him - just to show that this was not the sort of political vendetta that Trump so long desired against Democrats.
Great speech from Biden today, who's already setting up his team to mitigate Covid. Meanwhile Trump announces a press conference in a car park located between a crematorium and a dildo shop so the world can watch Guliani ranting about dead people and a film of someone burning a piece of paper with lighter fuel is beamed around the world's news channels!
It's insane!
"There's been something quite beautiful about watching Trump's presidency being slowly euthanized by cold hard numbers and irrefutable facts, not so much going out with a bang but an untrustworthy liquid fart."
:fire: :100: :party:
Best regards and good luck.
[i]La la la...
Yo canto a la mañana
Que ve mi juventud
Y al sol que día a día
Nos trae nueva inquietud
Todo en la vida es
Como una canción
Que cantan cuando naces
Y también en el adiós
La la la...
Le canto a mi madre
Que dio vida a mi ser
Le canto a la tierra
Que me ha visto crecer
Y canto al día en que
Sentí el amor
Andando por la vida
Aprendí esta canción
La la la...[/i]
The second tweet in the above picture is a video of an anchor emphatically repeating that there is "no winner yet" in the election. He immediately shifts into "we're getting reports of more and more voter fraud", and finally sums it up with "phizer got a vaccine, yay!".
The first tweet is obviously a subscription advertisement...
For anyone who doesn't known "OAN" (One America News) is basically the lowest brow form of conservative pander-tainment that can be found. OAN is to Fox News as Fox News is to CNN...
Given that Fox has shown signs of capitulation, OAN is poised to snag millions of upset Trump voters who don't want to hear it...
Given that Fox is a fairly important apparatus that the GOP uses to organize its constituents, what might a significant schism in viewership between Fox and OAN do to the future of the GOP?
It ain't over until it's over. He just fired the Sec of Defense, not an encouraging sign.
Imagine morale at the Electoral Commission, which is basically being accused of conspiring to commit electoral fraud. Just another hapless set of dedicated and scrupulous public servants whom Trump will happily throw under a bus to keep his base happy.
He will be obnoxious to the end, but at least he no longer has anything to gloat about and at last can be completely ignored. To which end, that is my last mention of his name on this forum.
Good plan, I too will waste no more attention on the lame duck here.
That seem ls more like a Trump thing to do. Take everyone down, even at his own expense, not even for any particular reason, just because it’s the kind of thing he does.
Trumpism has not been vanquished, as so many smug Democratic pundits predicted a landslide due to his "unpopularity".
Liberals are confirming my worst suspicions that they only care about throwing one man out of office and not doing anything about the material conditions that allowed Trumpism to emerge in the first place.
It's like "Now we can clink our champagne glasses, have brunch at the local vegan bistro, talk about the latest Real Housewives episode to the hairstylist at the upscale salon in peace, never needing to be shocked at whatever crazy Trump tweet today."
Trump has inconvenienced the liberal class daily by his brutish vulgarities. They simply want a return to their "normal" hedonism; free from the anger, resentment and spite so many of Trump's supporters have for them and their way of life.
They do not care at all to make those Trump voters lives any better (even if it meant not even inconveniencing them a little bit), so Trumpism will continue to grow even bigger as neoliberalism remains unchecked.
Make no mistake, Trump is a monstrous buffoon that deserves to be flushed down the toilet, but his whole movement ain't going anywhere anytime soon. Trump will return in 2024, either himself or a surrogate. And considering the lasting damage caused by the pandemic, Biden (or anyone else in his position) simply will not have enough time during his term to make noticeable improvements for the majority, especially with a Republican Senate that is going to obstruct any kind of Democratic agenda (even more so if they firmly believe he is an illegitimate president). 2022 will be a vicious backlash against Biden and the Democrats, setting up the stage for a massive re-take by Republicans in 2024 for the White House and whatever other levers of government not controlled by Rebpuclians then.
The sigh of relief couldn't be more fleeting. The next four years are just as worrisome as they were when Trump was in office. Every future election is going to be "the most important of our lifetimes".
America will continue to teeter on the brink of catastrophe.
Consider yourself paraphrased:
A viable candidate requires a movement, or a wealthy cabal of political, celebrity, establishment and media complicity in order to compete. Not many people possess either.
Watch this clip:
Donald Trump Voter Lost Her Home, Blames Trump's Pick For Treasury Secretary
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jIpkrelra0
HAYES: "You voted for Donald Trump, tell me what drew you to him and why you voted for him."
COLEBROOK: "Like many of the people I'm in touch with who were foreclosed on by Mnuchin, we voted for Trump because we are fed up like most of America with the politics as it is. We're fed up with a government and all those elected officials who were elected to serve the people but they are really only serving themselves.They vote in special compensations for themselves, everything. They are not really working for us, its all lip service and we believed Trump would be an outsider, for the first time, who would work for the people as his campaign promised....He's quoted as saying is 'to you the American people not major donors, the party or corporations now.'
....
HAYES: "So do you feel like you were played, you feel like you were hoodwinked?"
COLEBROOK: "I think yes in some instances, I understand that he's got to you know bring in a good team, but this one? There's plenty of qualified people out there who are not Wall St. insiders who are not billionaires that were made billionaires off the backs of the working class people. The alternative wasn't great either..."
This is just one voter, but I think its fair to say that she represents millions of other voters just like her and I'm going to use her reasoning as a springboard for discussion.
Most of the commenters call this woman a naive idiot, she should have known better, you get what you voted for, etc. etc.
They are missing an important point which I bolded above which fueled so much of the anger within Trump's coalition.
For decades now, we've had career politicians come and go in our government that don't truly work for the people. We all know the Republicans only care to work in the best interests of the rich, but the Democrats also only care for a small elite group: the professional class. They've since long abandoned the working class in this country. We've since seen enormous inequality that continues to worsen which has made that precarious working class a lot bigger, and there hasn't been someone that can represent the anger and betrayal so many of these working class voters have felt until Trump came a long and gave them a voice.
You can see so many communities in America hollowed out thanks to offshoring and outsourcing, wages that don't grow, trade treaties that have only benefited business owners, corporate monopolies that have run out the smaller competition out of business, diminished public infrastructure investment, lack of adequate healthcare access, austerity, etc etc.
All of these conditions together make for the perfect storm of a backlash against the ruling establishment.
How many Americans rightfully feel their government doesn't serve them when they've used their taxpayer dollars to bailout the banks that engineered the financial crisis of 2008, while in return doing nothing for Americans who wound up homeless due to predatory mortgage servicing and other fraudulent schemes? How many financers and bankers were actually jailed due to the crisis? They got away practically scratch free and a financial system that caused this still intact. Wall Street hugely influenced how the government was going to respond to the crisis. That's why the recovery skewed favorably for them. And those on Main Street can suffer austerity in return.
Look at the measures of how much anxiety and stress Americans have lived through the past couple of decades. The world most Americans experience feels increasingly unfair and uncertain. Trump tapped into all this unease and anger that has been caused chiefly by neoliberal capitalism. Until you make radical systemic changes that decouples us from neoliberalism, the conditions your average working American finds themselves in will continue to get worse and in turn so will their anger as a voting bloc. It's very possible an even more evil version of Trump can come out of this. Biden and the rest of the Democrats have no strategy or plan to deal with this, they want a status-quo return to the Obama years and it's going to backfire against them even more than it did in 2016. Obama's (and his administration) failure to turn this country in a different direction during the financial crisis is directly responsible for Trump to have the political clout he does.
:up:
Quite how do you know this?
Its the same in the UK and numerous other western countries have problems as a result of globalisation. It wasn't those elites you refer to who caused, or brought about this state of affairs and they certainty didn't want to. It's the combination of globalisation and free market capitalism. The political elites proved incapable of preventing it. The countries who faired better through this period are the more social democratic countries, where the wealth is circulated through the population more and exploitative capitalism is more difficult, or is regulated.
Electing figures like Trump and Boris Johnson isn't the answer and is a retrograde destructive step, like self harm. It allowed duplicitous populism to exploite the struggling populous. Neither side of the political divide can put it right without finding a wealthy alternative to the industries which were hollowed out by the globalisation.
The answer has been found now and Biden and Johnson can see it, green industries, the green economy. It could begin to turn things around in the US and might just give Johnson a life line out of the black hole he has dug for himself. (Many in the UK wish he would bury himself in that hole, metaphorically speaking)
To add to @Baphomet's posts, which directly confront Tim's comments, I think it's also important to understand the class-based and ideological nature of this kind of prejudice. To that end, it's worth going back to this Jacobin article from 2016:
Burying White Workers
It's worth reading in full.
As an aside, there's one particularly interesting part of the article that goes some way to explain how all this class hatred sits so happily alongside woke identity politics:
But as far as I can see as an outsider, most of the American Left choose to ignore this and just throw in their lot with the liberals. Leftists, correct me if I'm wrong.
That's written as if Democrats had a choice. They didn't. The Democratic party moved right in the 80s because rightism was just too powerful. It was either work with them or become completely irrelevant.
Quoting Princeton Study
As long as bribery is legal in the US whether via campaign funding or lobbying, the US simply isn't a democracy.
If fascists were "too powerful" we should therefore emulate them? Sounds like the worst excuse ever. I'd suggest it was that monied interests wanted certain things from politicians and politicians got paid well if they'd provide the policy outcomes corporations and rich people wanted.
Then globalisation started to bite.
Not AOC thank God. What Trump has shown is that money doesn't make the campaign, which is good as that opens the door for actual progressives. The truce in the Democratic party is over.
I did think James Clyburn had something useful to say about sloganeering and how that creates risks for making political gains in certain areas. I hope that The Squad takes that advice on board. But the conclusion some other mainstream Democrats made that the Democrats should move further right to court the "undecided Republican" is insanity.
There's no fighting prosperity. Leftism has to wait.
Because Biden wants no association with any of the policy goals that Bernie, AOC, and other progressives in the Democratic Party have pushed for. He corrects his interlocutors anytime they accuse him of being a socialist or even being a "trojan horse" for socialism.
See who Biden taps for his Cabinet. I will put money down the pool of candidates will be CEOs, moderate administrators from non-profit organizations, and other liberal like-minded lawmakers.
And what's really frustrating is how the rightwing media and many conservatives love to label the Democrats as being communists wanting to usher in socialism. They are hysterical about it. If only the Democrats had the cojones to fully embrace the label and be a communist party...
Bernie was already the compromise candidate for the left. And even still you had primary candidates like Michael Bloomberg who fought so hard against Bernie becoming the nominee. Biden is A-OK because he isn't a threat to Bloomberg's way of [s]exploiting[/s]living. The financial capitalists can rest easy knowing there will be no intrusion on what they do. Heck Biden was the only "barely-just-left-of center" primary candidate.
And to be fair to Biden, he is already hamstrung with both a Republican controlled Senate and Supreme Court. So if he wasn't already going to be a worthless agent of "change", it's all assuredly guaranteed.
What can Biden do to "unite" this country then? Take a page from Obama's playbook on more "hope and change" platitudes? Trump's loyal base already thinks he's an illegitimate president-elect so I can't see what Biden can say that would change their minds. He's got to do something but how can he? Stifled by the separation of powers and ideologically not capable of radical change that so desperately needs to happen with American politics.
And here's proof, after Trump told people to vote twice that's exactly what Republicans did: https://news.yahoo.com/nc-man-says-told-polls-223318035.html?guccounter=1
Shame on you Richard Brecht! Somebody go threaten him with a lawsuit or something.
Exactly, what we need in America is to follow the example of Cuba and Venezuela! Brain dead cojones, that's what is needed!!!
Quoting Baphomet
He can not go to the podium every day to tell blatant lies while jamming his finger in to the eyes of everyone he's ever met for our entertainment.
1) Have you ever been to America?
2) At what point in American history did you become an adult?
My answer, lived in America my entire life, came to maturity during the Vietnam War.
1) Have you ever been to America?
I've seen it from the Canadian Falls at Niagara. Does that count?
2) At what point in American history did you become an adult?
The era of R. Reagan and F. Bueller.
Nope.
Quoting Hippyhead
2006. The same point in every nation's history.
In some places, you're not an adult until you climb up a tree, stick your hand into a beehive, and steal a fistful of honeycomb. Not suggesting you do that, of course. Unless you really want to.
Jamalrob, I voted for Sarah Palin because she can see Russia from her backyard. :-) So your application is accepted.
Ha! I'm an adult then, sorta. True story, I once leaned over to the right putting my hand and full body weight on a wasp's nest. YEOOOOOOOOOOWWWWW! No honeycomb, but I'm still some kind of adult. A stupid one probably.
:cheer:
[quote= Bob Dylan]The deputy sheriffs, the soldiers, the governors get paid
And the marshals and cops get the same
But the poor white man's used in the hands of them all like a tool
He's taught in his school
From the start by the rule
That the laws are with him
To protect his white skin
To keep up his hate
So he never thinks straight
'Bout the shape that he's in
But it ain't him to blame
He's only a pawn in their game.[/quote]
Just seems odd to keep pointing elsewhere, to keep emphasizing lower taxes and less government, and the ordinary family still expecting to readily be able to put their kids through a solid educational system equally available to everyone, reliable health care, etc.
Wouldn't you want government to facilitate and organize such likes, since government is employed by voters in the first place?
That's not an objection to capitalism, just seeing the US situation as odd.
:alarmed: He is replacing a number of Defense Dept officials. Just to be paranoid, which is called for with HeWhoMustNotBeNamed, is this just childish revenge or part of a preparation to mobilize federal agents as was done against the Portland protests?
It seems abundantly clear that the wheels of democracy will in fact grind Trump out of office come 20th Jan. The first stop is certification of the electoral college vote which culimates 14th Dec. Yet he will draw this out as far as possible, once again demonstrating his contempt for democratic norms, the constitution and the rule of law. American citizens are dying in enormous numbers due to a pandemic he utterly failed to control, and yet, in his mind, the only thing that matters is that he didn't win. This is the only thing he will ever weep about, as the only genuine emotion he's capable of is self-pity.
(I would have hoped that Trump had rode into the sunset by now, or been tarred and feathered and dumped on the city outskirts, but as neither has happened I felt compelled to comment.)
But, you know... there are all those dire consequences, so, I'd rather those go away than get to watch the amusing spectacle.
Trump seems to be losing more than the election. The question is not how long till he's out of office, but how long until he's committed to a mental institution.
There's no "smoking gun" for election fraud. No ominous plans for a coup. Who would implement it? As I said, you would need a lot more balls and cunning than this trash talking media bully can do. The QAnon people might have been active in social media, but they aren't in the government. And the Republicans aren't going to rock the boat for Trump. They just understand that 76 million voted for Biden and 71 million (was it so?) voted for Trump and Trump is listened in Republican circles. At least still. Seems to be that Trump won't go with a bang, but with a whimper. For Trump that is fitting. The response that attorney general Barr's memo, mainly put there to woo the President, did get some response from his own department:
Perhaps finally now the Trump hating media is understanding that his immature tweets aren't worth the outrage or even commenting and what he does comment doesn't matter so much, because it's not actually real US policy. These media outcries against Trump has only kept Trump in the limelight and his followers happy about thinking that Trump is doing something. Because the actual work is not much. Just look at the wall. And not starting a new war (just killing an Iranian general and getting Iran to lob missiles into US bases didn't start it) is actually, really, not a huge accomplishment.
But “normalization” and the brokering of diplomatic relations between Israel and some Arab states is a huge accomplishment.
I remember you telling me that putting your son-in-law in charge of the Middle East policy with absolutely no idea about politics in the area is absurd. This was during the fear-mongering about the brief Turkey-PLK spat—so much talk of genocide, world war 3, and ISIS, none of which occurred. Yet during his brief time there the UAE, Bahrain, and Sudan normalize relations with Israel. These are countries that were a part of the Khartoum resolution of 1967, which essentially forbids peace with Israel. Even Ambassador Jim Jeffry, who once signed a letter proclaiming Trump a danger to the world, is going to recommend the Biden administration continue the Trump administration Middle East policies. He says it yielded better stability in the area than his predecessors.
So it’s not only that he didn’t start new wars, but he moved forward on peace in the Middle East, something that no virtue-signalling, “compassionate conservatism”, hopey-changey government could ever hope to accomplish.
You keep repeating this rubbish despite being refuted. So, again, Trump didn't do shit of substance in the Middle East. You can't make peace between countries that are not only not at war, but are not even in meaningful conflict. Meanwhile the parties that are in conflict, either directly or by proxy, eg. Israel, Palestine, Iran, still are, and are, in fact, further away from peace than ever due to Trump's one-sided approach, which included the inflammatory acts of relocating the US embassy to Jerusalem and withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal.
So, Trump's efforts at "peace" amounted to nothing more than granting a Netanyahu wishlist while attempting to bribe the Palestinians with a few billon to shut them up. That failed miserably, so he was reduced to this pathetic PR effort of "normalising relations" between Israel and a few Arab countries that had no part in the conflict. He did this for one reason and one reason only, so he and his sycophants could proclaim to an ignorant public that he made "peace" in the Middle East. Utter BS, the Middle East, in terms of the protagonists that actually matter, is further away from peace than ever.
Apparently the killing of Qasem Soleimani substantially hurt the Iranian efforts to dominate the Middle East.
Out of context. In terms of hurting the other side, yes, he hurt Iran with that attack. But it could hardly be argued that that was a successful effort to forge peace. In fact, it almost led to a dangerous escalation.
"
Achieving the Impossible, Trump May Leave the Middle East Worse Than He Found It
Trump deserves praise for brokering normalization accords between Israel and the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, and Sudan is the latest to join the list. In exchange, each country received a gift package suited to its needs: the UAE got F-35 fighters; Sudan was removed from the list of state sponsors of terrorism; and Bahrain will get what’s left over.
But a deal of the century that would end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it isn’t. Trump didn’t work any miracles; he didn’t resolve a bloody conflict between Israel and any Arab state.
He gave a seal of approval to the continuation of the occupation and the annexation of the Golan Heights. He moved the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem. And he destroyed Washington’s status as a mediator between Israel and the Palestinians, and thereby any hope of a diplomatic horizon for both Israelis and Palestinians.
...
But the crown jewel of Trump’s business doctrine was actually a liquidation: his withdrawal from the nuclear deal with Iran in 2018.
...
Trump’s efforts to heal the quarrel that pitted Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the UAE against Qatar, which hosts the largest U.S. base in the Middle East, also failed. The economic blockade that the Gulf states and Egypt imposed on Qatar resulted in the latter forging closer relations with Turkey and Iran, which have formed an alliance that seeks to replace the pro-American Arab axis.
...
We can only hope that the next U.S. presidential term will be a boring one, devoid of passions and without a clown running the world.
"
https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-trump-achieved-the-impossible-and-left-the-middle-east-worse-than-he-found-it-1.9284398
The Arab-Isreali conflict, the Khartoum resolution, and the years of “meaningful” conflict between these countries is well known, despite your hand waves. Until now Israeli planes couldn’t even enter Sudanese or UAE airspace, let alone begin talks for embassies, ambassadors, tourism, investment and telecommunications.
Actually, especially Saudi Arabia and Israel have already found each other as both fear Iran. Saudi-Arabia here is important as the largest GCC member, which also creates the opportunity for smaller states simply to start normalizing their relations.
As I have repeated again and again, not ONE of those Gulf States have ever deployed a single soldier to fight Israel. Ever. The Saudis haven't done that since the Israeli war of Independence. It's a positive move, yes, but it really isn't as a breakthrough as you think, especially after Egypt and Jordan have already normalized their relations with Israel. Still, it's a positive thing.
Yet tone down those superlatives, NOS4A2.
Soviet Russia never had any direct battles with the US in the Cold War, therefor the end of those tensions wasn’t much of a breakthrough, because it wasn’t a “meaningful” conflict.
I wonder if he will break down when he can no longer avoid facing up to the reality of his loss. His ego relies on constant affirmation, on being surrounded by people telling him how great he is. Let’s see what happens.
Sorry, but that's not true.
There were many Soviet aces in the Korean War and Stalin decided that the Soviet Air Force would rotate fighter regiments to fight in the war. Hence US and Russian Air Force fought over the "Mig Alley" of North Korea. Natural was to hide this fact, as people would have become even more worried if both sides would have admitted that they are fighting each other. And it isn't the only example of this during the Cold War.
Soviet fighter aces of the Korean War. The success in the Korean War (which continued even in the Vietnam war) lulled the Soviet Air Force to trust that the American air force didn't have any edge over them.
And you cannot relate these tiny Gulf states that have no weapons of mass destruction as a serious competitor to a regional power like Israel. Or are you really comparing these tiny states or dirt poor Sudan to Soviet Union???
If that’s true I guess the Cold War ended during the 50’s. So did the North-Soth Korean conflict, apparently. No peaceful breakthroughs are possible when the soldiers aren’t shooting each other.
To your second statement, if two nations are on opposing sides of some conflict, but not in open battle, then the seriousness of this comes from the possibility of an armed conflict. Cold War was serious.
First, no Gulf State will out of the blue start hostilities with Israel or vice versa. Only Israel has nuclear weapons and the capability to strike these countries with impunity. It would be different if the GCC members would have their own nuclear deterrent capable to strike Israel. They haven't and their threat scenarios aren't about Israel, but about Iran and possibly Iraq. And heck, for some countries their possible enemy is Saudi-Arabia or other GCC members!
This really is a similar "breakthrough" if Morocco and Israel would normalize their relations in a similar fashion. Absolutely "breathtaking achievement" that would be for the MIddle East. And Moroccan troops have actually fought the Israelis, btw. :roll:
Actually it is true because a Cold War is a war without direct military action by definition. I wasn’t aware of Soviet soldiers in the Vietnam, and I will give you the benefit of the doubt, but if you are arguing it was a hot war I might need more than that.
After checking your statement that “not ONE of those Gulf States have ever deployed a single soldier to fight Israel. Ever”, I found that to be false. Sudan sent a few thousand soldiers during the Yom Kippur war in the 70’s.
Either way I remain unconvinced. I cannot believe that a peaceful resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict, as shaky as that may be, is not serious.
Quoting NOS4A2
Learn geography, NOS4A2
Sudan isn't a Gulf State. It's in Africa, not in the Arabian Peninsula.
My mistake. Sorry my eyes gloss over after about a few of your sentences. I didn’t realize you were actively excluding one of the countries under discussion.
Seeing as Trump is becoming increasingly irrelevant, this thread is likely to soon outlive its usefulness and fade away. Ditto for NOS.
Sam Harris: #224 - THE KEY TO TRUMP’S APPEAL
This thread may be about Trump, and may fade... but the issues that Trump manipulated remain, and will reemerge.
Probably wishful thinking on my part. Sick of the orange monkey and his entourage of clowns.
The lesson some will be taking on board now is that fixing numbers in the Senate and popular cult status is insufficient; one also needs to gain control of the judiciary; and fixing numbers of Supremes is insufficient; State courts will also need to be fixed.
But the process for undermining any last semblance of democracy is in place; the oligarchy is becoming explicit.
How is it that you can’t see what’s happening?
Is it that you can’t see or just don’t want to see? Or is it all too much for your peanut brains.
Is this what you mean?
Quoting Drazjan
Why should this prediction be believed this time around, after it has failed so many times before?
The presumed population "explosion" has in fact already happened. The rate of population increase is slowing, and we can make decent guesses about when it will stabilise. Even if we were willing to expend more effort to slow the increase, it's unlikely to make much of a difference.
The real elephant in the room is not population size, but resource consumption per capita.
:up:
The US has had 'our Pompey' (Reagan) and 'our Julius Caesar' (Dubya) but not yet 'our Augustus'. This accidental, premature 'Nero' (Trump :point: "He would see this country burn if he could be King of the ashes." ~Varys The Spider) more likely than not foreshadows a DOA empire (formerly styled "Pax Americana") in free fall ...
Spell it out Brett - what is happening? What is it we’re not seeing?
Waiting to be enlightened. :eyes:
:rofl:
Over the last few days when I see a right wing comment on Twitter, usually about how great Brexit is, or f**k the EU and I click on their profile, I see post after post from the anti-vax movement. It's really spreading now.
Past veterans day, few days ago, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff general Milley went on a public speech quite openly to remind where the allegiance of the military lies on. Likely he wouldn't have given this kind of speech without the present political situation, but now it perhaps was needed to be clear about this issue.
If you put a nail into fears, it really hurts and makes more fear.
I guess you're talking about boomers and gen-x?
It's just surreal at this point.
:mask: :up:
And the fact that about half the voters voted for him anyway is a commensurate condemnation of the state of American culture.
Sad, sad, sad. I heard a story yesterday about patients, desperately ill with COVID-19, shrieking at the hospital staff trying to save their lives that 'COVID is a political conspiracy'.
This is Trump's true poison - demolishing any idea of there being an objective reality. He has sucked tens of millions of people into his vortex of delusion.
A source with knowledge of the trip said that Mr. Trump would meet with Michigan’s Senate majority leader, Mike Shirkey, and speaker of the House, Lee Chatfield, late Friday afternoon. Both lawmakers are Republicans who have said that whoever has the most votes in Michigan after the results are certified will get the state’s 16 electoral votes.
The White House invitation to Republican lawmakers in a battleground state is the latest — and the most brazen — salvo in a scattershot campaign-after-the-campaign waged by Mr. Trump and his allies to cast doubt on President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr.’s decisive victory.[/quote]
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/11/19/us/joe-biden-trump-updates/trump-tries-to-subvert-the-election-inviting-michigan-gop-lawmakers-to-the-white-house
And Mitch McConnell stands by and says nothing while the 'Trump allies' work to overthrow the results of a validly-conducted election.
What about this?
Yes, but let's not forget that Ghouliani is a sleeper agent hired by George Soros, Ayatollah Khomeini and Hugo Chavez (who is alive and well and living in a Hillary Clinton bodysuit) to destroy the Republican party. :party:
Indeed, poor Hugo. RIP. :death:
Then his Immediate successor is an old white selfish bigot, incarnation of king George of England, who would aspire to absolute power, and subvert all those same conventions established over centuries...
One of the tiredest bromides about our system of govt, liberal democracy, that it is fragile, becomes suddenly true, and looking back over the history of the Ancient Greek and Roman regimes one must wonder whether it is true that a state’s demise occurs precisely at the moment it seems to be in its fullest flower, fulfilling its greatest potential, as the Roman republic was when a philosopher had just served as head of state, and the greatest moral authority, Cato Minor, was soon to deny Caesar the glory of pardoning him by taking his own life in that famous and ghastly way.
Look at this way: as Trump makes this a huge fiasco of whining and lost court cases, the less he will have influence later come 2022 and 2024.
There's only so many redneck Republicans. Just like not all Democrats were enthusiastic Bernie supporters.
[quote=CNN]Sidney Powell claimed that widely used voting machines from the election technology company Dominion Voting Systems featured software created "at the direction" of former Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez to swing his own election results, and that the company has ties to the Clinton Foundation and Soros.
Facts first: None of this is true. Dominion has no corporate ties with Venezuela, the Clinton Foundation or Soros.[/quote]
Meanwhile, Rudy's Dripping Hair Dye stole the show. It was infinitely more classy than anything he actually said.
“What the hell was going on with Rudy?... Was his brain shitting itself? I didn’t even know that sideburns could get periods. You know your legal strategy is fucked up when even your hair starts crying about it.”
-Trevor Noah
:rofl:
Is it something simple like the desire to stay in the spotlight as long as possible? Is it basically just spoiled brat egoism?
Or is there a larger plan in the works? Is he already running for 2024? Is he planning on transitioning from king to king maker, a new version of Rush Limbaugh? Maybe start his own media network called TrumpTV? Is he preparing his base to accept a coming coup?
Is it just a business calculation, with all publicity judged to be good publicity for his brand renting business?
Has he just trapped himself inside of an ego outburst? Or is his ever scheming mind cooking up a larger agenda? If so, what?
As a lawyer, and as someone of (largely) Italian descent, I'm horrified by this seemingly demented and contemptible faccia di cazzo.
Trump reportedly told an ally he knows he lost the 2020 election but wants revenge on Democrats for doubting he properly won in 2016
In general, the eight years in which Obama served were marked by uneventfulness. True, we had a Great Recession, but the recovery was swift, and soon the economy was as robust as ever. One could imagine him being re-elected indefinitely, like FDR, and the cruelest thing I ever heard him say, a man so mild and gentle, was, after Hillary lost, “I could have won this election”: that was an unnecessary public belly-ache directed at his former faithful Secretary of State...though it was probably true...
...but Hillary was just too milquetoast, not a figure to inspire like her predecessor. It was time for another rock star to inspire the electorate...but how different a character!
Pure desperation.
Quoting Todd Martin
Agree. Hillary Clinton seemed uniquely hated by a lot of people. But there was also a strange confluence of circumstances that conspired to see Trump elected. And when he was elected, he was utterly surprised by it. According to Michael Wolff's Fire and Fury, 'Melania cried bitter tears' when it became clear he'd won. Trump looked like a poker player with a pair of two's who had just been called.
Meanwhile, news that Trump's attempt to persuade Michigan's GOP to over-ride the popular vote has failed.
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/11/20/us/joe-biden-trump/michigan-lawmakers-after-meeting-with-trump-reaffirm-that-they-will-honor-the-states-vote
What about Little Boots?
Yeah, I'll tune in for the divorce for some schadenfreude. Otherwise couldn't give a fuck.
Go on, do it. Give the Dems the last 2 Senators they need to take the Senate.
This was the case that Giuliani was sweating [s]blood[/s] hair dye over, with all the nonsense about Venezuelan voting software. The 30th- yes, you read that right, thirtieth - lawsuit filed by the Trump campaign that has been tossed by a judge on grounds of having no merit. Needless to say, nothing will ever stop Trump tweeting that the election was rigged, and a fair proportion of Americans from believing it, but at least he’s up against something he can’t bullshit his way out of.
Trump’s really acting like the guy who, when a girlfriend dumps him, throws acid in her face so that nobody else will like her - ‘if I can’t have her, nobody else can, either.’ :grimace:
From 1981, the Rebbe's view of US elections:
You can't make this stuff up.
Cool guy. :clap:
Btw, give me some insight, what do Georgians think of Sidney Powell's latest conspiracy theory that Dominion paid Brian Kemp to illegally add a shit-ton of votes to Biden's tally and of her threat to "blow up" Georgia with a "Biblical" lawsuit. It's National Enquirer "Aliens ate my baby"-level stuff, but is it gaining any traction? And wtf is she doing it for? It's never going anywhere? Is there a plan here?
Could be, a reasonable theory. Or, there could be more to this. If we can momentarily detach ourselves from our disgust of Trump, and for a bit look at him as a political communicator/debater, a man of rhetoric, he becomes rather more interesting.
We might observe how nobody really knows what Trump is up to. Everyone has their pet theory, but nobody really knows. Part of Trump's instinctive debate genius is to perpetually keep everyone off guard, confused, befuddled, not knowing what's going to happen next.
As example, imagine that he's preparing his followers to support a coming coup attempt. Not saying this is so, just asking you to imagine. Look at how we're unprepared for such a possibility. Is he a cartoon? An imbecile? An ego maniac? Is he serious? Is he cooking up a big surprise?
Yes, yes, I know, I know, each of you wants to chant "Trump is stupid and we are smart!!!" over and over again. Ok, fair enough, not really arguing, I just think it's more interesting to try to get beyond these emotional poses, our emotional poses, and try to look at Trump through other lenses. And, you know, he is President, and we are not.
I've been following American politics on an almost daily basis since the early sixties. Trump is easily the most interesting political figure of my lifetime. You look at him hosting some insipid reality TV show and can't imagine voting for him for dog catcher, and the next thing you know he's obtained personal control of the nation's nuclear arsenal. Hollywood is not creative enough to write scripts like this.
I think we should be careful in assuming that we know what Trump is up to. Trump himself may not know. He's a very instinctive and spontaneous player. And using that method he succeeded in defeating the entire political establishment at their own game, until very recently.
The time to relax will be when they're lowering Trump's casket in to the ground. Until then, we'd be wise to keep an open mind and pay attention.
Rather than "instinctive and spontaneous", I'd use the word "puppet".
Including himself.
I don't buy this for a moment. His 2016 electoral victory was a complete surprise to himself, as much as everyone else. In 2016 he never thought he would win - and he was wrong. His 2016 win was a Stephen Bradbury win. (That was the Australian ice skater who won gold at the olympics because the leading pack all fell over each other.)
In 2020 he never thought he could lose - wrong again.
Trump's wins come because he ruthlessly games the system for whatever momentary advantage he can. Many commentators have said that one of the reasons he's gotten away with so much is that the founders of the United States never imagined having to deal with such a shameless grifter - they assumed that whomever was elected President would at least have a modicum of ethical principles and decency. The remedy of impeachment was introduced specifically to deal with the kinds of criminal behaviour that Trump exhibits, but regrettably the Republican party has become so corrupted by him, that they were unwilling to rightfully exercise that power in February 2020 when they should have. Now the majority of the GOP stand idly by while he attempts to overthrow democratic rule. American democracy has never been under such threat as it has under Trump, and it's still not over.
But it looks as though finally Trump is facing a reckoning - that he lost the election by an enormous margin, too large to game or bullshit away. But he will never accept it, and he will convince millions of credulous people that really, he won. It's a kingdom of lies, a vortex of delusion.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1327811527123103746[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/JennaEllisEsq/status/1330638034619035655[/tweet]
The incompetence grows even further.
"Sidney Powell is practising law on her own. She is not a member of the Trump Legal Team. She is also not a lawyer for the President in his personal capacity. She is a crazed lunatic who made us look bad by being even crazier than we are. To make up for this we have hired celebrity superstar lawyer Lionel Hutz to replace her."
It's hard to get my finger on the pulse. There's a guy at work here who's sure that there was fraud, despite there being no evidence of it.
When the Republican Secretary of State Raffesnberger certified the election, Perdue and Loeffler issued a joint statement calling for his resignation. Kemp wouldn't go so far, so now there's talk when he's up for reelection, the Republicans are going to run someone against him in the primary who's more pro-Trump. It appears therefore that the political strategists believe that Republican Georgians are very pro-Trump and they don't want to push back on his crazy conspiracy theories. My own thinking is that isn't a great strategy considering the slim margin needed for a victory and this tact might lose more Republicans than it will gain. That is, I can't imagine any Trump supporter voting for Warnock or Ossoff because they'd have been incensed had Perdue and Loeffler showed some integrity and demanded the truth.
My own thought is that the Republicans need to recognize that Trump isn't concerned about the future of the Republican party or of the country and they need to jump off the Trump crazy train.
I'm in a bind myself here because I have serious problems with Warnock and Ossoff and could never vote for them. I also have a problem with Loeffler's stock trade shenanigans. And then there's the really big issue for me in that I think Perdue and Loeffler are spineless pieces of shit for not standing up against stupidity and dishonesty and in demanding the resignation of someone who did the right thing. But then again, I see the Senate as the only check left against a Democratic party that is being pushed farther left than the general public wants, so I want the Republicans to win here.
So, I guess I'll have to vote for Perdue at least, but maybe not Loeffler (and just leave that one blank), but I'm really not sure. I can't even so a write in vote here because you can't do a write in for a runoff. I guess I have to decide which choice is the least worst.
Funny thing is, Loeffler was mentioned by Powell as a beneficiary of the alleged fraud in her run off against Collins. So, she may take it from both sides. Hope she does because she's clearly just playing her supporters and doesn't give a F about anything but herself.
Why is it for Americans so difficult to understand that everybody doesn't think as they themselves do, even if you just had an election there where 79 million voted for Biden and 73 million voted for Trump?
This wasn't Franklin Delano Roosevelt winning Alf Landon, an electoral vote of 538 to 8 (and the popular vote being 60,8% to 36,5%), even if Joe Biden clearly did win.
Quoting tim wood
I disagee.
On the contrary, an Eisenhower like Republican could actually easily get a firm grip on the Republican party, if he gets a following like Trump. Just think about it for a second: If they become total jelly in front of the totally inept Trump and even now a vast majority don't dare to say the obvious, that how utterly crazy Trump's post-election tantrum is, it all just shows how much they bow down in front of popular support. Now an Eisenhower type leader from the right could easily get the working class to choose him and not a democrat career politician. You simply cannot deny the malleability of the GOP.
In fact it's the Democrats that can rule their party with a far more firmer grip. They control their extreme-lefties with giving some limelight to Bernie and AOC types to please the activist crowd, but firmly put these aside when the chips are down. If Trump could take over the Republican party, surely someone of Eisenhowers character could take it also. (Of course, to get an Eisenhower, perhaps the US has to have that war with China first.)
Eisenhower's TV Add from1956. Might be something Americans would still want to vote for.
Eisenhower won back then with 57% of the votes and 457 electoral votes only with the segregated South supporting the Democrats, btw.
As predictable as morning, the same voices that for three years spread misinformation and conspiracy theories of the 2016 election are now shedding tears about Trump’s threat to “our most sacred right” in 2020. The cliché “you reap what you sow” comes to mind.
Some are even saying Trump is staging a coup, as if he wasn’t already the leader of the free world—and this after years of failed investigations and frivolous impeachment attempts, all of which hindered the administration during a time when it might have focused on threats based in reality instead of the deep-state dinner-theater.
Never mind that the establishment’s parrots were silent when democrats such as Elizabeth Warren and Amy Klobuchar raised concerns in 2019 about voting machines, reports of “vote flipping”, and other problems; when the president expresses the same concerns he is doing so out of spite and revenge, at least according to “people familiar with the president’s thinking”, whose gossip could come from any self-appointed Trump mind reader. The tendency to assign motives to Trump is a consistent propaganda technique, but it is always based on two assumptions: that one can assume Trump holds the worst possible intentions, and that one can further assume that, if he has found the lowest possible motive, he has found the right one. One could just as easily say the concerns of Trump’s opponents about his refusal to concede is born of fear and megalomania and ignorance. At any rate, that is why the motive canard is so uninteresting. Each side can go on playing the game ad nauseam, but when all the mud has been flung every man’s views still remain to be considered on their merits.
As for the merits, that will be for the courts to decide.
The hair dye dripp’n, shirt tuck’n, landscaping storefront book’n, conspiracy theory sling’n Giuliani is certainly enjoying the spotlight, and his silly antics are rather amusing.
LOL, you lost every case, came out looking like morons, and will change nothing except making Trump look like an even whinier little bitch. But, yes, keep playing make believe because you haven't been humiliated quite enough just yet. Can't wait for the Kraken to be released. :lol:
Eisenhower was a Republican, so what is your contradiction?
Quoting tim wood
American political parties are quite malleable as their basic objective is simply to stay in power. There can be a lot of turnarounds.
Besides, If the two parties have changed so much in the past, why assume them to be static in the future? Trump's effect on the GOP shows how they can change... or basically how lost they can be.
Quoting tim wood
I'm not so sure that many just how static the whole political landscape is in the US.
As I've said, the Biden administration will have a very short honeymoon period. It doesn't seem that people are as hopeful as they were lets say the first time Obama got elected. The relief of the Trump era being over will quickly evaporate... I think in six months or so.
If you'd ask me, I think party affiliation is an important factor in US group identity. For people in a multiparty system it's quite common to shift from one party to the next depending on what you think is important during a specific election. Years ago, when I first could vote, I voted like my parents did: our centre-right political party. That has lurched right over the years (but surprisingly recently, it went left, yay!) but I've voted the Party for Animals last time, because they were the only one pushing a fully circular economy. Can't get much lefter than that except for the actual communist party.
That swing isn't even possible in the US because they don't offer such a wide variety of political options. Let alone that they perceive the gap between Democrats and Republicans as huge when in fact it's a tiny crack in the political pavement.
I do think the Democrats were more "left", or let's say, they used to be social Democrats now they are just liberal Democrats that are socially progressive but economically nearly indistinguishable from Republicans. Sure, they'll raise a few taxes and tweak a social program but in essence they still pander to corporate interests through deregulations and low taxes (if not as low as the Republicans).
Fairness in advertising would require the Democrats to rename to the "Plutocratic Party (but we'll let you have your gay marriage and abortion)" and the Republicans to the "More Plutocratic Party (and, no you can't have gay marriage or abortion)". Both items which won't matter to 90% of US citizens soon any way because they won't be able to afford either.
Are you suggesting that people voted for Trump because they're offended that Democrat voters think they're smarter than them for voting for Trump? Seems kinda circular.
EDIT: Even during this election what Democrats tried was shaming people into voting against Trump. I mean, Jesus, how weak and snobby can it get?
"I was going to vote for the Democrats because I believe that their policies are better, but because they're telling me that their policies are better and so therefore I'd be stupid to vote for the Republicans I'm going to vote for the Republicans instead."
Is that what you're suggesting they're thinking? Because if so then the Democrats are right; these Republican voters are stupid.
Not very convincing is it?
Even if I said what you think I said with that paraphrase above, which I didn't, it's still crap.
This is the structural problem in the US political system of having just two options. Yet the two-party system is quite aware of this huge problem.
In order for the two party system to survive, the parties themselves have to be malleable, they have to be loose in their ideology and open to change. Otherwise to system would simply collapse. They need to present the "primaries", which is for me quite hilarious, as this democratic opportunity to influence the outcome. Hence people even here can believe that Bernie Sanders and the social democrats, sorry, democratic socialists can take power in the DNC. And with the GOP, they have had already Trump taking power from the old leadership... at least for a while, so the Republicans likely have a firm belief in the system. Hence Americans believe, that democratic change can happen through the two-parties themselves.
This is in the heart of the staunch belief that Americans have in their system. Unfortunately a two-party system creates inherently a problem for representation and a situation for corruption to take root. Besides, political parties themselves are not democratic and totally open for changing their basic ideology.
For example, you have something like 13 parties in your Parliament and we have 9 political parties in our Parliament (and about 10 more registered political parties). Now imagine all those parties that have Parliament seats put into just two opposing parties. As political parties have one leadership, especially when ruling through an administration, it's obvious that a lot of views would simply be silenced and a lot of various agenda pushed now by the present political parties would simply not come out.
This is the reason just why the US is prone to have political turmoil if the economy hits bad times as many people simply don't have a party that is aligned to their political views. Without a root to voice your concerns the whole system can get shaky. The two-party system simply cannot represent all. Such hard times as now, this creates really a problem.
Americans can someday oust both parties. That can happen, even if it sounds crazy now.
"Brainlet" Hip term.
S, is that you?
It's incel frog talk. Picked it up from 4chan. I'm diversifying.
Had to Google all those terms. Either you're fucked up or I'm just old, but prolly both, and by "prolly," I mean probably, as in more likely, just in case you're not up on the way the kids talk.
Except there's no evidence that America has a shoddy election process. There's been no actual evidence presented and every meaningful claim he's filed in court has failed, even before some of his own appointees. I'm just not following how he's making anyone look silly by making unsubstantiated allegations.
De mortuis nil nisi bonum.
Quoting Benkei
Quoting tim wood
Perhaps someone can explain to me what you're exactly replying to.
EDIT: Quite frankly I find the only indecent thing here your assumption that 70 million of your countrymen (you know, the people you're trying to have a society with!) don't think and that none of them are good or decent because otherwise they would've migrated to the Democratic Party. Talk about a too broad brush. Jeez.
You have to restrict your definition of "blue collar" to "older blue collar white voters," to make that claim, something the Republican Party does implicitly in order to make the "party of the people claim."
Now, Democrats routinely understate Trump's support with minorities. 1:10, roughly his share of the Black vote is a sizeable amount of any group. Imagine a backyard barbeque with 20 people; chances are two people would have voted for Trump at that ratio. 1/3rd for Hispanic voters is also substantial. He only lost people under 55 by around 7 points each time. The electorate isn't monolithic by demographic catagory, as it is sometimes portrayed.
At the same time, electorally, Trump loses in a landslide with the people below late middle age, let alone minorities. That's an important fact.
The income data for Trump voters is also skewed by their age. You can be 65 and have a low income from Social Security and your 401k, but have a net worth of $800,000 between your house and savings. Wealth data might be more telling (also very difficult to gather accurately).
The major irony for me is that in an election framed by the GOP as a fight against socialism, the GOP's base is of course the demographic that has universal healthcare (Medicare) and UBI (Social Security) that pays far above what Yang proposed.
That, and immigration is to my mind the unifying issue for populists in the West. Yet lower wages, and property values driven ever higher by mass migration, primarily benefit the elderly who most support the populists.
Are people too stupid to pick their leaders? I wouldn't call it stupidity. Too poorly informed and too emotional would be my verdict. Executives would be better picked like city and county managers, by a small elected panel who can vet and remove candidates based on credentials. Certainly in research, the city manager model consistently outperforms the mayoral model. Unfortunately no state has ever adopted this for the governor's seat.
The US has a federal agency to regulate cheese but not an agency to regulate federal elections. America doesn’t have an election process.
You don’t have to follow but I explained it well enough. While these Twitter-parrots go on about Rudy’s hair dye, they leave his arguments completely untouched. Sworn affidavits, of which Rudy claims to have hundreds, is considered evidence the last time I checked.
Judges seem to disagree, I'm afraid. See link. I've prepared and reviewed and objected to many affidavits. This sort of thing just doesn't work in a court. If the affidavits made public and referred to are representative of what's available, no material evidence is being submitted.
https://reason.com/2020/11/20/judges-are-not-impressed-by-rudy-giulianis-evidence-of-widespread-nationwide-voter-fraud/
[tweet]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1331317982107213833[/tweet]
Thanks Joe!
Somehow I think that the US establishment doesn't want to put two Presidents, one Democrat and on Republican, under investigation in the Epstein case. Nope, in the US it's always either one or the other, not both.
Anyway, isn't the case of Stephen Ward in the Profumo quite similar to the Epstein case?
[tweet]https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1331706255212228608?s=21[/tweet]
The "largest witch hunt in history," by Presidential declaration actually. It's interesting to compare to the old record holder: the Würzburg witch trials, held in Germany during the 30 Years War.
Like today, there were also over zealous politically motivated inquisitors attacking heros of the people. Among prince-bishops, Philipp Adolf von Ehrenberg of Würzburg was particularly active: in his reign of eight years (1623–31) he burnt 900 persons, including his own nephew, nineteen Catholic priests, and children of seven who were said to have had intercourse with demons.
I'm sure he would have been a Democrat btw.
Although I grow tired of the Donald Trump show in its final act. If I wanted this, I'd just watch Downfall with the orange tint turned all the way up.
I thought it was obvious, but the term “witch hunt” has never been used in the sense of a hunt for evil witches. It was used to describe political harassment and a form of McCarthyism.
I thought that a bunch of Democrats are supposed to be members of a satanic cabal of elites, according to QAnon. It looks to me like "witch hunt" does refer to a hunt for evil witches in some circles.
Just joking around. People act like it's the end of the world, but at least we aren't burning people for being demon spawn (yet).
And in unrelated news, Rudy Giuliani reportedly seeks pardon from Donald Trump
Here's how this whole thing ends by the way.
Either:
1) Trump does a 180 degree u-turn, shuts the fuck up, and behaves himself.
2) Trump ends up in jail.
He has absolutely no chance of coming out on top here.
[quote=NY Times] Gabriel Sterling, a high-ranking [Republican] Georgia elections official, walked to a lectern in the State Capitol in Atlanta on Tuesday and angrily denounced the violent threats and harassment directed at people working on elections issues, urging President Trump to condemn it.
“It has to stop,” said Mr. Sterling, a Republican. “Mr. President, you have not condemned this language or these actions. This has to stop. We need you to step up, and if you’re going to take a position of leadership, show some.”
...
Speaking loudly, emotionally and deliberately, Mr. Sterling said that Mr. [Georgia Sec. of State] had intruders on his personal property. He said that Mr. Raffensperger’s wife was “getting sexualized threats through her cellphone.” Mr. Sterling said he had police protection outside his own house.
He mentioned reports that Joe diGenova, a lawyer for the Trump campaign, said that Christopher Krebs — a federal cybersecurity official who was fired shortly after saying that the election was fair — should be shot.
But Mr. Sterling said that “the straw that broke the camel’s back” had to do with a contractor for a voting system company in Gwinnett County who was targeted by someone who hung a noose and said he should be “hung for treason” simply for doing a routine element of his job.[/quote]
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2020/12/01/us/joe-biden-trump?referringSource=articleShare#georgia-elections-official-urges-trump-to-stop-inspiring-people-to-commit-potential-acts-of-violence
Two people should be called out for special mention in regards to this disgrace - Mitch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy, who stand by mute whilst Trump’s thugs deliberately set out to torpedo the democratic process. Let there be a reckoning, and let it be severe.
One positive coming out of this is that these overt and tacit supporters of MAGA terrorism can never again with any credibility complain about the "violent left". The cat's out of the bag.
2021.
This embarrassing irony should not be understated. Vast sums of human beings throughout the world now find themselves under some version or other of state control and coercion, none of which Trump decreed. Police checkpoints, curfews, lockdowns, state cessation of the economy, mask mandates, banned gatherings, the restriction of movement—those who promised us a Trumpian fascism never once warned us that the same tyranny has found its perfect breeding ground in the nostrums of paternalistic nanny-statism.
Where are they now? Santayana reasoned that “Fanaticism consists in redoubling your effort when you have forgotten your aim.”; one might excuse their mistake had they turned their mental machinery to the unprecedented erosion of civil liberties and human rights we are now seeing. But no. From beneath the state jackboot we can still hear their cries of wolf.
You should be rather happy with the level of tyrannical nanny-statism in the US, given that there were 2,600 coronavirus deaths reported yesterday. China reported only 9 deaths yesterday.
Would you be happier if there were double or triple the number of Americans dead yesterday?
god he's still going
We'll see what happens in Georgia. Hopefully the GOP turnout will be dampened because they see no point in voting in a "rigged" election and this will finally be a wakeup call to Republican leadership.
Then again, my fear is that you're right and that somehow the GOP will turnout 105% of their voters in January due to the MAGA cult not being able to think logically. Humanity always has a habit of letting us down so I wouldn't be surprised if that's what happens.
Quoting Benkei
Depends on if Biden can even run by then. If not then the Democrats will most likely nominate Harris whose message is *checks notes* being the first Black, Asian American Female president. She'll probably have Buttigieg as her running mate as well, who will be the first gay VP if elected. I mean, Biden's cabinet was praised for it's diversity (despite being full of the same corporate goons) so it's very obvious that the party is all in on identity politics as their winning pitch for the foreseeable future.
Oh I know!!!
Trump will go around preparing for a "The Real Inauguration", the inauguration of the real President, but in the end nothing will come out of it and it will turn out to be a scam to get people to give money to fund his oncoming legal battles.
Something like that! :grin:
The real inauguration will be at the Four Seasons...
I meant I don't see the Democrats winning next time. They had the "not Trump" turn out now but that's gone next time. And the corporate shill spiel, I'm betting Americans are smarter than that and if not smarts then definitely they must feel something is off after the lost decade with terrorism wars and the first crisis and now a pandemic and another crisis where again the rich aren't bleeding like the next man. Two lost decades? They sense the inequality and the betrayal hence Trump last time.
...Total Landscaping Company.
One of the remarks Bob Woodward made after his extensive series of phone interviews with Trump, is that Trump really doesn't have a grasp of reality. He can't differentiate what he believes, or wants to believe, from what is real.
[quote=Bob Woodward]I don’t know, to be honest, whether he’s got it straight in his head on what is real and what is unreal. That is why, at the end of the book, I say, in totality, my judgment is this is the wrong man for the job.[/quote]
Although I think this has been pretty obvious since Day One.
(I note that the Biden team is mostly ignoring Trump, which is probably what I ought to do from now on.)
I guess I don't disagree for the most part, but if the Democrats would win again, it would be with an incumbent on the ticket instead of Ms. identity politics on steroids (and even then it's a 50/50 thing). It's clear the party has learnt the wrong lessons from last time and they'll go on pretending like the problem is not with them which isn't a good sign for their future.
The only other way I can see the Dems winning again is if Trump somehow blows his party up in the next 4 years. It's crazy to say that that's not a total impossibility but that's where things have gone in America.
Not if Trump maintains any sway, which he seems to have a lot of right now, then he'll be right back next time.
Quoting tim wood
Wow, What a surprise! Maybe that's why all those judges keep rejecting him, I thought it was because they're all part of the anti-Trump, anti-America conspiracy.
I agree except that the GOP blowing up means the Democrats won't offer real policy changes because they won't have too. It's not something to look forward to if that happens as it will probably set back the progressive influence on the party for years, which has been gaining recently.
...until another second party takes the place of the GOP, as is inevitable under our FPTP system. And that second party may very well be a progressive party, if the Democrats split into a corporatist side and a progressive side.
"American institutions have often been the friend of the most authoritarian projects, as I argued in my first book ... And in fact, to the extent that Trump’s politics had any juice at all, it was precisely because the institutions support that politics. Where would Trump be without the Electoral College or the Senate confirming his judges and justices—and where would Trumpism be under a Biden administration without the Senate and the courts?
It’s ironic to me that people would choose this moment, and Trump’s presidency, to assign the label “fascist” to the right, for what fascism is about, above all else, is a politics of strength and will. That’s why fascists traditionally loathe the constitutional order: because they think it constrains the assertion of political will. The irony of Trumpist/GOP politics is that it is completely dependent upon the constitutional order. In that regard, it’s almost the complete opposite of fascism
... It seems so strange to me that people spoke so much of authoritarianism under Trump when what we’ve been seeing for years now, including the Trump years, is political impotence, the absence of political will. And without the left getting its act together, I don’t see that changing any time soon. That is something to be very worried about".
I still think Trump is something of an aspirational fascist - he's still a race-baiting nationalist who trades on a cult of personality - but he's simply too incompetent and too stupid of a human being to do anything about it.
[quote=Michelle Goldberg]Along with many other state-level Republican election officials, Sterling and Raffensperger have shown admirable commitment to the rule of law. Their refusal to participate in Trump’s attempted autogolpe helped avert a constitutional crisis. Yet it’s hard not to notice that their outrage is a bit selective.[/quote]
https://nyti.ms/37snUNe
New word! Autogolpe is 'A self-coup - a form of putsch or coup d'état in which a nation's leader, despite having come to power through legal means, dissolves or renders powerless the national legislature and unlawfully assumes extraordinary powers not granted under normal circumstances. Other measures taken may include annulling the nation's constitution, suspending civil courts and having the head of government assume dictatorial powers.' (Wikipedia)
This is exactly what Trump and his sycophants are trying to achieve, although as SLX points out, Trump's mendacity is outweighed only by his utter lack of competence. And also the resistance of lower-level, mainly state, republican electoral officials and politicians, ought to be acknowledged.
:naughty: :fire: :scream:
I can fully agree that Trump is an evil scumbag, so we don't have to debate that.
Claims by some that Trump is stupid and incompetent strike me as somewhat ridiculous emotional poses by my fellow members. In 2016 he defeated all competition from every party, and successfully showed the entire political and media classes to be incompetent in their predictions. Since then he's come to totally dominate the Republican Party to the point that very few Republican leaders will publicly stand up to him. Yes, he lost in 2020, but not by that much. And now he is using his defeat to raise something like 200 million dollars for investment in his next political adventure.
Dear fellow members, when you can match this record of accomplishment please return to the thread, this time with actual evidence, to show that you are smarter than Trump. When you get elected to ANY OFFICE, that would be a good time to try again.
Members are confusing their distaste for Trump, which I enthusiastically share, with an analysis of his intelligence. But then, the political commentary here is generally abysmal, so I have only myself to blame if I'm surprised.
Trump has had an instinctive ability to tap into a certain anti-establishment mindset and manipulate it to his advantage. On the other hand, he's incredibly ignorant on stuff like science and geopolitics. You can be lacking in intelligence in many areas and still have "street smarts"—though clearly even those failed him this time around as he managed to lose the election by a bigger margin than any incumbent in modern history. He's not playing 4D chess, so much as 1D checkers.
I think his "instinctive ability" is that he's a realist. He's not burdened with visions of how things should be and so can better see things as they really are. Here's an example to illustrate.
The media typically presents itself as a public service, and we typically buy this story. Trump sees through this self flattering story the media tells itself about itself, and understands that corporate media is just another profit seeking business. He "instinctively" gets that the media is not in the news business, they are in the ad selling business, and that their business model is powered by drama. So Trump hands over a non-stop stream of drama and is rewarded by the media with a non-stop spotlight on his every utterance.
As evidence, using this method Trump has succeeded in getting you and me to talk about him in this thread. And by talking about him, focusing on him, keeping him in the spotlight, we are helping to make him powerful. We're all competing to proclaim how superior we are to Trump etc etc, but here we are, doing his bidding.
Quoting Baden
Um, when was the last time that piles of total strangers sent you 200 million dollars? When was the last time that powerful Senators got down on their knees before you? How many people come to your rallies? When were you last covered on the news?
My point is this. This thread is mostly little people trying to pretend they are big. Me too. It's not really about evidence or reason or philosophy so much as it is emotional posturing.
It works.
Here's an example. I drive on the same road every day. At least 90% of the time other drivers tailgate me, risking their lives, in exchange for no conceivable benefit. What I like about this example is that it includes a randomized sample of the entire population, rich, poor, educated, uneducated, Dems, Repubs etc. People are stupid.
Another example which is also pretty all inclusive. You might have heard me mention that nuclear weapons could erase modern civilization in literally just a few minutes, and yet we just had a presidential campaign where they were just barely mentioned. Biden, Trump, the media, nobody interested. This forum too, incapable of focusing on it. People are stupid.
Trump is a realist. That is his gift. He's dealing with the world the way it really is. Stupid. The evidence for this is that his strategies are working.
Another example, the Catholic Church. It's quite trendy here and elsewhere to call them stupid too. And yet they are a 2,000 year old institution which forms one of the foundations of Western civilization. You don't reach such heights by being stupid, but by being a realist.
As Baden said, Trump is street smart, and certainly not an intellectual. I can agree with that. But being street smart to a high degree does not equal being stupid.
It's quite sad that being "big" in the way Trump is (defrauding supporters, bullying politicians, attracting media attention) is something you find admirable and desirable and makes you feel like a "little" person. Can't help you with that.
:rofl:
On the other hand, people as, uh, 'gifted' as Hippyhead are exemplary of how Trump gets to be as popular as he is. Morons mistaking other morons for brilliance.
You must admit it took some next-level ingenuity to lose the election in a landslide to Joe 30330 Biden.
As usual, every thing I'm saying is going right over your oh so clever little heads, and we've proven I'm not going to be able to fix that.
Can you read? I said nothing about Trump being admirable or desirable. What I did say is that his methods have been quite successful, and success on that scale is not usually not a product of stupidity. I did specifically say I share your distaste for this asshole.
Well, he may be aiming for a come back in 2024, so, sorry to say, might be a lot of counting ahead of us.
I can't believe a philosophy forum spent 483 pages talking about Donald Trump.
I think there's going to be a lot of counting for Trump. He's going to end up having to get out there and personally recount every single vote cast in the good old U.S. of A, as well as those from abroad, because no one else seems to be willing to do it for him. While he's at it, he'd better check every signature too. Maybe that'll keep him out of trouble for a while.
You wrote:
Quoting Hippyhead
This appears to mean that you believe taking advantage of ignorance for selfish gain is ‘realistic’ and expresses a ‘gift’.
You also say that he’s contemptible, however.
I think you’re simply not thinking clearly.
:up:
The theory that he plays into the fears of the beleaguered white man who sees his power escaping as the nation's culture and ethnicity change, so he harkens back to a non-existent time when things were great and can be now be made great again sounds like a better explanation.
Quoting Hippyhead
He's the President, so he's likely going to get press whether he carefully submits position papers or he tweets while taking a dump. He's also not selling any actual product, so it's not like he gets paid more the more people talk about him. He also doesn't increase his popularity with the interest he creates, which is apparent from the fact that he lost the last election (even though Newmax has failed to declare him the loser).
What we have is an egomaniac who doesn't care about the national ideals he praises, the religion he preaches, or the people he embraces. He's no different from the left leaning politician who panders to the suffering by saying what they want to hear and doing nothing but gaining whatever power the powerful need to stay powerful.
Trump is no more a genius than is the preacher who cries from the pulpit while he gathers the last dimes from the congregants. Believers aren't stupid, just vulnerable.
The only incumbent to ever lose without a primary challenger, if memory serves me right, and what I was taught once was true.
Nevermind the tax rate of the wealthy in the good 'ole days...
Trump has had most of the corporate global media, Hollywood, the intelligence community, and Big Tech against him. The most lucrative, influential and comprehensive machinery of propaganda in human history delivered an undoubtedly anti-Trump message, fitting the propaganda model to a T. The canard of a Kremlin-linked president still rattles in the heads of true believers while they remain mostly ignorant that the Chinese politburo had already reached the highest echelons of the opposing party. There was the sensationalism around violence at Trump’s rallies while hardly a whisper about violence against his rally-goers. Information gatekeepers actively suppress Trump and his supporters and anything that might reflect poorly on his opponents.
I think Trump’s Twitter feed and the reach of the few commentators who support him are utterly mild in comparison. That’s why I would also think Trump’s opponents are far more vulnerable.
And this is what fanatic Trump supporters cherish the most. Forget what he actually says, the main fact is that he has gotten these people angry.
Quoting NOS4A2
No. The simple reason is that I have to watch the whole press conference in Helsinki of the US president alongside the Russia president and NOT to refer to journalists (who indeed basically are biased against all Republican presidents), but use my OWN THINKING to see that it wasn't normal. Trump's behaviour isn't at all normal with Putin. No president of any country would take the view of a rival and be against his own team. Trump's behavior simply wasn't normal.
But you don't notice this. You think that you are just surrounded with zombies who don't think with their own heads. So there's this left-wing bias in mainstream media. So? You have a right-wing bias in Fox. Easy to notice what is propaganda and what isn't.
So I guess this means Trump didn’t stack the Supreme Court so as to use it in his favour. You morons.
Oh give it up. Don’t hold your breath for the coup either. It’s over and you still can’t let it go.
Of course it's over. It's been over for a month now, and everyone but Trump and his most deluded followers have known it.
No, it doesn't mean that. The fact that you fail at something doesn't mean you didn't intend to do it. I'd call that a lesson in basic logic but that would almost be an insult to basic logic. I realize you're not the brightest bulb on the christmas tree, Brett, but at least plug yourself in.
They made themselves angry. Before Trump came on the scene the gutter press could end a political campaign if the candidate happened to scream awkwardly. They had no power here, and overestimated their king-making status. They failed and lashed out because of it.
You don’t mention that Trump acted the same with pretty much every other leader he met—only Putin. The difference is, the Helsinki meeting, framed as it was in the midst of the Russia hoax, was sensationalized for appetites such as yours.
There was no red scare scare when leading Democrats were found to have CCP agents on their teams. Obama praised China in joint press conferences after this and other ugly incidents (the killing of CIA informants, hacking and theft of intellectual property). Merkel didn’t stoop to criticize Obama when Snowden revealed his NSA was spying on her. Is this the normal you’re speaking of?
No; what was not normal was drum of war banging in the background, especially as a McCarthyite red scare rippled through the DC establishment, disrupting the entire country with a dangerous, media-induced fantasy. That’s not normal, and as far as I can tell your own thinking has only served to defend those actions.
Quoting Baden
See it’s still about Trump for you. It’s the fact that you had no faith in judges nominated by Trump because they were nominated by Trump that’s your problem. You decided they were too biased to do their job properly. Just like everything else you were wrong.
For as long as I've been alive, everyone's been spying on each other, they just kind of take it for granted that they're being spied on. "Lower the cone of silence Max" "Not the cone of silence chief."
What? Only delusional Trumptards thought the supreme court would give in to these ludicrous nutjob suits.
Actually I think really you’re frustrated that you didn’t get what you want: Trump removed because he was a Putin puppet, a piss tape, a mental breakdown, death by COVID, war with North Korea, war with Iran, impeachment for a phone call, Jerusalem exploding, a blue wave, a coup.
Yes, I'm really frustrated at all the humiliation being heaped on the poor dumb bastard and his idiotic army of supporters. It's awful. Please make it stop.
You still don’t get it. It’s not about Trump. It’s the fact the the Constituition and the way things are worked out still functioned.
Do you have an argument to make against something I actually said, Brett? If so, quote me. I'm aware the constitution worked and I fully expected it to. Which is why I've spent the last few weeks laughing at those who thought Trump had a chance of overturning the result when it was obvious he had none.
"Quoting Baden
Oh Baden, you take things so personally.
Lol.
Well, not at all really when in came to the impeachment proceedings, particularly regarding the majority leader publicly confessing that he could not execute the unique responsibility bestowed upon Senators during an impeachment of the president.
He should have been forced to recuse himself.
Quoting Baden
None. Peace, brother.
This is directly from the populist playbook, actually. The populist has to give the image of being somebody else, being not part of the elite. Best way to use rhetoric that "ordinary" politicians don't use. A lot of it is simply talk. Never mind if the actual policies are similar or simply fail.
Trump in happier times with friends:
Quoting NOS4A2
Lol! That is an absolutely hilarious statement from you. He definately has not acted the same with every other leader he has met. He has complained, bickered, all in the way to create the "acting tough" image. Yet when it comes to Putin, he hasn't dealt similarly with him.
That's again a fact. Just watch yourself the press conferences, his statements. The actual remarks. Without no journalist on telling his or her view.
But I guess reality doesn't mean much for Trump supporters.
The nice thing about appointments for life is that once someone is on the SC, they effectively have their own powerbase and are independent from whoever appointed them. They'd have to be pretty stupid to risk that powerbase by challenging the election results without plausible reasons.
I think you're kinda missing the bigger picture here. We cannot really know what the GOPs strategy was here. Perhaps there wasn't one. But assuming that they could have done more to support Trump's challenges but decided not to, one of the core reasons might have been the senate runoffs.
In the scenarios "wargamed" before the election, it was clear that control of the senate was crucial to sustain any extra-legal attempt to elect a candidate who didn't actually get the votes. And of course control of the senate is crucial for the GOP strategy for other reasons as well. At the same time, Trump was never a long-term investment, and the myth of the stolen election will do its work for the GOP without them outwardly having to lift a finger.
So the fact that, this time around, democracy, or what passed for democracy, has prevailed, shouldn't cause any illusions about the resilience of US institutions and the US Constitution.
Do you mean if the Supreme Court leaned towards Trump their actions could backfire in the Senate runoffs?
I don't think the SC will necessarily do what the GOP wants. But if there was unambiguous support for Trump's claims from the party leadership, together with perhaps a different legal team working for the party rather than Trump personally, the chances to get at least some injunction from the SC would have been much better.
Note that such a move would likely have included local party officials, who could have lend their weight to fraud claims in the state.
So you’re looking at it in terms of association.? They’d rather be associated with the party as opposed to Trump.
Or are you suggesting they haven’t received pressure from GOP?
I don't think the GOP has applied pressure on it's members to contest the election.
Concerning the Justices, I don't think this is a matter of the GOP directly putting pressure on them. They're not beholden to them. It would be more likely a situation where the GOP can present a case that "the people" want a certain result and the candidate in question just happens to also support the kinds of things the religious conservatives find important.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1341537886315950080?s=21[/tweet]
So our wise and courageous leader will veto, right? :razz:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/23/trump-pardons-blackwater-contractors-jailed-for-massacre-of-iraq-civilians
It's difficult now to believe that Trump isn't a troll president, a man dedicated to using his office as a means to be as evil a prick as is humanly possible.
[quote=RM]Mark my words. Trump is going to try to restart real estate project discussions in Russia after he leaves office, which will go a long way to explain why he was so averse to criticizing Russia during his presidency, even taking the word of Putin over the unified assessment of America's intelligence services regarding the Russia attack on our election, and explaining why he is now dismissing the present Russia cyberattack. He doesn't want to offend the potential spigot of money from Russia.[/quote]
[quote=JS]Without the legal support of the DOJ and presidential immunity he may defect, but if he goes to Russia, he’s never coming back. Either US intelligence will kill him before he can divulge state secrets, or the Russians will find him a cozy place to dictate all the secrets. This because on top of being weak, he lacks moral fortitude and character.[/quote]
[quote=RS]I'm not sure Russia will give a damn about him once he loses power. They might let him live next to Edward Snowden to pump him for information when it's convenient for them. But that might be all he's worth at this point.[/quote]
[quote=RM]Ex-presidents are still given security briefings. Russia could exploit that.[/quote]
[quote=MG]Keep in mind most of his real estate dealings with Russians aren’t in Russia. They are in New York, Florida, Kazakhstan etc. “Trump Moscow” is just going to be the least secret, but we already know he sold a lot of Trump Tower condos to Russian oligarchs, got a bonus $50 million flipping a Florida estate to one, etc.[/quote]
A tad bit speculative, but we'll see if RM's prediction holds I guess.
Either way, potential security/political interests inside the borders of Russia probably shouldn't count themselves safe.
Congress didn’t even read it.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1341145260014100480?s=21[/tweet]
Either way it likely it would have passed silently had the president not objected.
Makes no difference unless it's significantly revised, besides the posturing.
There is a huge difference between knowledge and ignorance. At least now you know. But it will make no difference if you refuse to hold your lawmakers accountable.
Oh right, like this package is sooo unusual. :roll:
It’s true. Selling out Americans and bleeding the country dry is nothing new. What is new is a president who is willing to push back against Congress. I don’t recall Bush or Obama pushing back against the recovery act.
No other president has been pathetic enough to posture this way, sure.
I suspect the anti-Trumpism is working overtime to churn out excuses as to why Trump shouldn’t be applauded for his criticism. Assume (without evidence) he has malicious intentions in order to avoid agreement. Pathetic indeed.
I wish he weren't just posturing and actually worked for a better deal, but I think he's too busy undermining American democracy.
Trump is conflating the $900 billion COVID relief bill with the $1.4 trillion omnibus bill.
So it would have been better politically for Trump to veto the bill before the election?
You notice that when he complained about the COVID relief bill, he said that a re-crafted bill might have to be passed by the next administration, 'which might be mine'. So he's still utterly fixated on only one thing, and not giving a f*** about the damage he does, and who suffers and dies, in the meantime. Which is just as we have come to expect.
If the GOP had any balls (ridiculous idea, I know) they'd impeach him on Article 25 as unfit for office immediately, and let Mike Pence preside for three weeks.
Trump exerted great pressure on Republicans to contest the election:
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/12/21/trump-pressure-campaign-overturn-election-449486
Articles of impeachment, a vote in the House, and a trial in the Senate all over the Christmas and New Year's holidays just so he could be removed a day or two early?
Do you think Pence could push through healthcare reform during that those couple of days of presidency?
They were infused into one package, which only helped to amplify Congress’ priorities: chump-change for Americans while bleading the country dry.
GOP blocks House Democrats' attempt to pass $2,000 stimulus checks
I think the master plan is to own as much of our attention as he possibly can. The cliche for this strategy is "all publicity is good publicity".
If you haven't already, you may wish to dig in to Roger Stone, as he seems to be the philosophical godfather of much of Trump's strategy. As I understand it, Stone is generally the intellectual song writer, while Trump is the front man for the band. Think of the Rolling Stones. Keith Richards is the groove master for the band, the musical brains, but he's not charismatic. Jagger is charismatic, so he fronts the band and channels the egos of the audience.
So long as anyone is in the spotlight of the corporate media giants they inherit the credibility of those platforms. So for example, if CNN were to start covering Hippyhead every day, I would come to be perceived as important by many viewers, no matter what I was saying.
With his threatened veto of the relief bill Trump is just doing what he always does, grabbing the spotlight. We are talking about him right now. He has succeeded.
It seems a mistake for us to think of Trump as being just a very ugly human being with a juvenile mind. He is that for sure. But there's more to it. You don't win over the hearts and minds of half of a major world power by being stupid. It's possible to be immature, juvenile and ugly, while still being quite intelligent. We need travel no farther than any philosophy forum to see that. :-)
Not arguing the point, just trying to understand and explain his appeal to so many.
A great many people feel that politicians are always cutting private deals with their buddies behind the backs of the voters. This is a pretty reasonable theory, generally speaking. Trump pardons his partners in crime out in the open. Without apology. And so he is perceived by many to be an honest crook.
Traditional politicians often master a very polished manner of coming to the microphone to say a big bunch of vague nothing whose purpose is to obscure how they really feel. Trump comes to the mic and says, "Fuck that guy, I hate him, we're going to crush him etc". And so he is perceived by many to be an honest asshole.
Trump is an intriguing mystery because while he is clearly a pathological compulsive liar, he lies so incredibly blatantly that he is perceived to be an honest liar.
Trump has turned the whole political game on it's head. He's the most creative, bold and interesting American politician of my lifetime.
Yes, yes, yes and yes. HE'S A TOTAL ASSHOLE. But saying that which we already know over and over and over again doesn't add much to our understanding of this historic phenomena.
Quite easily, as you can see from Trump supporters.
Simply just make up your mind that the media is utterly corrupt and evil and will try telling everything about Trump in a bad light and will make up fake news about Trump. The Russia thing was a total hoax, remember, so naturally those that stood by Trump ought to be pardoned. It goes very easily, as you won't believe anything reported that is critical about Trump. Hence you will believe Trump which more an issue of faith than reason.
It's going to be a while before Americans will truly see how lousy Trump was. I assume later they will have difficulties in understanding that why would Trump have been so popular.
Quoting Hippyhead
Or when the assumption is that everybody lies and especially the Democrats and the liberal media lies, why would you then think that it would be bad to "fight the enemy" with similar tactics? The support on Trump is based on faith, not reasoning.
And why? My bet is: 'you people didn't vote for me, so I owe you nothing. Why should you expect anything from me, when you've voted against me?' If the Republicans approached Trump and told him that, if he signed, they'd overturn the election result, he'd sign on the spot. It's all pique, petulance, and egotism.
But I doubt it.
WaPo
It makes little sense to sign such a wasteful spending bill, while at the same time leaving little for everyday Americans. Despite your fantasies about Trump’s mind states, Congress has the power of the purse. It’s congress’ fault they left it so late. It’s congress’ fault it’s full of wasteful spending. It’s congress’ fault there is little left for Americans. It’s suspicious, but not surprising, that your fake concern for everyday Americans is used in the tacit defense of those who wronged them.
Trump’s mental states are on clear display for the entire world to see. Unfortunately.
The bill was negotiated by both parties, with Steve Mnuchin representing the White House. So apart from anything else, Trump's designation of the bill as 'a disgrace' completely undercuts and discredits his own treasury secretary, and the representatives who are trying to win the Georgia runoffs. Trump has at this point gone completely rogue.
It's all being done out of pure spite and hatred. Political reckoning has nothing to do with it.
Trump's demands for increased payments were never a serious negotiating ploy, but purely done to blow up the negotiations and f***k everyone over. It was clear that he didn't understand, or couldn't be bothered understanding, that the bill contained the general Appopriations Bill in addition to the COVID relief bill, complaining that there was 'all this stuff' that had nothing to do with Covid in it.
He's acting out of spite. Nothing to do with trying to get a better deal for anyone.
If he doesn't sign, 'Starting Tuesday, hundreds of thousands of federal employees would be sent home without pay. And even the many federal employees who continue to work because they are deemed “essential,” such as members of the military, will not be paid until a new funding bill is authorized.?In addition to a government shutdown on Tuesday, eviction protections for millions of Americans would lapse later this week, more than 14 million people could lose access to unemployment benefits, and no stimulus checks would be issued. In addition, failing to sign the bill into law would freeze new money for vaccine distribution, small business aid, money for the ailing airline industry, and school aid, among other things.'
//update - the bill has been signed. Another Trump mind game over.//
Trump's complaints vs. his own budget proposal
Worth the mention. Though I guess further evidence that Trump is a fucking idiot is kind of redundant now.
No kidding. As I said, the whole show was to (1) keep him the centre of attention, as always, and (2) to wreak vengeance on Americans for not voting for him and (3) possibly also exploring whether causing a shutdown would enable him to declare martial law and stay in office. But having actually lost the election, his reality distortion field is beginning to fracture and so he couldn’t quite swing it. Worth a try, in his addled mind, at least.
There’s a good read in Medium today, asking rhetorically whether not signing the bill was the sign of a breakdown. No, it says, because Trump is still in a position to convince himself that the election was stolen from him and that he is still the smartest, greatest and richest person ever to have lived. But it predicts the walls will really come crumbling down when he’s finally out of office and so distracted by rage that his business is driven in bankruptcy as his massive debts come due.
This all just shows the ineptness of Trump. If anyone thinks this is a great way to get "the deal" to made to be done is crazy. This all could have been done without people failing to get the one weeks benefits, it was all ready to be for Trump to be signed before Christmas. Someone else could think that the CEO of the country, the POTUS, would get his own party to back with the 2000$ before during the deal is made prior than an agreement is announced.
But of course, there's the Trump way of doing things. Now people correct me if I got this wrong (I may have), but it looks like to me like this:
a) Trump's administration + GOP make a budget deal with the Dems
b) Trump has to sign this, but he doesn't
c) Trump makes waves that the budget deal has pork afterwards and wants to raise the benefits, which his party wasn't for.
d) Trump drags his feet until the government is on the verge of shutdown... to make it more dramatic.
e) then Trump signs what he had already on b).
f) in reality, the overall checks are a bit smaller as the payments cannot be done for the past days that Trump dragged his feet. And we'll see if the Senate will go along with Trump's 2000$.
Art of the deal. Or then I got it wrong and Trump is playing 4D chess!
You neglected to mention the recision request, probably because it wasn’t reported on.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-from-the-president-122720/
This means he can withhold “pork” for 45 legislative session days. Though I suspect a congress drunk on spending will refuse to remove any of it, it may just give Americans time to object.
Trump listened to Americans instead of his party and administration, and raised a stink about it. Now my family, nearly broken by state and local government-enforced shutdowns, could get some more of their taxpayer dollars back instead of seeing it spent on gender programs in Pakistan.
Edit: McConnel blocked the increase of stimulus checks for Americans
https://news.gallup.com/poll/328193/donald-trump-michelle-obama-admired-2020.aspx
And shouldn't this be done perhaps well before before an agreement was made, right?
What would it make you feel if me and you first made an agreement and only after making that agreement I would publicly attack on how baseless and wrong your demands, NOS4A2, are in this proposal and I'm now defending people from the excesses of NOS4A2.
And I think this is the general pattern how budget deals are made in the US: they aren't done with every one being agreed separately (who would have that time), but in lumps. And of course, when you have lumps, there's always some issue that doesn't sound good, which can then be compared to something very dramatic or deemed important. The classic way is to compare military spending to health care of children and infants. My favorite (from my country) was when people compared the expense that members of parliament use on driving taxis and comparing that huge amount to (fill in the blank) government aid to some benign cause.
Pandemic relief to Americans compared to nearly anything else is simply 100% pure populism.
Populism or not, it’s the right thing to do.
Trump was probably not involved in the painstaking negotiations, so I’m not sure your little scenario is analogous. The conflation between Trump and those who actually negotiated the bill (indeed, between him, his party, and his entire administration) seems to be the common misinformation of a certain narrative. But history shows Trump goes against his own administration and party quite regularly.
Well, he probably hasn't been involved in any painstaking negotiations as the President (negotiations with Trump might be painstaking to others).
At least he takes care of his health by driving a golf cart.
Staggering evidence of a very deep disorder in America. He's presided over a health disaster, tried to destroy the democratic system, and somehow a large number of people are OK with that. It really is a political cult, not any kind of rational political movement.
He really is the worst person in US politics. Playing games with people's livelihoods.
https://beta.documentcloud.org/documents/20438365-mcconnell-stimulus-offer
Dirty, dirty, play. No-one wants that law repealed. It would lead to chaos. But pretending he does is probably his only realistic option given the spot Trump put him in.
The fact that a simple vote just on increasing COVID relief isn't an option is all the evidence you need that he/Republicans/Trump are in the wrong.
Yes, the game is 'how can we not do the right thing and minimise the chances of us getting blamed for it'.
Trump golfs, sure, and he also works while golfing, something the misinformed like to suppress. As Lindsey Graham said:
“We’d hit a shot, take a phone call. Hit a shot, take a phone call. Hit a shot, talk about what’s a good deal. It was a very intense Christmas Day.”
It’s just how he works. He’s gotten more done on the golf course than other presidents have gotten off of it, which is pretty sad.
Can you demonstrate this? Or did you just think, like Trump, that if you say it everyone ought to believe it?
I don’t care if you believe it or not. I’m just expressing what I believe.
A bunch of Republicans do now cause some guy started complaining about it. Same way they all suddenly started to oppose mail-in ballots, or funding cities in a crisis.
Trump can literally just tweet that honey causes cancer and he'll get the majority of the conservative base to never eat it again. Fox will start to run segments bringing on crank "doctors" (of political science) to talk about how bad Honey is and how Trump is right about it's dangers. Conservatives will act like they've always opposed it's consumption and soon GOP lawmakers will add provisions to commonsense bills that call for the utter annihilation of the Bee ecosystem before going on about how "insane" the left has gotten.
I guess he should have played more golf when they were trying to repeal and replace the ACA, build his wall that Mexico was supposed to pay for, and all during the Pandemic crisis. Hopefully, he's on the course right now.
Ah. Thanks for clarifying that it was just more bullshit.
Bad, sure, but that bad? :o
Anyway, thought you might enjoy these:
Besides, he was good for them. They owe him.
Dream killer.
There, fixed it for you.
We had some pretty heated discussions on “Russian bounties” in Afghanistan. The story reached a fever’s pitch earlier in the year leading to Dems and their followers (and many on this board) using the story to bash Trump, while the administration went so far as to say rogue elements within the intelligence community were trying to undermine the president’s peace talks with the Taliban.
Now we have uncorroborated reports of “Chinese bounties” of an oddly similar nature. I’ll wait to see if those who lamented Russian bounties will show the same outrage, but somehow I doubt it.
I'm not sure where you learned this, but it's a little wrong. The House and the Senate must first vote to reject a state's electors, and then if enough state electors are rejected, and so Biden doesn't have the necessary 270 votes to win, the one state one vote process follows (with the Republicans having a majority of 26). See Trump loves Rep. Mo Brooks' election objection. But Congress can't overturn Biden's win.
The House won't vote to reject a state's electors. It's impossible for Trump to steal the election.
Pence wants no part of this craziness.
This is not going to happen but I really hope enough Trump supporters believe it is as I will immediately bet large amounts of money against them and increase my net wealth significantly.
The Senate won't either. Not a hope in hell Romney, Collins and Murkowski, for a start, will vote for a coup. Even McConnell won't.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/llinwood/status/1345085438936150022[/tweet]
[tweet]https://twitter.com/llinwood/status/1345067881319587840[/tweet]
:D
L. Lin Wood ? cracked pot
Pro-Trump Lawyer Lin Wood Said He 'Might Actually Be' Second Coming of Christ
I'm buying.
All together now, "Crucify him, crucify him!"
This is exactly, exactly what Trump is attempting this week by having Congress refuse to certify the Electoral College Vote. All of the commentary says it will 'almost certainly' or 'probably' fail or has 'almost no chance' of succeeding. But latest reports are that:
[quote=CNN]11 Republican lawmakers said they intend to support an objection to the Electoral College votes, if one is brought, and propose an election commission to conduct an "emergency 10-day audit" of the election returns in the "disputed states." The group includes Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, James Lankford of Oklahoma, Steve Daines of Montana, John Kennedy of Louisiana, Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, and Mike Braun of Indiana, and Sens.-elect Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, Roger Marshall of Kansas, Bill Hagerty of Tennessee and Tommy Tuberville of Alabama.[/quote]
If this is not sedition, then there's no such thing. And, where's the outrage? Why are there not massive street protests over this? A sizeable proportion of the Republican Party is attempting to overthrow the democratically-elected President.
Unfortunately these lawmakers will need to be removed from office according to a democratic process, which is ironic since they are pledging their support to an effort that undermines a different democratic process.
"On the "Trump completely controls the GOP" claims...
So I've been closely following Congress's overriding Trump's veto on the defense bill. I've pointed out that previous presidents have vetoed these bills, and they've extracted concessions, whereas Trump got overridden by his own party.
I've also pointed out that one of the reasons Trump vetoed the bill is that Congress had required military bases to no longer name themselves after Confederate generals. Which is an interesting issue to confront Trump over.
But here are two new elements of the bill that I didn't know about.
First, it restricts the ability of the president to divert military funds for emergency construction purposes. This is a major rebuke of Trump's diversion of military funds for the purpose of building the wall.
Second, it puts restrictions on the military's sending of equipment to local police forces (thereby limiting certain federal attempts to militarize the police) AND it requires federal officers to display their insignia (in order to avoid a repeat of the Portland fiasco).
These are among the issues that the Republicans not only overwhelmingly put in the law but also overrode a Trump veto on."
+
More relevant for Trump, the NDAA attacks his business model. It “includes a measure known as the Corporate Transparency Act, which undercuts shell companies and money laundering in America. The act requires the owners of any company that is not otherwise overseen by the federal government (by filing taxes, for example, or through close regulation) to file a report that identifies each person associated with the company who either owns 25% or more of it or exercises substantial control over it. That report, including name, birthdate, address, and an identifying number, goes to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN). The measure also increases penalties for money laundering “.
https://billmoyers.com/story/reading-the-fine-print-what-trump-didnt-sign
Unfortunately, that seems completely unlikely.
Thanks, very insightful article.
This would mean that the public, wouldn't even know that he has already, put it into effect and sounded the alarm, to homeland security and the entire intelligence apparatus. If this is true, the United States is currently in a national state of emergency, meaning that every corrupt legislatures or possible conspirators, will basically walk right into a trap and being surveiled 24/7 by agents.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-imposing-certain-sanctions-event-foreign-interference-united-states-election/
According to the predefined executive order it states, that it should be issued no more than 45 days before the presidential transfer of power. A quick calculation tells us that this order should have been issued around 4-5th of December.
Do you find this theory plausible?
A question that has been fairly asked countless times this century, starting with W's outright theft of the election. (Just imagine if the roles had been reversed there!)
I think there are many factors. Two salient ones, IMO:
First, the relationship of Republicans to the rest of the country has become outright abusive. Trump is the perfect incarnation and avatar of this, he could not be a more archetypical American bully. (This I think is the true source of his popularity). But the trend hardly began with him. We have been lulled into accepting more and more outrages, hoping to forestall the bully's wrath, in the pattern of the abused everywhere.
The second is where the "both sides" chestnut really is relevant. Not only is the funding of both sides from monied interests, both sides are themselves, monied interests. There is never one "-archy" that exclusively characterizes any state. But among all the "-archies", oligarchy most strongly characterizes this one, at this point in time. This is homogenous across both party's leadership, indisputably. Therefore, the Democrats really do agree with the Republicans more than they disagree, their core ideology is the same.
This best explains the incredibly muted and ineffectual reaction of Democrats to all of Trump's outrages. It is really a cozy relationship, playing Blue good cop to Red's bad, in an ironclad two party system. If crazy Red wins again and imposes yet more extreme wealth redistribution to the top, ultimately they win too. They are at the top as well.
The good news is that we have an honest politician. The bad news is that simple honesty is an act of heroism.
"Well, Mr. President, the challenge that you have is, the data you have is wrong.”
I don't know about that. I was glued to the screen during the impeachment trial, and I think they did as well as they could, given that the Senate was always going to acquit. I wasn't very impressed with Nadler, but I thought Adam Schiff was as effective as he could possibly be. And I don't buy the 'they're all crooks' narrative, that is a corrosive form of cynicism. American politics is certainly corrupted by the holy $$, but no president has ever been near as corrupt as Trump.
Quoting tim wood
Nobody. I'm sure he's a rogue elephant. He hardly reads anything, so when he's delivered a 1500 page bill, he'll leaf through it until he finds something he doesn't like, and bellow about it. The COVID bill and the general expenditure bill had been combined, and he didn't understand that, he kept saying there's all this stuff not about Covid. Duh.
That was the lead story, or second behind the covid updates, in the national news bulletins this morning in Australia.
Let's hope he doesn't get shot.
Really? We have President High Crimes and Misdemeanors himself. After two years of dismissing impeachment entirely, Pelosi finally consented to one of innumerable impeachable offences Trump had committed. Not only did they not get him convicted. They couldn't even get the Republicans to bring witnesses!
After the sham trial, Trump emerged completely unscathed. pathetic. But they did get some screen time, provided you some political theater. This, to you, is an effective response?? This just proves that you are already conditioned to expect zero from the "opposition party".
Quoting Wayfarer
Kleptocracy is also apt, but I will stick with oligarchy. They are not all crooks, only by virtue of the fact that the bribery they receive is (bizarrely) legal. But they are all rich, their friends are rich, their connections are rich, their donors are rich. The ruling class is all rich. This is an oligarchy, and it is it in none of their interests to destroy the most oligarchic party, even though they could have easily chosen to do so, against the most ludicrous world leader we have seen.
The impeachment was never going to be effective (although don’t overlook the fact that he was indeed impeached, and his acquittal by the Senate doesn’t undo that). It was about what was possible. I don’t blame the Democrats for anything to do with the whole sorry affair, the fault was all with Trump who had already corrupted the GOP to the point that they were always going to absolve him, no matter what the charges were.
More of the same? When was the last time you’ve heard an audio recording of an American president criminality threaten a Secretary of State to “find” 11, 780 votes?
‘I just want to find $462,987,383’ ~ Donald Trump, Mar 2021
I read through the entire transcript proudly hosted on CNN. Apart from giving all the countries of the world a recording of a phone conversation between the President of the United states and the Georgian secretary of state, which is undoubtedly useful to I*** and C****, it makes you wonder how many other conversations have been recorded, I mean since the Republicans are such terrible people, as the story goes, it only makes sense that they would share secret recorded conversations, that is where this is going.
The acid test of character will come on January 20th, when Trump steps down. That means he accepts the opinion of the courts and the rule of law. Everyone is so darn sure that Biden will be sworn in, and be the next president, which means that everyone is sure that Trump will step down, following procedure. Following that reasoning, it means that Trumps efforts will be ultimately futile and he will accept defeat, finally. Quite the coup.
Seldom do we get a chance to test a conspiracy theory.
What struck me most was the pleading tone in Trump's voice. This was not a man confident at wielding power. This was a sore loser begging for help. It was pleading and pathetic.
Biden doesn't need Trump to step down to be sworn in.
If you're trying to contextualize this so that we can better understand the meaning of the word "find," you have to consider the whole context, not just what Trump's personal belief was about the validity of the election (and who knows what that really is). The role of the Secretary of State is to count the votes and to declare a winner, regardless of who that might be. Obviously there are times when the party of the Secretary of State will not be the party of the person who wins a given election, but that doesn't change the charge of the SoS. That is to say, the role of the SoS isn't to go out and "find" votes for a particular candidate like he's on an Easter egg hunt. What he is to do is count the votes and be sure the election was valid, which he did. In this case, the SoS counted the votes 3 times, once on election night, then he conducted a hand count, and then he did an electronic recount, and then he certified the election.
And to further contextualize this, Trump knew very well when he spoke to Raffensperger that Raffensperger did not believe the election to be stolen, so Trump knew very well that Raffensperger would not have accepted such a strained definition of "find" when Trump asked him to find more votes. That is to say, even if Trump truly believed votes were stolen and then stuffed into some nook and cranny, he had no reason to believe that Raffensperger would take the term "find" to be anything other than a euphemism for the term "fabricate." It makes sense that one would use a term how they expect the listener to understand it, unless Trump only meant to be talking to himself.
And to further contextualize this, within the same conversation, Trump told Raffensperger how mad Georgians were about this result and there was the allusion to criminal prosecution for some unknown sort of crime if additional votes weren't found. What this means is that we have the most powerful man in the world (although his power is fading fast) telling a local SoS to locate ballots that will swing the state's election in his favor, and if the votes aren't found, Raffensperger will lose his next election and will then be off to jail.
That's what happened. You can fully support Trump if you want to, but trying to cast the conversation between Trump and Raffensperger as an innocuous call to the lost and found department in search of the votes Trump thinks might have been left at the booth at the diner is pretty much nonsense.
[math]
\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{1}{n^2} = \frac{\pi^2}{6}
[/math]
Trump has stated that he will do everything within his power, legally and constitutionally, to contest the results, which is his right. Of course, the Uniparty media never reported on that.
According to Trump, all he needs to do is find around 12,000 ballots to win, which is more than enough reason to contest the results.
So far, at the most charitable, you are a slanderer and defamer, because all you can do is accuse. I need a little more than the accusation, Tim.
Yes I think the fact that it was a close race, a difference of around 12000 votes out of 5 or so million, warrants a closer look at the results, especially given the claims of fraud and irregularity. Either way, refusing the claims of election officials, there is no way to know without an independent, transparent audit of some sort.
No; you accuse. Your accusations are myriad, yet always without sufficient basis. They are pitiful in the way that your accusations seem to be for your own benefit, like you're trying to justify your own poor reasoning.
Like I said, an independent and transparent investigation would be required. Instead we get the opposite, and we are left taking the word of the same officials who told us to accept the results in the first place.
Call me what you want, Tim. I just don't care. You've called me evil, a liar, a bad man, and have compared me to almost every animal in a menagerie. What does that make you?
Except that isn't true. Winning Georgia means he still loses overall.
Also he's been at this for 2 months, there have been multiple recounts, and he lost all of his court cases. As someone on the left I can definitely say that I'm tired of winning at this point.
The president is clearly talking about winning Georgia.
Aren't you from the UK? What have you won?
And I fail to see how something so pointless would give him "more than enough reason" to try to undermine the will of the people... again.
You’re a proven liar and just wrote “I love it” in response to evidence of the president apparently engaging in illegal activity. Whatever constitutes a “bad man,” you must certainly be in the ballpark.
Quoting NOS4A2
A comparative zoologist? :chin:
Your name-calling is about as suspect as your stoicism.
"Apparently engaging in illegal activity". For what, exactly?
What kind of precedent is that? Anytime a candidate is unhappy with an election result, they can demand, and receive, an "independent and transparent investigation". Investigation into what? The vote was not even close, and there is no evidence of widespread fraud. There is nothing to investigate. Why would they investigate this or that state, and not all the states? What would they even be investigating, the American democratic system in general? No investigation is required. The reasons for an investigation which we hear touted, that millions of voters have lost faith in the system, would not be resolved by "an investigation". That's completely nonsensical. The demand for "an investigation" is an obvious political ploy. A dishonest one, I might add.
It holds more weight than starting vast investigations premised on rumors, such as crossfire hurricane and the Mueller report.
They should investigate all the states. They should investigate both parties. I see nothing wrong with an independent, transparent investigation, and nothing you've said convinces me otherwise.
The point isn’t to try convincing you of illegal activity, the point is that you “love” such activity, and that a person who loves this sort of activity is not a good person.
I never said I love “illegal activity”. This is why we get strange conclusions from false premises, or in this case, lies.
#Trumpbegged is trending. Cringeworthy.
You wrote:
Quoting NOS4A2
Whether or not the activity is illegal you express love for this sort of activity. In other words, you love it when a president appears to uses their power to pressure a secretary of state to commit voter fraud. Good people don't love such things. Or perhaps you love it when Trump begs like a whiny dog?
If Trump and his supporters would be satisfied with the results of such an investigation there might be some merit in this proposal. But when that investigation came up with nothing would Trump say "OK, this was investigated and they found nothing. I concede - let me give a very belated congratulations to President Biden"?
Of course not. Trump (and his supporters) would reject such results and still find something wrong with any investigation. If Trump is not willing to take the word of Secretary General William Barr what on earth makes you think he would accept the results of an independent (i.e., bipartisan) investigation?
There is only one 'massive fraud' in respect of the 2020 US Presidential Election, and that is the one being perpertrated by the incumbent.
A far more adept politician would buckle under the public pressure, but instead Trump is doing right by his constituents, most of whom believe Biden is illegitimate and voter fraud affected the outcome. That’s why I love it.
What illegal activity are you suggesting?
(Bit generous about the fact that Clinton actively angled to have Trump as her opponent because she thought she was not as utter shite as she in fact was).
Also not sure what's more pathetic - Trump's begging or watching a sniveling lapdog like NOS pretend like this is fine. Probably the latter. At least Trump's a fuckin loser on his own terms. NOS is a fucking loser on someone else's.
This seems to imply that you believe there was organized widespread voter fraud because if this were simply another one of his cons it wouldn't necessarily serve his constituent's interests. If that's the case, I'm curious about something. I know there's tons of "evidence" supporting the fraud conspiracy, but why have no conspirators been exposed? Who orchestrated the fraud? Isn't it odd that in two months no culprits have been discovered?
Even the Muller investigation turned up some bad apples and prosecuted them.
§ 21-2-604. Criminal solicitation to commit election fraud; penalties :: 2016 Georgia Code
Or, I guess Trump could try suing Raffensperger for recording the call? :D
Dang, lawyering must be good business these days.
Quoting StreetlightX
I mean, Trump made hundreds of millions in donations just from crying fraud and getting his base who somehow still think he's a supreme macho alpha man to fall in line. He's doing just fine for himself. As for people like NOS...
Quoting NOS4A2
...yeah. Gotta wonder how much money he gave away to Trump's election stealing fundraiser.
I don't see much evidence for "widespread voter fraud", a phrase commonly uttered in the gutter-press. But I understand Trump's paranoia. Entire institutions, even within his own government, have been weaponized against him. So I wouldn't mind seeing an audit of some sort.
Fraud against the American people.
The list is quite long.
Don't read @NOS4A2 at all anymore. I just presume watching his way of coping with his master's downfall would be the equivalent of staring at fresh roadkill.
We'll be seeing a few of those, Trump and his entire gang of associates' tax returns and other expenditures.
There’ll be insignificant instances of fraud in any election, just like there is petty theft, despite it being illegal. Only “widespread voter fraud” is significant enough to shift an election and I assume that’s the reason for the phrasing.
So you love Trumps paranoia? If it is paranoia then it is incurable. We both know that any audit that didn’t go his way would be defamed as fraudulent.
And it’s not his government, it’s our government. Many Americans love democracy because we understand its potential benefits. You seem to love something else, like autocracy I guess.
Yes, it's OK to piss on pond scum but not to swim in it. :vomit:
No, I said I understand Trump’s paranoia. He’s their folk devil, and they exhibit the religious fervor of a moral panic. He cannot trust anyone.
And something he pretty much prepared for in 2016. And then totally against his own reasoning and expectations, he actually won the election back then.
Now he's playing the tune he was so ready and eager to play in 2016, then with that TV program/channel in mind.
Yes. Hope Not Hate put out a report last year about its spread to the UK.
"This development has enabled the theory to gain
supporters from across the political spectrum
and of diverse backgrounds.
As it stands today it is a decentralised, grand and
multifaceted phenomenon, at once a conspiracy
theory, a political movement and a quasi-religion,
with variants tailored to chime with different
subcultures and national contexts."
That's close to a description of early Christianity. It has the same revelatory character as other new religions of the last century, but instead of being isolationist, it's absorbing conspiracy theories from all over, providing a sense of community, structure, and destination. It's a baby religion. That's so cool!
Hilarious. Especially if he tries to do it anyway. Trump, the illegal alien.
Have you watched any of the 'stop the steal' protests? The speakers, before indicating where supporters can donate money to the cause, literally do their best to inspire religious fervor in their audience, with countless appeals to God in the fight against evil. Frankly, it's surprising that it's not more effective. I suppose this demonstrates how religious faith is in decline, or rather that it's really about tribalism and not actual faith for many.
The phone conversation between Trump and the Georgia secretary of state is yet more evidence that Trump doesn't need to be demonized. His character and selfish motivations are painfully apparent.
That's QAnon. Trump knows about it. He's feeding it.
I have seen what you described. A lot of these people are god-fearing people, and the language of good and evil suffices to describe what they’re up against. I do fear that it is only a matter of time until they resort to violence, not just against those disrupting their gatherings, censoring and beating them, but also innocent people.
Religious faith, to me, has not disappeared, but been has recast towards other orthodoxies such as social justice, intersectionality and critical race theory. I also believe that the nascent demand for moral leadership from our politicians is one aspect of that. A transactional president like Trump is virtually foreign to them, and it’s why all this piffle about “healing” and “coming together” worked so well for Biden.
You mean like the IRA? Or just isolated cases? Also, exacty how anti-semitic are they? Is that just their fringe? Or is it core?
Groups with common values can form strong bonds and a sense of identity pursuing meaningful goals, that’s what effective branding is all about. The framework is basically the same as religion but with significant differences. Religion is necessarily hierarchical with an ultimate authority at top who has special access to metaphysics of some kind. In this way Trumpism is more religious in nature than the groups you mention because Trump is the top authority who dictates what the “alternative facts” are. There’s no single authority figure in the groups you mention, and though extremists may exist in any group, these groups may claim to value reason.
Quoting NOS4A2
What kind of fool doesn’t want their leadership to share their values, principles, and interests?
The interesting question is not what causes authoritarianism but what has ever suspended it.
By Adam Gopnik - New Yorker - January 4 & 11, 2021 Issue
Readers of “Through the Looking-Glass” may recall the plight of the Bread-and-Butterfly, which, as the Gnat explains to Alice, can live only on weak tea with cream in it. “Supposing it couldn’t find any?” Alice asks. “Then it would die, of course,” the Gnat answers. “That must happen very often,” Alice reflects. “It always happens,” the Gnat admits, dolefully.
How the Bread-and-Butterfly survives, given the impossible demands of its diet, is a nice question. Lewis Carroll was in part teasing Darwinian ideas, which depend on a struggle for existence in which, eventually, we all lose—nonexistence being the norm of living things, over time. But the plight of the Bread-and-Butterfly comes to mind, too, when we contemplate what is called, not without reason, America’s crisis of democracy. It always happens. We are told again and again that American democracy is in peril and may even be on its deathbed. Today, after all, a defeated yet deranged President bunkers in the White House contemplating crazy conspiracy theories and perhaps even martial law, with the uneasy consent of his party and the rabid support of his base. We are then told, with equal urgency, that what is wrong, ultimately, is deep, systemic, and Everybody’s Fault. Perhaps there is a crisis of meaning, or of spirit; perhaps it is a crisis caused by the condescension of self-important élites. (In truth, those élites tend to be at least as self-lacerating as they are condescending, as the latest rounds of self-laceration show.)
Lurking behind all of this is a faulty premise—that the descent into authoritarianism is what needs to be explained, when the reality is that . . . it always happens. The default condition of humankind is not to thrive in broadly egalitarian and stable democratic arrangements that get unsettled only when something happens to unsettle them. The default condition of humankind, traced across thousands of years of history, is some sort of autocracy.
America itself has never had a particularly settled commitment to democratic, rational government. At a high point of national prosperity, long before manufacturing fell away or economic anxiety gripped the Middle West—in an era when “silos” referred only to grain or missiles and information came from three sober networks, and when fewer flew over flyover country—a similar set of paranoid beliefs filled American minds and came perilously close to taking power. As this magazine’s political writer Richard Rovere documented in a beautifully sardonic 1965 collection, “The Goldwater Caper,” a sizable group of people believed things as fully fantastical as the Trumpite belief in voting machines rerouted by dead Venezuelan socialists. The intellectual forces behind Goldwater’s sudden rise thought that Eisenhower and J.F.K. were agents, wittingly or otherwise, of the Communist conspiracy, and that American democracy was in a death match with enemies within as much as without. (Goldwater was, political genealogists will note, a ferocious admirer and defender of Joe McCarthy, whose counsel in all things conspiratorial was Roy Cohn, Donald Trump’s mentor.)
Goldwater was a less personally malevolent figure than Trump, and, yes, he lost his 1964 Presidential bid. But, in sweeping the Deep South, he set a victorious neo-Confederate pattern for the next four decades of American politics, including the so-called Reagan revolution. Nor were his forces naïvely libertarian. At the time, Goldwater’s ghostwriter Brent Bozell spoke approvingly of Franco’s post-Fascist Spain as spiritually far superior to decadent America, much as the highbrow Trumpites talk of the Christian regimes of Putin and Orbán.
The interesting question is not what causes autocracy (not to mention the conspiratorial thinking that feeds it) but what has ever suspended it. We constantly create post-hoc explanations for the ascent of the irrational. The Weimar inflation caused the rise of Hitler, we say; the impoverishment of Tsarism caused the Bolshevik Revolution. In fact, the inflation was over in Germany long before Hitler rose, and Lenin came to power not in anything that resembled a revolution—which had happened already under the leadership of far more pluralistic politicians—but in a coup d’état by a militant minority. Force of personality, opportunity, sheer accident: these were much more decisive than some neat formula of suffering in, autocracy out.
Donald Trump came to power not because of an overwhelming wave of popular sentiment—he lost his two elections by a cumulative ten million votes—but because of an orphaned electoral system left on our doorstep by an exhausted Constitutional Convention. It’s true that our diagnoses, however dubious as explanations, still point to real maladies. Certainly there are all sorts of reasons for reducing economic inequality. But Trump’s power was not rooted in economic interests, and his approval rating among his followers was the same when things were going well as it is now, when they’re going badly. Then, too, some of the blandest occupants of the Oval Office were lofted there during previous peaks of inequality.
The way to shore up American democracy is to shore up American democracy—that is, to strengthen liberal institutions, in ways that are unglamorously specific and discouragingly minute. The task here is not so much to peer into our souls as to reduce the enormous democratic deficits under which the country labors, most notably an electoral landscape in which farmland tilts to power while city blocks are flattened. This means remedying manipulative redistricting while reforming the Electoral College and the Senate. Some of these things won’t be achievable, but all are worth pursuing—with the knowledge that, even if every box on our wonkish wish list were checked, no set-it-and-forget-it solution to democratic fragility would stand revealed. The only way to stave off another Trump is to recognize that it always happens. The temptation of anti-democratic cult politics is forever with us, and so is the work of fending it off.
The rule of law, the protection of rights, and the procedures of civil governance are not fixed foundations, shaken by events, but practices and habits, constantly threatened, frequently renewable. “A republic if you can keep it,” Benjamin Franklin said. Keeping a republic is a matter not of preserving it like pickles but of working it like dough—which sounds like something you’d serve alongside very weak tea. But it is the essential diet to feed our democracy if we are to make what always happens, for a little while longer, happily unhappen. ?
Think so?
I think that Pence isn't in the crazy crowd. We'll see soon.
Interesting that ALL living former secretaries of defense issued a joint statement, both democrat and republican ones:
Oh, no, that was sarcasm. :wink:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/election-us-2020-55558355
So much for standing by.
Is that official? Did it happen?
Not official, the scoundrels are still toying with the election, for shits and giggles I guess.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1346845109736845318?s=20[/tweet]
Big Brother sanctioned good times, of course.
The man won the most admired man award.
https://nypost.com/2020/12/29/trump-tops-list-of-most-admired-men-of-2020-poll/
Someone is crazy. Or maybe this world is filled with people who have the right to think differently? Concept?
Ooh smoke outside the House! Shit's kicking off!
The mistake of acquitting Trump after impeachment last year is now abundantly clear.
Lawmakers have been told to "be prepared" to relocate to cloakroom."
https://edition.cnn.com/politics/live-news/congress-electoral-college-vote-count-2021/index.html
But, but, let's just humour Trump some more.
(Fascists? Haha, you crazy libs.)
The current problem in American politics in 2020-2021: you don't know when people are sarcastic or not.
And Trump, the TV bully, now getting a little bit frightened and tweeting:
You know, for Trump it's all a TV show, which doesn't matter in the end.
Wouldn't that be Trump? Isn't inciting this pretty much in direct contravention to his oath of office?
I think Trump should be arrested and stripped of his powers immediately.
I hope they get their orange slices during the break.
Oh come now, there's been far worse behavior, but that's not to say that this behavior isn't especially bad. The streets burn every time there is any feeling of unfairness, real or perceived. Everyone always feels justified when they riot. What you're experiencing is how a riot looks when you find the rioters entirely unjustified.
Really? When was the last time the US Capitol Building was stormed by armed insurrectionists stopping the certification of Electoral College votes? Perhaps you could jog my memory?
If you're just saying that this is the worst example of protestors acting out at the capital, then maybe it is. I don't know. But if you're saying this is the worst example of violent behavior against the US government, I'm saying it's not.
Now you sound like BLM supporters in the summer when explaining the looting.
That's the point, I think.
What's different is the motivation and the symbolism, not the fact that there is violence.
Puerto Rican activists in 1954 showed the example: see 1954 US Capitol shooting.
Of course then it was a normal day...
I think it's just QAnon doing what they think Trump asked them to do
In the same sense that shooting someone on the street isn't inherently wrong. It all depends on who is doing it, and more importantly why.
The CIA must be rather upset right now. Only they get to orchastrate attempted violent coups against democratically elected governments in overexploited countries. These people are stepping on their turf.
I'm explaining why watching looters pisses people off, but I'm not suggesting a moral equivalence, nor am I suggesting that it's all subjective, as if some looters aren't objectively right and others wrong.
It's an unfortunate reality that voters don't have a very good memory. Except when it comes to the Liberal Democrats and tuition fees.
And when did getting totally fucked become a bad thing?
One already has been shot.
All that powerful, revolutionary energy. Channelled into defending a plutocrat like Trump. What an utter waste.
This reads as if it wasn't the police who were responsible.
I'd agree with that - The Civil War was worse.
And, due credit to Trump, no doubt aided by Trump's call for voters to boycott those elections. The man is an incomparable idiot.
It's such an interesting phenomenon, the influence of leadership and the cult like behavior that follows. I've got to assume these are just regular folks who go to work everyday and come home and hang out with their friends and family. They convince themselves they're fighting for a higher purpose and not just to protect Trump, their messiah. Do they not see just see the same brash, disrespectful dumbass that I see?
This billionaire buffoon stirs up the underclass into believing their will was subverted, their election stolen, and now their guns and way of life will be taken away. I do think they really believe this and they'll speak proudly to their grandkids about how they fought for freedom like a true patriot.
Yep.
Now Trump is saying that the election was stolen... but now go home.
The guy simply doesn't understand just how seriously his followers take him. And likely that will be the end of Trump once those hardcore supporters understand how full of bullshit their idol is. Because, in the end Trump cannot be anything else but the inept leader that he is.
(It would be like saying to us Finns that Russia just invaded your country, but go home now, no need to mobilize the army.)
I think so too. My immediate feelings are both of pity and admiration; pity because these poor fools are being used by powers who would not give a flying hoot if they died right there and then; admiration because they have the courage of their convictions so rarely seen. These people are real people with real greviances, and they've been manipulated into being pressed into the service of some moron who would gladly watch them burn.
Yes. But our politicians are venal and craven as a rule, and I doubt this will happen unless their paymasters feel threatened.
I agree with half you say here. Yes no one they are supporting cares for them. Yes they are real people with real grievances. However, you believe them to be 'wretches'. I am not sure. They are afraid of something being taken away from them. They are a political force but not the force of the have nots. They are a force of supremacists. They are not fighting for something, but against something, against change. This is actually counter revolutionary, it is a revolution of the right. That is why you do not see police, there is no one to restore order. That is very worrying.
Four years and you still can't answer this question. I feel pity for you too.
There was an interview with Pelosi around the commencement of the impeachment hearings. She said, everything Trump says is a projection. When he says that Adam Schiff is ‘a corrupt politician’, deep down he’s talking about himself. When he talks about the election being ‘stolen’, deep down it’s because he thinks he never deserved to be elected. But the neurosis is so deep, and his ego defences so powerful, that he can never allow himself to see it. In fact, if he did see it, it would be the end of him, a complete psychotic breakdown. (Mary Trump sees all this too.) The tragedy of the situation is that so many millions of people have been sucked into his vortex of delusion. That’s the real sickness of American society.
I agree with you there too. They should be allies and the left actually led them down. The left did not care about working class problems. Many on the left are very decent university educated people, but have no idea of the real hardship that current society is causing. In the 1990's at least in the Netherlands the biggest leftist parties actually left economic issues behind and focused on post materialist values. If that is true elsewhere than the working classes had nowhere to go. However, though many things are the same as the days of old, there are differences too. The spirit of the entrepreneur, instead of 'Der Arbeiter" has taken center stage as the political hero. Money, not work are the products that people are proud of. That means that an affluent populist will be the popular icon around which revolutionary forces coalesce.
I've been saying this about the right in general for a long time. Pretty much everything they ever accuse anyone on the left of is something they themselves are even more guilty of. (Not that the so-called "left" they're usually focusing on, the Democrats, are so blameless themselves).
:100: :up:
Quoting StreetlightX
And to top it all off, today's crowd of insurrectionists storming the capitol were lead by some lunatic cosplayer running around shirtless in a buffalo-horn hat and face paint. What the even fuck I can't.
What all these people have in common is that they don't trust the mainstream media at all. Their world has been taken over by fraud and evil. They're fairly rudderless. They think you're the one who is deluded.
They have a lot in common with leftists.
That is the difference with other revolutions. It is not a revolution against a government that rules at gun point. It is a revolution of those who own guns against those that write laws.
Quoting frank
When did leftists storm the Capitol?
Wy do you ask? Are you Finnish?
:lol: Hey, whose Irish?
Just not interested in in discussing it in snappy barbs with a European.
Does he really don't understand though, or is it exactly his intention, I can't decide. His video almost seemed like as explicit an invitation to carry on you could get away with as an acting president.
Ohhh dear identity politics. I thought that was a thing of the left...
This was grassroots civil disobedience at its finest, not that corporate-funded, celebrity-endorsed astroturfing we’ve been inundated with for the past few years.
Though the most racist and money-grubbing organization of the last millennia has once again taken power, a growing party of working class patriots forms beneath them. As Trump’s power wanes the movement he championed will carry on.
Probably the Kavanaugh hearing. I believe the new Vice President even spoke there.
It was internet-roots, stewed in conspiracy theories for years. It's all fantasy.
Don't you realize that?
Read Nos's comment. See if you can spot the leftism.
If you can't, fuck off.
Shut up, @frank.
sigh.
Whatever then. Knock yourself out. It's the same tape.
Tape?
Ohh, was a woman shot, bombs found in the halls, thugs breaking windows? Or was it a war of words in which eventually the outcome of democratic procedure was accepted?
Quoting frank
The eloquence of these people never ceases to amaze me.
You make an odd comment that sounds smart to you but doesn't to someone else and then get frustrated at the reaction (also, the you're not an American so you can't talk about America thing).
Um. That they're similar to leftists? That wasn't a salty jab. It's widely understood that QAnon now spans from right to left.
Oh, so you meant QAnon leftists. Not leftists. Right.
Maybe. It's absorbing anybody with a conspiracy theory. It's probably already in Ireland.
Far better than the state, corporate and media-funded conspiracies we’ve all had to listen too for years now. It was only a few days ago former pentagon officials and their media propagandists were warning us that Trump might use the military to remain in power. Instead he called for peace and for people to go home.
Sure, that happens on all sides of the political spectrum and in every country.
Well, something like 80 people were arrested. But I’m not comparing the two.
So it's a war where both sides are deluded?
What happens?
Involvement and belief in conspiracy theories.
It does actually. The left right dichotomy is also dated. I see a lot of revolutionary discourse which has historically been characterized as 'left' and QAnon supporters and Trumpists. I think Trumpism can best be described as populist. Apparently a large part of the population is susceptible to conspiracy theories, which actually resonate very well with the theories in vogue in 19th century Europe.
Oh.
Yeah, also in Pelosi's office? I was blissfully unaware your seats of government were stormed on a regular basis.
Or was it rioting? Something that is not to be condoned of course and a cause for arrest, but it is different from storming a government building. There is a reason why such places are often heavily guarded. The same reason why the US govt objects when in another country their buildings are stormed and rightly so. They also discriminate between riots and the storming of government building, the harassments of journalists etc.
Also, not too long ago there were riots immediately outside of the Whitehouse, in May I think. It turned quite violent and destructive, with the president sent to his bunker.
All of this started from day one, Trump’s inauguration, outside of which was a riot. Politics has been heated ever since.
Quoting StreetlightX
I agree with you here. It’s also interesting that they didn’t harass citizens or destroy private property but went straight to the source who hide from the citizens. For once the real criminals felt a little fear.
Terrorist MAGAts left a pipe bomb outside the Republican National Committee headquarters. Don't expect any tweets discouraging that. Just another thing for Trump and sycophants like NOS to cheer on while people die.
They probably don’t work right now, what with our trial run of socialism. Either way, I think we have a different conception of patriotism.
But I agree with you about the Republicans. They are an essential part of the Uniparty.
His since deleted tweet:
Minister for Foreign Affairs, Simon Coveney: "We must call this out for what it is: a deliberate assault on democracy by a sitting President and his supporters, attempting to overturn a free and fair election."
Quoting Baden
Quoting Baden
By the way, a GOP source close to the President has said, and I quote, "He's out of his mind". Slow learners.
So a Q/proudboy party? Or what? A great awakening?
If this guy had been a BLM protester, he'd be fucking dead.
Like Biden said, what the President says matters.
Just seen that Trump's Twitter account is now locked.
Yes and that is bad. Indeed Trump's presidency began with riots and the country is deeply polarized. An invasion though of these building is something different than a riot or a threatening situation. I wonder actually why you think the White House was not taken by protesters / rioteers. That is a serious question by the way, I am interested in your take on it.
Quoting Baden
The one thing all politicians fear: the people asserting themselves. They all have that fear and they all know their lines.
Yes, politicians should get right behind destroying any semblance of democracy while worms like you sit on the sidelines smiling about it.
And the tragedy is that the cynical (and fearful) Republican politicians simply cannot fathom that going with the polarizing rhetoric that has earlier "rallied the supporters", starting from the "Lock-her-up" chants and that have ending now with "Stop the Steal", has truly some other effect than just to get people to turn up vote for them in the elections. It's as the politicians don't understand that their bellicose and vitriolic accusations would and could truly create a tragedy. Yet when you depict someone to be the enemy, some simpleton or delusional person will really think so and respond how one deals with real enemies.
In other Third World countries such rhetoric from the elections losing President that Trump has used would have already brought it down to a small civil war with urban combat in the Capital where tanks and combat aircraft are used.
Yet Trump lives in his own delusional TV World where he can say whatever and if things really get bad, he might settle the issue out of court. This all is so obvious from Trump now begging his own supporters simply to "go home". And of course, respect monuments.
Quoting Baden
Really, is that what I said? And I’m a “ worm”. But I expected that, it’s part of the “conversation” these days.
Do you feel, the election aside, that people feel like the politicians not only ignore them but treat them with total disrespect, all over the world. I’m assuming from your posts you’re no happier than anyone else with the state of the world. Whoever wins elections is not going to make any difference to that situation. So the system is stacked against change, otherwise you would have seen it by now.
Do you really think, whatever side of politics you’re on, that the system is going to accept change. What was your anger at racism directed at, who can change that, who has the power and does nothing except use those tensions to their advantage?
Edit: as someone said, many of the Trump supporters and Sanders supporters are against the same thing but the politics divides them.
You’re Canadian?
Don't compare a scumbag like Trump who used a bunch of violent gullible morons as a proxy for his ego to any serious uprising against political oppression.
Quoting frank
I know this is about the US right now, but it’s not just an American condition, it’s happening in many different ways across the world. Left or right it’s the people against a heartless system.
I think it was a mix of good fencing and police force. But you’re right. I don’t know why these people were allowed to get in the capitol building, or why they bothered to do so.
Yes, poor white supremacist proud boys and QANON nutters against the heartless system that doesn't let them use the word "nigger", make death threats against anyone who disagrees with them, or plant pipe bombs outside government offices. :cry:
Quoting Baden
You don’t know how many people silently support these “morons”, nor who they may be. You also exaggerate my statement so as to attack it. I didn’t compare Trump to anyone, you took that upon yourself. I was talking about disenfranchised people. Are the yellow shirts any different, are the student protests of the sixties any different, are the people of Hong King any different. How can one use the system for change when it’s stacked against them, as, for example, your ideas on systemic racism in the US?
This event was organized on line by QAnon and the proudboys. That's a small group of people who inhabit a very different world from the rest of us.
Whose side are you on?
Nos is. I'm American.
Quoting frank
Obviously the people. These people shook up the system. I don’t have to like them to see that.
I understand that. What do you want to see happening next?
They didn't shake up shit. Trump and the Trumptards committed political suicide, you fool.
Quoting Baden
But not you, eh?
Quoting frank
More pressure on politicians.
I pointed out a woman died. So, no. She happened to be a Trump supporter. You and NOS think you've achieved something. That's who you are. Live with it.
To do what?
Quoting Baden
I’m really baffled by your attitude. Moderator and administrator?
Quoting frank
Is this going to go on long?
No, that's not all I do. I do call out scumbags from time to time, but mostly I make mildly witty remarks to entertain the folks.
They have a double standard. You just have to leave when it starts annoying you.
I know. :lol:
Quoting Garth
Well certainly not moderator.
apparently not
Funny, you just told someone to 'fuck off' and weren't moderated.
[tweet]https://twitter.com/kusinews/status/1346978856255647744?s=21[/tweet]
That’s me.
I imagine we want the same things. You want to know what I want from pressure on politicians?: integrity, honesty, true representation, commitment to the welfare of the people. You know those things we support.
Many more people will die from Ohio's new stand your ground because a black person walking up to a white person is inherently threatening.
Though to be fair, Baden, you don’t punish people for disagreeing. And this OP is very heated, so we either enter or stay out if we don’t like it.
No, you cannot discern an inherent threat from a man’s skin-color.
But I've been a naughty boy, I know. Thanks for understanding. :kiss:
The US won't heal, as Joe Biden would want it to.
The polarization will continue, the alienation will continue. The fringes will continue to dominate the scene (at least in the minds of people when thinking of those on the other side). The silent majority will stay silent. Trump has really helped polarization a lot.
And I think this will just slowly continue to erode American's belief in their own system. Demonstrations, protests and denials of election wins will have that effect.
Listened to great current interview from Jonathan Haidt, who in my view made good rational comments. One thing what he mentioned is the obvious generational gap. With older folks and with Biden's generation, domestic politics could be heated, but Americans could unite especially once on the international scene as there was a Cold War going on. However the younger generations have seen only dismal US invasions, hence they don't share that kind of patriotism anymore. And of course no Soviet Union or Marxism-Leninism, hence the left/right divide is seen differently.
Well why shouldn’t you have your opinion? Who wants to sit on the sidelines?
He has an Irish temper.
:up:
I am really fucking pissed off a woman had to die today to satisfy Trump's ego. In fact, I'm fucking furious. But I'll go drink some whiskey instead of ranting here.
Trump’s zombie hordes didn’t have the attention span for the boring political theatre that Ted Cruz and the other power-grubbing congressmen had planned for today so they spiced things up a bit. They made their own symbolic gesture, one befitting the lame duck prez.
So far, at least one congressmen has withdrawn their opposition to the electoral count and confirming Biden, as a result of the riot.
It seems that there is tension between the corporate, conservative right on one hand and the extreme populist right on the other hand. What a leftist can do to help is to accentuate the differences between these two groups in order to force them into conflict with each other. It would be truly wonderful if these two groups can be brought to destroy each other. To do this requires making some common cause with one or the other group.
For that reason, it is the absolute worst strategy to attack and insult the right wing generally. By posing yourself as a threat to both of them, you push them toward solidarity. That is why it is very important to be civil and to not call names in the course of your dealings, as a leftist, with right wing people.
Quoting Garth
Nothing will happen if that’s how the left regard the right. It’s far too simplistic to put it down to two factions as you have, with nothing in between,
Seconded.
Quoting Kenosha Kid
Why?
Putin gives all his trolls cute pet names. NOS in Russian means ‘small droopy balls’.
Here's exactly what I mean about leftist strategy: https://youtu.be/LN1LmXpQQQs?t=1518
I agree with Krystal Ball's strategic suggestion although I don't agree that this is populism per se.
I had a look at that but it’s all pretty shallow to me.
What about collateral damage? The result might be anarchy.
Twitter is considering a permanent ban. The President of the US is being moderated and banned on a website. How ridiculous is that.
I vote for a preemptive ban here. He's going to be looking for a new home to post, and I want to be proactive.
Quoting Hanover
What do you mean?
That Trump is banned here.
Quoting Hanover
I wouldn't mind dogpiling on the motherfucker.
Quoting Hanover
What about this part? I’m not sure where you stand.
Quoting hypericin
What’s “this country”?
All those Cunts needed mowing down, including their ringleader
Edit: this is my 666th comment - I think I'll leave it at that.
I mean that it's ridiculous that a US president can't make comments on a website that are not appropriate enough for publication so they have to moderate him.
I can see though how my comment might have been ambiguous.
Their treatment, by comparison, of a bunch of redneck wankers upset that a corrupt plutocrat did not win their barely-there democracy:
Oh and I forgot to mention the selfies:
[tweet]https://twitter.com/bubbaprog/status/1346920198461419520[/tweet]
ACAB.
Quoting hypericin
Quoting Brett
Is it the country blacks live in? Is it the country the unemployed live in, or the homeless, or the minimum wage worker, or drug addicts die in high numbers? Is it the country where 1% own most of the wealth? Is it the country that has such a poor health system that the Covid runs amok.
That’s not the cops taking selfies.
The guy in the red hat took the photo.
How?
Support for Trump and his populism must be sky-high among police. I'm not saying this sarcastically. Just look at exit polling data from the Georgia run-off. 70% of white males vote R, 96% of black women vote D.
I don’t get the connection.
That would make alot of sense. He supported them - and continues to do so - all through their continued murder spree of minorities.
Besides. The cops are the same people as those who made their way into the capitol. The distinction is a costume and a badge.
Which mental gymnastic routine will be preformed next?
More after the break.
What is the "this" about which you speak?
But despite the best efforts to run this country into the ground and, through foreign policy, nuclear weapons policy, and climate change policy, the rest of the world, there were more rational people than not.
We now have the presidency, the house and the senate. The healing and rebuilding begins. We have much work to do, and have learned hard lessons — from 40 years of neoliberal policies, an economic crash, a leader who turned his back on us (Obama) as we were sleeping, and now four years of destruction and degeneration. We can’t repeat these mistakes again.
For two months now, a political party and its accompanying media ecosystem has too often been unwilling to tell their followers the truth — that this was not a particularly close election and that President-Elect Biden will be inaugurated on January 20. Their fantasy narrative has spiraled further and further from reality, and it builds upon years of sown resentments. Now we’re seeing the consequences, whipped up into a violent crescendo."
Biden has systematically and with intent shut out every even marginally progressive voice out of his cabinet and decision making apparatus. The idea that it would be 'more progressive and bold than ever before' is no less delusional than those idiots on the hill right now. It's Blue MAGA.
Quoting Mr Bee
The first part is true. Getting rid of Trump won’t change it. America is dysfunctional.
The world is falling apart because of Global Warming. But yes, it's all Trump's fault.
No facts, but there's a rumour that trump initially refused to mobilize the dc national guard. Maybe he also undermined security at the Capitol? Sounds insane, but maybe.
Right or wrong I think these people had a lot more commitment, not just the banging of drums and chanting.
Nothing seems insane today, but I'd like to know something more concrete.
Yeah, they had a goal I suppose. But unlike burning a building spontaneously, given that they knew there were thousands of people in town and that this was certainly a possibility, you'd imagine the security would have been ramped up. Also, the small fact that it's the capital building and was in session. It's baffling.
I wouldn’t doubt it.
The police let them in, they got their photo-op of “democracy under attack”, killed a veteran, and dipped.
And also have the numbers, training, technology, equipment, weaponry, etc., that should far surpass anything we saw today. If used. For some reason, it wasn't. (Until much later.)
What a shocker.
Yeah and I heard all the "rioting and looting" was really Trump supporters in disguise.
Wouldn't doubt it.
Sounds plausible. Maybe it was the fascists who caused WWII and not Antifa.
We're here for you America.
I guess that Antifa also tricked Trump into giving speeches to those same protesters inciting them to march on the Capitol building.
Source
Quoting StreetlightX
Quoting Brett
Quoting StreetlightX
Quoting Brett
lmao incredible
Please help us
I heard antifa fucked your girlfriend
A few republican goons are objecting to Pennsylvania's votes
Quoting Maw
Can you explain that?
I could, but I won't
Why not?
Edit: is there something I’m missing in the video?
Well, in his political career Biden, for instance, has supported much of the ‘law & order’ politics and adversarial culture of law enforcement. No reason to be unhappy when their funding grows, accountability weakens, and are generally empowered regardless of which party holds the reigns.
Some of the comments here. I feel like banning the shit out of some people just to raise the level of sanity of this thread.
So violent. The doublespeak has begun.
A terrorist was shot. Cry me a river.
This will not end today, it is in the interest for too many politicans to maintain the status quo by keeping the people distracted from any type of policy, anything to do with improving actual conditions for actual people. The Republicans have set the stage for the next round of elections.
If people do not know yet what the "information apocalypse" is I urge you to read up on it. This will only get worse.
No, this was certainly not a terrorist. And quite frankly if people honestly believe the election was stolen, this reaction would be totally understandable. The problem is that for any outsider not submerged in the political discourse gripping a large segment of the population this looks like insanity. Inside it this all makes sense, are brave patriots and protecting the USA from a Democratic coup intend on implementing socialism. If the election really was stolen, which it obviously wasn't, I would want all US citizens to march on the Capitol and shoot the fuckers that made it possible.
This is also why some like to draw equivalence between BLM "rioters" and these people. The comparison fails in my view because one have grievances with actual facts (police brutality against minorities) and the others with a lie spun by GOP politicians and Trump. Where the discussion about BLM "rioters" is about the extent to which and how they should protest, the discussion here is whether they should be "protesting" at all.
In my view, there is therefore no moral equivalence between the two. I don't have anything good to say about the posters who imagine otherwise so I'll refrain from commenting directly to them.
But what is 'the people' in this case. I always get itchy when 'the people' are mentioned, because it is usually an appropriation by a small group who claims to represent them, see e.g. the People's Republic of China. These people were fighting not to overthrow the powers that be, but to have four more years of it. The people here rallied behind a multi millionaire from a political party that wishes to cut budget on welfare, health care etc. The believe the deck is stacked against them and that Trump is sent to liberate them, but what does that tell you about where they stand?
They feel that a man who incites violence, racism, is under investigation for numerous crimes and shady deals and uses bully like tactics to get his way is in fact their hero. Of course tis this different from '68 or Hong Kong or BLM. We have a group of people fighting for an authoritarianism they think they will profit from. I am not saying their grievances aren't real and that they have been treated fairly but what they are fighting for is not a fairer society it is a more unfair one in which they at least receive a form of cultural and social superiority.
Don't most terrorists think that they're doing the things they do for just and righteous political causes? Why would this unfortunate woman's belief likewise absolve her of the label of "terrorist"?
I like that you show sympathy for how these people have been duped and manipulated, since that "war for hearts and minds" really is where the battle needs to be fought; but lots of people fighting for lots of bad causes have been duped and manipulated into thinking they are good causes, and that doesn't make their actions okay.
18 U.S. Code § 2331 - Definitions
I don't think she satisfies condition (A).
Quoting Tobias
You’ve taken that line out of context. The line was in response to frank who asked whose side I was on.
Quoting Brett
By the people I mean:
Quoting Brett
[
Quoting Pfhorrest
How do you define that? What law are you referring to?
And that is why Trump and the Republicans kissing his ass are responsible here for everything.
Because for them it's just 2020's political rhetoric. They know they don't mean it for real, which makes all this utterly crazy and in the end a real tragedy. If the election really would be "stolen", then it is totally logical to take up arms, to breach Capitol Hill. But no. Oh how Trump loves his supporters, but "now they have to go home". Just like that. And they shouldn't oppose the police. And mind not destroying or vandalizing anything on the way. Yet just earlier inciting them to walk to the Capitol, which his supporters living in la-la-land aptly did, tells how out of touch this President is from what he is doing.
As I said, this really is as bizarre and delusional as if my country's President would, just to feel vindicated and to get political points, would start accusing that the Russians have invaded the country. And then when reservists would start to gather around military bases to form units and get their weapons, he would the say to them to go home. So the Russians are invading, but no need to really gather up the Russians, mine the channels, form the brigades. That's the messaging here.
This is really the absurd state where the US is now where delusional beliefs not only survive, but cherish. Yes, the information apocalypse is here, as you said. The Trump message is that 1) There democracy has been taken away (that's what stealing elections means), but 2) don't do anything about it, go home now.
In the end, it all just breeds more alienation, polarization and distrust in the democracy of the Republic.
Quoting Wayfarer
Is it because he’s smoking, or squinting, or just looking, what?
18 U.S. Code § 1752 - Restricted building or grounds
Trump referred to this statute in the tweet I mentioned earlier:
[tweet]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1275379758021390336[/tweet]
I don't actually know the specifics, but from all the news I've been seeing there seems to be a clear consensus that some crime was committed today, by the people storming the capitol. I would guess that at the very least bringing weapons into a government building like that is probably illegal, and even if not that, that there are restrictions on entry into at least some parts of that building if not the building as a whole, since I sincerely doubt it's lawful for just anyone to rummage through e.g. Pelosi's office.
She was guilty of tresspassing a federal building and possibly some destruction of property. Her intent cannot be derived from the facts we know but let's assume it was to intimidate and coerce senators. Not really the same as mass bombing a residential area and should hardly be sentenced similarly.
Especially if you realise Trump was intimidated all the way in the White House when people were protesting in the street. And protest is always done to influence policy. The whole clause sets itself up for an insane amount of abuse.
Is it a restricted building?
Yes. From that same statute:
It certainly satisfies condition (B), given that Pence was there, and I assume also satisfies condition (C).
Quoting Pfhorrest
The crime is ‘armed insurrection’ and ought to be dealt with accordingly.
Quoting Michael
Yes, I agree.
Edit: however (there’s always a however) how many times have laws been broken by people who sought to change things? Authorities are very good at asking us to use reason, remain calm, follow the law, demonising the protestors, digging into the private lives of people who challenge them, and claiming the moral high ground.
That's been debunked. He could never get a girlfriend.
That was just a definition, not a crime. Within the chapter on terrorism the actual crimes are distinct, e.g. homicide and use of weapons of mass destruction which have different sentencing guidelines.
Defining Terrorism
Quoting Benkei
Yes, the authorities can define anyone they want as a terrorist, from any side of politics, and therefore harass, convict them and remove them.
Compare with "international terrorism" which is used 14 times to establish actual crimes, e.g. providing financial support to a government that supports international terrorism.
Potentially seditious conspiracy.
For a year now, although hasn't posted in two.
It certainly is a crime. When protesters “stormed” the senate building a couple years ago, 600 protesters and a Dem Congress-woman were arrested occupying the senate building. When people protested back in January about impeachment, 41 protesters were arrested doing the same shit. During the Kavanaugh hearing, even celebrities were arrested occupying the senate building. Just in June of last year, George Floyd riots ripped through Washington.
The only difference is how these people are being portrayed in the gutter press: one group as terrorists, a violent mob, and the rest as concerned protesters and activists. I do not remember congress or the senate saying it was an attack on democracy when protesters occupied, disrupted and sometimes accosted its members.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/07/trump-twitter-ban/
Big Tech is censoring the president of the United States. Fuckerberg donated around $400 000 0000 to elections, some of which was spent on equipment that processed mail-in ballots, so it’s no wonder he suppresses dissent. Each day we become more and more like China.
Absolutely, though on the positive side, the ship is truly sunk. Trump couldn't have come up with a better way to humiliate, disgrace, and ultimately destroy himself. No 2024 run and probably jail. From that perspective, it's the best realistically possible outcome for the end of his presidency. It's just horrific 4 of his supporters had to die for it to happen. They really believed. And he doesn't give a fuck about them.
There is a difference between fighting, looting and rioting because of perceived social injustice (looting and rioting being criminal of course, do not get me wrong) and storming a government building with the aim of seizing power for your own preferred strong man. The first is civil disorder, the other an attempt at toppling the democratic state. The difference is that the legal order is shocked in the first instance, but not itself in danger, whereas in the second instance it is itself under threat.
In the same vein there is a difference between political protest and rioting at the Kavanaugh hearing, where the seats of power have not been breached and the storming of the capitol where they have been. The threat to the legal order is much larger where such actions succeed than where they do not and the shock to the legal order is consequently much more severe.
I know US criminal law is not used to thinking in terms of 'the legal order', it is a rather German / Dutch conception, but there must be something similar. The same rationale applies when terrorist intent is punished harsher than ordinary street crime, which holds under US criminal law. It is not 'the gutter press' just doing something, in reporting differently about these two instances. The difference is similar to the way attempted murder is reported and actual murder is. The second presenting the more severe shock to the legal order and therefore warranting much more coverage and indeed condemnation..
It was certainly a person using violence for political gain, aka a terrorist or if you prefer, an old style fascist. And of course it’s logical from their screwed-up POV. Mussolini was logical too, and his reactions perfectly understandable from a fascist perspective.
And, of course, everyone except a Trump troll would acknowledge this. Even Ted Cruz of all people has made an official statement calling these Trump supporters terrorists. I guess he's part of the leftie press too. :chin:
Moral of the story, Trump trolls will never concede even the most obvious facts and are not worth engaging.
I do not presume to talk for Benkei, but we do come from the same legal tradition and are surprisingly often in agreement about such matters so I will give it a shot. Not everyone who uses violence for political gain does it to the same measure and degree and therefore not everyone deserves the same punishment. If you are a street artist and you spray 'fuck the king' on a Dutch building you are committing the act of violence against goods, with a political motive. However it is hardly the same as planting a bomb in a crowded place in order to get the Dutch to withdraw from Afghanistan or wherever they might be. It has to do with the threat and shock to the legal order again. If you get swept away in a crowd with people who you agree with and in a frenzy of righteous fervor do something you really should not be doing, do you deserve to die? My feeling is no. Her death therefore is tragic. Could it be avoided and by who, that is the question of culpability for her death. The shooter might have acted in legitimate self defense or defense of others, but her death is tragic.
I’m not aware of anyone intent on seizing power, and find no rhetoric to that effect. Perhaps you can enlighten me. I was under the impression it was a protest.
Huh? They intended to stop the proceedings which would have proclaimed Biden the president elect... or was it just coincidental and does it happen every odd Monday morning?
You didn’t get any impression of rioting?
That doesn’t seem much worse than people literally calling for the removal of the president while occupying the senate building. The thing is there is no evidence of any “intent to seize power” outside of the fantasies of the gutter-press, who for months now have convinced themselves of an impending coup. It’s been a rally and a protest all along.
You are familiar with the term "gaslighting" right? Well, I suspect some gaslighting here..
How did they occupy the senate building, using potentially lethal force or armed in a way that might enable them to do so or not?
Quoting schopenhauer1
Gaslighting as in making the other believe they are crazy? How do you mean this exactly? he crowd was gaslighted into thinking they are being oppressed by an unseen elite and the media, or gaslighting as in the media are making us believe we see something that is actually not there, i.e., a violent mob invading the Capitol?
No NOS4A2 is gaslighting you it seems.. And yes Trump is certainly gaslighting his constituency. Actually they are willing participants.. already believe anything he says.. it's more the people that aren't his constituency that he's gaslighting.. trying to make actually very corrupt deeds seem no big deal.
I am not aware if the protesters were armed. DC has very strict gun laws, and in the livestreams I saw, no one was brandishing weapons, save for perhaps some American flags.
I do not think the protests under discussion were similar in intensity. The #removeTrump protests and the disruption of the Kavanaugh hearing were heavily funded by political action committees, but I don’t think they resorted to breaking windows, just making noise, the old heckler’s veto. They berated one Senator, but I do not think he was in any danger.
The trump protesters were not organized at all, but certainly more instance. CNN is comparing this 1812. But I cannot see it. As I watched it live, the protesters were mostly meandering about the building, putting MAGA hats on statues and taking pictures. Level-headed people were yelling not to destroy anything. No statues torn down, no spray paint, no weapons, just people yelling. Then 3 or 4 protesters tried to get past the barricade, breaking windows. The woman then tried to jump through the window, unarmed, and she was executed before she could make it through. I suggest watching the raw footage and come to your own conclusions.
As to the point that this was insurrection, a coup, not protest, there is no evidence of this. There never was. I’d love to see some evidence for this, because I much rather find myself misinformed than having to believe countless people are lying. Who knows? Perhaps some Q nutter thought this was his moment, but have not seen any evidence of this.
And thanks for hearing me out despite the ad hom. They don’t want anyone to hear these arguments, let alone discuss them.
It’s called law and order: if your Dutch guy tried to storm the royal palace instead of tagging it, he might get shot at too.
This reminds me of the Hong Kong protesters waving American flags and photos of “swole Trump”. Trump’s spirit resonates worldwide.
Molly Osberg for Jezebel.com
An hour ago
This morning I woke up and immediately turned on the radio, something I do regularly but which felt particularly urgent today. I wanted to know if there were any more pipe bombs discovered in federal buildings and how many people died as a direct result of the pro-Trump coalition of conspiracy theorists and white nationalists who stormed the Capitol building to ostensibly protest legitimate election results yesterday. (The answer, at least initially, was four.)
Imagine my surprise, then, to hear a steady stream of pundits and politicians looking forward to a “peaceful transition of power” with the same breath they used to describe yesterday’s events. I might argue that peaceful transition ended at one point or another in the past few months, and that the fantasy of an orderly progression from one administration to another has been delusional for about, say, four years. But perhaps you’ve seen the photographs of the guy in the Punisher vest carrying zip ties through the Senate chamber, or the one of men waving Trump flags as they scaled the Capitol wall: What should be obvious at this point is that the “peaceful transition” is irrefutably over now.
Since the election, the impulse to filter the grotesque or previously unimaginable through the language of optimism and stability has landed us in a bizarre place, watching the coup on the horizon as people on TV act as though saying words like democracy or integrity or bipartisanship will manifest a parallel reality in which the president’s supporters haven’t already been primed extensively to commit violence in his name.
This is why, I imagine, Ted Cruz and George Bush and Joe Biden and the CEOs of Blackstone and Morgan Chase as well as Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg have all urged nearly verbatim that the transition be peaceful sometime in the last 12 hours, an outcome not only impossible on January 7th but one that many of those figures actively worked against to their significant personal gain. It’s a minor gripe given the rather extraordinary circumstances, but if there was ever a time to call something by its name it might as well be the time a crew of a losing candidate’s supporters broke into the Capitol with zip ties and guns to contest an election they’d been repeatedly encouraged to believe was a hoax.
The transition between presidents in 2021 is not peaceful. And there’s no way it’s going to be any more smooth or respectful of a process from here. There’s supposed to be an inauguration in two weeks.
To the best of my ability to tell, NOS does not actually believe most of the things he posts. Most of the time, he is exactly repeating the current pro-Trump propaganda. There have been several instances where he actually started posting it before it was reported by mainstream news.
I consider it fairly likely that NOS is a profile of a professional troll.
All they need is a martyr.
Everything could be considered being armed if the force wielded is strong enough. The agent running scared and the reporter behind him certainly feared the crowd. Moreover the police present was overwhelmed, what more evidence of an asymmetric ratio of 'fire power' do you need?
Quoting NOS4A2
Agreed and though that might be 'too much' protest it is not threatening existing institutions.
Quoting NOS4A2
Well the point is not to physically destroy something. The aim is to conquer and they succeeded. I am sure you are aware of the picture below. Why is it such a strong picture, because it is the picture of conquest. Short lived maybe, but the message is stark, your force might not prevail, we will if we want. That is what makes it such a disgrace. The intent of conquest is not the problem, the success of it is. The message to everyone is, the police will not or cannot do much, we are the ones that wield control. That is why the slogan "you did not take back control, we gave it back" is meaningful. The maga hats on statues were similar signs. Everyone who has ever played a strategic war game, from 'stratego' to "Medieval" knows about capturing the flag. A state institution can never let that happen unwillingly.
Quoting NOS4A2
Well, as Hume famously pointed out the fact that you see a billiard ball move after it has been struck by another billiard ball is no logical evidence of one billiard ball moving the other. Here you see a president telling his followers to march to the capitol because nothing has ever been achieved by weakness and the crowd cheering "stop the steal" while they were interfering in the exact meeting in which Biden would be certified. Of course maybe they just wanted to buy tickets to the next Yankees game but it is not likely. They wanted four more years of Trump. They were there to insist on it happening. I do not know how much more evidence you want or how much would convince you. People are not lying. They might see or interpret things differently from you, but of course they are not lying. That is the exact oddness of your position and that of those so angry at you. You take issue with that, this black and white distinction. However, you buy into it too, they must be lying when they see things differently.
Quoting NOS4A2
Who is 'they'? I think those arguments are heard, actually quite loudly. These arguments got this horde on the steps of the Capitol in the first place no? If no one wanted those arguments to be heard they would not have been. I think they are actually heard way too loud.
Quoting NOS4A2
They might have gotten into this game too many times. There might be a reason for it, I know most to be sensible people. But well, I do not mind tough debate, including the odd ad hominem sometimes.
Quoting Olivier5
Well if a Dutch guy would storm the royal palace all by himself he would not be shot. He would be looked at with incredulity. He might well be shot if he would storm the royal palace together with a whole violent gang. That would be tragic, because someone caught up in a feverous frenzy at the wrong time and place does not deserve to die, even if the shooting might be justified.
(I seem not to be able to copy an image or paste it... too bad, but it is the image of the many sitting at Pelosi's desk, I think you saw it 1000 times.)
A troll I do not know, but he might well be a pro, I do not know. either way... even if he wields Trump propaganda I am still interested in who NOS is and why he think the way he does. (Or offers trump's spin).
lol The Washington Times has retracted this story after the firm they cited, XRVision, provided a Cease and Desist: "XRVision didn’t generate any composites or detections for the Washington Times or for any “retired military officer,” nor did it authorize them to make any such claims or representations. Additionally, The Washington Times never attempted to contact XRVision to verify their false claim prior publication. "
I should perhaps clarify that I am using "troll" in the more modern sense of:
someone intentionally trying to disrupt or manipulate online conversations and communities.
Lol.
It might well be, but I am also puzzled at the defensive reactions. I remember PF long ago and the battles with Baron Max and Darkcrow, they were far more vicious.
If they have no weapons it means they are unarmed, not armed, which is my only point. I'm not going to say the mob wasn't menacing and loud, but even metaphorically it makes no sense to say they were armed. Although I wouldn't be surprised if someone had a weapon.
It's true they want four more years of Trump, just as the anti-Trump protesters wanted Trump removed. And sure they would insist, as all protesters do, for this or that action. This to me isn't evidence of insurrection, however. So why, exactly, are we pretending this is insurrection? And to hear this after months and months of violent riots throughout America, to the point that entire city blocks were literally seized and occupied by armed groups, boggles my mind.
I don't believe people are lying. My theory is they are gripped in a moral panic.
Only those on this forum who project and fantasize that I am operating in bad faith.
Yeah, it seemed too suspicious. Fake news.
This cuts to one of the more important issues. In my own rage, I have to remind myself that these people really do believe the election was stolen, among other false things.
This level of brainwashing was taken to a new level by Trump, but as you know it's been going on for a long time -- in talk radio, in Fox News, and in print. Propaganda goes back much farther than the last 40 years, but it's especially pronounced during this era.
Combined with the simultaneous neoliberal assault from the business class and its results on the bottom 80% of the population, who turn for answers to these propaganda channels, and there's no wonder why 35%-45% of Americans believe the election was stolen, that Trump is a savior, that there's a deep state, etc.
At the core of all this, I think, is irrationality, in the sense of belief without evidence. This has always been around, but I can't help but think that religion, the education system, the fascination with sports (blind loyalty to the home team), jingoism, etc., all help contribute to making people ripe for a charlatan who's clever enough to take advantage. On a smaller scale it's called a cult, but on a larger scale it's called the Trumpism and the like.
Plenty of examples even on this thread. Pretty scary indeed. How do we counter all this?
Quoting Brett
Drop the act of being objective or truly interested in any way. Just jump right to the complete rationalization of what happened yesterday. Spare yourself the mental gymnastics.
There are far worse tragedies in this world. I see this one more as a ‘what did they except’ kind of tragedy, like when a drunken fool tries to walk on top of a train or to give a blow job to a bear... Darwin award material.
If I recall correctly, you've said that unarmed BLM rioters shot in the street were killed in self-defense, but when an unarmed rioter is shot storming the nation's capital you say that they were executed. Is your view based on white privilege?
Quoting NOS4A2
????????????
A cultist like NOS4A2 doesn't deserve such an articulate response. Don't waste your time -- he's a dead end mentally.
Quoting praxis
Quoting Tobias
Quoting Benkei
Quoting schopenhauer1
Yes indeed. Glad I'm far from the only one who notices.
Because when someone is no longer swayed by truth, by evidence, by reasons -- then they are in fact no longer a rational being. Still a human being, but not rational. When this irrationality threatens you, me, our children, and the future of the planet, then I also consider them enemies. I'm left no choice.
Reminds me of The Walking Dead, a show about a zombie apocalypse. In one episode there's a group of survivors who call themselves the 'whisperers'. They disguise themselves as zombies, infiltrate the herd, and subtly guide them to wherever they want, usually to attack a rival group of survivors.
I imagine that any group that worships Trump could be easily mislead. You might only need some shiny object or perhaps some deep-fried tweekies to lure them around.
You're right -- yesterday was just a normal protest. Not a big deal. Media playing it up too much. So are the Republicans. No weapons, no one was hurt, no police were hurt, no property was vandalized, etc. It is the people's house, after all.
There. Now you can go back to your Newsmax message boards. You've done your duty here.
Had she been attacking him, perhaps. But she wasn’t. The shooter was under no threat.
Not at all. We believe that you believe every word. Which makes you even more of a cancer.
When you lose even Bill Barr...guess he must be caught up in this unnecessary "moral panic." Let's stay calm as our capital is besieged. No reason to get hysterical, ladies.
Makes you wonder, though: had this happened a few months ago, or even a year or two ago -- before he lost the election and the Georgia runoffs -- would there be such a universal outrage? Would there be resignations? Editorials of condemnation? I have my doubts.
Seems awfully convenient for the people that enabled him for 4 years. But we'll see if they impeach and remove him. That'll be the real test. If they don't, then my question has been answered. If they do, I would still wonder. Still, I give his removal a 20% chance.
Hey, you're sounding like a BLM supporter. :up:
Nahh, many people do silly things. Indeed a drunk fool also does not deserve to die. You have a rather cavalier attitude to human life, but I think it is for the sake of argument.
Well, if there is a gang of violent people descending on you, you may well have a different perception of the situation. Legally, that is a key question. Could this officer reasonably feel under direct imminent and unlawful attack? I do not know but it cannot be ruled out. She herself was no direct threat but the whole mob was. She was an unfortunate death.
They were not attacking anyone, as far as I’m aware. They were certainly breaching the barricade. They were certainly pushing past police and destroying windows and a door. The victim certainly tried to crawl through the broken window. But she was shot before she could get through, as evidenced by her falling back into the room. The shooter, a man in a suit (secret service) was at the other window hiding behind a wall pointing his gun at people. It was like an ambush. He suddenly swung to shoot her as she tried to enter, seemingly without warning or care. I cannot say whether he thought his life was in imminent danger.
Here is a link to the video. It’s graphic.
https://twitter.com/thejaydenxander/status/1347056697899163648?s=21
You have a rather cavalier attitude to attacks on democracy.
Shit may happen when you attack a federal building, I suppose.
Try to imagine the same attack being perpetuated by people of non-white skin ... or by those utterly evil "anti-fascists" (an attitude which blatantly specifies whom the good guys are: those who are not antagonistic to fascism but, instead, either endorse it or are indifferent to it).
The shit you've specified would have been a lot worse. More along the lines of a slaughter. "Why" we wonder (sarcasm here).
But then, those who are not anti-democracy wouldn't attack a democratic institution to begin with.
You got that right. They're crying because the dead terrorist is blond.
Quoting Xtrix
I’m surprised you found it necessary to pick out my posts (naturally you left out the resolution to my questions) so that you could then make your accusation. I’m interested in this a great deal, just not from your perspective. But I get that this is an OP where you can legitimately behave in a way that would be unacceptable on other OPs. Still, what was your point?
[tweet]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1347334804052844550[/tweet]
Lol, reading from a pre-prepared script. Scared shitless of being removed and jailed the poor little thing.
Meanwhile, a police officer was confirmed murdered by one of NOS's heroic rioters. I guess blue lives don't matter to MAGAts after all.
:lol:
"Breaching the barricades"...
You once likened the George Floyd unrest/riots to "insurrection", but breaching barricades in a capitol building and getting shot for it is an ambush?
Quoting NOS4A2
Looking at the video you linked, the secret service agent clearly had his gun drawn and hanging out of the door for quite a while before he fired. We cannot see his mouth or hear properly through the noise, but it's likely that he was verbally warning them (But I mean, come on; if you break into a secure federal government compound and start climbing over barricades, you should know you're liable for getting shot, right?).
.....
I want to say it feels like this should put an end to the circus, but I know better than that by now...
Murdered? Cause of death confirmed?
Yes, head bashed in by a [s]Trump supporter[/s] MAGAt terrorist wielding a fire extinguisher.
https://www.pix11.com/news/national-news/capitol-police-officer-dies-after-being-hit-in-head-with-fire-extinguisher-by-a-rioter-source
Not at all. I feel democracy can and should defend itself and yes that might mean opening fire on rioters that threaten to overwhelm government buildings. However that does not mean I cannot also find the deaths that this leads to tragic. Such an attack is not black and white, it is black and black.
Maybe not murder though.
Yes, it might have been just an accident. The police officer could have been attempting to head the fire extinguisher thinking it was a soccer ball. I'm going with presuming the most likely scenario.
lol
In all seriousness I don't know what that's supposed to mean. He's a batshit goon and he adds no value to any conversation because his fundamental characteristic is that he's a dishonest interlocutor. He has the demeanor of a troll without the intelligence.
The cabinet has not agreed to remove him. Maybe we'll have to get him on camera and make a statement instead.
As sad as this might sound, Nos is pretty much representative of the bleeding edge of republican rhetoric. Whatever he deploys here is exactly the kind of thing that we are likely to see republican echo chambers reflect. He gets a chance to test and refine his shtick, and we get the chance to map and neutralize it (if only for ourselves).