The Political Thread - Machiavelli Edition

[Volourn]

I'll one up. I won't vote for anyone in the mid terms.

[smjjames]

I'll one up. I won't vote for anyone in the mid terms.

 

You're Canadian anyway.

 

 

This may come as a surprise to you all... but I will either not be voting or voting Republican in the midterm election.

 

You seemed somewhat liberal to me, so, I'm a bit surprised.

 

What state are you from? Just wondering.

[SonicMage117]

 

 

 

"Yeah, cops don't carry out execution sentences."

 

They do in Trumpland.

Only in blue states though.

I can't wait to see how democrats react if Trump gets re-elected

I don't think much of Trump. But i'm not going to like anyone the Donkey's nominate either. So it would almost be worth it just for the laughs at their red faced screaming.

I wanna see people make false promises again such as "If Trump's elected, I swear to God, I'm leaving the country!!!"

 

Trump's elected, they still stick around *sigh* quite humorous indeed!

https://youtu.be/SHG0ezLiVGc

I'll never forget this video as long as I live, and no doubt, everyone who refused (and still refuse) to accept that Trump became president will not forget that very feeling that night - as dramatized perfectly by the video hehe

Edited October 6, 2018 by SonicMage117

[Malcador]

Wonder if Kavanaugh's remarks will come back to bite him.

[ktchong]

I cannot stand conservatives, Evangelicals and Republicans.  I identify myself as a Democratic Socialist - I support universal healthcare, free public colleges, and many other progressive economic issues, (which the Democratic Party never actually support.)  The only two issues that I disagree with Democrats are: (1) affirmative action, which hurts Asians like myself the most, and it will hurt my children when they try to get into colleges; and (2) immigration; IMO, DACA and offering a path of citizenship to illegal immigrants would only encourage more migrants - especially migrant children - to come here illegally.  I see those two issues as purely identify politics to appeal to Blacks and Hispanics.  However, those two disagreements are minor points.  They are not deal-breakers that would change my support for Democrats.

However, I am angry at Democrats and women over the Kavanaugh fight, and here is why:  I am also a man who has been falsely accused of sexual harassment, twice; the second time by an ANONYMOUS woman or ANONYMOUS women.  Both incident happened a long time ago: the first one in 1999, and the second time in 2005.  However, even today I am still feeling angry - and wronged - by them, especially by the second accusation.

The first incident: I asked for a woman's phone number.  I thought she was attractive, so I wanted to ask her out.   I met and talked her only once.  I did not touch her.  I did not not say anything disrespectful or sexual to her.  However, she went straight to the HR and filed a sexual complaint against me.  I was called into my surpervisor's office and had to take a class on sexual harassment.  It was a humiliating experience.  Personally, I think a woman should not be able to file a sexual harassment complaint simply because a man talked to her the wrong way.

The second incident: After the lesson from the last incident, for years I had avoided speaking to any woman at work.  I never talked to them about anything that was not work-related.   I  never chit-chatted with them.  I never befriended or socialized with them.  I always tried to stay away from them.  Period.  Then, I was called into the HR office, again, because some ANONYMOUS woman or women had reported me.  Supposedly the anonymous woman or women saw me "stalking" another woman: I, allegedly,  followed the woman into some hallway or room and, allegedly, was acting "aggressively" towards her.  I did not even remember talking or even running into that woman on that day.  However, it was impossible for me to defend myself because I did not even know who was/were making the accusation against me, or the full details of the accusation.

So, somehow, if a woman accuses a man, even if a "she says vs. he says" scenario, then he is already guilty.   How Democrats - and women - treated Brett Kavanaugh really, really, ticks me off the more I think about it.  I gave Dr. Christine Blasey Ford the benefit of the doubt when she first came forward with her accusation.  However, the FBI had already investigated into  Dr. Christine Blasey Ford's accusation.  The FBI already interviewed the witnesses named by Dr. Ford herself.  Yet all of the people - the people named by her - said they could not corroborate her story.  That should have already cleared him.   Yet Democrats and women still insist he is guilty and a rapist.  Yet Democrats and women want the FBI to keep interviewing more and more people until they can finally nail him.  So, the position of Democrats is: always trust women and NEVER men in any accusation of sexual assault/harassment.  Even if an investigation clears him, he is still guilty because women must ALWAYS be trusted over men.
 

 

It is not like false accusations of sexual assault/harassment have never happened.  We all had seen several high-profile cases that turned out to be fraudulent: the Duke lacrosse case, the "Rape on a Campus" story published by Rolling Stone, the mattress girl, a recent case in which an European guy was deported when an American girl accused her of rape - which then turned out to be fake.   Why did those women make false  rape accusations?  Money and ATTENTION.  In the case of the University of Virginia, the accuser wanted attention and sympathy from a man that she liked, and that was enough of a reason for the attention whore to falsely accuse MULTIPLE men. 

 

Could Dr. Ford have lied?  Why would she come forward and turn her life upside-down?    I could think of a few reasons why Dr. Ford could falsely accuse Kavanaugh.  Here is one: she voted for Hillary Clinton.  She attended the Woman's March.  So we know her politics.  Maybe she saw Roe v. Wade was in danger, and she thought of herself as a martyr making the ultimate sacrifice for the greater good of all women.  It is possible.

 

Also, I am still angry over how the Democrat women - particularly Kamala Harris and Kirsten Gillibrand - framed Al Franken of sexual misconducts and forced him to resign.  He took a photo in which he pretended to touch the breasts of a sleeping woman; he did NOT actually touch her breast.   That was an attempt at humor, NOT sexual harassment.  And then a bunch of ANONYMOUS women, who have NEVER been identified, piled on with more accusations that have NEVER been proven.  IMO, we should NEVER accept or believe ANONYMOUS accusers: a fundamental right of the accused, in the ancient Roman and English common laws that serve as the basis of modern legal system, in the Sixth Amendment of the US Constitution, is to confront his accuser(s).  Yet somehow we have thrown out that basic right of the accused for the sake of women and #MeToo.   We no longer give men the presumption of innocence when women are the accusers. This trend of putting women above laws, above basic rights of the accused, above the presumption of innocence,  really upsets me.   IMO, Harris and Gillibrand conspired to oust Franken as a tactic to raise their national profiles and gain support from women because they planned to run for President in 2020.  Personally, I am disgusted by them.  I won't vote for either Harris or Gillibrand if either becomes  the Democratic presidential candidate in 2020.

 

I am not gonna tell my wife or friends: but if I vote, then I will be voting for Dana Rohrabacher this mid-term.  (My family have properties in Orange County where I used as my mailing address.)  I do not  know how many men who usually vote Democrat have my experience.  We are not gonna say anything about this whole Kavanaugh charade.  Men can't say anything because people automatically assume men are guilty even just because a WOMAN accuse us, but this will likely make men like me vote Republicans. 

Edited October 7, 2018 by ktchong

[SonicMage117]

Uh oh...

 

Not that can of worms again lmao

 

But I know what you mean, it's become common (well much more common) for false allegations to arise.

 

The newest case:

https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/10/04/parents-of-teen-boy-falsely-accused-of-sexual-assault-sues-five-mean-girls-accusers/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social

 

Basically 5 girls falsely accused a guy of sexual assault, they even went to the extent of making fake accounts and messages to make him appear as somethimg else. In the end, the 5 girls came clean, of course and now the parents of the guy are taking the girls to court.

 

They are right to do so, they should serve the time that he was going to lol The motives behind the accusations? Well, I think it's pretty easy to guess.

 

But if we remove "Innocent til proven guilty" precept, then quite literally every man will be a predator and feminists will have a field day. In other words, well, I think you get it lol

[ktchong]

Also, the economy is ridiculously good right now. If   Democrats control the House and/or Senate, it will be an endless partisan fight between the Congress v. White House and/or House vs. Senate. That kind of political fights and unpredictability will only derail the economy.

Edited October 7, 2018 by ktchong

[Malcador]

Eh, wouldn't read too much in them trying to knock off Kavanaugh, at least in terms of what they'd like to change laws on, anyway. Any bullet at hand is useful in these cases. Not too sure that " We no longer give men the presumption of innocence when women are the accusers.", maybe in terms of social reaction, but the courts still convict on proof.

Edited October 7, 2018 by Malcador

[smjjames]

Also, the economy is ridiculously good right now. If   Democrats control the House and/or Senate, it will be an endless partisan fight between the Congress v. White House and/or House vs. Senate. That kind of political fights and unpredictability will only derail the economy.

 

 

I think Wall Street is used to the unpredictability and political fights by now. Not like this is the first time that it has been that type of political situation and the economy was still good and there weren't any problems due to the political fighting.

 

Also, seriously, that's the exact kind of argument Trump and other Republicans are making about Democrats, that the economy will fail when they are elected. So, you're just repeating their own political propoganda.

Edited October 7, 2018 by smjjames

[Guard Dog]

Yeah they re not going to try an impeach Kavanaugh if they take over Congress. That is just a little pro wrestling grand standing there. They MIGHT try to impeach Trump if they actually have something on him. IMO that is a waste of time that will go nowhere and might even HELP re-elect him in 2020.

 

If I were them and had control of Congress I'd do the usual legislative impediments and try to force Trump to use executive power to circumvent them. True the die hard Trumpers  will applaud but the rank and file Republicans will be turned off enough they may stay home in 2020. Plus the Dems can make hay out of the hypocrisy of complaining about Obama's abuse of executive authority and then abusing it yourself. The icing on the cake is executive overreach is like interest. The more it is used to more it accumulates. The Democrats do not give a flying rat's a-s about the Constitution and dream of one of their Tribe wielding absolute executive power. If the next President is a Democrat they will be one step closer. 

[smjjames]

Speaking of executive power and hypocrisy, I wonder if Kavanaugh, with his views on executive power, would grant Democrats the same thing he'd happily give Trump? heh.

 

On impeaching Kavanaugh, it's the exact same proccess that's used to impeach Presidents, so, the Democrats would have to somehow convince a significant chunk of the Republicans in the Senate that Kavanaugh did wrong. Which there is practically zero chance of, and the kind of majority needed to do it alone hasn't existed since the 1930s.

[SonicMage117]

Yeah, not gonna happen no matter how hard the insignificant demos try.

 

They already tried to impeach President Trump and failed, so they moved on to the next big thing and still failed. Any guesses for who they'll target next? Lol

 

Well, whoever it is, they'll fail at ruining that person's future as well. The definition of insanity, eh?

[Malcador]

They already tried to impeach President Trump and failed,

When was this ?

[SonicMage117]

 

They already tried to impeach President Trump and failed,

When was this ?

About a year ago.

 

https://youtu.be/ScjIdN7DgNY

[SonicMage117]

More info:

[Malcador]

Seems silly and misguided, not least of all considering the...special guy that is waiting in line behind Trump.

[SonicMage117]

Agreed, then again, when was the last time democrats didn't do anything silly and misguided? Hehe

 

It seems everything the democrats do these days is done to target our President, to spite him or anything/anyone thereby supporting him. That's probably why they lose so much now and it's kinda sad to see them waste their efforts on that. Most amusing is when they want to get rid of something that's for President Trump but yet is for democrats as well and then when someone calls them out for it, there's always that petty excuse or in the rare ocassion they swallow the pride and admit that our President is human like them. It's that unrelenting paranoia and yndying hate which makes following the democrat party (and their extremists) very fun for us all.

 

Of course I'm talking congress via national committee, the media outlets and "we the people".

 

The Republicans aren't nearly as fun to watch because they are too busy winning everything, they just got the supreme court so now their relaxed as ever sipping on their spritzers and mimosas without a care. So I guess we're blessed to have ine party beung dramatic for our entertainment purposes... Somebody's gotta suffer

[Malcador]

Agreed, then again, when was the last time democrats didn't do anything silly and misguided? Hehe

 

It seems everything the democrats do these days is done to target our President, to spite him or anything/anyone thereby supporting him. That's probably why they lose so much now and it's kinda sad to see them waste their efforts on that. Most amusing is when they want to get rid of something that's for President Trump but yet is for democrats as well and then when someone calls them out for it, there's always that petty excuse or in the rare ocassion they swallow the pride and admit that our President is human like them. It's that unrelenting paranoia and yndying hate which makes following the democrat party (and their extremists) very fun for us all.

 

Of course I'm talking congress via national committee, the media outlets and "we the people".

 

The Republicans aren't nearly as fun to watch because they are too busy winning everything, they just got the supreme court so now their relaxed as ever sipping on their spritzers and mimosas without a care. So I guess we're blessed to have ine party beung dramatic for our entertainment purposes... Somebody's gotta suffer

Well, it worked for the Republicans before 2016. And their attitude certainly seems like just meeting like for like these days.

[SonicMage117]

Republicans were never quite that bad or amusing though lol

 

I mean, I don't remember Republicans trying to storm the White house or trying to hold imprachment rallies, the signs of desperation was never visible much.

[JFSOCC]

I definitely think we're in the darkest time-line, with right-extremist strong-man politicians such as Trump, Putin, Joko Widodo, Rodrigo Duterte, Shinzo Abe, Jair Bolsonaro, Reccep Erdogan, Benjamin Netanyahu, Viktor Orban and Andrzej Duda, amongst many more longtime hyper-conservatives such as the king of Morocco and the King of Saudi Arabia, I think it might be historically the worst time to be an immigrant anywhere on planet earth today. And you are right to have fear if you are a woman or part of a minority.

 

I see someone in this thread remarking on how because he's been unfairly accused of sexual misconduct that Brett Kavanaugh must gain the benefit of the doubt. Besides that being complete bull****, even if it wasn't, it's not what disqualifies him, it's his statements of blatant political partisanship, being pro-republican, and his atrocious medieval ideas on reproductive rights and gay rights, as well as his belief that a president should be free of the risk of indictment of any crime. That's rather convenient for a president who will be facing the consequences of his eternal stream of lies and fraud eventually.

[JFSOCC]

Also, the economy is ridiculously good right now. If   Democrats control the House and/or Senate, it will be an endless partisan fight between the Congress v. White House and/or House vs. Senate. That kind of political fights and unpredictability will only derail the economy.

Your national debt has grown by 1.6 trillion MORE than expected since Trump took office.

[injurai]

Debt is relative, how is debt growing in other nations? How large is the debt relative to the nations GDP. When the debt is being paid down it's usually when doing so is a better investment than actually investing.

 

David Graeber, famed champion of the occupy movement talks about the origins of debt and how people often want to have good debts with people they want to continue to do business with. What he gets wrong is he doesn't recognize debt at different scales being much the same. Debt in a very real sense represents large cyclical trade networks. To grow new markets you have to shift finite resources and the best way is first allow free market exchanges, but sometimes the initial capital is too high so the federal reserve will create the credit (and debt) to jump start a market which can eventually become self-sustaining.

 

What really needs to be focused on his how much value is produced. I don't think Trump and the GOP are necessarily super savvy economists by large, but nor are the democrats. I have no doubt a lot of that debt is bad, but a lot of it is actually stimulus through the defense sector. Like engineers/scientists/etc. and other high productivity people, who then actually spend their money locally, thus stimulating middle-class economies.

[213374U]

his belief that a Republican president should be free of the risk of indictment of any crime.

Fixed. Reminder that he was one of the authors of the Starr Report that argued for impeaching Clinton.

[smjjames]

 

his belief that a Republican president should be free of the risk of indictment of any crime.

Fixed. Reminder that he was one of the authors of the Starr Report that argued for impeaching Clinton.

 

 

Hence me commenting about hypocrisy and whether he'd grant Democrats the same thing he'd happily give Trump when it comes to executive power.

[Elerond]

Debt is relative, how is debt growing in other nations? How large is the debt relative to the nations GDP. When the debt is being paid down it's usually when doing so is a better investment than actually investing.

 

US debt is relativelly high compared to size of their GDP (~107%  of GDP)

 

Some example of national debt/gdp rations:  Finland's national debt is ~63% of our GDP (which we consider to be too high). And Germany's national debt is ~68% of their GDP. France which constantly gets notes of their high debt has national debt of ~97% of their GDP. Highly indebted Greece has national debt of ~180% of their GDP. Italy which also is considered to have too high national debt has national debt of ~140% of their GDP. UK has national debt of ~88.3% of their GDP. Sweden has national debt of ~43% of their GDP. Norway has national debt of ~34.55% of their GDP. China has national debt of ~46% of their GDP.

 

Fast increase of national debt can also cause illusion of economical growth that doesn't actually happen, because there are increase of money in economy because of loaned money, but that money does not necessary actually increase economy in speed that paying the debt eventually decreases the money in the economy. So even though in short term in may look that economy is increasing with speed, the long term economy may actually have much lower speed of increase and in some case long term economy may even be in decreasing trend.