Politics - wait for it... wait for it... 2020 isn't over yet

[Zoraptor]

39 minutes ago, Malcador said:

It was on how Biden is normalizing the forces of chaos, not really seeing that other than saying Trump sucks at his job, which is normal for quite some time to say about the incumbent.

Obviously from the R standpoint not explicitly denouncing all protesters as rioters and anarchists would be 'normalising the forces of chaos'. From an objective perspective it's a view that does have merits, even if it's overblown and lacking nuance due to politics.

21 minutes ago, Orogun01 said:

2- Covid-19 was in China around November but they kept the news under wraps. The W.H.O bought China's official statements; hook line and sinker, plus they ignored the advice of every Asian country that knew that China were full of it. Namely Japan, S. Korea and Taiwan.

Reality seems to be that the CCP bought the local Wuhan branch's statements hook line and sinker more than anything; there's plenty to blame the CCP for in the outbreak- promoting international travel while banning it domestically, especially, was grossly irresponsible at very very very best- but the initial outbreak was covered up by locals, to the significant detriment of China as a whole. The actual data released by China in terms of R numbers and fatalities plus treatment regime success seems to be decently accurate (well, it's inaccurate, but most countries data is significantly off too and China's isn't unusually off. UK excess deaths put their death toll ~50% higher than declared, for example).

The job of the WHO is not to critique countries, it's basically to issue advisories unless a country asks for help. If they critiqued the US response for example there would be hell to pay and claims of undue interference. They are very limited, by quite deliberate design, in what they can do and what they can require countries to do; ie they cannot require much at all from countries and are almost exclusively advisory in nature. They didn't require travel bans or the like because they cannot require travel bans and the like. It was and is up to individual countries as to how they respond. They also have the inherent problem that knowledge always lags behind reality. If you find out some Wuhan official has fudged figures the reasonable minimum time to discover that is about a month because that's how long it takes to do the tests and analyse the statistics and that's the minimum time.

[Orogun01]

22 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

1) sending troops to portland helped? course not. predictable, it made worse, which is why they were removed. police is a way to deal with an existing problem. the problems are social and economic which has nothing whatsoever to do with troops. 

2) dear lord. blame initial spread on china and who. then what? having an ocean separating put the US in a slight better position than most o' europe where covid had spread earlier. we had a smaller problem and trump's impotence made worse. we had time and trump golfed. 

talk 'bout rambling.

edit: shouldn't be necessary, but am gonna point out how marginalizing poll relevance 'cause 2016 is just so stoopid. in the decades o' polling, there has been a number o' years and races where the polls got it wrong. small number. the reasonable thing to do is to ignore the overwhelming trend o' accuracy and instead focus on one o' the exceptions to decide whether to put faith in future polls. wait. no. that makes no sense, does it. we tend to look for reasons why exceptions were different, but see the few exceptions as proof o' the fail o' the whole is nutty, particular as 2018 were so freaking accurate. 

and

muslim ban. rambling? *chuckle* is forcing folks to recall trump's promise. explain and we promise not to respond 'cause whatever you say in defense o' the muslim ban will be far more damning than anything we could write.

congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

and yeah, just as does due process and other fundamental rights, those liberties codified in the First Amendment apply to refugees, those seeking asylum and prospective immigrants.

unfreakingamerican, and you voted for the guy.

HA! Good Fun!

1-The troops were removed because an incompetent local government request it. Made it worse? How can you make total anarchy worse? Are you going to excuse the looting, raping and shooting as "social economic problems"?
2- I don't know, maybe having a media that hates your guts and would turn a reasonable travel ban into a xenophobic act had something to do with it. Also, I don't know if you're American but we do have balance of powers, which means that governors have some say in the matter.  So your point is that if Trump wasn't impotent he would be a xenophobe because he banned China?

3- Edit: Are you ok? You seem to be rambling? Also the Muslim ban was of countries not of religion.

4- Why Gormnir, I never knew you supported those fine folk that decide to congregate in spite of their state government forbidding it while supporting the riots. That's some progress.
5- As an immigrant I would love if our due processes applied to prospective immigrants. As an  legal  immigrant I would love it if there was a regulatory agency that separates criminals from refugees. Oh wait....there is.

[Orogun01]

3 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

Reality seems to be that the CCP bought the local Wuhan branch's statements hook line and sinker more than anything; there's plenty to blame the CCP for in the outbreak- promoting international travel while banning it domestically, especially, was grossly irresponsible at very very very best- but the initial outbreak was covered up by locals, to the significant detriment of China as a whole. The actual data released by China in terms of R numbers and fatalities plus treatment regime success seems to be decently accurate (well, it's inaccurate, but most countries data is significantly off too and China's isn't unusually off. UK excess deaths put their death toll ~50% higher than declared, for example).

The job of the WHO is not to critique countries, it's basically to issue advisories unless a country asks for help. If they critiqued the US response for example there would be hell to pay and claims of undue interference. They are very limited, by quite deliberate design, in what they can do and what they can require countries to do; ie they cannot require much at all from countries and are almost exclusively advisory in nature. They didn't require travel bans or the like because they cannot require travel bans and the like. It was and is up to individual countries as to how they respond. They also have the inherent problem that knowledge always lags behind reality. If you find out some Wuhan official has fudged figures the reasonable minimum time to discover that is about a month because that's how long it takes to do the tests and analyse the statistics and that's the minimum time.

China welded people's door shut  because they had the Covid. Any numbers we have of them are eschewed by their measures. The WHO ignored advice from Taiwan because of political reasons, advice from a country that dealt with the pandemic fairly well because they knew that China lied. Had a complete travel ban been supported in January or February we would likely have less cases. More so under China's report they underrepresented the threat of Covid...actually I'm not sure about that one because of the Covid mortality rate. Let's just say that the WHO has proven itself incompetent and just like a lot of western institutions; tainted by Chinese influence.

[Gromnir]

2 minutes ago, Orogun01 said:

1-The troops were removed because an incompetent local government request it. Made it worse? How can you make total anarchy worse? Are you going to excuse the looting, raping and shooting as "social economic problems"?
2- I don't know, maybe having a media that hates your guts and would turn a reasonable travel ban into a xenophobic act had something to do with it. Also, I don't know if you're American but we do have balance of powers, which means that governors have some say in the matter.  So your point is that if Trump wasn't impotent he would be a xenophobe because he banned China?

3- Edit: Are you ok? You seem to be rambling? Also the Muslim ban was of countries not of religion.

4- Why Gormnir, I never knew you supported those fine folk that decide to congregate in spite of their state government forbidding it while supporting the riots. That's some progress.
5- As an immigrant I would love if our due processes applied to prospective immigrants. As an  legal  immigrant I would love it if there was a regulatory agency that separates criminals from refugees. Oh wait....there is.

gonna ignore the total anarchy hyperbole and note how the incompetent local governments requested that the troops Not be sent in the first place. the troops became a focal point for the rioting and were not making trump look good 'mongst independents. no wonder.

and blame the media? freaking stop. 

*sigh*

last point is to correct what we hope is ignorance rather than malfeasance.  is best to assume ignorance. with such in mind, we we will once again note trump promised a muslim ban. trump was elected after he made the promise o' the muslim ban. were a muslim ban for purposes o' the election. even after elected, trump tried to implement a muslim ban. it were the THIRD iteration o' the ban which were directed at nations and not faiths. 

you voted for the muslim ban guy who did genuine try and implement a muslim ban.

no defense. is another florida man meme? 

HA! Good Fun!

[Hurlshort]

If Muslim ban doesn't do it for you, maybe **** grabbing will? I don't understand how anyone can vote for a guy who talks like that.

[Orogun01]

5 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

gonna ignore the total anarchy hyperbole and note how the incompetent local governments requested that the troops Not be sent in the first place. the troops became a focal point for the rioting and were not making trump look good 'mongst independents. no wonder.

and blame the media? freaking stop. 

*sigh*

last point is to correct what we hope is ignorance rather than malfeasance.  is best to assume ignorance. with such in mind, we we will once again note trump promised a muslim ban. trump was elected after he made the promise o' the muslim ban. were a muslim ban for purposes o' the election. even after elected, trump tried to implement a muslim ban. it were the THIRD iteration o' the ban which were directed at nations and not faiths. 

you voted for the muslim ban guy who did genuine try and implement a muslim ban.

no defense. is another florida man meme? 

HA! Good Fun!

1- So your point is that he shouldn't have sent the troops, even though most Americans were for it???

2-You're going to undermine the fact that leftist media has continually downplayed the rioting a looting to the point where it has become a meme?

3- A muslim ban is what the leftist media accused him of. He banned Muslim nations...I don't get what your point is. Are you arguing semantics?

4-Seriously.....Ad Hominem? I though better of you.

[HoonDing]

CHINA!

 

[Malcador]

3 minutes ago, Hurlshot said:

If Muslim ban doesn't do it for you, maybe **** grabbing will? I don't understand how anyone can vote for a guy who talks like that.

 

I find how people are eating up that he's the candidate of "law and order" the funniest, myself.  Well, maybe after the evangelicals, but those are a special lot.

 

[Gromnir]

oh, and ad hominems are swell and peachy and fine from a logic stand point unless you use in place of argument. suggesting your fail o' an argument makes you meme worthy is not a logic fail.  if you don't wanna be meme worthy, don't post meme worthy. most folks really don't understand logic fallacies.

again, the president Promised a muslim ban. he attempted to implement a muslim ban. the Courts struck down the first two iterations o' the muslim ban. you and @MedicineDan do not get to pretend like the muslim ban were never promised and made part o' multiple executive orders 'cause the Court had more sense and wisdom than trump and his supporters. 

"The dissent's reference to Korematsu, however, affords this Court the opportunity to make express what is already obvious: Korematsu was gravely wrong the day it was decided, has been overruled in the court of history, and—to be clear—'has no place in law under the Constitution. '"--J. Roberts

sotomayor used a hammer, but roberts got in a not so subtle swipe at trump as the lawyers for the prez had actual used korematsu as support for their earlier muslim ban attempts.

oh, and NEVER use "most americans" as the basis for legitimizing an Unconstitutional action. the whole point o' the Constitution is it is a bar on the tyranny o' the masses. the aforementioned internment of Japanese during ww2 was overwhelming approved by americans. 

not all trump voters are florida man meme, buth you are not helping.

edit: ok, this part is kinda funny and am sure most forget. one o' the attempted muslim bans tried to ban all immigrants from select islamic nations, with the exception o' christians. *chuckle* 

HA! Good Fun!

ps so far we are getting typical trumpster gaslighting, telling us not to look behind the curtain. still haven't seen a defense o' the promised muslim ban. somehow try to convince us we didn't see what we saw is cute and all, but am looking to see the defense o' the promised muslim ban, and why anybody o' conscience would support a candidate who made such a promise.

Edited August 29, 2020 by Gromnir

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

56 minutes ago, Hurlshot said:

If Muslim ban doesn't do it for you, maybe **** grabbing will? I don't understand how anyone can vote for a guy who talks like that.

There's probably hundreds of dumb or malicious or flatout fake **** Trump has said at this point, from small loan of a million dollars to the recent belief that Biden wants to defund the police (hilariously Biden has outflanked Trump from the right on this, saying he wants to give more money to the police). Either because of willful ignorance, addiction to bootlicking, dumb****ery, or whatever his supporters simply don't care and will not get off his ****. It shouldn't really be surprising at this point, no matter what morals or commitment to liberty they claim to have.

Anyways I for one think CHAOSBIDEN would be ****in badass the more I think about it. Imagine that dude vowing to guillotine all cops or whatever fantastical horse**** the dip****s who chug /pol/ memes on facebook come up with. It would be the most entertaining **** around and way better than watching dudes play sports.

[Volourn]

"maybe **** grabbing will? I don't understand how anyone can vote for a guy who talks like that. "

 

LMAO I've heard women say basicly the same thing. Everyone is perverted. LMAO

Edited August 29, 2020 by Volourn

[Darkpriest]

7 hours ago, Hurlshot said:

If Muslim ban doesn't do it for you, maybe **** grabbing will? I don't understand how anyone can vote for a guy who talks like that.

Like behaviors of creepy Joe? 

What about sexual misconduct behavior reported on him? 

 

Different treatment by media to what Kava. endured, even though there was more corroborative information against Joe? 

[Darkpriest]

28 minutes ago, Volourn said:

"maybe **** grabbing will? I don't understand how anyone can vote for a guy who talks like that. "

 

LMAO I've heard women say basicly the same thing. Everyone is perverted. LMAO

Case in point

 

[Volourn]

I've heard that kind of talk in person. In the staff room at work, I'm the only guy with a half dozen ladies. Theya re talking about ****, grabbing them, sizes, all that fun stuff. A couple even felt the need to apologize. You know my reaction? I chuckled. BECAUSE, OH NOES, NOT THE END OF THE WORLD. L0LZ

[Gromnir]

we would note the predictable whataboutism from the trumpers... oh wait, we just did.

the thing to keep in mind about the non-response to our muslim ban challenge is that trump's success isn't 'cause 30% o' the country believes his horseh!t and gaslighting. what trump is really selling is salvation and freedom from guilt. 30% o' the country is angry they has been made to feel guilty about agreeing with muslim bans. you got a family struggling to survive from paycheck-to-paycheck, and they see on tv how they is s'posed to feel guilty 'bout their white privilege? . uneducated doesn't mean you are worthless, but such folks has been made to feel that way for a long time. is more than a few smarty arse yankees who try and make southerners and midwesterners feel guilty about overt displays o' their faith. etc.

god help us all, but trump secured the republican nomination with his muslim ban promise. every other republican candidate condemned trump's muslim ban. with the muslim ban, trump legitimized the 30%. trump was the first major Presidential candidate since nixon (*snort*) who genuine spoke to the 30%. 

trumpers will put up with anything from him, 'cause just like elmer gantry, what he is selling is salvation. jesus forgives your sins, and so too does trump. trumpers will follow him to hell and back because he is the one who is making it possible to breathe again in america, to blame immigrants for disappearing jobs and crime, to repudiate islam and homosexuality and blm. trump is making it possible for the silent majority (maybe 30% o' the country) to stand tall and proud and brandish their guns and cast away their masks. 

can we get an amen?

HA! Good Fun!

[BruceVC]

10 hours ago, Gromnir said:

am not trying to convince you. in our job, we spent years empathizing with clients and juries. we don't need to do so on a freaking internet message board. is quite liberating.

1) the rioting is happening under trump. weird how trump folks blamed obama for ferguson and baltimore but instead blame mayors for portland.

2) willfully ignore every trump excess and shortcoming do not help your cause. covid-19 won't go away just 'cause you squint eyes, shake head and whistle with all your might to drown out tragedy.

3) keep ignoring 2018? say is different doesn't make it so. is differen't cause is more voter suppression this time? perhaps you suggest is different because trump is campaigning for himself he has less time to mess thing up for collins? might be a legit angle there, but not poll relevant, even with the qanon talking points.

4) muslim ban. you don't get to claim conscience and then ignore  the muslim ban promise.  am suspecting you know this, which is why your tone has changed. 

5) muslim ban

6) muslim ban

7) muslim ban

...

HA! Good Fun!

 

I am not going to get involved in this debate except for sharing something that is true about the Muslim ban. This matters for 2 main reasons

1. If you feel the USA was truly and unfairly banning Muslims from the USA ( this was never my main concern ) and you honestly feel this means it demonstrated that the USA could be seen as a  country that was openly bigoted and especially  Islamphobic
2. If you are someone following the current developments in the ME and you have a goal of a stable,peaceful ME where there is no disruption to the oil supply (this is my primary concern and is what most of us should want )

The Muslim ban  was never about  a ban on all Muslims, it has been mischaracterized by some both unintentionally and studiously. It was ban on Muslim countries linked to Iran, which means it was a ban on Shia " extremist\anti-USA " and  then it was a ban on any Muslim  country that was linked  to  Sunni extremism and ISIS ideology and these countries couldnt guarantee safe security checks at there airports. So you will see from the links below which Muslim countries were banned and for all of them I can give you absolutely valid reasons (except for Nigeria and Myanmar which arent Muslim ) why you can justify a ban based on the original reasons I discussed the ban

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/07/house-poised-vote-reversing-trump-muslim-ban-200721235927974.html

Now of course I realize the ban has been reversed which I support as the ban was wrong but there are the reasons I mentioned above where you can still justify it

The USA never banned any of the Muslim Gulf states like Saudi Arabia or Bahrain or Qatar. And this makes perfect sense due to the reality of the important role these countries play in the stability of the ME and the oil  supply

So in closing, you dont have to feel the USA was ever truly Islamaphobic because it didnt ban all Muslims and true Islamaphobia means you would have banned all Muslim countries 

 

Edited August 29, 2020 by BruceVC

[Maedhros]

Muslim ban, crotch grabbing, cheating on his wife, bullying, corruption...it all pales against the fact that he eats his steaks well done, with ketchup.

(Only slightly joking):

https://www.eater.com/2017/2/28/14753248/trump-steak-well-done-ketchup-personality

[BruceVC]

9 hours ago, Hurlshot said:

If Muslim ban doesn't do it for you, maybe **** grabbing will? I don't understand how anyone can vote for a guy who talks like that.

Please read my previous and you will see it wasnt  a true Muslim ban, so no need to feel you live in a racist\bigoted country 

And if that is the only reason you wont vote for Trump now you can vote for him 

 

[Volourn]

"to repudiate islam"

It does that itself - you know, by throwing gays off buildings.

 

If we are gonna call Catholicism/Christianity on its crap like how it handles abortion clinics (especially in the past), the pedophiles in its midst; the very least people should do, is call out Islam and its many sins. I mean it was founded by a literal pedophile.

 

Just Christianity, Islam has a LOT of followers who are good moral people but there is no doubt it is beyond corrupt. The less influence that Islam (and other rleigions have) the better people are off. This, FYI, includes the religions of Nazism, communism, the Far Right, and the Far Left.

 

 

"bullying, corruption..."

 

L0L @ bullying. No doubt Trump is corrupt. 100% agree on that. It is why even though he is new to it, he first perfectly in politics as a politician. No real scruples, is anti freedom, and a wannabe Nazi.

 

[Orogun01]

@Gromnir One has to be impressed by your ability to morally grandstand above the rest of us mere mortals while completely forgetting that the reason why Americans supported a Muslim ban and that one would need to be implemented was the wave of terrorism and rape gangs that hit Europe after the refugee crisis. I'm beginning to suspect that your platform is pro chaos...as long as it is minorities doing it.

[Guard Dog]

12 hours ago, Malcador said:

Not quite sure the privelge is really undone by that, but she seems to saying she'll encourage them to take crabs out, rather than jump in the bucket.

 

INB4 Volo calls her racist Nazi.

Dunno about that. The poor "white trash" of the USA would probably love to have someone explain to them how "privileged" they are.  Oh, what am I saying?  The goddamned  Democrats do that every day!

[BruceVC]

2 hours ago, Darkpriest said:

Case in point

 

Cardi B is seriously hot 

[Volourn]

"Obviously from the R standpoint not explicitly denouncing all protesters as rioters and anarchists would be 'normalising the forces of chaos'. From an objective perspective it's a view that does have merits, even if it's overblown and lacking nuance due to politics. "

 

Like most things it is extremes. The majority of protestors are peaceful. Just like the majority of cops tend to try to do their jobs the right way. The majority of blacks aren't violent criminals. The majority of whites aren't racist monsters.  It is the small % of each group that ruins it for everyone hence stereotypes.

 

FYI, Back to protestors,a nd riots. There is a clear cut reason why  the more violent outbreaks tend to occur at night. It isn't an accident.

[Guard Dog]

1 hour ago, Gromnir said:

we would note the predictable whataboutism from the trumpers... oh wait, we just did.

the thing to keep in mind about the non-response to our muslim ban challenge is that trump's success isn't 'cause 30% o' the country believes his horseh!t and gaslighting. what trump is really selling is salvation and freedom from guilt. 30% o' the country is angry they has been made to feel guilty about agreeing with muslim bans. you got a family struggling to survive from paycheck-to-paycheck, and they see on tv how they is s'posed to feel guilty 'bout their white privilege? . uneducated doesn't mean you are worthless, but such folks has been made to feel that way for a long time. is more than a few smarty arse yankees who try and make southerners and midwesterners feel guilty about overt displays o' their faith. etc.

god help us all, but trump secured the republican nomination with his muslim ban promise. every other republican candidate condemned trump's muslim ban. with the muslim ban, trump legitimized the 30%. trump was the first major Presidential candidate since nixon (*snort*) who genuine spoke to the 30%. 

trumpers will put up with anything from him, 'cause just like elmer gantry, what he is selling is salvation. jesus forgives your sins, and so too does trump. trumpers will follow him to hell and back because he is the one who is making it possible to breathe again in america, to blame immigrants for disappearing jobs and crime, to repudiate islam and homosexuality and blm. trump is making it possible for the silent majority (maybe 30% o' the country) to stand tall and proud and brandish their guns and cast away their masks. 

can we get an amen?

HA! Good Fun!

I wonder if Trump actually believes in anything? I think Bill Weld nailed it in '16 when he called Trump a showman. Everything he says and does is an act in a performance. A cynical attempt to use appeals to fear and nostalgia mixed with braggadocio as a sales pitch for a product he would never buy himself. Strip that away and it leaves you wondering why he bothered. He has not had any consistent governing theme like most past Presidents. He has been unpredictable and more often than not he is in his own way. I think he climbed the mountain just because it was there. And, just a guess here, is less invested in getting reelected than we'd think. After all, he can't be removed from the history books now. 

[Volourn]

Yup. Like when Obama retorted after a Trump insult of being 'worst president ever' that 'at least he was president'.

 

Well.. now, if someone says Trump was 'worst president ever' (debatable but he is definitely not one of the best) Trump can say 'well I was president'.