The all things Political Topic - When the sun Rises, the shadows must retreat Fleeing in fear from the Fires of dawn

[rjshae]

2 hours ago, Pidesco said:

I just watched the latest John Oliver thing, and it managed to surprise me once more. The US is an insane developed country. 

The subject was EMS in the USA and how terrible it is. Sure. What took me by surprise, though, is that EMS is not considered an essential service in the US. As said, just insane. 

Hospitals are generally considered essential services in the US, so I'm not sure what you're on about.

[Gromnir]

20 minutes ago, rjshae said:

Hospitals are generally considered essential services in the US, so I'm not sure what you're on about.

haven't seen the episode, but ordinarily the issue is cost. no insurance or wrong insurance means you gotta pay. we all know 'bout how if you ain't insured you gotta pay for emergency room services, yes? many thousands o' dollars. call for an ambulance and 911 dispatch sends a private ambulance service to your home, service not covered by your provider. what then? maybe get charged thousands o' dollars for a trip o' a few miles. the thing is, if you are unconscious or unable to call 911 and somebody else calls for the ambulance you still get charged.

HA! Good Fun!

[Bartimaeus]

8 hours ago, Gromnir said:

snip

A post on the subject of Trump and what it means for the U.S. going forward I just read and came by to post (although it's probably too long that most people won't bother...but I think they should if they're at all concerned with the growing fascist movement in the U.S.):

Quote

I think because the normalization of Trump and his erosion of political norms over the last 5 years, many people don't seem to see just how unfathomably dangerous and downright fascist this entire situation has become. Donald Trump lost. He lost. That is irrefutable and indisputable. He has refused to concede. Not only has he refused to concede, he's actively telling his millions of supporters that he actually won and that the opposition STOLE the election from him. He's not saying there was some counting error or computer malfunction. He claims that a crime was committed. It's absolutely inexcusable and outright seditious, as many [here] already know.

The founding fathers, for all their faults as men, were not stupid. Far from it. They understood how critically important it was that the absolute powers of a monarch (or a despot/dictator) needed to be diffused among many, and that those many separate entities would need to act as checks on one another. That's why there's essentially three branches of government in every iteration of democracies around the world; they each hold a fraction of the power that was once reserved for a sole monarch. This division is a check against corruption and the inherent nature of power to corrupt those who wield it. The only reason that democracy - any democracy, not just the American version - can survive is through a peaceful transfer of power. Without it, there is chaos. Several thousand years of recorded history taught the founding fathers that when absolute power is concentrated in one individual, when that individual dies or are overthrown, countless people suffer. Endless wars of succession and conflicts over who has the rightful claim to power plagued us for generations. Without a peaceful and legally delineated method to hand diffuse power from one individual to the next, there's nothing to stop someone from raising an army, crossing the proverbial Rubicon, and grabbing the reins of power by force. That's the real magic of a democratic system: that we all collectively agree that the power of the state is peacefully and legally passed down without bloodshed or recrimination. It's something that only works because we all believe it does, much like the inherent value of money. It's something we take for granted, but it's really astonishing given most of human history.

There is a method baked right into the constitution for someone who thinks they lost an election if they believe it was unfair, or corrupt, or stolen: You take it to the courts - to the separate branch - for it to be ruled on. It's the reason why the president-elect doesn't just assume power the day after the election. If there's a legitimate claim to malfeasance or miscounting, it goes to the courts, each side presents its case, and the judicial branch has the time to weigh the evidence and make a ruling. This isn't just hypothetical - it's already happened. In 2000 the electoral college came down to one state: Florida. Gore lost to Bush by less than a thousand votes. The night of the election Gore conceded, and then in the following days as the picture became more clear, he retracted his concession and took the matter to the courts. It went all the way to the Supreme Court, and he lost. They made their ruling and gave the election to Bush. That's the way it's supposed to happen, it's how the founding fathers designed it. No civil war. No bloodshed. Did Gore claim that the Bush stole the election? Did he sulk away to his mansion and call himself the "real" president? Did he whip his supporters into a frenzy, tell them to "stop the steal" and unleash them on the capital building when the votes were going to be certified? No. He conceded. Not only did he concede, he thanked his supporters for their hard work, congratulated Bush, and told his people to throw their support behind the President-elect. Because that's what you do in a democracy. It's not because he's some decent guy, it's your responsibility as a participant in the electoral process.

You throw your hat into the ring. You run your campaign and try to sway the voters. If you lose, you concede. It's not just a formality, it's critically important to the health of the country as a whole. Every candidate knows this. Kerry conceded in 2004. McCain in 2008 and Romney in 2012. Nixon conceded when he lost to Kennedy in 1960, and Nixon was an irredeemable piece of ****. (Skip to 5:50 to hear Nixon describe the importance of concession and uniting around the victor.) Each speech is essentially the same: thanking supporters, officially conceding, and throwing your support behind the new president-elect and urging your supporters to do the same. Candidates, even the irredeemably ****ty ones, know that elections are vicious and divisive, so effort needs to be made to try and unite afterwards. No one man is bigger or more important than the whole.

People need to have faith in the process, that elections are fair and free, and that the candidate with the most votes (or electoral votes) wins. If they doubt that very foundational premise some of them will resort to violence. They'll resort to violence because they'll believe that the legal channels for peaceful resolution aren't relevant. That's why the insurrectionists on January 6th thought they were being "patriots". It's a mass self-delusion that was perpetuated and allowed to fester and grow because Trump spent five years gaslighting the country and refusing to concede an election he lost. They might be ignorant authoritarians, but they wouldn't be storming the capital without Trump and his big lie. Trump had every legal right to contest the results of the 2020 election in the courts. He did. Over 60 lawsuits filed in multiple states. It went to the Supreme Court. He lost every single one. Those lawsuits failed or were tossed out because there was legitimately zero proof of the massive fraud and theft Trump was claiming.

The recent Vanity Fair interview with Trump is probably one of the scariest things I've read in a long while. Among the never-ending predictable lies and bull**** we come to expect from Trump came the fact that he was disappointed in the federal and state judges he appointed that decided against him or tossed out his lawsuits. He was upset with Brett Kavanagh and the conservative judges on the Supreme Court for their disloyalty. THEIR DISLOYALTY. This is surreal. It's beyond the pale. The President of the United States is upset that a separate branch of the federal government didn't show him sufficient loyalty. What the everlasting **** is this fascist nonsense? The federal government is not a mafia family. Federal judges don't owe anyone loyalty - regardless of whether they're from the same party or if they've been appointed by someone. Your merit is not judged on your loyalty, especially when your very role is to remain impartial and interpret the law. Judges are loyal to the constitution, not the President! It's in their very oath of office!

This is why Trump is such a threat. It's not just his ignorance, his incompetence, his vanity, his vindictiveness, his narcissism. Those are all horrible qualities to have. He's a threat because he's willing to completely disregard and tear down the very bedrock principles of democracy (the separation of authority and the peaceful transfer of power) to serve his needs. His ego can't handle a loss, so the constitution and everything that makes democracy a functional alternative to despotism and authoritarianism can burn. Trump isn't just the worst president in history, he's a threat to the very fabric of the country. Because of the slow crawl of his erosion of norms, the frenetic pace of 24 hour news, the short attention span of our modern society, and a media obsessed with ratings over information, Trump has been allowed to get away with this behaviour. The fact that Republicans are lining up and falling over each other to supplicate themselves before this man should be a stain that should never wash off and should be their legacy. If there is any justice in the world, history will not be kind to these enabling sycophants who actively helped this cancerous growth. 

I wish I was being hyperbolic, I really do. But there's no other way to see that one political party and millions of Americans are not only fine with authoritarianism, but will actively cheer it on and promote its rise. Sure, a case can be made that this was inevitable given the course of the Republican party for the last 30 years. Trump is a mutated strain of their brand of "conservatism" which doesn't really seem to stand for anything at this point beyond the acquisition and protection of power. But Trump is still far more dangerous than the original pathogen: he's a force that wants to ensure that facts don't mean anything and that loyalty is the only currency that matters. 

Sometimes I feel like I'm screaming into the void about some of this, but I feel like Trump's antics and firehose of bull**** is causing millions of people to lose sight of the forest for the trees. Hell, they're losing sight of the galaxy for the pebbles of sand on the beach. The only way I see out of this is if he faces legal ramifications for what he's done. If he's permitted to get away with it, and run in 2024, and win? That's the absolute nightmare scenario.

If the wheels are not already currently in motion to nail Donald J. Trump, by whatever legals means possible, by whatever parties capable of doing so, then I don't even know what to say, except that I very much fear 2024. Trump is one of a very few people whose sudden death I would feel a palpable sense of relief for due to the risk he poses to all that is sacred in our little democracy, and never mind the rest of the world.

Edited August 8, 2021 by Bartimaeus

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

11 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

If the wheels are not already currently in motion to nail Donald J. Trump, by whatever legals means possible, by whatever parties capable of doing so, then I don't even know what to say, except that I very much fear 2024. Trump is one of a very few people whose sudden death I would feel a palpable sense of relief for due to the risk he poses to all that is sacred in our little democracy, and never mind the rest of the world.

I think it's more likely that Trump's diet and hatred of exercise end up killing him than him spending a day in prison. Moreover, even if Trump doesn't run for president in 2024, Trump will run for president in 2024 by virtue of almost every likely nominee aping him so not even his death will spare us. This is going to be the new normal from now on, with increasingly outlandish conspiracy theories and bigotry being the baseline in a party that will control about half of the federal government and probably a majority of state governments, and the party that controls the other half will be ****ing useless at stopping either the fascist creep or the impending climate apocalypse.

[Gromnir]

2 hours ago, Bartimaeus said:

A post on the subject of Trump and what it means for the U.S. going forward I just read and came by to post (although it's probably too long that most people won't bother...but I think they should if they're at all concerned with the growing fascist movement in the U.S.):

If the wheels are not already currently in motion to nail Donald J. Trump, by whatever legals means possible, by whatever parties capable of doing so, then I don't even know what to say, except that I very much fear 2024. Trump is one of a very few people whose sudden death I would feel a palpable sense of relief for due to the risk he poses to all that is sacred in our little democracy, and never mind the rest of the world.

keep in mind that Gromnir has been expressing disbelief so many could shrug off trump excesses since the moment 45 advocated a muslim ban. death by a thousand cuts? quick cuts. the normalization o' American extremism happened far quicker than we coulda' imagined outside a nightmare scenario requiring a world war or continent spanning calamity.  

sure, there were genuine trump supporters on these boards who with full awareness forgave trump his sexual indiscretions and overt corruption 'cause 45 were the last and best hope for unborn children facing abortion and 'cause the dems were missionaries o' the apocalypse. am suspecting a few o' those folks is still 'round but they got kinda quiet after the election and they all but disappeared post january 6. whatever. not much possibility for dealing with folks who respond to any criticism o' trump's violations o' rule o' law and human decency as an existential crisis. 

the folks we were genuine disappointed with were the, "it wouldn't be any better with hillary," crowd. 

...

whatever. 

point is every step o' the way, as trump normalized the previous unthinkable, we shouted for people to wake up from their stupor. all too often our comic repeated cassandra play were met with same relative indifference we now see regarding january 6. am now told that january 6 were indeed unfortunate, but were it really any worse than the summer protests? we should all just move on 'cause no good will come from investigations or prosecutions and is not like this could happen again in two or four years, yes?

for the past four years have have been having same conversations regarding each new improbable excess. the fact we keep being rebuffed with indifference until we somehow reached the point where people were shrugging off the unmarked vans in portland kidnapping protesters and an actual gawd be damned insurrection at the Capitol meant to stop the peaceful transfer o' power from 45 to biden should be a wake up call... but muslim bans weren't so perhaps is Gromnir being obtuse for not accepting the inevitable, eh?

HA! Good Fun!

 

[Bartimaeus]

I was completely resigned to Hillary winning...but in the context of being a Bernie guy, where it felt like a guy with at least some amount of moral fiber actually got a good amount of following for once. Instead, I was terrified when Trump won. For now, the very worst imaginable has been averted...but it sure felt like it got close. The seditionists, a number of which who had just been chanting "HANG MIKE PENCE" outside, were one solitary hallway away from getting to the Vice President in the name of the President who had egged them on and refused to call in the National Guard (or anyone else) to quell the insurrection. If not for some clever security guards who properly used their training to redirect them...

So many people look at Trump losing as being "well, that's the end of that terrible era of the U.S."...but I'm sitting over here praying that it's not foreshadowing of things to come. These sorts of political movements ebb and flow, and extreme ones such as these especially come about for specific reasons that make them more persistent than you could ever reasonably believe possible. KP may be right that what tries to replace Trump may be just as terrible (or even worse!) than the man himself, but unless they have that magic demagogue instant appeal that has rapturously captured nearly 40% of our country (which is a quality, I think, rarer than one might expect), I will still be hoping he passes as quickly as humanly possible for at least some people to get over him and return to the realm of sanity.

[BruceVC]

1 hour ago, Gromnir said:

keep in mind that Gromnir has been expressing disbelief so many could shrug off trump excesses since the moment 45 advocated a muslim ban. death by a thousand cuts? quick cuts. the normalization o' American extremism happened far quicker than we coulda' imagined outside a nightmare scenario requiring a world war or continent spanning calamity.  

sure, there were genuine trump supporters on these boards who with full awareness forgave trump his sexual indiscretions and overt corruption 'cause 45 were the last and best hope for unborn children facing abortion and 'cause the dems were missionaries o' the apocalypse. am suspecting a few o' those folks is still 'round but they got kinda quiet after the election and they all but disappeared post january 6. whatever. not much possibility for dealing with folks who respond to any criticism o' trump's violations o' rule o' law and human decency as an existential crisis. 

the folks we were genuine disappointed with were the, "it wouldn't be any better with hillary," crowd. 

...

whatever. 

point is every step o' the way, as trump normalized the previous unthinkable, we shouted for people to wake up from their stupor. all too often our comic repeated cassandra play were met with same relative indifference we now see regarding january 6. am now told that january 6 were indeed unfortunate, but were it really any worse than the summer protests? we should all just move on 'cause no good will come from investigations or prosecutions and is not like this could happen again in two or four years, yes?

for the past four years have have been having same conversations regarding each new improbable excess. the fact we keep being rebuffed with indifference until we somehow reached the point where people were shrugging off the unmarked vans in portland kidnapping protesters and an actual gawd be damned insurrection at the Capitol meant to stop the peaceful transfer o' power from 45 to biden should be a wake up call... but muslim bans weren't so perhaps is Gromnir being obtuse for not accepting the inevitable, eh?

HA! Good Fun!

 

I dont mean to be captious but their are a  couple of points you making that arent part of what you would consider is Trumps true nature of supporting US extremism...is that a real thing?

I know you guys dont want to hear what people liked about Trump but I had to learn because irrespective if I agreed its why he was popular. And sometimes I still  wasnt getting the connection  but at least I understood it and that was important. I learnt ages ago if you need to create a relationship with people that you have no real affinity with you can still engage with them  by pretending to understand their concerns, and this is fine because I am just talking about an initial connection 

Anyway back to your point, the Muslim ban wasnt an example of extremism because as we discussed previously it cant be a Muslim ban if only some Muslim countries are banned. I know you dont think this matters but it is relevant because you are saying Trump revealed Islamophobia  by the Muslim ban and it would have been that if it was consistent. But it was more about appeasing his base and wanting to be seen to be tough and not afraid of certain decisions

But the first country Trump visited was Saudi Arabia and he continued to support them. Now that means he had a agenda for the Muslim ban but it wasnt because he didnt like Muslims 

Another interesting trait Trump  had was that he refused to pander to certain comments that were expected from him...and he stood his ground which surprised me. For example at the Charlottesville violence he simply rejected the characterization from prominent CNN  journalists that he should criticize the entire right wing protestors ....remember he made the point " their were some fine people on both sides " . Now this was true because some of the groups on the right were alt-right and not actual racists who believed that the statue of Lee mattered and that was more about history 

But CNN never forgot that and Jake Trapper never directly said Trump was anti-semitic because how could anyone really say that when he has Jewish son in law and was very popular in Israel. But personally I do think he is comfortable with people that espouse racial superiority but he knows when he must condemn them 

And by not condemning all the protestors as racist or evil he was seen as a champion and supporter of right wing base ...he always considered how to increase his supporters, he knew how to read certain people 

Its important to try to understand Trumps appeal with many Americans because what if he decides to run in the next election? We cant think that its because he is an extremist but he has support due to things like his consistency with "being candid and people getting his views "

Now I think his support is because he has convinced people he understands and cares about their fears ....but he is really a master performer and operates best in a world of populism and grandstanding 

 

 

[Gromnir]

not sure how many times we need correct you on the muslim ban.

the ban which were final enacted after going through the courts is not material. the point is trump were advocating a muslim ban, and people were cheering. this were BEFORE trump became President and the announcement revealed his willingness to embrace bigotry and extremism to further his political fortunes. truth to tell, this were the moment trump seperated himself from the other republican candidates, all of whom condemned trump's muslim ban promise. this were the moment trump won the republican nomination even if few recognized the significance at the time.

'course this announcement were not the first warning sign trump were unfit for office, but the fact americans did not rise up en masse to denounce trump is what is most telling in retrospect. trump warned us all what he was and what he would attempt to do once given power, and too many americans shrugged with indifference while others f'ing applauded. 

serious though, am not revisiting this bit o' bruce intransigence in the future. 

HA! Good Fun!

[Pidesco]

7 hours ago, rjshae said:

Hospitals are generally considered essential services in the US, so I'm not sure what you're on about.

EMS means emergency medical services. Specifically, medical services performed out of hospital. So ambulances and paramedics. 

[BruceVC]

1 hour ago, Gromnir said:

not sure how many times we need correct you on the muslim ban.

the ban which were final enacted after going through the courts is not material. the point is trump were advocating a muslim ban, and people were cheering. this were BEFORE trump became President and the announcement revealed his willingness to embrace bigotry and extremism to further his political fortunes. truth to tell, this were the moment trump seperated himself from the other republican candidates, all of whom condemned trump's muslim ban promise. this were the moment trump won the republican nomination even if few recognized the significance at the time.

'course this announcement were not the first warning sign trump were unfit for office, but the fact americans did not rise up en masse to denounce trump is what is most telling in retrospect. trump warned us all what he was and what he would attempt to do once given power, and too many americans shrugged with indifference while others f'ing applauded. 

serious though, am not revisiting this bit o' bruce intransigence in the future. 

HA! Good Fun!

Please continue this discussion because its important and if you dont comment then I am not going to get closure

I do understand your view because you have been consistent but you are not understanding my point because I am not explaining it properly. But before I go into more detail I just want to know if you are interested in understanding some of reasons Trump had support from certain countries and people. Its fine if you feel its not relevant because then it would be unnecessary for me to make a longer post. 

So what  I am asking is are you happy with a view that Trump was always a bigot and this Muslim ban just confirmed it more openly? And if you are happy with your view then  dont you think his friendship and reciprocated support from the Gulf States is a contradiction to this view of Trump

So in summary, a known white racist is not going to be seen as a  open friend of African American celebrities in a country like USA. Wouldnt you find that incongruous if he really was a racist, I would and I would want to know why they friends ? 

[Pidesco]

21 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Please continue this discussion because its important and if you dont comment then I am not going to get closure

I do understand your view because you have been consistent but you are not understanding my point because I am not explaining it properly. But before I go into more detail I just want to know if you are interested in understanding some of reasons Trump had support from certain countries and people. Its fine if you feel its not relevant because then it would be unnecessary for me to make a longer post. 

So what  I am asking is are you happy with a view that Trump was always a bigot and this Muslim ban just confirmed it more openly? And if you are happy with your view then  dont you think his friendship and reciprocated support from the Gulf States is a contradiction to this view of Trump

So in summary, a known white racist is not going to be seen as a  open friend of African American celebrities in a country like USA. Wouldnt you find that incongruous if he really was a racist, I would and I would want to know why they friends ? 

That's certainly a convoluted formulation of the black friend defense.

Trump is racist he has always been racist. His narcissistic love of celebrity and money may, however, sometimes supersede his racism.

[BruceVC]

3 minutes ago, Pidesco said:

That's certainly a convoluted formulation of the black friend defense.

Trump is racist he has always been racist. His narcissistic love of celebrity and money may, however, sometimes supersede his racism.

I appreciate you commenting on this issue because I dont have an answer on something else about Trump. I also understand your views on what racism is will be based on normal definitions that most of us understand and its easy to call out racism

But neither of us is black so sometimes I have come across people that I think are racist but some of my black friends dont.... so sometimes its not straight forward when something is bigotry

For example what would be your reasons for saying Trump has always been a racist, I just want to understand your point. And then if you right why would some African Americans support and even defend him....because I can promise you black people dont support real racists,  I see this in SA at times 

 

[Pidesco]

8 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

I appreciate you commenting on this issue because I dont have an answer on something else about Trump. I also understand your views on what racism is will be based on normal definitions that most of us understand and its easy to call out racism

But neither of us is black so sometimes I have come across people that I think are racist but some of my black friends dont.... so sometimes its not straight forward when something is bigotry

For example what would be your reasons for saying Trump has always been a racist, I just want to understand your point. And then if you right why would some African Americans support and even defend him....because I can promise you black people dont support real racists,  I see this in SA at times 

 

https://www.vox.com/2016/7/25/12270880/donald-trump-racist-racism-history

 

Oh, and Black people can support racist people. To suggest otherwise is, you guessed it, racist. Black people aren't some sort of infallible monolith.

 

[BruceVC]

17 minutes ago, Pidesco said:

https://www.vox.com/2016/7/25/12270880/donald-trump-racist-racism-history

 

Oh, and Black people can support racist people. To suggest otherwise is, you guessed it, racist. Black people aren't some sort of infallible monolith.

 

Holy smoke that is one detailed link, I will go through it in detail later 

I never thought that would be a valid reason for black people supporting Trump , I have never seen that in SA and I like to think I have all types of racism and strange reasons for people just being offensive. 

I am not saying you wrong because I dont know. The only concern I have is I cant think of why you would see that in RL especially when its well known about Trumps bigotry? And as you know that most of the African American community was loyal to the Democrats and many of them did say Trump was racist 

Because the other reason that some black people were Trump supporters was  mentioned by some people and I was surprised but end of the day  every person in any Democracy can vote for anyone they want. So the reasons I remember in different interviews were 

1.  The Democrats have not done anything to change the lives of African Americans in much of the USA. So its time for a change 
2. Trump offers a better understanding of the economy and will improve the lives of black people
3. Democrats have taken advantage of the support of the African American communities and we feel used and not taken seriously 
4. Trump is not racist, its the media creating a false narrative and always playing the race card

I know how annoying this must come across....but it will interesting if you can respond because sometimes I have no answers myself to certain questions and realities. But its a few things that I avoid 

[BruceVC]

43 minutes ago, Pidesco said:

https://www.vox.com/2016/7/25/12270880/donald-trump-racist-racism-history

 

Oh, and Black people can support racist people. To suggest otherwise is, you guessed it, racist. Black people aren't some sort of infallible monolith.

 

Oh I forgot to ask you something, who do identify with ethically in  Sweden ? Are you Swedish or Portuguese, it must be exciting to integrate into a country

The reason I am asking do you have any interest in the history of the end of the Portuguese colonies in Africa  and how SA was able to absorb thousands of Portuguese immigrants fleeing from Mozambique 

Its a good historical story but if you not really into that part of history than that is also fine because I dont mind  posting what happened but only if you want to read it? I dont want to waste my own time because their is no critical reason you should be interested 

[Skarpen]

2 hours ago, BruceVC said:

But before I go into more detail I just want to know if you are interested in understanding some of reasons Trump had support from certain countries and people.

You need to understand BruceVC that for some people Trump have to be the antichrist and his supporters all need to be bloodthirsty demons. They cannot be humanized or understand in any capacity beyond that they are all inherently evil from the day they were spawned in this world. Otherwise worldviews would crumble and some people would need to look in mirrors and see their own reflections and that's something they don't like to do. So don't get your hopes up on actually discuss the Trump and Trump supporters unless you want to be labeled as dissident

Edited August 8, 2021 by Skarpen

[BruceVC]

12 minutes ago, Skarpen said:

You need to understand BruceVC that for some people Trump have to be the antichrist and his supporters all need to be bloodthirsty demons. They cannot be humanized or understand in any capacity beyond that they are all inherently evil from the day they were spawned in this world. Otherwise worldviews would crumble and some people would need to look in mirrors and see their own reflections and that's something they don't like to do. So don't get your hopes up on actually discuss the Trump and Trump supporters unless you want to be labeled as dissident

, you make me laugh

But on a serious note it shouldn't matter what people think  if you support Trump, it is your choice and only you  can decide. But can you  share why you support Trump, their are many different reasons but they can differ from person to person ?

Trumps presidency did have several successful policies but you cant ignore how he handled the pandemic. But I am well aware how he connects with people

And another important point is Trump could be the next Republican presidential candidate....its not what I want but it has nothing to do with me.

[ComradeYellow]

1 hour ago, Skarpen said:

You need to understand BruceVC that for some people Trump have to be the antichrist and his supporters all need to be bloodthirsty demons.

Yeah well that's how white puritanical superstitious Westerners/Americans see China and especially North Korea, even though China offers lots of cheap public services and living costs are low, it's 40% cheaper to live in Shanghai than New York.

Massachusetts, for instance, is consistently ranked as the smartest state in the union, yet it's 40% above the national average in living costs.  You'd think the smartest state would figure out a way to reduce costs but I think they like it that way.  Why?  Elitism. most likely.

Anyway it looks like the U.S. won the Summer Olympics, though it was a close call.  China had adopted the Soviet model of state funded and regulated Olympics training for youths, I guess it might need more funding if the want to really kick @$$ next time around.

[Gromnir]

5 hours ago, BruceVC said:

Please continue this discussion because its important and if you dont comment then I am not going to get closure

 

no. trump, as a candidate clear advocated a muslim ban. ignore the video o' trump clear and irrefutable advocating for a muslim ban once again makes you appear obdurate on the level o' skarp_one. as President, trump attempted, multiple times, to implement the promised muslim ban but the Courts denied his efforts. trump gets no credit 'cause he were unsuccessful at implementing the muslim ban he promised. 

but again, we has had this same discussion in far more detail multiple times and you and Gromnir is doing no more than repeating. is a stoopid groundhog day exercise. indulge your need for digital self gratification w/o our help. 

HA! Good Fun!

[Skarpen]

2 hours ago, BruceVC said:

, you make me laugh

But on a serious note it shouldn't matter what people think  if you support Trump, it is your choice and only you  can decide. But can you  share why you support Trump, their are many different reasons but they can differ from person to person ?

Trumps presidency did have several successful policies but you cant ignore how he handled the pandemic. But I am well aware how he connects with people

And another important point is Trump could be the next Republican presidential candidate....its not what I want but it has nothing to do with me.

Looking forward to him running again. 

Look, if it's about Jerry from another department then yes it doesn't matter what he thinks of me. But get enough Jerries and it will matter. Did it matter what whites thought about blacks in SA during Apartheid? Or what Nazis were thinking about Jews in the 1940s?

1 hour ago, ComradeYellow said:

Yeah well that's how white puritanical superstitious Westerners/Americans see China and especially North Korea, even though China offers lots of cheap public services and living costs are low, it's 40% cheaper to live in Shanghai than New York.

Massachusetts, for instance, is consistently ranked as the smartest state in the union, yet it's 40% above the national average in living costs.  You'd think the smartest state would figure out a way to reduce costs but I think they like it that way.  Why?  Elitism. most likely.

Anyway it looks like the U.S. won the Summer Olympics, though it was a close call.  China had adopted the Soviet model of state funded and regulated Olympics training for youths, I guess it might need more funding if the want to really kick @$$ next time around.

China and especially NK? You consider them to be one and the same? Anyway, no I don't. I had the opportunity to meet many Chinese students and they are a decent folks. And my close friend worked for 5 years in China. So on the matter of NK and China I'm not fond of their governments not the people as such. 

Why would smartest people reduce the cost if they find the cost to quality ratio to be acceptable? It may be cheaper to live in Shanghai but are the standards the same? 

Kudos to US athletes. 

[BruceVC]

9 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

no. trump, as a candidate clear advocated a muslim ban. ignore the video o' trump clear and irrefutable advocating for a muslim ban once again makes you appear obdurate on the level o' skarp_one. as President, trump attempted, multiple times, to implement the promised muslim ban but the Courts denied his efforts. trump gets no credit 'cause he were unsuccessful at implementing the muslim ban he promised. 

but again, we has had this same discussion in far more detail multiple times and you and Gromnir is doing no more than repeating. is a stoopid groundhog day exercise. indulge your need for digital self gratification w/o our help. 

HA! Good Fun!

Gromnir you are sounding a little annoyed. Its not my fault you are not seeing my point but I am also failing to explain my point  which could be the reason you are not  agreeing with what  am I am trying to explain

This is an important point so I am going to try to explain my point to someone else and if they understand it then I will come back to you. 

[BruceVC]

@pidesco  @gorth are either of you guys available for maybe 20 minutes so I can try to explain something about the Muslim ban in the USA. Of course I would also need you to be interactive and if you dont agree just let me know like usual. And if you dont agree then I wont go back to Gromnir with the updated story

Its a really interesting  story if you want to know Trumps ME policies but I also understand if you not keen or we can do it tomorrow ?

[Skarpen]

8 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Gromnir you are sounding a little annoyed

It seems for Gromnir the banning of whole religious group is so fundamentally against the principality of what USA is as a country that no amount of argumentation or rationalization that you could provide would change his stance on the matter even by inch. You cannot argue with someone's fundamental principles. 

[ComradeYellow]

23 minutes ago, Skarpen said:

China and especially NK? You consider them to be one and the same?

No.  NK is backwards Marxist Leninism and China is Socialism with Chinese characteristics, basically an evolved form of Marxist Leninism.

And I'd say the living standards in Shanghai are better than New York in some ways, as it has lots of efficient high speed railway, whilst New York's subway system is dated as Hell.  Plus in Shanghai, food vendors are open at midnight, with lots of delicious food.  Pollution levels are about the same in both cities (ranked "moderate" at IQAir World Air Quality Index (AQI) Ranking | AirVisual (iqair.com))  New York would probably be considered better for rich people but not for poor people.

[BruceVC]

41 minutes ago, Skarpen said:

It seems for Gromnir the banning of whole religious group is so fundamentally against the principality of what USA is as a country that no amount of argumentation or rationalization that you could provide would change his stance on the matter even by inch. You cannot argue with someone's fundamental principles. 

Yes but now you are seeing my point, the Muslim ban was not all Muslims. It was certain countries, this is what Gromnir is not understanding and when you look at the list below they are not even all Muslim countries that have any kinds of Islamic extremism. So its important to understand the list of countries and also I can give you valid reasons why these countries should be on US watch list or definitely not  allowed to fly to the USA because they very hostile to the USA. So the actual ban that was framed as an extremist decision you can position this decision as one about state security. If you look at the list below Chad shouldn't on then list but the others you can see the risk.

Iran,  Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria,Yemen,Chad,North Korea, Venezuela

And I am not saying  this ban made sense, of course it didnt but to suggest it was a Muslim ban also cannot be true. Several countries on this list aren't even Muslim !!!