|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
We have a more than a few Russian nationals here in the US that have no love for Putin. And a whole bunch of US citizens that Putin does not care for. And if someone can get into the UK, I do not believe it is that hard to get to the US.
I will be interested to see if the UK can respond and if the Senate revisist sanctions after this.
|
On March 17 2018 04:19 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2018 04:15 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 17 2018 04:13 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 03:51 Slaughter wrote:On March 17 2018 03:47 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 03:36 a_flayer wrote:
Yeah. If you post any form of suggestion for change people always zoom in on that little thing they dislike, ignore everything else, and proclaim that "it is impossible". It's easy to shoot things down like that. Come up with your own better suggestions, or link to articles from what you think are more credible sources on the subject if that's your complaint.
Edit: stop drinking and posting Acrofales But theres nothing about GH's suggestion that people like. His suggestion is literally to get rid of the police and maybe do stuff afterwords. Theres some talk about creating reservations for minorities and reforming the police at some point but it all begins with just getting rid of the police and not expecting society to quickly fall apart. I don't know. Seems like GH plan is more slow? I may be misunderstanding but he seems to be pushing for working slowly towards making police obsolete or at the least have a much greatly reduced roll. Pretty sure he never said abolish the police in one swift strike. See GH has this problem with plans is that he doesn't really have them. He says something stupid and instead of realizing what he said was stupid he doubles down and scrambles to try and justify what he said. He believes that he can't be wrong and doesn't need to elaborate on any of his ideas because again he can't be wrong. When people ask him simple questions about his ideas or about obvious issues with his ideas he attacks them because again he can't be wrong. He brings up questions that can't be answered like "how efficient are the police" and when people ask him what that even means he knowing he can't be wrong proclaims he is right because his enemies can't prove him wrong. People ask him how creating reservations for minorities could possibly work alongside reservations for other minorities and he posts a rolling stone article as support. He doesn't have anything past just saying "abolish the police" or "End the democratic party" because he doesn't care about legitimacy or practicality. People think that because we're talking on a forum and assuming everyone's legitimately supporting the shit that comes out under their name. This doesn't apply to GH beacuse he can't be wrong. I'll take this post seriously if you can tell me how you measure the efficacy of the US police system. Otherwise kindly keep your irrelevant commentary on an argument you clearly don't understand to yourself. How many times a week I feel the need to lock my home when I leave or my car when I go to the store. Its working at 100% efficiency so checkmate GH. Edit: I love how you admit that you didn't read the post and then decided to read it after you already responded to it. I can't tell you if a Mad max apocolypse would be a better system for social justice then law and order but you don't see anyone watching that movie and going "gee that looks like a great system to follow". You have this problem with not knowing how much of a joke you are and how little people take what you say seriously. They compare Danglers favorably to you for christs sake.
A rare moment of honesty for our forum's left-wing majority.
|
On March 17 2018 06:07 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2018 04:19 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 04:15 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 17 2018 04:13 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 03:51 Slaughter wrote:On March 17 2018 03:47 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 03:36 a_flayer wrote:
Yeah. If you post any form of suggestion for change people always zoom in on that little thing they dislike, ignore everything else, and proclaim that "it is impossible". It's easy to shoot things down like that. Come up with your own better suggestions, or link to articles from what you think are more credible sources on the subject if that's your complaint.
Edit: stop drinking and posting Acrofales But theres nothing about GH's suggestion that people like. His suggestion is literally to get rid of the police and maybe do stuff afterwords. Theres some talk about creating reservations for minorities and reforming the police at some point but it all begins with just getting rid of the police and not expecting society to quickly fall apart. I don't know. Seems like GH plan is more slow? I may be misunderstanding but he seems to be pushing for working slowly towards making police obsolete or at the least have a much greatly reduced roll. Pretty sure he never said abolish the police in one swift strike. See GH has this problem with plans is that he doesn't really have them. He says something stupid and instead of realizing what he said was stupid he doubles down and scrambles to try and justify what he said. He believes that he can't be wrong and doesn't need to elaborate on any of his ideas because again he can't be wrong. When people ask him simple questions about his ideas or about obvious issues with his ideas he attacks them because again he can't be wrong. He brings up questions that can't be answered like "how efficient are the police" and when people ask him what that even means he knowing he can't be wrong proclaims he is right because his enemies can't prove him wrong. People ask him how creating reservations for minorities could possibly work alongside reservations for other minorities and he posts a rolling stone article as support. He doesn't have anything past just saying "abolish the police" or "End the democratic party" because he doesn't care about legitimacy or practicality. People think that because we're talking on a forum and assuming everyone's legitimately supporting the shit that comes out under their name. This doesn't apply to GH beacuse he can't be wrong. I'll take this post seriously if you can tell me how you measure the efficacy of the US police system. Otherwise kindly keep your irrelevant commentary on an argument you clearly don't understand to yourself. How many times a week I feel the need to lock my home when I leave or my car when I go to the store. Its working at 100% efficiency so checkmate GH. Edit: I love how you admit that you didn't read the post and then decided to read it after you already responded to it. I can't tell you if a Mad max apocolypse would be a better system for social justice then law and order but you don't see anyone watching that movie and going "gee that looks like a great system to follow". You have this problem with not knowing how much of a joke you are and how little people take what you say seriously. They compare Danglers favorably to you for christs sake. A rare moment of honesty for our forum's left-wing majority.
I'm not sure what you're implying here, but I'd be really careful with that line of thinking. If everyone you disagree with is automatically "dishonest" or "fake news" for their opinions, you immediately exclude yourself from having any reasonable conversation. People here aren't lying for their views
|
When rich, politically influential people start getting affected negatively by anything (including the police situation), that "anything" will be meaningfully addressed within the current system. I feel like capitalism is at fault here but I'm not an economics person so unfortunately have no meaningful alternatives or solutions to propose.
|
On March 17 2018 06:25 mierin wrote:
When rich, politically influential people start getting affected negatively by anything (including the police situation), that "anything" will be meaningfully addressed within the current system. I feel like capitalism is at fault here but I'm not an economics person so unfortunately have no meaningful alternatives or solutions to propose.
it's not capitalism's fault per se; it's every system of gov't ever, and somewhat unavoidable. when politically influential people are affected, something will be done about it; that holds whatever the political system is; it's part of what it means that someone is politically influential. and every system has politically influential people.
though some systems are more prone than others to the concentration of influence.
|
I think we need an anti-capitalism thread to absorb this very broad, sweeping discussion about how political change takes place.
|
On March 17 2018 06:25 mierin wrote:
When rich, politically influential people start getting affected negatively by anything (including the police situation), that "anything" will be meaningfully addressed within the current system. I feel like capitalism is at fault here but I'm not an economics person so unfortunately have no meaningful alternatives or solutions to propose.
To that effect Trump may be presenting a bill on the opiate crisis in the near future. It's rumored/described to be about as effective as all of Trumps other legislative and policy prescriptions for problems, but much like cutting taxes for the wealthiest among us, it seems to be a priority extending beyond Trump.
As I've heard it described, it's mostly designed to help wealthy kids who get caught up in opiates prevent related arrests and punishments intended for poor people, disproportionately black, brown and indigenous, from impeding their career ambitions.
Essentially wealthy kids are being disqualified from positions they would usually feel/be entitled to, as a result of prior opiate related issue. This legislation is aimed at helping them get off legally and increasing public funding for treatment, likely at private institutions, and stricter punishments made available for less desirable people guilty of similar offenses.
But it's all rumors as far as I last read, nothing has been released publicly besides Trumps previous fawning over killing people convicted of drug related crimes.
It will likely have bipartisan support, especially from Joe Manchin who has said previously (since Trump was elected iirc) that we need to reinvigorate the war on drugs.
On March 17 2018 06:46 Plansix wrote:
I think we need an anti-capitalism thread to absorb this very broad, sweeping discussion about how political change takes place.
There are few things more inextricably intertwined than US politics and anti-capitalism. I'd vote for a specific Russiagate thread though in a heart beat.
|
On March 17 2018 06:15 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2018 06:07 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 04:19 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 04:15 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 17 2018 04:13 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 03:51 Slaughter wrote:On March 17 2018 03:47 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 03:36 a_flayer wrote:
Yeah. If you post any form of suggestion for change people always zoom in on that little thing they dislike, ignore everything else, and proclaim that "it is impossible". It's easy to shoot things down like that. Come up with your own better suggestions, or link to articles from what you think are more credible sources on the subject if that's your complaint.
Edit: stop drinking and posting Acrofales But theres nothing about GH's suggestion that people like. His suggestion is literally to get rid of the police and maybe do stuff afterwords. Theres some talk about creating reservations for minorities and reforming the police at some point but it all begins with just getting rid of the police and not expecting society to quickly fall apart. I don't know. Seems like GH plan is more slow? I may be misunderstanding but he seems to be pushing for working slowly towards making police obsolete or at the least have a much greatly reduced roll. Pretty sure he never said abolish the police in one swift strike. See GH has this problem with plans is that he doesn't really have them. He says something stupid and instead of realizing what he said was stupid he doubles down and scrambles to try and justify what he said. He believes that he can't be wrong and doesn't need to elaborate on any of his ideas because again he can't be wrong. When people ask him simple questions about his ideas or about obvious issues with his ideas he attacks them because again he can't be wrong. He brings up questions that can't be answered like "how efficient are the police" and when people ask him what that even means he knowing he can't be wrong proclaims he is right because his enemies can't prove him wrong. People ask him how creating reservations for minorities could possibly work alongside reservations for other minorities and he posts a rolling stone article as support. He doesn't have anything past just saying "abolish the police" or "End the democratic party" because he doesn't care about legitimacy or practicality. People think that because we're talking on a forum and assuming everyone's legitimately supporting the shit that comes out under their name. This doesn't apply to GH beacuse he can't be wrong. I'll take this post seriously if you can tell me how you measure the efficacy of the US police system. Otherwise kindly keep your irrelevant commentary on an argument you clearly don't understand to yourself. How many times a week I feel the need to lock my home when I leave or my car when I go to the store. Its working at 100% efficiency so checkmate GH. Edit: I love how you admit that you didn't read the post and then decided to read it after you already responded to it. I can't tell you if a Mad max apocolypse would be a better system for social justice then law and order but you don't see anyone watching that movie and going "gee that looks like a great system to follow". You have this problem with not knowing how much of a joke you are and how little people take what you say seriously. They compare Danglers favorably to you for christs sake. A rare moment of honesty for our forum's left-wing majority. I'm not sure what you're implying here, but I'd be really careful with that line of thinking. If everyone you disagree with is automatically "dishonest" or "fake news" for their opinions, you immediately exclude yourself from having any reasonable conversation. People here aren't lying for their views
It's just the denizens of this forum. Outside in the US, there's far less europhiles and leftwingers than you see posting here. Simply take the roughly 5-8% of Trump voters in the US politics thread compared to the ~50% in the country at large. Based on your past interactions here, I have my doubts to whether you can correctly identify reasonable conversation.
|
On March 17 2018 06:55 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2018 06:15 Excludos wrote:On March 17 2018 06:07 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 04:19 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 04:15 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 17 2018 04:13 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 03:51 Slaughter wrote:On March 17 2018 03:47 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 03:36 a_flayer wrote:
Yeah. If you post any form of suggestion for change people always zoom in on that little thing they dislike, ignore everything else, and proclaim that "it is impossible". It's easy to shoot things down like that. Come up with your own better suggestions, or link to articles from what you think are more credible sources on the subject if that's your complaint.
Edit: stop drinking and posting Acrofales But theres nothing about GH's suggestion that people like. His suggestion is literally to get rid of the police and maybe do stuff afterwords. Theres some talk about creating reservations for minorities and reforming the police at some point but it all begins with just getting rid of the police and not expecting society to quickly fall apart. I don't know. Seems like GH plan is more slow? I may be misunderstanding but he seems to be pushing for working slowly towards making police obsolete or at the least have a much greatly reduced roll. Pretty sure he never said abolish the police in one swift strike. See GH has this problem with plans is that he doesn't really have them. He says something stupid and instead of realizing what he said was stupid he doubles down and scrambles to try and justify what he said. He believes that he can't be wrong and doesn't need to elaborate on any of his ideas because again he can't be wrong. When people ask him simple questions about his ideas or about obvious issues with his ideas he attacks them because again he can't be wrong. He brings up questions that can't be answered like "how efficient are the police" and when people ask him what that even means he knowing he can't be wrong proclaims he is right because his enemies can't prove him wrong. People ask him how creating reservations for minorities could possibly work alongside reservations for other minorities and he posts a rolling stone article as support. He doesn't have anything past just saying "abolish the police" or "End the democratic party" because he doesn't care about legitimacy or practicality. People think that because we're talking on a forum and assuming everyone's legitimately supporting the shit that comes out under their name. This doesn't apply to GH beacuse he can't be wrong. I'll take this post seriously if you can tell me how you measure the efficacy of the US police system. Otherwise kindly keep your irrelevant commentary on an argument you clearly don't understand to yourself. How many times a week I feel the need to lock my home when I leave or my car when I go to the store. Its working at 100% efficiency so checkmate GH. Edit: I love how you admit that you didn't read the post and then decided to read it after you already responded to it. I can't tell you if a Mad max apocolypse would be a better system for social justice then law and order but you don't see anyone watching that movie and going "gee that looks like a great system to follow". You have this problem with not knowing how much of a joke you are and how little people take what you say seriously. They compare Danglers favorably to you for christs sake. A rare moment of honesty for our forum's left-wing majority. I'm not sure what you're implying here, but I'd be really careful with that line of thinking. If everyone you disagree with is automatically "dishonest" or "fake news" for their opinions, you immediately exclude yourself from having any reasonable conversation. People here aren't lying for their views It's just the denizens of this forum. Outside in the US, there's far less europhiles and leftwingers than you see posting here. Simply take the roughly 5-8% of Trump voters in the US politics thread compared to the ~50% in the country at large. Based on your past interactions here, I have my doubts to whether you can correctly identify reasonable conversation.
~40% http://news.gallup.com/home.aspx
|
I think its like 26% of voting age Americans voted for Trump. Which is pretty close to the number of Americans that also self identify as Republicans.
|
On March 17 2018 06:56 IyMoon wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2018 06:55 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 06:15 Excludos wrote:On March 17 2018 06:07 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 04:19 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 04:15 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 17 2018 04:13 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 03:51 Slaughter wrote:On March 17 2018 03:47 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 03:36 a_flayer wrote:
Yeah. If you post any form of suggestion for change people always zoom in on that little thing they dislike, ignore everything else, and proclaim that "it is impossible". It's easy to shoot things down like that. Come up with your own better suggestions, or link to articles from what you think are more credible sources on the subject if that's your complaint.
Edit: stop drinking and posting Acrofales But theres nothing about GH's suggestion that people like. His suggestion is literally to get rid of the police and maybe do stuff afterwords. Theres some talk about creating reservations for minorities and reforming the police at some point but it all begins with just getting rid of the police and not expecting society to quickly fall apart. I don't know. Seems like GH plan is more slow? I may be misunderstanding but he seems to be pushing for working slowly towards making police obsolete or at the least have a much greatly reduced roll. Pretty sure he never said abolish the police in one swift strike. See GH has this problem with plans is that he doesn't really have them. He says something stupid and instead of realizing what he said was stupid he doubles down and scrambles to try and justify what he said. He believes that he can't be wrong and doesn't need to elaborate on any of his ideas because again he can't be wrong. When people ask him simple questions about his ideas or about obvious issues with his ideas he attacks them because again he can't be wrong. He brings up questions that can't be answered like "how efficient are the police" and when people ask him what that even means he knowing he can't be wrong proclaims he is right because his enemies can't prove him wrong. People ask him how creating reservations for minorities could possibly work alongside reservations for other minorities and he posts a rolling stone article as support. He doesn't have anything past just saying "abolish the police" or "End the democratic party" because he doesn't care about legitimacy or practicality. People think that because we're talking on a forum and assuming everyone's legitimately supporting the shit that comes out under their name. This doesn't apply to GH beacuse he can't be wrong. I'll take this post seriously if you can tell me how you measure the efficacy of the US police system. Otherwise kindly keep your irrelevant commentary on an argument you clearly don't understand to yourself. How many times a week I feel the need to lock my home when I leave or my car when I go to the store. Its working at 100% efficiency so checkmate GH. Edit: I love how you admit that you didn't read the post and then decided to read it after you already responded to it. I can't tell you if a Mad max apocolypse would be a better system for social justice then law and order but you don't see anyone watching that movie and going "gee that looks like a great system to follow". You have this problem with not knowing how much of a joke you are and how little people take what you say seriously. They compare Danglers favorably to you for christs sake. A rare moment of honesty for our forum's left-wing majority. I'm not sure what you're implying here, but I'd be really careful with that line of thinking. If everyone you disagree with is automatically "dishonest" or "fake news" for their opinions, you immediately exclude yourself from having any reasonable conversation. People here aren't lying for their views It's just the denizens of this forum. Outside in the US, there's far less europhiles and leftwingers than you see posting here. Simply take the roughly 5-8% of Trump voters in the US politics thread compared to the ~50% in the country at large. Based on your past interactions here, I have my doubts to whether you can correctly identify reasonable conversation. ~40% http://news.gallup.com/home.aspx
A lot of internet tryhards with all their self-righteous fury don’t show up to vote. 40% would’ve meant Clinton in the White House. Who’s in the White House? Who in this forum voted for Trump in the general? I’ll wait.
|
On March 17 2018 07:01 Plansix wrote:
I think its like 26% of voting age Americans voted for Trump. Which is pretty close to the number of Americans that also self identify as Republicans.
You are listening  If you add in right leaners it's closer to 40-45%
+ Show Spoiler +
What's really interesting and becoming increasingly reflected in the forum, is what happens when you don't pressure people to pick a side.
+ Show Spoiler +
Those are out of date but you can easily imagine how they are reflected in this more current graph
Source
+ Show Spoiler +
Compared to this "leaning included" current one. (Wasn't able to find the by age breakdown for 2017)
+ Show Spoiler +
Source
What that all ads up to is getting more younger people to vote is the best strategy to beat Trump and Republicans. The best way to get young people to vote is to get them excited, and then we have to ask who in the Democratic sphere gets young people the most excited and you have a policy prescription for what Democrats need to push for to win. Not just in 2018 or 2020 but for the foreseeable future.
|
On March 17 2018 07:17 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2018 06:56 IyMoon wrote:On March 17 2018 06:55 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 06:15 Excludos wrote:On March 17 2018 06:07 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 04:19 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 04:15 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 17 2018 04:13 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 03:51 Slaughter wrote:On March 17 2018 03:47 Sermokala wrote:
[quote]
But theres nothing about GH's suggestion that people like. His suggestion is literally to get rid of the police and maybe do stuff afterwords. Theres some talk about creating reservations for minorities and reforming the police at some point but it all begins with just getting rid of the police and not expecting society to quickly fall apart. I don't know. Seems like GH plan is more slow? I may be misunderstanding but he seems to be pushing for working slowly towards making police obsolete or at the least have a much greatly reduced roll. Pretty sure he never said abolish the police in one swift strike. See GH has this problem with plans is that he doesn't really have them. He says something stupid and instead of realizing what he said was stupid he doubles down and scrambles to try and justify what he said. He believes that he can't be wrong and doesn't need to elaborate on any of his ideas because again he can't be wrong. When people ask him simple questions about his ideas or about obvious issues with his ideas he attacks them because again he can't be wrong. He brings up questions that can't be answered like "how efficient are the police" and when people ask him what that even means he knowing he can't be wrong proclaims he is right because his enemies can't prove him wrong. People ask him how creating reservations for minorities could possibly work alongside reservations for other minorities and he posts a rolling stone article as support. He doesn't have anything past just saying "abolish the police" or "End the democratic party" because he doesn't care about legitimacy or practicality. People think that because we're talking on a forum and assuming everyone's legitimately supporting the shit that comes out under their name. This doesn't apply to GH beacuse he can't be wrong. I'll take this post seriously if you can tell me how you measure the efficacy of the US police system. Otherwise kindly keep your irrelevant commentary on an argument you clearly don't understand to yourself. How many times a week I feel the need to lock my home when I leave or my car when I go to the store. Its working at 100% efficiency so checkmate GH. Edit: I love how you admit that you didn't read the post and then decided to read it after you already responded to it. I can't tell you if a Mad max apocolypse would be a better system for social justice then law and order but you don't see anyone watching that movie and going "gee that looks like a great system to follow". You have this problem with not knowing how much of a joke you are and how little people take what you say seriously. They compare Danglers favorably to you for christs sake. A rare moment of honesty for our forum's left-wing majority. I'm not sure what you're implying here, but I'd be really careful with that line of thinking. If everyone you disagree with is automatically "dishonest" or "fake news" for their opinions, you immediately exclude yourself from having any reasonable conversation. People here aren't lying for their views It's just the denizens of this forum. Outside in the US, there's far less europhiles and leftwingers than you see posting here. Simply take the roughly 5-8% of Trump voters in the US politics thread compared to the ~50% in the country at large. Based on your past interactions here, I have my doubts to whether you can correctly identify reasonable conversation. ~40% http://news.gallup.com/home.aspx A lot of internet tryhards with all their self-righteous fury don’t show up to vote. 40% would’ve meant Clinton in the White House. Who’s in the White House? Who in this forum voted for Trump in the general? I’ll wait.
Are you for real right now?
|
On March 17 2018 07:22 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2018 07:17 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 06:56 IyMoon wrote:On March 17 2018 06:55 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 06:15 Excludos wrote:On March 17 2018 06:07 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 04:19 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 04:15 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 17 2018 04:13 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 03:51 Slaughter wrote:
[quote]
I don't know. Seems like GH plan is more slow? I may be misunderstanding but he seems to be pushing for working slowly towards making police obsolete or at the least have a much greatly reduced roll. Pretty sure he never said abolish the police in one swift strike. See GH has this problem with plans is that he doesn't really have them. He says something stupid and instead of realizing what he said was stupid he doubles down and scrambles to try and justify what he said. He believes that he can't be wrong and doesn't need to elaborate on any of his ideas because again he can't be wrong. When people ask him simple questions about his ideas or about obvious issues with his ideas he attacks them because again he can't be wrong. He brings up questions that can't be answered like "how efficient are the police" and when people ask him what that even means he knowing he can't be wrong proclaims he is right because his enemies can't prove him wrong. People ask him how creating reservations for minorities could possibly work alongside reservations for other minorities and he posts a rolling stone article as support. He doesn't have anything past just saying "abolish the police" or "End the democratic party" because he doesn't care about legitimacy or practicality. People think that because we're talking on a forum and assuming everyone's legitimately supporting the shit that comes out under their name. This doesn't apply to GH beacuse he can't be wrong. I'll take this post seriously if you can tell me how you measure the efficacy of the US police system. Otherwise kindly keep your irrelevant commentary on an argument you clearly don't understand to yourself. How many times a week I feel the need to lock my home when I leave or my car when I go to the store. Its working at 100% efficiency so checkmate GH. Edit: I love how you admit that you didn't read the post and then decided to read it after you already responded to it. I can't tell you if a Mad max apocolypse would be a better system for social justice then law and order but you don't see anyone watching that movie and going "gee that looks like a great system to follow". You have this problem with not knowing how much of a joke you are and how little people take what you say seriously. They compare Danglers favorably to you for christs sake. A rare moment of honesty for our forum's left-wing majority. I'm not sure what you're implying here, but I'd be really careful with that line of thinking. If everyone you disagree with is automatically "dishonest" or "fake news" for their opinions, you immediately exclude yourself from having any reasonable conversation. People here aren't lying for their views It's just the denizens of this forum. Outside in the US, there's far less europhiles and leftwingers than you see posting here. Simply take the roughly 5-8% of Trump voters in the US politics thread compared to the ~50% in the country at large. Based on your past interactions here, I have my doubts to whether you can correctly identify reasonable conversation. ~40% http://news.gallup.com/home.aspx A lot of internet tryhards with all their self-righteous fury don’t show up to vote. 40% would’ve meant Clinton in the White House. Who’s in the White House? Who in this forum voted for Trump in the general? I’ll wait. Are you for real right now?
Can you tell the difference between people who voted for Trump and Trump's polled approval rating today? This isn't a widespread skill, given the latest question-response.
|
On March 17 2018 07:25 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2018 07:22 Plansix wrote:On March 17 2018 07:17 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 06:56 IyMoon wrote:On March 17 2018 06:55 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 06:15 Excludos wrote:On March 17 2018 06:07 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 04:19 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 04:15 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 17 2018 04:13 Sermokala wrote:
[quote]
See GH has this problem with plans is that he doesn't really have them. He says something stupid and instead of realizing what he said was stupid he doubles down and scrambles to try and justify what he said. He believes that he can't be wrong and doesn't need to elaborate on any of his ideas because again he can't be wrong. When people ask him simple questions about his ideas or about obvious issues with his ideas he attacks them because again he can't be wrong. He brings up questions that can't be answered like "how efficient are the police" and when people ask him what that even means he knowing he can't be wrong proclaims he is right because his enemies can't prove him wrong. People ask him how creating reservations for minorities could possibly work alongside reservations for other minorities and he posts a rolling stone article as support.
He doesn't have anything past just saying "abolish the police" or "End the democratic party" because he doesn't care about legitimacy or practicality. People think that because we're talking on a forum and assuming everyone's legitimately supporting the shit that comes out under their name. This doesn't apply to GH beacuse he can't be wrong. I'll take this post seriously if you can tell me how you measure the efficacy of the US police system. Otherwise kindly keep your irrelevant commentary on an argument you clearly don't understand to yourself. How many times a week I feel the need to lock my home when I leave or my car when I go to the store. Its working at 100% efficiency so checkmate GH. Edit: I love how you admit that you didn't read the post and then decided to read it after you already responded to it. I can't tell you if a Mad max apocolypse would be a better system for social justice then law and order but you don't see anyone watching that movie and going "gee that looks like a great system to follow". You have this problem with not knowing how much of a joke you are and how little people take what you say seriously. They compare Danglers favorably to you for christs sake. A rare moment of honesty for our forum's left-wing majority. I'm not sure what you're implying here, but I'd be really careful with that line of thinking. If everyone you disagree with is automatically "dishonest" or "fake news" for their opinions, you immediately exclude yourself from having any reasonable conversation. People here aren't lying for their views It's just the denizens of this forum. Outside in the US, there's far less europhiles and leftwingers than you see posting here. Simply take the roughly 5-8% of Trump voters in the US politics thread compared to the ~50% in the country at large. Based on your past interactions here, I have my doubts to whether you can correctly identify reasonable conversation. ~40% http://news.gallup.com/home.aspx A lot of internet tryhards with all their self-righteous fury don’t show up to vote. 40% would’ve meant Clinton in the White House. Who’s in the White House? Who in this forum voted for Trump in the general? I’ll wait. Are you for real right now? Can you tell the difference between people who voted for Trump and Trump's polled approval rating today? This isn't a widespread skill, given the latest question-response.
Trump didn’t get the majority of votes....
|
On March 17 2018 07:29 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2018 07:25 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 07:22 Plansix wrote:On March 17 2018 07:17 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 06:56 IyMoon wrote:On March 17 2018 06:55 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 06:15 Excludos wrote:On March 17 2018 06:07 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 04:19 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 04:15 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
I'll take this post seriously if you can tell me how you measure the efficacy of the US police system. Otherwise kindly keep your irrelevant commentary on an argument you clearly don't understand to yourself. How many times a week I feel the need to lock my home when I leave or my car when I go to the store. Its working at 100% efficiency so checkmate GH. Edit: I love how you admit that you didn't read the post and then decided to read it after you already responded to it. I can't tell you if a Mad max apocolypse would be a better system for social justice then law and order but you don't see anyone watching that movie and going "gee that looks like a great system to follow". You have this problem with not knowing how much of a joke you are and how little people take what you say seriously. They compare Danglers favorably to you for christs sake. A rare moment of honesty for our forum's left-wing majority. I'm not sure what you're implying here, but I'd be really careful with that line of thinking. If everyone you disagree with is automatically "dishonest" or "fake news" for their opinions, you immediately exclude yourself from having any reasonable conversation. People here aren't lying for their views It's just the denizens of this forum. Outside in the US, there's far less europhiles and leftwingers than you see posting here. Simply take the roughly 5-8% of Trump voters in the US politics thread compared to the ~50% in the country at large. Based on your past interactions here, I have my doubts to whether you can correctly identify reasonable conversation. ~40% http://news.gallup.com/home.aspx A lot of internet tryhards with all their self-righteous fury don’t show up to vote. 40% would’ve meant Clinton in the White House. Who’s in the White House? Who in this forum voted for Trump in the general? I’ll wait. Are you for real right now? Can you tell the difference between people who voted for Trump and Trump's polled approval rating today? This isn't a widespread skill, given the latest question-response. Trump didn’t get the majority of votes....
no one did, I'd hope we don't have to keep going over this until the next presidential election.
|
|
|
On March 17 2018 07:29 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2018 07:25 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 07:22 Plansix wrote:On March 17 2018 07:17 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 06:56 IyMoon wrote:On March 17 2018 06:55 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 06:15 Excludos wrote:On March 17 2018 06:07 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 04:19 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 04:15 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
I'll take this post seriously if you can tell me how you measure the efficacy of the US police system. Otherwise kindly keep your irrelevant commentary on an argument you clearly don't understand to yourself. How many times a week I feel the need to lock my home when I leave or my car when I go to the store. Its working at 100% efficiency so checkmate GH. Edit: I love how you admit that you didn't read the post and then decided to read it after you already responded to it. I can't tell you if a Mad max apocolypse would be a better system for social justice then law and order but you don't see anyone watching that movie and going "gee that looks like a great system to follow". You have this problem with not knowing how much of a joke you are and how little people take what you say seriously. They compare Danglers favorably to you for christs sake. A rare moment of honesty for our forum's left-wing majority. I'm not sure what you're implying here, but I'd be really careful with that line of thinking. If everyone you disagree with is automatically "dishonest" or "fake news" for their opinions, you immediately exclude yourself from having any reasonable conversation. People here aren't lying for their views It's just the denizens of this forum. Outside in the US, there's far less europhiles and leftwingers than you see posting here. Simply take the roughly 5-8% of Trump voters in the US politics thread compared to the ~50% in the country at large. Based on your past interactions here, I have my doubts to whether you can correctly identify reasonable conversation. ~40% http://news.gallup.com/home.aspx A lot of internet tryhards with all their self-righteous fury don’t show up to vote. 40% would’ve meant Clinton in the White House. Who’s in the White House? Who in this forum voted for Trump in the general? I’ll wait. Are you for real right now? Can you tell the difference between people who voted for Trump and Trump's polled approval rating today? This isn't a widespread skill, given the latest question-response. Trump didn’t get the majority of votes....
Just answer the question, or respond to stuff I said.
|
On March 17 2018 07:25 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2018 07:22 Plansix wrote:On March 17 2018 07:17 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 06:56 IyMoon wrote:On March 17 2018 06:55 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 06:15 Excludos wrote:On March 17 2018 06:07 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 04:19 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 04:15 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 17 2018 04:13 Sermokala wrote:
[quote]
See GH has this problem with plans is that he doesn't really have them. He says something stupid and instead of realizing what he said was stupid he doubles down and scrambles to try and justify what he said. He believes that he can't be wrong and doesn't need to elaborate on any of his ideas because again he can't be wrong. When people ask him simple questions about his ideas or about obvious issues with his ideas he attacks them because again he can't be wrong. He brings up questions that can't be answered like "how efficient are the police" and when people ask him what that even means he knowing he can't be wrong proclaims he is right because his enemies can't prove him wrong. People ask him how creating reservations for minorities could possibly work alongside reservations for other minorities and he posts a rolling stone article as support.
He doesn't have anything past just saying "abolish the police" or "End the democratic party" because he doesn't care about legitimacy or practicality. People think that because we're talking on a forum and assuming everyone's legitimately supporting the shit that comes out under their name. This doesn't apply to GH beacuse he can't be wrong. I'll take this post seriously if you can tell me how you measure the efficacy of the US police system. Otherwise kindly keep your irrelevant commentary on an argument you clearly don't understand to yourself. How many times a week I feel the need to lock my home when I leave or my car when I go to the store. Its working at 100% efficiency so checkmate GH. Edit: I love how you admit that you didn't read the post and then decided to read it after you already responded to it. I can't tell you if a Mad max apocolypse would be a better system for social justice then law and order but you don't see anyone watching that movie and going "gee that looks like a great system to follow". You have this problem with not knowing how much of a joke you are and how little people take what you say seriously. They compare Danglers favorably to you for christs sake. A rare moment of honesty for our forum's left-wing majority. I'm not sure what you're implying here, but I'd be really careful with that line of thinking. If everyone you disagree with is automatically "dishonest" or "fake news" for their opinions, you immediately exclude yourself from having any reasonable conversation. People here aren't lying for their views It's just the denizens of this forum. Outside in the US, there's far less europhiles and leftwingers than you see posting here. Simply take the roughly 5-8% of Trump voters in the US politics thread compared to the ~50% in the country at large. Based on your past interactions here, I have my doubts to whether you can correctly identify reasonable conversation. ~40% http://news.gallup.com/home.aspx A lot of internet tryhards with all their self-righteous fury don’t show up to vote. 40% would’ve meant Clinton in the White House. Who’s in the White House? Who in this forum voted for Trump in the general? I’ll wait. Are you for real right now? Can you tell the difference between people who voted for Trump and Trump's polled approval rating today? This isn't a widespread skill, given the latest question-response.
You're not even trying.
If 35% of the population actually vote, and 50% vote for Trump, that's not 50% of the population, is it?
Once he's in the office, of course the percentage of population that has an opinion on him is going to increase. He's the president. You know as well as everyone else does that Trump's approval ratings have mostly been record lows, so stop trying to pretend everybody wanted him. Even people on your side held their nose while voting for Trump, and it's generally considered that anybody but Hilary would have beat him.
|
On March 17 2018 07:52 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2018 07:25 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 07:22 Plansix wrote:On March 17 2018 07:17 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 06:56 IyMoon wrote:On March 17 2018 06:55 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 06:15 Excludos wrote:On March 17 2018 06:07 Danglars wrote:On March 17 2018 04:19 Sermokala wrote:On March 17 2018 04:15 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
I'll take this post seriously if you can tell me how you measure the efficacy of the US police system. Otherwise kindly keep your irrelevant commentary on an argument you clearly don't understand to yourself. How many times a week I feel the need to lock my home when I leave or my car when I go to the store. Its working at 100% efficiency so checkmate GH. Edit: I love how you admit that you didn't read the post and then decided to read it after you already responded to it. I can't tell you if a Mad max apocolypse would be a better system for social justice then law and order but you don't see anyone watching that movie and going "gee that looks like a great system to follow". You have this problem with not knowing how much of a joke you are and how little people take what you say seriously. They compare Danglers favorably to you for christs sake. A rare moment of honesty for our forum's left-wing majority. I'm not sure what you're implying here, but I'd be really careful with that line of thinking. If everyone you disagree with is automatically "dishonest" or "fake news" for their opinions, you immediately exclude yourself from having any reasonable conversation. People here aren't lying for their views It's just the denizens of this forum. Outside in the US, there's far less europhiles and leftwingers than you see posting here. Simply take the roughly 5-8% of Trump voters in the US politics thread compared to the ~50% in the country at large. Based on your past interactions here, I have my doubts to whether you can correctly identify reasonable conversation. ~40% http://news.gallup.com/home.aspx A lot of internet tryhards with all their self-righteous fury don’t show up to vote. 40% would’ve meant Clinton in the White House. Who’s in the White House? Who in this forum voted for Trump in the general? I’ll wait. Are you for real right now? Can you tell the difference between people who voted for Trump and Trump's polled approval rating today? This isn't a widespread skill, given the latest question-response. You're not even trying. If 35% of the population actually vote, and 50% vote for Trump, that's not 50% of the population, is it? Once he's in the office, of course the percentage of population that has an opinion on him is going to increase. He's the president. You know as well as everyone else does that Trump's approval ratings have mostly been record lows, so stop trying to pretend everybody wanted him. Even people on your side held their nose while voting for Trump, and it's generally considered that anybody but Hilary would have beat him.
Legit, John Kasich would have beat him without Hillary in the race, because he would have the anti-trump right (more than Hillary got), and all of Hillary's lesser evil voters and folks like myself would have still voted for neither.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/wt-ykjnhfuezhxsedgqldg.png)
![[image loading]](http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/qlqkw13wb0c0ezykkhbxmw.png)
![[image loading]](http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/bk82tkyic0sqaulbp34asq.png)
![[image loading]](http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/ib4hgbvvekshcrqhj7rufw.png)
