EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 6912
| Forum Index > Closed |
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. | ||
|
Toadesstern
Germany16350 Posts
| ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15686 Posts
On February 18 2017 09:04 GreenHorizons wrote: Not for Democrats like Joe Manchin, at least we have a bipartisan EPA pick. If you take away the "Democrats" voting for Pruitt, Pence would have had to come down again to break another tie. Calling manchin a Democrat is borderline inaccurate. In fact, I'd say it's inaccurate. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23221 Posts
On February 18 2017 09:12 Mohdoo wrote: Calling manchin a Democrat is borderline inaccurate. In fact, I'd say it's inaccurate. Is it really? I don't think I've seen anyone from the party apparatus make anything close to a similar critique. Seems like the party doesn't have a problem with him being a democrat, unless I've missed something? | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On February 18 2017 09:04 Toadesstern wrote: I'm just going to assume he knows that he looks like an idiot and does it anyways because Bannon tells him to keep it up/increase the rhetoric because it's selling with the folks over at Breitbart? His media hate certainly does well with his base. He can probably take some attention away from the bad news by riling up his base's media hatred. It also keeps Republicans in Congress in line because they don't want to upset Trump's base. | ||
|
ChristianS
United States3188 Posts
On February 18 2017 08:02 Doodsmack wrote: Republican voters are willing to gloss over frequent, high level contacts with Russian intelligence in service of the hatred of the media. If shit hits the fan for the USA, we know who to blame. About a month ago I was noting Trump's direct attacks on any non-state information source are a clear sign of his authoritarian inclinations. That leftist hysteria about "fascism" becomes more plausible in the context of this type of bald-faced propaganda. But I noted that while he was outright attacking and telling lies about anyone who opposed him, at least he wasn't questioning their patriotism (yet). Well here we are. All information sources which challenge the President's narrative are enemies of the American people. Here it is apparently too far to say that, say, Russia is an enemy of the American people, but the NYT? Yup, totally, enemy of the state, public enemy number one, we must destroy them or be destroyed by them. Do you guys remember when Obama made a speech in ~2012 (I think) trying to convince Latinos to go out and vote for Democrats, and he referred to Republicans as their "enemy?" And there was a whole big kerfuffle about how inappropriate it is to call the opposition the "enemy" and Republicans were all calling him the Divider in Chief? Well, here we are now. Most major American news outlets are our enemy. We should, I assume, get all our information from the President, and never question any aspect of the offivial story lest we, too, become an Enemy of the American People. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On February 18 2017 09:32 GreenHorizons wrote: Is it really? I don't think I've seen anyone from the party apparatus make anything close to a similar critique. Seems like the party doesn't have a problem with him being a democrat, unless I've missed something? What do you think would happen if they did? | ||
|
biology]major
United States2253 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On February 18 2017 10:05 ChristianS wrote: About a month ago I was noting Trump's direct attacks on any non-state information source are a clear sign of his authoritarian inclinations. That leftist hysteria about "fascism" becomes more plausible in the context of this type of bald-faced propaganda. But I noted that while he was outright attacking and telling lies about anyone who opposed him, at least he wasn't questioning their patriotism (yet). Well here we are. All information sources which challenge the President's narrative are enemies of the American people. Here it is apparently too far to say that, say, Russia is an enemy of the American people, but the NYT? Yup, totally, enemy of the state, public enemy number one, we must destroy them or be destroyed by them. Do you guys remember when Obama made a speech in ~2012 (I think) trying to convince Latinos to go out and vote for Democrats, and he referred to Republicans as their "enemy?" And there was a whole big kerfuffle about how inappropriate it is to call the opposition the "enemy" and Republicans were all calling him the Divider in Chief? Well, here we are now. Most major American news outlets are our enemy. We should, I assume, get all our information from the President, and never question any aspect of the offivial story lest we, too, become an Enemy of the American People. It's all fair game until Trump actually shuts down the press using the force of government. The press has it made is very clear that it will do whatever it can to take Trump down. It has declared itself to be Trump's enemy and is acting as such in the court of public opinion. Trump has every right -- and the obligation -- to fight back in that venue. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On February 18 2017 10:19 biology]major wrote: Why does a person who literally attacks anyone and anything for any reason, never say anything negative regarding Russia? It baffles my mind, and is so out of character for trumpian rhetoric. I'm assuming this question is rhetorical, so not giving a significant response. It is a common sentiment you have there. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
ChristianS
United States3188 Posts
On February 18 2017 10:27 xDaunt wrote: It's all fair game until Trump actually shuts down the press using the force of government. The press has it made is very clear that it will do whatever it can to take Trump down. It has declared itself to be Trump's enemy and is acting as such in the court of public opinion. Trump has every right -- and the obligation -- to fight back in that venue. Trump has the right and obligation to tell outright lies and declare the media enemies of the people when they call him on it? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On February 18 2017 10:39 ChristianS wrote: Trump has the right and obligation to tell outright lies and declare the media enemies of the people when they call him on it? The right? Sure. Is it a good long term plan as president? Not likely. He can't keep blaming Clinton for four years. Also: | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On February 18 2017 10:19 biology]major wrote: Why does a person who literally attacks anyone and anything for any reason, never say anything negative regarding Russia? It baffles my mind, and is so out of character for trumpian rhetoric. Every European leader also wants to know the answer. But I'll give you something slightly more interesting to think on. If you listen long enough to how people talk about Russia, in a positive or negative light, you will notice that there is a difference between how Americans, Europeans, Poles/Balts (the "Russia is the ultimate evil" alliance), and Russians talk about Russia. It's a notable difference, in that Americans would never say the kinds of things Europeans would say, etc., about Russia because that's just not how they talk about it. But I noticed that, very occasionally, Trump uses distinctly Russian-origin rhetoric when he talks about Russia. Likely just read some RT/Sputnik/other Russian-English news source but even if so, it underlies a deeper willingness to support Russia than one should expect from a president. I'd be worried if it weren't just so very convenient for me, regardless of the way this ultimately goes. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On February 18 2017 10:05 ChristianS wrote: About a month ago I was noting Trump's direct attacks on any non-state information source are a clear sign of his authoritarian inclinations. That leftist hysteria about "fascism" becomes more plausible in the context of this type of bald-faced propaganda. But I noted that while he was outright attacking and telling lies about anyone who opposed him, at least he wasn't questioning their patriotism (yet). Well here we are. All information sources which challenge the President's narrative are enemies of the American people. Here it is apparently too far to say that, say, Russia is an enemy of the American people, but the NYT? Yup, totally, enemy of the state, public enemy number one, we must destroy them or be destroyed by them. Do you guys remember when Obama made a speech in ~2012 (I think) trying to convince Latinos to go out and vote for Democrats, and he referred to Republicans as their "enemy?" And there was a whole big kerfuffle about how inappropriate it is to call the opposition the "enemy" and Republicans were all calling him the Divider in Chief? Well, here we are now. Most major American news outlets are our enemy. We should, I assume, get all our information from the President, and never question any aspect of the offivial story lest we, too, become an Enemy of the American People. Let's not push this too far. Yes, the way he talks about anyone who criticizes him is troubling. But it's a far cry from "fascism" or any other flavor-of-the-year buzzword that our left-leaning folk have come up with. The innocuous explanation here is that he watched too much Fox News and Breitbart and started getting delusions of grandeur. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On February 18 2017 11:15 LegalLord wrote: Let's not push this too far. Yes, the way he talks about anyone who criticizes him is troubling. But it's a far cry from "fascism" or any other flavor-of-the-year buzzword that our left-leaning folk have come up with. The innocuous explanation here is that he watched too much Fox News and Breitbart and started getting delusions of grandeur. The problem is that the left has its head so far up its posterior on what the press is doing that it is conflating completely legitimate rhetoric with unconstitutional governmental action. There is nothing unconstitutional about relentlessly criticizing the press. There is nothing unconstitutional about pointing out very obvious instances of bias from the press and highlighting them for the public to see using the power of the bully pulpit. And perhaps most fundamental of all, the Constitution does not give the press carte blanche to attack its political oppositIon without fear of purely rhetorical reprisal. But hey, the left trying to silence the opposition is nothing new. | ||
|
biology]major
United States2253 Posts
I have confidence that Mattis will be independent in running DoD and will resign if it comes to worst case scenario, and so far he is holding ground and flat out saying Russia and USA are not ready to work together on the ground. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
Unconstitutional is a pretty high bar. | ||
| ||
