• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EST 01:44
CET 07:44
KST 15:44
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
HomeStory Cup 28 - Info & Preview3Rongyi Cup S3 - Preview & Info3herO wins SC2 All-Star Invitational14SC2 All-Star Invitational: Tournament Preview5RSL Revival - 2025 Season Finals Preview8
Community News
Weekly Cups (Jan 19-25): Bunny, Trigger, MaxPax win3Weekly Cups (Jan 12-18): herO, MaxPax, Solar win0BSL Season 2025 - Full Overview and Conclusion8Weekly Cups (Jan 5-11): Clem wins big offline, Trigger upsets4$21,000 Rongyi Cup Season 3 announced (Jan 22-Feb 7)38
StarCraft 2
General
HomeStory Cup 28 - Info & Preview StarCraft 2 Not at the Esports World Cup 2026 Weekly Cups (Jan 19-25): Bunny, Trigger, MaxPax win Oliveira Would Have Returned If EWC Continued herO wins SC2 All-Star Invitational
Tourneys
KSL Week 85 HomeStory Cup 28 $21,000 Rongyi Cup Season 3 announced (Jan 22-Feb 7) OSC Season 13 World Championship $70 Prize Pool Ladder Legends Academy Weekly Open!
Strategy
Simple Questions Simple Answers
Custom Maps
[A] Starcraft Sound Mod
External Content
Mutation # 510 Safety Violation Mutation # 509 Doomsday Report Mutation # 508 Violent Night Mutation # 507 Well Trained
Brood War
General
Bleak Future After Failed ProGaming Career Potential ASL qualifier breakthroughs? BW General Discussion BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ [ASL21] Potential Map Candidates
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues Small VOD Thread 2.0 Azhi's Colosseum - Season 2 [BSL21] Non-Korean Championship - Starts Jan 10
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Zealot bombing is no longer popular? Current Meta Soma's 9 hatch build from ASL Game 2
Other Games
General Games
Battle Aces/David Kim RTS Megathread Path of Exile Nintendo Switch Thread Mobile Legends: Bang Bang Beyond All Reason
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
Vanilla Mini Mafia Mafia Game Mode Feedback/Ideas
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread YouTube Thread Canadian Politics Mega-thread European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
The herO Fan Club! The IdrA Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread [Manga] One Piece
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
How Esports Advertising Shap…
TrAiDoS
My 2025 Magic: The Gathering…
DARKING
Life Update and thoughts.
FuDDx
How do archons sleep?
8882
James Bond movies ranking - pa…
Topin
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 1798 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 6914

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 6912 6913 6914 6915 6916 10093 Next
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.
LegalLord
Profile Blog Joined April 2013
United States13779 Posts
February 18 2017 03:32 GMT
#138261
On February 18 2017 12:19 Gahlo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 18 2017 12:15 LegalLord wrote:
My view of this is simply "Trump attacking the press [by saying they oppose the American people] is not in good taste, but it's far from reasonable to call him a fascist for it."

Let's not jump the gun just because we don't like him.

Nobody called him a facist because of it. They just noted it's a common tactic that facists have used in the past. Let's not jump the gun on jumping the gun.

The point of the comparison is obvious: to insinuate that he is, or that he is close to being, a fascist.
History will sooner or later sweep the European Union away without mercy.
Aquanim
Profile Joined November 2012
Australia2849 Posts
February 18 2017 03:33 GMT
#138262
On February 18 2017 11:42 xDaunt wrote:
If it's not unconstitutional, then there's nothing wrong with it.
...

Can you confirm that you actually meant to say this?
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
February 18 2017 03:34 GMT
#138263
On February 18 2017 12:32 LegalLord wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 18 2017 12:19 Gahlo wrote:
On February 18 2017 12:15 LegalLord wrote:
My view of this is simply "Trump attacking the press [by saying they oppose the American people] is not in good taste, but it's far from reasonable to call him a fascist for it."

Let's not jump the gun just because we don't like him.

Nobody called him a facist because of it. They just noted it's a common tactic that facists have used in the past. Let's not jump the gun on jumping the gun.

The point of the comparison is obvious: to insinuate that he is, or that he is close to being, a fascist.

or the somewhat milder, things are uncomfortably trending in that direction.

also, remember people, it's faScist, not facist. please help the OCD among us
Great read: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/ great book on democracy: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10671.html zlefin is grumpier due to long term illness. Ignoring some users.
LegalLord
Profile Blog Joined April 2013
United States13779 Posts
February 18 2017 03:36 GMT
#138264
On February 18 2017 12:24 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Show nested quote +
John McCain said on Friday that Donald Trump’s administration was in “disarray” and that Nato’s founders would be alarmed by the growing unwillingness to “separate truth from lies”.

The Republican Senator broke with the reassuring message that US officials visiting Germany have sought to convey on their debut trip to Europe, telling a Munich security conference the resignation of the new president’s security adviser, Michael Flynn, over his contacts with Russia reflected deep problems in Washington.

“I think that the Flynn issue obviously is something that shows that in many respects this administration is in disarray and they’ve got a lot of work to do,” said McCain, a known Trump critic, even as he praised Trump’s defence secretary. “The president, I think, makes statements [and] on other occasions contradicts himself. So we’ve learned to watch what the president does as opposed to what he says,” he said.

Without mentioning the president’s name, McCain lamented a shift in the US and Europe away from the “universal values” that forged the Nato alliance seven decades ago. McCain also said the alliance’s founders would be “alarmed by the growing inability, and even unwillingness, to separate truth from lies.”

The chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said “more and more of our fellow citizens seem to be flirting with authoritarianism and romanticising it as our moral equivalent”. The senator also regretted the “hardening resentment we see toward immigrants, and refugees, and minority groups, especially Muslims”.

European governments have been unsettled by the signals sent by Trump on a range of foreign policy issues ranging from Nato and Russia to Iran, Israel and European integration.

The debut trip to Europe of Trump’s defence secretary, Jim Mattis, and his secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, to a meeting of G20 counterparts in Bonn, went some way to assuaging concerns as they both took a more traditional US position.

But Trump is wrestling with a growing controversy at home about potential ties between his aides and Russia, which he dismissed on Thursday as a “ruse” and “scam” perpetrated by a hostile news media.

Mattis made clear to allies, both at Nato in Brussels and in Munich, that the US would not retreat from leadership as the European continent grapples with an assertive Russia, wars in eastern and southern Mediterranean countries and attacks by Islamist militants.

US vice-president Mike Pence will address the Munich conference on Saturday with a similar message of reassurance. Pence will say Europe is an “indispensable partner”, a senior White House foreign policy adviser told reporters.

Mattis told a crowd that included heads of state and more than 70 defence ministers that Trump backed Nato. “President Trump came into office and has thrown now his full support to Nato. He too espouses Nato’s need to adapt to today’s strategic situation for it to remain credible, capable and relevant,” Mattis said.

Mattis said the US and its European allies had a shared understanding of the challenges ahead. Trump has alarmed allies by expressing admiration for Russian president Vladimir Putin.


Source

McCain sounds like he wants a war with Russia and isn't happy that someone opposes it.

Although the reality on the ground suggests that US-Russia relations will toe the status quo so I suppose he will be happy.
History will sooner or later sweep the European Union away without mercy.
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
February 18 2017 03:40 GMT
#138265
On February 18 2017 12:33 Aquanim wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 18 2017 11:42 xDaunt wrote:
If it's not unconstitutional, then there's nothing wrong with it.
...

Can you confirm that you actually meant to say this?

Unlawful may be the better word (though issues of lawfulness concerning the press almost inevitably concern constitutionality), but yes.
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
February 18 2017 03:40 GMT
#138266
On February 18 2017 12:32 LegalLord wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 18 2017 12:19 Gahlo wrote:
On February 18 2017 12:15 LegalLord wrote:
My view of this is simply "Trump attacking the press [by saying they oppose the American people] is not in good taste, but it's far from reasonable to call him a fascist for it."

Let's not jump the gun just because we don't like him.

Nobody called him a facist because of it. They just noted it's a common tactic that facists have used in the past. Let's not jump the gun on jumping the gun.

The point of the comparison is obvious: to insinuate that he is, or that he is close to being, a fascist.

Yes that is the direction you would like the discussion to go.

However, it does not change the fact those are the tools that dictators and fascist used to gain and hold power. And discussion of those tools being employed in the US system, knowingly or unknowingly, is completely reasonable. And shouldn't be derailed by people crying about Trump being called a fascist when no one did that.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
LegalLord
Profile Blog Joined April 2013
United States13779 Posts
February 18 2017 03:47 GMT
#138267
On February 18 2017 12:40 Plansix wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 18 2017 12:32 LegalLord wrote:
On February 18 2017 12:19 Gahlo wrote:
On February 18 2017 12:15 LegalLord wrote:
My view of this is simply "Trump attacking the press [by saying they oppose the American people] is not in good taste, but it's far from reasonable to call him a fascist for it."

Let's not jump the gun just because we don't like him.

Nobody called him a facist because of it. They just noted it's a common tactic that facists have used in the past. Let's not jump the gun on jumping the gun.

The point of the comparison is obvious: to insinuate that he is, or that he is close to being, a fascist.

Yes that is the direction you would like the discussion to go.

However, it does not change the fact those are the tools that dictators and fascist used to gain and hold power. And discussion of those tools being employed in the US system, knowingly or unknowingly, is completely reasonable. And shouldn't be derailed by people crying about Trump being called a fascist when no one did that.

Dictators and fascist also give speeches and hold rallies and pass executive orders.
History will sooner or later sweep the European Union away without mercy.
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-02-18 03:50:05
February 18 2017 03:49 GMT
#138268
On February 18 2017 12:47 LegalLord wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 18 2017 12:40 Plansix wrote:
On February 18 2017 12:32 LegalLord wrote:
On February 18 2017 12:19 Gahlo wrote:
On February 18 2017 12:15 LegalLord wrote:
My view of this is simply "Trump attacking the press [by saying they oppose the American people] is not in good taste, but it's far from reasonable to call him a fascist for it."

Let's not jump the gun just because we don't like him.

Nobody called him a facist because of it. They just noted it's a common tactic that facists have used in the past. Let's not jump the gun on jumping the gun.

The point of the comparison is obvious: to insinuate that he is, or that he is close to being, a fascist.

Yes that is the direction you would like the discussion to go.

However, it does not change the fact those are the tools that dictators and fascist used to gain and hold power. And discussion of those tools being employed in the US system, knowingly or unknowingly, is completely reasonable. And shouldn't be derailed by people crying about Trump being called a fascist when no one did that.

Dictators and fascist also give speeches and hold rallies and pass executive orders.

Those are also well documented tool of democracy. Denial of provable facts like the weather, attacking the press and judiciary are not. Your argument sort of falls flat.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
LegalLord
Profile Blog Joined April 2013
United States13779 Posts
February 18 2017 03:55 GMT
#138269
On February 18 2017 12:49 Plansix wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 18 2017 12:47 LegalLord wrote:
On February 18 2017 12:40 Plansix wrote:
On February 18 2017 12:32 LegalLord wrote:
On February 18 2017 12:19 Gahlo wrote:
On February 18 2017 12:15 LegalLord wrote:
My view of this is simply "Trump attacking the press [by saying they oppose the American people] is not in good taste, but it's far from reasonable to call him a fascist for it."

Let's not jump the gun just because we don't like him.

Nobody called him a facist because of it. They just noted it's a common tactic that facists have used in the past. Let's not jump the gun on jumping the gun.

The point of the comparison is obvious: to insinuate that he is, or that he is close to being, a fascist.

Yes that is the direction you would like the discussion to go.

However, it does not change the fact those are the tools that dictators and fascist used to gain and hold power. And discussion of those tools being employed in the US system, knowingly or unknowingly, is completely reasonable. And shouldn't be derailed by people crying about Trump being called a fascist when no one did that.

Dictators and fascist also give speeches and hold rallies and pass executive orders.

Those are also well documented tool of democracy. Denial of provable facts like the weather, attacking the press and judiciary are not. Your argument sort of falls flat.

Not really. It's a sloppy correlation meant to draw parallels where they aren't really appropriate. It's understandable when you really don't like the guy (a fully reasonable position) but it's nonetheless wrong. It's sort of like when people tried to prove that Trump rallies had Nazi salutes at them. Just an attempt to draw parallels to paint a disliked fella in a worse light.

Fuck, at least get something better than just standard Fox News fare before crying fascist - or, in your very deflective and roundabout way, "tools that fascists use."
History will sooner or later sweep the European Union away without mercy.
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-02-18 04:03:44
February 18 2017 04:01 GMT
#138270
You're free to engaged in whatever discussions you want. But calling people hysterical and saying people are wrong for even broaching the topic is not a compelling argument. You're constant attempts to derail it are not either. The same with people discussions of Russian aggression towards our sovereignty and election. And other elections.

Trump isn't a dictator, but Bannon would love if he was. But Trump is just a really incompetent version of Nixon. He is no Putin.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
LegalLord
Profile Blog Joined April 2013
United States13779 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-02-18 04:09:58
February 18 2017 04:04 GMT
#138271
You're not wrong for broaching the topic - you're wrong for a severe overreaction to an admittedly problematic behavior.

Edit: This isn't going anywhere, as usual with you. Might as well just nip this in the bud and end the discussion. Random Russia mention is random by the way (your desire for people to see Russia in a poor light is noted).
History will sooner or later sweep the European Union away without mercy.
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-02-18 04:11:52
February 18 2017 04:11 GMT
#138272
Just pointing out your constant attempts to derail rather than engage with a topic. Specifically dictatorships and their trappings, real or highly hypothetical.

And saying someone is overreacting is synonymous with calling them hysterical. Not really convincing me of much.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
Acrofales
Profile Joined August 2010
Spain18205 Posts
February 18 2017 05:08 GMT
#138273
On February 18 2017 02:30 Nebuchad wrote:
Okay so we have one side who thinks it's not very important which one goes through, something like 55-45, and one side who thinks it's very important which one goes through. So since we're equal in this partnership, you're going to account for how important it's for the other side and choose the person who they think is important, right?

Right?

Insofar as I know, nobody in this thread is choosing jack shit, but if they were, I'd assume one person, one vote. If you're so passionate about Ellison, then make the case why he's better, because "it's important that we win" doesn't convince anybody.
Nebuchad
Profile Blog Joined December 2012
Switzerland12385 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-02-18 05:24:30
February 18 2017 05:23 GMT
#138274
On February 18 2017 14:08 Acrofales wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 18 2017 02:30 Nebuchad wrote:
Okay so we have one side who thinks it's not very important which one goes through, something like 55-45, and one side who thinks it's very important which one goes through. So since we're equal in this partnership, you're going to account for how important it's for the other side and choose the person who they think is important, right?

Right?

Insofar as I know, nobody in this thread is choosing jack shit, but if they were, I'd assume one person, one vote. If you're so passionate about Ellison, then make the case why he's better, because "it's important that we win" doesn't convince anybody.


Dude I'm not even american and you aren't either, why are you acting as if I believe it's about us choosing anything? Of course we aren't choosing anything. I'm just pointing out that in an equal relationship where both partners are honest, if one is mostly okay with A and B and the other reaaaaally wants A, then you probably should end up with A. That's a really basic thing. So if the DNC ends up going with B when one part of its base wants either A or B and the other part of its base wants A, that says something about the situation.



As per the press discussion, it's kind of ludicrous in the first place because the american press has actually been overall way too fair to republicans for way too long. It took a Trump for people to come out and actually denounce obvious lies, when the republicans have been demonstrably dishonest on a multitude of subjects for a multitude of years. The far right parties of most of Europe dream of a press that lets them get away with as much as yours does.
No will to live, no wish to die
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-02-18 05:30:16
February 18 2017 05:29 GMT
#138275
On February 18 2017 14:23 Nebuchad wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 18 2017 14:08 Acrofales wrote:
On February 18 2017 02:30 Nebuchad wrote:
Okay so we have one side who thinks it's not very important which one goes through, something like 55-45, and one side who thinks it's very important which one goes through. So since we're equal in this partnership, you're going to account for how important it's for the other side and choose the person who they think is important, right?

Right?

Insofar as I know, nobody in this thread is choosing jack shit, but if they were, I'd assume one person, one vote. If you're so passionate about Ellison, then make the case why he's better, because "it's important that we win" doesn't convince anybody.


Dude I'm not even american and you aren't either, why are you acting as if I believe it's about us choosing anything? Of course we aren't choosing anything. I'm just pointing out that in an equal relationship where both partners are honest, if one is mostly okay with A and B and the other reaaaaally wants A, then you probably should end up with A. That's a really basic thing. So if the DNC ends up going with B when one part of its base wants either A or B and the other part of its base wants A, that says something about the situation.



As per the press discussion, it's kind of ludicrous in the first place because the american press has actually been overall way too fair to republicans for way too long. It took a Trump for people to come out and actually denounce obvious lies, when the republicans have been demonstrably dishonest on a multitude of subjects for a multitude of years. The far right parties of most of Europe dream of a press that lets them get away with as much as yours does.

A and B are classifications in this case, not individuals, so the total weight of them is not so clear. in particular it's not equivalent to a two person system.

it's also a question of which standards should apply to the decision process.
Great read: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/ great book on democracy: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10671.html zlefin is grumpier due to long term illness. Ignoring some users.
Nebuchad
Profile Blog Joined December 2012
Switzerland12385 Posts
February 18 2017 05:38 GMT
#138276
On February 18 2017 14:29 zlefin wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 18 2017 14:23 Nebuchad wrote:
On February 18 2017 14:08 Acrofales wrote:
On February 18 2017 02:30 Nebuchad wrote:
Okay so we have one side who thinks it's not very important which one goes through, something like 55-45, and one side who thinks it's very important which one goes through. So since we're equal in this partnership, you're going to account for how important it's for the other side and choose the person who they think is important, right?

Right?

Insofar as I know, nobody in this thread is choosing jack shit, but if they were, I'd assume one person, one vote. If you're so passionate about Ellison, then make the case why he's better, because "it's important that we win" doesn't convince anybody.


Dude I'm not even american and you aren't either, why are you acting as if I believe it's about us choosing anything? Of course we aren't choosing anything. I'm just pointing out that in an equal relationship where both partners are honest, if one is mostly okay with A and B and the other reaaaaally wants A, then you probably should end up with A. That's a really basic thing. So if the DNC ends up going with B when one part of its base wants either A or B and the other part of its base wants A, that says something about the situation.



As per the press discussion, it's kind of ludicrous in the first place because the american press has actually been overall way too fair to republicans for way too long. It took a Trump for people to come out and actually denounce obvious lies, when the republicans have been demonstrably dishonest on a multitude of subjects for a multitude of years. The far right parties of most of Europe dream of a press that lets them get away with as much as yours does.

A and B are classifications in this case, not individuals, so the total weight of them is not so clear. in particular it's not equivalent to a two person system.

it's also a question of which standards should apply to the decision process.


Why are they classifications rather than individuals?
No will to live, no wish to die
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-02-18 05:45:27
February 18 2017 05:44 GMT
#138277
On February 18 2017 14:38 Nebuchad wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 18 2017 14:29 zlefin wrote:
On February 18 2017 14:23 Nebuchad wrote:
On February 18 2017 14:08 Acrofales wrote:
On February 18 2017 02:30 Nebuchad wrote:
Okay so we have one side who thinks it's not very important which one goes through, something like 55-45, and one side who thinks it's very important which one goes through. So since we're equal in this partnership, you're going to account for how important it's for the other side and choose the person who they think is important, right?

Right?

Insofar as I know, nobody in this thread is choosing jack shit, but if they were, I'd assume one person, one vote. If you're so passionate about Ellison, then make the case why he's better, because "it's important that we win" doesn't convince anybody.


Dude I'm not even american and you aren't either, why are you acting as if I believe it's about us choosing anything? Of course we aren't choosing anything. I'm just pointing out that in an equal relationship where both partners are honest, if one is mostly okay with A and B and the other reaaaaally wants A, then you probably should end up with A. That's a really basic thing. So if the DNC ends up going with B when one part of its base wants either A or B and the other part of its base wants A, that says something about the situation.



As per the press discussion, it's kind of ludicrous in the first place because the american press has actually been overall way too fair to republicans for way too long. It took a Trump for people to come out and actually denounce obvious lies, when the republicans have been demonstrably dishonest on a multitude of subjects for a multitude of years. The far right parties of most of Europe dream of a press that lets them get away with as much as yours does.

A and B are classifications in this case, not individuals, so the total weight of them is not so clear. in particular it's not equivalent to a two person system.

it's also a question of which standards should apply to the decision process.


Why are they classifications rather than individuals?

oops. my bad, I was incorrectly noting which words were used where.
It should instead be that where you said "both partners", that's the parts that should have been referred to for purposes of unclear weighting etc, rather than the A/B set.

so it should be both "partners" are classifications in this case, not individuals, so the total weight of them is not so clear. in particular it's not equivalent to a two person system.
Great read: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/ great book on democracy: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10671.html zlefin is grumpier due to long term illness. Ignoring some users.
Nebuchad
Profile Blog Joined December 2012
Switzerland12385 Posts
February 18 2017 05:50 GMT
#138278
On February 18 2017 14:44 zlefin wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 18 2017 14:38 Nebuchad wrote:
On February 18 2017 14:29 zlefin wrote:
On February 18 2017 14:23 Nebuchad wrote:
On February 18 2017 14:08 Acrofales wrote:
On February 18 2017 02:30 Nebuchad wrote:
Okay so we have one side who thinks it's not very important which one goes through, something like 55-45, and one side who thinks it's very important which one goes through. So since we're equal in this partnership, you're going to account for how important it's for the other side and choose the person who they think is important, right?

Right?

Insofar as I know, nobody in this thread is choosing jack shit, but if they were, I'd assume one person, one vote. If you're so passionate about Ellison, then make the case why he's better, because "it's important that we win" doesn't convince anybody.


Dude I'm not even american and you aren't either, why are you acting as if I believe it's about us choosing anything? Of course we aren't choosing anything. I'm just pointing out that in an equal relationship where both partners are honest, if one is mostly okay with A and B and the other reaaaaally wants A, then you probably should end up with A. That's a really basic thing. So if the DNC ends up going with B when one part of its base wants either A or B and the other part of its base wants A, that says something about the situation.



As per the press discussion, it's kind of ludicrous in the first place because the american press has actually been overall way too fair to republicans for way too long. It took a Trump for people to come out and actually denounce obvious lies, when the republicans have been demonstrably dishonest on a multitude of subjects for a multitude of years. The far right parties of most of Europe dream of a press that lets them get away with as much as yours does.

A and B are classifications in this case, not individuals, so the total weight of them is not so clear. in particular it's not equivalent to a two person system.

it's also a question of which standards should apply to the decision process.


Why are they classifications rather than individuals?

oops. my bad, I was incorrectly noting which words were used where.
It should instead be that where you said "both partners", that's the parts that should have been referred to for purposes of unclear weighting etc, rather than the A/B set.

so it should be both "partners" are classifications in this case, not individuals, so the total weight of them is not so clear. in particular it's not equivalent to a two person system.


Okay, then that's true, but it's also pretty obvious, and doesn't stop us from looking at the major trends in priority.
No will to live, no wish to die
Acrofales
Profile Joined August 2010
Spain18205 Posts
February 18 2017 06:26 GMT
#138279
On February 18 2017 12:40 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 18 2017 12:33 Aquanim wrote:
On February 18 2017 11:42 xDaunt wrote:
If it's not unconstitutional, then there's nothing wrong with it.
...

Can you confirm that you actually meant to say this?

Unlawful may be the better word (though issues of lawfulness concerning the press almost inevitably concern constitutionality), but yes.

Morality and legality are not the same. E.g. if you are an evangelical extremist you believe it's morally wrong to allow women to have an abortion or gays to marry. Luckily it is not legally wrong. For you to marry your morality to legality means you have no moral compass of your own and rely on the American courts to decide what is right or wrong. If that's so, then why are you often so outspoken against things that are obviously legal. One of which is Obamacare, which has been deemed legal, and according to you therefore just.

In fact, with a morality defined by law it seems very hard for you to support your congressmen (or Congress at all): their principal purpose is to propose changes to laws, but how could they do that without some further moral compass about what is right? Pragmatism alone?

But in all fairness, I doubt you actually hold that belief, because you have voiced strong opinions on some of the courts' rulings, as well as proposals by Congress and the president for changes in the law. So clearly you do have some opinion about what is right, regardless of what is lawful. So why not answer the question that was asked rather than dodging it with this weird false equivalency?
Acrofales
Profile Joined August 2010
Spain18205 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-02-18 06:32:06
February 18 2017 06:30 GMT
#138280
On February 18 2017 14:23 Nebuchad wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 18 2017 14:08 Acrofales wrote:
On February 18 2017 02:30 Nebuchad wrote:
Okay so we have one side who thinks it's not very important which one goes through, something like 55-45, and one side who thinks it's very important which one goes through. So since we're equal in this partnership, you're going to account for how important it's for the other side and choose the person who they think is important, right?

Right?

Insofar as I know, nobody in this thread is choosing jack shit, but if they were, I'd assume one person, one vote. If you're so passionate about Ellison, then make the case why he's better, because "it's important that we win" doesn't convince anybody.


Dude I'm not even american and you aren't either, why are you acting as if I believe it's about us choosing anything? Of course we aren't choosing anything. I'm just pointing out that in an equal relationship where both partners are honest, if one is mostly okay with A and B and the other reaaaaally wants A, then you probably should end up with A. That's a really basic thing. So if the DNC ends up going with B when one part of its base wants either A or B and the other part of its base wants A, that says something about the situation.



As per the press discussion, it's kind of ludicrous in the first place because the american press has actually been overall way too fair to republicans for way too long. It took a Trump for people to come out and actually denounce obvious lies, when the republicans have been demonstrably dishonest on a multitude of subjects for a multitude of years. The far right parties of most of Europe dream of a press that lets them get away with as much as yours does.

Shouldn't the proportions matter? If 99% of the party wants A, but is okay with B too, but 1% really really wants B, which choice is"right"?

In most European systems clearly the B people would have left the party ages ago and started their own political party. In the US the first past the post system prevents that. So should 1% (note: proportions are fictional) be able to hold the party hostage by virtue of their uncompromising stance?
Prev 1 6912 6913 6914 6915 6916 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 5h 16m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
SortOf 145
StarCraft: Brood War
Sea 5145
ZergMaN 107
Shinee 95
Shuttle 62
Shine 62
Bale 28
ToSsGirL 22
NotJumperer 14
Dota 2
NeuroSwarm118
League of Legends
JimRising 769
C9.Mang0438
Super Smash Bros
Mew2King64
Other Games
febbydoto44
Organizations
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 14 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• intothetv
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Scarra1959
• Rush1162
• Lourlo1127
• Stunt325
Upcoming Events
HomeStory Cup
5h 16m
Korean StarCraft League
20h 16m
HomeStory Cup
1d 5h
Replay Cast
1d 17h
HomeStory Cup
2 days
Replay Cast
2 days
Replay Cast
3 days
Wardi Open
4 days
WardiTV Invitational
5 days
The PondCast
6 days
[ Show More ]
WardiTV Invitational
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2026-01-29
OSC Championship Season 13
Underdog Cup #3

Ongoing

CSL 2025 WINTER (S19)
KCM Race Survival 2026 Season 1
Acropolis #4 - TS4
Escore Tournament S1: W6
Rongyi Cup S3
HSC XXVIII
IEM Kraków 2026
BLAST Bounty Winter 2026
BLAST Bounty Winter Qual
eXTREMESLAND 2025
SL Budapest Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 8

Upcoming

Escore Tournament S1: W7
Acropolis #4
IPSL Spring 2026
uThermal 2v2 2026 Main Event
Bellum Gens Elite Stara Zagora 2026
LiuLi Cup: 2025 Grand Finals
Nations Cup 2026
IEM Rio 2026
PGL Bucharest 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 1
BLAST Open Spring 2026
ESL Pro League Season 23
ESL Pro League Season 23
PGL Cluj-Napoca 2026
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2026 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.