• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 17:20
CEST 23:20
KST 06:20
  • 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
Serral wins HomeStory Cup 2914Serral wins Maestros of the Game 243ByuL, and the Limitations of Standard Play3Team Liquid Map Contest #22: Results and Winners7Code S Season 2 (2026): RO4 and Finals Preview12
Community News
Balance hotfix patch 5.0.16b (July 16)54Reynor: GSL Loss Wasn't About Preparation Format16[IPSL] Spring 2026 Grand Finals - This Weekend!6Weekly Cups (July 6 - 12): Protoss strike back12BSL Season 22 Full Overview & Conclusion8
StarCraft 2
General
Balance hotfix patch 5.0.16b (July 16) [D] Wireframe Casting Removed Clem: "I don't have that much hope in Blizzard" Reynor: GSL Loss Wasn't About Preparation Format Is the larve respawn broken?
Tourneys
Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2) WardiTV Summer Cup 2026 GSL CK #5 Race War RSL Revival: Season 6 - Qualifiers and Main Event HomeStory Cup 29
Strategy
[G] Having the right mentality to improve
Custom Maps
New Map Maker - Looking for Advice - Love or Hate Work In Progress Melee Maps [D]RTS in all its shapes and glory <3
External Content
The PondCast: SC2 News & Results Mutation # 534 Burning Evacuation Mutation # 533 Die Together Mutation # 532 Nuclear Family
Brood War
General
BW General Discussion ASL22 General Discussion NaDa’s Body Followup Pros Debate: Zerg Unfairly Nerfed? (ASL S22 map) Etiquete rules in Asl?
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [IPSL] Spring 2026 Grand Finals - This Weekend! Escore Tournament - Season 3 Small VOD Thread 2.0
Strategy
Fighting Spirit mining rates Simple Questions, Simple Answers Creating a full chart of Zerg builds Relatively freeroll strategies
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Path of Exile General RTS Discussion Thread Beyond All Reason Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread
Dota 2
Looking for a Dota Mentor 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
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Power Rank NeO.D_StephenKing vs This Guy From 1 Million Dance TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
Russo-Ukrainian War Thread US Politics Mega-thread The Games Industry And ATVI UK Politics Mega-thread YouTube Thread
Fan Clubs
The IdrA Fan Club The HerO Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Req][Books] Good Fantasy/SciFi books Series you have seen recently...
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread MLB/Baseball 2023 McBoner: A hockey love story Tennis[sport] Formula 1 Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Simple Questions Simple Answers FPS when play League Of Legend on laptop How to clean a TTe Thermaltake keyboard?
TL Community
Northern Ireland Global Starcraft The Automated Ban List
Blogs
ASL S22 English Commentary…
namkraft
Poker (part 2)
Nebuchad
The Experiences We Want and …
TrAiDoS
An Exploration of th…
waywardstrategy
ramps on octagon
StaticNine
Funny Nicknames
LUCKY_NOOB
Evil Gacha Games and the…
ffswowsucks
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 7678 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
Spain18376 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
Switzerland12485 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
Switzerland12485 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
Switzerland12485 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
Spain18376 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
Spain18376 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
Epic.LAN
13:00
Epic.LAN 48 Playoff Stage
epiclan93
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
SpeCial 161
BRAT_OK 113
ViBE30
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 626
HiyA 17
Dota 2
qojqva2146
syndereN315
LuMiX0
Counter-Strike
fl0m1445
minikerr24
Super Smash Bros
hungrybox592
Mew2King265
Heroes of the Storm
Trikslyr83
Other Games
gofns8953
tarik_tv4413
Grubby3477
Liquid`RaSZi1219
C9.Mang0564
Livibee235
XaKoH 97
KnowMe90
Chillindude17
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick2323
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
[ Show 15 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Hupsaiya 68
• musti20045 8
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• FirePhoenix21
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Other Games
• imaqtpie971
• Shiphtur362
Upcoming Events
RSL Revival
11h 40m
Classic vs Trap
herO vs SHIN
Sparkling Tuna Cup
12h 40m
OSC
15h 40m
IPSL
18h 40m
Bonyth vs Ret
WardiTV Weekly
1d 13h
Monday Night Weeklies
1d 18h
OSC
2 days
PiGosaur Cup
3 days
The PondCast
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
[ Show More ]
CrankTV Team League
4 days
Replay Cast
5 days
CrankTV Team League
5 days
Korean StarCraft League
6 days
RSL Revival
6 days
Online Event
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Escore Tournament S3: W3
HSC XXIX
Eternal Conflict S2 E2

Ongoing

IPSL Spring 2026
Acropolis #4
YSL S3
CSL 2026 Summer (S21)
KCM Race Survival 2026 Season 3
Proleague 2026-07-18
RSL Revival: Season 6
CranK Gathers Season 4: BW vs SC2 Team League
SCTL 2026 Spring
Stake Ranked Episode 3
XSE Pro League 2026
IEM Cologne Major 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 2
CS Asia Championships 2026
Asian Champions League 2026
IEM Atlanta 2026
PGL Astana 2026

Upcoming

Escore Tournament S3: W4
ASL S22 SEASON OPEN Day 2
Escore Tournament S3: W5
CSLAN 4
Blizzard Classic Cup 2026
HSC XXX
SC4ALL II: StarCraft II
Kung Fu Cup 2026 Grand Finals
Light Tournament 2026
Eternal Conflict S2 Finale
Eternal Conflict S2 E3
Logitech G Connect 2026
StarSeries Fall 2026
FISSURE Playground #5
BLAST Open Fall 2026
Esports World Cup 2026
BLAST Bounty Summer 2026
BLAST Bounty Summer Qual
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.