US Politics Mega-thread - Page 7099

On March 11 2017 04:33 Danglars wrote:

Would you consider the transfer of power from Obama to Trump to be peaceful? I saw "normal humans" rioting and #NotMyPresident #Resist everywhere ("unrest"). Seems like accepting the results of an election were already overrated.

Also, remember that impeachment is one separate process. Bill Clinton was impeached. He did not confront the scenario of transfer of power because he stayed in office after impeachment and finished the term!

On March 11 2017 04:39 LightSpectra wrote:


There was no attempted coup d'etat or civil war. The riots weren't nearly as bad as some of the ones in American history. It was a peaceful transfer by any reasonable standard.

The only precedent we have is Richard Nixon who resigned peacefully instead of dragging out the impeachment process. It's questionable if Trump would agree to the same thing.

On March 11 2017 04:58 Danglars wrote:

Do you mistake impeachment to mean more, like the one before you?

On March 11 2017 05:04 Danglars wrote:

The man talked about unrest and peaceful transfer. Given that both words could be equally discussed with Obama to Trump, I want to qualify what he means.

And we will see if this barrage of illegal leaks of classified info lasts long enough to function as a bureaucratic coup. We have some dangerous precedents being set with wiretaps and the ability of the deep state to rebel against their purported bosses.

On March 11 2017 05:01 Ayaz2810 wrote:



There's a very big difference between semi-peaceful marches and what I am suspecting will happen if the worst case scenario plays out. I'm not defending the left for what they have done in terms of like UC Berkely and that shit, but I'm thinking what we would see would involve firearms and chaos. I certainly hope I'm wrong lol.

On March 10 2017 21:59 Liquid`Drone wrote:


I'm quite certain I could quote several posts of yours where you mention not being worried about your personal future partly due to being intelligent. And it's obvious that you are highly intelligent, much more so than the average person.

This gives you the significant benefit of learning at a much higher pace. Mastery of languages in particular is something that is highly correlated to intelligence. For you, maybe it's something that can be accomplished in a few hours a week, and it's something that gives you a sense of mastery and accomplishment - and as a pedagogue, I can tell you that the feeling of mastery and accomplishment is, for most people, absolutely crucial in motivating further hard work.

You asked earlier about structural problems that make people incapable of exerting comparable degrees of control over their life direction. I'd argue that most people are to a large degree shaped by early years of their education. Teachers identify the smart, talented students early on, smart and talented students self-identify as smart and talented early on, the other students identify smart and talented students early on. And people who find themselves in the bottom half of the intelligence and talent pool will normally identify as being part of the bottom half of the intelligence and talent pool, or at least, they won't identify as part of the top quarter. Unlike you, they learn that learning is difficult, they learn that they only learn at half the pace as the smarter students, they learn that they aren't expected to do great things with their lives. For you, with your obvious talents, you learned that the world is out to get something from you, and that you can contribute meaningfully, that your efforts will be appreciated. For the 93 iq girl who tried her very best but still ended up with a C-, she learns that even if she tries her very best, she's still gonna fall short. I remember teaching at a school where they had separated the students based on ability, and upon asking the worse half a not-that-simple question, I got a response 'man, we're the retard class, we don't know this shit'.

I liked that kid a lot and I hope he goes on to do good things with his life, but he's not gonna spend his spare time learning spanish, or french, or german. He's already learned that he's not good at learning, and sadly, it's not even that incorrect. He wasn't very good at learning. At best, he's gonna hold on to a job, work out, get a girlfriend, watch tv or play computer games, and be content with his life. In Norway, I think that's a highly possible outcome, because even if you're just working in a warehouse or whatever, you can still make $80k per year, if you work some overtime. Still only a 40~ hour week though. (That said, these jobs are disappearing, I really can't speculate on how many of these types of jobs are still gonna be around 30 years from now.) But in the US? I wouldn't have high hopes.

The smart, lazy people, that's a pretty small fragment of society, even if they might stand out to you. The people who learn from a young age that they must be content with mediocrity, even if this is never explicitly stated to them, that's a significant group. And if looking at poor people as a whole, it's not a group dominated by the smart and lazy.

On March 11 2017 05:04 ticklishmusic wrote:


My point is that it's not a valid comparison. Trump won. There was a transition of power. Clinton was impeached AND SUBSEQUENTLY acquitted. There was no need for a transition of power.

On March 11 2017 05:04 Danglars wrote:

The man talked about unrest and peaceful transfer. Given that both words could be equally discussed with Obama to Trump, I want to qualify what he means.

And we will see if this barrage of illegal leaks of classified info lasts long enough to function as a bureaucratic coup. We have some dangerous precedents being set with wiretaps and the ability of the deep state to rebel against their purported bosses.

On March 11 2017 05:04 Danglars wrote:

The man talked about unrest and peaceful transfer. Given that both words could be equally discussed with Obama to Trump, I want to qualify what he means.

And we will see if this barrage of illegal leaks of classified info lasts long enough to function as a bureaucratic coup. We have some dangerous precedents being set with wiretaps and the ability of the deep state to rebel against their purported bosses.

With Mr. Trump’s administration aggressively pitching the House Republican plan to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, Capitol Hill’s official scorekeeper — the Congressional Budget Office — is coming under intense fire. As it prepares to render its judgment on the cost and impact of the bill, the nonpartisan agency of economists and statisticians has become a political piñata — and the latest example of Mr. Trump’s team casting doubt on benchmarks accepted as trustworthy for decades.

“If you’re looking to the C.B.O. for accuracy, you’re looking in the wrong place,” Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, said on Wednesday, arguing that the agency’s failure to accurately project enrollment in the Affordable Care Act’s online marketplaces had essentially killed its credibility.

Mr. Spicer’s criticism echoed that of some House Republicans who raised questions this week about the C.B.O.’s record.

The reason for their umbrage is clear: The C.B.O.’s official judgment on the American Health Care Act, as the Republican legislation is known, is expected to be released on Monday and it is more than an intellectual exercise. It could make or break the bill.

Budget rules that Republicans are using to bypass a possible Democratic filibuster in the Senate stipulate that the health care legislation must not add to deficits over the span of a decade. If the C.B.O. predicts that it would, Senate Democrats could block the bill. More broadly, a judgment by the C.B.O. that the Republican plan would strip health care from millions of people could have politically disastrous effects.

On March 11 2017 05:28 ShoCkeyy wrote:
https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/03/10/sean-spicer-wears-american-flag-pin-upside-down-at-press-briefing/21879530/

Subtle sign of distress?

On March 11 2017 05:12 Danglars wrote:

Sir, when I say impeachment is one part of the process, I mean it is one part of the process. Don't read in whatever silly comparisons you fashion in your head to be what I actually wrote. He said impeachment like that was the whole story, and I brought up Clinton to illustrate it most certainly is not the whole story. If you think that's somehow worth getting upset over, go read the constitution and have a nice cup of tea.

On March 11 2017 05:42 Gorsameth wrote:

Lets not get carried away, not like no one has did a pin wrong in a rush before.

On March 11 2017 05:42 Gorsameth wrote:

Lets not get carried away, not like no one has did a pin wrong in a rush before.

On March 11 2017 05:28 ShoCkeyy wrote:
https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/03/10/sean-spicer-wears-american-flag-pin-upside-down-at-press-briefing/21879530/

Subtle sign of distress?

On March 10 2017 22:55 farvacola wrote:
I'm going to continue to hope that Perez does his part in helping the party move away from Pelosi-style Democratic politics and I'll judge his chairmanship accordingly.