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.
On August 15 2017 11:04 Plansix wrote: You go Sessions. Get those protesters. I want to note that Sessions would have lost his shit if Obama did this.
Now they got a judge to sign a search warrant pursuant to the charge of inciting to riot. I'll put it in the liberal terms that would apply if Obama was still president. Why are you so accepting of violence and rioting? Is it because a black man is president? /s
Does this hurt the president or fans of manufacturing?
On August 15 2017 15:07 Wulfey_LA wrote: Sure he gives terrible advice to the President that delayed/weakened DJT's response to Nazi terrorism, but Bannon sure does stick it to the Libs!
Of course that doesn't really matter, with DJTs poll numbers going where they are going Bannon is doomed. Controversial chief political strategists get axed below 35%.
For example, who? DJT created the position of White House Chief Strategist for Bannon, we aren't in a campaign, and no president has gone below 35% so your post isn't adding up.
On August 15 2017 15:07 Wulfey_LA wrote: I mean seriously, what can Bannon point to (besides the 2016 electoral map) to show that his grand political strategy is working?
It's not Bannon's strategy, it's the president's, which you can verify if you go back and study 30 years of Trump, they just found each other and agree. Since he's president now, the goal isn't to win a popularity contest of political hackery, it's to actually do good things, get enough achievements in three to three and a half years to take to the American people in the next election and say this is what we've done and it's good, and this is what's to come. Also, if you know DJT he doesn't care about being unpopular if he's right, thrives on haters. It's true anyway that being right isn't the same as being popular and he ribbed politicians for that over the years.
Like not condemn violence by Nazis?
No, tax reform, immigration, healthcare, jobs, trade, infrastructure, crime, national security, preening government, and so forth.
But he won’t get to do those things because he refused to condemn Nazis and keeps trying to obstruct the Russian investigation. Tax reform is harder than healthcare and they can’t pass it with just 50 votes in the Senate. The man isn’t focused on being president because you need the approval of the American to pass laws. Otherwise the house members up for re-election in a year won’t jump on the train.
Now they got a judge to sign a search warrant pursuant to the charge of inciting to riot. I'll put it in the liberal terms that would apply if Obama was still president. Why are you so accepting of violence and rioting? Is it because a black man is president? /s
I wasn’t born yesterday. I know a drag net when I see one.
Now they got a judge to sign a search warrant pursuant to the charge of inciting to riot. I'll put it in the liberal terms that would apply if Obama was still president. Why are you so accepting of violence and rioting? Is it because a black man is president? /s
I wasn’t born yesterday. I know a drag net when I see one.
I'm just pointing out the rhetoric if the roles were reversed. You may be right on the function of the search warrant.
Now they got a judge to sign a search warrant pursuant to the charge of inciting to riot. I'll put it in the liberal terms that would apply if Obama was still president. Why are you so accepting of violence and rioting? Is it because a black man is president? /s
I wasn’t born yesterday. I know a drag net when I see one.
I'm just pointing out the rhetoric if the roles were reversed. You may be right on the function of the search warrant.
And I am sure they need the information on everyone who visited that website to track down the right leaders. And Sessions will be doing the same thing to Stormfront very soon. That is totally going to happen.
Does this hurt the president or fans of manufacturing?
On August 15 2017 15:07 Wulfey_LA wrote: Sure he gives terrible advice to the President that delayed/weakened DJT's response to Nazi terrorism, but Bannon sure does stick it to the Libs!
Of course that doesn't really matter, with DJTs poll numbers going where they are going Bannon is doomed. Controversial chief political strategists get axed below 35%.
For example, who? DJT created the position of White House Chief Strategist for Bannon, we aren't in a campaign, and no president has gone below 35% so your post isn't adding up.
On August 15 2017 15:07 Wulfey_LA wrote: I mean seriously, what can Bannon point to (besides the 2016 electoral map) to show that his grand political strategy is working?
It's not Bannon's strategy, it's the president's, which you can verify if you go back and study 30 years of Trump, they just found each other and agree. Since he's president now, the goal isn't to win a popularity contest of political hackery, it's to actually do good things, get enough achievements in three to three and a half years to take to the American people in the next election and say this is what we've done and it's good, and this is what's to come. Also, if you know DJT he doesn't care about being unpopular if he's right, thrives on haters. It's true anyway that being right isn't the same as being popular and he ribbed politicians for that over the years.
Like not condemn violence by Nazis?
No, tax reform, immigration, healthcare, jobs, trade, infrastructure, crime, national security, preening government, and so forth.
But he won’t get to do those things because he refused to condemn Nazis and keeps trying to obstruct the Russian investigation. Tax reform is harder than healthcare and they can’t pass it with just 50 votes in the Senate. The man isn’t focused on being president because you need the approval of the American to pass laws. Otherwise the house members up for re-election in a year won’t jump on the train.
If there's a goal that will help everyone, you shouldn't be rooting for failure, right? I can't connect with your planet at all. They issued a statement on Charlottesville which I guess is what you're talking about, you must be extremely emotionally invested or think we're a certain kind of gullible sap to push this.
The media is your enemy in that they are redirecting your outrage on shit that doesn't matter to prop up a one-party culture. This time last year you didn't think it was the job of the president to drop everything any time someone died to pop on national news and reassure people murder is bad, timed and worded to your same exacting standards, or else be of suspect character.
Not good timing with the car attack in Charlottesville. Then again, this could be another subliminal message from Trump to his white nationalist brethren.
On August 15 2017 16:30 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On August 15 2017 08:09 Danglars wrote:
On August 15 2017 07:17 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On August 15 2017 03:07 Danglars wrote:
On August 14 2017 23:04 Biff The Understudy wrote:
On August 14 2017 22:28 Danglars wrote:
On August 14 2017 22:18 Nevuk wrote:
Less than 24 hours after Charlotte trump released this ad that contains a list of people he identifies as the enemy.
Woah there no need to go full Nixon. He's trying to change the narrative and identify people obstructing his agenda (which is massive massive bigly success already apparently). List of people he identifies as enemies my ass, Nevuk.
Out of curiosity, and since all you Trumpers suddenly disappeared fron that debate, what's your take on Charlotte's events and the aftermath?
Debate? You must mean echo chamber. You'll have to drill down to some concrete questions that I didn't already post on, and the search function is open to you for the ones on the historical statue issue, political tweets from senators/NYT, left wing and right wing violence, etc.
Oh, and if you have curiosity, I'm not a Trumper. He was bottom of the barrel of acceptable candidates for the primary, and it was only the dawning reality of a Clinton presidency that got my to the polling station. Unless you're the kind of tribal member that wants to be called a Hillary shill. I'm a conservative Republican.
My respect and consideration for you will get such a boost the day you will be able to, you know, openly condemn a terrorist attack commited by the right wing, openly admit that Trump is a disaster and that maybe you made a mistake voting for such a clown and such a horrifying person, or openly admit that there is something deeply disturbing happening that got revealed in Charlottesville.
But you won't. Us getting horrified at nazis marching with swastikas and performing isis style terror attack is "echo chamber".
You simply can't get past your partisan hackery. And that's this mindless partisanship that is slowly killing your country.
When a Bernie supporter tried to kill a republican congressman, we were all horrified and tried to understand how that could happen. Sanders reacted immediatemy, denouncing that horrible act, instead of, like your guy, being a fucking jerk and putting victims and terrorists in the same bag. I haven't read a line of you, xDaunt, biology major or any of you hardcore conservatives expressing the slightest concern at nazis marching with torch Nurenberg style or going full Al Qaeda. It's shameful.
Which is sort of the reason I asked you to develop your question and put it forth. The real statement of your curiosity is along the lines of, "I know you to be a partisan Trump-loving hack at relative ease with white supremacist rallies, and I want anything I can twist to support my preconceived ideas." I'm not into your fanciful notions of conservatives needing to pipe up or they're assumed white supremacists ... but again, you're a confirmed Stalin lover for refusing to distance yourself from the Soviet flag held by one of the counter protestors. So, many apologies, but if you just want passive punching bags that issue disavowals at every turn, go play with impressionable and fearful children. If you have any doubt of my thoughts on white-supremacists and neonazis in marches, you can ask away.
I swear to you that if there were a march organized by my party fringe with torches, stalinist chants, ussr flag and a fucking terrorist attack, and that the guy i voted for didn't immediately distance himself from it in the most clear and uncompromising terms, I would be absolutely horrified and would express my disgust and regrets to be associated to those people and to have voted for such a morally bankrupt scumbag in the harshest terms.
And you realize as well as I do that the problem is not that "one of the guys had a nazi flag". It's that the guy you voted for is supported by an active and dynamic white supremacist neo nazi movement that recognize themselves in his ideas and what he says, who have no problem anymore marching with swastikas, kkk costumes and hitlerian salutes, and that, most importantly, he is extremely reluctant to condemn.
If something of that sort happened on the left, i would be fucking screaming and the first here to express my outrage, instead of talking of echo chamber and simply ignoring it.
But eh, never recognize you are wrong, never apologize, never show any doubt and never reflect critically on yourself.
Meanwhile the NYT continues to write glowing posthumous editorials and articles on the USSR and socialism. When will the NYT becomes as derided as the folks over at the Daily Stormer?
The NYT ideology is as far to USSR than North Korea is to libertarianism. If you find any kind of continuity or similarity between soviet stalinism and rge NYT line, you are the most creative person i ever talked to.
No one serious on the left glorifies soviet socialism and I would love to see those ussr flag bearer stalinists marching for Clinton and performing terrorist attacks. That would be something.
Does this hurt the president or fans of manufacturing?
On August 15 2017 15:07 Wulfey_LA wrote: Sure he gives terrible advice to the President that delayed/weakened DJT's response to Nazi terrorism, but Bannon sure does stick it to the Libs!
Of course that doesn't really matter, with DJTs poll numbers going where they are going Bannon is doomed. Controversial chief political strategists get axed below 35%.
For example, who? DJT created the position of White House Chief Strategist for Bannon, we aren't in a campaign, and no president has gone below 35% so your post isn't adding up.
On August 15 2017 15:07 Wulfey_LA wrote: I mean seriously, what can Bannon point to (besides the 2016 electoral map) to show that his grand political strategy is working?
It's not Bannon's strategy, it's the president's, which you can verify if you go back and study 30 years of Trump, they just found each other and agree. Since he's president now, the goal isn't to win a popularity contest of political hackery, it's to actually do good things, get enough achievements in three to three and a half years to take to the American people in the next election and say this is what we've done and it's good, and this is what's to come. Also, if you know DJT he doesn't care about being unpopular if he's right, thrives on haters. It's true anyway that being right isn't the same as being popular and he ribbed politicians for that over the years.
Like not condemn violence by Nazis?
No, tax reform, immigration, healthcare, jobs, trade, infrastructure, crime, national security, preening government, and so forth.
But he won’t get to do those things because he refused to condemn Nazis and keeps trying to obstruct the Russian investigation. Tax reform is harder than healthcare and they can’t pass it with just 50 votes in the Senate. The man isn’t focused on being president because you need the approval of the American to pass laws. Otherwise the house members up for re-election in a year won’t jump on the train.
If there's a goal that will help everyone, you shouldn't be rooting for failure, right? I can't connect with your planet at all. They issued a statement on Charlottesville which I guess is what you're talking about, you must be extremely emotionally invested or think we're a certain kind of gullible sap to push this.
The media is your enemy in that they are redirecting your outrage on shit that doesn't matter to prop up a one-party culture. This time last year you didn't think it was the job of the president to drop everything any time someone died to pop on national news and reassure people murder is bad, timed and worded to your same exacting standards, or else be of suspect character.
Oblade, I’m a big boy and I know which media outlets are bad for me and which are not. And my anger and outrage are my own. The problem is you think I oppose Trump for irrational reasons, but I don’t. He and the GOP have pushed bills that will actively harm me and my family. They will limit our economic options and hurt our ability to get healthcare coverage. We have friends that feel less safe in the US than they have ever felt in their lives. None of these are abstract or ideological. Trump’s policies are bad for me, my wife and the people we care about.
Edit: Also, your childish attempts to diminish people’s fears and anger over Charlottesville is gross. The President’s response was unacceptable and the three days it took him to issue a real statement was not sufficient. He doesn’t get half credit for being three days to late or whining that the media didn’t praise him after the statement.
Does this hurt the president or fans of manufacturing?
On August 15 2017 15:07 Wulfey_LA wrote: Sure he gives terrible advice to the President that delayed/weakened DJT's response to Nazi terrorism, but Bannon sure does stick it to the Libs!
Of course that doesn't really matter, with DJTs poll numbers going where they are going Bannon is doomed. Controversial chief political strategists get axed below 35%.
For example, who? DJT created the position of White House Chief Strategist for Bannon, we aren't in a campaign, and no president has gone below 35% so your post isn't adding up.
On August 15 2017 15:07 Wulfey_LA wrote: I mean seriously, what can Bannon point to (besides the 2016 electoral map) to show that his grand political strategy is working?
It's not Bannon's strategy, it's the president's, which you can verify if you go back and study 30 years of Trump, they just found each other and agree. Since he's president now, the goal isn't to win a popularity contest of political hackery, it's to actually do good things, get enough achievements in three to three and a half years to take to the American people in the next election and say this is what we've done and it's good, and this is what's to come. Also, if you know DJT he doesn't care about being unpopular if he's right, thrives on haters. It's true anyway that being right isn't the same as being popular and he ribbed politicians for that over the years.
Like not condemn violence by Nazis?
No, tax reform, immigration, healthcare, jobs, trade, infrastructure, crime, national security, preening government, and so forth.
But he won’t get to do those things because he refused to condemn Nazis and keeps trying to obstruct the Russian investigation. Tax reform is harder than healthcare and they can’t pass it with just 50 votes in the Senate. The man isn’t focused on being president because you need the approval of the American to pass laws. Otherwise the house members up for re-election in a year won’t jump on the train.
If there's a goal that will help everyone, you shouldn't be rooting for failure, right? I can't connect with your planet at all. They issued a statement on Charlottesville which I guess is what you're talking about, you must be extremely emotionally invested or think we're a certain kind of gullible sap to push this.
The media is your enemy in that they are redirecting your outrage on shit that doesn't matter to prop up a one-party culture. This time last year you didn't think it was the job of the president to drop everything any time someone died to pop on national news and reassure people murder is bad, timed and worded to your same exacting standards, or else be of suspect character.
Oblade, I’m a big boy and I know which media outlets are bad for me and which are not. And my anger and outrage are my own. The problem is you think I oppose Trump for irrational reasons, but I don’t. He and the GOP have pushed bills that will actively harm me and my family. They will limit our economic options and hurt our ability to get healthcare coverage. We have friends that feel less safe in the US than they have ever felt in their lives. None of these are abstract or ideological. Trump’s policies are bad for me, my wife and the people we care about.
I don't really care who you "support" or "oppose," as I was talking about Bannon, although I'm not sure anyone wants you to have bad healthcare. But yes, you're a gainfully employed college graduate who was just insinuating something like POTUS supports Nazi violence, does that go in the rational pile too?
Does this hurt the president or fans of manufacturing?
On August 15 2017 15:07 Wulfey_LA wrote: Sure he gives terrible advice to the President that delayed/weakened DJT's response to Nazi terrorism, but Bannon sure does stick it to the Libs!
Of course that doesn't really matter, with DJTs poll numbers going where they are going Bannon is doomed. Controversial chief political strategists get axed below 35%.
For example, who? DJT created the position of White House Chief Strategist for Bannon, we aren't in a campaign, and no president has gone below 35% so your post isn't adding up.
On August 15 2017 15:07 Wulfey_LA wrote: I mean seriously, what can Bannon point to (besides the 2016 electoral map) to show that his grand political strategy is working?
It's not Bannon's strategy, it's the president's, which you can verify if you go back and study 30 years of Trump, they just found each other and agree. Since he's president now, the goal isn't to win a popularity contest of political hackery, it's to actually do good things, get enough achievements in three to three and a half years to take to the American people in the next election and say this is what we've done and it's good, and this is what's to come. Also, if you know DJT he doesn't care about being unpopular if he's right, thrives on haters. It's true anyway that being right isn't the same as being popular and he ribbed politicians for that over the years.
Like not condemn violence by Nazis?
No, tax reform, immigration, healthcare, jobs, trade, infrastructure, crime, national security, preening government, and so forth.
But he won’t get to do those things because he refused to condemn Nazis and keeps trying to obstruct the Russian investigation. Tax reform is harder than healthcare and they can’t pass it with just 50 votes in the Senate. The man isn’t focused on being president because you need the approval of the American to pass laws. Otherwise the house members up for re-election in a year won’t jump on the train.
If there's a goal that will help everyone, you shouldn't be rooting for failure, right? I can't connect with your planet at all. They issued a statement on Charlottesville which I guess is what you're talking about, you must be extremely emotionally invested or think we're a certain kind of gullible sap to push this.
The media is your enemy in that they are redirecting your outrage on shit that doesn't matter to prop up a one-party culture. This time last year you didn't think it was the job of the president to drop everything any time someone died to pop on national news and reassure people murder is bad, timed and worded to your same exacting standards, or else be of suspect character.
Oblade, I’m a big boy and I know which media outlets are bad for me and which are not. And my anger and outrage are my own. The problem is you think I oppose Trump for irrational reasons, but I don’t. He and the GOP have pushed bills that will actively harm me and my family. They will limit our economic options and hurt our ability to get healthcare coverage. We have friends that feel less safe in the US than they have ever felt in their lives. None of these are abstract or ideological. Trump’s policies are bad for me, my wife and the people we care about.
I don't really care who you "support" or "oppose," as I was talking about Bannon, although I'm not sure anyone wants you to have bad healthcare. But yes, you're a gainfully employed college graduate who was just insinuating something like POTUS supports Nazi violence, does that go in the rational pile too?
There is overwhelming evidence that Trump is reluctant to condemn anyone who supports him, including violent Nazi and racists. We know this because he was asked several time on the day this happened to condemn them and failed to do so. Which resulted in the Nazis saying Trump is their guy.
You have a basic problem of viewing this in a binary state. It is either full support or full opposition. But that isn’t how this work. Trump may not openly support them, but he isn’t interested in openly condemning them. And being the leader of our country, that amounts to him being comfortable with Nazis and white supremacist existing openly in the US.
And Bannon said his publication was the home of the alt right, which is this group of Nazis, racists and white supremacist. He is more than happy to accept their support.
Does this hurt the president or fans of manufacturing?
On August 15 2017 15:07 Wulfey_LA wrote: Sure he gives terrible advice to the President that delayed/weakened DJT's response to Nazi terrorism, but Bannon sure does stick it to the Libs!
Of course that doesn't really matter, with DJTs poll numbers going where they are going Bannon is doomed. Controversial chief political strategists get axed below 35%.
For example, who? DJT created the position of White House Chief Strategist for Bannon, we aren't in a campaign, and no president has gone below 35% so your post isn't adding up.
On August 15 2017 15:07 Wulfey_LA wrote: I mean seriously, what can Bannon point to (besides the 2016 electoral map) to show that his grand political strategy is working?
It's not Bannon's strategy, it's the president's, which you can verify if you go back and study 30 years of Trump, they just found each other and agree. Since he's president now, the goal isn't to win a popularity contest of political hackery, it's to actually do good things, get enough achievements in three to three and a half years to take to the American people in the next election and say this is what we've done and it's good, and this is what's to come. Also, if you know DJT he doesn't care about being unpopular if he's right, thrives on haters. It's true anyway that being right isn't the same as being popular and he ribbed politicians for that over the years.
Like not condemn violence by Nazis?
No, tax reform, immigration, healthcare, jobs, trade, infrastructure, crime, national security, preening government, and so forth.
But he won’t get to do those things because he refused to condemn Nazis and keeps trying to obstruct the Russian investigation. Tax reform is harder than healthcare and they can’t pass it with just 50 votes in the Senate. The man isn’t focused on being president because you need the approval of the American to pass laws. Otherwise the house members up for re-election in a year won’t jump on the train.
If there's a goal that will help everyone, you shouldn't be rooting for failure, right? I can't connect with your planet at all. They issued a statement on Charlottesville which I guess is what you're talking about, you must be extremely emotionally invested or think we're a certain kind of gullible sap to push this.
The media is your enemy in that they are redirecting your outrage on shit that doesn't matter to prop up a one-party culture. This time last year you didn't think it was the job of the president to drop everything any time someone died to pop on national news and reassure people murder is bad, timed and worded to your same exacting standards, or else be of suspect character.
What I think you fail to realize is that no one is rooting for the failure of the system or the government to address the issues at hand, people are rooting for the person at the head of it all to realize that he is not fit for the job, and that he needs to step aside to let someone else try. You and many others may say that he hasn't been given enough time or that he hasn't done that bad of a job yet, and that is your opinion which you are entitled to, but there are also people who feel that they have seen enough.
The problem with the response to the attack is that the same people that jeered at the previous president for not calling Islamic terrorism by name on one or two occasions, are scoffing at calls for this president to call this domestic terrorism. I didn't expect him to make a statement on it willingly, but when he was asked the question multiple times I expect him, as the president, to answer it. He had two chances to do that immediately following his statements, and he failed to do so. Watch the press conference if you haven't already. And if you need a comparison, look at his response to the terrorist attack on Bastille day in Nice, France last year. look at the difference in tone and anger. look at how much more he appears to care for one more than the other. and you might say, "but trainrunnef look at the difference in body count!" and to that i will respond with the Louvre attack where he immediately tweeted, and called out the infamous "radical muslim terrorists" for an attack that had 0 deaths...
You can say that you dont expect him to condemn every single murder, and that may in fact be a reasonable thing, but when he is choosing which attacks to condemn harshly and which attacks to make tepid statements, his intentions become very clear. This is what so many people are up in arms about.
Given that Trump likely has the most Nazi/KKK support among US Presidents since the days of Woodrow Wilson, I don't think categorizing Nazi/KKK-related disapproval of Trump as "irrational" makes much sense. Even if one totally discounts the arguably fashy things Trump has said and the histories of the people he has surrounded himself with, white supremacists are outwardly voicing support for Trump enough to justify suspicion, ghost of Robert Byrd be damned.
I'm not on board with this idea that Trump's initial response to what happened with Charlottesville was out of bounds. There was nothing factually incorrect about his statement, and the idea that he should have singled out the Nazis and white supremacists amounts to little more than worthless virtue signalling. This idea that everyone needs to condemn the obviously contemptible reeks of mindless collectivism and partisan nonsense.
If a bunch of ISIS members were saying that Obama was their guy and him didn’t condemn them when asked, even I would have problems with that. Trump was asked and he dodged the question twice. He just refused to respond.
On August 15 2017 23:53 xDaunt wrote: I'm not on board with this idea that Trump's initial response to what happened with Charlottesville was out of bounds. There was nothing factually incorrect about his statement, and the idea that he should have singled out the Nazis and white supremacists amounts to little more than worthless virtue signalling. This idea that everyone needs to condemn the obviously contemptible reeks of mindless collectivism and partisan nonsense.
Islamic Terrorism!
Wasnt it a huge deal when the previous administration didnt utter specifics? Or use the correct diction?
On August 15 2017 23:53 xDaunt wrote: I'm not on board with this idea that Trump's initial response to what happened with Charlottesville was out of bounds. There was nothing factually incorrect about his statement, and the idea that he should have singled out the Nazis and white supremacists amounts to little more than worthless virtue signalling. This idea that everyone needs to condemn the obviously contemptible reeks of mindless collectivism and partisan nonsense.
Trump needs a teleprompter to tell right from wrong.
It isn't hard to single out the side that drove a car into a crowd.
On August 15 2017 23:53 xDaunt wrote: I'm not on board with this idea that Trump's initial response to what happened with Charlottesville was out of bounds. There was nothing factually incorrect about his statement, and the idea that he should have singled out the Nazis and white supremacists amounts to little more than worthless virtue signalling. This idea that everyone needs to condemn the obviously contemptible reeks of mindless collectivism and partisan nonsense.
Just out of curiosity were you one of the folks that was upset about Obama not calling out radical islamic terrorism by name? Id rather not assume that you were...
EPT
