• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 07:52
CEST 13:52
KST 20:52
  • 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
Team TLMC #5 - Finalists & Open Tournaments0[ASL20] Ro16 Preview Pt2: Turbulence2Classic Games #3: Rogue vs Serral at BlizzCon9[ASL20] Ro16 Preview Pt1: Ascent10Maestros of the Game: Week 1/Play-in Preview12
Community News
Weekly Cups (Sept 8-14): herO & MaxPax split cups1WardiTV TL Team Map Contest #5 Tournaments0SC4ALL $6,000 Open LAN in Philadelphia7Weekly Cups (Sept 1-7): MaxPax rebounds & Clem saga continues29LiuLi Cup - September 2025 Tournaments3
StarCraft 2
General
Weekly Cups (Sept 8-14): herO & MaxPax split cups SpeCial on The Tasteless Podcast Team TLMC #5 - Finalists & Open Tournaments Weekly Cups (Sept 1-7): MaxPax rebounds & Clem saga continues #1: Maru - Greatest Players of All Time
Tourneys
Maestros of The Game—$20k event w/ live finals in Paris RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series WardiTV TL Team Map Contest #5 Tournaments Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament SC4ALL $6,000 Open LAN in Philadelphia
Strategy
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 491 Night Drive Mutation # 490 Masters of Midnight Mutation # 489 Bannable Offense Mutation # 488 What Goes Around
Brood War
General
BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ ASL20 General Discussion Playing StarCraft as 2 people on the same network [ASL20] Ro16 Preview Pt2: Turbulence Pros React To: SoulKey's 5-Peat Challenge
Tourneys
[ASL20] Ro16 Group C [ASL20] Ro16 Group B [IPSL] ISPL Season 1 Winter Qualis and Info! Is there English video for group selection for ASL
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Muta micro map competition Fighting Spirit mining rates [G] Mineral Boosting
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Borderlands 3 Nintendo Switch Thread Path of Exile General RTS Discussion Thread
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion LiquidDota to reintegrate into TL.net
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Canadian Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread The Big Programming Thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine
Fan Clubs
The Happy Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Anime Discussion Thread
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion MLB/Baseball 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Linksys AE2500 USB WIFI keeps disconnecting Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread High temperatures on bridge(s)
TL Community
BarCraft in Tokyo Japan for ASL Season5 Final The Automated Ban List
Blogs
The Personality of a Spender…
TrAiDoS
A very expensive lesson on ma…
Garnet
hello world
radishsoup
Lemme tell you a thing o…
JoinTheRain
RTS Design in Hypercoven
a11
Evil Gacha Games and the…
ffswowsucks
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 1332 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 8651

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 8649 8650 8651 8652 8653 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.
{CC}StealthBlue
Profile Blog Joined January 2003
United States41117 Posts
September 05 2017 21:38 GMT
#173001
And lose that sweet, sweet new slavery money in the form of Private Prisons?
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules."
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23293 Posts
September 05 2017 21:39 GMT
#173002
On September 06 2017 06:30 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 06 2017 05:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:41 xDaunt wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:36 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:26 xDaunt wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:25 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:18 xDaunt wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:12 KwarK wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:07 xDaunt wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:00 kollin wrote:
[quote]
You literally do not engage with anyone that injects the nuance required into the issue, because to do so would be to admit that your original interjection into the discussion was pants on head retarded.


Oh I am perfectly willing to engage on nuance. What you don't understand, however, is that nuance requires context to be understood. I asked a very simple question to set the table for the more nuanced discussion to follow, which was met with .... whatever the fuck you would call this "discussion." Now, if y'all had the balls and the integrity to just make the admissions and concessions that you need to make, we'd be well on our way to a more productive discussion. But most of you are badly missing this point despite my repeatedly bludgeoning you over the head with it.


xDaunt

Just because someone would rather the agricultural sector of the economy not collapse than that there be zero illegal immigration does not mean they are in favour of illegal immigration.

You have finally reached the climax of your attempt to trap the left with the question "is illegal immigration bad?" and the conclusion simply doesn't follow. The universal answer to "is illegal immigration bad?" is always "it depends". And yet you are insisting that "it depends" is dishonest.

You're painting this absurd false choice and then crying about intellectual dishonesty whenever anyone gives you anything but a yes or no.

You're deliberately misrepresenting very clear answers.

You're insisting that because you were able to give a clear answer on whether or not Nazis are bad other people should be able to give an equally clear answer on illegal immigrants.

You're insisting that any answers other than "yes, you got me, I'm in favour of illegal immigration" indicate a lack of integrity on behalf of the answerer.

This is not what arguing in good faith looks like. You're making the kind of arguments that only an incredibly stupid or incredibly dishonest person would make. Stop.

I'm not misrepresenting anything. Illegal immigration is unequivocally a bad thing. It enslaves people, degrades their dignity, and reduces them to a sub-class within larger society. And that's before we start talking about stuff like human trafficking. None of these arguments that I'm seeing from people like Gorsameth about how illegal immigration props up the agricultural industry changes the fact that illegal immigration is bad. Do you know what also was used to prop up the agricultural economy? Slavery. I could go down the list of any number of "necessary evils" that are obviously bad things, but needed to accomplish desirable ends. Illegal immigration is no different than any of them. I just find it endlessly amusing that y'all on the Left refuse to admit this basic fact. And it's painfully obvious why you won't admit it: illegal immigration is a sacred cow on the Left cuz y'all gotta have that hispanic vote.


Illegal immigration is bad. The vast majority of people who immigrate illegally aren't. Our immigration policy is criminally negligent (as you've pointed out here). That's the response you got since the beginning.

Not understanding why you think that's a dodge or inadequate answer?

You gave a good answer. Most of the other posters didn't.


Can we also agree that Kate's Law is a really dumb idea if you want to keep immigrants who repeatedly cross the border out of the country?

On September 06 2017 05:34 Plansix wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:25 GreenHorizons wrote:
EDIT: @P6 please don't equate Hillary profiting off of blaming everyone but herself for losing to THE WORST MAJOR PARTY NOMINEE IN MODERN HISTORY (though I guess losing makes her the worst), and doing/saying practically nothing to "keep fighting", with Bernie going to red and blue districts around the country and actually trying to sway hearts and minds.

Can’t help you there. People gotta bury the hatchet if they want to win over moderates. I know a lot of moderate and older democrats and it is their number one complaint.


But you can, I'm not referring to burying the hatchet (a somewhat culturally insensitive phrase, but not nearly as bad as "Off the reservation"), which I agree with, but with your specific comparison.

Also ironic to call for a burying of hatchets when she literally is out promoting a book blaming Bernie more than herself, while Bernie is looking forward.

The only reason it's an issue is she and many of her supporters refuse to take responsibility for their errors and want to act as if they weren't errors at all, it's not personal, it's practical to point out how/why they still don't get it.

How does it hurt?


It demands that we keep them in the United States as their punishment for immigrating illegally.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of imprisoning illegal immigrants in general. I'd rather just Fedex them out of the country.


Why do you think Republicans and many Democrats think locking them up in our country is something we should make law, as opposed to deporting them (or trying to make being a contributing member of society the smart logistical/economic choice for the immigrant)?

BTW this aspect of Kate's Law is something I brought up at it's inception and is part of what gets it bipartisan support.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
September 05 2017 21:49 GMT
#173003
On September 06 2017 06:39 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 06 2017 06:30 xDaunt wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:41 xDaunt wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:36 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:26 xDaunt wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:25 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:18 xDaunt wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:12 KwarK wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:07 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]

Oh I am perfectly willing to engage on nuance. What you don't understand, however, is that nuance requires context to be understood. I asked a very simple question to set the table for the more nuanced discussion to follow, which was met with .... whatever the fuck you would call this "discussion." Now, if y'all had the balls and the integrity to just make the admissions and concessions that you need to make, we'd be well on our way to a more productive discussion. But most of you are badly missing this point despite my repeatedly bludgeoning you over the head with it.


xDaunt

Just because someone would rather the agricultural sector of the economy not collapse than that there be zero illegal immigration does not mean they are in favour of illegal immigration.

You have finally reached the climax of your attempt to trap the left with the question "is illegal immigration bad?" and the conclusion simply doesn't follow. The universal answer to "is illegal immigration bad?" is always "it depends". And yet you are insisting that "it depends" is dishonest.

You're painting this absurd false choice and then crying about intellectual dishonesty whenever anyone gives you anything but a yes or no.

You're deliberately misrepresenting very clear answers.

You're insisting that because you were able to give a clear answer on whether or not Nazis are bad other people should be able to give an equally clear answer on illegal immigrants.

You're insisting that any answers other than "yes, you got me, I'm in favour of illegal immigration" indicate a lack of integrity on behalf of the answerer.

This is not what arguing in good faith looks like. You're making the kind of arguments that only an incredibly stupid or incredibly dishonest person would make. Stop.

I'm not misrepresenting anything. Illegal immigration is unequivocally a bad thing. It enslaves people, degrades their dignity, and reduces them to a sub-class within larger society. And that's before we start talking about stuff like human trafficking. None of these arguments that I'm seeing from people like Gorsameth about how illegal immigration props up the agricultural industry changes the fact that illegal immigration is bad. Do you know what also was used to prop up the agricultural economy? Slavery. I could go down the list of any number of "necessary evils" that are obviously bad things, but needed to accomplish desirable ends. Illegal immigration is no different than any of them. I just find it endlessly amusing that y'all on the Left refuse to admit this basic fact. And it's painfully obvious why you won't admit it: illegal immigration is a sacred cow on the Left cuz y'all gotta have that hispanic vote.


Illegal immigration is bad. The vast majority of people who immigrate illegally aren't. Our immigration policy is criminally negligent (as you've pointed out here). That's the response you got since the beginning.

Not understanding why you think that's a dodge or inadequate answer?

You gave a good answer. Most of the other posters didn't.


Can we also agree that Kate's Law is a really dumb idea if you want to keep immigrants who repeatedly cross the border out of the country?

On September 06 2017 05:34 Plansix wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:25 GreenHorizons wrote:
EDIT: @P6 please don't equate Hillary profiting off of blaming everyone but herself for losing to THE WORST MAJOR PARTY NOMINEE IN MODERN HISTORY (though I guess losing makes her the worst), and doing/saying practically nothing to "keep fighting", with Bernie going to red and blue districts around the country and actually trying to sway hearts and minds.

Can’t help you there. People gotta bury the hatchet if they want to win over moderates. I know a lot of moderate and older democrats and it is their number one complaint.


But you can, I'm not referring to burying the hatchet (a somewhat culturally insensitive phrase, but not nearly as bad as "Off the reservation"), which I agree with, but with your specific comparison.

Also ironic to call for a burying of hatchets when she literally is out promoting a book blaming Bernie more than herself, while Bernie is looking forward.

The only reason it's an issue is she and many of her supporters refuse to take responsibility for their errors and want to act as if they weren't errors at all, it's not personal, it's practical to point out how/why they still don't get it.

How does it hurt?


It demands that we keep them in the United States as their punishment for immigrating illegally.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of imprisoning illegal immigrants in general. I'd rather just Fedex them out of the country.


Why do you think Republicans and many Democrats think locking them up in our country is something we should make law, as opposed to deporting them (or trying to make being a contributing member of society the smart logistical/economic choice for the immigrant)?

BTW this aspect of Kate's Law is something I brought up at it's inception and is part of what gets it bipartisan support.

Because, for the sake of political expedience, politicians would rather jerk off into a ceiling fan than tackle the real underlying issues. It's the same basic reason why neither party really wants to fix our immigration system.
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42955 Posts
September 05 2017 21:51 GMT
#173004
On September 06 2017 06:49 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 06 2017 06:39 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 06 2017 06:30 xDaunt wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:41 xDaunt wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:36 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:26 xDaunt wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:25 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:18 xDaunt wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:12 KwarK wrote:
[quote]

xDaunt

Just because someone would rather the agricultural sector of the economy not collapse than that there be zero illegal immigration does not mean they are in favour of illegal immigration.

You have finally reached the climax of your attempt to trap the left with the question "is illegal immigration bad?" and the conclusion simply doesn't follow. The universal answer to "is illegal immigration bad?" is always "it depends". And yet you are insisting that "it depends" is dishonest.

You're painting this absurd false choice and then crying about intellectual dishonesty whenever anyone gives you anything but a yes or no.

You're deliberately misrepresenting very clear answers.

You're insisting that because you were able to give a clear answer on whether or not Nazis are bad other people should be able to give an equally clear answer on illegal immigrants.

You're insisting that any answers other than "yes, you got me, I'm in favour of illegal immigration" indicate a lack of integrity on behalf of the answerer.

This is not what arguing in good faith looks like. You're making the kind of arguments that only an incredibly stupid or incredibly dishonest person would make. Stop.

I'm not misrepresenting anything. Illegal immigration is unequivocally a bad thing. It enslaves people, degrades their dignity, and reduces them to a sub-class within larger society. And that's before we start talking about stuff like human trafficking. None of these arguments that I'm seeing from people like Gorsameth about how illegal immigration props up the agricultural industry changes the fact that illegal immigration is bad. Do you know what also was used to prop up the agricultural economy? Slavery. I could go down the list of any number of "necessary evils" that are obviously bad things, but needed to accomplish desirable ends. Illegal immigration is no different than any of them. I just find it endlessly amusing that y'all on the Left refuse to admit this basic fact. And it's painfully obvious why you won't admit it: illegal immigration is a sacred cow on the Left cuz y'all gotta have that hispanic vote.


Illegal immigration is bad. The vast majority of people who immigrate illegally aren't. Our immigration policy is criminally negligent (as you've pointed out here). That's the response you got since the beginning.

Not understanding why you think that's a dodge or inadequate answer?

You gave a good answer. Most of the other posters didn't.


Can we also agree that Kate's Law is a really dumb idea if you want to keep immigrants who repeatedly cross the border out of the country?

On September 06 2017 05:34 Plansix wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:25 GreenHorizons wrote:
EDIT: @P6 please don't equate Hillary profiting off of blaming everyone but herself for losing to THE WORST MAJOR PARTY NOMINEE IN MODERN HISTORY (though I guess losing makes her the worst), and doing/saying practically nothing to "keep fighting", with Bernie going to red and blue districts around the country and actually trying to sway hearts and minds.

Can’t help you there. People gotta bury the hatchet if they want to win over moderates. I know a lot of moderate and older democrats and it is their number one complaint.


But you can, I'm not referring to burying the hatchet (a somewhat culturally insensitive phrase, but not nearly as bad as "Off the reservation"), which I agree with, but with your specific comparison.

Also ironic to call for a burying of hatchets when she literally is out promoting a book blaming Bernie more than herself, while Bernie is looking forward.

The only reason it's an issue is she and many of her supporters refuse to take responsibility for their errors and want to act as if they weren't errors at all, it's not personal, it's practical to point out how/why they still don't get it.

How does it hurt?


It demands that we keep them in the United States as their punishment for immigrating illegally.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of imprisoning illegal immigrants in general. I'd rather just Fedex them out of the country.


Why do you think Republicans and many Democrats think locking them up in our country is something we should make law, as opposed to deporting them (or trying to make being a contributing member of society the smart logistical/economic choice for the immigrant)?

BTW this aspect of Kate's Law is something I brought up at it's inception and is part of what gets it bipartisan support.

Because, for the sake of political expedience, politicians would rather jerk off into a ceiling fan than tackle the real underlying issues. It's the same basic reason why neither party really wants to fix our immigration system.

I thought you supported the wall?
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23293 Posts
September 05 2017 21:52 GMT
#173005
On September 06 2017 06:49 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 06 2017 06:39 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 06 2017 06:30 xDaunt wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:41 xDaunt wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:36 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:26 xDaunt wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:25 GreenHorizons wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:18 xDaunt wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:12 KwarK wrote:
[quote]

xDaunt

Just because someone would rather the agricultural sector of the economy not collapse than that there be zero illegal immigration does not mean they are in favour of illegal immigration.

You have finally reached the climax of your attempt to trap the left with the question "is illegal immigration bad?" and the conclusion simply doesn't follow. The universal answer to "is illegal immigration bad?" is always "it depends". And yet you are insisting that "it depends" is dishonest.

You're painting this absurd false choice and then crying about intellectual dishonesty whenever anyone gives you anything but a yes or no.

You're deliberately misrepresenting very clear answers.

You're insisting that because you were able to give a clear answer on whether or not Nazis are bad other people should be able to give an equally clear answer on illegal immigrants.

You're insisting that any answers other than "yes, you got me, I'm in favour of illegal immigration" indicate a lack of integrity on behalf of the answerer.

This is not what arguing in good faith looks like. You're making the kind of arguments that only an incredibly stupid or incredibly dishonest person would make. Stop.

I'm not misrepresenting anything. Illegal immigration is unequivocally a bad thing. It enslaves people, degrades their dignity, and reduces them to a sub-class within larger society. And that's before we start talking about stuff like human trafficking. None of these arguments that I'm seeing from people like Gorsameth about how illegal immigration props up the agricultural industry changes the fact that illegal immigration is bad. Do you know what also was used to prop up the agricultural economy? Slavery. I could go down the list of any number of "necessary evils" that are obviously bad things, but needed to accomplish desirable ends. Illegal immigration is no different than any of them. I just find it endlessly amusing that y'all on the Left refuse to admit this basic fact. And it's painfully obvious why you won't admit it: illegal immigration is a sacred cow on the Left cuz y'all gotta have that hispanic vote.


Illegal immigration is bad. The vast majority of people who immigrate illegally aren't. Our immigration policy is criminally negligent (as you've pointed out here). That's the response you got since the beginning.

Not understanding why you think that's a dodge or inadequate answer?

You gave a good answer. Most of the other posters didn't.


Can we also agree that Kate's Law is a really dumb idea if you want to keep immigrants who repeatedly cross the border out of the country?

On September 06 2017 05:34 Plansix wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:25 GreenHorizons wrote:
EDIT: @P6 please don't equate Hillary profiting off of blaming everyone but herself for losing to THE WORST MAJOR PARTY NOMINEE IN MODERN HISTORY (though I guess losing makes her the worst), and doing/saying practically nothing to "keep fighting", with Bernie going to red and blue districts around the country and actually trying to sway hearts and minds.

Can’t help you there. People gotta bury the hatchet if they want to win over moderates. I know a lot of moderate and older democrats and it is their number one complaint.


But you can, I'm not referring to burying the hatchet (a somewhat culturally insensitive phrase, but not nearly as bad as "Off the reservation"), which I agree with, but with your specific comparison.

Also ironic to call for a burying of hatchets when she literally is out promoting a book blaming Bernie more than herself, while Bernie is looking forward.

The only reason it's an issue is she and many of her supporters refuse to take responsibility for their errors and want to act as if they weren't errors at all, it's not personal, it's practical to point out how/why they still don't get it.

How does it hurt?


It demands that we keep them in the United States as their punishment for immigrating illegally.

Yeah, I'm not a fan of imprisoning illegal immigrants in general. I'd rather just Fedex them out of the country.


Why do you think Republicans and many Democrats think locking them up in our country is something we should make law, as opposed to deporting them (or trying to make being a contributing member of society the smart logistical/economic choice for the immigrant)?

BTW this aspect of Kate's Law is something I brought up at it's inception and is part of what gets it bipartisan support.

Because, for the sake of political expedience, politicians would rather jerk off into a ceiling fan than tackle the real underlying issues. It's the same basic reason why neither party really wants to fix our immigration system.


I'm not sure I follow? What about advocating locking up immigrants in our country is politically expedient? Who is it that thinks that's a good idea (besides the politicians) making it politically advantageous to advocate for? Why would anyone support doing such in your opinion?
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
{CC}StealthBlue
Profile Blog Joined January 2003
United States41117 Posts
September 05 2017 21:54 GMT
#173006
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules."
Danglars
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
United States12133 Posts
September 05 2017 22:19 GMT
#173007
On September 06 2017 06:54 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/905187171832868864

Why'd they remove "Environmental Issues" from the priority list on the poll? Supposedly this climate change thing is a big deal.

They went through the trouble of asking people who they think would handle the environment as an issue better, but left it off the ranking system. I wonder why.
Great armies come from happy zealots, and happy zealots come from California!
TL+ Member
Nebuchad
Profile Blog Joined December 2012
Switzerland12261 Posts
September 05 2017 22:28 GMT
#173008
On September 06 2017 06:36 Danglars wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 06 2017 05:49 Nebuchad wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:31 Danglars wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:26 Nebuchad wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:23 Danglars wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:16 Nebuchad wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:13 Danglars wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:09 Nebuchad wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:05 Danglars wrote:
On September 06 2017 04:43 kollin wrote:
[quote]
We're winning so we can't be wrong! If I'm not misremembering it's you that harps on about the failures of a two party system to give viable voting options, could that not be the case here?

Seriously, re-read. The poster described the right as not "having a bunch of coherent arguments" and the country has decided to "redefine the right so absurdly." How could the Democrats mess it up? Why does the party of the right enjoy such great majorities in governorships and state houses? It matters that people still see their interests represented in this supposed bankrupt position that huge majorities go this way. If it were just low amounts of viable voting options, the Dems ought to win that easily. Lesser of two evils with such a bad opposition how could you lose? Still waiting, kollin.


You posit your questions as evidence that my opinion is wrong when there are actual answers to your questions that make logical sense and when a cursory glance at the world demonstrates that my opinion is factually substantiated.

If only you could communicate the actual answers to your questions that make logical sense.

Wait a second ... let's see if I have it down: If you actually told them, you'd then realize that the real answers totally contradict your points and make them all fundamentally unsound, to the extent to which even a short read would make you realize how stupid it would be to hold them.


You clearly don't have it down. Haven't you learned from the last few times we had an interaction and you immediately disengaged when the threat of an actual conversation emerged?

Your solution is to state that such a contradictory argument exists, but you refuse to say it. I say you'd be better off not responding at all if you have something to refute my argument but won't lay it down. It might be mistaken for losing the argument.


It's just that I expect that immediately after I lay down the argument, you will stop answering and pretend nothing happened, so I'm milking my Danglars' answer time.

On top of that you have already agreed with the gist of my argument in your last answer to kollin.

Then don't waste everyone's time responding only to say you won't respond with an argument but that one "actually" exists, "is logical," and at a "cursory glance ... is factually substantiated." You become the parody everyone makes xDaunt out to be. Unless that's your goal.


1) Your parties are absurdly rightwing. You have already agreed to that. There are a bunch of facts that caused that to happen, I imagine some really historical facts like the Republicans moving to the right of the Democrats to execute the Southern Strategy or the fact that if you were even slightly left you could be a COMMUNIST during the Cold War did not help, but my guess is the biggest factors are closer to us, with Reagan worshipping and the Tea Party on your side, and the espousal of neoliberalism on the other. We can go into details if you want.

2) This doesn't say much about the actual people within the United States. A country that is that rightwing wouldn't have Bernie Sanders as their most liked politician, and wouldn't have all of the (actual) leftwing talking points at over 50% approval (no matter how much weight you put in those polls, it just wouldn't happen). You also wouldn't get Trump parroting a whole bunch of leftwing talking points to win if the people of the US were actually that rightwing, that would be a moronic strategy and that wouldn't have resulted in him winning some democratic states.

3) The democratic party IS a joke for losing to you guys. Like, not in that I personally think it's a joke (I do), but in that it is treated as such everywhere, even in your own entertainment media. Their losing can be explained strategically though. Their strategy on the state level was incredibly poor. It doesn't help that they're actually mostly playing by the rules, while you gerrymander and "anti voting fraud" your way into a more favourable electorate. They are also much more threatened by losing to their left than they are by losing to their right. If you want to see a strong democratic party, look no further than how they deal with us, and look as far away as you can from how they deal with you.

4) It's telling that you go to these circumstancial notions to defend that your party has sense and substance. Normally you would go to the issues and demonstrate that your party's positions make sense, rather than this convoluted copout. I'm pretty sure I remember xDaunt agreeing that the republican party was intellectually bankrupt not long ago.

4. I responded in context with how you described the situation between the parties. That's the circumstances of the response. I'll defend the sense on an issue-by-issue basis, since the actual positions of the Republican party do not frequently align with my conservative beliefs. But in your framing, absolutely there's the possibility that its beliefs aren't as unpalatable as you make out. And I'm content just to point out that your post paints the Democrat party in a very bad light, or like Kollin said, paints the electorate in a very bad light. That's probably as far as we'll get.

The US is a bit overdue to have a collapse with some Berniebro in charge. The Sanders support from the youth makes a lot of sense without a modern example of the unintentional consequences. Trump played off that Sanders support for sure. He's about as much a loser on the populist/socialist front as him.


And yet last time we talked about that you absolutely did not engage me on the issues, like not even remotely.

I'm not entirely sure why you point out that what I say puts the democratic party in a bad light. Do you think it's news to me? Or to Americans fwiw, since the Democratic party polls about as well as Trump?

Can't wait till you get a Berniebro in charge and will be eager to listen to your excuse when they don't destroy your country.
No will to live, no wish to die
warding
Profile Joined August 2005
Portugal2394 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-09-05 22:31:55
September 05 2017 22:31 GMT
#173009
Literature on the impact of low wage migration on wages suggests a neutral effect. We've already settled here the issue regarding crime rates. Since most migrants get in at working age, pay taxes and don't get benefits there is no drain on govt rss. Economically, the net effect of illegal immigrants in the US is, at worst, neutral. Meanwhile, net migration seems top have stalled from some years now. If illegal migration in the U.S. is bad then it is the kind of bad that doesn't have negativeconsequences.
Wulfey_LA
Profile Joined April 2017
932 Posts
September 05 2017 22:34 GMT
#173010
On September 06 2017 07:31 warding wrote:
Literature on the impact of low wage migration on wages suggests a neutral effect. We've already settled here the issue regarding crime rates. Since most migrants get in at working age, pay taxes and don't get benefits there is no drain on govt rss. Economically, the net effect of illegal immigrants in the US is, at worst, neutral. Meanwhile, net migration seems top have stalled from some years now. If illegal migration in the U.S. is bad then it is the kind of bad that doesn't have negativeconsequences.


But did here that the objections are about ILLEGAL immigration? Shouldn't that be the end of the argument right there? Who cares about consequences, facts, and actual legal standards. ILLEGAL means ILLEGAL, amirite?
Karis Vas Ryaar
Profile Blog Joined July 2011
United States4396 Posts
September 05 2017 22:46 GMT
#173011


"I'm not agreeing with a lot of Virus's decisions but they are working" Tasteless. Ipl4 Losers Bracket Virus 2-1 Maru
DarkPlasmaBall
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States44566 Posts
September 05 2017 22:47 GMT
#173012
On September 06 2017 05:40 Nevuk wrote:
Barack Obama on DACA
Show nested quote +

Immigration can be a controversial topic. We all want safe, secure borders and a dynamic economy, and people of goodwill can have legitimate disagreements about how to fix our immigration system so that everybody plays by the rules.
But that’s not what the action that the White House took today is about. This is about young people who grew up in America – kids who study in our schools, young adults who are starting careers, patriots who pledge allegiance to our flag. These Dreamers are Americans in their hearts, in their minds, in every single way but one: on paper. They were brought to this country by their parents, sometimes even as infants. They may not know a country besides ours. They may not even know a language besides English. They often have no idea they’re undocumented until they apply for a job, or college, or a driver’s license.
Over the years, politicians of both parties have worked together to write legislation that would have told these young people – our young people – that if your parents brought you here as a child, if you’ve been here a certain number of years, and if you’re willing to go to college or serve in our military, then you’ll get a chance to stay and earn your citizenship. And for years while I was President, I asked Congress to send me such a bill.
That bill never came. And because it made no sense to expel talented, driven, patriotic young people from the only country they know solely because of the actions of their parents, my administration acted to lift the shadow of deportation from these young people, so that they could continue to contribute to our communities and our country. We did so based on the well-established legal principle of prosecutorial discretion, deployed by Democratic and Republican presidents alike, because our immigration enforcement agencies have limited resources, and it makes sense to focus those resources on those who come illegally to this country to do us harm. Deportations of criminals went up. Some 800,000 young people stepped forward, met rigorous requirements, and went through background checks. And America grew stronger as a result.
But today, that shadow has been cast over some of our best and brightest young people once again. To target these young people is wrong – because they have done nothing wrong. It is self-defeating – because they want to start new businesses, staff our labs, serve in our military, and otherwise contribute to the country we love. And it is cruel. What if our kid’s science teacher, or our friendly neighbor turns out to be a Dreamer? Where are we supposed to send her? To a country she doesn’t know or remember, with a language she may not even speak?
Let’s be clear: the action taken today isn’t required legally. It’s a political decision, and a moral question. Whatever concerns or complaints Americans may have about immigration in general, we shouldn’t threaten the future of this group of young people who are here through no fault of their own, who pose no threat, who are not taking away anything from the rest of us. They are that pitcher on our kid’s softball team, that first responder who helps out his community after a disaster, that cadet in ROTC who wants nothing more than to wear the uniform of the country that gave him a chance. Kicking them out won’t lower the unemployment rate, or lighten anyone’s taxes, or raise anybody’s wages.
It is precisely because this action is contrary to our spirit, and to common sense, that business leaders, faith leaders, economists, and Americans of all political stripes called on the administration not to do what it did today. And now that the White House has shifted its responsibility for these young people to Congress, it’s up to Members of Congress to protect these young people and our future. I’m heartened by those who’ve suggested that they should. And I join my voice with the majority of Americans who hope they step up and do it with a sense of moral urgency that matches the urgency these young people feel.
Ultimately, this is about basic decency. This is about whether we are a people who kick hopeful young strivers out of America, or whether we treat them the way we’d want our own kids to be treated. It’s about who we are as a people – and who we want to be.
What makes us American is not a question of what we look like, or where our names come from, or the way we pray. What makes us American is our fidelity to a set of ideals – that all of us are created equal; that all of us deserve the chance to make of our lives what we will; that all of us share an obligation to stand up, speak out, and secure our most cherished values for the next generation. That’s how America has traveled this far. That’s how, if we keep at it, we will ultimately reach that more perfect union.


https://www.facebook.com/barackobama/posts/10155227588436749


So beautifully written, and so true too. I miss having a president who cared about other people and cared about speaking in complete sentences.
"There is nothing more satisfying than looking at a crowd of people and helping them get what I love." ~Day[9] Daily #100
Danglars
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
United States12133 Posts
September 05 2017 22:47 GMT
#173013
On September 06 2017 07:28 Nebuchad wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 06 2017 06:36 Danglars wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:49 Nebuchad wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:31 Danglars wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:26 Nebuchad wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:23 Danglars wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:16 Nebuchad wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:13 Danglars wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:09 Nebuchad wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:05 Danglars wrote:
[quote]
Seriously, re-read. The poster described the right as not "having a bunch of coherent arguments" and the country has decided to "redefine the right so absurdly." How could the Democrats mess it up? Why does the party of the right enjoy such great majorities in governorships and state houses? It matters that people still see their interests represented in this supposed bankrupt position that huge majorities go this way. If it were just low amounts of viable voting options, the Dems ought to win that easily. Lesser of two evils with such a bad opposition how could you lose? Still waiting, kollin.


You posit your questions as evidence that my opinion is wrong when there are actual answers to your questions that make logical sense and when a cursory glance at the world demonstrates that my opinion is factually substantiated.

If only you could communicate the actual answers to your questions that make logical sense.

Wait a second ... let's see if I have it down: If you actually told them, you'd then realize that the real answers totally contradict your points and make them all fundamentally unsound, to the extent to which even a short read would make you realize how stupid it would be to hold them.


You clearly don't have it down. Haven't you learned from the last few times we had an interaction and you immediately disengaged when the threat of an actual conversation emerged?

Your solution is to state that such a contradictory argument exists, but you refuse to say it. I say you'd be better off not responding at all if you have something to refute my argument but won't lay it down. It might be mistaken for losing the argument.


It's just that I expect that immediately after I lay down the argument, you will stop answering and pretend nothing happened, so I'm milking my Danglars' answer time.

On top of that you have already agreed with the gist of my argument in your last answer to kollin.

Then don't waste everyone's time responding only to say you won't respond with an argument but that one "actually" exists, "is logical," and at a "cursory glance ... is factually substantiated." You become the parody everyone makes xDaunt out to be. Unless that's your goal.


1) Your parties are absurdly rightwing. You have already agreed to that. There are a bunch of facts that caused that to happen, I imagine some really historical facts like the Republicans moving to the right of the Democrats to execute the Southern Strategy or the fact that if you were even slightly left you could be a COMMUNIST during the Cold War did not help, but my guess is the biggest factors are closer to us, with Reagan worshipping and the Tea Party on your side, and the espousal of neoliberalism on the other. We can go into details if you want.

2) This doesn't say much about the actual people within the United States. A country that is that rightwing wouldn't have Bernie Sanders as their most liked politician, and wouldn't have all of the (actual) leftwing talking points at over 50% approval (no matter how much weight you put in those polls, it just wouldn't happen). You also wouldn't get Trump parroting a whole bunch of leftwing talking points to win if the people of the US were actually that rightwing, that would be a moronic strategy and that wouldn't have resulted in him winning some democratic states.

3) The democratic party IS a joke for losing to you guys. Like, not in that I personally think it's a joke (I do), but in that it is treated as such everywhere, even in your own entertainment media. Their losing can be explained strategically though. Their strategy on the state level was incredibly poor. It doesn't help that they're actually mostly playing by the rules, while you gerrymander and "anti voting fraud" your way into a more favourable electorate. They are also much more threatened by losing to their left than they are by losing to their right. If you want to see a strong democratic party, look no further than how they deal with us, and look as far away as you can from how they deal with you.

4) It's telling that you go to these circumstancial notions to defend that your party has sense and substance. Normally you would go to the issues and demonstrate that your party's positions make sense, rather than this convoluted copout. I'm pretty sure I remember xDaunt agreeing that the republican party was intellectually bankrupt not long ago.

4. I responded in context with how you described the situation between the parties. That's the circumstances of the response. I'll defend the sense on an issue-by-issue basis, since the actual positions of the Republican party do not frequently align with my conservative beliefs. But in your framing, absolutely there's the possibility that its beliefs aren't as unpalatable as you make out. And I'm content just to point out that your post paints the Democrat party in a very bad light, or like Kollin said, paints the electorate in a very bad light. That's probably as far as we'll get.

The US is a bit overdue to have a collapse with some Berniebro in charge. The Sanders support from the youth makes a lot of sense without a modern example of the unintentional consequences. Trump played off that Sanders support for sure. He's about as much a loser on the populist/socialist front as him.


And yet last time we talked about that you absolutely did not engage me on the issues, like not even remotely.

I'm not entirely sure why you point out that what I say puts the democratic party in a bad light. Do you think it's news to me? Or to Americans fwiw, since the Democratic party polls about as well as Trump?

Can't wait till you get a Berniebro in charge and will be eager to listen to your excuse when they don't destroy your country.

Trump's doing a pretty bad job. You might get your shot. Flight 93 election, revisited.

I'm of the opinion that both major parties have huge issues representing their bases and future political viability. Identity politics and social issue extremism comes to mind for the Dems, only pretending to want to repeal Obamacare for 7 years and illegal immigration come to mind for the GOP. So, when you trash the Republicans in absolute form, I seek to make sure you understand it means the Dems still have been doing fucking horrible to still lose in what you think would be an easy fight. People like GH I know to have a poor opinion of that party. This was how I discover what your opinion of the Democrat party is. Not everyone thinks they're that bad. This forum is a bit dour compared to my SoCal lib friends. Usually they make excuses for D-party performance (see: They're all racists, traditionalists ... or it's about gerrymandering and voter intimidation). So now I know that about you. It's whatever.
Great armies come from happy zealots, and happy zealots come from California!
TL+ Member
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
September 05 2017 22:52 GMT
#173014
On September 06 2017 07:46 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:
https://twitter.com/RobbieGramer/status/905148924813508608

https://twitter.com/RobbieGramer/status/905158067683299329

I am really not ok with them losing cabinet members. Some of those people have really important jobs and they can't just go on the lam for a weekend.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
September 05 2017 22:54 GMT
#173015
On September 06 2017 07:52 Plansix wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 06 2017 07:46 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:
https://twitter.com/RobbieGramer/status/905148924813508608

https://twitter.com/RobbieGramer/status/905158067683299329

I am really not ok with them losing cabinet members. Some of those people have really important jobs and they can't just go on the lam for a weekend.

if it's the state dept; woulnd't they periodicalyl be going off to do secret negotiations anyways?
I'd kind of expect that, for certain sensitive negotiations. or at least wouldn't be that surprised by it.
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.
{CC}StealthBlue
Profile Blog Joined January 2003
United States41117 Posts
September 05 2017 22:54 GMT
#173016
President Donald Trump’s reelection campaign has canceled a series of fundraisers it had planned to hold in Texas this fall in the wake of Hurricane Harvey, according to three Republicans familiar with the decision.

Trump had been scheduled to host a Dallas fundraising dinner in late September, while Vice President Mike Pence had been slated to headline a dinner in San Antonio followed by a lunch in Houston, both to take place in early October. All three events, which had been part of a national Trump reelection campaign fundraising swing, have been removed from the schedule as the Lone Star State recovers from the storm.

According to an early schedule provided by the three Republicans, Trump still plans to headline events in Greensboro, North Carolina, and Las Vegas, both of which will be held in October. Later on, he is slated to host a pair of events in New York City.

Pence, meanwhile, is scheduled to attend fall events in Milwaukee and Washington, D.C.

The events are to benefit Trump Victory, a joint Trump reelection-Republican National Committee campaign account. They come as the president has begun to take steps to prepare for a 2020 campaign.


Source
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules."
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
September 05 2017 22:59 GMT
#173017
On September 06 2017 07:54 zlefin wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 06 2017 07:52 Plansix wrote:
On September 06 2017 07:46 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:
https://twitter.com/RobbieGramer/status/905148924813508608

https://twitter.com/RobbieGramer/status/905158067683299329

I am really not ok with them losing cabinet members. Some of those people have really important jobs and they can't just go on the lam for a weekend.

if it's the state dept; woulnd't they periodicalyl be going off to do secret negotiations anyways?
I'd kind of expect that, for certain sensitive negotiations. or at least wouldn't be that surprised by it.

If you do things in secret, have an alibi. Otherwise it's pretty easy to figure out you are doing something and not telling anyone. Because you didn't tell anyone.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
{CC}StealthBlue
Profile Blog Joined January 2003
United States41117 Posts
September 05 2017 23:08 GMT
#173018
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules."
DarkPlasmaBall
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States44566 Posts
September 05 2017 23:16 GMT
#173019
On September 06 2017 08:08 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
https://twitter.com/POLITICO_Steve/status/905082668127281152


Don't worry; Trump would never let Jose into America.
"There is nothing more satisfying than looking at a crowd of people and helping them get what I love." ~Day[9] Daily #100
Nebuchad
Profile Blog Joined December 2012
Switzerland12261 Posts
Last Edited: 2017-09-05 23:33:08
September 05 2017 23:31 GMT
#173020
On September 06 2017 07:47 Danglars wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 06 2017 07:28 Nebuchad wrote:
On September 06 2017 06:36 Danglars wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:49 Nebuchad wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:31 Danglars wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:26 Nebuchad wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:23 Danglars wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:16 Nebuchad wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:13 Danglars wrote:
On September 06 2017 05:09 Nebuchad wrote:
[quote]

You posit your questions as evidence that my opinion is wrong when there are actual answers to your questions that make logical sense and when a cursory glance at the world demonstrates that my opinion is factually substantiated.

If only you could communicate the actual answers to your questions that make logical sense.

Wait a second ... let's see if I have it down: If you actually told them, you'd then realize that the real answers totally contradict your points and make them all fundamentally unsound, to the extent to which even a short read would make you realize how stupid it would be to hold them.


You clearly don't have it down. Haven't you learned from the last few times we had an interaction and you immediately disengaged when the threat of an actual conversation emerged?

Your solution is to state that such a contradictory argument exists, but you refuse to say it. I say you'd be better off not responding at all if you have something to refute my argument but won't lay it down. It might be mistaken for losing the argument.


It's just that I expect that immediately after I lay down the argument, you will stop answering and pretend nothing happened, so I'm milking my Danglars' answer time.

On top of that you have already agreed with the gist of my argument in your last answer to kollin.

Then don't waste everyone's time responding only to say you won't respond with an argument but that one "actually" exists, "is logical," and at a "cursory glance ... is factually substantiated." You become the parody everyone makes xDaunt out to be. Unless that's your goal.


1) Your parties are absurdly rightwing. You have already agreed to that. There are a bunch of facts that caused that to happen, I imagine some really historical facts like the Republicans moving to the right of the Democrats to execute the Southern Strategy or the fact that if you were even slightly left you could be a COMMUNIST during the Cold War did not help, but my guess is the biggest factors are closer to us, with Reagan worshipping and the Tea Party on your side, and the espousal of neoliberalism on the other. We can go into details if you want.

2) This doesn't say much about the actual people within the United States. A country that is that rightwing wouldn't have Bernie Sanders as their most liked politician, and wouldn't have all of the (actual) leftwing talking points at over 50% approval (no matter how much weight you put in those polls, it just wouldn't happen). You also wouldn't get Trump parroting a whole bunch of leftwing talking points to win if the people of the US were actually that rightwing, that would be a moronic strategy and that wouldn't have resulted in him winning some democratic states.

3) The democratic party IS a joke for losing to you guys. Like, not in that I personally think it's a joke (I do), but in that it is treated as such everywhere, even in your own entertainment media. Their losing can be explained strategically though. Their strategy on the state level was incredibly poor. It doesn't help that they're actually mostly playing by the rules, while you gerrymander and "anti voting fraud" your way into a more favourable electorate. They are also much more threatened by losing to their left than they are by losing to their right. If you want to see a strong democratic party, look no further than how they deal with us, and look as far away as you can from how they deal with you.

4) It's telling that you go to these circumstancial notions to defend that your party has sense and substance. Normally you would go to the issues and demonstrate that your party's positions make sense, rather than this convoluted copout. I'm pretty sure I remember xDaunt agreeing that the republican party was intellectually bankrupt not long ago.

4. I responded in context with how you described the situation between the parties. That's the circumstances of the response. I'll defend the sense on an issue-by-issue basis, since the actual positions of the Republican party do not frequently align with my conservative beliefs. But in your framing, absolutely there's the possibility that its beliefs aren't as unpalatable as you make out. And I'm content just to point out that your post paints the Democrat party in a very bad light, or like Kollin said, paints the electorate in a very bad light. That's probably as far as we'll get.

The US is a bit overdue to have a collapse with some Berniebro in charge. The Sanders support from the youth makes a lot of sense without a modern example of the unintentional consequences. Trump played off that Sanders support for sure. He's about as much a loser on the populist/socialist front as him.


And yet last time we talked about that you absolutely did not engage me on the issues, like not even remotely.

I'm not entirely sure why you point out that what I say puts the democratic party in a bad light. Do you think it's news to me? Or to Americans fwiw, since the Democratic party polls about as well as Trump?

Can't wait till you get a Berniebro in charge and will be eager to listen to your excuse when they don't destroy your country.

Trump's doing a pretty bad job. You might get your shot. Flight 93 election, revisited.

I'm of the opinion that both major parties have huge issues representing their bases and future political viability. Identity politics and social issue extremism comes to mind for the Dems, only pretending to want to repeal Obamacare for 7 years and illegal immigration come to mind for the GOP. So, when you trash the Republicans in absolute form, I seek to make sure you understand it means the Dems still have been doing fucking horrible to still lose in what you think would be an easy fight. People like GH I know to have a poor opinion of that party. This was how I discover what your opinion of the Democrat party is. Not everyone thinks they're that bad. This forum is a bit dour compared to my SoCal lib friends. Usually they make excuses for D-party performance (see: They're all racists, traditionalists ... or it's about gerrymandering and voter intimidation). So now I know that about you. It's whatever.


Glad I moved away from the absurd pile then.

Identity politics doesn't mean much anymore (kind of like racism except this time it's true), and there really isn't such a thing as "too not racist". The Dem's problems lie elsewhere.

As for the GOP, they suck on healthcare, economy, guns, climate change, science, education, higher education, taxes, racism... Just about everything actually, I can't think of a subject they don't suck on, ideologically speaking. The overarching issue is that they believe most of what they believe not out of ideology, but because there's a financial interest behind what they support that asked them to believe it. Do you have any favourite subjects for elaboration?
No will to live, no wish to die
Prev 1 8649 8650 8651 8652 8653 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Wardi Open
11:00
Mondays #51
WardiTV257
Harstem229
OGKoka 196
CranKy Ducklings105
Rex98
LiquipediaDiscussion
Afreeca Starleague
10:00
Ro16 Group C
Snow vs Sharp
Jaedong vs Mini
Afreeca ASL 15790
sctven
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Harstem 229
OGKoka 196
Lowko180
Rex 98
StarCraft: Brood War
Calm 11606
Bisu 5834
Rain 5508
Flash 3310
Sea 2067
BeSt 1631
EffOrt 809
actioN 634
Hyun 455
Stork 348
[ Show more ]
Zeus 297
ZerO 197
Hyuk 188
firebathero 188
Pusan 158
Soulkey 152
ggaemo 144
Mong 100
Rush 94
Mind 92
Liquid`Ret 87
JYJ86
Barracks 63
PianO 57
Aegong 46
Movie 38
yabsab 30
Sea.KH 24
Icarus 21
SilentControl 16
Noble 13
Terrorterran 13
soO 11
sSak 11
Bale 9
Hm[arnc] 7
zelot 6
Sacsri 6
Dota 2
singsing2521
Dendi537
BananaSlamJamma282
Fuzer 167
Counter-Strike
olofmeister1538
x6flipin608
shoxiejesuss455
byalli189
Super Smash Bros
Westballz13
Other Games
B2W.Neo535
crisheroes338
XaKoH 166
NeuroSwarm46
Mew2King40
Organizations
StarCraft: Brood War
UltimateBattle 347
lovetv 11
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
[ Show 12 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• LUISG 49
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• lizZardDota242
Upcoming Events
Monday Night Weeklies
4h 8m
OSC
12h 8m
Sparkling Tuna Cup
22h 8m
Afreeca Starleague
22h 8m
Light vs Speed
Larva vs Soma
PiGosaur Monday
1d 12h
LiuLi Cup
1d 23h
RSL Revival
2 days
Maru vs Reynor
Cure vs TriGGeR
The PondCast
3 days
RSL Revival
3 days
Zoun vs Classic
Korean StarCraft League
4 days
[ Show More ]
RSL Revival
4 days
[BSL 2025] Weekly
5 days
BSL Team Wars
5 days
RSL Revival
5 days
Online Event
6 days
Wardi Open
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

BSL 20 Team Wars
Chzzk MurlocKing SC1 vs SC2 Cup #2
HCC Europe

Ongoing

KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 3
BSL 21 Points
ASL Season 20
CSL 2025 AUTUMN (S18)
LASL Season 20
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1

Upcoming

2025 Chongqing Offline CUP
BSL Polish World Championship 2025
IPSL Winter 2025-26
BSL Season 21
SC4ALL: Brood War
BSL 21 Team A
Stellar Fest
SC4ALL: StarCraft II
EC S1
ESL Impact League Season 8
SL Budapest Major 2025
BLAST Rivals Fall 2025
IEM Chengdu 2025
PGL Masters Bucharest 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters Fall
Thunderpick World Champ.
CS Asia Championships 2025
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
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 © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.