EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 9060
| Forum Index > Closed |
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. | ||
KwarK
United States42738 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 26 2017 03:47 Mohdoo wrote: Did he, though? Is there some kinda paper trail? If Trump says he didn't authorize it, how do we verify? They were either authorized to ok that mission or they were not. If they say the president provided them broad authority, which is likely given pass reporting on the subject, he authorized though that broad authority. Or he did not and they are operating outside the chain of command. Trump doesn’t get to rewrite the book on this one. After for verifying it, they can have the person who approved the mission testify as to who granted the authority and they work their way up. At some point a general has to testify and say “The president gave us the green light to perform these types of missions,” before congress. And then Trump can call a serving general a liar and see how that works out for him. | ||
|
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
| ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
Senator Jeff Flake (R-AZ): “Despotism loves a vacuum. And our allies are now looking elsewhere for leadership. Why are they doing this? None of this is normal. And what do we as United States Senators have to say about it? The principles that underlie our politics, the values of our founding, are too vital to our identity and to our survival to allow them to be compromised by the requirements of politics. Because politics can make us silent when we should speak, and silence can equal complicity. I have children and grandchildren to answer to, and so, Mr. President, I will not be complicit.” Watch above, via C-SPAN. That is something new. Here you have it from a GOP senator. GH and others say it time and again. Not speaking up against racism makes you complicit of it. Glad we can now move on with the discussion and focus on how to address the silent minority. Which I'm sure I'm part of... E: sorry I'm like 6 pages behind. Hope this hasn't been pointed out thrice already And why is Kulturkampf being used instead of culture war? Is one the liberal and the other the Nazi definition? | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21694 Posts
On October 26 2017 03:56 Wulfey_LA wrote: A more specific quote from Trump. As always, a mix of buck passing and incoherent nonsense and doublespeak. https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/923260393585283074 is the more relevant tweet imo So he gave them broad authority to do whatever they wanted. Still his responsibility. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 26 2017 04:03 Gorsameth wrote: https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/923260492155621376 is the more relevant tweet imo So he gave them broad authority to do whatever they wanted. Still his responsibility. Of course, this wouldn’t have been an issue if he hadn’t try to pass the buck and claim he didn’t authorize it. Now it is an issue because it looks like he is blaming the general. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On October 26 2017 00:10 Plansix wrote: Yes. If they pick up one or two seats in the Senate, the entire process will grind to a standstill if the GOP continues on the track they are going on. They will no long be able to be effective without working with the Democrats, so all the conservative pet projects will die. That is the problem with voting for conservative representatives. What they want to do in government is something that the opposing party would never allow to happen, so there is no ability govern. They have no interest in a deliberative process. Remember a few months ago when it looked like the Reps were going to probably expand their Senate majority in 2018 and all that? | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On October 26 2017 04:15 ticklishmusic wrote: Remember a few months ago when it looked like the Reps were going to probably expand their Senate majority in 2018 and all that? Well they might. They might suck but Democrats do as well. Think Flake’s seat is gonna go Democrat or something? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 26 2017 04:19 LegalLord wrote: Well they might. They might suck but Democrats do as well. Think Flake’s seat is gonna go Democrat or something? This is the era of Trump. Anything is possible. Anything. The guard rails are off and anything could happen. | ||
|
brian
United States9619 Posts
that said, as it stands now unless the GOP can provide an anti establishment pick that is a proven non-lunatic, i don’t know how successful they’ll be. but it’s a long time away so a lot can change. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Frankly “anything can happen” seems to have a tendency to not materialize into Democratic victories. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On October 26 2017 04:19 LegalLord wrote: Well they might. They might suck but Democrats do as well. Think Flake’s seat is gonna go Democrat or something? That would take quite a turnaround. It’s a tough climb up from single-digit percent campaign promises delivered. Dems Tun am impeachment election and laugh at the Republican coalition and hold more they should’ve lost. I don’t expect any blowouts given the quality of their recruited talent. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 26 2017 04:46 LegalLord wrote: Democrats do have a golden opportunity to flip lots of seats all across the country. But they’ve forgot how to campaign to win. I saw so many Democrats I voted for for any number of positions, from peasant to highly prestigious, that could have been won, but they just didn’t put their heart into it. Frankly “anything can happen” seems to have a tendency to not materialize into Democratic victories. It will come down to the quality of the candidates, like most elections. With a reasonable advantage for the party that isn’t in power. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
Of course only if shared bathrooms are sanctioned by Jesus. Y'all on the right triggered by that comment yet? Men have been sexually discriminated against the most ever since, they were just told to suck it up and rightly so they did as they were told. Amiright? | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15690 Posts
On October 26 2017 05:28 Artisreal wrote: So who thinks it's sexist of women to ask men to put the seat down after they had a leak? Of course only if shared bathrooms are sanctioned by Jesus. Y'all on the right triggered by that comment yet? Men have been sexually discriminated against the most ever since, they were just told to suck it up and rightly so they did as they were told. Amiright? TBH, this is a pretty braindead practice. The idea that one or the other is correct rather than just what the other wants is really stupid. As for me, I just sit to pee at home. Standing is 100% inferior from a contamination and cleanliness perspective. Should only be done in places where you don't wanna sit on the toilet, such as in public. | ||
|
harodihg
Japan1344 Posts
On October 26 2017 05:28 Artisreal wrote: So who thinks it's sexist of women to ask men to put the seat down after they had a leak? Of course only if shared bathrooms are sanctioned by Jesus. Y'all on the right triggered by that comment yet? Men have been sexually discriminated against the most ever since, they were just told to suck it up and rightly so they did as they were told. Amiright? That doesn't really seem sexist or like an issue to me, in the same sense that "manspreading" seems pretty dumb and like a non-issue. I don't think men have been discriminated against more than women, but in recent times it seems like their plights remain ignored and any attempt to put some light on issues that men may face, even if they're not caused by women, are met with comments about "stop thinking about men lol, not everything is about you!" | ||
|
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
| ||
|
IyMoon
United States1249 Posts
On October 26 2017 05:49 Wulfey_LA wrote: Trying to downplay workplace sexual harrassment and/or mocking extreme examples of gender politics on community college campuses is going to look real stupid in the next two weeks. Weinstein / Ailes / O'Rielly et. al. were just the beginning. MRA's might not like #MeToo since it triggers their butthurt, but a flood of legitimate abuse stories are going to come out and heaps of top guys at big firms are going to get purged. You can try and pick on 'manspreading' articles right now, but do realize that your hot takes will look stupid when the flood of assaulters is outed. I am willing to bet no more than 3 more big heads roll. Chalk it up to my little faith in America for dealing with shit like this but I don't think anymore big names are going down. | ||
|
Lmui
Canada6213 Posts
Electric cars emit significantly less greenhouse gases over their lifetimes than diesel engines even when they are powered by the most carbon intensive energy, a new report has found. In Poland, which uses high volumes of coal, electric vehicles produced a quarter less emissions than diesels when put through a full lifecycle modelling study by Belgium's VUB University. CO2 reductions on Europe's cleanest grid in Sweden were a remarkable 85%, falling to around one half for countries such as the UK. "On average, electric vehicles will emit half the CO2 emissions of a diesel car by 2030, including the manufacturing emissions," said Yoann Le Petit, a spokesman for the T&E think tank, which commissioned the study. Summarized with http://smmry.com/ Just to put to bed the arguments against electric cars. Even if you run the cars on electricity from coal power plants, they're still better overall. On the bathroom issue: Leave it in the state which you finish with it. If I have to lift the seat, then if someone is th opposite gender they will put it down. It's no harder to do either way. The alternative is to permanently have the seat always down, and put urinals in shared bathrooms. | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35152 Posts
On October 26 2017 05:36 Mohdoo wrote: TBH, this is a pretty braindead practice. The idea that one or the other is correct rather than just what the other wants is really stupid. As for me, I just sit to pee at home. Standing is 100% inferior from a contamination and cleanliness perspective. Should only be done in places where you don't wanna sit on the toilet, such as in public. And even then, whether the seat is up or down is a stupid discussion, because the lid should be closed completely when flushing. | ||
| ||
