|
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. |
2774 Posts
On November 26 2017 20:18 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2017 18:26 Artisreal wrote:On November 26 2017 16:26 Danglars wrote:On November 26 2017 14:00 Nevuk wrote:
This is a racist, antisemitic website he's linking btw
(Check the site name) What about the site name makes it racist and antisemitic? I'll map two possibilities for you: 1) MAGA = Trump loves it no matter the content 2) it's a know nazi site? I especially like that they listed extreme vetting under homeland security and DOJ as well as "deportations up 30%" and "deportations up 31%". Another gem is "238 arrested in sweep of suspected child sex predators". Neither sexism, racism, discirmination or homophobia are mentioned on the site. But those are unimportant topics anyway. Known by whom? This site is practically empty. It's a website version of a pretty common pastebin that Trump supporters circulate to rebut a simplistic "Trump hasn't done anything" SNS meme. Show nested quote +On November 26 2017 16:26 Danglars wrote:What about the site name makes it racist and antisemitic? I am totally dumbfounded by this one.
Tweet(s) made by the sites Twitter account has content commonly peddled by antisemites and white supremacists, or at the very least quite questionable content (not to mention idiotic conspiracy theories). While I agree that a name with a reference to the "red pill" terminology doesn't necessarily indicate any white supremacism ideology it's not exactly a great first impression either.
It's a laughable website at best and the linking of said tweet doesn't exactly help to improve disprove the POTUS' image as an ignorant fool.
It's tricky to go even go through the history of the website as it's seemingly been almost completely unknown so you can't even investigate in a comprehensive way, although I suppose it's very recent anyway.
|
I feel like at this point the media chronicling every bit of idiocy spouted by Trump is counter productive, because most of the awful things he has been involved with have originated from his cabinet. Trump could spend all his time golfing and signing whatever document is put in front of him, and the world wouldn't noticeably suffer. Even the mistreatment of immigrants, which is one of his signature policy ideas, operates mostly outside of his control via Sessions.
|
On November 26 2017 21:10 Toadesstern wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2017 20:17 Danglars wrote:On November 26 2017 14:12 Toadesstern wrote:On November 26 2017 13:50 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 26 2017 12:51 Excludos wrote:On November 26 2017 12:44 GreenHorizons wrote:
The fix for this isn't crucifying Trump, it's realizing Trump is a manifestation of a system that was a competition to be Trump and he was just wayyyy better at it. Why can it only be either or? Why not both? Crucify Trump, elect someone more reasonable, then start changing the rotten system that allowed Trump to be both bought out by the Russians and elected in the first place. Because " If Hillary Was President We'd All Be at Brunch Right Now". I'm not arguing that Trump shouldn't have already been impeached and shamed from society (if not in prison), I'm arguing people need to indict the entire system that Trump is exploiting in ways the politicians ready to crucify him only dreamed of. They aren't ready for that. Get rid of Trump and they'll be perfectly happy to resume calling/emailing/writing their representatives begging them not to kill them or ruin their lives every month because Pence is nice and he smiles and won't even be alone with women. at the end of the day a good portion of the US (voting) population want exactly what Trump is though. No change of system will change that. Actually, I guess changing election day to a holiday or sunday would get more "normal" people to the urns so less people voting extremes but you get what I mean A good portion thought Trump was "close enough" on several axes of issues. You're way off in the weeds to think they "want exactly what Trump is though." A good portion of voters (63%) thought he was temperamentally unfit to be president, but a good portion of them voted for him anyways. Ditto treatment of women. A good portion of the American public thought he absolutely alienated blacks & latinos, but he still outperformed mild-mannered Romney on both those groups. I never said it's different from what you just said in the beginning yourself. That's just you imaginging something I must have thought despite it never being written out and jumping to conclusions from there... "a good portion" does not mean "all", or even "a majority [of Trump voters]". It's just stating that a sizeable amount of people really do like him and what he stands for. Unless you want to come at me for suggesting that there are indeed a bunch of people out there who want exactly what Trump stands for you're putting words in my mouth. Just check Breitbart etc and you will see that those people do exist no matter how much you just said they're unicorns. I thought that much was obvious but apparently it wasn't. Except for a couple points I'd disagree with. Like the 63% you mention that thought he was temperamentally unfit to be president. I've mentioned the voting population exactly because those people you just mentioned didn't all vote. A lot of them stayed at home because a) they don't care enough about politics b) Hillary saying she isn't Trump isn't a message that gets people out to vote You also have Trump at what... 40% approval or whatever it is nowadays and he still managed to become President. Same thing. So yeah, you maybe have 63% of people saying he's unfit but if 50% of those 63% stay at home you're down to 31.5% who didn't vote Trump (because they thought he was unfit). I'm sure it's the same on both sides. Some people begrudgingly voting Hillary/Trump because it's the lesser evil but both sides also had real supporters no matter how much you just said that isn't the case. The people who don't care all that much are just so much more likely to not show up, not vote and just shrug. Whereas the people far on the left or far on the right all show up because they treat it as a fight they have to win.
Exit polls are conducted at polling stations, not at homes. As in “exit polls indicate anti-Trump backlash in Virginia” can’t be explained away by a Trump partisan as some disengaged people.
You’re referring to several overlapping groups. Lately, it’s been popular to broad-brush his support to think a sizable number like pussy-grabbing, and his campaign appointment skills, and his obvious exaggerations, and his twitter behavior. I can’t really help you if you missed the partisan line that tries to place a large number of his supporters in the deplorable bucket. If you’re disavowing this notion (depends on what you mean by “exactly what trump is”), then I’m happy to hear you say so.
|
On November 27 2017 00:30 Grumbels wrote:
I feel like at this point the media chronicling every bit of idiocy spouted by Trump is counter productive, because most of the awful things he has been involved with have originated from his cabinet. Trump could spend all his time golfing and signing whatever document is put in front of him, and the world wouldn't noticeably suffer. Even the mistreatment of immigrants, which is one of his signature policy ideas, operates mostly outside of his control via Sessions.
it wasn't ever about productivity, it was about what sells. and covering trump sells.
|
From those wonderful folks who bring us Davos, Existence as a Service!
Yes you can now purchase your existence for periods as short as one hour using WEFcoin and the EaaS platform... 
Welcome to 2030. I Own Nothing, Have No Privacy, and Life Has Never Been Better
Welcome to the year 2030. Welcome to my city – or should I say, “our city”. I don’t own anything. I don’t own a car. I don’t own a house. I don’t own any appliances or any clothes.
It might seem odd to you, but it makes perfect sense for us in this city. Everything you considered a product, has now become a service. We have access to transportation, accommodation, food and all the things we need in our daily lives. One by one all these things became free, so it ended up not making sense for us to own much. ..
https://futurism.com/welcome-2030-nothing-privacy-life-better/
|
On November 27 2017 00:34 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2017 00:30 Grumbels wrote:
I feel like at this point the media chronicling every bit of idiocy spouted by Trump is counter productive, because most of the awful things he has been involved with have originated from his cabinet. Trump could spend all his time golfing and signing whatever document is put in front of him, and the world wouldn't noticeably suffer. Even the mistreatment of immigrants, which is one of his signature policy ideas, operates mostly outside of his control via Sessions. it wasn't ever about productivity, it was about what sells. and covering trump sells.
It can be combined though. I sometimes watch stuff like the Seth Meyers or Stephen Colbert recaps of Trump's actions, and whenever Trump is more directly involved with policy it seems like they are capable of covering both his ineptitude as president, the potential danger of the policy proposals and the complicity of the GOP in supporting him. But when the focus should really be on all the proposals that come directly from the more extreme business friendly parts of the GOP, instead these comedians spend most of their time covering silly Trump soundbytes and Russia investigation fluff. I am not exactly expecting some sort of deep self-reflection about the flaws inherent in our system from these comedians, but I want them to at least move beyond Trump, because he is only a manifestation of the rot in the system.
I'm aware I'm being naive about this, and I know the remedy is to stop caring about what Stephen Colbert has to say, much like I already don't care about what the Democratic party has to say about anything, because I recognize they are part of the establishment and they can't subject themselves to meaningful self-reflection because part of liberalism is to pretend like it is ahistorical, eternal and beyond ideological examination. But I wish they would at least target all the so obviously vile and corrupt politicians of the GOP (as well as centrist Dems) with more vigor, as currently Colbert is insufferable to watch.
But maybe it is the case that all the comedy shows about Trump are not "productive" in the sense that they give people the idea they are resisting by passively watching television. So I don't know if I actually want Colbert to be more incisive as long as he is not somehow pushing people to genuine activism.
|
On November 27 2017 00:33 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2017 21:10 Toadesstern wrote:On November 26 2017 20:17 Danglars wrote:On November 26 2017 14:12 Toadesstern wrote:On November 26 2017 13:50 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 26 2017 12:51 Excludos wrote:On November 26 2017 12:44 GreenHorizons wrote:
The fix for this isn't crucifying Trump, it's realizing Trump is a manifestation of a system that was a competition to be Trump and he was just wayyyy better at it. Why can it only be either or? Why not both? Crucify Trump, elect someone more reasonable, then start changing the rotten system that allowed Trump to be both bought out by the Russians and elected in the first place. Because " If Hillary Was President We'd All Be at Brunch Right Now". I'm not arguing that Trump shouldn't have already been impeached and shamed from society (if not in prison), I'm arguing people need to indict the entire system that Trump is exploiting in ways the politicians ready to crucify him only dreamed of. They aren't ready for that. Get rid of Trump and they'll be perfectly happy to resume calling/emailing/writing their representatives begging them not to kill them or ruin their lives every month because Pence is nice and he smiles and won't even be alone with women. at the end of the day a good portion of the US (voting) population want exactly what Trump is though. No change of system will change that. Actually, I guess changing election day to a holiday or sunday would get more "normal" people to the urns so less people voting extremes but you get what I mean A good portion thought Trump was "close enough" on several axes of issues. You're way off in the weeds to think they "want exactly what Trump is though." A good portion of voters (63%) thought he was temperamentally unfit to be president, but a good portion of them voted for him anyways. Ditto treatment of women. A good portion of the American public thought he absolutely alienated blacks & latinos, but he still outperformed mild-mannered Romney on both those groups. I never said it's different from what you just said in the beginning yourself. That's just you imaginging something I must have thought despite it never being written out and jumping to conclusions from there... "a good portion" does not mean "all", or even "a majority [of Trump voters]". It's just stating that a sizeable amount of people really do like him and what he stands for. Unless you want to come at me for suggesting that there are indeed a bunch of people out there who want exactly what Trump stands for you're putting words in my mouth. Just check Breitbart etc and you will see that those people do exist no matter how much you just said they're unicorns. I thought that much was obvious but apparently it wasn't. Except for a couple points I'd disagree with. Like the 63% you mention that thought he was temperamentally unfit to be president. I've mentioned the voting population exactly because those people you just mentioned didn't all vote. A lot of them stayed at home because a) they don't care enough about politics b) Hillary saying she isn't Trump isn't a message that gets people out to vote You also have Trump at what... 40% approval or whatever it is nowadays and he still managed to become President. Same thing. So yeah, you maybe have 63% of people saying he's unfit but if 50% of those 63% stay at home you're down to 31.5% who didn't vote Trump (because they thought he was unfit). I'm sure it's the same on both sides. Some people begrudgingly voting Hillary/Trump because it's the lesser evil but both sides also had real supporters no matter how much you just said that isn't the case. The people who don't care all that much are just so much more likely to not show up, not vote and just shrug. Whereas the people far on the left or far on the right all show up because they treat it as a fight they have to win. Exit polls are conducted at polling stations, not at homes. As in “exit polls indicate anti-Trump backlash in Virginia” can’t be explained away by a Trump partisan as some disengaged people. You’re referring to several overlapping groups. Lately, it’s been popular to broad-brush his support to think a sizable number like pussy-grabbing, and his campaign appointment skills, and his obvious exaggerations, and his twitter behavior. I can’t really help you if you missed the partisan line that tries to place a large number of his supporters in the deplorable bucket. If you’re disavowing this notion (depends on what you mean by “exactly what trump is”), then I’m happy to hear you say so.
A sizable, or how I phrased it originally "a good portion", of the people that voted him doesn't mean it's anything even close to a majority. It just means it's a shitload of people, enough to be a problem. Even if it's just 1% of his voters I'd still call it exactly that considering how many people you have in the US.
If you're asking me how many I believe belong into the "begrudgingly voted Trump because I'm closer to him than I am to Hillary" and how many belong into the Breitbart-super-fans... idk, I'd have to take numbers out of my ass but I'd probably say something like 5-10% of the people who voted him genuinly like all the bad things about him you just mentioned:
the pussy-grabbing was deserved for whoever it was because *insert random women* is evil for *insert random reason*, campaign appointments are sticking it to the establishment (Obama warning him about Flynn for example) and therefore good, twitter behavior like fighting with that one Dad the other day is good because he's fighting back instead of apologizing etc.
I do think those people exist here and there. Again, unless you're making an argument that those people don't exist at all I really don't see your point. We can argue the numbers if you think my 5% guess (out of my ass) is way too high but I don't really see the difference in wether it's 0.5%, 5% or 15% of his cult. Hence not mentioning any initially
|
On November 27 2017 01:24 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2017 00:34 zlefin wrote:On November 27 2017 00:30 Grumbels wrote:
I feel like at this point the media chronicling every bit of idiocy spouted by Trump is counter productive, because most of the awful things he has been involved with have originated from his cabinet. Trump could spend all his time golfing and signing whatever document is put in front of him, and the world wouldn't noticeably suffer. Even the mistreatment of immigrants, which is one of his signature policy ideas, operates mostly outside of his control via Sessions. it wasn't ever about productivity, it was about what sells. and covering trump sells. It can be combined though. I sometimes watch stuff like the Seth Meyers or Stephen Colbert recaps of Trump's actions, and whenever Trump is more directly involved with policy it seems like they are capable of covering both his ineptitude as president, the potential danger of the policy proposals and the complicity of the GOP in supporting him. But when the focus should really be on all the proposals that come directly from the more extreme business friendly parts of the GOP, instead these comedians spend most of their time covering silly Trump soundbytes and Russia investigation fluff. I am not exactly expecting some sort of deep self-reflection about the flaws inherent in our system from these comedians, but I want them to at least move beyond Trump, because he is only a manifestation of the rot in the system. I'm aware I'm being naive about this, and I know the remedy is to stop caring about what Stephen Colbert has to say, much like I already don't care about what the Democratic party has to say about anything, because I recognize they are part of the establishment and they can't subject themselves to meaningful self-reflection because part of liberalism is to pretend like it is ahistorical, eternal and beyond ideological examination. But I wish they would at least target all the so obviously vile and corrupt politicians of the GOP (as well as centrist Dems) with more vigor, as currently Colbert is insufferable to watch. But maybe it is the case that all the comedy shows about Trump are not "productive" in the sense that they give people the idea they are resisting by passively watching television. So I don't know if I actually want Colbert to be more incisive as long as he is not somehow pushing people to genuine activism.
I thought you were talking about more traditional media rather than the comedians.
for the comedians, productivity is measured by laughter adn the reduction in audience stress. I do'nt have good data on how successful they are on that.
your aside on Dems seems weird to me; people in general are bad at self-reflection, it's nothing ot do with being establishment or liberal.
|
On November 27 2017 01:40 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2017 01:24 Grumbels wrote:On November 27 2017 00:34 zlefin wrote:On November 27 2017 00:30 Grumbels wrote:
I feel like at this point the media chronicling every bit of idiocy spouted by Trump is counter productive, because most of the awful things he has been involved with have originated from his cabinet. Trump could spend all his time golfing and signing whatever document is put in front of him, and the world wouldn't noticeably suffer. Even the mistreatment of immigrants, which is one of his signature policy ideas, operates mostly outside of his control via Sessions. it wasn't ever about productivity, it was about what sells. and covering trump sells. It can be combined though. I sometimes watch stuff like the Seth Meyers or Stephen Colbert recaps of Trump's actions, and whenever Trump is more directly involved with policy it seems like they are capable of covering both his ineptitude as president, the potential danger of the policy proposals and the complicity of the GOP in supporting him. But when the focus should really be on all the proposals that come directly from the more extreme business friendly parts of the GOP, instead these comedians spend most of their time covering silly Trump soundbytes and Russia investigation fluff. I am not exactly expecting some sort of deep self-reflection about the flaws inherent in our system from these comedians, but I want them to at least move beyond Trump, because he is only a manifestation of the rot in the system. I'm aware I'm being naive about this, and I know the remedy is to stop caring about what Stephen Colbert has to say, much like I already don't care about what the Democratic party has to say about anything, because I recognize they are part of the establishment and they can't subject themselves to meaningful self-reflection because part of liberalism is to pretend like it is ahistorical, eternal and beyond ideological examination. But I wish they would at least target all the so obviously vile and corrupt politicians of the GOP (as well as centrist Dems) with more vigor, as currently Colbert is insufferable to watch. But maybe it is the case that all the comedy shows about Trump are not "productive" in the sense that they give people the idea they are resisting by passively watching television. So I don't know if I actually want Colbert to be more incisive as long as he is not somehow pushing people to genuine activism. I thought you were talking about more traditional media rather than the comedians. for the comedians, productivity is measured by laughter adn the reduction in audience stress. I do'nt have good data on how successful they are on that. your aside on Dems seems weird to me; people in general are bad at self-reflection, it's nothing ot do with being establishment or liberal.
It's not that people are bad at self-reflection, it is the case that some ideologies are bad at self-reflection because they position themselves as not being ideologies. Dems don't understand that "milquetoast center-left capitalism where policy is created by debate and compromise with conservatives" is also an ideological position. That's why Obama didn't do anything, since he had deluded himself into thinking you could reason with conservatives and come up with solutions that benefit everyone.That's why the GOP always wins, they understand that the other side is the enemy and have to be defeated, whereas Dems somehow think that the system is good and if you squash the bad elements it will self-correct by the positive thinking of civicly minded people.
Because most mainstream comedians are liberals at heart, they also feel this way. That's why John Oliver makes earnest segments about how we should just vote for this or that law to fix some issue, and how this or that bad person was responsible for the problems. It's a fantasy, but he doesn't recognize it as a fantasy. The reality is that Dems are useless by design, because they can't systematically address inequality or corruption without recognizing that they are outgrowths of capitalism.
|
Chicago, you outdo yourself.
|
grumbels ->
the GOP doesn't always win, so i'm not sure where you're getting the claim that they do from.
also, you did USED to be able to reason with conservatives in the US, it's only more recent (relatively speaking) that that ceased to be the case and they went crazy.
I'm pretty sure i've seen plenty of Dem proposals to address inequality and corruption, including those that are an outgrowth of capitalism. are the dems somewhat ineffective? sure. but useless? that seems a bit far.
I'm also not sure what exactly you're proposing and how it's supposed to help.
|
On November 26 2017 21:35 Nixer wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2017 20:18 oBlade wrote:On November 26 2017 18:26 Artisreal wrote:On November 26 2017 16:26 Danglars wrote:What about the site name makes it racist and antisemitic? I'll map two possibilities for you: 1) MAGA = Trump loves it no matter the content 2) it's a know nazi site? I especially like that they listed extreme vetting under homeland security and DOJ as well as "deportations up 30%" and "deportations up 31%". Another gem is "238 arrested in sweep of suspected child sex predators". Neither sexism, racism, discirmination or homophobia are mentioned on the site. But those are unimportant topics anyway. Known by whom? This site is practically empty. It's a website version of a pretty common pastebin that Trump supporters circulate to rebut a simplistic "Trump hasn't done anything" SNS meme. On November 26 2017 16:26 Danglars wrote:What about the site name makes it racist and antisemitic? I am totally dumbfounded by this one. Tweet(s) made by the sites Twitter account has content commonly peddled by antisemites and white supremacists, or at the very least quite questionable content (not to mention idiotic conspiracy theories). While I agree that a name with a reference to the "red pill" terminology doesn't necessarily indicate any white supremacism ideology it's not exactly a great first impression either. It's a laughable website at best and the linking of said tweet doesn't exactly help to improve disprove the POTUS' image as an ignorant fool. It's tricky to go even go through the history of the website as it's seemingly been almost completely unknown so you can't even investigate in a comprehensive way, although I suppose it's very recent anyway. it also apparently lost a lot of its content recently and is back in temporary form, whatever that means.
And The website’s Twitter page, as of Sunday, included a video post by right-wing writer Liz Crokin in which she cites her anonymous sources to claim that the NYPD, the FBI and WikiLeaks are in possession of a sex tape involving Hillary Clinton, Huma Abedin and an underage girl (“Yes, believe it or not, women can be pedophiles too”).
And this lovely chart :
|
The whole bidding process is truly perverse. the race to the bottom is real.
|
Well, chicago is a cesspit, but I still dislike that kind of bidding war. I wonder how well it would work out in practice if we say, had an amendment forbidding all kinds of tax and other incentives for stuff like that.
|
On November 27 2017 02:39 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 26 2017 21:35 Nixer wrote:On November 26 2017 20:18 oBlade wrote:On November 26 2017 18:26 Artisreal wrote:On November 26 2017 16:26 Danglars wrote:What about the site name makes it racist and antisemitic? I'll map two possibilities for you: 1) MAGA = Trump loves it no matter the content 2) it's a know nazi site? I especially like that they listed extreme vetting under homeland security and DOJ as well as "deportations up 30%" and "deportations up 31%". Another gem is "238 arrested in sweep of suspected child sex predators". Neither sexism, racism, discirmination or homophobia are mentioned on the site. But those are unimportant topics anyway. Known by whom? This site is practically empty. It's a website version of a pretty common pastebin that Trump supporters circulate to rebut a simplistic "Trump hasn't done anything" SNS meme. On November 26 2017 16:26 Danglars wrote:What about the site name makes it racist and antisemitic? I am totally dumbfounded by this one. Tweet(s) made by the sites Twitter account has content commonly peddled by antisemites and white supremacists, or at the very least quite questionable content (not to mention idiotic conspiracy theories). While I agree that a name with a reference to the "red pill" terminology doesn't necessarily indicate any white supremacism ideology it's not exactly a great first impression either. It's a laughable website at best and the linking of said tweet doesn't exactly help to improve disprove the POTUS' image as an ignorant fool. It's tricky to go even go through the history of the website as it's seemingly been almost completely unknown so you can't even investigate in a comprehensive way, although I suppose it's very recent anyway. it also apparently lost a lot of its content recently and is back in temporary form, whatever that means. And Show nested quote +The website’s Twitter page, as of Sunday, included a video post by right-wing writer Liz Crokin in which she cites her anonymous sources to claim that the NYPD, the FBI and WikiLeaks are in possession of a sex tape involving Hillary Clinton, Huma Abedin and an underage girl (“Yes, believe it or not, women can be pedophiles too”). https://twitter.com/MAGAPILL/status/932757045488562178And this lovely chart : https://twitter.com/MAGAPILL/status/931987385860198400
Now you’ve got the missing context 
|
On November 27 2017 02:48 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2017 02:39 Nevuk wrote:On November 26 2017 21:35 Nixer wrote:On November 26 2017 20:18 oBlade wrote:On November 26 2017 18:26 Artisreal wrote:On November 26 2017 16:26 Danglars wrote:What about the site name makes it racist and antisemitic? I'll map two possibilities for you: 1) MAGA = Trump loves it no matter the content 2) it's a know nazi site? I especially like that they listed extreme vetting under homeland security and DOJ as well as "deportations up 30%" and "deportations up 31%". Another gem is "238 arrested in sweep of suspected child sex predators". Neither sexism, racism, discirmination or homophobia are mentioned on the site. But those are unimportant topics anyway. Known by whom? This site is practically empty. It's a website version of a pretty common pastebin that Trump supporters circulate to rebut a simplistic "Trump hasn't done anything" SNS meme. On November 26 2017 16:26 Danglars wrote:What about the site name makes it racist and antisemitic? I am totally dumbfounded by this one. Tweet(s) made by the sites Twitter account has content commonly peddled by antisemites and white supremacists, or at the very least quite questionable content (not to mention idiotic conspiracy theories). While I agree that a name with a reference to the "red pill" terminology doesn't necessarily indicate any white supremacism ideology it's not exactly a great first impression either. It's a laughable website at best and the linking of said tweet doesn't exactly help to improve disprove the POTUS' image as an ignorant fool. It's tricky to go even go through the history of the website as it's seemingly been almost completely unknown so you can't even investigate in a comprehensive way, although I suppose it's very recent anyway. it also apparently lost a lot of its content recently and is back in temporary form, whatever that means. And The website’s Twitter page, as of Sunday, included a video post by right-wing writer Liz Crokin in which she cites her anonymous sources to claim that the NYPD, the FBI and WikiLeaks are in possession of a sex tape involving Hillary Clinton, Huma Abedin and an underage girl (“Yes, believe it or not, women can be pedophiles too”). https://twitter.com/MAGAPILL/status/932757045488562178And this lovely chart : https://twitter.com/MAGAPILL/status/931987385860198400 Now you’ve got the missing context
Yeah, sorry, I went to sleep right after posting earlier lol.
Also, Pelosi remains horrible.
|
It seems pretty reasonable to say that a “good portion” of the voting public wants Trump exactly how he is. Those would be the ones who voted for him in the Republican primary. They affirmatively chose Donald Trump to be their nominee. They believe his twitter behavior is modern day presidential and that it riles up the establishment. They believe people like Stephen Miller (a 30 year old) are draining the swamp.
Presumably they wouldn’t endorse sexual assault or pedophilia though, so they do get credit for that.
|
Utah made a similar deal with Amazon. They collect the tax and get to keep a percentage and Utah gets the rest.
|
United States44352 Posts
That's just a capitalism thing.
|
Is this Chicago thing just a weird and convoluted way of talking about tax breaks?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
