|
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. |
On January 30 2018 07:38 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2018 07:35 GreenHorizons wrote:
There's only one metric that I think Trump is definitively better than having Clinton and that's the digging into political corruption.
I mean we're still doing a shit tier job at it, and this will probably be the most obvious case of corruption/grifting/incompetence/etc... we get from a president exposing the toothless nature of our justice system for those in power and so on.
We all know if Hillary was in, whatever scandal came up would be dismissed as Republican's obsessed with hating Hillary and how it's not as bad as what Trump would have done.
For the "abortion/birth control is murder" crowd it's not hard to see how Trump is bad but still less bad than someone who would vote to make killing babies easier (not withstanding she was the less pro-choice Democratic candidate).
I know you believe that if shit gets much worse something is gonna have to change for the better. I would really love to agree with you, but historically, when things have gotten worse, they have gotten worse. If you worry about the state of corruption in the US, Trump's victory is no good news, in any scenario, and under any circumstances. Having the most corrupt administration in US history will simply create a precedent and let everyone know that half the people in that country are too partisan to care that their republic is being shat over endlessly as long as the guy has a R next to his name.
I'm not saying it's surely going to get better, just that it would have been almost completely ignored by liberals if it was Hillary by way of blaming it on a right-wing obsession. We already saw this during the election where nothing she did was a real scandal or if it was bad, it's never as bad as the alternative. There would be no primary challenge for Hillary so in 2020 it would have again been "but that's a Republican crazy talking point and she's less bad than the Republican so if you don't vote for her you're bad at democracy"
Like I said, it's the one way I have 0 doubt that having Trump has been better for, not saying it balances out the bad or whatever, just that we can't lie to ourselves and pretend the corruption and such in DC (particularly around the white house) would be getting more serious attention from liberals under Hillary than it has under Trump
|
On January 30 2018 06:38 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2018 06:34 iamthedave wrote:On January 30 2018 01:51 Danglars wrote:On January 30 2018 01:18 iamthedave wrote:On January 30 2018 00:32 Danglars wrote:On January 29 2018 22:51 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
WTF is Clinton doing at the Grammy's for fuck sake. Her hubris is what sunk her in 2016. She should be on Trump’s payroll. The more she gets invited to speak at these things, the more we remember the 2016 choice. Honestly, your guys' obsession with Hilary Clinton is so disturbingly intense that I'm pretty sure you see her face in clouds, puddles of water, and check under your beds every night to make sure she isn't there. I mean... why the flying **** do you care what an old, now retired enemy politician is doing anymore? Are you so upset over the money you wasted trying to pin something on her? I mean... how many times WAS she investigated for things? Your Democrats don't seem to like Bush, but I don't see the same manic obsession over what Bush is doing in his retirement. Genuine question. I genuinely struggle to remember her without remembering an attached investigation. So you’re saying a comment on a Hillary appearance at the Grammys, where she read from a contested book on her general election opponent, that was made by another poster in the thread is Hillary obsession. Meet Trump mania. Did you not see that video a few pages back of Fox sending a reporter to sneak around in the woods of Hilary's hometown to catch up on what she's doing? Did you miss that period when Fox news called her 'the shadow president' as if she was somehow running your country from the sidelines? Even if you are not personally obsessed with Hilary, I think it's undeniable you rightists are over in the US. Why, I can't fathom. So you bring up an unrelated “Fox dummies behave like Fox dummies” vignette because you can’t defend your “Hillary obsession” comment directed at me? Are you really that desperate?
The original comment was meant to be a comment about the political right in general, rather than at you. Your post just happened to be the right jumping off point. You did say 'we' remember the 2016 election result, after all. So I was addressing the 'we' in your post, rather than the 'I' which didn't appear in your post.
Explain how it is unrelated, please. That segment perfectly demonstrates the obsession I'm referring to, and thus is appropriately mentioned.
And please. You aren't worth being desperate over. Stop projecting.
|
On January 30 2018 07:40 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2018 07:14 Plansix wrote:
We should totally re-litigate the 2016 elections, because that is productive. But I can see why some posters would want to drag it back there, when it was all “well he might not be that bad.” Now we are in 2018 and it is clear Trump is trying to core out any government agency he disapproves of. It would be far more productive to recognize each side had their own reasons for voting, with less of the pseudo-psychological “you hate being reminded that there was no good reason to vote” bullshit. It would save the Trump haters time and effort.
It would be more productive. Each poster should look to themselves to ask if they are doing that, or simply trying to stick it to the other side.
|
So.. Enlighten me, what is the reason to vote for a reality tv host, that hasn't ever shown even an inch of integrity or goodwill towards the common good?
Because of the R?
Well.. Thats not a reason.
|
So I just had an interesting thought. Russia's goal is not to empower Republicans. Russia's goal is to weaken our global presence both militarily and economically. The easiest way for them to do that was to hit us in our weak spot: Political polarity and a political system designed to come to a screeching stop once there is sufficient disagreement.
When 2018 midterms come around, the best thing for political tension would be democrats taking congress but not senate. If democrats take both congress and senate, democrats are too strong. If Democrats don't at least take congress, a dysfunctional yet directional administration can still get stuff done.
I am very curious how the bots behave in the coming months. Bots have already been used to inflame racial tension, but I am honestly still kind of expecting Russia to "leak" some stuff against Trump the same way they did the DNC if things get a little too orderly.
|
On January 30 2018 08:10 Mohdoo wrote:
So I just had an interesting thought. Russia's goal is not to empower Republicans. Russia's goal is to weaken our global presence both militarily and economically. The easiest way for them to do that was to hit us in our weak spot: Political polarity and a political system designed to come to a screeching stop once there is sufficient disagreement.
When 2018 midterms come around, the best thing for political tension would be democrats taking congress but not senate. If democrats take both congress and senate, democrats are too strong. If Democrats don't at least take congress, a dysfunctional yet directional administration can still get stuff done.
I am very curious how the bots behave in the coming months. Bots have already been used to inflame racial tension, but I am honestly still kind of expecting Russia to "leak" some stuff against Trump the same way they did the DNC if things get a little too orderly.
please let this go. The entire existence of the United States of America has inflamed racial tension, fifty thousand Russian bots did jack squat.
|
Mark Zuckerberg has said Facebook will begin focusing on promoting local news sources in people’s news feeds, the company’s latest change amid criticism that its algorithms prioritized misleading news and misinformation, influencing politics in the US and elsewhere.
“Starting today, we’re going to show more stories from news sources in your local town or city,” Zuckerberg said in a Facebook post on Monday. “If you follow a local publisher or if someone shares a local story, it may show up higher in News Feed.”
The update will be first rolled out in the United States and expanded to more countries later this year, Zuckerberg said.
“Local news helps us understand the issues that matter in our communities and affect our lives,” he wrote. “Research suggests that reading local news is directly correlated with civic engagement. People who know what’s happening around them are more likely to get involved and help make a difference.
“When I traveled around the country last year, one theme people kept telling me is how much we all have in common if we can get past some of the most divisive national issues. Many people told me they thought that if we could turn down the temperature on the more divisive issues and instead focus on concrete local issues, then we’d all make more progress together.”
The company recently adjusted its centerpiece News Feed to prioritize what friends and family share, while reducing the amount of non-advertising content from publishers and brands.
The move had worried investors, who feared that the changes would lead people to spend less time on Facebook.
Source
|
On January 30 2018 08:10 Mohdoo wrote:
So I just had an interesting thought. Russia's goal is not to empower Republicans. Russia's goal is to weaken our global presence both militarily and economically. The easiest way for them to do that was to hit us in our weak spot: Political polarity and a political system designed to come to a screeching stop once there is sufficient disagreement.
When 2018 midterms come around, the best thing for political tension would be democrats taking congress but not senate. If democrats take both congress and senate, democrats are too strong. If Democrats don't at least take congress, a dysfunctional yet directional administration can still get stuff done.
I am very curious how the bots behave in the coming months. Bots have already been used to inflame racial tension, but I am honestly still kind of expecting Russia to "leak" some stuff against Trump the same way they did the DNC if things get a little too orderly.
If weakening sanctions against Russia is still their goal as was initially thought, then it's still in their best interest to empower Trump and Republicans.
|
On January 30 2018 08:14 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2018 08:10 Mohdoo wrote:
So I just had an interesting thought. Russia's goal is not to empower Republicans. Russia's goal is to weaken our global presence both militarily and economically. The easiest way for them to do that was to hit us in our weak spot: Political polarity and a political system designed to come to a screeching stop once there is sufficient disagreement.
When 2018 midterms come around, the best thing for political tension would be democrats taking congress but not senate. If democrats take both congress and senate, democrats are too strong. If Democrats don't at least take congress, a dysfunctional yet directional administration can still get stuff done.
I am very curious how the bots behave in the coming months. Bots have already been used to inflame racial tension, but I am honestly still kind of expecting Russia to "leak" some stuff against Trump the same way they did the DNC if things get a little too orderly.
please let this go. The entire existence of the United States of America has inflamed racial tension, fifty thousand Russian bots did jack squat.
I was just using this as an example to show it's not like Russia gives 2 shits which side is "better". They just want to see us go at each other's throats best we can.
On January 30 2018 08:19 Tachion wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2018 08:10 Mohdoo wrote:
So I just had an interesting thought. Russia's goal is not to empower Republicans. Russia's goal is to weaken our global presence both militarily and economically. The easiest way for them to do that was to hit us in our weak spot: Political polarity and a political system designed to come to a screeching stop once there is sufficient disagreement.
When 2018 midterms come around, the best thing for political tension would be democrats taking congress but not senate. If democrats take both congress and senate, democrats are too strong. If Democrats don't at least take congress, a dysfunctional yet directional administration can still get stuff done.
I am very curious how the bots behave in the coming months. Bots have already been used to inflame racial tension, but I am honestly still kind of expecting Russia to "leak" some stuff against Trump the same way they did the DNC if things get a little too orderly.
If weakening sanctions against Russia is still their goal as was initially thought, then it's still in their best interest to empower Trump and Republicans.
And Republicans don't even blink, realizing they have become the Russia-sympathetic party. Isn't tribalism weird? But you're right that I lost track of the fact that sanctions are an enormous motivator here.
|
On January 30 2018 08:21 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2018 08:14 GreenHorizons wrote:On January 30 2018 08:10 Mohdoo wrote:
So I just had an interesting thought. Russia's goal is not to empower Republicans. Russia's goal is to weaken our global presence both militarily and economically. The easiest way for them to do that was to hit us in our weak spot: Political polarity and a political system designed to come to a screeching stop once there is sufficient disagreement.
When 2018 midterms come around, the best thing for political tension would be democrats taking congress but not senate. If democrats take both congress and senate, democrats are too strong. If Democrats don't at least take congress, a dysfunctional yet directional administration can still get stuff done.
I am very curious how the bots behave in the coming months. Bots have already been used to inflame racial tension, but I am honestly still kind of expecting Russia to "leak" some stuff against Trump the same way they did the DNC if things get a little too orderly.
please let this go. The entire existence of the United States of America has inflamed racial tension, fifty thousand Russian bots did jack squat. I was just using this as an example to show it's not like Russia gives 2 shits which side is "better". They just want to see us go at each other's throats best we can.
I get that, but I'm requesting you stop using that reference as if it was actually significant in any meaningful way.
|
On January 30 2018 08:04 Velr wrote:
So.. Enlighten me, what is the reason to vote for a reality tv host, that hasn't ever shown even an inch of integrity or goodwill towards the common good?
Because of the R?
Well.. Thats not a reason.
This is Oprah Winfrey you're referencing?
|
On January 30 2018 07:38 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2018 07:08 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:On January 30 2018 06:39 Danglars wrote:On January 30 2018 06:33 hunts wrote:On January 30 2018 00:32 Danglars wrote:On January 29 2018 22:51 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
WTF is Clinton doing at the Grammy's for fuck sake. Her hubris is what sunk her in 2016. She should be on Trump’s payroll. The more she gets invited to speak at these things, the more we remember the 2016 choice. It might be better for your side to forget that trump ran against a reasonable candidate, and to pretend that he ran unopposed. Lest you cons forget that you voted for the orange clown when you had a reasonable alternative. Trump looks pretty bad until you think back at who would’ve been in the White House had Trump not won. Genuinely, in what reality do you live?
What fracturing occurs between your senses and the mind that processes them?
Trump would dissemble the entire f***ing government, bar the bits of it that give him control, if he could. His picks like Pruitt are already frighteningly close to doing just that. You seem a little crazy with rage. Maybe step back from politics from a bit and then come back with a fresh attitude. You just can’t reason or debate with blind rage.
You can't debate with someone who literally doesn't occupy the same reality as you.
And "step back from the politics" is something only someone whose politics are the problem would possibly have reason to say.
Also in some nice crappy news - y'all have an... executive problem. (source is a congressional reporter for politico)
|
But wait! There's more.
Republicans vote to release memo alleging FBI missteps while surveilling Trump campaign operative
The House Intelligence Committee voted Monday evening to release a memo detailing alleged surveillance abuses by the FBI and Justice Department, escalating a political fight between conservatives and the nation’s intelligence agencies.
The vote, which proceeded along party lines in the Republican-controlled committee, now means that President Trump will have up to five days to review the material and decide whether to keep it secret. If he does nothing, the committee can release the memo publicly. The committee also voted along party lines against releasing a rebuttal memo from Democrats, who denounced both moves upon leaving the closed-door hearing.
Such a nice transparent democracy right now, innit? At this rate the 9th circle is just going to be a slightly hotter RNC convention.
|
On January 30 2018 08:54 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2018 07:38 Danglars wrote:On January 30 2018 07:08 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:On January 30 2018 06:39 Danglars wrote:On January 30 2018 06:33 hunts wrote:On January 30 2018 00:32 Danglars wrote:On January 29 2018 22:51 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
WTF is Clinton doing at the Grammy's for fuck sake. Her hubris is what sunk her in 2016. She should be on Trump’s payroll. The more she gets invited to speak at these things, the more we remember the 2016 choice. It might be better for your side to forget that trump ran against a reasonable candidate, and to pretend that he ran unopposed. Lest you cons forget that you voted for the orange clown when you had a reasonable alternative. Trump looks pretty bad until you think back at who would’ve been in the White House had Trump not won. Genuinely, in what reality do you live?
What fracturing occurs between your senses and the mind that processes them?
Trump would dissemble the entire f***ing government, bar the bits of it that give him control, if he could. His picks like Pruitt are already frighteningly close to doing just that. You seem a little crazy with rage. Maybe step back from politics from a bit and then come back with a fresh attitude. You just can’t reason or debate with blind rage. You can't debate with someone who literally doesn't occupy the same reality as you. And "step back from the politics" is something only someone whose politics are the problem would possibly have reason to say. Also in some nice crappy news - y'all have an... executive problem. (source is a congressional reporter for politico) https://twitter.com/eschor/status/958110759489294336
Is the executive problem just a general statement or did something else terrible happen recently that I havent heard about yet..?
|
On January 30 2018 09:04 Aveng3r wrote:Show nested quote +On January 30 2018 08:54 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:On January 30 2018 07:38 Danglars wrote:On January 30 2018 07:08 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:On January 30 2018 06:39 Danglars wrote:On January 30 2018 06:33 hunts wrote:On January 30 2018 00:32 Danglars wrote:On January 29 2018 22:51 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
WTF is Clinton doing at the Grammy's for fuck sake. Her hubris is what sunk her in 2016. She should be on Trump’s payroll. The more she gets invited to speak at these things, the more we remember the 2016 choice. It might be better for your side to forget that trump ran against a reasonable candidate, and to pretend that he ran unopposed. Lest you cons forget that you voted for the orange clown when you had a reasonable alternative. Trump looks pretty bad until you think back at who would’ve been in the White House had Trump not won. Genuinely, in what reality do you live?
What fracturing occurs between your senses and the mind that processes them?
Trump would dissemble the entire f***ing government, bar the bits of it that give him control, if he could. His picks like Pruitt are already frighteningly close to doing just that. You seem a little crazy with rage. Maybe step back from politics from a bit and then come back with a fresh attitude. You just can’t reason or debate with blind rage. You can't debate with someone who literally doesn't occupy the same reality as you. And "step back from the politics" is something only someone whose politics are the problem would possibly have reason to say. Also in some nice crappy news - y'all have an... executive problem. (source is a congressional reporter for politico) https://twitter.com/eschor/status/958110759489294336 Is the executive problem just a general statement or did something else terrible happen recently that I havent heard about yet..?
The tweet (admittedly straight from reporter only) says that the sanctions deadlined for today won't be implemented. "The bill existing" is apparently enough for the whitehouse.
|
Between McCabe, the memo, and sanctions, this is going to be a busy news week.
|
Putin wants the sanctions against Russia lifted. Every meeting we know about from 2016 was about sanctions.
Best Amazon book review of the upcoming memo.
|
On January 30 2018 09:25 Tachion wrote:
Between McCabe, the memo, and sanctions, this is going to be a busy news week.
Oh yes.
And don't forget State of the Union. Just to add some whipped dog feces to the pudding.
Also Reuters just put out an article about the sanctions, so that's confirmed.
|
On January 30 2018 09:04 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:But wait! There's more. Republicans vote to release memo alleging FBI missteps while surveilling Trump campaign operativeShow nested quote +
The House Intelligence Committee voted Monday evening to release a memo detailing alleged surveillance abuses by the FBI and Justice Department, escalating a political fight between conservatives and the nation’s intelligence agencies.
The vote, which proceeded along party lines in the Republican-controlled committee, now means that President Trump will have up to five days to review the material and decide whether to keep it secret. If he does nothing, the committee can release the memo publicly. The committee also voted along party lines against releasing a rebuttal memo from Democrats, who denounced both moves upon leaving the closed-door hearing.
Such a nice transparent democracy right now, innit? At this rate the 9th circle is just going to be a slightly hotter RNC convention.
#releasetheothermemo probably won't be the next hashtag the Russian bots pick up, unfortunately
(that said, from this reporting the memo DEFINITELY seems to be about the Page surveillance renewal, so the NYT sources seem to be correct)
Apparently Trump gets 5 days to review the memo before releasing. I'd find it absolutely fucking hilarious if he doesn't let it get out then blames it on the Democrats
|
This is Carter, I don’t need an attorney, Page? That surveillance on him was unlawful? That man is stunningly stupid and admitted to a whole bunch of shit on TV. He seems more then dumb enough to call Russians that we are watching and say shit that would have officials demanding to know who he was. He is really stupid.
I really want to see if this memo lands with he wet fat I expect:
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
