|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
United States43163 Posts
On May 24 2019 10:38 Doodsmack wrote:
Pretty sure the sum total of uranium one evidence will be that bill Clinton received speaking fees from Russians contemporaneous with them having business before the state department. Probably not enough to prove anything. Republicans' lack of concern with the temporal proximity of financial benefits to trump and certain decisions demonstrates how serious they are about corruption.
It didn't even involve the export of American uranium. The sale of a Kazakhstan mine to a Russian company by an American holding company is not a geopolitical threat. Which is why all of the independent people who reviewed the deal concluded exactly that.
A mine that used to be in the Russian Empire was bought by Russians. Hillary didn't authorize it, a body of impartial individuals of which she was one, authorized it. Hillary didn't profit from the authorization of it. The sale did not in any way impact American national security or interests.
|
United States43163 Posts
The whole thing comes down to "if it was above board then why did all those independent individuals all authorize it? Coincidence?!?!"
|
On May 24 2019 10:34 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2019 10:04 GreenHorizons wrote:
Revolutions and democracy aren't exclusive concepts. Chavez helped lead a revolution in Venezuela and it led to one of the most exemplary displays of democracy the world has seen. It's true the outcome of revolution isn't exactly predictable but we have ~10 years to radically change our entire way of life or accept that the next generations will have to as a result of catastrophic climate change they will be powerless to avoid.
If the institutions we have today offer a path to those necessary changes it seems peculiar that those counting on them have been the most ardent that they can't be fixed because of the very nature of the system to which they belong.
That's to say those opposing revolution simultaneously insist that we can't remove the proprietors of the system, dismiss the only viable alternative (based on their own assessment), then refuse to acknowledge they share Kwarks position. um no it didnt.
Except it did...
Most importantly, I want to recognize the Venezuelan people, especially the election workers, whose dedication to sustaining their democratic system, even in the wake of profound change, made these elections a true demonstration of democracy at work.
https://www.cartercenter.org/documents/1151.pdf
The entire election, from the opening to the close of the polls and the ballot count, was fully transparent. Voters went to the polls in a calm and orderly atmosphere, demonstrating their commitment to fulfilling their democratic responsibilities. Neither inside the voting centers nor in their immediate vicinity were any incidents reported that might have affected the integrity or transparency of the voting process, and no cases of voter intimidation were recorded.
http://www.oas.org/sap/publications/1998/moe/venezuela/doc/pbl_19_1998_eng.pdf
Unlike elections in the US practically no one disputes the legitimacy of the Chavez's 1998 election that followed/was part of the revolution.
|
On May 24 2019 10:45 KwarK wrote:
The whole thing comes down to "if it was above board then why did all those independent individuals all authorize it? Coincidence?!?!"
But once we get all the info on Uranium One and it’s super boring, a new conspiracy about the documents Obama destroyed will arise. It feeds itself.
|
The people who doubt the legitimacy of the US's elections aren't legitimate people. They're either willfully ignorant, ignorant, or just rabble rousers.
|
|
|
United States43163 Posts
On May 24 2019 11:06 Sermokala wrote:
The people who doubt the legitimacy of the US's elections aren't legitimate people. They're either willfully ignorant, ignorant, or just rabble rousers.
The US President claims mass voter fraud impacted the elections. There is also plenty of evidence of gerrymandering, illegal disenfranchisement through removal from voter registries or denial of access to polling booths, and of course the actual ballot box stuffing in NC.
The electoral process isn't a sham run by the ruling party as it is in one party dictatorships but nor is it wholly legitimate. The most solace we can take is that the fact we have identified the incidences of electoral fraud imply that they're the exception and that as society we object to them. The attention on the problems shows we still care about trying to fix it.
|
On May 24 2019 11:15 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2019 11:06 Sermokala wrote:
The people who doubt the legitimacy of the US's elections aren't legitimate people. They're either willfully ignorant, ignorant, or just rabble rousers. The US President claims mass voter fraud impacted the elections. There is also plenty of evidence of gerrymandering, illegal disenfranchisement through removal from voter registries or denial of access to polling booths, and of course the actual ballot box stuffing in NC. The electoral process isn't a sham run by the ruling party as it is in one party dictatorships but nor is it wholly legitimate. The most solace we can take is that the fact we have identified the incidences of electoral fraud imply that they're the exception and that as society we object to them. The attention on the problems shows we still care about trying to fix it.
I'd argue their persistence and accepted inevitability demonstrate that care is superficial and mostly useless beyond the solace it provides the person that holds it.
|
On May 24 2019 11:06 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2019 10:52 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 24 2019 10:34 JimmiC wrote:On May 24 2019 10:04 GreenHorizons wrote:
Revolutions and democracy aren't exclusive concepts. Chavez helped lead a revolution in Venezuela and it led to one of the most exemplary displays of democracy the world has seen. It's true the outcome of revolution isn't exactly predictable but we have ~10 years to radically change our entire way of life or accept that the next generations will have to as a result of catastrophic climate change they will be powerless to avoid.
If the institutions we have today offer a path to those necessary changes it seems peculiar that those counting on them have been the most ardent that they can't be fixed because of the very nature of the system to which they belong.
That's to say those opposing revolution simultaneously insist that we can't remove the proprietors of the system, dismiss the only viable alternative (based on their own assessment), then refuse to acknowledge they share Kwarks position. um no it didnt. Except it did... Most importantly, I want to recognize the Venezuelan people, especially the election workers, whose dedication to sustaining their democratic system, even in the wake of profound change, made these elections a true demonstration of democracy at work. https://www.cartercenter.org/documents/1151.pdfThe entire election, from the opening to the close of the polls and the ballot count, was fully transparent. Voters went to the polls in a calm and orderly atmosphere, demonstrating their commitment to fulfilling their democratic responsibilities. Neither inside the voting centers nor in their immediate vicinity were any incidents reported that might have affected the integrity or transparency of the voting process, and no cases of voter intimidation were recorded. http://www.oas.org/sap/publications/1998/moe/venezuela/doc/pbl_19_1998_eng.pdfUnlike elections in the US practically no one disputes the legitimacy of the Chavez's 1998 election that followed/was part of the revolution. Right that is why I said a short period of democracy. If this wad 1999 you would have a great example I would be super hopeful. Sadly its 2019 and we see what ended up actually happening.
We did see what happened. It was a universally recognized election of world class legitimacy unlike 2016, or 2000 in the US.
|
On May 24 2019 10:39 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2019 10:30 Danglars wrote:
Finally we'll have the surveillance info. Barr was pretty quick with the giant Mueller report release, so hopefully he can carry this out with great speed too. Americans deserve answers on the surveillance campaign and actions of domestic spies. Brennan, Comey, Clapper, and the other Obama-era agency heads are toast. But here’s my big prediction: Obama himself is going to be implicated in authorizing and directing the unlawful spying on Americans. The biggest winner here will be the ghost of Nixon, because Obama is going to supplant him as being the most abusive president in history.
Bold prediction. I don't think he'll have fingerprints anywhere near the actions of his subordinates. Allowing this stupidity by seeing the reports and doing nothing is one thing, but being dumb enough to have anything in writing is quite another. It's another stain on his administration most likely, but nothing personal to the man.
I think the real juice will be the anticipatory classified leaks to the major newspapers to soften the news before it breaks.
|
|
|
On May 24 2019 11:30 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2019 11:23 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 24 2019 11:06 JimmiC wrote:On May 24 2019 10:52 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 24 2019 10:34 JimmiC wrote:On May 24 2019 10:04 GreenHorizons wrote:
Revolutions and democracy aren't exclusive concepts. Chavez helped lead a revolution in Venezuela and it led to one of the most exemplary displays of democracy the world has seen. It's true the outcome of revolution isn't exactly predictable but we have ~10 years to radically change our entire way of life or accept that the next generations will have to as a result of catastrophic climate change they will be powerless to avoid.
If the institutions we have today offer a path to those necessary changes it seems peculiar that those counting on them have been the most ardent that they can't be fixed because of the very nature of the system to which they belong.
That's to say those opposing revolution simultaneously insist that we can't remove the proprietors of the system, dismiss the only viable alternative (based on their own assessment), then refuse to acknowledge they share Kwarks position. um no it didnt. Except it did... Most importantly, I want to recognize the Venezuelan people, especially the election workers, whose dedication to sustaining their democratic system, even in the wake of profound change, made these elections a true demonstration of democracy at work. https://www.cartercenter.org/documents/1151.pdfThe entire election, from the opening to the close of the polls and the ballot count, was fully transparent. Voters went to the polls in a calm and orderly atmosphere, demonstrating their commitment to fulfilling their democratic responsibilities. Neither inside the voting centers nor in their immediate vicinity were any incidents reported that might have affected the integrity or transparency of the voting process, and no cases of voter intimidation were recorded. http://www.oas.org/sap/publications/1998/moe/venezuela/doc/pbl_19_1998_eng.pdfUnlike elections in the US practically no one disputes the legitimacy of the Chavez's 1998 election that followed/was part of the revolution. Right that is why I said a short period of democracy. If this wad 1999 you would have a great example I would be super hopeful. Sadly its 2019 and we see what ended up actually happening. We did see what happened. It was a universally recognized election of world class legitimacy unlike 2016, or 2000 in the US. Right in 1998, and has gotten progressively worse every election after until we reached tge quagmire they are in now. Anf we are talking 20 years which is not that long when talking political system. I cant tell if you are just trolling us to be boasting about the exceptional democracy and conplaining about the US elections. It is really startling.
My point is that revolution and democracy aren't exclusive as you tried to frame them. Revolution can and has led to an exemplary democratic election (more widely recognized domestically and globally as legitimate than the most recent one in the US for comparison).
I assume there's also a reason we're ignoring the bourgeoisie revolution that created the United States and it's government.
|
On May 24 2019 11:29 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2019 10:39 xDaunt wrote:On May 24 2019 10:30 Danglars wrote:
Finally we'll have the surveillance info. Barr was pretty quick with the giant Mueller report release, so hopefully he can carry this out with great speed too. Americans deserve answers on the surveillance campaign and actions of domestic spies. Brennan, Comey, Clapper, and the other Obama-era agency heads are toast. But here’s my big prediction: Obama himself is going to be implicated in authorizing and directing the unlawful spying on Americans. The biggest winner here will be the ghost of Nixon, because Obama is going to supplant him as being the most abusive president in history. Bold prediction. I don't think he'll have fingerprints anywhere near the actions of his subordinates. Allowing this stupidity by seeing the reports and doing nothing is one thing, but being dumb enough to have anything in writing is quite another. It's another stain on his administration most likely, but nothing personal to the man. I think the real juice will be the anticipatory classified leaks to the major newspapers to soften the news before it breaks.
Trump already fingered him with a tweet back in 2017. Additionally, keep in mind where Nunes was when he had that press conference kicking much of this spygate stuff off: he was at the White House where he almost certainly was reviewing White House documents. And most importantly of all, don’t forget the Collyer report confirming that unlawful surveillance was occurring (see my prior post on this). In her memo, she states that an interagency memo allowed unlawful spying to occur. I bet you that Obama’s fingerprints are all over that bad boy.
|
|
|
On May 24 2019 11:58 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2019 11:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 24 2019 11:30 JimmiC wrote:On May 24 2019 11:23 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 24 2019 11:06 JimmiC wrote:On May 24 2019 10:52 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 24 2019 10:34 JimmiC wrote:On May 24 2019 10:04 GreenHorizons wrote:
Revolutions and democracy aren't exclusive concepts. Chavez helped lead a revolution in Venezuela and it led to one of the most exemplary displays of democracy the world has seen. It's true the outcome of revolution isn't exactly predictable but we have ~10 years to radically change our entire way of life or accept that the next generations will have to as a result of catastrophic climate change they will be powerless to avoid.
If the institutions we have today offer a path to those necessary changes it seems peculiar that those counting on them have been the most ardent that they can't be fixed because of the very nature of the system to which they belong.
That's to say those opposing revolution simultaneously insist that we can't remove the proprietors of the system, dismiss the only viable alternative (based on their own assessment), then refuse to acknowledge they share Kwarks position. um no it didnt. Except it did... Most importantly, I want to recognize the Venezuelan people, especially the election workers, whose dedication to sustaining their democratic system, even in the wake of profound change, made these elections a true demonstration of democracy at work. https://www.cartercenter.org/documents/1151.pdfThe entire election, from the opening to the close of the polls and the ballot count, was fully transparent. Voters went to the polls in a calm and orderly atmosphere, demonstrating their commitment to fulfilling their democratic responsibilities. Neither inside the voting centers nor in their immediate vicinity were any incidents reported that might have affected the integrity or transparency of the voting process, and no cases of voter intimidation were recorded. http://www.oas.org/sap/publications/1998/moe/venezuela/doc/pbl_19_1998_eng.pdfUnlike elections in the US practically no one disputes the legitimacy of the Chavez's 1998 election that followed/was part of the revolution. Right that is why I said a short period of democracy. If this wad 1999 you would have a great example I would be super hopeful. Sadly its 2019 and we see what ended up actually happening. We did see what happened. It was a universally recognized election of world class legitimacy unlike 2016, or 2000 in the US. Right in 1998, and has gotten progressively worse every election after until we reached tge quagmire they are in now. Anf we are talking 20 years which is not that long when talking political system. I cant tell if you are just trolling us to be boasting about the exceptional democracy and conplaining about the US elections. It is really startling. My point is that revolution and democracy aren't exclusive as you tried to frame them. Revolution can and has led to an exemplary democratic election (more widely recognized domestically and globally as legitimate than the most recent one in the US for comparison). I assume there's also a reason we're ignoring the bourgeoisie revolution that created the United States and it's government. You've moved the goalposts, Im sure by accident. We were talking about democracy and communism working together. I obviously agree that revolution is required for democracy, this is why I have supported the Venezualan attempt at revolution after their democracy was stolen from them.
I didn't move anything it was literally my opening line.
Revolutions and democracy aren't exclusive concepts.
But if:
I obviously agree that revolution is required for democracy
I don't understand what exactly you're arguing?
|
There was once a time where the last few pages would have never looked anything like this. This thread is in a very bad place right now.
|
|
|
On May 24 2019 10:55 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2019 10:45 KwarK wrote:
The whole thing comes down to "if it was above board then why did all those independent individuals all authorize it? Coincidence?!?!" But once we get all the info on Uranium One and it’s super boring, a new conspiracy about the documents Obama destroyed will arise. It feeds itself. Of course. That's how it always works. First there was Benghazi, which resulted in nothing because there was nothing, then there was the stupid email server thing, which resulted in nothing (and by the sounds of things Trump and co. were doing something not too far off once they took over, which makes the whole fake outrage they had even funnier), then there was the Peter Strzok/Lisa Page stuff, which thus far has amounted to nothing (as it turns out, people who are actually competent are able to have opinions on things and are able to keep their work separate from said opinions), and this Uranium One stuff that also has amounted to being nothing.
There always has to be some new dumb conspiracy to keep the base whipped up in a lather. Weird how they almost always end up amounting to nothing. It's all quite silly.
On May 24 2019 12:08 Mohdoo wrote:
There was once a time where the last few pages would have never looked anything like this. This thread is in a very bad place right now. Even a week ago it was 100x better.
|
On May 24 2019 12:14 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 24 2019 12:06 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 24 2019 11:58 JimmiC wrote:On May 24 2019 11:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 24 2019 11:30 JimmiC wrote:On May 24 2019 11:23 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 24 2019 11:06 JimmiC wrote:On May 24 2019 10:52 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 24 2019 10:34 JimmiC wrote:On May 24 2019 10:04 GreenHorizons wrote:
Revolutions and democracy aren't exclusive concepts. Chavez helped lead a revolution in Venezuela and it led to one of the most exemplary displays of democracy the world has seen. It's true the outcome of revolution isn't exactly predictable but we have ~10 years to radically change our entire way of life or accept that the next generations will have to as a result of catastrophic climate change they will be powerless to avoid.
If the institutions we have today offer a path to those necessary changes it seems peculiar that those counting on them have been the most ardent that they can't be fixed because of the very nature of the system to which they belong.
That's to say those opposing revolution simultaneously insist that we can't remove the proprietors of the system, dismiss the only viable alternative (based on their own assessment), then refuse to acknowledge they share Kwarks position. um no it didnt. Except it did... Most importantly, I want to recognize the Venezuelan people, especially the election workers, whose dedication to sustaining their democratic system, even in the wake of profound change, made these elections a true demonstration of democracy at work. https://www.cartercenter.org/documents/1151.pdfThe entire election, from the opening to the close of the polls and the ballot count, was fully transparent. Voters went to the polls in a calm and orderly atmosphere, demonstrating their commitment to fulfilling their democratic responsibilities. Neither inside the voting centers nor in their immediate vicinity were any incidents reported that might have affected the integrity or transparency of the voting process, and no cases of voter intimidation were recorded. http://www.oas.org/sap/publications/1998/moe/venezuela/doc/pbl_19_1998_eng.pdfUnlike elections in the US practically no one disputes the legitimacy of the Chavez's 1998 election that followed/was part of the revolution. Right that is why I said a short period of democracy. If this wad 1999 you would have a great example I would be super hopeful. Sadly its 2019 and we see what ended up actually happening. We did see what happened. It was a universally recognized election of world class legitimacy unlike 2016, or 2000 in the US. Right in 1998, and has gotten progressively worse every election after until we reached tge quagmire they are in now. Anf we are talking 20 years which is not that long when talking political system. I cant tell if you are just trolling us to be boasting about the exceptional democracy and conplaining about the US elections. It is really startling. My point is that revolution and democracy aren't exclusive as you tried to frame them. Revolution can and has led to an exemplary democratic election (more widely recognized domestically and globally as legitimate than the most recent one in the US for comparison). I assume there's also a reason we're ignoring the bourgeoisie revolution that created the United States and it's government. You've moved the goalposts, Im sure by accident. We were talking about democracy and communism working together. I obviously agree that revolution is required for democracy, this is why I have supported the Venezualan attempt at revolution after their democracy was stolen from them. I didn't move anything it was literally my opening line. Revolutions and democracy aren't exclusive concepts. But if: I obviously agree that revolution is required for democracy I don't understand what exactly you're arguing? That Venezuela was a good example and you have to take our whole conversation into account where I point out that was a very short term result. And how you say Show nested quote +Uhhh... what? I'm arguing in favor of a communist revolution, you may not be familiar, but democracy is integral to that. Or are we now going down the path that when you say revolution you just talking generally. If so you need no example because literally every democracy ever has started with a revolution, it is the only way it can happen. Power left or right do not hand over power they consolidate it.
Chavez's election is a good example of a revolution leading to a world renown democratic election. I have no interest in arguing beyond Venezuela's 1998 election as one the world should follow when it comes to running legitimate elections (notably more legitimate than the most recent US presidential election). However you want to characterize the ensuing ruling by said leader is irrelevant to the point I was making.
As far as your quote from another thread (not this discussion) you raise a valid point. Without revolution we don't have a democracy to save.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
