|
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 |
On May 29 2019 09:41 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2019 09:34 iamthedave wrote:On May 29 2019 07:00 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
Japan has a sizeable police force. They are also mostly unarmed. Crime there is so small to be nonexistent. Eh, that's not exactly true. Violent crimes are generally very low (depending on area), but crimes like larceny and the like are pretty common. Japan IS generally pretty law-abiding though, by the standards of the modern day. I concur with your expansion of my claim. When I lived and visited, it was alarming. I slept by the river with the homeless and nothing happened. I did get picked up by the Yakuza one day. That was interesting and kinda scary. But nothing happened.
The Yakuza are kind of weird. They have a usual ethic to leave foreigners out of their business unless the circumstances are specific (i.e. you're in their way). Ordinarily if footsoldiers mess with tourists they get the shit kicked out of them by their superiors.
What did happen, though? I'm kind of curious. Why'd they pick you up?
|
On May 29 2019 20:08 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2019 17:32 Godwrath wrote:On May 29 2019 10:50 JimmiC wrote:
I mean if he goes up against Trump it will be this vs saying that your daughter is a 10 and the only thing stopping you from dating her is that she is your daughter, and that the thing you and her have in common is "sex".
I think he would be OK. Where stuff like this might hurt him is in getting the nomination. What democrats and republicans understand as acceptable behaviour from their candidate is not the same. I thought that was crystal-clear already. Which is why I said it might hurt him in getting the nomination. So far though he is leading so enough people find this not that disturbing. ¿?
You are not only voted in nomination. That's the same silly argument where you take votes for granted. It will hurt him during the presidential campaign aswell. Because getting into mud-slinging contests with Trump just invigorates his potential base, while yours facepalm over your candidate for getting to that level.
To be honest, i am getting the same vibe i got for 2016, where the suppossedly pragmatic centrists were so naive and generally short-sighted about their primary election, that it was way more painful to read than it is to read xDaunt lawyering up to avoid answering a direct question about if he finds something morally reprehensibile or not.
|
Biden is a comically bad choice to oppose Trump, which is why every republican everywhere goes "Oh, no, please don't pick Biden, he is probably the best choice against Trump, we are very scared".
Biden will have more appeal than other candidates on republicans. But you know who else will have a lot of appeal on republicans? The republican candidate. So you're trying to get the votes of the demographic that is least likely to vote for you in the first place. It's bad strategy.
So far Biden has mostly focused on painting characters. And here are the characters that he painted: republicans are mostly sane and good people but they got tricked by Trump who is awful and terrible, once Trump is gone the republicans are going to be fine again like they were in the past. The left, the progressives? They're silly. Ignore them, dismiss them. It's bad optics.
If we look back at Hillary vs Donald, a lot of what was working for Donald was the racism and the bigotry, no question. Another thing that worked was that the situation allowed him to also make dishonest leftist points, because Hillary was decidedly not leftwing (despite all the bullshit that we heard on this forum during all the campaign). So you have on one side the people who want a change, whether a change to the right or a change to the left, and on the other side the people who think the situation is fine today and the status quo should continue. This is not actually true, of course, as Trump would never make a move toward a leftwing change. But we're talking rhetorics, so the truth doesn't matter. It's bad tactics.
Biden has talked about policy very little, but what he said was awful. He wants a middle ground on climate change? Wtf is that. He's against all the popular policies of the left, because of course he is. So on top of everything else, it's also bad policy.
There is no redeeming quality there.
|
On May 29 2019 17:39 Biff The Understudy wrote:
saying that Biden is a perv because he said a little girl was good looking (wtf is even wrong with that) .
Are you for real? Maybe it’s a Euro thing but for me calling a 10 year old good looking?
It’s super creepy especially considering Bidens record.
|
Calling a 10 year old girl pretty or something like that is totally normal. You probably shouldn't do it if your the kids Teacher or Priest for obvious reasons but in general there is nothing unusual about this?
|
United States42251 Posts
On May 29 2019 21:49 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2019 17:39 Biff The Understudy wrote:
saying that Biden is a perv because he said a little girl was good looking (wtf is even wrong with that) . Are you for real? Maybe it’s a Euro thing but for me calling a 10 year old good looking? It’s super creepy especially considering Bidens record.
His record of partying on the Lolita Express with actual pedophile Epstein? Wait, that's Trump's record.
|
On May 29 2019 21:49 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2019 17:39 Biff The Understudy wrote:
saying that Biden is a perv because he said a little girl was good looking (wtf is even wrong with that) . Are you for real? Maybe it’s a Euro thing but for me calling a 10 year old good looking? It’s super creepy especially considering Bidens record.
I don't see any problem with calling children beautiful, or adorable, or smart, because those positive words reinforces their own view about themselves. It gives them a better outcome in life, and not think negative about themselves.
Then you have Trump walking in on girls naked in the dressing room for Miss USA, saying he can do things like that cause he's the owner so he can "inspect". I also included a video of him trying to also kiss a little girl what looks like in the mouth on live TV... And if you look at where his right hand is, it's under her arse, in between her legs.
|
On May 29 2019 21:49 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2019 17:39 Biff The Understudy wrote:
saying that Biden is a perv because he said a little girl was good looking (wtf is even wrong with that) . Are you for real? Maybe it’s a Euro thing but for me calling a 10 year old good looking? It’s super creepy especially considering Bidens record.
Shouldn't you 'political correctness gone mad' crowd be against this culture of men being afraid of interacting with children in the US?
|
You guys really need to stop treating Nettles as a failed liberal...
Nettles is, at best, indifferent about how women are treated. He isn't attacking Biden because he really cares about women and he somehow hasn't realized that Trump is worse on the subject of women. He is attacking Biden because Biden is the enemy, and everything that you can use against the enemy is good.
This is like when the fascists in Israel complain about political violence from Palestinians and are completely fine with political violence from Israel against Palestinians. The issue isn't that they haven't figured out the contradiction that you see there. The issue is that "we should use the same standards for all people" is not an universal view, and they don't share it.
|
|
|
Mueller is making a statement at 11am. EST.
|
Looks like Mueller has something to say in 25 minutes. I see two possibilities. He either is going to try to get in front of the declassification freight train by laying a new anti-Barr narrative, or he is merely going up there to rebut the claims in that new Wolff book about having drafted an indictment of Trump.
|
On May 29 2019 23:37 xDaunt wrote:
Looks like Mueller has something to say in 25 minutes. I see two possibilities. He either is going to try to get in front of the declassification freight train by laying a new anti-Barr narrative, or he is merely going up there to rebut the claims in that new Wolff book about having drafted an indictment of Trump.
A WaPo reporter says it's not responding to Wolff's new book. Odds are Mueller is clarifying a few questions at best and speaking publicly to sate Democrat desires for him to say anything.
|
On May 29 2019 23:37 xDaunt wrote:
Looks like Mueller has something to say in 25 minutes. I see two possibilities. He either is going to try to get in front of the declassification freight train by laying a new anti-Barr narrative, or he is merely going up there to rebut the claims in that new Wolff book about having drafted an indictment of Trump.
Wapo reporting it is not about the book
|
I would expect its something to do with the attempts to get him into a public hearing?
|
I'm betting on it being disappointing and largely undeserving of the buildup.
|
Looks like he wants to make a public statement about the report without being subject to adversarial questioning.
|
On May 29 2019 23:49 xDaunt wrote:
Looks like he wants to make a public statement about the report without being subject to adversarial questioning.
He is trying to avoid giving a public hearing. That is all this is
|
There's no need for a new anti Barr narrative. All he needs is to confirm how badly the letter represented the report and that Barr misrepresented his statements in the phonecall.
I am prepared to be disappointed. Him not wanting to testify publicly, and not taking questions now, makes me think he just wants to sail off in the sunset instead of taking a stance one way or another.
|
On May 29 2019 23:13 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2019 20:17 Godwrath wrote:On May 29 2019 20:08 JimmiC wrote:On May 29 2019 17:32 Godwrath wrote:On May 29 2019 10:50 JimmiC wrote:
I mean if he goes up against Trump it will be this vs saying that your daughter is a 10 and the only thing stopping you from dating her is that she is your daughter, and that the thing you and her have in common is "sex".
I think he would be OK. Where stuff like this might hurt him is in getting the nomination. What democrats and republicans understand as acceptable behaviour from their candidate is not the same. I thought that was crystal-clear already. Which is why I said it might hurt him in getting the nomination. So far though he is leading so enough people find this not that disturbing. ¿? You are not only voted in nomination. That's the same silly argument where you take votes for granted. It will hurt him during the presidential campaign aswell. Because getting into mud-slinging contests with Trump just invigorates his potential base, while yours facepalm over your candidate for getting to that level. To be honest, i am getting the same vibe i got for 2016, where the suppossedly pragmatic centrists were so naive and generally short-sighted about their primary election, that it was way more painful to read than it is to read xDaunt lawyering up to avoid answering a direct question about if he finds something morally reprehensibile or not. ? Look, Biden would not be my choice. But trying to say that this event is bad is actually playing into their hands. It was a non story, it is only a story because of the "creepy" Joe" narrative. I mean look who posted the story on this sight danglars. Do you really think he is super concerned? Come on man you are getting played. Over reacting to this type of thing is probably more likely to cost voters than being reasonable about a grandpa aged man complimenting a girl. If had said "well your a handsome young fella" and put his hands on his shoulders would it be an issue? Now take the Trump clip where we picks the girl up, hand between the legs and goes for the lip kiss, would be disturbing with both. Don't get into the mud. flop around and pretend like this is a real story, write if off for what it is. Danglars concern trolling to try to get division in his opponents. And it might be 2016 again but for the reason you stated but for the reason of so much infighting over stupid shit that they are not united to fight the actual battle. I am getting played... about what exactly? Dude, you are not even getting the point, is that Biden is not electable for a big chunk of the american left, and the fear the Trump perspective won't work (That's what GH was saying, why would he vote for Biden if the radical change he feels is needed won't happen anyways). That appealing to "more centrist" republicans won't work. You need to energize your base by appealing to your base. I don't give two shits about the "creepy joe" thing, that's not what makes him unelectable in the first place.
You say this only affects him in the primaries, and i facepalm hard because that's exactly the same point about Hillary. That the left should vote for her just because Trump.
And about the mudslinging contests, Do you realize that you (and others) were already making the comparison with Trump's daughter?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
