| Forum Index > General Forum |
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 | ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9244 Posts
On June 27 2019 03:18 Danglars wrote: Where are you getting >50% odds? Trump has some serious weaknesses going into 2020. Are you real pessimistic on Democratic field? Are you fairly sure Trump keeps his 2016 EC states intact? It's option C, contrarianism for the sake of it | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24304 Posts
On June 27 2019 03:48 Simberto wrote: I didn't post it. That was kind of my point. I don't think people should post every Trump tweet, or get outraged about stuff that Trump tweets. I don't think anything that Trump could possibly tweet at this point could substantially influence what people think about him. Regardless of whether there was any misrepresentation or not. Been saying this for a while now. Glad to have you on board. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11960 Posts
On June 27 2019 03:50 GreenHorizons wrote: Been saying this for a while now. Glad to have you on board. Yeah i know, i think i agreed with you about this at some point in the past, too. (might be incorrectly remembering this) But it still feels like something that one should repeat from time to time. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On June 27 2019 03:49 Dan HH wrote: It's option C, contrarianism for the sake of it IgnE isn’t a contrarian for the sake of it. He has some reason to put Trump above an even 50-50. It might be not among my mentioned reasons. This is despite IgnE frequently examining arguments he does not personally hold. He never says “I think blah blah” in the first person singular in those cases. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On June 27 2019 03:57 Danglars wrote: IgnE isn’t a contrarian for the sake of it. He has some reason to put Trump above an even 50-50. It might be not among my mentioned reasons. This is despite IgnE frequently examining arguments he does not personally hold. He never says “I think blah blah” in the first person singular in those cases. mostly incumbency advantage (incumbent wins 2/3 of the time historically, even if this is diminished in trump’s case it would still be significant) paired with the fact that the most exciting Democrats that would bring D voters out also seem to be ones that are divisive in Trump states (socialists, warren) and would likely energize the opposition. i think biden is bound to lose. | ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9244 Posts
On June 27 2019 03:57 Danglars wrote: IgnE isn’t a contrarian for the sake of it. He has some reason to put Trump above an even 50-50. It might be not among my mentioned reasons. This is despite IgnE frequently examining arguments he does not personally hold. He never says “I think blah blah” in the first person singular in those cases. Oh I don't doubt anyone's ability to come up with reasons for their their contrarianism. Here's a quick one: people that want to vote for Trump don't always admit it when asked by pollsters | ||
|
ShambhalaWar
United States930 Posts
On June 26 2019 12:04 Danglars wrote: Oh he was actually subpoena’d all right. That’s the news. He’s complying with the subpoena to appear before the House. So much for the warnings he gave in the press conference. Unlike the majority of people subpoenaed from the trump administration, Mueller will actually show up because he doesn't have anything to hide. Unlike trump officials, appearing in front of a committee for investigation won't require Mueller to commit perjury in order to testify without incriminating himself. Mueller has said that his testimony would be what the report said, implying he won't say anything other that what the report says, but I welcome the testimony, if that's the case so let it be, and let it be in front of the world. I welcome the ability of both sides to ask questions to gain clarity here. The report brought up more questions due to lack of clarity, that is Mueller's fault, lack of clarity in the report demanded he be subpoenaed. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On June 27 2019 02:37 IgnE wrote: probably because that’s not what he said. he did not say he “hoped” mccain was in hell. we just had someone in this thread explicitly wish that Duncan Hunter fall into a volcano and now you are criticizing Trump for being “glad that [McCain is] gone.” it is possible to be glad someone is gone without being glad they are dead per se Its possible to be glad that someone is gone without referring to death, but the obvious reference to hell is a reference to death. It would be odd for trump to reference death and hell if he was only glad McCain is "gone" from the Senate. I guess just making independent observations that McCain died and possibly went to hell? | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On June 27 2019 04:04 ShambhalaWar wrote: Unlike the majority of people subpoenaed from the trump administration, Mueller will actually show up because he doesn't have anything to hide. Unlike trump officials, appearing in front of a committee for investigation won't require Mueller to commit perjury in order to testify without incriminating himself. Mueller has said that his testimony would be what the report said, implying he won't say anything other that what the report says, but I welcome the testimony, if that's the case so let it be, and let it be in front of the world. I welcome the ability of both sides to ask questions to gain clarity here. The report brought up more questions due to lack of clarity, that is Mueller's fault, lack of clarity in the report demanded he be subpoenaed. Unlike the other subpoenas, Mueller is not a senior presidential advisor. Executive branch lawyers have argued that those advisors are immune from congressional subpoenas for over 50 years. It’s a very silly thing to argue to overturn 5 decades of legal analysis, or else you’re hiding something. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On June 27 2019 04:03 Dan HH wrote: Oh I don't doubt anyone's ability to come up with reasons for their their contrarianism. Here's a quick one: people that want to vote for Trump don't always admit it when asked by pollsters He’s given me his reasons why and gave understandable explanations for why he decided on them. Your thought that he’s hiding his real reason, contrarianism for its own sake, is simply paranoia. | ||
|
ShambhalaWar
United States930 Posts
On June 27 2019 02:37 IgnE wrote: probably because that’s not what he said. he did not say he “hoped” mccain was in hell. we just had someone in this thread explicitly wish that Duncan Hunter fall into a volcano and now you are criticizing Trump for being “glad that [McCain is] gone.” it is possible to be glad someone is gone without being glad they are dead per se First, let's not pretend anymore about trump. Ok? Second why mention, "less greener pastures" if you don't want to insinuate a reference to hell? trump has said so many horrible things, we don't really need to be confused here, right? Why be surprised? I'm not. | ||
|
ShambhalaWar
United States930 Posts
| ||
|
ShambhalaWar
United States930 Posts
On June 27 2019 04:11 Danglars wrote: Unlike the other subpoenas, Mueller is not a senior presidential advisor. Executive branch lawyers have argued that those advisors are immune from congressional subpoenas for over 50 years. It’s a very silly thing to argue to overturn 5 decades of legal analysis, or else you’re hiding something. Legal opinion is nothing more than opinion. These subpoenas are given according to the current law. I also don't see how having anyone testify openly on either side is hiding something. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
if you have to substitute other words for the literal words in the quotation in order to build your case that somebody “really meant” something else then your case is generally not as strong as you think it is — to wit he doesnt actually say “mccain,” “death/dying,” or “hell” at all. does the use of the plural not trouble your interpretations at all? i don’t really have any interest in convincing you that my interpretation is better, my aim was to show you that many people in this country could reasonably interpret what he said to be something fairly innocuous | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On June 27 2019 04:26 ShambhalaWar wrote: Legal opinion is nothing more than opinion. These subpoenas are given according to the current law. I also don't see how having anyone testify openly on either side is hiding something. It’s the prevailing understanding of the law until a challenge is brought and the Supreme Court gives a ruling. The length of standing without challenge and ruling gives it its weight. To claim otherwise, you must come up with some pretty infowarsy-story on why it’s stood for 50 years despite being only some opinion to be easily discarded. I’m all ears. If it’s just legal opinion, nothing more, why was it affirmed by lawyers from Nixon and Reagan and Clinton and Obama and Trump? The executive branch has regularly ignored congressional subpoenas, and have succeeded for this very reason. | ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9244 Posts
On June 27 2019 04:14 Danglars wrote: He’s given me his reasons why and gave understandable explanations for why he decided on them. Your thought that he’s hiding his real reason, contrarianism for its own sake, is simply paranoia. It's a simple concept, Danglars. It is never difficult to have reasons for going against the grain. It is only when the number of topics you go against the grain approaches 100% that being a contrarian for the sake of it becomes an obvious priority in weighing reasons. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On June 27 2019 04:54 Dan HH wrote: It's a simple concept, Danglars. It is never difficult to have reasons for going against the grain. It is only when the number of topics you go against the grain approaches 100% that being a contrarian for the sake of it becomes an obvious priority in weighing reasons. There’s nothing simple about convincing someone an anonymous person on the internet is lying in opinion and reasoning, but a second anonymous person knows best the real reason. This is particularly true when the given opinion and reasoning are rational on their face. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14198 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On June 27 2019 05:29 Sermokala wrote: A rather important event I think is Reddit beginning the process on banning and purging r/thedonald. I belive at least that it had a significant effect on the larger internet contribution to the election and it might as well as anything tilted the election to Trump especially after the burnout that was the sanders campaign on reddit and social media as a whole Yeah, this is a really big deal. Throw in Twitter's shenanigans over the past few years and the recent Project Veritas expose on Google, and it's pretty obvious that big tech has it in for conservatives. As a general rule, I'm not in favor of government regulation of private affairs, but the power that big tech wields is too much to ignore. Plus, what they're doing is morally offensive if not un-American. I don't know what the solution is (minimally Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act needs to be amended), but something needs to be done. | ||
|
IyMoon
United States1249 Posts
On June 27 2019 05:29 Sermokala wrote: A rather important event I think is Reddit beginning the process on banning and purging r/thedonald. I belive at least that it had a significant effect on the larger internet contribution to the election and it might as well as anything tilted the election to Trump especially after the burnout that was the sanders campaign on reddit and social media as a whole They are banning r/T_D? Thats pretty funny to be honest, couldn't happen to a nicer subreddit | ||
| ||
|
|
The PondCast
KCM Race Survival
OSC
IntoTheTV X SOOP
CranKy Ducklings
Sparkling Tuna Cup
OSC
Shopify Rebellion Sundays
Mixu vs TBD
Spirit vs TBD
Clem vs TBD
Afreeca Starleague
Soma vs Shuttle
BeSt vs Rush
WardiTV Weekly
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
