|
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 |
Northern Ireland27348 Posts
On November 19 2021 20:12 Dromar wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2021 10:50 WombaT wrote:On November 19 2021 03:20 Dromar wrote:On November 19 2021 01:48 LegalLord wrote:
Been watching a couple of videos of the administration making fanfare over signing the "bipartisan" infrastructure bill that was agreed upon months ago but only just signed this week. The enthusiasm definitely feels contrived in light of what the bill managed not to be, but I can forgive the Biden folks for trying to play it as a win. Notably, the comments and ratings on YouTube are abysmally unfavorable, and it's probably the reaction to things like those on sponsored content (i.e. YT-pushed news releases) that are driving the dislike button removal.
Not just "news" releases, but when Disney (for example) pays Youtube to push trailers for their new content, they probably don't like it when it has tons of downvotes visible to viewers. something something manufactured consentMost disingenuous, though, was the fact that the Biden administration decided that this would be a good time to start parading around Kamala Harris for what seems like the first time in a year of being a VP. Had the same vibe as that time that Clinton was sending out the "what if I ran?" feelers in 2020, with the same universal response of "fuck off" from the commenters at large. Edit: Should post some examples I suppose. 1 2I think dems are in a really tough spot with Kamala. Biden is a zombie, and his choice of Kamala for VP was complete virtue signalling. Normally that isn't that big of a deal with a VP pick, but when 2024 comes around, dems will have to either a) run the very old Biden as the nominee, b) if Biden doesn't want to run or cant, they run Kamala, who people basically don't like and feel she was given the role simply because she's a woman of color (Biden outright stated during the 2020 primary that he wanted to pick a woman of color, so it was as if his priorities were first pick a woman of color, then someone qualified/good for the job, rather than the other way around). c) if they don't run Biden but choose not to run Kamala, they expose hypocrisy or racism within the dem party, depending on your point of view. This also puts dems on a path to tear themselves apart (which they're already so good at doing, they shouldn't be encouraged) trying to find a non-Kamala nominee. I don't know how large the virtue signalling bloc of the dem votership is, but I feel like it must be large enough that backtracking on Kamala as the presumptive non-Biden nominee would look really bad. Anyway, all this is to say that IMO the dems have virtue-signalled themselves into a corner and are maybe trying to give themselves the best chance they can with option b. Aside from your post yet reinforcing my hope that the term ‘virtue signalling’ gets retired from being endlessly overused, yes. Along with ‘narrative’ and ‘elites’ Amongst other issues, the problem with Harris is that the demographic she’s ostensibly meant to reach via ‘virtue signalling’, she doesn’t, at all because she’s a cop. To boot she’s not especially charismatic, likeable, etc etc I hate it too. I even hated it when I wrote the post, and rephrased it so I only used it 3 times instead of 4. But it accurately describes the pretense, so that's what I was stuck with. Show nested quote +
She doesn’t really, occupy any particular niche as VP. Hell Biden did the everyman shtick for Obama, even Dick Cheney had a public conception of being the brains behind things and being the ruthless, hardassed foil to Dubya
At this point what the fuck is Harris?
This is a good point.
I hate it mostly because it is a bloody useful descriptive term, but is so overused by people I don’t like in service of ideas I don’t like that it causes me pain to see or use.
But yeah 100%, sorry if I came off as hostile was having a rather grumpy day, you are correct.
|
United States44286 Posts
The silly thing is that Harris may well be a competent and effective administrator but that’s not relevant if she can’t also win. Do we know why John Kerry isn’t interested? Just a convention to only run once? He was a very good candidate in 04 and an effective cabinet member for years.
|
Too old and not enough brand recognition?
|
Sadly the only thing I remember about Kerry is losing to GWB. Not a great brand.
|
Rittenhouse not guilty, lol
|
On November 20 2021 03:17 Mohdoo wrote:
Rittenhouse not guilty, lol
Gross but not surprising
|
On November 20 2021 03:17 Mohdoo wrote:
Rittenhouse not guilty, lol
Completely disgusting. Who coulda guess? /sarcasm
|
On November 20 2021 03:23 Titusmaster6 wrote:Completely disgusting. Who coulda guess? /sarcasm
Classic america. Guy is on video saying he wants to shoot people, takes guns, goes to place, shoots people.
Obvious self defense.
Another great example of your utterly broken "justice" system. If he had 3 grams of weed and was black, probably prison for 10+ years.
|
On November 20 2021 03:27 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2021 03:23 Titusmaster6 wrote:On November 20 2021 03:17 Mohdoo wrote:
Rittenhouse not guilty, lol Completely disgusting. Who coulda guess? /sarcasm Classic america. Guy is on video saying he wants to shoot people, takes guns, goes to place, shoots people. Obvious self defense. Another great example of your utterly broken "justice" system. If he had 3 grams of weed and was black, probably prison for 10+ years.
My impression from the trial was that the legal system essentially accepted the wine mom perspective of Kenosha needing to be rescued/defended from black people destroying it. They accepted the idea that he had a legitimate reason to be there. Totally wild.
|
On November 20 2021 03:29 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2021 03:27 Simberto wrote:On November 20 2021 03:23 Titusmaster6 wrote:On November 20 2021 03:17 Mohdoo wrote:
Rittenhouse not guilty, lol Completely disgusting. Who coulda guess? /sarcasm Classic america. Guy is on video saying he wants to shoot people, takes guns, goes to place, shoots people. Obvious self defense. Another great example of your utterly broken "justice" system. If he had 3 grams of weed and was black, probably prison for 10+ years. My impression from the trial was that the legal system essentially accepted the wine mom perspective of Kenosha needing to be rescued/defended from black people destroying it. They accepted the idea that he had a legitimate reason to be there. Totally wild.
Watch as more riots happen and another Rittenhouse happens, given the precendent this sets.
|
On November 20 2021 03:38 Lmui wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2021 03:29 Mohdoo wrote:On November 20 2021 03:27 Simberto wrote:On November 20 2021 03:23 Titusmaster6 wrote:On November 20 2021 03:17 Mohdoo wrote:
Rittenhouse not guilty, lol Completely disgusting. Who coulda guess? /sarcasm Classic america. Guy is on video saying he wants to shoot people, takes guns, goes to place, shoots people. Obvious self defense. Another great example of your utterly broken "justice" system. If he had 3 grams of weed and was black, probably prison for 10+ years. My impression from the trial was that the legal system essentially accepted the wine mom perspective of Kenosha needing to be rescued/defended from black people destroying it. They accepted the idea that he had a legitimate reason to be there. Totally wild. Watch as more riots happen and another Rittenhouse happens, given the precendent this sets.
That will happen, and I’d give good odds to Rittenhouse himself being a part of another set of murders.
|
On November 20 2021 03:40 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2021 03:38 Lmui wrote:On November 20 2021 03:29 Mohdoo wrote:On November 20 2021 03:27 Simberto wrote:On November 20 2021 03:23 Titusmaster6 wrote:On November 20 2021 03:17 Mohdoo wrote:
Rittenhouse not guilty, lol Completely disgusting. Who coulda guess? /sarcasm Classic america. Guy is on video saying he wants to shoot people, takes guns, goes to place, shoots people. Obvious self defense. Another great example of your utterly broken "justice" system. If he had 3 grams of weed and was black, probably prison for 10+ years. My impression from the trial was that the legal system essentially accepted the wine mom perspective of Kenosha needing to be rescued/defended from black people destroying it. They accepted the idea that he had a legitimate reason to be there. Totally wild. Watch as more riots happen and another Rittenhouse happens, given the precendent this sets. That will happen, and I’d give good odds to Rittenhouse himself being a part of another set of murders.
Don't you mean "Totally legitimate acts of self defense"? /s
|
On November 20 2021 03:38 Lmui wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2021 03:29 Mohdoo wrote:On November 20 2021 03:27 Simberto wrote:On November 20 2021 03:23 Titusmaster6 wrote:On November 20 2021 03:17 Mohdoo wrote:
Rittenhouse not guilty, lol Completely disgusting. Who coulda guess? /sarcasm Classic america. Guy is on video saying he wants to shoot people, takes guns, goes to place, shoots people. Obvious self defense. Another great example of your utterly broken "justice" system. If he had 3 grams of weed and was black, probably prison for 10+ years. My impression from the trial was that the legal system essentially accepted the wine mom perspective of Kenosha needing to be rescued/defended from black people destroying it. They accepted the idea that he had a legitimate reason to be there. Totally wild. Watch as more riots happen and another Rittenhouse happens, given the precendent this sets.
Absolutely. The justice system sure as hell will not protect them so what else can you do?
|
On November 20 2021 03:38 Lmui wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2021 03:29 Mohdoo wrote:On November 20 2021 03:27 Simberto wrote:On November 20 2021 03:23 Titusmaster6 wrote:On November 20 2021 03:17 Mohdoo wrote:
Rittenhouse not guilty, lol Completely disgusting. Who coulda guess? /sarcasm Classic america. Guy is on video saying he wants to shoot people, takes guns, goes to place, shoots people. Obvious self defense. Another great example of your utterly broken "justice" system. If he had 3 grams of weed and was black, probably prison for 10+ years. My impression from the trial was that the legal system essentially accepted the wine mom perspective of Kenosha needing to be rescued/defended from black people destroying it. They accepted the idea that he had a legitimate reason to be there. Totally wild. Watch as more riots happen and another Rittenhouse happens, given the precendent this sets.
Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but this feels like essentially legalizing vigilantism?
If I think some bad shit is going on in Washington, I can legally show up with a gun and insert myself into the situation, and if anything goes wrong, so long as someone attempted to physically harm me first, I can just rain hell on them?
|
I'm actually not sure how many levels of irony are on display here. Are people here actually convinced he was guilty? I was only following it because both the defence and prosecutors were hilariously inept and I kept getting clips, but there's literally video evidence of every single person who he shot being the aggressor. Did anyone here actually watch the trial? Even the prosecutors' witnesses admitted he was attempting to flee and was never the aggressor.
Is the consensus here just "Well he shouldn't have been there so being attacked was expected"?
|
On November 20 2021 03:49 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2021 03:38 Lmui wrote:On November 20 2021 03:29 Mohdoo wrote:On November 20 2021 03:27 Simberto wrote:On November 20 2021 03:23 Titusmaster6 wrote:On November 20 2021 03:17 Mohdoo wrote:
Rittenhouse not guilty, lol Completely disgusting. Who coulda guess? /sarcasm Classic america. Guy is on video saying he wants to shoot people, takes guns, goes to place, shoots people. Obvious self defense. Another great example of your utterly broken "justice" system. If he had 3 grams of weed and was black, probably prison for 10+ years. My impression from the trial was that the legal system essentially accepted the wine mom perspective of Kenosha needing to be rescued/defended from black people destroying it. They accepted the idea that he had a legitimate reason to be there. Totally wild. Watch as more riots happen and another Rittenhouse happens, given the precendent this sets. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but this feels like essentially legalizing vigilantism? If I think some bad shit is going on in Washington, I can legally show up with a gun and insert myself into the situation, and if anything goes wrong, so long as someone attempted to physically harm me first, I can just rain hell on them?
Only if you're white and on "their" team.
|
On November 20 2021 03:51 killa_robot wrote:
I'm actually not sure how many levels of irony are on display here. Are people here actually convinced he was guilty? I was only following it because both the defence and prosecutors were hilariously inept and I kept getting clips, but there's literally video evidence of every single person who he shot being the aggressor. Did anyone here actually watch the trial? Even the prosecutors' witnesses admitted he was attempting to flee and was never the aggressor.
Is the consensus here just "Well he shouldn't have been there so being attacked was expected"?
Quite right.
If you are surprised by this verdict you should rethink your news consumption habits.
|
On November 20 2021 03:49 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2021 03:38 Lmui wrote:On November 20 2021 03:29 Mohdoo wrote:On November 20 2021 03:27 Simberto wrote:On November 20 2021 03:23 Titusmaster6 wrote:On November 20 2021 03:17 Mohdoo wrote:
Rittenhouse not guilty, lol Completely disgusting. Who coulda guess? /sarcasm Classic america. Guy is on video saying he wants to shoot people, takes guns, goes to place, shoots people. Obvious self defense. Another great example of your utterly broken "justice" system. If he had 3 grams of weed and was black, probably prison for 10+ years. My impression from the trial was that the legal system essentially accepted the wine mom perspective of Kenosha needing to be rescued/defended from black people destroying it. They accepted the idea that he had a legitimate reason to be there. Totally wild. Watch as more riots happen and another Rittenhouse happens, given the precendent this sets. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but this feels like essentially legalizing vigilantism? If I think some bad shit is going on in Washington, I can legally show up with a gun and insert myself into the situation, and if anything goes wrong, so long as someone attempted to physically harm me first, I can just rain hell on them? Laws differ per state. He may well have been found guilty in Washington based on differences between their respective laws. So I suggest only doing it in Wisconsin for now.
|
On November 20 2021 03:54 dudeman001 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2021 03:51 killa_robot wrote:
I'm actually not sure how many levels of irony are on display here. Are people here actually convinced he was guilty? I was only following it because both the defence and prosecutors were hilariously inept and I kept getting clips, but there's literally video evidence of every single person who he shot being the aggressor. Did anyone here actually watch the trial? Even the prosecutors' witnesses admitted he was attempting to flee and was never the aggressor.
Is the consensus here just "Well he shouldn't have been there so being attacked was expected"? Quite right. If you are surprised by this verdict you should rethink your news consumption habits.
In Germany he would have absolutely been guilty. If you are on video saying you would like to shoot some people, then take a gun, go to a place, and shoot some people, it is really hard to try to argue that that is self defense.
If you bring a gun into a situation, you are responsible if people get shot.
|
On November 20 2021 03:51 killa_robot wrote:
I'm actually not sure how many levels of irony are on display here. Are people here actually convinced he was guilty? I was only following it because both the defence and prosecutors were hilariously inept and I kept getting clips, but there's literally video evidence of every single person who he shot being the aggressor. Did anyone here actually watch the trial? Even the prosecutors' witnesses admitted he was attempting to flee and was never the aggressor.
Is the consensus here just "Well he shouldn't have been there so being attacked was expected"? I think the thing to keep in mind here is the difference between what the law allows and what people think the law should allow.
The law says this was self defence (apparently), but it shouldn't. In every other first world country he would be found guilty of atleast some level of manslaughter.
And many people think that if you express that you want to kill looters and then go to a riot to shoot looters and purposefully get yourself in a situation where a protester chases or is otherwise aggressive towards you so that you can then shoot them shouldn't qualify as self defence. That fact that is apparently is, is an issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
