| 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 | ||
|
KT_Elwood
Germany903 Posts
On October 17 2024 23:32 GreenHorizons wrote: Now 21st century libs rationalizing their own support of genocide, I admit, that has been a bit of a bummer. You know that Trump would have asked if he and Bibi could drop a MOAB on Gaza from the AF1 themselves right? | ||
|
CuddlyCuteKitten
Sweden2590 Posts
On October 18 2024 17:32 BlackJack wrote: Right. They could have rejected this for a number of legitimate reasons and we'd be none the wiser. By bringing his politics into it they've opened themselves up to a lawsuit. Your post reads "Not only are they biased, but they are also stupid." If I understand it correctly it doesn't matter because Vandenberg is military and California has no say in what launches. I read something about this is the commitie being salty as hell that SpaceX and the air force declined a meeting to even brief them. If it's the same statement I read they even bring up at the end that it doesn't matter. Or is this something new? Musk is so smooth in his handling of different goverment institutions so you never know. | ||
|
Sadist
United States7216 Posts
On October 18 2024 21:09 KT_Elwood wrote: You know that Trump would have asked if he and Bibi could drop a MOAB on Gaza from the AF1 themselves right? GH would never vote for the democrats anyway even if they stopped sending aid to Israel. Hes stated as much. Not worth wasting energy as the goalposts would just get moved. The people of Gaza are just pawns in the game for revolution. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9605 Posts
On October 18 2024 22:48 Sadist wrote: GH would never vote for the democrats anyway even if they stopped sending aid to Israel. Hes stated as much. Not worth wasting energy as the goalposts would just get moved. The people of Gaza are just pawns in the game for revolution. I'm not sure I quite understand where you're coming from here. GH isn't a dem voter so everyone should ignore him? He believes in revolution so he can't genuinely believe in trying to help the Palestinians? None of that seems logical. | ||
|
KT_Elwood
Germany903 Posts
When the republicans will actively shell the gaza strip for shits and giggles, they will blame them for genocide. I guess that tankies can't cope with the fact that america will support israel because Israel does align more with values like freedom or democracy.. than with the traditional islamic iran, who is behind all the terrorists that get hit at the moment. To me moscow weaponized the good old anti-imperial narrative and just brainwashed many fresh people on the internet and especially on the left. Goal is pretty clear: devide and conquer.. if leftwing-tankies don't vote for harris, Trump will win, isolate the US and suck up to Putin. For Ukraine that would mean defeat. The absurdity in case of middle east ... the GOP and Christian-Taliban totally align with the zionist hardliners that constantly ask to purge arabs from israel and if they could make a wish.... just nuke iran. If military aid from the west dries up to ukraine, Putin wouldn't need iran for anything, so nuking them would be totally fine. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9605 Posts
On October 18 2024 23:10 KT_Elwood wrote: When the democrats don't cut weapon deliveries that tankies will blame them for genocide. When the republicans will actively shell the gaza strip for shits and giggles, they will blame them for genocide. I guess that tankies can't cope with the fact that america will support israel because Israel does align more with values like freedom or democracy.. than with the traditional islamic iran, who is behind all the terrorists that get hit at the moment. To me moscow weaponized the good old anti-imperial narrative and just brainwashed many fresh people on the internet and especially on the left. Goal is pretty clear: devide and conquer.. if leftwing-tankies don't vote for harris, Trump will win, isolate the US and suck up to Putin. For Ukraine that would mean defeat. The absurdity in case of middle east ... the GOP and Christian-Taliban totally align with the zionist hardliners that constantly ask to purge arabs from israel and if they could make a wish.... just nuke iran. If military aid from the west dries up to ukraine, Putin wouldn't need iran for anything, so nuking them would be totally fine. This is so divorced from reality I don't know where to begin. Is this just the centre way of politics now? Don't like an argument someone is making so...... It must be PUTIN and they love PUTIN or are useful idiots for PUTIN. Maybe people don't like the genocide in Gaza regardless of who is arming and funding it, because genocide is bad? I think perhaps you haven't considered that among all the justifications, as if genocide in the name of freedom and democracy is something we should all aspire to. | ||
|
Sadist
United States7216 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23136 Posts
On October 18 2024 23:15 Jockmcplop wrote: This is so divorced from reality I don't know where to begin. Is this just the centre way of politics now? Don't like an argument someone is making so...... It must be PUTIN and they love PUTIN or are useful idiots for PUTIN. Maybe people don't like the genocide in Gaza regardless of who is arming and funding it, because genocide is bad? I think perhaps you haven't considered that among all the justifications, as if genocide in the name of freedom and democracy is something we should all aspire to. To be fair, libs have been using that sort of argumentation since 2016 (since Red Summer back in 1919 really more or less). On October 18 2024 23:21 Sadist wrote: My point was telling GH that Trump will be worse for Gaza doesnt mean anything. He doesnt believe in harm reduction so will never vote for democrats. He wants a revolution. Attacking democrats knowing the republican alternative is worse tells me he doesnt really care about Gaza. Its just a wedge issue to spark his revolution. Libs don't care about Palestinians else they wouldn't be supporting their genocide. One point I'm making is that this "Attacking democrats knowing the republican alternative is worse tells me he doesnt really care about X" lesser evilism is that there is nothing bad enough for you not to vote for. You could vote for Trump, Hitler, or even Satan personified as long as you could tell yourself Republicans gave you a worse option. It's superficially reasonable, but actually morally bankrupt and irrational. You could attempt a utilitarian angle, but ethically, lesser evilism doesn't have a bottom. It means there's no evil too evil to get your support. It makes the moralizing that "actually it's the people supporting the genocide of the Palestinians that care about their well being" obviously unhinged. | ||
|
areoryn
5 Posts
On October 18 2024 22:11 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: If I understand it correctly it doesn't matter because Vandenberg is military and California has no say in what launches. I read something about this is the commitie being salty as hell that SpaceX and the air force declined a meeting to even brief them. If it's the same statement I read they even bring up at the end that it doesn't matter. Or is this something new? Musk is so smooth in his handling of different goverment institutions so you never know. California cannot block a launch made at Vandenberg for a military/federal payload, so the military could still authorize the launch without California's authorization by declaring Starlink launches as "federal". Since it is not currently the case, a request was needed. On one hand, commission rejected the request for 50 launches a year 6-4, with a decision document based on the impact of the launches on local wildlife. On the other, SpaceX argues that the quoted remarks on Elon Musk's political involvement (made during the discussions) are a clear indication of political bias, which is what actually made the decision ; as an illustration, SpaceX states the same commission authorized 60 launches for Phantom Space. SpaceX will have to prove the political bias is the cause of the decision, while the commission will defend the text of the decision as written. Not sure the 60 accepted for Phantom vs 50 refused for SpaceX stands (the two rockets are different beasts), the decision may not matter anyway if military decides to accept the launch and the proof will probably be difficult to make, but clearly a mistake on the Comission's side in any case. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44158 Posts
| ||
|
KT_Elwood
Germany903 Posts
On October 18 2024 23:15 Jockmcplop wrote: This is so divorced from reality I don't know where to begin. Is this just the centre way of politics now? Don't like an argument someone is making so...... It must be PUTIN and they love PUTIN or are useful idiots for PUTIN. Maybe people don't like the genocide in Gaza regardless of who is arming and funding it, because genocide is bad? I think perhaps you haven't considered that among all the justifications, as if genocide in the name of freedom and democracy is something we should all aspire to. So you are just mad because a singular vote for POTUS won't solve the middle east? | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9605 Posts
On October 19 2024 02:41 KT_Elwood wrote: So you are just mad because a singular vote for POTUS won't solve the middle east? Yeah that must be it | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44158 Posts
Donald Trump won’t stop backing out of interviews, and his forces have been left scrambling. Trump dropped out of yet another interview on Friday, when a Trump adviser told producers of The Shade Room that Trump wouldn’t be following through on talks to appear on the podcast because he was “exhausted and refusing [some] interviews but that could change,” two people familiar with the conversation told Politico. https://newrepublic.com/post/187306/donald-trump-team-worried-dropping-interviews Up until now, Trump's primary excuse for why he was been backing out of interviews had been because he refused to be fact-checked by journalists speaking with him, which was also a complaint that his runningmate, JD Vance, made after being caught in a lie during his vice presidential debate against Tim Walz. So now there appears to be two reasons why Trump may continue dodging certain conversations: he doesn't want to be called out on his bullshit *and* he just physically can't keep up anymore. If he can't even handle the pace of campaigning, then there's no way he'd be able to handle the job of being the oldest president of all time. Perhaps he's known this for a while now, which would explain why he's been hiding his official medical records from the public. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10421 Posts
Edit: for context Trump was at the Al Smith charity dinner where he spoke last night and then the next morning he was on Fox & Friends at 7am. With New York City traffic and the time to do hair and makeup how much sleep do you think he got? According to AP this is how the rest of the day went: On Friday, he spent 40 minutes on set with the hosts of “Fox & Friends” before he joined “The Dan Bongino Show,” a video podcast, and taped an interview with Mark Calaway, the wrestler famously known as “The Undertaker,” for his “Six Feet Under” podcast. He also attended an editorial meeting with Fox News and the New York Post before he departed for a multi-stop trip to Michigan. But the Dems decide to attack his stamina so the media will fall in line. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23136 Posts
Democrats attacks/efforts are going to get more panicked and desperate the worse that gets. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44158 Posts
On October 19 2024 06:58 BlackJack wrote: lol Trump has been campaigning non-stop for weeks without a single day off and he doesn’t plan to take a single day off until the election. I couldn’t keep up with his schedule and he’s doing it at 78. Trying to attack his stamina while you were fully prepared to defend someone that needs a mid-day nap every day to be a figurehead President is eye roll worthy. Edit: for context Trump was at the Al Smith charity dinner where he spoke last night and then the next morning he was on Fox & Friends at 7am. With New York City traffic and the time to do hair and makeup how much sleep do you think he got? According to AP this is how the rest of the day went: But the Dems decide to attack his stamina so the media will fall in line. It's weird that you're scolding Dems for attacking his stamina when it's a quote from Trump's own team, but sure, blame other people. Also, the "what about Biden" line stopped being relevant when Biden dropped out of the race. There's only one old, exhausted person left in the race: Donald Trump. And also, please cite the evidence that "Trump has been campaigning non-stop for weeks without a single day off", and what exactly you mean by that. Citing that last night and this morning he did two events in the same city is great, but apparently a Trump advisor still believes that Trump's exhaustion is to blame for why he backs out of some events. I'm just the messenger - don't attack me for something Trump's team said. On October 19 2024 07:16 GreenHorizons wrote: I suspect Democrats internal polling is ahead of the 538 forecast in showing Harris has lost the lead for the first time since August when she took it. Democrats attacks/efforts are going to get more panicked and desperate the worse that gets. Again, *Trump's advisor*, not Democrats. Dismissing criticism of Trump because of polling data is a complete non sequitur. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10421 Posts
On October 19 2024 07:34 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: It's weird that you're scolding Dems for attacking his stamina when it's a quote from Trump's own team, but sure, blame other people. Also, the "what about Biden" line stopped being relevant when Biden dropped out of the race. There's only one old, exhausted person left in the race: Donald Trump. And also, please cite the evidence that "Trump has been campaigning non-stop for weeks without a single day off", and what exactly you mean by that. Citing that last night and this morning he did two events in the same city is great, but apparently a Trump advisor still believes that Trump's exhaustion is to blame for why he backs out of some events. I'm just the messenger - don't attack me for something Trump's team said. Again, *Trump's advisor*, not Democrats. Dismissing criticism of Trump because of polling data is a complete non sequitur. I didn't say "what about Biden." I said "what about what you said about Biden." Unfortunately for you Biden dropping out of the race doesn't retroactively delete everything you've said about him. Your willingness to defend Biden who wouldn't be capable of campaigning at even half the pace Trump is campaigning at while simultaneously questioning Trump's stamina is sufficient to point out your blind partisanship. Whether Biden is still in the race is irrelevant to that. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10421 Posts
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-outpaces-harris-walz-campaign-events-run-final/story?id=113932634 | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44158 Posts
On October 19 2024 08:25 BlackJack wrote: I didn't say "what about Biden." I said "what about what you said about Biden." Unfortunately for you Biden dropping out of the race doesn't retroactively delete everything you've said about him. Your willingness to defend Biden who wouldn't be capable of campaigning at even half the pace Trump is campaigning at while simultaneously questioning Trump's stamina is sufficient to point out your blind partisanship. Whether Biden is still in the race is irrelevant to that. Your doubling down on the Biden pivot is not a good look. It won't distract the rest of us from realizing that you didn't cite the evidence from last post, nor clarify your position. If you want to talk about the actual topic at hand - whether or not Trump's decision to back out of interviews is due to fact-checking like Trump said, exhaustion like Trump's advisor said, or some other reason - then that's fine. But I'm not interested in the red herring of Biden. Edit, because you made a second post: I appreciate the new link. I'd be interested in what counts and doesn't count as a campaign event, and I'd also be interested in hearing (again) why you think Trump backs out of some of his interviews. "So some unnamed source reportedly telling an interviewer" I think you mean a Trump advisor told a news organization, and yeah of course plenty of sources need to remain anonymous. Welcome to journalism. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
PiGosaur Monday
Replay Cast
The PondCast
Replay Cast
HomeStory Cup
HomeStory Cup
BSL: ProLeague
SOOP
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
