|
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 November 08 2024 03:45 sevencck wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 03:33 Falling wrote:On November 08 2024 03:12 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 03:03 Gorsameth wrote:On November 08 2024 02:49 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 02:37 NewSunshine wrote:On November 08 2024 02:32 WombaT wrote:On November 08 2024 02:20 Slydie wrote:On November 08 2024 01:38 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 01:30 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
The old man yelling about how he hates flies is the deranged one. "If you hate a person, you hate something in him that is part of yourself. What isn't part of ourselves doesn't disturb us." -Hermann Hesse The derangement around Trump is like 90% shadow projection. You're all just shadow boxing with your own inner tyrant imo. So the Trump voters who are angry at Kamala and Democrats are really just angry with their inner Kamala/Democrat? And what is 100% not a part of you so you are not disturbed by it? That kind of quotes are only good for making people angry. It is like a parent claiming "you are only fighting because you are so alike". The quote is a perfectly reasonable one, just completely ripped from what it’s meant to actually describe Correct. That quote has infinitely more to do with why a Trumper bristles at being called racist than it does with why reasonable people are upset with the Right's fascism. Incorrect. If you're reacting to something inside of you then you aren't actually responsive to what is outside of you, youre just shadow boxing and that's the difference. I don't see the same derangement among conservatives on any level, people very reasonably don't want to live under socialism. The derangement around Trump has been next level. When you foam at the mouth about him being a nazi, Hitler, a fascist, and a tyrant (particularly as you try to force a vaccine on others, and exlude those from society who refuse) it is quite clear that you are just shadow boxing. When you have a stroke about racism and all the rest of it, while accusing black men who voted for Trump of x, y, and z, it's clear you're just shadow boxing. The dems accused Trump of trying to overturn an election because he wanted a suspect result scrutinized. They're only articulating who they are inside. If I'm correct (I am), we will see dems advocate for not handing over power in the coming weeks. We've already seen such an intimation on the past couple page of the current discussion. Trump just wanted a suspect result scrutinized? The dude incited an actual insurrection. That is not 'just looking at a suspect result'. But sure, its the derangement around Trump, not your utter denial of reality... No, no he didn't. Do you think the Canadian trucker protest was also an insurrection, just curious? It was in front of the parliament buildings. They got called Nazis too btw, by the people who fight so tirelessly for inclusion. Seems like a memetic literal concrete comprehension which believes that a protest outside a government building makes it an insurrection, as though we're still living in the 4th century BCE, and not the information age. Guess when he told them to go home after 2 hours that was a typo, it was meant to read "send them to Bergen Belsen." No, no, no, no. A thousand times now. I defend the Trucker protest from the silly accusations of an insurrection. It most definitely was a protest. An obnoxious one to the local residents, but a protest nonetheless. Trudeau got excited because he thought he had a January 6 on his hands, but he was dead wrong. What Trump tried to do is nothing the same. He tried to over-ride the will of the people (false electors). He was pressuring states to find votes for him, which constitutionally, the president has no role in the elector role. Besides, based on what he was asking, it was quite transparently a quest to just have the States declare the number he needed to win +1 and Trump's team 'would do the rest." His cronies went around deliberately lying about election fraud. (Giuliani's defence was that he lied, but it was his First Amendment right to do so.) All their climp chimped falsehoods were shut down in the courts and when it all failed, they tried to strong-arm Mike Pence into breaking his constitutional duty. Do you think it was a coincidence that they all showed up on January 6, carrying weapons and guns and shouting revolution, and "Hang Mike Pence? The vote certification was delayed and it was a genuine attempt to stop the certification of the vote through intimidation. That goes well beyond a violent protest that attempts to persuade the government to change it's mind. It was a blatant attempt to overturn the functions of government itself through force. I don't mind calling that an insurrection. It is categorically different than the Trucker protest. Of course it wasn't an coincidence. But if you believe there has been fraud in an election, it is appropriate to protest. It shouldn't be certified until legitimate and widespread doubts have been addressed, and they weren't being addressed. Thus we are discussing the line between protest and unlawful action. If the people have reason to be at the capital for protest, then the accusation of insurrection is extremely uncharitable even if violence does break out. My question to you: the millions of people not at the capital that day who wanted the results scrutinized more closely, do you think they wanted protest or insurrection? Do they become insurrectionists for supporting a protest that loses control? And if they don't, then why aren't we acknowledging there was a legitimate basis for protest?
I'm pretty sure the fact they had constructed a gallows and were chanting hang Mike Pence probably is a nice clear dividing line between a protest and an insurrection.
Also the fact they charged the police barricades. Any time a protest does that, it's automatically a riot. If the police set up barricades, you can go up to them and chant at them. You cant forcibly breach them. That's a riot. Plain and simple.
|
On November 08 2024 03:33 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 03:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 08 2024 02:49 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 02:37 NewSunshine wrote:On November 08 2024 02:32 WombaT wrote:On November 08 2024 02:20 Slydie wrote:On November 08 2024 01:38 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 01:30 KwarK wrote:On November 08 2024 00:28 sevencck wrote:On March 18 2024 23:20 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
It’s not incoherent, it’s deranged. You lost the presidency, the senate, the house, and the supreme court. You're losing the culture war and don't really even appear to understand why. Instead of listening, as you so evidently should, you continue to lecture. Who's deranged? The old man yelling about how he hates flies is the deranged one. "If you hate a person, you hate something in him that is part of yourself. What isn't part of ourselves doesn't disturb us." -Hermann Hesse The derangement around Trump is like 90% shadow projection. You're all just shadow boxing with your own inner tyrant imo. So the Trump voters who are angry at Kamala and Democrats are really just angry with their inner Kamala/Democrat? And what is 100% not a part of you so you are not disturbed by it? That kind of quotes are only good for making people angry. It is like a parent claiming "you are only fighting because you are so alike". The quote is a perfectly reasonable one, just completely ripped from what it’s meant to actually describe Correct. That quote has infinitely more to do with why a Trumper bristles at being called racist than it does with why reasonable people are upset with the Right's fascism. + Show Spoiler +
Incorrect. If you're reacting to something inside of you then you aren't actually responsive to what is outside of you, youre just shadow boxing and that's the difference. I don't see the same derangement among conservatives on any level, people very reasonably don't want to live under socialism.
The derangement around Trump has been next level. When you foam at the mouth about him being a nazi, Hitler, a fascist, and a tyrant (particularly as you try to force a vaccine on others, and exlude those from society who refuse) it is quite clear that you are just shadow boxing. When you have a stroke about racism and all the rest of it, while accusing black men who voted for Trump of x, y, and z, it's clear you're just shadow boxing.
The dems accused Trump of trying to overturn an election because he wanted a suspect result scrutinized. They're only arriculating who they are inside.
If I'm correct (I am), we will see dems advocate for not handing over power in the coming weeks. We've already seen such an intimation on the past couple page of the current discussion. As far as I can tell none of the Dems/libs here are supportive of the suggestion of them not proudly and peacefully handing power over to fascists. Nor have any shown any support for the fact that Biden can legally assasinate Trump and Vance in his official capacity as President to protect the US from a fascist takeover It's incoherent with their campaigning/rhetoric on Trump being a fascist dictator on day 1. It's irrational from a practical perspective and inconsistent with their understanding of free speech absolutism and the tolerance paradox. It's probably more hypocritical of them to willingly hand him power after he tried to steal it than it would be to refuse to give it to him though. Yes the two are a bit incongruous in combination. Trump is a Fascist we can’t allow in, but hey if we wins an election we’ll not do anything But yeah, the ‘we’ll not do anything until the next vote’ is still demonstrably the approach
They are completely irrational in combination, the cognitive dissonance should be overwhelming.
On November 08 2024 03:38 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 03:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 08 2024 03:28 Sermokala wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Ashli Babbitt had already been shot by the time Trump told the people to go home.
A lot of people trying to justify why they voted for Trump or why Trump winning is a good thing for America. A quote that has helped me and others yesterday is "don't be there for the people who weren't there for you". Not going to have a lot of time for the people who didn't vote for harris yet want to tell me to do any type of work for them. A ban on slavery is currently failing to pass in California. Miss me hard next time someone from California tries to tell me they're a leftist state. To be honest I didn't even know this was on the ballot all the months I've been harping on Democrats failing to even end the enslavement of US citizens for 100+ years. It's not a "leftist" state but that's Democrat af. Yeah I'm going to save this post for the next time you try to explain to me what way I should vote on anything at all. If you're so uninformed about whats going on in your own state about an issue I've seen you give a shit about before this cycle I'm not going to respect you to do the work on any issue in the future. You care so little about ending the enslavement of US citizens you didn't know it was on the ballot until the election. Needed something to laugh about this morning.
I don't live in CA lol? I had my own rich asshole shit on my ballot to worry about.
I'm guessing it didn't get a lot of attention, because people didn't think Democrats in California would vote to keep enslaving US citizens in 2024. Also probably related to why no one here that actually lives in CA ever mentioned it in response to me pointing out Democrats are still pro-slavery in 2024.
|
On November 08 2024 03:38 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 03:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 08 2024 03:28 Sermokala wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Ashli Babbitt had already been shot by the time Trump told the people to go home.
A lot of people trying to justify why they voted for Trump or why Trump winning is a good thing for America. A quote that has helped me and others yesterday is "don't be there for the people who weren't there for you". Not going to have a lot of time for the people who didn't vote for harris yet want to tell me to do any type of work for them. A ban on slavery is currently failing to pass in California. Miss me hard next time someone from California tries to tell me they're a leftist state. To be honest I didn't even know this was on the ballot all the months I've been harping on Democrats failing to even end the enslavement of US citizens for 100+ years. It's not a "leftist" state but that's Democrat af. Yeah I'm going to save this post for the next time you try to explain to me what way I should vote on anything at all. If you're so uninformed about whats going on in your own state about an issue I've seen you give a shit about before this cycle I'm not going to respect you to do the work on any issue in the future. You care so little about ending the enslavement of US citizens you didn't know it was on the ballot until the election. Needed something to laugh about this morning.
Is it really reasonable for GH to know whats on the ballot in literally every single state in detail?
|
On November 08 2024 03:47 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 03:33 WombaT wrote:On November 08 2024 03:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 08 2024 02:49 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 02:37 NewSunshine wrote:On November 08 2024 02:32 WombaT wrote:On November 08 2024 02:20 Slydie wrote:On November 08 2024 01:38 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 01:30 KwarK wrote:On November 08 2024 00:28 sevencck wrote:
[quote]
You lost the presidency, the senate, the house, and the supreme court. You're losing the culture war and don't really even appear to understand why. Instead of listening, as you so evidently should, you continue to lecture. Who's deranged? The old man yelling about how he hates flies is the deranged one. "If you hate a person, you hate something in him that is part of yourself. What isn't part of ourselves doesn't disturb us." -Hermann Hesse The derangement around Trump is like 90% shadow projection. You're all just shadow boxing with your own inner tyrant imo. So the Trump voters who are angry at Kamala and Democrats are really just angry with their inner Kamala/Democrat? And what is 100% not a part of you so you are not disturbed by it? That kind of quotes are only good for making people angry. It is like a parent claiming "you are only fighting because you are so alike". The quote is a perfectly reasonable one, just completely ripped from what it’s meant to actually describe Correct. That quote has infinitely more to do with why a Trumper bristles at being called racist than it does with why reasonable people are upset with the Right's fascism. + Show Spoiler +
Incorrect. If you're reacting to something inside of you then you aren't actually responsive to what is outside of you, youre just shadow boxing and that's the difference. I don't see the same derangement among conservatives on any level, people very reasonably don't want to live under socialism.
The derangement around Trump has been next level. When you foam at the mouth about him being a nazi, Hitler, a fascist, and a tyrant (particularly as you try to force a vaccine on others, and exlude those from society who refuse) it is quite clear that you are just shadow boxing. When you have a stroke about racism and all the rest of it, while accusing black men who voted for Trump of x, y, and z, it's clear you're just shadow boxing.
The dems accused Trump of trying to overturn an election because he wanted a suspect result scrutinized. They're only arriculating who they are inside.
If I'm correct (I am), we will see dems advocate for not handing over power in the coming weeks. We've already seen such an intimation on the past couple page of the current discussion. As far as I can tell none of the Dems/libs here are supportive of the suggestion of them not proudly and peacefully handing power over to fascists. Nor have any shown any support for the fact that Biden can legally assasinate Trump and Vance in his official capacity as President to protect the US from a fascist takeover It's incoherent with their campaigning/rhetoric on Trump being a fascist dictator on day 1. It's irrational from a practical perspective and inconsistent with their understanding of free speech absolutism and the tolerance paradox. It's probably more hypocritical of them to willingly hand him power after he tried to steal it than it would be to refuse to give it to him though. Yes the two are a bit incongruous in combination. Trump is a Fascist we can’t allow in, but hey if we wins an election we’ll not do anything But yeah, the ‘we’ll not do anything until the next vote’ is still demonstrably the approach They are completely irrational in combination, the cognitive dissonance should be overwhelming. Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 03:38 Sermokala wrote:On November 08 2024 03:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 08 2024 03:28 Sermokala wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Ashli Babbitt had already been shot by the time Trump told the people to go home.
A lot of people trying to justify why they voted for Trump or why Trump winning is a good thing for America. A quote that has helped me and others yesterday is "don't be there for the people who weren't there for you". Not going to have a lot of time for the people who didn't vote for harris yet want to tell me to do any type of work for them. A ban on slavery is currently failing to pass in California. Miss me hard next time someone from California tries to tell me they're a leftist state. To be honest I didn't even know this was on the ballot all the months I've been harping on Democrats failing to even end the enslavement of US citizens for 100+ years. It's not a "leftist" state but that's Democrat af. Yeah I'm going to save this post for the next time you try to explain to me what way I should vote on anything at all. If you're so uninformed about whats going on in your own state about an issue I've seen you give a shit about before this cycle I'm not going to respect you to do the work on any issue in the future. You care so little about ending the enslavement of US citizens you didn't know it was on the ballot until the election. Needed something to laugh about this morning. I don't live in CA lol? I had my own rich asshole shit on my ballot to worry about. I'm guessing it didn't get a lot of attention, because people didn't think Democrats in California would vote to keep enslaving US citizens in 2024. Also probably related to why no one here that actually lives in CA ever mentioned it in response to me pointing out Democrats are still pro-slavery in 2024.
To be fair I DO live in California and I didn't know about the chain gang proposition until I got my sample ballot. There's been almost zero press coverage of it, while there's been a ton on basically every other prop.
I voted to repeal it btw. For all the good it did.
|
On November 08 2024 03:45 sevencck wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 03:33 Falling wrote:On November 08 2024 03:12 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 03:03 Gorsameth wrote:On November 08 2024 02:49 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 02:37 NewSunshine wrote:On November 08 2024 02:32 WombaT wrote:On November 08 2024 02:20 Slydie wrote:On November 08 2024 01:38 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 01:30 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
The old man yelling about how he hates flies is the deranged one. "If you hate a person, you hate something in him that is part of yourself. What isn't part of ourselves doesn't disturb us." -Hermann Hesse The derangement around Trump is like 90% shadow projection. You're all just shadow boxing with your own inner tyrant imo. So the Trump voters who are angry at Kamala and Democrats are really just angry with their inner Kamala/Democrat? And what is 100% not a part of you so you are not disturbed by it? That kind of quotes are only good for making people angry. It is like a parent claiming "you are only fighting because you are so alike". The quote is a perfectly reasonable one, just completely ripped from what it’s meant to actually describe Correct. That quote has infinitely more to do with why a Trumper bristles at being called racist than it does with why reasonable people are upset with the Right's fascism. Incorrect. If you're reacting to something inside of you then you aren't actually responsive to what is outside of you, youre just shadow boxing and that's the difference. I don't see the same derangement among conservatives on any level, people very reasonably don't want to live under socialism. The derangement around Trump has been next level. When you foam at the mouth about him being a nazi, Hitler, a fascist, and a tyrant (particularly as you try to force a vaccine on others, and exlude those from society who refuse) it is quite clear that you are just shadow boxing. When you have a stroke about racism and all the rest of it, while accusing black men who voted for Trump of x, y, and z, it's clear you're just shadow boxing. The dems accused Trump of trying to overturn an election because he wanted a suspect result scrutinized. They're only articulating who they are inside. If I'm correct (I am), we will see dems advocate for not handing over power in the coming weeks. We've already seen such an intimation on the past couple page of the current discussion. Trump just wanted a suspect result scrutinized? The dude incited an actual insurrection. That is not 'just looking at a suspect result'. But sure, its the derangement around Trump, not your utter denial of reality... No, no he didn't. Do you think the Canadian trucker protest was also an insurrection, just curious? It was in front of the parliament buildings. They got called Nazis too btw, by the people who fight so tirelessly for inclusion. Seems like a memetic literal concrete comprehension which believes that a protest outside a government building makes it an insurrection, as though we're still living in the 4th century BCE, and not the information age. Guess when he told them to go home after 2 hours that was a typo, it was meant to read "send them to Bergen Belsen." No, no, no, no. A thousand times now. I defend the Trucker protest from the silly accusations of an insurrection. It most definitely was a protest. An obnoxious one to the local residents, but a protest nonetheless. Trudeau got excited because he thought he had a January 6 on his hands, but he was dead wrong. What Trump tried to do is nothing the same. He tried to over-ride the will of the people (false electors). He was pressuring states to find votes for him, which constitutionally, the president has no role in the elector role. Besides, based on what he was asking, it was quite transparently a quest to just have the States declare the number he needed to win +1 and Trump's team 'would do the rest." His cronies went around deliberately lying about election fraud. (Giuliani's defence was that he lied, but it was his First Amendment right to do so.) All their climp chimped falsehoods were shut down in the courts and when it all failed, they tried to strong-arm Mike Pence into breaking his constitutional duty. Do you think it was a coincidence that they all showed up on January 6, carrying weapons and guns and shouting revolution, and "Hang Mike Pence? The vote certification was delayed and it was a genuine attempt to stop the certification of the vote through intimidation. That goes well beyond a violent protest that attempts to persuade the government to change it's mind. It was a blatant attempt to overturn the functions of government itself through force. I don't mind calling that an insurrection. It is categorically different than the Trucker protest. Of course it wasn't an coincidence. But if you believe there has been fraud in an election, it is appropriate to protest. It shouldn't be certified until legitimate and widespread doubts have been addressed, and they weren't being addressed. Thus we are discussing the line between protest and unlawful action. If the people have reason to be at the capital for protest, then the accusation of insurrection is extremely uncharitable even if violence does break out. My question to you: the millions of people not at the capital that day who wanted the results scrutinized more closely, do you think they wanted protest or insurrection? Do they become insurrectionists for supporting a protest that loses control? And if they don't, then why aren't we acknowledging there was a legitimate basis for protest?
ok
1:
But if you believe there has been fraud in an election, it is appropriate to protest. It shouldn't be certified until legitimate and widespread doubts have been addressed, and they weren't being addressed.
Absolutely not! If all a party leader has to do to initiate a Jan 6 type insurrection is say 'I think they stole the election' then every party leader could do this at every single election and people would be perfectly justified repeating the whole thing.
2:
If the people have reason to be at the capital for protest, then the accusation of insurrection is extremely uncharitable even if violence does break out.
People with nooses?
3:
My question to you: the millions of people not at the capital that day who wanted the results scrutinized more closely, do you think they wanted protest or insurrection? Do they become insurrectionists for supporting a protest that loses control? And if they don't, then why aren't we acknowledging there was a legitimate basis for protest?
What people wanted them to do has absolutely nothing to do with the insurrection they attempted.
These people didn't have legitimate concerns. They didn't. That is absolutely clear. Trump said he would claim the election was stolen before he lost the election and everyone knew that. It was a necessary condition of him losing. Everyone knew that.
Sorry, but being an absolutely massive fucking idiot who can't understand even the basic logic does not make someone's concerns 'legitimate', and the same applies to millions of people as it does to any individual.
|
Northern Ireland24329 Posts
On November 08 2024 03:45 sevencck wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 03:33 Falling wrote:On November 08 2024 03:12 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 03:03 Gorsameth wrote:On November 08 2024 02:49 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 02:37 NewSunshine wrote:On November 08 2024 02:32 WombaT wrote:On November 08 2024 02:20 Slydie wrote:On November 08 2024 01:38 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 01:30 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
The old man yelling about how he hates flies is the deranged one. "If you hate a person, you hate something in him that is part of yourself. What isn't part of ourselves doesn't disturb us." -Hermann Hesse The derangement around Trump is like 90% shadow projection. You're all just shadow boxing with your own inner tyrant imo. So the Trump voters who are angry at Kamala and Democrats are really just angry with their inner Kamala/Democrat? And what is 100% not a part of you so you are not disturbed by it? That kind of quotes are only good for making people angry. It is like a parent claiming "you are only fighting because you are so alike". The quote is a perfectly reasonable one, just completely ripped from what it’s meant to actually describe Correct. That quote has infinitely more to do with why a Trumper bristles at being called racist than it does with why reasonable people are upset with the Right's fascism. Incorrect. If you're reacting to something inside of you then you aren't actually responsive to what is outside of you, youre just shadow boxing and that's the difference. I don't see the same derangement among conservatives on any level, people very reasonably don't want to live under socialism. The derangement around Trump has been next level. When you foam at the mouth about him being a nazi, Hitler, a fascist, and a tyrant (particularly as you try to force a vaccine on others, and exlude those from society who refuse) it is quite clear that you are just shadow boxing. When you have a stroke about racism and all the rest of it, while accusing black men who voted for Trump of x, y, and z, it's clear you're just shadow boxing. The dems accused Trump of trying to overturn an election because he wanted a suspect result scrutinized. They're only articulating who they are inside. If I'm correct (I am), we will see dems advocate for not handing over power in the coming weeks. We've already seen such an intimation on the past couple page of the current discussion. Trump just wanted a suspect result scrutinized? The dude incited an actual insurrection. That is not 'just looking at a suspect result'. But sure, its the derangement around Trump, not your utter denial of reality... No, no he didn't. Do you think the Canadian trucker protest was also an insurrection, just curious? It was in front of the parliament buildings. They got called Nazis too btw, by the people who fight so tirelessly for inclusion. Seems like a memetic literal concrete comprehension which believes that a protest outside a government building makes it an insurrection, as though we're still living in the 4th century BCE, and not the information age. Guess when he told them to go home after 2 hours that was a typo, it was meant to read "send them to Bergen Belsen." No, no, no, no. A thousand times now. I defend the Trucker protest from the silly accusations of an insurrection. It most definitely was a protest. An obnoxious one to the local residents, but a protest nonetheless. Trudeau got excited because he thought he had a January 6 on his hands, but he was dead wrong. What Trump tried to do is nothing the same. He tried to over-ride the will of the people (false electors). He was pressuring states to find votes for him, which constitutionally, the president has no role in the elector role. Besides, based on what he was asking, it was quite transparently a quest to just have the States declare the number he needed to win +1 and Trump's team 'would do the rest." His cronies went around deliberately lying about election fraud. (Giuliani's defence was that he lied, but it was his First Amendment right to do so.) All their climp chimped falsehoods were shut down in the courts and when it all failed, they tried to strong-arm Mike Pence into breaking his constitutional duty. Do you think it was a coincidence that they all showed up on January 6, carrying weapons and guns and shouting revolution, and "Hang Mike Pence? The vote certification was delayed and it was a genuine attempt to stop the certification of the vote through intimidation. That goes well beyond a violent protest that attempts to persuade the government to change it's mind. It was a blatant attempt to overturn the functions of government itself through force. I don't mind calling that an insurrection. It is categorically different than the Trucker protest. Of course it wasn't an coincidence. But if you believe there has been fraud in an election, it is appropriate to protest. It shouldn't be certified until legitimate and widespread doubts have been addressed, and they weren't being addressed. Thus we are discussing the line between protest and unlawful action. If the people have reason to be at the capital for protest, then the accusation of insurrection is extremely uncharitable even if violence does break out. My question to you: the millions of people not at the capital that day who wanted the results scrutinized more closely, do you think they wanted protest or insurrection? Do they become insurrectionists for supporting a protest that loses control? And if they don't, then why aren't we acknowledging there was a legitimate basis for protest?
But they didn’t believe there was fraud in the election. Or at least Trump didn’t. Those he dragged along perhaps did, but because he claimed it They haven’t been able to subsequently prove fraud in said election.
I’d empty my bank account in its entirety to bet that Trump didn’t actually earnestly believe he was losing out due to electoral fraud
|
California is like Northern Virginia, blue, but the kind of affluent blue that puts that dumb "In this house we believe in..." sign but at the slightest hint of any of those supposed values causing the smallest bit of mental discomfort would trade those ideals in for their mental coziness or slight material benefit.
|
Canada11318 Posts
On November 08 2024 03:45 sevencck wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 03:33 Falling wrote:On November 08 2024 03:12 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 03:03 Gorsameth wrote:On November 08 2024 02:49 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 02:37 NewSunshine wrote:On November 08 2024 02:32 WombaT wrote:On November 08 2024 02:20 Slydie wrote:On November 08 2024 01:38 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 01:30 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
The old man yelling about how he hates flies is the deranged one. "If you hate a person, you hate something in him that is part of yourself. What isn't part of ourselves doesn't disturb us." -Hermann Hesse The derangement around Trump is like 90% shadow projection. You're all just shadow boxing with your own inner tyrant imo. So the Trump voters who are angry at Kamala and Democrats are really just angry with their inner Kamala/Democrat? And what is 100% not a part of you so you are not disturbed by it? That kind of quotes are only good for making people angry. It is like a parent claiming "you are only fighting because you are so alike". The quote is a perfectly reasonable one, just completely ripped from what it’s meant to actually describe Correct. That quote has infinitely more to do with why a Trumper bristles at being called racist than it does with why reasonable people are upset with the Right's fascism. Incorrect. If you're reacting to something inside of you then you aren't actually responsive to what is outside of you, youre just shadow boxing and that's the difference. I don't see the same derangement among conservatives on any level, people very reasonably don't want to live under socialism. The derangement around Trump has been next level. When you foam at the mouth about him being a nazi, Hitler, a fascist, and a tyrant (particularly as you try to force a vaccine on others, and exlude those from society who refuse) it is quite clear that you are just shadow boxing. When you have a stroke about racism and all the rest of it, while accusing black men who voted for Trump of x, y, and z, it's clear you're just shadow boxing. The dems accused Trump of trying to overturn an election because he wanted a suspect result scrutinized. They're only articulating who they are inside. If I'm correct (I am), we will see dems advocate for not handing over power in the coming weeks. We've already seen such an intimation on the past couple page of the current discussion. Trump just wanted a suspect result scrutinized? The dude incited an actual insurrection. That is not 'just looking at a suspect result'. But sure, its the derangement around Trump, not your utter denial of reality... No, no he didn't. Do you think the Canadian trucker protest was also an insurrection, just curious? It was in front of the parliament buildings. They got called Nazis too btw, by the people who fight so tirelessly for inclusion. Seems like a memetic literal concrete comprehension which believes that a protest outside a government building makes it an insurrection, as though we're still living in the 4th century BCE, and not the information age. Guess when he told them to go home after 2 hours that was a typo, it was meant to read "send them to Bergen Belsen." No, no, no, no. A thousand times now. I defend the Trucker protest from the silly accusations of an insurrection. It most definitely was a protest. An obnoxious one to the local residents, but a protest nonetheless. Trudeau got excited because he thought he had a January 6 on his hands, but he was dead wrong. What Trump tried to do is nothing the same. He tried to over-ride the will of the people (false electors). He was pressuring states to find votes for him, which constitutionally, the president has no role in the elector role. Besides, based on what he was asking, it was quite transparently a quest to just have the States declare the number he needed to win +1 and Trump's team 'would do the rest." His cronies went around deliberately lying about election fraud. (Giuliani's defence was that he lied, but it was his First Amendment right to do so.) All their climp chimped falsehoods were shut down in the courts and when it all failed, they tried to strong-arm Mike Pence into breaking his constitutional duty. Do you think it was a coincidence that they all showed up on January 6, carrying weapons and guns and shouting revolution, and "Hang Mike Pence? The vote certification was delayed and it was a genuine attempt to stop the certification of the vote through intimidation. That goes well beyond a violent protest that attempts to persuade the government to change it's mind. It was a blatant attempt to overturn the functions of government itself through force. I don't mind calling that an insurrection. It is categorically different than the Trucker protest. Of course it wasn't an coincidence. But if you believe there has been fraud in an election, it is appropriate to protest. It shouldn't be certified until legitimate and widespread doubts have been addressed, and they weren't being addressed. Thus we are discussing the line between protest and unlawful action. If the people have reason to be at the capital for protest, then the accusation of insurrection is extremely uncharitable even if violence does break out. My question to you: the millions of people not at the capital that day who wanted the results scrutinized more closely, do you think they wanted protest or insurrection? Do they become insurrectionists for supporting a protest that loses control? And if they don't, then why aren't we acknowledging there was a legitimate basis for protest?
All you are doing is giving justification for the insurrection.
The claims were addressed. Trump put them before the courts and they lost. Resoundingly. And no, they didn't all just lose on the merits. Quite a few even though the judges dismissed on the standing, they bothered to also give commentary as to the nature of the evidence which was universally trash.
I don't exactly blame the people who have been lied to. They have been fed lies for years leading up to the election that there would be voter fraud. Then they were fed lies after the election. Lies that Trump's own team knew were false because they were refuted by Trump's own people. They were refuted by Republicans like Raffensperger. But Trump dismissed those people, repeated the lies and actively sought out hacks that would do his bidding.
Lying about false electors and strong-arming the vice president to overturn American votes is not a legitimate way to redress anything. It is anti-constitutional. You would never accept the same from Harris, if she just slotted in her own electors on enough swing states for her to win.
And if you are so convinced that the Democrat machine rigged the elections, what the heck happened this time? Trump made the same claim: the Democrats are going to steal the election, there's rampant fraud. Did Democrats decide to deliberately lose to throw you off the scent or what?
|
The gallows are a particularly interesting case, of all the people who were caught, identified, reported by their own family and friends, charged, and convicted for things on that day, yet the gallows people have eluded capture. Someone got up at 6am, really wanting to make America great again apparently, put a gallows together next to the Capitol, in preparation for people later in the day marching there from the Ellipse.
|
Northern Ireland24329 Posts
On November 08 2024 03:47 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 03:33 WombaT wrote:On November 08 2024 03:25 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 08 2024 02:49 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 02:37 NewSunshine wrote:On November 08 2024 02:32 WombaT wrote:On November 08 2024 02:20 Slydie wrote:On November 08 2024 01:38 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 01:30 KwarK wrote:On November 08 2024 00:28 sevencck wrote:
[quote]
You lost the presidency, the senate, the house, and the supreme court. You're losing the culture war and don't really even appear to understand why. Instead of listening, as you so evidently should, you continue to lecture. Who's deranged? The old man yelling about how he hates flies is the deranged one. "If you hate a person, you hate something in him that is part of yourself. What isn't part of ourselves doesn't disturb us." -Hermann Hesse The derangement around Trump is like 90% shadow projection. You're all just shadow boxing with your own inner tyrant imo. So the Trump voters who are angry at Kamala and Democrats are really just angry with their inner Kamala/Democrat? And what is 100% not a part of you so you are not disturbed by it? That kind of quotes are only good for making people angry. It is like a parent claiming "you are only fighting because you are so alike". The quote is a perfectly reasonable one, just completely ripped from what it’s meant to actually describe Correct. That quote has infinitely more to do with why a Trumper bristles at being called racist than it does with why reasonable people are upset with the Right's fascism. + Show Spoiler +
Incorrect. If you're reacting to something inside of you then you aren't actually responsive to what is outside of you, youre just shadow boxing and that's the difference. I don't see the same derangement among conservatives on any level, people very reasonably don't want to live under socialism.
The derangement around Trump has been next level. When you foam at the mouth about him being a nazi, Hitler, a fascist, and a tyrant (particularly as you try to force a vaccine on others, and exlude those from society who refuse) it is quite clear that you are just shadow boxing. When you have a stroke about racism and all the rest of it, while accusing black men who voted for Trump of x, y, and z, it's clear you're just shadow boxing.
The dems accused Trump of trying to overturn an election because he wanted a suspect result scrutinized. They're only arriculating who they are inside.
If I'm correct (I am), we will see dems advocate for not handing over power in the coming weeks. We've already seen such an intimation on the past couple page of the current discussion. As far as I can tell none of the Dems/libs here are supportive of the suggestion of them not proudly and peacefully handing power over to fascists. Nor have any shown any support for the fact that Biden can legally assasinate Trump and Vance in his official capacity as President to protect the US from a fascist takeover It's incoherent with their campaigning/rhetoric on Trump being a fascist dictator on day 1. It's irrational from a practical perspective and inconsistent with their understanding of free speech absolutism and the tolerance paradox. It's probably more hypocritical of them to willingly hand him power after he tried to steal it than it would be to refuse to give it to him though. Yes the two are a bit incongruous in combination. Trump is a Fascist we can’t allow in, but hey if we wins an election we’ll not do anything But yeah, the ‘we’ll not do anything until the next vote’ is still demonstrably the approach They are completely irrational in combination, the cognitive dissonance should be overwhelming. Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 03:38 Sermokala wrote:On November 08 2024 03:33 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 08 2024 03:28 Sermokala wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Ashli Babbitt had already been shot by the time Trump told the people to go home.
A lot of people trying to justify why they voted for Trump or why Trump winning is a good thing for America. A quote that has helped me and others yesterday is "don't be there for the people who weren't there for you". Not going to have a lot of time for the people who didn't vote for harris yet want to tell me to do any type of work for them. A ban on slavery is currently failing to pass in California. Miss me hard next time someone from California tries to tell me they're a leftist state. To be honest I didn't even know this was on the ballot all the months I've been harping on Democrats failing to even end the enslavement of US citizens for 100+ years. It's not a "leftist" state but that's Democrat af. Yeah I'm going to save this post for the next time you try to explain to me what way I should vote on anything at all. If you're so uninformed about whats going on in your own state about an issue I've seen you give a shit about before this cycle I'm not going to respect you to do the work on any issue in the future. You care so little about ending the enslavement of US citizens you didn't know it was on the ballot until the election. Needed something to laugh about this morning. I don't live in CA lol? I had my own rich asshole shit on my ballot to worry about. I'm guessing it didn't get a lot of attention, because people didn't think Democrats in California would vote to keep enslaving US citizens in 2024. Also probably related to why no one here that actually lives in CA ever mentioned it in response to me pointing out Democrats are still pro-slavery in 2024.
There’s a certain cognitive dissonance, but not one that really extends to conservative fears.
The Democrats unwillingness to actually do anything beyond the ballot box to hold back a Fascism they claim is immminent isn’t exactly heartening to aspects of their base.
This might piss me off if I’m a leftist, but it’s preposterous for a conservative to complain about given they’ll just accept the election and hand over power
|
Absolutely not! If all a party leader has to do to initiate a Jan 6 type insurrection is say 'I think they stole the election' then every party leader could do this at every single election and people would be perfectly justified repeating the whole thing.
Not if there was law that made it clear that you cannot bear false witness.
"But, but, but I believed that was true so I wasn't bearing false witness"
If you believed something and brought a claim without performing due diligence, then that would still fall under giving untruthful testimony. Do something like that, and you handle the quoted problem.
|
|
|
On November 08 2024 03:51 Zambrah wrote:
California is like Northern Virginia, blue, but the kind of affluent blue that puts that dumb "In this house we believe in..." sign but at the slightest hint of any of those supposed values causing the smallest bit of mental discomfort would trade those ideals in for their mental coziness or slight material benefit.
Anyone speaking about California like it has any kind of uniform idealogy doesn't understand the basics about this state.
We have more conservatives in this state than any other state of the union except Texas and Florida.
We are a comfortable majority blue in this state, but that comfortable majority is like 58% or something. It's NOT that big, that everything the Liberals want passes without a fight.
We had a lower voter turn out here just like we did nationwide. This is what happens when the Democrats run someone that doesn't energize the party's base.
Everyone turned out in 2020 to get rid of Donald Trump. The Democrats just expected everyone to do that again. They didn't bother running a campaign that actually got Liberals to the polls and enthusiastic to vote for them again.
|
United States42229 Posts
On November 08 2024 03:25 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 02:49 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 02:37 NewSunshine wrote:On November 08 2024 02:32 WombaT wrote:On November 08 2024 02:20 Slydie wrote:On November 08 2024 01:38 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 01:30 KwarK wrote:On November 08 2024 00:28 sevencck wrote:On March 18 2024 23:20 KwarK wrote:On March 18 2024 18:06 BlackJack wrote:[quote] https://youtube.com/shorts/yWD9T5J0vaQ?si=xPccA0ZcIk4EY2ntFound the snippet you’re quoting. A fly buzzes around him on stage so he does some half-serious ad libbing about flies while pandering to his base by implying that the red meat republicans can’t harm flies because of pussy liberal animal rights activists. Ok… that’s pretty on brand from Trump. Hardly incoherent. Once again this just reinforces my point. Trump gets up and talks off the cuff for hours on end and tweets every thought that comes through his mind. If Biden goes off script for 2 minutes it’s a disaster. It’s not incoherent, it’s deranged. You lost the presidency, the senate, the house, and the supreme court. You're losing the culture war and don't really even appear to understand why. Instead of listening, as you so evidently should, you continue to lecture. Who's deranged? The old man yelling about how he hates flies is the deranged one. "If you hate a person, you hate something in him that is part of yourself. What isn't part of ourselves doesn't disturb us." -Hermann Hesse The derangement around Trump is like 90% shadow projection. You're all just shadow boxing with your own inner tyrant imo. So the Trump voters who are angry at Kamala and Democrats are really just angry with their inner Kamala/Democrat? And what is 100% not a part of you so you are not disturbed by it? That kind of quotes are only good for making people angry. It is like a parent claiming "you are only fighting because you are so alike". The quote is a perfectly reasonable one, just completely ripped from what it’s meant to actually describe Correct. That quote has infinitely more to do with why a Trumper bristles at being called racist than it does with why reasonable people are upset with the Right's fascism. + Show Spoiler +
Incorrect. If you're reacting to something inside of you then you aren't actually responsive to what is outside of you, youre just shadow boxing and that's the difference. I don't see the same derangement among conservatives on any level, people very reasonably don't want to live under socialism.
The derangement around Trump has been next level. When you foam at the mouth about him being a nazi, Hitler, a fascist, and a tyrant (particularly as you try to force a vaccine on others, and exlude those from society who refuse) it is quite clear that you are just shadow boxing. When you have a stroke about racism and all the rest of it, while accusing black men who voted for Trump of x, y, and z, it's clear you're just shadow boxing.
The dems accused Trump of trying to overturn an election because he wanted a suspect result scrutinized. They're only arriculating who they are inside.
If I'm correct (I am), we will see dems advocate for not handing over power in the coming weeks. We've already seen such an intimation on the past couple page of the current discussion. As far as I can tell none of the Dems/libs here are supportive of the suggestion of them not proudly and peacefully handing power over to fascists. Nor have any shown any support for the fact that Biden can legally assasinate Trump and Vance in his official capacity as President to protect the US from a fascist takeover It's incoherent with their campaigning/rhetoric on Trump being a fascist dictator on day 1. It's irrational from a practical perspective and inconsistent with their understanding of free speech absolutism and the tolerance paradox. It's probably more hypocritical of them to willingly hand him power after he tried to steal it than it would be to refuse to give it to him though.
I've been calling Biden and the rest of the institutions gutless about this stuff for ages. I was also there on Supreme Court enlargement and the bringing of charges against Trump after Jan 6. I'm not opposed to direct action. My attacks on you are because you argue the time for voting is over, the time for direct action is upon us, and then appear to do neither. That said, if you successfully use your Second Amendment rights to prevent Trump taking office (by voting as famously explained by Trump) then I'll eat my words and apologize to you.
|
Liberals are exactly the people I'm describing in my post, I'm not saying anything about California's majority, just that its flavor of Blue isn't actually all that super left, its a common American flavor that says it has lots of values but doesn't want to live up to those values if it requires any work or effort. Basically they're aligned with the Democrats in a very core way lol
California is the kind of state that can go "Yes, we want to keep forced labor and slavery," and also yasss queen on about a Black Woman President.
|
United States42229 Posts
On November 08 2024 03:33 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 03:12 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 03:03 Gorsameth wrote:On November 08 2024 02:49 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 02:37 NewSunshine wrote:On November 08 2024 02:32 WombaT wrote:On November 08 2024 02:20 Slydie wrote:On November 08 2024 01:38 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 01:30 KwarK wrote:On November 08 2024 00:28 sevencck wrote:
[quote]
You lost the presidency, the senate, the house, and the supreme court. You're losing the culture war and don't really even appear to understand why. Instead of listening, as you so evidently should, you continue to lecture. Who's deranged? The old man yelling about how he hates flies is the deranged one. "If you hate a person, you hate something in him that is part of yourself. What isn't part of ourselves doesn't disturb us." -Hermann Hesse The derangement around Trump is like 90% shadow projection. You're all just shadow boxing with your own inner tyrant imo. So the Trump voters who are angry at Kamala and Democrats are really just angry with their inner Kamala/Democrat? And what is 100% not a part of you so you are not disturbed by it? That kind of quotes are only good for making people angry. It is like a parent claiming "you are only fighting because you are so alike". The quote is a perfectly reasonable one, just completely ripped from what it’s meant to actually describe Correct. That quote has infinitely more to do with why a Trumper bristles at being called racist than it does with why reasonable people are upset with the Right's fascism. Incorrect. If you're reacting to something inside of you then you aren't actually responsive to what is outside of you, youre just shadow boxing and that's the difference. I don't see the same derangement among conservatives on any level, people very reasonably don't want to live under socialism. The derangement around Trump has been next level. When you foam at the mouth about him being a nazi, Hitler, a fascist, and a tyrant (particularly as you try to force a vaccine on others, and exlude those from society who refuse) it is quite clear that you are just shadow boxing. When you have a stroke about racism and all the rest of it, while accusing black men who voted for Trump of x, y, and z, it's clear you're just shadow boxing. The dems accused Trump of trying to overturn an election because he wanted a suspect result scrutinized. They're only articulating who they are inside. If I'm correct (I am), we will see dems advocate for not handing over power in the coming weeks. We've already seen such an intimation on the past couple page of the current discussion. Trump just wanted a suspect result scrutinized? The dude incited an actual insurrection. That is not 'just looking at a suspect result'. But sure, its the derangement around Trump, not your utter denial of reality... No, no he didn't. Do you think the Canadian trucker protest was also an insurrection, just curious? It was in front of the parliament buildings. They got called Nazis too btw, by the people who fight so tirelessly for inclusion. Seems like a memetic literal concrete comprehension which believes that a protest outside a government building makes it an insurrection, as though we're still living in the 4th century BCE, and not the information age. Guess when he told them to go home after 2 hours that was a typo, it was meant to read "send them to Bergen Belsen." No, no, no, no. A thousand times no. I defend the Trucker protest from the silly accusations of an insurrection. It most definitely was a protest. An obnoxious one to the local residents, but a protest nonetheless. Trudeau got excited because he thought he had a January 6 on his hands, but he was dead wrong. What Trump tried to do is nothing the same. He demanded that states stop counting votes of all things! Would you accept that from any Democrat president or would you be in the streets crying 'Tyrant'?? Trump tried to over-ride the will of the people (false electors). He was pressuring states to find votes for him, which constitutionally, the president has no role in the elector role. Besides, based on what he was asking, it was quite transparently a quest to just have the States declare the number he needed to win +1 and Trump's team 'would do the rest." His cronies went around deliberately lying about election fraud. (Giuliani's defence was that he lied, but it was his First Amendment right to do so.) All their climp chimped falsehoods were shut down in the courts and when it all failed, they tried to strong-arm Mike Pence into breaking his constitutional duty. Do you think it was a coincidence that they all showed up on January 6, carrying weapons and guns and shouting revolution, and "Hang Mike Pence?" The vote certification was delayed and it was a genuine attempt to stop the certification of the vote through intimidation. That goes well beyond a violent protest that attempts to persuade the government to change it's mind. It was a blatant attempt to overturn the functions of government itself through force. I don't mind calling that an insurrection. It is categorically different than the Trucker protest, who as far as I know stuck to the streets, adjusted their protest to allow a single lane of traffic through (I think-it's been so long now. I know that they did accept some restrictions put upon them by police... though not the one that told them to go home.) And I don't even think they crossed onto the lawn outside Parliament, but certainly did not try to storm the government buildings.
You're doing good work putting together all the pieces of the puzzle and explaining how the combined picture is one of an insurrection. But I think you're overcomplicating this because not only do we have all the pieces of the puzzle, we also have the puzzle box with the picture on the front and a title. We have Trump campaign memos from after the 2020 election results when they discussed the various means in which they could overturn the election. We have the discussions of the fake electors plot and how it would be implemented. They emailed about it and we have the emails.
Sure, you can walk someone through how if you put all the pieces of the puzzle together and look at it then it looks like a plot to seize power after the people voted Trump out. But it came in a box labeled "secret plan to seize power after the people voted Trump out" and we have that box.
|
On November 08 2024 04:02 Zambrah wrote:
Liberals are exactly the people I'm describing in my post, I'm not saying anything about California's majority, just that its flavor of Blue isn't actually all that super left, its a common American flavor that says it has lots of values but doesn't want to live up to those values if it requires any work or effort. Basically they're aligned with the Democrats in a very core way lol
California is the kind of state that can go "Yes, we want to keep forced labor and slavery," and also yasss queen on about a Black Woman President.
And I'm saying it looks like that when viewed in aggregate. We have 40 million people here. If you go to some parts of the state they are more hardcore Trump than most of the south.
If you go to some parts of the state they are VERY progressive and activist. We got a lot of white collar, blue collar, minorities, wealthy white gated communities etc.
In aggregate, we're baby blue. That's not to say that there aren't a lot of dedicated idealistic people here. You just can't expect them to make up the majority of the state. The State is way too big for that.
|
Im going on aggregate because in aggregate California voted to actively preserve slavery and I think that speaks to the kind of blue that California, as an aggregate, is
I don't have any more contempt for California than I do for any of the other blue NIMBY bitchboy areas that I've lived in or currently live in, just wanted to be pissy at a group of people that I have a vehement distaste for in a situation basically epitomizing why I have a distaste for that group of people.
|
On November 08 2024 03:45 sevencck wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2024 03:33 Falling wrote:On November 08 2024 03:12 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 03:03 Gorsameth wrote:On November 08 2024 02:49 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 02:37 NewSunshine wrote:On November 08 2024 02:32 WombaT wrote:On November 08 2024 02:20 Slydie wrote:On November 08 2024 01:38 sevencck wrote:On November 08 2024 01:30 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
The old man yelling about how he hates flies is the deranged one. "If you hate a person, you hate something in him that is part of yourself. What isn't part of ourselves doesn't disturb us." -Hermann Hesse The derangement around Trump is like 90% shadow projection. You're all just shadow boxing with your own inner tyrant imo. So the Trump voters who are angry at Kamala and Democrats are really just angry with their inner Kamala/Democrat? And what is 100% not a part of you so you are not disturbed by it? That kind of quotes are only good for making people angry. It is like a parent claiming "you are only fighting because you are so alike". The quote is a perfectly reasonable one, just completely ripped from what it’s meant to actually describe Correct. That quote has infinitely more to do with why a Trumper bristles at being called racist than it does with why reasonable people are upset with the Right's fascism. Incorrect. If you're reacting to something inside of you then you aren't actually responsive to what is outside of you, youre just shadow boxing and that's the difference. I don't see the same derangement among conservatives on any level, people very reasonably don't want to live under socialism. The derangement around Trump has been next level. When you foam at the mouth about him being a nazi, Hitler, a fascist, and a tyrant (particularly as you try to force a vaccine on others, and exlude those from society who refuse) it is quite clear that you are just shadow boxing. When you have a stroke about racism and all the rest of it, while accusing black men who voted for Trump of x, y, and z, it's clear you're just shadow boxing. The dems accused Trump of trying to overturn an election because he wanted a suspect result scrutinized. They're only articulating who they are inside. If I'm correct (I am), we will see dems advocate for not handing over power in the coming weeks. We've already seen such an intimation on the past couple page of the current discussion. Trump just wanted a suspect result scrutinized? The dude incited an actual insurrection. That is not 'just looking at a suspect result'. But sure, its the derangement around Trump, not your utter denial of reality... No, no he didn't. Do you think the Canadian trucker protest was also an insurrection, just curious? It was in front of the parliament buildings. They got called Nazis too btw, by the people who fight so tirelessly for inclusion. Seems like a memetic literal concrete comprehension which believes that a protest outside a government building makes it an insurrection, as though we're still living in the 4th century BCE, and not the information age. Guess when he told them to go home after 2 hours that was a typo, it was meant to read "send them to Bergen Belsen." No, no, no, no. A thousand times now. I defend the Trucker protest from the silly accusations of an insurrection. It most definitely was a protest. An obnoxious one to the local residents, but a protest nonetheless. Trudeau got excited because he thought he had a January 6 on his hands, but he was dead wrong. What Trump tried to do is nothing the same. He tried to over-ride the will of the people (false electors). He was pressuring states to find votes for him, which constitutionally, the president has no role in the elector role. Besides, based on what he was asking, it was quite transparently a quest to just have the States declare the number he needed to win +1 and Trump's team 'would do the rest." His cronies went around deliberately lying about election fraud. (Giuliani's defence was that he lied, but it was his First Amendment right to do so.) All their climp chimped falsehoods were shut down in the courts and when it all failed, they tried to strong-arm Mike Pence into breaking his constitutional duty. Do you think it was a coincidence that they all showed up on January 6, carrying weapons and guns and shouting revolution, and "Hang Mike Pence? The vote certification was delayed and it was a genuine attempt to stop the certification of the vote through intimidation. That goes well beyond a violent protest that attempts to persuade the government to change it's mind. It was a blatant attempt to overturn the functions of government itself through force. I don't mind calling that an insurrection. It is categorically different than the Trucker protest. Of course it wasn't a coincidence. But if you believe there has been fraud in an election, it is appropriate to protest. It shouldn't be certified until legitimate and widespread doubts have been addressed, and they weren't being addressed. Thus we are discussing the line between protest and unlawful action. If the people have reason to be at the capital for protest, then the accusation of insurrection is extremely uncharitable even if violence does break out. My question to you: the millions of people not at the capital that day who wanted the results scrutinized more closely, do you think they wanted protest or insurrection? Do they become insurrectionists for supporting a protest that loses control? And if they don't, then why aren't we acknowledging there was a legitimate basis for protest?
But there was not fraud in the election, and the people spreading the information that there was were lying. So what consequence is fair for the people who started the lies and tried to use the mob for their own benefit?
Try to imagine your political opponents doing this when you think of the punishment, because believe me they are watching to see how it works. And it won't just be the American MAGA, it might be communists or whoever you are scared of doing it next.
|
Northern Ireland24329 Posts
Hypothetically. If we were to reform institutions, what does that look like?
I’d remove term limits on Presidents first. It feels very arbitrary if we look at the other branches. Also it just feels kinda silly tbh. I understand the reason for it but you can absolutely end up with your best potential President being ineligible for the job
To compensate I’d slightly tweak the Supreme Court. I think Iong term expertise and surety of position are important. But perhaps it being a lottery of when someone dies versus who’s an incumbent President plus what does the Senate look like? Not ideal
I think perhaps you could say have a nomination per Pres term that both the Democrats and Republicans can do. You can either renew existing justices, or replace one from your own cohort. Make it bigger too. If there’s a vacancy, it has to be bipartisan with a threshold of 60% or whatever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
