| 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 | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
On July 16 2018 04:38 Nouar wrote: The most baffling to me is how around 45% of the US population is still behind him after all this bullshit he keeps doing. Hurt white pride, and political evangelism is a hell of a motivator. | ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
On July 16 2018 06:20 sc-darkness wrote: Hillary is corrupt as fuck: 1. Clinton Foundation 2. Leaked e-mails Hillary insults a large mass of voters ("deplorables"). It's ok for me to say it, but I'm not running for a president. Under normal circumstances, she shouldn't even be a candidate. Just let Bernie Sanders run and all will be fine. This is a good prompting for the umpteenth reminder that that speech was literally about how many Trump voters have valid concerns coming from valid places in the next paragraph. | ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On July 16 2018 06:20 sc-darkness wrote: Hillary is corrupt as fuck: 1. Clinton Foundation 2. Leaked e-mails Hillary insults a large mass of voters ("deplorables"). It's ok for me to say it, but I'm not running for a president. Under normal circumstances, she shouldn't even be a candidate. Just let Bernie Sanders run and all will be fine. If these are the biggest complaints you have about Hillary I have to assume she got your vote. These are pretty weak. | ||
|
kollin
United Kingdom8380 Posts
On July 16 2018 06:55 zlefin wrote: unreasonable opinions means ones not based on reason; ones that ignore facts and reality. that there may be legitimate reasons to dislike/hate hillary doesn't change that most of the actual hatred of hillary is unreasonable. as to your supposed actual reasons; we'd need to look at them more specifically to see how reasonable they are. Thank you for explaining the meaning of the word reason. What I was really trying to do is get you to examine some unreasonable opinions and see how unreasonable they really are. For example, one of the most accurate ways of predicting whether an area voted majority Trump was number of people from that area who were Iraq casualties. Given pre-election Hillary was by far the more obviously warlike candidate, this is fairly reasonable. Another significant factor in her losing the election was low turnout - especially black communities. Given her 'superpredator' comment, the widening gulf between rich and poor communities during Obama's presidency, hugely reported on shootings of unarmed kids by the police (combined with the lived realities a ballooning prison population and systemically racist police force impose on black communities), I think black people not turning out for Hillary is also pretty reasonable. If we look at why Hillary lost electorally - rather than masturbating over the egregious examples of conspiracist thinking over emails and whatnot on Fox News, which almost certainly only served to rile a base up which would vote Republican regardless - we can come to the conclusion that there are identifiable and rational causes behind Hillary losing. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44564 Posts
On July 16 2018 06:54 kollin wrote: He literally said he'd still vote for Hillary over Trump, but only because she's not Trump. All you've done is affirm his point. Not at all. He said "Under normal circumstances, she shouldn't even be a candidate." That's crap. There's a good argument to be made that she's literally the most qualified presidential candidate of all time, ffs. | ||
|
kollin
United Kingdom8380 Posts
On July 16 2018 07:07 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Not at all. He said "Under normal circumstances, she shouldn't even be a candidate." That's crap. There's a good argument to be made that she's literally the most qualified presidential candidate of all time, ffs. Qualified in the most anodyne, technocratic, continuation of the prevailing ideology for the next millennia sense. Qualified to change the country significantly for the better, to reverse the American slide into enormous economic disparities compounded by structural racism and a swollen military industrial machine abroad? Almost certainly not. | ||
|
Nouar
France3270 Posts
On July 16 2018 04:41 zlefin wrote: you can't think of one because there hasn't been a president this bad at basic diplomacy in the post WWII era; probably not prior to that either unless we go back a really long way; and maybe not ever. nouar -> there's explanations for why they still support if you want to hear them (i.e. the psych/sociological processes that lead to people still supporting him) Pretty sure I know most of them, but I wouldn't be able to cope supporting a guy like that even for my own interests, knowing what it entails (and if I was stupid enough to just *believe* or get blinded by what he says, then... to hell with me.). There are gullible people everywhere, I just don't understand how this large a chunk of the population can live with it, or support this kind of behaviour. And let's not get started with the Republican party :-) @StealthBlue : see, evangelism. This guy is going against nearly all scriptures (well from what I know of them), corrupt businessman, not respecting others and even less women, not speaking truth. So supporting him in spite of that to advance your political agenda, makes you a joke of a believer to my mind. Nothing respectable or based on truth here, no values, no self-respect. Intelligent people manipulating others to advance their stuff if what I despise most. But when a... clown manages to do that, I doubt humanity and the future a lot. I'll stop here or I will derail. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
I mean one could easily mistake this as SNL skit, it is just surreal. | ||
|
Leporello
United States2845 Posts
But she was qualified. Her charity foundation was legit. There was no question she was at least loyal to "America's interests", even if you feel that doesn't necessarily mean the interest of the average American. But talking about Hillary now is, almost always, indulging in the justification of someone who voted for a traitorous, lecherous fascist, so I really don't care. | ||
|
Nouar
France3270 Posts
On July 16 2018 07:13 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: The fact that Sacha Baron Cohen can get members of the GOP to support a non exist program of having kids being armed in classrooms is peak USA. https://twitter.com/twpolk/status/1018372408074522624 I mean one could easily mistake this as SNL skit, it is just surreal. Ahah I'm so waiting for the "Dick Cheney signing a waterboard kit" one. | ||
|
Leporello
United States2845 Posts
On July 16 2018 07:13 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: The fact that Sacha Baron Cohen can get members of the GOP to support a non exist program of having kids being armed in classrooms is peak USA. https://twitter.com/twpolk/status/1018372408074522624 I mean one could easily mistake this as SNL skit, it is just surreal. That is the greatest thing ever. "The science is proven". Proceeds to talk about Blink-182 and Wiz Khalifa. That is the Republican Party, ladies and gents. OMG, watch this bit. Sacha jokes about raping his wife and getting shot for it and the other guy is just all about it. | ||
|
kollin
United Kingdom8380 Posts
On July 16 2018 07:18 Leporello wrote: That is the greatest thing ever. "The science is proven". Proceeds to talk about Blink-182 and Wiz Khalifa. That is the Republican Party, ladies and gents. In fairness a somewhat similar thing was pulled off by a program called 'Brasseye' in UK about 20 years ago. The political classes have always been moronic. | ||
|
FueledUpAndReadyToGo
Netherlands30548 Posts
On July 16 2018 07:13 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: The fact that Sacha Baron Cohen can get members of the GOP to support a non exist program of having kids being armed in classrooms is peak USA. https://twitter.com/twpolk/status/1018372408074522624 I mean one could easily mistake this as SNL skit, it is just surreal. LMAO Looks like he just asked them to read from a paper though without asking anything about supporting the text. I'm pretty sure even those guys don't want to turn first graders into first grenadiers. | ||
|
hunts
United States2113 Posts
On July 16 2018 06:20 sc-darkness wrote: Hillary is corrupt as fuck: 1. Clinton Foundation 2. Leaked e-mails Hillary insults a large mass of voters ("deplorables"). It's ok for me to say it, but I'm not running for a president. Under normal circumstances, she shouldn't even be a candidate. Just let Bernie Sanders run and all will be fine. 1: Was investigated thoroughly and found zero evidence of wrong doing, so false. 2: the leaked emails had nothing incriminating, so again false. 3: bernie lost to the person that lost to trump. He lost to Hillary. He would not have beaten trump, stop pretending that he would've just because you like him more. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23293 Posts
On July 16 2018 07:40 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote: LMAO Looks like he just asked them to read from a paper though without asking anything about supporting the text. I'm pretty sure even those guys don't want to turn first graders into first grenadiers. Pretty much, and Walsh's explanation basically boiled down to feeling guilty about confronting it since it was Israel and they put him up in a fancy hotel and such. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On July 16 2018 07:03 kollin wrote: Thank you for explaining the meaning of the word reason. What I was really trying to do is get you to examine some unreasonable opinions and see how unreasonable they really are. For example, one of the most accurate ways of predicting whether an area voted majority Trump was number of people from that area who were Iraq casualties. Given pre-election Hillary was by far the more obviously warlike candidate, this is fairly reasonable. Another significant factor in her losing the election was low turnout - especially black communities. Given her 'superpredator' comment, the widening gulf between rich and poor communities during Obama's presidency, hugely reported on shootings of unarmed kids by the police (combined with the lived realities a ballooning prison population and systemically racist police force impose on black communities), I think black people not turning out for Hillary is also pretty reasonable. If we look at why Hillary lost electorally - rather than masturbating over the egregious examples of conspiracist thinking over emails and whatnot on Fox News, which almost certainly only served to rile a base up which would vote Republican regardless - we can come to the conclusion that there are identifiable and rational causes behind Hillary losing. but you didn't cite the most unreasonable opinions; like the corruption ones. the majority of the hillary hate came from republicans. so you don't get to ignore the largest source of unreasonable hate when trying to make your case. especially seeing as many of them might have, if they didn't find hillary so objectionable; simply chosen to not vote rather than vote for trump. as to your others, I'm willing to explore them. and we'll see how reasonable they are. on Iraq casualty correlation - can you find the source again? I'd like to look for other explanations in its data. there's often a lot of cross-correlations in cases like that; so it could be that it's simply a side effect of other sources. also I'd note that it's not so clear hillary would be a greater threat to those soldier's lives via war. While Hillary was more likely to intentionally start/be involved in a war. She was far less likely to get in a war accidentally; which is a real risk with Trump. Hillary is also more likely to endorse a decent strategy at the military level. and of course hillary didn't level tons of major insults at the military like trump did. on the black vote - was the black vote for hillary particularly low? I don't see evidence that the black turnout was particularly low. yes, it was down a lot from the prior presidencys; but that's cuz a black man was running, which caused unusually high turnout. that seems a far simpler explanation. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/05/12/black-voter-turnout-fell-in-2016-even-as-a-record-number-of-americans-cast-ballots/ the black turnout rate for 2016 was the same as the turnout rate in 2004. the widening gulf between rich and poor is not something that would be fixed by trump or the republicans; and there were more plans by the Dems and hillary to address it. nor was it in their power to fix so easily during the obama presidency. The superpredator comment hurt some, but it was also a long time ago. shootings of kids by the police doesn't constitute a reason to vote against hillary unless you provide further reasoning/points. since it's clear the Dems are in general far more likely to take action to stop such shootings than the republicans are. The black people (at least the ones I've met) wouldn't say that there was a spike in such shootings under obama; they've said that there've always been such shootings; they just didn't get as much press attention in the past. I also note that Hillary did far better than Sanders at getting black votes in the primary. I note that there is a large amount of literature/research in the political science field which demonstrates that voting behavior, when looked at in the aggregate, is quite irrational in many different ways. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On July 16 2018 06:33 sc-darkness wrote: Yes, unfortunately. If you had elected a donkey, the donkey would be a much better president for 4 years. donkeys are democratic. you need to elect an elephant to get those sweet sweet textualist judges | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35159 Posts
On July 16 2018 03:48 TheTenthDoc wrote: It's bonus bad because you can't really maintain he was talking about grandparents because he's right about where his mother was born and it's a clear "both" statement-none of his grandparent pairs fit that description either. But I'm sure it's just 4D chess or something rather than losing track of things no functional person should. Maybe a sign that he believes it takes two generations to change where people are "born." Y'all just don't get it. He's clearly talking about his Father and Motherlands in the European Sector(countries that aren't shit holes). Just more of the virtue signaling, regressive left being ableist hypocrites. The president and the people he speaks for know exactly what he meant. Ouph, that was painful. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 16 2018 08:14 IgnE wrote: donkeys are democratic. you need to elect an elephant to get those sweet sweet textualist judges Elephants have good memories that date back to the intentions of the founding fathers. | ||
|
Leporello
United States2845 Posts
"and now, the Rigged Witch Hunt!" He's not even blaming the "witch hunt" on the worsened relationship, as much as the "foolishness". Crimea? I guess the U.S.'s fault? All that "years of foolishness"? What? So, yeah. In about two years I expect the average Republican household to be speaking Russian at this rate. The President just blamed America for Russian aggression. I think? I, uhm. IDK. Maybe the "Deep State" wrote this tweet? What's the excuse here? I know it gets old saying it: but this is fucking crazy. edit: I would argue that for a President to say such a thing is actually open treason, and not Trump's first. "or in adhering to their [the US's] enemies, giving them aid and comfort" is the law for treason. He's done that many times. Perhaps never so obtusely as this, although yukking with Kislyak and Putin's friends over firing the FBI director in the Oval Office comes pretty close. Actually this comes second to that Oval Office meeting. If the GOP had any actual patriotism, a call for impeachment hearings should've happened on that reporting, over a year ago. Instead, they tried, and largely succeeded, in sweeping it under the rug. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Afreeca Starleague
Snow vs Sharp
Jaedong vs Mini
Wardi Open
OSC
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Afreeca Starleague
Light vs Speed
Larva vs Soma
PiGosaur Monday
LiuLi Cup
RSL Revival
Maru vs Reynor
Cure vs TriGGeR
The PondCast
RSL Revival
Zoun vs Classic
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
