Jump to content
IGNORED

General Current Events/Political Discussion


MrWunderful

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, cartman said:

That's how politics are you're expected to align yourself with people from your own tribe. If they sling shit at Trump the whole party might appear weak they figure.

Trump's a sinking ship. He's destroying the Republican party every day. They are going to regret backing him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Tulpa said:

Trump's a sinking ship. He's destroying the Republican party every day. They are going to regret backing him.

Yeah there's always a trade-off you know and the net value might very well be on the losing side. But it's not shocking if they say they haven't heard a comment or don't use Twitter you can't expect them to incriminate their own. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, cartman said:

Yeah there's always a trade-off you know and the net value might very well be on the losing side. But it's not shocking if they say they haven't heard a comment or don't use Twitter you can't expect them to incriminate their own. 

It's not that I expect them to incriminate, but they look utterly ridiculous.

"I never saw that tweet."

Bullshit they never saw that tweet. They all saw it. They could just go, "no comment," or something non-committal. But no, they say something like this and they look like bigger idiots than they already are.

That's the problem they're having, and what many Trump supporters are having. They're getting themselves twisted in knots having to deal with whatever shitheaded thing he did. While it can be funny to watch if you're not on that side, it's no fucking way to run a country that has superpower status. Especially since how intertwined every country's economy and other aspects are.

There's still a virus out there killing people and there's civil unrest. We need a president, not a fucking child.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tulpa said:

It's not that I expect them to incriminate, but they look utterly ridiculous.

"I never saw that tweet."

Bullshit they never saw that tweet. They all saw it. They could just go, "no comment," or something non-committal. But no, they say something like this and they look like bigger idiots than they already are.

That's the problem they're having, and what many Trump supporters are having. They're getting themselves twisted in knots having to deal with whatever shitheaded thing he did. While it can be funny to watch if you're not on that side, it's no fucking way to run a country that has superpower status. Especially since how intertwined every country's economy and other aspects are.

There's still a virus out there killing people and there's civil unrest. We need a president, not a fucking child.

Yeah that's true. They should've wrapped it up better in the way you do when you don't want denounce something outright but not support it either. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, cartman said:

If they did it would've been risk management and unloading baggage not to be "brave". You wouldn't have gotten what you want anyway.

There is a pretty wide gulf between genuine "bravery" and the utter cowardice these guys have been displaying for the last few years.

Somewhere in the middle of that spectrum exists people willing to have some actual integrity where, even though one may disagree with them, they are following genuine beliefs in a way that can be somewhat respected.

But these guys are pathetic.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, arch_8ngel said:

There is a pretty wide gulf between genuine "bravery" and the utter cowardice these guys have been displaying for the last few years.

Somewhere in the middle of that spectrum exists people willing to have some actual integrity where, even though one may disagree with them, they are following genuine beliefs in a way that can be somewhat respected.

But these guys are pathetic.

 

The gulf is irrelevant because it isn't part of the equation to begin with. Nobody cares how cowardly he was on the way to the objective neither him nor the party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, cartman said:

The gulf is irrelevant because it isn't part of the equation to begin with. Nobody cares how cowardly he was on the way to the objective neither him nor the party.

I think it is a sad state of affairs that people don't care about how pathetic and how little integrity their representatives have.

They should care.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, arch_8ngel said:

I think it is a sad state of affairs that people don't care about how pathetic and how little integrity their representatives have.

They should care.

I meant the politician and his party. The image they're selling and adjusting along the way isn't a worry about being a liar or coward as long as it scores the vote. Look at how Obama for example was both for and anti gay marriage at different times based on what situation suited him, same well-spoken and groomed selling both opinions. You think he gave a shit about how noble it was? Or maybe he did loose respect for himself inside or whatever but he did what needed to be done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RE: Them pretending to know nothing about Twitter

I lost all faith in our politicians to understand technology after seeing this clip:

“Google doesn’t make iPhone.” - the golden quote of the video.

Love her or hate her, we need more politicians like AOC who understand both her constituents and the rapidly changing world, rather than these old farts who see things changing and either panic or get mad.

And if you think “I didn’t see the tweet” is the worst possible answer, think again. I was arguing with a Trump supporter in person once who said “Yeah threatening to shoot looters is disgusting but that’s precisely why I know Trump didn’t say it.” I showed her both his Twitter feed and the tweet. Her response?

”Well we don’t know for sure that’s Trump. It could very well be ANTIFA or someone else behind that account to make Trump look bad.”

So yes, they can go further. 🤦‍♂️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, arch_8ngel said:

The problem is that the police union isn't "footing the bill", it is ultimately the local taxpayers.

 Police need to be required to have some kind of professional liability insurance, that is tied to them INDIVIDUALLY to prevent the abomination of bad cops being "fired" from one city and getting rehired immediately in another town somewhere that doesn't care about their checkered past.

Make that liability insurance follow them, so that they are too expensive to rehire.

No "3 strikes" -- let actuaries do the real legwork on understanding all of the statistics with completely apolitical motivations.  They will tell you what the real "risks" are, in terms of how expensive someone is potentially going to be in the future.

Great point! If doctors and nurses must carry malpractice insurance, police should carry something similar too.

I was under the impression that the legal services provided by the police union is funded from union dues. I gather that's not the case.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cartman said:

Look at how Obama for example was both for and anti gay marriage at different times based on what situation suited him, same well-spoken and groomed selling both opinions. You think he gave a shit about how noble it was? Or maybe he did loose respect for himself inside or whatever but he did what needed to be done.

You are allowed to change your mind upon hearing a compelling enough argument.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Kguillemette said:

I was under the impression that the legal services provided by the police union is funded from union dues. I gather that's not the case.

 

From what I've seen, they're generally paid for by the city, aka taxes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Kguillemette said:

You are allowed to change your mind upon hearing a compelling enough argument.

I would also state that he didn't go back and forth on the issue. He changed his stance once, and cited his daughters as a big force in that change.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Kguillemette said:

You are allowed to change your mind upon hearing a compelling enough argument.

That is certainly true, and you know what else is true?  The more radical elements of BLM may expect their movement to be above honest opposition/criticism and to think nothing of people lately who are being fired/ostracized because (God forbid!) they are not bending the knee unconditionally to BLM!  I got news and weather and sports for them...as a certain former Senator once said back in the mid 2000s I absolutely reserve the right as an American citizen to debate and disagree with any individual or group or movement or whatever.  No one and no group is above honest opposition or scrutiny or whatever.

 

Edited by Estil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Estil said:

That is certainly true, and you know what else is true?  The more radical elements of BLM may expect their movement to be above honest opposition/criticism and to think nothing of people lately who are being fired/ostracized because (God forbid!) they are not bending the knee unconditionally to BLM!  I got news and weather and sports for them...as a certain former Senator once said back in the mid 2000s I absolutely reserve the right as an American citizen to debate and disagree with any individual or group or movement or whatever.  No one and no group is above honest opposition or scrutiny or whatever.

 

Don't blame BLM for that. Blame the Hollywood cancel culture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Kguillemette said:

Don't blame BLM for that. Blame the Hollywood cancel culture.

I think under the circumstances blaming at least the really radical parts of BLM is also fair game.  And a lot of that censorship eh I mean "cancel culture" does involve fake racism.  You know several decades ago we had HUAC (House Unamerican Activities Committee) for witch hunting Communists?  Well today we have UIAC's (University Intolerant Activities Committees) at our institutions of higher learning to witch hunt for so-called "racists".  Observe...

https://www.campusreform.org/

PS: Yeah we had liberal bias (especially our Kentucky Kernel newspaper...which might as well have been called the Kentucky Liberal; no, they were really obvious about whose side of the political spectrum they were on!!) and a liberal stacked deck among our professors at UK back in the day (early 2000s), but luckily it was nothing like, well, THAT.

Edited by Estil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...