Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns. The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns.

02-18-2017 , 04:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
Of course many religions condone violence, including Christianity. I'm against all religion.

My point is simple and completely obvious. If you rank all religions on some kind of scale, like women's rights, homophobia, freedom of expression, it's clear they are not all equal.

One would be hard pressed to argue Islam is better than Buddhism in terms of homophobia.

Islam's general tenants are far more socially regressive than other major religions.
There's only Buddhist-Muslim genocide going on right now, and it's not the Muslims doing it...
02-18-2017 , 04:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hornbug
If the economy remains strong for the next 18 months his popularity will soar, real people don't care about all the minor nonsense you guys whine about in this thread.
So you now admit the economy is strong? Let me guess - that started about 1 month ago.
02-18-2017 , 04:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
I don't feel like really attempting a good poast here, but the "arc of history" stuff Clovis was talking about fundamentally rests imo on the power of the people and their demand for rights which rests on education.

A broad real education across the entire society is the best guarantor of freedom possible.

Education of girls is the best path towards liberalization in backwards patriarchal societies.

The recipe for regression in the United States isn't student actions against reactionary speakers, it's decline in public education, McDonaldsization/privatization of schools, and the decline of the press and it's submission to power and commercial interests.
You didn't feel like attempting a great post but succeeded nonetheless. This is all so very true. Education leads to social progress. It's the real silver bulllet.
02-18-2017 , 04:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobman0330
There's only Buddhist-Muslim genocide going on right now, and it's not the Muslims doing it...
Indeed. Your point?
02-18-2017 , 04:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99
Any Trumpites want to defend this?

Obama Spent $97M on Travel in 8 Years. Trump Family Will Hit That in 7 Months
Taxpayers will be footing Trump family's massive travel bill.


Meanwhile we have to kill PBS and the NEA because reasons.
I will sort of defend it in that Trump's family situation is pretty unique in that his kids run (wink wink) his business which would require a lot of traveling, and I'm willing to indulge in a bit of First Wife whatever of staying where they originally are.

But yea if all these little luxuries can be afforded for the First Family then some f*cking kids can have Sesame Street.
02-18-2017 , 04:53 PM
I don't know of any instance, ever, of Trump refusing to take any amount of money, no matter how small. During the campaign he couldn't return $20 checks even though he didn't need them, what with being self-funding and all.
02-18-2017 , 04:54 PM
Idle detainees.
02-18-2017 , 04:54 PM
Quote:
And the reactionaries are counting on all of the above. Good schools for the rich and bad for the poor is part of the plan. Degradation of the humanities, except for the children of the ruling class is what they want. They don't want people to be political. They don't want people to care. They really don't want people to vote.
The smartest P.R. campaign the 1% ever embarked on was "both sides are the same." It's so simple, so "above it all," so primed and ready for our culture in this moment. And it can also be linked backed to Russian propaganda.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
Quote:
Whataboutism is a term describing a propaganda technique used by the Soviet Union in its dealings with the Western world during the Cold War. When criticisms were levelled at the Soviet Union, the response would be "What about..." followed by the naming of an event in the Western world.[1][2] It represents a case of tu quoque (appeal to hypocrisy),[3] a logical fallacy which attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with that position, without directly refuting or disproving the opponent's initial argument.

The term describing the technique was popularized in 2008 by Edward Lucas in an article for The Economist. Lucas said that this tactic is observed in the politics of modern Russia, along with this being evidence of a resurgence of Cold War and Soviet-era mentality within Russia's leadership.[1]
02-18-2017 , 04:55 PM
Quote:
Newly leaked audio from a November party at President Trump's Bedminster, N.J., golf club reveals then president-elect Trump touting to guests his scheduled interviews on premises with potential cabinet members and White House staff.

“We’re doing a lot of interviews tomorrow — generals, dictators, we have everything,” Trump says in the tape, obtained by Politico and published Saturday. “You may wanna come around. It’ll be fun. We’re really working tomorrow. We have meetings every 15, 20 minutes with different people that will form our government."

We’re going to be interviewing everybody — Treasury, we’re going to be interviewing Secretary of State,” he continued. “We have everybody coming in — if you want to come around, it’s going to be unbelievable … so you might want to come along.”


The tape was recorded at the same New Jersey golf club where Trump interviewed several potential cabinet picks, including former GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who was under consideration to be secretary of State.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...s-to-watch-his

Emails though.
02-18-2017 , 04:56 PM
Dude who thinks TRUMPERS are gonna get into a civil war, look at the rally crowd and try to imagine them on in battle. It looks like the line to get hot dogs at Costco.
02-18-2017 , 04:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
I don't feel like really attempting a good poast here, but the "arc of history" stuff Clovis was talking about fundamentally rests imo on the power of the people and their demand for rights which rests on education.

A broad real education across the entire society is the best guarantor of freedom possible.

Education of girls is the best path towards liberalization in backwards patriarchal societies.

The recipe for regression in the United States isn't student actions against reactionary speakers, it's decline in public education, McDonaldsization/privatization of schools, and the decline of the press and it's submission to power and commercial interests.

And the reactionaries are counting on all of the above. Good schools for the rich and bad for the poor is part of the plan. Degradation of the humanities, except for the children of the ruling class is what they want. They don't want people to be political. They don't want people to care. They really don't want people to vote.

good poast tho
02-18-2017 , 04:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hornbug
If the economy remains strong for the next 18 months his popularity will soar, real people don't care about all the minor nonsense you guys whine about in this thread.
"Remains strong." I thought to quite djt that he "inherited a mess" and unemployment was at 42%! How could it "remain strong?"
02-18-2017 , 04:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
History just does not support your claim. I can't think of an example where censorship resulted in social progress. Every social debate has been won when the wrong side got to express thier wrong opinions. Of course we will lose some battles (like this election) but the arc of history is clearly towards greater social progress.
Nobody's talking about censorship. You seem to believe you are, but you're not. The bolded is some oddball mix of meaningless and false. LDO 'debates' are won when two sides debate. The Civil Rights movement was not 'a debate' and it wasn't 'won' when MLK gave a speech. Slavery wasn't ended when Lincoln and Davis had a debate. Change comes when it's demanded with enough force to make it happen. Not when people ask for it eloquently enough.

Quote:
Nobody should be forced to book idiots like Milo, nor should anyone be forced to watch if he is booked. I just think we lose the moral high ground and feed right into the trumpkin narrative if we spend all our time trying to play wack-a-mole with people like Milo. Let's say we succeed in preventing him from ever speaking publicly. There will be another Milo right behind him.
OMG nobody's talking about any of these things. I don't care if we feed in to the Trumpkin narrative; they certainly don't care when we don't.

Quote:
We win by having better ideas and showing they work better in the real world.

We don't win by preventing the other side from speaking.
Last time I'm going to say it: nobody is preventing anyone from speaking.
02-18-2017 , 05:00 PM
DeVos is getting extra security now and no doubt others in the Admin. That security expense is on the leftists that are threatening harm to those people.
02-18-2017 , 05:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99
Hoping Garland has a better track record on this kind of thing than Kurt Eichenwald.
If he's prepared to dig in and really, you know, break it down for us with some game theory, then we're in for a treat.
02-18-2017 , 05:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
Indeed. Your point?
It can be a mistake to attribute properties of realized cultures to religion. Religions that seem "nice" can justify/tolerate/ignore terrible things, while religions that seem terrible can be interpreted in a way that makes them decent.
02-18-2017 , 05:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aoFrantic
"Remains strong." I thought to quite djt that he "inherited a mess" and unemployment was at 42%! How could it "remain strong?"
the market rally started after he was elected and the Dow is a leading indicator of a better economy than Obamas.
02-18-2017 , 05:02 PM
On "the media" and a journalist giving a guest lecture to a class of students






02-18-2017 , 05:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hornbug
DeVos is getting extra security now and no doubt others in the Admin. That security expense is on the leftists that are threatening harm to those people.
That has nothing to do with my post. How do you feel about Trump outpacing Obama's 8 years of spending (which I'm sure you complained about at the time) in 7 months?
02-18-2017 , 05:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Cut
good poast tho
Thanks and to Clovis too. I meant more like with well constructed sentences and paragraphs and stuff like Dvault does.
02-18-2017 , 05:05 PM


/milo
02-18-2017 , 05:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by All-In Flynn
Change comes when it's demanded with enough force to make it happen. Not when people ask for it eloquently enough.
This just isn't true. Debate and speeches were a huge part of every victory you cite. Not the only part, but a big part.



Quote:
Originally Posted by All-In Flynn
I don't care if we feed in to the Trumpkin narrative; they certainly don't care when we don't.
You should care. We need to win minds to win in the long run.
02-18-2017 , 05:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzzer99
That has nothing to do with my post. How do you feel about Trump outpacing Obama's 8 years of spending (which I'm sure you complained about at the time) in 7 months?
So constitutional amendment prohibiting candidates with adult children? So much cheaper to have pre-college age kids.
02-18-2017 , 05:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hornbug
So constitutional amendment prohibiting candidates with adult children? So much cheaper to have pre-college age kids.
Do you think Obama overspent on protection while he was President?
02-18-2017 , 05:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hornbug
the market rally started after he was elected and the Dow is a leading indicator of a better economy than Obamas.
So, like looking at the economy in January 2017 vs. February 2017 is a good way to judge Trump on the economy despite the fact that he's done absolutely nothing yet in regards to taxes, trade, monetary policy, financial regulation or anything else. But.....2009 to 2017, the worst economy in the last 75 years to what we have now is not a good way to judge Obama.

Last edited by microbet; 02-18-2017 at 05:29 PM.

      
m