U.S. Politics

Status
Not open for further replies.

daelm

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2009
Messages
1,353
Contrary to what the hive mind would have you believe, I am actually pragmatic, and don't strongly identify with any ideology. I don't support people or parties, I support good values, promising policies and observable outcomes.

You have promoted the views of a cult that has been making crazier and crazier predictions for a year now. There are pages and pages of your claims where you encourage readers to anticipate dates and events promulgated by QAnon. These now include your recent views on countries and cities actually being "corporations", which QAnon uses to underpin their most recent fantasy that the election is fraudulent because it appoints a CEO, not a president and so on.

When you say you don't support an ideology, you are therefore actively misrepresenting your own behaviour on the forum. Doing so makes it harder for people to engage you in good faith.

I don't get easily offended, and will always value honesty and openness over being nice and not hurting other peoples feelings.

You routinely get offended and take action based on that, the least of which is putting people on ignore. There are dozens of examples in your own hand.

When you say you don't get offended easily, you are therefore actively misrepresenting your behaviour on the forum. Doing so makes it harder for people to engage you in good faith.

That's why I am very much against fascist woke culture, as I value free speech, and have seen how much harm illogical wokeness has done to society.

You routinely refuse to engage with anything that disagrees with you, reject evidence presented to you, block, report, and ignore people who disagree with you. Doing so makes it harder for people to engage you in good faith.

Biden stealing the election with widespread fraud should be enough on it's own, and contrary to the common narrative, there actually is overwhelming evidence of that. It simply has yet to be evaluated by anyone who is willing and able to actually do anything about the situation.

There have been something like 64 cases lodged in the US. Trump appointed judges are amongst the people who have reviewed them and they have all been found wanting. To date, under the greatest scrutiny of any American election ever, no evidence has emerged that the election was fraudulent. Donald Trump's own Attorney General has rejected this claim.

You have been asked repeatedly for evidence of these claims.

Even without considering fraud, it couldn't be more clear that the only reason he has any support at all, is because of the crazy level of psychological manipulation that has been conducted by the Democrats, media and big tech. They have made him appear to be a viable candidate and hidden all of his flaws, while also completely destroying the image of his opponent in the eyes of all those who trust the media and can't see through their deception.

If you're talking about the political left, zero people are unaware of his flaws. The vast majority of politically active left analysis is horrified that Biden was promoted to nominee, and, again, there are thousands and thousands of examples of this being discussed online.

The maneuvering, for example, that led to Sanders being relegated is going to be the subject of a lot of future histories. I predict that it will be seen as the moment when the Democratic party had the window to revitalise and become relevant again to the vast number of Americans who don't vote, and turned it down. The Democrats reversion to the middle is their signal failure.

If you're talking about the average American voter, the media diet they consume depends largely on their ideology. (American media bias is such a well known phenomenon that people teach it in universities.) The idea that there was some unique, conspiratorial push to elect Biden, involving everyone you're scared of just shows how little you actually know about the American media landscape. There was, with Biden, as there was with Trump, Obama, Bush, et al, pretty much business as usual - media fell in line with party affiliation.

It just shows how much control those who are in power have over the average person, who is isolated from the real world by big tech censorship and manipulation, and brainwashed into believing so much that doesn't align with reality, using dishonest narratives pushed by media. I broke the hold that the media had on me years ago, and can see right through all of their lies, propaganda and censorship. I simply know far too much at this point to be fooled.


"We found that the tendency to believe in conspiracy theories was associated with the feeling of possessing scarce information about the situations explained by the conspiracy theories (Study 1) and higher need for uniqueness (Study 2)."

I've been involved in analysis of censorship and manipulation of social media as a part of my job, so I know just how bad things have gotten on all popular social media networks and even Google.

100% think this is your hobby, not a job, but happy to take your word for it.

All mainstream media has an incredible left-wing bias to any objective observer. They also have zero credibility, because there are so many examples where they have cherry picked statistics, used out of context quotes and clips, spun narratives to further their agenda, and suppressed inconvenient stories. They fabricate completely false stories with "anonymous sources" daily, to push their left-wing agendas and also to "debunk" anything inconvenient. Honest journalism is long dead. There are no reporters... Only advocates and activists. There is no research or investigation... Only assumptions, opinions and fabrications. There is no objectivity or integrity... Everything has an angle, and there's no line they won't cross.

This was Noam Chomsky and Ed Herman's point in Manufacturing Consent and events since then have only made it stronger. They made, and make, a much stronger argument than your screaming and link-spamming, and draw much deeper conclusions. Rather than the fantasy of a left-wing bias, they identify media as subservient to power irrespective of the ideology of power. (they achieve this with a little known skill called "research".)

The solution to that problem, fyi, does not lie in joining a cult or parroting a party line.

As far as politics goes, Biden has proven over his 48 year long political career that he is totally incompetent, and one of the worst possible candidates. He was seemingly chosen by the Democrats because he does not come across as a threat. He is also disposable, so he can be replaced by Kamala, who is one of the least popular candidates of all time and would never have had any chance of becoming the president even with everything stacked in her favor.

Biden is, if the Democrats wished to have a vibrant, relevant party in 10 years, definitely the worst possible candidate for them. Is he the "worst possible candidate" for the presidency? No. He's mediocre, but the nature of American structures is that "mediocre" is fine. They've had so many mediocre presidents that it's almost a norm. In the American political landscape, there are dozens of equally mediocre persons who are worse candidates. Is he "totally incompetent"? No, not that either. He's a career politician and a moderately successful one, although that's a very low bar. Does that make him good? Not at all. A large part of that career has been spent doing bad things.

Did some conspiratorial cabal place him in the role to give Harris a run in? Nope. Democrats pushed him into the job because they didn't have another centrist, career politician to call on, and because doing so allowed them to hark back to Obama and hope that counted for something, is all. They're terrified of a "non-normal" politician. Trump, Sanders, even Bloomberg, all have in common that they are loose cannons to some degree. The parties don't like loose cannons.

They put Harris in for similar reasons.

If you can entertain the possibility that any of this is true, then it becomes much easier to comprehend why Trump has such massive support. It should certainly be more believable than half of America being violent white supremacist nazis, which is what the left would like you to believe.

Trump has, based on election outcomes, just over 20% support. That's (a) after the biggest turnout ever, and (b) after the most publicised election ever. Throughout his term, his core never changed, nor did it increase. In fact, he lost the edges of that core, primarily based on his behaviour.

Is 20% of America "white supremacist"? Probably not. Are they white supremacist adjacent? Definitely yes. The overlaps between people in the evangelical community, militia movements, Tea Party, sovereign citizens, etc and formal white supremacists have been documented for decades. That's why you saw that blend at the capitol.


edit: for clarity and grammar.
 
Last edited:

Grant

Honorary Master
Joined
Mar 27, 2007
Messages
53,174
There are so many reasons why Biden doesn't deserve a chance. It's really mind-blowing that people have been conditioned to believe otherwise. I would be here all night if I were to cover most of the reasoning behind my position, but I'll try to at least give you some idea of where I stand....
Alright - so I'm not going to go thru your entire post and try dissect your various points.
But let's assume for discussion purposes there was a whole lot of cheating and skulduggery involved in getting him to president.
Now that he is president a burden is also placed on him to perform for the benefit of the population as a whole.
Is it not better to judge him as president on outcomes, rather than any schitfukkery created previously by the party to which he belongs?
 

tetrasect

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
2,778

Trump's pardons may be poorly worded enough to leave some people on the hook​

On his way out of office, President Donald Trump issued more than 100 pardons, mostly to his personal friends and political allies.

Though the president's pardon powers are broad, a number of prosecutors and experts on clemency laws don't believe those people are off the hook just yet.

Trump pardoned Manafort for his specific convictions. It's much more narrowly tailored than the pardon Trump gave to Flynn, for "any and all offenses arising out of the facts and circumstances" brought by Robert Mueller's office.

Andrew Weissman, Mueller's second-in-command, in an article for the blog Just Security on Wednesday, argued that while Flynn's pardon left "no room for now holding Flynn to account for his past felonious conduct," the pardon for Manafort was full of holes.

"Specifically, the pardon is solely for the crimes of conviction ... That leaves numerous crimes as to which Manafort can still be prosecuted, as in Virginia there were 10 hung counts," Weissman wrote. "In Washington, the situation is even more wide open. In that district, Manafort pleaded to a superseding information containing two conspiracy charges, while the entire underlying indictment — containing numerous crimes from money laundering, to witness tampering, to violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act — now remains open to prosecution as there was no conviction for those charges."

 

Pegasus

Executive Member
Joined
May 17, 2004
Messages
7,641
And how exactly will scrapping plans to build a pipeline that doesn't exist yet make energy costs go up?

Why did the share prices of construction companies, and a few other industries jump when we managed to win the right to host the Soccer world cup?
 

daelm

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2009
Messages
1,353
if you all just ignore the chief troll, it will go away.

Open to trying that (again) but not convinced it'll work. What happened to other threads when we tried that was that they either became vehicles for spamming 1000s of links, usually vile, or they attracted other trolls of similar inclination and became monotone cheerleading of proven lies, presented without challenge.

edit: I frankly don't know what the answer is.
 
Last edited:

surface

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 23, 2006
Messages
16,025
Open to trying that (again) but not convinced it'll work. What happened to that other threads when we tried that was that they either became vehicles for spamming 1000s of links, usually vile, or they attracted other trolls of similar inclination and became monotone lists of proven lies that were presented without challenge.
There are only 3 main ones. If no one pays any attention, they will go away. I put them on ignore so I don't see their posts. Having different view points is one thing but if someone is as crazy as to suggest flat earth, they are just being gigantically stupid or ignorant or both.
 

daelm

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2009
Messages
1,353
There are only 3 main ones. If no one pays any attention, they will go away. I put them on ignore so I don't see their posts. Having different view points is one thing but if someone is as crazy as to suggest flat earth, they are just being gigantically stupid or ignorant or both.

Message me your list and I'll check whether mine's the same :)

edit: I agree with you, btw, that it's pointless to engage in good faith with people who don't subscribe to basic realities.
 

surface

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 23, 2006
Messages
16,025
Message me your list and I'll check whether mine's the same :)

edit: I agree with you, btw, that it's pointless to engage in good faith with people who don't subscribe to basic realities.
Remember, your efforts are not wasted. (and many others here). You guys brought up many significant points talking to the crazies. It is something like Sam Harris or Dillahunty said - when you debate x, you are not really debating x, you are making sure others (who are reading/viewing) benefit from debate.

:ROFL: :ROFL: I suspect they have put me on ignore so it is safe to take their names. :p

@DreamKing , @DavidFreeman and @NarrowBandFtw
 

daelm

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2009
Messages
1,353
Remember, your efforts are not wasted. (and many others here). You guys brought up many significant points. It is something like Sam Harris or someone said - when you debate x, you are not only debating x, you are making sure other benefit from debate.

:ROFL: :ROFL: I suspect they have put me on ignore so it is safe to take their names. :p

@DreamKing , @DavidFreeman and @NarrowBandFtw

Lol. I'd add a couple to the list, but I take your point.
 

daelm

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2009
Messages
1,353

Trump's pardons may be poorly worded enough to leave some people on the hook​

On his way out of office, President Donald Trump issued more than 100 pardons, mostly to his personal friends and political allies.

Though the president's pardon powers are broad, a number of prosecutors and experts on clemency laws don't believe those people are off the hook just yet.

Trump pardoned Manafort for his specific convictions. It's much more narrowly tailored than the pardon Trump gave to Flynn, for "any and all offenses arising out of the facts and circumstances" brought by Robert Mueller's office.

Andrew Weissman, Mueller's second-in-command, in an article for the blog Just Security on Wednesday, argued that while Flynn's pardon left "no room for now holding Flynn to account for his past felonious conduct," the pardon for Manafort was full of holes.

"Specifically, the pardon is solely for the crimes of conviction ... That leaves numerous crimes as to which Manafort can still be prosecuted, as in Virginia there were 10 hung counts," Weissman wrote. "In Washington, the situation is even more wide open. In that district, Manafort pleaded to a superseding information containing two conspiracy charges, while the entire underlying indictment — containing numerous crimes from money laundering, to witness tampering, to violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act — now remains open to prosecution as there was no conviction for those charges."


"How much Mr. Trump and his aides knew about Mr. Braun’s past and his current legal troubles is not clear. In its announcement of the pardon this week, the White House appears to have substantially overstated how much of his 10-year sentence Mr. Braun had completed, saying he had served five years when he had only reported to prison a year ago. (The White House announcement also misspelled his first name, calling him Jonathon.)"

@greg0205 as we said on one of the other threads, that pardon list looks really hastily compiled.
 

scudsucker

Executive Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2006
Messages
8,315
Prove yourself right with real evidence, and not because CNN said so. (see what I did there?)
I do see. It's not as clever as you think.

DavidFreeman is (ahem) a little free with his wide ranging claims and very short on any evidence at all. Are you supporting his claims? Would you like to offer any evidence to support them? Any evidence at all?

Let's start with the events due to occur on March 4th 2021....
 
Last edited:

greg0205

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 18, 2010
Messages
24,821

"How much Mr. Trump and his aides knew about Mr. Braun’s past and his current legal troubles is not clear. In its announcement of the pardon this week, the White House appears to have substantially overstated how much of his 10-year sentence Mr. Braun had completed, saying he had served five years when he had only reported to prison a year ago. (The White House announcement also misspelled his first name, calling him Jonathon.)"

@greg0205 as we said on one of the other threads, that pardon list looks really hastily compiled.

Someone posted Elie’s tweet earlier, and it’s spot on.


I see Matt Schlapp took $750K to lobby for a pardon that wasn’t issued... pretty sure the bulk of them are more a reward for tributes to the don than benevolent; and I’d show you my shocked face that Donnie’s legal team are garbage, but I don’t have one.

The entire Trump era has been a showcase for mediocrity and mendacity.
 

EADC

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2018
Messages
7,684
But they only bullied Trump!

MSM attacks Biden, whose side do they choose??!?!

Yeah not even surprised it's all silly really. But what can you expect from the brains trust is Trump supporters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: STS
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top