The General American Politics Thread

[WakanoBaka]

I just found out people are actually hoping, praying, wishing Trump gets assassinated. Holy Fuck are they that bitter? Jesus, that is literally uncalled for.

 

Hope JC closing his request box, it's filled with spam.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

3 minutes ago, WakanoBaka said:

 

 

But just in case I'm misunderstanding you. What you are saying, to sum it up; buckle down and take one for the team...right?

Errm, couldn't the same just as easily apply to you simply paying taxes to help those in need though?

[Patticus]

Just now, WakanoBaka said:

I just found out people are actually hoping Trump gets assassinated. Holy Fuck are they that bitter? Jesus, that is literally uncalled for.

People hoped Obama would get assassinated, and Dubya, and so on. It's nasty and petulant, but it'll happen when Trump's successor gets elected too, and their successor and so on. Passions run high around elections, and this one was very passionate, so the reactions from the losing side are going to be equally inflamed.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

3 minutes ago, WakanoBaka said:

I just found out people are actually hoping Trump gets assassinated. Holy Fuck are they that bitter? Jesus, that is literally uncalled for.

In a universe where Trump supporters are beating up people because he won,  this sadly isn't surprising. 

 

[Tani Coyote]

 

2 minutes ago, WakanoBaka said:

I just found out people are actually hoping Trump gets assassinated. Holy Fuck are they that bitter? Jesus, that is literally uncalled for.

Just now, Patticus said:

People hoped Obama would get assassinated, and Dubya, and so on. It's nasty and petulant, but it'll happen when Trump's successor gets elected too, and their successor and so on. Passions run high around elections, and this one was very passionate, so the reactions from the losing side are going to be equally inflamed.

Considering Trump was openly calling for Clinton to not have bodyguards and see how long she lasted... is this that surprising?

This isn't even considering the bigots his victory has enabled. For many people, this feels like we just took several decades backwards.

As soon as Trump steps into the White House, there is literally nothing stopping the GOP from repealing the Voting Rights Act. The Court already showed how little it cares for it, and the only thing really protecting minority voters was Obama's veto.

Obama won't be there in just over 2 months. Of course people are terrified.

I see a lot of this false equivalence of the bad elements of both sides. Here's the difference: Clinton's campaign wasn't a racism enabler. Many of Trump's supporters were calling it a rigged election on the basis of not liking Clinton, whereas Clinton supporters saying the same for Trump have good cause given the evidence of voter suppression.

Clinton would have seen tax increases. Trump is going to see an erosion of minority protections.

Such an equivalence indeed.

[Nepenthe]

17 minutes ago, WakanoBaka said:

IE;Assuming.

K.

Quote

Yes, an abortion often times not paid for by the sperm donor or the woman's parents

You know most social services are not paid for by the people directly affected by it, right? You're not putting forth an argument as to why abortion is radically different.

Quote

Not a 'champion of women'. Just basic chivalry that died along time ago, I'm just the only one who holds on too it, just barely.

Chivalry died because it's outdated in a society where women have rebuked the idea that they need to be reliant upon men.

Quote

Life is what you make it. Life is about me, life is about you, life is about whoever is living it. You think it's because I don't like it? Sure, it might also be because I have a family to take care of myself. But who gives a fuck about an already born child? But it sounds like you are saying I as a citizen don't have the right to care for me and my family when someone else is probably struggling. You are literally telling me to shut up and keep paying these fees. Life isn't about them just as much as it isn't about me. Equality after all! Right?

If you're now trying to take a high-road rationale to your stance and saying it's now about "taking care of my family!", know that the money you pay into abortions would instead be going to trying to prop up struggling mothers anyway. So you wouldn't solve the problem. Seriously, if you're being financially ruined by this, you're shit at budgeting and your wife needs to straighten you out. You'd do better to complain about the DMV.

[WakanoBaka]

9 minutes ago, Jovahexeon the Sapphire said:

Errm, couldn't the same just as easily apply to you simply paying taxes to help those in need though?

Uhhh, that was what I meant though...I was asking them if they are basically telling me to suck it up.

[Patticus]

6 minutes ago, Noelgilvie said:

As soon as Trump steps into the White House, there is literally nothing stopping the GOP from repealing the Voting Rights Act. The Court already showed how little it cares for it, and the only thing really protecting minority voters was Obama's veto.

If it wasn't for Trump's lifelong history of racism (from discriminatory housing practices, to having all his black casino workers gather in a back room out of sight when he and his family visited, to the anti-immigrant/Muslim rants) I'd hope that his rolling back of campaign promises could extend to defending the VRA. But it probably won't.

On the plus side, when the Democrats eventually retake the Houses and the presidency, whomever that president is will be credited with re-establishing the VRA and ending what could well be a very dark period in America, that is about to close in on us.

[Mad Convoy]

4 minutes ago, Patticus said:

I'm confused by the wording of Trump's statement in the article:

Is he saying to leave North Carolina's law the way it is, or leave alone the law (or whatever it is) permitting transgender people to use the bathroom they identify with?

He mentions that North Carolina's new law caused a big problem when there were very little problems before, not to mention causing issues with businesses and people, so that hints that he thinks the law should have been left alone and the bathroom laws should not have been passed.

Though of course, he made known transphobe Pence his VP and may hire more in the future, so I wouldn't get comfortable just yet.

-------

Facade or not, we're in for a rough ride. Though as I mentioned a few pages back, Trump's extreme supporters are trusting him to fulfill all his promises and succeed whereas his moderate supporters believe that he won't really carry out his crazy promises and would be horrified if he did. If he doesn't balance this perfectly, he could alienating and disillusioning large chunks of his support base. This could lead to him being extremely unpopular, losing his working class and/or his extremist appeal, and thus an unlikely incumbent-- not to mention possibly weakening GOP's chances in 2018.

But please, progressives, don't stoop to the Trumpists tactics. You're just hurting your credibility. Peaceful protest, civil disobedience, and actually showing up to vote instead of assuming that you've got it in the bag or that there's no point in voting are key. Also, do help the environment in any way you can in spite of the lack of regulation.

This is your wake-up call, progressives. Look at where violence and hate has gotten us, look at where progressive apathy and complacence has gotten us. Please, band together and show the bigots that their crap still isn't right.

2 minutes ago, Noelgilvie said:

I see a lot of this false equivalence of the bad elements of both sides. Here's the difference: Clinton's campaign wasn't a racism enabler. Many of Trump's supporters were calling it a rigged election on the basis of not liking Clinton, whereas Clinton supporters saying the same for Trump have good cause given the evidence of voter suppression.

Clinton would have seen tax increases. Trump is going to see an erosion of minority protections.

Such an equivalence indeed.

The idea going around that the people protesting Trump's victory are somehow the real bigots is ridiculous. The only attempt at explaining why beyond "NO U" twisted the definition of bigotry to mean insulting people for not agreeing with your opinion. Which... isn't even close to what bigotry actually entails.

[Hyp3hat]

18 minutes ago, Patticus said:

I'm confused by the wording of Trump's statement in the article:

Quote

North Carolina did something — it was very strong — and they’re paying a big price,” Mr. Trump said. “And there’s a lot of problems. And I heard — one of the best answers I heard was from a commentator yesterday saying, leave it the way it is, right now.”

He added that before the law passed, there had been “very few problems” but now North Carolina is experiencing an exodus of businesses and “strife” from people on both sides of the issue.

“You leave it the way it is,” he said. “There have been very few complaints the way it is.”

Is he saying to leave North Carolina's law the way it is, or leave alone the law (or whatever it is) permitting transgender people to use the bathroom they identify with?

Oh my god, that is incomprehensible. This must be why he's such a good businessman, he'll be in the middle of a negotiation and suddenly just let forth with a stream of non-committal gibberish in response to a simple yes/no question, then sit back and watch his opponent collapse mentally as they attempt to parse it. Of course, he doesn't realise he's doing this, it all made sense in his head, and he's always right, ergo, Trump's the best at deals, you can't believe it, people come up to me and say 'Donald, you're so good at making deals', etc etc.

[Patticus]

Is this scenario plausible, or likely?

Trump proves unstoppable, winning the primaries and the election against all the odds; and without key GOP help. Then, the Republican party impeaches him on the basis of ongoing court cases or whatever, bringing Pence, a man they know, like and can control, to the presidency.

There are conspiracy theories to that effect flying around, and they almost sound plausible.

[Tornado]

1 hour ago, KHCast said:

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/04/21/donald-trump-says-transgender-people-should-use-the-bathroom-they-want/?_r=0

 

MORE BACKTRACKING DIDNT SEE THAT COMING! /sarcasm

Your earlier posts didn't suggest that you did, no.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

Ironic words of wisdom to live by, eh?

[SenEDDtor Missile]

Trump's being a complete seesaw; I can't figure out what he's doing.

[KHCast]

9 minutes ago, Tornado said:

Your earlier posts didn't suggest that you did, no.

After the supposed rumors yesterday about the Muslim ban being axed,(which I talked about in statuses) yeah I kinda gave that impression. Presidents backtrack all the time, so even if I didn't expect this in particular happening, I'm not surprised. Cute attempt at a jab tho 

 

Also, trump responding to yhe protests on Twitter just now calling them "unfair"

[WakanoBaka]

2 minutes ago, Nepenthe said:

Most social services are not paid for by the people directly affected by it, right? You're not putting forth

Bigger percentage =/= Automatically a good thing

 

2 minutes ago, Nepenthe said:

Chivalry died because it's outdated in a society where women have rebuked the idea that they need to be reliant upon men.

That's a rather warped view of it. I'm talking shit like opening doors and putting coats down, you are talk some systematic type deal of oppression.

 

3 minutes ago, Nepenthe said:

If you're now trying to take a high-road rationale to your stance and saying it's now about "taking care of my family!", know that the money you pay into abortions would instead be going to trying to prop up struggling mothers anyway. So you wouldn't solve the problem. Seriously, if you're being financially ruined by this, you're shit at budgeting and your wife needs to straighten you out. You'd do better to complain about the DMV.

Okay, I almost got angry here. But I have calmed down and will counter rationally and not let emotions get in the way. Honestly I have a head ache now, must be from regulating what I'm trying to say without getting angry

Okay I'm gonna put this plainly...or as compacted as I can, if you want to refute it, not my concern.

Sacrifice is something that has played a very important part in my life, I was raised on the mobsters mentality of; "give it all for the family, don't give jack to the people you can't see".  Now yes, ask anyone, I preach morality in the society that often ignores such ideals and refuses to promote them any longer. But I find it down right silly some talk about human body being theirs until they end up in some sorta trouble, then it's everybody elses. Yes, morality. But it isn't exactly right in itself.  Helping a mother? You can't be a mother till you have a child, getting an abortion further proves this fact. You are pulling up the argument that there is someone struggling, so I shouldn't complain. But I'm actually sure that is a logical fallacy. You are telling me to do it for that small percentage. 

Now I feel like I'm incoherently rambling. I must be really upset. I'll try to calm down more.

Also, I don't have a wife.

 

1 minute ago, Patticus said:

There are conspiracy theories to that effect flying around, and they almost sound plausible.

Once heard conspiracy theory saying; Trump is only running to make Hilary look good. But Either that plan fucked up, or it was just wrong.

1 hour ago, Noelgilvie said:

This is a right-wing myth.

What... Are you saying the news interview was staged? Or Are you saying that it's unlikely that anybody is taking advantage of welfare.

[Mad Convoy]

20 minutes ago, Patticus said:

Is this scenario likely?

Trump proves unstoppable. He wins the primaries and the election, against all the odds - and without GOP help. Then, the Republican party impeaches him out of nowhere, bringing Pence, a man they can control, to the presidency.

There are conspiracy theories to that effect flying around, and they almost sound plausible.

Ugh, dear god I hope not. I honestly think Pence is the greater threat here than Trump. Trump doesn't really care about LGBT+ rights and will take the side that benefits him most without bringing up a whole lot, meanwhile Pence is actively against them. Trump, drawing on his business experience, is pragmatic-- granted the pragmatism is entirely self-serving, but it means that he may be willing to concede and maybe even try to reverse a few things if it allows him to maintain his support base and benefits himself. Pence, drawing on his religious background, is more likely to be ideologically driven, meaning that he won't so much as concede a little bit even if it hurts him because he feels its for the good of something greater than himself, America, and perhaps the world.

Not to mention that Pence is a lot more appealing to the GOP traditionalists than Trump, is very charismatic, and is more stable and clear on his intentions as vice president. Trump, on the other hand, is alienating and polarizing and there's no telling what he'll do next. Pence is simply more likely to actually succeed as a president in fulfilling the promises that entail racism, LBGT+ discrimination, sexism, etc. to the letter, so if we are forced to deal with him at all, let's keep him in a lesser position.

[Remy]

3 hours ago, WakanoBaka said:

Sacrifice is something that has played a very important part in my life, I was raised on the mobsters mentality of; "give it all for the family, don't give jack to the people you can't see".  Now yes, ask anyone, I preach morality in the society that often ignores such ideals and refuses to promote them any longer. But I find it down right silly some talk about human body being theirs until they end up in some sorta trouble, then it's everybody elses. Yes, morality. But it isn't exactly right in itself.  Helping a mother? You can't be a mother till you have a child, getting an abortion further proves this fact. You are pulling up the argument that there is someone struggling, so I shouldn't complain. But I'm actually sure that is a logical fallacy. You are telling me to do it for that small percentage. 

A few things.

In regards to this: "give it all for the family, don't give jack to the people you can't see" - you pay taxes already brah. Surely you realise that right? You might not really need birth control if you're not a woman, or if you're not having sex but I presume there's something else specific to you that you take advantage of. There's also probably a lot of dumb shit you pay for too, like tax cuts for trillionaires, anyway you pay tax so people can have services they need. 

Why is that birth control is the line you draw where you're like "whoa this is fucking unacceptable" Are you aware birthcontrol usage saves the us like 19 billion dollars in medical costs every year? By paying for people to safely not have babies you don't have to then pay much more for them to safely deliver, then raise, treat and feed that baby later. Without funding for birth control you'd end up paying more then whatever tiny percentage of your taxes go to it now.

And are you seriously suggesting women are undeserving of compassion or help until they have a baby? Small percentage? you mean all women? like 50% of the population? This is some gross, misogynistic shit.

I don't understand the logic of cutting shit that hurts the most vulnerable people in society (healthcare, welfare) when you could just tax the ultra mega rich a little more. If you're worried about paying for it just take a little off the top ;] 

Edited November 11, 2016 by Remy
spacing..

[The Deleter]

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/muslim-student-reported-trump-inspired-attack-admits-made/story?id=43442471

http://www.mndaily.com/article/2016/11/umpd-not-involved-in-handcuffed-university-student

Okay, this is just disgusting.

People are crying for you. People are killing themselves over the fear and terror these stories spread, out of fear that the same or much worse will happen to them. All to get a little attention?

I don't doubt that most stories are probably real, but my goodness. Get your act together, you self-important brats...

[Patticus]

58 minutes ago, SenEDtor Missile said:

Trump's being a complete seesaw; I can't figure out what he's doing.

That's what has made him so scary - nobody knows what he'd do as president because of his having taken almost every position he can take on a variety of issues. In that respect, he's exactly like many long-serving politicians. Also, he did say that he wanted to be unpredictable... maybe this is part of his plan? GOP high command won't take kindly to that strategy though.

 

Also, a thought, that I may have articulated previously in less well defined ways: Trump campaigned as wanting to tear Washington apart and end its corruption, but many Republicans on Capitol Hill hate him, and many more are at least unhappy with him being president. There's an atmosphere of getting to know one another now, and as long as Trump tows the party line in enough areas, they'll work together, through gritted teeth and forced smiles, scratching each others' backs.

But wait, doesn't that kind of co-operation with what is now the dominant power throughout the entire government apparatus make him a traitor to every voter who hung on his every word as he pledged to "drain the swamp" and do other crazy things?

And then there's the fact that if he strays too far out of line, the threat of impeachment will spring up to block his path. I'm sure that there are quite a lot of Republicans on the Hill who wouldn't mind Trump being fired and Pence being given the green light to lead, as they know him already.

My realization is this: It is impossible for Trump to fulfill his campaign promise to be the wrecking ball that brings down the house, because like Clinton, he is just too overburdened by scandals, ongoing investigations, hatred and the like to succeed.

[Remy]

Just now, Patticus said:

 

My realization is this: It is impossible for Trump to fulfill his campaign promise to be the wrecking ball that brings down the house.

Well yeah, I can't see the republican establishment backing him on that. I also feel like, to be quite honest he didn't really give a shit about washington or corruption- he just was able to identify that crowds liked hearing him talk about it and pushed based on that.

[Patticus]

4 minutes ago, Remy said:

Well yeah, I can't see the republican establishment backing him on that. I also feel like, to be quite honest he didn't really give a shit about washington or corruption- he just was able to identify that crowds liked hearing him talk about it and pushed based on that.

And when the Democrats figure out how to exploit that betrayal, the GOP's hold on the presidency (and inevitably some downballot seats) is going to be in no small amount of peril. Clinton lost because she lost the trust of just enough voters - Trump is facing that exact same threat going into his presidency.

It almost seems like his only option moving forward is to piss everyone off, justified by his typical bombastic hyperbole, and hope that he can do it in small enough increments to thread the needle.

[Tani Coyote]

3 hours ago, Patticus said:

Is this scenario plausible, or likely?

Trump proves unstoppable, winning the primaries and the election against all the odds; and without key GOP help. Then, the Republican party impeaches him on the basis of ongoing court cases or whatever, bringing Pence, a man they know, like and can control, to the presidency.

There are conspiracy theories to that effect flying around, and they almost sound plausible.

In a hilarious reversal of fortunes, I imagine if that scenario came in, the Democrats would obstruct the impeachment.

It's a no-brainer: if the GOP thinks Trump is so bad they need to get rid of him, it is likely in the Democrats' advantage to hold their nose and support him against it.

If the GOP gains from President Pence, the Democrats likely lose. Ergo, they're gonna wreck that before it can get off the ground. It is to Democrats' benefit to inflame and preserve any civil war within the GOP.

3 hours ago, WakanoBaka said:

What... Are you saying the news interview was staged? Or Are you saying that it's unlikely that anybody is taking advantage of welfare.

What news interview?

And yeah. I'm saying the concept of widespread welfare abuse is a lie. Does it happen? Of course. There are awful people in all walks of society.

But it's like voter fraud. It's such a small problem it cost more to try and fix it rather than just leaving it be.

Plus let's be honest. Anything lost to welfare abuse pales in comparison to what we lose from special tax breaks, subsidies, bailouts, the military-industrial complex and all the waste and pork barrel that comes from the oligarchs in Washington.

But sure, let's go after the most marginalized damned groups in the country instead.

2 hours ago, Patticus said:

But wait, doesn't that kind of co-operation with what is now the dominant power throughout the entire government apparatus make him a traitor to every voter who hung on his every word as he pledged to "drain the swamp" and do other crazy things?

And then there's the fact that if he strays too far out of line, the threat of impeachment will spring up to block his path. I'm sure that there are quite a lot of Republicans on the Hill who wouldn't mind Trump being fired and Pence being given the green light to lead, as they know him already.

My realization is this: It is impossible for Trump to fulfill his campaign promise to be the wrecking ball that brings down the house, because like Clinton, he is just too overburdened by scandals, ongoing investigations, hatred and the like to succeed.

I think it really boiled down to subconscious sexism, really. Clinton wasn't any more corrupt or deceitful than any other candidate really, and yet she was smeared as the Mother of all Lies.

But yeah. This is basically a bizarro Jimmy Carter situation. So many people rallied to Trump's side because they thought he'd be able to make a difference due to his wealthy background and outsider status, but he's likely to not know what the Hell he's doing. Like a right wing FDR, he's created this coalition of racists and working class Northerners, but he doesn't have the same tact and intellect that FDR did to make the best of a bad situation.

And on top of that, he's got his own baggage that is starting to finally get attention now that he can't just point at Hillary and make it go away.

[Tani Coyote]

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/305446-sanders-vows-to-be-trumps-worst-nightmare-if-he-goes

Feel the Bern. Sanders is saying that he'll work with Trump on policies that help the working class, but he will bring his full base to bear against him if he goes after minorities.

Given that there was some overlap between Trump and Bernie's base, this could pan out in an interesting way. What's more, Bernie is showing working class voters there is an alternative to the objective racism that Trump courted. If we're lucky, maybe he can peel away Trump voters in the midterms or 2020 in the event Trump has lackluster performance for the Rust Belt. Now that Clinton is out of the picture and not a distraction, I'd say Trump and Sanders can have a hell of a hearts and minds battle.

Speaking of Clinton...

DNC Staffers are starting to call out the DNC leadership. Hopefully between this internal protest and Clinton's humiliating defeat, they're going to get the picture that if they don't abolish the superdelegates, they need to keep their mouths shut in future primaries. All the money, safe states, and historical ties in the world was not enough to stop Trump.

Voter suppression is likely going to depress turnout in 2018 and 2020, so it's more important than ever that the DNC doesn't push everyone towards their personal choice, or support one with baggage. Or one who is so confident in their upcoming victory that they make dismissive gaffes.

[Conando]

You really do have to appreciate Bernie. He's going to do his best to at least work on some of the things he promised regardless of who the President is. Damn sure he can find ways to help people without sacrificing the other either, unless they're super rich that is.  I believe Warren said something along the same lines.