Jump to content
downzy

US Politics/Elections Thread

Recommended Posts

@downzy Congrats to you guys for making the NBA Finals.

I'm not expecting it, but i hope Toronto wins. Tired of the Warriors winning :sleeper:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, -W.A.R- said:

@downzy Congrats to you guys for making the NBA Finals.

I'm not expecting it, but i hope Toronto wins. Tired of the Warriors winning :sleeper:

KD literally ruined what would have been excellent rivalries the past couple years with OKC vs GS and OKC or GS vs Clev in the finals. No one respects this dynasty that GS is putting together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
38 minutes ago, Padme said:

Mueller's statement. He can't. But Congress can... I guess 

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/29/politics/mueller-full-remarks/index.html

He never could. His Job was to conclude on any Russian involvement. Not enough evidence on obstruction. Trump is an American, which we are all innocent until proven guilty.

Edited by 31illusions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2019-05-28 at 4:00 PM, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

Well here's evidence from 2012 that shows 55% of the people wanted Assad to stay, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jan/17/syrians-support-assad-western-propaganda

Polling in Syria is dubious at best for a variety of reasons.  First, it's unlikely the poll was conducted by those actually involved in the violence since how are you going to contact those people who were killed, harmed, or decided to leave the country for their owns safety.  Second, higher levels of support for Assad might have been the result of people just wanting the fighting to end.  Not an endorsement of Assad per se, but a better option than having the country torn apart.  

On 2019-05-28 at 4:00 PM, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

Why would a majority of the population want him to stay if he was just randomly mowing people down?

Wait, so you're suggesting the attrocities reported didn't actually happen?  That it's all propaganda?  Sorry, but it's hard to take you seriously considering everything we know at this point of what happened.   

On 2019-05-28 at 4:00 PM, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

And let's cut the crap on US foreign policy and stop acting like any of this is due to morals. Everything here is about projecting power and playing geo-strategic games.

That's a big part of it, but there's also a question of what is the moral thing to do with respect to watching innocent people get butchered versus the costs of action/inaction.  It's not nothing nor should it be. 

On 2019-05-28 at 4:00 PM, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

No I don't consider Lincoln a great leader. Too much blood on his hands and too little effort in compromise for me to give him the label of great. The North and South were both run by plutocratic interests, so I see the whole thing as a rich man's war and a poor man's fight. If Lincoln were great and truly wanted to avoid bloodshed, he would have had offers on the table to avoid war, what were they?

Six or seven states seceded even before Lincoln took office.  Once he took office, he made it clear that while he viewed secession as legally void, he had no intention of invading the South.  But also stood his ground on U.S. keeping its forts in southern states.  It was only when Virginia attacked Fort Sumter that it prompted Lincoln to respond that precipitated the Civil War.  So again, I have no clue what you're talking about here.  

On 2019-05-28 at 4:00 PM, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

Those protests in France are about more than gas taxes. I would contend that they are essentially protests against neoliberalism itself. Sure, we have democratic processes to change legislators and presidents too, doesn't seem to actually change much now does it.

You keep arguing about different matters that have zero relevance to the original issue: whether Assad is a bad man who did bad things.  Trying to excuse his behaviour by point to police response to the yellow vest movement in France is asinine.  In no way are they in any way comparable.  This is just a red herring because you refuse to acknowledge that Assad is on a different moral plane than say Macron and hence have to admit that Tulsi has some issues with her treatment of Assad.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, 31illusions said:

He never could. His Job was to conclude on any Russian involvement. Not enough evidence on obstruction. Trump is an American, which we are all innocent until proven guilty.

No.  His job was to investigate any Russian involvement and any attempts to interfere or obstruct his and previous investigations.  

There was evidence to obstruct.  But as Mueller made clear yesterday, he can't bring indictments against a sitting President as he viewed such a move as unconstitutional.  Hence he released his report and Congress can decide whether to indict Trump through the political process since the legal one is closed off at present.

 

19 hours ago, -W.A.R- said:

@downzy Congrats to you guys for making the NBA Finals.

I'm not expecting it, but i hope Toronto wins. Tired of the Warriors winning :sleeper:

Thanks.  Not a huge basketball fan but it's really energized the city and put everyone in a good mood.

That said, I think Toronto will be lucky to win one game.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, downzy said:

No.  His job was to investigate any Russian involvement and any attempts to interfere or obstruct his and previous investigations.  

There was evidence to obstruct.  But as Mueller made clear yesterday, he can't bring indictments against a sitting President as he viewed such a move as unconstitutional.  Hence he released his report and Congress can decide whether to indict Trump through the political process since the legal one is closed off at present.

I must say you are extraordinarily great at stating the obvious and at reiterating my exact point. Having not enough evidence or not pursuing it or having plenty of evidence and doing nothing about it are THE SAME THING! To quote Robert Mueller "Every defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty" and "We did not make a determination as to weather the President did commit a crime".

I might have more faith in democrats searching for the truth IF they were not on a witch hunt since day one! They spoke of impeachment before he was inaugurated. They don't care about the truth, all they want is the annihilation of our 45th president, politics and American people be damned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, 31illusions said:

is the annihilation of our 45th president, politics and American people be damned.

If Trump was annihilated then that would benefit US politics and the American people, so you can't really blame patriots for wanting to see his downfall, can you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SoulMonster said:

If Trump was annihilated then that would benefit US politics and the American people, so you can't really blame patriots for wanting to see his downfall, can you?

Patriotism is impeaching Trump for 'reasons' and having President Pence? Yikes! The neocons may actually get their war with Iran should that happen!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, downzy said:

Polling in Syria is dubious at best for a variety of reasons.  First, it's unlikely the poll was conducted by those actually involved in the violence since how are you going to contact those people who were killed, harmed, or decided to leave the country for their owns safety.  Second, higher levels of support for Assad might have been the result of people just wanting the fighting to end.  Not an endorsement of Assad per se, but a better option than having the country torn apart.  

Wait, so you're suggesting the attrocities reported didn't actually happen?  That it's all propaganda?  Sorry, but it's hard to take you seriously considering everything we know at this point of what happened.   

That's a big part of it, but there's also a question of what is the moral thing to do with respect to watching innocent people get butchered versus the costs of action/inaction.  It's not nothing nor should it be. 

Six or seven states seceded even before Lincoln took office.  Once he took office, he made it clear that while he viewed secession as legally void, he had no intention of invading the South.  But also stood his ground on U.S. keeping its forts in southern states.  It was only when Virginia attacked Fort Sumter that it prompted Lincoln to respond that precipitated the Civil War.  So again, I have no clue what you're talking about here.  

You keep arguing about different matters that have zero relevance to the original issue: whether Assad is a bad man who did bad things.  Trying to excuse his behaviour by point to police response to the yellow vest movement in France is asinine.  In no way are they in any way comparable.  This is just a red herring because you refuse to acknowledge that Assad is on a different moral plane than say Macron and hence have to admit that Tulsi has some issues with her treatment of Assad.  

Yes there is atrocity propaganda in war. I have very serious doubts about the 2017 & 2018 alleged Assad gassings, and it is not beyond the pale that earlier tales of Assad suppression had truth mixed in with propaganda. 

The war is Syria is essentially over, Assad has won. Continuing to arm 'rebels' is just continuing bloodshed unnecessarily.

The Lincoln comment was a one-off, it wasn't meant to be the crux of the argument. But you are ignoring the fact that both the Southern leaders AND Lincoln's own cabinet told him that reinforcing Fort Sumter would most likely lead to hostilities breaking out, and it did. Does a 'great' leader do such a thing and risk hostility?

You misunderstood my point about Macron. It was a thought experiment. The yellow vests are only fighting with their fists at the moment, and they are meeting some pretty harsh resistance. Now, imagine if they were already armed, and then on top of that getting more arms and aid from a major foreign power. Are you honestly going to pretend that Macron wouldn't resort to brutal means of suppression at that point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SoulMonster said:

If Trump was annihilated then that would benefit US politics and the American people, so you can't really blame patriots for wanting to see his downfall, can you?

If you think doing so at All costs is American, then you having bigger issues than I care to address here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, 31illusions said:

If you think doing so at All costs is American, then you having bigger issues than I care to address here.

Did I say at all costs? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 31illusions said:

I must say you are extraordinarily great at stating the obvious and at reiterating my exact point. Having not enough evidence or not pursuing it or having plenty of evidence and doing nothing about it are THE SAME THING! To quote Robert Mueller "Every defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty" and "We did not make a determination as to weather the President did commit a crime".

I might have more faith in democrats searching for the truth IF they were not on a witch hunt since day one! They spoke of impeachment before he was inaugurated. They don't care about the truth, all they want is the annihilation of our 45th president, politics and American people be damned.

Again, Mueller stated they could not exonerate Trump on the obstruction charge.  Hence there was evidence that he committed a crime but they could not litigate it due to constitutional restrictions of indicting a sitting President.

You're getting this wrong.

And not all Democrats spoke of impeachment.  Hell, look at Pelosi, who still won't give in to the minority of House Democrats who want to proceed with impeachment hearings.

More bullshit from a Trump supporter. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

Yes there is atrocity propaganda in war. I have very serious doubts about the 2017 & 2018 alleged Assad gassings, and it is not beyond the pale that earlier tales of Assad suppression had truth mixed in with propaganda. 

No, it is beyond the pale to say that the earlier Assad suppression is a mix of propaganda and truth.  Reporters on the scenes and accounts from protestors attest to the kidnappings, shootings, and overt violence directed by Assad towards make it clear.  You're just choosing not to believe because you want to hold on to your worldview.  

Take five minutes and read this: https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/a-times-reporter-documents-the-horror-of-syrias-torture-sites

That's not to say anything about the chemical weapons attack in 2013 that was unequivocally done by forces loyal to Assad. 

It's not debatable.  

2 hours ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

The Lincoln comment was a one-off, it wasn't meant to be the crux of the argument. But you are ignoring the fact that both the Southern leaders AND Lincoln's own cabinet told him that reinforcing Fort Sumter would most likely lead to hostilities breaking out, and it did. Does a 'great' leader do such a thing and risk hostility?

So great leaders pander and shrink to outright aggression?  Again, this fucking nonsense.  You're putting the blood of all those who died on Lincoln, a man who's election resulted in secession by slave own states.  Who warned the South not to attack or overrun U.S. territory, but they did it anyway.  

2 hours ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

You misunderstood my point about Macron. It was a thought experiment. The yellow vests are only fighting with their fists at the moment, and they are meeting some pretty harsh resistance. Now, imagine if they were already armed, and then on top of that getting more arms and aid from a major foreign power. Are you honestly going to pretend that Macron wouldn't resort to brutal means of suppression at that point?

See the article above.

Enough said.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, downzy said:

No, it is beyond the pale to say that the earlier Assad suppression is a mix of propaganda and truth.  Reporters on the scenes and accounts from protestors attest to the kidnappings, shootings, and overt violence directed by Assad towards make it clear.  You're just choosing not to believe because you want to hold on to your worldview.  

Take five minutes and read this: https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/a-times-reporter-documents-the-horror-of-syrias-torture-sites

That's not to say anything about the chemical weapons attack in 2013 that was unequivocally done by forces loyal to Assad. 

It's not debatable.  

So great leaders pander and shrink to outright aggression?  Again, this fucking nonsense.  You're putting the blood of all those who died on Lincoln, a man who's election resulted in secession by slave own states.  Who warned the South not to attack or overrun U.S. states, but they did it anyway.  

See the article above.

Enough said.  

Yeah I'll look into the 2013 Assad incident and come back with a thoughtful response.

Regarding Lincoln, again, he was told that reinforcements would lead to hostilities by all parties involved. There were no actual casualties during the bombardment, most people don't know that. I want leaders who actually think first and make good faith compromises before playing games with lives.

I don't know why you won't even entertain my hypothetical Macron scenario. Are you honestly saying he wouldn't use brutal means of suppression if the yellow vests were armed and being further armed and funded by a hostile foreign power? Simple answer really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting study released on the use of force by police officers on white versus black subjects:

"According to the new numbers, Chicago police officers used more force against black citizens, on average, than any other race—even though black citizens tended to exercise less resistance than whites."

So even though black citizens of Chicago were less hostile towards police officers, cops still used more force on them than white subjects.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/05/chicago-police-department-consent-decree-black-lives-matter-resistance.html

And some people still claim that institutional racism doesn't exist.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

I don't know why you won't even entertain my hypothetical Macron scenario. Are you honestly saying he wouldn't use brutal means of suppression if the yellow vests were armed and being further armed and funded by a hostile foreign power? Simple answer really.

Macron, and any leader, would use the necessary force to put down any armed insurrection against the government.  But he would not resort to torture, kidnappings, mass shootings, military violence on peaceful demonstrators, nor use establish a secrete prison operation to conduct the kind of crimes Assad is guilty of committing.

Regardless, this is all mute since the yellow vests aren't arming themselves because they don't have to.  They are given the opportunity to protest without being brutalized or murdered.  They can also vote Macron out of power.  It's not in any way a comparable situation with what has occurred in Syria.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

Regarding Lincoln, again, he was told that reinforcements would lead to hostilities by all parties involved. There were no actual casualties during the bombardment, most people don't know that. I want leaders who actually think first and make good faith compromises before playing games with lives.

Hostilities were already upon the United States.  Southern states had already confiscated many other forts despite warnings by Lincoln and his predecessor President Buchanan.  

Also, prior to sending reinforcements, the Fort was garrisoned by one single soldier.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, downzy said:

Hostilities were already upon the United States.  Southern states had already confiscated many other forts despite warnings by Lincoln and his predecessor President Buchanan.  

Also, prior to sending reinforcements, the Fort was garrisoned by one single soldier.  

Were Union soldiers being killed at those forts, or tortured, or whathaveyou? "They took ownership of some forts in their territory but haven't harmed anyone Mr. Lincoln." "Great let's escalate the tension and see what happens!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

Were Union soldiers being killed at those forts, or tortured, or whathaveyou? "They took ownership of some forts in their territory but haven't harmed anyone Mr. Lincoln." "Great let's escalate the tension and see what happens!"

Besides the point.  These were not forts for seceding states to take.  Besides, Sumter was the crown jewel of U.S. defence for the area being the headquarters of the U.S. Army garrison.  The South had made it known it was going to take it regardless.  

But I guess you still think Lincoln is at fault for protecting U.S. military interests and property?  

You must be a fan of Neville Chamberlain.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, downzy said:

Besides the point.  These were not forts for seceding states to take.  Besides, Sumter was the crown jewel of U.S. defence for the area being the headquarters of the U.S. Army garrison.  The South had made it known it was going to take it regardless.  

But I guess you still think Lincoln is at fault for protecting U.S. military interests and property?  

You must be a fan of Neville Chamberlain.  

I'm not giving my life for some corporatists idea of military interests and property. F that. I would only give my life in war in defense of my family or if someone is taking my freedoms away. Everything else is a racket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

I'm not giving my life for some corporatists idea of military interests and property. F that. I would only give my life in war in defense of my family or if someone is taking my freedoms away. Everything else is a racket.

You might want to review the battle of Fort Sumter on Wikipedia.  Granted not the most thorough resource on the matter but the accounts of the lead up of the battle and the efforts the North and Lincoln made to avoid violence in their efforts to provide supplies to the fort undercut your claim that this was all on Lincoln.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Fort_Sumter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, downzy said:

And not all Democrats spoke of impeachment.  Hell, look at Pelosi, who still won't give in to the minority of House Democrats who want to proceed with impeachment hearings.

More bullshit from a Trump supporter. 

You think she and chuck doesn't know the elections are next year? It's not worth their time. Impeachment hearings for what? You can't impeach a President when no crime has been committed. Silly boy. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 31illusions said:

You think she and chuck doesn't know the elections are next year? It's not worth their time. Impeachment hearings for what? You can't impeach a President when no crime has been committed. Silly boy. lol

Circular logic by a Trump supporter. Shocking!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 31illusions said:

You think she and chuck doesn't know the elections are next year? It's not worth their time. Impeachment hearings for what? You can't impeach a President when no crime has been committed. Silly boy. lol

To quote a beloved Republican, Lindsey Graham, (sorry, choked there for a sec)  "You don't even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job....impeachment is not about punishment.  Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×