Jump to content

The US Politics/Elections Thread 2.0


Recommended Posts

23 hours ago, Ace Nova said:

If all they've been told for the past two months by their elected leaders and the news media they follow that there was massive voter fraud....when someone calls them and asks them if they think Biden's presidency is legitimate, what do you expect them to say? 

So they take zero responsibility? 

That's my issue with your take.  Trump certainly owns a lot of this, but let's not let the flock off the hook so easily.  Republicans had long been considered the "party of responsibility."  Shouldn't those who are unable or unwilling to read anything other than Trump's twitter feed or a Qanon website be also held to account for the rot that they have revelled in?  

23 hours ago, Ace Nova said:

When it comes to partisan politics, most people will not research a topic hoping to prove themselves wrong...so they will tote the party line and believe the information that their party has been giving them.

That is true.  But the bullshit that was digested is so far off from reality that it's hard to say that there was  no stink on that cheese.  Democrats certainly got over their skis a bit on the Russian investigation.  But it's not as though it wasn't based on a complete fantasy.  There were improper and questionable connections between the Trump campaign and Russian assets and individuals that created the appearance of culpability, if not outright criminality. 

Believing both Democrats and Republicans were in on the take to cheat Trump out of re-election is so far detached from anything that looks like reality it is difficult to not assign some of the blame and responsibility towards those drinking the kool-aid.  It was always such a preposterous position and yet so many still choose to believe in the fantasy.  I think assigning all blame to Trump misses the bigger issue with the people who would continue to support such nonsense.

23 hours ago, Ace Nova said:

This can eventually get turned around but the majority of Republican officials in office will need to publicly state that they believe that there is no evidence showing massive voter fraud, especially on the scale needed for it to have made a difference in the outcome of the election.  

Yeah, something tells me you're going to be waiting a good long while before that ever happens.  Over a hundred Republican House members and six Republican Senators still chose to vote to invalidate the election after the attack on the Capitol.  If you're expecting the adults to show up anytime soon, I'm not sure what to tell you.  Ben Sasse can write all of the op-ed pieces in the Atlantic he wants.  Where was he for the last four years?   

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 549
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

You must have missed the nearly 20 year history I have of rooting for GN'R online through every line up change, every delay, every canceled tour, every riot, every late start and so on and so on. 

This is amazing.      

Posted Images

21 hours ago, Ace Nova said:

The report of possible Russian collusion wasn't released until January, as Downzy mentioned.  So although Clinton and her campaign were "shocked" by the loss, at the time, there wasn't much to contest.  

 

The Clinton campaign was aware of the findings in the Steele dossier.  They helped fund it.  It was passed to John McCain, who passed it on to the FBI.  The public didn't know about Trump's Russian connections, but many of the players did.  But they chose not to make it an issue, even in an election that was closer to the 2020 election.  

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

On the first point, a guy that immediately came to mind was Stefan Molyneux. I still have no idea why he was banned from Twitter and YouTube. I legit miss his "the truth about" YouTube clips whenever he would take a popular media story of the day and try to explain what was going on. 

Twitter and YouTube expanded their terms and conditions to exclude speech that was deemed racially offensive back in June and July after the BLM protests.  You don't have to be well versed with Stefan Molyneux to know why he wouldn't last long.  If you really need me to expand on this then fine. But I would recommend you look at his posting history and his overall world-view on race to understand why Twitter, YouTube, and other social media platforms are on solid ground by kicking him to the curb.  I can tell you he lasted far longer on those sites than he would on this one.

2 hours ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

You predicted my response. I was going to say, I would rather have political people determining what can and can't be said than a private tech CEO. At least with the politician, I can try and vote them out if they advocate censorship (and I'd imagine that wouldn't be a popular position for a politician to advocate straight censorship, so they'd be afraid to do it)

The problem here is that the constitution would not allow for such a system to work.  You would need to amend or revise the first and fourteenth amendments.  The state cannot limit the freedom of expression amongst citizens and groups of citizens.  Telling Facebook what speech can be allowed and what couldn't be allowed would not hold up in courts.

Moreover, it would create a situation whereby social media platforms could potentially lose any freedom to moderate its content should the politician or appointee responsible for making that decision has a very loose or untroubled view on speech restrictions.  Not hard to imagine, but what if Trump decided that Facebook could no longer ban sexually explicit content?  What if another President blocked any form of moderation towards outright hate towards people of another religion or race?  And how does Facebook or any other social media platform manage these policies if they're constantly in flux.  If the administration changes every four or eight years, how does both Facebook and its users have any consistent understanding of what is allowed and what isn't?  

It's a dangerous game if you're putting all of that power in the hands of one or several elected (or perhaps unelected) officials.  

2 hours ago, Basic_GnR_Fan said:

I would argue that Twitter, or even social media in general, is actually more important than the NYT or publications like that, at this point

I get that, but your claim of dominance isn't without a similar comparison.  Nor is twitter all that big in the social media space.  It has an active user base of around 160 million.  Facebook is in the billions.  

But more to the point, there is nothing stopping Parler or any other conservative minded platform from building their own hosting services.  The Internet is not closed off to anyone who wants to self-host.  It's not a utility like power or water that does not allow for new pipping.  Anyone can connect their computers and host themselves.  As big as AWS is, it's not the internet.  It benefits from an economy of scale, and there's a legitimate discussion to be had over how big AWS should be allowed to be before it prevents new players in the market and denies competition amongst the entire web.  But I don't think we're anywhere close to that point yet.  

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, downzy said:

The Clinton campaign was aware of the findings in the Steele dossier.  They helped fund it.  It was passed to John McCain, who passed it on to the FBI.  The public didn't know about Trump's Russian connections, but many of the players did.  But they chose not to make it an issue, even in an election that was closer to the 2020 election.  

July 2016 they started Crossfire Hurricane. 

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

So they take zero responsibility? 

That's my issue with your take.  Trump certainly owns a lot of this, but let's not let the flock off the hook so easily.  Republicans had long been considered the "party of responsibility."  Shouldn't those who are unable or unwilling to read anything other than Trump's twitter feed or a Qanon website be also held to account for the rot that they have revelled in?  

That is true.  But the bullshit that was digested is so far off from reality that it's hard to say that there was  no stink on that cheese.  Democrats certainly got over their skis a bit on the Russian investigation.  But it's not as though it wasn't based on a complete fantasy.  There were improper and questionable connections between the Trump campaign and Russian assets and individuals that created the appearance of culpability, if not outright criminality. 

Believing both Democrats and Republicans were in on the take to cheat Trump out of re-election is so far detached from anything that looks like reality it is difficult to not assign some of the blame and responsibility towards those drinking the kool-aid.  It was always such a preposterous position and yet so many still choose to believe in the fantasy.  I think assigning all blame to Trump misses the bigger issue with the people who would continue to support such nonsense.

Yeah, something tells me you're going to be waiting a good long while before that ever happens.  Over a hundred Republican House members and six Republican Senators still chose to vote to invalidate the election after the attack on the Capitol.  If you're expecting the adults to show up anytime soon, I'm not sure what to tell you.  Ben Sasse can write all of the op-ed pieces in the Atlantic he wants.  Where was he for the last four years?   

 

Only a very small % of Trump supporters were in the riot.  Obviously they will be held accountable for what they did.  

Are you saying you want all Trump supporters held accountable for what less than 0.001% of his supporters were involved in?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ace Nova said:

Only a very small % of Trump supporters were in the riot.  Obviously they will be held accountable for what they did. 

I wasn’t talking about the riot on the capitol.

My issue is with the overwhelming belief by Republicans that the election was stolen, that Biden has no legitimate claim to the office of the presidency.

As I said, Trump owns a lot of that, but to absolve the entire Republican party and its supporters for the big lie is wrong. Nobody forced them to believe that the emperor had no clothes. This goes beyond the normal confines of rank partisanship.  In fact I would say it’s part of a longer story that was touched off by the response to LBJ signing the 1964 Civil Rights Act, continued with Nixon’s Southern Strategy that was perfected by Reagan in the 80s; picked up by Gingrich’s total war against Democrats and moderate Republicans in the House in the 1990s; to finally the rise of anti-intellectualism personified by Sarah Palin in the 2000s.

The position America finds itself in is another chapter of the same book that’s over 50 years old (if not longer). Trump is not the sole cause of why so many Republicans are fully detached from reality. He’s the inevitable culmination of what has come before him. But he’s also an accelerant.

A presidency like this one does not happen out of no where:

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dazey said:

 

 

To the smallest degree, It's hard not to feel bad for these people. 

As much as I think they hold some responsibility for how terrible politics have become in the US, how empty is their lives that publicly professing this nonsense seems like a good idea.

Fucking crazy.

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

And yet the more believable explanation for Trump’s loss to many daft morons is fraud.

Good fucking riddance. 

Still far too high

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just saw people on Twitter saying they hope Trump incites violence at some point after 12pm tomorrow because then he won't have the presidency to protect him from consequences. 

Jesus Christ. There are so many stupid people on both sides of this. Hoping for violence in your quest to own Trump is not a great option. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, RussTCB said:

Just saw people on Twitter saying they hope Trump incites violence at some point after 12pm tomorrow because then he won't have the presidency to protect him from consequences. 

Jesus Christ. There are so many stupid people on both sides of this. Hoping for violence in your quest to own Trump is not a great option. 

It’s really dumb since the actions taken while President are still prosecutorial once they leave office.  

Trump doesn’t need to incite additional violence to be prosecuted for the violence he has already incited. 

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

It’s really dumb since the actions taken while President are still prosecutorial once they leave office.  

Trump doesn’t need to incite additional violence to be prosecuted for the violence he has already incited. 

First and foremost, it's dumb because wishing for violence is never a good thing. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SoulMonster said:

I really, really, really, really hope Trump starts his "Patriot Party".

That would be the best thing ever. I'd often wondered what an 80 seat Democratic majority would look like in the Senate. :lol: 

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

That would be the best thing ever. I'd often wondered what an 80 seat Democratic majority would look like in the Senate. :lol: 

Honestly, I would like the Democratic party to split, too. It will probably happen sooner or later anyway.

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

Honestly, I would like the Democratic party to split, too. It will probably happen sooner or later anyway.

I doubt that. In the current two party system you'd have to be insane to split your base and basically give the other side a free run at power. Luckily for the Democrats Trump is insanely vengeful and petty and could quite happily burn down the GOP out of sheer spite.

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

I doubt that. In the current two party system you'd have to be insane to split your base and basically give the other side a free run at power. Luckily for the Democrats Trump is insanely vengeful and petty and could quite happily burn down the GOP out of sheer spite.

There too much tension in both parties now, I think. Anyway, I meant that the fallout from the GOP splitting will likely be the Dems doing it, too. It wouldn't be the rational thing to do, as you point out, but if the tension increases between the "radical left" and the moderates, then I don't see how they can co-exist in one party.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...