2020 US Election (Part Two)

[Sommerswerd]

Not really. If people can't survive without things changing for the better, it isn't appealing to just be a shadow.
Those people may abstain.

"vote for me, and you won't hear about politics from Kyriakos for another four years".

Better?​

 

[Gori the Grey]

However, I did not want to just gleefully return to the thread to dance on your grave, I actually wanted to learn something new and also give your assertion a fair shot of being right, since I take your claims seriously.

So I asked a few more and I found a colleague who, exactly as you predicted, immediately sang the "don't spoil the whole bunch, girl" in response... Although he was adamant that it was a Michael Jackson song and was impressed that I "knew" that it was an Osmonds song. When I admitted that I'd actually heard about it from someone else he actually Googled it... Turns out the song was actually written for the Jacskon 5 and they were going to record it but they decided to record "ABC" instead. So TIL a bunch of new stuff. Thanks Gor

I would submit that the most significant thing you learned is the answer to the question you originally asked: why do people use "one bad apple'' about cops. It's because the lyrics of a ditzy Osmonds song have subverted a proverb. I think that's (ethnolinguistically) remarkable.

 

[sophie]

God that debate made me feel so depressed. We are all so fudged.

 

[Gori the Grey]

What was funny, though, was every time Biden retreated from progressive views, Trump would go "well, there you've done it; you've lost the radical left!"

 

[sophie]

He lost me months ago. But I also found that funny.

The highlight of the night was Trump opening an answer attacking Biden for writing the Crime Bill, and ending it by attacking him for his support of radical Antifa thugs.

 

[Gori the Grey]

My favorite was the "manifesto" he has supposedly signed with Bernie. There is no manifesto. WELL THERE YOU'VE DONE IT; YOU'VE LOST THE RADICAL LEFT!

Trump's so desperate that all he can hope for is a miracle out-of-the-park home run. He thinks he can get that from a single comment, and then once he draws that comment, he's there to pounce and declare that BINGO, the race is now decided in his favor.

 

[Estebonrober]

I hate Biden, only slightly less than Trump. I hate the idea that the above hot take still seems like the most relevant one I've seen all day.

I mean if you vote Trump after these 4 years you are jsut racist as hell and frankly everything after that doesn't need to be worked out.

This was said at his rally the other day. . .

https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/518031-trumps-good-genes-speech-echoes-racial-eugenics

“You have good genes, you know that, right? You have good genes. A lot of it is about the genes, isn’t it, don’t you believe? The racehorse theory? You think we’re so different. You have good genes in Minnesota.”

I mean anyone who knew him knew he believed this racist **** his entire life, but to say it at a fudging rally and be cheered on in America in 2020. . . If you vote for this. . . jsut fudge you.

 

[Gori the Grey]

I've got a limerick on that bit about Minnesotans' genes over in the Clown Car thread.

To continue with my post above. Then Trump would try it on the opposite side. "You can't even say 'Law and Order'" Law and Order SEE, THERE'S NO WAY YOU CAN WIN THE SUBURBS IF YOU DON'T SAY "LAW AND ORDER"

 

[sophie]

I hate Biden, only slightly less than Trump. I hate the idea that the above hot take still seems like the most relevant one I've seen all day.

I mean if you vote Trump after these 4 years you are jsut racist as hell and frankly everything after that doesn't need to be worked out.

This was said at his rally the other day. . .

https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/518031-trumps-good-genes-speech-echoes-racial-eugenics

“You have good genes, you know that, right? You have good genes. A lot of it is about the genes, isn’t it, don’t you believe? The racehorse theory? You think we’re so different. You have good genes in Minnesota.”

I mean anyone who knew him knew he believed this racist **** his entire life, but to say it at a ******* rally and be cheered on in America in 2020. . . If you vote for this. . . jsut fudge you.

Can't tell if you're subquoting me, but to be clear: Trump never had me to begin with. Biden lost me when he said he wanted to arrest anarchists.

 

[Estebonrober]

Can't tell if you're subquoting me, but to be clear: Trump never had me to begin with. Biden lost me when he said he wanted to arrest anarchists.

I was not jsut sharing my sentiment on the reality we are living in.

 

[Takhisis]

This ‘debate’ has already given me the feeling that it's like the beginning of a Beastie Boys video.
‘I hope no bad people show up.’

Sorry. Trump might storm out before it is over, but he'll definitely show up.

This was a reference to a certain video:

(about '80s excess, totally unrelated to Trump)

I won the pool!!!

This one?

Spoiler :

So, tonight's presidential debate promises to be an entirely new experience in USian politics. Would anyone be interested in a pool where you put in a dollar to pick a number of minutes into the "debate" when Trump storms off the stage? I figure if sixty people play we can use the minutes from 30 to 89.

If so, how?

I agree that Trump's constant interrupting saved Biden from having to spend a lot of time on tough questions and sometimes enabled him to avoid them altogether. I've always felt that part of the reason that Biden was so "respectful" of the time limits and the time's-up lights was that the warning lights essentially bailed him out when he was rambling or stumbling through a topic... "Oh would you look at that, I'm out of time! Too bad. I'll just shut up, then." thinks * that was close... almost put my foot in my mouth there*

If Trump had the discipline to just STFU and let Biden ramble, he and his team would have more opportunities to find fodder to make the case that Biden is senile, demented, etc. Hence the pic in @Drakle's post. But you can't do that when you don't let Biden talk. Now of course there is the risk that Biden comes off looking competent and Presidential, but there is at least a chance that he stumbles, stutters, stammers and rambles. If Trump does what he did last night there is virtually no chance of Biden screwing up badly, because he isn't talking enough.

This part of your post really brought the old adage ‘don't interrupt your opponent when he's making a mistake’ to my mind.

 

[Gori the Grey]

One of the funniest moments was when Biden had confronted Trump with the $750 in taxes, and Trump actually said "I was able to do that because of the tax code approved by Congress, including by you, Joe." Biden missed the opportunity here. He should have done one of his turns to the camera to directly address the viewer and said, "Do you see what Trump just openly admitted here: that the tax code is designed so that the super-rich can avoid paying taxes? If you elect me, I'll change that."

 

[Narz]

Not really. If people can't survive without things changing for the better, it isn't appealing to just be a shadow.
Those people may abstain.

Agreed. Reminds me bill maher's "lets get back to normal"

If normal was good enuf this never would've happened

Desperate times call for desperate measures

 

[Lexicus]

Mostly wrong. Trade opportunities create the need for investment. China in the 21st C is a pretty good example of how improving global trade infrastructure created the opportunity for US industry to move offshore and enrich China. Investments followed and built upon itself.

If investment drove economic development, then one could build laundromats and restaurants in every economically hard-hit city and have recovery. Economic growth happens when new money from outside an economy flows into it.

Sorry, but this doesn't even pass the smell test. The classic definition of an industrial revolution is literally a movement from production for consumption to the production of capital goods, or an increase in the level of capital investment.

US industry moving offshore to China is investment, not trade. China's strategy of growth has been to attract foreign direct investment to grow its industrial capacity. Its massive presence in world trade is a consequence of this strategy, not the other way around.

If you look at world history you will see that up until the 19th century all "Great Powers" everywhere around the world (From Egypt to Assyria through Rome and the Mongols and China) became rich and powerful by controlling the flows of trade. This tended to create a dynamic where an imperial center was enriched at the expense of the periphery - a classic example is the British looting of India by setting very favorable terms of exchange for themselves. There was little growth to speak of in India under this system. Growth in India came later when the British invested in things like railroads and hospitals rather than simply stealing everything that wasn't nailed down under the aegis of free trade.

If the Federal government gave everyone in Akron OH $10,000, you would see a temporary growth in the economy. If they gave that money ongoing, the growth would be more permanent.

This has scenario has nothing to do with trade at all. Whether the growth in Akron was temporary or permanent would depend on how people chose to spend their one-time $10,000 payments. What you are supporting with this hypothetical is the notion that economic growth is driven by government injection of money into the private economy, which I actually agree with if we're talking about the longer term.

If we took your point about growth coming from "outside money" literally, then we would never see any growth at all except as a result of government injections of money into the private sector, because any inflow of money into one region from another would lead to a contraction (which would be expected to be equal in size to the growth, all other things equal) in the economy of the region from which the money was flowing.

You may have been thrown off because you are used to considering the financial definition of investment where I'm using the economic definition. Investment in the former sense is simply buying a financial instrument or other asset in the expectation of future profit. The economist uses "investment" to mean the production of capital, that is, the production of goods which can produce more goods. Under this definition, saying that economic growth is driven by investment is so obvious that it's almost a truism.

This is also a good illustration of the difference between micro and macro thinking.

 

[Lexicus]

Agreed. Conservatives/FOX News, beginning with the initial "fair and balanced" slogan, have very successfully cemented a false narrative into the American political consciousness... that you can only be credible/believable if you are "in the middle", "fair and balanced", appreciate "both sides" and so on. Its so pervasive that the media is obsessed with giving Republicans/Conservatives airtime, even when they are saying things that are mostly lies and misleading garbage. So they are going to "both sides" it no matter what, for fear of being labeled "biased".

Now you've got it.

He should have done one of his turns to the camera to directly address the viewer and said, "Do you see what Trump just openly admitted here: that the tax code is designed so that the super-rich can avoid paying taxes? If you elect me, I'll change that."

Well there is one little teensy tiny problem with that...and of course,

 

[Birdjaguar]

@Lexicus This is really the wrong thread to continue this discussion. Your eresponse and @El_Machinae s are interesting and worth discussing, just not here.

 

[Berzerker]

To me it really doesn‘t matter if it was murder or manslaughter or killing-in-self-defence. Someone died. That‘s bad. It could have been avoided, peaceful protests are possible. And around here, if a cop kills a person, there is an investigation no matter what happened. But we try to create an environment where this doesn‘t happen, the US has a different culture in this regard, I know. Also, that guy from Kenosha wasn‘t a cop, I think that‘s an important distinction.

Cops and the people they protect have the right to defend themselves, even from each other.

When your solution to problems are guns, innocent people are going to die.

Kyle placed himself in the position where he was, because he had a gun. Without it, he wouldn't have been there. Kyle placed himself in that position because he idolizes Trump. If Trump's rhetoric had been less moronic, he wouldn't have been there.

Would they be innocent if they were shot attacking a cop? If Kyle was a Biden supporter putting out fires set by neo-Nazis or the KKK and they attacked him, would y'all be calling him a murderer?

It doesn't matter because ultimately people like @Berzerker will do everything they can to defend trump, the gop and the right wing and all it's constituent parts, there isn't a single level or thing they won't stoop or lower themselves to; sacrificing other people's futures, other people's lives, their own family member's futures and lives, THEIR OWN CHILDREN'S FUTURES AND LIVES.

You cannot reason with these people, they are gone and so is their humanity and it's not coming back; the same people who place more humanity in a clump of cells then they do a non-white skinned child and said child's life or future. There are other people on this forum, and you know who you are, whose entire belief in the sanctity of life is phony because they cannot bring themselves to care or do anything about the encroaching disasters that will eliminate whatever progress we've made in terms of life quality; who think the lowering of environmental standards and the damage that will do is an acceptable trade off in the hopes that roe v wade might be abolished.

Berzerker will always be more scared of Hilary clinton out of power than he'll ever be of a fascist Republican in power because the former represents more of a threat to him than the latter does.

Think on that next time he defends the gop whilst claiming he isn't supportive of them; he views biden and the dnc as more a threat to him ands his goals than an open fascist who has no problem with doing things that reasonable people would consider sociopathic.

You sound utterly apathetic... The only times - and I suppose there are rare exceptions - I defend Trump is when the Democrats make false, deceitful or hypocritical accusations about him. When do I defend the GOP? Thats even more rare. Hell, I defended Obama when he was criticized for bowing to foreign royalty and when he pulled us out of Iraq. I applauded the House Democrats who voted against the Iraq War, you support the people who voted for these wars and you're lecturing us about humanity?

I dont know the views of the SCOTUS nominee but she appears to be pro-life so she may care about that clump of cells and she adopted 2 black children from Haiti. Is she walking the walk or is she just hiding her racism? Hillary voted to invade Iraq, destroyed Libya and was undoubtedly fully behind toppling Syria. I am so glad she lost, for the sake of Syrians if nothing else. And Trump didn't lie to a fisa court to spy on Hillary, so Democrats complaining about 'fascism' is just farting upwind.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

When do I defend the GOP?

Always?

More often than not?

Why do you ask?

I think that the HOW you do it and the WHY you do it are much more interesting questions.

 

[Estebonrober]

Cops and the people they protect have the right to defend themselves, even from each other.



Would they be innocent if they were shot attacking a cop? If Kyle was a Biden supporter putting out fires set by neo-Nazis or the KKK and they attacked him, would y'all be calling him a murderer?



.

Yes, the guy in Portland who killed the Proud Boy seemed to be guilty of at least manslaughter, reckless homicide, something along those lines. Similar with Rittenhouse. Goose/gander you hypocrite.

 

[Takhisis]

When do I defend the GOP?

Do we have to do a Sommerswerd and quote your posts where you say ‘I defend the GOP’ and ‘I defend Donald Trump’ again?