Yojinbo Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 6 minutes ago, Freyjadour said: anyone who voted third party is complicit Wrong. Just because the entire Trump administration has turned out to be a basket of deplorables doesn't mean Hillary would've been an even remotely decent candidate to vote for. And she's not more entitled to Stein's or Johnson's votes than they are to hers. You don't get to blame 3rd party voters for how this election has turned out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rezzy Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 1 hour ago, Radiant head said: still needs 60 votes though,not sure you're even reading my posts I read your posts, don't fret. I'm not a Constitutional Scholar, but the Dems took the unprecedented step of weakening the filibuster for nominees, so I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility for the GOP to further weaken it to get their SCOTUS nominees through. The GOP has already threatened to do the nuclear option, if the Dems try to filibuster. 36 minutes ago, Freyjadour said: Anyone who voted or supported Trump is complicit, anyone who voted third party is complicit. I've stayed away from this topic, but I've been heavily involved on Twitter, and now this is my breaking point. I hated the Muslim ban, I tweeted about it this weekend? But this! This supposed upcoming EO makes life ten times worse, why even live anymore? i repeat: you are complicit. You have ruined mine and so many other people's lives, and there will be no forgiveness. As I've lived my life with the motto: This too, will pass. Anything that far reaching will likely get challenged and go to the Supreme Court. Even with Scalia's replacement, the court will still likely go 5-4 in favor of LGBT with Kennedy breaking away from the Conservative side. 24 minutes ago, Lord Raven said: You should channel your anger to something more productive like protests and awareness instead of being petty and venting. The third party voters here voted in blue states. The majority of Trump supporters here voted in Texas, Maryland (a blue state), or NC (that one you will need to address that particular user on) and some of the others were European. Nothing they did affected you. You're not the only one on the chopping block here, by the way. 15 minutes ago, Yojinbo said: Wrong. Just because the entire Trump administration has turned out to be a basket of deplorables doesn't mean Hillary would've been an even remotely decent candidate to vote for. And she's not more entitled to Stein's or Johnson's votes than they are to hers. You don't get to blame 3rd party voters for how this election has turned out. I voted third party. The two main parties are not entitled to anyone's votes. The burden is on them to convince us to vote for them, and last year, neither major party convinced me enough for me to vote for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tryhard Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 (edited) Which EO? This one? http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2017/01/sources-report-trump-executive-order-lgbtq-community-coming-soon/ edit: oops, I missed that Not sure how legit the source is but I wouldn't really be surprised. "But he held a LGBT flag upside down!" Edited January 30, 2017 by Tryhard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rezzy Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 7 minutes ago, Tryhard said: Which EO? This one? http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2017/01/sources-report-trump-executive-order-lgbtq-community-coming-soon/ Not sure how legit the source is but I wouldn't really be surprised. "But he held a LGBT flag upside down!" If it only applies to private enterprise, that's a gray area, but it mentions federal employees, which I see getting struck down by the Supreme Court, just like the Gay Marriage bans, as long as Kennedy's still on the Supreme Court and Ginsberg doesn't die before Trump's out of office. Ginsberg really should have retired a few years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augestein Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 16 minutes ago, Rezzy said: If it only applies to private enterprise, that's a gray area, but it mentions federal employees, which I see getting struck down by the Supreme Court, just like the Gay Marriage bans, as long as Kennedy's still on the Supreme Court and Ginsberg doesn't die before Trump's out of office. Ginsberg really should have retired a few years ago. Private business I don't mind as much if they discriminate. It's their choice. Federal? Not at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rezzy Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 3 minutes ago, Augestein said: Private business I don't mind as much if they discriminate. It's their choice. Federal? Not at all. Pretty much my feelings. Private companies can follow their religion as they see fit, but the government can't be using religion as the grounds for any law or regulation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Banzai Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 In 2008, before Obama took office, the entire world despised the United States. Trump's cabinet is filled with incompetent cronies and his executive orders thus far have demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge about geopolitics. Trump's insistence on "America First" as an excuse to screw over the global economy, when the global economy already privileges the United States at the expense of most nations, is baseless jingoism set against a nefarious, nebulous "globalist" other that does not, in actuality, exist. Trump's constituents claim that only the rich are getting richer and the poor are being left out. But they support a man who wants to give tax cuts to the rich. Even if he also cuts taxes for poorer people, the net loss in terms of benefits, infrastructure, and safety will more than outweigh the temporary financial gains. Lowering taxes worked poorly for both Reagan and W. Bush, the last two who tried it, so I don't know why anyone would think they would work now. On the level of crime, Trump's policies would return us to 1980s levels of police militarization, where poor inner city communities were brutally subjugated in the name of "law and order." This actually caused crime to skyrocket during that time, because when the police treat people like scum, the people tend to treat the police, and the institutions they represent, like scum in turn. Ever since the 1992 Rodney King riots caused major inner-city police reform, ending the "War on Drugs" de facto and fostering cooperation between police and the communities they serve, crime has been on the decline. Crime is currently at its lowest point in around 40 years. Yet Donald Trump, in his debates, claimed "it's like medieval times out there" and has made similar hyperbolic lies about crime in the state of inner city neghborhoods, pandering to a mostly white, mostly rural constituency who has never been to the inner city. But that is Trump's modus operandi as a politician; invent or greatly exaggerate a problem (crime, Mexican immigration, Islamic terrorism), demonize an entire group of people, and propose ridiculous, costly, discriminatory legislation to "fix" said problem. Of course, most people who do business with Trump know him to be a shyster and more of a reality TV personality than a legitimate businessman, who frequently "fails upward," profiting at the executive level off of failed or failing business ventures. It's no surprise he would take a similar approach to his politics, and it's shameful that any fragment of the population, let alone a significant one, has bought his used car salesman act so wholeheartedly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 3 hours ago, Rezzy said: As I've lived my life with the motto: This too, will pass. Anything that far reaching will likely get challenged and go to the Supreme Court. Even with Scalia's replacement, the court will still likely go 5-4 in favor of LGBT with Kennedy breaking away from the Conservative side. 2 of the liberal members of the supreme court, as well as kennedy himself, are very old. It's quite likely that they could have to leave it (or even die) before trump's term end. you are being too optimistic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eclipse Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 2 hours ago, General Banzai said: In 2008, before Obama took office, the entire world despised the United States. Trump's cabinet is filled with incompetent cronies and his executive orders thus far have demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge about geopolitics. Trump's insistence on "America First" as an excuse to screw over the global economy, when the global economy already privileges the United States at the expense of most nations, is baseless jingoism set against a nefarious, nebulous "globalist" other that does not, in actuality, exist. Trump's constituents claim that only the rich are getting richer and the poor are being left out. But they support a man who wants to give tax cuts to the rich. Even if he also cuts taxes for poorer people, the net loss in terms of benefits, infrastructure, and safety will more than outweigh the temporary financial gains. Lowering taxes worked poorly for both Reagan and W. Bush, the last two who tried it, so I don't know why anyone would think they would work now. On the level of crime, Trump's policies would return us to 1980s levels of police militarization, where poor inner city communities were brutally subjugated in the name of "law and order." This actually caused crime to skyrocket during that time, because when the police treat people like scum, the people tend to treat the police, and the institutions they represent, like scum in turn. Ever since the 1992 Rodney King riots caused major inner-city police reform, ending the "War on Drugs" de facto and fostering cooperation between police and the communities they serve, crime has been on the decline. Crime is currently at its lowest point in around 40 years. Yet Donald Trump, in his debates, claimed "it's like medieval times out there" and has made similar hyperbolic lies about crime in the state of inner city neghborhoods, pandering to a mostly white, mostly rural constituency who has never been to the inner city. But that is Trump's modus operandi as a politician; invent or greatly exaggerate a problem (crime, Mexican immigration, Islamic terrorism), demonize an entire group of people, and propose ridiculous, costly, discriminatory legislation to "fix" said problem. Of course, most people who do business with Trump know him to be a shyster and more of a reality TV personality than a legitimate businessman, who frequently "fails upward," profiting at the executive level off of failed or failing business ventures. It's no surprise he would take a similar approach to his politics, and it's shameful that any fragment of the population, let alone a significant one, has bought his used car salesman act so wholeheartedly. It's a bunch of factors. Some don't want their money going towards certain things (Life has said this in the topic somewhere). Some just don't like the idea of taxes, so less taxes = better, even if it's to their detriment. Some really need the extra money. And some will legitimately benefit from this, so they'd gladly support it. What you're describing is a demagogue - someone who appeals to emotion. Back in the mafia community, we really hated it when people did this. Unfortunately, we can't get the entire United States to play a game of forum mafia, though I sorely wish we could. Regardless, it's a complicated issue, since there are people that really think the not-too-distant past was an amazing time (it wasn't if you were a woman). Someone described the last election as "the worst of politics versus the worst of society". I think it was an apt description. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Res Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 (edited) @General Banzai I agree with everything you wrote except I think it's important to always bear in mind that we're not just dealing with Trump; we're dealing with men like Bannon who are more than likely behind a lot of the decisions being made right now. The acting attorney general was fired and the language used, talk about inflammatory! Oh and the mosque shooter was a white nationalist but the early, false reports that he was a Muslim haven't been corrected by right wing channels... Edited January 31, 2017 by Res Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rezzy Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 8 minutes ago, eclipse said: It's a bunch of factors. Some don't want their money going towards certain things (Life has said this in the topic somewhere). Some just don't like the idea of taxes, so less taxes = better, even if it's to their detriment. Some really need the extra money. And some will legitimately benefit from this, so they'd gladly support it. What you're describing is a demagogue - someone who appeals to emotion. Back in the mafia community, we really hated it when people did this. Unfortunately, we can't get the entire United States to play a game of forum mafia, though I sorely wish we could. Regardless, it's a complicated issue, since there are people that really think the not-too-distant past was an amazing time (it wasn't if you were a woman). Someone described the last election as "the worst of politics versus the worst of society". I think it was an apt description. What do you mean by demagogues in the mafia? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eclipse Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 13 minutes ago, Rezzy said: What do you mean by demagogues in the mafia? The mafia subforum is dedicated to people yelling at each other. One of the things we absolutely did NOT like is what's known as an appeal to emotion. In other words, your argument is based on making the other person feel something emotionally, rather than taking apart the argument. Thus, Trump's exaggerations wouldn't fly if everyone in the US had to deal with a few games of forum mafia, because they'd recognize it as an appeal to emotion (instead of refuting the other person's logic), and kick him out of the game accordingly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Res Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 By the way, sort of related to that, but here's a look at how Trump's team likely attracted voters in key swing states. The Trump Regrets twitter is infuriating. Who on earth are all these people who thought Trump would protect LGBTQ rights or the lives of Native Americans?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunwoo Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 2 minutes ago, Res said: By the way, sort of related to that, but here's a look at how Trump's team likely attracted voters in key swing states. The Trump Regrets twitter is infuriating. Who on earth are all these people who thought Trump would protect LGBTQ rights or the lives of Native Americans?! What kind of stuff are the people over in the Trump Regrets twitter saying? Specifically, what did they think he WAS going to do, and which actions specifically are they upset about? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Res Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 2 minutes ago, Sunwoo said: What kind of stuff are the people over in the Trump Regrets twitter saying? Specifically, what did they think he WAS going to do, and which actions specifically are they upset about? Here's the link to the twitter account I was reading! There's several accounts and tumblrs, too, keeping track of regretful Trump voters, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eclipse Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 11 minutes ago, Res said: By the way, sort of related to that, but here's a look at how Trump's team likely attracted voters in key swing states. The Trump Regrets twitter is infuriating. Who on earth are all these people who thought Trump would protect LGBTQ rights or the lives of Native Americans?! This is why I advocate for privacy. Given Trump's methods, I expect very little to be done on the government's end. The Trump Regrets account is pretty amusing IMO. Even if I had been crazy enough to vote for Trump, I sure as hell wouldn't attach my name and picture to it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sunwoo Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 If everyone who regrets voting Trump now hadn't voted for him back in November, I wonder if that would've changed the outcome of the election any. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
General Banzai Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 I would also like to mention that in 2012 I wrote a novel about a brash, tells-it-like-it-is cult of personality dictator rising to power through democratic means on a right-wing, nativist, anti-Islamic, militaristic platform. (Although the novel is set in Europe, not the United States.) If you looked at elections in Europe, which account for much more fringe groups due to having multi-party systems, these kinds of platforms were snowballing popular support as early as 2004, when the Netherlands saw about 25% of its vote go to an extreme nativist party. The point is, none of what is happening now is coming out of nowhere, it's been building especially since the early 00s. Why? Well, terrorism is a major reason. Of course, people often don't realize that the exact aim of terrorism, and the best way for them to achieve their goals of inciting a race war between Muslims and the rest of the world, is to cause these kinds of institutionalized prejudices against Muslims that will then sway Muslims to the Jihadist cause. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Water Mage Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, Res said: The Trump Regrets twitter is infuriating. Who on earth are all these people who thought Trump would protect LGBTQ rights or the lives of Native Americans?! They probably heard Trump's speeches that appealed to their fear and heard Trump's promises for instant solutions for some of the US's problems, and voted for him without thinking things through. Speaking of Trump's promises, do you all think that he intends to send Hillary to jail, as he promised? And I wonder if anyone here on SF who supported Trump regrets voting for him. Edited January 31, 2017 by Water Mage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Res Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 14 minutes ago, Water Mage said: Speaking of Trump's promises, do you all think that he intends to send Hillary to jail, as he promised? And I wonder if anyone here on SF who supported Trump regrets voting for him. I think if there's one promise he *doesn't* keep, it'll be that. I think he has bigger fish to fry now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Time the Crestfallen Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 I find the Regret Trump thing to be more infuriating than anything else. Not even two weeks into a four year term and they're already feeling buyer's remorse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yojinbo Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 9 hours ago, Res said: Here's the link to the twitter account I was reading! That's actually quite pathetic. Trump has displayed his blatant incompetence on several occasions during the election campaign for everybody to see. Why people would regret their choice all of a sudden now that Trump actually keeps his promises [or at least tries to] is beyond me. All he's doing is trying to implement what he's been talking about for a long time now, people who voted him must've wanted it to be that way. Pathetic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Raven Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 @Res Michael Moore seems to agree with that medium article that we may see a coup from Trump and Bannon. Actually he's been speculating this for a few months now, because he said that we are fucked once a terrorist attack occurs - and they are definitely trying to provoke one, given that a memo was sent out stating the exact issue of the travel ban including green card holders and only including specific countries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Water Mage Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 I'm curious, when people say coup, what do they think Trump will do? Is it really possible for Trump to seize power indefinitely? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tryhard Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 classic power grab under the illusion of 'safety'. if a terrorist attack occurs, unite people through fear (or for fear of being labelled unpatriotic), crack down on civil liberties ala the patriot act, declare martial law against crime and terrorism. when the next election occurs, declare suspicions of fraudulent elections and delay proceedings until "we look into it and sort it out" possible, but for as much as I hate Trump, that seems more like how they would do it more than if they would Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.