Jump to content
Ansem

General US Politics

Recommended Posts

Trump is a fucking jerk for trying to withhold funds just because some states want vote by mail, especially with COVID-19 around. If Michigan wants to vote by mail, they can vote by mail. I am pretty sure the federal government cannot dictate how people vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, XRay said:

Trump is a fucking jerk for trying to withhold funds just because some states want vote by mail, especially with COVID-19 around. If Michigan wants to vote by mail, they can vote by mail. I am pretty sure the federal government cannot dictate how people vote.

It also lines up with a hypothetical that was brought up by lawyers suggesting Trump SHOULD be impeached during that "trial". I swear, there has to be politicians in the GOP that would still let it slide if Trump raped their daughters in front of their faces.

Edited by Dr. Tarrasque

Share this post


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

Trump is a fucking jerk for trying to withhold funds just because some states want vote by mail, especially with COVID-19 around. If Michigan wants to vote by mail, they can vote by mail. I am pretty sure the federal government cannot dictate how people vote.

that pussy deleted the tweet LOL

This was a response to said tweet -- you can see the tweet is now deleted. Trump's such a fucking idiot. I wish the media stopped calling him racist and the like and just called him a fucking idiot.

 

Edited by Lord Raven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can tell states are reopening because we're hearing about mass shootings in other states again.

Out of curiosity I've been looking out for masked faces for an idea of how many people are doing it as I run some errands. Major shopping centers are almost free of masked people. But 100% of people at the recycling center were masked. I guess there's an obvious correlation between people being socially responsible and people collecting plastic and cans. I thought the mask would suck too, but it was fine once I got past the smell of cheerios.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Excellen Browning said:

Now wait for the supreme court to overturn it.

The question is if there's enough time for them to do so before the November election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The man actually went and said something so ludicrous that even Twitter had enough and decided to apply a label to his tweet leading to actual information about mail-in ballots and absentee voting.

Naturally, his response once he found out was to claim that Twitter was not only violating freedom of speech, but interfering with the presidential election.

It never stops with this guy, honestly.

Share this post


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

The question is if there's enough time for them to do so before the November election.

They managed to overturn the Wisconsin state election mail-in ballot ruling within a month.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dai said:

The man actually went and said something so ludicrous that even Twitter had enough and decided to apply a label to his tweet leading to actual information about mail-in ballots and absentee voting.

Naturally, his response once he found out was to claim that Twitter was not only violating freedom of speech, but interfering with the presidential election.

It never stops with this guy, honestly.

He also targets Michigan and doesn't give a fuck about any of the red States doing it 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Dai said:

It never stops with this guy, honestly.

I assume this is him crying about the same news from two or three weeks ago. The only change in California is that if you're a registered voter, you're receiving a ballot in the mail this November without having to check a box on your voter registration. There will still be in-person voting options if you prefer that, just make sure to bring your mail ballot so that they can confirm its disposal in order to prevent the potential of double counting. If you're a registered voter and don't want to vote either way, you can throw your ballot in the garbage. This is not compulsory voting, or forced voter registration, just common sense assurance that the average voter could participate if they choose to. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, eclipse said:

More details on Trump vs. Twitter.

It's bad when a private company has to warn people about our president.  FFS.

I am glad that Twitter is starting to take action against Trump's constant misinformation, but I am also a little worried at the same time because they are so powerful and can potentially abuse their power.

While the courts currently say that companies cannot violate the First Amendment because they are not the government, I think I remember reading somewhere that Trump also is not allowed to block people on Twitter or something? It feels like there is a slight contradiction in that the courts are trying to regulate and not regulate social media at the same time.

I am against breaking up Facebook, Twitter, or any social media company as a solution to try to curb their power because that would inconvenience the users and the general public. One reason I like Facebook and Twitter is that it is easy to add people to your digital social network since most people have either one of them or both, and it is easier to manage one or two social media platforms than a dozen social media platforms. At the same time, I am not sure I want the government to regulate them extensively either because then it feels like it gives the government too much power in controlling speech. I guess I want a very light regulation of social media to stop obvious things like cyberbullying and scams, and I think fact checking is fine too. However, I am concerned that whether fact checking is enforced by the company or by the government, it may lead to further concentration of power and potential abuse of that power.

Share this post


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

While the courts currently say that companies cannot violate the First Amendment because they are not the government, I think I remember reading somewhere that Trump also is not allowed to block people on Twitter or something? It feels like there is a slight contradiction in that the courts are trying to regulate and not regulate social media at the same time.

Stopping Trump, a public official, from blocking people is regulating the president. If the president starts blocking people on a popular platform, it might interfere with the first amendment. I don't really see how this is regulating social media, given twitter in this regard still allows people to block each other if they so wish.

Share this post


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

Stopping Trump, a public official, from blocking people is regulating the president. If the president starts blocking people on a popular platform, it might interfere with the first amendment. I don't really see how this is regulating social media, given twitter in this regard still allows people to block each other if they so wish.

Hm, I guess that is true, but where do you draw the line? Trump is allowed to revoke press passes and block certain journalists and news organizations. Why is Trump's action more subject to regulation on Twitter's platform than the White's House own press conference platform?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, XRay said:

I am glad that Twitter is starting to take action against Trump's constant misinformation, but I am also a little worried at the same time because they are so powerful and can potentially abuse their power.

While the courts currently say that companies cannot violate the First Amendment because they are not the government, I think I remember reading somewhere that Trump also is not allowed to block people on Twitter or something? It feels like there is a slight contradiction in that the courts are trying to regulate and not regulate social media at the same time.

I am against breaking up Facebook, Twitter, or any social media company as a solution to try to curb their power because that would inconvenience the users and the general public. One reason I like Facebook and Twitter is that it is easy to add people to your digital social network since most people have either one of them or both, and it is easier to manage one or two social media platforms than a dozen social media platforms. At the same time, I am not sure I want the government to regulate them extensively either because then it feels like it gives the government too much power in controlling speech. I guess I want a very light regulation of social media to stop obvious things like cyberbullying and scams, and I think fact checking is fine too. However, I am concerned that whether fact checking is enforced by the company or by the government, it may lead to further concentration of power and potential abuse of that power.

Trump can't block people from viewing his twitter posts, since he's the president, has been using twitter as his primary means of sharing his opinions and views with the world (and he's been trying to rule by twitter decree for years now). As it's being used by him it's essentially a public forum, and that's why he can't just ban people (journalists from publications he dislikes) from viewing them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Excellen Browning said:

Trump can't block people from viewing his twitter posts, since he's the president, has been using twitter as his primary means of sharing his opinions and views with the world (and he's been trying to rule by twitter decree for years now). As it's being used by him it's essentially a public forum, and that's why he can't just ban people (journalists from publications he dislikes) from viewing them. 

Yeah, I get that part now, but what makes it okay for him to deny press passes to the White House press conferences but not okay for him to block people on Twitter? Why is Trump's action treated differently on Twitter versus his press conferences? Does White House's press conferences not fall under public forum too?

Edited by XRay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, XRay said:

Yeah, I get that part now, but what makes it okay for him to deny press passes to the White House press conferences but not okay for him to block people on Twitter? Why is Trump's action treated differently on Twitter versus his press conferences? Does White House's press conferences not fall under public forum too?

It doesn't make it okay for him to deny press passes to the press for his normal press briefings and as far as I know the courts told him to fuck off on this one as well. 

In principle they're the same thing, anyway.

Share this post


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

and as far as I know the courts told him to fuck off on this one as well. 

Ah, okay, just read up a little on that on Google. Good to know the courts are being consistent in this regard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose I'll also give the hot take that it truly is a sad day when/if the so-called left begs social media corporations to step in and believes they have the authority or impartiality to make the call on what are the facts.

Trump is a liar, this is undoubtedly true, but the left should place no faith in social media corporations actually to represent the truth. If this was just going to be on this claim (which is demonstrably false) only, then maybe it wouldn't be an issue but from what Twitter said, they implied it would be a thing going forward.

Edited by Tryhard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Tryhard said:

I suppose I'll also give the hot take that it truly is a sad day when/if the so-called left begs social media corporations to step in and believes they have the authority or impartiality to make the call on what are the facts.

Trump is a liar, this is undoubtedly true, but the left should place no faith in social media corporations actually to represent the truth. If this was just going to be on this claim (which is demonstrably false) only, then maybe it wouldn't be an issue but from what Twitter said, they implied it would be a thing going forward.

I'm all for additional sources (which is apparently what happened).  It will also tell me what kind of bias the media platform has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Tryhard said:

I suppose I'll also give the hot take that it truly is a sad day when/if the so-called left begs social media corporations to step in and believes they have the authority or impartiality to make the call on what are the facts.

Trump is a liar, this is undoubtedly true, but the left should place no faith in social media corporations actually to represent the truth. If this was just going to be on this claim (which is demonstrably false) only, then maybe it wouldn't be an issue but from what Twitter said, they implied it would be a thing going forward.

I have a bit of a hot take that Jack Dorsey has some degree of conscience. Having that said, I'd figure this is a test run and somewhat of a more incremental measure that was halfassedly implemented.

I think at some point they need to cut that part out and possibly alter it to include a bunch of places to discuss the meaning of a hashtag or something. I'm just shitting out ideas, though.

I'd say also that they should add some degree of freedom to monitor federal politician and the state Governor's tweets for fact checks or something. Or just allow tweets to be like 3000 characters long or some shit. Fuck 300 characters. Ain't nobody going on twitter to read longass tweets anyway.

Regardless, what an acid trip the last few days have been politically. I haven't even talked about it at my house but everyone knows and everyone is too in agreement to even have a discussion.

I also want to make the point that you can't literally sue the president of the united states for lying his ass off on twitter and causing harassment. This man is a grown up troll using grown up troll powers to test any air bud flaw in our institutions. I don't even think he's a bad faith actor, I just think he's literally all of us if we had an ego but were a billionaire from birth.

I think it's like if you just coast off of being a billionaire for your entire life... except the version of you that gets mad during an internet argument, without any of the education, who is given a billion dollars. That's who Trump actually is, and because this shit will in no way affect him he can make some dumb ass statements, do some dumb ass shit, and then just go back to being president because he can literally do whatever the actual fuck he wants with no repercussions. Now, he has to go through a bunch of avenues for, say, launch codes. But he can say shit on twitter to spite people you don't like who talk shit to you. I dunno, I think these Hitler takes are dumb because Hitler actually had an agenda. I view it as mitigating damage from... the president of the united states, to some extent. It's a reactionary way to react to a reactionary, and once Trump is out we really do need to take a really hard look in the mirror because currently the Republican party are in serious trouble...

Edited by Lord Raven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So... Minneapolis is burning because another Treyvon Martin incident happened.

...yeah.

Share this post


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

So... Minneapolis is burning because another Treyvon Martin incident happened.

...yeah.

I think it's tough to describe my feelings but... there's a lot of protest everywhere right now in spite of COVID, and currently it's really really pressuring people because nobody really listened or cared. Those that did listen got blocked. It's significantly more inspiring than all of the previous ones.

There's a lot of peaceful protest too. They seem to be mainly targeting more stores that can afford it, like Target and CVS and etc. Those companies can get over it. There's residual damage but at this point the black community is basically almost surrendering their life it feels like a crazy significant amount more time than any other demographic in this country, and nothing's been done about it as a nation. That's fucked and some degree of empathy and some degree of reversed helplessness is needed, especially to see who would react how and who's with them vs against them.

And truth be told, the same measures that would basically disallow prejudices would benefit literally everyone. The same measures that would cause police to stop shooting black people (general de-escalation, proper diversity training that's legitimately uncomfortable that you need in order to pass, more education, things to that effect) would benefit literally anyone who has been a victim of police violence. Black people are shot on the street like dogs in this country.

The only reason it's not bipartisan is either white supremacy within the votership or a general lack of good knowledge/communication about the issue. Like people see politics and transactions as zero sum still, when in reality it's just propping others up with you. I think they've been trained to find someone to look down on by people who prey on white supremacy, without truly understanding they're doing it, and that's just wholly too common. But I'm ranting here, we really need someone who's actually knowledgeable of issues and empathetic and talks like Joe Exotic. That guy can fix all of our problems.

Share this post


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.

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...