politics Post Election Thread: Democracy Dies In Darkness And You Can Help

[Jeeps_Guns_Tanks]

13 minutes ago, Oedipus Wreckx-n-Effect said:

 

Interesting. I wonder if it's at all true.

 

http://www.shearsocialmedia.com/2018/08/top-college-tried-to-reject-applicant-who-followed-alex-jones-on-twitter.html

 

https://www.newswars.com/college-grilled-prospective-student-for-following-alex-jones-on-twitter-lawyer/

 

https://www.cnn.com/2016/09/21/health/kids-social-media-college-admissions/index.html

 

https://www.dailywire.com/news/34274/warning-colleges-may-reject-you-based-who-you-ashe-schow

 

 

Who knows.

Hey look the left showing its support for freedom of speech again.

 

 

[Donward]

25 minutes ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

 

 

This story has nothing to do with anything.  She wasn't even on the ballot, let alone the Democratic candidate for her district.  Anyhow, if you want to start comparing which party has more nutcase candidates for US house races, I just want to point out that the Republicans can boast of a handful of candidates that are literal Nazis. 

 

 

Calm down man. I'm mostly just cracking wise by running my "But muh Blue Wave" joke into the ground in the quest for good comedy.

 

Of course the chick is just some random.

 

On the other hand, if it was a "GOP" candidate, this would have made the news crawl on CNN. And there is a healthy bit of irony when it's a Democrat wielding a gun.

 

...

 

(And to be fair, the New York Post covered it but mostly because of the tabloid aspect of it.)

[Walter_Sobchak]

2 minutes ago, Donward said:

Calm down man.

 

 

[Lostwingman]

30 minutes ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

Hey look the left showing its support for freedom of speech again.

 

 

Politics is projection.

[Jeeps_Guns_Tanks]

32 minutes ago, Lostwingman said:

Politics is projection.

 

 

It's like they don't understand, eventually, the government will declare their speech hate speech and ban it too, if we let that camel's nose under the tent.  The left was far easier to support/take seriously when they were not blatantly anti-free speech.  Ironically, if they did get hate speech laws passed, a bunch of vile leftists who spew hatred at white, and Jewish people would be the majority of the people punished. At least if the law were not written to blatantly attack only right-wingers,  but I don't think the left has fallen that far, nor could they get a biased law passed, and then the supreme court, even a few of the lefties on it, would still kill it.  This is why Trump's judge pics have been so good.   

[Lostwingman]

2 minutes ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

 

 

It's like they don't understand, eventually, the government will declare their speech hate speech and ban it too, if we let that camel's nose under the tent.  The left was far easier to support/take seriously when they were not blatantly anti-free speech.  Ironically, if they did get hate speech laws passed, a bunch of vile leftists who spew hatred at white, and Jewish people would be the majority of the people punished. At least if the law were not written to blatantly attack only right-wingers,  but I don't think the left has fallen that far, nor could they get a biased law passed, and then the supreme court, even a few of the lefties on it, would still kill it.  This is why Trump's judge pics have been so good.   

 

 

These people can't see past their "right side of history" crap. 

 

It seems the courts are still operational though. Getting BTFO of the 9th circuit, ooof.

 

[Sturgeon]

1 hour ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

 

I'm sure they all have their platforms posted on campaign websites in case you want to prove your point.  Anyhow, while I am sure there are a number of democratic candidates who are socialists, I doubt there are any that resemble of the hardline communists of old, demanding the liquidation of the Kulaks and Stalinist re-education camps.  Most of the "democratic socialist" candidates seem to be espousing something more in line with the socialist policies of some of the Western European countries.  

 

Nope, look up Ocasio-Cortez's platform. And look at the party she comes from.

 

The optics of somebody like her who wants to force post-capitalism (which always leads to mass death) are pretty bad - but the no enemies on the left, no friends on the right is the rule du jour for the left these days.

[Walter_Sobchak]

33 minutes ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

 

 

It's like they don't understand, eventually, the government will declare their speech hate speech and ban it too, if we let that camel's nose under the tent.  The left was far easier to support/take seriously when they were not blatantly anti-free speech.  Ironically, if they did get hate speech laws passed, a bunch of vile leftists who spew hatred at white, and Jewish people would be the majority of the people punished. At least if the law were not written to blatantly attack only right-wingers,  but I don't think the left has fallen that far, nor could they get a biased law passed, and then the supreme court, even a few of the lefties on it, would still kill it.  This is why Trump's judge pics have been so good.   

 

Pretty sure Harvard is a private university. 

[Sturgeon]

Like, as history people, we can all agree that Communism and National Socialism are both failed ideologies. They aren't failed because they are distasteful, they are distasteful because they are failed.

The Nazis were early political standard bearers for scientific racism and eugenics. At the time, it wasn't known what negative effects this would have - and it turns out it leads to horrific racially-motivated genocide (and a shitty economy). 

 

The Communists bore the standard of aggressive forced post-capitalist economic theory. At the time, it wasn't known what negative effects this would have - and it turns out it leads to starvation and horrific politically-motivated genocide (and a disaster of an economy).

So from my perspective, if a left-wing candidate is associated with CPUSA, or the Democratic Socialists, then I find that essentially equivalent to right-wing candidates being associated with the NSWPP, from a political perspective.

But, as has been pointed out, oh, eighty bajillion times now including by you, the two Nazis on the ballots got there despite Republican resistance in areas where the Republicans didn't run any opposition due to the districts being deep blue. They have not been endorsed by the Republican Party, and I believe have actually been condemned by them.

 

Ocasio-Cortez certainly hasn't been condemned by the DNC, although it sounds like they are writhing in agony over her victory. Yet, if her politics get mainstreamed (and that's a whole lot more likely than Nazis becoming mainstream), people will die in large numbers, in all likelihood.

[Lostwingman]

35 minutes ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

 

Pretty sure Harvard is a private university. 

 

Pretty sure we frown upon political discrimination, if we can even call this that.

 

Then again, if you wanna try winning this point you gotta accept the "it's a private X" for a whole host of things you didn't think through. Just asking for a friend but...you vote Goldwater?

[Jeeps_Guns_Tanks]

44 minutes ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

 

Pretty sure Harvard is a private university. 

 

 

Not sure what your response has to do with the lefts blatant, across the board attack on Free Speech. Frankly, the left wing pushing hate speech laws is a bigger threat to this country than anything Trump has done. 

[Donward]

Harvard gets about a half billion dollars in federal funding despite being a private university.

 

https://247wallst.com/special-report/2017/03/22/universities-getting-the-most-money-from-the-federal-government/3/

 

This story was also linked by HuffPo.

[Jeeps_Guns_Tanks]

Here's the left supporting free speech.

 

 

 

[Walter_Sobchak]

6 minutes ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

 

 

Not sure what your response has to do with the lefts blatant, across the board attack on Free Speech. Frankly, the left wing pushing hate speech laws is a bigger threat to this country than anything Trump has done. 

 

Read the linked articles again.  One is a blog post by the lawyer of someone who claims they were asked by a school administrator why they followed Alex Jones.  Then there is another blog post repeating the lawyers blog post, and then an article repeating the story as well.  The other link is a CNN article that does not mention Alex Jones at all, it just notes that college admissions officers are examining prospects social media history.  So basically, we have one example of this supposed "political" censorship.  Although, its not censorship since Harvard is a private institution.  Just like a prospective employer might look at your social media presence to make sure they are not hiring a Nazi or a flat earther or whatever.  If you follow the link provided in the one post giving examples of other times when an applicant was turned down because of their social media history, the examples cited were not political, but rather because people were posting pretty gross and stupid stuff.  

 

"In the group, students sent each other memes and other images mocking sexual assault, the Holocaust, and the deaths of children, according to screenshots of the chat obtained by The Crimson. Some of the messages joked that abusing children was sexually arousing, while others had punchlines directed at specific ethnic or racial groups. One called the hypothetical hanging of a Mexican child “piñata time.”

After discovering the existence and contents of the chat, Harvard administrators revoked admissions offers to at least ten participants in mid-April, according to several members of the group. University officials have previously said that Harvard’s decision to rescind a student’s offer is final."

 

  

[Jeeps_Guns_Tanks]

3 minutes ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

 

Read the linked articles again.  One is a blog post by the lawyer of someone who claims they were asked by a school administrator why they followed Alex Jones.  Then there is another blog post repeating the lawyers blog post, and then an article repeating the story as well.  The other link is a CNN article that does not mention Alex Jones at all, it just notes that college admissions officers are examining prospects social media history.  So basically, we have one example of this supposed "political" censorship.  Although, its not censorship since Harvard is a private institution.  Just like a prospective employer might look at your social media presence to make sure they are not hiring a Nazi or a flat earther or whatever.  If you follow the link provided in the one post giving examples of other times when an applicant was turned down because of their social media history, the examples cited were not political, but rather because people were posting pretty gross and stupid stuff.  

 

"In the group, students sent each other memes and other images mocking sexual assault, the Holocaust, and the deaths of children, according to screenshots of the chat obtained by The Crimson. Some of the messages joked that abusing children was sexually arousing, while others had punchlines directed at specific ethnic or racial groups. One called the hypothetical hanging of a Mexican child “piñata time.”

After discovering the existence and contents of the chat, Harvard administrators revoked admissions offers to at least ten participants in mid-April, according to several members of the group. University officials have previously said that Harvard’s decision to rescind a student’s offer is final."

 

  

 

I hope you don't approve of private leftist corps acting like fascists, cause its not the government.   Anyway, I wasn't responding to any link or a particular post. I'm making the statement, I think I've been making for years, that leftist in this country no longer value free speech. 

 

And yeah, I know the 1st Amendment, only protects us from Government action, and even though Don posted about how much money they take, that's not even the point. The point is, Freedom of Speech is a plain old good idea, a good idea for everyone.  I am very suspicious of anyone who wants to restrict free speech. I find it disgusting Harvard is doing something like this, but its par for the course, whats shocking is anyone is defending them with "well they are a private" line of BS.  

 

You act like this is the first time this has come up, but just go back and read the descents on the last few Freedom of Speech cases that went through the supreme court. 

 

 

[Walter_Sobchak]

5 minutes ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

 

I hope you don't approve of private leftist corps acting like fascists, cause its not the government.   Anyway, I wasn't responding to any link or a particular post. I'm making the statement, I think I've been making for years, that leftist in this country no longer value free speech. 

 

And yeah, I know the 1st Amendment, only protects us from Government action, and even though Don posted about how much money they take, that's not even the point. The point is, Freedom of Speech is a plain old good idea, a good idea for everyone.  I am very suspicious of anyone who wants to restrict free speech. I find it disgusting Harvard is doing something like this, but its par for the course, whats shocking is anyone is defending them with "well they are a private" line of BS.  

 

You act like this is the first time this has come up, but just go back and read the descents on the last few Freedom of Speech cases that went through the supreme court. 

 

 

 

Be that as i may, I like evidence.  All that was in those articles were the claims of one lawyer.  And yes, I like freedom of speech just fine.  I also think that Universities have gotten a bit silly in how much they coddle students these days.  That said, it's fairly low on the list of my current concerns regarding the health of the nation.

[Jeeps_Guns_Tanks]

57 minutes ago, Walter_Sobchak said:

 

Be that as i may, I like evidence.  All that was in those articles were the claims of one lawyer.  And yes, I like freedom of speech just fine.  I also think that Universities have gotten a bit silly in how much they coddle students these days.  That said, it's fairly low on the list of my current concerns regarding the health of the nation.

 

 

Yes, because the Trump admin, who has a record-breaking economy going, with record-breaking low unemployment, and a higher GDP than Obama ever achieved, and who has our NATO allies finally taking defense seriously and starting to pay their fair share, and who has gotten the remains of lost soldiers from North Korea, and who got a tax cut through that helped me and everyone I know, and appointed a great judge,  is much more concerning than one party going insane, and throwing away its long-held values to try and resist Trump, while ignoring all the good he has done. 

 

P.S. SPACEFORCE!

[Donward]

In the interest of bi-partisanship, here's some red-meat for the Democrats/Socialists.

 

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez just strapped on her dildo and verbally ass-raped Ben Shapiro on Twitter today.

 

 

 

Apparently Pajama Boy Shapiro and his minions at DailyWire have been trolling Ocasio-Cortez' social media accounts challenging her to a debate in exchange for $10,000 (donated to "charity"). Because it's not like Ocasio-Cortez is involved in a political campaign to get elected and actually has an opponent in the race to debate. But she has to debate Ben Shapiro for some reason who doesn't even live in her Congressional District and is from California. And in taking him down a peg, she has made Shapiro look like a cheap pervert.

 

And now the gang at DailyWire is busy clutching their pearls and collapsing on their collective feinting couches because their fearless leader got beat up by a girl, claiming that Ocasio-Cortez has "slandered" Shapiro.

 

https://www.dailywire.com/news/34321/twitter-explodes-after-ocasio-cortez-attacks-ryan-saavedra

 

"Twitter exploded on Thursday after democratic socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez slandered Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro in response to the debate offer he extended to her earlier in the week, leading many prominent accounts to slam the 28-year-old bartender turned politician."

 

And it's stupid shit like this that annoys me with modern politics, where even the GOP intelligentsia tries to score political points by seeing who can get offended the hardest after their cheap political stunt fails.

 

 

 

God Shapiro is such a pussy.

 

[Belesarius]

20 minutes ago, Donward said:

In the interest of bi-partisanship, here's some red-meat for the Democrats/Socialists.

 

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez just strapped on her dildo and verbally ass-raped Ben Shapiro on Twitter today.

 

 

 

Apparently Pajama Boy Shapiro and his minions at DailyWire have been trolling Ocasio-Cortez' social media accounts challenging her to a debate in exchange for $10,000 (donated to "charity"). Because it's not like Ocasio-Cortez is involved in a political campaign to get elected and actually has an opponent in the race to debate. But she has to debate Ben Shapiro for some reason who doesn't even live in her Congressional District and is from California. And in taking him down a peg, she has made Shapiro look like a cheap pervert.

 

And now the gang at DailyWire is busy clutching their pearls and collapsing on their collective feinting couches because their fearless leader got beat up by a girl, claiming that Ocasio-Cortez has "slandered" Shapiro.

 

https://www.dailywire.com/news/34321/twitter-explodes-after-ocasio-cortez-attacks-ryan-saavedra

 

"Twitter exploded on Thursday after democratic socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez slandered Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro in response to the debate offer he extended to her earlier in the week, leading many prominent accounts to slam the 28-year-old bartender turned politician."

 

And it's stupid shit like this that annoys me with modern politics, where even the GOP intelligentsia tries to score political points by seeing who can get offended the hardest after their cheap political stunt fails.

 

 

 

God Shapiro is such a pussy.

 

It's no wonder why the country elected a notorious trash talker who isn't afraid to talk shit.

 

I wouldn't care which political alignment you are.  Ouch. That was a bitchslap.

 

[Lostwingman]

Ben Shapiro is such an insufferable little weasel.

 

How the fuck do you get BTFO by the clueless socialist? Also "GOP Intelligentsia" are fucking hacks and shills. Absolutely useless and unaware talking heads like Bill Kristol need to just peacefully sunset themselves into a self-exile. 

 

Edit:

Aaaand ofc I go onto twitter and one of the random youtubers I enjoy had a better come back than Benji:

"Let me get this straight. You are a politician; who doesn't want to debate politics.

Retard."

[Sturgeon]

I had to stop reading before I grew a vagina.

[Walter_Sobchak]

9 hours ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

 

is much more concerning than one party going insane, and throwing away its long-held values to try and resist Trump, while ignoring all the good he has done. 

 

 

 

Yes, I to think it's a shame the Republican party threw away what remained of its values and dignity.  Oh wait,  you were talking about the Democrats?

 

anyhow, enough snark.

You say the economy is doing great.  Yes, for corporations, who got the lions share of the tax cut.  Wages for working people are stagnant, and the average US worker has nothing in savings.  This is not a new trend, but Trump's "great" economy has done nothing to reverse this trend.  And of course, while the corporate tax cuts are permanent, the ones for individuals end in ten years.  I figure that's about when they will use the excuse that there is a huge hole in the federal budget (due to the Bush Jr and Trump tax cuts) to start seriously cutting entitlements.  So, kiss your social security and medicaid goodbye by the time any of us need it.

 

As to NATO, please stop using Trumps deliberately misleading rhetoric.  No one "pays" anything.  The issue is whether or not member states are "spending" enough on defense, not "paying" money to anyone.  The 2% goal is not something Trump created, it actually is a long standing goal established by previous administrations.  Trump's main "accomplishment" regarding NATO has been to cause our allies to have serious doubts as to the US willingness to actually Article 5 of the NATO treaty.  

 

On other foreign policy issues, he tore up the Iran deal, then said he would be willing to talk to the Iranians.  Predictably, the Iranians were not in any hurry to talk to a leader who just arbitrarily withdrew from a treaty signed only a few years ago.  By reimposing sanctions on Iran, Trump has created another dilemma  regarding European relations, who have not disavowed the Iran deal. 

 

So far, negotiations with North Korea have gotten the return of US soldier remains, but as far as actual progress on the dismantling of NK's nuclear capability, recent reports claim that NK research and development is continuing.  Actually, Mike Pompeo stated it himself last month.  As to US - Russian relations, Trump went to meet with Putin in Helsinki, and the results were, shall we say, a little odd...

 

One the international economic front, he seems to think tariffs are the magic bullet.  Frankly, it's still probably too soon to tell exactly what impact these tariffs will have, although Trump already has had to bribe US farmers with $12 billion dollars to make up for their tariff related losses.  If we are lucky, prices on consumer goods will not go up too dramatically as this trade war escalates.

 

As to his skill as an executive leader, the Trump white house has been an absolute mess.  Never before have we seen an administration with such a quick turnover of high ranking positions.  Most of his cabinet heads seemed to have been picked based on their antipathy for the department they are supposed to head.  His first EPA choice, Scott Pruitt, ended up in over a dozen ethics investigations.  Zinke, the head of interior, has had a few ethical issues of his own.  Betsy Devos, sec of Ed, went in front of congress and delivered one of the most embarrassing performances by a cabinet head ever.  Tom Price, of Health and Human services had to resign over misuse of department money for travel.  Ben Carson seems to like very expensive office furniture.  

 

As far as Trump's primary campaign promises, most are still unfulfilled. 

 

The Wall?  Congress has not been able to come up with a new immigration bill, let alone funding for the wall.  The idea that Mexico will pay for the wall seems to have been quietly abandoned.  The only accomplishment by Trump on immigration so far has been to put children in cages. 

 

His other big promise, to repeal and replace Obamacare with something better has not materialized either.  He's managed to cripple the AHCA to a certain extent, but the law still stands, and it is doubtful congress will take up the issue of repeal any time soon. 

 

And then there is the promise to "drain the swamp", whatever that means exactly.  If it means getting rid of corruption, perhaps he should have started with his own campaign?  Currently, we have Trump's former campaign manager on trail, the star witness being Trump's former deputy campaign manager.  Both are accused of serious financial crimes. His commerce Secretary, Wilbur Ross, has been accused of grifting $120 million dollars.  His son and son in law are prime targets for the Mueller probe, and Trump himself has admitted that the two willing attended a meeting during the campaign with the goal of securing damaging information about Trump's opponent from agents of a foreign government.  Meanwhile, a different legal case is proceeding regarding Trump's potential violations of the emoluments clause.  Given that Trump refused to disclose his tax returns to the American public, or to effectively distance himself from his business empire while president, the notion that he is financially benefiting from his elected office is not all that far-fetched. 

 

Meanwhile, Trump's approval ratings have stayed fairly flat, hovering in the 40-45 % range.  The republican establishment is scared as hell of November, knowing that Trump has alienated all but his base.  Just look at all the high profile republicans who decided to retire to "spend more time with their families."  Most of what Trump has accomplished so far has been done the same way his predecessor did it, with executive orders.  And as we have seen, executive orders are not nearly as long lasting or as durable as actual laws.  If Trump loses the congress in November, you can be guaranteed that the next two years of his presidency will be even less productive. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Oedipus Wreckx-n-Effect]

I bet Democrats would care more about unborn babies if they were allowed to register them as voters prior to exiting the womb. 

[Walter_Sobchak]

12 hours ago, Sturgeon said:

Like, as history people, we can all agree that Communism and National Socialism are both failed ideologies. They aren't failed because they are distasteful, they are distasteful because they are failed.

The Nazis were early political standard bearers for scientific racism and eugenics. At the time, it wasn't known what negative effects this would have - and it turns out it leads to horrific racially-motivated genocide (and a shitty economy). 

 

The Communists bore the standard of aggressive forced post-capitalist economic theory. At the time, it wasn't known what negative effects this would have - and it turns out it leads to starvation and horrific politically-motivated genocide (and a disaster of an economy).

So from my perspective, if a left-wing candidate is associated with CPUSA, or the Democratic Socialists, then I find that essentially equivalent to right-wing candidates being associated with the NSWPP, from a political perspective.

But, as has been pointed out, oh, eighty bajillion times now including by you, the two Nazis on the ballots got there despite Republican resistance in areas where the Republicans didn't run any opposition due to the districts being deep blue. They have not been endorsed by the Republican Party, and I believe have actually been condemned by them.

 

Ocasio-Cortez certainly hasn't been condemned by the DNC, although it sounds like they are writhing in agony over her victory. Yet, if her politics get mainstreamed (and that's a whole lot more likely than Nazis becoming mainstream), people will die in large numbers, in all likelihood.

 

Again, you keep using Communism and Socialism interchangeably.  I looked at the platform for Ocasio-Cortez, most of it is pretty much a continuation of New Deal style policy.  I saw nothing about the liquidation of Kulaks, imposition of single party rule, or the collectivization of the means of production.  And please, don't assume that I support her entire platform.  Some of it sounds wildly impractical from a financial standpoint.  That said, I don't think she is the second coming of Stalin, nor is it fair to compare her to some of the extreme right nutjobs that have surfaced on the Republican ticket in non-competitive districts.  And yes, the Democratic establishment is not all that happy with her.  For that fact alone, I am sort of happy she is around.  

[Walter_Sobchak]

8 minutes ago, Oedipus Wreckx-n-Effect said:

I bet Democrats would care more about unborn babies if they were allowed to register them as voters prior to exiting the womb. 

 

That would perhaps be the weirdest canvassing job ever.