Murrica: fuck yeah

..et d'autres discussions ennuyeuses
User avatar
Dr_Chimera
Registered Broad
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:50 pm
Has given rep: 140 times
Received rep: 423 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11601 by Dr_Chimera » Sat Aug 18, 2018 5:42 pm

Social media, like twitter, is great for average folks like us to talk shit to, and gang up on, powerful rich people of high society. These are the same kinds of people who later complain about mobs and how they make them uncomfortable, silence them and so forth (think Bari Weiss, Bret Stephens, Elon Musk).

I don't know if Kierkegaard had anything to say about that. But Jonathan Swift would love it.
User avatar
chicpea
Registered Broad
Posts: 18058
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 11:09 pm
Location: lagoons or ditches
Has given rep: 747 times
Received rep: 438 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11602 by chicpea » Sat Aug 18, 2018 7:03 pm

I wish Prince Charles were online.
User avatar
Slick Nick
Registered Broad
Posts: 9470
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 11:40 pm
Has given rep: 1203 times
Received rep: 747 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11603 by Slick Nick » Sat Aug 18, 2018 9:51 pm

Dr_Chimera wrote:Social media, like twitter, is great for average folks like us to talk shit to, and gang up on, powerful rich people of high society. These are the same kinds of people who later complain about mobs and how they make them uncomfortable, silence them and so forth (think Bari Weiss, Bret Stephens, Elon Musk).

I don't know if Kierkegaard had anything to say about that. But Jonathan Swift would love it.


What about 4chan trolls, or RUSSIAN TROLLS?
User avatar
Dr_Chimera
Registered Broad
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:50 pm
Has given rep: 140 times
Received rep: 423 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11604 by Dr_Chimera » Sat Aug 18, 2018 11:04 pm

Slick Nick wrote:What about 4chan trolls, or RUSSIAN TROLLS?


I don't spend enough time on 4chan to comment on this. I know one thing though: I have seen The Goodbye Girl and Dreyfuss's performance was not all that and a bag of chips.
User avatar
Shawnathan Horcoff
Registered Broad
Posts: 37825
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2007 7:51 am
Has given rep: 546 times
Received rep: 747 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11605 by Shawnathan Horcoff » Sun Aug 19, 2018 3:25 am

mayoradamwest wrote:People are terrible at knowing when something isn't going their way, and unfortunately stupidity - ignorance is a root cause.

Fear based politics are really being pushed, though educated people also fall into it... We seem to believe what we want to. Seems like there's an ever present theme that self motivated actions are the only logical option, and to me the overarching debate of expanding services provided by the government vs trying to use free market mechanisms has been completely replaced with a collective vs extreme individualism debate. And - that there is a huge collective of people convinced that working together at a larger level is impossible and illogical who insist on running government is, at its heart, stupid.


Don't worry, maw (my good friend), I've got this:

Dog wrote:I think alot of Kirk’s positions on the press/public opinion are informed by his being the subject of ridicule in the press. Thin skinned and elitist response.

Regardless of the “masses are idiots” instincts of many “elites”, I think people (elites and proles alike) all tend to broadly espouse self-serving positions. They can certainly be indoctrinized and manipulated, but when we look at broad trends, positions and worldviews can often be explained by real self interest and/or emerge from the particular circumstances applicable to a given demographic.

If one feels the masses are going “crazy”, I think we have to look at why -what’s the undelying cause/force pushing towards that- and address it (whether accomodating it or fighting it). Address it at the root causes/issues, not dismiss it as “stupid”. People may be more or less eloquent, but they are all pretty good at sensing when something’s not going their way. I often find myself amazed at how much popular movements point to things I’m completely oblivious to (from my own position within society). Like I stated earlier, the current broad based wave of populism taking hold signals deep discontent. It shouldn’t be dismissed as “stupid”. Causes should be searched for and addressed.


Image
Also, let's keep this thread about Galchenyuk's on-ice performance, development and value and NOT bring in his personal life or race.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 58321
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1931 times
Received rep: 1292 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11606 by Dog » Sun Aug 19, 2018 9:40 am

I’m not saying people generally are well informed and make the best long term policy decisions. I’m saying that I tend to think actions, both deliberative and purely reactive ones, have their roots in circumstances. Demographics are extremely predictive of voting. To me, that fact is inescapable. I think in trying to decipher why a certain demographic votes a certain way, we have to look beyond “they are stupid and/or manipulated”. The same could be said of all sides -that’s how it looks like from the opposing view. I tend to think liberalism is something that naturally appeals to middle/upper middle more educated demographics because that worldview suits them and their position in society. Sometimes, they can “sell it” to other strata and sometimes they can’t. Rural folks will tend to be more conservative also because of their historical circumstances. Young people more idealistic and reform oriented. Old folks more conservative. Working class more weary of things like trade and immigration, because it affects them more directly (they primarily face the competition from both). Minorities, even if they can themselves be deeply conservative, will massively support more liberal/pluralist policies for obvious reasons. None of that is stupid. Their roots can be explained and you can see why different demographics have different leanings. Pro-authoritariasm stances can be explained when the need for a firm hand to stear/bulldoze in a give direction is felt.

I think currents -especially when they are changing- signal something profound (that may be invisible from my own viewpoint). The solutions pushed forth can suck, but the movement towards somethings signals that causes are pushing given demographics in a certain direction. The causes will tend to be multifaceted and complex, but I think they really have to be looked at and addressed (which doesn’t mean the vkewpoint amd proposed solutions have to be accepted). I think popular movements are quite informative as to underlying concerns and desires. Any productive debate or negotiation needs to have good knowledge of the underlying beliefs, concerns and desires of opposing views.

I don’t really believe in enlightened despots. The moment a group ceases to have a voice, its interests will start to get disregarded. Even in the unrealistic and idealized scenario of a trully selfless despot working solely in the greatest public interest (that notion itself will be subjective) -that despot/central authority/governing elite will have impecfect access to information. It would have to “poll” to get a feel for concerns.
User avatar
Dr_Chimera
Registered Broad
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:50 pm
Has given rep: 140 times
Received rep: 423 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11607 by Dr_Chimera » Sun Aug 19, 2018 4:29 pm

Dog wrote:I don’t really believe in enlightened despots. The moment a group ceases to have a voice, its interests will start to get disregarded. Even in the unrealistic and idealized scenario of a trully selfless despot working solely in the greatest public interest (that notion itself will be subjective) -that despot/central authority/governing elite will have impecfect access to information. It would have to “poll” to get a feel for concerns.


This would have been a scorching hot take 120 years ago.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 58321
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1931 times
Received rep: 1292 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11608 by Dog » Sun Aug 19, 2018 4:55 pm

Dr_Chimera wrote:
Dog wrote:I don’t really believe in enlightened despots. The moment a group ceases to have a voice, its interests will start to get disregarded. Even in the unrealistic and idealized scenario of a trully selfless despot working solely in the greatest public interest (that notion itself will be subjective) -that despot/central authority/governing elite will have impecfect access to information. It would have to “poll” to get a feel for concerns.


This would have been a scorching hot take 120 years ago.


Do you think it could get published in your Jacobin magazine you repeatedly link to? Seems to reside in roughly the same time period.
User avatar
Dr_Chimera
Registered Broad
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:50 pm
Has given rep: 140 times
Received rep: 423 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11609 by Dr_Chimera » Sun Aug 19, 2018 5:24 pm

I think Reader's Digest would dig it.
User avatar
Dr_Chimera
Registered Broad
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:50 pm
Has given rep: 140 times
Received rep: 423 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11610 by Dr_Chimera » Sun Aug 19, 2018 5:30 pm

Hey guys,

About those enlightened despots, I gotta say I'm not a fan. Don't want to badmouth anybody, but I think we can do without them. Sorry if I'm stirring any controversy with this.

And about all of those people upset about stuff, we should listen very carefully and really pay attention to the underlying roots of their discontent.

Also Raquel, just a second, I had a thought. This show is being seen all over the world. I was thinking, if we could all just send good thoughts, transmit them through these cameras here, to the elected leader of China, Wing Wa Woo Tong, so that they might finally be nice. Thank you.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 58321
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1931 times
Received rep: 1292 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11611 by Dog » Sun Aug 19, 2018 5:48 pm

Bit too long for a vacuous tweet. Unsettling.

The issue being discussed started with Nick posting somewhat about the masses being given too much space in public discourse. The enlightened despot was absolutely tongue-in-cheek (I like to use colour on the internets), but at its root is the belief that popular currents have substantive underpinnings which shouldn’t be dismissed.

You know, Doctor, how about you engage and defend your positions. You seem to me to be exceptionally dogmatic, without an inkling of desire or openless to expose views fully and debate them. You prefer to close down, hiding behind insecure smugness, thinking you hold the Unquestionable Truth in your retarded communist ideals.
User avatar
Dr_Chimera
Registered Broad
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:50 pm
Has given rep: 140 times
Received rep: 423 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11612 by Dr_Chimera » Sun Aug 19, 2018 5:56 pm

Dog wrote:Bit too long for a vacuous tweet. Unsettling.

The issue being discussed started with Nick posting somewhat about the masses being given too much space in public discourse. The enlightened despot was absolutely tongue-in-cheek (I like to use colour on the internets), but at its root is the belief that popular currents have substantive underpinnings which shouldn’t be dismissed.

You know, Doctor, how about you engage and defend your positions. You seem to me to be exceptionally dogmatic, without an inkling of desire or openless to expose views fully and debate them. You prefer to close down, hiding behind insecure smugness, thinking you hold the Unquestionable Truth in your retarded communist ideals.


Debate what? I am not really disagreeing with you about anything.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 58321
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1931 times
Received rep: 1292 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11613 by Dog » Sun Aug 19, 2018 5:57 pm

Comrades,

The age of the liberal swine is coming to an end. We will free the oppressed workers, which under our enlightened tutelage will rule the world. We can disregard even basic elements of history, economics and human nature and pretend we’ve found an all encompassing solution, regardless of how untethered it is to reality. We will find comfort in our smugness as we laugh at those liberal airheads and sheep that haven’t seen the Truth. I hope they all die choking on their lattes.
User avatar
Dr_Chimera
Registered Broad
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:50 pm
Has given rep: 140 times
Received rep: 423 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11614 by Dr_Chimera » Sun Aug 19, 2018 6:01 pm

Dog wrote:Comrades,

The age of the liberal swine is coming to an end. We will free the oppressed workers, which under our enlightened lead will rule the world. We can disregard even basic elements of history, economics and human nature and pretend we’ve found an all encompassing solution, regardless of how untethered it is to reality. We will find comfort in our smugness as we laugh at those liberal airheads and sheep that haven’t seen the Truth. I hope they all die choking on their lattes.


Finest prose I have seen from you to date.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 58321
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1931 times
Received rep: 1292 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11615 by Dog » Sun Aug 19, 2018 6:03 pm

Dr_Chimera wrote:Debate what? I am not really disagreeing with you about anything.


Debate anything. On the merits and with specific arguments. We’re left to piece together your positions as you never really flush anything out.

I suspect you agree with the “respect the people’s voice/interest” sentiment but disliked the liberal framework in was posted and lack of big words -because, deep down, you believe in a prole dictatorship (lead -aka coopted by a leftish intellegencia).

Just guessing, though.
User avatar
Dr_Chimera
Registered Broad
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:50 pm
Has given rep: 140 times
Received rep: 423 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11616 by Dr_Chimera » Sun Aug 19, 2018 6:25 pm

Dog wrote:
Dr_Chimera wrote:Debate what? I am not really disagreeing with you about anything.


Debate anything. We’re left to piece together your positions as you never really flush anything out.

I suspect you agree with the “respect the people’s voice/interest” sentiment but disliked the liberal framework in was posted and lack of big words -because, deep down, you believe in a prole dictatorship (lead/coopted by a leftish intellegencia).

Just guessing, though.


A good question here would be 'who doesn't believe in the people's voice/interest'? It is almost as if you set yourself the task of writing something really long, with which almost nobody can disagree. Hence my mocking.

(which actually does sound like a 'liberal framework', now that I think about it)
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 58321
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1931 times
Received rep: 1292 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11617 by Dog » Sun Aug 19, 2018 7:23 pm

Dr_Chimera wrote:
Dog wrote:
Dr_Chimera wrote:Debate what? I am not really disagreeing with you about anything.


Debate anything. We’re left to piece together your positions as you never really flush anything out.

I suspect you agree with the “respect the people’s voice/interest” sentiment but disliked the liberal framework in was posted and lack of big words -because, deep down, you believe in a prole dictatorship (lead/coopted by a leftish intellegencia).

Just guessing, though.


A good question here would be 'who doesn't believe in the people's voice/interest'? It is almost as if you set yourself the task of writing something really long, with which almost nobody can disagree. Hence my mocking.

(which actually does sound like a 'liberal framework', now that I think about it)


Some 3-4 responses to my initial post where of the “crowd mentality”/“people are terrible at knowing what’s best for them”/“people are manipulated” variety.

I replied that we shouldn’t dismiss so easily popular movements. That even if not well expressed, even if solutions proposed are ineffective/counter-productive, currents betray significant underpinnings and we need to look for and listen to those. Further, that there is no substitute for a person speaking for himself -it’s not something you can delegate. Thinking “elites know better what’s good for ya” is implicit in dismissals of popular opinion. The reference to the “enlightened despot” in the last paragrapgh was tongue-in-cheek, I actually thought about removing it thinking some would take it at the first degree and jump at it, but I like colour in my posts and nuanced it with a reference to despots/central authority/elites in the end. Sure it’s simple sounding, but a dismissal of the message carried in popular movements (often when we disagree with them) is very much an elitist response -thinking elites will know best what’s best for other demographics and don’t need to pay careful attention to the signals they send.
User avatar
Dr_Chimera
Registered Broad
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:50 pm
Has given rep: 140 times
Received rep: 423 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11618 by Dr_Chimera » Sun Aug 19, 2018 9:07 pm

It's a fringe perspective. I believe Josh Barro wrote something like this once and no one took him seriously.

American elitism is more implicit (in socio-cultural terms) than discursive. Politicians/pundits mostly valorize working classes and compliment mass movements that align with their ideological leanings.
User avatar
Dr_Chimera
Registered Broad
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:50 pm
Has given rep: 140 times
Received rep: 423 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11619 by Dr_Chimera » Sun Aug 19, 2018 9:40 pm

This from Angus Deaton is a relevant counter to Stephen Pinker's feel-good BS about progress: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/24/opin ... tates.html

Many Americans live in extreme poverty and this is generally not known. Some key points:

- There are 5.3 million Americans who are absolutely poor by global standards. It is more than in Sierra Leone (3.2 million) or Nepal (2.5 million), about the same as in Senegal (5.3 million) and only one-third less than in Angola (7.4 million).

- Kathryn Edin and Luke Shaefer have documented the daily horrors of life for the several million people in the United States who actually do live on $2 a day, in both urban and rural America: http://www.twodollarsaday.com

- Matthew Desmond’s ethnography of Milwaukee explores the nightmare of finding urban shelter among the American poor: http://www.evictedbook.com

- Of course, people live longer and have healthier lives in rich countries. With only a few (and usually scandalous) exceptions, water is safe to drink, food is safe to eat, sanitation is universal, and some sort of medical care is available to everyone. Yet all these essentials of health are more likely to be lacking for poorer Americans. There are places — the Mississippi Delta and much of Appalachia — where life expectancy is lower than in Bangladesh and Vietnam.

- Some groups - like white Americans with no more than a high school education, have seen worsening health. Their life expectancy is falling, mortality rates from drugs, alcohol and suicide rising.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 58321
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1931 times
Received rep: 1292 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11620 by Dog » Sun Aug 19, 2018 9:52 pm

America is a quasi-plutocracy. The disparities within its society is without parallel in the other Western democracies.
User avatar
Dr_Chimera
Registered Broad
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:50 pm
Has given rep: 140 times
Received rep: 423 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11621 by Dr_Chimera » Tue Aug 21, 2018 1:06 pm

Attacking Sanders appears to be an irresistible impulse for centrists in the media. And it is lucrative.

User avatar
Dr_Chimera
Registered Broad
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:50 pm
Has given rep: 140 times
Received rep: 423 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11622 by Dr_Chimera » Wed Aug 22, 2018 2:36 pm

Propaganda war on Russia isn't enough. Need one with Iran as well.

User avatar
Dr_Chimera
Registered Broad
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:50 pm
Has given rep: 140 times
Received rep: 423 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11623 by Dr_Chimera » Wed Aug 22, 2018 4:16 pm

On a lighter note.

User avatar
mayoradamwest
Registered Broad
Posts: 29960
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 8:38 pm
Has given rep: 383 times
Received rep: 185 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11624 by mayoradamwest » Wed Aug 22, 2018 6:56 pm

Dr_Chimera wrote:Propaganda war on Russia isn't enough. Need one with Iran as well.



I thought the point here was that Iran wasn't doing it. How's that fit with Russia?
User avatar
Dr_Chimera
Registered Broad
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:50 pm
Has given rep: 140 times
Received rep: 423 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11625 by Dr_Chimera » Wed Aug 22, 2018 7:38 pm

This freaking country.

User avatar
chicpea
Registered Broad
Posts: 18058
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 11:09 pm
Location: lagoons or ditches
Has given rep: 747 times
Received rep: 438 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11626 by chicpea » Wed Aug 22, 2018 8:55 pm

Wrong thread, buddy.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 58321
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1931 times
Received rep: 1292 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11627 by Dog » Wed Aug 22, 2018 8:57 pm

Who is “obviously” donating to Cohen’s GoFundMe? Clinton Foundation?
User avatar
AD
Posts: 69246
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:30 pm
Location: Here
Has given rep: 739 times
Received rep: 860 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11628 by AD » Wed Aug 22, 2018 10:08 pm

Well the Clintons are friends with Lanny Davis.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 58321
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1931 times
Received rep: 1292 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11629 by Dog » Wed Aug 22, 2018 10:10 pm

AD wrote:Well the Clintons are friends with Lanny Davis.


:stare:

Lock.Them.Up!
User avatar
AD
Posts: 69246
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:30 pm
Location: Here
Has given rep: 739 times
Received rep: 860 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11630 by AD » Thu Aug 23, 2018 10:08 am

We only lock up women Dog. You're mis-chanting.

:colbert:
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 58321
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1931 times
Received rep: 1292 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11631 by Dog » Thu Aug 23, 2018 10:26 am

But seriously, the campaign finance thing (not declaring a payment to mistress as a campaign contribution) is not and should not qualify as an impeachable offense. Hopefully the Mueller report details more serious offenses.

Cohen seems more than willing to sing. Probably would want to avoid jail altogether, though. Will depend on what he’s got and what he can provide evidence of, I gather.
User avatar
Craig
Registered Broad
Posts: 39756
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Toronto
Has given rep: 42 times
Received rep: 440 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11632 by Craig » Thu Aug 23, 2018 10:31 am

I'm fine with impeaching for that. I mean if you accidentally violate campaign finance, of course not. If you do and get caught, maybe not. But he did it intentionally, covered it up, then lied about it consistently. The thing he lied about and covered up probably would have cost him the election. It illegitimizes his mandate, so he should go.
User avatar
AD
Posts: 69246
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:30 pm
Location: Here
Has given rep: 739 times
Received rep: 860 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11633 by AD » Thu Aug 23, 2018 10:41 am

I'd rather see him humiliated and belittled than impeached.
User avatar
Craig
Registered Broad
Posts: 39756
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Toronto
Has given rep: 42 times
Received rep: 440 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11634 by Craig » Thu Aug 23, 2018 10:56 am

Why not both?
User avatar
AD
Posts: 69246
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:30 pm
Location: Here
Has given rep: 739 times
Received rep: 860 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11635 by AD » Thu Aug 23, 2018 11:41 am

Craig wrote:Why not both?


Because I don't want him to become a political martyr. I want him to be degraded into nothingness. Mocked as a mistake by an overwhelming proportion of people.

If he's impeached, natural lizard brain politics will take over and a healthy proportion of people will want to defend him. I want that proportion (i.e. his defenders) to drop to insignificant numbers. Impeachment process will naturally raise the number of defenders.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 58321
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1931 times
Received rep: 1292 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11636 by Dog » Thu Aug 23, 2018 11:51 am

Craig wrote:The thing he lied about and covered up probably would have cost him the election. It illegitimizes his mandate, so he should go.


Paying off Stormy Daniels and hidding it would have cost him the election? I very much doubt it.

In any event, I’m personally happy with Trump being thrown into the fiery depths of hell, but I’m talking strategically. I don’t think they have enough to forcefully push for impeachment in the eyes of the electorate. I think doing so risks backfiring and would garner support for Trump, which you don’t want heading into the midterms. You want him to hang out there looking like a crook. Bang on the convictions and his links and the fact that he needs to have congress as a counterwight, but don’t formally/explicitely push for impeachment. I don’t think Dems have enough amo (at least as of yet) to do that without it backfiring.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 58321
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1931 times
Received rep: 1292 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11637 by Dog » Thu Aug 23, 2018 11:58 am

AD wrote:
Craig wrote:Why not both?


Because I don't want him to become a political martyr. I want him to be degraded into nothingness. Mocked as a mistake by an overwhelming proportion of people.

If he's impeached, natural lizard brain politics will take over and a healthy proportion of people will want to defend him. I want that proportion (i.e. his defenders) to drop to insignificant numbers. Impeachment process will naturally raise the number of defenders.


Agreed. I think impeachment full stop should be avoided other than for grave offenses (evidence of personal involvement in collussion with Russia and cover-up of that would more than qualify in my book -it’s bad for national security to have potus candidates coordinate attacks on opponents with foreign powers). If it’s less than that (or high level white collar crimes such as money laundering/dealings with org crime), even if Dems take the house they should refrain from starting impeachment proceedings. Obstruct and block his political agenda, but leave him there to stink and have that stink strongly wear off on the GOP rather than make a martyr out of him to get him out of office a year or so sooner than 2020 elections.
User avatar
Craig
Registered Broad
Posts: 39756
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Toronto
Has given rep: 42 times
Received rep: 440 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11638 by Craig » Thu Aug 23, 2018 12:47 pm

Dog wrote:
Craig wrote:The thing he lied about and covered up probably would have cost him the election. It illegitimizes his mandate, so he should go.


Paying off Stormy Daniels and hidding it would have cost him the election? I very much doubt it.

In any event, I’m personally happy with Trump being thrown into the fiery depths of hell, but I’m talking strategically. I don’t think they have enough to forcefully push for impeachment in the eyes of the electorate. I think doing so risks backfiring and would garner support for Trump, which you don’t want heading into the midterms. You want him to hang out there looking like a crook. Bang on the convictions and his links and the fact that he needs to have congress as a counterwight, but don’t formally/explicitely push for impeachment. I don’t think Dems have enough amo (at least as of yet) to do that without it backfiring.


He won a bunch of states by less than 100k votes. Finding out about an affair with a playmate could definitely been enough of a swing. Heck, it probably would have cost him the nomination, depending on when the news came out.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 58321
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1931 times
Received rep: 1292 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11639 by Dog » Thu Aug 23, 2018 12:50 pm

Craig wrote:
Dog wrote:
Craig wrote:The thing he lied about and covered up probably would have cost him the election. It illegitimizes his mandate, so he should go.


Paying off Stormy Daniels and hidding it would have cost him the election? I very much doubt it.

In any event, I’m personally happy with Trump being thrown into the fiery depths of hell, but I’m talking strategically. I don’t think they have enough to forcefully push for impeachment in the eyes of the electorate. I think doing so risks backfiring and would garner support for Trump, which you don’t want heading into the midterms. You want him to hang out there looking like a crook. Bang on the convictions and his links and the fact that he needs to have congress as a counterwight, but don’t formally/explicitely push for impeachment. I don’t think Dems have enough amo (at least as of yet) to do that without it backfiring.


He won a bunch of states by less than 100k votes. Finding out about an affair with a playmate could definitely been enough of a swing. Heck, it probably would have cost him the nomination, depending on when the news came out.


People that voted for him after the pussy grab vid and the allegations of sexual misconduct by like a dozen other womens would not have voted for him had they know about an affair with a porn star?
User avatar
AD
Posts: 69246
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:30 pm
Location: Here
Has given rep: 739 times
Received rep: 860 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11640 by AD » Thu Aug 23, 2018 1:20 pm

Impossible to know. But actual affair with a pornstar is bigger than random allegations from unnamed sources and a bit of locker room talk. So I'm with Craig. It definitely could have affected the results somewhat.

In any case, that's not the test. The aim of the hush money was to influence electorate. The fact that it would or not have been determinative is irrelevant.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 58321
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1931 times
Received rep: 1292 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11641 by Dog » Thu Aug 23, 2018 1:28 pm

AD wrote:Impossible to know. But actual affair with a pornstar is bigger than random allegations from unnamed sources and a bit of locker room talk. So I'm with Craig. It definitely could have affected the results somewhat.

In any case, that's not the test. The aim of the hush money was to influence electorate. The fact that it would or not have been determinative is irrelevant.


It wasn’t anonymous. Plenty of women were on TV alleging affairs, groping and other sexual misconduct. This in the wake of the pussy grab tape.

Trying to influence the electorate is what candidates do. The bad here was not disclosing funds used to pay hush money as a campaign contribution. Signing confidentiality agreements isn’t illegal. They probably also provide for no admission of wrongdoing (unless Cohen was writting them). The offense, as I understand it, is not disclosing a few hundred thousand dollars which may qualify as a campaign contribution (in a campaign that spent several hundred million dollars).
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 58321
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1931 times
Received rep: 1292 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11642 by Dog » Thu Aug 23, 2018 1:32 pm

Personally, I tend to think the sexual misconduct thing post access Hollywood tape was sinking him until the Comey “new Clinton email declaration” swung it back to him and the election occured before it would likely have reswung for Hillary. Regardless, not excusing anything. Hillary was the wrong candidate at the wrong time (the definition of old school establishment in an era of considerable popular upheaval).
User avatar
AD
Posts: 69246
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:30 pm
Location: Here
Has given rep: 739 times
Received rep: 860 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11643 by AD » Thu Aug 23, 2018 1:36 pm

I don't know what you're arguing dog.

That paying a pornstar (or two) in an attempt to hide information about an extra-marital affair, and then illegally not disclosing that payment as an election expense, is not important enough to issue articles of impeachment?

But lying about a blowjob was?
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 58321
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1931 times
Received rep: 1292 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11644 by Dog » Thu Aug 23, 2018 1:37 pm

She also fucked up by not defending her positions on trade and deciding to pull out of TPP and whatnot at the 11th hour. Wtf? That was basically conceding the argument to Trump that trade was bad and handing him the rust belt.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 58321
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1931 times
Received rep: 1292 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11645 by Dog » Thu Aug 23, 2018 1:40 pm

AD wrote:I don't know what you're arguing dog.

That paying a pornstar (or two) in an attempt to hide information about an extra-marital affair, and then illegally not disclosing that payment as an election expense, is not important enough to issue articles of impeachment?

But lying about a blowjob was?


Neither are.

Clinton’s approval rating soared during his impeachment proceedings.

That’s what I’m saying. Don’t strenghten Trump by going nuclear on a triviality. Wait til you have the amo if you are going to do it. This isn’t enough to sway public opinion behind impeachment. Need Moar.
User avatar
AD
Posts: 69246
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:30 pm
Location: Here
Has given rep: 739 times
Received rep: 860 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11646 by AD » Thu Aug 23, 2018 1:44 pm

Yeah. Like I said above. I agree with that. (except for the word "triviality")
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 58321
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1931 times
Received rep: 1292 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11647 by Dog » Thu Aug 23, 2018 1:51 pm

AD wrote:Yeah. Like I said above. I agree with that. (except for the word "triviality")


It’s absolutely trivial -in the context of serving as a basis for removing a president from office. Removing an elected president from office should require a heck of alot more than not disclosing a payment that may be construed as a contribution that would have amounted to less than 0.05% of his total campaign expenditures.

Forget about Trump. We all hate him and think he’s crooked as hell. 40% of the electorate doesn’t, though. And the middle is wishy washy. Trying to sell impeachment on a relatively minor campaign finance offense is, imho, much more likely to backfire.

Heck, imagine it happened to Obama. Right agitating to impeach him on failing to disclose 100k or so in campaign contrbutions when his campaign spent upwards of $400M. We’d all think it was bullshit and with reason.
User avatar
Craig
Registered Broad
Posts: 39756
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 4:33 pm
Location: Toronto
Has given rep: 42 times
Received rep: 440 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11648 by Craig » Thu Aug 23, 2018 3:34 pm

I normally agree with the thought that a crime is a crime, regardless of how effective it is. But in this case I think it's important the the thing being covered up here might have prevented him from being in power at all. That matters to me.

The Obama comparison is silly, because Obama accidentally failed to disclose, then owned up to it right away when it was uncovered. Trump knowingly didn't disclose, then lied about disclosing, then lied about knowing about the disclosure, and now continues to lie about whether the disclosure is a crime. His handling of the situation is at least as bad a sin as the original violation. Combined they're much worse.
User avatar
Dog
Registered Broad
Posts: 58321
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 2:53 pm
Has given rep: 1931 times
Received rep: 1292 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11649 by Dog » Thu Aug 23, 2018 5:46 pm

Craig wrote:I normally agree with the thought that a crime is a crime, regardless of how effective it is. But in this case I think it's important the the thing being covered up here might have prevented him from being in power at all. That matters to me.

The Obama comparison is silly, because Obama accidentally failed to disclose, then owned up to it right away when it was uncovered. Trump knowingly didn't disclose, then lied about disclosing, then lied about knowing about the disclosure, and now continues to lie about whether the disclosure is a crime. His handling of the situation is at least as bad a sin as the original violation. Combined they're much worse.


Impeachment isn’t for any old crime, nor should it be. Removing a democratically elected president should be reserved for stuff that meets a high treshold of unsuitability. I agree with the way it’s framed -as a vague “high crimes and misdemeanours” political question for congress.

Failing to disclose 100 or so grand of what may be construed as a political donation (in an otherwise virtually uncapped system where hundreds of millions were raised and spend) does not come close to triggering the sufficient level of materiality for me.

I know Trump’s Obama reference is lame, as they were not similar situations and intents differed. I’m saying IF Obama (or any other potus) had wilfully covered up a campaign expense in the order of 0.05% of total expenses for an otherwise legal undertaking (ie. paying someone to shut them up), then that’s not an indictable offense in my book. I raised it simply because I think people are blinded by it being Trump. Reeks of partisanship (on something as fundamental as removing the potus from office) and likely won’t play well with public opinion. Now if the payment itself was for an illegal activity (rather than it not being disclosed being the illegality), my opinion could change.

It’s a political question/judgement call on what should be “impeachable”. The criteria in the constitution, however, isn’t “any crime”. The threshold is political, as it probably should be for something like this.
User avatar
Dr_Chimera
Registered Broad
Posts: 22159
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:50 pm
Has given rep: 140 times
Received rep: 423 times

Re: Murrica: fuck yeah

Post #11650 by Dr_Chimera » Thu Aug 23, 2018 5:53 pm


Return to “Le mur de messages”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest