• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

All things Trump + Russia Part 4

The Great Zaganza said:
So can we ship all Trump supporters to Siberia - for their own sake, of course?
Click to expand...

A workable solution.

However, I'm getting increasingly worried that the only way you guys can save your country is a new civil war. The Trumpists are simply too many to just disappear, and the differences of opinion are not solvable as I see it. Hell, the Trumpists don't even acknowlege reality. I'm starting to think you're going to need a blank slate to have a chance.
 
WilliamSeger said:
Trump's "red wave."
Click to expand...

Don't dismiss the prospect.

Unless the Democratic Party comes up with some attractive candidates and policies then there's a very real risk that the GOP will strengthen their position in the senate considerably - if they get all 10 seats where a Democrat is the incumbent but where President Trump carried the state, they could have a supermajority. :(
 
uke2se said:
A workable solution.

However, I'm getting increasingly worried that the only way you guys can save your country is a new civil war. The Trumpists are simply too many to just disappear, and the differences of opinion are not solvable as I see it. Hell, the Trumpists don't even acknowlege reality. I'm starting to think you're going to need a blank slate to have a chance.
Click to expand...

I just watched the first episode of Ed Balls' Travels in Trumpland. He seems to have taken a leaf out of Louis Theroux's book and gone in with a non-judgemental open mind.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0bdpvh5
 
The Don said:
I just watched the first episode of Ed Balls' Travels in Trumpland. He seems to have taken a leaf out of Louis Theroux's book and gone in with a non-judgemental open mind.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0bdpvh5
Click to expand...

I'm seriously not interested in another anthropological and empathetic essay on "Why-oh-why would these fine stand up people vote for Trump? Well, there may be rational reasons..." It's all bollocks. We all knew who Trump was before the election, and we all know what the people who voted for him and still support him are.

They might be lovely to their neighbours and help quadriplegic cats in their free time, but they voted for a racist and proto-fascist, and they are comfortable with their choice.

**** 'em.
 
Last edited:
uke2se said:
I'm seriously not interested in another anthropological and empathetic essay on "Why-oh-why would these fine stand up people vote for Trump? Well, there may be rational reasons..." It's all bollocks. We all knew who Trump was before the election, and we all know what the people who voted for him and still support him are.

They might be lovely to their neighbours and help quadriplegic cats in their free time, but they voted for a racist and proto-fascist, and they are comfortable with their choice.

**** 'em.
Click to expand...

A civil war simply would not work. The overwhelming majority of military and law enforcement are firmly behind President Trump and he has tried to ensure that they have all the funding they require and/or all the ex-military hardware they require and by pardoning Sheriff Joe he's also given a clear signal that breaking the law in a way that aligns with his wishes is consequence free.

Any popular uprising would be immediately and brutally put down.
 
A trailer for "Active Measures - A conspiracy hiding in plain sight" documenting Trump's ties to the Russian mob, to be released August 31:

 
There won't be a Civil War, since the divide is along class, not state lines.
What we will get is more and more violence against the top 5% and law enforcement until the militant poor are a sufficient force in politics to shift the balance of power away from the super-rich and towards massive wealth redistribution.
Alternatively, we will enter into another war that will be so costly in terms of wealth and lives that it will force the government to take away the 1% er's money to pay for it.
 
The Don said:
Don't dismiss the prospect.

Unless the Democratic Party comes up with some attractive candidates and policies then there's a very real risk that the GOP will strengthen their position in the senate considerably - if they get all 10 seats where a Democrat is the incumbent but where President Trump carried the state, they could have a supermajority. :(
Click to expand...


I dare say that you know virtually nothing about the Congressional Democratic candidates except for the very small few who make national news like Ocasio-Cortez and a few sitting Congressmen. But neither do the vast majority of Americans; they simply don't get much attention even in local news. It's particularly annoying that you keep saying the Democrats lack attractive policies. No, what we lack is a news media that thinks that's important.
 
WilliamSeger said:
It's particularly annoying that you keep saying the Democrats lack attractive policies.
Click to expand...

I'd say that Democratic Party policies aren't that attractive.

Take the Democratic Party response to the rust belt. Their approach is to offer to retrain people for new jobs and to advise people that they may have to relocate to get a good job - and even then it may not a certainty that the person will get a job. That sounds risky and hard. President Trump had a much more popular message - he'll get your old job back for you. For sure it's a flat-out lie but it's what people want to hear.

Or how about Democratic Party policy on taxation. The Democratic Party would like to move towards a balanced budget by increasing taxes on those people best able to pay them whilst at the same time reducing military spending and making more money available for health and welfare. The GOP policy is far more attractive. They will reduce taxes until an economic miracle becomes inevitable and everyone becomes rich. For sure it's a flat-out lie but it's what people want to hear.

How about healthcare ? The Democratic Party would like to properly fund the ACA but that's expensive and is running into headwinds because there are a lot of people out there who don't want spongers (a.k.a. anyone other than themselves) benefiting and who say their insurance premiums rise (even though they always rose before and at least now they actually have some functionally useful insurance). President Trump has promised much better healthcare for less money which is a much more popular message. For sure it's a flat-out lie but it's what people want to hear.

Democratic Party policies are well thought out and are very often perfectly feasible. They also exist in the real world which means there are complications and grey areas which make people uncomfortable. The GOP OTOH offer simple (albeit completely unachievable) solutions to complex problems - it's an enticing message.

In order to lose weight, would you rather eat less, improve your nutrition and do more exercise or would you rather take a magic pill which simply melts the extra weight away while you sleep ? That first option sounds hard :( people would much rather take the second option - even though it's a complete con.
 
The Don said:
In order to lose weight, would you rather eat less, improve your nutrition and do more exercise or would you rather take a magic pill which simply melts the extra weight away while you sleep ? That first option sounds hard :( people would much rather take the second option - even though it's a complete con.
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
The Don said:
I'd say that Democratic Party policies aren't that attractive.

Take the Democratic Party response to the rust belt. Their approach is to offer to retrain people for new jobs and to advise people that they may have to relocate to get a good job - and even then it may not a certainty that the person will get a job. That sounds risky and hard. President Trump had a much more popular message - he'll get your old job back for you. For sure it's a flat-out lie but it's what people want to hear.

Or how about Democratic Party policy on taxation. The Democratic Party would like to move towards a balanced budget by increasing taxes on those people best able to pay them whilst at the same time reducing military spending and making more money available for health and welfare. The GOP policy is far more attractive. They will reduce taxes until an economic miracle becomes inevitable and everyone becomes rich. For sure it's a flat-out lie but it's what people want to hear.

How about healthcare ? The Democratic Party would like to properly fund the ACA but that's expensive and is running into headwinds because there are a lot of people out there who don't want spongers (a.k.a. anyone other than themselves) benefiting and who say their insurance premiums rise (even though they always rose before and at least now they actually have some functionally useful insurance). President Trump has promised much better healthcare for less money which is a much more popular message. For sure it's a flat-out lie but it's what people want to hear.

Democratic Party policies are well thought out and are very often perfectly feasible. They also exist in the real world which means there are complications and grey areas which make people uncomfortable. The GOP OTOH offer simple (albeit completely unachievable) solutions to complex problems - it's an enticing message.

In order to lose weight, would you rather eat less, improve your nutrition and do more exercise or would you rather take a magic pill which simply melts the extra weight away while you sleep ? That first option sounds hard :( people would much rather take the second option - even though it's a complete con.
Click to expand...

You are wrong; polls show that Democratic policies on taxes, health care, abortion and a host of other important issues are more popular with the American public than the Republicans' policies. It appears that "other reasons" explain the Republicans' grip on power, and it's one of the clearest signs that our democracy is not healthy.
 
WilliamSeger said:
You are wrong; polls show that Democratic policies on taxes, health care, abortion and a host of other important issues are more popular with the American public than the Republicans' policies. It appears that "other reasons" explain the Republicans' grip on power, and it's one of the clearest signs that our democracy is not healthy.
Click to expand...

The policies themselves may be popular (when they have been explained and presented in a non-partisan fashion), if so the Democratic Party has done a terrible job marketing them.

My mind goes back to all those people who resolutely opposed to Obamacare and were worried about the impact Obamacare might have on their much loved ACA coverage.

People may claim that they are not in favour of the GOP's tax plans, but they still vote GOP and are still in favour of low taxes.

More voters who have heard about President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans' plans to overhaul the tax code back the proposal than oppose it — but support declined last week following the release of the House GOP bill.

That's according to a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll that also shows the proposed benefits to all Americans and small businesses are more popular than those for large corporations and the wealthy.

Among registered voters who said they have seen, read or heard about the tax proposal, 45 percent support the proposal, down from 48 percent last week. The percentage of voters who have heard about the proposal who oppose it held steady at 36 percent, the poll shows.
Click to expand...

https://www.politico.com/story/2017...x-plan-ticks-down-but-remains-positive-244715

So while people in the abstract may be in favour of raising taxes on those best best able to afford to pay them, this doesn't seem to translate into support at the polls.
 
The thing that puzzles me most about the "meeting with the Russians to get dirt on Hillary" is, why the **** do you even go to Russia to get "dirt" on Hillary Clinton? For cripes sake, aren't there enough manufactured domestic outrages you could use? Even if it is an issue of "Hillary made a shady deal with the Russians" that you are hoping to hear, can't you find a domestic source of that information? I mean, see Uranium 1.

You would hope that, if you are going to the Russians, you are going for more than just "dirt." It better be more like, "We can tell you about Hillary's role in X activity."

What next? Arrange for a meeting with the Chinese to get the scuttlebutt?
 
pgwenthold said:
The thing that puzzles me most about the "meeting with the Russians to get dirt on Hillary" is, why the **** do you even go to Russia to get "dirt" on Hillary Clinton? For cripes sake, aren't there enough manufactured domestic outrages you could use? Even if it is an issue of "Hillary made a shady deal with the Russians" that you are hoping to hear, can't you find a domestic source of that information? I mean, see Uranium 1.

You would hope that, if you are going to the Russians, you are going for more than just "dirt." It better be more like, "We can tell you about Hillary's role in X activity."

What next? Arrange for a meeting with the Chinese to get the scuttlebutt?
Click to expand...

A horde of hackers at their command.

ETA: Its the new Watergate Break-In tools!
 
Last edited:
pgwenthold said:
The thing that puzzles me most about the "meeting with the Russians to get dirt on Hillary" is, why the **** do you even go to Russia to get "dirt" on Hillary Clinton? For cripes sake, aren't there enough manufactured domestic outrages you could use? Even if it is an issue of "Hillary made a shady deal with the Russians" that you are hoping to hear, can't you find a domestic source of that information? I mean, see Uranium 1.

You would hope that, if you are going to the Russians, you are going for more than just "dirt." It better be more like, "We can tell you about Hillary's role in X activity."

What next? Arrange for a meeting with the Chinese to get the scuttlebutt?
Click to expand...

They were hoping to get a video of Clinton paying prostitutes to pee on the bed Trump slept in during his Moscow pageant stay. You know, the night he didn't stay overnight, but did?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom