US Politics Thread

[Moxie]

I hope we're wrong. I'm holding out some hope. His behaviour with Russia-Ukraine has been positive so far. And he was great with the Gaza conflict

I'd be happy to be wrong. If Trump discovers some statesmanship and humanity. And the sycophants he has surrounded himself with grow a spine. But I won't be holding out much hope for that.

 

[Moxie]

Say it with your chest!!!

#Priorities?

 

[Federberg]

#Priorities?

it's a HUGE priority. Progressivism has gone too far. Promoting degeneracy and the destruction of the traditional family. Not just in the US, but in Europe as well. I'll ride with DJT on this one.

 

[Federberg]

he has a point..

 

[britbox]

We clearly are not having the same conversation. I don't know why you should roll your eyes at a direct comparison, however much you try to prohibit it. I notice you have no opinion about how smart (or not) Trump is, while you are willing to say that you don't think Harris isn't, and based on nothing. You also don't address that he and his VP are far less qualified...basically than anyone who's ever held the offices.

I see you put "cult" in quotes, but do wonder how you define it, because your definition seems pretty elastic, if it includes college fraternities and rapper parties.

Smart-ass quips about Gabbard thinking "outside of the box" and "actually talking to people" doesn't address the downsides of her lack of qualifications, which you refuse to do.

Nobody is prohibiting you from anything Moxie. You talk of "qualifications" - maybe you should elaborate on that first. We've had peanut farmers, actors, and ex-CIA bosses... what qualifies you to be President of the USA? My main point was that by most metrics, the American standard of living has dropped over decades and some tribalists perpetually prop the status quo system up.

On another note, I think we will see massive changes worldwide over the next few years - a lot of turbulence, good and bad. Many old systems and ways of thinking will be destroyed.

Federberg posted an interesting video showing the Tech Giants in full prominence at the inauguration. I honestly don't think most people have ANY IDEA on how advanced some of the technologies are out there and a lot of ancient mysticism and quantum science will dovetail into some common understandable truth.

 

[Moxie]

it's a HUGE priority. Progressivism has gone too far. Promoting degeneracy and the destruction of the traditional family. Not just in the US, but in Europe as well. I'll ride with DJT on this one.

I understand how you feel about it, but it's a shiny object to warm the cockles of the heart of the faith, not a national emergency for day 1. And spare me the lecture...I understand the issue. I know what he was signaling, and why. We don't agree on a few things, based on your above.

 

[Moxie]

Nobody is prohibiting you from anything Moxie. You talk of "qualifications" - maybe you should elaborate on that first. We've had peanut farmers, actors, and ex-CIA bosses... what qualifies you to be President of the USA? My main point was that by most metrics, the American standard of living has dropped over decades and some tribalists perpetually prop the status quo system up.

On another note, I think we will see massive changes worldwide over the next few years - a lot of turbulence, good and bad. Many old systems and ways of thinking will be destroyed.

Federberg posted an interesting video showing the Tech Giants in full prominence at the inauguration. I honestly don't think most people have ANY IDEA on how advanced some of the technologies are out there and a lot of ancient mysticism and quantum science will dovetail into some common understandable truth.

Again with the sweeping generalizations and changing the subject. You're impossible to have a conversation with.

 

[britbox]

Again with the sweeping generalizations and changing the subject. You're impossible to have a conversation with.

Because you cannot define anything.

What qualifications? You continually use very generic language without any substance. As for changing the subject - the discussion was about Kamala before you immediately tried to switch it to Trump.

 

[Moxie]

Because you cannot define anything.

What qualifications? You continually use very generic language without any substance. As for changing the subject - the discussion was about Kamala before you immediately tried to switch it to Trump.

I can't say this 8 times. I was making a direct comparison. I haven't left her out of it. I gave you a link to her qualifications. I merely said, of him, that she was more qualified. As she is compared to Vance. And in terms of intelligence, because we were talking about it, it is my opinion, and my impression, and I'm far from alone in this, that she's massively more intelligent than Trump. A direct comparison to the guy she ran for President against. There is nothing wrong with doing that. Only you don't seem to be capable of it.

We're talking about that, and you don't like the details, so default to broad comments about nepotism and dynasties. Then, we're talking about Gabbard and her qualifications, or lack thereof, IMO, and next thing out of you it's Diddy and GHW Bush and Skull and Bones and cults. Simply addressing the point would be helpful.

 

[Moxie]

Not a peep about clemency for all of the Jan. 6th offenders? Is anyone else shocked that he made no distinction between minor offenders and people charged with assaulting police officers, and those with crimes that essentially amount to treason? Because a lot of Republicans are. I guess history really is (re)written by the winners.

 

[britbox]

I can't say this 8 times. I was making a direct comparison. I haven't left her out of it. I gave you a link to her qualifications. I merely said, of him, that she was more qualified. As she is compared to Vance. And in terms of intelligence, because we were talking about it, it is my opinion, and my impression, and I'm far from alone in this, that she's massively more intelligent than Trump. A direct comparison to the guy she ran for President against. There is nothing wrong with doing that. Only you don't seem to be capable of it.

We're talking about that, and you don't like the details, so default to broad comments about nepotism and dynasties. Then, we're talking about Gabbard and her qualifications, or lack thereof, IMO, and next thing out of you it's Diddy and GHW Bush and Skull and Bones and cults. Simply addressing the point would be helpful.

I'm asking YOU what YOU think the qualifications are for a US President or Vice President. It's not a difficult question.

You gave me a link to a friendly media piece listing Kamala's resume. At least two of those appointments were made by her lover then. Other career achievements include initiating the development of a "crime dashboard" (go look at it!) and tackling truancy (laudable - but no yearly data is available). Other than that, it's largely a list of positions. Again, I'm interested in OUTCOMES - Harris, Pelosi and Newsome should be ashamed of themselves when you look at San Francisco.

So what's the qualification? Lawyer, DA, Senator, or just "Public Service"?

As for cults, you brought that up (scroll back) with Tulsi Gabbard. I was pointing out this was nothing new...it seems to be par for the course... and the Epstein, Diddy stuff is relevant if high-profile people are compromised.

For somebody you deem incredibly stupid - Trump and MAGA have taken over the Republican Party, Congress, Senate, and the Presidency. It doesn't say much for the highly intelligent incumbents you appear to hero worship. Maybe they're not so smart after all. Very rich, however. A lot richer than when they took office.

 

[Moxie]

I'm asking YOU what YOU think the qualifications are for a US President or Vice President. It's not a difficult question.

You gave me a link to a friendly media piece listing Kamala's resume. At least two of those appointments were made by her lover then. Other career achievements include initiating the development of a "crime dashboard" (go look at it!) and tackling truancy (laudable - but no yearly data is available). Other than that, it's largely a list of positions. Again, I'm interested in OUTCOMES - Harris, Pelosi and Newsome should be ashamed of themselves when you look at San Francisco.

So what's the qualification? Lawyer, DA, Senator, or just "Public Service"?

As for cults, you brought that up (scroll back) with Tulsi Gabbard. I was pointing out this was nothing new...it seems to be par for the course... and the Epstein, Diddy stuff is relevant if high-profile people are compromised.

For somebody you deem incredibly stupid - Trump and MAGA have taken over the Republican Party, Congress, Senate, and the Presidency. It doesn't say much for the highly intelligent incumbents you appear to hero worship. Maybe they're not so smart after all. Very rich, however. A lot richer than when they took office.

If you asked me what I think the qualifications are for Pres/VP, I missed that as a specific question. I didn't dodge it. Must have missed it in all the palaver. I do think that some form of public service does make one better qualified to be President of the US. A lot take the path through governorships, as well. (Remember that technically the VPs main job is to be capable to be President, so the qualifications are the same.) I don't personally think that only being a business person is a good background. We had Mike Bloomberg as Mayor here in NYC, and, while I liked him, and he did handle some things well, he tended to behave as a CEO, and sometimes just bulldozed certain of his ideas through, which weren't always good and rubbed everyone the wrong way. Trump had a tendency to be like that as President.

I don't know why you have to say that I "hero-worship" certain politicians. That's pointless hyperbole, and incorrect.

I already copped to the fact that I brought up cults first, in the context of Gabbard, and why. I still think your latching onto them is pointless. Though, speaking of definitions, I asked you to define "cult", since your definition seen seems to be pretty loose and all-encompassing, but you didn't. So no need to go so ALL CAPS on me, mister.

I do think that Trump is pretty much a moron. He has a very incurious mind, and he basically reacts to everything instinctively. Now, I will say that he has an instinct for finding the zeitgeist and exploiting it, which is his super-power. But that just makes him an excellent snake oil salesman. He's also a bully, and a sociopath. But he's a man's man, and he's got Arnold Palmer's penis to prove it. And the Village People.

 

[Federberg]

Not a peep about clemency for all of the Jan. 6th offenders? Is anyone else shocked that he made no distinction between minor offenders and people charged with assaulting police officers, and those with crimes that essentially amount to treason? Because a lot of Republicans are. I guess history really is (re)written by the winners.

why should we say anything? Biden just pardoned Fauci! We knew the moment Trump won the Jan 6th folks were going to be pardoned. We're not exactly surprised, so miss me with the outrage

 

[Moxie]

why should we say anything? Biden just pardoned Fauci! We knew the moment Trump won the Jan 6th folks were going to be pardoned. We're not exactly surprised, so miss me with the outrage

We knew that last summer, but you seem to keep ignoring that. You claim to put a pox on both of their houses, but you still seem to act like it's Biden's fault for Trump doing what he said like he'd do long ago. Surely preemptive pardons for Capital police who testified in the Jan 6th hearings are nothing other than fear of the retribution that Trump has been promising for months. And it wasn't ME that pardoned Fauci, so excuse me, I'm entitled to my outrage, or concern for precedent, at Trump pardoning some of those Jan. 6th criminals. Is there no subtlety in you for this?

 

[mrzz]

 

[Federberg]

We knew that last summer, but you seem to keep ignoring that. You claim to put a pox on both of their houses, but you still seem to act like it's Biden's fault for Trump doing what he said like he'd do long ago. Surely preemptive pardons for Capital police who testified in the Jan 6th hearings are nothing other than fear of the retribution that Trump has been promising for months. And it wasn't ME that pardoned Fauci, so excuse me, I'm entitled to my outrage, or concern for precedent, at Trump pardoning some of those Jan. 6th criminals. Is there no subtlety in you for this?

Oh there's subtlety. You subtly have no outrage for Biden pardoning Fauci. I don't recall your reaction to him pardoning his son, maybe it bothered you, maybe it didn't. Bottom line is the energy coming from you is biased. And this is coming from someone who loathes Trump!

In any case the rule of law is important to me. The fact that you don't seem to get that once Biden pardoned his son, no one on the Dem side has the moral standing to whine about Jan 6th offenders being pardoned. At least they went to jail for a bit. That's something. Let go of this need you have to believe your side is good. They're bad too. I'm not going to grade them and say they're better or worse. It's meaningless. The fact that you don't seem to understand that the precedent was already breached by Biden is pure comedy to me

 

[Moxie]

Oh there's subtlety. You subtly have no outrage for Biden pardoning Fauci. I don't recall your reaction to him pardoning his son, maybe it bothered you, maybe it didn't. Bottom line is the energy coming from you is biased. And this is coming from someone who loathes Trump!

In any case the rule of law is important to me. The fact that you don't seem to get that once Biden pardoned his son, no one on the Dem side has the moral standing to whine about Jan 6th offenders being pardoned. At least they went to jail for a bit. That's something. Let go of this need you have to believe your side is good. They're bad too. I'm not going to grade them and say they're better or worse. It's meaningless. The fact that you don't seem to understand that the precedent was already breached by Biden is pure comedy to me

First of all, let me quote you back to yourself, from one page ago: "prior bad acts don't justify further bad acts." Second of all, I have nothing to say about Fauci, here, and that is my right. I have discussed Biden pardoning his son. With you. If you've forgotten, that's on you to go back. However, for you to just close down conversation because of what you assume is my "bias" is unfortunate. Then I don't know why we bother, since we know where people basically come from. A lot of folks around here say stop with the tribalism, but you are ascribing to me a position that you claim gives me no right to opine. Enforcing tribalism. And eliminating conversation between old friends around here. That's unfortunate.

 

[Federberg]

First of all, let me quote you back to yourself, from one page ago: "prior bad acts don't justify further bad acts." Second of all, I have nothing to say about Fauci, here, and that is my right. I have discussed Biden pardoning his son. With you. If you've forgotten, that's on you to go back. However, for you to just close down conversation because of what you assume is my "bias" is unfortunate. Then I don't know why we bother, since we know where people basically come from. A lot of folks around here say stop with the tribalism, but you are ascribing to me a position that you claim gives me no right to opine. Enforcing tribalism. And eliminating conversation between old friends around here. That's unfortunate.

oh stop with the victim nonsense. It's so difficult to have a debate with you if your instinct is always to fall back on that. I didn't say you hadn't opined on the Hunter pardon, I specifically said I couldn't recall. As for the prior bad acts quote... you understand precedent right? That ship's sailed. Just did a quick search and found this...#8,888. I must say I find it funny how all of a sudden you're very free with the 'what-about-isms'... Just reinforces both sides are getting just as bad as the other these days. The basic point here is that there are no moral superiors

 

[Moxie]

oh stop with the victim nonsense. It's so difficult to have a debate with you if your instinct is always to fall back on that. I didn't say you hadn't opined on the Hunter pardon, I specifically said I couldn't recall. As for the prior bad acts quote... you understand precedent right? That ship's sailed. Just did a quick search and found this...#8,888. I must say I find it funny how all of a sudden you're very free with the 'what-about-isms'... Just reinforces both sides are getting just as bad as the other these days. The basic point here is that there are no moral superiors

Can you stop with finger wagging? Are you really just ok with Trump forgiving wholesale every crime committed on Jan 6th? Blue Lives Don't so much matter to the Republicans, then? Forget about me. Let's just talk about what goes on.

 

[Federberg]

Can you stop with finger wagging? Are you really just ok with Trump forgiving wholesale every crime committed on Jan 6th? Blue Lives Don't so much matter to the Republicans, then? Forget about me. Let's just talk about what goes on.

lol! I've made it very clear I don't approve of ANY of it. Both Biden and Trump's pardon's. Rule of law! Just done whine about one and keep quiet about the other. Maintain the same energy about BOTH, or don't say anything at all in my view.

I'll stop finger wagging when you stop trying to be a victim. Good?