Political Roundtable Part XXVII

Pointgod · Post #1241 » by **Pointgod** » Wed Jan 22, 2020 7:03 pm

I love it. Warren once again showing she’s a serious candidate.

pancakes3 · Post #1242 » by **pancakes3** » Wed Jan 22, 2020 7:18 pm

gtn130 wrote:
Ruzious wrote:That's not fair. He just views things differently - as does a large portion of the US population - which at times drives me crazy, but I have no doubt his posts are in good faith, and he deserves more respect than we (including me) showed.

I don't think this is a response to what I'm actually saying. Obviously popper views things differently. My issue is that he's constantly being disingenuous about how much of a Trump supporter he is. He wants to come off as a neutral observer when he's not. This is what I mean when I say he is never posting in good faith.

His impeachment argument started with his didactical "I'm looking at this as a strict constitutionalist" nonsense. Do you think he has any particular knowledge of the constitution as it relates to impeachment or he's done any research on this subject? He's regurgitating partisan talking points like almost everyone else, but he wants you to believe he's neutral and objective.

i'm not a fan of the "i'm trying to be fair and balanced here, but you libs jump on me every time i post, so i'll be the bigger man and bow out" schtick either. like, you're not taking your leave because ppl are mean to you. you're taking your leave bc you have nothing to say.

not all things have 2 sides to it. some things are just right and some things are just wrong. the inability to concede points when they're lost is... childish. plus, the "well you've made your point, let me make mine" position would be a lot more convincing if there were ever *any* cogent counterarguments - and not just from Popper but from any Trumper.

like, how do you assert a cogent counterargument defending the act of taking a sharpie and scribbling on a weather map?

plus, it gets just as mean on the real board as it does in here. but it's fine to have a bad sports opinion and be shamed out of it. ppl don't like being shamed out of their bad political opinions.

Zonkerbl · Post #1243 » by **Zonkerbl** » Wed Jan 22, 2020 7:42 pm

Anyway arguing with people like Popper is good practice. I like hearing what the latest right wing talking points are (even if he doesn't admit that's what they are) and appreciate the practice refuting them, so if I'm in a live fire situation I can just rattle things off. But I can see how it can be emotionally exhausting to be proven wrong all the time. Although it wouldn't be so tiring if such people would just change their minds in the face of persuasive facts and logic...

I mean seriously, you bring your Fox News talking points in here and get them blown out of the water consistently, maybe the problem is not us "libs"? Maybe it's Fox News? Just a thought.

Wizardspride · Post #1244 » by **Wizardspride** » Wed Jan 22, 2020 9:22 pm

Read on Twitter

?s=19

pancakes3 · Post #1245 » by **pancakes3** » Wed Jan 22, 2020 9:25 pm

it'd be great if R's could muster some of that "hey, lazy @ss politicians, go do your job" energy for this, but nah, still spent from freaking out about Obama's tan suit from like 10 years ago.

Ruzious · Post #1246 » by **Ruzious** » Wed Jan 22, 2020 9:43 pm

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/sen-paul-45-republicans-ready-to-dismiss-impeachment-charges-against-trump/ar-BBZdTid?li=BBnb7Kz
Guess what Mr. Paul, when everyone who works there becomes a disgruntled ex-employee, ya kinda lose credibility when you use that as your excuse for not allowing a knowledgable person to testify. And try washing your damn hair more than once a year. Find someone to groom you before they figure you're a homeless man in the Senate office building.

Wizardspride · Post #1247 » by **Wizardspride** » Thu Jan 23, 2020 1:49 pm

Read on Twitter

?s=19

pancakes3 · Post #1248 » by **pancakes3** » Thu Jan 23, 2020 3:25 pm

not only that, the entire point of holding a trial is to lay the cards on the table.

people are only defensive about producing documents when the docs are potentially incriminating. if you've got exonerating material, you can't get that on the record fast enough. people waive privilege regularly when the evidence supports their position - medical records for instance.

it's like claiming that you were injured in a car accident, but refusing to produce evidence of your injuries bc of doctor/patient confidentiality. sure, the privilege exists, but exerting it doesn't help your case.

and this isn't just "Trump being Trump." He's got a team of attorneys, and they know all of this. Them still being obstinate about testifying (0% chance his lawyers let him testify) and producing documents means that the docs are damaging. If the docs are sensitive for natsec reasons, you can present it in-camera, closed proceedings where the public/press can't access it. happens all the time. happens thousands of times a day, notably in family law cases involving minors.

it's bad guys. it's real bad.

pancakes3 · Post #1249 » by **pancakes3** » Thu Jan 23, 2020 3:45 pm

impeachment story that won't make you want to tear your eyes out

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/23/politics/milk-senate-impeachment-trial/

pancakes3 · Post #1250 » by **pancakes3** » Thu Jan 23, 2020 4:48 pm

But back to your regularly scheduled slog

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/479540-trump-administration-releases-rule-to-restrict-birth-tourism

just broken brains trying to reconcile pro-life with nativism, and definitely has nothing to do with regulating women and their bodies.

pancakes3 · Post #1251 » by **pancakes3** » Thu Jan 23, 2020 8:13 pm

ladies and gentlemen, i present to you, your president.

KERNEN: Tesla's now worth more than GM and Ford. Do you have comments on Elon Musk?

TRUMP: Well -- you have to give him credit. I spoke to him very recently, and he's also doing the rockets. He likes rockets. And -- he does good at rockets too, by the way. I never saw where the engines come down with no wings, no anything, and they're landing. I said I've never seen that before. And I was worried about him, because he's one of our great geniuses, and we have to protect our genius. You know, we have to protect Thomas Edison and we have to protect all of these people that -- came up with originally the light bulb and -- the wheel and all of these things. And he's one of our very smart people and we want to-- we want to cherish those people.

Ruzious · Post #1252 » by **Ruzious** » Thu Jan 23, 2020 11:00 pm

Your President and your Secretary of the Treasury https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/01/23/us-treasury-secretary-mnuchin-says-climate-activist-greta-thunberg-should-go-study-economics/

It's just amazing that they can't even answer simple questions from a 17 year old and feel so intimidated that they need to resort to laughing at her. She effortlessly runs circles around the children representing our country. How is someone like Mnuchin in a position of power? He's a stock grinning dufus in any pulp writer's repertoire.

Wizardspride · Post #1253 » by **Wizardspride** » Fri Jan 24, 2020 2:33 am

Read on Twitter

?s=19

Wizardspride · Post #1254 » by **Wizardspride** » Fri Jan 24, 2020 6:08 am

Read on Twitter

?s=19

queridiculo · Post #1255 » by **queridiculo** » Fri Jan 24, 2020 12:51 pm

Ruzious wrote:Your President and your Secretary of the Treasury https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/01/23/us-treasury-secretary-mnuchin-says-climate-activist-greta-thunberg-should-go-study-economics/

It's just amazing that they can't even answer simple questions from a 17 year old and feel so intimidated that they need to resort to laughing at her. She effortlessly runs circles around the children representing our country. How is someone like Mnuchin in a position of power? He's a stock grinning dufus in any pulp writer's repertoire.

Discredit, diminish, attack.

Not much else you can do when the facts aren't on your side.

Ruzious · Post #1256 » by **Ruzious** » Fri Jan 24, 2020 1:09 pm

Wizardspride wrote:

Read on Twitter
?s=19

Pure corruption.

Wizardspride · Post #1257 » by **Wizardspride** » Fri Jan 24, 2020 2:55 pm

Read on Twitter

?s=19

pancakes3 · Post #1258 » by **pancakes3** » Fri Jan 24, 2020 3:26 pm

he's 100% doing this bc he's angling for a 2024 run, and he wants to impress upon Trump's base that he's the heir apparent.
the sad thing is that it'll work despite being so transparent.
#poetanddidntevenknowitpost

Pointgod · Post #1259 » by **Pointgod** » Fri Jan 24, 2020 5:20 pm

Wizardspride wrote:

Read on Twitter
?s=19

The hypocrisy is the point. Republicans are a shameless, hateful and spiteful cult that only want to “stick it to the Liberals” because deep down inside they know that they’re cynical nihilists who’s whole ideology is vapid and worthless.

One of the greatest examples of how utterly worthless and meaningless anything means to Republicans:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/29/us/politics/mitch-mcconnell-supreme-court.html

The senator made the remarks at a Chamber of Commerce event in Paducah, Ky., after an audience member asked what Senate Republicans would do if a Supreme Court justice died next year.

“Oh, we’d fill it,” he responded with a grin, prompting laughter from the audience.

pancakes3 · Post #1260 » by **pancakes3** » Fri Jan 24, 2020 6:20 pm

there's some pretty contentious discussion re: Bernie retweeting Joe Rogan's endorsement on another forum I post at, and wanted a penny for y'alls thoughts (bc, frankly the other forum skews young, and super lib).

the argument is that Bernie retweeting it amounts to implicitly legitimizing/endorsing Rogan, and by extension a lot of his problematic stances re: sexism, transphobia, etc.

the counterargument is that it's still a good thing overall to have Rogan reach out to his millions of listeners bc most of them (generalized to be stoners and roid bros) are politically disengaged, underinformed, and a win for the Dem party to pull them into the Dem coalition. plus, it's a molehill, retweeting is WAY short of legitimizing/endorsing, and it's ok to have ppl in your party who hold different views and values, albeit bad and odious values. also with the caveat that sexism and transphobia are underlying values that have deep roots in American society, and to have them identify as Dems will go a long way towards changing those biases.

(i tried to present the arguments as non-biased as i can, but it's still pretty obvious where i fall huh?)