Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[sluissa]

There's a huge difference between internet arguments and shooting five BLM protestors. There's a huge difference between a 4 million strong peaceful protest and a few dozen anarchists crashing a different peaceful protest against an actual fascist. Please tell me about any civil wars and rebellions you know about, by the way. Right now the same people are passing around California succession things as always, and about as seriously. 

And really, how did you turn the platform of social liberalism into people telling you what to think? Is it because I or people like me have posited that scientific evidence should be used in government? Is it because people are asking for 'silly things' like equality before the law?

Do you have a practical plan to remove judges from the... uh, judicial system? I guess we'd just call it the system after that. If not, are you proposing overthrowing of the existing system to eliminate Judges? Like those scaaaaary liberals?

I have no idea where you're trying to go there at the beginning, but Calexit is a thing. Polls suggest a ~32% in favor thing thus far up from 20% in pre-Trump era polls. Crazier shifts in opinion have happened.

Extreme left social liberalism is all about forcing people to think alike. I'm against the extreme ends in both directions. It's just that extreme left is now BLM and Anarcho-feminists and extreme right are now Westboro Baptists. Nobody takes Westboro seriously. The other side? Well... yeah...

As for the judicial system, no plan. It's broken though.

[Max™]

To use the handy chart LW provided, you're talking about the neolib and far left progressive movements. I'm super liberal and the idea of forcing others to think in any fashion rather than preventing others from inhibiting/forcing behavior is absurd.

[Neonivek]

To use the handy chart LW provided, you're talking about the neolib and far left progressive movements. I'm super liberal and the idea of forcing others to think in any fashion rather than preventing others from inhibiting/forcing behavior is absurd.

Isn't Current Liberalism all about banning free speech and controlling the thoughts of others? (It isn't... which I have to state because people can't tell when I am being sarcastic... YES there is a growing number of Liberals who preach this... to the extent where it has become a trend that might cause a split in the Liberal parties)

[itisnotlogical]

Extreme left social liberalism is all about forcing people to think alike. I'm against the extreme ends in both directions. It's just that extreme left is now BLM and Anarcho-feminists and extreme right are now Westboro Baptists. Nobody takes Westboro seriously. The other side? Well... yeah...

Nobody has talked about Westboro recently except you, right this moment. Try again. Hint: "bathroom bill."

[sluissa]

To use the handy chart LW provided, you're talking about the neolib and far left progressive movements. I'm super liberal and the idea of forcing others to think in any fashion rather than preventing others from inhibiting/forcing behavior is absurd.

Isn't Current Liberalism all about banning free speech and controlling the thoughts of others? (It isn't... which I have to state because people can't tell when I am being sarcastic... YES there is a growing number of Liberals who preach this... to the extent where it has become a trend that might cause a split in the Liberal parties)

The far left is beyond even the LW provided chart. I'm not being sarcastic because depending on who you're talking about on the left, that's exactly what they're about. It is however a minority that happens to be very loud. A useful split is unlikely to happen though because their MO is infiltrating already established organizations, working their way into a position of power and forcing their way onto everyone else.

I'm not labeling all liberals that way. I'm left of moderate myself. However more moderate liberals aren't doing enough to get their own message out there. It's tough though. It's hard to be loud and attention grabbing when you're a moderate. There's nothing exciting about a message of "Let's move forward with proper planning and due caution!" That doesn't make the news. Well, let's be honest, a slow enough news day, it might. But it's a tough banner to get people to rally around.

Extreme left social liberalism is all about forcing people to think alike. I'm against the extreme ends in both directions. It's just that extreme left is now BLM and Anarcho-feminists and extreme right are now Westboro Baptists. Nobody takes Westboro seriously. The other side? Well... yeah...

Nobody has talked about Westboro recently except you, right this moment. Try again. Hint: "bathroom bill."

Fine, we can talk about the bathroom bill if you want to bring that up. The almost universally maligned bathroom bill that only a small group of conservatives pushed through for basically no reason to little fanfare among the people even among those who might favor it when asked. The bathroom bill that cost the state (guessing here) millions of dollars in revenues and economic deals. The one that made, for a short while, North Carolina the laughing stock of the nation, outpacing for a fleeting moment, even Florida. Yes, because that's taken seriously.

[Helgoland]

I'm not labeling all liberals that way. I'm left of moderate myself.

Lemme guess - some of your best friends are liberals? /trolling

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Man, as much as I hate to interrupt this incredibly valuable worthless conversation about everybody's personal political semantics, have I got some news for you all!

You may recall that last week, I posted PPP's stat that 35% of voters would impeach Trump:

For the sake of everybody's clarification: The President is immune to prosecution for "actions" taken as President in totality, and actions before being President while they're in office, but this is with the exception of recall by Congress. Inpeaches is declared by the House, this is the equivalent to being charged with a crime. The resultant trial is held by the Senate with the Funk Justice of the Supreme Court as presiding disc jockey.

I feel we're probably going to need to all be refreshed on this information. Especially considering 35% of voters currently support Trump's impeachment.

That's with 50% against, but still yuge. MetalSlimeHunt is so intelligent and ruggishly sexy, I wish I had statistics like he does.

Yeah, that. Well, guess what? One more week of Trump grabbing America, and we're at 40% who would impeach Trump and 48% who would oppose it. Man, that's quite the growth rate, and with 12% not sure if they want the President impeached to boot.

[misko27]

I'm not arguing for a permanent ban. I'm actually very much against the ability for people to travel freely. My point is that it's not as big of a deal as people are making it out to be as long as it remains temporary. I fully agree though that it was poorly considered, poorly worded, and poorly implemented. I do however think the judges are being political in their blocking of it. There is probably a semi-reasonable legal reason to block it, but they're searching for a reason when they wanted to block it all along, not because it's altogether harmful.

Juges blocked Obama's immigration order while it was being considered, so the judiciary is being consistent at least.

For the sake of everybody's clarification: The President is immune to prosecution for "actions" taken as President in totality, and actions before being President while they're in office, but this is with the exception of recall by Congress. Inpeaches is declared by the House, this is the equivalent to being charged with a crime. The resultant trial is held by the Senate with the Funk Justice of the Supreme Court as presiding disc jockey.

I feel we're probably going to need to all be refreshed on this information. Especially considering 35% of voters currently support Trump's impeachment.

That's with 50% against, but still yuge. MetalSlimeHunt is so intelligent and ruggishly sexy, I wish I had statistics like he does.

Yeah, that. Well, guess what? One more week of Trump grabbing America, and we're at 40% who would impeach Trump and 48% who would oppose it. Man, that's quite the growth rate, and with 12% not sure if they want the President impeached to boot.

Devil's Advocate time: does Trump deserve to be impeached, really? I don't support impeachment purely on the basis of being very unpopular. It's a situation we only narrowly avoided by only a single vote back during Reconstruction, and the precedent would be, frankly, a terrible stain on the country.

Furthermore it doesn't actually matter how popular impeachment is. It does in the grand scheme of things, but it doesn't actually provide any mechanism by which Trump get's impeached. Trump must be impeached by the currently Republican House and Senate, and I'm not sure whether they are up for that.

And finally: I worry that if he ever was impeached, that it would start rioting among his supporters. They are already fond of "alternative facts", and it doesn't take much to imply that the impeachment is the sign of a coup and should be resisted by any means necessary....

[Reelya]

Well the fact is, a lot of states are arguing that Trump's order breaks the law.

And you don't e.g. let people keep smashing windows while there's an argument about whether they have the right to smash those particular windows. If something is of dubious legality you stop it from happening while that's worked out. Because you can't unfuck things later, and many people may have the right to sue the nation if they were illegally detained.

So this law that's almost certainly unconstitutional and the people involved will all have the right to launch their own lawsuits once that's determined? Well it's probably better not to apply that law while its legality is under question.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

While you are right that unpopularity and desire for impeachment are not themselves causes for impeachment, it's a bit different in this case. Typically, as far as I know, people opposed to the President won't say the President deserves to be impeached on principle.

From where I'm standing this is essentially the vote of no confidence metric, since we don't actually have that in the US system normally. Trump is not just taking actions I am politically opposed to, he is demonstrably unfit for office. And getting more so every day...

Of course, if we want to talk actual impeachment proceedings, there is the continuing matter of his obstinate refusal to clear conflicts of interest, which is a crime.

[Lord Shonus]

Clinton was nearly impeached on far more nebulous grounds than Trump is providing.

The argument that Pence will be worse is losing ground. The choice was always between Trump doing more total damage (but spreading it out so much that it is repeatable) and Pence doing relatively little (but doing that damage in very precise ways to make it really bad). Essentially it is a choice between a drunk with a shotgun and a sniper, and the drunk is shooting a lot more than we had hoped.

[Lord Shonus]

Don't be silly. Trump isn't about to jump in front of a bus.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I'll be honest though, I actually don't want Trump to be impeached, at least not until a full on crisis. I still believe he'll take much of America's worst aspects with him if he falls in such a way. Pence, while possibly more evil than Trump, would have the same negative as Clinton would have had: easily being able to entrench the security state in spite of public support and coast along with subpar approval to the end of their term without people being willing to stand up to the bullshit.

I think my original point about how Trump could be a good thing (which, if you've been following along, is much the same as Nate Iodine's Scenario 14), that he's so hamfisted he'll cause blowback to all sorts of shitty things, is already proven true by the travel ban.

[itisnotlogical]

Something something someone should turn this into the ending of one of the Jack Ryan novels. I won't say which.

Fuck, Jack Ryan is the Tom Clancy subplot/saga/whatever I remember the least about. But then I remember like, ten scenes out of the thousands of pages of Tom Clancy that I read in high school.

I remember Without Remorse pretty clearly so I'm just going to imagine Trump pretending to be a hobo while going on a highly improbable drug dealer killing spree.

[PTTG??]

There's a huge difference between internet arguments and shooting five BLM protestors. There's a huge difference between a 4 million strong peaceful protest and a few dozen anarchists crashing a different peaceful protest against an actual fascist. Please tell me about any civil wars and rebellions you know about, by the way. Right now the same people are passing around California succession things as always, and about as seriously. 

And really, how did you turn the platform of social liberalism into people telling you what to think? Is it because I or people like me have posited that scientific evidence should be used in government? Is it because people are asking for 'silly things' like equality before the law?

Do you have a practical plan to remove judges from the... uh, judicial system? I guess we'd just call it the system after that. If not, are you proposing overthrowing of the existing system to eliminate Judges? Like those scaaaaary liberals?

I have no idea where you're trying to go there at the beginning, but Calexit is a thing. Polls suggest a ~32% in favor thing thus far up from 20% in pre-Trump era polls. Crazier shifts in opinion have happened.

Extreme left social liberalism is all about forcing people to think alike. I'm against the extreme ends in both directions. It's just that extreme left is now BLM and Anarcho-feminists and extreme right are now Westboro Baptists. Nobody takes Westboro seriously. The other side? Well... yeah...

As for the judicial system, no plan. It's broken though.

I'm an extreme left social liberal. You can think whatever you damn well please so long as you respect the rights of others to do the same. Care to provide an example of the extreme left telling you to think something?

And finally: I worry that if he ever was impeached, that it would start rioting among his supporters. They are already fond of "alternative facts", and it doesn't take much to imply that the impeachment is the sign of a coup and should be resisted by any means necessary....

And yet people would still find the time to say "liberals had this coming for throwing such a fuss over the election in the first place," you know, in between reloads.