Print

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

[Starver]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, much of Trump's rhetoric has been to accuse other people of things he himself has been at least seen to consider doing himself, whether that be maintaining a swampy environment of cabalistic 'advisors' or misappropriating funds or sucking up to people that shouldn't be sucked up to. This would fit with "Obama played the game selfishly, 'cos that's how I would (and now maybe can) play it," and other things like that.

I don't say Obama is a saint, nor that Clinton, H, is even on balance altruistic, but it appears that Trump is a misanthrope who does not understand that people other than him can be not misanthropes, at least lart of the time. Or he's just so used to poisoning the well¹ in all his business dealings that he thinks that is the only way to do anything...

¹ Or putting "warning: poisoned well!" signs up on someone else's well, then buying it cheaply. Or arranging to sell his own, healthy, well then poisoning it as soon as he's paid for it. Or...

[Descan]

Gerrymandering isn't really relevant for the presidential election, since I don't believe any state calculates results on a congressional-district basis. Sure it's relevant in other races, just not that one. e.g. this article is titled "How the electoral college gerrymanders the presidential vote".

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/11/29/how-the-electoral-college-gerrymanders-the-presidential-vote/?utm_term=.8a0e1ec2258f

But the problem is that they need to move state borders to prove their point, which effectively disproves the point. Borders which cannot be moved can't be manipulated by either party, so the gerrymandering term isn't really applicable.

That article wasn't about parties gerrymandering districts, it was about the electoral college adding arbitrariness to how the presidency is won by making the same number of votes give radically different results just based on state lines.

I don't really know why they used the word "gerrymander" when it's not at all related.

[EnigmaticHat]

Trump's influence as President is such that this is an inappropriate action regardless of whether or not it is a legal one. And yes, Trump still seems to be under the impression that his office makes him "boss of America" and able to issue instructions to anybody that "just ought" to be followed whether there's legal authority or not.

Makes you think doesn't it?  It would be kind of weird to live in a monarchy.  Like you meet the king walking down a street and you just have to do anything that he says.  Like, "The flies here are appalling!  You there, yes you, get a flyswatter and take care of them.  And make it snappy, I could have you killed you know!"

[PTTG??]

Emerging from scholastic stasis: I can't give even a single rat's ads what Trump does about millionaire footballers.  Puerto Rico is apocalyptic, he's trying to start a nuclear war with North Korea, he toys with the lives of millions of dreamers, and that's just the stuff I've noted in the past few weeks.

His Twitter fights can go to hell. What we need is fundamental medical reform and education reconstruction, and that's not going to happen while he's in office.

[scriver]

Trump's influence as President is such that this is an inappropriate action regardless of whether or not it is a legal one. And yes, Trump still seems to be under the impression that his office makes him "boss of America" and able to issue instructions to anybody that "just ought" to be followed whether there's legal authority or not.

Makes you think doesn't it?  It would be kind of weird to live in a monarchy.  Like you meet the king walking down a street and you just have to do anything that he says.  Like, "The flies here are appalling!  You there, yes you, get a flyswatter and take care of them.  And make it snappy, I could have you killed you know!"

No. That isn't how things work.

[EnigmaticHat]

Are you implying its a ridiculous example or that a king wouldn't have had that power?

[Loud Whispers]

Are you implying its a ridiculous example or that a king wouldn't have had that power?

Both tbh

[hector13]

Well, Trump doesn't act presidential so he wouldn't act regal, either.

[IronTomato]

In other news, Trump's taking massive fire from the NFL and the NFL Player's Union, which have jointly denounced a speech in which he advocates firing any player who participates in the Anthem Protests. This is intensified by his revocation of the traditional White House invitation to the Golden State Warriors (the current NBA champions) after a player expressed reluctance to participate.

Remember guys, Donald Trump supports free speech. He means it.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Donald Trump supports free speech except burning the flag should be a felony and people shouldn't be allowed to question the authority of the President and libel laws should apply to criticism of public figures and neo-nazis should be allowed to march around assaulting minorities and hecklers at rallies should be lynched by the mob and people who oppose the President should be publicly targeted by him for his followers and news organizations shouldn't be allowed to speak ill of the government and people who run against him in elections should be jailed and

[Max™]

*NFL player takes a knee in peaceful protest during the anthem*
"THROW THAT SON OF A BITCH OFF THE FIELD!"

*Actual Neo-Nazi cunts marching around a confederate statue with torches before one kills a counterprotester*
"Well, you know, both sides..."

Gerrymandering isn't really relevant for the presidential election [snipped additional irrelevance preemptively]

I didn't say anything about the presidency; I said it won them two of three branches. While this point may seem strange to make for the senate as that was more about disenfranchised voters than gerrymandering really, having the house owned by republicans during the Obama years allowed them to cockblock enough shit that they were able to fuck over everyone and then sell it as "if only those fucking worthless democrats weren't in power" with the implication being that they would be much better able to govern with all three houses of government under their control.

...so, ha ha ha ha ha, eat shit bastards, and such to them. Sadly I am incapable of comforting beliefs and thus have no reason to expect the big orange fuckup will actually lose any significant number of republican votes, so I am left with nothing but being amused at him continuously screwing over the worst-supervillain-shitbags in congress as they try to fuck over everyone else.

[MrRoboto75]

Donald Trump supports free speech except burning the flag should be a felony and people shouldn't be allowed to question the authority of the President and libel laws should apply to criticism of public figures and neo-nazis should be allowed to march around assaulting minorities and hecklers at rallies should be lynched by the mob and people who oppose the President should be publicly targeted by him for his followers and news organizations shouldn't be allowed to speak ill of the government and people who run against him in elections should be jailed and

You know, free speech*!

[scriver]

Are you implying its a ridiculous example or that a king wouldn't have had that power?

Both tbh

Yep, both. It's a ridiculous example and a king wouldn't have that power.

[Arx]

Are you implying its a ridiculous example or that a king wouldn't have had that power?

Both tbh

Yep, both. It's a ridiculous example and a king wouldn't have that power.

I feel like this is something of a comment on how Americans in general sometimes view the world - that many of them completely forget that several European countries (some of them bastions of liberalism and progress!) are in fact monarchies. It's surprisingly easy to let the distinction between a (parliamentary or similar) monarchy, an absolute monarchy, and a dictatorship blur in ones head.

[Frumple]

Well... yeah. Considering most (all?) of the ones that don't have pretty serious problems related to it are monarchies more or less in name only, with a near entirely ornamental "ruler"... is pretty easy to not pay much attention to the glorified figurehead that's functionally powerless outside of soft influence, or would be committing variously literal suicide if they tried to exercise anything else they ostensibly had, and largely refer to monarchies as... not those.

Far as I'm aware most or all of the bastiony sorts are about as much a monarchy as my other one is bebelled and requesting a tug, really...