Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 3596 3597 [3598] 3599 3600 ... 3610

Author Topic: AmeriPol thread  (Read 4451882 times)

Robot Parade Leader

  • Bay Watcher
  • Well, go on ... parade!
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53955 on: November 07, 2024, 08:01:20 pm »

That's not the same as saying he knew nothing about it. Certainly it's true that it wasn't HIS personal platform and he had nothing to do with drafting it.


.... What? Did you read the direct quotes from Trump?

In the debate, Trump said, “I have nothing to do as she knows better than anyone, I have nothing to do with Project 2025. That is out there. I have not read it. I don't want to read it, purposely. I'm not going to read it," he said.

He didn't read it and he was saying he had nothing to do with it, "“I have nothing to do as she knows better than anyone, I have nothing to do with Project 2025."

Did you read what he said? He repeatedly and regularly denied it. Multiple times. This is just one instance. He didn't say "nothing to do with drafting it, he said nothing to do with it. He didn't know what was in it, "purposefully."
He... didn't have anything to do with it, that was the point.

Once again, you're not being clear at best. I really don't know what you're getting this from.

https://www.npr.org/2024/07/11/nx-s1-5035272/project-2025-trump-biden-heritage-foundation-conservative

“I know nothing about Project 2025,” Trump wrote on his social media website Truth Social. “I have no idea who is behind it. I disagree with some of the things they’re saying and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal. Anything they do, I wish them luck, but I have nothing to do with them.”

This is an absolute fact. He said a TON about denying anything to do with it and disagreeing with it.
« Last Edit: November 07, 2024, 08:09:45 pm by Robot Parade Leader »
Logged

MaxTheFox

  • Bay Watcher
  • Лишь одна дорожка да на всей земле
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53956 on: November 07, 2024, 08:09:39 pm »

Harris could have won handily if she made a few concessions to the left wing. Not all, not most. Even one or two somewhat daring reforms would have probably helped secure otherwise non-voters and might even have swung over a few centrists. But what do you expect from the party whose totem animal is a donkey.

*Bursts in laughter*

To win elections you need to fight for the (moderate) electorate of the other side not do something that they strongly oppose to attract few votes of "against both" radical marginals.
What moderate electorate? Anyone who was gonna vote for Trump was locked in on him. You're not gonna turn more than a few Trump voters away from him while Trump is still alive. So many people didn't vote because they felt both sides sucked and would not improve their lives.

Kamala just did exactly that, try to not offend both sides too much, and lost for it because Trump was more daring.
« Last Edit: November 07, 2024, 08:11:13 pm by MaxTheFox »
Logged
Woe to those who make unjust laws, to those who issue oppressive decrees, to deprive the poor of their rights and withhold justice from the oppressed of my people, making widows their prey and robbing the fatherless. What will you do on the day of reckoning, when disaster comes from afar?

Maximum Spin

  • Bay Watcher
  • [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE] [GOES_TO_ELEVEN]
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53957 on: November 07, 2024, 08:36:07 pm »

Once again, you're not being clear at best. I really don't know what you're getting this from.

https://www.npr.org/2024/07/11/nx-s1-5035272/project-2025-trump-biden-heritage-foundation-conservative

“I know nothing about Project 2025,” Trump wrote on his social media website Truth Social. “I have no idea who is behind it. I disagree with some of the things they’re saying and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal. Anything they do, I wish them luck, but I have nothing to do with them.”

This is an absolute fact. He said a TON about denying anything to do with it and disagreeing with it.
Okay, I think these words mean something different to you than they do to me, somehow.
So he only said he "knew nothing about it" on his fake social media site I don't read, and then immediately went on to clearly show that he did know about it, so we can assume it was a figure of speech; but he does say he doesn't know who came up with it, which is probably true. It was never his personal platform and he obviously had nothing to do with it, since he is not part of the Heritage Foundation. That statement was plainly true. It seems reasonably likely that he never even read it and only had information about it second-hand.

I guess you could call that dissembling if you think he specifically intended to follow it as written, but I don't even think he was being dishonest. It wasn't HIS agenda, it was the agenda of the people hoping to get into his administration, and it was never hidden in the slightest.
Logged

Robot Parade Leader

  • Bay Watcher
  • Well, go on ... parade!
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53958 on: November 07, 2024, 09:01:04 pm »

Once again, you're not being clear at best. I really don't know what you're getting this from.

https://www.npr.org/2024/07/11/nx-s1-5035272/project-2025-trump-biden-heritage-foundation-conservative

“I know nothing about Project 2025,” Trump wrote on his social media website Truth Social. “I have no idea who is behind it. I disagree with some of the things they’re saying and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal. Anything they do, I wish them luck, but I have nothing to do with them.”

This is an absolute fact. He said a TON about denying anything to do with it and disagreeing with it.
Okay, I think these words mean something different to you than they do to me, somehow.
So he only said he "knew nothing about it" on his fake social media site I don't read, and then immediately went on to clearly show that he did know about it, so we can assume it was a figure of speech; but he does say he doesn't know who came up with it, which is probably true. It was never his personal platform and he obviously had nothing to do with it, since he is not part of the Heritage Foundation. That statement was plainly true. It seems reasonably likely that he never even read it and only had information about it second-hand.

I guess you could call that dissembling if you think he specifically intended to follow it as written, but I don't even think he was being dishonest. It wasn't HIS agenda, it was the agenda of the people hoping to get into his administration, and it was never hidden in the slightest.


That's if a government does it.

I don't know. I'm upset most people aren't going to own a home and threw something out there.
I think it's genuinely a good idea and I support doing the legwork to try to make it happen.

Quote
Wow so  agenda you can't even admit to before it's too late to stop it.
We all knew it was the agenda to begin with, though, didn't we? Not only on the left, too, but even Trump-voting Boomers knew it was the agenda. It wasn't really hidden. This is what people voted for.

How did people "vote for it" if the candidate (Trump) said he knew "nothing about it" and "some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal?"

This is absolutely not clear and openly presented. If it was actually the agenda, then it was denied and hidden. "It wasn't HIS agenda, it was the agenda of the people hoping to get into his administration"

This is real simple:
People weren't voting for unnamed "people hoping to get into his administration" who Trump denied knowing.
People voted for Trump.
Trump said he knew nothing about it and didn't know who wrote it.
So people didn't vote for it (project 2025).

If you vote for a candidate, you vote for the policies they say they are going to do, not the policies they deny.

Candidate A runs for office and says he knows nothing about the put a "Flower in Every Driveway Initiative" FIEDI or who wrote it and calls it absolutely ridiculous and abysmal. Candidate A gets elected. Before you know it, there are florists who liked Candidate A charging the government to but a flower in every driveway. Did the people vote for a flower in every driveway? Of course not. They voted for Candidate A who called it "absolutely ridiculous and abysmal." Unless of course, Candidate A was really secretly hiding that he wanted FIEDI the whole time.

You're gonna think what you're gonna think.
« Last Edit: November 07, 2024, 09:03:17 pm by Robot Parade Leader »
Logged

Maximum Spin

  • Bay Watcher
  • [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE] [GOES_TO_ELEVEN]
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53959 on: November 07, 2024, 09:07:17 pm »

How did people "vote for it" if the candidate (Trump) said he knew "nothing about it" and "some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal?"
Because THEY knew about it. I know this is true to a significant degree because I've talked to people, even people you would expect not to know anything about something like that. It was being widely shared all over. I would say that it's very likely that MOST of the people who voted for Trump had heard of it. Of course they also understood that it wasn't Trump's proposal specifically, too, but they hoped that all or part of it would become the policy of his administration.
Logged

Robot Parade Leader

  • Bay Watcher
  • Well, go on ... parade!
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53960 on: November 07, 2024, 09:19:41 pm »

How did people "vote for it" if the candidate (Trump) said he knew "nothing about it" and "some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal?"
Because THEY knew about it. I know this is true to a significant degree because I've talked to people, even people you would expect not to know anything about something like that. It was being widely shared all over. I would say that it's very likely that MOST of the people who voted for Trump had heard of it. Of course they also understood that it wasn't Trump's proposal specifically, too, but they hoped that all or part of it would become the policy of his administration.

There is a massive disconnect in your thinking here. "THEY." This explains nothing.

*"It was being widely shared all over."

900 + pages. No coverage in debates except denials from the candidate they voted for? Why bother reading it. Trump denied it.


**"I would say that it's very likely that MOST of the people who voted for Trump had heard of it."

Did people understand it or even know what was in it even if they "heard of it." Heard of what, the two word title? Did they know any of the details or think to look into them if Trump himself denied it and called it "absolutely ridiculous and abysmal." These are Trump's words. Should we think he means the opposite of what he says?

***"Of course they also understood that it wasn't Trump's proposal specifically, too, but they hoped that all or part of it would become the policy of his administration."

How was it "understood?" How did "they" "hope that all or part of it would become the policy of his administration?"

How did anyone "understand" that Trump would deny it in public in writing on his own social media platform while calling it "absolutely ridiculous and abysmal" and then it should be a part of his policy despite him expressly and repeatedly denying it.

"All or Part?" Which parts? The ones he called "absolutely ridiculous and abysmal?" He denied reading any part of it "purposefully," and said he knew nothing about it.

People voted for Trump. They voted for the policies he said he would do: immigration, border wall, tax cuts. They did not vote for the policies he said he knew nothing about. There is zero evidence supporting what you're saying that it was "understood," (how?) and "voted for."

If you vote for someone you vote for what they say they'll do, not what they say they expressly don't know anything about, haven't read, refuse to read, and call  "absolutely ridiculous and abysmal."

The example I put still stands. Here's another. A customer has a vote for dinner. The chef tells customer "you won't be served chicken" and that chicken is "absolutely ridiculous and abysmal." Customer decides to eat at the chef's restaurant assured there will not be chicken served. Other chicken farmers want to sell their chickens to Chef but Chef says no. Customer finds the only thing Chef serves is chicken. Everyone says the customer wanted chicken even though customer was told there would be no chicken. Customer is understandably confused because the chicken was hidden.
« Last Edit: November 07, 2024, 09:29:11 pm by Robot Parade Leader »
Logged

Maximum Spin

  • Bay Watcher
  • [OPPOSED_TO_LIFE] [GOES_TO_ELEVEN]
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53961 on: November 07, 2024, 09:29:20 pm »

There is a massive disconnect in your thinking here. "THEY." This explains nothing.

*"It was being widely shared all over."

900 + pages. No coverage in debates except denials from the candidate they voted for?

**"I would say that it's very likely that MOST of the people who voted for Trump had heard of it."

Did people understand it or even know what was in it even if they "heard of it." Heard of what, the two word title? Did they know any of the details or think to look into them if Trump himself denied it and called it "absolutely ridiculous and abysmal." These are Trump's words. Should we think he means the opposite of what he says?

***"Of course they also understood that it wasn't Trump's proposal specifically, too, but they hoped that all or part of it would become the policy of his administration."

How was it "understood?" How did "they" "hope that all or part of it would become the policy of his administration?"

How did anyone "understand" that Trump would deny it in public in writing on his own social media platform while calling it "absolutely ridiculous and abysmal" and then it should be a part of his policy despite him expressly and repeatedly denying it.

"All or Part?" Which parts? The ones he called "absolutely ridiculous and abysmal?" He denied reading any part of it "purposefully," and said he knew nothing about it.

People voted for Trump. They voted for the policies he said he would do: immigration, border wall, tax cuts. They did not vote for the policies he said he knew nothing about. There is zero evidence supporting what you're saying that it was "understood," (how?) and "voted for."

If you vote for someone you vote for what they say they'll do, not what they say they expressly don't know anything about, haven't read, refuse to read, and call  "absolutely ridiculous and abysmal."

The example I put still stands. Here's another. A customer has a vote for dinner. The chef tells customer "you won't be served chicken" and that chicken is "absolutely ridiculous and abysmal." Customer decides to eat at the chef's restaurant assured there will not be chicken served. Other chicken farmers want to sell their chickens to Chef but Chef says no. Customer finds the only thing Chef serves is chicken. Everyone says the customer wanted chicken.
Do you actually know any Trump voters? I can only conclude you don't.
In general, they get their information from social media, not "debates". Project 2025 was a major talking point in Trump-voting circles, to the extent that, like I said, even older boomers who barely use computers knew about it from word of mouth. Awareness of it and its contents was widespread in that demographic. Of course I'm not saying that I can know for sure whether every single person knew about it, but to pretend that it was "hidden" when it was publically posted on the internet and being shared all over is absurd. People have been talking about it for more than a year. Yes, Trump voters, in the main, knew about it and it was part of their expectations. You can ask some if you want.
Logged

Frumple

  • Bay Watcher
  • The Prettiest Kyuuki
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53962 on: November 07, 2024, 09:33:30 pm »

The example I put still stands. Here's another. A customer has a vote for dinner. The chef tells customer "you won't be served chicken" and that chicken is "absolutely ridiculous and abysmal." Customer decides to eat at the chef's restaurant assured there will not be chicken served. Other chicken farmers want to sell their chickens to Chef but Chef says no. Customer finds the only thing Chef serves is chicken. Everyone says the customer wanted chicken even though customer was told there would be no chicken. Customer is understandably confused because the chicken was hidden.
Eh, the thing kinda' missing from the analogy is the chef's not the only person in the kitchen and everyone from the primary assistant down, well, they're chicken specialists, they were hired because they were chicken specialists, and everyone involved is well aware the chef chose them because, well, chicken. You pretty reasonably say the customer wanted chicken when they went into the restaurant with the chicken-denying chef who staffed the place with chicken cookers.

They're not confused even a little when chicken ends up on the plate. Someone from out of town might be confused (keeping them from figuring out what was going on was basically the entire point), but the proverbial locals (the folks that actually voted for trump instead of just... not voting), piles of 'em know exactly what's going on at that chicken restaurant.

A rough understanding of what 2025 entailed was being shared pretty well and widely. The official GOP platform was 2025 with the name filed off, and there wasn't really anything subtle about it, y'know?
Logged
Ask not!
What your country can hump for you.
Ask!
What you can hump for your country.

Robot Parade Leader

  • Bay Watcher
  • Well, go on ... parade!
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53963 on: November 07, 2024, 09:37:44 pm »

There is a massive disconnect in your thinking here. "THEY." This explains nothing.

*"It was being widely shared all over."

900 + pages. No coverage in debates except denials from the candidate they voted for?

**"I would say that it's very likely that MOST of the people who voted for Trump had heard of it."

Did people understand it or even know what was in it even if they "heard of it." Heard of what, the two word title? Did they know any of the details or think to look into them if Trump himself denied it and called it "absolutely ridiculous and abysmal." These are Trump's words. Should we think he means the opposite of what he says?

***"Of course they also understood that it wasn't Trump's proposal specifically, too, but they hoped that all or part of it would become the policy of his administration."

How was it "understood?" How did "they" "hope that all or part of it would become the policy of his administration?"

How did anyone "understand" that Trump would deny it in public in writing on his own social media platform while calling it "absolutely ridiculous and abysmal" and then it should be a part of his policy despite him expressly and repeatedly denying it.

"All or Part?" Which parts? The ones he called "absolutely ridiculous and abysmal?" He denied reading any part of it "purposefully," and said he knew nothing about it.

People voted for Trump. They voted for the policies he said he would do: immigration, border wall, tax cuts. They did not vote for the policies he said he knew nothing about. There is zero evidence supporting what you're saying that it was "understood," (how?) and "voted for."

If you vote for someone you vote for what they say they'll do, not what they say they expressly don't know anything about, haven't read, refuse to read, and call  "absolutely ridiculous and abysmal."

The example I put still stands. Here's another. A customer has a vote for dinner. The chef tells customer "you won't be served chicken" and that chicken is "absolutely ridiculous and abysmal." Customer decides to eat at the chef's restaurant assured there will not be chicken served. Other chicken farmers want to sell their chickens to Chef but Chef says no. Customer finds the only thing Chef serves is chicken. Everyone says the customer wanted chicken.
Do you actually know any Trump voters? I can only conclude you don't.
In general, they get their information from social media, not "debates". Project 2025 was a major talking point in Trump-voting circles, to the extent that, like I said, even older boomers who barely use computers knew about it from word of mouth. Awareness of it and its contents was widespread in that demographic. Of course I'm not saying that I can know for sure whether every single person knew about it, but to pretend that it was "hidden" when it was publically posted on the internet and being shared all over is absurd. People have been talking about it for more than a year. Yes, Trump voters, in the main, knew about it and it was part of their expectations. You can ask some if you want.

I disagree with you and show you words Trump put in writing himself on his own social media website. So you can only conclude I don't know any Trump voters when they make up half the voting public and number in the millions? Quoting Trump himself doesn't mean anything?

*In general, they get their information from social media, not "debates".

https://www.npr.org/2024/07/11/nx-s1-5035272/project-2025-trump-biden-heritage-foundation-conservative

“I know nothing about Project 2025,” Trump wrote on his social media website Truth Social. “I have no idea who is behind it. I disagree with some of the things they’re saying and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal. Anything they do, I wish them luck, but I have nothing to do with them.”

So they get their information from social media. Trump's social media is Truth Social. He said he knew nothing about project 2025 on Truth social.

Quoting Trump himself, and getting the news from Trump's own social media platform isn't good enough? Who am I supposed to quote if quoting Trump isn't good enough? So quoting other news sites is "fake news," and quoting what Trump wrote himself from Trump's own social media is not good enough either? What source is good enough?

The example I put still stands. Here's another. A customer has a vote for dinner. The chef tells customer "you won't be served chicken" and that chicken is "absolutely ridiculous and abysmal." Customer decides to eat at the chef's restaurant assured there will not be chicken served. Other chicken farmers want to sell their chickens to Chef but Chef says no. Customer finds the only thing Chef serves is chicken. Everyone says the customer wanted chicken even though customer was told there would be no chicken. Customer is understandably confused because the chicken was hidden.
Eh, the thing kinda' missing from the analogy is the chef's not the only person in the kitchen and everyone from the primary assistant down, well, they're chicken specialists, they were hired because they were chicken specialists, and everyone involved is well aware the chef chose them because, well, chicken. You pretty reasonably say the customer wanted chicken when they went into the restaurant with the chicken-denying chef who staffed the place with chicken cookers.

They're not confused even a little when chicken ends up on the plate. Someone from out of town might be confused (keeping them from figuring out what was going on was basically the entire point), but the proverbial locals (the folks that actually voted for trump instead of just... not voting), piles of 'em know exactly what's going on at that chicken restaurant.

A rough understanding of what 2025 entailed was being shared pretty well and widely. The official GOP platform was 2025 with the name filed off, and there wasn't really anything subtle about it, y'know?

Chicken denying Chef. He's hiding the chicken, badly. Yeah, that's lying about not serving chicken. Hiring the chicken specialists makes it intentional. Sure, some of the insiders knew and maybe some of the insiders voted for it. But those from "out of town might be confused (keeping them from figuring out what was going on was basically the entire point)." Did the out of towners vote for chicken and are there enough out of towners for that to matter? Surely there was some reason the out of towners were kept in the dark (lied to)? If it really was open and not hidden, then why hide the chicken. Why not advertise it like any other dish for sale to seem if people want it. Doesn't see right to try to hide it, even if hiding it was badly done. Why not embrace it openly for people to decide what they wanna eat?

"Keeping them from figuring out what was going on was basically the entire point." Yup, that's the lie. Denying the policy wasn't honest.

The point is Trump lied. This isn't new news.
« Last Edit: November 07, 2024, 09:56:45 pm by Robot Parade Leader »
Logged

Flying Dice

  • Bay Watcher
  • inveterate shitposter
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53964 on: November 07, 2024, 09:48:51 pm »

Harris could have won handily if she made a few concessions to the left wing. Not all, not most. Even one or two somewhat daring reforms would have probably helped secure otherwise non-voters and might even have swung over a few centrists. But what do you expect from the party whose totem animal is a donkey.
Every step "left" would have added ten percent to Trump's totals. Most American leftists are in the demographics that Harris already did well in. The groups that turned out for Trump hate and despise the left with the passion of a thousand suns.
That segment alone wouldn't have done it. It was brought up by several people yesterday, but the American left has been hoist by their own petard repeatedly.

The bit about driving young men into the arms of shitheels like Tate is apt. When you spend a quarter of a century telling men that they're intrinsically bad and evil, that masculinity should be destroyed, you are not making them want to vote for the people you support. It's been demonstrated time and again that one of the factors which primes a population for radicalization is destroying the sense of purpose for fighting-age men, convincing them that their society isn't worth defending and maintaining, demonstrating that they're unable to fulfill biological imperatives centered around protecting and providing for their family. That's happening regardless in a society where prices have inflated beyond control for 40 years while income has remained stagnant, but when you combine it by telling those fighting-age men that not only are they *unable* to express their masculinity in socially positive ways, they're wrong for even wanting to... yeah, no shit they're going to turn to literally anyone else. This is closely monitored by anti-terrorism organizations but it's much older than that -- economic collapse and mass disillusionment of fighting-age men are the classic recipe for violent revolution.


I also agree with Sanders' recent comment except to say that he didn't go far enough. A portion of the left has spent 25 years spitting on men, but almost the entire Democrat establishment has been doing the same thing to working-class and rural folks, treating us like we're duty-bound to vote for them eternally for no return. In my life I have seen one presidential candidate campaign on issues I cared deeply about (Gore), and none whatsoever who I was genuinely excited for. Every vote I have ever cast in a presidential election has been a "lesser evil" vote against someone I really didn't want in office, not a vote for someone I did want there. The Democrat establishment has been coasting since 1992 on the assumption that their base would keep voting for them forever because hey, at least they're not the other guy. They've been told over and over that that's not good enough -- I'm shocked that even Trump's abysmal first performance was enough to push a center-right business-as-usual type like Biden over the line, which really shows how miserable his first term was for everyone. Then Harris came in this year and trotted out the same old "Hey, look at their guy! Guess what, at least I'm not him," and here we are.


I fucking despise the Democratic party almost as much as our dysfunctional electoral system and the theocratic authoritarian thugs on the other side of the aisle. I can count with two fingers the number of times I have cast a vote for someone I genuinely wanted in office at a level higher than city council seats. If the political establishment on the right is insane and authoritarian, the one on the left is fat, diseased, and condescending.

I'm only half joking, because I don't know how. I don't think many of us are going to be able to afford a house and rent is insanely high. Now I'm hearing inflation is going to go higher, which means housing prices are going to go higher. The average house is already over $400,000 in the US. They don't want to give us remote work so we can't live in cheaper places.
Plus if you need to move for work it's a giant pain.
It's not just inflation and prices spiking, the incoming administration's been running on gutting the labor market for construction (and agriculture, and a pile of other things) on top of it all. All the supply issues involved are going to go from "very bad" to "looks like a cliff face" if something doesn't manage to stop that.

Housing's pretty likely to get much, much worse in a very rapid timeframe.

Don't forget the imminent collapse of social security funding if we see mass deportation of young immigrant workers who are currently paying to support the boomers.



Also, total side note, looks like I was off on the timing: the nonviolent hate crimes are firing off less than two days in. Black Americans in more than 10 states, including many schoolchildren, are being spammed with text messages commanding them to report to plantation sites with their belongings. """Protestors""" at Texas State University added a new sign to the usual "God hates f*gs" lineup with "Women are property".
« Last Edit: November 07, 2024, 10:26:43 pm by Flying Dice »
Logged


Aurora on small monitors:
1. Game Parameters -> Reduced Height Windows.
2. Lock taskbar to the right side of your desktop.
3. Run Resize Enable

Robot Parade Leader

  • Bay Watcher
  • Well, go on ... parade!
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53965 on: November 07, 2024, 10:19:42 pm »

Yeah, I agree with Flying Dice.

There needs to be acceptance and a place for the straight white guys on the left. A lot of us didn't do a thing wrong and are getting screwed by the people with money pretty bad. A lot of people said we can be allies and that's true but I'm not happy being told I'm the problem. It kinda sucks. I'm not trying to hurt anyone. I learned GLBT people are fine and so are other minorities. I wasn't raised to think that but I learned.

I saw George Floyd and what happened to him was very wrong. I think the way a lot of minorities are treated badly is wrong.
I didn't cause the bad things they don't deserve to be suffering though. I have no problem helping them when I can. There's not a lot the average person can do when they're barely able to afford necessities with rising prices. All I can do is try my best not to add to the crap they don't deserve to suffer through.

I want a real choice with real solutions instead of blaming people, no matter who is the person being blamed. Blaming isn't going to solve shit. Doesn't matter who. I don't think dismantling everything is gonna magically solve anything, because it's just gonna be replaced with something else eventually and who knows if that replacement thing will be better.

I feel like a lot of the people who voted for Trump probably did it because they were tired and felt they didn't have any options. What's going on isn't working for them. A lot of Trump voters aren't demons or anything. The rural people aren't bad people. They're screwed over too. Basically anybody without money right now is not doing well.

I think it's got to be hard living in a small town in the middle of nowhere and the world is kinda screwing you over. You hear about all these problems in places you're not and nobody gives a damn about your problems. They call where you live "fly over country," and they say you're the problem. Hell you didn't do anything bad or at least you didn't mean to. You're not even sure what you did wrong, or were supposed to have done wrong, or what you "should've" done different. Those rural people probably go to a job like the rest of us  and get screwed over like the rest of us but there are just fewer people around.

I don't know how to make it all work together and I don't know if anybody really does. I don't know what to tell an 18 year old growing up in the country do to. I don't know if going to college is good for them or if they can afford it. I don't know if a factory job is good for them if they can even get one. I don't know what to tell the rural person who is 40 to do that would work for them. They've probably worked all their damn life and now things are changing and how do they adapt to support themselves and their family. I don't know what to tell the rural person who's like 60 or older. Shit, is social security going to be there for them (or for the rest of us one day). Hell if I know. Those concerns are legit and I wish there were real solutions for those real people. That way they wouldn't turn to people who lie to them.

I don't think Trump or Harris really had real answers. I think the people with the money are pulling the strings for both Biden and Trump and neither one is really out to help us. I think if people with whatever ideology weren't running weren't fighting over their ideology, we could somehow look at things and figure out how do to things to help everyone, or at least a whole lot more people than we are helping now. That rural person who's working their ass off should have a decent life. They probably voted for Trump because they might not have a good one, but people are telling them everything's fine. It's not fine. Maybe he or she has a reason to be upset. I just wish they felt they had a better option to vote for too.
« Last Edit: November 07, 2024, 10:27:03 pm by Robot Parade Leader »
Logged

Flying Teasets

  • Bay Watcher
  • another nation, or a non-governmental entity
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53966 on: November 07, 2024, 10:26:55 pm »

ratchet effect
Logged
Flying Teasets is stricken by melancholy!
The USA is a rogue state.

Robot Parade Leader

  • Bay Watcher
  • Well, go on ... parade!
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53967 on: November 07, 2024, 10:29:51 pm »

ratchet effect

Is this what you mean? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratchet_effect    I'm not sure I understand you.
Logged

Lord Shonus

  • Bay Watcher
  • Angle of Death
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53968 on: November 07, 2024, 10:51:39 pm »

Harris could have won handily if she made a few concessions to the left wing. Not all, not most. Even one or two somewhat daring reforms would have probably helped secure otherwise non-voters and might even have swung over a few centrists. But what do you expect from the party whose totem animal is a donkey.

*Bursts in laughter*

To win elections you need to fight for the (moderate) electorate of the other side not do something that they strongly oppose to attract few votes of "against both" radical marginals.
Anyone who was gonna vote for Trump was locked in on him. You're not gonna turn more than a few Trump voters away from him while Trump is still alive. So many people didn't vote because they felt both sides sucked and would not improve their lives.

This is very blatantly not true. Harris didn't win because of low turnout - the numbers aren't quite as high as 2020, but they're still higher than every other Presidential election in this century. Once all the outstanding ballots (which are not enough to change the results) are counted, we'll be pretty close to the same total.

The problem was that a lot of the people who voted for Biden last time switched to Trump, not that they didn't vote at all.
Logged
On Giant In the Playground and Something Awful I am Gnoman.
Man, ninja'd by a potentially inebriated Lord Shonus. I was gonna say to burn it.

Flying Teasets

  • Bay Watcher
  • another nation, or a non-governmental entity
    • View Profile
Re: AmeriPol thread
« Reply #53969 on: November 07, 2024, 11:05:13 pm »

ratchet effect

Is this what you mean? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ratchet_effect    I'm not sure I understand you.
Reactionaries move right, Dems slow that movement without going left.
Logged
Flying Teasets is stricken by melancholy!
The USA is a rogue state.
Pages: 1 ... 3596 3597 [3598] 3599 3600 ... 3610