Jump to content

US Politics Thread

Sharpshooter

By Sharpshooter
in Off-Topic

 Share

Recommended Posts

Gator Top 6

Gator

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, kilgore said:

 

I know Satchmo has already answered this but maybe you need a second opinion.

 

1.  OF COURSE there are late term abortions.  In very rare occasions. When a mother, who wanted the child, has complications and as he said, the fetus is "nonviable"  (won't live long anyways)  This happens sadly to a number of new mothers.  Sometimes the infant is still alive, and so is removed and kept comfortable until the doctor and mother can speak about what is best.  Probably ending up stopping the infant's life instead of watching it suffer longer and die that way.  Is that your beef? That they should rather pull it out, throw it on a table and let it die "naturally"? Or....leave it in until its for sure dead?  What do you suggest?

 

2. She said she was not banning fracking back in 2020 already.  Where were you? You can go back further I guess and find where she did say she'd ban fracking.  So what?  She changed her position.  That is not "lying".  That is what any person does. Especially politicians. She never said "I was never against fracking"   That would be a lie.  You know, like lying about winning the last election.

 

3. "Defund the Police' was taken off of a BLM protest sign.  Written no doubt by passionate protesters who were expressing their anger in the moment.  It was politically stupid for some more green Demcrats to repeat that even though what they really meant was use some of the funds we give to the police for enforcement and spend some on working on root causes, and helping bridge the gap between the police and the community. But of course Republicans use that to come to a conclusion that what that means is that Democrats are against law and order...as migrants run wild through the streets raping and killing pets.

 

She answered the question by clarifying it was about "reimaginaing the police" Balancing brute force with social connection, education of officers etc.  As a way to lessen the us vs them mentality.  Once again, using pure disingenuous bullshit. Distorting reality to fit into their own crazy bubble of alt reality.

 

What is sad that because the new Trumpublican party is just looking for weapons they can use against Democrats, they simply cannot even have a discussion about other ideas like funding the police in new creative and expanded ways to curb violence.  Its just us vs them. Some Rs tried to come to agreement with the border bill, but Trump soon put them straight. 

 

4. Why do you think its appropriate for a candidate for the POTUS to even use that terminology? Even if the statement was sandwiched between lines speaking about the economy? 

“Now, if I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the whole — that’s going to be the least of it, It’s going to be a bloodbath for the country.”

Especially in such a toxic environment.  And especially following his previous dog whistles to violence:

 

He predicted “riots” if denied the Republican presidential nomination at the party’s 2016 convention.

 

He said in November 2020 that a ruling of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court would “induce violence in the streets.”

 

He warned in August 2022 that “terrible things are going to happen” after the FBI searched Mar-a-Lago. (He also promoted Sen. Lindsey Graham’s (R-S.C.) prediction of “riots in the streets.”)

 

He last year promoted a social media post in which a supporter said: “People my age and old[er] will physically fight for him this time. … They got my 6 and we Are Locked and LOADED.”

 

Around the same time, he warned of “potential death & destruction” if he were indicted in Manhattan.

In January, he warned of “bedlam in the country” if he were pursued on federal charges that he tried to interfere in the 2020 election.

 

1. Again.. Regardless of if it's morally right or not, Trump was right to bring up the topic, and he was wrongfully fact checked. They made it seem like he was straight up lying about the whole late term abortion thing, when he really wasn't.. Your stance on it being morally the right this is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand, but just like the last few people your steer the discussion to make you seem right, and ignore the specific point that's being made.

 

2. Like I said she was for it, and now she's not. Conveniently Pennsylvania is a swing state and she would more than definitely lose it if she admitted to still wanting to ban it. If Trump showed as strong of a stance on a matter like she did on that in 2019, there's no way you'd buy him conveniently changing his stance. 

 

Point is if tables were reversed they would have been so quick to say "Well actually Trump did say this back in 2019", regardless if he said he changed stance or not.

 

Hell he said during the debate he had nothing to do with project 2025, and when Harris kept bringing it up she wasn't fact checked.

 

3. That's just a fancy doctored up way of saying she was for defunding the police. Just making it more appeasing to the people reading so it doesn't sound so negative. The comments were also made during a discussion about "defunding the police".. So its not like her words were taken out of context and spun into something theyre not. She was asked specifically on "defunding the police" before making that statement.

 

It's fact she was for defunding the police, yet there was no fact check.

 

4. I didn't once say it's appropriate. Stop twisting my words. I simply pointed it it's taken way out of context (by a mile) to push a very dangers "hitler" narrative about Trump. That's the dangerous stuff leading to the assassination attempts that you guys are truly responsible for by knowingly pushing the false narrative.

 

Again, wasn't fact checked when Kamala brought it up in the debate. Ultimately showing the American people Trump is in fact a threat to democracy.. And look what happened.. A second assassination attempt not even a wee after the debate

 

 

You guys are dangerous. Crazy you guys really don't see it.

  • Wiener 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Elias Pettersson All-Star

Elias Pettersson

Posted
Posted (edited)

JUST IN: Ohio governor says all 33 bomb threats against Springfield, Ohio have been hoaxes that are coming from overseas. Just another media-fueled hoax. Governor Mike DeWine said the threats are coming from "one particular country." "33 separate bomb threats, each one of which has been responded to, and each one of whom has been found as a hoax." "So 33 threats, 33 hoaxes. I'll make that very, very clear. None of these had any validity at all." "We have people unfortunately overseas who are taking these actions. Some of them are coming from one particular country."

Edited by Elias Pettersson
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchmo All-Star

Satchmo

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Gator said:

1. Again.. Regardless of if it's morally right or not, Trump was right to bring up the topic, and he was wrongfully fact checked. They made it seem like he was straight up lying about the whole late term abortion thing, when he really wasn't.. Your stance on it being morally the right this is completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand, but just like the last few people your steer the discussion to make you seem right, and ignore the specific point that's being made.

 

2. Like I said she was for it, and now she's not. Conveniently Pennsylvania is a swing state and she would more than definitely lose it if she admitted to still wanting to ban it. If Trump showed as strong of a stance on a matter like she did on that in 2019, there's no way you'd buy him conveniently changing his stance. 

 

Point is if tables were reversed they would have been so quick to say "Well actually Trump did say this back in 2019", regardless if he said he changed stance or not.

 

Hell he said during the debate he had nothing to do with project 2025, and when Harris kept bringing it up she wasn't fact checked.

 

3. That's just a fancy doctored up way of saying she was for defunding the police. Just making it more appeasing to the people reading so it doesn't sound so negative. The comments were also made during a discussion about "defunding the police".. So its not like her words were taken out of context and spun into something theyre not. She was asked specifically on "defunding the police" before making that statement.

 

It's fact she was for defunding the police, yet there was no fact check.

 

4. I didn't once say it's appropriate. Stop twisting my words. I simply pointed it it's taken way out of context (by a mile) to push a very dangers "hitler" narrative about Trump. That's the dangerous stuff leading to the assassination attempts that you guys are truly responsible for by knowingly pushing the false narrative.

 

Again, wasn't fact checked when Kamala brought it up in the debate. Ultimately showing the American people Trump is in fact a threat to democracy.. And look what happened.. A second assassination attempt not even a wee after the debate

 

 

You guys are dangerous. Crazy you guys really don't see it.

1) That's just false.  He didn't 'just bring it up'.  He said during the debate, and many times prior, that they (Democrats presumably) 'have abortions in the 9th month' and after birth 'execute the  baby'.  He is then fact checked and told 'there is no state in this country where it is legal to kill a baby after it is born'.

 

And Look!  I have video proof! Trump speaks at 0:53. The moderator speaks a 2:50.

 

2) Who really cares?  She was against it, now she's for it. That's politics.   As others have pointed out, she never lied and said she was always for it.

 

3) You are clutching at straws.  Find us somewhere were she says 'Defund the police!!!' or stfu.

 

4) Again, who really cares.  He says a lot of dumb shit.   

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
nuckin_futz All-Star

nuckin_futz

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

JUST IN: Ohio governor says all 33 bomb threats against Springfield, Ohio have been hoaxes that are coming from overseas. Just another media-fueled hoax. Governor Mike DeWine said the threats are coming from "one particular country." "33 separate bomb threats, each one of which has been responded to, and each one of whom has been found as a hoax." "So 33 threats, 33 hoaxes. I'll make that very, very clear. None of these had any validity at all." "We have people unfortunately overseas who are taking these actions. Some of them are coming from one particular country."

 

Not sure I get the 'media fueled hoax' part. The media reports there have been bomb threats which there have been, that's factual. They turn out to not be actual bombs. This sounds like the media phoned them in. Correct me if I am wrong, the media reported what happened. What could have happened after then didn't.

 

Am I missing something here?

Edited by nuckin_futz
  • Thanks 2
  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Optimist Prime All-Star

Optimist Prime

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

Do Not attack each other in this discussion. Debate ideas, not who is dangerous or crazy among our membership.

I honestly don't want to lose any of you, regardless of your position and political leanings. If you are trolling, stop. If you are being trolled, stop replying. 

Use ignore or just stop. Thank you. 

  • Like 2
  • Cheers 2
  • Vintage 2
  • chaos 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Elias Pettersson All-Star

Elias Pettersson

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, nuckin_futz said:

 

Not sure I get the 'media fueled hoax' part. The media reports there have been bomb threats which there have been, that's factual. They turn out to not be actual bombs. This sounds like the media phoned them in. Correct me if I am wrong, the media reported what happened. What could have happened after then didn't.

 

Am I missing something here?

 

I just posted the tweet to show the Governor speaking.  Those words came from the person tweeting.

 

My personal feeling is that there have been bomb threats, that is factual.  However, the spin coming from the media is that Trump is the one responsible for putting lives in danger because of those threats.  So, my question now is are the media going to retract their stories now that an actual investigation has been done and it has been proven that a foreign country is the one responsible for putting those lives in danger and not Trump?  My guess is the media will either double down or move on to the next story...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nuckin_futz All-Star

nuckin_futz

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

I just posted the tweet to show the Governor speaking.  Those words came from the person tweeting.

 

My personal feeling is that there have been bomb threats, that is factual.  However, the spin coming from the media is that Trump is the one responsible for putting lives in danger because of those threats.  So, my question now is are the media going to retract their stories now that an actual investigation has been done and it has been proven that a foreign country is the one responsible for putting those lives in danger and not Trump?  My guess is the media will either double down or move on to the next story...

 

I guess it's a chicken and egg thing. Would these foreign actors phoning in these threats be doing this if the opportunity didn't exist? They didn't phone them in to Olympia, Washington. They phoned them into a situation that was already inflamed courtesy of Trump/Vance.

 

Is it incumbent on the media to retract the bomb stories which were true perceived threats or on Trump/Vance to retract the lies they have spewed about Springfield? My guess is Trump/Vance will double down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gator Top 6

Gator

Posted
Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, Satchmo said:

He is then fact checked and told 'there is no state in this country where it is legal to kill a baby after it is born'.

He also NEVER said that it's legal anywhere. He specifically mentions that the governor of West Virginia" (meant Virginia and later correct himself) says after the baby is born they would decide what to do with it.. Which is EXACTLY what buddy said in proof I provided.

 

The the moderators fact check him saying it's not legal in any state to kill a baby.

 

What that does is try to discredit the important matter he raised, and they just avoided the very serious conversation.

 

So yes he was very wrongly fact checked on that. Idc how blind to that fact you pretend to be.

Edited by Gator
  • Wiener 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Elias Pettersson All-Star

Elias Pettersson

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, nuckin_futz said:

 

I guess it's a chicken and egg thing. Would these foreign actors phoning in these threats be doing this if the opportunity didn't exist? They didn't phone them in to Olympia, Washington. They phoned them into a situation that was already inflamed courtesy of Trump/Vance.

 

Is it incumbent on the media to retract the bomb stories which were true perceived threats or on Trump/Vance to retract the lies they have spewed about Springfield? My guess is Trump/Vance will double down.

 

I understand what you are saying and for the most part I agree with it.  Seems like Trump/Vance and the media both have liability here. 

 

Again, like you said it's the chicken and the egg thing.  Without Trump's rhetoric, foreign actors don't have a reason to start fake bomb threats.  Fake bomb threats are what caused schools and hospitals to close down and put lives in danger.

 

Question now would be which foreign country is responsible for the bomb hoaxes?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchmo All-Star

Satchmo

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Gator said:

He also NEVER said that it's legal anywhere. He specifically mentions that the governor of West Virginia" (meant Virginia and later correct himself) says after the baby is born they would decide what to do with it.. Which is EXACTLY what buddy said in proof I provided.

 

The the moderators fact check him saying it's not legal in any state to kill a baby.

 

What that does is try to discredit the important matter he raised, and they just avoided the very serious conversation.

 

So yes he was very wrongly fact checked on that. Idc how blind to that fact you pretend to be.

Quite right - he never said it was legal to kill  baby.  He said Democrats were doing it.   Right out loud at 0:43 on the video. Maybe the moderator should have given him the libel laws instead of the infanticide laws.

 

There are about 3.58 infant deaths per 1,000 births every year in the US.  In red states, blue states, there are doctors whose only course of action is to keep the baby comfortable.  Nature can be cruel and is often insurmountable.

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
nuckin_futz All-Star

nuckin_futz

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I understand what you are saying and for the most part I agree with it.  Seems like Trump/Vance and the media both have liability here. 

 

Again, like you said it's the chicken and the egg thing.  Without Trump's rhetoric, foreign actors don't have a reason to start fake bomb threats.  Fake bomb threats are what caused schools and hospitals to close down and put lives in danger.

 

Question now would be which foreign country is responsible for the bomb hoaxes?  

 

My money is on those assholes in Uruguay. 😆

 

I think we both know which country the worst odds would be on.

Edited by nuckin_futz
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Curmudgeon Top 6

Curmudgeon

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

My personal feeling is that there have been bomb threats, that is factual.  However, the spin coming from the media is that Trump is the one responsible for putting lives in danger because of those threats. 

 

But he is. Faced with repeated debunking of his cats and dogs accusations, he has continued to perpetuate the lie. That lie has disrupted, diminished and demeaned an entire Ohio city as well as driving a divisive wedge between the residents of that city. Of course he bears responsibility for the repercussions of continuing to spread demonstrably false information. To deny Trump's culpability is disingenuous.

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Elias Pettersson All-Star

Elias Pettersson

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Curmudgeon said:

 

But he is. Faced with repeated debunking of his cats and dogs accusations, he has continued to perpetuate the lie. That lie has disrupted, diminished and demeaned an entire Ohio city as well as driving a divisive wedge between the residents of that city. Of course he bears responsibility for the repercussions of continuing to spread demonstrably false information. To deny Trump's culpability is disingenuous.

 

 

I never said he didn't have any responsibility.  Trump/Vance and the media share the responsibility.  His lie caused hardship.  However, it did not cause the bomb threats.  The bomb threats were fake and a foreign actor took advantage of the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...