Donald Trump and US politics

Do you think Bannon purposely put together this gang of terrible cabinet nominees to ignite and fuel the obstruction fire?

"

鬼殺し wrote:

Take it back.

I never called you a liar. I said what you said was a lie, which I'll admit holds an unintended inference — not an implication, per se — which I took time to explicitly deny. In that denial, you managed to find yet another unintended inference, which I will address now: repeating a lie one sincerely believes does not make one a liar. There is no alternative definition at play here.

I would it take back if I did it, but I didn't. I guess I should apologize for some potentially misleading wording since then, however.

Almost submitted this post with "implication" instead of "inference," btw. But I don't really want a Round 3. Good that I caught it.

"

TheAnuhart wrote:

Do you think Bannon purposely put together this gang of terrible cabinet nominees to ignite and fuel the obstruction fire?

It wouldn't be too terribly surprising. One thing me and Bannon have in common is that "despises the mainstream media" is high on our lists of politically defining attributes. I think he's mentally and intellectually capable of going all "Zemo in the Civil War movie" on them. And assuming the collateral damage incurred doesn't become objectionable, I'd be inclined to cheer on such an effort. And everything I said about the Dems crying wolf applies equally to the MSM and their credibility.

"

鬼殺し wrote:

Then you should have used the word "repeat", as in 'I see people repeat this lie a lot'.

Or "I see this lie repeated a lot." But yeah.

"

鬼殺し wrote:

You're not really here for discussion. You've decided what it is right. What is truth. What is a lie. And woe betide anyone who feels otherwise. The difference between 'you're lying' and 'you're saying a lie' is functionally non-existent.

You should consider a career in politics, Scrotie. You might have finally found your calling.

And I repeat: LOL at your 'I don't like circlejerks' comment. You're on the fucking moon if you don't realise that's all this is.

On the specific issue of "did Trump have a substantially developed policy platform during the campaign?" — yeah, I was kinda paying attention at the time, so I noticed there was one. On that one point I have decided what is right, what is truth.

But — outside of clearing the point up with someone who's got it wrong — I have little interest in further discussing it. If it wasn't for your post, I doubt I would have even mentioned it myself.

And I'm not so absurdly arrogant as to believe that, just because I know I know one thing, that I know I know everything. I haven't decided everything that's right, I haven't found all of the truth. And even of the things I expect are true, I doubt I'm right about all of them.

I mean, you be all like "the sky is yellow" "um, no it's blue" "see you just like circle-jerks because you already have it all figured out"

"

Laurium wrote:

Because there's no power. There's no leverage. What do you think the DNC will be taking advantage of? How? By reminding people how awful things are you're making a BIG fundamental assumption that people agree with you, that things are worse every single day. Friday certainly didn't count, what with those 200k jobs. That stock market's rising. Working people probably not pissed about that. You're banking everything on huge assumption and in so doing taking a risk, all the while the DNC has no power.

How much power did the republicans have back in 2009?

Also, it would be remiss of me to not point out that those 200k jobs are not thanks to Trump's policies. Because they aren't. Of course, it's the first time in eight fucking years that FOX News reports on the job numbers in anything resembling a positive light, because they can thank a Republican for it...

"

They've not won in many years. Why should anything be different tomorrow when we double down on losing strategies?

The DNC lost 85% of counties in the last election! Democratic change since 2010: -35% governors, -20% house/legislature, and -10% senate. Lowest representation since 1920s.

Do numbers mean something differently where you're from, Germany is it? What position of strength are you arguing from?

Except that, again, this is fundamentally not the same strategy. This is not the strategy the democrats applied in the previous elections. In the past, we tried being the adults in the room. It didn't work. Now we're doing what the republicans did for the last eight years, the strategies they used to win those 85% of counties.

(Also, by the way, those 15% of counties contained the majority of the population and the vast majority of the economic power of the USA. But sure, pretend that the democrats suffered some huge, debilitating defeat because they're more concentrated in urban areas, rather than spread out over ten miles of Bumblefuck, Texas.)

Meanwhile, here's Steve King:

https://twitter.com/SteveKingIA/status/840980755236999169

"

Wilders understands that culture and demographics are our destiny. We can't restore our civilization with somebody else's babies.

A congressman said that. A fucking congressman said that. Yeah, white nationalism isn't something we need to be worried about at all.

"

Budget_player_cadet wrote:

Meanwhile, here's Steve King:

https://twitter.com/SteveKingIA/status/840980755236999169

"

Wilders understands that culture and demographics are our destiny. We can't restore our civilization with somebody else's babies.

A congressman said that. A fucking congressman said that. Yeah, white nationalism isn't something we need to be worried about at all.

How is that white nationalism? He's right, you can't solve your demographics issues by importing culturally incompatible people and letting them handle it.

"

Budget_player_cadet wrote:

Snip

You and I will never agree about this. We perceive party strategy in completely different ways.

It's difficult to understand why you would ignore the major defeat this last election. When you go from control of Presidency with sure-thing candidate to lowest representation since the 1920s, I don't see how you can state I am pretending that there was a huge defeat. It wasn't a huge defeat...it was a historically gigantic defeat, never before seen when considering all the circumstances.

For someone who demands numbers, sources, facts, and justifications from anybody making so much as a whisper in this thread or the other, you're quick to qualify away the obvious and ignore reality when it's on your terms. That same economic power has always been there, still 85% of counties were nevertheless lost among the other numbers that can't be wished away. Petulant shots against Bumblefuck Texas doesn't change any of this.

Things are not hunky dory within the DNC because millennials of progressive persuasion have a monopoly over Twitter trends on any given day of the week. That's not how you win representation and enact real, substantive change in this country. You need districts beyond the coasts. You need candidates. You need leadership whose collective age doesn't exceed 200 years. We have none of that. We have "the resistance", promoted by a person who may not win re-election in 2018. For my money, that's not a strategy with a purpose of electing the future, but it does carry with it very big risks. Could be wrong, never know.

It doesn't matter. You and I have said what we have to say. It's run its course. We just don't perceive current action or reflect upon the last six years the same. C'est la vie.