ALL HAIL PRESIDENT TRUMP

"
Raycheetah wrote:
"
ScrotieMcB wrote:


Oh, yeah. NOW the Left are concerned about governmental corruption...

https://represent.us/donor-list/

Not exactly a Who's Who of Conservative voices supporting their idea to tear down the "system." Revolution by any means, comrade. =9[.]9=


You know, Raycheetah, your us-versus-them mentality has completely overpowered your critical thinking. Your assumption that the left is not concerned about government corruption is just down right silly.
Over 430 threads discussing labyrinth problems with over 1040 posters in support (thread # 1702621) Thank you all! GGG will implement a different method for ascension in PoE2. Retired!
It's a key component of the cult hypnosis.
"
Turtledove wrote:
"
Raycheetah wrote:
"
ScrotieMcB wrote:


Oh, yeah. NOW the Left are concerned about governmental corruption...

https://represent.us/donor-list/

Not exactly a Who's Who of Conservative voices supporting their idea to tear down the "system." Revolution by any means, comrade. =9[.]9=


You know, Raycheetah, your us-versus-them mentality has completely overpowered your critical thinking. Your assumption that the left is not concerned about government corruption is just down right silly.

Do you notice how strange it is that, for a movement that claims to support a bipartisan cause (83% of republicans, 9x% of democrats), they don't have a single conservative in their board, donor list, or otherwise?

I laid out pretty well why there are purely logical reasons to be suspicious of them before looking into their about page or donors page. I have no reason to assume that Ray was incapable of reading their plans and coming to a similar conclusion, then also discovering their somewhat hidden bias.

Them being partisan under the hood is no big shock, but it certainly taints their message. Now when you read "independent committee", you have to re-read it with a biased eye.
Last edited by pneuma on Mar 1, 2019, 1:10:49 PM
"
Raycheetah wrote:
"
ScrotieMcB wrote:
Oh, yeah. NOW the Left are concerned about governmental corruption...

https://represent.us/donor-list/

Not exactly a Who's Who of Conservative voices supporting their idea to tear down the "system." Revolution by any means, comrade. =9[.]9=
As it just so happens, I found the RepresentUs video by following a link in a Breitbart article. I watched the video and, knowing full well the JLaw is strongly anti-Trump, had almost no problem with anything she said in that video. It was excellent. I was surprised.

But the Breitbart staff knew something it took me until now to realize: TDS_Reporter is right about most, but not all, Trump supporters. Sent to raid via link, this sensible video was bombarded with rightwing NPC comments such as "So what you're saying is you want to abolish representatives and run the government by public opinion poll," "lol Hollywood elite thinks their political opinion matters" (in response to a video arguing that it doesn't), "taxation is theft" and "I've seen your butthole."

I don't give a fuck who says good ideas. Is it weird that JLaw has had a moment of political sanity bordering on genius? Absolutely. But I'm not so coldly cynical that I can't congratulate her on doing something good for once. I already know that the rightwing versions of TDS_Reporter, who say the lefties are in an anti-Trump hypnosis that nothing can break, are mostly correct, but I don't want them to be fully correct.

I want the hyperpartisan hypnosis to be breakable. And it's not going to be breakable unless we learn the lesson if Trump's foreign policy: if your enemy comes to the table, treat them as a friend but don't mince words on policy. Try to make a good deal, but don't be afraid to walk away from a bad deal.

Instead, someone suffering from TDS has the courage to put aside partisan politics for twelve whole minutes and extend an olive branch, and you culture-war-mongering fuckheads swat it away because dirty commies can't be trusted. As if I trusted her — of course I didn't. As if this was about something other than rewarding peace and cooperation with a little reciprocity, both sides fully aware that things could descend into hostility again at any moment.

Of course, things descended into hostility almost immediately. I can honestly say I haven't been this ashamed of conservatives since McCain was nominated.

--------

Molasses edit: As an aside on the "if your enemy comes to the table, treat them as a friend but don't mince words on policy" thing, one of my new guilty pleasures is Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson, host of The Fallen State on YouTube. JLP's ideas are radical bordering on insane; he's a borderline white supremacist (who is black) who denies that racism is real and is obsessed with the concepts of alpha and beta males. He says hilariously politically incorrect shit regularly. That, I don't particularly love.

But what I do love is how he'll invite people with radically different views onto his show (recent example: Hasan Piker of TYT), and he'll have a very jovial conversation with them, and he'll never get offended or angry and probably have a good laugh. And then at the end of every interview, his last question is always "did you have fun?" and he always gets a yes back. JLP is an absolute nutter, but he seems to know, better than almost anyone, the lost art of civil conversation. And in that respect — and trust me, in that respect only — how desperately do I wish more people were like him!
"
pneuma wrote:
Do you notice how strange it is that, for a movement that claims to support a bipartisan cause (83% of republicans, 9x% of democrats), they don't have a single conservative in their board, donor list, or otherwise?

I laid out pretty well why there are purely logical reasons to be suspicious of them before looking into their about page or donors page. I have no reason to assume that Ray was incapable of reading their plans and coming to a similar conclusion, then also discovering their somewhat hidden bias.

Them being partisan under the hood is no big shock, but it certainly taints their message. Now when you read "independent committee", you have to re-read it with a biased eye.
I agree wholeheartedly that these are good reasons to be cautious, but not to the point of inactivity.

This issue does have genuine bipartisan support, even if the organization is, for the moment, exclusively from one side of the aisle. The solution to that would be to balance out the board more, get some prominent conservatives/libertarians in there. If RepresentUs is open to this idea, then it demonstrates the genuineness of their claims to bipartisanship; if not, well, better to walk away from a bad deal.

When I read "independent committee" I don't read it with a biased eye, but a conditional one. If RepresentUs becomes a bipartisan populist movement, which it currently isn't but claims to want to be, the committees might actually be independent. If it fails to become bipartisan, it probably won't be capable of forming unbiased committees, even if the organization earnestly tries to set aside bias as best it can. They won't succeed if people suspect the latter is the case.

RepresentUs needs conservatives to succeed. More importantly: they know this. In the video JLaw outright told her lefty base that they can't achieve their goals without the cooperation of conservatives and moderates. They're not begging for our help, but they're clearly asking as politely as we could reasonably hope for.
When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
Last edited by ScrotieMcB on Mar 1, 2019, 2:34:02 PM
.
When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
Last edited by ScrotieMcB on Mar 1, 2019, 2:10:54 PM
I genuinely hope you weren't including me in that "culture-war-mongering fuckheads" swipe. I've certainly given the ACA a fair shake, and I avoided even looking into their backers until after reading their proposals.

"
ScrotieMcB wrote:
I want the hyperpartisan hypnosis to be breakable. And it's not going to be breakable unless we learn the lesson if Trump's foreign policy: if your enemy comes to the table, treat them as a friend but don't mince words on policy. Try to make a good deal, but don't be afraid to walk away from a bad deal.

I was knocking their ideas. Aside from the two things in their ACA that I specifically mentioned as being good, the rest are potentially very ungood and that bit about subtly providing a $100billion+ subsidy to the media industry is where I walk away with no qualms.
"
pneuma wrote:
I genuinely hope you weren't including me in that "culture-war-mongering fuckheads" swipe.
I wasn't, and I apologize for not being more explicit about that.
"
pneuma wrote:
"
ScrotieMcB wrote:
I want the hyperpartisan hypnosis to be breakable. And it's not going to be breakable unless we learn the lesson if Trump's foreign policy: if your enemy comes to the table, treat them as a friend but don't mince words on policy. Try to make a good deal, but don't be afraid to walk away from a bad deal.
I was knocking their ideas. Aside from the two things in their ACA that I specifically mentioned as being good, the rest are potentially very ungood and that bit about subtly providing a $100billion+ subsidy to the media industry is where I walk away with no qualms.
I think that subsidy is a terrible idea, as I've already mentioned. I haven't yet checked out the full ACA, but I wouldn't be surprised to find even more to disagree with.

But the video is separate from the proposed ACA. Intent is separate from solutions, and specific solutions such as their drafted legislation are different from, and IMHO less important than, metasolutions such as "let's work with conservatives and moderates." I think they might recognize that their current draft might be a little left-biased, given their early membership, and open to conservative critique.

Or perhaps not. Although their own evidence shows they need moderate and conservative support, they might consider the metasolution to be less important than their ACA and shun anyone who disagrees with it. This is actually the most likely outcome, as they seem perhaps overconfident they've found the Holy Grail.

In any case, I respect your polite skepticism and also have no qualms with you walking away. I think I'll tough it out a bit longer, though.
When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
Last edited by ScrotieMcB on Mar 1, 2019, 3:25:34 PM
The video and ideas within are what normal minded folks have been looking to do since forever. Great stuff IMO. But Trump folks will unfortunately never go along with it.
"
But Trump folks will unfortunately never go along with it.
Some won't. But one of those Trump folks first posted it here, approvingly.

Maybe you should admit to yourself that "Trump folks" aren't as monolithic as you think they are.
When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
Last edited by ScrotieMcB on Mar 1, 2019, 5:21:23 PM
"
ScrotieMcB wrote:
"
But Trump folks will unfortunately never go along with it.
Some won't. But one of those Trump folks first posted it here, approvingly.

Maybe you should admit to yourself that "Trump folks" aren't as monolithic as you think they are.


The problem is, once Trump/Putin or one of their talking heads (Coulter etc.) nix it, the rest of the cultists will fall in line to please the leader(s)

Report Forum Post

Report Account:

Report Type

Additional Info