US Presidential Election Predictions

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
2864

I think Obama could give Trump a run for his money in division of intense partisanship. I didn’t respond to name recognition. I quoted the part of your post where you said you couldn’t think of another president whom people tied their identities to as much as Trump.

The study flat out does not support saying that “the MSM” is a “subsidiary of Twitter”. Period. Let’s recap the conversation:

Pat - the MSM is a subsidiary of Twitter. I posted evidence in the other thread.

Me - I found your evidence lacking

Pat - what did you find lacking?

Me - explains that the study doesn’t support the assertion, and in any case the conclusion drawn by you is not the only possible conclusion that fits all the facts described by the study.

When you state a conclusion as fact, you are by definition saying THIS IS THE ONLY TRUE RESULT. That is what effectively happens when you state “we have PROOF” and when you state multiple times that they’re a subsidiary of Twitter. You are claiming your conclusion as the decisive one.

However, in order to be the final “PROOF” of your conclusion you also have to address and refute the other likely hypotheses that can explain all the facts.

I’d personally prefer a different term from dead but ok, point taken about pervasive lack of confidence in media and “life support”. However, I 1,000% disagree RE: work to get the facts of a story. It’s not really that much work to do. In fact I’d say it’s easier than ever. I do think less people want to get the facts than before, or you could say they’re lazier about wanting to understand the facts. I could agree with that. But it’s really not that hard to get the facts of you want to.

I don’t understand. I just finished saying that a head of state is more than a policy conduit. By extension that means I do not believe behavior to be “superficial”, and in fact I believe it to be integral to the role of head of state. So yes, there’s substance. I was specifically not talking about policy and was doing that on purpose.

If speaking of 100% as the cutoff: Immutable yes, secure no. The role of the population is to keep their rights secure by vigilance. The role of government is to recognize these immutable, God given rights.

I do believe I’m on record in these forums criticizing that exact thing. I got in several debates with Californigrown about it. So again, I don’t know why you’re bringing it up to ask me my position when you were part of those threads and ended up agreeing with a number of my posts. I didn’t use the same charged language you did but I think it was clear what I thought.

As far as is it important, uh yes… Already answered in said other threads.

2865

Outside the made up scandals regarding Russia that were proven false, what scandals did Trump actually create himself? His tweets? He was spied on, falsely accused, railroaded constantly for a Russian collusion hoax, and you put that on him?

2866

I think that you far too often state opinions as though they are fact.
Here’s a simple razor: is it likely that a man who has led a scandalous and unethical life continues to lead a scandalous and unethical life as president? Is it less likely than a media conspiracy involving tens of thousands of people, aimed at making this man appear (here’s the kicker) scandalous and unethical?

1 Like
2867

@pat:

Painting Trump as some poor and innocent, persecuted, mis-understood figure who had to suffer the full weight of the U.S. Government and the media is quite franking beyond ridiculous. (If you don’t know how…please don’t ask “in what way?”).

He’s a narcissistic carnival barker who crapped on anyone or anything that disagreed with him…media or not.

And he continues to prove with each passing day that his four years never, ever were about America, the Constitution or truth. It was about whatever boosted his ego and gained the favor of his sycophants. Even as we speak, he is torching anything and everything that will not bow at his feet. ( Don’t take my word for it. Ask the Republicans who dared to not support his continued election fraud delusion)…and he appears to be making things as difficult as he can for the incoming President, while fleecing his followers of money that many probably can’t afford during this Pandemic.

Poor, persecuted Donald…

2868

You’re missing the point. This is all semantics. You’re mistaking my framing device for a phenomenological argument. Yes, the media is a subsidiary of twitter, not as a company, but as the main source material for the majority of their stories. It doesn’t much matter in the end why you think the media is a sack of lying horseshit it matters much more that you recognize the fact that it is corrupted to the point that they are completely unreliable as a source of information. If you want to throw university in to the mix, I am a-ok with that fact.
I am not making an argument I am making a point.

It doesn’t disturb the fact that most media relies on social media, particularly twitter for their stories.

It wasn’t a trick question. Policy is what lasts as leadership changes. All you said was there was more to it than policy. I wasn’t debating that point. I am asking what policies that his administration put forth that you disagree with.
The reason being is that the alternative is going to have vastly different policies. You hate the man, I am assuming you hate the policies too. By action of voting you not only have removed the man and the ether that surrounds him, you remove his policies and are having vastly different policies enacted. I am different. To me policy is everything. I don’t care the president is transexual clown, who uses their genitalia as the presidential seal and who identifies as a nymph, as long as that person gives me the policies I believe in.
So since you have chosen to remove the man and his policies, what did hate about his policies? What policy changes did you vote for that you are now getting?
I.E. I am asking about policy, only.

How important is freedom of speech to you? Is it a top, medium or low priority.
I will give you an example of what I mean. I am against gay marriage, okay? But I don’t really give a damn about it. In the list of a million things I care about it’s damn near the bottom. However, freedom of speech for me is my number one priority, yep even above abortion.

Sure, I didn’t read every post you ever made, so I don’t know what degree you oppose these things, hence I ask. Given the fact that the violent ‘protests’ worked and yielded results where they happened in favor of the rioters, how concerned are you? Is it like something you don’t like, but don’t care about all that much or is it of major concern?
I can understand your not for violent riots, but how much do you care that they are happening and will continue to happen?

1 Like
2869

LOL! You mean Occam’s razor?

Can you not give examples? If the guy has scandels coming out of every orifice, surely you can name one. So give me an example of a scandal that he was the arbiter of? Did he secretly sell missiles to North Korea? Did he use the office to enrich himself? Did he rape a secretary? What scandal did he create?

2870

This is something. I would of expected you of all people to be able to rattle off a list of his scandals that he caused. Instead you gave an opinion of you you think I thought.
I feel like I am at a restaurant and I order the lamb chops, but I keep getting turkey and the waiter cannot understand the words I am saying.
All I am asking for is a list of scandals or any scandals Trump was the cause of, in the tenure of his presidency. If he is the most scandalous, immoral president to ever live, certainly he has a bunch of scandals he arbitrated. So what did he do? Did he bomb a wedding in Yemen? Did he gas an orphanage? What scandals did he do?

2871

Whose nuts will pat ride once Trump is officially gone?

2872

There are several philosophical razors one can apply to cut your numerous claims to shreds. Occam’s is one. Another important one you neglect is falsifiability.

You appear to have constructed a Theory of Trump which no amount of data can refute. To be perfectly honest, I have no expectation that you’ll change your mind about any of this as a result of words you read in this thread. I write out of some stupid sense of duty to rationality.

2 Likes
2873

The problem is Pat has been provided a list of “scandals” before on Trump. But he doesn’t read/doesn’t care. Meanwhile he will deliver you scandal upon scandal of any Dem and tell you it is the biggest thing ever. Evidence doesn’t matter. He doesn’t need it if it’s a Dem and he won’t accept it if it’s Trump.

He pretends that he is interested in your argument but he really isn’t. He does the fake “if you show me I want to see it” but when you give it to him it’s deflect and on to something else.

It’s why Pat has banned half the forum especially those of us who have been on a long time. He simply got tired of the people who were most persistent in calling out BS.

3 Likes
2874

Quite frankly, I’m mentally exhausted by it all, @pat.

If his apologist don’t see all of the issues with Trump, they never will.

Head-banging against Titanium walls ain’t my thing.

2875

From Barr:

“To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have affected a different outcome in the election,” Barr said.

Barr, who prior to the election echoed President Donald Trump’s claims that mail-in voting wasn’t secure, said both the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security have looked into claims of fraud and came up empty.

1 Like
2876

Top

I appreciate that you asked. I am just a bit surprised since most of those posts were in threads you were very active in and many were liked by you or used in replies by you.

I consider it a medium/low concern. The quality of response concerns me more than the loonies doing loon stuff.

There are other things that last.

Understood. I thoroughly disagree with his increasingly close alignment with House of Saud, his execution of the trade war (not the aims but the implementation and what I consider to be lack of strategy). I disagree with his inattention to national security matters as shown by his relative inattention during briefings and especially the fact that his entire bleeding senior staff has been a revolving door with no continuity (which directly affects policy) and decreasing expertise in favor of tribalism. I disagree with his handling of the coronavirus. I disagree with him unilaterally pulling out of a number of international agreements and distancing himself from our allies. That is not the way to reduce blood and treasure spent overseas, at least not the way HE did it. There’s more but I think you get the point.

You would be wrong. Many of his domestic policies I either benefit from or am indifferent to. But again “Character is fate” and there are things worth voting on THAT ARE NOT POLICY.

Then you and I have very little in common. I am more akin to Sloth. Yes I’m sure that was hyperbole on your part but it is in every way ridiculous and in no way acceptable for a leader.

1 Like
2877

As it is to Democrats(Progressives). That’s why they win. Republicans have to find someone likable and with whom they all agree, while Democrats only have to have a Democrat that will advance Democrat policy. Democrats don’t win every battle, but they win the war because they understand. It’s weird that the more-religious Party seems to be seeking a God in politics.

2878

This really isn’t true. Since Bush sr started the first Gulf War, everyone all the way to the other side of the world has been watching the US. There are Muslim countries here. They(the NYSE) fucking crashed the HK stock market in 1988. Malaysia did an absurd “sodomy trial” to get rid of one of it’s political rivals immediately after they saw how the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal affected the US public. 911 caused immediate fear of a world-wide coordinated attack(there are things I could go into but I won’t because of privacy issues), with US counter attacks coinciding with the JI and Abu Sayaf fucking shit up in Indonesia and the Philippines amongst other shit that happened from Thailand to Pakistan.

You can also see my post way above on the reaction of some browner skinned dudes in Asia celebrating Obama’s win and how it started people getting more involved in voting.

Prior to this, people in countries where the Ruling Parties had been in power for DECADES couldn’t even be bothered to vote because the assumption was that even if they voted for the opposition, nothing would change the outcome. Obama had a lot to do with their change in mindset.

This Trump shit is NOTHING compared to all these.

Trump is more spoken about only because he’s more reported on. It doesn’t mean that the rest of the world doesn’t follow US politics more closely. They just do it more often but place less importance on it because hey see Trump’s name more often by the MSM unless he does something stupid like a “Muslim Ban”(coined by the MSM, not him, to be fair).

And to be even fairer to Trump, he wasn’t that hated in Asia other than by the Muslims since he was viewed as “standing up to China”(whatever the fuck that meant). But then he had to use the term “Chinese Virus”, which pissed off every single person of the Chinese race outside of China and was one of the catalysts for violence committed on Chinese minorities in countries in the region.

One more thing. People, as in civilians, in China RESPECTED the US up to the time Obama’s term ended. Then Trump came along and now they don’t. This is both the fault of the MSM in the US and CCP media propaganda. Historically, we only had a problem with the former “8 Nation Alliance”(Germany, Russia, US, Britain, France, Italy, Austria, Japan) as a whole, not just the US as the major bogeyman constructed by the CCP in the last 4 years.

I mean, come on, you know we Chinese are big fans of science and shit. What do you think people were saying when he suggested injecting bleach or shining UV rays inside the body, even if he claims he said it in jest lol?

I believe this. I don’t think I’ve ever disagreed here. I work with media outlets in different countries quite often and I’m aware of what goes on behind the scenes.

2 Likes
2879

This is not important. What is important is telling people fraud happened and then telling people they need money to fight the fraud.

And then pocketing the money.

And then once that grift is done move towards the Trump 2024 grift and do that until he magically decides not to run because something something liberal.

And then pocketing the money.

1 Like
2880

And people were worried about Cheney and Halliburton lol. Seems quaint now.

1 Like
2881

But think how much money the clinton foundation has stolen!!

1 Like
2882

On one hand I feel bad for the people who are giving money probably thinking that he’s a lawsuit away from victory.

On the other a fool and his money…

Been a bit of buzz about him announcing he’s running in 2024 on Biden’s inauguration. Personally I would place decent money on him not actually running by the time it comes around but who knows.

But I believe candidates can use campaign money to pay court fees and Trump is likely facing some legal issues from New York. Which is another reason to not stop being a “candidate.”

1 Like
2883

100%. We learned he’s got $400 million in loans coming due in a year or two and no viable business to generate the income he needs. He has to monetize his current situation and the create some reason for his baselings to keep forking over their hard earned dollars for the next few years. If he walks away now an honorable loser who concedes, he walks away from that cash.

It’s a grift. It’s always been a grift, and it’ll always be. And the new divide in America is not between liberals and conservatives, or blue states and red states, but people who have sense and suckers.

2 Likes