General American Politics Thread

[rairii]

6 hours ago, Im_CIA said:

Right, because cheering for someone to die from disease while crying about healthcare reform is totally not double-think.

Ah yes, because it's oh-so sad that the man who's been DENYING us that healthcare reform and being totally negligent in his handling of a global pandemic is getting his cosmic justice. I'm in tears.

 

Fuck off. Trump can rot in hell for all I care, the blood of thousands of not millions of innocent people is on his hands and I hope he gets what he deserves.

[Im_CIA]

14 hours ago, Annie said:

 

Fuck off. Trump can rot in hell for all I care, the blood of thousands of not millions of innocent people is on his hands and I hope he gets what he deserves.

Are you sure it's not gorillions? 

It was the political structure of the nation that delt itself this hand. Each state having the power to decide its governance makes things particularly disorganized in such a situation, but I wouldn't have it any other way. 

[BTGBullseye]

14 hours ago, Im_CIA said:

Are you sure it's not gorillions? 

It was the political structure of the nation that delt itself this hand. Each state having the power to decide its governance makes things particularly disorganized in such a situation, but I wouldn't have it any other way. 

Not just that, but the States outright REFUSED to do anything about any of this, when it is in fact their responsibility, not the responsibility of the President. Also, Trump-haters that refuse to accept that, because they loathe the idea that Trump isn't responsible for all the ills of this world.

[kerdios]

 

[Trar]

I think Trump is bad.

[Im_CIA]

I think any political figure in the free world can be as good or bad as you want them to be. 

[BTGBullseye]

43 minutes ago, Im_CIA said:

I think any political figure in the free world can be as good or bad as you want them to be. 

It's all about the point of view.

 

I personally feel like no politician is ever going to be able to represent the will of the people, and popular people are only slightly less removed from the general public's representation. The sooner we make political bribery (lobbying) illegal, the better for everyone except the already filthy rich.

[Eshanas]

3 hours ago, BTGBullseye said:

It's all about the point of view.

 

I personally feel like no politician is ever going to be able to represent the will of the people, and popular people are only slightly less removed from the general public's representation. The sooner we make political bribery (lobbying) illegal, the better for everyone except the already filthy rich.

 

Meh. We got rid of Pork in the 90s and Partisanship shot through the roof. Senators had no need to go across the aisle, it became a zero-sum-game - you don't need a Democrat and a Republican senator, you just need two REpublican or two Democratic senators, thus it became a race for total control.

 

I think getting rid of Citizens United would be a good step, but outright removing lobbying or revolving door stuff just means the money will be directed to private groups, paramilitary groups, associated groups. The masses can be swayed by targeted campaign, we already see this in advertising as in the Soda 'Cap' in NYC or McDonalds Hot Coffee Case. Now imagine the lobby money going into efforts to sway the masses, radicalise them, gather them for support.

 

These things just have a way of snaking out and about. Got rid of the Spoils System and Patronage, we get Pork and Lobbying. Got rid of the Pork, we get extreme partianship. Get rid of the lobbying, mass radicalization and stirring's probably gonna follow.

Edited October 18, 2020 by Eshanas (see edit history)

[kerdios]

6 hours ago, BTGBullseye said:

It's all about the point of view.

 

I personally feel like no politician is ever going to be able to represent the will of the people, and popular people are only slightly less removed from the general public's representation. The sooner we make political bribery (lobbying) illegal, the better for everyone except the already filthy rich.

Hey we agree about something

3 hours ago, Eshanas said:

Meh. We got rid of Pork in the 90s and Partisanship shot through the roof. Senators had no need to go across the aisle, it became a zero-sum-game - you don't need a Democrat and a Republican senator, you just need two Republican or two Democratic senators, thus it became a race for total control.

 

I think getting rid of Citizens United would be a good step, but outright removing lobbying or revolving door stuff just means the money will be directed to private groups, paramilitary groups, associated groups. The masses can be swayed by targeted campaign, we already see this in advertising as in the Soda 'Cap' in NYC or McDonalds Hot Coffee Case. Now imagine the lobby money going into efforts to sway the masses, radicalise them, gather them for support.

 

These things just have a way of snaking out and about. Got rid of the Spoils System and Patronage, we get Pork and Lobbying. Got rid of the Pork, we get extreme partianship. Get rid of the lobbying, mass radicalization and stirring's probably gonna follow.

I don't get what you're saying, how can companies like google, comcast, mcdonalds etc.. cause radicalization and psuedo military groups to arise? The only extreme case I can think of is the NRA and that's happening regardless of lobbying (or even more so - because of it).

[Eshanas]

On 10/18/2020 at 6:15 AM, kerdios said:

Hey we agree about something

I don't get what you're saying, how can companies like google, comcast, mcdonalds etc.. cause radicalization and psuedo military groups to arise? The only extreme case I can think of is the NRA and that's happening regardless of lobbying (or even more so - because of it).

They already do.

 

McDonalds and the Hot Coffee Case. A case of frivilous litigation by a dumb-ass old senile granny, right? Oh wait no. McDonalds thought they could coast off any damage caused by keeping coffee boiling hot because that was better than risking cold coffee that needed to be reheated. They slandered a old woman whose labia were fused together by the heat of the coffee and only, at first, wanted her medical costs covered. And they dragged her through the dirt, and she became the poster child for litigious, whiny America.

 

NYC Soda Tax/Ban - Socialist New York Governor Bloomberg wants to dictate what YOU Can eat. Nevermind that it's basically 1c per 12 oz Can of soda and a ban on massive cups of sugary soda, no! Stand up against the Bureaucrats, don't let them tell you what do drink - listen to us, instead. And the NAACP and local interest minority orgs, which we brought out. 

 

FAT IS BAD FOR YOU - wait, no, not really. We honestly have little idea of what is bad for you, but you'll never know it since from the 70s onward, the papers that got released, the diets that sprang up, complained about Fat. And it's obvious, right? You don't want to be fat, ergo, don't eat Fat. But what about eating too much sugar? Oh ignore that. Chow down in 100 g of Sugar a day. Oh and calories? Ah fuggadabout it, 2k a day? Sureee. How much can this meal have? 1.4k? Have three of them! Oh you're overweight? Obese? O gee, cut down on carbs and fat! Don't mind that it hasn't worked for the populace in the last forty years; no no no, don't worry about sugar or cal intake.

 

And most of this is just soft stuff. It's not warpath level stuff. McDonalds, if you recall, DID change their policies on coffee, on supersizing, on beef tallow in fries. But that was because after years of back and forth, it just wasn't worth it to continue, i.e the free market forced it, not legislation. SUperSize Me. The Coffe Case costing millions in fees and the risk of more such cases. Beef Tallow was axed due to a rising vegetarian trend, sparked in part by that diet-anti-fat trend above. And McDonalds was suffering a bad pr image. Pink Slime - though governments did get on that eventually, and more.

 

Think of the pull NewsCorp and Sinclair has on information, already, which I would say is on a active warpath to influence society. The corporations will reach around and hit the living room, appeal to the masses, plaster every ad with attack ads so novel and succint people wouldn't even know they were attack ads, hit the NGOs to get mouthpieces to support them (As in the NYC Soda Cap ban where PepsiCo and Coca Cola hit Hispanic and African American groups as they consume more of that product), and other stuff that'll creep in or be nailed into the zeitgeist. Now imagine that for issues on lobbying - defense contracts, infrastructure, bids for government contracts. That'll go just as far - 'Lockheed has employed millions and produced the jets and vehicles that defended America. Senator So-and-So blocks us from getting you jobs and getting pilots in the air', posted out in the Rust Belt or Sun Belt. People will beg for lobbying to return or run on pro-business revisionist tickets. Protests and marches will be organized, akin to the Tea Party ones. After all unless you ban interest groups, the money will manifest in action on the ground. And if the economy and workforce is so crippled enough, people will beg and sign up to advocate for 'pro-economy', 'pro-business' orgs and action.

 

[kerdios]

3 hours ago, Eshanas said:

They already do.

 

McDonalds and the Hot Coffee Case. A case of frivilous litigation by a dumb-ass old senile granny, right? Oh wait no. McDonalds thought they could coast off any damage caused by keeping coffee boiling hot because that was better than risking cold coffee that needed to be reheated. They slandered a old woman whose labia were fused together by the heat of the coffee and only, at first, wanted her medical costs covered. And they dragged her through the dirt, and she became the poster child for litigious, whiny America.

 

NYC Soda Tax/Ban - Socialist New York Governor Bloomberg wants to dictate what YOU Can eat. Nevermind that it's basically 1c per 12 oz Can of soda and a ban on massive cups of sugary soda, no! Stand up against the Bureaucrats, don't let them tell you what do drink - listen to us, instead. And the NAACP and local interest minority orgs, which we brought out. 

 

FAT IS BAD FOR YOU - wait, no, not really. We honestly have little idea of what is bad for you, but you'll never know it since from the 70s onward, the papers that got released, the diets that sprang up, complained about Fat. And it's obvious, right? You don't want to be fat, ergo, don't eat Fat. But what about eating too much sugar? Oh ignore that. Chow down in 100 g of Sugar a day. Oh and calories? Ah fuggadabout it, 2k a day? Sureee. How much can this meal have? 1.4k? Have three of them! Oh you're overweight? Obese? O gee, cut down on carbs and fat! Don't mind that it hasn't worked for the populace in the last forty years; no no no, don't worry about sugar or cal intake.

 

And most of this is just soft stuff. It's not warpath level stuff. McDonalds, if you recall, DID change their policies on coffee, on supersizing, on beef tallow in fries. But that was because after years of back and forth, it just wasn't worth it to continue, i.e the free market forced it, not legislation. SUperSize Me. The Coffe Case costing millions in fees and the risk of more such cases. Beef Tallow was axed due to a rising vegetarian trend, sparked in part by that diet-anti-fat trend above. And McDonalds was suffering a bad pr image. Pink Slime - though governments did get on that eventually, and more.

 

Think of the pull NewsCorp and Sinclair has on information, already, which I would say is on a active warpath to influence society. The corporations will reach around and hit the living room, appeal to the masses, plaster every ad with attack ads so novel and succint people wouldn't even know they were attack ads, hit the NGOs to get mouthpieces to support them (As in the NYC Soda Cap ban where PepsiCo and Coca Cola hit Hispanic and African American groups as they consume more of that product), and other stuff that'll creep in or be nailed into the zeitgeist. Now imagine that for issues on lobbying - defense contracts, infrastructure, bids for government contracts. That'll go just as far - 'Lockheed has employed millions and produced the jets and vehicles that defended America. Senator So-and-So blocks us from getting you jobs and getting pilots in the air', posted out in the Rust Belt or Sun Belt. People will beg for lobbying to return or run on pro-business revisionist tickets. Protests and marches will be organized, akin to the Tea Party ones. After all unless you ban interest groups, the money will manifest in action on the ground. And if the economy and workforce is so crippled enough, people will beg and sign up to advocate for 'pro-economy', 'pro-business' orgs and action.

 

It's just that In my mind propaganda ads and biased documentaries are part of lobbying, so when I think about banning lobbying it includes the aforementioned.

[Icebox]

4 hours ago, Eshanas said:

They already do.

 

McDonalds and the Hot Coffee Case. A case of frivilous litigation by a dumb-ass old senile granny, right? Oh wait no. McDonalds thought they could coast off any damage caused by keeping coffee boiling hot because that was better than risking cold coffee that needed to be reheated. They slandered a old woman whose labia were fused together by the heat of the coffee and only, at first, wanted her medical costs covered. And they dragged her through the dirt, and she became the poster child for litigious, whiny America.

 

NYC Soda Tax/Ban - Socialist New York Governor Bloomberg wants to dictate what YOU Can eat. Nevermind that it's basically 1c per 12 oz Can of soda and a ban on massive cups of sugary soda, no! Stand up against the Bureaucrats, don't let them tell you what do drink - listen to us, instead. And the NAACP and local interest minority orgs, which we brought out. 

 

FAT IS BAD FOR YOU - wait, no, not really. We honestly have little idea of what is bad for you, but you'll never know it since from the 70s onward, the papers that got released, the diets that sprang up, complained about Fat. And it's obvious, right? You don't want to be fat, ergo, don't eat Fat. But what about eating too much sugar? Oh ignore that. Chow down in 100 g of Sugar a day. Oh and calories? Ah fuggadabout it, 2k a day? Sureee. How much can this meal have? 1.4k? Have three of them! Oh you're overweight? Obese? O gee, cut down on carbs and fat! Don't mind that it hasn't worked for the populace in the last forty years; no no no, don't worry about sugar or cal intake.

 

And most of this is just soft stuff. It's not warpath level stuff. McDonalds, if you recall, DID change their policies on coffee, on supersizing, on beef tallow in fries. But that was because after years of back and forth, it just wasn't worth it to continue, i.e the free market forced it, not legislation. SUperSize Me. The Coffe Case costing millions in fees and the risk of more such cases. Beef Tallow was axed due to a rising vegetarian trend, sparked in part by that diet-anti-fat trend above. And McDonalds was suffering a bad pr image. Pink Slime - though governments did get on that eventually, and more.

 

Think of the pull NewsCorp and Sinclair has on information, already, which I would say is on a active warpath to influence society. The corporations will reach around and hit the living room, appeal to the masses, plaster every ad with attack ads so novel and succint people wouldn't even know they were attack ads, hit the NGOs to get mouthpieces to support them (As in the NYC Soda Cap ban where PepsiCo and Coca Cola hit Hispanic and African American groups as they consume more of that product), and other stuff that'll creep in or be nailed into the zeitgeist. Now imagine that for issues on lobbying - defense contracts, infrastructure, bids for government contracts. That'll go just as far - 'Lockheed has employed millions and produced the jets and vehicles that defended America. Senator So-and-So blocks us from getting you jobs and getting pilots in the air', posted out in the Rust Belt or Sun Belt. People will beg for lobbying to return or run on pro-business revisionist tickets. Protests and marches will be organized, akin to the Tea Party ones. After all unless you ban interest groups, the money will manifest in action on the ground. And if the economy and workforce is so crippled enough, people will beg and sign up to advocate for 'pro-economy', 'pro-business' orgs and action.

 

Most of those are good examples, but the soda tax/ban was bullshit.

Edited October 22, 2020 by Icebox (see edit history)

[kerdios]

e

[BTGBullseye]

15 hours ago, kerdios said:

e

That has an incredibly clickbait title... (and some inaccuracies, which are common in anti-Trump propaganda)

[rairii]

3 hours ago, BTGBullseye said:

That has an incredibly clickbait title... (and some inaccuracies, which are common in anti-Trump propaganda)

You need to be more specific if you want your argument to hold any water.

[kerdios]

7 hours ago, BTGBullseye said:

That has an incredibly clickbait title...

I guess they did that in order to improve their chances of conservatives actually opening the video rather than just see an accurate title and saying no way in hell I'm watching that. Though I agree it's pretty slimy behavior, seeing a video titled "why Biden will win" that then goes on to regale his alleged corruption and the other false spins on his policies would also have been very bad form.

Still I think it's important to address the issues brought up in this video like the fact/claim that above the board countries such as S. Korea and Japan were (and are) able to avoid both the brunt of an economic crisis and a high mortality rate while the US has such an extreme mortality rate and an economic crisis.

[Im_CIA]

23 hours ago, kerdios said:

I guess they did that in order to improve their chances of conservatives actually opening the video rather than just see an accurate title and saying no way in hell I'm watching that. Though I agree it's pretty slimy behavior, seeing a video titled "why Biden will win" that then goes on to regale his alleged corruption and the other false spins on his policies would also have been very bad form.

Still I think it's important to address the issues brought up in this video like the fact/claim that above the board countries such as S. Korea and Japan were (and are) able to avoid both the brunt of an economic crisis and a high mortality rate while the US has such an extreme mortality rate and an economic crisis.

Because each state relegates its own response to the virus, and some Asian countries are collectivist insect colonies.

[kerdios]

1 hour ago, Im_CIA said:

Because each state relegates its own response to the virus, and some Asian countries are collectivist insect colonies.

that's a very bland response and also do you consider S.korea and japan communists?

[BTGBullseye]

On 10/24/2020 at 5:13 AM, kerdios said:

Still I think it's important to address the issues brought up in this video like the fact/claim that above the board countries such as S. Korea and Japan were (and are) able to avoid both the brunt of an economic crisis and a high mortality rate while the US has such an extreme mortality rate and an economic crisis.

The fact is that it's exclusively a state governing issue for all of the Coronavirus issues. The President literally has no control over it whatsoever. If you have issues with how COVID was handled in the USA, look no further than the state governors. Anything the federal government does regarding COVID can land them in lawsuitland for decades, which is something they're trying to avoid.

[Im_CIA]

4 hours ago, kerdios said:

that's a very bland response and also do you consider S.korea and japan communists?

No, they are collectivist, not a political system but a different frame of mind altogether. Americans are enterprising individualists, who are also spiteful and contradictory. We aren't keen on being told what to do by public authority figures, and those figures don't want to commit political suicide.