Trump/US Politics

[Palfy]

Trump accusing China of wanting him to lose his re-election, some news for Trump most of the world wants you to lose you moron. 

[Matt]

2 minutes ago, Palfy said:

Trump accusing China of wanting him to lose his re-election, some news for Trump most of the world wants you to lose you moron. 

That was my immediate reaction too  

[Chach]

18 hours ago, Sibdane said:

I think I misunderstood your question. 

I meant do you think any others are winnable, a couple of polls have come out since saying its tight in Texas and North Carolina.

[Sibdane]

1 hour ago, Chach said:

I meant do you think any others are winnable, a couple of polls have come out since saying its tight in Texas and North Carolina.

Ahh I see. Well yeah, the midwest states are winnable. On Texas, Beto wasn't too far from winning a senate seat, and he's a lot more left than Biden. Never know. I personally don't see Texas flipping though. 

[Palfy]

50 minutes ago, Sibdane said:

Ahh I see. Well yeah, the midwest states are winnable. On Texas, Beto wasn't too far from winning a senate seat, and he's a lot more left than Biden. Never know. I personally don't see Texas flipping though. 

What states form the rust belt, and would he be unassailable in those states still. 

[Sibdane]

15 minutes ago, Palfy said:

What states form the rust belt, and would he be unassailable in those states still. 

 Michigan, Wisconsin, Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. 

I think Ohio and Indiana would be hard to turn against Trump. 

[Palfy]

28 minutes ago, Sibdane said:

 Michigan, Wisconsin, Indiana, Illinois, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. 

I think Ohio and Indiana would be hard to turn against Trump. 

Thanks for that Sib I’d heard of the terminology but was never sure what states made up the rust belt, have they always been fiercely republican states or is it that they believe Trump is the man. 

[Sibdane]

4 minutes ago, Palfy said:

Thanks for that Sib I’d heard of the terminology but was never sure what states made up the rust belt, have they always been fiercely republican states or is it that they believe Trump is the man. 

Mostly Republican now, but those other states above were barely won by Trump with the exception of Illinois. I can see a most of them flipping the other way. Here's how the states voted in 2016. Even if all the states voted the same but Biden managed to flip Penn and Florida then he would win. 

[Palfy]

1 hour ago, Sibdane said:

Mostly Republican now, but those other states above were barely won by Trump with the exception of Illinois. I can see a most of them flipping the other way. Here's how the states voted in 2016. Even if all the states voted the same but Biden managed to flip Penn and Florida then he would win. 

Do you think that Biden has a better than average chance to win in Penn and Florida. 

[Sibdane]

13 minutes ago, Palfy said:

Do you think that Biden has a better than average chance to win in Penn and Florida. 

The polls think so, but they got it wrong about Clinton. It is a good sign that Fox News has Biden beating Trump in FL and PA. 

[Palfy]

2 minutes ago, Sibdane said:

The polls think so, but they got it wrong about Clinton. It is a good sign that Fox News has Biden beating Trump in FL and PA. 

That looks very promising. Possibly not the right thread to put this, but if any good comes out of the Covid disaster, let it be that the world comes back to it’s senses and politicians like Trump aren’t accepted as credible leaders again. 

[Chach]

17 hours ago, Sibdane said:

The polls think so, but they got it wrong about Clinton. It is a good sign that Fox News has Biden beating Trump in FL and PA. 

To be fair to the pollsters she did win the popular vote by 2% and was predicted to win by 3%. They break out a few other weighting issues in this piece,

https://www.pewresearch.org/methods/2019/11/19/a-field-guide-to-polling-election-2020-edition/

Apparently a lot of undecideds went disproportionately Trump's way which is curious, I would love to know why that might have been.

This poll called it for Trump the entire campaign, have dug around to find out what they might do differently but no joy. Will certainly be watching this one this campaign, but if this was supposed to predict popular vote, technically and ironically it was the furthest out.

[Palfy]

Trump on the phone to Kim “ Is that really you I heard you had died “

Kim to Trump “ I nearly did after I took your disinfectant advice you stupid prick”
 

For me that sort of sums up the education of our world leaders, I know it’s not what happened in reality, but I wonder if Boris did the same thing
 

[MikeO]

 

[MikeO]

 

[Palfy]

1 hour ago, MikeO said:

 

I wouldn’t argue with that. 

[Matt]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52760420

[MikeO]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52815552

[Guest TallPaul1878]

39 minutes ago, MikeO said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52815552

Entrenched positions are entrenched. Flagging Trump's tweets just fuels the fire that Twitter and silicon valley in general has it in for conservatives. It's why he is going to win again in 2020.

[Sibdane]

3 hours ago, TallPaul1878 said:

Entrenched positions are entrenched. Flagging Trump's tweets just fuels the fire that Twitter and silicon valley in general has it in for conservatives. It's why he is going to win again in 2020.

What I find funny about Trump's stance against mail-in voting is that he has used it in the past without issue (according to him).

[Guest TallPaul1878]

22 minutes ago, Sibdane said:

What I find funny about Trump's stance against mail-in voting is that he has used it in the past without issue (according to him).

Trump was a life long Democrat, he just went Republican because that was where he felt it easiest to gain power.

That's what people do with power, they grab it where they can. If mail in voting doesn't suit him then he'll block it, if it did then he'd support it. I don't think Democrats would play it any differently. They're all sociopaths

[Sibdane]

12 minutes ago, TallPaul1878 said:

Trump was a life long Democrat, he just went Republican because that was where he felt it easiest to gain power.

That's what people do with power, they grab it where they can. If mail in voting doesn't suit him then he'll block it, if it did then he'd support it. I don't think Democrats would play it any differently. They're all sociopaths

The things is, he used mail-in voting for the Republican primary in FL this year. 

[Guest TallPaul1878]

Just now, Sibdane said:

The things is, he used mail-in voting for the Republican primary in FL this year. 

Oh I'm not all that aware of the primaries. It doesn't surprise me though. Florida has a lot of elderly Republican voters so it is likely he would want to get them to their votes counted whilst they could not make it to the ballot box.

New York and California not so much

[Sibdane]

3 hours ago, TallPaul1878 said:

Oh I'm not all that aware of the primaries. It doesn't surprise me though. Florida has a lot of elderly Republican voters so it is likely he would want to get them to their votes counted whilst they could not make it to the ballot box.

New York and California not so much

Also just read that White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany has voted by mail 11 times in the past 10 years, sending in a ballot for every Florida election she's participated in. This is Trump's spoke-person, which I find interesting. 

[Guest TallPaul1878]

13 hours ago, Sibdane said:

Also just read that White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany has voted by mail 11 times in the past 10 years, sending in a ballot for every Florida election she's participated in. This is Trump's spoke-person, which I find interesting. 

The issue with social media companies is that they are offered certain protections with regards to content that goes on their sites. They are protected as platforms and so cannot be held accountable for what is said, they are a digital town square.

Since Twitter has taken it upon itself to moderate content then they have started to act as a publisher rather than a platform holder. A publisher would be liable for content that is available on it's sites and Twitter is NOTORIOUS for hate speech. If Twitter wants to police speech, rightly or wrongly, then it has to police it all.

Is Twitter a platform or a publisher of content? It needs to make that distinction, Facebook too. There is one thing to remove illegal content, another to decide what is and isn't considered "truth".

Yes, Trump was wrong with his statements. He is wrong quite a lot of times, but so are a whole host of other blue check marked users that get cart blanche to spout their drivel on a daily basis.

It's the same thing I've complained about on here. Twitter and silicon valley in general leans towards globalism and progressivism. It is made up of those kinds of people. They, probably through an unconscious bias, offer leniency towards those of their own persuasion than to socially conservative and populist voices.

[Sibdane]

4 hours ago, TallPaul1878 said:

The issue with social media companies is that they are offered certain protections with regards to content that goes on their sites. They are protected as platforms and so cannot be held accountable for what is said, they are a digital town square.

Since Twitter has taken it upon itself to moderate content then they have started to act as a publisher rather than a platform holder. A publisher would be liable for content that is available on it's sites and Twitter is NOTORIOUS for hate speech. If Twitter wants to police speech, rightly or wrongly, then it has to police it all.

Is Twitter a platform or a publisher of content? It needs to make that distinction, Facebook too. There is one thing to remove illegal content, another to decide what is and isn't considered "truth".

Yes, Trump was wrong with his statements. He is wrong quite a lot of times, but so are a whole host of other blue check marked users that get cart blanche to spout their drivel on a daily basis.

It's the same thing I've complained about on here. Twitter and silicon valley in general leans towards globalism and progressivism. It is made up of those kinds of people. They, probably through an unconscious bias, offer leniency towards those of their own persuasion than to socially conservative and populist voices.

I get where you're coming from, but you also have to consider the amount of influence Trump has on the public versus other "blue checks." I also do see a lot of others getting banned and/or moderated, but it's mostly for hate speech or spamming. 

Facebook is an interesting one to bring up though, because they are notorious for running misleading/untrue ads in favor of conservatism. 

I don't disagree with your broader point that silicon valley leans more left of center. 

[markjazzbassist]

25 minutes ago, Sibdane said:

I get where you're coming from, but you also have to consider the amount of influence Trump has on the public versus other "blue checks." I also do see a lot of others getting banned and/or moderated, but it's mostly for hate speech or spamming. 

Facebook is an interesting one to bring up though, because they are notorious for running misleading/untrue ads in favor of conservatism. 

I don't disagree with your broader point that silicon valley leans more left of center. 

Silicon valley employees may lean left of center (i mean grunts, not execs) but all the CEO's are hardcore right wingers or libertarians or whatever you wanna call it.  the execs are all money grubbing and power hungry capitalists.  that's as conservative as it gets.  i don't see any socialism at play in those companies.  I see massively unequal pay structures, unequal treatment of men and women, and policies (like the twitter mentioned) that are meant to capitalize on money and power (see the way they handle or don't handle trump).  I see all of them at the round table with Trump FREQUENTLY talking  business and putting their agenda forward and seeing how they can benefit each other.  If these were idealistic socialists they wouldn't be at that table Paul.  There they are though, and they do the song and dance routine where Trump uses them all and then acts like he doesn't with a slap on the wrist penalties (see facebook) and then they go back to sharing meals and tables at White House dinners and functions.  

[Guest TallPaul1878]

1 hour ago, markjazzbassist said:

Silicon valley employees may lean left of center (i mean grunts, not execs) but all the CEO's are hardcore right wingers or libertarians or whatever you wanna call it.  the execs are all money grubbing and power hungry capitalists.  that's as conservative as it gets.  i don't see any socialism at play in those companies.  I see massively unequal pay structures, unequal treatment of men and women, and policies (like the twitter mentioned) that are meant to capitalize on money and power (see the way they handle or don't handle trump).  I see all of them at the round table with Trump FREQUENTLY talking  business and putting their agenda forward and seeing how they can benefit each other.  If these were idealistic socialists they wouldn't be at that table Paul.  There they are though, and they do the song and dance routine where Trump uses them all and then acts like he doesn't with a slap on the wrist penalties (see facebook) and then they go back to sharing meals and tables at White House dinners and functions.  

There are 2 aspects to political affiliations. I would suggest both Republican and Democrats are both economically liberal in their ideology. When I speak of conservatives I generally mean of a social slant. One that is a proponent of tradition, church, marriage, etc. Look at Trump and Boris and they are none of these either so I don't consider them true "conservatives".

I would place myself firmly as socially conservative but I have plenty of traditionally "left wing" ideologies around state ownership of public utilities etc.

The majority of these silicon valley and Hollywood execs appear to lean left because culturally that is where the power lies. Additionally we have the Chinese marketplace to consider. Look at how Twitch are quite happy to bend the knee and silence pro Hong Kong sentiment for fear of losing out on access to the Chinese market. A reckoning needs to be made as to whether we are going to continue down the path of appeasement or whether our Western values our worth more than the money available in China.

The libertarian ideals do not work on a global scale because nations like China are not playing the same game. Letting the market decide is a flawed idea when the market is now being rigged by a powerful government. 

[Guest TallPaul1878]

2 hours ago, Sibdane said:

I get where you're coming from, but you also have to consider the amount of influence Trump has on the public versus other "blue checks." I also do see a lot of others getting banned and/or moderated, but it's mostly for hate speech or spamming. 

Facebook is an interesting one to bring up though, because they are notorious for running misleading/untrue ads in favor of conservatism. 

I don't disagree with your broader point that silicon valley leans more left of center. 

I think I covered most of it in my reply to Mark. I don't really see left and right in their traditional senses any more. I don't think the major parties really represent traditional left wing ideologies. I can't imagine Labour or Democrats actually renationalising public utilities any time soon. One party is just more laissez fare than the other.

The left now represents globalism and progressivism. I have no doubt that Barclays Bank doesn't actually give a stuff about LGBT people when they decide to smother everything in rainbow colours once a year.

My neighbours are lesbians, neither of them have ever been to a Pride parade, they find it fake, I guess that makes them far right now

The progressive left likes to believe it has a moral high ground because it champions the rights of minority groups. Really they just see them as giant voting bloc to gain power and until recently they did have all the power. People complain about Trump and Boris espousing populism, well populism doesn't sprout up in a vacuum. Enough people felt marginalised enough by globalist and progressive policies that they voted against it.

[markjazzbassist]

1 hour ago, TallPaul1878 said:

The progressive left likes to believe it has a moral high ground because it champions the rights of minority groups. Really they just see them as giant voting bloc to gain power and until recently they did have all the power. People complain about Trump and Boris espousing populism, well populism doesn't sprout up in a vacuum. Enough people felt marginalised enough by globalist and progressive policies that they voted against it.

your first point i half agree with, the "me first" politicians i would agree with your point.  but the voters that care about those issues (myself, friends, people on here) i know care passionately about equality and don't see those groups simply as an advantageous voting bonus.  that's why i'm trying to vote in people that care for those things, so they can help make the change to correct the system.  the second point on populism i don't disagree with at all. i would argue that true left isn't globalist, it's socialist which by its very nature is focusing on state production instead of foreign.  Bernie Sanders is actually against globalism and China and stands with conservatives on that issue.  the labour/democrat left i would agree is pro globalism.  i don't see them as true lefties though, more center left or neo-liberals.  i am what i would consider a socialist or true lefty.  i'd like to see way more state involvement in the US.