T
TorontoReign
Guest
I only vote for women that were in the military and go surfing.
Stupid Watergate - or how to impeach Donald Trump.
- Thread starter Crni Vuk
- Start date
It should be a requirement for presidential candidacy to have worked as a pornstar.
Mutant Screg
Totally not a mutant
I disagree. Clinton would have won by popular vote, if that was the way the government did things. Trump only won because of how the electoral college "works."
MutantScalper
Dogmeat
Yea it's stupid alright since I don't think they have anything that'll stick in the end. Meaning Trump will grow stronger like a virus you try to kill with too little antibiotics.
TheGM
The voice of reason
Muh popular vote. You can disagree all you want, putting caulk in your ears and sewing you eyes shut won't change the facts. If you take away her reported 6 million illegal alien votes she loses by 3 million. Good thing the EC checks and balances total toilets like California and New York from telling the rest of the country who the president will be. Even then she could have used the EC to win but she decided that she didn't need to campaign in places like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. not to mention getting way less votes than Obama because it turns out people don't want to vote for Hilary Clinton.
Last edited:
T
TorontoReign
Guest
Right, she totally skipped whole regions that would have helped her if she won them over. Why? Because it would have been tough work to get any of those fucks to listen to her lying ass. Instead she went and got a bunch of celebs to shill for her. Pathetic.
Biden is taking the same playbook and getting reamed in the ass with it. Gabbard is the one decent option I see, but she is simply a female Obama. She will go in there and do something totally opposite of what she says. 70 percent chance of that. Because every other president in recent memory BESIDES TRUMP has done that. Obama is gonna take care of them crooked elites. No, he gave them billions of dollars. Oh boy Obama is all for peace. No, he killed more with drones than ever before.
Trump went in and did what he said and what people thought he would do. People like to know what they are voting for. With him you know.
One look at Biden and you can tell he has a thing for kids. One look at Clinton and you can tell she eats kids.
Biden is taking the same playbook and getting reamed in the ass with it. Gabbard is the one decent option I see, but she is simply a female Obama. She will go in there and do something totally opposite of what she says. 70 percent chance of that. Because every other president in recent memory BESIDES TRUMP has done that. Obama is gonna take care of them crooked elites. No, he gave them billions of dollars. Oh boy Obama is all for peace. No, he killed more with drones than ever before.
Trump went in and did what he said and what people thought he would do. People like to know what they are voting for. With him you know.
One look at Biden and you can tell he has a thing for kids. One look at Clinton and you can tell she eats kids.
TheHouseAlwaysWins
Look, Ma! Two Heads!
I didn't vote in the last election because I didn't really like Hillary or Trump. If Bernie is able to win the primary i might be interested otherwise ill either vote for Trump or stay out of it.
The electoral college does kind of make sense and we have something similar here in Canada. The majority of the population here lives in a few major cities but we have "ridings" that are divided and cover the entirety of every province. Ex. There are probably more people in Toronto than even live in my province. That is why each area needs to have representation of their interests in democracy. If it was just a sum of people voting for one thing or another it may actually be less democratic because it represents very small regional interests when the country and its circumstances are very large and unique. There are people that live in mining areas, forestry areas, fisheries, manufacturing centres, etc. There are a lot of circumstances that a large population such as Toronto would have no understanding or interest in.
Uhhhh, the only one "reporting" this nonsense is Donald Trump and conspiracy theorists. There is no factual evidence for this claim. If it were actually true the country would literally be on fire right now. It wouldn't matter who won, millions of fraudulent voters would be a shitstorm. US democracy would be in total chaos. It is extremely rare to have anyone commit fraud at all let alone for there to be millions of fraudulent votes. That would be unprecedented, literally in the history of the entire world. Absolute nonsense.
TheGM
The voice of reason
If I disagree with it, it must be crazy peoples also muh russians. Honestly I couldn't give a flying fuck through a rolling donut, I just think its funny she was getting more votes in places than there were registered voters. And besides Epstein didn't kill himself.
Also, the Donald is well on his way to being impeached but the senate will still never convict him. I'm not sure what the goal here is. The impeachment process is a useful tool for preventing another Hitler but this isn't going anywhere. There's a grey enough area for Republicans to argue against it. Unless he starts murdering and/or molesting people (well, he's probably molested people, just not during his time in office - that we know of) it will never happen. It seems like Democrats are just hoping Republicans are going to magically change their minds.
The impeachment inquiries certainly are enlightening however because I don't think there is any doubt that Trump was withholding foreign aid for a political favour. Watching Republicans try to talk circles around that issue has actually been nauseating. Some of the arguments and lines of inquiry involve child-like reasoning. The same goes for some of the Democrats, making claims and assertions that embellish or extrapolate upon existing information without being accurate. The brass tacks of the situation is he over ruled the foreign policy set out by everyone that handles foreign policy in his administration (without even telling them - which left they baffled) and withheld aid for an investigation into Biden's son and the Burisma company. He didn't care at all that the Ukraine was (and still is) at war with Russia (like, actual, literal war), he only cared about investigating a conspiracy theory.
The impeachment inquiries certainly are enlightening however because I don't think there is any doubt that Trump was withholding foreign aid for a political favour. Watching Republicans try to talk circles around that issue has actually been nauseating. Some of the arguments and lines of inquiry involve child-like reasoning. The same goes for some of the Democrats, making claims and assertions that embellish or extrapolate upon existing information without being accurate. The brass tacks of the situation is he over ruled the foreign policy set out by everyone that handles foreign policy in his administration (without even telling them - which left they baffled) and withheld aid for an investigation into Biden's son and the Burisma company. He didn't care at all that the Ukraine was (and still is) at war with Russia (like, actual, literal war), he only cared about investigating a conspiracy theory.
MutantScalper
Dogmeat
Well, yea. But maybe 'regionality' is giving way to absolute representation in voting etc., or 'true democracy' if you wish to see it so. If the human population survives without anyone living in the rural regions, why should there be folks living there? Maybe human race would survive best if it was concentrated rather than spread out etc. It can get a little boring in the sticks if you know what I mean.
I disagree with it because there's no factual evidence for it. It's not a matter of opinion like which tea you think tastes best.
The majority of resource comes from these areas... like where do y'all think vegetables and meat come from? Wheat? Paper? Coal and oil? There's also significant economic differences in these areas. Everyone literally cannot live in a city because they couldn't afford it. Rural areas aren't a wasteland for outlanders... we aren't living in the Walking Dead here. Rural areas support the urban areas. It would also be a kind of lunacy to infringe upon the rights of people to choose how and where they're going to live.
TheGM
The voice of reason
whatever helps you feel better.
I feel as fine as I did earlier in the day. It seems like you're the one that needs to cuddle misinformation to feel better. Let me know if you have any facts you'd like to share that didn't come from Infowars.
TheGM
The voice of reason
you seem upset. want to talk about it?
Also @Korin, forget about discussing conspiracy theories. If Trump said the Loch Ness monster had a child with sasquatch, some Trump supporters would explain to you how it could have some truth in to it and the only reason you don't accept the possibility is because your an extreme leftist or something like that.
The electoral college is a rather strange system for a modern democracy. What ever use it might had 200 years ago it's going to lead to issues in the future. However there are attempts by more and more states to actually get rid of the electoral college without removing it.
CGP Grey has also a Video on that one.
Except that the electoral college is doing a piss poor job at that. There are many myths about it it circulating. If the intention really is to keep a balance between "populated" and "rural" areas and get presidents to campaign in smaller states as well then I am afraid it's broken.
The electoral college is a rather strange system for a modern democracy. What ever use it might had 200 years ago it's going to lead to issues in the future. However there are attempts by more and more states to actually get rid of the electoral college without removing it.
CGP Grey has also a Video on that one.
Last edited:
I would debate just about anyone in good faith if they presented me the information for their reasoning. I might even end up learning something as is not infrequently the case. I don't think Trump supporters or Republicans are inherently or uniformly stupid. If that were the case you would have to consider that almost half of the United States could be characterized by the most vocal minority of MAGA hat wearers and I tend to think individuals are more nuanced than that. If that isn't the case then I am truly afraid.
It is weird to me that people on the right side of the political spectrum seem to gobble up a disproportionate amount of fake news and conspiracy theories. My running theory on that is that personality types that believe in conspiracy theories often place much higher on a spectrum of distrusting authority. That could be any authority, governmental, medical, scientific etc. Since the political compass keeps moving to the left anyone that distrusts authority must naturally gravitate to the right. Anti-social, paranoid/distrusting and delusional behaviour tends to often favour nationalist viewpoints, especially if complex problems in the world can be boiled down to having very specific causes (ex. immigrants). If we were more on the right-end of the spectrum the situation might be reversed and these people would flock to leftist conspiracy theories because any governing authority must be working against their interests.
That's interesting, I had to re-watch a couple videos about electoral college because I'd forgotten how it worked evidently. So not quite the same as Canada because it's state level and not sub-state (like a riding). The ridings here are only worth one vote, so you can't win a riding and suddenly get an 54 extra votes. We do have similar issues as a result of it not being multi-party system where a party with 27% of the vote will take half of the seats because there is no proportional representation.
Electoral college was probably better at a smaller scale that didn't need to count millions.
I am not saying they are stupid. Believing in conspiracy theories is not a question of intelligence. It's just that we can see how more and more "conspiracy theories" are making their way in to the main stream these days, which has also to do with the incredible growth of social networks and platforms like Facebook. As David Coen said in a recent speech, if this was the 1930s Facebook would host an political add from Hitler. And I think he's right. It seems more and more likely that the internet with it's free access to completely unfiltered Information is becoming more of a hotbed for extremist propaganda, fringe opinions and outright lies. Far from the promise it came with in the past of an informed and educated society ... Oh well. And just for the record I am not saying that this is only happening on the right, it does happen on the left as well. It's just that the loudest voices right now are coming from the right. When you take a lot of that "scepticism" movement for example that happend to form around Youtube you would be surprised how many of their talking points have an actual antisemitic source. Like the "Holocaust sceptics", "Race Realists" and who knows what else is there. The likes of youtubers like sargon of akkad or right wing PragerU.
Also I don't see a merit in debating every point out there to be honest. Like that Hiliary killed so-and-so many people or Holocaust denial or outright genocide fantasies spawned by racist ideology just to name a few. What's the point of debating such stuff? It's simply pigeon chess.
But that explains for example why so many conservatives are (seemingly) in favour of the free market dictating the rules where as leftists and progressives want to see it regulated to benefit everyone. In a more conservative mind, If you simply can't make it on the free market then you simply deserve the things that happen to you. And anyone who would not help you and push you up, so to speak, would bring you into a position that you actually don't deserve. It's a different definition of justice.
However this idea of some 'sceptics' today supporting the political right and far right and their narrative as a form of 'anti-government' thing? That's so very bizarre in my opinion. The extreme right and conservatives never get tired of repeating the narrative to keep the state out of everyone's business. but the reality is you just have to hit the right topics and they will cry for regulations and laws just as much like the other side. Like burning flags or abortions, the military and the like. Suddenly the state telling you what to do and throwing billions in subsidies at it (like the Pentagon) is alright.
If people really support the right because they think it's against authority then they live in a dream world.
Also I don't see a merit in debating every point out there to be honest. Like that Hiliary killed so-and-so many people or Holocaust denial or outright genocide fantasies spawned by racist ideology just to name a few. What's the point of debating such stuff? It's simply pigeon chess.
Which is interesting when you consider the fact that the political right and conservative spectrum actually approves of authority due to their hierarchical thinking as long it represents a natural order so to speak. The difference here is the authority has to be perceived as just. Like let us say the shark and the small fish in a conservative mind the shark has every right to eat the other fish simply because he is the shark. To a progressive or more left leaning mind that's seen as unjust. And I am not saying this to attack conservative values. Both conservative and progressive values have equal merit.
But that explains for example why so many conservatives are (seemingly) in favour of the free market dictating the rules where as leftists and progressives want to see it regulated to benefit everyone. In a more conservative mind, If you simply can't make it on the free market then you simply deserve the things that happen to you. And anyone who would not help you and push you up, so to speak, would bring you into a position that you actually don't deserve. It's a different definition of justice.
However this idea of some 'sceptics' today supporting the political right and far right and their narrative as a form of 'anti-government' thing? That's so very bizarre in my opinion. The extreme right and conservatives never get tired of repeating the narrative to keep the state out of everyone's business. but the reality is you just have to hit the right topics and they will cry for regulations and laws just as much like the other side. Like burning flags or abortions, the military and the like. Suddenly the state telling you what to do and throwing billions in subsidies at it (like the Pentagon) is alright.
If people really support the right because they think it's against authority then they live in a dream world.
Last edited: