The Political Discussion Thread

[SoulReaver]

And, speaking of foot-in mouth disease...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018...otiations.html

I wish he (Trump) would just shut the he** up and do what he was elected to do.

I dunno if this one can or should blow over. Somebody wake up Pence.

https://i.imgflip.com/211sab.jpg

not foot in mouth he said that on purpose
to get more votes for his camp this year's legislative elections

for some reason immigration's an extremely important topic maybe even the most important in the US & he knows it
Roy Moore didn't focus on immigration & that could also be a reason why he lost

[Annoyed]

not foot in mouth he said that on purpose
to get more votes for his camp this year's legislative elections

for some reason immigration's an extremely important topic maybe even the most important in the US & he knows it
Roy Moore didn't focus on immigration & that could also be a reason why he lost

You watch. There's gonna be a huge firefight over this. And at the end of the day, I won't be surprised if Pence ends up in the White House.

[aretood2]

I'm not talking about people whose circumstances make it difficult to train, which might be made easier. I'm talking about those who cannot be retrained; they just don't have the mental chops for it. There are an awful lot of people who fit that category in this country. as I said, college is not for everyone. Many folks can't pass it.
Unless you want to remove a significant portion of the population so that only those who can be retrained remain, it might not be a good idea to let that happen.

There are more options than just 4 year college.

You watch. There's gonna be a huge firefight over this. And at the end of the day, I won't be surprised if Pence ends up in the White House.

You have more faith in the GOP than I at the moment. Right now, nothing short of high treason will get the GOP to turn on him.

[BlowitUpistus]

Ya know, it might not be the best idea for Pence to take his vacations in liberal paradises such as Aspen, CO.

Just from the point of view of liking to see the feds hamstrung, that's gotta tick Pence off no end, and there isn't squat he can do about it.

Perhaps he should have responded by flying a confederate flag right beside a MAGA sign..

Free Speech, anyone?

Never mind the ramifications towards free speech as proposed, how long before this means "posts that the government doesn't agree with" ?

Part of me agrees with it, after seeing those videos on Youtube where those blacks beat up that kid, but after seeing a project veritas video showing just HOW low twitter goes to squelch out conservative views and voices, i don't want then to have a LEGAL means of doing so..

Free speech should not be of concern for people who are planning terrorist attacks. You give up that right when you plan to kill and harm people

I agree Mr gate..

That is not even close to what is happening here. Free speech has always had limits on what can be said. Harming others has never been protected by free speech. That is a long way from your conspiracy to government is going to silence us.

And here in the USA, we have laws about speech leading to incitement of violence..

Look at the bottom of the Gateworld forum main page. Tens of thousands of bots have been banned. This isn't possible without censorship.

Real life has no equivalent for botnets, yet they exist aplenty on the internet.

Which is why i would LOVE for a way to criminally charge those who MAKE those bots.

about Trump thinking it's all fake...I might be inclined to agree with him on that score...these days it seems to me like all major media outlets operate more like a 3-ring circus than as entities charged with reporting facts and truth

And how many times does it seem he's proven right afterwards?

An opinion is not the same as questioning something.

I question whether Trump is fit to be president, but in my opinion he is most certainly not.

A question requires an answer, an opinion does not.

Then why is it we see, left-leaning schools silencing not just opinions but questions?

Mate, I just wanna know what she would have done "far worse"
Objectively, every foreign policy made by trump has weakened US standing across the globe and emboldened it's enemies. Trump destabilizes NATO, Russia is happy. Trump destabilized the pacific, China is happy.
These are not good outcomes for the US.

You must have one skewed perception of things then. If anything, i feel hes STRENGTHENED our standing..

Well, now done up to page 1355.. Will get the rest tomorrow..

[Coco Pops]

You watch. There's gonna be a huge firefight over this. And at the end of the day, I won't be surprised if Pence ends up in the White House.

How so?

Will Pence be a better President then Trump?

[Gatefan1976]

You must have one skewed perception of things then. If anything, i feel hes STRENGTHENED our standing..

Well, now done up to page 1355.. Will get the rest tomorrow..

Strengthened your standing?
If you mean the US is willing to "go it alone" then sure, he has.
If you mean diplomatically, and being the leader of the "free world", he passed on that role, same as he passed on any real leadership in his televised immigration meeting. He gives the work to the senate and the house, then claims all the "glory". This is how business works, but it is not how diplomacy works.

[Gatefan1976]

You watch. There's gonna be a huge firefight over this. And at the end of the day, I won't be surprised if Pence ends up in the White House.

You don't give a hard turd what he says as long as you get what you want, and stop pretending otherwise.
Trump could call your own mother a 1 out of 10 fat ***** and you would not care so long as you got what you wanted.
You are pathetic.

[Falcon Horus]

Okay, trying to catch up... first the previous quoted posts, then the newer ones...

People who aren't gifted with witty comebacks, often feel silenced because they're basically at their wits end for speaking any further (and I'm NOT the only person who has felt this way or said that). That in its own way is a form of being silenced (short of being told to "just shut up!").

Somehow I'm amused by this comment about witty comebacks. My sister and I have a saying when it comes to witty comebacks, "You snooze, you loose." but Politics isn't about witty comebacks and on a written forum you don't have to be quick or witty to write a message (well, relatively speaking since a conversation might run long and you could be missing half of it if you don't have the time to check back regularly -- but that's why we have multi-quote ).

I would think someone whose native language is English wouldn't have too hard a time explaining themselves without having to look for the right words, as opposed to someone for whom English is second or third, or perhaps fourth, fifth... language -- not a native speaker/typer, I mean.

...because perhaps I was too hopeful to believe that most other people see things the same way ~ as I do.

That's very naive of you.

Maybe some of you folks here don't see things that way, because your thoughts are blinding you into believing that your ideas are far superior than certain *other* people who think differently.

So, you think you're not guilty of such thought pattern?

I'm rather amused you think you got everyone figured out so well. Perhaps, it's you who is blinded by your believes that everything that contradicts such believes is seen as evil leftist agenda... or whatever.

She would have given the order to blast whatever nukes we had left into Russia to wipe out the other super-power, world opposition force.

But Trump's nuclear button being bigger than Kim Jong-Un is OK, I imagine.

Anyway... here's Reuters take on that whole Clinton/Putin thing you mentioned, if interested in knowing the details you conveniently ignored (hey, you wanna accuse me of ignoring details, you're pretty damn good at that too): Skeptical of Russia, Clinton seen going toe-to-toe with Putin - Reuters, September 20, 2016

...both countries and PTB would have become devastated enough to be economically, agriculturally, and militarily unable to help the rest of the world or whomever they believed to be their allies in whatever dire circumstances might arise (hurricanes, cyclones, earthquake disasters, etc).

Your lack of knowledge on current military technology and weapons is showing. WWIII would end with mutual destruction and there would be no "rest of the world" to worry or think about.

Here's a quote, generally attributed to have been mentioned by Einstein:

"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."

Ack!!! she's following me... ...

Following you -- where?

Having the talented gift of humor and "wit" seems to have escaped me all my life... I may not show it or express it, but I do appreciate some of the interesting stuff you (FH) do write about.
Humble apologies...

No apologies needed, not as far as I am concerned anyway.

What do you know of my country?

I know a little, but far less than I probably could know.
But meh... I'll google it if I need it.

You are quite right there. If someone or everyone for that matter considers my views to be something best spread over the back 40...

I have no idea what that means.
Well, no... I get the sentiment of what it means, but what's the back of a 40?

But we live in a very hostile world. And one of the things you learn on the playground in preschool is that someone is always trying to knock the king of the hill of his perch.

This toddler reference works really well with the current WH occupant.

I rather like the fact that we are so well-armed that aside from 1 or two other nations, no one will dare start shiznit with us because it's over before it starts. Much more peaceful that way.

That's an oxymoron.

Had Rome not expanded as large as it did and started focusing on it's own internal structure, it may have avoided collapse and simply evolved.

Rome was also corrupt.

Does remind me a lot of the Trump-era though.

***

More later -- lunch first.

[Annoyed]

I have no idea what that means.
Well, no... I get the sentiment of what it means, but what's the back of a 40?

"Back 40" refers to a plot of land used for growing things; farming/gardening and such. Often, fertilizer is spread over this land..

Originally Posted by Annoyed
I rather like the fact that we are so well-armed that aside from 1 or two other nations, no one will dare start shiznit with us because it's over before it starts. Much more peaceful that way.

That's an oxymoron.

How? Peaceful means no fighting. If no one will dare attack the "king of the hill" because they haven't a prayer of surviving the attempt, let alone winning, there is no fighting.

[Womble]

Turn that around. If they aren't in our best interests, why should we be interested? We don't exist simply for the benefit of other nations.

These agreements are supposed to be give-and-take, not one-way streets. The USA, as the dominant economy in any free trade deal, usually reaps most of the benefits. These benefits do not trickle down to the blue collar workers losing their jobs, but the root of the problem isn't in the trade deals, it is in the nature of American economy.

(NAFTA, btw, saved the American auto industry. Low-skilled assembly jobs moved to Mexico but higher-paid, more skill-demanding auto parts manufacturing jobs did not. Which is how North America is still able to compete as a bloc against Chinese and other Asian car makers.

The middle class, blue-collar jobs that have been outsourced to other nations.

You mean the manufacturing jobs? Well, 70%+ of those jobs lost by the USA were lost to automation not to outsourcing.

How are you planning to stop the self-driving cars, by the way? That tech is about to extinguish the dominant job of 29 American states - truck driving. What then?

[Annoyed]

These agreements are supposed to be give-and-take, not one-way streets. The USA, as the dominant economy in any free trade deal, usually reaps most of the benefits. These benefits do not trickle down to the blue collar workers losing their jobs, but the root of the problem isn't in the trade deals, it is in the nature of American economy.

(NAFTA, btw, saved the American auto industry. Low-skilled assembly jobs moved to Mexico but higher-paid, more skill-demanding auto parts manufacturing jobs did not. Which is how North America is still able to compete as a bloc against Chinese and other Asian car makers.


You mean the manufacturing jobs? Well, 70%+ of those jobs lost by the USA were lost to automation not to outsourcing.

How are you planning to stop the self-driving cars, by the way? That tech is about to extinguish the dominant job of 29 American states - truck driving. What then?

I'm hoping that we really aren't stupid enough to allow driverless cars.

[Ian-S]

Considering how many deaths are caused a year in cars from human error, you've no chance of avoiding them.

[Falcon Horus]

Oh, I definitely think we should be far more isolationist than we are. How often have I said we ought to quit the U.N. and tell them to get the hell out?

Thou knowest not the history of the United Nations, I see. A reminder:

1 January 1942
The name "United Nations" is coined by United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt, and first used in the Declaration by United Nations of 1 January 1942, during the Second World War, when representatives of 26 nations pledged their Governments to continue fighting together against the Axis Powers.

24 October 1945 - The United Nations officially comes into existence
In 1945, representatives of 50 countries met in San Francisco at the United Nations Conference on International Organization to draw up the United Nations Charter. Those delegates deliberated on the basis of proposals worked out by the representatives of China, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom and the United States at Dumbarton Oaks, United States in August-October 1944.

The Charter was signed on 26 June 1945 by the representatives of the 50 countries. Poland, which was not represented at the Conference, signed it later and became one of the original 51 Member States.

The United Nations officially came into existence on 24 October 1945, when the Charter had been ratified by China, France, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, the United States and by a majority of other signatories.

The UN's main organs explained @ their official website.

As a Christian, what would you make of me going on about Ragnarok?

Depends, Thor Ragnarok or Ragnarok-end-of-the-world...

To a large extent, our economic and industrial might was developed in the first half of the 20th century as we provided the manufacturing capabilities for not one, but two world wars.

Well, it does help that the USA was spared of bombardments and fighting -- I mean, Europe was being leveled. Kinda hard to start a succesful business when your buildings get decimated during air raids.

The war-industry was on a high across the ocean -- though brought forth quite a few innovations too so cannot be underestimated.

"The Arsenal of Democracy" and all that. We didn't want to participate, but we provided most of the hardware used by the allies. If we hadn't "played empire", the world would almost certainly be speaking German today.

Mmm... I remember distinctly, the USA wasn't too eager on stepping up the game when Germany was expanding its territory outside of its borders. Japan had to send a reminder of what was at stake in the form of an all-out attack 2 years into the second world war (Germany invaded Poland on September 9, 1939 -- Japan launched their attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7th, 1941).

And the Führer would not have stopped at England -- a 1000 year reich would have included the US.

The Man in the High Castle, I believe the TV-show is called? Isn't that about nazi's winning the war?

I've always wondered what might have happened had Berlin been nuked instead of Japan if they had the bombs say a year earlier.

You can see how much would have been destroyed, using the nuke map (interactive browser app). You can even pick Fatman and Little Boy if you like, or use a different nuke altogether. But since we're historically speaking you'd have to run a simulation using those two nukes, I guess.

It would have had the same effect on Berlin as it did on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, but Berlin wouldn't have been the target. The target would have been the war industry -- Dresden.

Fake news is news that is clearly fake. Not whatever trump says is fake.

Everything that he doesn't agree with is fake. Except for Fox & Friends.

Which is why people don't really like US interventionism, because it's often the bull in a china shop and then when we ask "did you really have to smash all this china" the answer is "be grateful we sent a bull".

Zoinks!

FYI and for the written record, Christianity is on its way out.

And yet, it's still the largest religious group in the world.

It's been watered down so much over the past several decades, that within a few years what was once thought to be "mainstream" Christianity will soon morph into something totally (neutered) "lukewarm" as Revelation 3:14-18 describes. This is the "Church" that God (of the Bible) detests, and their deeds will be dealt with accordingly (severely).

People start to think for themselves -- they've grown beyond being god-fearing Christians.

In other words, if you (GF) and others here fear of some hard-core Christian takeover -- it ain't gonna happen -- not on a global scale...

Really?

Cause it's taken marriage equality quite a long time to get to where it is. There's the SCOTUS case about religious freedom to discriminate (which btw is perfectly legal to do in Mississippi). Religious groups do their finest work, making sure their way is the only way.

Explain how that is not trying to make it "One Nation, under One God"?

I know what Ragnarok is (all things Thor/Nordic related). I have no problem about it, because one of my favorite sources who lists world events and other "leading up to the end of all wars" info calls (nicknamed) himself Ragnarok (he's also an expert of Islam)...

Did he study islam at university? Or does his expertise derived from dodgy websites?

Bet you weren't expecting *that* for a reaction.

You didn't actually answer his question.
Nice dance though, you know, around the question.

Bet you weren't expecting *that* for a reaction. [/quote]
Also, don't forget that Islam also believes in a "One God" world, so it's best to be careful how you phrase --such details within-- your comments to Muslims. They take a harsher stance at such specific wording (they see them as insults) than (born-again) Christians. [/quote]

No, they don't. Much as many Christians take offence to it. But you wouldn't know that, I guess, I mean, your Islam expert is called Ragnarok.

Mine are called Kawtar, Blair, Neslihan and 2 Mohammed's (Mo for short).

Why? Because they don't censor what you think should be censored?

Facebook has an odd censoring system in place, much like Twitter and other social media places.
It is what it is.

So Oprah for 2020...... This should be fun if she actually runs

Fun sure, but I doubt she will.

I'd rather Biden would run, and take Obama as his VP -- bring the bromance back to the WH.

I wouldn't be so isolationist IF our relations with other nations and the U.N. were crafted for OUR benefit, rather than more beneficial to the other party.

All of the 193 member countries -- you're not the only country on the planet. You're sharing. And we all know, sharing is caring.

So, you want Trump to win in 2020. Gotcha.

*snort*

He has to make it to 2020 first.

Even more than 2016, 2020 is the Democrats' to win or to lose.

You seem to forget 2018 -- if I remember correctly dems could take both house and senate back if they play their cards right.

Hey all. New probie here. I am going back one month in this and the "Discussion about hot topics thread" just so you all know.. Go easy on me dudes and lasses..

Sorry, these two threads happen to be the one where going easy is not on the menu.
But one piece of advice, though -- try to keep both threads apart when quoting. Sometimes it's okay to drag quotes into other threads but it's generally best to keep them in their own thread.

To mr Gatefan.

Err... question though, what's with the formal Mr.?

I've seen over the past year Mr Trump has been in office, a NUMBER of people who has flatly called for his assassination, being hung, etc yet not one of them to my knowledge, have been banned by Twitter, and in many cases, still work at the colleges they were employed by?

Is this the one you mean: Fresno State professor faces backlash after 'Trump must hang' tweet

If Breitbart News hadn't picked up on the tweet, only 28 people would have known about it.
And he did apologize for his tweet and deleted it himself.

So if Mr Trump saying, something you don't like is grounds for him being banned, What pray tell, [/URL]do yoiu think should happen to all those who have publicly called for his death?

This reminds me of an article I read a couple days ago -- or a week ago:
Twitter explains why it will not ban Donald Trump (without mentioning his name)

Direct link to the blogpost by Twitter mentioned in the article: World Leaders on Twitter

That is true Mr Jelgate, but if they are going to ban HIM for something that other's find offensive, just cause he is on the right of the political spectrum, doesn't equality demand that twitter ALSO ban people on the left for saying stuff OTHERS find offensive?

Twitter has banned and taken blue marks away from both sides.

[Falcon Horus]

And part 2 of that genormous post...

Did i miss something? Where did Judge Moore get convicted in a court of law? When did he get legally charged? Calling him a padeo cause of unproven allegations is like me calling you a wife beater cause you wear a tank top tee shirt.. Dumb.

Except that his track record with child mollestors in his court speaks against him also. He may not have yet been charged with anything but his track record isn't exactly in his favor either. And let's not forget, that the fire at one of his accusors house is investigated as arson (related or unrelated to her coming forth is yet under investigations).

And then there's also this reminder:
Mr. Moore, a Republican, has responded with the same defiance that he exhibited when he was twice removed from his post as chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, first for dismissing a federal court order to remove a 5,280-pound granite monument of the Ten Commandments he had installed in the state judicial building, and later for flouting the United States Supreme Court’s decision affirming gay marriage. For good measure, he has declared that homosexuality should be illegal, and that Muslims should not be allowed to serve in Congress.

And do you by chance, think that maybe that is cause they have nato protection? If they didn't i am sure they would spend more.

Excuse me? Say what now?



This is the best one I've heard so far, I have to say but nope... we're not under NATO's protection. You do know where Belgium is situated, right? (just checking)

We're surrounded by France, Germany, The Netherlands, Luxembourg, and the North Sea -- who do we need to be afraid of?
We've been part of France, Spain, Austria, The Netherlands, Germany, the Roman Empire.... we can take care of ourselves, and we have far more important things to spend our money on than the military.

Genuinely amused...

..though now I'm curious what gave you the idea?

How can a hash tag be a person of the year is beyond me..

Yes, it's a hashtag on twitter but it's a Movement, therefore, a person who started it and in this setting, many persons.

Can anyone name a candidate that could beat Trump?

Depends how they'll play it, but there are definitely people who could send him packing. In the GOP-party and outside of it.

In which case, why would they want any relations with you in the first place?

Indeed.

***And the rest is for later...

[Annoyed]

Originally Posted by Annoyed View Post
"The Arsenal of Democracy" and all that. We didn't want to participate, but we provided most of the hardware used by the allies. If we hadn't "played empire", the world would almost certainly be speaking German today.

Mmm... I remember distinctly, the USA wasn't too eager on stepping up the game when Germany was expanding its territory outside of its borders. Japan had to send a reminder of what was at stake in the form of an all-out attack 2 years into the second world war (Germany invaded Poland on September 9, 1939 -- Japan launched their attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7th, 1941).

And the Führer would not have stopped at England -- a 1000 year reich would have included the US.

The Man in the High Castle, I believe the TV-show is called? Isn't that about nazi's winning the war?

That's what I'm saying; we didn't want to get involved in WWII. Till the Japanese bombed Pearl, that is.

And that is a very good show. I can't wait to see what happens in S3.