Donald Trump is the President Mark IV (Read Mod Warning in OP)

hill16bhoy

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Can you tell me any time anybody non jewish or anybody on the right has critisized a jew over something money related and it hasnt been anti Semitic or are you just not allowed do that ?

The very fact that you're asking this question keeps proving that you have a serious issue as regards anti-semitism, whether through ignorance or just troll behaviour.

Give Trumpists enough rope and they'll always hang themselves.

That's a commonly used metaphor by the way, not a joke at suicide victims, in case you were thinking of invoking any more mendacious false equivalence.

everlast75

So I hear Acosta assaulted a reporter?

If only there was a video disproving that...

Oh wait.

There is.

When Ben Shapiro calls you on it, you know you're out of line

https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/1060345582756147201?s=19

Pelvis

Manic Moran wrote: »

They are fifty separate but equal states.
https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Constitution_Senate.htm

To do otherwise is like saying, at the state level, that because Joe earns more or is better educated than James, Joe's vote should count for more"

As the above link observes, the House reflects the population differences. It is a good compromise for the federal nature of the US.

So in the senate, all states are equal, but in the house they're not.

Got it.

Manic Moran

Pelvis wrote: »

So in the senate, all states are equal, but in the house they're not.

Got it.

Exactly. In the House, the more populous states get more votes.

Christy42

Pelvis wrote: »

Manic Moran wrote: »

They are fifty separate but equal states.
https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Constitution_Senate.htm

To do otherwise is like saying, at the state level, that because Joe earns more or is better educated than James, Joe's vote should count for more"

As the above link observes, the House reflects the population differences. It is a good compromise for the federal nature of the US.

So in the senate, all states are equal, but in the house they're not.

Got it.

Exactly 2 seats per state helps the rural states and the party they are associated with (Republicans).

In the house of course you then get Gerrymandering to help the republicans.

The system works (especially when a man is in charge of elections and also running for election- Georgia)

dr.fuzzenstein

Eric Cartman wrote: »

ahh come off it, what anti-semitism, he moved the damn embassy to Jerusalem and has been militantly pro Israel.

The one and only reason Trump did that is because he knew that the world would lose it's sh*t over it.
It was trolling on a global scale. If there is violence and death because of this utter cnut move, he doesn't care, or worse, that's his aim.
He often stokes violence and always doubles down when called on it.
He thrives in hatred and division and so do his fans.

dr.fuzzenstein

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

It's funny how right-wing advocates of US hypercapitalism and zero government only ever seem to see countries such as China, Somalia or Nazi Germany as viable examples of different systems, with Nordic (or other successful left leaning) countries ignored, downplayed or sneered at.
I wonder how long their high tech economy would last if every child costs the equivalent of a house to educate and every hospital visit the same.
They seem to gleefully accept that 20% of the country will live in 3rd world poverty, but it's OK, poor peopl are lazy and/or stupid and don't deserve help such as education, healthcare or social welfare.
In many ways it's the American dream (nightmare). If you can't make it, it's YOUR fault and you deserve to suffer.
It's only the first world for the top 10%. The rest can kindly FOAD. They may only do as stem cell donors for the superrich.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Thats why norwegian companies constantly loophole taxation to buy products in other countries , Its why finish companies regularly stockpile money in other countries to not pay tax on it, Theres loads of norwegians here working in call centres because they cant afford to live in norway.

A lot of the time this is the case, not always but people are masters of their own destiny and often its poor choices made have left them poor.

Ah, you're chosing the downplay/sneering route.
And you're repeating the American dream mantra, anyone who doesn't make it is lazy/stupid and doesn't deserve help, so it's OK if they're croaking it in the gutter, as long as the rich are OK and don't have to give a bean of their billions to help poor people.
It really is a sh*tty attitude to have towards people less fortunate than yourself.
Stick the snout in the trough and kick it over once you're done. Classy.

Eric Cartman

hill16bhoy wrote: »

The very fact that you're asking this question keeps proving that you have a serious issue as regards anti-semitism, whether through ignorance or just troll behaviour.

Give Trumpists enough rope and they'll always hang themselves.

That's a commonly used metaphor by the way, not a joke at suicide victims, in case you were thinking of invoking any more mendacious false equivalence.

Youre deflecting , is there ever a way that somebody non jewish and particularly a GOP candidate can complain about a person who happens to be jewish , for monetary or economic reasons and not be anti Semitic ?

Was there any possible way the GOP could run an ad complaining about kim schriers higher tax rates and not be anti Semitic ?

pixelburp

So I presume any minute now, we can expect Chuck Grassley, Lesley Graham et al to swoop in, defend Acosta from the obviously false, scurrilous allegations that he assaulted that intern during the press conference?

An interesting side point BTW that might have ramifications on Florida & 2020: with all the midterms drama, one other election in Florida passed by was an amendment to restore felons' voting rights. Amounting to approx. 1.4 million votes so a pretty sizeable demographic.

Christy42

Eric Cartman wrote: »

hill16bhoy wrote: »

The very fact that you're asking this question keeps proving that you have a serious issue as regards anti-semitism, whether through ignorance or just troll behaviour.

Give Trumpists enough rope and they'll always hang themselves.

That's a commonly used metaphor by the way, not a joke at suicide victims, in case you were thinking of invoking any more mendacious false equivalence.

Youre deflecting , is there ever a way that somebody non jewish and particularly a GOP candidate can complain about a person who happens to be jewish , for monetary or economic reasons and not be anti Semitic ?

Was there any possible way the GOP could run an ad complaining about kim schriers higher tax rates and not be anti Semitic ?

Yeah just show an add saying she wants to increase taxes and say this will hurt whoever.

I have no idea why she is shown in the picture holding a load of cash. It has nothing to do with higher tax rates and only serves to reinforce a tired old Jewish trope.

Higher taxes go to services, whether they are used effectively enough to justify the hit they cause for people is up for debate but it is not she would personally benefit from them so why show money hungry Jewish stereotype?

The writing is fine. The picture is absolutely playing for racist votes.

Eric Cartman

pixelburp wrote: »

So I presume any minute now, we can expect Chuck Grassley, Lesley Graham et al to swoop in, defend Acosta from the obviously false, scurrilous allegations that he assaulted that intern during the press conference?

An interesting side point BTW that might have ramifications on Florida & 2020: with all the midterms drama, one other election in Florida passed by was an amendment to restore felons' voting rights. Amounting to approx. 1.4 million votes so a pretty sizeable demographic.

A load more democrat votes there so hah

Eric Cartman

Christy42 wrote: »

Yeah just show an add saying she wants to increase taxes and say this will hurt whoever.

I have no idea why she is shown in the picture holding a load of cash. It has nothing to do with higher tax rates and only serves to reinforce a tired old Jewish trope.

Higher taxes go to services, whether they are used effectively enough to justify the hit they cause for people is up for debate but it is not she would personally benefit from them so why show money hungry Jewish stereotype?

The writing is fine. The picture is absolutely playing for racist votes.

I don't think the photo is the best option , that said if the candidate wasnt jewish theyd have no issue with it, its that constant stereotype rattling round in peoples heads and a desire to avoid that causing offence.

Now lets say you had her involved in an expenses fiddling scandal and used that photo , would that be ok , if no , would it be ok if she wasnt jewish ?

pixelburp

Let's see:

- The constant reference to George Soros as a bogeyman behind every progressive stunt (apparently Fox News have refused Soros' reps a chance to challenge these claims on-air)
- The new use of 'globalist' as a term of warning / antagonism against a mysterious 'other'.
- The obvious attack on the synagogue in Pittsburgh
- An observed uptick in anti-semitism across the US, including swastikas daubed on Jewish properties and an increase in vandalism etc.
- Many GOP campaign ads used either racial or anti-semitic angles to attack their Democratic opponents: the example attacking Matt Lesser was particularly obvious in its inspiration, alongside the previosly mentioned example, and 30 seconds of googling reveals the parallels with historical posters taking a similar angle (of the Jewish being manipulative money hoarders)
- White Nationalism. Let's just include that because they're the most overt example of anti-semitism, being as they are inspired by those chaps I won't name for fear of invoking Godwin. They were chanting "Jews will not replace us" at the infamous march in Charlotteville.

The parallels with history are there, but claiming the thoughtful, unmoved middle-ground rings hollow when the evidence - circumstantial it can be claimed to be - is there that a quiet conspiracy is in effect, playing on a sentiment that has never really, truly left the zeitgeist.

spacecoyote

Opinion piece written by Session's interim replacement, Whittaker. Its not difficult to see why Trump would be eager to get him in to the position:

https://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/06/opinions/rosenstein-should-curb-mueller-whittaker-opinion/index.html

If he were to continue to investigate the financial relationships without a broadened scope in his appointment, then this would raise serious concerns that the special counsel's investigation was a mere witch hunt

It is time for Rosenstein, who is the acting attorney general for the purposes of this investigation, to order Mueller to limit the scope of his investigation to the four corners of the order appointing him special counsel.

If he doesn't, then Mueller's investigation will eventually start to look like a political fishing expedition. This would not only be out of character for a respected figure like Mueller, but also could be damaging to the President of the United States and his family -- and by extension, to the country

Even the use of language, such as "Witch Hunt", its purely playing up the Trump rhetoric.

Christy42

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Christy42 wrote: »

Yeah just show an add saying she wants to increase taxes and say this will hurt whoever.

I have no idea why she is shown in the picture holding a load of cash. It has nothing to do with higher tax rates and only serves to reinforce a tired old Jewish trope.

Higher taxes go to services, whether they are used effectively enough to justify the hit they cause for people is up for debate but it is not she would personally benefit from them so why show money hungry Jewish stereotype?

The writing is fine. The picture is absolutely playing for racist votes.

I don't think the photo is the best option , that said if the candidate wasnt jewish theyd have no issue with it, its that constant stereotype rattling round in peoples heads and a desire to avoid that causing offence.

Now lets say you had her involved in an expenses fiddling scandal and used that photo , would that be ok , if no , would it be ok if she wasnt jewish ?

Shockingly racial stereotypes are an issue for the relevant race and not for other people? Yes intentionally calling a stereotype is an issue. Yes it does show racism. If it wasn't a Jewish person then they would not have been abusing a racist stereotype for votes. Pretty big difference.

Yeah the money grabbing Christian is not a worn out stereotype so most would just think it a dumb ad at that point. However then they would not have used it.

She has not been in an expenses campaign but then they might have an argument. She hasn't so they don't. I am jot sure about the point of theory crafting.

Gbear

spacecoyote wrote: »

Opinion piece written by Session's interim replacement, Whittaker. Its not difficult to see why Trump would be eager to get him in to the position:

https://edition.cnn.com/2017/08/06/opinions/rosenstein-should-curb-mueller-whittaker-opinion/index.html

Even the use of language, such as "Witch Hunt", its purely playing up the Trump rhetoric.

It really is absurd. The investigation has been incredibly quiet, I don't know that there's been any leaks and the only time we hear a peep is when someone is indicted.

It's a bald-faced lie told for the benefit of the credulous that it's a witch hunt, but even if it was a witch hunt, the way it has been conducted would mean that it wouldn't have any impact if there was nothing to find.

spacecoyote

pixelburp wrote: »

Let's see:

- The constant reference to George Soros as a bogeyman behind every progressive stunt (apparently Fox News have refused Soros' reps a chance to challenge these claims on-air)
- The new use of 'globalist' as a term of warning / antagonism against a mysterious 'other'.
- The obvious attack on the synagogue in Pittsburgh
- An observed uptick in anti-semitism across the US, including swastikas daubed on Jewish properties and an increase in vandalism etc.
- Many GOP campaign ads used either racial or anti-semitic angles to attack their Democratic opponents: the example attacking Matt Lesser was particularly obvious in its inspiration, alongside the previosly mentioned example, and 30 seconds of googling reveals the parallels with historical posters taking a similar angle (of the Jewish being manipulative money hoarders)
- White Nationalism. Let's just include that because they're the most overt example of anti-semitism, being as they are inspired by those chaps I won't name for fear of invoking Godwin. They were chanting "Jews will not replace us" at the infamous march in Charlotteville.

The parallels with history are there, but claiming the thoughtful, unmoved middle-ground rings hollow when the evidence - circumstantial it can be claimed to be - is there that a quiet conspiracy is in effect, playing on a sentiment that has never really, truly left the zeitgeist.

There was also the ambiguous Chuck Todd nickname stuff too:

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/sleepy-eyes-anti-semitic-slur/

I know that snopes are rating it as an ambiguous one, which is fair enough, but given the context of everything else that has been said & taken place, it just adds a bit of extra weight to the argument that he fans the flames with that corner of his base

Igotadose

I was wondering why we hadn't heard much from Rudy Ghouliani lately. Seems he and awful wife Judith Nathan, are splitting and are engaged in a nasty divorce proceeding. Rudy's pleading beal bocht because, among other things, he's working for Trump for free. But, he did spend $12,000 on cigars and $7,000 on pens recently. https://www.thedailybeast.com/millionaire-rudy-giuliani-cries-poor-in-divorce-court-after-spending-big-on-alleged-mistress

Also the article mentions there may be a 'rebuttal' to the Mueller report coming out 'soon', whatever that means, since there's no Mueller report yet.

Good article on Sessions on Slate, just what a troglodyte he was, no loss but whoever replaces him won't be any better: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/11/jeff-sessions-donald-trump-resign-disgrace.html

Captain Obvious

2 Scoops wrote: »

Not in the manner that Acosta does, he's literally at the back of a crowd who're clapping and he's roaring questions knowing they can't be heard. Kim meeting was only at the beginning before the agreement was negotiated and he's shouting questions he knows can't be answered. He's continuously pulled these stunts throughout Trump's Presidency. I don't dislike Acosta, but p-p-please, don't take me for a fool when we both know what he's doing, he's pretty good at it.

https://twitter.com/AprilDRyan/status/1012799505496932353

Trump demonised the media. Acosta called him on it. CNN was then targeted with bombs. Trump continues to call them the enemy of the people. The shameful thing is that more journalists aren't holding Trump and Saunders to account.

2 Scoops wrote: »

You're right, as an individual we can't criticize activi.. I mean journalists. What's your view on Sean Hannity?

I know it might be hard for you to process, but being on board with Trump's media rhetoric is not mutually inclusive with criticizing certain journalists.

Is Hannity a journalist?

Eric Cartman wrote: »

A load more democrat votes there so hah

Probably. It's amazing to me that one of the core strategies of the GOP seems to be to stop people voting.

Eric Cartman

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Probably. It's amazing to me that one of the core strategies of the GOP seems to be to stop people voting.

While usually id be defending peoples right to vote, I dont believe felons should have the vote in any country so ill have to agree with the GOP on that one

Leroy42

So Trump completely loses control of yet another press conference and not one word or concern from his supporters?

The man clearly cannot handle any sort of questioning, any sort of debate, any different opinions. Think what that means when he is dealing with Putin or China or NATO.

One cannot watch any of that and think that this is a man for a crisis. That this is the leader to handle the biggest negotiations. He is so easy to spook. Jim Acosta, a journalist - in the overall scheme of things a nobody, yet he totally flusters POTUS. As usual, if there is a good way or a bad way to handle a situation, Trump invariably makes the wrong choice.

He has so many wrong choices at this stage I fail to see how anyone can have any faith in him.

everlast75

Eric Cartman wrote: »

While usually id be defending peoples right to vote, I dont believe felons should have the vote in any country so ill have to agree with the GOP on that one

So you don't believe in rehabilitation, or that people who serve their time have paid their debt to society?

Leroy42

Eric Cartman wrote: »

While usually id be defending peoples right to vote, I dont believe felons should have the vote in any country so ill have to agree with the GOP on that one

They can vote in Ireland. What countries can they not vote in?

The whole point of the justice system is that you pay for your crime and then reenter society. Removing their right to vote means you are punishing them forever.

Eric Cartman

everlast75 wrote: »

So you don't believe in rehabilitation, or that people who serve their time have paid their debt to society?

For the most part no, I do not. I would actively support the 3 strike rule also, you might make 1 mistake , 2 at a push , but committing 3 felony offences and I don't think theres any hope for you

Captain Obvious

Eric Cartman wrote: »

While usually id be defending peoples right to vote, I dont believe felons should have the vote in any country so ill have to agree with the GOP on that one

Does the actual crime not matter? It still excludes murderers and sex crime offenders.

Captain Obvious

Eric Cartman wrote: »

For the most part no, I do not. I would actively support the 3 strike rule also, you might make 1 mistake , 2 at a push , but committing 3 felony offences and I don't think theres any hope for you

What if you commit all three at the same time?

Leroy42

Eric Cartman wrote: »

For the most part no, I do not. I would actively support the 3 strike rule also, you might make 1 mistake , 2 at a push , but committing 3 felony offences and I don't think theres any hope for you

So a drunk driver should never again be allowed to vote? What about if you fails to pay taxes? Or a parking fine?
If you don't believe in rehabilitation they why not lock people up forever? What is the point of a second strike?
Should people lose their citizenship if they commit a crime, because voting is one of the major ways that people partake as citizens?

Actually no, forget it. It is clear from yesterday that you haven't really thought through this idea and simply posting whatever comes into your head thinking it a great idea without thinking through the implications.

You have some vague notion that criminals are bad and as such can't be seen to vote. Are there any members of Congress that have criminals records? I know GWB had a DUI for example. So its ok to be POTUS, but you shouldn't vote?

Stallingrad

It was telling when he momentarily walked away from the lectern, unable to deal with Acostas' questions. He is totally unequipped to deal with being challenged, a lifetime of being handed everything and being surrounded by 'yes' men exposes his intellectual deficit for all to see. He is such an empty vessel, beyond his own narrative nothing exists.

I really hope history learns from this, and we never put such a flawed person into such a position of power again.

8-10

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I would actively support the 3 strike rule also, you might make 1 mistake , 2 at a push , but committing 3 felony offences and I don't think theres any hope for you

So people who have committed 1 felony and serve their time should be allowed to vote

People who commit 2 felonies and serve their time should be allowed to vote

People who commit a third lose that right?

prawnsambo

Another mass shooting. This time in California