nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

2020 the battle of the septuagenarians - Trump vs Biden, Part 2

Beasty

No spitting, biting, gouging or uncivility allowed

First thread here

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Irishman80

dwayneshintzy wrote: »

Relatively high salary, overtime pay, great pension and job security. Do you know any American policemen?

No. But you couldn't pay me enough to work that job.

What's the average salary of a police officer?

namloc1980

Irishman80 wrote: »

Yes, shooting someone in the back 7 times is clearly not reasonable force.

But that doesn't mean I'm going to blanket blame all the police in the US. It's a country with 400 million legal guns, 10's of millions of illegal guns, gun sales of over 20 million already in 2020. The police have a thankless job.

I can't understand why anyone would want to be a police officer over there.

But you're happy enough to blanket blame all the Democrats for the riots and conflate protesters as rioters.

Irishman80

namloc1980 wrote: »

But you're happy enough to blanket blame all the Democrats for the riots and conflate protesters as rioters.

I didn't conflate protestors and rioters. I clearly said above we shouldnt confuse the two.

Gerry Hatrick

dwayneshintzy wrote: »

Are you American? What are you basing this statement on?

I'd dispute your premise that there is widespread bloodshed and mob rule.

No not American. Watch the news and I don't mean CNN or Fox. Americans are growing tired of the looting and yes widespread violence.

[Deleted User]

Irishman80 wrote: »

Yes, shooting someone in the back 7 times is clearly not reasonable force.

But that doesn't mean I'm going to blanket blame all the police in the US. It's a country with 400 million legal guns, 10's of millions of illegal guns, gun sales of over 20 million already in 2020. The police have a thankless job.

I can't understand why anyone would want to be a police officer over there.

And can you understand that the regularity of such events inevitably leads to large scale unrest and protests? Meanwhile the President has previously egged the Police on to use undue force.

In addition to that, he's pardoned the likes of Sheriff Joe Arpaio who was infamous for racial profiling and ignored crimes when they were against black people. It's pretty clear that Trump has contributed further to unrest. What has he done to reduce divisions? Has he called for any reforms of police? Nope, he's done nothing outside of making the problem worse...

Eric Cartman wrote: »

slow down on that Kool aid there, drinking it way too fast.

I'm pretty sure nobody is gonna place much value in your opinion on this given the views you've previously expressed on this...

timsey tiger

duploelabs wrote: »

Neither should you but unfortunately it seems every protester is a rioter in the eyes of the Republicans

Hardly surprising, since they think every black man is a criminal and a rapist.

Leroy42

Irishman80 wrote: »

No. But you couldn't pay me enough to work that job.

Its a significant, a multi faceted problem.

There are clearly far too many guns in the general populace. Not only too many actual guns, but even the expectation that any person you meet may well have a gun. That changes peoples perception of risk.

But rather than reduce the prevalence of violence as argued by the gun lobby, it leads to increased violence as people need to act first to avoid being dead.

Police are poorly trained. In particular instance, there were numerous officers present, the shooting officer was a close enough proximity to the man to have been able to subdue him. That lack of training, or ability to do their jobs, means that US police officiers have little option but to fear for themselves in these types of situations and thus that the 'shoot first' and regret later option. Far better to be suspended than dead.

The people, particularly black people, do not trust and even fear the police. I have plenty of issues with the conduct of Garda etc but there are few times that people are in actual fear of them. Certainy not on a daily basis. But that is very much the case in the US.

So you have a fearful public, a scared and fearful police force, inadequate training, a view that guns are the solution to everything and bigger guns if the other guns weren't enough.

Throw in terrible race relations and it is not surprising that instances like this happen, and will continue to happen. But, much like the view of gun rights advocates in the US after each mass shooting, their is apparently nothing that can be done to resolve the issues and it just is what it is.

Penn

Eric Cartman wrote: »

slow down on that Kool aid there, drinking it way too fast.

Not going down the rabbit hole of debating BLM, but let me ask you this:

Do you think Trump's response to the protests helped quell them or inflamed things further?

Kidchameleon

Cody montana wrote: »

So which is it?

I dont see Kamala as an inspiration to women. Kimberly did not sleep her way to a top job. I dont care how promiscuous a person is.

Carfacemandog

Gerry Hatrick wrote: »

No not American. Watch the news and I don't mean CNN or Fox. Americans are growing tired of the looting and yes widespread violence.

Can you provide some reputable polls and surveys for that?

dwayneshintzy

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I dont see Kamala as an inspiration to women. Kimberly did not sleep her way to a top job. I dont care how promiscuous a person is.

Why would you say Harris did, but Guilfoyle didn't?

She was hired as an Assistant DA while her boyfriend (and future husband) was a prominent local politician. How is her situation different from Harris'?

[Deleted User]

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I dont see Kamala as an inspiration to women. Kimberly did not sleep her way to a top job. I dont care how promiscuous a person is.

She did not sleep her way to reaching a vice presidential nomination or to the primaries and frankly, your view stinks of both misogyny and double standards. She was in a publicly known relationship and you've warped it.

ancapailldorcha

Kidchameleon wrote: »

So a strong independent woman comes out in favor of Trump (and we certainly need more strong women) yet straight away the slut shaming and commenting on her appearance starts, shameful.

I never mentioned her appearance or her sex life. I'm referring to her having a partner who extorted money from children with cancer.

For me, that'd be a deal breaker.

Irishman80

[Deleted User] wrote: »

And can you understand that the regularity of such events inevitably leads to large scale unrest and protests? Meanwhile the President has previously egged the Police on to use undue force.

In addition to that, he's pardoned the likes of Sheriff Joe Arpaio who was infamous for racial profiling and ignored crimes when they were against black people. It's pretty clear that Trump has contributed further to unrest. What has he done to reduce divisions? Has he called for any reforms of police? Nope, he's done nothing outside of making the problem worse...

I'm pretty sure nobody is gonna place much value in your opinion on this given the views you've previously expressed on this...

Trump will never be a unifier. But he doesn't have to be to get re-elected. The US is divided and will be for many years to come.

My opinions are pretty moderate too. I don't tie myself to political parties or politicians.

ancapailldorcha

Biker79 wrote: »

Hmm. A party whose values are based on 2000 years of heritage, that prioritise the individual over the collective. Values that the country was built on.

Versus another party who have no regard for personal property, ethics or truth, and who champion collective identity over the individual.

Think its clear which one is the cult.

His inherited wealth certainly helped, but it didn't protect him from harsh lessons learned and valuable experience formed.

Biden on the other hand is a classic ' go along to get along ' character, who never took any risks, who sat in a government dept for 40 years picking up a paycheck.

He's a person who never actually ' did ' anything, under any meaningful definition of the word. Perhaps that's why he appeals to some people?

What values are these? Oppression? Tyranny? Grifting?

Trump's inherited wealth enabled him to run all of his original ventures (or scams if you'd prefer) into the ground without consequence. Anyone else would be in prison or sleeping on the streets.

[Deleted User]

Irishman80 wrote: »

Trump will never be a unifier. But he doesn't have to be to get re-elected. The US is divided and will be for many years to come.

My opinions are pretty moderate too. I don't tie myself to political parties or politicians.

You've addressed not a single thing from my post...

Biker79

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I I'm referring to her having a partner who extorted money from children with cancer.

.

' Wont someone PLEASE think of the children '

Yeah....sounds like one of the more plausible articles from the NY Times.

ancapailldorcha

Biker79 wrote: »

' Wont someone PLEASE think of the children '

Yeah....sounds like one of the more plausible articles from the NY Times.

The judge did when he banned this grubby little chip off the old block from running charities.

Leroy42

Irishman80 wrote: »

Trump will never be a unifier. But he doesn't have to be to get re-elected. The US is divided and will be for many years to come.

My opinions are pretty moderate too. I don't tie myself to political parties or politicians.

Absolutley, he doesn't have to be to be re-elected.

However, for the US to start to make things better, to start making the changes necessary to stop the slide then they need a unifyer to bring people together.

And that is why this election is important. Regardless on where one stands on individual issues, every American should be aware that things have got noticeable worse in the last four years.

Of course they can pretend that race relations, rich poor gap, employment rights, healthcare etc don't count and that all that matters is the economy, but that is the path they have followed for 40+ years and sees them where they are today.

Irishman80

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You've addressed not a single thing from my post...

Yes I did. I basically agreed with you that Trump is not a unifier. And I disagreed with you on my opinions which you seemed to suggest were radical.

What opinion have I stated in the thread that you seem to think is radical?

namloc1980

Biker79 wrote: »

' Wont someone PLEASE think of the children '

Yeah....sounds like one of the more plausible articles from the NY Times.

What are you talking about? Trump's kids had to pay settlements to 8 charities because they funneled charity money for their own personal use. They've also been barred from serving on any charities in the state of New York for their grifting activities. Are you suggesting this is not true and the courts and legal system made it up?

Irishman80

Leroy42 wrote: »

Absolutley, he doesn't have to be to be re-elected.

However, for the US to start to make things better, to start making the changes necessary to stop the slide then they need a unifyer to bring people together.

And that is why this election is important. Regardless on where one stands on individual issues, every American should be aware that things have got noticeable worse in the last four years.

Of course they can pretend that race relations, rich poor gap, employment rights, healthcare etc don't count and that all that matters is the economy, but that is the path they have followed for 40+ years and sees them where they are today.

You're optimistic, Leroy.

My view is that there is no politician in the US that can unify the country at this time. Lots of dividers, no unifiers.

[Deleted User]

Irishman80 wrote: »

Yes I did. I basically agreed with you that Trump is not a unifier. And I disagreed with you on my opinions which you seemed to suggest were radical.

What opinion have I stated in the thread that you seem to think is radical?

Do you think protests won't continue to occur while no efforts are made to reform? Trump has further inflamed the situation, no? So what benefits does his presidency offer in this respect? Also iirc, polling indicates the majority support BLM.

Gerry Hatrick

Cody montana wrote: »

Is this not happening under trumps watch?

Trump is offering to send the national guard into sort the mess out and the democratic governors are refusing. Most of the trouble we are seeing is in democrat run cities.

I'm not advocating Trump as a good president (he obviously isn't) but people care about their families security and well being and he's running on the platform which will win him votes.

America is still predominantly white middle class based who won't look favorably upon the Democrats for what's happening come election day.

duploelabs

Gerry Hatrick wrote: »

Trump is offering to send the national guard into sort the mess out and the democratic governors are refusing. Most of the trouble we are seeing is in democrat run cities.

I'm not advocating Trump as a good president (he obviously isn't) but people care about their families security and well being and he's running on the platform which will win him votes.

America is still predominantly white middle class based who won't look favorably upon the Democrats for what's happening come election day.

The national guard was sent in to portland and the rioting increased

Gerry Hatrick

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you think protests won't continue to occur while no efforts are made to reform? Trump has further inflamed the situation, no? So what benefits does his presidency offer in this respect? Also iirc, polling indicates the majority support BLM.

There is a big difference between supporting BLM and supporting the violence.

BLM needed to stick to peaceful widespread mass protest but they haven't and it's done great damage to their movement.

Leroy42

Irishman80 wrote: »

You're optimistic, Leroy.

My view is that there is no politician in the US that can unify the country at this time. Lots of dividers, no unifiers.

True, but Trump is definitely not the person.

Can Biden do it, probably not? Although he does have a history of bi-partisan work to at least signal that it may start a rewind in the current trajectory.

But US needs to start somewhere. Whilst 4 years of Biden not make any positive difference, 4 more years of Trump will undoubtedly lead to significantly more negative difference.

It is a nettle US voters will have to grasp at some point. They will need to put aside their own narrow concerns for the greater ideal of the US. I believe that a significant amount of US are thinking that way, but there remains a significant amount that continue to only care about themselves.

That is most evident in the GoP and particularly Trump voters, which have shown a clear disregard for the US itself in pursuit of their own narrow agenda. The fact that they are wiling to paint Biden as some commie, US hating socialist intent on taking away freedoms and destroying god tells you where their heads are at.

[Deleted User]

Gerry Hatrick wrote: »

There is a big difference between supporting BLM and supporting the violence.

BLM needed to stick to peaceful widespread mass protest but they haven't and it's done great damage to their movement.

The thing is violence has largely been a minor aspect that has been over egged. The biggest outbreaks was when Trump sent in the troops and actively inflamed the situation. Support for them has surged.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/support-for-black-lives-matter-surged-during-protests-but-is-waning-among-white-americans/

Irishman80

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Do you think protests won't continue to occur while no efforts are made to reform? Trump has further inflamed the situation, no? So what benefits does his presidency offer in this respect? Also iirc, polling indicates the majority support BLM.

I'm not arguing about protests. The issue is rioting and looting.

Trump is inflaming the issue. He is leaning into the Culture War which is a good position to take politically.

Polling also indicates majority support for sending in the National Guard and even the army to quash the riots. 49% of Democrats said they'd support the army been deployed to US cities.

namloc1980

Gerry Hatrick wrote: »

Trump is offering to send the national guard into sort the mess out and the democratic governors are refusing. Most of the trouble we are seeing is in democrat run cities.

I'm not advocating Trump as a good president (he obviously isn't) but people care about their families security and well being and he's running on the platform which will win him votes.

America is still predominantly white middle class based who won't look favorably upon the Democrats for what's happening come election day.

Trump sent in federal goons to Portland which inflamed things and made them worse. For the party which champions States rights and limited government the republicans and Trump sure love sending the feds in.