America - The Official Thread

[TexRex]

Not much I guess considering it has a sequel https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1640571/

Holy moley...

...wait...

...Bruce Davison? Aww.

 

[Novalee]

They are saying early voting is way up so it is good to see more people become engaged in the vote .


Sidenote Oprah seems to still have star power .
Oprah Winfrey has lent her star power to Stacey Abrams, the Georgia Democrat aiming to become America’s first black female governor in the midterm elections next week.

“I am here today because Stacey Abrams cares about the things that matter,” Winfrey told a cheering crowd at a Cobb County town hall, citing Abrams’ stance on environmental protection, healthcare and gun control.

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-...s-georgia-campaign-town-hall-midterm-election

 

[PocketZeven]

They are saying early voting is way up so it is good to see more people become engaged in the vote .


Sidenote Oprah seems to still have star power .
Oprah Winfrey has lent her star power to Stacey Abrams, the Georgia Democrat aiming to become America’s first black female governor in the midterm elections next week.

“I am here today because Stacey Abrams cares about the things that matter,” Winfrey told a cheering crowd at a Cobb County town hall, citing Abrams’ stance on environmental protection, healthcare and gun control.

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-...s-georgia-campaign-town-hall-midterm-election

There have been reporting about voters being suppressed in Georgia though. So I dont think she has much chance. With her opponent being the Secretary of State for Georgia, the office responsible for running the state’s elections. So he is using every "legals"means neccessary to win that election. A bit strange though that a conflict of interest like this is allowed in elections. I am not saying he is sabotaging the election, but there is still a conflicty of interest nonetheless. Imagine that the current whitehouse is responsible for running the 2020 presidential elections?

 

[Johnnypenso]

Then why offer it as an argument in support of...anything? You've presented yourself as a Trump supporter so fervent that you're willing to provide tu quoque "arguments" any chance you get, and yet you're unwilling to provide anything to substantiate your opinion that the beliefs of the supposed majority align with your own? Why should anyone take that seriously?

Mind, this is not to be confused with an opinion being rejected simply because of what it alludes to or from whom it originated...since I can very easily see such an assertion being made...rather on the basis of it not being substantiated.

Because

Spoiler: Spoiler

This is the OPINIONS and Current Events Forum

You are citing examples, because I asked for examples of behaviour of modern presidents that showed dictatorish behavior. You came with an example of the DOJ persuing an individual and not Obama.

Which worldleaders current and from the past have vilified the press and certain minorities as the current president of the USA has?

This was your original question. As I respond you simply add words and move the goalposts and we keep going round and round.

To the Hitler analogy:

anti-semitism was pretty widespread in the 1930's. You can find anti-semitic statements by most prominent figures in Europe (& the US). What Hitler did was on the same point of (racist) principle, but on an entirely different scale. Differences matter ... a lot.

And Lincoln? Lincoln was President during a time of literal civil war, when spies, assassins & saboteurs were actually plotting in Washington. In fact - "not many people know this" - he was assassinated by one in a theatre immediately after the war.

So imprisoning journalists and shutting down newspapers is ok so long as there is an emergency? Unless Lincoln was a psychic, he wasn't putting journalists in jail because he thought it would help avoid getting assassinated so you're putting the cart way before the horse with that link.

 

[PocketZeven]

Because

Spoiler: Spoiler

This is the OPINIONS and Current Events Forum

This was your original question. As I respond you simply add words and move the goalposts and we keep going round and round.

So imprisoning journalists and shutting down newspapers is ok so long as there is an emergency? Unless Lincoln was a psychic, he wasn't putting journalists in jail because he thought it would help avoid getting assassinated so you're putting the cart way before the horse with that link.

Correct. However you are a champion in not answering questions. You provided an example that has nothing to do with the question you are quoting.
How did Obama vilify the press? It was the DOJ that investigated an individual journalist. Was he indicted or arrested? Was it an attack on Fox news by the president? No these are conspiracy theories.

Why not just use examples that are actually relevant to the question?

 

[DDastardly00]

It's the ruling of a federal judge, and that's why I provided it as an example. You didn't specify such a requirement, but I felt it appropriate to offer something at least as substantive as that.

See, I sort of figured that the ruling of a federal judge carried some weight, certainly more than my personal opinion, but it seems that you're of the belief that it only carries weight if it aligns with your opinion.

Of course the ruling is being appealed, it's sort of the prerogative of an accused party to seek an alternate ruling from a higher court when a court rules against them. There hasn't been an alternate ruling at this time and the previous ruling against the accused still stands...which is why I provided it as an example. Had the ruling been overturned, I wouldn't have provided it.

I think you ought to accept the example as having sufficiently contradicted your assertion that Trump has done nothing to limit free speech, at least until such a point that the ruling has been overturned--if that happens--at which point I am more than willing to concede and withdraw the example.

Sufficiently? Not really. You have to realize how small this is in the broader context of this discussion. Trump is being compared to Hitler here, which is ridiculous. The result of this lawsuit is Trump had to unblock a few people on twitter, hooray, free speech can resume now.

I really don't care how it started; I don't have a dog in that race. If I did, I would have cited more than your claim that Trump isn't trying to limit free speech. If I did, I would have offered opinions and evidence to contradict more than your claim that Trump isn't trying to limit free speech. Because my interest lay in that claim specifically, I opted to cite only it and provide evidence to contradict only it.

So the context of the discussion doesn't matter, only the one fine point you are dragging out and isolating and beating with a stick, then why bother with this discussion at all? Literally the only reason why I commented is because of the silly Trump-Hitler comparisons. Now if Trump surrounds the NY Times, WaPo and others with troops then I will be gravely concerned. Until then, the claim that Trump is shutting down freedom of speech is greatly exaggerated.

 

[ryzno]

There have been reporting about voters being suppressed in Georgia though. So I dont think she has much chance. With her opponent being the Secretary of State for Georgia, the office responsible for running the state’s elections. So he is using every "legals"means neccessary to win that election. A bit strange though that a conflict of interest like this is allowed in elections. I am not saying he is sabotaging the election, but there is still a conflicty of interest nonetheless. Imagine that the current whitehouse is responsible for running the 2020 presidential elections?

It's not voter suppression...
There are inaccuracies in the ballots. Misspelled names, incorrect addresses, invalid signatures etc...
That said, a ballot application literally had Jesus Christ on Heaven St. Stop letting CNN brainwash y'all...
PS it's approximately 4000 ballots.

 

[TexRex]

Because

Spoiler: Spoiler

This is the OPINIONS and Current Events Forum

Yes, it is. Yes, you're entitled to yours. But why should anyone take yours seriously if you're unwilling and/or unable to establish a foundation for that opinion? And if you use an unfounded opinion to prop up an assertion (in this instance that something is worse than something else), why should anyone take that assertion seriously?

Should it not be taken seriously? If it's not to be taken seriously, why offer it up in the first place? Are you only interested in an echo chamber?

Sufficiently? Not really.

By what measure?

You have to realize how small this is in the broader context of this discussion.

So small that a false statement ought to be permissible?

Trump is being compared to Hitler here, which is ridiculous.

That may very well be the case, but employing incorrect statements doesn't aid the point you're trying to make.

The result of this lawsuit is Trump had to unblock a few people on twitter, hooray, free speech can resume now.

Then you acknowledge that his actions prior to the ruling constitute him trying to limit free speech? Well it's about danged time.

So the context of the discussion doesn't matter, only the one fine point you are dragging out and isolating and beating with a stick, then why bother with this discussion at all?

I didn't say the context doesn't matter. I said I don't care about the larger argument. I said I don't have a dog in that race.

What I care about is the use of false statements to prop up assertions, and I care enough that I'm compelled to provide evidence that contradict those statements.

That you don't seem to care about that and are willing to employ those false statements is disconcerting.

Literally the only reason why I commented is because of the silly Trump-Hitler comparisons.

I gathered as much. Literally the only reason I commented was your use of a false statement. Now we understand each others' reason for commenting.

Now if Trump surrounds the NY Times, WaPo and others with troops then I will be gravely concerned. Until then, the claim that Trump is shutting down freedom of speech is greatly exaggerated.

You really can't help it, can you?



Why is it so hard for you to leave the goalposts in one place?

You said...

he isn't trying to limit free speech

...and I provided an example wherein a judge ruled his actions as having been precisely that.

You said nothing of "shutting down" or implementation of military force in the assertion to which I originally replied.

But hey, I appreciate you not resorting to ad hominems or misrepresentation of logical fallacies this time around.

There are inaccuracies in the ballots. Misspelled names, incorrect addresses, invalid signatures etc...

Source?

That said, a ballot application literally had Jesus Christ on Heaven St.

Source?

PS it's approximately 4000 ballots.

Source? How many is worth being concerned about if 4000 is not? Why that many but not 4000?

And to pull a page out of @Johnnypenso's book, would you not be concerned by 4000 if it was the candidate for governor that you don't support overseeing voter registration? Would that not be a conflict of interest? Should they not step down from that position when running for governor? If not, why? What if it was you affected by this?

 

[ryzno]

Source? How many is worth being concerned about if 4000 is not? Why that many but not 4000?

And to pull a page out of @Johnnypenso's book, would you not be concerned by 4000 if it was the candidate for governor that you don't support overseeing voter registration? Would that not be a conflict of interest? Should they not step down from that position when running for governor? If not, why? What if it was you affected by this?

Kemps 30 minute interview last week on WSB radio, which is also the same TV that was going to show the Gubernatorial debate that no one could schedule.
He probably should've stepped down or temporarily turned over the position.
4000 out of 8 million, I don't see it as a problem, you wanna know why?
Everyone of the 4K who did a mail in still have 4 days to go to thier local voter registration office with a photo ID to resolve the situation.
It really isn't as big a deal as they are making it out to be. I would be happy if she was in the same position and did the same thing.
I also wouldn't have a problem going to the office to resolve my situation if it occurred. But I don't have to worry about that cause I always vote in person.
Mail in ballots are the easiest way to create voter fraud.
Which she was highly promoting during her campaign and conveniently used it as an argument.

 

[Rallywagon]

Hate to keep beating the dead horse but I am curious. Did Trump say that the press was the enemy, or just fake news?

 

[Sanji Himura]

I don’t know why it’s such a difficult concept.

If you are the president or the leader of a nation, you don’t get to have a ‘personal’ ‘non-work’ twitter account or anything that’s just ‘personal’ that’s publically posted to millions of people.

It’s not a riddle

So you think that @realDonaldTrump twitter handle should be seized by the government AFTER his term is done then or should Donald Trump be allowed to continue to use it as his account. If you answer one way, then Donald Trump is a Persona Non Grata when his term expires. If you answer the other, then you just proved me right.

 

[Sanji Himura]

Hate to keep beating the dead horse but I am curious. Did Trump say that the press was the enemy, or just fake news?

Full quote, if his twitter is to be believed:

The FAKE NEWS media is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American People.

 

[Biggles]

Lemme guess...different?

I'm starting to think that you must have missed the "These Things Are Different" episode of Sesame Street way back & have been struggling with the concept ever since.

With regard to Lincoln - it was a long time ago &, most importantly, the circumstances were quite extraordinary. Literally the survival of the United States was in question - quite different from anything encountered by a US President in the last half century. Really not worth discussing any further.

With regard to twitter - I have no idea. I'm not a twitter user, so it seems a relatively insignificant issue to me.

This is the original, exact Trump quote (which he has repeated in many forms since):

The FAKE NEWS media (failing @nytimes, @NBCNews, @ABC, @CBS, @CNN) is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American People!

 

[TexRex]

I'm starting to think that you must have missed the "These Things Are Different" episode of Sesame Street way back & have been struggling with the concept ever since.

Totally!

With regard to twitter - I have no idea. I'm not a twitter user, so it seems a relatively insignificant issue to me.

I'm in a very similar boat, as someone who isn't on Twitter, but I don't feel anyone should be permitted to actively prohibit another from replying directly to their comments. The notion that a sitting president would do such a thing is particularly heinous, especially when he uses it as a platform from which to address the public.

Want to not be able to see how someone replies to your comment? Fine. That actually fits his legal counsel's analogy of "walking away from a press conference" in the matter that resulted in him having to unblock users, because in that analogy, press conference attendees can still remark once he's no longer there to witness it. Blocking users, however, is very different.

 

[Novalee]

Cheerleader take a knee .

http://huffp.st/mrYu4qG


A cheerleader for the San Francisco 49ers kneeled during the national anthem on Thursday during a game against the Oakland Raiders at Levi’s Stadium in San Francisco.

Will the Trump supporters now boycott women ?

 

[Tornado]

Actually, she'll probably just be fired.

 

[Novalee]

Exercising your first is reason to dismiss ? Interesting .

 

[McLaren]

Exercising your first is reason to dismiss ? Interesting .

Freedom of speech isn't protected from a private organization....

 

[baldgye]

So you think that @realDonaldTrump twitter handle should be seized by the government AFTER his term is done then or should Donald Trump be allowed to continue to use it as his account. If you answer one way, then Donald Trump is a Persona Non Grata when his term expires. If you answer the other, then you just proved me right.

You really are struggling with this one aren’t you...

Ok let’s work this out, together. Why do you think Obama kept his personal twitter account, after he stopped being president?

 

[Tornado]

If assholes like Milo can be chased off of YouTube and Twitter without it being a free speech issue (which it isn't, as people are so quick to point out when alt right people throw a fit), the 49ers (the first team to decide they didn't want to put up with Kaepernick) can most likely fire cheerleaders for doing things other than cheerleading while "on duty." I assume 49ers cheerleaders don't have a national union to force the 49ers to put up with it like the actual players do.



That's assuming they don't just fire the whole team like Buffalo did in 2014.

 

[PocketZeven]

Hate to keep beating the dead horse but I am curious. Did Trump say that the press was the enemy, or just fake news?

Perhaps this interview will open your eyes on the point of how claiming “enemy of the people” is a problem from the point of view of someone conservative. Fox News Chris Wallace on that subject on Stephen Colbert:

Kemps 30 minute interview last week on WSB radio, which is also the same TV that was going to show the Gubernatorial debate that no one could schedule.
He probably should've stepped down or temporarily turned over the position.
4000 out of 8 million, I don't see it as a problem, you wanna know why?
Everyone of the 4K who did a mail in still have 4 days to go to thier local voter registration office with a photo ID to resolve the situation.
It really isn't as big a deal as they are making it out to be. I would be happy if she was in the same position and did the same thing.
I also wouldn't have a problem going to the office to resolve my situation if it occurred. But I don't have to worry about that cause I always vote in person.
Mail in ballots are the easiest way to create voter fraud.
Which she was highly promoting during her campaign and conveniently used it as an argument.

You do understand kemp himself is an unreliable source. The number that has been reported widely is around 50.000 and not 4000. Big difference.

https://www.politifact.com/georgia/...as-exact-match-law-and-its-impact-voters-gov/

There are reports of about 340.000 votes purged. All apparently legal though.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/oct/19/georgia-governor-race-voter-suppression-brian-kemp

 

[ryzno]

Perhaps this interview will open your eyes on the point of how claiming “enemy of the people” is a problem from the point of view of someone conservative. Fox News Chris Wallace on that subject on Stephen Colbert:





You do understand kemp himself is an unreliable source. The number that has been reported widely is around 50.000 and not 4000. Big difference.

https://www.politifact.com/georgia/...as-exact-match-law-and-its-impact-voters-gov/

There are reports of about 340.000 votes purged. All apparently legal though.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/oct/19/georgia-governor-race-voter-suppression-brian-kemp

Yep and a Judge said he/they couldn't do that, so.

 

[Joey D]

Freedom of speech isn't protected from a private organization....

I really wish more people, from both sides of the political spectrum, understood this.

 

[Rallywagon]

Perhaps this interview will open your eyes on the point of how claiming “enemy of the people” is a problem from the point of view of someone conservative. Fox News Chris Wallace on that subject on Stephen Colbert:





You do understand kemp himself is an unreliable source. The number that has been reported widely is around 50.000 and not 4000. Big difference.

https://www.politifact.com/georgia/...as-exact-match-law-and-its-impact-voters-gov/

There are reports of about 340.000 votes purged. All apparently legal though.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/oct/19/georgia-governor-race-voter-suppression-brian-kemp

Perhaps you could just answer the question instead of posting two other peoples opinions... Does Trump say that the media is the enemy, or fake news?

 

[PocketZeven]

Perhaps you could just answer the question instead of posting two other peoples opinions... Does Trump say that the media is the enemy, or fake news?

Both. I thought that fact was already established.



He is backtracking on his claims lately. But keep in mind he calls CNN, CBS, ABC NBCnews as being fakenews. So in his logic.CNN,CBS,NBC,ABC=fakenews=enemy of the people



Ironically he is the one spreading fake news and the media are trying to call him out on it.

Just a few lies of the past few weeks (all on camera or tweets):
- stockmarket opened day after 9/11
- the democrats are inviting the caravan to sign them up for benefits
- democrats oppose any effort to secure the border
- Usa is only country in the world with birthright nationality
- An executive order can overrule an amendment
- promised a plan for a 10% tax cut for the middle class before the end of november and voted on after midterm
- he"always wants to tell the truth"
etc.

edit: added tweets

 

[mustafur]

Perhaps you could just answer the question instead of posting two other peoples opinions... Does Trump say that the media is the enemy, or fake news?

NPC's don't have opinions.

 

[PocketZeven]

he just tweeted this:


And for the record his biggest lie in front of the biggest inaugaration crowd ever (period!):
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

He signed an executive order change the 14th amendment of the constitution:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

 

[Joey D]

And for the record his biggest lie in front of the biggest inaugaration crowd ever (period!):
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

He signed an executive order change the 14th amendment of the constitution:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

It'll never stand up in court. The President doesn't have the legal authority to change the Constitution by Executive Order.

But really Trump is no different than his predecessors in that regard. Most violate something in the Constitution, which is a bit sad. The leader of the country should have a firm grasp on the document that outlines how the country should be run.

 

[TexRex]

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States...

Oh but he did, and he's been dancing on the corpse ever since.

 

[huskeR32]

Source?

Kemps 30 minute interview last week on WSB radio