America - The Official Thread

[Dotini]

You mean BS story after BS story? Just accept defeat. America is nowhere near as bad as it's made it out to be. I'm honestly tired of it and the new damn "Democratic Socialist" party.

Enjoy yourself, friend, for the Great Game is afoot! The left wing of the Democrat Party is playing a desperate game of high stakes, for should they fail in impeaching, convicting and removing the dreaded Trump from office, they will almost certainly receive a vicious retribution from within their own party and from the people at the polls in the 2020 election. The Mueller Gambit has collapsed, now they are trying the Ukrainian Gambit and this will shortly backfire as well, starting with drowning Biden in a cesspool of corruption. As off-the-wall as Trump is, at present there is NO WAY Republican Senators are going to vote against him. Impeachment is not a legal process, it is a political process.
@Eunos_Cosmo
Judicial appointments x 5.

 

[ryzno]

Can you really not see that there's something seriously wrong with Trump?

Besides being road blocked at every little thing he tries to do, no.

There's a long history of comments that attack his perceived opponents

I'd do the same after being called what he was called by his opponents.

 

[TexRex]

Y'know...I respect one's right to be ignorant if that's what they decide, but I'm under no obligation to respect the decision. It's sad.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

Besides being road blocked at every little thing he tries to do, no.
I'd do the same after being called what he was called by his opponents.

Is Trump the perfect embodiment of a leader?

I challenge you to read this article and honestly consider how many of the attributes listed apply to Donald Trump. Try your best to resist "what about Obama". Keep in mind this article was written in 2012, long before Trump became a central figure in American politics.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/spycatcher/201208/dangerous-cult-leaders

 

[ryzno]

It's sad.

It is sad...That Americans hate their country cause of a President they don't like(I hated Obama not America), can't accept a legitimately voted President. Try to remove the electoral college(I'm waiting for a Dem to win from the electoral college and the Dems praise it!) Cheer when politicians say they want to give more benefits to illegal aliens than the citizens that pay their salaries... I can go on...

Is Trump the perfect embodiment of a leader?

No. Same could be said for a lot of world leaders and American local politicians. We have a few here(GA) I'd love to vote against but sadly I'm not in their districts.

 

[Dennisch]

the laughing stock of the world

I'll burst this bubble, but it has been that way since at least Clinton with his shenanigans. Trump just has the benefit of social media to make himself heard even more. And quicker.

 

[Biggles]

Besides being road blocked at every little thing he tries to do, no.
I'd do the same after being called what he was called by his opponents.

You do realize that Trump started calling his Republican rivals childish names long before he became President?

. Try to remove the electoral college(I'm waiting for a Dem to win from the electoral college and the Dems praise it!)

The electoral college is a ridiculous institution regardless of who benefits from it. It renders Republican voters in Democratic states voiceless & vice versa. There's no reasonable justification for not having a universal popular vote for the office of President.

I wish both the Democrats and Republicans would wake up and see this. Trump is dangerous because he clearly has no idea what he's doing and won't listen to anyone. And as much as I don't like Pence, he's at least a politician and can presumably act like one.

And no, Democratic Socialism isn't the answer. Putting someone in charge who doesn't act like a child and spends all their time on Twitter is though.

This is the point: Trump is completely out of his depth. Many comparisons have been made to Hitler & Mussolini. I recent finished reading a book about Henry VIII & it struck me how much Trump is like Henry VIII. A man with a grotesquely inflated self-regard combined with a strangely fragile ego. Henry screwed up practically everything he touched, while his advisors desperately tried to contain the damage while keeping their heads on their shoulders.

Unlike Henry, Trump is not an absolute monarch - there are supposed to be checks & balances in the American system, but the GOP has gone AWOL in this respect. I don't favour impeachment, because I believe the American people need to get rid of Trump through voting, not through political maneuvering. However, that does depend on how far off the rails Trump goes. And as I wrote: it's starting to look more & more like there is something seriously wrong with Donald J. Trump.

 

[Dotini]

You do realize that Trump started calling his Republican rivals childish names long before he became President?



The electoral college is a ridiculous institution regardless of who benefits from it. It renders Republican voters in Democratic states voiceless & vice versa. There's no reasonable justification for not having a universal popular vote for the office of President.



This is the point: Trump is completely out of his depth. Many comparisons have been made to Hitler & Mussolini. I recent finished reading a book about Henry VIII & it struck me how much Trump is like Henry VIII. A man with a grotesquely inflated self-regard combined with a strangely fragile ego. Henry screwed up practically everything he touched, while his advisors desperately tried to contain the damage while keeping their heads on their shoulders.

Unlike Henry, Trump is not an absolute monarch - there are supposed to be checks & balances in the American system, but the GOP has gone AWOL in this respect. I don't favour impeachment, because I believe the American people need to get rid of Trump through voting, not through political maneuvering. However, that does depend on how far off the rails Trump goes. And as I wrote: it's starting to look more & more like there is something seriously wrong with Donald J. Trump.

Trump is like a core of madly fissioning Uranium, hissing, spitting and tweeting nonsense while endlessly appointing an infinity of conservatives judges and justices. As long as the Senate keeps this wonderful gift box of toxic magic working the way it does, nothing changes.

 

[TexRex]

That Americans hate their country cause of a President they don't like

Traitorous critic fallacy. It's possible to love one's country while criticizing aspects of which one disapproves.

(I hated Obama not America)

"No you hated America because you hated the president."

See how stupid that looks?

can't accept a legitimately voted President

Birthers. Argument invalidated with a single word.

(I'm waiting for a Dem to win from the electoral college and the Dems praise it!)

Counterfactual. The only sample sets we have are for elections in which the Dems lost to the Pubes* (save for the first instance of an Electoral College win negating a popular vote loss, when all four candidates represented the same Democratic-Republican Party--which would later be known as the Republican Party) by way of the Electoral College.

There is no equal and opposite scenario to observe, and there frankly isn't likely to be one short of an itself extremely unlikely series of events that leads to the political map being reversed without populations also being reversed.

*"Reps" is too easily mistaken for Representatives and "Repubs" doesn't exactly roll off the tongue. "Pubes" is the logical abbreviation and so it shall henceforth be.

Cheer when politicians say they want to give more benefits to illegal aliens than the citizens that pay their salaries...

Citation needed.

Trump is like a core of madly fissioning Uranium, hissing, spitting and tweeting nonsense while endlessly appointing an infinity of conservatives judges and justices. As long as the Senate keeps this wonderful gift box of toxic magic working the way it does, nothing changes.

Folderol.

Wait, no...

...

Trumpery!

Yes, that works nicely. How I managed to not use it up until now is beyond me, but I'm glad for it.

 

[GranTurNismo]

It is sad...That Americans hate their country cause of a President they don't like(I hated Obama not America), can't accept a legitimately voted President. Try to remove the electoral college(I'm waiting for a Dem to win from the electoral college and the Dems praise it!) Cheer when politicians say they want to give more benefits to illegal aliens than the citizens that pay their salaries... I can go on...

No. Same could be said for a lot of world leaders and American local politicians. We have a few here(GA) I'd love to vote against but sadly I'm not in their districts.

I hate Trump but I don't hate America. Though I do hate what this nation was founded on, I love America because at heart, it is a society where everyone is granted an opportunity and just being American is a privilege in itself.

But I'm tired of the stale old "logic" used by conservatives, that all these leftists who are against trump and conservative policies in general "hate America". We don't hate America; if we did, we would either leave, or attempt to deconstruct it. We simply have a much different vision for what makes America successful, and this does not include a border wall, tax breaks for the rich, and giving billions and billions of dollars to Israel. Leftists have opposed the electoral college long before it got us Trump, as it is an outdated system which is not democratic at heart nor does it fairly represent everyone.

I'm not even going to entertain an argument from someone who refers to people as "illegal aliens". Because dehumanizing people is a way to get your point across to only the ignorant and uneducated.

And it seems you conveniently avoided Cosmo's question, which was a fair and necessary question to ask. Likely because most of the time, Trump supporters when asked this question either don't even know, or state really vague "accomplishments" such as "helping the economy" or "making America win" and whatnot.

 

[Dotini]

you conveniently avoided Cosmo's question, which was a fair and necessary question to ask. Likely because most of the time, Trump supporters when asked this question either don't even know, or state really vague "accomplishments" such as "helping the economy" or "making America win" and whatnot.

Boiled down, Presidents have only 3 responsibilities, and 3 things to accomplish - not 5.
They are: Peace, Prosperity, and the appointment of judges which determine the law of the land.

 

[GranTurNismo]

Boiled down, Presidents have only 3 responsibilities, and 3 things to accomplish - not 5.
They are: Peace, Prosperity, and the appointment of judges which determine the law of the land.

Interesting way to look at it.

 

[BobK]

I'm not even going to entertain an argument from someone who refers to people as "illegal aliens". Because dehumanizing people is a way to get your point across to only the ignorant and uneducated.

Why do you consider referring to "illegal aliens" as dehumanizing? You have to be human to do something illegal, and you have to be human to be an alien (in that context; we're not talking about aliens from outer space).

 

[GranTurNismo]

Why do you consider referring to "illegal aliens" as dehumanizing? You have to be human to do something illegal, and you have to be human to be an alien (in that context; we're not talking about aliens from outer space).

Because it reduces someone who's in America without citizenship, usually just looking for a better life, as "illegal" and an "alien". "Illegal" suggests their are bad and have ill-intentions, and "alien" is foreign and non-human. Either way, it's dehumanizing. The right has latched on to the term "illegal alien" to refer to Hispanics in America without citizenship, and the term is usually used to support something that has racist intentions.

 

[BobK]

Because it reduces someone who's in America without citizenship, usually just looking for a better life, as "illegal" and an "alien". "Illegal" suggests their are bad and have ill-intentions, and "alien" is foreign and non-human. Either way, it's dehumanizing. The right has latched on to the term "illegal alien" to refer to Hispanics in America without citizenship, and the term is usually used to support something that has racist intentions.

Are they here illegally?

Alien does not suggest non-human, unless you're talking science fiction etc. A synonym in context would be "foreigner".

 

[Exorcet]

Because it reduces someone who's in America without citizenship, usually just looking for a better life, as "illegal" and an "alien".

I'm not one to harp on about illegal immigration, but what you point out isn't a bad thing. It's merely descriptive, when accurate.

"Illegal" suggests their are bad and have ill-intentions,

All it suggests is that they've entered the country illegally.

"alien" is foreign and non-human.

"Alien" isn't non-human. You're conflating separate definitions of a word.

The right has latched on to the term "illegal alien" to refer to Hispanics in America without citizenship, and the term is usually used to support something that has racist intentions.

Would any term be safe from that? If they were referred to as something else wouldn't the process repeat? The people who dislike illegal aliens don't dislike them because of the name, it's because they have certain ideas, be they factual or not, about immigrants and immigration.

 

[Dotini]

The people who dislike illegal aliens don't dislike them because of the name, it's because they have certain ideas, be they factual or not, about immigrants and immigration.

I'm not sure this is entirely correct. I think most people who are not in favor of illegal immigration is because of the burden it places upon hard pressed citizen/taxpayers.

 

[Eunos_Cosmo]

I'm not one to harp on about illegal immigration, but what you point out isn't a bad thing. It's merely descriptive, when accurate.


All it suggests is that they've entered the country illegally.


"Alien" isn't non-human. You're conflating separate definitions of a word.


Would any term be safe from that? If they were referred to as something else wouldn't the process repeat? The people who dislike illegal aliens don't dislike them because of the name, it's because they have certain ideas, be they factual or not, about immigrants and immigration.

I think the idea is that describing a person as "illegal" effectively removes their humanity (that is to say, you tend not to think of them as people anymore, an effective tool for some) and replaces with it with a walking & breathing embodiment of crime and fear - "invasion of illegals" and the like. It's ripe for abuse, and effective.

However, I agree with your last point. "Without papers" was a pretty innocuous way to refer to a person (quite similar to "undocumented immigrant", though a little more crude) and that ended up becoming a full on racial slur. If undocumented immigrant does become the de-facto term, then I can even imagine it being shortened to "undoc" or "undocs" and being just as slurry. So, in the end, I don't think it matters that much. From the undocumented immigrants I've known (they technically are dreamers, but I knew them before that was on the books), what people call them is not one of their top concerns. (Both of them now have masters degrees, for the record)

For all this "burden" language that gets tossed around regarding tax payers and undocumented immigrants, I don't really see it. How much does it really cost a typical tax payer? I've lived in several communities I believe had fairly substantial populations of undocumented immigrants - I've never felt anything resembling burden. Where is the burden? Benefits paid out to these people must be extraordinarily small. Proportionally compared to military spending, it has to be something like 1/10th of a percent. And that's not even considering that these people often do pay taxes. I mean, they certainly pay some amount of sales tax right?

 

[GranTurNismo]

I think the idea is that describing a person as "illegal" effectively removes their humanity (that is to say, you tend not to think of them as people anymore, an effective tool for some) and replaces with it with a walking & breathing embodiment of crime and fear - "invasion of illegals" and the like. It's ripe for abuse, and effective.

Well said, that's exactly what I was trying to convey.

 

[Exorcet]

I'm not sure this is entirely correct. I think most people who are not in favor of illegal immigration is because of the burden it places upon hard pressed citizen/taxpayers.

This one be one of the ideas on immigration that those opposed could maintain. If immigration is a burden, they won't want to support it.

I think the idea is that describing a person as "illegal" effectively removes their humanity (that is to say, you tend not to think of them as people anymore, an effective tool for some) and replaces with it with a walking & breathing embodiment of crime and fear - "invasion of illegals" and the like. It's ripe for abuse, and effective.

I have no doubt that such a thing is possible. It's happening now I'm sure. It's a terrible way of looking at things though, even outside of the immigration discussion. Doing something illegal doesn't equate to doing something wrong. The law can be wrong instead. It's as valid to question the law as it is to question the accused. I'd prefer trying to get people to consider that concept rather than creating new terms that will most likely degrade with time. I guess if the words used to describe something can influence perception then careful naming is a valid method of tackling an issue, but I don't think it actually gets to the core of the problem.

 

[Milouse]

Is Trump the perfect embodiment of a leader?

I challenge you to read this article and honestly consider how many of the attributes listed apply to Donald Trump. Try your best to resist "what about Obama". Keep in mind this article was written in 2012, long before Trump became a central figure in American politics.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/spycatcher/201208/dangerous-cult-leaders

Starting to read your post, i was sure you were going to link to that

The golf sequences are my favorites.

Edit: oh, with a bonus video i didn't see before

 

[mustafur]

Ladies and gentlemen the most popular Cable TV channel in America, Fox News.

 

[NotThePrez]

^ The second they called Michelle "The Merchant of Death" I instantly tuned out....

...And then I started it again, and almost instantly tuned out when the one pundit suggested that she needed to lose some weight. That genuinely infuriated me, and the fact that so many Americans take that nonsense as gospel infuriates me further.

 

[TexRex]

That's a riot. I particularly enjoy the bit at the end: "The glaring double standard that exists here is nothing short of incredible."

 

[ryzno]

*"Reps" is too easily mistaken for Representatives and "Repubs" doesn't exactly roll off the tongue. "Pubes" is the logical abbreviation and so it shall henceforth be.

How mature of you.

Citation needed.

Did you watch the debates?

 

[Rallywagon]

How mature of you.

I mean, I see lots of similarities myself....

 

[TexRex]

How mature of you.

What? Do you think you should be permitted to use monosyllabic abbreviations and I shouldn't? How Republican of you. Or is there something wrong with the abbreviation I've chosen? I briefly considered "Pubs", but it occurred to me I might catch flack from religious zealots on the right with a puritanical bent, who would prefer to not be associated with establishments in which patrons partake of alcoholic beverages...and I just don't need that kind of drama in my life.

Did you watch the debates?

I mean...I was able to catch parts of a couple, but the format made it quite difficult to tune in and not zone out. I don't recall a single politician proposing during the debates that immigrants--regardless of their status--receive more benefits than anyone else. Further, I don't recall subsequent cheers.

Still, "Did you watch..." does not a citation make. If you're going to say that something happened, the responsibility is yours to provide proof that it did, and your frequent "my opinion" copout simply does not satisfy in such a case. Without proof, the accusation is nothing more than drummed-up garbage not worthy of consideration.

 

[PocketZeven]

How mature of you.

Did you watch the debates?

I hope you at least see the ethical violations surrounding , paying of extramarital affairs (wife was pregnant), the obstruction of justice, accepting Russian meddling (officially not “collusion”), tax evasion, self enrichment and now the whistleblower. It really doesn’t matter if it was Obama, Biden, Clinton, Bush, McConnell or whoever. This isn’t partisan, it’s corrupt behavior by a sitting president. No modern president has behaved this way in this magnitude.

 

[Dotini]

I hope you at least see the ethical violations surrounding , paying of extramarital affairs (wife was pregnant), the obstruction of justice, accepting Russian meddling (officially not “collusion”), tax evasion, self enrichment and now the whistleblower. It really doesn’t matter if it was Obama, Biden, Clinton, Bush, McConnell or whoever. This isn’t partisan, it’s corrupt behavior by a sitting president. No modern president has behaved this way in this magnitude.

Kennedy was arguably a worse person, doing things so bad he got his head blown off for it, and the CIA just snickered. Nixon was only a 2nd rate burglar, not a serious crime, and yet he resigned as conviction for impeachment was a certainty. The point is, this impeachment process has nothing whatever to do with laws, ethics or justice. It is a political matter.

 

[NotThePrez]

Kennedy was arguably a worse person, doing things so bad he got his head blown off for it, and the CIA just snickered. Nixon was only a 2nd rate burglar, not a serious crime, and yet he resigned as conviction for impeachment was a certainty. The point is, this impeachment process has nothing whatever to do with laws, ethics or justice. It is a political matter.

The president withheld previously agreed-upon foreign aid in order to get dirt on a political opponent.

I'd definitely say that that's at minimum a sure fire ethical conflict.

And in Nixon's case, burglary is still a crime, regardless of how severe it may or may not be. Let's also not forget that another portion of Watergate included illegally wiretapping the DNC, among other things.