National Politics Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Read between the lines:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_Hedge

It's a russian propaganda outlet just like RT and sputnik.

On leaving, Lokey said: "I can't be a 24-hour cheerleader for Hezbollah, Moscow, Tehran, Beijing, and Trump anymore. It's wrong. Period. I know it gets you views now, but it will kill your brand over the long run. This isn't a revolution. It's a joke."[1]
Click to expand...

Dr. Craig Pirrong, professor at the Bauer College of Business writes that "I have frequently written that Zero Hedge has the MO of a Soviet agitprop operation, that it reliably peddles Russian propaganda: my first post on this, almost exactly three years ago, noted the parallels between Zero Hedge and Russia Today."[18][19]
Click to expand...
 
This whole thing with Lewis was a brilliant stunt to tear this country apart.

Keeping the accelerator to the floor, it just might work.

They know Trump will take the bait. Well played.

The Dems are just driving more people away.

And the Deplorables are driving more people away.

Won't be big trouble ahead.

No dead people.

we know that never happens.

Steve Harvey is also an Uncle Tom now.

Negro's being accused of being dragged up in front of the camera for propaganda.

Dems screaming at Trump for bringing actors to come to play in the sandbox,

We all know Dems never do that. Never talk to movie stars.

Trump couldn't possibly have done it to calm the divide or bring people together.

He is Hitler after all.
 
odurandina said:
This whole thing with Lewis was a brilliant stunt to tear this country apart.

Keeping the accelerator to the floor, it just might work.

They know Trump will take the bait. Well played.

The Dems are just driving more people away.

And the Deplorables are driving more people away.

Won't be big trouble ahead.

No dead people.

we know that never happens.

Steve Harvey is also an Uncle Tom now.

Negro's being accused of being dragged up in front of the camera for propaganda.

Dems screaming at Trump for bringing actors to come to play in the sandbox,

We all know Dems never do that. Never talk to movie stars.

Trump couldn't possibly have done it to calm the divide or bring people together.

He is Hitler after all.
Click to expand...

Trump would never last long as a fish because he always takes the bait. badumpbump.

But as much as I loathe our new president elect, I wish the Dems would just go to the damn inauguration - if not for the new president, for the Presidency. Despite the deplorable individual who will occupy the position on Friday, I still respect the position.
 
I guess everything is a fake news site but CNN/Fox/MSNBC which has a balanced outlook on the world and only reports the truth.

Jouhu---You are delusional.
 
TheRifleman said:
I guess everything is a fake news site but CNN/Fox/MSNBC which has a balanced outlook on the world and only reports the truth.

Jouhu---You are delusional.
Click to expand...

I read international news, bub. I think you need to learn the definition of delusional, if you can't accept that russia freely exploits our press freedoms by indirectly funding your favorite media outlets.
 
I find it interesting that those who supports Trump on this forum are the ones who tends to take the most extreme positions, even in regards to skyscrapers. It makes sense that they would take the candidate with the most extreme views.
 
So, as soon as we challenge your sources you try telling us we're the brainwashed ones? As if that was not more far fetched than the easily provable russian meddling?
 
Justin7 said:
I'm not sure applies when someone else received more votes.
Click to expand...

...other than the fact that we the Americans created this dumb electoral college system in the first place, and we'll never be able to repeal it because our gerrymandered national political system itself assures congress will never have the votes it needs to redesign the system! Local self interests Trump the good of the many, time and again...apparently it's what our country was founded on.
 
bigpicture7 said:
...other than the fact that we the Americans created this dumb electoral college system in the first place, and we'll never be able to repeal it because our gerrymandered national political system itself assures congress will never have the votes it needs to redesign the system! Local self interests Trump the good of the many, time and again...apparently it's what our country was founded on.
Click to expand...

I don't particularly dislike the electoral college system. It does make some sense in the fact that it wants to ensure those that are in less populated area do have a voice.

Let's give an extreme example. Let's say California make ups 51% of the country's population and let's say one of the candidate running is running on the platform that, if voted president, he/she will give California residents a 50% decrease in tax while the rest of the country gets a 50% increase in tax to make up the difference. If everyone in California votes for that candidate, that candidate will win the popular vote despite the fact that every other states will suffer.

The electoral college exists to prevent something like that from happening where the benefit goes to one region (or one class, market segment, etc.) I think the electoral college system is good to have BUT I think the allocation to each state should be changed a bit so that it is a bit more fair but not to the point that the less populated region lose their voice entirely.
 
odurandina said:
This whole thing with Lewis was a brilliant stunt to tear this country apart.

Keeping the accelerator to the floor, it just might work.

They know Trump will take the bait. Well played.

The Dems are just driving more people away.

And the Deplorables are driving more people away.

Won't be big trouble ahead.

No dead people.

we know that never happens.

Steve Harvey is also an Uncle Tom now.

Negro's being accused of being dragged up in front of the camera for propaganda.

Dems screaming at Trump for bringing actors to come to play in the sandbox,

We all know Dems never do that. Never talk to movie stars.

Trump couldn't possibly have done it to calm the divide or bring people together.

He is Hitler after all.
Click to expand...


Uncle Tom? negro? Really?
 
Last edited:
More corruption from Trump's cabinet picks. Tom Price making money by buying stocks of a medical manufacturing company and then introducing a bill to benefit the company (aka inside trading).

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-idUSKBN1510EZ

Remember how supporters said they voted for Trump because he would 'drain the swamp' and reduce corruption? That's a cover for them to try to justify their vote because obviously, they don't care if the government is corrupted and making money off their elected positions.

Hey Rifleman, you might want to wake up.
 
KentXie said:
I don't particularly dislike the electoral college system. It does make some sense in the fact that it wants to ensure those that are in less populated area do have a voice.

Let's give an extreme example. Let's say California make ups 51% of the country's population and let's say one of the candidate running is running on the platform that, if voted president, he/she will give California residents a 50% decrease in tax while the rest of the country gets a 50% increase in tax to make up the difference. If everyone in California votes for that candidate, that candidate will win the popular vote despite the fact that every other states will suffer.

The electoral college exists to prevent something like that from happening where the benefit goes to one region (or one class, market segment, etc.) I think the electoral college system is good to have BUT I think the allocation to each state should be changed a bit so that it is a bit more fair but not to the point that the less populated region lose their voice entirely.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with your expression of the intent of the system, but it will always be held hostage by whatever interest groups/party is supported by its outcomes at any given point in time. That's not the way it's supposed to work. No matter how far out of whack the popular consensus gets with respect to the national election outcome, the party that serves to lose out will never concede that system should be redrawn. The devil's in the details of a system like this, and since the system is so fragile to the details, it would conceivably need to be recalibrated every few years...but who is ever going to agree on how to do that?
 
bigpicture7 said:
I totally agree with your expression of the intent of the system, but it will always be held hostage by whatever interest groups/party is supported by its outcomes at any given point in time. That's not the way it's supposed to work. No matter how far out of whack the popular consensus gets with respect to the national election outcome, the party that serves to lose out will never concede that system should be redrawn. The devil's in the details of a system like this, and since the system is so fragile to the details, it would conceivably need to be recalibrated every few years...but who is ever going to agree on how to do that?
Click to expand...

I understand but we can't say for sure that the popular vote won't be held hostage by interest groups/party as well. Both system can be abused. A candidate can run on a platform that provides only benefits to those who live in cities and suburban areas, for example, more healthcare and education funding in urban areas. Most likely, this candidate would win the popular vote, leaving rural areas underfunded. And this scenario isn't exactly too impossible to happen. I agree, there's no easy way to fix this problem and changing it to popular vote won't solve it.
 
I kind of imagine most Trump supporters to be like flailing drowning victims off of the Titanic. They're just smart enough to know that they're probably screwed either way but instead of attempting to swim to a lifeboat they try to reboard the sinking ship since for the moment it's warm and dry.
 
KentXie said:
I understand but we can't say for sure that the popular vote won't be held hostage by interest groups/party as well. Both system can be abused. A candidate can run on a platform that provides only benefits to those who live in cities and suburban areas, for example, more healthcare and education funding in urban areas. Most likely, this candidate would win the popular vote, leaving rural areas underfunded. And this scenario isn't exactly too impossible to happen. I agree, there's no easy way to fix this problem and changing it to popular vote won't solve it.
Click to expand...

I totally agree, and I am not saying we should switch to pure popular vote. But what I am saying is that we currently can't expect any change to the system because of purely partisan, rather than rational, reasons...

Also, don't forget that our multi-branch approach to government / multi-house congress (Connecticut compromise, etc) is supposed to help deal with local representation issues. Neither executive nor legislative branches are supposed to have absolute power, and local representatives are supposed to help balance things...

So I am not sure how wayy-off-track it would be to elect a president by popular vote if such a system of checks and balances worked well. What we have instead is a system that's not very balanced - locals control the executive and houses despite substantial popular shortfall
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top