Happy Atheist Forum

General => Politics => Topic started by: Asmodean on July 17, 2017, 03:42:47 PM

Title: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Asmodean on July 17, 2017, 03:42:47 PM
In my re-entry post, I may have mentioned something that raised an eyebrow or two, namely that as it stands today, I consider my indirect opposition to Donald Trump's candidacy and subsequent succession to presidency to have been... Misplaced. As promised, I shall now discuss my reasons for thinking that.

It all began with a choice. A choice Americans had to make. A choice between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. As many, I thought, and still do think, that Hillary would have made a far more competent president, one who would do better by the American public. I didn't really care about the whole email bullshit any more than I did about Trump's pussy-grabbing ways. I still don't. To me, a leader of a nation is not a role model or favorite uncle. I want my leaders to be able to make choices I couldn't when those choices, however distasteful I may find them, serve my long-term interests. So if I would not condemn my leader ordering someone's death or sending my friends to war in a country I would struggle to point to on a map, how could I then be outraged at some bullshit proper-etiquette issue? Well, I could, but I do try not to be a total hypocrite about such things.

But I'm getting sidetracked here.

I did not think Trump would be a good leader for me (And do please note that I represent foreign interests here - I do not stand to suffer from the ruination of an already shaky healthcare system or get coal miner's lung or suddenly have a solar-powered wall cross my land) I did not think he would be good for me because I thought that, with a Republican majority, he would be... Effective.

Thus far, he has been anything but on the world stage. From my side of the pond, most of what the White House seems to do these days is react to various scandals surrounding the current administration. Those being of a mostly internal nature, (And I do consider Russia allegedly influencing the outcome of the election to be such an issue, at least until some sort of reaction actually materializes) they do not serve to destabilize the world any more than it does all by itself. US troops still bomb a country or two, US stock still churns out profit - or loss, if you don't see the signs, The Wall™ seems to be 25% winged wishes, 30% bullshit and 45% financial nightmare and... That's about it.

Trump is widely seen as a spray-tanned joke, but I think the fears of those who contemplated the isolationist nature of some of his statements and the effects his policies would have on the global arena are gradually proving to be unfounded.

So how is any of that good, you may rightly ask. Pretty much nothing I said is particularly flattering. That is certainly true. However, I think Hillary would have tried much harder to be a player on the world stage, and her being Hillary, I don't think I would have approved of her leading the "Free world" nearly as much as I would have approved of her leading the United States. Trump... He just doesn't lead the "Free world." At least, not yet. And while I sympathize with those affected in the worst possible ways by his actions or the lack thereof... It's been half a year, and we're doing OK. Islamic terrorists still want to blow us up because our backs are less hairy than theirs... Or some such, The UK is still leaving the European Union, China still sells crap for cheap, although they are becoming good at making nice stuff for expensive at an alarming rate. Kim the Third-or-whatever is still building ICBMs... The wars are all in the usual places... Business as usual "across the board."

And... That there is pretty much it. By being as passive/ineffective/insert-your-adjective on the world stage as he is, right here and now, he's not making worse that, which I care enough about to... well, care.

I'd be happy to discuss what I, as an outsider, think of his domestic policies, successes and failures if any one is interested in having that conversation, but that one will, as implied, have a completely different tone.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Icarus on July 19, 2017, 10:27:14 PM
Pleased to have input from an individual with a sense of perspective even though he is determined to do away with Luxembourg.   

In my mind we have elected a president who is conspicuously unqualified for the job that he was appointed to do.  That is our problem that we cannot immediately undo. We dug ourselves into this hole because too few of us, prior to the election, bothered to filter through the bullshit that both parties were selling. 

It should have been perfectly obvious that The Donald is a snake oil salesman who is extremely reckless with the truth.  He promised a whole basket of things that neither he, nor his party, could realistically deliver. Some of us were aware of that simple reality.  Unfortunately not enough of us were paying attention.

I believe that one of the several reasons that Trump won was the deep, and completely unfounded and widely subscribed dislike of Obama. An enormous number of people believed that Obama was/is a Muslim communist hell bent on destroying our country.  Hillary was guilty by association in the minds of much of that ill informed electorate.  The E-mail thing hurt her badly even though the influence of her indiscretion has yet to be discovered as harmful. 

The Trumpites were frequently behaving with a mob mentality, incited and encouraged my Mr. Trump and his acolytes.....Lock her up, lock her up,.... etc.  That kind of mob behavior was contagious. Nice people in Iowa and good Christians in Kansas bought into the notion that Hillary was the spawn of the devil. The fact that she is a female also cost her some votes, male chauvinism being what it is. I am still having a problem with the knowledge that so many of my fellow Americans are either unbelievably gullible and/or as dumb as a basket of rocks

So much for a partial post mortem......the prime question is; where do we go from here??  Suggestions anyone??

Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Arturo on July 20, 2017, 12:03:25 AM
I think the trumpettes were compelled by his openly racist views and actions. He hated anyone from any race and gave his reasons why. This related to people on a deep level and they didn't let go. Even now in the mist of the Trump Jr thing they cling to their papa as if he were their god incarnate.

I think they are willing to throw out any and all morals as long as they win. Lies? Ok, he is just misunderstood actually. Cheats? Sure, he is just being smart. Steals? Why not, the other people are evil. Helping communist countries despite us being openly anti-communism? Haha, we like being poor and abused!

At this point I am emotionally invested and reactive. I don't have a good answer to where we should go from here.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Tom62 on July 20, 2017, 06:47:41 AM
I agree for most parts with the Asmo from a foreign policies perspective. Obama screwed up enormously in the Middle East with the help of the highly aggressive Hillary Clinton and the extremely weak John Kerry. Supporting Jihad groups in Libya and Syria to remove dictators, but instead generating huge clusterfucks. Granted, Obama's predecessor didn't do much better. Invading countries without having an exit strategy is pretty dumb.

Hillary Clinton is a scruples hawk, who's policies goes wherever the wind blows. Now it is all about gender equality, feminism and Muslim hugging. How to solve terrorism? Answer: we should get to know the terrorists better and eat their food. She would support the corrupt Ukraine regime and established a no-fly zone in Syria, thus  causing severe problems with the Russians. She'd also invite thousands of unvetted migrants in the USA from countries that hate the USA. Lesson learned in Europe: you better don't do that unless you want no-go zones, more sexual assaults, crimes and terrorist attacks. No wonder that many people voted for Trump.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Davin on July 20, 2017, 03:06:57 PM
Quote from: Tom62 on July 20, 2017, 06:47:41 AMNow it is all about gender equality, feminism and Muslim hugging.
What? You don't want gender equality?

Muslim hugging? What's wrong with treating Muslims like they are people? Not all Christians are child molesters, and not all Muslims are terrorists. I think it's more to do with what has happened to their country and not so much the specific religion.

Quote from: Tom62She would support the corrupt Ukraine regime and established a no-fly zone in Syria, thus  causing severe problems with the Russians.
Huh? She was against Russia causing problems in the Ukraine and conquering it. As were many other people. No fly zones in Syria are something that are a bit more nuanced. It's difficult not to cause problems with Russia, Russia is like a spoiled toddler in a supermarket: everything is fine as long as the brat is  getting everything it wants, but if it doesn't, then the snot throws a fit until the shitty parents concede. That is how Russia has been behaving since Putin's been in control, except that people that have died. So, fuck Russia's tantrums, Russia needs to grow the fuck up and coddling Russia like Trump supporters seem to want is going to make things worse just like with a spoiled toddler.

Quote from: Tom62She'd also invite thousands of unvetted migrants in the USA from countries that hate the USA.
Woah.... no one was talking about unvetted migrants. But liars for Trump presented such bullshit.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Asmodean on July 20, 2017, 03:58:00 PM
Quote from: Icarus on July 19, 2017, 10:27:14 PM
Pleased to have input from an individual with a sense of perspective even though he is determined to do away with Luxembourg.
We all have out little eccentricities, damn those Luxemburgers!   

QuoteIn my mind we have elected a president who is conspicuously unqualified for the job that he was appointed to do.  That is our problem that we cannot immediately undo. We dug ourselves into this hole because too few of us, prior to the election, bothered to filter through the bullshit that both parties were selling.
I've actually read an interesting opinion article about it somewhere. Tried to find it, but I can't seem to. Wrong computer - wrong browser history. In any case, the author asserted that the problem is less one of Trump being unqualified and more of him indeed being qualified. It has to do with the qualifications required for a person to be elected into a position of leadership. And yes, a generally permissive system does mean that occasionally, you may find a pearl in the otherwise monotonously average masses of humanity. However, statistically, is it not more likely to backfire and return a thousand dog turds for every such pearl?

I find this line of thinking intriguing. What ought and ought not be demanded from a potential president-to-be?

QuoteI believe that one of the several reasons that Trump won was the deep, and completely unfounded and widely subscribed dislike of Obama. An enormous number of people believed that Obama was/is a Muslim communist hell bent on destroying our country.  Hillary was guilty by association in the minds of much of that ill informed electorate.  The E-mail thing hurt her badly even though the influence of her indiscretion has yet to be discovered as harmful.
I think that dissatisfaction with Obama was a factor. Also, that here and there, it was warranted. My beef with him is mostly that well-intentioned as he was, he was too weak on the world arena to make significant impact. I wonder what the Arab Spring might have looked like if he was better at the craft..? Well... It might not have happened at all, but while fun, idle speculations are just that - idle speculations.

More to the point, while I think Obamas tenure in the White House was a variable in Trump getting his gig, general dissatisfaction with the establishment was a bigger one and Hillary, she sort of embodies the establishment. When in situations like that, populists do tend to storm ahead - even the incompetent ones.

QuoteI am still having a problem with the knowledge that so many of my fellow Americans are either unbelievably gullible and/or as dumb as a basket of rocks
I think it may well be a cultural issue, actually. I speculate from personal experience only here, but it seems to me like many Americans put a lot of stock in being American, which may stem, at least in part, from the United states being heavily populated by people who initially looked for a place to belong, for that "something greater," chasing the American Dream, which I think may be a detrimental factor to recognizing and resisting some forms of herd mentality. Of course, the issue is most likely a compound one and the variables at play are near-countless. I'm just trying to look at those factors present in for example Europe, but not the USA or vice versa.

*Sigh...* Then again, I may not be onto anything at all. If fallacies have ever taught us something, it's that there is no such creature as a true Scotsman - not until there is only one left.

Quote
So much for a partial post mortem......the prime question is; where do we go from here??  Suggestions anyone??
Personally, I like up and forward. To be less vague, however, my suggestion is to try to fight your own battles and let the world go to shits mostly by itself. There is vast potential in the United States. It's up to its people to realize it.

Quote from: Arturo on July 20, 2017, 12:03:25 AM
I think the trumpettes were compelled by his openly racist views and actions. He hated anyone from any race and gave his reasons why. This related to people on a deep level and they didn't let go. Even now in the mist of the Trump Jr thing they cling to their papa as if he were their god incarnate.
Really? Racism? As in, fueled by Obama being a shade of black? I suppose I can see that, but wouldn't it take more to vote to the perceived detriment of an opposing tribe than to the perceived benefit of one's own? Remember that we are talking about tens of million people here.

Quote
At this point I am emotionally invested and reactive. I don't have a good answer to where we should go from here.
Respect points for self-awareness and subsequent self-restraint.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Asmodean on July 20, 2017, 04:08:06 PM
Quote from: Davin on July 20, 2017, 03:06:57 PM
Not all Christians are child molesters, and not all Muslims are terrorists.
Oh, the temptation! No. Getting late. Going home. Maybe later.

QuoteThat is how Russia has been behaving since Putin's been in control, except that people that have died. So, fuck Russia's tantrums, Russia needs to grow the fuck up and coddling Russia like Trump supporters seem to want is going to make things worse just like with a spoiled toddler.
They play the game well. It does take some mental acrobatics not to grant them that. It takes more to call it "tantrums." And of course they play to win, and with their own agenda in mind - who doesn't?

Quote
Woah.... no one was talking about unvetted migrants. But liars for Trump presented such bullshit.
Sort-of with you on that one, and yet I do think the US under Hillary may have had more of a refugee problem than what is currently the case. Misplaced as they may be, Trump's policies on the subject seem nicely protectionist-like.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Davin on July 20, 2017, 04:26:09 PM
Quote from: Asmodean on July 20, 2017, 04:08:06 PM
Quote from: Davin on July 20, 2017, 03:06:57 PM
Not all Christians are child molesters, and not all Muslims are terrorists.
Oh, the temptation! No. Getting late. Going home. Maybe later.
Don't forget the rest of what I said.

Quote from: Asmodean
QuoteThat is how Russia has been behaving since Putin's been in control, except that people that have died. So, fuck Russia's tantrums, Russia needs to grow the fuck up and coddling Russia like Trump supporters seem to want is going to make things worse just like with a spoiled toddler.
They play the game well. It does take some mental acrobatics not to grant them that. It takes more to call it "tantrums." And of course they play to win, and with their own agenda in mind - who doesn't?
I don't think it takes much gymnastics at all to call it "tantrums." A lot of bad things happen under the excuse of "playing to win." Of course I could go around and violently attack people that disagree with me in arguments right? I mean I'm just playing to win.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
Woah.... no one was talking about unvetted migrants. But liars for Trump presented such bullshit.
Sort-of with you on that one, and yet I do think the US under Hillary may have had more of a refugee problem than what is currently the case. Misplaced as they may be, Trump's policies on the subject seem nicely protectionist-like.
The problem with that shitty "protectionist" position is that we have the ability to protect ourselves and help out those who need it. I mean we spend more on defense than the next several countries combined.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Asmodean on July 20, 2017, 06:10:27 PM
Apparently, I lied about going home back then. But I did go home eventually. I'll address your response from a better platform than my iPhone, also the part I did not quote.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Firebird on July 20, 2017, 10:16:45 PM
Quote from: Tom62 on July 20, 2017, 06:47:41 AM
She'd also invite thousands of unvetted migrants in the USA from countries that hate the USA.

Oh come on, really? This "unvetted" lie is complete utter  bullshit that was propagated over and over by the right media to scare people. Are you talking about Refugees? As it stands now, the refugee screening process takes months and months, I think even over a year in some cases.
Or do you mean just immigrants in general? Because the crime rate among immigrants is a lot lower than those born here. And you know how many people form those countries Trump tried to ban people from committed acts of terrorism in the US? 0. None. I have issues with other things you said too, but this one needs to be quashed now, because it's just false.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Asmodean on July 21, 2017, 07:46:58 AM
Quote
What? You don't want gender equality?
I realize that this is not a question directed at me, but to a first degree approximation, no, I don't want gender equality specifically. As I stated before, I want equal starting conditions and core rights for every human within a society, and for life to fix the rest.

QuoteMuslim hugging? What's wrong with treating Muslims like they are people?
A feminist ought not have much of a problem answering that.  ;)

I'll answer your question as a European, as I suspect Tom sees this issue through the EU migrant crisis lens too.

Ok... General obviousness first. I treat you as a human being, and yet we are at each other's throats pretty much every time one of us opens his mouth. It's not a good example. What I'm trying to illustrate is that you can, in fact, not pander to people and still not rob them of their humanity, so to speak.

Then there is the question of rhetoric. "Muslim" can, and often in these discussion, should be viewed as a first-degree approximation rather than a direct reference to religion. When anti-immigration... No, let me rephrase that somehow, it's not immigration as such that is often seen as a problem... Gah. Fine. Whatever. When anti-Muslim-refugee elements chant "Build that wall!" and places like Romania do just that, the underlying issue is that Europe does not have a place for the sheer number of people trying to get in. I'll tear through the talking points at speed. If nuance or citation is wanted, tell me where.

1. Europe does not have a system in place to handle very large numbers of refugees. There is no stable or even functional political framework within the EU/EEC to redistribute the refugees among the member states. Further, few internal systems are capable by design of coping with large increases in refugee inflow.

2. The individual countries have an expectation of respect for the sovereignty of their borders. They want to be able to turn away those, who attempt to seek asylum from a safe area. This is more important than many give it credit for, as it serves to put pressure on those countries like Italy, Romania and Greece, which are closest to the conflict areas and must abide by the treaty proclaiming that those camping just outside their walls have a right to seek asylum, but not to seek asylum wherever they so wish.

3. An increasing number of people subscribe to the point of view that their money would be better spent helping the refugees in the conflict areas themselves (They would be IDPs, not refugees then, but semantics)

4. An increasing number of people are concerned with foreign nationals disproportionately crowding the violent crime statistics. In some cases, it's bullshit. In others... The shoe does fit. Besides, a voter doesn't have to be right - just cast the ballot. And many European voters cast theirs with the immigration being a top-three, or even a clear top-one issue.

5. It is difficult for refugees to find employment due to linguistic and cultural barriers, education, local demand concerns and the like. Further, it is a common view that many refugees do not want employment as long as they are getting the tax payers' coin - sometimes more than the poor within a given country.

6. In Europe, we suck at integration and we know it.

7. Fortune-hunters can go fuck themselves. On this point, on the most general level, I disagree. I work in an in industry where fortune-hunters are the ones who, at the end of the day, earn me my monthly paycheck. Granted, nearly all of them are from the Baltics, but frankly, I don't give a shit where they are from. We do not have enough locals to fill those jobs, and they do need filling. So yeah, I usually go into those debates with "Depends on the fortune-hunter."

8. The refugees do come from mostly Muslim-majority countries and areas where certain of our much-prized freedoms, rights and privileges simply do not exist, and a number of them do upon arrival seem to attempt to turn their new home into exactly the sort of shithole they escaped rather than assimilate.

...I'll stop here. Although I'm about half-way down the list, I think I covered the core issues and even produced a buzzword or two. 

QuoteNot all Christians are child molesters, and not all Muslims are terrorists. I think it's more to do with what has happened to their country and not so much the specific religion.
I'm still resisting the temptation to go on an epic tirade here - I have done so before, so do a quick search if you want to see me rant about "not all" arguments.

Short version, what is "not all" doing to prevent the rest of them from doing what they do, be it kiddie-fondling or honor killings or driving Allah's holy goods vehicles into crowds?

Quote
]I don't think it takes much gymnastics at all to call it "tantrums." A lot of bad things happen under the excuse of "playing to win." Of course I could go around and violently attack people that disagree with me in arguments right? I mean I'm just playing to win.
I think you may have read my objection in a wrong way. What I said was that the game they play well is far more sinister than a tantrum. They shelled the shit out of Georgia (Yes, yes, there were reasons - not the point right here and now) and got away with it for the price they were willing to pay. They annexed Crimea (same parentheses) and got away with that. They throw their weight around in areas where they have strategic interests when those areas attempt to slide more in the Westerly direction, they support groups in the West most friendly, or at the very least, least hostile towards their interests.

They are playing at being a superpower, and in their immediate strategic interest zone, they are succeeding.

Tantrums or outbursts or hissy fits, those are not. There are clear patterns of proactive power play there.

QuoteThe problem with that shitty "protectionist" position is that we have the ability to protect ourselves and help out those who need it. I mean we spend more on defense than the next several countries combined.
Technically, it's more of a political hot topic than a problem. Sure, it's a problem for the refugees, but not for your society.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Tom62 on July 21, 2017, 08:26:41 AM
QuoteMuslim hugging? What's wrong with treating Muslims like they are people?
What I'd like to add to the Asmo's excellent list of replies is the following:
Muslims are people, no doubt about that. But they are not better than other people and they should  be treated like anyone else. The problem however is that they are treated dfferently, because of their religion. They can't do anything wrong, nor can their religion be criticized. I don't know why that is, because Islam is a bunch of bad ideas (like mysogyny, pedophilia, FGM, sharia law, slaughtering animals the halal way, etc.) and its fundamental followers are (lets put it friendly) mentally unstable and highly aggressive.  Also, at least here in Europe, Islam is a very demanding religion (in comparison with other religions) and a religion that constantly plays the victim card.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Asmodean on July 21, 2017, 09:52:15 AM
Mhm. When speaking of Islam as a religion in broad terms, I agree.

I think I will cover this topic in higher definition later. It will take some time, so I'll try to do it outside work hours or like... Tomorrow.

Also, Muslims being no better than the rest of us is a very good point. In fact, it was number nine on the list I gave up half-way, and I chose not to make it because again, it is quite time-consuming to make a case for followers of Islam receiving preferential treatment when it comes to dealing with their precious little "religious and cultural sensibilities." It is time-consuming not because it's difficult to find the relevant data, but because of the scope of the case.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Dave on July 21, 2017, 10:48:18 AM
QuoteAlso, at least here in Europe, Islam is a very demanding religion (in comparison with other religions) and a religion that constantly plays the victim card.
It is a very demanding religion everywhere that it is practiced in anything like a traditional manner, Tom, the word "Islam" effectively translates as "submission (to the will of god)".

You will probably find that every religious (and atheist and humanist and political. . .) entity has played the "victim card" at some point in its history. - just a part of the standard politics of humanity. We have to live in the little window of our own lifespan, with the events thst affect our daily life. But those who react only to today's events, with no learning from yesterday nor respect for tomorrow, help to maintain the violence and transgenerational hatred.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Davin on July 21, 2017, 03:24:43 PM
Quote from: Asmodean on July 21, 2017, 07:46:58 AM
Quote
What? You don't want gender equality?
I realize that this is not a question directed at me, but to a first degree approximation, no, I don't want gender equality specifically. As I stated before, I want equal starting conditions and core rights for every human within a society, and for life to fix the rest.
That's more than even I want. I don't think it even possible to equal starting conditions. But we can adjust things along the line.

Quote from: Asmodean
QuoteMuslim hugging? What's wrong with treating Muslims like they are people?
A feminist ought not have much of a problem answering that.  ;)
Not all Muslims oppress women, and it's not like they are the only religion to do so. I mean, Islam is just as shitty as any other religion and many manage to be decent people in spite of the religion just like Christians have done. So how about we stop making it about the religion, and start making it about the people?

Quote from: AsmodeanI'll answer your question as a European, as I suspect Tom sees this issue through the EU migrant crisis lens too.[...]
Well that certainly was a lot of stuff. What I didn't see though, is something along the lines of and argument for why one shouldn't treat a person like any other person just because they are a Muslim.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
]I don't think it takes much gymnastics at all to call it "tantrums." A lot of bad things happen under the excuse of "playing to win." Of course I could go around and violently attack people that disagree with me in arguments right? I mean I'm just playing to win.
I think you may have read my objection in a wrong way. [...]
Tantrums or outbursts or hissy fits, those are not. There are clear patterns of proactive power play there.
There is a strategy, but they are still tantrums.

Quote from: Asmodean
QuoteThe problem with that shitty "protectionist" position is that we have the ability to protect ourselves and help out those who need it. I mean we spend more on defense than the next several countries combined.
Technically, it's more of a political hot topic than a problem. Sure, it's a problem for the refugees, but not for your society.
I consider all of humanity to be my society, so it is a problem for my society.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Asmodean on July 22, 2017, 11:04:28 AM
Quote from: Davin on July 21, 2017, 03:24:43 PM
Not all Muslims oppress women, and it's not like they are the only religion to do so.
...

QuoteI mean, Islam is just as shitty as any other religion and many manage to be decent people in spite of the religion just like Christians have done
...

QuoteSo how about we stop making it about the religion, and start making it about the people?
...No.

QuoteWell that certainly was a lot of stuff. What I didn't see though, is something along the lines of and argument for why one shouldn't treat a person like any other person just because they are a Muslim.
I suggest you actually read it then. Your question was answered early on.

QuoteThere is a strategy, but they are still tantrums.
Make your case, or cede the point - I've made mine.

QuoteI consider all of humanity to be my society, so it is a problem for my society.
Not how the world works.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Davin on July 24, 2017, 04:14:18 PM
Quote from: Asmodean on July 22, 2017, 11:04:28 AM
...No.
...Yes.

Quote from: Asmodean
QuoteWell that certainly was a lot of stuff. What I didn't see though, is something along the lines of and argument for why one shouldn't treat a person like any other person just because they are a Muslim.
I suggest you actually read it then. Your question was answered early on.
Unfortunately for me, I did read the whole thing, it didn't address my point at all.

Quote from: Asmodean
QuoteThere is a strategy, but they are still tantrums.
Make your case, or cede the point - I've made mine.
?? Your case doesn't mean that he's not acting out tantrums, tantrums and strategies are not mutually exclusive.

Quote from: Asmodean
QuoteI consider all of humanity to be my society, so it is a problem for my society.
Not how the world works.
Make your case or cede to the point. :lol: See how stupid that looks?

It is how the world works though, because in the world I get to decide how and what I consider. But if you need more, are we not communicating as a community across borders here on this site? The world is increasingly becoming a unified world more and more. The people (in general, because there are still a bunch of xenophobes), are giving less and less of a shit. On the government level, trade deals are being made across countries the reduce the cost of importing goods and many of those include migration rules. So overall, things are moving towards a unified world.

And even without all that, the world doesn't get to dictate who I consider to be a part of my community.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Asmodean on July 25, 2017, 12:57:03 PM
Quote
Yes.
No.

QuoteUnfortunately for me, I did read the whole thing, it didn't address my point at all.
It did. Here, I'll even quote it for you;
Quote from: The AsmoI'll answer your question as a European, as I suspect Tom sees this issue through the EU migrant crisis lens too.

Ok... General obviousness first. I treat you as a human being, and yet we are at each other's throats pretty much every time one of us opens his mouth. It's not a good example. What I'm trying to illustrate is that you can, in fact, not pander to people and still not rob them of their humanity, so to speak.

Then there is the question of rhetoric. "Muslim" can, and often in these discussion, should be viewed as a first-degree approximation rather than a direct reference to religion. When anti-immigration... No, let me rephrase that somehow, it's not immigration as such that is often seen as a problem... Gah. Fine. Whatever. When anti-Muslim-refugee elements chant "Build that wall!" and places like Romania do just that, the underlying issue is that Europe does not have a place for the sheer number of people trying to get in.


QuoteYour case doesn't mean that he's not acting out tantrums, tantrums and strategies are not mutually exclusive.
No, of course reactive responses are not mutually exclusive from proactive responses, in much the same way as actions are nut mutually exclusive from reactions.

Yes, Russia's brief stint in Georgia may have been reactionary to their treatment of South Abkhazistan or what have you, if one were to subscribe to the point of view that Russia actually gives a fuck about such matters.

Yes, Russia's hullabaloo in the Ukraine may have been highly opportunistic, but opportunism does not signify some sort of emotional bullshit. In fact, it reeks of pretty cold calculation all the way here.

Yes, Russia's support of populist elements in Europe is a reaction to the EU leadership being unfriendly with Moscow. As far as reactions go, that seems effective.

And yes, my case for it being something, which does not let itself be categorized as tantrums, was made, and not half-badly. I'll try using some regressive vocabulary next time though.

Quote
Make your case or cede to the point. :lol: See how stupid that looks?
:smug:

The world is not your society because the world is not unified by the same principles, which a society make. Societies around the world are governed by different, sometimes opposing laws, different moral codes, they place different value on human life, expect different things from their members, value different things in themselves, their members and the world in general, they have different approaches to The Great Outside™ and so on.

So yes, you may think me a part of your society - I will still put you in a fire pit and eat you for being an outsider. Well, not an actual fire pit - I'm way past cannibalism and am not really a violent type. I'll get back to spinning this metaphor in part two and three of making my case. Will you be making yours on my point, I wonder..? The one where I asked you to..?

Quote
But if you need more, are we not communicating as a community across borders here on this site? The world is increasingly becoming a unified world more and more. The people (in general, because there are still a bunch of xenophobes), are giving less and less of a shit. On the government level, trade deals are being made across countries the reduce the cost of importing goods and many of those include migration rules. So overall, things are moving towards a unified world.
A case for globalization? Not bad... In fact, I think this is the best case your side of the issue can make. However, the globalists are struggling with the tribes becoming more specialized and issue-oriented rather than dissolving. New borderlines are being drawn across political and cultural rather than physical landscape. Eventually, "we" on this site may well consider ourselves to be a society of sorts - we have internal rules and some exclusivity of membership and we do act and are acted upon "The Great Outside" but... A tribe is a tribe, and even we have swirled an outsider or two on a spit.

Quote
And even without all that, the world doesn't get to dictate who I consider to be a part of my community.
I sort-of admire the use of the word "consider" in masking the individualistic naïveté of this statement. (And I do speak as an individualist of sorts) The world gets to dictate pretty much every fucking thing in your life. That's not to say that the choices you make are of no profound importance, but should the world decide to reward you for embracing someone as your own by detonating their explosive underpants, well... That does happen with an alarming frequency.

So yes, consider who you want to be what you want. In this case, however, you are simply wrong to.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Davin on July 25, 2017, 03:48:03 PM
Quote from: Asmodean on July 25, 2017, 12:57:03 PM
No.
Yes.

Quote from: Asmodean
QuoteUnfortunately for me, I did read the whole thing, it didn't address my point at all.
It did. Here, I'll even quote it for you;
Quote from: The AsmoI'll answer your question as a European, as I suspect Tom sees this issue through the EU migrant crisis lens too.

Ok... General obviousness first. I treat you as a human being, and yet we are at each other's throats pretty much every time one of us opens his mouth. It's not a good example. What I'm trying to illustrate is that you can, in fact, not pander to people and still not rob them of their humanity, so to speak.

Then there is the question of rhetoric. "Muslim" can, and often in these discussion, should be viewed as a first-degree approximation rather than a direct reference to religion. When anti-immigration... No, let me rephrase that somehow, it's not immigration as such that is often seen as a problem... Gah. Fine. Whatever. When anti-Muslim-refugee elements chant "Build that wall!" and places like Romania do just that, the underlying issue is that Europe does not have a place for the sheer number of people trying to get in.
That doesn't answer my question.

Quote from: Asmodean
QuoteYour case doesn't mean that he's not acting out tantrums, tantrums and strategies are not mutually exclusive.
No, of course reactive responses are not mutually exclusive from proactive responses, in much the same way as actions are nut mutually exclusive from reactions.
Great.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
Make your case or cede to the point. :lol: See how stupid that looks?
:smug:

The world is not your society because the world is not unified by the same principles[...]
None of that matters to my point.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
But if you need more, are we not communicating as a community across borders here on this site? The world is increasingly becoming a unified world more and more. The people (in general, because there are still a bunch of xenophobes), are giving less and less of a shit. On the government level, trade deals are being made across countries the reduce the cost of importing goods and many of those include migration rules. So overall, things are moving towards a unified world.
A case for globalization? Not bad...
It is happening, not much of a case as it is an acceptance of what is going on.

Quote from: Asmodean
Quote
And even without all that, the world doesn't get to dictate who I consider to be a part of my community.
I sort-of admire the use of the word "consider" in masking the individualistic naïveté of this statement.
Why do you resort to personal attacks? What I describe is how communities work. People decide who is part of their community and who is not. People rarely ever agree exactly on who is on what side of the arbitrary lines. Immigrants to America think they are part of this country's community, most right wingers don't think they are.

Quote from: Asmodean(And I do speak as an individualist of sorts) The world gets to dictate pretty much every fucking thing in your life.
It doesn't. See? It's not dictating what I think. It is true that there are a lot of things out of my control, but there are also a lot of things under my control. The world dictates many things, but not everything.

Quote from: AsmodeanSo yes, consider who you want to be what you want. In this case, however, you are simply wrong to.
I think that instead of making the case you think you've made, you misrepresented reality too much for me to accept what I suppose was meant to be your kill statement. And instead of cinching it in the end, you've instead tripped up half way down the track.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Asmodean on July 25, 2017, 04:41:15 PM
I do not make kill statements unless bored or trying to accomplish something. Those tend to close arguments, which is usually against my interests.

Now, show me the personal attack, will you? Because I can see reporting my own posts as getting really tiresome for everyone involved really quickly.

I shall come back to this after this matter is resolved.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Davin on July 25, 2017, 05:09:52 PM
Quote from: Asmodean on July 25, 2017, 04:41:15 PM
Now, show me the personal attack, will you? Because I can see reporting my own posts as getting really tiresome for everyone involved really quickly.
Do you know what the word "naivete" means? I mean, it's possible that it wasn't an intentional attack on me instead of my argument and you just don't know what the word means.

Quote from: AsmodeanI shall come back to this after this matter is resolved.
Do whatever you want to do, I don't mind one way or the other. Personal attacks do not bother me, but if you're going to engage in them, then I might as well too..
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Asmodean on July 25, 2017, 05:30:04 PM
Yes, I know what the word means. A lack of wisdom. A narrowness of perspective, in some sense. It refers to the statement you made.

Really, though, I am not even walking the line here. Yes, I use loaded terms, but I do provide context within which they are to be understood.

Regardless, my apologies if offense was taken.

Now, to find a proper keyboard and address a point or two...
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Davin on July 25, 2017, 05:47:51 PM
Quote from: Asmodean on July 25, 2017, 05:30:04 PM
Yes, I know what the word means. A lack of wisdom. A narrowness of perspective, in some sense. It refers to the statement you made.
How does that apply to the statement and not the one making the statement?

Quote from: AsmodeanRegardless, my apologies if offense was taken.
I already said I didn't care, I'm wondering about the rules of engagement. I was under the impression that personal attacks were off the table, but if you're going to use them, then I will as well.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Asmodean on July 25, 2017, 08:19:01 PM
Still on my phone, so not quoting properly.

To answer your first question, smart people can make stupid statements and wise people can make naïve statements. All people can, just like all people can hold silly beliefs. You must have seen, for instance, that neither intelligence nor wisdom are surefire bars to faith in the divine.

No, I was not talking about the person behind the statement. I don't know you beyond your HAF persona, so how could I?

I do not, nor did I attack you. How you conduct yourself in an argument in which I have a lead role, is not something I can allow myself to judge. Moderate yourself - or do not. I'm not asking you to do so on my account though. I'm not made of glass, especially on the internet.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Davin on July 25, 2017, 08:52:17 PM
Quote from: Asmodean on July 25, 2017, 08:19:01 PM
To answer your first question, smart people can make stupid statements and wise people can make naïve statements. All people can, just like all people can hold silly beliefs. You must have seen, for instance, that neither intelligence nor wisdom are surefire bars to faith in the divine.

No, I was not talking about the person behind the statement. I don't know you beyond your HAF persona, so how could I?
A lack of knowledge of a person does not prevent people from committing ad hominems against them. How does saying that my statement shows "A lack of wisdom. A narrowness of perspective, in some sense." not addressing me? You're literally saying that (even if it's limited to that one statement), that I am "lacking wisdom, and/or have a narrowness of perspective." How can a statement itself be "naive?" Those terms do not apply to statements, those terms apply to people.

Quote from: AsmodeanI do not, nor did I attack you.
You did. Statements cannot themselves be naive, while people making statements can.

Quote from: AsmodeanHow you conduct yourself in an argument in which I have a lead role, is not something I can allow myself to judge. Moderate yourself - or do not. I'm not asking you to do so on my account though. I'm not made of glass, especially on the internet.
No worries then. I'll conduct myself by what is permitted.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Asmodean on July 26, 2017, 12:37:03 AM
Phone, lack of inches, same disclaimer for not quoting.

I just wanted to answer that one can, in fact, imbue inanimate and even immaterial objects with qualities normally reserved for people, naīveté among them.

Of course what you say reflects on you. My description of what you say though, does not. Me calling a statement asinine is not me calling its author an ass. Me calling a statement true does not imply that the author is not a liar (beyond the one instance, obviously, in both cases) There is a pattern there. I don't care enough to word myself carefully or delicately. This is not that sort of conversation. That doesn't mean that anything that comes off my fingertips has any meaning beyond or in stead of that which was provided in its context. And if at all ambiguous, I am nearly always happy to clarify and defend both my position and it's associated wording.

So yeah... I don't see a problem. If you do, propose a solution and I will consider it. If it costs me few calories, I will implement it - for a time at least.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Firebird on July 26, 2017, 04:32:35 AM
(https://media.giphy.com/media/E3xXqq617AaFW/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Asmodean on July 26, 2017, 08:14:20 AM
Yes, yes... Asmo vs. Davin season 83 is still as fascinating as the day it first aired...  :P
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Davin on July 26, 2017, 03:14:25 PM
Quote from: Asmodean on July 26, 2017, 12:37:03 AM
I just wanted to answer that one can, in fact, imbue inanimate and even immaterial objects with qualities normally reserved for people, naīveté among them.
So you're not saying that the statement displays a narrow viewpoint or lack of knowledge?

I don't see how you knowing the meaning of the word, and then applying that word to what I said, is not you telling me that my statement is wrong not because of what I said, but because you erroneously think that I have a narrow viewpoint and/or I lack knowledge. Both of which could be true. But that's not the problem. The problem is that you're committing an ad hominem fallacy in that instead of attacking what I said, you've said that my statement is naive which implies that what is said is not worth addressing because it has a narrow viewpoint and/or is lacking knowledge.

If you try to apply having a narrow perspective or a lack of knowledge to a statement, well that doesn't make any sense.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Tom62 on July 26, 2017, 05:26:23 PM
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fp.fod4.com%2Fp%2Fmedia%2F5c597eb60b%2FqLWyZcvfSiaXUjDHMzih_Confused%2520John%2520Cena.gif&hash=6a6e8adb7e4834f25f42c18cb639321e8431e9e7)
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Dave on July 26, 2017, 05:36:17 PM
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FlZxY9fW.gif&hash=03f4b3e93e24a28c27dc104633317dc69a67376f)
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Essie Mae on July 26, 2017, 06:00:43 PM
Gentlemen! Gentlemen! This is very upsetting!

I another issue, Trump is Noe saying that transgender people will not be allowed to serve in any capacity in the military.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Tom62 on July 26, 2017, 06:18:08 PM
Quote from: Essie Mae on July 26, 2017, 06:00:43 PM
Gentlemen! Gentlemen! This is very upsetting!

I another issue, Trump is Noe saying that transgender people will not be allowed to serve in any capacity in the military.

The army would not be the same any more....
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Dave on July 26, 2017, 06:35:17 PM
Quote from: Tom62 on July 26, 2017, 06:18:08 PM
Quote from: Essie Mae on July 26, 2017, 06:00:43 PM
Gentlemen! Gentlemen! This is very upsetting!

I another issue, Trump is Noe saying that transgender people will not be allowed to serve in any capacity in the military.

The army would not be the same any more....


I just knew it would be that clip!

I assume the US armed forces, "Don't ask, don't tell" policy for gays and lesbians still stands (for the moment) then? Or did that just get left out of the media's interpretation?
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Davin on July 26, 2017, 07:29:33 PM
Quote from: Essie Mae on July 26, 2017, 06:00:43 PM
Gentlemen! Gentlemen! This is very upsetting!

I another issue, Trump is Noe saying that transgender people will not be allowed to serve in any capacity in the military.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/742771576039460864?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fabcnews.go.com%2FPolitics%2Fdonald-trumps-past-statements-lgbt-rights%2Fstory%3Fid%3D48858527
Quote from: Trump 10:31 AM - 14 Jun 2016Thank you to the LGBT community! I will fight for you while Hillary brings in more people that will threaten your freedoms and beliefs.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: xSilverPhinx on July 26, 2017, 11:15:24 PM
^He's learning to be a politician.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Firebird on July 27, 2017, 03:55:34 AM
Quote from: Gloucester on July 26, 2017, 06:35:17 PM
I assume the US armed forces, "Don't ask, don't tell" policy for gays and lesbians still stands (for the moment) then? Or did that just get left out of the media's interpretation?

Don't ask don't tell no longer exists, so there's no restrictions on gays serving in the military. At least, not at this time. I'm sure if Sessions and the religious right had their way, they'd ban anyone who's not a white male Christian and then put crosses on their uniforms a la the Crusades.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Arturo on July 27, 2017, 04:04:53 AM
Quote from: Firebird on July 27, 2017, 03:55:34 AM
Quote from: Gloucester on July 26, 2017, 06:35:17 PM
I assume the US armed forces, "Don't ask, don't tell" policy for gays and lesbians still stands (for the moment) then? Or did that just get left out of the media's interpretation?

Don't ask don't tell no longer exists, so there's no restrictions on gays serving in the military. At least, not at this time. I'm sure if Sessions and the religious right had their way, they'd ban anyone who's not a white male Christian and then put crosses on their uniforms a la the Crusades.

That would severly limit the military's numbers. And then all these military trained minorities with a shared tribal identity would be displaced and justifiably upset. And perhaps with such access to guns in the states here, we would see a civil war/2nd revolution with the goverment losing to the far greater numbers.

And the Goverment would have no choice but to take away the guns of the people which would get even more people against them and knock out a good chunk of their voter base potentially.

I don't see them allowing that to happen unless they really are that stupid *plays banjo*
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Asmodean on July 27, 2017, 07:18:28 AM
Quote from: Davin on July 26, 2017, 03:14:25 PM
So you're not saying that the statement displays a narrow viewpoint or lack of knowledge?
No. A lack of wisdom. a narrowness of perspective. Were those not my words?

Quote from: Essie Mae on July 26, 2017, 06:00:43 PM
I another issue, Trump is Noe saying that transgender people will not be allowed to serve in any capacity in the military.
Yeas, I have seen the tweets.

Why not just be happy that someone actually wants to serve in your armed forces, rather than exclude potential candidates based on whatever reason?

EDIT: Actually, I take that back. There is a valid reason to turn away a potential candidate - not needing more personnel. Slamming the door in their face and burning the bridge, however, may not be the best approach even if that is the case.

Quote from: Arturo on July 27, 2017, 04:04:53 AM
That would severly limit the military's numbers. And then all these military trained minorities with a shared tribal identity would be displaced and justifiably upset. And perhaps with such access to guns in the states here, we would see a civil war/2nd revolution with the goverment losing to the far greater numbers.
A civil war over who gets to fight wars? Now that would be an irony to end all ironies.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Icarus on July 27, 2017, 07:36:29 AM
At least for the moment the removal of trans people has caused a shitstorm of opposition and anger.   There are thousands of military people who are transgender and it has not been much of a problem. Some of them have done multiple tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are just as good at their jobs and loyal to their country as other soldiers, sailors, or airmen.

Today an interview on NPR was compelling. The soldier had been in the service for eighteen and a half years, with three Afghan tours. Eligible for partial retirement benefits at 20 years.  If that person is bounced out of the service by some silly ass quirk, before the time is up..........well that is not going to fly no matter what the imperial leader says.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Asmodean on July 27, 2017, 09:57:05 AM
Was that soldier dismissed for being transgendered? Or about to be? One would think that after eighteen years of proving that you are indeed "one of the guys," you would be long-since accepted as such by your peers, if you were any good at all for anything at all.

And if those who work with you trust you to have their back... Is it really some orange bureaucracy's place to tell you and them that you don't belong there?

It's... Stupid. Not riots-in-the-streets stupid in my book, as we are talking about a tiny fraction of the population, but still stupid enough for a letter or two.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Firebird on July 27, 2017, 01:19:29 PM
So apparently Trump did this because there was a spending bill being held up over whether to pay for gender reassignment for transgender soldiers, a bill that included things like his stupid Mexican wall (guess the Mexicans aren't paying for it after all!). The Republicans go to Trump asking for help resolving this, and he tweets out a ban on all transgender soldiers, which is NOT what they expected or wanted. Apparently his precious wall is worth this bullshit, though. What a disgrace.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Asmodean on July 27, 2017, 01:39:04 PM
*Sigh* Can't we just pass a hat around or something? Build the damned wall, stick Trump's name on it, then sue his ass over its placement a few thousand times?

I like walls, but... Walls can be effective at stopping or slowing down large and concentrated groups of people. Has that ever been a problem on the US-Mexican border?
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Davin on July 27, 2017, 03:19:44 PM
Quote from: Asmodean on July 27, 2017, 07:18:28 AM
Quote from: Davin on July 26, 2017, 03:14:25 PM
So you're not saying that the statement displays a narrow viewpoint or lack of knowledge?
No. A lack of wisdom. a narrowness of perspective. Were those not my words?
:lol:
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Asmodean on July 27, 2017, 03:40:46 PM
They were, were they not?

Eh... I'm getting bored of that argument. Too bored, in fact, to look it up, so if there is a point to be made, I will address it. Otherwise, meh...
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Davin on July 27, 2017, 04:42:26 PM
(https://ugc.kn3.net/i/760x/https://media.giphy.com/media/DgfW4r4tJ8SYM/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Ecurb Noselrub on July 27, 2017, 08:09:18 PM
In Trump's USA right now, it's pretty good to be male, white, straight, Christian, professional, upper middle class.  I wouldn't want to be in any other category, however.  That's an insider's view.  My main issue with him is still the Wall in Texas, which I will continue to resist, as able.  He is, in my view, incompetent and dangerous, but my personal life has not suffered so far.  We'll see where things are in a few months. 

I voted for Hillary because at least I thought she was competent.  She had too much baggage, however, and did not run a good campaign.  Allowing him to win the Electoral College was inexcusable.  But, that's all spilled milk and water under the bridge.  Now, Trump is the reality.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Dave on July 27, 2017, 08:35:08 PM
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on July 27, 2017, 08:09:18 PM
In Trump's USA right now, it's pretty good to be male, white, straight, Christian, professional, upper middle class.  I wouldn't want to be in any other category, however.  That's an insider's view.  My main issue with him is still the Wall in Texas, which I will continue to resist, as able.  He is, in my view, incompetent and dangerous, but my personal life has not suffered so far.  We'll see where things are in a few months. 

I voted for Hillary because at least I thought she was competent.  She had too much baggage, however, and did not run a good campaign.  Allowing him to win the Electoral College was inexcusable.  But, that's all spilled milk and water under the bridge.  Now, Trump is the reality TV president.

Just thought I would nake it a bit more specific!
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Ecurb Noselrub on July 27, 2017, 09:25:09 PM
Quote from: Gloucester on July 27, 2017, 08:35:08 PM
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on July 27, 2017, 08:09:18 PM
In Trump's USA right now, it's pretty good to be male, white, straight, Christian, professional, upper middle class.  I wouldn't want to be in any other category, however.  That's an insider's view.  My main issue with him is still the Wall in Texas, which I will continue to resist, as able.  He is, in my view, incompetent and dangerous, but my personal life has not suffered so far.  We'll see where things are in a few months. 

I voted for Hillary because at least I thought she was competent.  She had too much baggage, however, and did not run a good campaign.  Allowing him to win the Electoral College was inexcusable.  But, that's all spilled milk and water under the bridge.  Now, Trump is the reality TV president.

Just thought I would nake it a bit more specific!

Heh, I approve of the edit. 
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Arturo on July 28, 2017, 12:22:39 AM
I don't know how accurate it is but I heard republicans redrew districts so they would more easily win elections.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Ecurb Noselrub on July 28, 2017, 02:02:04 AM
Quote from: Arturo on July 28, 2017, 12:22:39 AM
I don't know how accurate it is but I heard republicans redrew districts so they would more easily win elections.

Well, of course. Every ten years there is a census, and every ten years the party in power in state legislatures starts gerrymandering the districts to ensure that their party stays in power.  It's been going on forever.  The result is some really weirdly shaped districts that connect communities that have nothing to do with each other, but whose voter concentration is advantageous to whatever party has the majority.  The GOP has been able to do this because they win more at the state level, and it's the states who create their own districts.  Now, there is some constitutional oversight by federal courts, so there are rules to be followed.  But subject to that the states can create whatever districts they want as long as they all have approximately the same number of people (one man, one vote).   
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Arturo on July 28, 2017, 02:16:41 AM
That begins to make sense that nearly all the states were red but hillary won by 2.7 miilion votes (or so i heard)

I find this REALLY dumb that there are people in a place very different culturally can have a say in what laws we have to live by. And that goes for me too. In case you don't know what I'm talking about, I mean other states having a say.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Magdalena on July 28, 2017, 06:32:24 AM
Quote from: Davin on July 27, 2017, 03:19:44 PM
Quote from: Asmodean on July 27, 2017, 07:18:28 AM
Quote from: Davin on July 26, 2017, 03:14:25 PM
So you're not saying that the statement displays a narrow viewpoint or lack of knowledge?
No. A lack of wisdom. a narrowness of perspective. Were those not my words?
:lol:
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2Fho2hpMT.gif&hash=35759cd9ec1ed96ae25cdb7d3307e3cd48d67166)
You guys are funny. Both of you are great.  :lol:
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Magdalena on July 28, 2017, 06:41:47 AM
Quote from: Asmodean on July 26, 2017, 08:14:20 AM
Yes, yes... Asmo vs. Davin season 83 is still as fascinating as the day it first aired...  :P

:rofl:
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Asmodean on July 28, 2017, 07:58:30 AM
Quote from: Davin on July 27, 2017, 04:42:26 PM
(https://ugc.kn3.net/i/760x/https://media.giphy.com/media/DgfW4r4tJ8SYM/giphy.gif)
I don't know what that means. The expression just looks... Fake, somehow.

Quote from: Arturo on July 28, 2017, 12:22:39 AM
I don't know how accurate it is but I heard republicans redrew districts so they would more easily win elections.
That's what they call "gerrymandering," yes? As I understand it, they all do it.
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Davin on July 28, 2017, 02:44:17 PM
Quote from: Asmodean on July 28, 2017, 07:58:30 AM
I don't know what that means. The expression just looks... Fake, somehow.
(https://images.gr-assets.com/hostedimages/1424043534ra/13707900.gif)
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Asmodean on July 28, 2017, 02:51:17 PM
Oh! He's... Is there a word for that emotion? Like, if he just pissed his pants and was confronted with it and went "Nope" in the most obvious way just for the laughs?

That, yes?  :D
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Davin on July 28, 2017, 03:06:29 PM
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FxpMYqHb.gif&hash=7401dd04d31f8afa826903dc4546e7b901bd2757)
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Asmodean on July 28, 2017, 03:36:41 PM
Good. Totally no end to references The Asmo geteth today.

:frolic:
Title: Re: The Asmo's Trump Thread
Post by: Dave on July 28, 2017, 09:05:47 PM
Seems like the Pentagon is getting plumb ornery over Trump's "transgender" tweets.

QuoteMarine Gen. Joseph Dunford, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, wrote in a memo to commanders and senior enlisted leaders of the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines that the military will continue to "treat all of our personnel with respect."

Dunford said Pentagon policy on transgender troops would not change until the White House has issued Trump's directive to Secretary of Defense James Mattis through formal channels — not on Twitter —  and the secretary's office issues guidance on implementation to the service chiefs. It's unclear when that might happen.
http://www.latimes.com/politics/washington/la-na-essential-washington-updates-top-u-s-general-tells-military-leaders-1501171360-htmlstory.html