|
|
Post by herzlos on Nov 7, 2024 16:43:35 GMT -5
I'm guessing the financial markets are all doing well because deregulation is good for business, and it this stage it's mostly the workers who'll be screwed.
Stuff like the removal of tax on tips and overtime will be amazing for the Wall Street guys. Suddenly the millionaire stock brokers are on 1 hour a week contracts and doing 59 hours of overtime, and bonuses are now tips.
Joe dude in a supermarket doesn't get any overtime perks (including the old time and a half) because averaged over 4 weeks he's no longer doing any overtime even though he did an 80 hour work week.
|
|
|
|
Post by whembly on Nov 7, 2024 16:47:09 GMT -5
But why go to "bigotry" in the first place? Can we at least acknowledge that there may be other rationales as to why Harris lost the election, other than bigotry? I have ideas... if you're interested. Please enlighten me. I'd love to see some good reasons to vote for Trump. This election was really about both the person AND the policies. It's not necessarily voting for Trump as it for many, it was a vote against Harris. If you were honest, you'd know that Kamala Harris should never have even been in a position to run for the presidency. She was and remains a mindless cipher whose sole previous success had come from a lifetime spent slavishly slicking and shucking her way up the greasy pole of California politics... a land where merit and intellect matter vastly less than do demographic profile, looks, and availability. She is simply unintelligent and constantly conveyed as much every time she was forced to open her mouth and speak outside of scripted venues. It’s not something that can be conquered, either.... you’re either dumb or you’re not. No wonder she managed to lose the popular vote to Donald Trump, of all people. I will always argue this, that the mainstream media’s coverage of American politics is so often so indistinguishable from cheerleading for the Democratic Party that Democrats never actually have a good, reliable, realistic sense of how they’re doing. The lack of self-awareness is a major problem, and if Democrats refuses to confront that, they'll keep losing elections. Furthermore, policy-wise, it’s all the big stuff — defeat in Afghanistan, a porous border, inflation, and (yes, this really matters) Biden’s refusal to acknowledge reality and step aside in time for Democrats to have a real primary. The fact that Harris never saw a primary vote was a real albatross to certain Democrat and Independent voters. Part of the Democrat's "cockiness" in this election is that they believed that progressivism was still popular...and that the traditional midterm backlash of 2018 convinced them that Trump had proven to be so unpopular, they could move as far to the left as they wanted, and the electorate would still always pick them over Trump and his MAGA candidates. They thought wrong. Progressivism, liberalism, woke-ism — they will never be the same. They won’t wither away completely. But the Democrats just learned the hardest of hard lessons: The electorate...not just straight white males...doesn’t want their brand of deeply divisive identity politics, deliberate conflation of legal immigration and illegal immigration, policies that reflexively recommend and enact permanent bodily changes for teenagers questioning their gender identity, and basically the entire agenda of the 2019 Kamala Harris presidential campaign. It reminds of this story (joke?) about this advertising genius who was brought in to revitalize the sales of a brand of dog food. He redesigns the packaging, runs a whole bunch of appealing commercials, and gets a bright, vibrant display for the brand right in the front of the supermarket. But as he’s shopping for groceries, he watches a customer walking a dog reach down to buy the other leading brand. Exasperated, the advertising genius goes up to the man and asks why, despite the new packaging, commercials, and display, he bought the other leading brand and not this marketing genius' client’s brand of dog food. The customer shrugs and points to his dog, saying “He won’t eat it.” Democrats, the electorate is just not going to eat your dog food. It doesn’t matter if you raise more money and spend more on ads and have more campaign offices and have more doorknockers and volunteers. The sales pitch isn’t really the problem; the product is. I truly hope Democrats takes this as an opportunity to reflect and adjust their "marketing" strategy going forward. America wins when both parties put up decent candidates that doesn't cater to their extreme base. |
|
|
|
Post by herzlos on Nov 7, 2024 16:48:48 GMT -5
DOJ is already looking into winding down all of Trumps federal investigations ahead of him becoming President again: www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2n4x1p70roBecause they think he'll be immune again as soon as he becomes President, and nothing will happen before then. He's also unlikely to get another impeachment for any of it since the Republicans control everything.
He's bloody got away with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by herzlos on Nov 7, 2024 16:53:26 GMT -5
Please enlighten me. I'd love to see some good reasons to vote for Trump. This election was really about both the person AND the policies. It's not necessarily voting for Trump as it for many, it was a vote against Harris. If you were honest, you'd know that Kamala Harris should never have even been in a position to run for the presidency. She was and remains a mindless cipher whose sole previous success had come from a lifetime spent slavishly slicking and shucking her way up the greasy pole of California politics... a land where merit and intellect matter vastly less than do demographic profile, looks, and availability. She is simply unintelligent and constantly conveyed as much every time she was forced to open her mouth and speak outside of scripted venues. It’s not something that can be conquered, either.... you’re either dumb or you’re not. No wonder she managed to lose the popular vote to Donald Trump, of all people. I will always argue this, that the mainstream media’s coverage of American politics is so often so indistinguishable from cheerleading for the Democratic Party that Democrats never actually have a good, reliable, realistic sense of how they’re doing. The lack of self-awareness is a major problem, and if Democrats refuses to confront that, they'll keep losing elections. Furthermore, policy-wise, it’s all the big stuff — defeat in Afghanistan, a porous border, inflation, and (yes, this really matters) Biden’s refusal to acknowledge reality and step aside in time for Democrats to have a real primary. The fact that Harris never saw a primary vote was a real albatross to certain Democrat and Independent voters. Part of the Democrat's "cockiness" in this election is that they believed that progressivism was still popular...and that the traditional midterm backlash of 2018 convinced them that Trump had proven to be so unpopular, they could move as far to the left as they wanted, and the electorate would still always pick them over Trump and his MAGA candidates. They thought wrong. Progressivism, liberalism, woke-ism — they will never be the same. They won’t wither away completely. But the Democrats just learned the hardest of hard lessons: The electorate...not just straight white males...doesn’t want their brand of deeply divisive identity politics, deliberate conflation of legal immigration and illegal immigration, policies that reflexively recommend and enact permanent bodily changes for teenagers questioning their gender identity, and basically the entire agenda of the 2019 Kamala Harris presidential campaign. It reminds of this story (joke?) about this advertising genius who was brought in to revitalize the sales of a brand of dog food. He redesigns the packaging, runs a whole bunch of appealing commercials, and gets a bright, vibrant display for the brand right in the front of the supermarket. But as he’s shopping for groceries, he watches a customer walking a dog reach down to buy the other leading brand. Exasperated, the advertising genius goes up to the man and asks why, despite the new packaging, commercials, and display, he bought the other leading brand and not this marketing genius' client’s brand of dog food. The customer shrugs and points to his dog, saying “He won’t eat it.” Democrats, the electorate is just not going to eat your dog food. It doesn’t matter if you raise more money and spend more on ads and have more campaign offices and have more doorknockers and volunteers. The sales pitch isn’t really the problem; the product is. I truly hope Democrats takes this as an opportunity to reflect and adjust their "marketing" strategy going forward. America wins when both parties put up decent candidates that doesn't cater to their extreme base.
I actually agree with most of that, though I'm confused as to why you think she's unintelligent and didn't get where she was by merit. As a black woman she's almost certainly overcome hurdles we don't even know exist. She laughs a lot, which is unusual for women in US politics, but she's always come across to me as pretty sharp and coherent.
I also don't think mainstream media was pro-Democrat. Most of them wailed on Biden just as much.
I do think that the Democrats laid into the "Vote Harris because Trump sucks" a bit too hard, got stuck in a bit of a bubble and underestimated Trumps impact on voters. I'm not convinced they could win over many on the Trump side. How do you win over people who think tariffs will save the USA whilst not being able to explain how tariffs work?
From all the hype and funds raised for Harris, her rallies being huge whilst Trump rallies were getting quieter and quieter, the misplaced certainty that people wouldn't vote Trump again, likely left a lot of people convinced Harris was going to win and probably spurred a lot of Republicans to get out and vote. They totally flubbed it.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobtheinquisitor on Nov 7, 2024 16:58:58 GMT -5
I'm going to agree with Hordini here. The solution to the Whembly problem is to simply put him on ignore and do not engage with him. It's worked wonders for me. Unfortunately I find ignoring the problem of rampant falsehoods leads to waking up to a felon president. |
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Nov 7, 2024 17:00:22 GMT -5
I'm going to agree with Hordini here. The solution to the Whembly problem is to simply put him on ignore and do not engage with him. It's worked wonders for me. Unfortunately I find ignoring the problem of rampant falsehoods leads to waking up to a felon president. You could argue that had the media not given him tons of attention and sane-washed him these last 8 years, he might have never gotten started in the first place. |
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Nov 7, 2024 17:01:40 GMT -5
You know how Malus pointed out the whole "leaving a conversation and then returning later as though it never happened" thing? Here it is in action. That correlation isn't causation isn't a matter of disagreement or dispute over interpretations. It's fundamental, demonstrable, basic logic. It's the difference between being able to show that something's actually connected and something happening simultaneously by chance.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobtheinquisitor on Nov 7, 2024 17:05:31 GMT -5
You know how Malus pointed out the whole "leaving a conversation and then returning later as though it never happened" thing? Here it is in action. That correlation isn't causation isn't a matter of disagreement or dispute over interpretations. It's fundamental, demonstrable, basic logic. It's the difference between being able to show that something's actually connected and something happening simultaneously by chance. Is this addressed to my comment? |
|
|
|
Post by whembly on Nov 7, 2024 17:06:31 GMT -5
This election was really about both the person AND the policies. It's not necessarily voting for Trump as it for many, it was a vote against Harris. If you were honest, you'd know that Kamala Harris should never have even been in a position to run for the presidency. She was and remains a mindless cipher whose sole previous success had come from a lifetime spent slavishly slicking and shucking her way up the greasy pole of California politics... a land where merit and intellect matter vastly less than do demographic profile, looks, and availability. She is simply unintelligent and constantly conveyed as much every time she was forced to open her mouth and speak outside of scripted venues. It’s not something that can be conquered, either.... you’re either dumb or you’re not. No wonder she managed to lose the popular vote to Donald Trump, of all people. I will always argue this, that the mainstream media’s coverage of American politics is so often so indistinguishable from cheerleading for the Democratic Party that Democrats never actually have a good, reliable, realistic sense of how they’re doing. The lack of self-awareness is a major problem, and if Democrats refuses to confront that, they'll keep losing elections. Furthermore, policy-wise, it’s all the big stuff — defeat in Afghanistan, a porous border, inflation, and (yes, this really matters) Biden’s refusal to acknowledge reality and step aside in time for Democrats to have a real primary. The fact that Harris never saw a primary vote was a real albatross to certain Democrat and Independent voters. Part of the Democrat's "cockiness" in this election is that they believed that progressivism was still popular...and that the traditional midterm backlash of 2018 convinced them that Trump had proven to be so unpopular, they could move as far to the left as they wanted, and the electorate would still always pick them over Trump and his MAGA candidates. They thought wrong. Progressivism, liberalism, woke-ism — they will never be the same. They won’t wither away completely. But the Democrats just learned the hardest of hard lessons: The electorate...not just straight white males...doesn’t want their brand of deeply divisive identity politics, deliberate conflation of legal immigration and illegal immigration, policies that reflexively recommend and enact permanent bodily changes for teenagers questioning their gender identity, and basically the entire agenda of the 2019 Kamala Harris presidential campaign. It reminds of this story (joke?) about this advertising genius who was brought in to revitalize the sales of a brand of dog food. He redesigns the packaging, runs a whole bunch of appealing commercials, and gets a bright, vibrant display for the brand right in the front of the supermarket. But as he’s shopping for groceries, he watches a customer walking a dog reach down to buy the other leading brand. Exasperated, the advertising genius goes up to the man and asks why, despite the new packaging, commercials, and display, he bought the other leading brand and not this marketing genius' client’s brand of dog food. The customer shrugs and points to his dog, saying “He won’t eat it.” Democrats, the electorate is just not going to eat your dog food. It doesn’t matter if you raise more money and spend more on ads and have more campaign offices and have more doorknockers and volunteers. The sales pitch isn’t really the problem; the product is. I truly hope Democrats takes this as an opportunity to reflect and adjust their "marketing" strategy going forward. America wins when both parties put up decent candidates that doesn't cater to their extreme base.
I actually agree with most of that, though I'm confused as to why you think she's unintelligent and didn't get where she was by merit. As a black woman she's almost certainly overcome hurdles we don't even know exist. She laughs a lot, which is unusual for women in US politics, but she's always come across to me as pretty sharp and coherent.
When I say she's unintelligent, it's more of a reflection of her political acumen, rather than raw brain IQ. She's a San Frisco uber-leftist activist cos-playing as a politician. (which to be fair, isn't unusual). She comes off as unintelligent, because she's hiding what she truly believes and struggles to navigate that in a national election, knowing that the non-coastal elite voters doesn't support her policies. It's why she copies some of Trump's planks, like "no tips for waiters" and others. I'll give her this: She excels at saying a lot of words without saying anything meaningful. Like, a student who hasn't read the book, but is trying to fill the speech with nonsense just to get through with her book report. |
|
|
|
Post by whembly on Nov 7, 2024 17:10:06 GMT -5
You know how Malus pointed out the whole "leaving a conversation and then returning later as though it never happened" thing? Here it is in action. That correlation isn't causation isn't a matter of disagreement or dispute over interpretations. It's fundamental, demonstrable, basic logic. It's the difference between being able to show that something's actually connected and something happening simultaneously by chance. Hmmm... no. I'm not interested in this "game" that you claim its based on scientific method, where you effectively appeal to authority in every argument you posit. I posted the statistic from the actual Border Patrol Agency that clearly demonstrates the massive influx of migrants during the Biden/Harris term compared to the previous administration. And it's you, who won't confront that. |
|
|
|
Post by A Town Called Malus on Nov 7, 2024 17:11:56 GMT -5
You know how Malus pointed out the whole "leaving a conversation and then returning later as though it never happened" thing? Here it is in action. That correlation isn't causation isn't a matter of disagreement or dispute over interpretations. It's fundamental, demonstrable, basic logic. It's the difference between being able to show that something's actually connected and something happening simultaneously by chance. Hmmm... no. I'm not interested in this "game" that you claim its based on scientific method, where you effectively appeal to authority in every argument you posit. I posted the statistic for the actual Border Patrol Agency that clearly demonstrates the massive influx of migrants during the Biden/Harris term compared to the previous administration. And it's you, who won't confront that. But you haven't shared any policy change or mechanism to prove it was actually related to anything that Biden did, and are ignoring the massive spike that happened under Trump prior to the COVID pandemic. You also haven't addressed what effect the change in reporting that happened from 2020 on had on the numbers. It is entirely possible that the numbers only increased so starkly due to a change in reporting criteria, just like how left handedness massively spiked after we stopped beating people for being left handed. |
|
|
|
Post by whembly on Nov 7, 2024 17:17:42 GMT -5
Hmmm... no. I'm not interested in this "game" that you claim its based on scientific method, where you effectively appeal to authority in every argument you posit. I posted the statistic for the actual Border Patrol Agency that clearly demonstrates the massive influx of migrants during the Biden/Harris term compared to the previous administration. And it's you, who won't confront that. But you haven't shared any policy change or mechanism to prove it was actually related to anything that Biden did, and are ignoring the massive spike that happened under Trump prior to the COVID pandemic. Biden reversed all of Trump immigration policies on Day one. There's your policy change. Biden also issued orders to the DHS to liberalize the asylum claims, that is being abused by economic-migrants. I mean, just look at this chart: cis.org/sites/default/files/2024-05/pop-5-24-f2.jpgIt's clear as day. |
|
|
|
Post by A Town Called Malus on Nov 7, 2024 17:19:48 GMT -5
What specific policies were those, though?
Again, specifics please. You based your vote on this. Surely you actually did research to know exactly what the change was.
And again, how do you explain the spike in fy2019 compared to fy2018?
And we're not using the cis. We're using the CBP numbers by your own request.
For instance, what do the CIS include under foreign-born? What is their criteria?
|
|
|
|
Post by Peregrine on Nov 7, 2024 17:21:09 GMT -5
Do you want me to ban him because he's not good enough at arguing? I don't think he should be banned for being bad at arguing, I think he should be banned if he continues to post in bad faith without even attempting to argue. Spamming "cope and seethe", "fap fap fap fap", etc is not being bad at arguing or holding a controversial point of view, it's pure trolling intended solely to get people angry at him. And then there's stuff like otzone.proboards.com/post/150898/thread where he's asked a reasonable question, to provide evidence of causation instead of merely correlation, and his response is to claim victory and refuse to continue the discussion. He knows exactly what he's doing and it isn't something that leads to constructive discussion. |
|
|
|
Post by Peregrine on Nov 7, 2024 17:27:05 GMT -5
I'm not interested in this "game" that you claim its based on scientific method, where you effectively appeal to authority in every argument you posit. I posted the statistic from the actual Border Patrol Agency that clearly demonstrates the massive influx of migrants during the Biden/Harris term compared to the previous administration. And it's you, who won't confront that. It isn't a "game", it's a basic understanding of how reality works. Correlation and causation are not the same, especially on a topic as complicated as illegal immigration. For example, let's say next fall with Trump in office a major hurricane hits northern Mexico and causes massive infrastructure damage, loss of homes and jobs, etc. As a result a lot of residents of those areas head north, illegally cross the border, and try to live in the US. Would you claim that this massive influx of migrants is a result of Trump's policies? Or would you point out that it was driven by external factors the US can not control? Biden also issued orders to the DHS to liberalize the asylum claims, that is being abused by economic-migrants. And that right there is the racist bait and switch. You talk about illegal immigration, frame it in the context of the harm done by the cartels and drug smuggling, but then your supposed evidence is about asylum claims. And whether or not you like the criteria used to determine if someone is eligible for asylum it is indisputable fact that the asylum process is LEGAL immigration. You aren't objecting to criminals breaking the law, you're salty about the US allowing "too many" legal immigrants in. She is simply unintelligent and constantly conveyed as much every time she was forced to open her mouth and speak outside of scripted venues. It’s not something that can be conquered, either.... you’re either dumb or you’re not. "Harris doesn't speak intelligently enough so I'm voting for Trump", said nobody with above room temperature IQ. There you go with the revisionist history. The defeat in Afgnanistan was the direct result of Trump's decision to withdraw, it was arranged and scheduled before Biden took office. You're blaming Biden and Harris for executing Trump's policy decisions and using that as an excuse to vote for Trump FFS. And if you want to speak in more general terms about Afghanistan the war was really lost in the Bush administration, where we lost sight of the goal of destroying a specific enemy and turned it into a poorly defined long-term occupation with no coherent goals or victory conditions. There was never going to be anything but defeat, the only question was which administration would finally accept the obvious and take responsibility for leaving. You say this but every time I've seen a complaint about not having a primary vote it has come from people who were 100% committed to Trump and were not going to vote for a democrat regardless of who it was. Part of the Democrat's "cockiness" in this election is that they believed that progressivism was still popular...and that the traditional midterm backlash of 2018 convinced them that Trump had proven to be so unpopular, they could move as far to the left as they wanted, and the electorate would still always pick them over Trump and his MAGA candidates. There you go, there's the blatant transphobia that we all knew was why you voted for Trump! Good to see you finally admitting it in public. And sure, maybe the US as a whole is bigoted enough to vote for Trump over that stuff. This is not a fact to be proud of if it is true. If you think Harris was an extreme leftist you are deeply, deeply ignorant about politics outside of your bubble. She was a typical center-left democrat on the US scale, center-right on the general "western" scale. She was only extreme on the Fox News scale where everyone who isn't a republican is an EXTREME LIBERAL COMMUNIST. |
|
