Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

T5 Official Discussion: The Trump Presidency

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by RussianCoffeeAddict View Post
    It'll end the shutdown.
    They've taken reasonable steps to end it. The shutdown is in Trump's (and his ilk's) hands.

    At this point, I don't particularly give a damn if the wall is built or not; it's barely 1% of the budget allocated to a useless thing
    Yes, you've reminded me how you don't seem to particularity care about much and how you would rather laugh about the absolute state of our country. Understandable for a child that's still living on his mother's paycheck.

    Do the math, lol. Trillions...4.4 trillion, from what I can tell.

    20 billion is the wall's price.

    Under 1% of the federal budget.

    Actually...

    Under half a percentage of the federal budget.

    As I said...tiny.
    So?

    Never insinuated such.
    You implied it.

    Just that the wall would be an improvement in tax dollars spent by comparison of the tax dollars spent on foreign wars...hence why I'm not all that offended by the "morality of the wall."
    This stupid logic works under the assumption that our tax dollars are only used to fund foreign wars and that the wall isn't a step back from other fundings that exists.

    Comment


      Originally posted by RussianCoffeeAddict View Post
      I mean, Cid...

      We've skimped out on going into places over far worse things, IIRC.

      Let the world be a mess if it's gonna be a mess.

      At the least, our meddling just only kind of seems to make things worse...
      It's a pretty shit situation either way, mate. But as I've said multiple times in response to various things... We also have to consider our reputation on the global stage. Which is worst?

      "The United States is always sticking their nose into things! They might be making it all worst!"

      Or

      "This tyrannical dictator literally just threw a baby into a wood chipper on TV and the United States just collectively shrugged and said ''eh, not our problem.'"

      Comment


        Originally posted by Cid View Post

        There's a name for the fallacy you're using here... But I can't quite remember what's it's called...

        You're essentially saying "we're using more money on worse things so why fight using less money on something that isn't as bad?" And the answer to your question is simply... "Why use any of that money on something bad when it could all be used for something good?"

        This isn't algebra mate, two negatives don't make a positive.
        Yes. I know that a useless wall is still a waste, even when the military stuff is a worse investment.

        But considering the other benefits of the wall that I see (outside of anything Trump says it will do, obviously), the money looks like a price tag for other things that aren't related to the wall.

        Honestly, at this point, I think I'm done. Not much else for me to say that I haven't repeated.

        I think the wall being built would be something of a strategic retreat, you think it's just a failing on Democrats part (and so do the others in your camp).

        So I think I'm just gonna go to bed now.

        Comment


        Originally posted by Cid View Post
        'eh, not our problem.'"
        It's really not. Besides, the US isn't this unyielding pillar of virtue. We have enough trouble policing ourselves, as seen by BLM; what gives us the right to police anyone else?

        As for Assad killing his own people... You do realize that Obama has done similar things, yes?
        Last edited by Lord L'Zoril; January 12th, 2019, 07:15 AM.

        Comment


          Originally posted by Oneiros View Post

          It's really not. Besides, the US isn't this unyielding pillar of virtue. We have enough trouble policing ourselves, as seen by BLM; what gives us the right to police anyone else?

          As for Assad killing his own people... You do realize that Obama has done similar things, yes?
          "Do as I say, not as I do"

          It's probably the most hypocritical piece of advice I've ever gotten, also some of the best.

          We should always strive to be a world leader.

          Comment


            Originally posted by Cid View Post

            "Do as I say, not as I do"

            It's probably the most hypocritical piece of advice I've ever gotten, also some of the best.

            We should always strive to be a world leader.
            Realistically, who is going to obey a plain old hypocrite, much less a sanctimonious one? Nobody, unless we "convince" them otherwise. Surely, you see the issue here.

            Comment


              Originally posted by Oneiros View Post

              Realistically, who is going to obey a plain old hypocrite, much less a sanctimonious one? Nobody, unless we "convince" them otherwise. Surely, you see the issue here.
              We should be cleaning our own stuff up, year... But are we supposed to let the rest of the world go to shit while we do it?

              Personally, I'd rather we make the UN man up and do it's job. Have NATO forces handling these humanitarian problems as opposed to the US just outright sending our army in.

              But... Realistically, is that ever going to happen? Probably not with how shit the current state of affairs is.

              Comment


                Originally posted by Cid View Post

                We should be cleaning our own stuff up, year... But are we supposed to let the rest of the world go to shit while we do it?

                Personally, I'd rather we make the UN man up and do it's job. Have NATO forces handling these humanitarian problems as opposed to the US just outright sending our army in.

                But... Realistically, is that ever going to happen? Probably not with how shit the current state of affairs is.
                NATO only exists to suppress Russia, signifying that Trump was actually right even though he went about it completely the wrong way. Our "allies" really don't contribute much outside of trade. However, they will cry to Uncle America whenever they need aid against an unfriendly, which is often.

                Instead of remaining on Russia's nuts well after the Cold War is "over," those collective NATO forces (not just ours) could definitely help keep the world from going to even more shit. And that would also solve the problem of America being the singular shot-caller, incidentally.

                But alas...

                Comment


                  Originally posted by Oneiros View Post
                  But alas...
                  My point exactly. It's a bureaucratic mess and I doubt all the whining in the world would fix it unless you have a leader AND congress bent on doing it.

                  So it's kind of back to what I said before... Which is worse for the US?

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by Cid View Post

                    My point exactly. It's a bureaucratic mess and I doubt all the whining in the world would fix it unless you have a leader AND congress bent on doing it.

                    So it's kind of back to what I said before... Which is worse for the US?
                    Hard to say. It's a bit of a lose-lose because everyone will hate us in varying degrees either way.
                    Last edited by Lord L'Zoril; January 12th, 2019, 08:09 AM. Reason: Cleared up wording.

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by Cid View Post
                      The "our US budget is trillions" argument doesn't hold much weight. The $20 billion that Trump wants for the wall is a fraction of the total budget, sure, but it's also much more than many organizations get.

                      Heck, NASA's budget for 2018 was $20 billion... And with that funding, they launched a prob to explore the corona of the sun, continued missions to explore Jupiter and it's moons, continued operations to explore the surface of Mars, and mapped a few drawf planets beyond Pluto. Imagine what NASA could do with $40 billion?
                      Go back to bed, grandpa. Space was relevant back in the 60s.
                      Originally posted by Kajin_Style ;n513566
                      Why should I even give a damn that some faggot is being stoned to death in another country?

                      Comment


                        https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/11/u...a-inquiry.html

                        Damn, how did I miss this gem yesterday?

                        Originally posted by DokTOR. View Post

                        Go back to bed, grandpa. Space was relevant back in the 60s.
                        You should be an astronaut. Go be the first man on Mars.

                        And don't come back.

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by Cid View Post
                          https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/11/u...a-inquiry.html

                          Damn, how did I miss this gem yesterday?



                          You should be an astronaut. Go be the first man on Mars.

                          And don't come back.
                          Matt Damon beat me to it
                          Originally posted by Kajin_Style ;n513566
                          Why should I even give a damn that some faggot is being stoned to death in another country?

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by DokTOR. View Post

                            Matt Damon beat me to it
                            You right. Damn good movie.

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by Cid View Post
                              Go be the first man on Mars.

                              And don't come back.
                              I mean...

                              Comment


                              • Cid
                                Cid commented
                                Editing a comment
                                You got something to say!?

                              • Lord L'Zoril
                                Lord L'Zoril commented
                                Editing a comment
                                Redundant, is all. Also, reported for threatening grievous bodily harm.

                              • Cid
                                Cid commented
                                Editing a comment
                                I felt the latter bit needed to really be implied. So he didn't think I wanted him back.

                              Originally posted by Cid View Post

                              If they don't push a very progressive agenda after 2016, then they deserve four more years of Donald Trump.
                              The problem is if they let the crazy portion of the progressive movement at the forefront they will also lose. Think of the open boarder types as well as the UBI type stuff.

                              I personally support UBI, but at this point in time we cannot hope to achieve it without getting the country more modernized socially.

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by Raniero View Post


                                Refer to what Cid said. Strategically, it doesn't benefit the Democrats in any significant means that's readily apparent. What Peth proposed is conjecture that works under the assumption that voters, Republicans specifically, will have a very particular mindset. Any Republicans that have heavily supported the wall will not suddenly denounce Republican or vote Democrat, because they're far too loyal to their party. They'll merely deflect the blame to Democrats. Democrat voters will blame Republicans either way. Nothing changes.


                                .
                                Except there are more people than republicans and democrats. Libertarians have a loose alliance with republicans and they only need to have enough evidence that republicans won't be fiscally responsible to leave the party or take it over. The republican party is a coalition of ideologies ranging from Libertarian to Evangelical Christians. If the democrats cannot convince them to vote blue, their best bet is to make them stop voting red. It's similar to how those who are in the green party stopped voting democrat when it was made clear that the democrats weren't representing their values.

                                The way you win macro politics is by letting your opponent hang themselves by giving them enough rope, then taking full advantage of the debacle to try and scrape away as much support as possible. Especially when you're in a two party system that has the country galvanized. It's why republicans now aim to simply lower voter turnout and focus on keeping their demographics voting, because they are losing support from the majority and their demographics are dwindling so they can no longer hope to recruit help, they can only make it so democrats get less.



                                Nothing hurt the democrats more in 2016 than when Trump rightfully pointed out Hillary didn't earn her nomination and that Bernie was cheated out of his primary. To say that having legitimate facts to point to does nothing is a lie. Plenty of republicans have abandoned Trump because they do not agree with him or his policies.

                                Comment


                                • RussianCoffeeAddict
                                  Editing a comment
                                  And this is what I'm talking about.

                                  Never interfere with your enemy when he is making a mistake.

                                • #83.6666666667
                                  #83.6666666667 commented
                                  Editing a comment
                                  "Libertarians have a loose alliance with republicans and they only need to have enough evidence that republicans won't be fiscally responsible to leave the party or take it over"
                                  Last edited by #83.6666666667; January 13th, 2019, 06:33 PM.

                                Originally posted by Cid View Post
                                https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/11/u...a-inquiry.html

                                Damn, how did I miss this gem yesterday?



                                You should be an astronaut. Go be the first man on Mars.

                                And don't come back.
                                So what happened to Trump's spaceforce, Cid?

                                Comment


                                  Originally posted by J peth View Post

                                  The problem is if they let the crazy portion of the progressive movement at the forefront they will also lose. Think of the open boarder types as well as the UBI type stuff.

                                  I personally support UBI, but at this point in time we cannot hope to achieve it without getting the country more modernized socially.
                                  Not entirely sure how I feel about UBI. I don't know if it would be a good solution for America. There's plenty of opportunity for people to succeed here, unlike in some countries that are playing around with the idea. I think for us, it's more important to open up those opportunities through things like free public universities.

                                  Originally posted by J peth View Post

                                  Except there are more people than republicans and democrats. Libertarians have a loose alliance with republicans and they only need to have enough evidence that republicans won't be fiscally responsible to leave the party or take it over. The republican party is a coalition of ideologies ranging from Libertarian to Evangelical Christians. If the democrats cannot convince them to vote blue, their best bet is to make them stop voting red. It's similar to how those who are in the green party stopped voting democrat when it was made clear that the democrats weren't representing their values.

                                  The way you win macro politics is by letting your opponent hang themselves by giving them enough rope, then taking full advantage of the debacle to try and scrape away as much support as possible. Especially when you're in a two party system that has the country galvanized. It's why republicans now aim to simply lower voter turnout and focus on keeping their demographics voting, because they are losing support from the majority and their demographics are dwindling so they can no longer hope to recruit help, they can only make it so democrats get less.



                                  Nothing hurt the democrats more in 2016 than when Trump rightfully pointed out Hillary didn't earn her nomination and that Bernie was cheated out of his primary. To say that having legitimate facts to point to does nothing is a lie. Plenty of republicans have abandoned Trump because they do not agree with him or his policies.
                                  I'm not sure if there's enough numbers there. Seems like a good percentage of libertarians actually vote libertarian. Johnson had 1.3 million votes in 2016. There's more independent voters in the US than there are Democrats or Republicans, but that's misleading. As are the percentage of voters registered as Dems or Reps. States like Alabama, for example, don't require you to register a party. So Alabama's entire population is registered independent, though they're mostly republican. So goes for Washington where they're mostly democrats. It would probably be pretty difficult to gauge true party strength without just taking presidential votes at face value.

                                  Originally posted by Flame Saber View Post

                                  So what happened to Trump's spaceforce, Cid?
                                  Hopefully in hell where it belongs.

                                  Comment


                                    Originally posted by Cid View Post

                                    Not entirely sure how I feel about UBI. I don't know if it would be a good solution for America. There's plenty of opportunity for people to succeed here, unlike in some countries that are playing around with the idea. I think for us, it's more important to open up those opportunities through things like free public universities.
                                    I agree, but I was more saying the far left points are going to be a hindrance rather than a boon for current politics and should thus be avoided despite being dubbed "progressive"

                                    Originally posted by Cid View Post
                                    I'm not sure if there's enough numbers there. Seems like a good percentage of libertarians actually vote libertarian. Johnson had 1.3 million votes in 2016. There's more independent voters in the US than there are Democrats or Republicans, but that's misleading. As are the percentage of voters registered as Dems or Reps. States like Alabama, for example, don't require you to register a party. So Alabama's entire population is registered independent, though they're mostly republican. So goes for Washington where they're mostly democrats. It would probably be pretty difficult to gauge true party strength without just taking presidential votes at face value.
                                    That's why I said "scrape" as to show that it's a minor amount lost. But it adds up over time. You have to chip away at your opposition party if you're going to win in a two party system like we have when it's well entrenched as it is.

                                    Comment

                                    Working...
                                    X