Random Politics

Post by **brian** » Thu Apr 27, 2017 2:48 pm

Sometimes it's hard to believe that people that stupid are actually responsible for making our laws.

Post by **brian** » Thu Apr 27, 2017 3:05 pm

P.D.X. · Post by **P.D.X.** » Thu Apr 27, 2017 3:13 pm

brian wrote:Sometimes it's hard to believe that people that stupid are actually responsible for making our laws.

I can't even wrap my head around all the layers of stupidity packed into there. Does he think weed is being imported legally so we should make it illegal? Or are these bales coming in illegally to a country that can grow it's own weed just fine? Why can't a nuke just be wrapped around any product that's being smuggled in? Is he pre-blaming stoners for the next terror attack? Is NK growing the good shit?

Post by **brian** » Thu Apr 27, 2017 3:20 pm

Yeah, it's almost like a mobius strip of stupidity, brilliant in its own insanity. I first thought that he was implying that our ports are somehow letting shipments of marijuana from North Korea through customs, which is funny when you consider that I'm not even sure it's possible to mail a postcard from the DPRK to the United States. And then yeah you nailed most of the insanity from there.

DSafetyGuy · Post by **DSafetyGuy** » Thu Apr 27, 2017 3:20 pm

brian wrote:Sometimes it's hard to believe that people that stupid are actually responsible for making our laws.

And then, I remember their constituents.

Pruitt · Post by **Pruitt** » Thu Apr 27, 2017 3:23 pm

brian wrote:Sometimes it's hard to believe that people that stupid are actually responsible for making our laws.

The mind reels.

Regarding the Zuckerberg post - do "hard workin' folks" ever get tired of being treated this way?
Are they supposed to be grateful that king tech boy thinks they work hard?

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Thu Apr 27, 2017 3:28 pm

Pruitt wrote:
Regarding the Zuckerberg post - do "hard workin' folks" ever get tired of being treated this way?
Are they supposed to be grateful that king tech boy thinks they work hard?

They like being recognized by someone who doesn't fully understand what they do, yes. But they don't like to be patronized. I don't think Zuckerberg was patronizing there. Seemed fairly genuine.

The Sybian · Post by **The Sybian** » Thu Apr 27, 2017 4:41 pm

A_B wrote:
Pruitt wrote:
Regarding the Zuckerberg post - do "hard workin' folks" ever get tired of being treated this way?
Are they supposed to be grateful that king tech boy thinks they work hard?

They like being recognized by someone who doesn't fully understand what they do, yes. But they don't like to be patronized. I don't think Zuckerberg was patronizing there. Seemed fairly genuine.

Such an interesting dilemma for the 2020 Dem field. It seems clear the difference in Trump winning was telling blue collar workers in Michigan, Wisconsin and Ohio that he would fix all of their problems, while they felt Hillary ignored them. Trump promised the impossible. Is it patronizing to say "I will bring back all of your factory jobs?" I would have thought so, but it worked. I watched a lot of post-election shows interviewing people in blue collar counties that voted for Trump after voting for Obama twice. So many of the people interviewed said they knew Trump's promises were empty and unrealistic, but voted for him anyways because it showed he at least cared about their problems. If Hillary did what Zuckerberg did there, it would have been transparent pandering, we all would have made fun of her, but it might have been the difference in winning the election.

Joe K · Post by **Joe K** » Thu Apr 27, 2017 5:07 pm

The Sybian wrote:
A_B wrote:
Pruitt wrote:
Regarding the Zuckerberg post - do "hard workin' folks" ever get tired of being treated this way?
Are they supposed to be grateful that king tech boy thinks they work hard?

They like being recognized by someone who doesn't fully understand what they do, yes. But they don't like to be patronized. I don't think Zuckerberg was patronizing there. Seemed fairly genuine.
Such an interesting dilemma for the 2020 Dem field. It seems clear the difference in Trump winning was telling blue collar workers in Michigan, Wisconsin and Ohio that he would fix all of their problems, while they felt Hillary ignored them. Trump promised the impossible. Is it patronizing to say "I will bring back all of your factory jobs?" I would have thought so, but it worked. I watched a lot of post-election shows interviewing people in blue collar counties that voted for Trump after voting for Obama twice. So many of the people interviewed said they knew Trump's promises were empty and unrealistic, but voted for him anyways because it showed he at least cared about their problems. If Hillary did what Zuckerberg did there, it would have been transparent pandering, we all would have made fun of her, but it might have been the difference in winning the election.

I think it's possible to appeal to those voters and show that you care about their problems without making unrealistic promises. But the Clinton campaign didn't even make the attempt to persuade those voters, based on its infamous conclusion that "for every blue collar voter we lose in Western Pennsylvania, we'll gain two voters in the Philly suburbs." That said, someone like Zuckerberg, a Harvard educated tech billionaire who grew up in Westchester County, is about the worst messenger to the Rust Belt that I can think of. But I at least give him points for effort.

Pruitt · Post by **Pruitt** » Thu Apr 27, 2017 6:25 pm

Joe K wrote:
The Sybian wrote:
A_B wrote:
Pruitt wrote:
Regarding the Zuckerberg post - do "hard workin' folks" ever get tired of being treated this way?
Are they supposed to be grateful that king tech boy thinks they work hard?

They like being recognized by someone who doesn't fully understand what they do, yes. But they don't like to be patronized. I don't think Zuckerberg was patronizing there. Seemed fairly genuine.
Such an interesting dilemma for the 2020 Dem field. It seems clear the difference in Trump winning was telling blue collar workers in Michigan, Wisconsin and Ohio that he would fix all of their problems, while they felt Hillary ignored them. Trump promised the impossible. Is it patronizing to say "I will bring back all of your factory jobs?" I would have thought so, but it worked. I watched a lot of post-election shows interviewing people in blue collar counties that voted for Trump after voting for Obama twice. So many of the people interviewed said they knew Trump's promises were empty and unrealistic, but voted for him anyways because it showed he at least cared about their problems. If Hillary did what Zuckerberg did there, it would have been transparent pandering, we all would have made fun of her, but it might have been the difference in winning the election.
I think it's possible to appeal to those voters and show that you care about their problems without making unrealistic promises. But the Clinton campaign didn't even make the attempt to persuade those voters, based on its infamous conclusion that "for every blue collar voter we lose in Western Pennsylvania, we'll gain two voters in the Philly suburbs." That said, someone like Zuckerberg, a Harvard educated tech billionaire who grew up in Westchester County, is about the worst messenger to the Rust Belt that I can think of. But I at least give him points for effort.

And a Jew married to a woman of Asian background.

Not happening.

Post by **brian** » Thu Apr 27, 2017 6:54 pm

After the US elected an atheist married to a Slovak prostitute I'd say anything is possible.

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Thu Apr 27, 2017 7:56 pm

brian wrote:After the US elected an atheist married to a Slovak prostitute I'd say anything is possible.

Steve of phpBB · Post by **Steve of phpBB** » Fri Apr 28, 2017 9:58 am

brian wrote:After the US elected an atheist married to a Slovak prostitute I'd say anything is possible.

Dude, that is over the line.

She's a Slovene. Not a Slovak.

Post by **brian** » Fri Apr 28, 2017 11:07 am

Steve of phpBB wrote:
brian wrote:After the US elected an atheist married to a Slovak prostitute I'd say anything is possible.
Dude, that is over the line.

She's a Slovene. Not a Slovak.

Duly chastened. I had a couple of pops before that post and didn't check my facts.

Gunpowder · Post by **Gunpowder** » Mon May 01, 2017 7:47 am

https://youtu.be/f4Jjg_B78uo

Thought this one was really good.

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Mon May 01, 2017 8:54 am

I must really be out of the loop because I had no idea who he was until yesterday. He also did this speech last year and he gets serious at the 18 minute mark.

https://youtu.be/NUymQKZqP6w

After watching the WHCD speech you linked, a video of him on Hot Ones with Sean Evans popped up on YouTube for me, which led me to the above video. The dude is hilarious.

Post by **Shirley** » Mon May 01, 2017 9:59 am

I guess you don't watch The Daily Show. Can't really blame you now, but I think he was even on before Jon Stewart retired.

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Mon May 01, 2017 10:56 am

Yea, haven't had cable since 2007. My extent of watching The Daily Show has been YouTube and the Comedy Central website.

Pruitt · Post by **Pruitt** » Tue May 02, 2017 7:10 am

Why is the Labour party going to be decimated in the upcoming British election?

Here's part of the answer.

Interview With Labour's Potential Home Secretary

She's clearly making this shit up.

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Wed May 03, 2017 12:49 pm

Obama gets 400k per speech these days. And Hillary's lack of introspection over the election results is hilariously expected.

Politicians are awesome.

Joe K · Post by **Joe K** » Wed May 03, 2017 1:02 pm

Johnnie wrote:Obama gets 400k per speech these days. And Hillary's lack of introspection over the election results is hilariously expected.

Politicians are awesome.

The Democratic Party's continued cozying up to Wall Street and failure to acknowledge the massive mistakes by the Clinton campaign both make me think we're way more likely to get 8 years of Trump than people realize.

duff · Post by **duff** » Thu May 04, 2017 8:46 am

Do you want him to give speeches for free? Don't knock him for the amount of money people are willing to pay anyone. There is no complaints from this group when athletes make as much money as possible.

As far as Hillary, yeah, she just needs to accept the facts that she and the DNC were completely outplayed by Trumpy and his gang.

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Thu May 04, 2017 8:51 am

The knock on Obama is who he's giving the speech to, not how much money he's making. No one would give a fuck if he got $400K to speak to some farmers assocation or whatever.

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Thu May 04, 2017 9:07 am

duff wrote:Do you want him to give speeches for free? Don't knock him for the amount of money people are willing to pay anyone. There is no complaints from this group when athletes make as much money as possible.

That loud whooshing sound is the point completely going over your head.

~75K thousand residents from three states that Democrats thought they had in the bag flipped to Trump due to hubris.

They failed to connect with middle/lower middle class voters in part because of a perception that democrats were out of touch from their situations and were too cozy to Wall Street.

They're not making 400K in 10 years. Now the "hope and change" prior president will make that in a speaking engagement. You want to continue to alienate voters so brashly and continue to fucking lose? Keep doing this.

The left's job at this point is to convince people they are empathetic. They are playing against a stacked deck and I know this. When you peel apart the onion and start getting to the center of issues, I know that the left is trying to help these people. But these people don't believe it. In a society where the headline or first reports are the truth and the facts enclosed are struggling to catch up, the optics of perception of this far outweigh the the reality of truth.

But that's fucking politics. And it's why I hate politicians. I can gauge the nuance, but I can't cast ~75K votes in 3 states.

The Sybian · Post by **The Sybian** » Thu May 04, 2017 9:53 am

duff wrote:Do you want him to give speeches for free? Don't knock him for the amount of money people are willing to pay anyone. There is no complaints from this group when athletes make as much money as possible.

As far as Hillary, yeah, she just needs to accept the facts that she and the DNC were completely outplayed by Trumpy and his gang.

And athletes don't have veto power over regulations that govern the financial industry. This has the appearance of a bribe. Don't regulate our industry, and 3 months after you are out of office, we will fork over a pile a cash. These speaking fees are nothing more than a very thinly veiled payoff.

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Sun May 07, 2017 3:08 pm

Macron wins.

Pruitt · Post by **Pruitt** » Sun May 07, 2017 6:20 pm

Partially those factors. Also, most other democracies are filled with people who aren't quite as lazy and entitled as in the States and to a (slightly) lesser extent, Canada.

Rex · Post by **Rex** » Sun May 07, 2017 8:16 pm

Woohoo! The dude beats the chick again!

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Tue May 09, 2017 4:38 pm

Moon Jae-In, according to exit polls, is the new President of South Korea. Cool.

But this is how the announcement went down:

https://youtu.be/jBFj0zynil8

Post by **brian** » Tue May 16, 2017 10:45 am

Pruitt · Post by **Pruitt** » Wed May 17, 2017 3:44 pm

This Erdogan is a bad motherfucker.

Turkish Bodyguards On The Rampage in D.C.

sancarlos · Post by **sancarlos** » Wed May 17, 2017 4:27 pm

Pruitt wrote:This Erdogan is a bad motherfucker.
Turkish Bodyguards On The Rampage in D.C.

Where's our trigger-happy cops when we need them.

Johnnie · Post by **Johnnie** » Wed May 17, 2017 8:37 pm

So we can just let foreigners beat up Americans now on American soil?

This is bullshit.

Post by **brian** » Wed May 17, 2017 9:08 pm

Johnnie wrote:So we can just let foreigners beat up Americans now on American soil?

This is bullshit.

Diplomatic immunity. It was basically the plot of Lethal Weapon 2.

Post by **brian** » Fri May 19, 2017 4:22 pm

Post by **brian** » Mon May 22, 2017 10:12 am

I would seldom say this about a mayoral address, but this address by New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu after the removal of the four Confederate monuments there is a must-read.

Pruitt · Post by **Pruitt** » Mon May 22, 2017 12:46 pm

brian wrote:I would seldom say this about a mayoral address, but this address by New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu after the removal of the four Confederate monuments there is a must-read.

Wow! "The cult of the lost cause..." That is an amazing speech.

Instead of revering a 4-year brief historical aberration that was called the Confederacy we can celebrate all 300 years of our rich, diverse history as a place named New Orleans and set the tone for the next 300 years.

Steve of phpBB · Post by **Steve of phpBB** » Wed May 24, 2017 4:59 pm

I guess there's no point in dredging up the 2016 Presidential Election thread, but, umm ...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... 0c97fe6e8f

Joe K · Post by **Joe K** » Wed May 24, 2017 7:18 pm

So, the GOP candidate in the Montana special election just physically assaulted a journalist. Police are investigating so the dude might get arrested. Looks like the Dems will pick up at least one seat.

Pruitt · Post by **Pruitt** » Wed May 24, 2017 8:33 pm

Joe K wrote:So, the GOP candidate in the Montana special election just physically assaulted a journalist. Police are investigating so the dude might get arrested. Looks like the Dems will pick up at least one seat.

Same Reporter Exposed His Investments in Russian Companies

I have a fresh John A. MacDonald ($10 Canadian) that says this guy still wins.