Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Zaktar]

I'd point out that proper education, while always an worthwhile goal, will not prevent people from either failing to understand and/or even forgetting the meaning of those concepts; people like Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani have ostensibly graduated from law school and passed the bar.

"It can't be perfectly fixed so why bother trying"?

A better educated populace would not be so easily manipulated by grifters like Powell and Giuliani. I don't think it's a coincidence that the American education system does a poor job of teaching law to the majority of citizens AND a weak, badly supported legal argument has gripped almost half the country. Too many people do get their legal education from Law and Order SVU which is why they think a video of someone moving a box while a professional con-artist dramatically speculates on the person's intent and the box's contents = slam dunk case 100% no question fraud.

This really isn't that far off topic, widespread ignorance is absolutely one of the root causes of the Trump disaster.

Tangent but I'm a naturalized citizen, I became an American 2 years after I graduated from an American high school after I went to an American elementary/middle school. I learned more about civics in the pamphlets they give you to practice for the naturalization test than I did during the 10 years I'd spent in our education system, and I supposedly went to good schools - we had good test scores anyway. Someone with no American education who passed the naturalization test would know more about civics and American law than most of the people I graduated from an American high school with. Obviously some places do better than others but some kind of baseline national standard might help avert these kind of crises in the future.

[masterhorus8]

Queen's "Another One Bites The Dust" is probably so overused at this point, but, well...

California Rep. Devin Nunes says he's tested positive for COVID-19

But how's his cow doing?

[PhaelixWW]

I'd point out that proper education, while always an worthwhile goal, will not prevent people from either failing to understand and/or even forgetting the meaning of those concepts; people like Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani have ostensibly graduated from law school and passed the bar.

"It can't be perfectly fixed so why bother trying"?

Well, now. I've been trying to engage with you honestly, but now it's beginning to seem like you're actively misinterpreting what I'm saying, rather than accidentally. I don't know how you misconstrue "always a worthwhile goal" as "why bother trying".

So far, I've tried to explain all my responses, but if you're bound and determined to find an argument no matter what, then please take your strawman and look elsewhere; I've already given your misunderstandings more attention that they warranted.

Reading comprehension is a sorely lacking subject in education, as well.

[Zaktar]

Well, now. I've been trying to engage with you honestly, but now it's beginning to seem like you're actively misinterpreting what I'm saying, rather than accidentally. I don't know how you misconstrue "always a worthwhile goal" as "why bother trying".

So far, I've tried to explain all my responses, but if you're bound and determined to find an argument no matter what, then please take your strawman and look elsewhere; I've already given your misunderstandings more attention that they warranted.

Reading comprehension is a sorely lacking subject in education, as well.

Sick burn. You're arguing that it's a worthy goal but will leave an element of the problem unsolved (perhaps you live in a world where perfect solutions exist?) You leave the implication unsaid, but the implication is clearly: why bother? Calling something a "worthy goal," is typically a kind way of saying it's overly idealistic and not worth doing in practice. Reading subtext is an important part of reading comprehension.

I was trying to point out how you were coming across, but clearly failed. I did also try to engage on the substance of the issue but I notice you chose to ignore that. You seem hostile about this for some reason?

[Edge-]

https://twitter.com/brooklynmutt/sta...41654446809089

So while people are being turned away from hospitals due to overcapacity, Tudy's bragging about getting "celebrity" treatment.

Remember when Trump promised the same treatment he got for everyone? Remember when Chris Christie also go that celebrity treatment?

Good times.

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.washingtonpost.com/inves...7e8_story.html

That "Spi/yder" guy that's totally MilInt? Yeah, he's an IT consultant and never worked in military intelligence. Oops.

[PhaelixWW]

Sick burn. You're arguing that it's a worthy goal but will leave an element of the problem unsolved (perhaps you live in a world where perfect solutions exist?) You leave the implication unsaid, but the implication is clearly: why bother?

No, lol, there was zero implication of the sort. That's why it's a strawman argument that you're pushing.

My point was that education relies in large part upon the willing participation on the part of the recipient of the knowledge. It's about providing the information to the person and hoping that they retain it after the immediacy has passed.

My point here was that pretty much everyone has been exposed to the correct information, but there's no guarantee that they retained it and/or not had it overwritten by other, false information.

My point was simply to manage your expectations, because yes, the world is imperfect.

Nowhere did I say, or even imply, that imperfect solutions should not be attempted because they're imperfect. That's utterly ridiculous.

Calling something a "worthy goal," is typically a kind way of saying it's overly idealistic and not worth doing in practice.

No, really, it's not. Quite often it comes with a qualifier, as it did when I said it, but that's text, not subtext. And a qualifier is not a negation, yet you're presupposing a meaning that's directly contrary to the actual statement. "Why bother" is literally the antithesis of "worthwhile". So your response was to see what I wrote, then pretend I wrote the opposite.

Reading subtext is an important part of reading comprehension.

My sentiments exactly. You just failed at it.

You seem hostile about this for some reason?

I certainly wasn't, at least before you started to start throwing that ridiculous strawman at me. I mean, really. Who the hell would even suggest that education is a "why bother" subject? If you ever think you're reading subtext that implies that, then re-examine your assumptions.

[Benggaul]

246,530 new cases; about 8.5k more than last Friday. Another new national record. Also, yesterday's total ended up being higher than last week as well after Missouri and Nebraska reported. So much for that dip.

Top 20:

California: 37,143 new cases (new record); 216 deaths (new record)
Texas: 15,084 new cases; 232 deaths
Pennsylvania: 13,318 new cases (new record); 227 deaths
Fuck Florida.
New York: 10,716 new cases; 95 deaths
Ohio: 10,359 new cases; 128 deaths
Illinois: 9,420 new cases; 222 deaths
North Carolina: 7,540 new cases (new record); 38 deaths
Tennessee: 7,289 new cases; 87 deaths
Indiana: 7,200 new cases; 70 deaths
Arizona: 6,983 new cases (new record*); 91 deaths
Georgia: 6,191 new cases; 56 deaths
Massachusetts: 5,655 new cases; 48 deaths
Michigan: 5,626 new cases; 65 deaths
Kansas: 5,115 new cases; 131 deaths (new record)
Colorado: 4,678 new cases; 87 deaths
Missouri: 4,524 new cases; 31 deaths
Oklahoma: 3,900 new cases; 27 deaths
Wisconsin: 3,858 new cases; 47 deaths
Alabama: 3,853 new cases; 52 deaths

Other states with new case/death records: South Carolina, Arkansas and New Hampshire.

The asterisk by Arizona's record is because they technically have one day that's higher (nearly double) but it really reads like a correction that wasn't explicitly stated. California is still climbing upwards with the caveats I listed previously about their outstanding testing. I forgot to mention it yesterday but the US passed 16 million cases (according to worldometers). We didn't quite reach 250k this week but it still doesn't appear that the country has reached the peak of this thing. Granted, many experts are saying we won't be reaching the peak until late January, but I'm trying not to look so far ahead. It's depressing as fuck. Speaking of which...

3,019 deaths is over 300 more than last Friday and brings the total to 302,750. Given the trends 3k is likely to become more of a staple in the daily numbers next week and those following. The 7-day average is a little under 2.5k--which would mean we're losing around 17k people a week. And numbers are still going up.

Related news:

California's ICU beds near capacity as Covid hospitalizations hit record levels--With so many cases comes so many critical cases. I have a feeling this scenario is more prevalent throughout the rest of the country than is being reported.

Houston doctor succumbs to Covid after months of saving patients--If there's anything like the medical equivalent of a purple heart, the doctors and nurses on the front line of this thing should be getting them. Especially in the face of ignorant Trump supporters denying to their dying breath that it's a problem.

Stay safe, folks.

[Zaktar]

No, lol, there was zero implication of the sort. That's why it's a strawman argument that you're pushing.

My point was that education relies in large part upon the willing participation on the part of the recipient of the knowledge. It's about providing the information to the person and hoping that they retain it after the immediacy has passed.

My point here was that pretty much everyone has been exposed to the correct information, but there's no guarantee that they retained it and/or not had it overwritten by other, false information.

My point was simply to manage your expectations, because yes, the world is imperfect.

Nowhere did I say, or even imply, that imperfect solutions should not be attempted because they're imperfect. That's utterly ridiculous.

No, really, it's not. Quite often it comes with a qualifier, as it did when I said it, but that's text, not subtext. And a qualifier is not a negation, yet you're presupposing a meaning that's directly contrary to the actual statement. "Why bother" is literally the antithesis of "worthwhile". So your response was to see what I wrote, then pretend I wrote the opposite.

My sentiments exactly. You just failed at it.

I certainly wasn't, at least before you started to start throwing that ridiculous strawman at me. I mean, really. Who the hell would even suggest that education is a "why bother" subject? If you ever think you're reading subtext that implies that, then re-examine your assumptions.

1) You did a poor job of conveying the point that "education relies in large part upon the willing participation on the part of the recipient of the knowledge." While I agree with that sentiment, it isn't evident that that is the greater problem in the case of Americans' poor comprehension of the legal system. In congress, among elected officials - absolutely this is willful "ignorance," among the general American populace - it's just plain ignorance. Talk to some average people about the law and how poorly we grasp it will come through. Can education stop people from wilful misinterpretations? Obviously not, but it can create an environment in which those wilful misinterpretations don't travel nearly as far.

2) You keep saying everyone has been exposed to the correct information, but that's not remotely true. When it comes to the concept of burden of proof in general, sure, why not - but when it comes to what constitutes acceptable evidence for a particular crime? That is an extremely complex subject with different rules in different jurisdictions which are dependent on very specific facts in the case at hand. To some people a tweet seems like evidence, maybe even concrete evidence for something like inciting imminent unlawful actions but the gulf between "seems" and "fact" in a court is very wide.

3) "My point was simply to manage your expectations, because yes, the world is imperfect." That did not come through. I guess I should be insulted that you think I'm too stupid to grasp that the world is imperfect and that improving legal education wouldn't solve all of our problems, but it's more bewildering. Like if that was your point, why did you bother to write anything at all? It's like reassuring someone that oxygen exists so they can still breathe.

4) I'm not strawmaning you, I'm just expressing what I take away from what you write. If it's wrong, it's wrong and that's fine. Did you notice the question mark? It was a question, I was asking if that was what you meant to convey, not a stating your intent. Not everything is a fight.

Agree to disagree on the interpretation of the subtext. A problem with writing is it's impossible to know tone. What was your emotional intent with each word? I can't know, I can only speculate. My argument was: the US has a dearth of legal education which can help explain the crisis we're in the midst of in which much of the country badly misunderstands the law. Your response was, basically: education is nice, but can't fix this problem. With that in mind, "why bother with improving legal education," is a reasonable interpretation.

5) You accuse me of strawmanning but you're ungenerously interpreting much of what I said. For instance, you write, "I mean, really. Who the hell would even suggest that education is a "why bother" subject?" Obviously my response was limited to the idea of expanding legal education in the country, yet you write as though I think you'd think that of education in general. Just to reflect your point, why in the world would I think you're generally hostile to education? You're clearly an intelligent, well educated person. I don't think that, I just think you wrote your post in such a way to shoot the idea down rather than support it. Yes, it is entirely possible to describe something as a worthwhile goal and then shoot it down. It's a reasonably common debate maneuver.

My takeaway from this conversation is that if we'd had it in person, it would have been a reasonable conversation between two people who basically agree on most of the points, with maybe some nitpicky disagreements. I can definitely afford to write more clearly though I struggle with the balance between writing too much and being unintelligible via word vomit, and writing so little that people can easily misinterpret what I wrote. This conversation was obviously a failure on the whole, so I'll let it go.

[YUPPIE]

I want to sincerely ask how we can change the way things are to ensure we don't get a Trump again, and only asking that because people at large now don't like Trump evidently (my sentiments are mixed). As some people said, it's the will of the people and freedom that elected Trump into office.

If you don't have a choice in who your leader is and it's pre-determined, then people would cry foul it's a dictatorship and nothing is free. But otherwise, we could very well have Kanye West as president if the majority willed it.

After all, Trump had no experience in politics beforehand but people wanted to give him a chance. Anyone can become president.

[tylenol]

I want to sincerely ask how we can change the way things are to ensure we don't get a Trump again, and only asking that because people at large now don't like Trump evidently (my sentiments are mixed). As some people said, it's the will of the people and freedom that elected Trump into office.

If you don't have a choice in who your leader is and it's pre-determined, then people would cry foul it's a dictatorship and nothing is free. But otherwise, we could very well have Kanye West as president if the majority willed it.

After all, Trump had no experience in politics beforehand but people wanted to give him a chance. Anyone can become president.

You really can't do anything, anyone who is an asshole like trump can play to groups of people (in his case racists) and get a large base going and become president as we saw, if he isn't swamped in lawsuits for the next 4 years with a possible visit to prison then I'd bet cash he'll run again in 24, as long as he can continue communicating to his cult for the next 4 years and he already has plans for doing just that, OAN, his own network even, so even when his protection runs out on twitter and they ban him it won't matter.

Maybe something that says you need at least a couple years of experience in something politics related, basically it'll happen again because this countries population is not on the same level, half are beyond ignorant and the other half wants shit to change but there are always roadblocks...like with Biden, if people in Georgia don't get out and vote then the GOP will control the senate and the next 4 years will be a waste of time because any and all bills will sit on that fucking ghouls desk...

[Shadowferal]

German magazine Der Spiegel names Trump 'Loser of the Year'

In an article titled "Der Verlierer des Jahres," which translates as "The Loser of the Year,” the publication’s Washington bureau chief Roland Nelles and Berlin-based correspondent Ralf Neukirch described Trump as "a man who ... was never concerned with the common good, but always with one thing — himself."

"Nothing is normal under Trump," the article added. “He refuses to admit defeat. Instead, he speaks of massive electoral fraud, although there is no evidence for it. The whole thing is not surprising. Trump's presidency ends as it began. Without decency and without dignity."

[Breccia]

I want to sincerely ask how we can change the way things are to ensure we don't get a Trump again

Fewer people vote for a proven loser to run the world's largest economy, then backtrack four years later and ask how "we" fix this.

Like you did.

[Blur4stuff]

I feel compelled to remember that Hillary Clinton beat Trump by 3 million votes. Biden looks to be beating him by over 8 million. So not only did the American people reject Trump the first time, but they did so by an even larger margin after seeing the kind of president he was.

I agree that we need better education and to tackle the problem of right wing propaganda, but those kinds of problems have always existed. Trump is only president and republicans have the amount of power they do because the game is rigged in their favor. It's more lopsided now than ever.

As soon as they get the opportunity they need to do what they can to fix this. Obviously there are limitations to what is possible, but dems need to fucking do what is necessary and within the bounds of the law.

[Veggie50]

Do you feel that the AZ GoP tweets could be proven to be sedition in court?

- - - Updated - - -


"Beyond a reasonable doubt" is the burden used in criminal trials, not just murder trials. Sedition is absolutely a criminal charge.

Parking tickets are civil, not criminal charges, which is the difference.

There’s actually 3 levels of proof in USA courts.
- Beyond reasonable doubt (used in the heavier segment of criminal cases)
- Clear and convincing evidence (used in the lower segment of criminal cases)
- preponderance of evidence (used in civil cases. This just means; is one side more likely than the other).

Now, I don’t know where sedition would land, but there IS more than 1 standard for burden of proof in criminal cases.

Otherwise, no parking ticket could ever be given... “your honor, you cant proof it was ME who parked the car there.”

[DarkTZeratul]

There’s actually 3 levels of proof in USA courts.
- Beyond reasonable doubt (used in the heavier segment of criminal cases)
- Clear and convincing evidence (used in the lower segment of criminal cases)
- preponderance of evidence (used in civil cases. This just means; is one side more likely than the other).

Now, I don’t know where sedition would land, but there IS more than 1 standard for burden of proof in criminal cases.

Otherwise, no parking ticket could ever be given... “your honor, you cant proof it was ME who parked the car there.”

Well, to your last point, as has been repeatedly pointed out, parking tickets are civil violations, not criminal. Stop using that as an example. And I cannot possibly believe that sedition would be considered in the lower segment of criminal cases.

[Gorsameth]

I feel compelled to remember that Hillary Clinton beat Trump by 3 million votes. Biden looks to be beating him by over 8 million. So not only did the American people reject Trump the first time, but they did so by an even larger margin after seeing the kind of president he was.

I agree that we need better education and to tackle the problem of right wing propaganda, but those kinds of problems have always existed. Trump is only president and republicans have the amount of power they do because the game is rigged in their favor. It's more lopsided now than ever.

As soon as they get the opportunity they need to do what they can to fix this. Obviously there are limitations to what is possible, but dems need to fucking do what is necessary and within the bounds of the law.

Yes, he lost by a bigger marging but the fact that more people voted for Trump after seeing the dumbster fire then before should have people worried for the future.

Trump was not some apparition that can never happen again.

[Felya]

Trump was not some apparition that can never happen again.

I don’t know if the combination of such a hated opponent, combined with the disparity between the complacency of one side and the massive stakes of the other, can ever happen again.

[Gorsameth]

I don’t know if the combination of such a hated opponent, combined with the disparity between the complacency of one side and the massive stakes of the other, can ever happen again.

Trump didn't need Hillary to win, he almost beat Biden after being the worst President in US history.

(a small swing in key states and Trump would have a 2nd term, that he loses by 8 mil votes doesn't matter due to the electoral collage. ~100k votes going to Trump instead of Biden in the right places and that is it).

[Felya]

Trump didn't need Hillary to win, he almost beat Biden after being the worst President in US history.

(a small swing in key states and Trump would have a 2nd term, that he loses by 8 mil votes doesn't matter due to the electoral collage. ~100k votes going to Trump instead of Biden in the right places and that is it).

I agree on the Hillary part, but we were doing too well under Obama, which would have lead to complacency towards the democrat. Couple that with the unbelievable odds of Trump not just winning, but having any support. You got the perfect Stormy Daniels... lol

[Resurgo]

huh, seems Enrique Tarrio got an invite to the White House...
https://parler.com/profile/NobleLead/posts