Mega-Thread: Trump Focused Discussion

[Hollycakes]

Yep, convo now will be "tone it down for the snowflakes" or they could take the MTG route and turn it into something else atrocious.
Like a modern day garbage pail kid, they try and one up themselves usually so that wouldn't surprise me.
In Florida at the club/event scene near me, they all skirted the rules as much as they could on any flyer like that.
Taking any image they find from the net, nudity, famous people etc and pushing any laws/boundaries only to feign ignorance later.
I see this as no different.
He knew what imagery he was using as did the people who hired him.
They purposely invoked that theme.
From the color red to the black silhouette to the fucking swastika, it was all planned.
Don't forget, MTG is an actual strategy now.

[PrimiOne]

I do wonder how Trumpshere rationalize the fraud has been "thoroughly and conclusively documented" and still every single court has given them the middle finger.

Is the judicial system:

A) Stupid, blind and ignorant
B) Complicit in the fraud


No, really , I know asking about arguments and facts to this kind is like telling your dog to do your taxes for you but how do exactly resolve this paradox in their minds?

[Verdugo]

Worth noting: Herschel Walkers campaign initially responded by claiming "That's not a Swastika, that's just anti mandatory vaccine imagery."

Before eventually acknowledging that yes, it's a Swastika, and remembering that he had to talk about how much of a friend he is to the Jewish community and how strongly he supports Israel.

You know, after a few hours of being told that's a fuckin Swastika, dude.

"Its 6 syringes, I didnt know its going to come off like that."

[Benggaul]

Wednesday's report:

99,775 new cases; about 10k fewer than last Wednesday.

Top 10:

Texas: 9,552 new cases; 296 deaths
California: 6,233 new cases; 120 deaths
Ohio: 5,648 new cases; deaths not reported
Michigan: 5,438 new cases; 63 deaths
Pennsylvania: 5,012 new cases; 167 deaths
New York: 4,745 new cases; 55 deaths
North Carolina: 3,239 new cases; 97 deaths
Washington: 3,005 new cases; 84 deaths
Illinois: 2,913 new cases; 48 deaths
Wisconsin: 2,873 new cases; 3 deaths

Texas reclaimed the top spot as I expected they would, jumping back up to nearly 10k. Pennsylvania's been appearing on the list more and more often though their case numbers have been relatively flat for the past few weeks. Like most of New England their vaccination rate is over 70% with at least one dose, so even a glut of Trumpers in their midst isn't enough to fuck them up too badly. Their cases per 100k is around 36 which is about the middle of the pack nationally. Supposedly Florida's at 14 cases per 100k, about on par with California, but again, who knows how accurate that is given their reporting. Fuck Florida.

1,819 deaths is over 400 fewer than last Wednesday and brings the total to 739,778. We're seeing pretty dramatic drops this week overall, though Texas nearly passed 300 again. Pennsylvania and California rounded out the top 3 though, as with yesterday, I'm sure Florida's up there somewhere. I think we get data dumps on Fridays from Florida so we'll see how they're doing. The 7-day average remains under 1.5k and is falling but Florida's dump will likely stink things up a bit.

Related news:

Hospitals weigh COVID vaccine mandates for patients in need of lifesaving organ transplants--This is very likely a huge can of worms but it's the natural progression of things. It's also not really different than the other rules in place for those wanting organ transplants that ensure the organs aren't just going to go to waste, essentially.

CDC predicts continued declines in Covid-19 hospitalizations and deaths over next 4 weeks--Kind of a "no shit" statement given we've already been seeing declines but nice to have confirmation, I guess. We'll see how low it goes before late Fall/early Winter comes around.

New Covid cases surge in Minnesota, despite vaccination efforts--Their reporting scheme means they didn't show up on my list today, but they'll probably be back on tomorrow. Their anti-vaxx crowd are choking the hospitals with COVID cases and it's having the same consequences as elsewhere in the nation.

Stay safe, folks.

[Flarelaine]

Arkansas passes two laws that allow people to opt out of mandates because they just don't want to.

The governor does have veto power, but by not using it, he gives Biden 90 days to challenge the laws in court. He criticized these bills heavily, but they became law without his signature. He's been vocal that he disagrees with Biden's mandate, but at the same time, doesn't want to get in the crossfire when these bills become law and the anarkansists just start showing up to work unvaccinated anyhow.

By doing this, the governor has basically tried to just stand aside of all this and let Biden and his own legislature fight it out. He knows he can't challenge the Trump death cult, but he also knows he probably can't beat Biden either. Having placed himself in a no-win situation, yeah this is your fault governor Hutchison, he simply has a poll drop to look forward to and a challenger in 2022 who will have something both negative and true to say.

Hutchinson is term-limited, so he is just riding it out anyway.

[Breccia]

Hutchinson is term-limited, so he is just riding it out anyway.

Hmm. Interesting.

Normally I would say "well he's a lame duck, why not stand for his pricinples?" but we all know the anwer: Trump supporters might literally kill him.

[Biglog]

A recent Harvard study explained what dangerous political territory the GOP has gone to. Studying the rise of authoritarian fascist leaders, what typically stops them is the entrenched wise leadership in the party that stops it before it goes too far. Trump isn't the first authoritarian trying to use the GOP. David Duke, McGovern, even Nixon were not far from Trump. But the difference is in the past the GOP didn't give the authoritarian leader a blank check. Nixon was forced to resign, the GOP didn't take his side and attack the (true) Watergate story as 'fake news'. However, that changed when the GOP opted not prosecute Trump on impeachment, and then embraced Trumpism to the extreme.

So I do fear for the future of democracy in our country in a way I have never in the past. Trump may or may not be allowed to run because of his 1/6 insurrection planning and support, but I don't think the GOP will stop him. He also may or may not survive until 2024, he'll be 78 years old then and has been obese for decades. In a normal election, democrats would easily win in 2024. The sitting President gets about 5 points off the start as the incumbent, and Trump couldn't win as the sitting President. The wrinkle in that is the GOP's radical gerrymandering that they've done and are doing wherever they can to change future election results. Minorities are being gerrymandered out of their votes mattering left and right in the south. So that could cause some surprises but that's also something that still might be addressed hopefully. The electoral college simply needs to be abolished to make gerrrymandering and which state you reside in irrelevant when voting for President, as it should be. One vote should have the value of one vote, no matter which state you live in or what district you've been gerrymandered into, and today it doesn't.

[Breccia]

Some basketball player I don't know explains his decision to not get vaccinated, which I believe is now the most common excuse used:

I just don't want to

"Har har. What did he really say?"

I’m standing with all those that believe what is right. Everybody is entitled to do what they feel is what’s best for themselves. Seeing the way this is dividing our world up, it’s sad to see. People are losing jobs to mandates,

Let's kick those easy parts right between the crossbars.
1) People are not losing their jobs to mandates. People are losing their jobs for refusing to follow mandates.
2) And before we get into any attempt to dance around semantics on that one, do you know what else is mandated at most jobs? Pants. If I show up to teach without wearing pants, or any equivalent, my bare ass gets fired, probably on the spot. And it's not the fault of the left's unfair pants mandate. It's the fault of me showing up to work with my dick hanging out.
3) This also applies to the "division". Another way to look at it, is the world is divided by those who choose to murder and steal, and those who don't. That's a division, and it's a pretty big one. When people choose to do things that are illegal and dangerous, you don't get to hide behind "well it's a shame to see the world divided, I'm standing with the murderers and thieves" without, well, self-identifying as a murderer or thief. When the division is being caused by one side looking at health and common sense and then just not doing it because they don't want to, "oh no the world is divided" isn't the correct response. "I choose not to stand with health and common sense" is.

And of course, the big one.

4) "Everybody is entitled to do what they feel is what’s best for themselves" has another name: Neutral Evil.

"Whoa whoa whoa! It sounds way more True Neutral than that!"

It does not.

First, while True Neutral characters are looking out for themselves, they are also looking out for any organization they are part of. This basketball player is not. His choice benched him indefinitely.

Second, while True Neutral characters are looking for balance, they are not looking for balance in the form of "nobody has been murdered recently, so I will murder people". And even if they did, this basketball player is not saying he's trying to bring balance to the universe anyhow.

Third, while True Neutral characters accept that bad/evil things happen to other people, they don't go out of their way to be the cause of it. They will respond to a threat, but a basketball player does not have his health threatened by vaccinated players or the vaccine itself.

Fourth, a True Neutral character keeps their word -- such as a signed contract -- until doing so puts them at even greater risk. Getting a vaccine is not a greater risk, nor was this the basketball player's excuse. A True Neutral character will follow the law and social norms while advantageous to do so. Losing your job, because you did not follow the contract, does not fit this.

And fifth, True Neutral characters are offended by those who take extreme views, which this basketball player is espousing. True Neutral characters do not force others to take a stance on a moral or ethical issue, which this basketball player did. A True Neutral character will take risks if the reward is great enough. This guy got fired, which he knew ahead of time he would be, so this doesn't fit.

By contrast, Neutral Evil characters do whatever they can get away with, even if it harms others. This basketball player was intentionally taking steps to make himself a threat. It wasn't that he accepted that COVID would happen to other people, he was insisting he be part of that chain. You could argue that his intentionally breaking a contract/social norms would make him Chaotic Evil, but he at least claimed he wasn't doing it just to be disruptive. He said he was looking out for himself...by being a risk to his fellow man and by being fired.

There is, of course, the possibility that the basketball player is simply lying. I'm not sure that makes him less evil.

Just to be clear, disobeying an order or contract is not inherently evil. But this one was for the health and safety of the organization, the people in it, the fans, and basically just people in general while we're at it. If the country/state/city/county has a law "please don't discharge firearms randomly, you might hit someone" and your response is "fuck you, I'll do what I want! *BLAM BLAM BLAM*" you are not being a brave conscientious objector. You're not trying to bring balance to the universe. And no, you're not doing "what's right for you". You're being an asshole, and if you hit someone, a violent criminal as well.

[AntiFascistVoter]

Some basketball player I don't know explains his decision to not get vaccinated, which I believe is now the most common excuse used:



"Har har. What did he really say?"



Let's kick those easy parts right between the crossbars.
1) People are not losing their jobs to mandates. People are losing their jobs for refusing to follow mandates.
2) And before we get into any attempt to dance around semantics on that one, do you know what else is mandated at most jobs? Pants. If I show up to teach without wearing pants, or any equivalent, my bare ass gets fired, probably on the spot. And it's not the fault of the left's unfair pants mandate. It's the fault of me showing up to work with my dick hanging out.
3) This also applies to the "division". Another way to look at it, is the world is divided by those who choose to murder and steal, and those who don't. That's a division, and it's a pretty big one. When people choose to do things that are illegal and dangerous, you don't get to hide behind "well it's a shame to see the world divided, I'm standing with the murderers and thieves" without, well, self-identifying as a murderer or thief. When the division is being caused by one side looking at health and common sense and then just not doing it because they don't want to, "oh no the world is divided" isn't the correct response. "I choose not to stand with health and common sense" is.

And of course, the big one.

4) "Everybody is entitled to do what they feel is what’s best for themselves" has another name: Neutral Evil.

"Whoa whoa whoa! It sounds way more True Neutral than that!"

It does not.

First, while True Neutral characters are looking out for themselves, they are also looking out for any organization they are part of. This basketball player is not. His choice benched him indefinitely.

Second, while True Neutral characters are looking for balance, they are not looking for balance in the form of "nobody has been murdered recently, so I will murder people". And even if they did, this basketball player is not saying he's trying to bring balance to the universe anyhow.

Third, while True Neutral characters accept that bad/evil things happen to other people, they don't go out of their way to be the cause of it. They will respond to a threat, but a basketball player does not have his health threatened by vaccinated players or the vaccine itself.

Fourth, a True Neutral character keeps their word -- such as a signed contract -- until doing so puts them at even greater risk. Getting a vaccine is not a greater risk, nor was this the basketball player's excuse. A True Neutral character will follow the law and social norms while advantageous to do so. Losing your job, because you did not follow the contract, does not fit this.

And fifth, True Neutral characters are offended by those who take extreme views, which this basketball player is espousing. True Neutral characters do not force others to take a stance on a moral or ethical issue, which this basketball player did. A True Neutral character will take risks if the reward is great enough. This guy got fired, which he knew ahead of time he would be, so this doesn't fit.

By contrast, Neutral Evil characters do whatever they can get away with, even if it harms others. This basketball player was intentionally taking steps to make himself a threat. It wasn't that he accepted that COVID would happen to other people, he was insisting he be part of that chain. You could argue that his intentionally breaking a contract/social norms would make him Chaotic Evil, but he at least claimed he wasn't doing it just to be disruptive. He said he was looking out for himself...by being a risk to his fellow man and by being fired.

There is, of course, the possibility that the basketball player is simply lying. I'm not sure that makes him less evil.

Just to be clear, disobeying an order or contract is not inherently evil. But this one was for the health and safety of the organization, the people in it, the fans, and basically just people in general while we're at it. If the country/state/city/county has a law "please don't discharge firearms randomly, you might hit someone" and your response is "fuck you, I'll do what I want! *BLAM BLAM BLAM*" you are not being a brave conscientious objector. You're not trying to bring balance to the universe. And no, you're not doing "what's right for you". You're being an asshole, and if you hit someone, a violent criminal as well.

You're saying some random guy in Brooklyn is using their media platform to spew some nonsense?

First time here?

/joke

[Breccia]

You're saying some random guy in Brooklyn is using their media platform to spew some nonsense?

You joke, but it's not nonsense. He's basically saying "I just want to be allowed to hurt and kill people, without consequences". He's announcing that he's evil, and doesn't expect there to be any fallout. And it's not just him.

[PrimiOne]

Oh ...people don't know Kirye Irving? From his statement:

"You think I really want to give up my dream to go after a championship?" Irving asked.

I answer: YES

"Do you think I really just want to give up my job?"

YES, again.

" You think I really just want to sit at home and not go after the things with my teammates that I've been able to grow with, to learn with?"

Yes, for the third time.

You want all those 3 because you are an ignorant flatearther who didn't take the opportunity your basketball talent gave you to get actually educated.

I guess people who don't follow NBA does not know him but Mr.Irving is the perfect example of conspiranoic. It didn't start with coronavirus no, way before that whatever the fuck the crazy thing you could think of.. he believed it. Flat Earth, Fake moon landing, secret World government, Aliens...you name it: Irving was there.

I mean...you are Australian dude!!! You were born in Melbourne...you have travelled many times there. How the friggin fuck a multimillionaire American-Australian can be a flatearther?


But let's not forget this jewel:

Irving, who serves as a vice president on the executive committee of the players’ union, recently started following and liking Instagram posts from a conspiracy theorist who claims that “secret societies” are implanting vaccines in a plot to connect Black people to a master computer for “a plan of Satan.”

Mate you could have opened a book at least once in college.

[Belize]

So has Trump secretly been a Democrat plant the whole time?

Actually encouraging Republicans not to vote? That's...insane.

It's what he did in 2020 when the polls didn't show him in the lead... It's one of the factors that drove Georgia blue, he actively campaigned to boycott voting because they were "rigged" anyways.

[PhaelixWW]

The wrinkle in that is the GOP's radical gerrymandering that they've done and are doing wherever they can to change future election results. Minorities are being gerrymandered out of their votes mattering left and right in the south. So that could cause some surprises but that's also something that still might be addressed hopefully. The electoral college simply needs to be abolished to make gerrrymandering and which state you reside in irrelevant when voting for President, as it should be. One vote should have the value of one vote, no matter which state you live in or what district you've been gerrymandered into, and today it doesn't.

<sigh>

Again, gerrymandering does not directly affect the Electoral College (with the exception of Maine and Nebraska). It does not affect the US Senate, state governors, or state senates. The only things that gerrymandering directly affects are the US House of Representatives and state representatives.

Its effects on state legislatures might be viewed as having an effect on state voting laws, but the impact is relatively slight, considering that changing those voting laws would also typically require the state governor and senate to be firmly GoP as well, which means that the state representative branch would likely be controlled by the GoP even without gerrymandering.

There are plenty of reasons to fight against gerrymandering, but it realistically has nothing to do with presidential elections.

Some basketball player I don't know explains his decision to not get vaccinated...

As an aside, anybody who follows the NBA at all knows who Kyrie Irving is, so he's not just some no-name baller. He currently makes 35 million a year, which is the 16th highest salary in the NBA. He's also an idiot flat-earther, of course, so even people who don't normally follow the NBA might know of him.

[Fugus]

<sigh>

Again, gerrymandering does not directly affect the Electoral College (with the exception of Maine and Nebraska). It does not affect the US Senate, state governors, or state senates. The only things that gerrymandering directly affects are the US House of Representatives and state representatives.

Its effects on state legislatures might be viewed as having an effect on state voting laws, but the impact is relatively slight, considering that changing those voting laws would also typically require the state governor and senate to be firmly GoP as well, which means that the state representative branch would likely be controlled by the GoP even without gerrymandering.

There are plenty of reasons to fight against gerrymandering, but it realistically has nothing to do with presidential elections.



As an aside, anybody who follows the NBA at all knows who Kyrie Irving is, so he's not just some no-name baller. He currently makes 35 million a year, which is the 16th highest salary in the NBA. He's also an idiot flat-earther, of course, so even people who don't normally follow the NBA might know of him.

I have to disagree some on this. As a resident of North Carolina, we are red on paper only due to gerrymandering.

That gerrymandering not only impacts EVERY seat voting on by district but also every other position nominated or voted on by those voted on by district. You see how far they have been going to get power against the will of the people.

This is a state were a 50/50 vote gets a 3/10 split in our seats alone, even the Democrats getting 55% of the vote only gets them 4 seats while the losers got the other 9.

And what have they tried to do with that? They have tried repeatedly to make it HARDER to vote in ways that impacts the local level on up to the national level. Remember, the Supreme Court had to overrule their voter IDs because it was so brazen that they had done studies to find out which forms of ID minorities were most likely to lack to require them with surgical precision to remove them from the rolls.

Cooper is the main reason why haven't been as screwed up as we could have been and they have been trying to screw around then. They tried to override one of his veto's and to do so, they waited till the 9/11 memorial to hold an unscheduled a vote when most of them were out at the lower house which made news.

So when it came to the other house, they had it scheduled multiple times to come up for the vote and each time they canceled it because the Democrats showed up with enough to make sure they couldn't override it and were called out for it on camera with one of them responding that they will hold the vote "In Time" and they hope he isn't there when it does. And from then the budget was stuck in continuing resolutions for a while because the Republicans refused to hold votes on it.

You underestimate just how much impact they have on the national makeup.

Gerrymandering directly impacts the Congress along with all local offices voted on by district or voted on by those voted on by district.
The voter suppression it allows further impacts the Senate and President by them trying to make it harder for people to vote strategically.

Just in Texas, I remember about them trying to mandate voter ID and then started strategically closing places they could get IDs making it where a minority might be stuck driving 3 counties over for an ID at a place with reduced hours. Or just look at the stuff they just recently passed where Jimbob Hodunk in his deer stand can use his gun permit as a valid ID to vote even if he can't spell his own name without help while the college student won't be allowed to use his college ID even though he is demonstrating a desire to learn and think critically about this stuff. Mainly because his ability to learn and think critically makes him more likely to reject the modern republican party and any incarnation of it of the past 150 years.

[Ivanstone]

Its effects on state legislatures might be viewed as having an effect on state voting laws, but the impact is relatively slight, considering that changing those voting laws would also typically require the state governor and senate to be firmly GoP as well, which means that the state representative branch would likely be controlled by the GoP even without gerrymandering.

https://ballotpedia.org/Veto_overrid...e_legislatures

Vetoes can happen and way too many GOP states can over-ride their governors even if a Dem gets a elected.

I am pleasantly pleased to see that Wisconsin has fallen off this list. Its one of the most aggressively GOP gerrymandered states.

[Bodakane]

https://www.businessinsider.com/gop-...n-2022-2021-10



I mean, if nothing else it's an interesting take. But to anyone who has been paying attention the last 5 years, it's kinda ridiculous. Serious, who do they think they are talking to? How many years have we heard of the evils of the 'demoncrats'? And now they want their constituents to vote for them? Not only that, but why do they think their voters even want "Rational Republicans"? I think it's been made pretty clear what they want is bread and circuses.



Nooooo, Trump got even more votes in 2020 than he did in 2016. Biden won in 2020 because progressives got over themselves, held their noses, and voted for him.

Outside of the minor progressive faction, the Dems and pre Trump republicans aren't all that different anyway. They are basically the same for all practical purposes.

[PhaelixWW]

I have to disagree some on this. As a resident of North Carolina, we are red on paper only due to gerrymandering.

Just no. Full stop. North Carolina has had their popular vote go to the GoP in every election since 1980 with the sole exception of 2008 by a razor-thin margin of 0.32% or 14k votes.

Also, the NC state senate has been GoP controlled since 2011. You're not "red on paper due to gerrymandering".

Just in Texas...

Texas has also had their popular vote go to the GoP since 1980. They didn't even have an exception for 2008. They've had a trifecta of state governance for the last 18 years. Their state house of representatives would almost certainly be GoP-led even without gerrymandering.

Nobody is arguing that there aren't problems with the Electoral College.

Nobody is arguing that voter suppression laws are acceptable.

Nobody is arguing that gerrymandering isn't a huge issue.

But gerrymandering is not the problem with presidential elections.

[Fugus]

Just no. Full stop. North Carolina has had their popular vote go to the GoP in every election since 1980 with the sole exception of 2008 by a razor-thin margin of 0.32% or 14k votes.

Also, the NC state senate has been GoP controlled since 2011. You're not "red on paper due to gerrymandering".



Texas has also had their popular vote go to the GoP since 1980. They didn't even have an exception for 2008. They've had a trifecta of state governance for the last 18 years. Their state house of representatives would almost certainly be GoP-led even without gerrymandering.

Nobody is arguing that there aren't problems with the Electoral College.

Nobody is arguing that voter suppression laws are acceptable.

Nobody is arguing that gerrymandering isn't a huge issue.

But gerrymandering is not the problem with presidential elections.

Actually, you might want to look into the details more. I am a resident of North Carolina.

And using 2018 as an example, while the Republicans like to mention how the overall was roughly a 50/50 split in popular vote with a slight red edge. But they neglect that in one of the districts, the the Republican candidate ran completely unopposed.

Out of the 12 CONTESTED districts, the Republicans LOST by over 164,000 votes and got 9 of those contested seats themselves. You have to look at the local level stuff as that also directly impacts the national level stuff with how they do stuff.

I remember another year where the local level results had the Democrats win the majority while still getting minority of the seats.


Also, notice how you said it was GOP controlled since 2011, when was the last redistricting done again? And how were our 13 seats spread BEFORE that redistricting.

Gerrymandering's impacts ARE a problem with the presidential elections unfortunately as they allow them to do stuff at the local level that impacts the votes at the national level.

- - - Updated - - -

Here:

https://www.270towin.com/states/North_Carolina

As I said, you look at our history and the impact of the last redistricting, North Carolina is red on paper only. By will of the people it is firmly purple with a slight blue edge.

[Ivanstone]

Also, the NC state senate has been GoP controlled since 2011. You're not "red on paper due to gerrymandering".

Correct. He should have said “due to gerrymandering and voter suppression”.

In NC, the GOP have had narrow margins of victory the past 10 years and even lost most races in 2018. This hasn’t translated into meaningful seat gains for the Dems however. Gerrymandering has preserved GOP power in NC.

[PhaelixWW]

As I said, you look at our history and the impact of the last redistricting, North Carolina is red on paper only. By will of the people it is firmly purple with a slight blue edge.

Uh... by the will of the people, your state has voted GoP in 10 of the last 11 presidential elections.

It's like you're trying to tell me that the sky is green right now. Just no. There's no "slight blue edge".

What the actual fuck.