The Traitors Among Us

[Theodarzna]

I'm pro-democracy. Maybe you ment the Democratic party.

I'm not exactly sure what this means. I'm only anti-politics if the politics of an era isn't about policy.

Pluralism is dumb though, unless it's about the pluralism of our ideas and theories.

Maybe a lot of parties is good, I'm not too concerned with that because there only needs to be at least two parties for democracy to work. It's not a deal-breaker in my view.

FPTP is the best. Least important to most important points;

-High simplicity and efficiency, especially compared to PR.
-Doesn't give disproportionate power to the third biggest party.
-Relatively good when it comes to local feedback.
-Tends to cause tactical voting based on who the voter 'dislikes' more.
-Is compatible with Karl Popper's 'removability criterion' for politics, because it's easier to get rid of a bad leader with only a relatively small shift in voter opinion change.
-Prevents the complete idiocy of a run-off system and the transfer of votes. *opportunity cost* gives meaning to a vote and a run-off system eliminates opportunity cost.

First, saying you are pro-democracy is negated by your words.

Second, you explicitly are about anti-policy since you don't want policies represented.

Third, Multiparty democracy is precisely that, so you are full of it.

Fourth, Everything you give is a argument against FPTP and your support of it negates your pro-democracy and pro-policy stance. Since you see "Voting for lesser evil" as a positive, you are explicitly against people voting for what policy they want.

[Levelfive]

Oh, true dat! I was just talking of that specific aspect in response to Edge. Since then, there's been a multitude of unbelievable offenses against the very law n' order that those creatures purport to represent.

- - - Updated - - -



A reminder: Kangodo also believes there are no Muslim correction camps in China. It doesn't have anything to do with American Politics, but it is a reminder that you're not dealing with somebody who deals in reality. This is not meant as an insult or a flame against him. This is just a PSA about the rabbit-hole you're attempting to dive into.

But in response - yeah, that half-hearted coffee salute to a slodier and that Tan suit really was on the same level as ICE-Led Mexican concentration camps and publicly declaring the FBI finding was wrong about Putin while standing next to him, nevermind actually being impeached over a legit scandal involving using political powers for personal gain. >_<

I'm sure he's probably referring to drone strikes or something... as if that hasn't stopped under Dump, on top of all the OHOLYSHIT crimes Dump's been currently committing.

Yeah, I wondered if I'd be treated to a righteous monologue about drone strikes or deportations, as if there still exists any semi-sane comparison with Obama's administration and this craven amoral shitstain lining his and his enablers' pockets from here to North Korea. There doesn't. Agreeing with the person he agreed with is, indeed, a very bad sign.

[Fugus]

ReVision is a "Hippie" themed magazine...

A Journal of Consciousness and Transformation
http://www.revisionpublishing.org/

I am talking about how calling Trump a good president is revisionist history at best.

That is the humor I was talking about. Not about the magazine itself but how their name perfectly describes the title of their article.

[Cockus Maximus]

It's still an amazing how well of a smear job the Repubs/Russians did to Hillary. There are people on both sides who still believe, to this day, that Hillary is some kind of criminal. They're so daft, they'll even respond to this saying "It was also Hillary's fault for running a bad campaign". No, it really wasn't a bad campaign at all. It was just a basic campaign, the way it should've normally been - but it wasn't "Bad". what was bad (or rather, successful) was everything that was done to her. She played Chess... Dump and the Republicans sat in front of the board and simply had a gun under the desk and a thug behind her with a Sap, and the audience cheered when both struck.

I still love calling out those who are buying into the Hunter Biden shit that they suddenly gave up trying to "Lock Hillary up", and point out that Dumbass Dump did absolutely nothing to keep said promise to "Lock her up". They know she's not guilty of anything. They know it was purely about making her an Icon of their hatred. Now, AOC, Omar and Biden are the new targets of hate to represent "the enemy".

So let me get this straight... Hillary, Biden, Omar, etc. are all targets of smear campaigns, but Trump is actually the corrupt one and everything the media reports on him is totally not a smear campaign? What makes you so certain that Trump is any more corrupt than the rest of them?

[Polyxo]

I'd say Trump's accusations of treason really stem from his and his followers belief that he is the state. It's really more akin to lese Majeste.

[shimerra]

So let me get this straight... Hillary, Biden, Omar, etc. are all targets of smear campaigns, but Trump is actually the corrupt one and everything the media reports on him is totally not a smear campaign? What makes you so certain that Trump is any more corrupt than the rest of them?

Simple. One just has to not be a total moron and compare what actually happened with the lies told. For example Benghazi: 9 Republican led investigations turning up nothing and zero action by Trump including one of the main republicans openly admitting the sole goal of the investigations was to harm Hillary's electoral chances. Trump: willingly encourages foreign interference in our elections and tried to obstruct a legal investigation while lieing about the events that happened.

Pizza Gate: A lie confirmed by multiple sources.
Trump using unsecured cell phones for classified information multiple times: confirmed by multiple sources as well.


Use your brain. You can figure it out.

[Cockus Maximus]

Simple. One just has to not be a total moron and compare what actually happened with the lies told. For example Benghazi: 9 Republican led investigations turning up nothing and zero action by Trump including one of the main republicans openly admitting the sole goal of the investigations was to harm Hillary's electoral chances. Trump: willingly encourages foreign interference in our elections and tried to obstruct a legal investigation while lieing about the events that happened.

Pizza Gate: A lie confirmed by multiple sources.
Trump using unsecured cell phones for classified information multiple times: confirmed by multiple sources as well.


Use your brain. You can figure it out.

Not sure how any of that proves that the entire Democratic party (and the Republican party for that matter) are completely free from corruption... The Mueller investigation turned up nothing on Trump either so by your logic people should stop yelling about him being corrupt as well.

And next time your views are challenged, try thinking critically instead of talking down to people. It makes you appear as if you're unable to use your brain.

[mvaliz]

So let me get this straight... Hillary, Biden, Omar, etc. are all targets of smear campaigns, but Trump is actually the corrupt one and everything the media reports on him is totally not a smear campaign? What makes you so certain that Trump is any more corrupt than the rest of them?

...and that's another one to the ignore list.

To answer the question: Because they're backed by facts and evidence, and none of the others had any evidence whatsoever other than emotional FOX news-esque article outrage and BS rumors that had nothing backing them. Even the remotest of them (Benghazi) had 9 investigations, all proving her innocent of any responsibility. (incidentally, Hillary showed up to them - lasting hours answering questions. Where was Chickenshit Chump when asked to answer questions durring the impeachment hearings???

By the way - that's not an argument I'm making... that is a statement.

EDIT: To put it using a simple analogy - one is occasionally caught stealing cookies from a jar (of which they get rid of/take responsibility forin even the most arguable of cases. Case in point, Anthony Weiner and Al Franken), while the other is currently punching mexican babies locked in jail cells made from brass knuckles bought by Russia, and their supporters claiming him not doing that is a hoax - and you're claiming they're both equal in being bad.

Again... that's a statement. You're wrong, and you damn well know you're wrong. It's not about "Dem = perfect", it's about "Dem =/= horrific Republicans, but at least Dem = far better than horrific Republicans."


Infracted.

[Cockus Maximus]

...and that's another one to the ignore list.

To answer the question: Because they're backed by facts and evidence, and none of the others had any evidence whatsoever other than emotional FOX news-esque article outrage and BS rumors that had nothing backing them. Even the remotest of them (Benghazi) had 6 investigations, all proving her innocent of any responsibility.

By the way - that's not an argument I'm making... that is a statement.

Ignore me if you like, it won't bring your "statement" any closer to the truth.

To reiterate your answer: They're backed by news stations that spout propaganda you agree with. Anything MSNBC or CNN says is unbiased and must inherently be true, while Fox News is just "conservative propaganda", according to you.

[Levelfive]

No, he had the media lie to people to benefit him in elections.
He definitely benefited from his Presidency, according to Forbes he made 20 million. And that was just during his presidency, how much do you think the job benefits him now?
Don't even bring up NATO and shit, you know that report on Afghanistan that came out today? It happened under his watch.


It's not a case of 'or'.
Both of them can be scum.
Hell, you don't become the president of the US without being a corrupt motherfucker.

Oh ffs, precisely the kind of false equivalencies you were telegraphing. You know how you felt queasy agreeing with Cizr? You should have heeded that in the first place. "Obama made money! Wahhhhhh it's totally the saaaaaaaame, the same!" Jesus wept.

[Levelfive]

Perhaps you want a leader that ISN'T corrupt? Or is that too much to ask?

I'll take a leader who's human, and yet doesn't somehow think that the Constitution is fake news and the presidency and foreign policy and world events are personal loot tickets to extra goldish looking hotels in exotic locales, or is THAT too much to ask?

[Levelfive]

Honestly? Yeaah.. It is.
You're asking people to vote on something they absolutely hate just to prevent something worse from occurring. That's bad.

People want no corruption. And you ask them if hidden corruption is better than openly doing it?

There's no equivalence to draw between Trump's administration and any other in the history of the country. None. This is like saying the murderer's fine because the guy before wasn't perfect. It's grossly dishonest. IS that your point, by the way, that Trump and his sycophants aren't traitors because Obama made 20 million dollars?

[Levelfive]

No, it's like saying that I don't want to pick between the guy that murders someone on camera or the guy who does it behind closed doors.

Welp, fortunately Obama's not running. In the meantime, Trump is the most corrupt, lawless traitor we've ever had as president and we need to deal with that. Maybe we can re(re-re-re-re-re-re-re) litigate Benghazi or something after, though. Fingers crossed!

[Beefhammer]

So let me get this straight... Hillary, Biden, Omar, etc. are all targets of smear campaigns, but Trump is actually the corrupt one and everything the media reports on him is totally not a smear campaign? What makes you so certain that Trump is any more corrupt than the rest of them?

Considering we have a 40 year public record and 3 years on record as president doing corrupt things and literally 0 evidence of the other three doing anything corrupt. I'd say it is an objective fact at this point, that Trump is more corrupt than the rest of them.

- - - Updated - - -

Ignore me if you like, it won't bring your "statement" any closer to the truth.

To reiterate your answer: They're backed by news stations that spout propaganda you agree with. Anything MSNBC or CNN says is unbiased and must inherently be true, while Fox News is just "conservative propaganda", according to you.

No according to Fox's creation, they were created to be a propaganda arm of the GOP. They routinely rank as on of the most biased in terms of coverage and have tons of nonfactual statements when comparing to other networks. While CNN and MSNBC are biased in the other direction, it is not nearly close how bad Fox is, nor do they have anywhere close to as many nonfactual statements.

You know this though.

[Eviscero]

Honestly? Yeaah.. It is.
You're asking people to vote on something they absolutely hate just to prevent something worse from occurring. That's bad.

People want no corruption. And you ask them if hidden corruption is better than openly doing it?

By "hidden corruption" you mean corruption for which there is no evidence? "Corruption" that has been extensively investigated and found to not exist is simply "hidden"?

Stop lying to yourself to protect your fragile worldview.

[Ghostpanther]

Basically summary of the article is "people that I dislike are traitors". Ok then

Basically. There are certainly traitors within the Republican party. Not to the country, but to the principles the party is suppose to represent. And Trump still enjoys a large majority support within the party. In spite of those who are ether jealous or resent him for their own personal reasons. Romney for one, I think still resents Trump doing what he failed to do.

[Daelak]

Basically summary of the article is "people that I dislike are traitors". Ok then

The president and his administration have already broken laws. The people who have resigned are ones that knew if they stayed longer, they would be subject to questioning once Trump leaves office. Conservatives always pushing this "hatred" and "dislike" for reasons why the "left" are pursuing articles of impeachment against him, instead of the simplest and most easily provable reason; he has broken laws and used the office of the presidency and the government to his own personal benefit.

- - - Updated - - -

By "hidden corruption" you mean corruption for which there is no evidence? "Corruption" that has been extensively investigated and found to not exist is simply "hidden"?

Stop lying to yourself to protect your fragile worldview.

What are you talking about? Even before Trump's inauguration, non-partisan ethical watchdogs were sounding alarm bells over the opacity of his inauguration committee (which garnered more than $100 million dollars from unknown parties) and Trump's unwillingness to remove himself from the business operations of his private company due to the potential (now realized) conflicts of interest with the GSA lease to the trump hotel in DC, and now in Ireland, New Jersey, South Florida. These are all open investigations and/or in judicial proceedings.

[Spectral]

The escalating hysterics of calling basically all ideological opponents "traitors" can't possibly be intended to convince much of anyone of anything. So what's the goal and who's the intended audience? Seems more like an exhortation to action or perhaps just the sort of cathartic righteousness depicted as Two Minutes Hate in 1984. One has trouble imagining those two minutes extending for years, but it sure seems like the case for the goofiest of columnists.

On the other hand, Rick Wilson has always been a shitbag grifter feeding off of and generating hatred to further his personal brand. That doesn't forgive it, but it does explain it.

[Machismo]

Basically. There are certainly traitors within the Republican party. Not to the country, but to the principles the party is suppose to represent. And Trump still enjoys a large majority support within the party. In spite of those who are ether jealous or resent him for their own personal reasons. Romney for one, I think still resents Trump doing what he failed to do.

Trump and the Trumpsters are those traitors.

How ironic.

The Trumpsters are the ones who sacrificed their morals, conservative beliefs, and integrity to jump behind a national socialist.

Spending is up. Deficits are skyrocketing. Trump has raised taxes multiple times, with more to come. He's a racist, misogynistic asshole who represents almost nothing that conservatives claim to support.

[Levelfive]

The escalating hysterics of calling basically all ideological opponents "traitors" can't possibly be intended to convince much of anyone of anything. So what's the goal and who's the intended audience? Seems more like an exhortation to action or perhaps just the sort of cathartic righteousness depicted as Two Minutes Hate in 1984. One has trouble imagining those two minutes extending for years, but it sure seems like the case for the goofiest of columnists.

On the other hand, Rick Wilson has always been a shitbag grifter feeding off of and generating hatred to further his personal brand. That doesn't forgive it, but it does explain it.

Plenty of execrable people who aren't traitors. This lot you keep making cheap, transparent deflections for while pretending you're not are both execrable and actual traitors.

The president and his administration have already broken laws. The people who have resigned are ones that knew if they stayed longer, they would be subject to questioning once Trump leaves office. Conservatives always pushing this "hatred" and "dislike" for reasons why the "left" are pursuing articles of impeachment against him, instead of the simplest and most easily provable reason; he has broken laws and used the office of the presidency and the government to his own personal benefit.

- - - Updated - - -



What are you talking about? Even before Trump's inauguration, non-partisan ethical watchdogs were sounding alarm bells over the opacity of his inauguration committee (which garnered more than $100 million dollars from unknown parties) and Trump's unwillingness to remove himself from the business operations of his private company due to the potential (now realized) conflicts of interest with the GSA lease to the trump hotel in DC, and now in Ireland, New Jersey, South Florida. These are all open investigations and/or in judicial proceedings.

He was talking about Obama, not Trump.