All Purpose News and Politics Thread Part IV: The Center Cannot Hold

[Detox]

While incarcerated they shouldn't be allowed to vote. Upon release, having served their debt to society, voting rights should immediately be restored.

Exactly. At one point you are effectively "outside" of what I would consider to be society, once released that changes.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

I agree, just keep investigating him and don't start the articles quite yet. Putting the squeeze on Trump and showing how weak he really is will erode more of his support than impeachment will embolden IMO.

Now that sounds like a damn good strategy, one that should be adopted by the Democrats with all due haste. Trump has NEVER been under this level of relentless, 24/7 scrutiny in his misbegotten life, and he's bound to crack from the strain eventually. The problem is convincing others in the party, including progressives and a few presidential candidates, both needing to feed red meat to their followers to go that route, in their minds, it's increasingly becoming impeachment or bust, and that's shaping up to be a bad bet.

[Tendrin]

This is a complete reversal of what you've said on the 2nd amendment, something that would be a much harder fight with the payoff even more unlikely. Going after the 2nd would also embolden even more opponents and drum up far more resistance, while requiring even more support in Congress as well as the States.

Suddenly when Trump's on the line, we have to be conservative in our goals . . . interesting.



I agree, just keep investigating him and don't start the articles quite yet. Putting the squeeze on Trump and showing how weak he really is will erode more of his support than impeachment will embolden IMO.

I mean, impeachment is not widely understood as a process. Opening an inquiry into it is the first step and that opens avenues for investigatiion. The House can always decide not to impeach after the inquiry starts. It's a process.

[Dalak]

I mean, impeachment is not widely understood as a process. Opening an inquiry into it is the first step and that opens avenues for investigatiion. The House can always decide not to impeach after the inquiry starts. It's a process.

The worst thing I've heard about the fallout from the Brexit vote is that the government started the process to Leave too soon without a clear plan in mind, which has led to the current clusterfuck they're in. I'd rather get most of my ducks in a row before I start any process going forward. While I don't think not impeaching will lead to the vindication of Trump so many are worried about, I'm sure that starting the process and then deciding to cancel it would certainly do the trick.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

This is a complete reversal of what you've said on the 2nd amendment, something that would be a much harder fight with the payoff even more unlikely. Going after the 2nd would also embolden even more opponents and drum up far more resistance, while requiring even more support in Congress as well as the States.

Suddenly when Trump's on the line, we have to be conservative in our goals . . . interesting.



I agree, just keep investigating him and don't start the articles quite yet. Putting the squeeze on Trump and showing how weak he really is will erode more of his support than impeachment will embolden IMO.

Actually it just a distortion on your views of the 2nd amendment issue. In both cases I’m advocating against fighting and wasting political capital on meaningless half measures that are doomed out the gate.

We’ve already been through this before. Your strategy on gun rights is a proven losing method that loses the debate every time and even if you won you win a tiny fraction of a percent less gun crime on a massive assumption that gun criminals just decide to not kill people using bump stocks or find a weapon slightly different than a semi auto. It’s so ineffective you lose the debate and if you ever fell ass backwards into winning you still probably put a bandaids on a decapitation.

It’s a meaningless ineffective measure that does absolutely nothing that is not going to succeed anyways. But I’m sure it makes you feel better about yourself. Kind of like impeaching Trump. It’s destined to lose and is at best a meaningless gesture to feel like you are doing something. It’s political masturbation.

But I really shouldn’t expect much from someone who has a weird complex about his beliefs where everyone who challenges them is a secret Trump supporter.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

I said widely liked, not backed by a narrow 23% of the electorate. The racists are never gonna back down on Trump and the rest of us can't either. It will probably fall in the Senate, yes, but that doesn't matter. Not doing anything because it's assured of failure because 'Repbulicans' is just a bad idea.

I think you must also consider the very real risks in /not/ impeaching him.

Clinton was liked but not by Republicans. He got his most popularity when people thought he was being railroaded. That’s the risk with Trump. You risk Democrats being asked whether Trump was cleared of the crime he is being impeached on counts of obstructing every single day.

The risk not impeaching Trump is what? Setting a precedent that he can’t be held accountable? The Senate won’t hold him accountable anyways.

[Dalak]

In both cases I’m advocating against fighting and wasting political capital on meaningless half measures that are doomed out the gate.

Aiming to abolish the 2nd without doing anything else first is doomed right out of the gate, so forgive me if your hypocrisy on such matters of substance is impossible to ignore.

[jetengine]

The issue is that there IS actually alot of secret Trump supporters. Whether thet be bots or Trolls or Nazis theres alot happy to gaslight.

[Dalak]

The issue is that there IS actually alot of secret Trump supporters. Whether thet be bots or Trolls or Nazis theres alot happy to gaslight.

Yes, that is a fact that more and more corroborating evidence is coming out in support of. They eventually reveal themselves, you just have to keep an eye on posts, a mind for history, and a realization that if something looks/walks/quacks like a duck then it's a duck even if it quacks in english.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Aiming to abolish the 2nd without doing anything else first is doomed right out of the gate, so forgive me if your hypocrisy on such matters of substance is impossible to ignore.

You don’t know that and the strategy you advocate for has been failing for 30 years. One of the reasons it fails consistently is precisely because all those small compromises you aim for aren’t effective and you end up having to field attacks from Republicans on why you are fighting for something that is statistically insignificant.

So not only would you be ceasing to chase a failed strategy you’d be doing something that minimizes one of the biggest weaknesses of it. But of course this shows how absolutist you are about your stances.

It’s not comparable to impeaching Trump. We know exactly what circumstances are necessary and you don’t have something that will get Senate Republicans to oust him. It’s actually far closer to what you want to do by making a meaningless point that you already know will be ineffective and fail

If you have a better argument feel free to bring it up, otherwise don’t waste my time trying to make meaningless connections to call people hypocrites so you can feel better about being slighted elsewhere in this thread.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

The issue is that there IS actually alot of secret Trump supporters. Whether thet be bots or Trolls or Nazis theres alot happy to gaslight.

I’m sure their are. At the same time there are several hyper partisan people on this sub that can’t handle not towing the party line and using that to dismiss people who challenge their opinions because they aren’t comfortable.

Take Dalak who is trying to insinuate that me being in hyper opposition to the second Amendment and agreeing with the stance of the de facto head of the DNC on the impeachment matter (Pelosi) somehow makes me a secret Trump supporter. It’s preposterous on its face and doesn’t hold up to the slightest bit of logic. But I don’t agree with Dalak all the time so he’d rather believe that than address real points.

[Gray Lensman]

I dunno. Is trump a widely liked, charismatic politician who is being hung up on technicalities in a merely embarrassing situation by obvious hypocrites who were all doing the same thing? It's easy to forget why Clinton gained support at the time. Those factors are not in in play. There are a different set of challenges ahead of us. We need to be clear eyed about those rather than fretting a replay of the Clinton ordeal.

No, but it will be spun that way by what is basically his personal propaganda network.

[Dalak]

You don’t know that and the strategy you advocate for has been failing for 30 years. One of the reasons it fails consistently is precisely because all those small compromises you aim for aren’t effective and you end up having to field attacks from Republicans on why you are fighting for something that is statistically insignificant.

So not only would you be ceasing to chase a failed strategy you’d be doing something that minimizes one of the biggest weaknesses of it. But of course this shows how absolutist you are about your stances.

It’s not comparable to impeaching Trump. We know exactly what circumstances are necessary and you don’t have something that will get Senate Republicans to oust him. It’s actually far closer to what you want to do by making a meaningless point that you already know will be ineffective and fail

If you have a better argument feel free to bring it up, otherwise don’t waste my time trying to make meaningless connections to call people hypocrites so you can feel better about being slighted elsewhere in this thread.

The last 8 years have been breeding whole new generations that are actually supportive of gun control, and the part of 'my argument' that you always leave out to create a strawman is that looooong before you get the magic 2/3rds to abolish the 2nd you'll be able to get actual legitimate legislation passed that will be effective. inB4 SCOTUS: vote for folks that won't put in drunken sexual criminals and it wouldn't be an issue.

So again - Preach about how ineffective & meaningless Thing You Don't Like is while endorsing something just as ineffective & meaningless, just don't expect anyone to ignore the hypocrisy.

I’m sure their are. At the same time there are several hyper partisan people on this sub that can’t handle not towing the party line and using that to dismiss people who challenge their opinions because they aren’t comfortable.

Take Dalak who is trying to insinuate that me being in hyper opposition to the second Amendment and agreeing with the stance of the de facto head of the DNC on the impeachment matter (Pelosi) somehow makes me a secret Trump supporter. It’s preposterous on its face and doesn’t hold up to the slightest bit of logic. But I don’t agree with Dalak all the time so he’d rather believe that than address real points.

If I claimed everyone I disagreed with at all a secret trump supporter, there'd be no one on this forum that would be immune. Instead, I focus on the things a person says and does when unforced as that is far more revealing of a person's character. I just point these things out, like how you refuse to back up claims you make about posters with evidence because you can't spend the time you spend posting things to look up proof.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

He Went To Jared opened his yap, and bullshit pouted out:

Kushner Says Mueller Probe Damaged U.S. Democracy More Than Russia Did

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Hmm! Sounds like Trump's kind of people:

Militia allegedly trained to assassinate Obama, Hillary Clinton