All purpose news and politics thread part VII: News & Politics Total Landscaping

[SUPERECWFAN1]

When Trump loses, brother, he loses BIGLY! So, would anyone be willing to piss half a billion down the toilet to help Dolt45, given his sketchy finances? I doubt even his most deep pocketed, dark money buddies would take that sort of risk. By the way, does anyone know how that GoFundMe to bail him out is coming along?

But a friend told me pages back I posted how great at business Trump was. Surely the MAGA folks know how great he is. lol

[Jack Dracula]

Would it kill Mets to admit he was wrong about the Party he's been a member of for so long? I mean seriously, is the fact that being a Republican is so much a part of his identity all that it is? If so, that is just sad.

You folks should understand that the other person in an argument may not necessarily care much or at all about the subject at hand, they just enjoy arguing and have initiated the conversation to fulfill that need. Pushing peoples buttons gives some people a feeling of superiority.

[Jack Dracula]

But a friend told me pages back I posted how great at business Trump was. Surely the MAGA folks know how great he is. lol

It may be that several of Trumps failed business ventures were actually successful. Casinos for example are a good way to continually skim profits while making it look like you’re losing money. Eventually you claim bankruptcy and hide behind whatever protections you’re entitled to and plan another venture to repeat the process.

[zinderel]

Trump Spurned by 30 Companies as He Seeks Bond in $454 Million Judgment





Oh well sell assets!

Seize his assets! Or…or…take him into custody for failing to make his bail/bond. As if he were a normal American citizen, and not one of the wealthy elite who pay their way out of things.

Any one of us would have been in a prison cell for committing any ONE of his ludicrously well-documented crimes. His money and power have kept him out of a cell, but his ego is going to see him finally inside one (if we’re lucky).

The right loves their little malicious sound bites, so let’s appropriate one for our own:

LOCK HIM UP.

[Gray Lensman]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/gop-nomin...200002143.html

The GOP is a full on freak show at this point, but the NC GOP is definitely trying to take the lead.

They take their lead from the Mango Mussolini. And the only thing that would shock me to hear come out of Trump's mouth is a complete and coherent sentence.

[Tami]

Trump is trying to get Musk to bail him out. My assumption. Musk is likely dumb enough to do it.

[kidfresh512]

Trump is trying to get Musk to bail him out. My assumption. Musk is likely dumb enough to do it.

Yeah I was thinking just sell him Truth social or something.

[AnakinFlair]

Are they comfortable? I'm needing new shoes myself.

It may be that several of Trumps failed business ventures were actually successful. Casinos for example are a good way to continually skim profits while making it look like you’re losing money. Eventually you claim bankruptcy and hide behind whatever protections you’re entitled to and plan another venture to repeat the process.

If you bankrupt a casino, it is not successful. It doesn't matter if you claim bankruptcy to hide behind protections- if a CASINO goes bankrupt, that is a FAILURE.

[CaptainEurope]

Trump Spurned by 30 Companies as He Seeks Bond in $454 Million Judgment





Oh well sell assets!

I think he does not have time for that. They will seize his assets at firesale value.

[CaptainEurope]

Trump is trying to get Musk to bail him out. My assumption. Musk is likely dumb enough to do it.

After burning so much money on twitter and the Tesla stock losing a third of its value, I doubt Apartheid Clyde can just cough up half a billion bucks on short notice, either.

[Tami]

After burning so much money on twitter and the Tesla stock losing a third of its value, I doubt Apartheid Clyde can just cough up half a billion bucks on short notice, either.

Don't underestimate Musk's ability to throw money away.

[Gray Lensman]

Are they comfortable? I'm needing new shoes myself.



If you bankrupt a casino, it is not successful. It doesn't matter if you claim bankruptcy to hide behind protections- if a CASINO goes bankrupt, that is a FAILURE.

That depends on how you look at success. If you loot the casino for millions in cash, then escape the consequences by declaring bankruptcy, it's a failure for the casino but a success for the guy who got richer running it into the ground. Much like private equity firms buy companies, load them with the debt used to buy them, then escape with all the money. The company goes under, but the people running the equity firm don't care - they still have all the money.

It's a feature, not a bug.

[Mister Mets]

You folks should understand that the other person in an argument may not necessarily care much or at all about the subject at hand, they just enjoy arguing and have initiated the conversation to fulfill that need. Pushing peoples buttons gives some people a feeling of superiority.

Or the other person disagrees with others here.

What have I said that's so outrageous that it's impossible for me to really believe it, so I have to be pushing buttons?
I said I don't know why Nex Benedict committed suicide.
I said I don't want trans kids getting the idea that ending their lives makes them important.
I said that that efforts to reduce bullying in schools exist within the context of efforts to decrease punitive discipline.
I said that it's unlikely that the major problem in American schools is kids taking the lead from Republican politicians.
I said that Matthew Shepard was probably not the victim of a hate crime, but that this is a distinction without a difference because there have been homophobic murders in the US.
I said that it's absurd to conclude from the above that Matthew Shepard deserved to die, or that his murderers were victims.

These are things that I believe. In some cases, it connects to what I've written before or thought about. I think the misinformation about Matthew Shepard raises some interesting questions about shorthand. I've been bothered by valorization of suicide for years (the death of Aaron Swartz crystalized this for me.)

Trump is trying to get Musk to bail him out. My assumption. Musk is likely dumb enough to do it.

What makes you think this specifically about Musk?

There are plenty of sketchy rich people who would love to have a President in their pocket.

Musk did say he may make an endorsement close to the general election.

Would it kill Mets to admit he was wrong about the Party he's been a member of for so long? I mean seriously, is the fact that being a Republican is so much a part of his identity all that it is? If so, that is just sad.

This is an unsettling tangent on a generic political forum.

I was responding to specific comments from you guys. Does pointing out that Matthew Shepard was probably not the victim of a hate crime mean that he deserved it? Should a website that claimed that Max Benedict was beaten to death update the claim? Was I lying weeks ago when I said we don't know the full details of how Nex Benedict died?

If you think the discussion is about Republican politics, it seems to highlight a difference in approaches. I'm looking at specifics, but the response is about the side I'm on, which makes sense if it's more important to signal what side you're on than to be correct.

All too true! We're watching this nightmare unfold in real time. Of course, certain members who post here will scoff and say we're "exaggerating" and "overreacting".

It depends on whether you're signaling that Trump is bad, or whether you really want your views on American politics to be judged on whether someone will agree with you that he's likely to send migrants and LGBTQ+ people to death camps.

[AnakinFlair]

Don't underestimate Musk's ability to throw money away.

I don't underestimate his ability to throw money away. I do wonder about his liquidy at the moment. I'm sure most of his money is tied up in his companies and his investments.

[Mister Mets]

As I said before: people don't generally update DailyKos posts unless it's still on their reccomended list and receiving feedback and discussion. Instead, new posts are written containing new opinions and information. This is how DailyKos works. I posted that article because it aggregated a lot of information on the climate created and emboldened by the people you're protecting here. Demanding that they change it to suit you before you'll take anything else written in something posted at the time more seriously is another example of you deciding you get to invent a standard and apply it to a site you don't use. Moreover, it changes nothing about what's contained within the diary in terms of sources for what it's mostly talking about: the climate of bullying, harassment, and prejudice created by Chaya Raichik and Ryan Walters, alongside the kind of people who would call bomb threats into schools or work to get more supporitve teachers fired.



Again, this changes literally nothing about what else is contained in the article, written by people not them in reputable newspapers, which you'd know if you bothered to look at anything beyond trying to find something to disagree with so you can ignore everything else. Like you do.



Oh, it's a t-shirt thing! Again, this is another example of you trying to find a minor thing you can then use to ignore all the other things there.



It's not controversial and changes nothing about anything else they wrote. This is another example of you wanting to discount the entirety of something by trying to find one thing you consider a 'red flag' that lets you do so. You never address the totality of an argument because you know that you cannot. You can think they're wrong about Matthew Shepherd if you want, but it doesn't challenge anything else they wrote. It's just you, once again, inventing a standard and applying it as a means to ignore everything else.



Yes, I actually do, because this is the justification many abusers use when they are abusing people, and given that we're talking about people creating overseeing a climate of factually documented bullying, harassment, and abuse...



I said lies *and* deflection. Mostly, you were doing the latter, but you absolutely do both.



Naw.




Hardly.



Head injuries are notorious for later killing someone initially assessed as all right, and can be quite difficult to actually properly identify. I didn't wholly think suicide is out of the question, and American law enforcement is *notorious* for downplaying crimes against minorities, which is why the police initial statement and later walk back was eyebrow raising.

And even if they had taken their own life, they had done so in a heightened climate of bile directed at them by the party and politicians in question. Unlike you, they have to live with the policies and politicians you carry endless water for.

The Daily Kos doesn't seem like the comments section of a newspaper. In this case, someone posted a discrete article, so I'm going to have the same expectations as I would have for a website that posts articles, or for a random blogger. If a Youtube video or a tweet is that inaccurate, there would be a presumption of some kind of correction. If there isn't a norm of corrections if an article turns out to be inaccurate, I'm going to be suspicious of the source. I'm disappointed that you have such low standards for people who agree with you politically.

Saying that someone was murdered in an assault, and died from their injuries the next day, when the individual committed suicide, changes a big thing about the truth.

If you called me a liar, I'm going to look at my original post and I'll also include a post I was responding to, so that others have the necessary information to make up their own mind.

There may be a difference in approaches that isn't partisan, in that I value giving people the information to make up their own mind.

You weren’t criticized for being “right” as others also made that same observation.

You are being criticized for your hypocrisy in ignoring racism and bigotry in the party you support.

You’ve provided no evidence that refutes the issue of blatant Republican bigotry while others have posted direct evidence about Republican anti-LGBT legislation and its effects on those it targets.

Given recent legislation and hate speech in Oklahoma, Nex clearly was one such individual.

You argued “we don’t know why they were bullied” despite being provided with numerous articles that stated why — reminding others again of why they shouldn’t bother providing evidence to you.

In reality, you’ve spent more time complaining about others than addressing factual evidence.

Because you can’t defend Republican bigotry.





More factual evidence for him to address — or likely ignore — regarding Republican bigotry.

Rather than repeatedly mischaracterizing the arguments of others in an attempt to deflect from actual conservative behavior and policy since that is his habit.

If he truly wanted to address these issues he would do so instead of criticizing other posters.

You seem to be criticizing me for things I haven't said, for not calling out things that bother you and for not coming to the same conclusions you do.

If you'd like my thoughts about something, ask it in a non-loaded way.

If you're not willing to say what specifically you think is important, it seems kinda hypocritical to go after me for not commenting on it.

Can’t see where he would admit that if he agrees with Republican policies.

It’s the lack of objective debate over said policies and corresponding evidence that prevents any real progress — the repeated denial of facts shows that it is more about proving others wrong than reaching reasonable consensus.

Which is understandable when there is no common ground to be found in accepting bigotry.

If you'd like my thoughts on a fact, as me in a non-loaded way.

Pretty much the bolded, one doesn't get to be smug about being right if they refuse to admit when they are in the wrong . . at least without it being commented on.



A post that was carefully ignored when Mets decided to try and attack you for calling him out. It helps to avoid acknowledging things like this when trying to portray someone as attacking him without evidence.



Considering the last several replies, it seems that you are pretty close if not spot on.







Claiming we don't know if Nex was bullied for being trans for sure means doubting all reports involving Nex . . except when they say that things might not be as bad for the Anti-Trans bigots.



No evidence except for unrelated arguments. On the subject of questioning if Nex was actually bullied - None. As I said above, it really comes down to doubting everything else to assume such.




This seems very familiar, including the failure to read evidence, use of nitpicks to dismiss people/arguments outright, and an interesting new Double Standard - When a News Story doesn't update if they're wrong it's a sign that the publication is Trash . . unless it's The Week and then it's a sign that they are right instead of hobbyists online with factual evidence.

Ultimately, not arguing in good faith as usual.





Every time he asks for more evidence, it shows the hypocrisy on display in ignoring so much other evidence.






Admitting he was wrong about this would undercut the position of authority that he sees himself in here, or at least that's my guess. He does seem to police our behavior and use our posts to dismiss actual news reports that argue differently than he feels things should be after all. That doesn't explain the times he's refused to admit he was wrong regarding minor things though.

I'm not sure why I should comment on a post by Tendrin that just includes an excerpt from a Yahoo piece.

As far as I know, we don't have specifics the bullying Nex Benedict experienced or why. An important question is the altercation the day before he killed himself, and whether that was set off by transphobic bullying. We do have to consider that minors are involved in a national news story.

I do think you've misinterpreted The Week story. We've gone over this a lot, but it seems you assume that a reputable paper made a serious error that no one else noticed, and this is so obvious that you get to make dozens of posts calling me out for it years later. I don't have much to add from a month ago.

https://community.cbr.com/showthread...=1#post6719827