All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!

**numberthirty** · 05-22-2018, 07:09 PM

While I'm not sure that I can say for certain "Maher is truly evil.", I do know that he is standing squarely in the way of making any actual progress.

Without the "Wheels Spinning In The Mud" status quo, he is out of a job.

He will play a role in keeping things this way for as long as he can.

**Mister Mets** · 05-22-2018, 07:15 PM

Originally Posted by Kirby101

fixed it for you.

I've posted this link before, but Fivethirtyeight has an interesting interactive on the effects various decisions can have on the composition of the House.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com...ting-maps/#Dem

They compare eight scenarios, and the only one in which Democrats currently have the House is one in which things are gerrymandered in their favor. If districts were selected to be geographically compact (either following county lines or algorithmically) Republicans have 2-3 less House members than they currently do, which fits the idea that gerrymandering has helped them a little bit, but that geography is much more important.

**Mister Mets** · 05-22-2018, 07:18 PM

Originally Posted by Tazirai

Guess who the Democrats are supporting...?

Even though the Progressive polls AHEAD of Hunter, They are going for the guy who used to have a R next to his name.

Internal Poll Shows Campa-Najjar Best Positioned Against Hunter

They even ran a "Your Grandfather was a Terrorist hit piece against another DEMOCRAT!" But Bernie isn't a Democrat and Nina Turner is a white Bernie Bro. But they want unity?

Grandson of Munich Massacre Terrorist Is Running for Congress – Sounding a Peaceful Tone on Israel
Ammar Campa-Najjar’s grandfather was in the terrorist organization Black September in the 1970s, but the Democratic candidate in California strongly rejects violence as a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian issue

FORTY EIGHT YEARS AGO!!!!!! He's 28. He wasn't even a twinkle in ANYBODIES eyes lt alone even considered to be born. Da **** is wrong with Democrats supporting this bullshit?

I get it, When you don't toe the line and challenge them that's when the Letter next to your name matters, not your voting record.

Internal polls are generally treated with suspicion.

I'm also a bit confused on what the poll shows. Showing him in a second place at 14 percent doesn't mean he's well positioned in a runoff against the guy who has 39 percent.

I do think it's wrong to criticize people for the actions of their ancestors since they have no control over that, but the Haaretz piece seems to be relatively positive, describing someone who is not like an infamous relative.

**Tazirai** · 05-22-2018, 07:50 PM

Originally Posted by Mister Mets

Internal polls are generally treated with suspicion.

I'm also a bit confused on what the poll shows. Showing him in a second place at 14 percent doesn't mean he's well positioned in a runoff against the guy who has 39 percent.

I do think it's wrong to criticize people for the actions of their ancestors since they have no control over that, but the Haaretz piece seems to be relatively positive, describing someone who is not like an infamous relative.

Then Why THAT particular headline? That was a Sniper Bullet that was fired to graze and wound. That's all that was.

You know what people do today? They see the Headline, read 12 Paragraphs ad jump to the comment section. Damage done!

I read all the time, and im guilty of it at times. I know less savvy people do i daily.

I can't wait for either BIBI or Dolt 45 to go to jail.

**Tazirai** · 05-22-2018, 07:51 PM

**Tazirai** · 05-22-2018, 08:35 PM

Is Hillary sexist??? YOU decide! Cynthia Nixon is more Progressive than Cuomo, but gotta support that Establishment over being Progressive.

Even though Cuomo is doing his damnedest to make NY a Red state.

**numberthirty** · 05-22-2018, 10:25 PM

"We'll always be there for you..."

right up until we decide to say "Yeah, whatever...", and back a male candidate.

**Tazirai** · 05-22-2018, 11:29 PM

Politico a couple days ago, ran a hitpiece on Our Revolution and Progressives and Bernie Sanders, (OF COURSE). But These two organizations have been around approximately 3 seconds. Yet tonight they scored MAJOR victories for Progressives and Democrats. Going left works, even in Red states. Texas has FOUR Justice Democrats as of tonight. A true Progressive Black Woman endorsed by Lefy leftists of Bernies ilk, and won.

**WestPhillyPunisher** · 05-23-2018, 01:21 AM

‘60 Minutes’ Reporter Reveals Trump’s Chilling Reason For Slamming The Press

Lesley Stahl said Trump admitted that he attacks journalists so “no one will believe” them. This is what happens when you have a thin-skinned demagogue as president who deals with criticism by discrediting and killing the messenger. But hey, her emails! Speaking of which....

**********

But Her Emails? Lawmakers Shrug Off Trump’s Lax Cellphone Security

“I suspect the president of the United States is sophisticated enough to know what he should or shouldn’t be talking about on an unsecured line,” Sen. Jim Risch said. The same craven and cowardly politicians who screamed bloody murder for months about Hillary Clinton and 'Servergate' and wanted her jailed because of that just shrug and look the other way when Adolph Twitler commits security screw-ups.

**********

GOP Candidate Who Pointed Gun At Teenager Advances To Georgia Governor Primary Runoff

In an ad, Brian Kemp said he would round up undocumented immigrants and “take them home myself.” Well, of course he did.

**********

Giuliani’s New Stance On Russian Collusion: So What? It’s Not Illegal.

“It was sort of like a gift,” Giuliani said of the Clinton campaign material stolen by Russia. “And you’re not involved in the illegality of getting it.” And Rantin' Rudy is sort of like a moron.

**********

Trevor Noah Reveals The Question He’d Ask Donald Trump That No Else Has Dared To

Trevor Noah isn’t likely to score an interview with Donald Trump anytime soon, given the president’s penchant for speaking with friendly media outlets. But if “The Daily Show” host did get a chance to grill the commander in chief, he’d ask the one question no one else has dared to:

“I would ask him what his get-out number is,” Noah said in an interview with BBC World that aired Tuesday night.

“Because I do believe he has one,” he added. “I think if people came together and offered him the right amount of money, he would take it.”

I have to disagree as Trump won't take a bribe for ANY amount to vacate the Oval Office. I'm of the belief Trump is driven more by ego than greed, being the Leader of the Free World is THE biggest ego trip he's ever been on, and he'll NEVER be more powerful, or be on a bigger stage than he is right now. No way in hell he gives that up, not without a fight, for sure Cheeto Jesus will campaign for a second term, and don't think he doesn't have legal eagles working behind the scenes to find some sort of loophole that would allow him to bypass the Constitutional law limiting presidents to two terms. Yeah, I really think Trump wants to be president for life, just like his BFF Bad Vlad Putin.

**KNIGHT OF THE LAKE** · 05-23-2018, 02:17 AM

Originally Posted by Tazirai

Read all those articles and tbh they were poorly written and struggled to make their point. The best point in all of them was that the format that made Maher’s show Work in the 90’s/00’s can be problematic in today’s political culture. Aside from that it was “oh he said this and it made me uncomfortable, I’m not going to explain why it was wrong or present data behind it, I just didn’t like it”.

**KNIGHT OF THE LAKE** · 05-23-2018, 02:25 AM

Originally Posted by Tendrin

Oh, he's definitely every conservative's idea of a smarmy, limousine liberal who hates on Religion.

It's why they love him being a face of liberalism.

Yeah because for some reasons in this country people still walk on egg shells over criticizing all the shitty things done in the name of religion. Aside from gauranteeing that people are free to practice whatever they want as long as it doesn’t infringe on the rights of others, no policy should be made in the name of religion.

The only reason conservatives like it is because there is a double standard they cultivated where they can spend all day using dog whistles to promote their views, but the second you point out they are a bunch of nuts who think god wills everything **** thing they do they get to cry “oh you are attacking my religion”. **** that. Stop justifying your bad behavior with your religion and no one will have a problem.

But I like how liberals should moderate what they do to acquiesce conservatives bullshit political games

**Tendrin** · 05-23-2018, 02:35 AM

Originally Posted by KNIGHT OF THE LAKE

Yeah because for some reasons in this country people still walk on egg shells over criticizing all the shitty things done in the name of religion.

We can criticize it without devolving to the level of Maher, Dawkins and Harris.

Aside from gauranteeing that people are free to practice whatever they want as long as it doesn’t infringe on the rights of others, no policy should be made in the name of religion.

Certainly.

The only reason conservatives like it is because there is a double standard they cultivated where they can spend all day using dog whistles to promote their views, but the second you point out they are a bunch of nuts who think god wills everything **** thing they do they get to cry “oh you are attacking my religion”. **** that. Stop justifying your bad behavior with your religion and no one will have a problem.

Again, certainly. However, one can do this without being a bigot. This is a test that has been failed repeatedly by Maher, Harris and Dawkins.

But I like how liberals should moderate what they do to acquiesce conservatives bullshit political games

It's not about moderating. It's about not being a bigot. And yes, I certainly believe that Maher fits the image a lot of conservatives have of liberals, but that doesn't make him untalented. I dislike him for his bigotry, even if I agree with him on a range of issues.

**KNIGHT OF THE LAKE** · 05-23-2018, 03:09 AM

Originally Posted by Tendrin

We can criticize it without devolving to the level of Maher, Dawkins and Harris.

Certainly.

Again, certainly. However, one can do this without being a bigot. This is a test that has been failed repeatedly by Maher, Harris and Dawkins.

It's not about moderating. It's about not being a bigot. And yes, I certainly believe that Maher fits the image a lot of conservatives have of liberals, but that doesn't make him untalented. I dislike him for his bigotry, even if I agree with him on a range of issues.

I’m not going to deny that both of them can be dicks, but the last criticism I want to hear is that “conservatives like that they have a platform” because their bullshit double standard comes into effect for how they should be treated with kid gloves.

Cause I promise you there is no one at that side looking at their worst on Fox News saying “you know we shouldn’t have these guys as faces of our ideology because liberals can point to all the nasty **** they say about them”. Because they don’t give a ****. They make the rules, tell their opponents to play by them, then break them whenever necessary. This idea that liberals should curtail their media because conservatives might criticize it is such a paper tiger argument. As if they aren’t going to criticize something else. Oh and the only reason they really go after Maher is because he doesn’t walk on egg shells talking about how they are all bible thumpers that bring their religion into politics to the detriment of everyone. I don’t need to hear a bunch of yokels who will spend all day defending how some poor little Christian baker should be allowed to tell a gay couplr to **** off when they want a cake how the rest of us should be more tolerant of their views. If you believe that, you’re already losing.

In case people didn’t notice, they had no problem rallying around a serial adulterer, whose conned millions of people, who spent the last decade accusing our last President of not being American. There’s no high ground with them. I don’t care that there’s a few people on the left that treat them exactly how they deserve. Maybe if more people did and didn’t pull their punches they’d actually be shamed out of it and their intolerance wouldn’t be tolerated. But they get everyone to treat them with kid gloves because a bunch of religious white weirdos like to act like they are minorities while they discriminate against everyone and that’s it’s a intolerant to call them out.

How conservatives feel is the last argument I need to hear. Go spend a day watching Fox and see if they give even slightest **** about how liberals feel about their programming. And no Maher and Dakins are not comparable. At least when they **** on a religion they can point to all the awful things they do and the statistics of who believes those things. Let’s not make false equivancies.

**Tendrin** · 05-23-2018, 04:09 AM

Originally Posted by KNIGHT OF THE LAKE

I’m not going to deny that both of them can be dicks, but the last criticism I want to hear is that “conservatives like that they have a platform” because their bullshit double standard comes into effect for how they should be treated with kid gloves.

And yet, how many times have conservatives told me I need to listen to Bil Maher because 'see, even the liberal Bill Maher agrees with us' when it comes to their islamophobia and 'radical islam' and what not? Because I hear it all the time. All. The. Time.

Cause I promise you there is no one at that side looking at their worst on Fox News saying “you know we shouldn’t have these guys as faces of our ideology because liberals can point to all the nasty **** they say about them”

We shouldn't have them as the faces of a progressive ideology because they're /bigots/. That he reinforces a conservative view of Liberals in a lot of cases is only a bonus to them because it validates their existant opinions when an opposition figure acknowledges it and tells them they're right. It's why so many liberals loved Andrew Sullivan. It's why Never-Trumpers still get hired.

Also, remind me to bring this point up when we talk about Nancy Pelosi again.

Because they don’t give a ****. They make the rules, tell their opponents to play by them, then break them whenever necessary. This idea that liberals should curtail their media because conservatives might criticize it is such a paper tiger argument. As if they aren’t going to criticize something else. Oh and the only reason they really go after Maher is because he doesn’t walk on egg shells talking about how they are all bible thumpers that bring their religion into politics to the detriment of everyone. I don’t need to hear a bunch of yokels who will spend all day defending how some poor little Christian baker should be allowed to tell a gay couplr to **** off when they want a cake how the rest of us should be more tolerant of their views. If you believe that, you’re already losing.

That's great and all but has little to do with Maher's tendency to punch down at marginalized groups like, say, Muslims who constitute one frigging percent of the population. He contributes to the rising tide of Islamaphobia and he validates it in the minds of already conservative viewers who are /already scared of Muslims/ by agreeing with the noxious views of his frequently anti-Islam guests. These things do have consequences.

In case people didn’t notice, they had no problem rallying around a serial adulterer, whose conned millions of people, who spent the last decade accusing our last President of not being American. There’s no high ground with them. I don’t care that there’s a few people on the left that treat them exactly how they deserve. Maybe if more people did and didn’t pull their punches they’d actually be shamed out of it and their intolerance wouldn’t be tolerated. But they get everyone to treat them with kid gloves because a bunch of religious white weirdos like to act like they are minorities while they discriminate against everyone and that’s it’s a intolerant to call them out.

I don't judge based on these items either. I judge on the fact that we can do better and do it without giving them evidence to fuel their stupid narratives while allowing a bigot to be an example of 'liberalism'. Maher ought to be criticized. There are better, more talented, more progressive, less misogynistic, and less awful people out there who could use a platform on HBO that won't stand by and platform frigging Milo so he can get called a 'good liberal' by him.

How conservatives feel is the last argument I need to hear. Go spend a day watching Fox and see if they give even slightest **** about how liberals feel about their programming. And no Maher and Dakins are not comparable. At least when they **** on a religion they can point to all the awful things they do and the statistics of who believes those things. Let’s not make false equivancies.

Oh brother.

**KNIGHT OF THE LAKE** · 05-23-2018, 04:15 AM

Originally Posted by Tendrin

And yet, how many times have conservatives told me I need to listen to Bil Maher because 'see, even the liberal Bill Maher agrees with us' when it comes to their islamophobia and 'radical islam' and what not? Because I hear it all the time. All. The. Time.

We shouldn't have them as the faces of a progressive ideology because they're /bigots/. That he reinforces a conservative view of Liberals in a lot of cases is only a bonus to them. Also, remind me to bring this point up when we talk about Nancy Pelosi again.

That's great and all but has little to do with Maher's tendency to punch down at marginalized groups like, say, Muslims who constitute one frigging percent of the population. He contributes to the rising tide of Islamaphobia and he validates it in the minds of already conservative viewers who are /already scared of Muslims/ by agreeing with the noxious views of his frequently anti-Islam guests. These things do have consequences.

I don't judge based on these items either. I judge on the fact that we can do better and do it without giving them evidence to fuel their stupid narratives while allowing a bigot to be an example of 'liberalism'.

Oh brother.

It’s not punching down at marginalized groups when they are actually predominant groups of not the government in the countries he’s referring to when he makes his statements. This isn’t calling American Muslims terrorists because you are an uncultured dicko. It’s calling out countries that stone adulterous women and behead gay people in the name of their state run religion out for bad behavior.

That’s a massive distinction that is very relevant that you aren’t making.

And honestly I don’t care what conservatives tell you.

Thread: All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!

Thread Tools

Display

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions