Serious US Election Thread (read post #2014)

Status
Not open for further replies.
sunny004 said:
My point is is that people didn't really care about restricting political satire before it became legal precedent. If Citizen's is repealed, with the mass amount of media coverage that will certainly garner, it's a possibility that can't be ignored.
Click to expand...

"Satire" will never be repressed at all, ever. There are already ample protections in place for it. It's not like we're proposing something new that could be used to infringe upon it, we want to overturn something that didn't affect it at all whatsoever. And no one is talking about legislating against the ruling, but overturning it due to a new justice and hopefully a new majority.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JES
sunny004 said:
Two things

1) It's a Supreme Court Justice, not a Supreme Judge (Not hating or anything, but would just like to clarify)

2) I'm pretty sure you're not against Citizen's United, but are actually against lobbying/corporate donors. Citizen's united did allow for campaign donations by corporations and other activist groups, but its main intent was to allow corporations/activist groups to make political media. If Citizen's United was overturned, you could say goodbye to things like political satire, opinionated talk shows/tv programs, etc. On the other hand, what you're describing is corporate donations / lobbying, which is really where you see the corrupt politicians.

Also, trying to legislate against Supreme Court decision (Recently exemplified by Oklahoma's anti-abortion law) would technically be unconstitutional, and would never become law.
Click to expand...

I thought that everybody would at least know who I was talking about. Unfortunately, I'm not even close to 100% knowledgeable about all the different official terms and jargon. Glad at least you know who I was talking about, so I don't see not using the correct term as a loss on my part.

And yes, basically getting rid of Citizens United means that corporations and organizations will no longer be allowed to make UNLIMITED POWER!!!! unlimited campaign finance contributions, which are pretty much bribes for their politicians of choice. Money isn't freedom of speech when you can outspend grassroots activists groups, metaphorically giving them a voice that is too loud to speak over.

And the loss of political satire, opinionated talk shows, and TV programs would be a small price to pay, which won't happen entirely, so long as the corporations, wealthy individuals, and coordinated groups for the wealthy fat pigs (refuse to call them the "wealthy elite", because I feel it gives them some validity) to pay for whatever laws they like, and block anything they don't. If anything, I expect them to use any victories to their advantage, and egg on supporters for the movement.

And so long as Citizens United is ruled as law, we'd have better luck starting over than trying to legislate laws banning unlimited and opaque campaign contributions, let alone make it an offense that is a jailable offense (which it should be, similar to the sentences that have been given out as a result of the war on drugs. It's fair to say that it is a threat to destroying our democracy, if not at least 10 years in similar prisons. No country prisons for any assholes that continue to try to game the system).

But yes, the corporate, super PACs, and lobbying contributions needs to go. The ability to lobby should have nothing to do with money or the ability to do "favors".
 
Outlaw said:
Sure am. At least I'm not throwing rocks at horses and destroying property.

Man I'm so childish. Wew
Click to expand...

Nice meme! If I could suggest something, it'd be even nicer if you weren't supporting a "politician" who does this or this or this or this or this . Also, this looks pretty concerning, too. We absolutely can't forget about this. But that's just the tip of the iceberg. Like how we're going to force a close ally to pay for a wall because he said their government is deliberately sending rapists and "bad people" to...undermine America. Let's go with that. This looks bad. Oh, this is concerning.

But he did post a Pepe on Twitter. That was pretty cool!
 
SteelEdges said:
Nice meme! If I could suggest something, it'd be even nicer if you weren't supporting a "politician" who does this or this or this or this or this . Also, this looks pretty concerning, too. We absolutely can't forget about this. But that's just the tip of the iceberg. Like how we're going to force a close ally to pay for a wall because he said their government is deliberately sending rapists and "bad people" to...undermine America. Let's go with that. This looks bad. Oh, this is concerning.

But he did post a Pepe on Twitter. That was pretty cool!
Click to expand...

What does any of this have to do with people abusing horses and destroying property? Are those links carte blanche to be a criminal now?

Oh no, someone said something I disagree with! I better set fires and jump on police cars between throwing rocks at their horses!
 
Can we stop with the passive-aggressive bullshit and try to get our points out there please

Yeah, Bernie supporters are out of line if they're engaging in violent protests (I don't know if they are*). Obviously.

Doesn't really invalidate any of what SteelEdges has linked, though. Trump's a bitch.

*edit: checkin' it out and uh the shit that went down in Nevada is not really anything on the level of a full-fledged riot but I agree that it reflects badly on Sanders supporters (and Sanders for hesitating to condemn their behaviour).

This Cali business is disturbing though. Broad generalisation here but some of Sanders' bunch may be getting a bit too anti-establishment

dubedit: one could counter that violence towards anti-trump protesters at trump rallies holds similar implications (too-impassioned reactions towards criticism of the movement, etc), which is understandable since Trump's a populist and Bernie a democratic socialist and both anti-establishment candidates
 
Last edited:
My point is there is no reason to support Trump that doesn't reveal the supporter to be extremely prejudiced or - at best - apathetic to this prejudice. It's also nice that bigoted speech is just harmless discourse that people just happen to disagree with. Definitely not a trope used by bigots!
 
13310365_10154243436369600_7274677315621150477_n.jpg
 
Speaking to a television interviewer in London, Hawking called Trump “a demagogue who seems to appeal to the lowest common denominator,” a statement that many Trump supporters believed was intentionally designed to confuse them. Moments after Hawking made the remark, Google reported a sharp increase in searches for the terms “demagogue,” “denominator,” and “Stephen Hawking.”
 
First & only contribution to this shitstorm: I was quite set on not voting (for all the reasons you'd expect, plus the fact that my state of residence is one where my individual vote is entirely meaningless), but Trump publicly called Elizabeth Warren 'Pocahontas' so I'm probably voting for him now.
 

which side does the violent things bruv? did u try to come into a thread and contend donald trump supporters havent committed violent acts? and the critical difference: trump encourages this. hes all about the ultra-violence. the dems do not. I was about to say "if u disagree", but u cant, because this is a fact.
 
Shrug said:

which side does the violent things bruv? did u try to come into a thread and contend donald trump supporters havent committed violent acts? and the critical difference: trump encourages this. hes all about the ultra-violence. the dems do not. I was about to say "if u disagree", but u cant, because this is a fact.
Click to expand...

I'm contending that Bernie/Hilldawg supports are far more violent. Besides the video you linked, the only other violent Trump supporter I can recall is that black guy who clocked the dude early on in the campaign. If Trump supporters have been smashing property, lighting fires and disrupting Bernie/Hilldawg rallies, please enlighten me.

I wish every anti-Trump protestor could be as nice and peaceful as Stephen Hawking, but I'm not seeing very much of it. All I see is a lot of "Don't criticize us, or we'll wreck your shit."
 
i literally saw two violent attacks against two different trump supporters yesterday on reddit, and another one against a different trump supporter today on reddit. you can't possibly say that the level of violence is at all comparable and while hillary/bernie may not support it in words the culture of the left (or at least its supporters) is definitely generally complicit with using violence as a means in politics because they are blaming this violence on trump saying mean things rather than, you know, on assholes who think that bloodying someone up for their choice of candidate is at all acceptable.
 
Trump isn't saying "mean things". Trump is speaking in rhetoric that sponsors racial cultural and political violence.

Weird how it's those being maligned by trump and his supporters that have to remain dignified in the face of literally the same shit. Weird how it's the white people now doing the self victimization shtick but it's allowed because racism is only real if it's against them???? Got some real high moral ground there buds. Y'all are some real respectable folks and all you want is just some good old fashion ethnic cleansing to protect your wholesome white values. How dare they react so viciously against some truly benign ideology.

Edit: it's also super comical that you assume these people are Bernie or Hillary supporters too because God forbid they have onions that lie outside of the hegemonic views.
 
Last edited:
TheValkyries said:
Trump isn't saying "mean things". Trump is speaking in rhetoric that sponsors racial cultural and political violence.

Weird how it's those being maligned by trump and his supporters that have to remain dignified in the face of literally the same shit. Weird how it's the white people now doing the self victimization shtick but it's allowed because racism is only real if it's against them???? Got some real high moral ground there buds. Y'all are some real respectable folks and all you want is just some good old fashion ethnic cleansing to protect your wholesome white values. How dare they react so viciously against some truly benign ideology.

Edit: it's also super comical that you assume these people are Bernie or Hillary supporters too because God forbid they have onions that lie outside of the hegemonic views.
Click to expand...

So it's okay to harm, destroy property, etc, as long as someone said something that offends you or supports someone who does? Good to know.

And thank you for bringing race into this when no one else did.

Edit: And I guess responsibility for ones own actions is horse shit now. Cause it's -definitely- Trumps fault that people against him are hurting those for him. Yep. Totally HIS fault.
 
Last edited:
TheValkyries said:
Weird how it's the white people now doing the self victimization shtick but it's allowed because racism is only real if it's against them???? Got some real high moral ground there buds. Y'all are some real respectable folks and all you want is just some good old fashion ethnic cleansing to protect your wholesome white values. How dare they react so viciously against some truly benign ideology.
Click to expand...
Dude, what? How is the fact that trump supporters are saying they are attacked for their political views have anything to do with race at all? I'm sure that a good majority of trump supporters are white, but that's pretty obvious when you look at an overlap of the US demographics and republicans, but I don't see in the last page where race was a factor at all.

What do you mean, "Y'all" want to protect "white values"? What exactly are white values? I didn't realize that all white people had identical political thoughts? How can you call people out for assuming somebody's a Bernie/Hillary supporter, then go on and say this about all these "white people"? Trump supporters are trump supporters. And how the HELL do you go straight to ethnic cleansing?? That's basically jumping to "you are hitler" right out of the gate.



As for Trump in general, it's true that he has encouraged violence. Not violence against, minorities. He's been very careful to toe that line. Saying "mexico is sending criminals" is a very carefully worded statement, because it's not saying "Mexicans are criminals". Though he's playing on the thoughts of some* racist people, he's not saying it himself. So I can't say he's specifically being racist. But he is encouraging violence--"you punch somebody, I'll pay your legal fees". No denying that he's encouraging people to get out there and fight. Maybe he backtracked on that a few days later, but that's what Trump does. Talk talk talk, cross the line, and backtrack once it's already too late. Look at him flip flop on the abortion or nukes. And people got mad at biden for stuff like this.
 
hey, outlaw, you're raising all the internet racist red flags

Violence should of course be condemned. No one can defend this, for example. It's simply unacceptable. I am curious (except I'm not because I'm pretty sure I know the answer) about how Trump fans never bother trying to defend the blatant lies and bigotry Trump spews. Outlaw's just been saying "HEY GUYS SOME PEOPLE AGAINST TRUMP HAVE COMMITTED ACTS OF VIOLENCE AND DESTROYED PROPERTY" while, as I mentioned before, using the same old dog whistles. He'll have a promising future in comment sections of Breitbart articles or insisting that /pol/ is ironic memeing.

I mean, Trump fans don't ever mention this or how Trump defended that hate crime in this way. They also don't seem to mind too much that white nationalists and racists and anti-Semites adore Trump. And Trump supporters are pretty invested in the same deal . etc .
 
Last edited:
beating a hispanic man is terrible. You shouldn't physically attack anyone unless they're physically attacking you first. If that man bragged to me about how he beat a hispanic man, as a trump supporter myself, I'd tell him to get the fuck out and that he wasn't welcome.

was that hard? no shifting blame, no saying "you do it too," no victim blaming. violence is bad and anyone who uses violence as a political tool is not welcome in my movement. i don't have the power to do anything about a man 1000 miles away but if someone told me they committed violence in the name of trump i would tell them off and stop associating with them. violence is not acceptable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top