US Politics Thread 2021-24

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

You mean the woman who put pot smokers in jail but giggled when asked if she smoked weed. Tough on crime gets you so far. How does she do on the economy? How is the border doing? Right now crime is very low on my list. She does not cut it for running a country.

I reckon they weren’t lying when they said she slept her way to the top. How else could someone that stupid get to the position she’s in?

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

I reckon they weren’t lying when they said she slept her way to the top. How else could someone that stupid get to the position she’s in?

Yep......

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

I think Beyonce was supposed to show up at the DNC. She didn't. She was a Obama fan from what I recall. But hey, Kid Rock like Trump. A few others in the music industry.

Crikey! here's another one Chris, I reckon word must be travelling around and they're all jumping on the bandwagon (no pun intended)

Jack White rages against Trump campaign’s use of his music: ‘Lawsuit coming’

Jack White has threatened to sue Donald Trump’s campaign over the use of his former rock duo The White Stripes’s hit “Seven Nation Army.”

On Thursday (August 29), the guitarist and singer shared a screen recording of a since-deleted clip posted to X by Trump’s deputy director of communications, Margo Martin, showing the former president boarding a flight to Michigan and Wisconsin.

The footage was overlayed with the 2003 song’s famous instrumental intro.

“Oh....Don’t even think about using my music you fascists,” White wrote in the caption of the Instagram post. “Lawsuit coming from my lawyers about this (to add to your 5 thousand others.) Have a great day at work today Margo Martin.”

He angrily continued: “And as long as I’m here, a double ******* you DonOLD for insulting our nation’s veterans at Arlington you scum. You should lose every military family’s vote immediately from that if ANYTHING makes sense anymore.”
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknew...93cffb00&ei=44

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

Crikey! here's another one Chris, I reckon word must be travelling around and they're all jumping on the bandwagon (no pun intended)

It just ends up being bad if artist permits usage of their songs, etc. It goes both ways. Jack Black and his little band shut it down after his band mate said the gunman didn't miss Trump. There was outrage of course. Fans get upset. And it does give a picture of the artist supporting said candidate when they don't.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

It just ends up being bad if artist permits usage of their songs, etc. It goes both ways. Jack Black and his little band shut it down after his band mate said the gunman didn't miss Trump. There was outrage of course. Fans get upset. And it does give a picture of the artist supporting said candidate when they don't.

Yeah

[ET2SN]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

You mean the woman who put pot smokers in jail but giggled when asked if she smoked weed. Tough on crime gets you so far. How does she do on the economy? How is the border doing? Right now crime is very low on my list. She does not cut it for running a country.

Which is what the Russian troll farms and the GOP rat bleepers want you to believe.

Look, its obvious you won't believe me. So, ask some of the really big wigs in US business. Not the moon bats in tech who play D&D and WarThunder in costume, I mean the board rooms of the really big corporations who actually make and sell stuff.

They want a strong NATO with the US providing most of the muscle. That gives them a big stick so they can find the cheapest possible labor to make their crap and millions/billions of potential customers to buy it. They want the US CVG's prowling off the coasts of Asia for the same reason.

What they don't want is the US withdrawing into a shell and telling the rest of the world to go bleep themselves.

That message is coming from Russia and China. They want us in chaos. They would be really happy if we fell headlong into Isolationism and, better yet, a true civil war. It gets us out of their way.

At this point you should also REALLY consider the alternative to Harris and Walz. Trump, and be honest with your self, blundered his way thru a global pandemic and set up as much chaos as he could in Europe and Asia. Biden had to work over time just to calm down our allies.
You think Biden is a chump? Look at who set the table up for him.

The one thing I'm looking for is STABILTY. Believe it or not, I used to like voting a split ticket where the party didn't matter but the results did.
I'd like to get back there again.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by ET2SN

Which is what the Russian troll farms and the GOP rat bleepers want you to believe.

Look, its obvious you won't believe me. So, ask some of the really big wigs in US business. Not the moon bats in tech who play D&D and WarThunder in costume, I mean the board rooms of the really big corporations who actually make and sell stuff.

They want a strong NATO with the US providing most of the muscle. That gives them a big stick so they can find the cheapest possible labor to make their crap and millions/billions of potential customers to buy it. They want the US CVG's prowling off the coasts of Asia for the same reason.

What they don't want is the US withdrawing into a shell and telling the rest of the world to go bleep themselves.

That message is coming from Russia and China. They want us in chaos. They would be really happy if we fell headlong into Isolationism and, better yet, a true civil war. It gets us out of their way.

At this point you should also REALLY consider the alternative to Harris and Walz. Trump, and be honest with your self, blundered his way thru a global pandemic and set up as much chaos as he could in Europe and Asia. Biden had to work over time just to calm down our allies.
You think Biden is a chump? Look at who set the table up for him.

The one thing I'm looking for is STABILTY. Believe it or not, I used to like voting a split ticket where the party didn't matter but the results did.
I'd like to get back there again.

It takes more the being tough on crime and sleeping with Brown to run a country. She doesn't have it in her to run a country. You will not convince me of that. She is easily manipulated and will a pawn.

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

Beyonce as well, blocked Trump but has allowed Harris

It's a question of requesting permission before using copyright protected material.

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

It's a question of requesting permission before using copyright protected material.

No it’s not.


Do Politicians Need a Musician's Permission to Play One of Their Songs at a Campaign Event?

By Jake Rossen |Jul 6, 2020

https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/...ampaign-events

Whether it’s the songwriter, the performer, or the recording label, someone always owns the rights to a song. Whether or not one needs permission to play that song depends a lot on the circumstances. A DJ at a wedding doesn’t need to worry about any consequences for playing Peter Gabriel's “In Your Eyes” or The Righteous Brothers's “Unchained Melody.” Sports arenas can pipe in the Rolling Stones's “Start Me Up” without a release.

In the world of politics, however, campaigns and rallies that rely on music to stir up crowds often come under fire for unauthorized use. What’s the reason?

According to Rolling Stone, it’s not typically an issue over copyright, though using a song without permission is technically copyright infringement. If a song is played in a public venue like a stadium or arena that has a public performance license, no permission is needed. The license is typically granted through a songwriters’ association like the American Society of Composers, Authors, and Publishers (ASCAP) or Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI). Even so, ASCAP still recommends [PDF] that political campaigns seek out permission from the musicians or songwriters, as these licenses exclude music played during conventions or campaign events.

Additionally, most artists aren’t concerned with their music being played at a wedding or sporting event. It is, after all, a form of free publicity and exposure, and no one is really making any substantial amount of money from their work. But the political realm is different. Because artists might have differing political beliefs than a candidate using their music, they sometimes grow concerned that use of their material might be construed as an endorsement.

That’s when artists can begin to make noise about wanting politicians to stop playing their music. In this instance, they can object on the basis of their Right of Publicity—a legal argument that covers how their image is portrayed. They can make the assertion that use of their work infringes on their right to not be associated with a subject they find objectionable. Other arguments can be raised through the Lanham Act, which covers trademark confusion (or a False Endorsement), which addresses the implication an artist is endorsing a political message if their music is used.

In 2008, for example, Jackson Browne won a lawsuit against John McCain and the national and Ohio GOP when the McCain campaign used Browne’s song “Running on Empty” in ads attacking Barack Obama over gas conservation.

Even if the musician isn’t supportive of a candidate, it’s not always advisable to take such action. A contentious legal confrontation can often result in more publicity than if a musician simply let the campaign continue uninterrupted. Other times, recording artists feel strongly enough about distancing themselves from a message they disagree with that they’ll take whatever steps are necessary.

The bottom line? More often than not, a song played during a campaign isn’t there because an artist or label gave their permission. And unless the artist strenuously objects to the campaign message and is willing to get into a legal tussle, they probably can’t do a whole lot to stop it.

[mapuc]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

No it’s not.


Do Politicians Need a Musician's Permission to Play One of Their Songs at a Campaign Event?

By Jake Rossen |Jul 6, 2020

https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/...ampaign-events

You can boil it down to one thing-Who do they like and Trump they dislike

Markus

[AVGWarhawk]

Concerning Harris' economic plan, how is a 1 time child tax credit going to help the economy? A child under 1 year of age gets the credit. Trump's child tax credit is much better. $25k to first time home buyers. How will this lessen the burden of today's economy? Will this be another housing crash crisis in the making? Taxes on unrealized gains? Best of luck. When ever a Democrat says "investment" there is never a return. Investment of your tax dollars. No return.

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by Rockstar

No it’s not.


Do Politicians Need a Musician's Permission to Play One of Their Songs at a Campaign Event?

By Jake Rossen |Jul 6, 2020

https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/...ampaign-events

" VI CONCLUSION

The tension between musicians and politicians has intensified during
the campaign trail. It is clear that artists do not want their songs standing
for a political figure they do not agree with. While campaigns can acquire
blanket licenses through performing rights organizations, some campaigns
have resorted to using music without permission because artists tend to be
left leaning and more liberal. A politician’s use of a song may not only
change the meaning of a song, but also show an association among a
musician and particular political party. In light of recent suits, artists’
public statements, and negative publicity, some politicians have
surrendered and stopped use of a song when requested. However, despite
countless artists who have spoken out against Trump’s use of their music
during campaign rallies and advertisements, Trump continued to use their
music. The Grant v. Trump decision was a win for artists everywhere and
will hopefully prove the importance of requesting permission to use an
artist’s copyrighted work moving forward."

https://repository.law.miami.edu/cgi...&context=umblr

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

" VI CONCLUSION

The tension between musicians and politicians has intensified during
the campaign trail. It is clear that artists do not want their songs standing
for a political figure they do not agree with. While campaigns can acquire
blanket licenses through performing rights organizations, some campaigns
have resorted to using music without permission because artists tend to be
left leaning and more liberal. A politician’s use of a song may not only
change the meaning of a song, but also show an association among a
musician and particular political party. In light of recent suits, artists’
public statements, and negative publicity, some politicians have
surrendered and stopped use of a song when requested. However, despite
countless artists who have spoken out against Trump’s use of their music
during campaign rallies and advertisements, Trump continued to use their
music. The Grant v. Trump decision was a win for artists everywhere and hopefully prove the importance of requesting permission will always to use an artist’s copyrighted work moving forward."

https://repository.law.miami.edu/cgi...&context=umblr

I guess you did read the article I posted either. Pretty much said the same thing. Copy write is not really the issue it’s the perception, how the music is used, and the artist not wanting be seen as endorsing a candidate.

hopefully it will prove the importance of a candidate requesting permission. Then again maybe it won’t

[Otto Harkaman]

Asking ChatGPT

What is the current Financial Industries' opinion of Kamala Harris and her economic policy?

The financial industry's opinion of Kamala Harris and her economic policy is one of cautious scrutiny. While Harris is viewed as generally pragmatic, her support for policies that could lead to increased regulation and higher taxes, particularly on the wealthy and corporations, raises concerns among Wall Street investors. The industry is wary of her potential impact on sectors like technology and finance, given her alignment with more progressive elements of the Democratic Party on issues like income inequality and corporate accountability.

Give some sources on Kamala Harris and the Financial sector

For detailed insights on Kamala Harris and the financial sector's perspective on her economic policies, you can explore the following sources:

1. Financial Times: Offers analysis on Wall Street's reaction to Harris and potential implications of her economic policies. Financial Times (Subscription required)
2. Bloomberg: Provides coverage on how financial markets and investors perceive Kamala Harris, including her stance on regulation and taxation. Bloomberg
3. Wall Street Journal: Discusses the financial industry's concerns and expectations regarding Harris's economic policies. Wall Street Journal (Subscription required)

These sources will give you a broad view of the financial sector's opinions and concerns.

What is the current Financial Industries' opinion of Donald Trump and his economic policy?

The financial industry's opinion on Donald Trump's economic policy is largely divided, with some elements viewed favorably and others raising concerns.
Positive Views:

• Tax Cuts: Many in the financial sector appreciate Trump's commitment to making the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act provisions permanent, as these cuts are seen as beneficial for wealthy individuals, small businesses, and real estate investors. The lower corporate tax rate and individual tax cuts have been credited with boosting economic growth and increasing revenues during his first term​(Financial Planning).
• Deregulation: Trump's emphasis on reducing regulations is welcomed by investors, particularly in sectors like energy and finance, where less oversight is seen as an opportunity for increased profits​(Fox Business).

Concerns:

• Tariffs: Trump's aggressive use of tariffs, particularly against China and other trading partners, is a point of concern. Many in the financial sector worry that such policies could lead to higher costs for consumers and businesses, potentially fueling inflation and disrupting global supply chains​(Fox Business).
• Market Volatility: There is also apprehension about the potential for increased market volatility under Trump's leadership, especially if his policies on tariffs and trade lead to further economic uncertainty​(Financial Planning).

Overall, while Trump's policies of tax cuts and deregulation are popular among many investors, his approach to trade and tariffs creates significant concerns about the long-term stability and health of the economy.

Give some sources on Donald Trump and the Financial sector

For insights on Donald Trump and the financial sector, you can refer to the following sources:

1. Fox Business: Provides a detailed discussion of Trump's economic plans, including tax cuts, tariffs, and deregulation, and how these policies are perceived by the financial industry.
   • Fox Business​(Fox Business)
2. Financial Planning: Compares the economic proposals of Trump and other candidates, offering perspectives from financial advisors on how Trump's policies might influence the market, particularly regarding taxes and tariffs.
   • Financial Planning​(Financial Planning)
3. The Wall Street Journal: Covers the broader impact of Trump's economic policies on Wall Street, including views on his deregulation efforts and trade policies.
   • The Wall Street Journal (Subscription required)

[ET2SN]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

It takes more the being tough on crime and sleeping with Brown to run a country. She doesn't have it in her to run a country. You will not convince me of that. She is easily manipulated and will a pawn.

Seriously, you want to go there?

Gee, if only there was a job where you could pick up OJT on how to run the country.. Maybe something like "The President's #1 Helper" or maybe a title like "President Of The US Senate". You know, a position where she could learn how to do all of this President stuff.

Would it make you happy if she cozied up to Putin or Kim? Which brutal dictator would be better when it comes to being manipulated?

Do me favor and at least the read the crap you copy before you paste it. You won't have to shovel it as high to cover a point.