US Politics Thread 2016-2020

[bstanko6]

If it’s true. And trump pulls this off... he’s a genius!

[Buddahaid]

Originally Posted by bstanko6

If it’s true. And trump pulls this off... he’s a genius!

Well don't hold your breath. I had a difficult time concentrating on what was being said because of all the snarky commentary being shoved in my face at the same time which also makes me not want to watch it again.

[bstanko6]

It’s a pretty serious video! Trump said many times for over a year that the mail in ballot would get him out of office. That China sent the virus here. And all Pelosi did for 4 years was attack him with impeachment and false narratives. Trump was on his guard a long time and may have foreseen this.

I mean he is the president with access to a lot of intelligence departments. He could have been watching Pelosi a long time!

[skidman]

Originally Posted by u crank

Ok the Post breaks the story, Twitter locks their account. It should be a story that at least gets some play on major news sites. It is a big story if accurate. The reporters on most news platforms use Twitter. So now CNN, NTY etc. are not going to touch this story out of fear that their reporters will be locked out of this tool that they use everyday. Again, Twitter is within their rights to do it but it is pretty easy (for me anyway) to see how that is a strong arm tactic on Twitter's part. And it worked.

OK, I can see your point and I can't prove you wrong. But I just executed a little internet experiment (from a German IP, using an US or Canadian IP might give different results):

Googling for "Biden Hunter Laptop" (without quotation marks) gives me around 3.230.000 hits.

"Biden Hunter Laptop Twitter" (without quotation marks) produces 3.890.000 hits.

But

"Biden Hunter Twitter New York Post" (without quotation marks) produces a whooping 10.800.000 results.

Why is that? Obviously Twitter's conduct on the matter, the so called censorship, made the story much bigger than it was before. And the Post, the supposed victims, actually cashed in on the "scandal" big time. That's exactly my point: The internet is an amplifier, it can hardy be used to suppress information. Google could try to do it, but they would always lose to the meta crawlers.

[Buddahaid]

I've no doubts that the mail in ballot was a big reason but I don't buy it was the only reason. Voter fraud will never be a settled issue no matter how much investigation happens when people will only accept one answer from either camp.

I still think Trump lost because his vitriol became tiring to a segment of his base and motivated his detractors to a high degree. Simply put, he could have easily won by not acting the petulant child whenever criticized and showing more concern, compassion, and interest in stopping Covid, instead of pretending it doesn't exist and will just go away. But he couldn't do that because he thinks he understands everything better than anyone else, blah, blah, blah, and so here we are.

[bstanko6]

I’m bumping this video again. I think we all need to see it.

[Rockstar]

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

Fair enough but racism is also a central point to fascism and it certainly appears there is an effort to make Trump into that dictator as well.

Trump a dictator? I have not heard of this when was it reported or are you just pulling me leg?

BLM? One can argue that is also racist so go figure, and then there was the great failed experiment in Seattle where there was minimal governmental interference. Funny, that is something conservatives express a desire for but railed against.

Yes there are racists in BLM, but BLM is made up of a lot people. Watching the video of Darius Leonard explain what BLM means to him. Its impossible to argue that because he wears a BLM label on his helmet in public makes him a racist. Its no different than accusing a whole group of people because they wear a hat with MAGA on it as far right extremists. Or labelling everyone fascists because because they have the stars and bars on the bumper of their truck.

How does one talk about this without labels? Is that the real problem, labels?

Yes I do believe labels are the problem for the reasons I stated above. You just can't arbitrarily accuse a whole group of people of being racists, fascists, far right, far left, extremists just because someone else you never met or spoke with labeled them as such. In order to talk about anything without labels you might have to actually talk to the accused and listen to what THEY have to say. Chances are the vast majority you meet will be sensible, reasonable people who want the same things in life you do.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by skidman

The internet is an amplifier, it can hardy be used to suppress information.

Well I'm not so sure about that. Maybe suppress is the wrong word. More like "hey look over there".

Of course you should know that this story has a pre election and a post election side to it. I did my own little test before the election and googled 'hunter biden laptop new york post'. It took almost five pages on Google before I could get something that wasn't about 'Russian disinformation' or a 'vicious smear by the Trump campaign'. In other words articles defending Biden and trying to delegitimize the Post story. I just now tried the same search. Guess what? Top of the page. Now pre election I could and did just go to the Post's web site and read the article. Was Google trying to surpress the story? Seems like it but who could prove it. Guess you got to know your way around the roadblocks if you want to find out stuff. And maybe that is the way it should be.

Now I am going to google LOH-Counter. I hope it doesn't break the internet.

[Skybird]

There are two ways of hiding something.
Hiding it from view by covering it, making it invisible, blicking view.

Or putting it on open display in a flood of other, distracting "signals" where the thing to be hidden simply gets drowned.

Hiding, or distracting.

Preventing perception or preventing discrimination.

The Russians are very good at the latter. They always mix untruths with truths.
The internet also practices the latter a lot.

[Cybermat47]

Originally Posted by u crank

Tech platforms like Google, Facebook and Twitter may be private entities but their influence and power doesn't need to be stated. Their political sympathies are not a secret. Their political power is enormous. Or do you think they are apolitical?

That’s how unrestrained capitalism works.

My point is simple. If Twitter can ban the President of the USA then they can ban you. There are very little alternatives to these platforms.

And in a capitalist society, Twitter has the right to run their business however they want. Do I think that’s a good thing? Not especially, but I was under the impression that the GOP has a libertarian platform (capitalism and small government).

I am a child of the 60's. I can clearly remember when the Liberal/Left railed against Big Brother and the administrative state. We have now come full circle and people, especially young people who are on the Left completely embrace the idea of censorship, Big Tech and a government that wishes to criminalize political dissent. We should be worried.

Yeah, there is a good amount of hypocrisy on the left. But in terms of government power, I think you’re confusing the authoritarian left (communists) with the liberal left (anarchists).

Because Twitter and Facebook are private entities they are completely unchecked. You guys ok with that?

Not at all, that’s why I’d say I’m something of a Social Democrat. But again, to my knowledge GOP support capitalism and small government. It seems like Twitter banning POTUS is a victory for capitalism, as well as being small government in action.

[MaDef]

Originally Posted by skidman

OK, I can see your point and I can't prove you wrong. But I just executed a little internet experiment (from a German IP, using an US or Canadian IP might give different results):

Googling for "Biden Hunter Laptop" (without quotation marks) gives me around 3.230.000 hits.

"Biden Hunter Laptop Twitter" (without quotation marks) produces 3.890.000 hits.

But

"Biden Hunter Twitter New York Post" (without quotation marks) produces a whooping 10.800.000 results.

Why is that? Obviously Twitter's conduct on the matter, the so called censorship, made the story much bigger than it was before. And the Post, the supposed victims, actually cashed in on the "scandal" big time. That's exactly my point: The internet is an amplifier, it can hardy be used to suppress information. Google could try to do it, but they would always lose to the meta crawlers.

Google plays fast and loose with search results as a matter of course. I did your Google search with Biden, Hunter Biden, Twitter, New York Post without quotes and got 8.2 million hits. Did an advanced search with the same words and got 640,000 hits.

I keep telling you kids, believe nothing you hear and only half of what you see, and you should find the truth.

[ET2SN]

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Cybermat47

That’s how unrestrained capitalism works.

That's right but most countries have laws about monopolies. And for good reason.

And in a capitalist society, Twitter has the right to run their business however they want. Do I think that’s a good thing? Not especially, but I was under the impression that the GOP has a libertarian platform (capitalism and small government).

What does the GOP have to do with this discusion?

Yeah, there is a good amount of hypocrisy on the left. But in terms of government power, I think you’re confusing the authoritarian left (communists) with the liberal left (anarchists).

The left I was refering to existed in the 60s and 70's. That left no longer exists. The left of today has a decidedly authoritarian bent to it. It is not interested in free speech, a trait of the old Left, but is quite happy with controlled speech. Especially if they control it.

It seems like Twitter banning POTUS is a victory for capitalism, as well as being small government in action.

Which small government are you refering to?

[Cybermat47]

Originally Posted by u crank

That's right but most countries have laws about monopolies. And for good reason.

If you’re saying that the USA should follow the lead of social democracies that have laws limiting monopolies and restraining capitalism, I honestly couldn’t agree more.

What does the GOP have to do with this discusion?

President Trump is a member of the GOP, and so his words and actions should be expected to represent the GOP’s beliefs.

The left I was refering to existed in the 60s and 70's. That left no longer exists. The left of today has a decidedly authoritarian bent to it. It is not interested in free speech, a trait of the old Left, but is quite happy with controlled speech. Especially if they control it.

If you only look at the loud extremist minority of the left that the media focuses on to promote division just like they do with the loud extremist minority of the right, sure.

Which small government are you refering to?

‘A small government is a principle widely invoked by New Right conservatives and libertarians to describe an economic and political system where there is minimal government involvement in certain areas of public policy or the private sector, especially matters considered to be private or personal.’

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_government

[bstanko6]

I never understood why anyone would want to be a socialist! It makes no sense. You make government bigger? Give them all the money and purse strings?

The government can’t even handle a simple budget! And you want them to control everything?

No thank you