Total posts: 4,222
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
Was this little baby assaulted by a 6`22 178lb black man while another held this babies arms tightly behind its back or not? .
unclear. The news report says the child is unharmed. So neither one of us knows if the child was "Assaulted"
So you would deny this happened and call it "fake news" no matter who had reported this horrific story?
I would call out anyone for reporting fake news. There is no evidence yet that any crime has been committed. It has been confirmed the child is fine. Anyone who says that they know a crime has been committed (who wasn't there or hasn't investigated it) is a liar or an idiot.
So are you saying that BLM isn't a Marxist movement?
of course they aren't. Why would anyone think that they are?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
How many are doing that out of 3 million police interactions? Oh yeah...>>>that<<< many...
who the hell cares how many interactions there were? If I interact with 3 million people, but i only murder a few hundred of them, i am still a mass murderer. If police have harass, and attack people, they need to go to prison.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bmdrocks21
Well Oromagi was criticizing a “pro Trump” source, so I provided another link to someone else.
The sources provided gave no evidence any crime had occurred. They now confirm the child was not harmed. So again, why do you think this story is worth talking about?
Despite the whole tiresome “if the races were reversed, we wouldn’t hear the end of it” (@ fake hate crimes), there isn’t much more to it.
Did i miss something? Is this guy a cop and the child was killed? Because if not, you aren't making any sense.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@bmdrocks21
Here is another small outlet detailing the event:
so one guy does something stupid and didn't end up harming anyone. Why are we still talking about this?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
so that's wrong then?
there is a facebook photo. the child has been confirmed to be fine. That is all the information we have.
Jackson, a parole authority holder from the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction, was taken into custody and remains incarcerated in the Clark County Jail. He is waiting for the county prosecutor “to provide a determination on the scope and breadth of the felony charges that will be supported by that office for presentation in court,” according to the sheriff’s office.huh, can't believe something so specific would be incorrect, clearly you know something they don't but aren't willing to share it.
he has been taken into custody and they have made no determination what (if any) charges will be laid.
this is one heck of a conspiracy. let me guess dindu
no one is arguing there is a conspiracy. I am arguing this is a non story. If it turns out to be exactly what you think it is, which i acknowledge is possible, then it is one asshole who deserves the prison sentence that is coming to him. But that is still not a national story. It's barely even a local story.
just amazing how so many can get it so wrong, they really should run these things past you first, clearly.
what are you even talking about? you are just jumping to wild conclusions with no evidence about what 1 guy did, then trying to use that to slander millions of people. This is an extremely useless conversation because even if it is exactly as you describe, it is still just one idiot and has no bearing on the BLM movement.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
sick isn't it, they don't see it which is horrible, amazing what they condone and tolerate when it's "not their side"
this is just pathetic. I haven't condoned or tolerated anything. I have questioned the accuracy of the story. And since there are absolutely no details to go on I question why you continue to push this story as if it is accurate when you have no information at all.
guess if the colors were reversed he'd feel the same right? wrong, the leftist hypocrisy is limitless.
Are you kidding me? Right wing assholes commit violence all the time. I condemn that. If this story turns out to be accurate (which there is no evidence of yet) then i will condemn that too. But so far there is no evidence anyone has been harmed and you are treating it like an indictment of an entire political movement. It is pathetic.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
So this child crying under the knee of this 6`2"175 lb man is not being assaulted then? I see.
The articles provided say the child is fine.
Are you saying this didn't happen? What if it had all been reported by a msm outlet? Would have that given this story more or less credibility?
at the time of my previous post, the only information provided was a post on facebook. Do you know how much bullshit gets posted on facebook? If MSNBC had run that story I would be just as critical.
That will be the Marxist movement that are using and radicalising black people for their own agenda .
this level of delusion is disturbing. People protest that they want police to stop harassing and murdering them, so they must want the state to own all the means of production. How are those things related in your mind?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
couldn't simply just look it up yourself, that would be too much to ask, you'd rather pretend it's not real and ignore it like a good leftist.
lol the evidence you provided said that no one had been arrested and the police hadn't even confirmed it had actually happened. You provided rumors as evidence and then get pissy that people call you on it.
Ohio man in custody after kneeling on crying White child's neck, praising Black Lives Matter
There's still absolutely no evidence anyone was harmed. The article you linked to says the child was fine. So why exactly do you think this is a topic worth discussing? You want to discredit the BLM movement, so you show me an article saying that a child was not harmed by someone supposedly in the BLM movement. I can see why this might be local news, but why the hell would anyone else be interested in this case?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
You don't know how the rope-a-dope works then, Trump literally plans on doing what he did in 2016.
in order for it to be a rope-a-dope you need to be faking. Tricking them into thinking you are weak. You don't break your own arms and legs and go "I've got you now!!". Trump has badly damaged his support by his mis-management of the defining crisis of his presidency.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
That's only part of it. A big part of Trump's strategy was to lull Hillary into a sense of complacency.
ok, but the idea is to get your opponent to think you are unpopular, not to actually make yourself unpopular. And treating a global pandemic that is killing americans in the 10's of thousands as if it is no big deal is an excellent way to make yourself unpopular.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Not like he didn't pull a rope-a-dope 2016 in October. This isn't Trump's 1st horserace.
no, but his tricks from last time aren't working. Last time he was the "outsider" candidate. He had no record to run on. All he had to do was make vague promises and attack his opponent's corruption and that was enough to win. But he isn't the outsider any more. He is the incumbent. He has a record to run on. And right now that record is colossally mismanaging the worst crisis in decades. People are worried about the pandemic. They wanted to see their government take it seriously and do something about it.
Trump has spent months pretending it doesn't exist, then pretending it wasn't serious, then pretending like america would just ignore it and get used to it. Now, months late, he is pretending like he takes it seriously because he wasn't able to just ignore and distract from it, which was most of what he did in 2016 on hard issues.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Trump knows the value of virtue signalling.
true, but he is usually unable to keep it up. Ie he will say he loves latinos, then call mexicans rapsists. that sort of thing. Virtue signaling is of limited usefulness if people know you're lying. Trump is obviously lying because he has been saying the exact opposite for months. He was still downplaying the importance Corona as recently as the weekend in his disaster of an interview with Chris Wallace where he was called out for his lies in real time.
I'm wondering if the change of tone is a response to his smack down by Chris.
Created:
Posted in:
lol it is some facebook post. There is no evidence provided that anyone was harmed in any way. But "journalists" with no integrity report it as if it is fact in an attempt to slander the BLM movement.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
"In the matter of reforming things, as distinct from deforming them, there is one plain and simple principle; a principle which will probably be called a paradox. There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, "I don't see the use of this; let us clear it away." To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: "If you don't see the use of it, I certainly won't let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it."
ok, how is this quote relevant? You are arguing that protesters want to get rid of police because they don't see the use for them. But that is 100% innacurate. They are arguing for reforming (not getting rid of police) because of systematic abuse by the police. If the wall was crushing people to death, then the reformers would be very much justified in calling for the wall to be fixed or replaced.
You foolishly assume there is a long list of qualified cops lining up for reduced pay. The opposite is true. If anything, it's going to be EXTREMELY expensive to recruit the kinds of cops you want to hire. Otherwise, you will have a reduced police force
but that is exactly the point. The police are so large and numerous because they are preforming so many tasks which have nothing to do with violent crime. You don't need to send cops to harass homeless people. You shouldn't send cops to deal with addiction issues. Those are not tasks they are equipped to deal with. once you re-distribute those tasks to other people who are better able to hand these tasks, then you don't need nearly as many cops.
which is already a problem as shown with the sick-outs.
those sick outs are a symptom of the problem. They don't want to be held accountable. They like being above the law. So they are basically threatening public safety in order to ensure they keep their privileged status.
People don't understand WHY the police are needed when dealing with the homeless and mentally ill. Somebody has to protect the social workers. The homeless are absolutely irrational and sometimes very dangerous.
Ok, but the police have no training on how to actually help with these issues. They just force the homeless to move. That didn't help anything, it just moved the problem. they aren't trained to handle the mentally ill. So issues will naturally escalate because police will behave how they were trained to (ie use commands, if they aren't obeyed then use force).
Defunding and reducing the police with the assumption "LOTS OF PEOPLE WANNA BE GOOD COPS BUT THE BAD COPS JUST WON'T LET THEM," Is a page right out of the Marxist manifesto.
that is an extremely dumbed down version of it, but sort of.
Just replace good cops and bad cops with proles and bourgies. When you throw the baby out with the bathwater, you don't magically get more babies.
are you attempting to argue that police are somehow magical creatures that cannot be replaced? There are millions of people coming of age every year. Many of them would love to be a cop.
Expecting to recruit well-trained cops willing to take risks with their lives so that a handful of criminals might have theirs spared without monetary incentives is purely a Marxist ideal.
you clearly have not been paying attention at all. No one is saying cops should work for free. No one is even arguing they should work for less money. So this whole point is complete nonsense. The point is to remove the non-crime related tasks they are doing so that less police are needed.
Created:
In Trump's briefing last night trump did a huge change on his take on Corona and masks. Up until now he has constantly downplayed the severity of the crisis. He has downplayed the importance of masks and social distancing. He has argued that testing needs to slow, if not stop (and tried to cut funding for testing). He has basically tried to wish the virus away this whole time.
In the briefing last night Trump (while reading from his prompter) was clear. You need to social distance, if you can't social distance you should wear a mask. This is some pretty basic stuff that he should have been saying for the last 4 months. But it shows that he has some level of cognizance that his approach and language has been disastrous for his campaign and is making an effort to change course. Whether it will actually help is unclear as everyone has seen that he really doesn't give a shit. And he is pretty famous by this point of saying one thing when people push him, but then he pushes in the other direction and undermines his comments very quickly.
I wonder 2 things:
1) will his lip service attempt at looking like he gives a shit about people and the crisis actually win people back?
2) can he actually keep this up? Will he revert back to his instinctual response (which is to ignore the crisis)?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
A retarded position, otherwise you would support defunding public education when they abuse your kids and fail to give them what you paid for.
this statement shows you didn't listen to me at all. I said removing tasks from police they are not suited for. Once they have less tasks, they obviously don't need as much funding. If teachers were also harassing homeless people and breaking up domestic disturbances I would argue for reassigning those tasks too.
Exactly how are you going to replace bad cops with good cops without money? Good luck with that throw the baby out with the bathwater logic.
the reducing funding is in relation reducing their tasks. Since the majority of the tasks police are doing have nothing to do with violent crime, once you remove those tasks and you refocus the police on actually dealing with crime, then they will need far less resources to do the job.
For replacing bad cops, it is more about fixing the review and firing process. Police have a very high chance of getting off with a warning (assuming there is any punishment at all) for committing crimes. In any other line of work, people who did that would be in prison. If you are a cop, you get a slap on the wrist.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
The thoughtlessness or thoughtfulness of the populace and the corruptability of the system will decide the outcome.
True. And that is why we need to reform the entire policing system to reduce the corruptibility of the system.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
There's a problem with both sides of course, but I'd rather be safe with corrupt cops than live for any extended period of time in a police free no-go neighborhood.
this is a false choice though. Almost no one is suggesting abolishing the police. Most protesters are calling for reducing what police do and therfore reducing their funding. for example dealing with the homeless, addiction issues etc. Most of what police do has nothing to do with crime. Police should be used to deal with issues that require force. But they also need to be accountable and held to the law.
Seattle can have Chop. They deserve it. Corrupt cops are by far the lesser of the 2 evils. And I say this from experience having once been physically violated by cops due to a mistaken identity. It was far more tolerable than the multitude of times being assaulted by criminals. It isnt the gated elites that need cops. It's the poor that need them.
you are doing the same thing again. You are making it a black and white issue. Either we have corrupt, abusive cops or we have chaos. That is a false choice. We can have police who are held accountable.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Both parties support the elites. I support the elites. If you can't beat em, join em.
so you acknowledge that you support the destruction of the middle class and therefore the destruction of the american dream and way of life?
I mean I didn't think you would be quite so forthcoming with admitting that you hate American values.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Kinda like peaceful protesters throwing bottles.
I have never denied that there are some protesters who are violent. I acknowledge that happens. But you repeatedly refuse to acknowledge that the police attack peaceful protesters even when presented with videos of them doing it.
You keep pretending like the problem is all the protesters fault. Even you can't believe that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Thanks for the zero-sum lecture. Now, I have some middle class people to villanize on behalf of the rich elites.
well you continue to support republicans as they destroy the middle class.... so yeah I believe that.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
But we must try.No we don't. Chop is easy. Police are evil.
you do love trying to paint issues as black and white don't you? Either we need authoritarian repression of dessent, or we need chaos. Either police are blameless innocents, or they are evil, souless monsters.
Reality is rarely so simple.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Not my fault you don't know the difference between the middle class and the rich elites with liquid capital.
It is your fault that you don't understand that their money is tied to the economy as a whole. And that economy relies on forcing the working class back to work.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
In your dreams buddy.
I agree. It is hard to enforce the law on people who believe they are above the law. But we must try. The police cannot be allowed to attack peaceful protesters and get away with it.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
You argue that polls ought to be avoided in singular, but rather an average of them should tell the tale. But if the polls all have flawed methodologies [the very 5 subjects I discussed as flaws in pol polls in my #13], then the averaging of those polls does not improve the stats accuracy. No silk if its a sow.
point 1 i disproved.
Point 2 is irrelevant as you are basically arguing that all polls must be false.
Point 3 is also irrelevant if you are averaging polls because then your "sample" size is in the 10 of thousands, therefore the size of individual polls is irrelevant.
Point 4 has some merit. And I might entertain the idea that this would skew less interesting questions. But the who do you support is a pretty straight forward and clear question.
Point 5 is mostly just whining. Random samples show there are more D's than R's. The fact that random samples keep having this happens means that is what the population looks like. If the population didn't look this way, then an average of polls would correct for this as random samples would end up with results showing both.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
The middle class might worry, but the rich elites have already transferred their capital. They don't give a fuck about what you think Corona can do for them.
i'm not going to bother reading a dozen links when you can't be bothered actually making an argument.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
It's ok.We can reinstate CHop and let innocent Democrats kill each other instead of ebil po po.
so our options are police that are completely above the law and can attack anyone they want at will or a society with no police at all? Forgive me, but i'm pretty sure we can have a society where we have police, but they also follow the law.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
it must have just been the fooooox neeeeeeeeeeeews!
where you got the idea that anyone who protests is somehow a criminal or a terrorist? Yeah it was probably fox news. Or god forbid, OAN.
Created:
-->
@ILikePie5
Did you even bother reading what fauxlaw wrote?
I did. but since it was dumb I skipped over it. But if you insist.
1. Until around September of any presidential election year, they are based on registered voters, of whom, historically [the last 40 years], only 58% actually vote. Likely voters is the proper target.
this is not true. Here is poll done with a random sample of 1,006 adults. of whom 845 were registered voters
2. The MoE of these polls is typically in excess of ±3%, Too large a margin of error.
This is typical of polls. That is why you never take 1 poll as gospel. You take a look at the average of the polls and the trends. And the trend is horrendous for trump.
3. There are typically too few people polled, typically no more than 1,000 which reduces accuracy. Another half again is sufficient.
Again, this is why you don't rely on any one poll. They can't sample everyone in america.
4. There are typically too many questions. Professional sampling cautions having more than 10 questions. Beyond that, people get bored.
So your argument is that people are saying they support biden instead of trump out of boredom? That's weak.
5. Democrat/Republican respondents are generally weighted with more Ds than Rs. Skewed results.
This might matter if the population of the US was evenly split between D's and R's. It's not. Polling shows that there are more D's than R's. So if you tried to weight it to make them even, you would be skewing your results to favor the R's and throwing off your poll.
And again, this is exactly why you go with an average of polls. When taking samples, you are never going to get a 100% accurate picture. Which is why you look at the trends of lots of polls. And that trend is trump being heavily under water.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
but we just proved that you wouldnt trust another pollwhats going on!
No we didn't. We just proved the polls were off by a little in 2016. If they were off by that much now Biden would win in a landslide.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
nope wrong again, ANOTHER strawman, celebreties raised money for rioters bailout, not for the protest
in the eyes of fox news and most idiots on the right, there is no difference between the two. How would you know who was getting bailed out? I'm guessing you just believe whatever nonsense fox told you.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
then why would you trust any poll claiming the same of an election?
because the polls were fairly accurate last time. The were off by a small margin in a few critical states. Those small errors allowed trump to lose the popular vote by millions of votes, but still steal a win because of an antiquated system that skews power to rural areas.
If the polls were off by the same margin this time, Biden will win in an absolute landslide.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
nothing more guys, it was just a protest, it wasnt like in the middle of a global pandemic even though we told you you couldnt go back to work and that "our voices need to be heard" when every single corporation in the US got behind you, and that celebrtieis raised 150 million dollars for rioter bailout but zero for affected businnesses that was looted from LA to boston...
lol so because celebrities and corporations realized that the protesters are right and are being wrongfully arrested, that must mean it is really the people clubbing and pepper spraying indiscriminately that are right. fantastic reasoning.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
the protestors
so people using their constitutionally protected right to protest are responsible for the police attacking them? That is some dictatorship level of logic.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
would you get on the plane?
of course not. I would protest and make sure the government regulated that incredibly unsafe industry.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Lol no, it isn't. You're absolutely delusional if you think the elite rich are wealthy because of labor exploitation. That might be how some people get to the middle class, but the elite rich are monopolists and rent collectors first and foremost with investments as far as you can imagine.
yeah, and those companies they invest in, how do they make their money? From selling/making things. If they can't force poor people to go back to work, then those companies will continue to lose money. And they can't have that.
The main goal of the ultra-rich is to first destroy the competition by destroying the middle class (as they did in California) and their secondary goal is to convince poor people that they can never make it to the middle class no matter what life choices they make.
and they have been successful in doing that for quite awhile. But how does their companies losing money help them do that?
The stock market says otherwise. In fact, you can tell exactly who is making assloads of money over the lockdowns by looking at the discrepancies in public policy.
the stock market is not an accurate measure of how the economy is going. It is a measure of what rich assholes and betting on. The 2 things are very different.
Amazon is doing just fine with the elimination of competition
how does this, in any way, undermine my point? Isolated companies are still making lots of money. I have never denied that. But most companies are not. Most are losing money and they want their wage slaves back at work.
Rich people don't give a fuck about you or Corona. It's just business as usual. Using the government to eliminate competition.
this is absolutely delusional. I totally agree that the rich don't care about me or anyone but themselves. But they absolutely care about the effect corona is having on their businesses.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
it aint the police fault
police clubbing and pepper spraying protesters isn't their fault? Whose fault is it? Their parents for abusing them causing them to lash out at people?
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
if you were to get on a plane but had an 11% chance of crashing and falling, which one would you pick?
That's a great analogy. Trump winning is like a plane crash. It is fiery, tragic and kills alot of people.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
If only we could keep police officers from attacking peaceful bottle throwers.
we've been through this. Police abuse protesters. Protesters are justifiably angry and some of them retaliate. The police use that pretext to attack more protesters. As a society we can't control the actions of every angry protester. You know who we can control? The people we are hiring and training to uphold the law. Maybe we get them to actually obey it and reduce the violence.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
If only we could get the peaceful protesters from throwing ice bottles at innocent statues and accidentally hitting officer friendly.
If only we could keep police officers from attacking peaceful protesters.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Banning Ice bottles at peaceful protests will solve this confusion.
Banning police from attacking protesters would certainly help. Actually punishing and arresting police who attack would be better. But the police will protect their own from consequences.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Lol, if the rich want to make money, they keep the poor at home and unemployed. That way they have no competition. It's the poor people unemployed at home that need to work for money. The rich can just live off of the unemployment checks the poor spend just fine.
this whole statement is just delusional. How do you think those rich people make their money? It is by profiting off the labor of the poor and working class. If the poor and working class are no working, their money is at risk. They need to force poor people back to work so that they continue to be safe in their mansions while the poor risk their lives.
And the poor wouldn't need to go back to work if the government would take proper steps to keep them afloat while we get corona virus under control. But sadly, both the democrats and republicans don't want to do that. They just want to funnel tax dollars to the rich.
It's in the rich person's self-interest to make sure as many people are not working or climbing the ladder to eliminate market competition, and they can use the government to force people to stay at home. Easy peasy.
this makes literally no sense. The companies need their expendable workers back at work to make their money.
The stock market is looking great for the crony elites right now... All that competition under house arrest. It's a scrooge McDuck paradise.
we are on the edge of a financial crisis that will make the great depression look like a picnic. The stock market is still looking good because we haven't tipped over the edge yet. When the $600 top ups run out and the moratorium on evictions run out, that's when we hit panic mode. millions are going to get evicted all at the same time. consumer spending will plummet.
I guess you will be voting for Kanye then, since the rich win no matter who is elected in 2020.
no, i want someone who isn't a complete lunatic to win. Did you see kanye's rally? He clearly needs psychological help.
Created:
-->
@n8nrgmi
i would give biden more credit on healthcare. he wants a public option. one that reimburses medical providers at medicare rates or thereabouts. that means universal coverage and inching us closer to spending what other countries spend on healthcare. (which on average is half of what we spend).
biden's plan still leaves millions uninsured. It also leaves 10's of millions under-insured. It does not solve america's healthcare problems, it just helps sand off some of the worst "rough edges" of the terrible healthcare system. But that is exactly what biden wants. Do just enough to look good, but not nearly enough to actually fix the problem, because that would undercut the profits of the people who donate to his campaign.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Also, much of the rioting is going on in swing states. People are not going to support violence in November, and will remember (or be reminded) who allowed the riots to get out of control.
Except that all the polling shows biden is much, much more trusted on the issue of race relations. So the fact that there is widespread protests about racial inequality plays to biden's strength, not trumps.
It also doesn't help trump to look both impotent (because he can't stop the protests) as well as dictatorial by ordering what are essentially secret police to attack the protesters. It is a really bad look either way.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Stephen
But does any of this surprise anyone, at all?
with a complete idiot running the UK? not in the slightest. I'm surprised boris can tie his own shoelaces, let alone manage a crisis.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Rich will be as rich or more if Trump loses. Why even care about the rich?
I care about the rich to the extent that they actively try to screw up the country and screw over everyone else. Trying to force open the economy and force people back to work when cases are spiking is insane. Rich people want to go back to making money. If a few 10's of thousands of people have to die for them to do that, they don't care.
Rich do nothing for or against me, Except pay my salary for my comfy lifestyle. I don't wake up miserable every day because someone a half a mile away lives in a mansion.
I don't care if they live in a mansion. I do care that they use their money and influence to twist the government and the economy to serve them while screwing over everyone else.
I really don't give a fuck about what the government does for or against the rich since I am not rich. I do care what the government does to me though.
those 2 issues are completely intertwined. The rich want to get as much out of the government as possible, while paying into it as little as possible. Doing this means the government lacks the resources to help Americans, but they will always lobby and get massive handouts from the government when they want them. When corona virus hit, poor and working class people got peanuts while the rich got trillions.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Great satire lol. We should reinstitute Chop where the only people getting killed and injured were innocent non-cops.
there have been countless videos of police attacking peaceful protesters. Their assault on people carrying out their right to protest causes alot of violence. The police then arrest people for the violence they caused. They then use those arrests as evidence that their assault was necessary. It's a vicious cycle.
Created:
-->
@oromagi
that was an interesting read. thank you for linking it.
I liked this line in particular "This was by no means the rare exception that proves the rule. The terrain of presidential contests is littered with nominees who saw a poll lead in the spring turn to dust in the fall."
biden's lead has massively increased since these findings came out. The polls when this came out were biden up by a couple points. The polls now are biden up by double digits.
add to this that the primary issue people care about (the global pandemic) is being bungled and actively sabotaged by the white house, and trump's numbers are unlikely to improve as the pandemic drags on and potentially continues to worsen.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
ok, and how much of that violence was triggered by the police attacking protesters?
"Few"..."Random"...attacks...what a joke opinion. Great satire HB.
this is a pretty straight forward fox news kind of take. there are 10's or hundreds of thousands of people protesting. a couple dozen commit crimes. SO THEY ARE ALL TERRORISTS AND CRIMINALS!!!!!
Created:
-->
@n8nrgmi
do you honestly think bernie sanders would be polling better than biden is now? i can't see that. bernie does have the enthusiasm thing going for him though, as does trump with his base.
i'm not really sure. The vast majority of Biden's support is "he's not trump". Very few people who are going to vote for biden are excited to vote for him. Very few think he is going to take on and solve america's problems. But their options are a lunatic who is actively trying to make things worse, or a guy who is going to fight to keep the status quo. And the status quo is better than trump.
Sanders would have much better energy behind his campaign. People were excited to support him. He had a talented and enthusiastic team.
I think that sanders' healthcare plans would be extremely popular right now. The pandemic has really highlighted how fragile american healthcare is. You are one global event away from losing your job, your healthcare and being completely ruined financially (assuming you survive). I think that message would crush trump right now. But we will never know. Biden has promised little to no change on healthcare and trump has promised to make healthcare worse. So there really isn't anything to talk about on that front in this election.
Created: