Total posts: 2,798
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
He’s been more consistent than most politicians but he quite famously flipped on his stance regarding work visas during his last presidential run.
Used to oppose because they depressed American wages
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Created:
Posted in:
Never underestimate the power of a bmrock endorsement
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
What I’m seeing is: I vote for winners. 🗽
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
There are two opinions there. Which one?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Leaking Supreme Court decisions isn’t common enough that it could be considered a tradition
Created:
Posted in:
“We investigated ourselves and have found no evidence of our wrongdoing”.
If I had to guess, someone working under Sotomayor. She seems to be the lib with the least regard for the judicial process and American traditions
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
What is your pfp?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
I actually appreciate the candidness. Better than the “muh democracy” crowd
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
That is what the opposite reece did. Reece votes RM so he would unblock
Shoot, you mean I could have *checks notes* sent him messages?
STOP THE COUNT!
Created:
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
This is correct
Thank you for your timely affirmation, Mr. Future President!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Then any police officer who fires his gun can be reasonably considered a bad person.
Why did you clip out the part before that where I said self-defense shootings aren’t gun violence. I’d add defending other people from violence to that too. So, false
In other words, if you accept that gun violence is mostly committed by black people and you accept that gun violence is the result of "bad guys with guns", then by extension, you must accept that black people are just far more likely to be bad.That belief is by definition, racist
You keep avoiding my point: if we both agree that we can call murderers bad people, and black people are more likely to commit murder, are we by extension being racist because that would mean blacks are more likely to be bad people (murderers)? An objective, provable fact is that they commit more murders than any other racial group, and according to you murderers can be called bad people.
So it sounds like you believe certain facts are ‘racist’
No, my evidence is the arguments that are being used to advocate for gun prevalence, which I already explained in detail.And when it comes to wants and/or needs, I prioritize stopping needles loss of life over preserving people's hobbies. I don't consider that racist.
Have you ever even owned a gun? If you have, you’d know the primary purpose of most guns is self-defense or hunting. Another slogan relates to when seconds count, police are minutes away.
I don’t care if you’re a woman, smaller man, outnumbered by criminals, or whatever the case may be, people desire the ability to defend oneself without waiting for the cleanup crew (cops) to get there after the fact
Most fun hobby guns are not used to commit violence, as most gun violence is committed using pistols. So restricting people from buying an AR-15 for fun is going to have a pretty negligible effect
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SammiBoi
I think there are some cases where someone that commits gun violence aren’t bad people. I think it’s relatively rare, but it does happen.
This whole bad guy vs good guy with a gun is a political slogan, which is meant to be super general rather than a nuanced position by itself
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
No, it’s not. Murder and rape are clearly defined acts which and take into account the full circumstances of the act. Gun violence is broad term. We’re also talking about groups not individuals, so it’s a completely different dynamic.
But the group in question are people who commit “gun violence”, are they not? Aren’t the bad people with guns perpetrating the “gun violence”? Also, it isn’t a clearly defined act, but it covers a handful of defined terms that are all acts of aggression (nobody refers to a self-defense shooting as ‘gun violence’). It refers to assault with a deadly weapon, armed robbery, shooting murders, etc.
We can call anything reasonably considered gun violence to be done by bad people.
And your logic suggests that we can call black people worse because they are more likely to commit bad acts like those outlined above for the exact same reason you claim that racism “fuels the pro gun movement” because black neighborhoods are rife with bad guys with guns. We can call rapists and murderers bad people, well there are more of them in said neighborhoods but I still disagree that calling murderers bad people is a racially charged argument for the same reason criticizing the perpetrators of gun violence isn’t racially charged
You make this distinction about group vs individual but saying “bad GUY with a gun” is a statement targeting an individual- said guy with a gun. There are multiple of them, but it targets the individuals in different circumstances
You don’t have to simultaneously think it, that’s kind of the point. If the conclusion follows… (see previous post)A lot of people hold attitudes towards individuals or groups that they are not cognizant of. Racism is probably the most prevalent example.
But the conclusion doesn’t follow. If your neighborhood doesn’t have gun violence, you’re less likely to want to change the status quo that benefits you, assuming gun control would even do that. Just because you brow beat people with accusations of racism doesn’t make them racist for not caving to the sad stories of gun violence. Your position seems to be that hesitation to completely changing your position to help black people is evidence of racism when there are 87% of other people to consider and neglecting their racial groups’ wants and needs isn’t racist?
My point is that if my portrayal we’re found to be accurate, then a portion of the lack of desire in this country to curb gun violence is attributed the demonization of a group of people as a way of dismissing the victimization the rest of us are subjecting them to
But Republican states in the south are very pro-gun, and they also have a lot of black residents. They must think that there are good guys among them that can use those guns to defeat the bad guys with guns, yeah? Why must an elevated presence of bad guys suggest that there are no good guys?
Created:
Posted in:
And a numbers game is much more likely to be the reason for nothing changing rather than a race one
Since neighborhoods are more or less segregated by race, we’ll do a little generalizing. So, a subset of 13% of neighborhoods have a very big gun crime problem….. so, that means that it isn’t a big issue for more than 87% of neighborhoods. Why on earth would you restricts ~90% of people? Why would the political will be there when most people aren’t negatively impacted by guns ever?
It has nothing to do with race. I could equally easily suggest that Congress hates young men because they are much more likely to be killed by guns.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
It’s a weird mix here. You’re being both charitable (in terms of not really attacking any statistic) and making a huge stretch at the same time (by saying some trite phrase is evidence of racism when nobody saying that phrase is simultaneously thinking ‘black people bad’)
Honestly, this same thinking could apply to saying murderers and rapists are bad people. Is it racist to say that? Statistically, blacks do it more. But when I say rapists and murderers are bad, I don’t attribute that to anyone of any race who hasn’t done those things.
This is a very desperate attempt to inject race into a debate in which it doesn’t belong.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Trying to mess with the fed and their money printing would have got him JFK’d
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Nixon really made the best out of a terrible situation. To save our gold reserves from being pillaged, had to take us off hold standard (a process started by FDR when he wanted money printer to go burrr. Same as today, the voters liked it).
And now his legacy is being lost. He pried China and Russia apart during the Cold War and put us on better terms with both. Now look where the schizophrenic Left has taken us just a few years after Obama criticized Romney for being anti-Russia, saying the Cold Was is over. Losing our power over oil.
#NixonNowMorethanEver!
Created:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
No, I’m agreeing with you. stupid white males like yourself can definitely be losers without being subjected to racism. You’re proof of that
Shitlib that sits on a debate site with a bunch of teenagers 24/7 is lecturing me about being a loser.
Lol. Lmao, even
Created:
I’ve noticed this about so many liberals. They assign agency to White people. If they are poor, somehow it MUST be their fault. They must be deadbeats who made bad choices. Because to them, White people just effortlessly float to the best roles in society and not achieving that means they did something wrong. However, any other group failing is never a question of choice or character or culture. It is always racism
Created:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Plus we have all these white losers who weren’t affected by racism but are still doing poorly. What about them?
Brilliant observation here by Roosevelt PhD!
Racism is the only external cause of poverty!
Then how are those “loser” white people poor???
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
And anyway people aren't interested in apologies, it's just cash and power that they're really after.
Exactly, which is why you never hear politicians say exactly how much is owed before the slate is wiped clean for slavery. They dread there ever being a day when they can’t continue to hold that over our heads to morally blackmail us for money and special treatment- something they want in perpetuity. That’s why you’ll never get a straight answer when you ask them how much it’ll take to make things even. It’s either no answer, or it is exorbitantly high knowing the US could never afford the figure.
Even if they got some amount of reparations, we’d be in the exact same spot in 5 years and they’d be demanding more money. The only way to deal with these people is to stop caving to them and rewarding them for slandering you and your ancestors
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
And to say “they don’t need” the vaccine is a lie. But that’s because you’re a moron
I can tell your inadequacies bother you. Stop projecting your own perceived lack of intelligence on others.
To say the need the vaccine is a lie
The Navy is the fattest and is tied for the oldest max enlistment age, yet less than 1% on that boat you fear mongered about were hospitalized.
From the time of the invasion of Iraq to 2011, 90 US soldiers died from negligent discharges. Get rid of these dangerous guns! They are killing too many military members. Imagine training soldiers in specialized skills only for them to be killed by a negligent discharge! https://foreignpolicy.com/2011/05/13/negligent-discharges-one-subject-the-military-really-doesnt-like-to-talk-about/
This is how MoRoNs like you sound
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
And for a while there, he was done with politics. Went back to being a lawyer. He had a respectable living outside of being a career politician.
He had integrity and loyalty too- campaigned endlessly for a party that had more or less turned their back on him after his first loss
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
Nixon- now more than ever!
Don't see too many other fans of him anywhere. :D
The most pragmatic president of modern times. Likely had the best grasp of foreign policy of any president ever
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
Only liberal YouTuber I'd actually consider intelligent and good faith. Used to watch him on and off for a few years, but I've lost much of my interest in politics.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@coal
You're here for me: Nixon respecter
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
What good are vaccines if people don’t take them?There is no permanent natural immunity. If you get Covid, after you recover the antibodies only last a period of months. You still need the shot later on
It would be good for the people taking them wouldn’t it? If you have 60-70% taking it and your population of the non-vaccinated is still comparatively young and healthy people, then this idea that we will have nonfunctional units is just silly. Natural immunity can last up to 11 months.
Let’s compromise: the military should require all obese personnel to get vaccinated. Army gives a few weeks to lose weight. low standards seems to be the primary issue here anyway.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
27,000 Americans of military age died of Covid. Imagine loosing a pilot to Covid, all the money and time it took to train that person, and then they die, because why, because they don’t believe the vaccine works. Brilliant. But all the other vaccines they are required to get, that’s fine. Those don’t matter
27,000 of military age died…. The average American of military age is also still more likely to be obese than people in the military. The military also requires that you not have asthma or other health issues that make you at higher risk for death from COVID.
Imagine having a lack of troops to train because you demanded they take a vaccine they didn’t need.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
I guess you have never been in the military if you think everyone is young and fit. Officers and senior enlisted can be in their 30s and 40s. Many are overweight, especially in the Navy. These are key people in any unit. But we already know you’re a dummy.An aircraft carrier was out of service for 2 months due to a Covid outbreak
So out of a ship of over 2,000 people and 1,156 confirmed cases, 7 total were hospitalized with 1 dying before anyone had any vaccines to mitigate the disease and before anyone gained natural immunity.
Do you think perhaps the aircraft carrier was out of service in early 2020 because we knew nothing about this disease that hospitalized less than 1% of all people infected? Or do you have an incorrect, different conclusion?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Yes genius, the virus that killed 1 million Americans is the same as the risk posed by the negligent discharge of firearms.
Genius thinks the average soldier and the average American are equally at risk from Covid
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Oh no, the disease that is negligibly dangerous for fit young people is going to kill all of our fit young people!
We should also ban firearms in the military while we’re at it. Someone might get hurt from a negligent discharge!
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Yeah, that's what the Government said too when they got away with the Kent State shootings.
Bunch of bums, anyway
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
And let’s not forget the recent banning of opposition parties- a democratic ban if I’ve ever seen one
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
When exactly did democracy become a fetish?
They describe a form of government like it is a religious cult, and even merely questioning if elections are free and fair is an unforgiveable heresy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
- If I say Goliath had more of everything except courage, that does not imply that courage was the only reason David won- there was the slingshot too.
- If I say Persia had more of everything except Democracy, that does not imply that Democracy was the sole reason Athens won- there was the high ground and long spears and the speed that comes from years of training and the sacrifice of the Spartans and the disorder of the Persian landing and other factors too.
- Just because the victorious possesses a quality than the defeated lacked, it does not necessarily follow that quality must be the cause of victory. That would a post hoc ergo propter hoc presumption.
If you said "Goliath had more of everything except courage" or "Persia had more of everything except Democracy", you'd be wrong.
Goliath had fewer ranged weapons, Persians had fewer spears. That's why nobody says the above quotes- because they are objectively incorrect. But I'm glad you now disagree with democracy being the sole cause of good performance.
I'm being a little pedantic here, but you are seemingly doubling down on the statement and rejecting it simultaneously.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
- In addition to diplomatic support in its conflict with Russia, the U.S. provided Ukraine with US$1.5 billion in military aid from 2014 to 2019.
That seems to be in line with what I said. We have $2 billion in total aid, of which ~75% was military it would seem, excluding any other countries
- Expect those rankings to change dramatically this year
In what sense? That we dramatically overestimated Russia’s military or that Ukraine is using our stuff to destroy a lot of what they have?
- You are trying to disprove Ukraine a Greek vs. Persia, David vs. Goliath type underdog here. The Greeks also had home field advantage.
They have done well (better than expected)- so far. But David had a small stone and a slingshot. Ukraine is being given some of the best weapons in the world. And we aren’t even sure if they will actually win in the long run before you compare Ukraine to David or the Greeks.
False.GP claimed that "American style" Democracy hurt Ukraine: "You see where that kind of Democracy landed Ukraine."I said "Russians had more of everything except Democracy. ""solely due to "democracy" is entirely your invention and not a statement I would defend.The advantages of Democracy are manifest and many fold but the statement was as much to explain Putin's failures in intelligence, moral, competance as Ukrainian cohesion.
Yes, democracy does have benefits. However, everything that you say seems to support my “invention” that it is solely due to democracy.
If Russia has more of “everything except democracy”, how is that different from what I say? If when I claim that having more doesn’t mean better, your response is to tell that to Georgia, then clearly you think having more of things is an inherent advantage. Ergo, the thing (singular thing, according to you) they have less of (democracy) can be the only thing keeping them from victory based on everything you have said thus far.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
McCarthyMcConnellMcDaniels…McFailure
Why do you hate Irish people?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
We have been supplying military and economic aid to Ukraine for many years now. The US alone gave ~$2billion from 2014-2018. And while Russia may have more tanks and planes, that doesn’t mean a whole lot by itself.
That thinking is reminiscent of Romney’s debate point that we have less boats in our Navy than we did in 1917. I, for one, think our 2022 Navy would beat our 1917 Navy in a battle. While it is hard to gauge the overall quality of Russian equipment, there have been reports of early Cold War tanks being used (T-62s were introduced in 1961). So even if Ukraine has less, that by no means indicates that they are at a disadvantage.
Additionally, there are big considerations of home field advantage at play- they know their own terrain and infrastructure better than the Russians do.
And I do think Ukraine undoubtedly has their heart in the fight moreso than the Russians, which can’t be underestimated. Although, my contention is your claim that this is solely due to “democracy”. I think that having your kinfolk killed by an aggressor is a far stronger motivator than some abstract democratic ideal.
I think it is telling that you don't even consider Russia a first world country anymore. Under Putin's dictatorship, Russia has sank from a G8 nation to a G20 to a pariah outlaw state that isn't even considered first world economy anymore. Where would Russia be today if Putin had been limited to a one or two term president
While I’ve never defended his economic policies (Russian economics is a little too niche for even me), Russia’s GDP per capita did rise from $1,772 in 2000 to $11,536 in 2019 (pre-COVID). The overall GDP grew from $259.7B to $1,693B https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/RUS/russia/gdp-gross-domestic-product pulling data from World Bank
That and considering Russia is one of the major emerging “BRIC” economies, I don’t think he’s done poorly based on the numbers
Now, that’ll quite likely no longer be the case due to mass sanctioning, but the numbers speak for themselves
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
The CIA funded Azov Nazis faster than they armed the Taliban!
When does the “American Taliban” get crates of money and weapons? ;(
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
- Yeah, a 21st century Battle of Marathon- a superpower ten times their size invaded and the people didn't back down, didn't flee, they beat back invaders who had more of everything except democracy.
They also had the entire first world on their side, giving them weapons and money while simultaneously sanctioning the invader. Said sanctioning countries had a combined economy well over ten times Russia’s. Small details glossed over there, but I’m sure Our Democracy™ helped!
Created:
-->
@Avery
Nationalism extended from genetic traits and caters to them (originally evolving from smaller tribes). So, when these European countries (or really any normal country) is thinking in terms of what is best for the nation, they're thinking in terms of what is best for people genetically similar to me.These racial categories are always meaningful because they are a colloquial recognition of everything that extends from those shared genetics, too (i.e. ideas, culture etc.)
They might be meaningful in an abstract sense, but the history of Whites in Europe is the same as any other race anywhere: rife with war against people of the same race. There have been a few times in history where they’ve stuck together, although they likely were due to other factors like religion and for just sheer survival (thinking of Siege of Peking and the fight against Islamic invaders)
The classification is meaningful in terms of average intelligence, predisposition to certain diseases, and the like, but it has not proven to be a source of solidarity for Europeans.
No, Hispanic means all the other phenotypic traits, too. Also, Argentinians run similar governments, have similar I.Q etc. to Mexicans. Yes, they're not completely the same, but it's meaningful enough to be distinguished from White, African and Asian racial groups. That's why the Hispanic racial group is recognized in the first place -- it's meaningful enough to be consistently used
Let us not forget that in the early 1900s, Argentina had one of the largest economies in the world and a per capita income that rivaled Canada’s. Mexico has never had such success, despite the citizens of both countries being considered “Hispanic” under that broad term.
There are large genetic differences between these populations in terms of European genetic makeup, so unless they are “indigenous” Central and South Americans exclusively, I don’t think there is much use in calling many South Americans ‘Hispanics’.
It’s not meaningful enough to be consistently used in America i. a context outside of receiving government power. If that was never in the picture, that term probably wouldn’t exist or be used much at all. It was pushed from the top down. There is an underlying racial reality to them being different than Whites, but bear in mind that many of them are quite distinct from the “indigenous” population due to race mixing
I think a more-than-two-state solution might actually be the solution, as a kind of pan-separatism, but that's a separate thread topic.
It could be the solution, but it won’t happen. Within the situation we are given, the only realistic fix to the problem is: get rid of racial preferences, lower immigration as much as possible, and *altering procreational incentives*
I believe America is too far gone. There's too undesirables already inside, draining the taxpayer's money, making walking down the street a chore, spiking crime rates etc. Their genetics are the problem, not the law or rules.
It very likely is too far gone, but the situation isn’t what I would consider entirely hopeless. It isn’t set in stone yet, so it’s long past due we take common sense steps like those highlighted above
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Putin is your boyfriend not ours.what is your plan for stopping your out-of-control boyfriend?
Oro just called you gay as an insult. Curious
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Even a broken clock is right twice a day :D
Created:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
You said two very specific things
1. So when the market goes down it’s Biden’s fault but when it goes up there’s no correlation
2. And the same with gasoline, right?
The first is a compound statement. I never said it was his fault when it goes down, so that statement is false.
I never mentioned gas
Created:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
So when the market goes down it’s Biden’s fault but when it goes up there’s no correlation? And the same with gasoline, right?
Please point out where I said that. My memory seems to be failing me
Created:
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Question: why did the stock market jump?
For my answer, I’ll quote you:
If you answered Biden or Democrats you are an idiot.
Created: