Why is their a high ratio of Trump supporters here?

Post Reply New Topic

There you go again spreading your fake news. Everyone knows it's Putin that is the reptilian. Trump is just Putin's human puppet. Wake up, people!!

That's a lot of hyperbolic nonsense. And claiming Putin is a reptilian is plain bonkers. Uh oh, I just "defended" Putin. Guess that means I'm actually a Russian farm troll army spy. But I deny being such of course.

You claim to be 'anti-bonkers' but you really just insist on portraying any opposition to Trump as 'bonkers' no matter how reasonable it might be. First muddy the waters, then dismiss all criticism, wash and repeat. There's certainly some insanity in some of the opposition to Trump, but there's far more within his supporters. If you were genuinely anti-bonkers you'd go after insanity no matter where it's found, but that's not what you do.

I have no problem with reasonable observations and have agreed with them and made a few of my own.

But then again, I may simply just have an opinion, which is more often the case. I am allowed to have and express opinions, whether you or Astroplanes like them or not.



In other words I come in and scrutinize certain things posted during bashing fests and that spoils all the fun.



Well of course. They're fascists who support a Hitler-like psychopath.



I hold liberals to a higher standard because liberalism is supposed to have higher standards.

Hey Eras do you listen to people like Armoured Sceptic, Sargon of Akkad, Chris Ray Gun and Sh0eonhead quite frequently?

I have absolutely no idea who they are. If you're talking about youtube channels, I don't normally watch anyone's channel or listen to podcasts or read blogs, especially when it comes to politics. Outside of daily news from Reuters and AP or similar and these WP sub-forums, I don't really have any other imput or oulet regarding news and politics.

He probably does, given that he likes to nihilistically gawk at pointless fringe asshattery while ignoring any issue with any actual value.

Nah I mostly ignore your posts.

Which is the best way to deal with trolls, unless you just want to toy with them...

I don't usually categorize someone as a troll unless they're blatant trolls like "rick sanchez/stinky dog".

And Clinton flaunted how she once defended a rapist knowing he did it. She also attacked women who came out about her husbands sexual activities. Yet tons of women voted for her anyways.

Trump was closest to what I liked. And he saved me and millions of other disabled people on social security from losing our rights. So so far he’s done what I wanted.

Yes, Hillary is a sociopath, no arguments here. But wait until the end of the year before you start praising GOP policies towards the disabled: tax cuts were last year, the only way they can cover the costs of said tax cuts and retain their 'fiscal discipline' argument is by cutting social programs this year forward, of which social security and medicare are the two biggest targets.

Ryan says Republicans to target welfare, Medicare, Medicaid spending in 2018

Ryan wants to cut those programs, but if he can't make it pass they'll just borrow to pay for the tax cuts. Effectively boomers robbing their kids and grandkids.

True. Chances are it will be like healthcare, a giant boondoggle they just can't seem to pass because of it's unpopularity. That said, I made the post so Sly would at least understand the intent of the GOP at this point.

I increasingly think government is the wrong place to craft all kinds of policies. Healthcare is one of them, ideas like UBI are another.

What I mean by this - I really think robust professional organizations need to lead the charge at drafting bills - whether healthcare, economic well-being, global warming, etc. because these organizations have the competence and command of the subjects to actually come up with good ideas. I don't think there are enough doctors in congress to draft sensible healthcare legislation. Similarly I don't think there are enough scientists in congress to adequately handle the shape and character of global warming legislation.

I brought up the UBI issue here in context of something Dave Rubin brought up in a recent interview which I though was a fascinating criticism of what would happen if congress legislated UBI - ie. wouldn't politicians just raise UBI sky-high to milk votes in their district? I think that forces the response that you couldn't have congress in charge of UBI rates - they'd reliably do the wrong things with it because their incentive structure cuts against what's actually healthy for the maintenance of such a system. What you'd need is something like a governmental organization, of similar kind to the Office of Inspector General or CBO, doing an analysis of the costs of living, evaluating the poverty line and the changes in the costs of living, and their detailed analysis should be the only thing to raise UBI - any other considerations would have to be very carefully orchestrated with that office, that office always having high-hand on the pendulum in considering or rejecting any changes to UBI.

I think this is where we might have to consider that our systems, and demands of knowledge, are too far beyond our legislators to have them doing what they want, on political knee-jerk (or based on their lobbyists) to expect sane solutions. We need expertise worked into the system properly and if there is a major populist backlash the only thing legislators should really do is push for transparency in these departments, push for them to have better PR, and really explain to the public - adequately - what they're doing and why their actions, one way or the other, are the best choices that can be made given the information that they have available.

Last edited by techstepgenr8tion on 01 Jan 2018, 4:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I’m not a big fan of gop. But that hasn’t happen yet. The social security ban was going happen if trump hadn’t been elected. Hilary would of for sure vetoed the congress getting rid of it. O prefer a congress that’s split and can’t pass anything. Both parties want and will do horrible things. Currently gop doesn’t have the votes in senate anymore they couldn’t pass the concealed carry law. Also trump wants t be popular so if it appears stripping social security is unpopular he won’t support it. He supports what will make his ego feel more popular. Which is why he stopped the ban, I don’t think he gives a c**p about disabled people losing their rights. He just saw it was popular to stop it.