/baw/ - General Discussion

And because I didn’t want to put this in the OP:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/08/10/in-a-new-poll-half-of-republicans-say-they-would-support-postponing-the-2020-election-if-trump-proposed-it/

>If North Korea does anything in terms of even thinking about attack of anybody that we love or we represent or our allies or us, they can be very, very nervous. I’ll tell you why. And they should be very nervous. Because things will happen to them like they never thought possible, OK? He’s been pushing the world around for a long time.

— Ol’ 45, all but threatening to use a nuclear weapon on North Korea

>On Tuesday Mr Trump warned North Korea it would be "met with fire and fury like the world has never seen" if it continued to threaten the US.
After what you did to Japan, I doubt it.

they already beat you in one war, don't make it two

>He’s been pushing the world around for a long time.
no u

>>415638

He is the kind of asshole who would burn a dollar to save a dime.

>>415638
>I-I didn't even want those diplomats anyway... Y-you're doing us a favour! Haha ha

>>415643

Sad thing is, at this point, they honestly could just wait.

>Trans people cost 8 mill a year
>Banning them costs almost a billion a year

Trans people really are the new black people. This is what the reublicans would do to everyone else if they were small enough, numbers-wise.

>>415629
Poll: Is this equally legitimate as a sex change operation?

Side note based on today’s events: Fuck White supremacists and the alt-right.

>>415648

Not really. Sex reassignment surgery is done primarily as treatment for gender dysphoria. A woman pulling off a 21st century form of blackface does not treat any known medical condition.

I don't like to post in these threads, but I really do hope all the vocal racists in the Republican party royally fucks the party, thus making it go the way of the Whig party and die.

Yep, some part of me wishes Trump pardons Arpaio so that Democrats can ask all Republicans how come their Donald went and did that, and what do they think about it on the record?

>>415680
That actually would be pretty good, because it would be hard to come out in support of Arpaio right now given the current state of awareness about White Nationalism. It'd be terrible optics right now for most moderate republicans--even amongst most republican voters--to be seen as an apologist for or willing to compromise with white nationalism. The only people who see reaching out to the skinheads right now as a positive thing is skinheads and people who would be skinheads if they weren't so lazy.

Personally I'm just impressed that we're apparently at the "toppling statues of the regime" stage

https://twitter.com/DerrickQLewis/status/897235297485901825

Instead of having the statues taken down, local politicians should just tell people they can go have a party and tear it down together, provided they don't get rowdy, try to blow the statues the fuck up, endanger themselves or scream anything inciting or violent regarding today's politics.

I dont think the term Person of Colour is any good:
1) It really seems to promote a "us vs. them" mindset. It's basically a term used to emphasise that you aren't white.
2) the acronym honestly makes me think of "Piece of Crap" because people have been abbreviating that long before Person of colour became a think.
3) as a European (British, quarter German), my skin is pinky orange. My skin tone is literally more colourful than many Peoples of Colour.

If it's a term used mainly with people who emphasise individuality, shouldn't they just embrace their natiomality/heratage instead of using a divisive, non-specific umbrella term?

>>415693
>It really seems to promote a "us vs. them" mindset. It's basically a term used to emphasise that you aren't white.
Yup
>as a European
-you get no input on what non-Whites call themselves

>>415693

>It's basically a term used to emphasise that you aren't white.

Why should the other four major racial groups of America—Black, Latino, Asian, and Native Americans—be called “non-Whites”? We do not refer to White people as “non-Native” or “non-Black”. And like >>415694 said, you really do not deserve any input on how anyone else—including people of color—choose to identify themselves. (Unless we’re talking about an idiot like Rachel Dolezal, in which case you can call them a dumb White asshole.)

>>415694
I'm pretty sure he's allowed to say whatever he wants to say, unless it goes against the rules of the site. Skin color doesn't play a role in that. Whether you want to listen to what he has to say is your own prerogative, but just because you have a bias against Europeans doesn't mean his opinion is automatically invalid.

>>415695
>Why should the other four major racial groups of America—Black, Latino, Asian, and Native Americans—be called “non-Whites”?
They shouldn't. Stop putting words in my mouth. I even said I think they should use tgeir nationality/heratage to refer to themselves just like you refered to them.

>you really do not deserve any input on how anyone else—including people of color—choose to identify themselves.
I have an opinion and I think it is valid and justified. They can use the term all they fucking want, it doesn't significantly affect me, but my race doesn't make my disapproval invalid. If I refered to myself repeatedly as "non-black", a black person would definitely deserve to express their opinion; my example title implies their race is undesirable to me. They have every right to be offended.

>>415698

>I even said I think they should use [their] nationality/heratage to refer to themselves just like you refered to them. […] I have an opinion and I think it is valid and justified.

You are welcome to hold and express your opinion. The rest of us, in turn, are welcome to laugh at, mock, and rip apart your opinion because you think it deserves to be taken seriously.

Oh, and one more thing: “Non-White” is not an implication that being White is “undesirable”, but an implication that Whiteness—that is, being White—is a “default state” and everyone else is “abnormal”. There is no “default” for humanity; we should not, then, centre the identification of other people around an assumed “default” (e.g., “White” and “non-White”).

>>415699
>are welcome to laugh at, mock, and rip apart your opinion
You sure are, but are yet to do so in a post. All you've ("you" in the plural sense) done is refer to arguments I never used and say my opinion is not deserved due to my race. I wish to point out that racist attitudes are exactly what you don't need right now in America.

>Oh, and one more thing
Good point, I didn't think about it like that before. And I agree especially with the final sentence: that's a point I've tried to make myself. Race isn't binary.

>>415700

>I didn't think about it like that before.

Of course you didn’t.

>>415701
Calm down mate. Take a breather. Watch a good cartoon.

>post on FB about the recent demonstration in the US
>both my grandparents fought the nazis
>they never bought a single product from Germany
Wow....... way to miss the point.

>>415704
Someone showed me a twitter conversation along the lines of:
>User#1 - "There is no reason not to punch a nazi in the head. Good job."
>User#2 - "would it be ok to punch a commie in the head?"
>User#1 - "Probably not. It isn't ok to hurt someone due to their political views"
And while I believe all neo-Nazis could benefit from a swift trauma to the head, such hypocrisy is honestly impressive.

>>415706

A call for genocide is not a political view.

https://www.washingtonian.com/2017/08/16/white-house-removed-capital-bikeshare-station-inside-perimeter/

I know he's a revanchist racist and all, but this seems extra petty.

>>415708
Well, those idiots are feeling threatened by the upcoming white genocide.

>>415710

no such thing is happening, stop trying to stir a race war

>>415711
I don't buy into the race war meme. But, at lest in Europe, a replacement of the native population is underway

>>415713
No it isn't you fucking idiot.

>>415714
Well, if you want to remain delusional and only listen to those who are waiting eagerly to tell you "that's right, you're right!", keep at it.

>>415713
So Europe is finally getting colonised?

I can't deny that it would be poetic justice.

>>415726
Please present the population numbers that in any way demonstrates the possibility of such.

>>415728
>children must pay for the sins of SOME of their great-great-great-great-great-great-grandparents
Your dad robbed my dad once, so I'll just cut you.

>>415736
I meant more in an international sense rather than a personal sense. It's like the big bad guy who invaded all the countries finally gets invaded. except really almost everyone was invading everyone, we just happened to win most of the time because of technology fuck yeah.

You're taking me more serious than I intended. I'd be devastated if my homelands were invaded. Two wrongs don't make a right. Yadda yadda. But I couldn't possibly look back and say we (as nations) did nothing ever to earn war against us. If America wasn't so indisputably shitty in recent years, colonist European countries would probably be the most hated in the world, even above the Chinese, NKoreans and Israelites.

>>415712
>>415715
>Peter Thiel

Are he and you talking about the same Peter Thiel as the wikipedia page? Openly gay?

>>415738

Yes, Peter Thiel, bankrupter of Gawker and actual literal vampire.

Lordy, I hope Bannon is really out and this isn't just another Gorkaesque "he's OUT but he's still getting paid and acting as a surrogate for the administration and influencing Trump and no one's sure whether he still has security clearance or not and he's sleeping on the sofa in the Oval Office" not-departure.

If Obama was able to run in the last election, would he have beaten Trump?

>>415753

While the entire mess with Hillary and her emails would not have happened, Obama would have been weighed down by many of the same problems she had to face—specifically, a Southern White American electorate that turned out in droves for Trump, the gerrymandering that favored Republican voters, Republicans lacking the spine to stand against Trump, and the third party nightmare that was Uncle Bernie and Crazy Aunt Jill.

I would consider an Obama victory against Trump as “possible, but unlikely”.

>>415754
Obama was and is trusted much more by a broader coalition than Trump or Hillary ever were.

>>415754
I disagree. Hilary's biggest problem was apathy on the left, not high turnout on the right--the nazi vote (I refuse to treat it as anything else at this point) was not really all that unusual in 2016. It's possible Obama would've faced some of that, (because a lot of people were unfairly shitting on what he had accomplished in his two terms, and certainly plenty of people were calling him center-right), but I doubt as much would've stuck. And even with all that, if it hadn't been for the timing of the Comey letter, Hilary would've still probably won.

Nothing the Republicans threw at Obama stuck. They tried, (oh my god, did they try) to make shit stick on him, but the worst they could come up with was "tan suit" "terrorist fist jab" and "coffee salute" bullshit that even the other republicans knew were weak as shit.

>>415757

If we are assuming Obama could have run for a third term, what they could have hit him on is the fact that we could have had four more years of Obama and everything that went wrong during his presidency. Four more years of the ACA, four more years of wars that the general public neither wants nor likes, and—this is especially important for the Republican base—four more years of a Black man being POTUS.

And while they did try to stick Obama with what they thought would turn into national, bipartisan scandals, it never really worked on the left/liberals/Dems because we all saw through it for what it was: hypocrisy based on race. But the right/conservatives/Republican base ate it up because they perceived Obama doing things like putting his feet on the Oval Office desk as “scandalous” and “disrespectful” only because a Black man did it. The same racist fuckwads who turned out for Trump in our actual 2016 election might turned out in even greater numbers if they knew it was for keeping a Black man out of the White House.

https://news.grabien.com/story-tucker-carlson-trump-looking-eclipse-perhaps-most-impressive
>"Even the president saw it, but in a move that is not a complete surprise, he looked directly at the sun without any glasses. Perhaps the most impressive thing any president has ever done."

It is true that it wasn't a surprise.

>>415766

One thing. He had to do just one thing right.

JFC.

Well, Trump decided to go full neocon Re: Afghanistan, because his "America First, let's stop being world police" promises to his voters matter far less than his hard-on for uniforms, killing and things that go boom.

I'd like if people paid more attention to school board elections, despite them being so local that expecting everyone to talk about what's going on in their own district on an internationally visited imageboard sounds like it'd be ridiculously unmanageable. It just seems like the people most directly responsible for school policy ought to get examined more closely, given that there's so much concern about the future of schools when it comes to federal/national level elections.

https://www.gop.gov/legend-zelda-american-tax-code-common/

Not only does this read like the GOP hired an intern to come up with a “cool” reference that could fit into this cringeworthy screed, but even that intern fucked up basic fact-checking.

Also, how dare they use The Legend of Zelda for this kind of shit.

>>415776

404'd, but the Internet never forgets:

https://archive.fo/shro6

So this is fun:

https://qz.com/1056319/what-is-the-alt-right-a-linguistic-data-analysis-of-3-billion-reddit-comments-shows-a-disparate-group-that-is-quickly-uniting/

And by fun I mean horrifying. But it does make it really easy to tell a person's biases just by looking at the words they use.

The alt-right and the "anti-SJW" monstrosities all have a very noticeable way of writing, expressing their emotions and presenting their 'reasoning' ("Someone one Tumblr said something about Halloween costumes, so now I want to vote for old dudes that love zygotes and I claim Jews are indoctrinating us into race-mixing, out of spite").

It's like how you can tell something is off with a moving human that has been rendered by a computer, or the way you can actually hear whether water is room temperature or boiling when poured into a cup.

>>415773

>the people most directly responsible for school policy ought to get examined more closely

To wit: http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/davidbadash/school_board_president_says_sex_ed_can_make_kids_gay_attacks_lgbt_activists_plays_religion_card

>>415792

Sooner? They are already going underground. Hell, they expect to have their “public” hidey-holes getting the Internet equivalent of being filled with cement. Killing off T_D or /pol/ would only drive them into near-permanent underground hiding, rather than the occasional visit.

>>415792
I would guess the result might be a mix of the Hydra effect and general desegregation.

Gorka is out of the WH, Arpaio is pardoned and transgender recruits are out of the armed forces.

Hey Harvey, aim for the Trump voters.

He just pardoned Arpaio
After ordering the Pentagon to enact the transgender ban
And he's likely going to end DACA

Feels like he's lashing out more than usual.

>>415796

He will do whatever it takes to make his base stay loyal because he cares only about the people who will make him feel like a success. He is a man-child, a whimpering baby in a three-piece suit who needs constant validation. The grand irony is that he is also playing the role of a father figure to a part of the country’s population that feels like they need such a figure to protect them from the evils of a changing society.

We are all fucked.

>>415797

Speaking of how fucked we all are:

https://twitter.com/brianklaas/status/901874859101343744

>>415814
He's totally hyped to exploit disaster to look "presidential" and make up for tweeting about whatever bullshit they were talking about on DVR'd Fox & Friends while people were dying.

>>415815

For all the shit Ol’ 45 flung at Obama for not visiting a natural disaster site “soon enough”, Obama knew that his visit would have drained resources that were needed elsewhere. Ol’ 45 wants to visit as soon as he possibly can just to make himself look good, Texas state resources be damned.

I hate him so fucking much.

>>415817
>republican governor tells people to evacuate three days before it hits, on time so all could be saved
>democrat mayor tells people to stay anyway because the illegals cant be evacuated
>people get flooded out and die as a result of libtardism
>republican president pulls all strings to solve the problem
>muh funding
Wew lad where was your concern for funding when the last president spooged $600 million on a nonfunctioning website that sixteen year old kids in CS classes were making fun of.

>>415818

“Resources” does not refer specifically to funding alone—it also refers to manpower and preparations for safe routes of travel. Cities affected by the hurricane need everyone possible working to save lives, repair damage, and generally create a sense of normalcy again. A visit from the POTUS draws manpower away from those efforts and toward protecting the president. Ol’ 45 does not comprehend this idea; apparently, neither do you.

>>415818
Actually, I'm pretty sure they didn't issue a mandatory evacuation order because they didn't want a repeat of the Hurricane Rita evac. Remember, when more than two million people trying to flee the city jammed the highways for over 48 hours? They would've been underwater by now.

Also, it wasn't the Democratic mayor's decision alone, but the Republican county judge's.

Also-also lmao @ Trump "solving the problem," the fuck did he do? Revoking Executive Order 13690? Tweeting about Sherriff Clarke's new book? Doing product placement for his hats?

http://www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/davidbadash/white_house_releases_embarrassing_photos_of_trump_at_camp_david_and_pence_managing_hurricane_harvey

This would be hilarious if it were not astoundingly sad on numerous levels.

https://twitter.com/ABCPolitics/status/902270737901170688

So much fucking hate.

When did the preconception start that harassment and incitement is protected under free speech?

>>415824

When the Internet made it easy for assholes to harass and incite without their names attached to it.

>>415824
It's less a preconception and more an ex post facto rationalization for "Why X bad behavior I engaged in was actually correct." They don't think about these things they're doing until after they're called out for being assholes, and then the human mind's self-preservation instincts kick in and they start grasping for a reason why they weren't in the wrong.

It doesn't matter what the law actually says, they just need something to provide psychological scaffolding for their collapsing image of themselves as always being the good guy. To be fair, I'm saying "they," but regardless of the point on the political spectrum one falls, pretty much all humans think this way--not in regards to harassment/incitement specifically (that's on these assholes in particular), but in regards to being called out for being wrong. They do it, you do it, I do it. It's the human condition. That's why it's so important to at least be open to the possibility of being wrong--even if you ultimately decide you're still right, you've got to be willing to entertain the notion that you're wrong or you're giving in to the same human frailties these assholes are.

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/08/listen-eric-trump-says-his-father-tunes-out-criticism-so-he-doesnt-commit-suicide-out-of-depression/

What can I even fucking say to this?

>>415828

>“There is no racist bone in my father’s body."

Trump has been accused of racism since the 80s. His wife outed him decades ago (she too was pretty openly racist)

>>415844
>His wife outed him decades ago
Can I have a link to that?

>>415848

Heres a good article for you

https://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/2015/07/donald-ivana-trump-divorce-prenup-marie-brenner

>Ivana Trump told her lawyer Michael Kennedy that from time to time her husband reads a book of Hitler’s collected speeches, My New Order, which he keeps in a cabinet by his bed.

>Ivana told a friend, he clicks his heels and says, “Heil Hitler,” possibly as a family joke.

>>415849

Also important to remember: He was the target of a 1973 lawsuit alleging a practice of racial discrimination at one of his real estate properties.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/09/28/trumps-claim-that-a-racial-discrimination-suit-was-brought-against-many-real-estate-firms/

It would be nice if your stolen political memes were immediately relevant to your post content. Otherwise it just comes off as annoying propaganda.

>>415858

White hoods did the same thing.

Another day, another reason I want to slap everyone who ever said Hillary and Trump were the same

>>415864

>antifa is the modern day militant wing of the democratic party

This would be true only if the DNC actually endorsed or otherwise openly approved of any given AntiFa group. And if AntiFa groups actually aligned with the DNC. Also, do not forget that the Democratic Party of “yesteryear” would eventually become the Republican Party of The Current Year—support from the Klan included.

>>415859
Well, it is just annoying propaganda.

>>415857
Get bikelocked, yokel.

>>415864
I'm sorry your life has lead you to becoming what you've become. Society has failed you by allowing you to grow up thinking that acting this way makes you interesting or novel, or that your ideas are actually innovative or helpful for anyone, yourself included.

>>415870
Ditto to you.

>>415871
So even when insulting people you can't think of anything new to say.

>>415866
I was giving benefit of the doubt at that point.

Personally, I'm for gay marriage in my country. It doesn't directly affect me, it makes people happy, and it's a step toward more rights and away from religious laws and attitudes.

But why do gay people want to get married? Sure, the word sounds better than "civil union", but is there some legally significant difference between the two statuses?

>>415887

>is there some legally significant difference between the two statuses?

Find out whether a couple in a civil union has access to the same privileges and rights as a couple in a marriage. If the answer is “no”, well, there you go.

>>415886
Dang, those uniforms do look cool.

>>415887
>>415888
Separate is not equal

>>415888
Yeah, depends on the laws where they live. That bit was a silly question on my part.

>>415889
The Nazis were morally horrible, but they had style. I can't deny that.

>>415890
>Sure, the word sounds better than "civil union", but is there some legally significant difference between the two statuses?
Aside from the stuff that has already been pointed out, civil unions do not necessarily count for "Next of Kin" rights when determining who's allowed to visit someone in the hospital when unconscious / critical, when determining the custody of children or ownership of property after the death of a partner with no will, are not required to be recognized by life insurance companies when determining beneficiaries or medical insurance companies when determining who can be on who's insurance.

For example, people have lost their kids or their living places before marriage equality was ruled on by the Supreme Court because legally they weren't recognized as spouses of their partners and therefore, for example, little old ladies who had been living with their wives in a house for 30 years get kicked out of their homes by whoever the law decides to give their wife's house to because those family members didn't approve of the marriage or are just greedly little shits, and people have lost their kids because they weren't legally recognized as guardians when losing partners or when divorcing.

Which is what people mean when they say "separate is not equal," but will give more concrete and specific examples for concern trolls.

>>415894
That is messed up when long term partners are not treated as such. Thanks for explaining.

Snopes.com, that "unbiased" far left bastion of truthfacts against the fakenews, is run by a Los Angeles prostitute and her pimp.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4730092/Snopes-brink-founder-accused-fraud-lying.html

>>415899

How do you continue to breathe with such a low IQ?

Hillary is the most sour grapes dumb ass, "Bernie treated the election like some kind of popularity contest!"

......Do you just not talk to your husband anymore? Did you not even ask him what he did to win?

>>415902

If you really want to be fair, both of them fucked up. Bernie fucked up by not doing more to campaign for Hillary after the primaries—and by not doing more to reign in his rabid fanbase—while Hillary fucked up by not moving to the left far enough to please the BernieBros and win their votes. Then again, everyone in the country kinda fucked up by identifying more with individual candidates and less with policies and principles that could withstand one person losing or being embroiled in scandal.

Except for the white supremacists and the Nazis. Those fuckers always vote on ideology.

>>415905

hillary fucked up by not making sanders VP and instead choosing slimeball Kaine. would have been a landslide

>>415908
Not in a million years.

Trump’s DOJ sided with the anti-gay bakers in their SCOTUS case that will determine whether people can refuse service to gay people if “religious freedom” is at stake.

Also not surprising is how the DOJ reasons that anti-gay discrimination is not as bad as racial discrimination: https://twitter.com/ZackFord/status/905917979489173504

>>415905
>Bernie fucked up by not doing more to campaign for Hillary after the primaries—and by not doing more to reign in his rabid fanbase
Did he do any less for Hillary than Hillary did for Obama?

>>415911

Clinton fans in 2008 would not have affected the general election in the same way BernieBros (and Stein supporters) did in 2016. She didn’t need to campaign for Obama—he won that election as soon as he won the primaries.

But this gets into the primary issue with re-litigating the 2016 primaries over and over and over and over and over again: THEY BOTH FUCKING LOST. Bernie lost the primaries; Hillary lost the election. Learning from their mistakes matters, but not nearly as much as looking toward 2018 and 2020.

>>415911
When Hillary lost the primary in 2008 she immediately conceded and campaigned for Obama, and her backers and fundraisers rallied behind him. It took Bernie over a month to even endorse Hillary after the 2016 primary and he didn't stump for her until September, iirc.

>>415912
Well the question I guess I'm getting to is, what is the level of supplication before one's newly designated monarch that one must do when forced to bend the knee for them not to be considered to be responsible for that monarch's failure?

>>415914
It's not about "bending the knee to the monarch," it's about being a team player and working to get your party*'s chosen candidate elected and not letting your delegates run with conspiracy theories of a rigged primary and the "Clinton and Trump are the same" narrative you helped foment with your attacks on her and the Democrats.

I canvassed and voted for Bernie in the primaries, and did the same for Hillary in the general.

I never want to hear a peep from either of them ever again. Franken save us. Franken help us.

>>415915
But Bernie never said she was the same as Trump. In fact he specifically said from the beginning that he refused to run third party because he didn't want to hurt her chances against Trump.

You're blaming him for her incompetence, and for the actions of Clinton supporters--I told you when Bernie conceded and you were so keen on telling Bernie supporters how stupid they were for ever not genuflecting before Hilary that you were going to alienate the left (who made up a good 40% of primary voters) with your holier than thou attitudes, and you still managed to act shocked when the left was apathetic to your campaign in November.

This was your campaign to lose. Bernie was no worse for Clinton than Rubio or Cruz were for Trump. Liberals will just do anything they can to justify their sticking by corparatist politics even when those politics are unpopular--and relying on being seen as the lesser of two evils to get them elected instead of actually engaging the citizens.

>>415917
>your holier than thou attitudes

oh, the irony

>>415922
Yeah, ignore the beef of the criticism to evade in whataboutism. You may not be "the same" as conservatives, but you damn sure like to work from the sane playbook.... and serve different but similarly corrupt big businesses. The fact that you serve Disney instead of serving Exxon doesn't make you one of the good guys, it just makes you the bad guy who is less immediately horrific.

You are like a bipedal Facebook minions meme, you perfectly generic puddle of propaganda.

>>415923
Your "Democrats are the lesser of two evils" bullshit is whataboutism to begin with. That's what I'm talking about when I said that Sanders and his surrogates encouraged this thinking with his attacks on Hillary and the Democratic party in the primary and well into the fall, when he was still grumbling about our elections being determined by "a handful of wealthy people and special interests" (because he can't POSSIBLY have lost by over 3 million votes on his own— you think he'd have done better against those unpopular corporatist policies of Clinton's). Seriously, how are are they beholden to Wall Street/corporations/billionaires? Democrats are for overturning Citizens United, reform and regulation of Wall Street and big pharma, middle class tax relief and progressive tax policies, but they're apparently in the thrall of fucking Disney now because ??? Because they accept corporate donations, they have to do what they want, now? Is that how it works? You know Bernie takes corporate and lobbyist money too, right? Is he in the service of corrupt big business, now?

Clinton, day ONE of her campaign: "I want Citizens United gone, even if it takes a constitutional amendment."

Bernie kids: "Yeah but that's a safe promise for you, evil shit-lady, because it can't happen anyway. Fuck you, you're like Cruella DeVil or something. *posts 'How do you do, fellow kids* meme for the trillionth time*"

Bernie: "I promise single-payer and free college even though Whites/people older than 45 will NEVER allow that to get through congress."

Bernie kids: "WHY WON'T THE EVIL SHIT-LADY AND THE DNC GET BEHIND THIS AND MAKE IT THEIR CENTRAL ISSUE BSAHDBAHUFBEGIEBYHUAHDUGHUI"

>>415928
Textbook strawman.

>>415930
No, those are quotes bro

At this point I think the Russian trolls have decided to try to further increase the chaos in the US by playing liberals this time, and continuing to increase the divide between liberals and leftists by being such whiny assholes about losing the election and blaming it on everyone else--as well as getting the liberals to hate counterprotesters on the left worse than they hate the nazis of the alt-right--just to make sure republicans remain in power.

And to think all of this is just bullshit to defang the Magnisky Act so Putin and some other oligarchs can make fuck your mother money off of conspiracy and murder.

>>415932

Right now, Ted Cruz probably wishes he could claim to have had his Twitter account hacked by Russian bots.

Push Franken i m o

>>415947

I hope you realize what a mistake it would be to believe Ol’ 45 sees Democrats as anything more than a means to an end.

>>415948
He sees everyone as a means to an end; he's entirely ego. If the end is "Donald does what Chuck and Nancy want to punish Ryan/McConnell and the only lives ruined are Ann Coulter's and r/The_Donald's" then awesome.

That said, I won't be surprised if he reneges, since he contradicts himself on everything (DACA itself being an example) but he's cost himself support either way.

The god of rural crackers is at the UN talking about how the US may have to "destroy" North Korea (25 millionsh people).

So good thing mega-hawk Hillary Clinton didn't get to start World War III-IX with Russia or whatever the fuck the generic pasty gulag-filling was telling us.

>>415969

He cares not how many other people—especially innocent people—die at the hands of the United States military, so long as he kills the one guy who can out-crazy POTUS.

>>415970
Kim Jong Un doesn't even come close to out crazying Trump. All of his actions are entirely rational.... evil and cynical, but rational.

The entirety of his power is based on having the North Koreans but in to his cult of the personality, and in the threat of the United States. And given the atrocities he and his regime have committed, losing power would almost certainly mean his death. So he must continue to expand nuclear power (because his people have been less to believe it's the only way to prevent America from invading) and is willing to provoke America and other nations because he knows they would be hesitant to go to war with North Korea-- they've got nukes, and they're still technically at war with South Korea which is everyone's friend. And they are close enough to China to cause serious problems for them, which makes China want to cause serious problems for anyone who sets them off.

No, he's not crazy. He's desperate and evil. Trump on the other hand is motivated pretty much entirely by emotion and ego, and is easily the most irrational Head of State on earth.

>>415972
I don't believe it's really rational to threaten the one nation that has used atomic bombs and also has a crazy leader, but apart from that I agree. Kim is a bit crazy, but it's more desperation than insanity.

>>415984

Fuck Australia for putting the civil rights of queer people up for a vote.

>>415985
Woah, slightly different situation here.
1) This event is not exactly putting it up for a vote. It's an official survey rather than a referendum: the government can ignore the results (but claim they will not). I'm nitpicking here but it's an important detail.
2) It isn't near as massive a civil rights issue like in America, due to our laws regarding de facto relationships. Same-sex couples in a de facto relationship over here have all the major rights and proceedings that married couples have (a sane legal comparison can be found here: https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-legal-benefits-do-married-couples-have-that-de-facto-couples-do-not-83896)

>Fuck Australia for putting [heavily divisive issue] up for a vote.
we are a democracy lol

I think this shouldn't be an issue and that opposition to same sex marriage need to stop being a selfish/religious idiot, but my country is mostly democratic and I appreciate that.

>tfw yes-vote protesters are being bigger pieces of shit and it's not even false flagging
I get that people take this debate to heart and become overly passionate, but they are harming their cause.

>>415986
>I get that people take this debate to heart
Yes, how utterly unbecoming that some people might get passionate about defending their civil rights. Don't they know that their self defense exhausts me?

People really ought to learn to stop standing up for themselves and just accept that they are in an inferior caste if the majority of the population decides to assign them to it.

>>415987
>Yes, how utterly unbecoming that some people might get passionate about defending their civil rights. Don't they know that their self defense exhausts me?
This is more 'when you infringe upon the rights of others, you don't deserve the rights you have'. Fuck anyone who walks up to peaceful protesters and yells at them through a megaphone from a metre away.

>>415988
>This is more 'when you infringe upon the rights of others, you don't deserve the rights you have'. Fuck anyone who walks up to peaceful protesters and yells at them through a megaphone from a metre away.
Yes, fuck peacefully protesting peaceful protests

>>415988
Awwww diddums, the no-voters that want gay people to pay all the taxes and obey all the laws that straight people do without getting the same rights and treatment in society don't like yes-voter anger.

>>415988

>when you infringe upon the rights of others, you don't deserve the rights you have

Which civil rights are we talking about here—free speech or marriage?

>>415989
physical assault and harassment =/= peace

>>415993
>Which civil rights are we talking about here—free speech or marriage?
Not marriage. Certain people are protesting in non-peaceful ways that infringe the basic rights of others, such as a right to not be harassed. I feel like the individuals that are protesting in unacceptable ways are hurting the image of the group they support. My argument is unrelated to same-sex marriage, that just happens to be the current issue being protested.

There are jerks on both sides, but the jerks on one side seem more numerous and more obnoxious than the jerks on the other side. That kind of behavior can make enemies of apathetic or undecided people, which results in more chance of getting LESS GAY RIGHTS, which royally fucks over those of us who want more gay rights.

>>415992
At least read my posts if you are going to try and mock me.

>>415996
>detonating a large weapon
>no negative environmental impacts
But I think most North Koreans might be brainwashed enough to believe it.

>>415995
You seem to like coming up with excuses for people to do evil, rather than fighting against the notion that peoole should do evil because a few protesters don't behave the way they want them to.

I went voting for the first time since I moved. It's actually a nice feeling. Makes you feel like a proper citizen of the town.

>>416000
I don't believe that. Maybe there's been a miscommunication, an assumption or I've made a bad choice of words somewhere.

I think 'no' voters are selfish and making a bad decision. I've made that clear. But, certain 'yes' protesters are behaving in ways that create negative attention, and that may influence more people to vote 'no'. That is not a good thing nor is it a valid excuse for voting a certain way, but I think it's something which may happen, because people may respond to perceived harassment by rebelling and doing the opposite.

Just because I vote one way doesn't mean I should be justifying destructive behavior of people voting the same way as me. They are hurting the people they fight for as well as the people they fight against, and that is not alright. People should not do evil. People making mistakes may cause other people to do evil. People should try not to make those preventable mistakes, so that other people don't do preventable evil.

>>416001
>It's actually a nice feeling. Makes you feel like a proper citizen of the town.
It sure is. Do you live in an optional-voting area?

>>416003
Yep.

Peace can't exist without equality. No matter how orderly they may be in advocating eradication of peace, fascists, racists, bigots and homophobes are automatically not peaceful by virtue of their politics.

>>416006
While many organized religions might advocate inequality, it is not an inherent element of organized religion to be against equality. For example, Buddhism has no advocacy for inequality.

Unless you meant inequality based on the target's religion, in which case, I included that under bigotry, since there's no one-word "ism" to describe discrimination based on the target's faith.

>>416005
The Final Solution to the Bigot Question?

>>416007
>it is not an inherent element of organized religion to be against equality.
You're right, I did paint with too broad of a brush. I meant the ones that do advocate bigotry of infidels and heretics, such as the three main Abrahamic religions. I actually haven't heard much of Buddhism and other Asian religions in a long time because they rarely make news.

>>416009
>I actually haven't heard much of Buddhism and other Asian religions in a long time because they rarely make news.
well uh, there's the Rohingya matter

imperialism isn't inherent in Buddhism but Buddhists are as capable of it as anyone else

>>416010
>
>imperialism isn't inherent in Buddhism but Buddhists are as
Yeah, I didn't mean Buddhists weren't capable of it, I just meant that the "official doctrine" doesn't single out groups for marginalization the way the more "Popular in Western Countries" religions do.

To put it another way, this wasn't a statement about buddhists[i], it was a statement about [i]Buddhism. There is no grouping of humans which is not going to consist at least 25% of shitheads.

https://twitter.com/AntifaBoston/status/912763777698889728
>12:40 PM - 26 Sep 2017 from Vladivostok, Russia

are these 12th dimensional agitprop tactics or did someone fuck up

>>416018
Pretty much everything that claims to be an antifa "organization" is someone on the alt-right, or perhaps Russia, trying to start shit. An Antifa organization/group makes about as much sense as an Anonymous organization/group. They're not clubs with members, and they don't organize actions. People just decide to act and sometimes other people do it with them.

So yeah, it's probably someone fucking up their attempt to either build an alt-left group from wholecloth to further agitate the situation in the US, or an attempt to assassinate the character of the left.

>>416018
I guess it could be a VPN

The Price is wrong, bitch.

Love to give up my federal level elected office to spend 9 months being humiliated publicly and being able to do nothing but bureaucratic obstruction until I'm forced to resign over plane tickets

>>416025
>>416026
Context? I couldn't find anything.

>>416027
Tom Price.

I'm actually surprised he resigned. It seems like there have been so many stories about cabinet officials abusing private flights, I figured he'd use them for cover.

Naturally, Trump's response to Puerto Rico would cause any other nation to simply lynch him or force him out of office, but roughly a third of America's population is now nothing but an unnatural, inhuman fistula of pasty, anti-educated gulag-stuffing that actually gets a kick out of seeing and hearing him act like a pig-cunt towards vulnerable people.

>>416033

Our store-brand Sunny D president would rather marvel at the rising number of dead brown people and insult aid workers than do anything to help them—even if they are Americans.

>>416033
Are you pretending to care yourself?

//youtube.com/watch?v=SVOuY7hoqEs

Cracked is doing better journalism than the news networks.

2017 has been one very fucked up year.

>>416036
Not surprising in the slightest.

>>416038
>Not surprising in the slightest.
Really? I honestly expected there to be more. There's even a well-known game about him having sex.

>>416037
>Cracked is doing better journalism than the news networks.
Haven't watched the link yet but I believe you, it's not a hard hurdle to leap. Fuck, even this thread could do a better job than some news networks.

>>416040

>I don't know the details of all these groups, or how homogeneous they are in their beliefs and behaviors, but judging a group by the acts of a few is NOT better journalism than the news networks.

It is better journalism when Cracked takes the time to point out how the Nazi-corpse-humping “alt-right” intentionally tries to make themselves look like martyrs and victims while the news networks, newspapers, and other “serious” journalists do the “both sides” thing. It is better journalism when Cracked points out how those swastika-wearing fucksticks intentionally play with both media perceptions and words—specifically because they can, thanks to their not being limited by the same ethics as you or I—to receive a “fair shot” in the media. It is better journalism when Cracked exposes how Tiki-torch-carrying anti-Semites manipulate the media into ignoring the sources and perpetrators of right-wing violence while playing up left-wing violence as wholly unprovoked or somehow worse than right-wing violence.

>Gibson may be a fuckhead, but they should be trying to prove that with evidence

The video points out how he says discrimination against Muslims is neither racism or bigotry. This was after noting how the media portrayed Patriot Prayer as a “non-racist group”, how the group shows up armed with weaponry so they can provoke violence from leftist groups, and how white supremacists keep following him to his rallies. Gee, I wonder if Gibson is a hypocrite who uses the whole “I’m not a racist” declaration to make himself seem like “a reasonable person” in the face of the “intolerant left” that he and his followers keep baiting into violent responses so as to bolster his “reasonable person” image.

>>416040
But all Trump voters knew what Trump was and what he would do. All Trump voters own what the nationalists and fascists do.

If Clinton had been a black bloc member that sympathized with even the worst Antifa members, the right-wing cunts would have a right to complain.

But the extremism, escalation, partisanship and ideological indoctrination is more assymetrical than it's ever been. People wanting both sides to fix this are on the side of republicans and the alt-right.

You simply fucking have to stop whining about Antifa or it's impossible to think you're a good or well-meaning person.

>>416041
>It is better journalism when [x3]
They might be sending the right message, but they are doing it in a way that makes them look like liars, when that could be avoided. I don't think that's better journalism.

That said, I'm certain those groups are very crafty with their words and say things they don't believe. They would have to be in order to gain whatever media support they may have. They can be lying, racist fuckwits. But a respectable journalist should be calling them out with proof, not just calling them out with rhetoric.

>This was after noting how the media portrayed Patriot Prayer as a "non-racist group"
Except I just explained in my last post that they didn't. Oh, the reader said they did, sure. They made an unsupported claim (that Patriot Prayer was presented as non-racist) and pretended they did support the claim by highlighting irrelevant quotes. They falsely suggested citation. That is unethical. Not worse than right wing violence and the media that tries to justify it, of course, but that's no benchmark to compare oneself to.

>how the group shows up armed with weaponry so they can provoke violence from leftist groups
They explained that fact well.

>Gee, I wonder if Gibson is a hypocrite who uses the whole “I’m not a racist” declaration to make himself seem like “a reasonable person” in the face of the “intolerant left” that he and his followers keep baiting into violent responses so as to bolster his “reasonable person” image.
Yes, exactly. They don't need to resort to unethical journalism to show that!

Because republicans are allowed to live and because progressives only care about telling as many people as possible that voting for either party is uncool, nine million US children are currently without health insurance.

But be super scared of Islam and BLM guys.

>>416045
>But be super scared of Islam and BLM guys.
And those communists and anarchists!

>>416045
>because progressives only care about telling as many people as possible that voting for either party is uncool
while this is an easy pit to fall into, it doesn't actually reflect reality:
90% of Bernie primary voters are known to have moved onto Hillary in the general and the capital P Progressive caucus that effectively speaks for the Social Democrat wing is the largest of the house caucuses.

Always remember that a lot of "Bernie supporters" were alt-reichers and Russkies pretending to be Bernouts to support Hillary and foster more anger between Leftists and Liberals.

Another mass shooting. Another “lone wolf” (read: White male) shooter. Another three dozen or so people killed.

And the US will not do anything about guns because our leaders watched the children at Sandy Hook die and decided they were okay with that being the tradeoff for taking money from the NRA/worshipping the Second Amendment.

Reminder that even if your entire family has been whacked in a mass shooting, you're not allowed to even feel upset unless you vote for anti-gun and anti-NRA politicians.

>>416049

If you have been personally affected by a mass-casualty shooting, you can feel however you want, personal politics be damned. Anyone who says otherwise is a fool.

>>416050
Anyone who enters into apologia for NRA supporters reaping what they so is the fool

>>416051

NRA supporters who lost friends or loved ones in the Vegas shooting did not ask for those people to die. An NRA supporter who died in the Vegas shooting did not ask to have their life taken. If you cannot see the difference between disagreeing with a political stance and having the most basic-ass empathy for people regardless of that political stance, you never will.

What do other nations think when this keeps happening in the US?

>>416054
Pretty much.

>>416052
Now this is an interesting turn in the debate we haven't seen yet that ignites some hope in my eyes.

>>416052
>NRA supporters who lost friends or loved ones in the Vegas shooting did not ask for those people to die.
No that's exactly what they did. Support for the NRA=support for gun murder. The end. If you still insist on supporting them after it has been repeatedly demonstrated to you and the world, you deserve whatever happens to you and your loved ones. In fact, it's objectively better that it happens to you and yours than anyone else, since you are an accomplice.

If you cannot understand that some political stances DEMONSTRATE basic lack of human empathy and hence DESERVE no such empathy themselves, you are the reason why fascists will continue to rule.

>>416057

No person needs to die because of their political beliefs. Someone murdering another person because of a political disagreement is a bad thing regardless of the political stances of the victim. You have said nothing to change those opinions.

>>416058
>No person needs to die because of their political beliefs.
Fascists actually do need to die but that's irrelevant because:

>Someone murdering another person because of a political disagreement is a bad thing regardless of the political stances of the victim.
What you're describing here does not accurately reflect the described scenario. This isn't someone being targeted and killed for their beliefs, this is the inevitable consequences of their belief system taking effect. Just like any Trumpet/Republican whose kid lost their insurance yesterday: you voted for the person/people who you were warned, and in fact they told you themselves, would take your kids healthcare away. So no dipshit, you don't get to be mad that your kid is uninsured, cause it's your fucking fault. By the same token, if you oppose gun control, and then cousin BillyBob is shredded by a gun wielding lunatic, too fucking bad, you should have backed gun control.

DON'T WORRY PUERTO RICO!

The golf trophy is one the way!

>>416059
This. Whenever there is a mass shooting, I cross my fingers the victims voted for politicians owned by the NRA. I don't WANT anyone to be a victim of gun violence, but if we are going to sacrifice Americans on the altar of retarded massacre weapons, then it's at least more fair if the sacrifices actually value massacre weapons.

>>416059

>Fascists actually do need to die

If they “need” to die, it should be because they pose a direct, immediate, and serious threat to the safety of yourself or others. If you say a Nazi fuckhead “needs” to die only because of an expressed political belief—no matter how awful that belief—you are advocating for the murder of people with whom you disagree. And while I understand the idea of “they’d do it to you if they could”, that idea does not convince me to justify the murder of political extremists as “pre-emptive self-defense”. Richard Spencer is an awful human being whose beliefs deserve every ounce of mockery and spite that they receive; he still does not deserve to die only for what he believes.

>This isn't someone being targeted and killed for their beliefs, this is the inevitable consequences of their belief system taking effect.

That does not convince me that the people who died in Vegas had to die, nor does it make me believe that I should not feel at least base-level sorrow for the people who died or some sympathy for the families of the dead—regardless of the political opinions of either group. An NRA supporter is still a human being even if you believe otherwise.

>if you oppose gun control, and then cousin BillyBob is shredded by a gun wielding lunatic, too fucking bad, you should have backed gun control.

I disagree with people who stand against gun control laws. I abhor how the NRA controls the discussion on gun control. Neither of those stances include a desire to see NRA supporters/executives to die in a mass-casualty shooting. And if it were to happen, I would not take joy in their deaths. I have no reason to celebrate such a thing.

>>416062

>I don't WANT anyone to be a victim of gun violence, but

That “but”, no matter what follows it, means you do want someone to be a victim of gun violence. (See also: “I’m not a racist, but…”) Next time, just say you want NRA supporters to die in a mass-casualty shooting. I will not respect your opinion, but I will at least respect your honesty.

>>416063

>mass shooter opens fire at a NRA convention

The initial shots would create so much confusion and fear that more casualties would come from the return fire and resulting collateral damage of “the good guys with guns” than would likely come from “the bad guy with a gun”.

>>416064
>If they “need” to die, it should be because they pose a direct, immediate, and serious threat to the safety of yourself or others. If you say a Nazi fuckhead “needs” to die only because of an expressed political belief—no matter how awful that belief—you are advocating for the murder of people with whom you disagree. And while I understand the idea of “they’d do it to you if they could”, that idea does not convince me to justify the murder of political extremists as “pre-emptive self-defense”. Richard Spencer is an awful human being whose beliefs deserve every ounce of mockery and spite that they receive; he still does not deserve to die only for what he believes.
Nazis deserve to die by dint of being Nazis. The end. There is no excuse for being a Nazi, and in being a Nazi you should effectively be an outlaw, unprotected by social mores or laws.
>That does not convince me that the people who died in Vegas had to die
Of course they didn't, however, those among them who helped create the situation by supporting the NRA deserve no sympathy if they did.
>I disagree with people who stand against gun control laws. I abhor how the NRA controls the discussion on gun control. Neither of those stances include a desire to see NRA supporters/executives to die in a mass-casualty shooting. And if it were to happen, I would not take joy in their deaths. I have no reason to celebrate such a thing.
That's because you don't really care about this country and will be forever unable to actually put forward what it takes to save it.
>That “but”, no matter what follows it, means you do want someone to be a victim of gun violence.
No, it means that he believes that evil people (which is what you are if you're an NRA supporter) should suffer the consequences of their evil actions, instead of real people.
>The initial shots would create so much confusion and fear that more casualties would come from the return fire and resulting collateral damage of “the good guys with guns” than would likely come from “the bad guy with a gun”.
They'd all be NRA supporters though. Every dead convention goer would be an improvement to America.

>>416065

>There is no excuse for being a Nazi, and in being a Nazi you should effectively be an outlaw, unprotected by social mores or laws.

I refuse to engage with the rest of your post based on this statement alone.

>>416066
Why do you love advocates of genocide stone? Hasn't anything about the last 2-3 years sunk in about the falsehood that is the neoliberal idea of absolute tolerance of even intolerance?

>>416067

I reject the premise that a person must be killed because they hold a specific political belief. Even if that belief is reprehensible and the person holding it would love to make it a reality, that alone does not—and will never—justify murder.

>>416059
>[people I don't like] actually need to die
You fascist.

Hooooooooboy, here we go!

The sandy hook truthers are starting in!

False flag operations, everywhere!

//youtube.com/watch?v=GPhKZpbbVqM
//youtube.com/watch?v=ZqRCKhJOKUU

The NRA is forcing random Americans to die every year. The sacrifices to the second amendment should be NRA members and children of NRA members.

If there HAS to be a sacrifice to the retarded second amendment, the sacrifice should consist of gun zealots only. It is only fair.

Tillerson is one of the most surprising players in the administration, being a by all appearances a scum bag choice by every metric he has done nothing but work tirelessly in the pursuit of peace much to his own chagrin as Trump backhands him at every turn.

>>416072

Neither a belief in the Second Amendment nor support for the NRA justifies the murder of someone who offers that support or holds that belief. If you can justify killing someone over their politics, you will have justified your own murder.

>>416074
Okay, see you are going for them wishing direct death, they aren't saying that.

They are saying that this situation is a direct result of those political ideologies and in the interest of karma these death should not befall those who oppose these increasingly foolish view.

It's the Spider-man paradox, if you permit a crime you have to deal with the consequence.

If you are going to let a mugger go, you can't blame anyone but yourself when your family gets mugged and someone you love dies as a direct result of your actions.

They aren't wishing for death, they see death as a natural consequence of looking at bullshit like bumper stocks being on the market as a device that has no other function than to kill large amounts of people despite opposing it.

Who do you want to see hurt, an innocent person or an accomplice to a criminal? We don't live in a world where both are going to be unscathed so most rational people say fuck the accomplice, he's an accomplice.

>>416075

Fair enough on that point, though I would still prefer we work toward a world where both will come out unscathed.

>>416076
Okay so why did it take literal days to pry that from you?

>>416078

The other posts were phrased in a way where they at least implied that murdering people over their political beliefs would be justified if even one of their beliefs were “bad”. If you want other people to pick up on the actual meaning of your posts, make the meaning as clear as possible.

>>416078
Because you weren't listening to each other.

>>416080

Also possible. I admit to being a bit bull-headed when I have a strong personal opinion about subjects such as this one.

WOW WAY TO FUCK UP ON CHIP GOP

Oh, insomnia—what you do to my sleep schedule, you make up for in neverending brain activity. Which leads me to a question related to the recent discussion in this thread: If a person votes for a politican who supports the NRA, but cast their vote for any other reason(s) besides the Second Amendment (e.g., abortion, economy, emails), is that voter’s death “deserved” if they die from gun violence?

>>416083
No, because you can support a politician while opposing their views on given subjects by writing them letters or otherwise contacting them. In fact you are SUPPOSED to do that.

>>416083
Anyone who votes for any of those reasons is by definition a delusional R-bot who believes Republican Reality and is thus in all likelihood pro-NRA.

HERE WE GO

Trump is pushing for investigations of the media.

>>416080
Welcome to +4/pol/

https://twitter.com/Walldo/status/916085532404236288

He is going to launch a pre-emptive military strike against North Korea, isn't he.

>>416090
No.

>>416090
I'm pretty sure he's just trying to sound tough and whip up the pundits.

If he's referring to something specific in the future and not just blustering, it might be decertifying the Iran deal or something to do with Afghanistan.