American Politics X: Is There A Reset Button Around Here?

[Vassenor]

What good does it do to elect liars who lie about their goals and beliefs?

Lying is different from tailoring your message. Clinton didn't do the latter and its part of why she lost.

So where are all the things Trump promised he'd do? Sounds like he was lying rather than tailoring.

[San Lumen]

No Im not. What good does saying things that turn off people do and you wind up losing? If Biden had done what some people here want making the same mistakes Clinton did Trump would have won a second term.

If you're omitting/deliberately hiding things you believe from your constituents, especially when those things will have an effect on your constituent's lives now that you wield the power to make laws that effect their lives, how is that not lying to your constituents?

For them to be informed voters and make informed decisions that have real effects on their lives, they should know that thing you're deliberately omitting for fears you'd lose if they knew about it. But hey, this advocating lying/omitting the truth thing you've got going on right now totally tracks with what you were saying about Cal Cunningham in the NC Senate race two years ago.

What Cunningham did had no business being public. If was running a campaign i'd fire any campaign staff that leaked something like that and say I don't care about this and neither should you. Its his private life.

Everyone knew JFK was having an affair with Marylin Monroe. No one cared.

[Kannap]

I'm going to wager a guess here that these are things that cops and departments already know they shouldn't be doing. Once again, police are largely above the law and largely aren't held accountable.



Sure, still not a form of defunding.



Eh, civilian review boards - as I've already said - can be a good idea if they're actually empowered to hold police accountable and as long as they're not the victims of harassment or instilled fear at the hands of the police department.

Nonetheless, defunding the police (of their money and specific duties police shouldn't be handling, and diverting those funds to organizations or agencies better trained and equipped for these duties; you seem to be omitting these steps) is a far better solution, easily.

Say that instead of a broad term defund the police.

That's what we've been saying all along, if you'd actually bothered to learn or read what the message means - because that's what you have to do to find out what a message means. "Defund the police" is a short way to say it but it's a meaningless statement by itself if you ignore the detailed explanation that is also accessible and published for you to read.

You're proposing replacing it with "reform the police," another meaningless statement unless it's backed by a detailed explanation of what it means.

[Grave_n_idle]

Is it, though?

If there's no requirements for entry? Sounds like it.

Does it, though? You appear to have forgotten a lot of details of what actually comprises a border.

[San Lumen]

Say that instead of a broad term defund the police.

That's what we've been saying all along, if you'd actually bothered to learn or read what the message means - because that's what you have to do to find out what a message means. "Defund the police" is a short way to say it but it's a meaningless statement by itself if you ignore the detailed explanation that is also accessible and published for you to read.

You're proposing replacing it with "reform the police," another meaningless statement unless it's backed by a detailed explanation of what it means.

and this is why Democrats lose. They don't know how to message.

[Kannap]

What good does it do to elect liars who lie about their goals and beliefs?

Lying is different from tailoring your message. Clinton didn't do the latter and its part of why she lost.

Would love to hear a detailed explanation of what you mean when you say "tailoring your message" then. Because it just sounds like you're advocating for lying, especially alongside The West Wing example you gave.

[Ifreann]

What good does it do to elect liars who lie about their goals and beliefs?

Lying is different from tailoring your message. Clinton didn't do the latter and its part of why she lost.

That's just a euphemism for lying. You think that people who want to defund the police should cover up their goals when running for office. You think they should deceive the electorate in order to get into power.

Politicians should be honest about what they want to do in office. The only way they should be "tailoring their message" is to make sure their real goals and beliefs are understood.

[San Lumen]

Lying is different from tailoring your message. Clinton didn't do the latter and its part of why she lost.

That's just a euphemism for lying. You think that people who want to defund the police should cover up their goals when running for office. You think they should deceive the electorate in order to get into power.

Politicians should be honest about what they want to do in office. The only way they should be "tailoring their message" is to make sure their real goals and beliefs are understood.

I said nothing about covering it up or deception. Explain it in a way that doesn't turn people off.

[The Jamesian Republic]

If you have to lie about your agenda then maybe you need to change it or just drop it.

[Thermodolia]

Likelihood of criminal charges against Trump rising, experts say

Good. He belongs behind bars.

He won’t because that would mean ever president from Biden onwards could be prosecuted and they won’t do that

[San Lumen]

Good. He belongs behind bars.

He won’t because that would mean ever president from Biden onwards could be prosecuted and they won’t do that

No it does not.

[Thermodolia]

Been looking at the NC congressional districts in NC since they've been solidified and damn, I'm in the safe Republican 8th District. Like, literally about a two minute drive from the 12th District though.

Guess I really need to get the ball rolling on moving south this year, like I hoped to.

Come to Arizona we got mountains, actual mountains not those east coast hills, and you could live in my district which is D+23

[Thermodolia]

Probably all the war crimes they did.

This is one of those terms people throw around and they don’t know what it means. What did Clinton, Bush Jr and Obama go that constitutes a war crime?

Obama ordered a US citizen dead without a fair trial all because he was considered a terrorist. Violating the constitution should have Obama in jail

[Ifreann]

That's just a euphemism for lying. You think that people who want to defund the police should cover up their goals when running for office. You think they should deceive the electorate in order to get into power.

Politicians should be honest about what they want to do in office. The only way they should be "tailoring their message" is to make sure their real goals and beliefs are understood.

I said nothing about covering it up or deception. Explain it in a way that doesn't turn people off.

You are saying that they should cover it up. That's exactly what you're saying. You keep saying that people who want to defund the police should stop saying that they want to defund the police. That means they have to cover it up and trick people into thinking they don't want to defund the police.

[San Lumen]

I said nothing about covering it up or deception. Explain it in a way that doesn't turn people off.

You are saying that they should cover it up. That's exactly what you're saying. You keep saying that people who want to defund the police should stop saying that they want to defund the police. That means they have to cover it up and trick people into thinking they don't want to defund the police.

You clearly don't understand the concept of messaging.

[Ifreann]

Probably all the war crimes they did.

This is one of those terms people throw around and they don’t know what it means. What did Clinton, Bush Jr and Obama go that constitutes a war crime?

The civilian targets they bombed, obviously.

[Kannap]

If you're omitting/deliberately hiding things you believe from your constituents, especially when those things will have an effect on your constituent's lives now that you wield the power to make laws that effect their lives, how is that not lying to your constituents?

For them to be informed voters and make informed decisions that have real effects on their lives, they should know that thing you're deliberately omitting for fears you'd lose if they knew about it. But hey, this advocating lying/omitting the truth thing you've got going on right now totally tracks with what you were saying about Cal Cunningham in the NC Senate race two years ago.

What Cunningham did had no business being public.

When you run for office, you risk parts of your life becoming public because you're putting yourself in the spotlight and trying to convince voters to vote for you. You're deliberately allowing eyes to be focused on you.

As for what we learned about Cunningham, I said it when it came out that he'd lose the election (to your insistence that he wouldn't because nobody would care) and I still maintain that I believe he could have won if it weren't for that. He was polling better than Tillis throughout the campaign season because North Carolinians hate Tillis.

If was running a campaign i'd fire any campaign staff that leaked something like that and say I don't care about this and neither should you. Its his private life.

Firing a whistleblower will extinguish the flames of a scandal, for sure dude.

Everyone knew JFK was having an affair with Marylin Monroe. No one cared.

Not sure why you're comparing something that happened in real time in front of our eyes in 2020 to a conspiracy theory about a President who died in 1963 and his alleged affair with a woman who died in 1962. Especially when you have the internet to debunk this conspiracy theory. At the time JFK was in running for President and in office, nobody "knew" that JFK was "having an affair" with Marilyn Monroe. The tabloids toyed with the idea a few times as rumors, but they're just the tabloids. From what I've read, we do know now that JFK loved Jackie but also enjoyed sleeping with other women, but what we know about that suggests he enjoyed encounters rather than affairs - but that's hindsight, people didn't know that in the 1950s.

The book "Marilyn" was published in 1973 - ten years after JFK's death and 11 years after Marilyn's - alleging they had an affair and was the first time the idea was really seriously proposed before the public eye and this is likely where the conspiracy theory originally gains its popularity. The author of this book would later admit he just wanted to include the name Kennedy because he knew it would cause sales to skyrocket. Some documents that allegedly proved the affair were found to be a hoax in 1997. So, at best, all we've got it a conspiracy theory that Kennedy and Monroe had some kind of affair, there's no genuinely proof of it and it certainly wasn't an "everybody knew ... no one cared" situation.

Not to delve into the realm of alternate history - which a statement following this disclaimer is - but if people knew about JFK sleeping around when he was running for President, it probably would've cost him the election. Likewise, if Bill Clinton's scandal with Monica Lewinsky was publicly brought to light during his first term instead of his second, he might not have won re-election.

You may not personally care if people cheat on and hurt their partners, but it fortunately seems to be a part of some common morality that cheating on - and by extension - hurting your partner is wrong. Understandably, it's a violation of trust and calls into question whether or not voters can trust you to be honest (or at least maintain the illusion of honesty, I don't expect any politicians are honest) when you're holding an office that gives you power to make decisions and pass laws about their lives.

[Untecna]

You are saying that they should cover it up. That's exactly what you're saying. You keep saying that people who want to defund the police should stop saying that they want to defund the police. That means they have to cover it up and trick people into thinking they don't want to defund the police.

You clearly don't understand the concept of messaging.

No, Lumen, I think its you who doesn't understand.

Its not surprising considering your lack of knowledge in terms of defining words like "endemic".

[Thermodolia]

Nah, we don't need the GOP or a far-right party in power. The Democrats already do well as a conservative party, give me an actual leftist party to challenge them and bring about some of the changes we've seen in other "first world" developed countries.

There is something called a primary. You can vote for people who are more in line with your views.

No it won’t. A primary doesn’t make the democrats magically socialist, no matter how hard the right screams that they are

[Free Algerstonia]

You clearly don't understand the concept of messaging.

No, Lumen, I think its you who doesn't understand.

Its not surprising considering your lack of knowledge in terms of defining words like "endemic".

endemic is when pandemic end haha get it (pun intended) (please clap)

[Kannap]

That's what we've been saying all along, if you'd actually bothered to learn or read what the message means - because that's what you have to do to find out what a message means. "Defund the police" is a short way to say it but it's a meaningless statement by itself if you ignore the detailed explanation that is also accessible and published for you to read.

You're proposing replacing it with "reform the police," another meaningless statement unless it's backed by a detailed explanation of what it means.

and this is why Democrats lose. They don't know how to message.

Joseph "shoot em in the legs" Biden and Nancy "thanks George Floyd for sacrificing your life" Pelosi are great examples of that. Absolutely shitty, vile things to say in the face of genuine concerns about police brutality and what our leaders intend to do to solve it. Which, of course, seems to be nothing. They're throwing more money at the police to pay them more and buy them better equipment, they don't care about the victims of police brutality.

[Ifreann]

You are saying that they should cover it up. That's exactly what you're saying. You keep saying that people who want to defund the police should stop saying that they want to defund the police. That means they have to cover it up and trick people into thinking they don't want to defund the police.

You clearly don't understand the concept of messaging.

I understand it perfectly well, that's why it's so easy to see through your terrible lies. You want dirty politics, you want Democrats to lie their way into power, you want them to say anything to win, but when Republicans do the same thing you whine that they won't just admit their real beliefs. Pure partisanship.

[Untecna]

No, Lumen, I think its you who doesn't understand.

Its not surprising considering your lack of knowledge in terms of defining words like "endemic".

endemic is when pandemic end haha get it (pun intended) (please clap)

I'm more inclined to facepalm.

[Thermodolia]

or you could simply say reform the police as its basically the same thing and would play better.

You could simply lie, but that would make you a liar.

House of Cards showed the same thing to a degree and that wasn't a fantasy. It was a warning.

House of Cards was fictional. It was a fictional story about a fictional politician. Jesus fucking Christ.

But the Character was played by a real fucking bastard

[Kannap]

Been looking at the NC congressional districts in NC since they've been solidified and damn, I'm in the safe Republican 8th District. Like, literally about a two minute drive from the 12th District though.

Guess I really need to get the ball rolling on moving south this year, like I hoped to.

Come to Arizona we got mountains, actual mountains not those east coast hills, and you could live in my district which is D+23

If I manage to move just a few miles south, I could be in a D+30 district. Been wanting to move to Charlotte for a little bit now. Rent is the hard part.