Trump MAGAThread XII: A Tarriff-ic Thread!

[Tobleste]

So, I assume it’s just me, but I’m actually fckin sick of people being like “trump is bigot and evil” because, to me, I think that his corruption and greed is much more damning than him being mean and offensive.

True but the first two make him a worse person. Also he makes some small effort to hide the second two. When it comes to his bigotry, he's loud and proud.

[Uxupox]

They just see the world in a fundamentally different way than those that didn't. Such is the psychology of partisanship and tribal attitudes.

Not at all.

That's unlike what media propagates. You see these types of people on any type of political or social spectrum which technically be considered the extreme vocal minority making their efforts known. The media rapidly conflates this and because of this they are mistaken to be the actual voice of their supposed "side".

[Valrifell]

Not at all.

That's unlike what media propagates. You see these types of people on any type of political or social spectrum which technically be considered the extreme vocal minority making their efforts known. The media rapidly conflates this and because of this they are mistaken to be the actual voice of their supposed "side".

It's because loud people who stand for something with vigor and passion tend to get news coverage. Consequently, people on the fringes of politics tend to be more passionate about their beliefs.

[Geneviev]

Not at all.

That's unlike what media propagates. You see these types of people on any type of political or social spectrum which technically be considered the extreme vocal minority making their efforts known. The media rapidly conflates this and because of this they are mistaken to be the actual voice of their supposed "side".

In the end, most every news source is looking to get money. That means they have to be interesting. So they show the more insane people from each side.

[Cannot think of a name]

So, I assume it’s just me,

Nah, the internet is full of people who hipster up their opinions.

but I’m actually fckin sick of people being like “trump is bigot and evil” because, to me, I think that his corruption and greed is much more damning than him being mean and offensive.

I’m capable of disliking people for a number of reasons.

[The Flutterlands]

Probably his nurses would.

No, not at all. I don't consider myself a year ago stupid. Most people who support President Trump are just the same as people who don't.

We'll agree to disagree. Anyone who supports that man as president is either incredibly uninformed, unintelligent or immoral. No one can support someone like that without having a fundamentally different sense of right and wrong to what is considered normal in a developed society. That will probably be seen as bigoted by trump supporters but that doesn't make it untrue and I'm happy to be intolerant of intolerance.

You can say that about the entire Republican Party at least on a national level and in a number of states. No one can support a party like that without having a fundamentally different sense of right and wrong to what is considered normal in a developed society either. I myself am sick of the tolerating the intolerable as well.

[Valrifell]

So, I assume it’s just me,

Nah, the internet is full of people who hipster up their opinions.

but I’m actually fckin sick of people being like “trump is bigot and evil” because, to me, I think that his corruption and greed is much more damning than him being mean and offensive.

I’m capable of disliking people for a number of reasons.

Get out of here with your non-binary worldview! There is no place for nuance in politics.

[West Leas Oros]

So, I assume it’s just me,

Nah, the internet is full of people who hipster up their opinions.

but I’m actually fckin sick of people being like “trump is bigot and evil” because, to me, I think that his corruption and greed is much more damning than him being mean and offensive.

I’m capable of disliking people for a number of reasons.

1. No need to be an ass about it
2. So am I, but I think the latter is more important to me

[West Leas Oros]

So, I assume it’s just me, but I’m actually fckin sick of people being like “trump is bigot and evil” because, to me, I think that his corruption and greed is much more damning than him being mean and offensive.

True but the first two make him a worse person. Also he makes some small effort to hide the second two. When it comes to his bigotry, he's loud and proud.

1. The latter two seem to me as more worse than the former to me
2. He openly said he was a greedy person. Pretty loud about that too.

[Salandriagado]

No it isn't. Not in the fucking slightest. The specific claim made is that there was an offence committed that the FBI should have investigated. That claim was a lie, and my post gives precisely the reason that it's a lie. It's exactly the opposite of a cop-out: it's a direct refutation of the central point.

Also, the whole idea of having a primary is silly and only serves to preserve the shitshow that is two-party politics: the parties should just choose their damned candidates and get on with the real elections.

Wouldn’t abolishing primaries protect the two party system more than keeping them would?

Nope: with the current system, if your don't agree with either of the main parties, the most effective way to get into power is to join one of them and attempt to win a primary. Without the primary system, the most effective way to get into power would be to start a third party.

[Salandriagado]

No it isn't. Not in the fucking slightest. The specific claim made is that there was an offence committed that the FBI should have investigated. That claim was a lie, and my post gives precisely the reason that it's a lie. It's exactly the opposite of a cop-out: it's a direct refutation of the central point.

Also, the whole idea of having a primary is silly and only serves to preserve the shitshow that is two-party politics: the parties should just choose their damned candidates and get on with the real elections.

You think Obama was a bad choice?

Oh look, a non-sequitur.

[Hittanryan]

Wouldn’t abolishing primaries protect the two party system more than keeping them would?

Nope: with the current system, if your don't agree with either of the main parties, the most effective way to get into power is to join one of them and attempt to win a primary. Without the primary system, the most effective way to get into power would be to start a third party.

As long as we have FPTP elections, we will have a two party system. It's inevitable. Third parties will only ever be spoilers. I don't like it, but math is a harsh mistress.

[Salandriagado]

Nope: with the current system, if your don't agree with either of the main parties, the most effective way to get into power is to join one of them and attempt to win a primary. Without the primary system, the most effective way to get into power would be to start a third party.

As long as we have FPTP elections, we will have a two party system. It's inevitable. Third parties will only ever be spoilers. I don't like it, but math is a harsh mistress.

*Looks at Europe*

You were saying?

[Everhall]

Wouldn’t abolishing primaries protect the two party system more than keeping them would?

Nope: with the current system, if your don't agree with either of the main parties, the most effective way to get into power is to join one of them and attempt to win a primary. Without the primary system, the most effective way to get into power would be to start a third party.

And yet, before we even had primaries we still had a two party system

+ if you're gonna mention Europe, name the specific country you're talking about.

[Hittanryan]

As long as we have FPTP elections, we will have a two party system. It's inevitable. Third parties will only ever be spoilers. I don't like it, but math is a harsh mistress.

*Looks at Europe*

You were saying?

...what country in Europe?

[Salandriagado]

Nope: with the current system, if your don't agree with either of the main parties, the most effective way to get into power is to join one of them and attempt to win a primary. Without the primary system, the most effective way to get into power would be to start a third party.

And yet, before we even had primaries we still had a two party system

+ if you're gonna mention Europe, name the specific country you're talking about.

Most of them? Let's start with France.

[Hittanryan]

And yet, before we even had primaries we still had a two party system

+ if you're gonna mention Europe, name the specific country you're talking about.

Most of them? Let's start with France.

I'm confused. Are you saying that every other electoral system also always results in a two party system? Are you arguing in favor of FPTP? What is your point here?

[Salandriagado]

Most of them? Let's start with France.

I'm confused. Are you saying that every other electoral system also always results in a two party system? Are you arguing in favor of FPTP? What is your point here?

Try reading my posts. Notice that France has an essentially FPTP system, and significantly more than two parties represented in it. Ditto the UK. My point has been explicitly stated already.

[Petrasylvania]

Maine is ditching FPTP in favor of Ranked Choice.

[Vassenor]

So it seems that the death toll on PR from Hurricane Maria could be over 4,600 people.

So how is the rebuilding going?

[Hittanryan]

I'm confused. Are you saying that every other electoral system also always results in a two party system? Are you arguing in favor of FPTP? What is your point here?

Try reading my posts. Notice that France has an essentially FPTP system, and significantly more than two parties represented in it. Ditto the UK. My point has been explicitly stated already.

Apologies, browsing casually on a phone during a break.

When it comes to the legislature, I don't think France's two-round system can really be considered the exact same as the US's single-member district FPTP elections.

[Salandriagado]

Try reading my posts. Notice that France has an essentially FPTP system, and significantly more than two parties represented in it. Ditto the UK. My point has been explicitly stated already.

Apologies, browsing casually on a phone during a break.

When it comes to the legislature, I don't think France's two-round system can really be considered the exact same as the US's single-member district FPTP elections.

No, but it's even more strongly inclined towards a two-party system. If you prefer a pure example, try Scotland.

[The Flutterlands]

Also, if America had more than two parties, wouldn't they coalesce into factions of regions considering the cultural and political differences?

[Uxupox]

So it seems that the death toll on PR from Hurricane Maria could be over 4,600 people.

So how is the rebuilding going?

pretty good considering i have electricity.

[Hittanryan]

Apologies, browsing casually on a phone during a break.

When it comes to the legislature, I don't think France's two-round system can really be considered the exact same as the US's single-member district FPTP elections.

No, but it's even more strongly inclined towards a two-party system. If you prefer a pure example, try Scotland.

In theory the two round system isn't automatically predisposed to a two party system. If one or both of the two largest parties put up unpopular candidates, and one of them didn't make it to the second round, everyone else could pool their votes in a third party candidate. In practice I'm sure it doesn't work out ideally. It's likely at the mercy of voter turnout and ideological voters who refuse to vote in the second round.

In a straight FPTP single member district election, unless a third party outright displaces one of the two majors, they can only be a spoiler.