logo Sign In

Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo — Page 24

This topic has been locked by a moderator.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Tyrphanax said:

I feel like all this irrational hate for Obama is pretty funny. I mean, at worst his policies did nothing. The country is still here. The economy is still here. We didn’t really start any new wars or have any major attacks on our soil. Our guns didn’t get grabbed. None of us got droned. I’d argue that we’re actually somewhat better off now than we were eight years ago, but for the sake of this post lets pretend he was a total lame duck.

And yet people act like we’re coming out of some sort of horrible medieval dark age. Like Obama was actively standing on their chest for eight years. Hilarious.

Ironically everything people feared would happen under Obama is going to happen under Trump. I am just not looking forward the inauguration.

At least the conservatives can gloat over the next four years how they won the culture wars against the PC SJW left.

Author
Time


The advanced aging characteristic of this office leads me to question the validity of the “figurehead” claim. Certainly the power of the presidency has expanded and shrunk in different ways over the decades, but I highly doubt the power of the office is as frivolous as it was in, say, the majority of the 19th century.

Author
Time

Handman said:

The advanced aging characteristic of this office leads

The fact is that we don’t know if Obama would have aged the same way without being US (ie World) president. 8 years is quite a long time, everybody ages… except Keanu Reeves.

Author
Time

I believe there are other “before and after” pics of previous presidents to back that up. And anyone who doesn’t think it’s a stressful job that takes a physical toll is fooling themselves.

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

Well, I don’t mind fooling myself on such an inoffensive “president aging process” issue.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

generalfrevious said:

ferris209 said:

NYT is unreliable.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/19/new-york-times-falsely-states-rick-perry-didnt-know-what-the-department-of-energy-does/

This is why the right always wins.

Eh, it’s not winning, it’s all just taking one news institution’s word over another for no other reason than they cater to your personal political views. Both sides are guilty and buy right into the line that they’re being sold.

As a result, media becomes more and more politically polarized because real objective news journalism doesn’t sell like sensationalized attack “news,” and as a result of that, our political parties become more and more polarized, no compromises are reached (why would you compromise with someone who is obviously wrong and an idiot, after all), and America suffers.

Nobody “wins” in this equation, except for the people making money off of the people who blindly follow the narrative they offer on their “news outlet.” Until news stops being a business focused around driving clicks so they can sell ad space, this decline will continue. Unfortunately, that’s up to the people to not blindly buy what they’re being sold, and since people don’t like to think for themselves, who knows when things will change.

Keep Circulating the Tapes.

END OF LINE

(It hasn’t happened yet)

Author
Time

Warbler said:

I mean seriously, Obama brought more wars than W. Bush???

He didn’t end any of them effectively as he promised. There was certainly no less war under Obama than G. W. Bush

The Person in Question

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Warbler said:

Bingowings said:

SilverWook said:

MalàStrana said:

I know it’s going to be historic. The man is funny AND seems to be efficient. Obama had good speeches but without intelligent actions speeches are worthless, and so are Obama’s 8 years: worthless. He only brought more wars than Bush and let ISIS spread. So yeah, thanks Obama, really… won’t miss you…

Do you complain about your own country’s leaders this much?

I do.
The guy is right.
He was elected as some kind of modern messiah figure and carried on bombing the middle east and torturing people. He is was as effective as a leader as Bush (as in he was a figure head with very little real influence).
David Cameron however had real power. He assumed he would win Brexit and silence the eurosceptics in his party for a generation and lost the UK probably trillions. Bush and Obama are fake news.
Cameron is a really evil dick and Theresa May is the g-spot of evil.

How do you come to the conclusion that W. Bush and Obama were just figure heads with real influence while David Cameron had real power??? Also if W. Bush and Obama were just figureheads, just you do you think was really in charge? Congress?

https://youtu.be/OyBNmecVtdU

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

Warbler said:

I mean seriously, Obama brought more wars than W. Bush???

He didn’t end any of them effectively as he promised. There was certainly no less war under Obama than G. W. Bush

I’ll admit I haven’t paid close to attention to foreign affairs, but it seems like Obama was in a no-win situation, at least in Afghanistan and Iraq. He got out too quickly and too slowly at the same time, depending on who you’re talking to.

Author
Time

Tyrphanax said:

generalfrevious said:

ferris209 said:

NYT is unreliable.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/01/19/new-york-times-falsely-states-rick-perry-didnt-know-what-the-department-of-energy-does/

This is why the right always wins.

Eh, it’s not winning, it’s all just taking one news institution’s word over another for no other reason than they cater to your personal political views. Both sides are guilty and buy right into the line that they’re being sold.

As a result, media becomes more and more politically polarized because real objective news journalism doesn’t sell like sensationalized attack “news,” and as a result of that, our political parties become more and more polarized, no compromises are reached (why would you compromise with someone who is obviously wrong and an idiot, after all), and America suffers.

Nobody “wins” in this equation, except for the people making money off of the people who blindly follow the narrative they offer on their “news outlet.” Until news stops being a business focused around driving clicks so they can sell ad space, this decline will continue. Unfortunately, that’s up to the people to not blindly buy what they’re being sold, and since people don’t like to think for themselves, who knows when things will change.

I understand your argument, but I believe the right is going to come out as the victor in this polarized environment. They control all three branches of the federal government now, so they are in control of how our lives will be run in the next four years.

Even though Trump is coming into office with little popularity, the left-leaning media has even less popularity than he does. Click on any youtube video critical about institutional racism or sexism, and it will have a ton of dislikes automatically. I remember an online ad featuring a transgender kid and it has 25,000 dislikes vs. about 300 likes. The most hated channels on that site are MTV news and Feminist Frequency, while the most popular channels are the likes of Sargon Of Akkad and TheAmazingAtheist, which spend most of their time “debunking” leftist opinions. Anyone who doesn’t harbor a far-right viewpoint online is labeled a Marxist who wants to send everyone into reeducation camps. It’s far more socially acceptable to be on the right on social media rather than on the left.

Author
Time

Bingowings said:

SilverWook said:

MalàStrana said:

I know it’s going to be historic. The man is funny AND seems to be efficient. Obama had good speeches but without intelligent actions speeches are worthless, and so are Obama’s 8 years: worthless. He only brought more wars than Bush and let ISIS spread. So yeah, thanks Obama, really… won’t miss you…

Do you complain about your own country’s leaders this much?

I do.
The guy is right.
He was elected as some kind of modern messiah figure and carried on bombing the middle east and torturing people. He is was as effective as a leader as Bush (as in he was a figure head with very little real influence).
David Cameron however had real power. He assumed he would win Brexit and silence the eurosceptics in his party for a generation and lost the UK probably trillions. Bush and Obama are fake news.
Cameron is a really evil dick and Theresa May is the g-spot of evil.

I agree with all you’ve said here.

Author
Time

I want to believe this is fake news but who the fuck knows.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-military-equipment-inauguration_us_58811f4ae4b096b4a23091f7

The military “may come marching down Pennsylvania Avenue,” Trump told the Washington Post in an interview published Wednesday. “That military may be flying over New York City and Washington, D.C., for parades. I mean, we’re going to be showing our military.”

Trump spoke about his vision of military parades in vague terms, suggesting it was something he might oversee in the future. But according to several sources involved in his inaugural preparations, Trump has endeavored to ensure that his first day as commander-in-chief is marked by an unusual display of heavy military equipment.

During the preparation for Friday’s transfer-of-power, a member of Trump’s transition team floated the idea of including tanks and missile launchers in the inaugural parade, a source involved in inaugural planning told The Huffington Post. “They were legit thinking Red Square/North Korea-style parade,” the source said, referring to massive military parades in Moscow and Pyongyang, typically seen as an aggressive display of muscle-flexing.

Author
Time

generalfrevious said:
I understand your argument, but I believe the right is going to come out as the victor in this polarized environment. They control all three branches of the federal government now, so they are in control of how our lives will be run in the next four years.

Don’t forget about midterms.

Author
Time

Yeah but Dems suck at midterms.