Encyclopaedia Metallum: The Metal Archives

Message board

* FAQ    * Search   * Register   * Login 



Reply to topic
Author Message Previous topic | Next topic
Napero
GedankenPanzer

Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 4:16 pm
Posts: 8638
Location: Finland
PostPosted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 6:06 pm 
 

severzhavnost wrote:
That would be true... if it were even remotely practical to attempt to reduce GHG's by making impositions on individuals' per capita consumption and pollution. But it isn't; which is why all efforts toward this goal target gross national emission totals. And by that metric, China's 9700 tons are worse than the USA's 6700 tons.

In 2013, the per capita CO2 emissions of the USA and China were 16.4 tons 7.6 tons, respectively. In your logic, there's no difference, and every US citizen is allowed to pollute twice as much as a Chinese person, because reasons. I call that objective bullshit.

If that was the case, every citizen of Andorra, for example, could spew 65 000 tons of CO2 into the atmosphere, and it would be OK. I don't think so, I'd say our atmosphere and planet belong equally much to each and every person on Earth. No special treatment for people with a US passport, sorry.
_________________
Chest wounds suck (when properly inflicted).
-Butch-

Top
 Profile  
severzhavnost
Veteran

Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008 10:16 pm
Posts: 2542
Location: Ottawa
PostPosted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 6:47 pm 
 

I don't suggest any special treatment for any country. Western nations have buggered up our environmental conditions, and we should commit to tackling those problems. Developing nations are in the process of similarly ruining their environmental conditions, and they should commit to tackling those problems. It's your side who are suggesting special treatment - by laying the blame and cost of third world ecological collapses at our shoes instead of their own. (Note that this does not preclude cooperation between the global North and South. It's just recognizing that the issue doesn't need to be approached in such a death-to-western-capitalism way.)

Focusing on per capita emissions, and complaining that "every US citizen is allowed to pollute twice as much as a Chinese person", is chasing a phantom equality which can never be realized. The only way to even try, would be through a truly dreadful, super-invasive micromanagement of people's personal lives. I don't think you want that?
_________________
rannvroeleirezh ha rakvarn komzont brezhoneg

Top
 Profile  
Sepulchrave
Metalhead

Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2015 7:29 pm
Posts: 1660
Location: Croatia
PostPosted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 7:05 pm 
 

henkkjelle wrote:
And even if that were all to be true, the US would still have been better off with Hillary because Trump=dumb authoritarian narcissist and Hillary=smart practical lady with a lifetime of political experience. Sometimes choices are really simple. And I'm pretty certain this was one of them.


Well... no. There are many people who recognised the flaws in the austerity policies under previous presidents (which Hillary would have continued) and Trump could have been seen, at the time of the elections, as a game changer. For some this was a crucial issue.

Youtube: show


This is one leftist, simplified perspective of why the choice between Hillary and Trump wasn't so simple, although I nonetheless disagreed with him strongly back then, and even he changed his opinion eventually.
_________________
Ку.

Top
 Profile  
Napero
GedankenPanzer

Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2005 4:16 pm
Posts: 8638
Location: Finland
PostPosted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 7:18 pm 
 

severzhavnost wrote:
I don't suggest any special treatment for any country. Western nations have buggered up our environmental conditions, and we should commit to tackling those problems. Developing nations are in the process of similarly ruining their environmental conditions, and they should commit to tackling those problems. It's your side who are suggesting special treatment - by laying the blame and cost of third world ecological collapses at our shoes instead of their own. (Note that this does not preclude cooperation between the global North and South. It's just recognizing that the issue doesn't need to be approached in such a death-to-western-capitalism way.)

Where have I said anything to the effect of "death to western capitalism"? Right, nowhere. My point is that is our planet is a finite resource, the rights to spoiling it should be equal. And at the moment, even with the manufacturing jobs being moved to China by Trump & Al, the Chinese still only cause half the CO2 emissions per capita. You're being a bit sensitive about this, and the fact remains that the US is VERY inefficient with its CO2. If you don't even manufacture anything, and your main population centers are largely concentrated on areas with little need for heating most of the year, and you still have the highest emissions in the world, you're obviously doing something wrong, or wasting a finite resource.

severzhavnost wrote:
Focusing on per capita emissions, and complaining that "every US citizen is allowed to pollute twice as much as a Chinese person", is chasing a phantom equality which can never be realized. The only way to even try, would be through a truly dreadful, super-invasive micromanagement of people's personal lives. I don't think you want that?

Take a look at where CO2 emissions come from, and think for a while. There's quite a bit of CO2 that can be cut without micromanaging. Supporting rail instead of air travel, giving a bit of financial help to renewable energy forms, making decisions that support people getting fuel efficient/electric cars, designing cities with sensible commuting (a long term goal, sure, but one that should be started now), turning off the silly lights in Las Vegas, and giving tax cuts to, say, highly localized biomass/heat pump/solar solutions of individual households are all things that can have a huge impact, and in no way limit anyone's personal freedom. Unlike an orange clown yammering about "bringing back coal" without any basis in technical or economical reality.

I work on a project that will turn renewable electricity into number crunching by up to 200 000 servers, and then use a bit more of that same renewable energy to turn almost all of the energy-turned-into-waste-heat into a useful district heating heat. I live in a city of 325 000 people, and that thing alone can provide 40% of the city's summertime heating needs (mostly used for hot water during the summer months) without any fossil fuels. I'd say that's a bloody fine example of doing the right thing to tackle the CO2 problem, and one that infringes in no way on anyone's rights.

"Freedom" is not the same as being allowed to spoil the environment with a gas guzzler and eat endangered species. Unless if you ask Ted Nugent, of course. It's fairly easy to be sensible on a much higher level than an individual person, and that's something the USA nowadays fails in big time.
_________________
Chest wounds suck (when properly inflicted).
-Butch-

Top
 Profile  
henkkjelle
Veteran

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 3:54 pm
Posts: 3912
Location: Netherlands
PostPosted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 7:31 pm 
 

Sepulchrave wrote:
henkkjelle wrote:
And even if that were all to be true, the US would still have been better off with Hillary because Trump=dumb authoritarian narcissist and Hillary=smart practical lady with a lifetime of political experience. Sometimes choices are really simple. And I'm pretty certain this was one of them.


Well... no. There are many people who recognised the flaws in the austerity policies under previous presidents (which Hillary would have continued) and Trump could have been seen, at the time of the elections, as a game changer. For some this was a crucial issue.

Youtube: show


This is one leftist, simplified perspective of why the choice between Hillary and Trump wasn't so simple, although I nonetheless disagreed with him strongly back then, and even he changed his opinion eventually.


Trump could have been seen as a game changer if you put on the biggest pair of rose-tinted shutter shades. At the time of the elections Trump's ineptitude was more than clear. Even the idea of him shaking up the establishment or "draining the swamp" was wishful thinking. Now if people would have realized this it would have been a very easy choice: Hillary. They obviously did not realize this in time. But that does not make it a less simple choice.

Top
 Profile  
Sepulchrave
Metalhead

Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2015 7:29 pm
Posts: 1660
Location: Croatia
PostPosted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 8:02 pm 
 

henkkjelle wrote:
Sepulchrave wrote:
Well... no. There are many people who recognised the flaws in the austerity policies under previous presidents (which Hillary would have continued) and Trump could have been seen, at the time of the elections, as a game changer. For some this was a crucial issue.

Youtube: show


This is one leftist, simplified perspective of why the choice between Hillary and Trump wasn't so simple, although I nonetheless disagreed with him strongly back then, and even he changed his opinion eventually.


Trump could have been seen as a game changer if you put on the biggest pair of rose-tinted shutter shades. At the time of the elections Trump's ineptitude was more than clear. Even the idea of him shaking up the establishment or "draining the swamp" was wishful thinking. Now if people would have realized this it would have been a very easy choice: Hillary. They obviously did not realize this in time. But that does not make it a less simple choice.


No, his ineptitude to shake up the establishment wouldn't have been obvious without rose-tinted shutter shades or whatever. If you're a desperate, rural worker in a failing coal town in America, you in no way would want someone who wishes to continue an economic policy that fucks over working people and doesn't hide it as president (like Hillary) over a president who promises some kind of prosperity to the white working class (like Trump). If you look at Poland's current parliament, which is dominated by the populist right Law and Justice party, you'll see their anti-austerity economic measures were surprisingly successful - the poverty rate has declined, minimum wage increased, etc. The Front National in France is also similarly anti-austerity. So, at the time of the election, it wouldn't have been far-fetched to say Trump may have benefitted many financially. Now, of course, we can see those were just BS promises, as Morrigan kindly pointed out here:

Morrigan wrote:
Soooo back on topic... here's Donald "doing a great job" Trump's great budget plan:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/20 ... error.html

Quote:
One of the ways Donald Trump’s budget claims to balance the budget over a decade, without cutting defense or retirement spending, is to assume a $2 trillion increase in revenue through economic growth. This is the magic of the still-to-be-designed Trump tax cuts. But wait — if you recall, the magic of the Trump tax cuts is also supposed to pay for the Trump tax cuts. So the $2 trillion is a double-counting error.

Quote:
But then the budget assumes $2 trillion in higher revenue from growth in order to achieve balance after ten years. So the $2 trillion from higher growth is a double-count. It pays for the Trump cuts, and then it pays again for balancing the budget. Or, alternatively, Trump could be assuming that his tax cuts will not only pay for themselves but generate $2 trillion in higher revenue. But Trump has not claimed his tax cuts will recoup more than 100 percent of their lost revenue, so it’s simply an embarrassing mistake.

Quote:
Asked about this absurd mistake, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin’s explanation does not inspire a great deal of confidence:
[ https://twitter.com/davidmwessel/status ... 1795280896 ]
This is apparently the best defense they could come up with: Eh, we’ll fix it later. It’s only the budget for the federal government of the United States of America.

:durr:

Image

----------

Oh yeah, remember those jobs Trump is supposed to save? Those Carrier jobs? Those Ohio coal jobs? Yeah, about that... #somuchwinning
_________________
Ку.


Last edited by Sepulchrave on Sat Jun 03, 2017 8:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top
 Profile  
severzhavnost
Veteran

Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008 10:16 pm
Posts: 2542
Location: Ottawa
PostPosted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 8:03 pm 
 

Napero, I apologize. I unfairly lumped you in with crazy-ass anti-Western eco-radicals; when what you actually support is sensible - and most importantly, voluntary - lifestyle changes that would indeed be very helpful. Best of luck with heating your city!
_________________
rannvroeleirezh ha rakvarn komzont brezhoneg

Top
 Profile  
henkkjelle
Veteran

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 3:54 pm
Posts: 3912
Location: Netherlands
PostPosted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 8:29 pm 
 

@Sepulchrave

I get all that. A desperate rural worker would have had reason to not vote for Hillary. What I do not get is how anyone could have seen Trump (of all people) as being concerned with the plight of the common man. Maybe I'm underestimating the genuine desperation amongst a big portion of the American working class though.

Top
 Profile  
Morrigan
Crone of War

Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2002 7:27 am
Posts: 9806
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 8:37 pm 
 

Sepulchrave wrote:
No, his ineptitude to shake up the establishment wouldn't have been obvious without rose-tinted shutter shades or whatever. If you're a desperate, rural worker in a failing coal town in America, you in no way would want someone who wishes to continue an economic policy that fucks over working people and doesn't hide it as president (like Hillary) over a president who promises some kind of prosperity to the white working class (like Trump).

Except... no.

Because only a special, particular brand of stupid would think that a NYC billionaire living in a tower literally made of gold with his name on it, who repeatedly screwed over his own employees and contractors, would give a flying FUCK about desperate rural workers.
Moreover, it is completely factually incorrect that Hillary's policies would fuck over working people (here were her plans for handling coal jobs losses, did anyone care? as senator she co-sponsored a coalition to help manufacturing jobs with... Lindsey Graham of all people, did anyone remember that? hmmm guess not, too busy talking about emails), and it is also incorrect that she "doesn't hide it", because all her career as senator has been about pushing bills and policies that benefit workers, poor families, women, and sick kids:
https://www.congress.gov/member/hillary ... C001041?q={%22sponsorship%22:%22sponsored%22}
(Edit: link parsing is fucked because of the { } symbols, just copy paste or click this tinyurl if very lazy)
This notion that she's worked to fuck over poor workers is not based on reality, but rather, decades-old propaganda/GOP smear machine (and probably misogyny, it's common that powerful women get demonized like that after all).

As for rural workers, well... surveys have also repeatedly shown that the primary concerns of Clinton-voting people in the Rust belt were the economy and jobs, and the primary concerns of Trump-voting people in the same places were... immigration and terrorism.

Yeah, turns out it was really just racism all along. Oops.

Quote:
So, at the time of the election, it wouldn't have been far-fetched to say Trump may have benefitted many financially. Now, of course, we can see those were just BS promises, as Morrigan kindly pointed out here:

You might want to also kindly point out that I've also been saying since day 1 that it was going to be BS and anyone with a single brain cell should have known that? And that even if he had kept some of his promises, it still would have been a disastrous presidencies for a mile-long list of other reasons? Yeah...

henkkjelle wrote:
@Sepulchrave

I get all that. A desperate rural worker would have had reason to not vote for Hillary. What I do not get is how anyone could have seen Trump (of all people) as being concerned with the plight of the common man. Maybe I'm underestimating the genuine desperation amongst a big portion of the American working class though.

A desperate rural worker has no reason to vote Republican. GOP policies continue to screw them over and over and over. Democrats have done plenty of stupid things, but pretty much every time a bill is passed that would help these people, it comes from them. But uneducated people continue to vote against their own interests. Just look at the people of Beatyville, KY, the poorest white town in America, who, despite receiving tons of government aid since LBJ, continue to heap scorn on the very idea of welfare, and continue to support slimey fucks like Mitch McConnell who continues to screw them over and over (and don't forget blaming Obama for something that started to happen in the 60's).
_________________
Von Cichlid wrote:
I work with plenty of Oriental and Indian persons and we get along pretty good, and some females as well.

Markeri, in 2013 wrote:
a fairly agreed upon date [of the beginning of metal] is 1969. Metal is almost 25 years old

Top
 Profile  
BastardHead
Worse than the PMRC

Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2005 7:53 pm
Posts: 9248
Location: St. Charles, Illinois
PostPosted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 8:58 pm 
 

Morri beat me to pretty much everything I was going to say (right down to the fact that he lived in a literal Supervillian lair with his own name plastered on the front while he shat in an actual, for real, solid gold toilet), but it really does need to be reiterated. Trump was not ever going to truly do any good for the poor rural areas, he was just smart enough to actually go there and say what the people wanted to hear, while Hillary ran a comparatively lazy campaign because she (rightfully) assumed she was running against a total joke and (wrongfully) assumed the country would never be so fucking retarded as to actually vote him in. The whole "he's gonna shake up the system!" excuse was invoked out of either sheer ignorance or a poor excuse to mask whatever socially unacceptable things they thought behind closed doors. Saying the government sucks so you're going to vote for a guy who has precisely zero political experience is like saying your mechanic has been overcharging you and doing crappy repairs so you're going to pay your hair stylist to fix your transmission. Maybe Trump can give me the best haircut I've ever had but he certainly doesn't know the first fucking thing about fixing a car. In a perfect world, that first debate would have consisted entirely of Hillary asking him "How does a bill get passed?" before doing the DX "Suck It" gesture and moonwalking offstage.

It's worth pointing out that Trump also got a ton of support from the middle class, not just dust farmers in Pigsknuckle Tennessee. I'm basing this purely on my own assumptions so take this with a grain of salt, but I think that had a lot to do with the fact that a lot of the middle class folks I know seem convinced that they are almost at the point where they reach that cartoonish 1% level of wealth. So they'll vote against their own self interests because who cares? They'll be reaping all that sweet mega money soon anyway.
_________________
Lair of the Bastard: LATEST REVIEWS: White Ward - Love Exchange Failure, False - Portent, Kryptos - Afterburner
The Outer RIM - Uatism: The dogs bark in street slang
VOTING IS NOW OPEN FOR ENCYCLOPAEDIA METALLUM ALBUM OF THE YEAR 2019

Top
 Profile  
circleofdestruction
Metalhead

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 8:15 am
Posts: 1060
PostPosted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 9:07 pm 
 

henkkjelle wrote:
@Sepulchrave

I get all that. A desperate rural worker would have had reason to not vote for Hillary. What I do not get is how anyone could have seen Trump (of all people) as being concerned with the plight of the common man. Maybe I'm underestimating the genuine desperation amongst a big portion of the American working class though.


This. It's really, really baffling. I was also quite annoyed when he said he was elected by "the people of Pittsburgh, not Paris" concerning the Paris accord, because, even though I don't live in Pittsburgh anymore, the larger PA cities tend to vote Democrat. It's the PA country bumpkins that hate gay people and think Obama was trying to take away their guns that voted for Trump in this state (which is normally blue, so I was shocked).
_________________
CircleOfDestruction zine #18|Video-Nasties.net | My Art Site

Top
 Profile  
severzhavnost
Veteran

Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008 10:16 pm
Posts: 2542
Location: Ottawa
PostPosted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 9:21 pm 
 

I think some folks in here are overestimating the genuineness of Trump's support. Yes, he did energize a bunch of (honest and otherwise) marginalized people with his fake-ass maverick routine. But another significant level of his support came from (in many cases, reluctant) Republican Party loyalty. And loads of the latter group are feeling some heavy buyer's remorse*.

That's a very hard thing for non-Americans to understand: for a nation that traditionally prides itself on rugged individualism, party loyalty is so much more powerful over there than in practically any free country. Being a card-carrying member of a political party, and being defined by that, is normal in the USA. It's weird as hell here in Canada! For example, my family is quite uniform in our core beliefs and values, yet altogether we've voted for 14 different parties when you count provincial and federal parties with the same name.

*Not counting those Republicans who share my and Resident Hazard's suspicions, that the Donald Trump saga is all part of "The Plan":
1 - use orange buffoon to win election, knowing that an establishment Repub might not defeat establishment Democrat.
2 - watch and wait as orange buffoon is overwhelmed by the job, gets impeached/is forced to resign.
3 - replace orange buffoon with establishment-approved Vice President candidate, who could never have gotten in via the front door.
_________________
rannvroeleirezh ha rakvarn komzont brezhoneg

Top
 Profile  
circleofdestruction
Metalhead

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 8:15 am
Posts: 1060
PostPosted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 9:31 pm 
 

I think severzhavnost makes a good point, too. Many people just vote straight Republican, no matter who is running. It's just like football teams, the sort of loyalty. i like to think my dad and my grandparents were Republicans because the Republican party was less crazy back in the day, though. These things often run in families and regions, though my generation of my family switched parties, along with my mom, aunts and uncles. But driving around this area, there were hundreds of Trump signs out last November. I counted TWO Clintons signs.

It also sort of baffles me that he got the crazy super-religious voters, but some of them don't even think women should hold positions of power (even the women think that sometimes), and I think that also has a lot to do with Trump's support, just because the Republican party is considered more connected to the religious voter base.
_________________
CircleOfDestruction zine #18|Video-Nasties.net | My Art Site

Top
 Profile  
Sepulchrave
Metalhead

Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2015 7:29 pm
Posts: 1660
Location: Croatia
PostPosted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 9:43 pm 
 

Morrigan wrote:
Sepulchrave wrote:
No, his ineptitude to shake up the establishment wouldn't have been obvious without rose-tinted shutter shades or whatever. If you're a desperate, rural worker in a failing coal town in America, you in no way would want someone who wishes to continue an economic policy that fucks over working people and doesn't hide it as president (like Hillary) over a president who promises some kind of prosperity to the white working class (like Trump).

Except... no.

Because only a special, particular brand of stupid would think that a NYC billionaire living in a tower literally made of gold with his name on it, who repeatedly screwed over his own employees and contractors, would give a flying FUCK about desperate rural workers.

LOL I totally get you, but you have to realise in elections like these it's rhetoric that matters more than cold, hard facts above all. It's stupid, I know, but that's real life. One of Trump's many important points he emphasised was bringing back the coal jobs. Hillary mentioned them only once on CNN. BH is right that she was lazy on that front

I'm gonna respond to more of your points, esp. concerning her plan, but I'm tired as fuck and I wanna sleep.
_________________
Ку.

Top
 Profile  
severzhavnost
Veteran

Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008 10:16 pm
Posts: 2542
Location: Ottawa
PostPosted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 9:51 pm 
 

circleofdestruction wrote:
It also sort of baffles me that he got the crazy super-religious voters, but some of them don't even think women should hold positions of power (even the women think that sometimes), and I think that also has a lot to do with Trump's support, just because the Republican party is considered more connected to the religious voter base.


That baffled me too! I mean, look at the pussy-grabbing thing. Even for those who didn't find that disgusting on feminist, or even basic equal legal rights grounds; what about the religious perspective? Ya know, and I'm paraphrasing, "thou shalt not be a lecherous old pervert?"
_________________
rannvroeleirezh ha rakvarn komzont brezhoneg

Top
 Profile  
failsafeman
Digital Dictator

Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 8:45 am
Posts: 11861
Location: In the Arena
PostPosted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 9:57 pm 
 

You're underestimating how much the Republicans hate the Clintons. Remember, we're talking literal decades of hate-spewing brainwashing here. According to the tabloids and AM radio and so on, everything Trump has actually done, Hillary supposedly did long ago, and then some.
_________________
MorbidBlood wrote:
So the winner is Destruction and Infernal Overkill is the motherfucking skullcrushing poserkilling satan-worshiping 666 FUCK YOU greatest german thrash record.

Top
 Profile  
Earthcubed
The Great Fearmonger

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 3:44 am
Posts: 3767
Location: eccaira nare epë Anar
PostPosted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 10:16 pm 
 

This started as a shorter post, then I got blindsided with noteworthy new posts I felt unreasonably compelled to respond to.

Morrigan, I think you have it a bit backwards in the case of Trump voters. It's the racism that is much rarer than is often claimed, whereas the "special, particular brand of stupid" is unfortunately not very particular and/or special but rather generally widespread. This is a swath of voters more prone to disbelief in evolution than, say, disbelief that the KKK is bad. A large number of them (several hundred counties' worth) voted for Obama twice.

The phenomenon you cited of rural towns continually voting for politicians that make their lives harder for decades on end is just more evidence the problem is widespread disinformation, which thanks to the proliferation of partisan online news sources is now also like a self-replicating nanobot army from hell. Misinformation begets misinformation, disinformation begets conspiracy theories, stupidity begets idiocy.

BastardHead wrote:
while Hillary ran a comparatively lazy campaign because she (rightfully) assumed she was running against a total joke and (wrongfully) assumed the country would never be so fucking retarded as to actually vote him in.


She didn't just run a lazy campaign; she ran a willfully stupid campaign that intentionally ignored its own data. They had data pouring in from local/state Democratic groups showing they were losing or close to losing states like Michigan and Wisconsin for months before the vote. Do you know what she did with that data? Threw it in the garbage, literally. It didn't support her campaign's perfect model of voter metrics, which was designed by the Clintons so of course must be perfect and beyond reproach. Imagine a scientist in some research field saying "hmm, 38% of the data do not support our model which is well outside what our 95% confidence threshold says should be possible---the data must be wrong!"

I still have trouble processing the fact that the DNC fell so hard for her and essentially tried to clear the field for her before the primaries even began. They knew that an entire generation of voters have been raised to distrust the Clintons generally and her particularly, like failsafeman alluded to. They knew what a chaotic, disorganized mess her last campaign was. They knew the Clinton style of politics is pretty much the antithesis to the Obama style that fired up voters two cycles in a row. They knew there were allegations of impropriety at the Clinton Foundation that were even a problem for her during the 2008 Democratic primaries. They knew she was under three different federal investigations by Obama appointees (including possibly the first-ever FBI counterintelligence investigation of a political candidate for Espionage Act violations), in addition to the predictable ones by a politically-motivated GOP Congress. Most importantly, they didn't know their opponent in the general would be a complete dolt---they operated on the assumption that a deeply flawed, unpopular, currently-under-criminal-investigation Clinton would be running against a formidable, disciplined, well-funded opponent (there were a lot of big-money GOP campaign bundlers who sat this election out because of Trump).

I mean, the DNC can't prevent someone from running if they meet the requirements, but tying themselves to her hip the way they did negated a lot of advantages Dem candidates ordinarily have by default in a general election (younger voter base, higher turnout, fewer crazy candidates). Against a more normal GOP candidate in a normal election Clinton probably would have been destroyed.

circleofdestruction wrote:
It also sort of baffles me that he got the crazy super-religious voters


This was pretty much purely about those super-religious voters being terrified that Clinton would appoint a pro-choice justice to the Supreme Court. Trump has been all over the map politically, so he's unpredictable, whereas nobody seriously thinks Clinton would ever consider appointing a pro-life justice under any circumstance. So for the pro-life crowd it was a choice between certain failure or "well, maybe he'll appoint someone opposed to abortion, maybe he won't."


There was an essay last year that a NeverTrump Republican I follow on Twitter was mocking; I didn't see it until after the election but apparently it was widely read among GOP fence-sitters and hardcore abortion opponents. It's called "The Flight 93 Election," just google it and you can find it pretty easily. That's the sort of thinking a lot of on-the-fence GOP voters adopted: "either we rush the cockpit and maybe all die, or the plane crashes and we definitely all die." Obviously, for these voters, Clinton = plane crashing and Trump = rush cockpit, hope for the best. If you're a hardcore pro-lifer, that might make sense. Obviously, it doesn't really make much sense for anything else (how could you possibly believe Trump could pilot the plane of foreign policy without depressurizing the cabin full of diplomats, flying through the hurricane of trade policy and crash-landing somewhere along the 48th parallel with the landing gear still up...)
_________________
iamntbatman wrote:
On Friday I passed an important milestone in my teaching career: a student shat himself

FloristOfVampyrism wrote:
That wasn't meant as a k.o. though, he specifically targeted an area of the cerebellum which, if ruptured, renders you a Jehovah's witness indefinitely

Top
 Profile  
Earthcubed
The Great Fearmonger

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 3:44 am
Posts: 3767
Location: eccaira nare epë Anar
PostPosted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 10:50 pm 
 

Resident_Hazard wrote:
Uhhhhhhhhh.......

Whut

Nigel Farage, one of the guys responsible for Brexit... has apparently been turning up in FBI probes. As a person of interest.

http://www.snopes.com/nigel-farage-repo ... ium=social

Okay, paranoia setting in.


A few years ago I made a post here where I mentioned Russia's courting of right-wing parties as a way to try to weaken NATO and the EU more broadly, and someone (I don't remember who) basically said I was a paranoid fear/war-mongering idiot. Would have been nice to be wrong on this one, but, well, ahem.
_________________
iamntbatman wrote:
On Friday I passed an important milestone in my teaching career: a student shat himself

FloristOfVampyrism wrote:
That wasn't meant as a k.o. though, he specifically targeted an area of the cerebellum which, if ruptured, renders you a Jehovah's witness indefinitely

Top
 Profile  
Resident_Hazard
Possessed by Starscream's Ghost

Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:33 pm
Posts: 2834
Location: United States
PostPosted: Sun Jun 04, 2017 12:08 am 
 

Grimbeard wrote:
circleofdestruction wrote:
And don't forget that Trump outsourced his merchandise creation to China. You know, the guy who says he loves creating American jobs.


Let us never forget the past!


There's one thing to be said about never forgetting the past, but there's another about letting go if it's no longer relevant. Which Trump supporters seemingly cannot do.

The same jackass I mentioned earlier who posts pro-Trump/anti-Left memes and conspiracy theories is also fond of sharing otherwise pointless "reminders" of irrelevant things like how Democrats used to be the racists and slave owners. It's a deliberate distraction to muddy an argument and has no bearing on modern reality.

It's also highly selective, as in, the way the wingnuts deliberately ignore the past when it comes to Trump's behavior or, you know, his four bankruptcies. Big surprise there's a two trillion dollar discrepancy in the fucking budget.
_________________
Warm Fuzzy Cynical comics.
Warm Fuzzy Cynical Facebook page.

Top
 Profile  
darkeningday
xXdArKenIngDayXx

Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 1:20 pm
Posts: 4868
Location: United States
PostPosted: Sun Jun 04, 2017 1:03 am 
 

Image

:lol:
_________________
ambientsorrow wrote:
Pretty rubbish, I must say. Certainly not worth the hype behind it. Boring and predictable. A band for 14-22 year olds.


Last edited by darkeningday on Mon Jun 05, 2017 9:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top
 Profile  
Sepulchrave
Metalhead

Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2015 7:29 pm
Posts: 1660
Location: Croatia
PostPosted: Sun Jun 04, 2017 6:33 am 
 

Morrigan wrote:
Moreover, it is completely factually incorrect that Hillary's policies would fuck over working people (here were her plans for handling coal jobs losses, did anyone care? as senator she co-sponsored a coalition to help manufacturing jobs with... Lindsey Graham of all people, did anyone remember that? hmmm guess not, too busy talking about emails)


Her plans got a pretty negative response from mining groups, though, as she was supportive of Obama's measures which helped speed up the closing of the country's coal plants. The new jobs would also pay for much less, which, for states like Kentucky and West Virginia, with their long history of coal mining, is just kind of outrageous. Above all, however, she made a really stupid mistake concerning her rhetoric, when she opened up her sentence with "we're going to put a lot of coal companies and mines out of business". At least Bernie Sanders, who had similar plans, worded it much better. By the way, outside of coal jobs, another way Trump mobilised the white working class is that he would bring back manufacturing jobs from other countries, as such relocation in the past has hurt many. Hillary, meanwhile, simply didn't address these issues.
_________________
Ку.

Top
 Profile  
GTog
Metalhead

Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 8:35 pm
Posts: 1077
Location: United States
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 1:52 pm 
 

All this obsession with coal doesn't make any sense. There are only 50,000 coal jobs in the entire US. It's just such a tiny industry it's not even funny. And coal has been in decline for a long time.

The number of coal jobs fell under Reagan in the 80s. Then more under Bush I. And more under Clinton. Went up a bit under Bush II, then down again under Obama. Mainly because natural gas is cheaper, but also because modern methods have taken the place of dudes with pickaxes and helmet lights.

And then there's the fact that the major coal producing regions just aren't producing as much. The coal seams that were easy to get at are gone. Who thinks Trump is going to magic up more coal to dig?
_________________
Metalheads never get old. We just become legendary.

Top
 Profile  
Earthcubed
The Great Fearmonger

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 3:44 am
Posts: 3767
Location: eccaira nare epë Anar
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 2:03 pm 
 

^Wishful thinking is a powerful drug.





Donald Trump changed his NATO speech at the last minute to remove all Article 5 assurances. The speech he had already written was the product of a lot of work both by his own staff and by generals Mattis and McMaster plus SecState Tillerson, the proverbial adults in the room. It originally included a verbal commitment to mutual defense. They all expected him to give that speech until he started talking and they realized he was using a different speech. Amazing.
_________________
iamntbatman wrote:
On Friday I passed an important milestone in my teaching career: a student shat himself

FloristOfVampyrism wrote:
That wasn't meant as a k.o. though, he specifically targeted an area of the cerebellum which, if ruptured, renders you a Jehovah's witness indefinitely

Top
 Profile  
iamntbatman
Chaos Breed

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:55 am
Posts: 11422
Location: Tyrn Gorthad
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 2:28 pm 
 

Man what a colossal fucking douchewit. The mayor of London tweets that armed police presence is going to be bumped up in the wake of the terror attacks, telling citizens not to be alarmed by this, then Trump takes this out of context to tweet back about how THE TERRORISTS ARE WINNING AND THIS GUY SAYS DON'T BE ALARMED, then the mayor's people say, "yeah...that sentence is being taken out of context obviously" then Trump just jumps all over this guy. Like seriously if someone on this website did that exact same kind of shit, I would ban him in a heartbeat for being a worthless scumbag troll.
_________________
Nolan_B wrote:
I've been punched in the face maybe 3 times in the past 6 months


GLOAMING - death/doom | COMA VOID - black/doom/post-rock

Top
 Profile  
Resident_Hazard
Possessed by Starscream's Ghost

Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:33 pm
Posts: 2834
Location: United States
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 2:41 pm 
 

Earthcubed wrote:

Donald Trump changed his NATO speech at the last minute to remove all Article 5 assurances. The speech he had already written was the product of a lot of work both by his own staff and by generals Mattis and McMaster plus SecState Tillerson, the proverbial adults in the room. It originally included a verbal commitment to mutual defense. They all expected him to give that speech until he started talking and they realized he was using a different speech. Amazing.


You've got to be fucking kidding me. I seriously don't understand how every day can continue to get worse.
_________________
Warm Fuzzy Cynical comics.
Warm Fuzzy Cynical Facebook page.

Top
 Profile  
Napalm_Satan
Ever-Opening Flower

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2015 4:27 pm
Posts: 3327
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 2:53 pm 
 

iamntbatman wrote:
Man what a colossal fucking douchewit. The mayor of London tweets that armed police presence is going to be bumped up in the wake of the terror attacks, telling citizens not to be alarmed by this, then Trump takes this out of context to tweet back about how THE TERRORISTS ARE WINNING AND THIS GUY SAYS DON'T BE ALARMED, then the mayor's people say, "yeah...that sentence is being taken out of context obviously" then Trump just jumps all over this guy. Like seriously if someone on this website did that exact same kind of shit, I would ban him in a heartbeat for being a worthless scumbag troll.


How can the oldest person ever to be elected into office also be the most petty, petulant manchild ever elected into office? (to my knowledge anyway, feel free to unearth an example from history to prove me wrong!)

Top
 Profile  
Andvari
Mallcore Kid

Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2014 4:16 pm
Posts: 26
Location: United States
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 3:00 pm 
 

He's on his way to impeachment. I mean I am a staunch democrat and yes I wouldn't mind Hillary as President hell I wish Bill could become president but this is unspeakable pulling out of the Paris climate program. When GHW Bush got re-elected a lot of people including me were like this is one of the worse presidents we have had in recent times. However Trump is just doing this for himself. I would take McCain over him in fact Cruz and Rubio even Carson would be better then this guy. Bottom line he is going to either get impeached or he will lose drastically in 2010. That's just my two cents into this but then again and I haven't read the whole thread but people say Hillary would be the lesser of the two evils we shouldn't have to think like that even when Obama was in office people thought he was a lesser evil we shouldn't have to come to that. This is all my opinion and it's your right to agree and disagree with me on this. I'm just voicing my opinion on this. That's all i'll say feel free to express your opinions.

Top
 Profile  
Metalisepic
Metal newbie

Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2015 4:23 am
Posts: 56
Location: France/Norway
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 3:08 pm 
 

circleofdestruction wrote:
Metalisepic wrote:
iamntbatman:
Don't forget that China is the factory of the world.

And don't forget that Trump outsourced his merchandise creation to China. You know, the guy who says he loves creating American jobs.

Yeah, saw that. His campaign gear and products were manufactured in China and Mexico. And that guy is bashing China for stealing American jobs lol.

GTog wrote:
All this obsession with coal doesn't make any sense. There are only 50,000 coal jobs in the entire US. It's just such a tiny industry it's not even funny. And coal has been in decline for a long time.

The funny thing is that renewable energy employs more people than fossil energies in most, if not all, developed countries. But the guy is too idiot to understand that. All that matters to him and his government is to literally erase everything Obama did in the last 8 years, whatever it is.

Top
 Profile  
Empyreal
The Final Frontier

Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 6:58 pm
Posts: 26907
Location: Where the dead rule the night
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 3:20 pm 
 

The dumbest thing to me was when he said something about how they used knives and a truck in the London attack, so he noticed there was no gun debate coming up now - I can't even believe that we have someone this rock-bottom fucking dumb in office right now. It's astounding to me.
_________________
Cinema Freaks latest reviews: Joker

Top
 Profile  
circleofdestruction
Metalhead

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 8:15 am
Posts: 1060
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 3:38 pm 
 

Empyreal wrote:
The dumbest thing to me was when he said something about how they used knives and a truck in the London attack, so he noticed there was no gun debate coming up now - I can't even believe that we have someone this rock-bottom fucking dumb in office right now. It's astounding to me.

Well, he has to appeal to gun owners. (I don't own guns, but I'm not against owning guns and know a lot of people who hunt.) However, he's appealing to the people who believed that Obama was coming to take all the guns away, and some people were stupid enough to believe that. (Also, stricter regulations/gun control is not the same as "they're gonna come and take all the guns away from everybody!")

That's all I can figure. He has so little support that he HAS to keep the nuttier gun-owners supporting him by using everything to be about taking their guns, even when it has fuckall to do with guns. Also, guns make it easier to kill a bunch of people in a short people of time and from a distance, but Trump wouldn't mention details like that.

Comparing a truck mowing down pedestrians also has fuckall to do with attacks using guns, but I also know a lot of Trump fans who are conspiracy theorists and seem to think ALL gun and bomb related terror attacks/shootings/etc. are "false flags" and hoaxes in which no one died. The stupidity of which is just unbelievable.
_________________
CircleOfDestruction zine #18|Video-Nasties.net | My Art Site


Last edited by circleofdestruction on Mon Jun 05, 2017 3:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Top
 Profile  
Subrick
Metal freak

Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 7:27 pm
Posts: 8229
Location: United States
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 3:43 pm 
 

iamntbatman is correct. Donald Trump is, in fact, a worthless scumbag troll.
_________________
Earthcubed wrote:
I'm just perpetually annoyed by Sean William Scott and he's never been in a movie where I wasn't rooting for his head to sever by strange means.

Blacksoul Seraphim Gothic Doom Metal
Autumn's Ashes Melodic Death/Doom Metal

Top
 Profile  
Empyreal
The Final Frontier

Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 6:58 pm
Posts: 26907
Location: Where the dead rule the night
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 3:46 pm 
 

circleofdestruction wrote:
Empyreal wrote:
The dumbest thing to me was when he said something about how they used knives and a truck in the London attack, so he noticed there was no gun debate coming up now - I can't even believe that we have someone this rock-bottom fucking dumb in office right now. It's astounding to me.

Well, he has to appeal to gun owners. (I don't own guns, but I'm not against owning guns and know a lot of people who hunt.) However, he's appealing to the people who believed that Obama was coming to take all the guns away, and some people were stupid enough to believe that. (Also, stricter regulations/gun control is not the same as "they're gonna come and take all the guns away from everybody!")

That's all I can figure. He has so little support that he HAS to keep the nuttier gun-owners supporting him by using everything to be about taking their guns, even when it has fuckall to do with guns. Also, guns make it easier to kill a bunch of people in a short people of time and from a distance, but Trump wouldn't mention details like that.


Probably not far off there, he does need to keep the religious right and gun-owning fanatics on his side. Man do I just hate that line of thought though - "terror attacks happen with other weapons besides guns, so let's just not do anything about guns which are the most dangerous weapon that can be used in one outside of a bomb."
_________________
Cinema Freaks latest reviews: Joker

Top
 Profile  
Earthcubed
The Great Fearmonger

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 3:44 am
Posts: 3767
Location: eccaira nare epë Anar
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 3:48 pm 
 

It isn't about any attempt at wooing gun owners. Trump doesn't think that far ahead of his tweets. There's no planning to his tweets, they're just the echoes in his cranium given digital form. Trump uses Twitter like an infant given a large supply of candy. No impulse control.
_________________
iamntbatman wrote:
On Friday I passed an important milestone in my teaching career: a student shat himself

FloristOfVampyrism wrote:
That wasn't meant as a k.o. though, he specifically targeted an area of the cerebellum which, if ruptured, renders you a Jehovah's witness indefinitely

Top
 Profile  
circleofdestruction
Metalhead

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 8:15 am
Posts: 1060
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 3:52 pm 
 

Earthcubed wrote:
It isn't about any attempt at wooing gun owners. Trump doesn't think that far ahead of his tweets. There's no planning to his tweets, they're just the echoes in his cranium given digital form. Trump uses Twitter like an infant given a large supply of candy. No impulse control.

I recall reading an article suggesting his brain was kind of like a bunch of lightning bugs randomly bumping the edges of a glass jar, but that's probably giving him too much credit, yeah.
_________________
CircleOfDestruction zine #18|Video-Nasties.net | My Art Site

Top
 Profile  
Earthcubed
The Great Fearmonger

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 3:44 am
Posts: 3767
Location: eccaira nare epë Anar
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 4:36 pm 
 

The most appropriate analogy I've heard people here in DC use for his Twitter postings is that of manstrual cramps. They're just thoughtless, reflexive outbursts.
_________________
iamntbatman wrote:
On Friday I passed an important milestone in my teaching career: a student shat himself

FloristOfVampyrism wrote:
That wasn't meant as a k.o. though, he specifically targeted an area of the cerebellum which, if ruptured, renders you a Jehovah's witness indefinitely

Top
 Profile  
GTog
Metalhead

Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 8:35 pm
Posts: 1077
Location: United States
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 5:06 pm 
 

Earthcubed wrote:
It isn't about any attempt at wooing gun owners. Trump doesn't think that far ahead of his tweets. There's no planning to his tweets, they're just the echoes in his cranium given digital form. Trump uses Twitter like an infant given a large supply of candy. No impulse control.


That's on the money. People who follow politics are used to divining the real motives behind things politicians say & do, like a party game. Take a shot every time a new zoning law is really just an attempt to get a local abortion provider closed down, or how a new voter ID law is just a way of keeping minorities from voting.

But in the case of Trump, we'd all still be stone cold sober at the end of the night. There just aren't any motives. He's just a mean-spirited douchebag.
_________________
Metalheads never get old. We just become legendary.

Top
 Profile  
Morrigan
Crone of War

Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2002 7:27 am
Posts: 9806
Location: Canada
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:36 pm 
 

Earthcubed wrote:
The most appropriate analogy I've heard people here in DC use for his Twitter postings is that of manstrual cramps. They're just thoughtless, reflexive outbursts.

As someone who suffers from those monthly, I find that insulting!
_________________
Von Cichlid wrote:
I work with plenty of Oriental and Indian persons and we get along pretty good, and some females as well.

Markeri, in 2013 wrote:
a fairly agreed upon date [of the beginning of metal] is 1969. Metal is almost 25 years old

Top
 Profile  
iamntbatman
Chaos Breed

Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:55 am
Posts: 11422
Location: Tyrn Gorthad
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 11:00 pm 
 

Morrigan wrote:
Earthcubed wrote:
manstrual cramps

As someone who suffers from those monthly, I find that insulting!


Huh, and I thought HellBlazer was pretty chill!
_________________
Nolan_B wrote:
I've been punched in the face maybe 3 times in the past 6 months


GLOAMING - death/doom | COMA VOID - black/doom/post-rock

Top
 Profile  
darkeningday
xXdArKenIngDayXx

Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 1:20 pm
Posts: 4868
Location: United States
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2017 11:49 pm 
 

You guys shouldn't be casually mocking such a serious condition that adversely affects many, many geriatric windbag assholes the world over!
_________________
ambientsorrow wrote:
Pretty rubbish, I must say. Certainly not worth the hype behind it. Boring and predictable. A band for 14-22 year olds.

Top
 Profile  
Earthcubed
The Great Fearmonger

Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 3:44 am
Posts: 3767
Location: eccaira nare epë Anar
PostPosted: Tue Jun 06, 2017 10:04 am 
 

Manstrual cycles only become serious when you try to regulate them with cocaine, which is also why Trump stays up all night tweeting even when he's cramp-free.
_________________
iamntbatman wrote:
On Friday I passed an important milestone in my teaching career: a student shat himself

FloristOfVampyrism wrote:
That wasn't meant as a k.o. though, he specifically targeted an area of the cerebellum which, if ruptured, renders you a Jehovah's witness indefinitely

Top
 Profile  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 ... 137  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: theposega and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

 
Jump to:  

Back to the Encyclopaedia Metallum


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group