*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[Mr.Banana]

You played yourself into a corner banana, well done.

wut?

[Poopadoop]

lol no I'm not outraged, Jesus. It was just the first lie I could find, and it was exactly the kind of lie you'd gleefully mock Trump for.

Because Trump would say that he finished first in his class when he really finished last. And that he was class president, and won the class golf tournament with a hole in one on the last hole. And the last hole was a par five.

Biden's lies are standard politician b.s., Trump's are on the level of a three-year old child. That's what makes it funny.

[Poopadoop]

wut?

Huh?

[OngBonga]

Because Trump would say that he finished first in his class when he really finished last. And that he was class president, and won the class golf tournament with a hole in one on the last hole. And the last hole was a par four.

Biden's lies are standard politician b.s., Trump's are on the level of a three-year old child. That's what makes it funny.

Weak as fuck.

[Poopadoop]

Weak as fuck.

lol, you know it's true.

And yet, we're supposed to take him seriously when he says the election is rigged with no evidence.

[OngBonga]

lol, you know it's true.

And yet, we're supposed to take him seriously when he says the election is rigged with no evidence.

True? When did he say these things? Show me. I mean it seems to me you're making up lies about Trump's lies.

[Mr.Banana]

Because Trump would say that he finished first in his class when he really finished last. And that he was class president, and won the class golf tournament with a hole in one on the last hole. And the last hole was a par five.

Biden's lies are standard politician b.s., Trump's are on the level of a three-year old child. That's what makes it funny.

You're soooooo close to "getting it". but you're just too stubborn to admit what you already know.

Cmon....just try one time...

Follow this thought through....

Trump is a hyperbolic caricature of everything wrong in politics......yes...

What does that mean? Why would someone vote for him knowing this?

[Poopadoop]

True? When did he say these things? Show me. I mean it seems to me you're making up lies about Trump's lies.

I'm exaggerating ldo. But it's not far from how he really behaves. And if it's 2021 and you really haven't figured out by now he's a serial liar, I can't help you, sorry.

[Poopadoop]

Why would someone vote for him knowing this?

Because they don't know that. Because they watch hours a day of stations like Fox who do nothing but talk about what a great president he is.

See how that works?

[Poopadoop]

I mean maybe your vote banana was a protest vote or a vote for nihilism or whatever you want to call it. But a lot of people have really, legitimately drunk the KoolAid on Trump and you and I and every reasonable person knows it.

[Mr.Banana]

Populism = what happens when the people in charge fuck up.

That's what Trump is about. He's a middle finger to everyone in the ruling class.

Instead of looking at themselves and asking how they can do a better job for regular americans, they decided that they HATE regular americans and declared war.

That's the problem here. It's not about Trump or any one election. It's about a ruling class made up of progressive democrats, tech oligarchs, academia, and social justice bullies taking over our institutions. It's about crushing the middle class.

The soviets called this dekulakization. Kulak was anyone who managed to have his shit together and wasn't completely reliant on the ruling class for either employment, or sustenance.

[Mr.Banana]

Because they don't know that. Because they watch hours a day of stations like Fox who do nothing but talk about what a great president he is.

This is the face of the flagship program on Fox News. He wrote a whole book about exactly what I just said.

And using Trump as a useful policy tool isn't the same as "drinking the KoolAid". We can send a big orange middle finger to the permanent bureaucracy in washington DC........AND we can build a wall.

[Poopadoop]

Populism = what happens when the people in charge fuck up.

And the cure is always worse than the disease.

That's what Trump is about. He's a middle finger to everyone in the ruling class.

Voting for him the first time hoping he would drain the swamp was understandable, if naive. Voting for him the second time when he not only didn't drain the swamp, but made it even swampier by replacing everyone competent with someone pliable to his wishes was just cutting off your nose to spite your face. You'd rather have a fuckwit retard narcissist president drag the country down around him than someone in the "ruling class" not drag the country down.

[Poopadoop]

AND we can build a wall.

How's that coming along, by the way?

[Mr.Banana]

Voting for him the first time hoping he would drain the swamp was understandable, if naive. Voting for him the second time when he not only didn't drain the swamp, but made it even swampier by replacing everyone competent with someone pliable to his wishes was just cutting off your nose to spite your face. You'd rather have a fuckwit retard narcissist president drag the country down around him than someone in the "ruling class" not drag the country down.

Just because he didn't bat 1.000 on his first term doesn't mean that he didn't deserve a second. The previous two presidents fucked the economy extremely badly. Trump turned that around. Economy, jobs, employment...he gets A's for all of those policies. He appointed all the right judges, at least ostensibly. He got some wall built. Crossings are down 100% in the places where walls were built. I could go on, but it suffices to say that the guy wasn't totally useless.

Am I disappointed in the lack of a wall? Sure. I also don't like how he got manipulated by the corporatist wing of the republican party, led by Paul Ryan, during the first two years. And he loses some points for his economic success because he got it by spending his ass off, which is the same mistake the last two ass-holes made.

But voting for Trump a second time was totally understandable simply because the alternative was worse. You see the proof of it already. Trump isn't even gone and half the country is banned from twitter and can't fly commercial anymore. They're going to pack the court. They're going to make DC an Puerto Rico into states and pack the legislature. Everyday Americans with inconvenient political views will be banned from getting jobs, opening bank accounts, enrolling in schools, and it's already happening.

That's why they were desperate enough to say "Fuck this" and just push their way into the capitol.

[Mr.Banana]

Here's chapter 1 of the indoctrination manual. Get them while they're young

https://www.parents.com/news/how-to-...=pocket-newtab

[Poopadoop]

Your MAGA-tears are killing me. Please stop.

[MadMojoMonkey]

I mean... banana raving is just hilarious to read.

Like, banana is clearly capable of rational thought, but once politics is the subject, he just shuts all that off and goes full conspiracy theory froth about every aspect.

[OngBonga]

I'm exaggerating ldo. But it's not far from how he really behaves. And if it's 2021 and you really haven't figured out by now he's a serial liar, I can't help you, sorry.

You're deliberately missing the point. I can't be bothered to criticise politicians on either side for lying, because it would be a long and tedious process. Why pick on one politician? There's only one reason... because you are biased.

I have never suggested Trump isn't a liar. I also haven't bothered to post lies from other politicians, except the one recently for Biden as an example, which you were happy to dismiss, and would certainly not have done if it were Trump.

Your are biased. That isn't a slur, it's an observation. Instead of being defensive over it and reiterating that Trump is a liar while neglecting the rest of the political class, try addressing your bias.

Or spend the next four years crying about Biden. Choice is yours.

[Poopadoop]

That's great Ong. Glad to hear your objective opinion on how biased I am because I make fun of Trump.

[Mr.Banana]

Like, banana is clearly capable of rational thought, but once politics is the subject, he just shuts all that off and goes full conspiracy theory froth about every aspect

What conspiracy am I claiming?

Are you denying that there is an effort, led by the left, to crush the middle class?

[MadMojoMonkey]

The difference between Trump and other politicians isn't the corruption. It's the scale of corruption.

It's like you're arguing that the mere fact that corruption exists means that it's OK.

It's like you're arguing that we want our politicians to be corrupt, or we should just give up and accept that all politicians are corrupt and there's nothing we can do about it.

All politicians are corrupt is a good place to start, but the response of, "Oh well, guess I'll just let the world burn in a vacuum of quality leadership." is just asinine. That's how civilizations fall - when the popular will to fight corruption is lost.

The right response to corruption isn't to accept it, it's to make it harder by attacking it. It's to push back on the corruption and force them to be sneakier, shadier and less obvious about it, so that we can't as easily attack them. It's to force them to appear to be doing things for the benefit of their constituents at a bare minimum. It's to acknowledge that some fights are worth fighting, not because you can win, but because losing is a price you are unwilling to pay. If we don't fight to root out corruption all the time, then we inherit a corrupt political system.


Sometimes, we'll misfire, and seek out corruption where none exists. We're not perfect. That's not a big deal. The constant push to root out corruption forces the politicians to at least do enough for us that the corruption is hidden behind actual good governance.


So no, the argument that all politicians lie doesn't mean we shouldn't care when a politician lies. It means we should lambaste them thoroughly and make it clear that if they want to lie to us, they better do it better than that. They better at least give us enough to argue over whether it was a lie or not. And for the most part, they do give us that.


But the scale is what matters. Trump is so far off the scale compared to other US politicians. Accepting that bar he's set isn't just bad for Dems today, it's bad for Reps tomorrow. A Dem version of Trump is now a more likely scenario than it was before Trump. Expanding the power of the POTUS cuts both ways. It's not just boosting the power of the Reps... it boosts the power of the executive - pushes the power of the POTUS closer to that of a monarch - it undermines the accountability of the office of POTUS to the American people.


And yes, I was just as worried when Obama was pulling power into the office of POTUS, because that in many ways paved the way for the Trump presidency. Divesting power away from that figurehead is a fundamental aspect of the American government, and straying away from that foundation expresses an ignorance of history, and a forgetting of the lessons that got us to 2021.

Germany spends a year of schooling teaching the dangers of following a charismatic leader. They still remember their lesson. We seem to have forgotten it already, and we were the supposed "good guys" in that fight.

[MadMojoMonkey]

What conspiracy am I claiming?

Are you denying that there is an effort, led by the left, to crush the middle class?

[OngBonga]

The difference between Trump and other politicians isn't the corruption. It's the scale of corruption.

I think this is naive.

It's like you're arguing that the mere fact that corruption exists means that it's OK.

I've been talking about lies, not corruption, but this isn't how I feel. I am against corruption on all fronts. That's why I have criticised the Tories for sending Dominic Cummings to "test his eyesight" pissing distance from a pharmaceutical company that two days later announced a vaccine deal. This is why I won't even consider voting for the Tories. I do not accept corruption. I also can't do much about it other than complain.

It's like you're arguing that we want our politicians to be corrupt, or we should just give up and accept that all politicians are corrupt and there's nothing we can do about it.

Is there something we can do about it? Tell me what we can do. There's not voting for them, there's not trusting them, but how do we hold them to account? It requires action from the masses, not individuals.

The right response to corruption isn't to accept it, it's to make it harder by attacking it. It's to push back on the corruption and force them to be sneakier, shadier and less obvious about it, so that we can't as easily attack them. It's to force them to appear to be doing things for the benefit of their constituents at a bare minimum. It's to acknowledge that some fights are worth fighting, not because you can win, but because losing is a price you are unwilling to pay. If we don't fight to root out corruption all the time, then we inherit a corrupt political system.

This is all very well and good, but it's just words, this is rhetoric, not action. We're not forcing them to do anything. They get votes, they get airtime. The corruption is so deep that there's no way to hold them to account. The courts are corrupt. The media is corrupt. The entire system is corrupt. If you speak out, you get silenced, branded a "conspiracy theorist", you get pushed to the fringes of society. Or worse.

So no, the argument that all politicians lie doesn't mean we shouldn't care when a politician lies.

I'm not saying that. I'm saying we shouldn't show bias and only call out the lies of the "other" side, while ignoring the lies of you own side. We should put politics aside, but we don't. Poop is proof of this. Poop isn't even that extreme when it comes to this sort of thing. Go to Twitter and see how many people call Trump a liar, go through their timeline and see how many call out the lies of Dems. Call someone out on it, and laugh as you get blocked so they don't have to confront their bias.

Trump is so far off the scale compared to other US politicians.

I don't think so. I think they're all as bad as each other.

Germany spends a year of schooling teaching the dangers of following a charismatic leader. They still remember their lesson. We seem to have forgotten it already, and we were the supposed "good guys" in that fight.

Comparing Trump to Hitler is ridiculous. Utterly ridiculous. How many Jews has Trump gassed? How many countries has he invaded? This is a silly game, pointing to Germany and saying "learn that lesson". It's not relevant in this case. Just because Trump is "charismatic", doesn't make him a despot.

[Poopadoop]

Trump is so far off the scale compared to other US politicians.

Stop being biased Mojo. Try to understand your inner bias and work at removing it. If you criticize the most corrupt politicians now, you'll just spend the rest of your life complaining about any politican who ever bigs themselves up a bit or is even remotely tarnished in any way.

Signed,
Ong.

[OngBonga]

[OngBonga]

Stop being biased Mojo. Try to understand your inner bias and work at removing it. If you criticize the most corrupt politicians now, you'll just spend the rest of your life complaining about any politican who ever bigs themselves up a bit or is even remotely tarnished in any way.

Signed,
Ong.

This is you refusing to admit your bias clouds your judgment.

[CoccoBill]

The previous two presidents fucked the economy extremely badly. Trump turned that around.

Say what?

[Poopadoop]

The courts are corrupt. The media is corrupt. The entire system is corrupt. If you speak out, you get silenced, branded a "conspiracy theorist", you get pushed to the fringes of society. Or worse.

Go to Twitter and see how many people call Trump a liar, go through their timeline and see how many call out the lies of Dems. Call someone out on it, and laugh as you get blocked so they don't have to confront their bias.

Fuck me I would block some twat who did that too. If I tweeted about Boris' starve a kid to make a quid policy and you or Andrea Jenkins or Nigel Farage or some random pinhead came on my feed to call me a hypocrite 'cause Starmer lied about winning a bike race when he was a kid I would instablock you before I could blink.

I mean they are probably laughing even louder at you 'cause you have nothing better to do than try to reductio ad whatabout them.

Comparing Trump to Hitler is ridiculous. Utterly ridiculous.

He wasn't. He was talking about how Germany tries to educate people not to fall prey to populist demagogues.

Nice reductio ad bananum there though.

Just because Trump is "charismatic", doesn't make him a despot.

No, but it makes it easier.

[Poopadoop]

Who in this forum has expressed a view even remotely as stupid as that? Or, are you suggesting this is a commonly-held view on the left?

I never even heard of that guy which probably goes a long way to showing just how far his influence runs.

[OngBonga]

You're still refusing to confront your bias poop.

This is about politics to you, not corruption, not lies, it's pure politics.

[Poopadoop]

Say what?
...

I'll answer this for banana:

"Those aren't the graphs they showed on Fox News! What's going on here?! More conspiracies!"

[Poopadoop]

You're still refusing to confront your bias poop.

This is about politics to you, not corruption, not lies, it's pure politics.

When you become a paragon of objectivity in this and/or the Brexit thread, you can lecture me about political bias. Until then...

[OngBonga]

Who in this forum has expressed a view even remotely as stupid as that? Or, are you suggesting this is a commonly-held view on the left?

I never heard of that guy which probably goes a long way to showing just how far his influence runs.

I'd never heard of him either until this pooped up in my timeline, but I somehow have been blocked by him. It's a guy called Bill Palmer, claims to be a journalist. I had to dig around to find out what he was about. Check his website, it's relentless anti-Trump and anti-conservative propaganda. Like multiple articles a day.

Nobody here thinks this, not even oskar. But "commonly held view"? Sure it is. Maybe not this extreme, but it's getting there. Cancel culture shows us that. People listen to guys like this.

[OngBonga]

When you become a paragon of objectivity in this and/or the Brexit thread, you can lecture me about political bias. Until then...

Nice dismissal once again.

I at least try not to be biased. I don't call out one side and give the other side a free pass for the same thing. That's what you're doing.

[Poopadoop]

I'd never heard of him either until this pooped up in my timeline, but I somehow have been blocked by him. It's a guy called Bill Palmer, claims to be a journalist. I had to dig around to find out what he was about. Check his website, it's relentless anti-Trump and anti-conservative propaganda. Like multiple articles a day.

I can't even watch Joe Scarborough or most of NBC because it's so relentlessly anti-Trump. Why would I want to read some drivel by a third-rate journo?

Nobody here thinks this, not even oskar. But "commonly held view"? Sure it is. Maybe not this extreme, but it's getting there. Cancel culture shows us that. People listen to guys like this.

Data?

[Poopadoop]

Nice dismissal once again.

I at least try not to be biased. I don't call out one side and give the other side a free pass for the same thing. That's what you're doing.

Sorry? When did you call out Trump? There's 112 pages ITT so there must be at least one occasion you can refer to.

Re: the bolded. When did I say the left should storm the Capitol and try to stop the inaugaration in 2016? Or do you mean that I don't hold Biden's lying about his academic achievements on the same level as Trump's lying about losing the election and fomenting a coup d'tard?

[Mr.Banana]

But the scale is what matters. Trump is so far off the scale compared to other US politicians.

OOOOOHH YOU'RE SO CLOSE!!!

so what if other politician's sins are small-scale? They're still sins. And sins are bad. And those sins have fucked over the middle of america for decades now.

So when we vote Trump to send a message, it's not meant to be mild. It's meant to be a giant, orange-tinted "Fuck you" to the permanent bureaucracy in Washington. So it has to be large-scale.

Trump is SUPPOSED TO BE REPULSIVE

Everything you find disgusting about him is exactly why he's president.

[OngBonga]

Sorry? When did you call out Trump? There's 112 pages ITT so there must be at least one occasion you can refer to.

Re: the bolded. When did I say the left should storm the Capitol and try to stop the inaugaration in 2016? Or do you mean that I don't hold Biden's lying about his academic achievements on the same level as Trump's lying about losing the election and fomenting a coup d'tard?

When have I defended Trump? I've never suggested he's not a liar, I've never suggested he's a nice guy, I've never implied I support him.

And when did I call out Biden? Apart from the one example of him lying to provide you with an example.

I'm pretty sure 4 years ago I was calling out Clinton. I had a lot of bias four years ago, I had a lot of contempt for Clinton. I still do, but she and her husband are largely irrelevant now. But I've tried really hard to not focus on Biden and "call him out" in any way. They're all tarred with the same brush, as far as I'm concerned.

I try not to be biased. Do I fail sometimes? Sure. Point out my bias, point out where I treat one side differently to the other, and I'll try to address that bias.

There is a natural level of bias, I mean if you hold conservative views, you're going to tend more towards a conservative party than a neoliberal party. That isn't the same as ignoring the ills of conservatives while slating the neolibs for the same faults, like corruption, or being professional liars.

I don't even like the term neolib, but they're not classical liberals. They don't promote free market capitalism.

[Poopadoop]

OOOOOHH YOU'RE SO CLOSE!!!

so what if other politician's sins are small-scale? They're still sins. And sins are bad. And those sins have fucked over the middle of america for decades now.

So when we vote Trump to send a message, it's not meant to be mild. It's meant to be a giant, orange-tinted "Fuck you" to the permanent bureaucracy in Washington. So it has to be large-scale.

Trump is SUPPOSED TO BE REPULSIVE

Everything you find disgusting about him is exactly why he's president.

Not any more.

[Poopadoop]

When have I defended Trump? I've never suggested he's not a liar, I've never suggested he's a nice guy, I've never implied I support him.

Not calling out anyone for anything is at best apathetic, and at worst, tacit approval. Not expressing an opinion on anything does not make you objective.

I promise you if Biden loses in 2024 and tries to get the far-left to go postal on the Capitol, I will be the first to disown him. I'm not even a fan of his tbh. I just think having a grown-up in charge of the world's most important country is preferable to having an unstable loony in charge. One reason being that he's a lot less likely to try to incite his supporters to violence when things don't go his way.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Ong: what you do is you speak to power. You engage in the dialogue with the politicians. You write them letters, you phone their staffers, you give them feedback. Voting is only one form of engagement, and when people only voice their opinions on their politicians in a binary fashion once every few years, that's not giving them adequate, nuanced feedback.

What you do is you support the free press, and you hold anyone accountable to does anything to stifle the free press from reporting on what's going on.

What you do is seek out other intelligent people like yourself who have different perspectives on things and you try to understand their concerns and needs and incorporate all of that knowledge into your world view of what your culture is and needs.

What you don't do is entrench yourself into "us vs. them" mentality in which you allow yourself to think of other humans in ways that strips those people of their humanity. Even a corrupt politician is a human being, who lives in a world of half-truths and misunderstandings. No one knows everything, or has a perfect moral compass, and everyone is doing what they think is best as they see it. Allowing yourself to know that about them certainly complicates cultural matters, but not doing so is just giving in to lazy childishness. It's playground nonsense.

We're all on the same team. Left and Right... all trying to accomplish ultimately the same thing - what is best for our society. The vilification of the other side is just petty and puerile, and engaging in that crap is just your personal choice to put yourself near the bottom rung of engagement.


And more. I mean... We're adults, here. I don't need to describe what civic involvement is to you. If you're pretending you don't know, then fine... play your little game.


And lol at suggesting I'm comparing Trump to Hitler in any more of a sense than both were charismatic. Poop already clarified that what I was saying is, in fact, exactly what I said.

[MadMojoMonkey]

To the extent that Trump supporters are standing up for what they believe in and speaking out to corrupt powers, I totally support them.
To the extent that they continue to support positions that are demonstrably false - like a "stolen" election - I do not support that.
To the extent that there was a mob chanting to lynch the VP and forcing entry into the halls of Congress while it was in session - that I find very difficult to understand as positive civic protest.

The core of the movement to fight against an entrenched, corrupt political class is awesome.
I like it. I love it. I want to see more of it.
I just don't think Trump was the right guy for the job. I don't think he drained any swamp. I think he took a politically divided America and jammed a wedge as deep into that divide as he could.

I don't identify as Rep or Dem - as Liberal or Conservative - until you tell me the issue we're discussing. I'm pro-gun, pro-legalized drugs, pro-legalized prostitution, and also pro-open borders and pro-reform the way we approach policing mental health problems. I'm a complicated person - i.e. a person.

So presuming I'm anti-Trump because he's a Rep is both stupid and wrong. I'm not opposed to Trump because he's a politician, nor because he's a corrupt politician (redundant). I'm opposed to Trump because he has deepened the internal animosity of the American people. I'm opposed to Trump because I don't think a leader who "jokes" about drinking disinfectant deserves a microphone.

Everything you find disgusting about him is exactly why he's president.

When you try to argue against things I haven't said, positions I do not espouse - I can't take you seriously.

[Mr.Banana]

When you try to argue against things I haven't said, positions I do not espouse - I can't take you seriously.

Your last two posts said it all dude. Everything you don't like about Trump is exactly why people voted for him

[Mr.Banana]

The core of the movement to fight against an entrenched, corrupt political class is awesome.
I like it. I love it. I want to see more of it.
I just don't think Trump was the right guy for the job.

What do you think should have been done instead? And who should have done it?

Let's say they asked you, a monkey, to disrupt an entrenched, corrupt political class. What's your plan?

[CoccoBill]

Let's say they asked you, a monkey, to disrupt an entrenched, corrupt political class. What's your plan?

Not mojo but can act like a monkey, so I'll butt in:

- enforce maximum terms (maybe 2-3) on senate and house seats
- make it illegal for lobbyists to make campaign donations
- complete transparency for campaign donations
- stop gerrymandering
- get rid of the electoral college
- stricter regulations against conflicts of interest
- etc

Not:
- vote in a wannabe mafioso dictator

[Poopadoop]

Not a banana but I'll take a stab at acting like one.

Not mojo but can act like a monkey, so I'll butt in:

- enforce maximum terms (maybe 2-3) on senate and house seats
- make it illegal for lobbyists to make campaign donations
- complete transparency for campaign donations
- stop gerrymandering
- get rid of the electoral college
- stricter regulations against conflicts of interest
- etc

That's communism!

Not:
- vote in a wannabe mafioso dictator

But what if it's a wannabe mafioso dictator that will troll the libs?

[Poopadoop]

To be fair, the choice offered to Americans was to either:

a) maintain (2016) or return (2020) to the status quo

b) vote in a reality TV star wannabe mafioso dictator (who is also an idiot)


So in that context I have to agree the status quo must be pretty bad if a large minority of people thought b) was the better option the second time around as well.

[Mr.Banana]

Not mojo but can act like a monkey, so I'll butt in:

Ok, let's see how you do at being a monkey.

- enforce maximum terms (maybe 2-3) on senate and house seats

Term limits? This is just a wishlist item for corporate lobbyists. The donors for entrenched swamp monsters prevail over other interests. Those other interests want to see more turnover so they can have a turn to buy the politicians. Besides, 3 senate terms is 18 years. That's practically a whole generation. More than two presidential terms. I get that it supports the goal of "draining the swamp". But I just don't see what it will actually accomplish.

- make it illegal for lobbyists to make campaign donations

Then what would a lobbyist do? Are you simply arguing for the abolition of lobbyists?

- complete transparency for campaign donations

What does this mean? It's really not a secret where the money comes from.

- stop gerrymandering

Ok. How? And how will this disrupt an "entrenched political class"

- get rid of the electoral college

Why?

- stricter regulations against conflicts of interest

Like what?

- etc

Is that a suggestion?

Not:
- vote in a wannabe mafioso dictator

I guess it's just really cool to use superlative terms to describe Trump. It must make people feel good or something because it's just not supported by any fact at all.

What exactly has he done that you feel is "mafioso dictator-ish"?

[Mr.Banana]

Term limits, campaign finance changes, lobbying reforms....all the stuff Bill just suggested would only affect the legislative branch.

Frankly, the answer to the legislative branch is to expand it....dramatically. Congress should have 2000 members and there should be 500 senators.

The entrenched political class I'm worried about is in the executive branch. That branch has a million employees (3 mil if you count the military) and votes >90% democrat.

[Mr.Banana]

I don't know how many members are in the two houses of British Parliament, but I know the number is up there. The US House of representatives has 435 members. I'm not sure of the order, but I do know that those three lawmaking bodies represent the top 3 largest in the western world.

Do you know what #4 is?

[Poopadoop]

How do you stop gerrymandering? I don't know, but other countries have managed to recognize it's a problem and don't have it themselves, so that suggests there is a way. Possibly by not letting the people who have a vested interest draw the boundaries? That seems like a plan to me.

Why get rid of the EC? Because it's not proportional representation (duh). A better question is why a sheep farmer in Wyoming's vote should count x times as much as sheep farmer in Texas. Or why keep a system where an R voter in CA is basically wasting their time voting and a D voter in AL is too.

Stricter regulations against conflict of interest - how about not letting people hire their relatives into their administration? That would be a start. I'm sure there's other ways to do it too. Again though you might have to look outside your own borders to get ideas on that.

[Poopadoop]

I don't know how many members are in the two houses of British Parliament, but I know the number is up there. The US House of representatives has 435 members. I'm not sure of the order, but I do know that those three lawmaking bodies represent the top 3 largest in the western world.

Do you know what #4 is?

No idea.

Here's a q for you though: What is the point of having a senate? Isn't it basically just another congress on top of the one already there? So unless the POTUS, Congress, and Senate are all aligned, how does anything get done?

[Mr.Banana]

No idea.

It's the New Hampshire state legislature. For those of you in shithole countries, I'll explain. Every state in the US has it's own mini-congress. The State of New Hampshire's congress is the 4th largest legislative body in the west.

The state of NH is probably in the bottom five of US states ranked by population. Yet they have they have a top five sized congress in the world

[Poopadoop]

What exactly has he done that you feel is "mafioso dictator-ish"?

Witholding aid to Ukraine to try to get them to provide dirt on his political opponent springs to mind.

Telling G. Stephanopolous he wouldn't call the feds if a foreign country offered him a bribe is the second one I can think of off the top of my head.

Demanding "loyalty" from the head of the FBI, then firing him when he refused.

Saying Pence had betrayed him by not somehow stopping the confirmation of the election.

Giving his family members jobs in the administration, despite them having absolutely zero experience or qualifications.

Trying to bully, intimidate and/or discredit anyone who opposes any of his idiotic and/or criminal plans.

And I've probably forgotten more examples than I've listed here.

[Poopadoop]

It's the New Hampshire state legislature.

That should make for a good gun battle on Jan. 20. Link to a live feed?

[Mr.Banana]

The idea is that having so many members in congress, it's harder for lobbyists, donors, and special interests to affect policy. They would have to buy too many lawmakers to actually influence a vote.

Also, I really like Andrew Yang's idea of paying them shitloads of money, but denying them the ability to serve on corporate boards or as lobbyists after their term. If you want to get rich in washington, you can. Just do a good job representing your constituents and keep getting re-elected. Term limits kind of fucks this up.

[Mr.Banana]

, how does anything get done?

Here's the trick. The ideal state is that *nothing* gets done. Congress passing a law that 49% of the country hates is a really really bad idea. The only laws congress should get through are the ones with 70-80+ percent public support. The rest of the time, I prefer they just argue with each other and fail at just about everything.

[OngBonga]

That should make for a good gun battle on Jan. 20. Link to a live feed?

Portland Andy on youtube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eER3XAsvZs

He's currently going for a drive. Thrilling stuff. But tune in on the 20th and you'll have like six or so live streams on one screen.

[Mr.Banana]

Witholding aid to Ukraine to try to get them to provide dirt on his political opponent springs to mind.

He had a perfectly good reason.

Telling G. Stephanopolous he wouldn't call the feds if a foreign country offered him a bribe is the second one I can think of off the top of my head.

Why would he do that? What does that even mean "call the feds"? If you're POTUS, you ARE the feds!

Demanding "loyalty" from the head of the FBI, then firing him when he refused.

This story is grossly exaggerated. Comey deserved to get fired. The idea that he was doing a great job, but for failing to pledge loyalty, is pretty laughable.

Saying Pence had betrayed him by not somehow stopping the confirmation of the election.

Is that really a "dictator-ish" thing to do though? usually when subordinates of dictators disobey orders, they disappear. All Trump has done is whine.

Giving his family members jobs in the administration, despite them having absolutely zero experience or qualifications.

You're the head of the executive branch. It has a million employees virtually all of whom voted against you. Not only that, they have a derangement syndrome and hate your fucking guts. You don't think you'd install some allies (i.e. family) in some key areas?

I don't care what his qualifications are. I don't care if his IQ is 40. I want the person I trust the most to be my liason to China. the guy fucking my daughter is probably a good choice.

Trying to bully, intimidate and/or discredit anyone who opposes any of his idiotic and/or criminal plans.

lol. you're right, this guy is a just a fucking tyrant. Jeeeez

[Poopadoop]

He had a perfectly good reason.

Lost me right here (not that I'm surprised).

[Mr.Banana]

One of the "Impeachment Managers" is the same congressman who was recently exposed for having sex with a chinese spy working on his own staff.

That's the guy telling you that Trump is a danger to democracy.

[Mr.Banana]

That same guy went on TV and said that Osama bin Laden wasn't even in America on 9/11, but we can still hold him responsible.

And Trump is the same as Osama bin Laden.

He said that. On national TV.

That's the guy heading the impeachment charge.

[Mr.Banana]

After this aired, big-tech scrubbed her wikipedia page and locked access to the incriminating writings.

This is the person who will be calculating your social credit scores.

[Mr.Banana]

Lost me right here (not that I'm surprised).

Oh give me a break.

Biden threatened to withhold aid unless the prosecutor looking into his son's company was fired. This isn't speculation. Biden admitted it on tape. He said it...bragged about it. The way he tells the story, he told Ukraine "I said I'm getting on a plane in 6 hours, and if the prosecutor isn't fired, you're not getting the money"

If Trump used taxpayer dollars as leverage to bail Ivanka out of legal trouble, and bragged about it, you'd want to see him crucified. All Trump asked for was an investigation.

Please don't try to tell me that the ukraine impeachment was anything more than a political stunt

[Mr.Banana]

The difference between Trump and other politicians isn't the corruption. It's the scale of corruption.

Cmon on dude. He is literally the only person who ever took office in washington, any office, and left poorer than when he got in. No one else has done that.

How corrupt can he be?

Barack Obama was broke when he first became senator. Now he's worth $40 million. He only earned 3M for being president.

Nancy Pelosi makes $193K per year but somehow has a net worth of 117 million.


Are you really telling me Trump is worse? He lost money!!

[CoccoBill]

Term limits? This is just a wishlist item for corporate lobbyists. The donors for entrenched swamp monsters prevail over other interests. Those other interests want to see more turnover so they can have a turn to buy the politicians. Besides, 3 senate terms is 18 years. That's practically a whole generation. More than two presidential terms. I get that it supports the goal of "draining the swamp". But I just don't see what it will actually accomplish.

I'm convinced it wouldn't solve a lot, and not even convinced it would solve anything, but I think worth a shot. It would get rid of career politicians just wanting to hold onto their seats, for one. That's potentially a big deal.

Then what would a lobbyist do? Are you simply arguing for the abolition of lobbyists?

Um they would lobby? You know, present their case, argue, justify, provide facts. They are an important part of democracy, but they should not be able to bribe.

What does this mean? It's really not a secret where the money comes from.

Trade association groups, non-profits, super PACs etc. donate hundreds of million each election cycle, and do not need to disclose pretty much anything. That's one issue, I'm sure there are more. It's mandatory to know who's indebted to what parties to identify conflicts of interest. Ideally money played no part in politics, but that's a pipe dream.

Ok. How? And how will this disrupt an "entrenched political class"

The main purpose of gerrymandering is to entrench the governing party's political support. How? You'll probably need someone more qualified than a monkey on an abandoned poker forum.

Why?

A direct popular vote would likely be far more democratic and have less issues.

Like what?

https://www.cmi.no/publications/file...hallenging.pdf

Is that a suggestion?

Yes. I don't have all the answers, those are just what I came up with on the spot. There's plenty that could and should be done.

I guess it's just really cool to use superlative terms to describe Trump. It must make people feel good or something because it's just not supported by any fact at all.

What exactly has he done that you feel is "mafioso dictator-ish"?

- using threats and extortion (eg. he was impeached once for that with Ukraine, demanding Georgia "find" him some votes, demanding Pence not certify the election results...)
- trying to overturn the election
- etc.

You know exactly what about his actions is wannabe mafioso dictator-ish.

[CoccoBill]

Term limits, campaign finance changes, lobbying reforms....all the stuff Bill just suggested would only affect the legislative branch.

Frankly, the answer to the legislative branch is to expand it....dramatically. Congress should have 2000 members and there should be 500 senators.

The entrenched political class I'm worried about is in the executive branch. That branch has a million employees (3 mil if you count the military) and votes >90% democrat.

I'd like a source on that >90%, but even if that were true, it's the legislative that make the rules, the executive just act upon those rules, as the names suggest. One is IMO a far bigger priority.

Answered to the previous and this without reading the rest of the thread, Poop gave good examples to many points already.

[CoccoBill]

Cmon on dude. He is literally the only person who ever took office in washington, any office, and left poorer than when he got in. No one else has done that.

Source?

[Mr.Banana]

I'd like a source on that >90%,

Voter registration data for the city of washington dc shows that it's only 5% republican.
https://www.dcboe.org/CMSPages/GetFi...0-dff333ec863c

Also, you can easily google "DC election results" and see that Biden got 93%.

Why are you challenging things that are so trivially easy to prove?

it's the legislative that make the rules, the executive just act upon those rules, as the names suggest.

lol, that's what they teach in 4th grade, but it's wrong. The executive branch is where the corrupt concentration of power lies. That's why they hated Donald Trump so much.

One is IMO a far bigger priority.

Yeah, I know. It's not the legislative branch.

[Mr.Banana]

Source? (of trump's net worth)

You can easily google this shit yourself dude. Cmon. If you want to cross-examine something I post....go ahead. Post your own contrary evidence though.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ne...of-presidents/

Snopes has a bullshit explanation for why it's ok that Obama is so rich. It says that ex presidents can write books etc. Except Obama's $10M from his book deals came WHILE he was president.

[CoccoBill]

Voter registration data for the city of washington dc shows that it's only 5% republican.
https://www.dcboe.org/CMSPages/GetFi...0-dff333ec863c

Also, you can easily google "DC election results" and see that Biden got 93%.

Why are you challenging things that are so trivially easy to prove?

According to your source 76.8% are dems, not >90%. Thanks for the link.

lol, that's what they teach in 4th grade, but it's wrong. The executive branch is where the corrupt concentration of power lies. That's why they hated Donald Trump so much.

Arguably the executive does have power sure, when they interpret the rules made by the legislative, and that can in some cases majorly affect the results. That doesn't change the fact that the legislative makes the rules, and it's on them if they leave room for interpretation.

[CoccoBill]

You can easily google this shit yourself dude. Cmon. If you want to cross-examine something I post....go ahead. Post your own contrary evidence though.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ne...of-presidents/

That's from 2017. My point is, we don't know what Trump's net worth was before elections, since he hasn't released his full tax reports, and we don't know what it is now. Maybe that pesky audit will soon end and he'll release them.

[Mr.Banana]

we don't know what Trump's net worth was before elections, since he hasn't released his full tax reports, and we don't know what it is now. Maybe that pesky audit will soon end and he'll release them.

none of this is right. every word is wrong. Candidates have to file all kinds of financial disclosures, hundreds of pages in fact. So we do know what Trump's net worth is. Even the snopes article admits that the numbers are right.

And stop with the tax return stuff. You wouldn't know what to make of them if they fell in your lap tomorrow.

[CoccoBill]

So 10 senators voted for impeachment. That's not many, but I guess still a bit surprising. Those 10 did that knowing they'll face the wrath of Trumpster divers, so in effect putting their career in jeopardy. Very few people make those decisions lightly, most of them probably have families to take care of. It's sad that those things directly interfere with the job they're doing, which should be making things better, not pandering to whoever can further their own careers.