Political Discussion Thread (With Rules)

[Pattern Ghost]

Well, that gives Blue Screen of Death a whole new meaning.

[megaplayboy]

9 hours ago, death tribble said:

The Joint Enterprise Defence Infrastructure project is awarded to Microsoft

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-50191242

whoever came up with the name is a Star Wars fan and did it deliberately.

I assume Amazon's lawyers are carefully scrutinizing the language of the decision.  Given Trump's antipathy and that he reportedly asked Mattis to "screw them" out of the contract, I'd imagine they're chomping at the bit to sue over this.  

[Lord Liaden]

Donald Trump was roundly booed when he attended Game 5 of the World Series, as well being greeted with chants of, "Lock him up!" On an admittedly petty and spiteful level, this pleases me. Trump is overdue for a taste of what his country thinks of him outside of his Fox News, MAGA rally, White House sycophant bubble.

[Iuz the Evil]

Seriously, Washington Post? Really? They actually deserve the scorn they're getting on this one. The #WaPodeathnotices tag is hilarious. 

 

Adolf Hitler, passionate community planner and dynamic public speaker, dies at 56.

 

Scar, political idealist and leader of Pride Rock who made history by integrating the lion and hyena communities, is dead after a coup d’etat.

 

Osama bin Laden, real estate developer and devoted father dies at age 54

 

Jeffrey Dahmer, lover of exotic cuisine, dies at 34

 

Edit: (love this one) Bane, city planner who overcame physical pain to level the playing field, dies at 37

[ScottishFox]

I've been pretty shocked how some of the media outlets have spoken about the dead leader of ISIS in ways that make him seem like a nice and respectable guy and not the leader of a terrorist group so villainous they give Nazi's actual competition.

 

[Hermit]

5 minutes ago, ScottishFox said:

I've been pretty shocked how some of the media outlets have spoken about the dead leader of ISIS in ways that make him seem like a nice and respectable guy and not the leader of a terrorist group so villainous they give Nazi's actual competition.

 

 

Yeah, Iuz's message was the first I heard of WaPo's screw up. I feel sorry for the guy  who wrote the article. I don't know what editor changed the title on him but geez. They changed it again, but the damage to their rep has been done.

 

[Hermit]

On 10/28/2019 at 6:26 AM, Lord Liaden said:

Donald Trump was roundly booed when he attended Game 5 of the World Series, as well being greeted with chants of, "Lock him up!" On an admittedly petty and spiteful level, this pleases me. Trump is overdue for a taste of what his country thinks of him outside of his Fox News, MAGA rally, White House sycophant bubble.

 

It was glorious!  I haven't watched Baseball in decades and suddenly I think I'm a Nationals fan

or at least a fan of their fans!

 

 

[death tribble]

There will be an election in Britain shortly. Oh what fun !

[Cygnia]

Be safe, DT...

[Hermit]

30 minutes ago, death tribble said:

There will be an election in Britain shortly. Oh what fun !

 

Lay back, close your eyes, and think of England.

 

*Salutes*

 

[Lord Liaden]

The worst part is the election in the UK may not resolve the Brexit impasse that precipitated it. None of the parties or party leaders are well liked or trusted enough to assume any party can muster the support to form a majority, so the country may end up back in the same boondoggle.

[ScottishFox]

What is happening with the media outlets?

 

 

[Joe Walsh]

Looks like the correction was published on the 23rd:

https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2019/10/18/us/politics/ap-us-election-2020-gabbard-clinton.html

 

Here's a story about the source audio that resulted in the correction:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7605303/Hillary-Clinton-DIDNT-call-Tulsi-Gabbard-Russian-spy-claimed-Republicans-grooming-her.html

 

Sometimes traditional media behave problematically, but more often I find it's social media that's untrustworthy.

[TrickstaPriest]

1 hour ago, GM Joe said:

Sometimes traditional media behave problematically, but more often I find it's social media that's untrustworthy.

 

Indeed.  And I appreciate any effort put into research and references.

[DShomshak]

 

 

A while back, pondering American options in the Middle East, I suggested that if the US and allies kept playing whack-a-mole with terrorists and smacking down the occasional despot, something better might gradually emerge on its own. According to the episode of the radio program On the Media I heard a couple weeks ago, that was actually happening among the Kurds of NE Syria. Their attempt at creating a new state as a governing model for post Assad Syria has gone through several acronymic name changes but the informal name is Rojava: You can find more about it on Wikipedia under that name, though the leader warns not every source cited is trustworthy.

 

 

rojava is trying to be democratic: Accusations of authoritarianism have been made, but in the Middle East this is the pot calling the kettle black. The Turkish government line is that it's a Marxist totalitarian hell that people can't get out of fast enough, but I would call that source unreliable. It is undeniable that the Kurdish political groups such as the YPG are spun off from the PKK, which undeniably commits terrorist acts against Turkey; but political terrorists have made the transition to respectable politician before. And Rojava isn't using weapons of mass destruction against its own people, so by grading on the Middle Eastern curve it's doing pretty well. Or was, before Trump pulled the rug out.

 

Incidentally, Rojava's leaders claim their goal is not to create a Kurdish state. Rojava's population encompasses Kurds and Arabs as the largest ethnic groups, but also Assyrian Christians (multiple confessions), Turkmens, and smaller groups such as Circassians. But it's Kurdish enough to seem an existential threat to Turkey, who (I am told) for decades have had the official doctrine that Kurds do not exist: They are "Mountain Turks." That's one problem with nationalism: The "nations" on which states are supposed to be built often do not really exist.

 

I could rant on this a bit more, but I have chores now.

 

Dean Shomshak

[ScottishFox]

1 hour ago, GM Joe said:

Looks like the correction was published on the 23rd:

https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2019/10/18/us/politics/ap-us-election-2020-gabbard-clinton.html

 

Here's a story about the source audio that resulted in the correction:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7605303/Hillary-Clinton-DIDNT-call-Tulsi-Gabbard-Russian-spy-claimed-Republicans-grooming-her.html

 

Sometimes traditional media behave problematically, but more often I find it's social media that's untrustworthy.

 

In the audio HRC clearly says, "She's a favorite of the Russians".

 

'I'm not making any predictions,' Clinton said, 'but I think they've got their eye on somebody who's currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third party candidate. She's a favorite of the Russians. They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far.'

 

Not sure why Hillary even cares about Tulsi at this point.  Tulsi was trending under 2% until the Hillary - Russian thing bumped her - briefly - into the 5% range and resulted in a lot of free attention.

[TrickstaPriest]

11 minutes ago, ScottishFox said:

Not sure why Hillary even cares about Tulsi at this point.  Tulsi was trending under 2% until the Hillary - Russian thing bumped her - briefly - into the 5% range and resulted in a lot of free attention.

 

It's kind of petty and absurd.  Which sounds exactly like our politicians and congress.

[Ranxerox]

1 hour ago, ScottishFox said:

 

In the audio HRC clearly says, "She's a favorite of the Russians".

 

'I'm not making any predictions,' Clinton said, 'but I think they've got their eye on somebody who's currently in the Democratic primary and are grooming her to be the third party candidate. She's a favorite of the Russians. They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far.'

 

Not sure why Hillary even cares about Tulsi at this point.  Tulsi was trending under 2% until the Hillary - Russian thing bumped her - briefly - into the 5% range and resulted in a lot of free attention.

 

Yes, she did say that the person that she believed was being groomed by the Republicans for a third party run was a "favorite of the Russians".  That is not the same as saying that person was being groomed by the Russians.  That is saying the person being groomed by the Republicans, also happens to be a favorite of the Russians.

[megaplayboy]

17 minutes ago, Ranxerox said:

 

Yes, she did say that the person that she believed was being groomed by the Republicans for a third party run was a "favorite of the Russians".  That is not the same as saying that person was being groomed by the Russians.  That is saying the person being groomed by the Republicans, also happens to be a favorite of the Russians.

Correct.  Evidence in favor: 1) Frequent appearances on Fox News, on which she generally bashes Democrats or the Democratic party; 2) Favorable mention of Gabbard on Fox News, particularly in contrast to leading Democratic candidates; 3) Promotion of Gabbard by alt-right types online; 4) Heavy promotion of Gabbard and favorable coverage of her on English-language Russian media like RT/Russia Today.  Being the "favorite Democratic candidate of Fox News(and Russian state tv)" is not a great strategy for winning the Democratic nomination for president, but if you're planning a 3rd party spoiler candidacy to undermine the Dem nominee, it's a pretty solid plan.  

Gabbard fits the profile for a 3rd party spoiler candidate, one who damages the Democratic nominee in two ways; first, by attacking the Dem nominee from the ostensible left(sometimes from the center, as "too extreme"); second, by siphoning away a few votes in key battleground states.  

[TrickstaPriest]

12 minutes ago, megaplayboy said:

2) Favorable mention of Gabbard on Fox News, particularly in contrast to leading Democratic candidates; 3) Promotion of Gabbard by alt-right types online; 4) Heavy promotion of Gabbard and favorable coverage of her on English-language Russian media like RT/Russia Today

 

These are the ones that I find particularly notable, specifically.  I wonder how much information there is available on #4.

[Ranxerox]

1 hour ago, megaplayboy said:

Gabbard fits the profile for a 3rd party spoiler candidate, one who damages the Democratic nominee in two ways; first, by attacking the Dem nominee from the ostensible left(sometimes from the center, as "too extreme"); second, by siphoning away a few votes in key battleground states.  

 

She may fit the profile, but I can see the backfiring on them.  Gabbard is only polling around 2%, and given Gabbard's status as the favorite Democrat of Trump supporters, how many of those 2% were a really gung ho to vote Democrat anyway?  She could, maybe, hurt to Democrats by giving Never Trump Republicans someone to vote for other Democratic nominee. However, she could just as easily, give Republicans who can't bring themselves to ever vote Democrat (particularly if a progressive like Warren or Sanders is nominated) someone to vote for other than Trump.  This is especially relevant in the likely event that the Senate refuses to remove Trump, but the impeachment process digs up enough dirt that all but "ride or die" Trump supporters abandon him.

[Pariah]

5 hours ago, DShomshak said:

A while back, pondering American options in the Middle East, I suggested that if the US and allies kept playing whack-a-mole with terrorists and smacking down the occasional despot, something better might gradually emerge on its own. According to the episode of the radio program On the Media I heard a couple weeks ago, that was actually happening among the Kurds of NE Syria. Their attempt at creating a new state as a governing model for post Assad Syria has gone through several acronymic name changes but the informal name is Rojava: You can find more about it on Wikipedia under that name, though the leader warns not every source cited is trustworthy.

 

Rojava is trying to be democratic: Accusations of authoritarianism have been made, but in the Middle East this is the pot calling the kettle black. The Turkish government line is that it's a Marxist totalitarian hell that people can't get out of fast enough, but I would call that source unreliable. It is undeniable that the Kurdish political groups such as the YPG are spun off from the PKK, which undeniably commits terrorist acts against Turkey; but political terrorists have made the transition to respectable politician before. And Rojava isn't using weapons of mass destruction against its own people, so by grading on the Middle Eastern curve it's doing pretty well. Or was, before Trump pulled the rug out.

 

Incidentally, Rojava's leaders claim their goal is not to create a Kurdish state. Rojava's population encompasses Kurds and Arabs as the largest ethnic groups, but also Assyrian Christians (multiple confessions), Turkmens, and smaller groups such as Circassians. But it's Kurdish enough to seem an existential threat to Turkey, who (I am told) for decades have had the official doctrine that Kurds do not exist: They are "Mountain Turks." That's one problem with nationalism: The "nations" on which states are supposed to be built often do not really exist.

 

I heard about this on NPR a few days ago. It's fascinating. The fascinating thing, I thought, was their emphasis on gender equality. That's not something you hear much about in that part of the world.

 

I wish more people in the U.S. were more knowledgeable about Rojava. (I wish I were one of them. Maybe after I graduate.)

[Pariah]

Interesting statement from Barack Obama:

 

"This idea of purity and you're never compromised and you're always politically woke and all that stuff, you should get over that quickly"

 

tl;dr version: You can't enact change if all you're doing is throwing rocks on social media.

[megaplayboy]

6 hours ago, Pariah said:

Interesting statement from Barack Obama:

 

"This idea of purity and you're never compromised and you're always politically woke and all that stuff, you should get over that quickly"

 

tl;dr version: You can't enact change if all you're doing is throwing rocks on social media.

The problem with this is that it presents a false dichotomy. Of course people can engage in real social activism to enact positive change, AND call out problematic statements and behavior of public figures and people in positions of authority.  

[BNakagawa]

On 10/28/2019 at 3:26 AM, Lord Liaden said:

Donald Trump was roundly booed when he attended Game 5 of the World Series, as well being greeted with chants of, "Lock him up!" On an admittedly petty and spiteful level, this pleases me. Trump is overdue for a taste of what his country thinks of him outside of his Fox News, MAGA rally, White House sycophant bubble.

 

I doubt he has the guts to show up at their victory parade...