2020 US Presidential Election

[FGG]

I don't think they will force people to get the COVID-19 vaccine. If they make it mandatory there would be so much backlash. What happens if you had vaccines in the past that have affected you. Are they still going to force those people to get the COVID-19 vaccine?

By the way I'm not an anti-vaxxer. I have taken a few vaccines in the past. Since this COVID-19 vaccine is brand new and it's not just one type of COVID-19 vaccine we need to look out for others too. I may take it in a few years time and want to make sure there are no major side effects.

The Cornell entry requirement was for the flu vaccine only, not the COVID-19 vaccine.

 

[FGG]

It was bad for that article to mislead people thinking that they were making it mandatory for one race and not the other.

I think the way it was worded could have been better. If they didn't mention about people of colour being used as a science experiment then right wing media would not have manipulated the article much.

I could see why right wing media would edit that part out cause they would know that some black people don't want to get the COVID-19 vaccine due to them being used as a science experiment in the past and they would be able to get a free pass but whereas white people have no excuse to complain cause apparently people are saying their privilege.

Obama talked about this recently. Liberals in general are way too careless with wording in a way that can be very easily manipulated and misconstrued.

He used the example of "defund the police" which was supposed to mean "shift some of the funding towards social and preventative programs" but instead was reported by the right to say the left wants no police departments at all (which is what anarchists want but that's a very small part of society and certainly not anyone in power).

"De-militarize the police" would have been much clearer and harder to distort by both the right and by anarchist who might actually want no police at all.

Bernie ran into this problem, too. People are just not going to learn the difference between Democratic socialism (Scandinavia) and Autocratic Socialism (China) so he shouldn't have used the word at all.

 

[Luman]

All these corrupt, lying politicians have to do, is de-unionize the police, and fire all the bad ones before they kill. The Democrats are the biggest pack of phonies in the universe. They know damn well that the unions are the stumbling block, yet they won't do anything about it. BLM won't, either. None of them want to solve the problems with bad cops, so they'll let the lunatics remain on the force, and kill people. Defunding the police is the worst idea ever imagined, as a response to the minority of bad cops on police forces.

 

[Lucifer]

Obama talked about this recently. Liberals in general are way too careless with wording in a way that can be very easily manipulated and misconstrued.

He used the example of "defund the police" which was supposed to mean "shift some of the funding towards social and preventative programs" but instead was reported by the right to say the left wants no police departments at all (which is what anarchists want but that's a very small part of society and certainly not anyone in power).

"De-militarize the police" would have been much clearer and harder to distort by both the right and by anarchist who might actually want no police at all.

Bernie ran into this problem, too. People are just not going to learn the difference between Democratic socialism (Scandinavia) and Autocratic Socialism (China) so he shouldn't have used the word at all.

I agree they should have never used the phrase defund the police. I knew they didn't mean that but clearly some people thought they meant get rid of police completely. Demilitarised or reformation would have been a better term.

Interpretation is really important and people need to make sure that the words that they say are clear and concise. The information could have been interpreted and manipulated on either side.

 

[Lilah]

I agree they should have never used the phrase defund the police. I knew they didn't mean that but clearly some people thought they meant get rid of police completely. Demilitarised or reformation would have been a better term.

Interpretation is really important and people need to make sure that the words that they say are clear and concise. The information could have been interpreted and manipulated on either side.

He used the example of "defund the police" which was supposed to mean "shift some of the funding towards social and preventative programs" but instead was reported by the right to say the left wants no police departments at all (which is what anarchists want but that's a very small part of society and certainly not anyone in power).

"De-militarize the police" would have been much clearer and harder to distort by both the right and by anarchist who might actually want no police at all.

Watch this CNN interview...the guest didn't even bother to answer the question on who to call if someone needs the police. CHAZ/CHOP, the Democratic utopia zone that existed in Seattle for a few weeks, was a police-free zone. Many people did think at least a large potion of Democrats were serious about defunding the police, understandably. Also, what does "De-militarize the police" mean, no guns?

 

[Lucifer]

Watch this CNN interview...the guest didn't even bother to answer the question on who to call if someone needs the police. CHAZ/CHOP, the Democratic utopia zone that existed in Seattle for a few weeks, was a police-free zone. Many people did think at least a large potion of Democrats were serious about defunding the police, understandably. Also, what does "De-militarize the police" mean, no guns?

Demilitarise the police, meaning only using deadly force when necessary. For example if someone is unarmed the police should only be using tasers and pepper spray for this situation if someone doesn't cooperate. Another example is that if someone is armed with a gun or knife then the police have every right to use deadly force if they don't cooperate.

The police need to be held accountable for themselves but also for each other as well. They are serving the public and need to be excellent role models to society.

The reason why there are bad cops is that no one tells them to stop when they are using deadly force when it's not necessary as they are afraid to get fired from their job. So far on videos where the cop kills someone unarmed you don't hear any of the cops around them telling him or her to stop.

To mitigate this problem they need to get rid of the unions trying to protect those cops that have been charged for killing innocent people. The investigation needs to be separate from the union.

I also believe they need to increase the amount of training in the programme before someone becomes a cop. Wasn't the training only like 10-12 weeks or something like that? It should be at least 1-3 years and when someone becomes a cop there needs to be supervision for the first few years to make sure that they know how to do their job properly.

 

[PeteJ]

California socialist? Is their tech industry nationalised? If I recall correctly, one of their biggest money makers is still very much privatised over there. You can still be a capitalist market economy with a slight increase in minimum wage or a basic welfare program for the poor and disabled. Countries with the far right in power even have these "socialist" policies.

Norway has more public ownership (almost half of the oil industry is nationalised). How much public ownership does California have on its tech industry in comparison? Oh and Norway is also the most developed country in the world in terms of human development index. If California is socialist than Norway is a communist dictatorship.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_inequality-adjusted_HDI

The far right is not in power anywhere.

You need to research California if you don't know anything about it.

The economy there is in tatters. The state is practically bankrupt. Apparently, there is crap, literally, all over San Francisco.

Companies have left in droves including tech because they are getting taxed into oblivion to pay for a decaying socialist experiment.

You can't compare it with Norway which relied mostly on oil for decades. Even the oil market has hit a rough patch.

 

[PeteJ]

I don't think they will force people to get the COVID-19 vaccine. If they make it mandatory there would be so much backlash. What happens if you had vaccines in the past that have affected you. Are they still going to force those people to get the COVID-19 vaccine?

By the way I'm not an anti-vaxxer. I have taken a few vaccines in the past. Since this COVID-19 vaccine is brand new and it's not just one type of COVID-19 vaccine we need to look out for others too. I may take it in a few years time and want to make sure there are no major side effects.

It is going to be mandatory. You won't be able to get into places without it: schools, hospitals, medical clinics, airplanes (travel) etc. If they require it to enter grocery stores and to renew your license, it's game over.

It's funny people say it's not mandatory... "you don't need to eat!"

Lol.

 

[FGG]

Watch this CNN interview...the guest didn't even bother to answer the question on who to call if someone needs the police. CHAZ/CHOP, the Democratic utopia zone that existed in Seattle for a few weeks, was a police-free zone. Many people did think at least a large potion of Democrats were serious about defunding the police, understandably. Also, what does "De-militarize the police" mean, no guns?

Demilitarize does not mean no guns. It means no grenade launchers and tanks in some cities:

https://www.marketplace.org/2020/06/12/police-departments-1033-military-equipment-weapons/

Because if you equip police like the military, then the public becomes the "enemy combatants."

Use this funding instead on programs for the betterment of society, which ultimately reduces crime.

 

[aot]

This image pretty much sums up what most people mean when they say "Defund The Police."

 

[FGG]

View attachment 42208

This image pretty much sums up what most people mean when they say "Defund The Police."

To add to this, private prisons are part of the problem, too. It's just too profitable to avoid preventive measures to avoid jailing people for drug offenses.

 

[Luman]

As Attorney General of California, Kamala Harris was uncooperative with the concept of reducing the prison population, of inmates who were sentenced for non-violent offenses. In fact, she fought to keep them locked up, and increase the number of prisoners in the already crowded, unsafe, expensive facilities. A damning article, below.

How Kamala Harris Fought to Keep Nonviolent Prisoners Locked Up

 

[FGG]

As Attorney General of California, Kamala Harris was uncooperative with the concept of reducing the prison population, of inmates who were sentenced for non-violent offenses. In fact, she fought to keep them locked up, and increase the number of prisoners in the already crowded, unsafe, expensive facilities. A damning article, below.

How Kamala Harris Fought to Keep Nonviolent Prisoners Locked Up

See, THIS is something to criticize, not sexual history.

If you recall, the progressives in the thread were less than thrilled about Biden's choice for reasons like this.

 

[Lane]

Just ran across an interesting article where Washington Post readers were asked to describe 2020 in one word or phrase. They were then asked what they were hopeful for in 2021. I especially like what Dan from Portland was hopeful for in 2021. It would probably be my fondest hope as well.

Nightmare
"If you've ever experienced a nightmare that you struggled to wake up from and woke up screaming and covered in sweat, you would know why that word best describes 2020."

What are you hopeful for in 2021?
"Never again seeing, hearing or reading about Trump."

— Dan Hutchinson, 72, Portland, Ore.

 

[TeeOh]

Bernie ran into this problem, too. People are just not going to learn the difference between Democratic socialism (Scandinavia) and Autocratic Socialism (China) so he shouldn't have used the word at all.

They don't care about that. I mean this Fox News anchor made the image of poor people getting an education in Denmark a bad thing. I mean you need a degree for some high paying jobs.



Even if they're really technical about their economics, their debates about whether or not they should adopt Scandinavian policies normally end up like this.

Believe it or not, but speaking of Scandinavia (going to use Norway in this example) and China soon you brought them up, they actually have a lot of similarities when it comes to how they organise their economy lol. They're both huge on State owned enterprises and nationalisation, except Norway might be more "socialist" than communist China in some areas like how much of the countries wealth the government owns from public ownership (which was a huge thing in socialist countries during the cold war).

List of Government Enterprises of Norway

State-Owned Enterprises of China

"Norway is more socialist than communist China? It must be a third world country over there compared to here! Socialism never works! Wait, you're telling me they're the most developed country in the world?? That's not socialism!"

 

[linearb]

Bernie ran into this problem, too. People are just not going to learn the difference between Democratic socialism (Scandinavia) and Autocratic Socialism (China) so he shouldn't have used the word at all.

On the one hand, yes, you're right.

On the other hand -- the American right is going to always brand their opponent "socialist", because it fires up their base. Biden, who is, by record, by statements, by all appearances, just another neolib centrist, was called a "socialist" who would "destroy the suburbs" by the GOP attack dog ads.

More or less, political ads and messaging is so completely detached from reality at this point, that maybe all that matters in terms of moving public opinion is Overton Window shifts? If that's really true, it means the only weapon the Dems have left, is to start using the same super extreme rhetoric of the right. ("YES, we ARE coming to take your guns. YES, we ARE going to tax you more to provide healthcare to people who make too little money to pay taxes! YES, we ARE going to require that every K-12 child attend one Gay Wedding as part of their education! YES, we ARE going to collect old stupid dogmatic religious texts and have big book burning parties. GAY BIBLE BURNING FOR ALL!")

This might rile up a certain amount of the younger liberal base, but it would completely lose old centrists, who don't know what a meme or an Overton Window shift is.

Biden won by threading a needle and pulling those old centrists. I am not confident Bernie would have been able to even though ultimately he's another Old White Guy Millionaire, and so the AOCs of the party are definitely fighting over table scraps, policy wise.

I think we're headed for Russia style oligarchy here, more or less. I don't really know if it's avoidable at this point, so I am mostly focused on trying to figure out what I need to do to give my kid a path to go to college in some Better Place and then never come back unless they want to for some horrible reason.

 

[Luman]

See, THIS is something to criticize, not sexual history.

If you recall, the progressives in the thread were less than thrilled about Biden's choice for reasons like this.

Her "sexual history" in and of itself, was never a problem. What people fail to understand, or PRETEND to not understand, is that trading sex for government jobs, and very powerful political influence, which Harris did through a sexual liaison with the powerful California Democrat Willie Brown, is the main reason that Harris was able to become the next Vice President. I will keep on saying this, no matter how many times I am accused of being a prude or misogynistic. I will also continue to remind those who continue to bring it up as a non-issue, that people of any gender or sexual preference are at fault if they perform sex for the purpose of obtaining political appointments in the government, as are their partners who reward them for sex by bestowing them with government jobs and political influence. I find it hard to be believe that you do not understand this concept or, if you do, that you actually believe that trading sex for government jobs, and political influence, is acceptable in government.

 

[TeeOh]

On the one hand, yes, you're right.

On the other hand -- the American right is going to always brand their opponent "socialist", because it fires up their base. Biden, who is, by record, by statements, by all appearances, just another neolib centrist, was called a "socialist" who would "destroy the suburbs" by the GOP attack dog ads.

More or less, political ads and messaging is so completely detached from reality at this point, that maybe all that matters in terms of moving public opinion is Overton Window shifts? If that's really true, it means the only weapon the Dems have left, is to start using the same super extreme rhetoric of the right. ("YES, we ARE coming to take your guns. YES, we ARE going to tax you more to provide healthcare to people who make too little money to pay taxes! YES, we ARE going to require that every K-12 child attend one Gay Wedding as part of their education! YES, we ARE going to collect old stupid dogmatic religious texts and have big book burning parties. GAY BIBLE BURNING FOR ALL!")

One of my favourite right-wing conspiracy theories is when they say the liBRuLs are promoting "gay propaganda" to make communism more possible LMAO . It's supposed to be scary, but it comes off as satire. They said equal rights for black Americans and race mixing was communism not so long ago too.

 

[Lane]

it would completely lose old centrists, who don't know what a meme or an Overton Window shift is.

Uh, what's a meme?

 

[Born To Slay]

On the one hand, yes, you're right.

On the other hand -- the American right is going to always brand their opponent "socialist", because it fires up their base. Biden, who is, by record, by statements, by all appearances, just another neolib centrist, was called a "socialist" who would "destroy the suburbs" by the GOP attack dog ads.

More or less, political ads and messaging is so completely detached from reality at this point, that maybe all that matters in terms of moving public opinion is Overton Window shifts? If that's really true, it means the only weapon the Dems have left, is to start using the same super extreme rhetoric of the right. ("YES, we ARE coming to take your guns. YES, we ARE going to tax you more to provide healthcare to people who make too little money to pay taxes! YES, we ARE going to require that every K-12 child attend one Gay Wedding as part of their education! YES, we ARE going to collect old stupid dogmatic religious texts and have big book burning parties. GAY BIBLE BURNING FOR ALL!")

This might rile up a certain amount of the younger liberal base, but it would completely lose old centrists, who don't know what a meme or an Overton Window shift is.

Biden won by threading a needle and pulling those old centrists. I am not confident Bernie would have been able to even though ultimately he's another Old White Guy Millionaire, and so the AOCs of the party are definitely fighting over table scraps, policy wise.

I think we're headed for Russia style oligarchy here, more or less. I don't really know if it's avoidable at this point, so I am mostly focused on trying to figure out what I need to do to give my kid a path to go to college in some Better Place and then never come back unless they want to for some horrible reason.

I think if that happened, you'd actually see the rise of a third party for all the lame Joe Manchin and Susan Collins types to be in.

 

[just1morething]

Uh, what's a meme?

Some of you would be better suited to a political forum than a tinnitus forum.

 

[just1morething]

Message from the President of the United States. I think it means you're #1, but can't be positive? He was probably trying to get your vote. It's my noise talking, not me.

 

[FGG]

Her "sexual history" in and of itself, was never a problem. What people fail to understand, or PRETEND to not understand, is that trading sex for government jobs, and very powerful political influence, which Harris did through a sexual liaison with the powerful California Democrat Willie Brown, is the main reason that Harris was able to become the next Vice President. I will keep on saying this, no matter how many times I am accused of being a prude or misogynistic. I will also continue to remind those who continue to bring it up as a non-issue, that people of any gender or sexual preference are at fault if they perform sex for the purpose of obtaining political appointments in the government, as are their partners who reward them for sex by bestowing them with government jobs and political influence. I find it hard to be believe that you do not understand this concept or, if you do, that you actually believe that trading sex for government jobs, and political influence, is acceptable in government.

The fact is you are taking a consensual relationship where the guy happened to be much older and saying it must be prostitution because he helped her get a job she was qualified for is the problem.

People help their lovers every single day.

Yeah nepotism is annoying but geez, look at the entire Trump family.

You really think Jared is qualified to lead a COVID-19 task force?

You think Ivanka is qualified to meet with foreign leaders?

You think Melania deserved a "Genius Grant" while working as a model?

Call it nepotism, fine, but you have zero evidence Harris traded her body for a job. And what's more is even if he got her an "in", she kept advancing based on her own merits.

The entire language you use "whore" and "bimbo" (Harris a bimbo... really? You think she is only a dumb sex object. For real?) is deeply rooted in misogyny.

 

[aot]

Message from the President of the United States.

Until Janurary 20th, anyway.

 

[TeeOh]

I keep wondering, what's with the mysterious messages I keep seeing from people like Born To Slay? Especially when it relates to Kamala Harris having sex and people calling her a bimbo.

Then I just remembered... I put a few people on ignore as what came off funny at first as accidental conservative satire (obsession about Kamala's sex life and crazy but funny right-wing conspiracy theories), after a while just became boring.

Plus it saves me time avoiding reading scientific journals on Kamala Harris's sex life as I had trouble forcing myself to not waste my time reading long sex stories (he wrote them like erotic novels) about Kamala Harris where I'm not in the mood for that especially if I'm eating.

 

[FGG]

I don't think they will force people to get the COVID-19 vaccine. If they make it mandatory there would be so much backlash. What happens if you had vaccines in the past that have affected you. Are they still going to force those people to get the COVID-19 vaccine?

By the way I'm not an anti-vaxxer. I have taken a few vaccines in the past. Since this COVID-19 vaccine is brand new and it's not just one type of COVID-19 vaccine we need to look out for others too. I may take it in a few years time and want to make sure there are no major side effects.

I almost forgot as an FYI to you personally, since you are in NZ, you will have the option right away of the Novavax vaccine which is a lot more like traditional vaccines and isn't an mRNA vaccine.

 

[Lucifer]

I almost forgot as an FYI to you personally, since you are in NZ, you will have the option right away of the Novavax vaccine which is a lot more like traditional vaccines and isn't an mRNA vaccine.

Thanks for letting me know. Would a traditional vaccine like Novavax have less side effects compared to the mRNA vaccine such as Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna?

 

[FGG]

Thanks for letting me know. Would a traditional vaccine like Novavax have less side effects compared to the mRNA vaccine such as Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna?

I would say if you have done well with traditional vaccines in the past, it's at least very likely you would tolerate it.

 

[Luman]

The fact is you are taking a consensual relationship where the guy happened to be much older and saying it must be prostitution because he helped her get a job she was qualified for is the problem.

People help their lovers every single day.

Yeah nepotism is annoying but geez, look at the entire Trump family.

You really think Jared is qualified to lead a COVID-19 task force?

You think Ivanka is qualified to meet with foreign leaders?

You think Melania deserved a "Genius Grant" while working as a model?

Call it nepotism, fine, but you have zero evidence Harris traded her body for a job. And what's more is even if he got her an "in", she kept advancing based on her own merits.

The entire language you use "whore" and "bimbo" (Harris a bimbo... really? You think she is only a dumb sex object. For real?) is deeply rooted in misogyny.

She could very well become the President. This is a far cry from a specific, almost honorary position bestowed upon a friend or family member, by a politician. She will be responsible for the lives of over 300 million people. Yes, a glorified clerk who locked up people for five dollars worth of marijuana, had parents arrested because their child played hooky, refused to prosecute abusive cops, and won the Porker of the Year 2018 award, could be our President.

She made a choice, when she decided to trade sex for golden opportunities, with a powerful politician 30 years her senior, who had a very well known penchant for attractive women far younger than himself. She was actually older than the girls he usually "dated". I am not aware of whether he appointed other girlfriends to lucrative government positions.

Kamala Harris attempted to become nominated to run for President, and she got about 2% of the votes. People did not like her, for good reason. She is not even 1/100th as qualified to hold the office of President, as Biden, Pence, Pelosi, Obama, Bill or Hillary Clinton or, whether you like him or hate him, Donald Trump. It astounds me that not a single voice from the Women's Lib movement has pointed out what a bad choice she was, to be nominated and then elected, as the first female VP of the United States.

With Trump almost out of office, the Trump bashing media and press are already losing viewers and customers. They will need new people to focus on, and relentlessly criticize. Harris had better be very careful, because she may very well become their next target.

 

[FGG]

What do y'all think of this bill:

Warren re-ups bill to ban stock trading by lawmakers

I strongly support it along with repealing Citizens United.