Gwynbleidd

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

<Snipped quote by Dark Wind>
Oh, I agree ANTIFA fits the bill of domestic terrorist, but to speak of them a day after Charleston instead of immediately denouncing one of America's greatest foes in the last century was...well, wrong.

@POOHEAD189

The irony here is that Antifa looks and acts the way the Nazis did before their rise. Still, I don't see how you can construe the condemnation of a group that actively assaults people (and did so during Charlottesville, perhaps being a significant contributing factor to the ultimate tragedy) as wrong.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

He condemned them after 3 days of harassment, after initially not condemning them in his first interview/press conference on the subject.

@POOHEAD189

And then he doubled down on his original comments, which he should have. Was there not violence on 'many sides' as Trump said? There certainly was. His statement was not inaccurate, and his statement covers all bases including that of the alleged Nazis.

The fact that violent counter-protestors are allowed to get near another group of protestors of an opposing viewpoint is somewhat absurd to me. But, I digress, point is, there was violence on each side at the rally. He condemned the violence, as he should. Trump was taking an incredibly responsible position by NOT finger-pointing in one direction and being a reactionary hack like the rest of the media INCLUDING Fox News.

If I can say he's not Hitler, can you admit this TV personality isn't somewhat of an attention whore?

@POOHEAD189

Trump has an ego (yuuuugeee). Of course he does. I don't mind the suggestion that Trump's got a love for attention, so long as he sticks to the agenda.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

He has condemned them. Besides, I don't care who the candidate is, they don't have to condemn who supports them because lunatics support people and you have no real control over who supports you and who doesn't outside of you're political agenda. I do believe there are KKK members and Nazis who put their support out for other candidates, not just Trump (including dems here as well).

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

@mdk I will say it's a sweeping over generalization to call Trump a Nazi, despite one of the groups that follow him. He's just opportunistic and enjoys praise, no matter who it's from.

@POOHEAD189

It's not just a sweeping generalization, it's unprovable and likely utterly false.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

<Snipped quote by catchamber>

Futurists enjoy being very vocal about such things, and it's true that technology is growing rapidly. But every time I've thought the way you are, I've always found something to make me think 'oh, not a big deal.' In fact, forever futurists have been claiming they would soon be able to hook your brain up to a computer. Yet a study last year in China had someone's thoughts being scanned, and it took 40 minutes to download 1% of one thought. And the average human thinks 30-50 thousand thoughts a day, sending us back decades in where we thought we were.

I agree with you, this is something to take note of. But at the same time, we won't be seeing surrogate robots in 5 years.

@POOHEAD189

I read a book on DARPA. They're basically this almost completely unaccountable arm of the U.S. government who develop advanced weapons and other technologies. Brilliant minds, basically, but they're turned loose and never told they CAN'T do so something.

They believe limb regeneration is completely possible. That's fucking cool, and I hope it happens.

But, they're also the scary brand of people that are responsible for Agent Orange and a hundred percent believed that if they had been given more time and hadn't had their operation derailed by bad press... that they could have legitimately burned down the entire forest of Vietnam.

These are the same people who are working on hunter killers that can recognize a face and then wander out into a city/battlefield and assassinate them. Sure, we won't be seeing these things any time soon but there are some things you just SHOULD NOT do.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

Imprisoning people for their words is ludicrous.

<Snipped quote by Dark Wind>

At this rate medical staff will be forced to refer to patients in they way they want to be refereed to. I don't know if I can function in a world where I have to refer to a patient as Mr Smith, rather than Johnny Organ-donor. Sad.

@Penny

It's not your place, or my place to demand that a person change their beliefs for the sake of your or my comfort. That's tyranny, plain and simple. Don't like your doctor? Change to a different one.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

<Snipped quote by mdk>

I remember when that Jordan Peterson guy first emerged when Canada passed a similar law regarding pronouns. He claimed that America would eventually pass pronoun laws too and although I was sympathetic to his situation I felt the very idea was preposterous. But here we are. Pronoun laws.

@Kratesis

Never underestimate the slippery slope.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

<Snipped quote by Dark Wind>
Well, seeing as 260 million didn't, I'd say the 60 million who did can easily be misinformed. Though a lot of people vote simply for the party which is pretty much the definition of bias and misinformed. Same with democratic voters.

Hell, I'd say my fellow independents did pretty bad this election.

@POOHEAD189

Mmhm, voting by party line is a two-way street as you said. How many actually vote simply by party line is up for debate because we have no conclusive number, so trying to discuss this with any sense of accuracy is, I'd say, impossible.

And, hey, I personally know college-educated women who voted for Trump. I know people that I consider extremely intelligent who voted for Trump. They're not the people I would call 'misinformed'. Inevitably, in that sixty plus million group of people, there's most likely a large number of intelligent people who are informed about their country and the political situation of their country. Also, I'd like to note that a college education probably does not make you 'smarter' than another person.

I'm pleased by the result of this election because, to me, it told me that our population is not compliant with what government leaders appear to want us to believe, nor with what the media wants us to believe. It's not their job to speculate and declare opinions for the people, it's their job to state the news in the most vanilla terms and then let us decide for ourselves what to believe. Republic democracy is alive and well.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

While I did vote for Hillary, I don't like her, and I am not a supporter of hers. I voted for her because I was against a corrupt television personality with a penchant for sexual offense being given executive power. Hillary is definitely shady, but I still trusted her with nuclear launch codes.

In essence, just because I am anti-Trump doesn't mean I am arguing for Hillary Clinton. I felt like this was a particularly weak election.

@POOHEAD189

Corrupt is the operative word here, and in essence, once again, a subjective descriptor for Trump.

Some people think Trump corrupt, others do not. Some people think Hillary corrupt, others do not.

I'm against any candidate who calls close to half of the country 'deplorable'. I'm against any candidate who has a strong inclination toward gun control. Universal healthcare appears to me, on paper, reckless and economically irresponsible even if it 'sounds' nice. My home state is a good example of this: Romney's health care reform has gone out of control with spending, and I see the same trends in other countries who have adopted this policy. The Hillary emails, the DNC emails, they all suggest strong leanings toward corruption. A lot of this was poorly planned, right down to the slogan. "I'm with her." vs "Make America Great Again." It shouldn't be too difficult to recognize the superior slogan. One is about Hillary, and one is about America. Hillary's slogan suggests that she should be president because she's a woman. Women should vote for Hillary because they're women. Didn't she just say recently that she believed women who voted for Trump are 'publicly disrespecting themselves'? It's hard to fathom (for me) that amount of arrogance, condescension, and point blank repugnantly sexist behavior. Women are not monoliths. Women have agency and individual minds just like everyone else.

But again, this argument comes down to, in perhaps too much simplicity: is Trump corrupt or is Hillary corrupt? Is Trump good or is Hillary good? Or, even, the lesser evil debate. We're obviously of two different minds on this, and our perspectives are subjective although we try to provide our positions with the strength of attempted objective analysis.

Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

Sixty-plus million people voted for Trump, are you more informed and more intelligent than all of them?

Your answer will tell me spades about your mentality.