The problem with Trump

[99topdawg]

Bull shit. The bias was relevant in Trump’s favor when he was allowed to ramble on for several minutes more than Harris was allowed to speak. Gutless moderators should have shut him down and told him to follow the rules he agreed to. Then allow Harris another 6 or 7 minutes for rebuttals.

Was that a bias in Trump's favor? The longer he speaks, the more time he has to make an ass out of himself.

 

[Fryowa]

Was that a bias in Trump's favor? The longer he speaks, the more time he has to make an ass out of himself.

I don't think these debates or any other media etc. matter to be honest. We've reached a place in our society unfortunately where there are no such things as swing voters or people who are watching to decide between the two. We are so far from center with both parties that no one is changing their mind or deciding between these two. Minds are already made up and it's a matter of who can get the most voter participation in "swing states." I put that in quotes because it isn't really a question of the parties working to change those states, like I said the voters have their minds made up and it's just a wait and see thing.

It's why I don't watch the discourse anymore. The relevant parties are both so far removed from reality and what's truly best for the country that there's no compromise or middle ground anymore. I've abstained the past two elections and will do so this year as well. Abstaining isn't un-American, it's keeping true to the values you hold and being at peace with yourself that you didn't endorse a scummy person. Although you aren't voting for a person, you're voting for a wealthy and powerful political machine on either side that doesn't have you or your welfare as a person or society in mind. Neither Donald Trump nor Kamala Harris are making any decisions. Their puppeteers in the background are. If there is a candidate in the future who I think fits my beliefs which are moderate, I'll vote for that person.

My life is so much better since I stopped paying any attention to politics. I don't get angry at any of it anymore, and to be honest it's not funny to me anymore to hear the idiocy. It's just sad. So I go about my life and try to just keep my personal house in order and deal with whatever comes down the pipe from the political party that happens to be driving the bus at the time. We only have a few years going around the sun, why waste them being miserable about things you can't control? Neither party is doing what's best for us and unless you have a TON of money and influence, you have no control. You might think you have control by voting, but that's exactly what the Democratic and GOP parties want you to think. It's no different than 18th century merry old England. Keep the peasants and farmers and blacksmiths thinking they have a small say in the matter and everything is copacetic. Yeah, it's two parties fighting rather than a king ruling, but to be truthful it's just two kings arguing. Democracy in the US doesn't exist, it's just a name we call it like lipstick on a pig to make us feel like we have some power.

I couldn't tell you what was said at any debate that's happened in recent memory because I simply don't care. It's a bunch of clowns arguing with each other and that doesn't seem to be changing at least in my lifetime. Hopefully it will some day, but until then I'm out. And for people out there who think that's "un-American" (not directing this at you because you seem to be a very reasonable guy), it's not. Abstaining is at it's core a very American thing to do. It's a civil protest. If people want to complain about it being un-American, I'd remind them that not being forced to support one of many unsavory options being shoved down peoples' throats is what started this great country when we gave the finger to King George III. I'm not not participating. I'm participating by not casting a vote for a party that doesn't have my interests or future in mind. If anyone here thinks either of these rich guy country clubs we call parties are acting in our best interests, those people are absolute clowns. That's harsh, yeah, but the truth is harsh sometimes.

 

[Fryowa]

Guys, these debates are purely Jerry Springer-level entertainment, only worse. All of us here know very well there isn't a single soul in the United States who watches these stooges on stage and thinks to themselves..."Huh, you know what, that was a good point. I was going to vote for Harris/Trump, but now I think I'm changing my vote to Trump/Harris."

Along a similar vein, no one goes, "Well, I wasn't decided on who I'm going to vote for, but I think Trump/Harris made good, rational arguments just now and I think I'm going to vote for him/her now."

These "parties" are so far apart they can't see each other on the clearest day. There's nothing to discuss and no one to persuade.

Literally no one benefits from these things other than the hosting channel from their ad revenue and Twitter advertisers. It's an echo chamber of the grandest proportions.

Let's be real here, folks.

 

[Westernhawk]

I see stories all the time on X of illegal criminals who committed crimes here. Also stories at the boarder where these criminals are coming in. It's possible all of those stories are fake. But it's also possible they're true. The point is, it's a big story right now. It's not Trump's lie.

The "everyone wants abortions" claim falls more into the exaggeration category that every politician does.

The after birth abortion claim comes from the ex governor of Virgina (who he specifically mentioned) saying it. A politician finding the most extreme example and pretending it's more common than it is is also something that both sides do. I just watched a video today of a lady in court trying to pass a bill that states its legal to get an abortion while the mother is in labor. So again, there are democrats for that. Trump acting like all democrats want that is the exact same as Harris acting like all Republicans want to get rid of IVF and birth control just because there are stories of a select few that do. It's not a lie, it's an exaggeration.

The 2020 election is a tough one for a lot of reasons. One side says all arguments were heard and then struck down and the other side said everything was struck down before they were even looked at. One thing I know is how the 2000 election was allowed to be contested after and how the 2020 one wasn't was a pretty big difference. I can't call that a lie at all even tho I understand how the other side would say it is. To me, I just don't understand how anyone can know how much money and power are involved here and still assume there isn't cheating. Especially with the use of mail in voting because of covid. People cheat for way less and it's already well documented our government interferes in other countries elections.

There are lots of videos out there of Harris and Waltz saying they want to get rid of guns. Saying they don't want to right before an election isn't something you should trust.

I heard Trump say Putin too, but I think he misspoke since it's well-known that the Biden administration hasn't talked to Putin at all, which is pretty damning for them. I think his point still holds true even tho Putin wasn't talked to. One last effort to prevent a war, and then it starts a couple days later. Thats a pretty good talking point to use politically, even tho he butchered it by saying Putin.

Again, there are politicians trying to do abortion after birth (Virginal Governor) so saying it isn't a lie, it's an exaggeration on how many democrats want it.

The eating pets story is a very weird one. That story was thrown out all over X days before the debate. There are three possibilities. One is it's true and democrats are clearly trying to cover it up for political reasons. Another possibility is Republicans put the story out there to make democrats look bad. The third option (the one I think happened) is democrats put that story out there right before the debate to set up Trump for exactly what happened.

Here's the reason I think that is what happened. When Trump said it, the moderator said he fact checked that story and some town cop spokesman said it wasn't true. But than Harris was acting like she never heard such a thing and Trump is crazy for making it up. Well that doesn't make any sense because the story was big enough for ABC news to look into it, so how is she acting so surprised to hear it? They made a mistake there. If they want to say Trump is a crazy man for making up such a crazy story, you can't say the story was already looked into and it's not true. That immediately proves it wasn't Trump's story, it was a "legit" one that deserved looking into. When Harris says a debunked story like the "very fine people" one, the proper response is exactly what Trump did. Simply say that story isn't true. Imagine if Trump started laughing pretending like he's never heard of such a thing and saying Harris just invented that out of thin air. The fact that a legit news organization looked into the story before the debate really screws up the picture they were wanting to paint there. The point is, it wasn't a Trump lie. Worst case scenario it was Trump falling for a news story that just came out and ended up being false.

I was giving you example of fact checking from a website that does fact checking. The bullet points are verifiably false statements. You can go on that site, and find that there are similarly fact checked statements that Harris made, which were also objectively false. I was attempting (in vain, apparently) to get out of the emotion-laden quagmire here, but that's likely impossible (as FryIowa noted in a later post). It's impossible to discuss facts and logic with the tribes.

I understand you have strong opinions and are obviously pro-Trump, so the fact that Trump said obviously false statements, which I noted above, probably does not matter to you, which is aok with me, as that's the country we live in right now. You can save your typing energy for something else, because I don't think you are saying anything particularly compelling. You're just justifying your pre-determined conclusions. As Fryowa noted, any rational discussion is probably pointless, so I will relent.

BTW, love your "virginial governor" comment. Please cite some evidence of infanticide. Give me a freakin break. . Wait, don't try to cite evidence because everyone with a brain knows there is no evidence. This conspiracy theory stuff is just maddening.

Trying to have a fact-based debate with a Trumper is impossible. Not so long ago, making comments (presented as facts) that infanticide is a common occurrence, or that dogs are being eaten in Ohio by Haitians, would be absolutely disqualifying. But, the apologists and conspiracy theorists are there for his rescue. The felon and adjudicated sex offender may very well be our next President.

Everything looks the same with your eyes closed.

 

[Fryowa]

Trying to have a fact-based debate with any political person is impossible.

LOL
Fixed that for you...

I'm sorry, but people like you and your opponents on the far-right are what's wrong with this country. All you want to do is angrily prove the other side wrong...you have literally no interest in compromise. You want all or nothing (so does the GOP), and that's why nothing improves. And when asked about compromise you get offended and partake in whataboutism concerning the other party.

The GOP isn't changing it's opinions about what's best for the country, and neither are democrats. So unless both of you are willing to work on a compromise of certain things, absolutely nothing will change. There is a middle ground whether you're man enough or not to admit it or not, but you stubbornly refuse to accept it. And when you use the juvenile excuse of "I'm willing to compromise but the republicans aren't!" why don't you stop the "yeahbut...yeahbut...yeahbut" and put your money where your mouth is. You either are or are not willing to compromise, irrespective of what the other side is willing to do.

And that applies to both sides. Not just democrats.

But just as I've said, you'd rather sit in a dirty diaper and whine and complain, and argue with the visiting team, than do anything to work together. No one's asking you to like Donald Trump or Kamala Harris and no one's asking anyone to start loving democrats or republicans. Hate each other all you want, no one cares. Just stop being so arrogant and full of yourself that you can't see a middle ground. It's there...but you won't open your eyes and look for it because it scares you. Your only interest is angrily slinging mud rather than working with someone you don't like. You're the same as the MAGA crowd, bub. I work every day with people I don't like and I can't think of many times I ever get things 100% my way, most times not even 50%. but you know what? Work gets done, life goes on, and things are mostly better for it.

Now after typing that I'm going to sit back and wait for the "yeahbut" response deflecting onto the other side.

3...

2...

1...

 

[HuckFinn]

I was giving you example of fact checking from a website that does fact checking. The bullet points are verifiably false statements. You can go on that site, and find that there are similarly fact checked statements that Harris made, which were also objectively false. I was attempting (in vain, apparently) to get out of the emotion-laden quagmire here, but that's likely impossible (as FryIowa noted in a later post). It's impossible to discuss facts and logic with the tribes.

I understand you have strong opinions and are obviously pro-Trump, so the fact that Trump said obviously false statements, which I noted above, probably does not matter to you, which is aok with me, as that's the country we live in right now. You can save your typing energy for something else, because I don't think you are saying anything particularly compelling. You're just justifying your pre-determined conclusions. As Fryowa noted, any rational discussion is probably pointless, so I will relent.

BTW, love your "virginial governor" comment. Please cite some evidence of infanticide. Give me a freakin break. . Wait, don't try to cite evidence because everyone with a brain knows there is no evidence. This conspiracy theory stuff is just maddening.

Trying to have a fact-based debate with a Trumper is impossible. Not so long ago, making comments (presented as facts) that infanticide is a common occurrence, or that dogs are being eaten in Ohio by Haitians, would be absolutely disqualifying. But, the apologists and conspiracy theorists are there for his rescue. The felon and adjudicated sex offender may very well be our next President.

Everything looks the same with your eyes closed.

I blocked PC long ago over his racist views clearly expressed on HN. Obviously, I don’t need to reconsider my action.

 

[PCHawk]

I don't think these debates or any other media etc. matter to be honest. We've reached a place in our society unfortunately where there are no such things as swing voters or people who are watching to decide between the two. We are so far from center with both parties that no one is changing their mind or deciding between these two. Minds are already made up and it's a matter of who can get the most voter participation in "swing states." I put that in quotes because it isn't really a question of the parties working to change those states, like I said the voters have their minds made up and it's just a wait and see thing.

It's why I don't watch the discourse anymore. The relevant parties are both so far removed from reality and what's truly best for the country that there's no compromise or middle ground anymore. I've abstained the past two elections and will do so this year as well. Abstaining isn't un-American, it's keeping true to the values you hold and being at peace with yourself that you didn't endorse a scummy person. Although you aren't voting for a person, you're voting for a wealthy and powerful political machine on either side that doesn't have you or your welfare as a person or society in mind. Neither Donald Trump nor Kamala Harris are making any decisions. Their puppeteers in the background are. If there is a candidate in the future who I think fits my beliefs which are moderate, I'll vote for that person.

My life is so much better since I stopped paying any attention to politics. I don't get angry at any of it anymore, and to be honest it's not funny to me anymore to hear the idiocy. It's just sad. So I go about my life and try to just keep my personal house in order and deal with whatever comes down the pipe from the political party that happens to be driving the bus at the time. We only have a few years going around the sun, why waste them being miserable about things you can't control? Neither party is doing what's best for us and unless you have a TON of money and influence, you have no control. You might think you have control by voting, but that's exactly what the Democratic and GOP parties want you to think. It's no different than 18th century merry old England. Keep the peasants and farmers and blacksmiths thinking they have a small say in the matter and everything is copacetic. Yeah, it's two parties fighting rather than a king ruling, but to be truthful it's just two kings arguing. Democracy in the US doesn't exist, it's just a name we call it like lipstick on a pig to make us feel like we have some power.

I couldn't tell you what was said at any debate that's happened in recent memory because I simply don't care. It's a bunch of clowns arguing with each other and that doesn't seem to be changing at least in my lifetime. Hopefully it will some day, but until then I'm out. And for people out there who think that's "un-American" (not directing this at you because you seem to be a very reasonable guy), it's not. Abstaining is at it's core a very American thing to do. It's a civil protest. If people want to complain about it being un-American, I'd remind them that not being forced to support one of many unsavory options being shoved down peoples' throats is what started this great country when we gave the finger to King George III. I'm not not participating. I'm participating by not casting a vote for a party that doesn't have my interests or future in mind. If anyone here thinks either of these rich guy country clubs we call parties are acting in our best interests, those people are absolute clowns. That's harsh, yeah, but the truth is harsh sometimes.

This was my exact thoughts my whole life. I voted for the first time ever hoping Trump was different because he wasn't part of the club. His first term didn't really do anything for me to want to vote for him again. Lately he's been saying he learned a lit his first term and knows a lot more people so he will do a way better job of weeding out the corruption. If he gets in and nothing changes, I might never vote again. I'll need to see a huge decline in the deficit and/or politicians condemned for accumulating so much wealth in office or I'm right back where you're at.

 

[PCHawk]

I was giving you example of fact checking from a website that does fact checking. The bullet points are verifiably false statements. You can go on that site, and find that there are similarly fact checked statements that Harris made, which were also objectively false. I was attempting (in vain, apparently) to get out of the emotion-laden quagmire here, but that's likely impossible (as FryIowa noted in a later post). It's impossible to discuss facts and logic with the tribes.

I understand you have strong opinions and are obviously pro-Trump, so the fact that Trump said obviously false statements, which I noted above, probably does not matter to you, which is aok with me, as that's the country we live in right now. You can save your typing energy for something else, because I don't think you are saying anything particularly compelling. You're just justifying your pre-determined conclusions. As Fryowa noted, any rational discussion is probably pointless, so I will relent.

BTW, love your "virginial governor" comment. Please cite some evidence of infanticide. Give me a freakin break. . Wait, don't try to cite evidence because everyone with a brain knows there is no evidence. This conspiracy theory stuff is just maddening.

Trying to have a fact-based debate with a Trumper is impossible. Not so long ago, making comments (presented as facts) that infanticide is a common occurrence, or that dogs are being eaten in Ohio by Haitians, would be absolutely disqualifying. But, the apologists and conspiracy theorists are there for his rescue. The felon and adjudicated sex offender may very well be our next President.

Everything looks the same with your eyes closed.

My post wasn't an attack on yours. I was just giving my opinion all the fact checks you sighted.

As far as the eating pets story goes. My point was the story started circulating the days before the election and had enough legs for the ABC News crew to investigate. The investigation consisted of a call to one person who said it wasn't happening. Yet there are videos of people talking about it happening at city council meetings. For all I know the videos are AI or the people in the videos are liars. Also for all I know, the guy ABC News called lied. Who knows. It's either an elaborate made up story that Trump sited (wrongly) or its true. That's different than Trump making it up himself. Even tho you can make an argument that it's equally dumb.

 

[Gibsonian]

What are some examples of times you think he was lying? I heard two times where Harris straight up lied (fine people on both sides and bloodbath) but I'm not sure which things Trump said thar were complete lies. He obvious exaggerates the shit out of everything. Maybe that's what you mean.

Fine people on both sides. Yes he said it, I saw it live 7 years ago.

President Donald Trump On Charlottesville: You Had Very Fine People, On Both Sides | CNBC

President Donald Trump answers questions at a press briefing on infrastructure at Trump Tower in New York.» Subscribe to CNBC: http://cnb.cx/SubscribeCNBCAbo...

www.youtube.com

Bloodbath he also said, although I think it was not a violent threat.

Neither were lies, he said both and there is tape.

 

[Fryowa]

This was my exact thoughts my whole life. I voted for the first time ever hoping Trump was different because he wasn't part of the club. His first term didn't really do anything for me to want to vote for him again. Lately he's been saying he learned a lit his first term and knows a lot more people so he will do a way better job of weeding out the corruption. If he gets in and nothing changes, I might never vote again. I'll need to see a huge decline in the deficit and/or politicians condemned for accumulating so much wealth in office or I'm right back where you're at.

Trump nor any other president has the power to change anything.

The party machination behind them does. The president of the US in 2024 is nothing but a sales pitching puppet. What they say they'll do or won't do means zilch. Nada.

It's a fart in the wind, man, and if you think it isn't you're mistaken.

Rich old career politicians and corporate lobbyists decide what's going to happen and none of it--from the left nor the right--is decided with your interests in mind. It's about how much money is going in whose pockets.

And it's not going to change in our lifetimes. Save as much money as you can, try to stay healthy and do enjoyable things without affecting other people around you and that's literally all you can do. Forget the bullshit on TV and enjoy life. For god's sake don't buy what these douche bag politicians are selling as truth. You'll be much happier.

 

[Westernhawk]

My post wasn't an attack on yours. I was just giving my opinion all the fact checks you sighted.

As far as the eating pets story goes. My point was the story started circulating the days before the election and had enough legs for the ABC News crew to investigate. The investigation consisted of a call to one person who said it wasn't happening. Yet there are videos of people talking about it happening at city council meetings. For all I know the videos are AI or the people in the videos are liars. Also for all I know, the guy ABC News called lied. Who knows. It's either an elaborate made up story that Trump sited (wrongly) or its true. That's different than Trump making it up himself. Even tho you can make an argument that it's equally dumb.

That's fair. Thank you.

 

[PCHawk]

Trump nor any other president has the power to change anything.

The party machination behind them does. The president of the US in 2024 is nothing but a sales pitching puppet. What they say they'll do or won't do means zilch. Nada.

It's a fart in the wind, man, and if you think it isn't you're mistaken.

Rich old career politicians and corporate lobbyists decide what's going to happen and none of it--from the left nor the right--is decided with your interests in mind. It's about how much money is going in whose pockets.

And it's not going to change in our lifetimes. Save as much money as you can, try to stay healthy and do enjoyable things without affecting other people around you and that's literally all you can do. Forget the bullshit on TV and enjoy life. For god's sake don't buy what these douche bag politicians are selling as truth. You'll be much happier.

I'm afraid you're probably right. I'm gunna hang on to that tiny sliver of hope until November or a couple more years after. Depending on the outcome. I'll almost certainly be telling you you're right soon.

 

[PCHawk]

Fine people on both sides. Yes he said it, I saw it live 7 years ago.

President Donald Trump On Charlottesville: You Had Very Fine People, On Both Sides | CNBC

President Donald Trump answers questions at a press briefing on infrastructure at Trump Tower in New York.» Subscribe to CNBC: http://cnb.cx/SubscribeCNBCAbo...

www.youtube.com

Bloodbath he also said, although I think it was not a violent threat.

Neither were lies, he said both and there is tape.

I'm really surprised you posted the entire video instead of the cut up one that normally floats around. But I'm also confused. The question is whether or not he called white supremacists very fine people, not that he said the words "there were very fine people on both sides". So are you saying your video proves he called white supremacists very fine people? Or are you just being technical saying he did say those exact words?

On a side not. Anyone who thinks Trymp actually called white supremacists very fine people should really watch that video he posted.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

The guy is uncoachable. He was and has always been unprepared. Unwilling and unable to master a set of facts or data and speak with any specificity. Does he think people are stupid? You can't expect to win over enough people with spouting off broad generaliziations and saying "its awesome" "you're horrible" "everyone thinks" "everyone agrees". It would be funny if only the stakes were not so high.

I'm not a Democrat, actually I don't belong to a party.

on a lighter note, I'm amused that people say "I'm a registered independent" - there is no such thing. You register with a party or you dont.

What it takes to get elected is not the same as what it takes to govern. (not rule). We're not electing a king or emperor or a pope either.

that should be enought to light up the forum

Yea, there is not a good candidate on either side, and to be honest, have not had a decent candidate for some time now. I actually prob align with the Libertarian Party the most. Civil rights an emphasis and also more conservative pertaining to the economics side. I don't have a problem with anybody or any individual's race or background. Everybody is their own individual and shouldn't be judged by the name of the race they belong to. I don't care what people do or how they choose to live their life. Doesn't matter to me and I'd like to think I would treat anybody fairly.

I just wish the Libertarian Party could make headway as far as being a third major party. Currently they don't really have a chance.

 

[MelroseHawkins]

Bull shit. The bias was relevant in Trump’s favor when he was allowed to ramble on for several minutes more than Harris was allowed to speak. Gutless moderators should have shut him down and told him to follow the rules he agreed to. Then allow Harris another 6 or 7 minutes for rebuttals.

Geesus, I don't know what the hell you were watching................I disagree.

 

[Fryowa]

I actually prob align with the Libertarian Party the most. Civil rights an emphasis and also more conservative pertaining to the economics side.

This is me.

I couldn't care less about someone's religious (or not) beliefs, gender opinions, or sexual orientation. People should be able to marry whoever they choose and have the same benefits as people in a traditional marriage.

I think immigration is good, but not unfettered. Borders should not be closed and shouldn't be wide open.

I think white privilege is a real thing and a real problem and I benefit from it.

I think climate change is real, caused by humans, but the answer isn't electric vehicles. The answer is nuclear power which isn't going to happen in my lifetime or my son's. The "left's" push for EVs as an answer is extremely short-sighted and populist. It's idiocy that isn't going to help the problem near-term whatsoever. The answer is also not public transportation or high speed rail. This country is orders of magnitude more spread out than European and Asian countries where it can work, it would take a century to even begin to implement, and there's not enough money or resources in this country to make it happen in those hundred years.

I think abortion is appropriate in some circumstances but shouldn't be used as birth control That has nothing to do with spiritual convictions because I don't have any.

I think increased taxation is bad and stymies innovation and betterment of the world. Profit drives innovation and quality of life improvements and always has. We didn't become the leader of the world from an industrial, medical, and engineering standpoint by taking smart people's money in the form of taxation, it happened because there was a metric shit ton of profit to be made. Profit also drives really bad things to happen as side effects, but you have to go with the lesser of the two evils. My personal "lesser of the two evils" doesn't align with the leftists in this country.

Russia, Cuba, China, Venezuela, et al are horrible places to live and exist for all but those at the very, very top. In communism/socialism, there is supposed to be no top according to Marx/Lenin/Trotsky/Engels. But guess what? It's never worked in the history of all its attempts and in every case has degraded the societies in which it's been tried. One can go on and on and on about how people should share and have no property and work equally hard and have no ruling class, but at the end of the day we're all animals driven by an innate need for self preservation and making sure we have as much meat, fire, and water as possible for our own benefit. Driven to a point we'll all kill to get it, whether literally or metaphorically.

I don't think government mandates are usually a good thing. If I don't want to buy health insurance I shouldn't have to. I also shouldn't get it free if I choose not to. I work with a large Canadian contingent in my day job, and they all WITHOUT FAIL hate their healthcare system. Need not-emergency knee surgery? Better make that appointment a year ahead of time and be ready for sub-par treatment because the US has a much higher quality field of health care professionals who want to make a wealthy income from all the hard work and sacrifice they put in. Want to go to the doctor for flu/cold/other? Nope. You're going to see a nurse practitioner. Have symptoms you don't understand and want to get evaluated by someone who knows what they're doing? Either make an appointment 6 months out or see a nurse practitioner.

Anyway, those are my views. Lefties think I'm a fascist bent on destroying the world in the name of money. Righties think I'm a godless gay communist baby killer.

So eff 'em both. At least my position would allow two parties to compromise and work with each other. But they won't. You conservatives and liberals out there are both too worried about being right and being assholes to each other to really care about making headway in anything.

Love,

Fryowa

 

[CP87]

This is me.

I couldn't care less about someone's religious (or not) beliefs, gender opinions, or sexual orientation.

I think immigration is good, but not unfettered. Borders should not be closed and shouldn't be wide open.

I think white privilege is a real thing and a real problem.

I think climate change is real, caused by humans, but the answer isn't electric vehicles. The answer is nuclear power which isn't going to happen in my lifetime or my son's. The "left's" push for EVs as an answer is extremely short-sighted and populist. It's idiocy that isn't going to help the problem near-term whatsoever. The answer is also not public transportation or high speed rail. This country is orders of magnitude more spread out than European and Asian countries where it can work, it would take a century to even begin to implement, and there's not enough money or resources in this country to make it happen in those hundred years.

I think abortion is appropriate in some circumstances but shouldn't be used as birth control That has nothing to do with spiritual convictions because I don't have any.

I think increased taxation is bad and stymies innovation and betterment of the world. Profit drives innovation and quality of life improvements and always has. We didn't become the leader of the world from an industrial, medical, and engineering standpoint by taking smart people's money in the form of taxation, it happened because there was a metric shit ton of profit to be made. Profit also drives really bad things to happen as side effects, but you have to go with the lesser of the two evils. My personal "lesser of the two evils" doesn't align with the leftists in this country.

Russia, Cuba, China, Venezuela, et al are horrible places to live and exist for all but those at the very, very top. In communism/socialism, there is supposed to be no top according to Marx/Lenin/Trotsky/Engels. But guess what? It's never worked in the history of all its attempts and in every case has degraded the societies in which it's been tried. One can go on and on and on about how people should share and have no property and work equally hard and have no ruling class, but at the end of the day we're all animals driven by an innate need for self preservation and making sure we have as much meat, fire, and water as possible for our own benefit. Driven to a point we'll all kill to get it, whether literally or metaphorically.

I don't think government mandates are usually a good thing. If I don't want to buy health insurance I shouldn't have to. I also shouldn't get it free if I choose not to. I work with a large Canadian contingent in my day job, and they all WITHOUT FAIL hate their healthcare system. Need not-emergency knee surgery? Better make that appointment a year ahead of time and be ready for sub-par treatment because the US has a much higher quality field of health care professionals who want to make a wealthy income from all the hard work and sacrifice they put in. Want to go to the doctor for flu/cold/other? Nope. You're going to see a nurse practitioner. Have symptoms you don't understand and want to get evaluated by someone who knows what they're doing? Either make an appointment 6 months out or see a nurse practitioner.

Anyway, those are my views. Lefties think I'm a fascist bent on destroying the world in the name of money. Righties think I'm a godless gay communist baby killer.

So eff 'em both. At least my position would allow two parties to compromise and work with each other. But they won't. You conservatives and liberals out there are both too worried about being right and being assholes to each other to really care about making headway in anything.

Love,

Fryowa

I used to think mostly along those lines. I have since been persuaded that while capitalism has allowed us to be exceptional in the ways you have pointed out, it cannot work for providing public goods, and unregulated seeking of profits has all sorts of horrible downsides (e.g. the awful water quality in our state, the state of our food ecosystem, etc.). So, capitalsim yay!, but also let's have the necessary regulations in place so that we are not just making corporations our monarchy. Figuring out where to draw that line has to be a negotiation between the 2 sides, and if neither side ends up happy, it is probably in the right place.

 

[CP87]

Secondarily, I agree nuclear is crucial, and if we hadn't demonized it 40 years ago, we would be in a lot better place now. I also think EVs are a part of the solution. If your car can only be powered by 1 thing (gas), that is not nearly as good as if it can be powered by many things (natural gas, coal, solar, wind, nuclear, the next new thing that hasn't been invented yet).

EVs aren't perfect, and there is horrible shit going on right now in the provision of critical minerals such as cobalt; that is not an EV problem, it is a geopolitical problem. As Maggie Nelson has put it, we want a tool with no blood on it, we want a solution to all of our problems with no downside. That just is not realistic. There is blood on the tool that is pushing toward a more electric future, but it is better than the alternative. The EVs of today are not moving the needle a ton, but the EVs of 50 years from now will be, and they will never be built unless we start pushing in that direction now.

My fairly uninformed 2 cents.

 

[Fryowa]

I used to think mostly along those lines. I have since been persuaded that while capitalism has allowed us to be exceptional in the ways you have pointed out, it cannot work for providing public goods, and unregulated seeking of profits has all sorts of horrible downsides (e.g. the awful water quality in our state, the state of our food ecosystem, etc.). So, capitalsim yay!, but also let's have the necessary regulations in place so that we are not just making corporations our monarchy. Figuring out where to draw that line has to be a negotiation between the 2 sides, and if neither side ends up happy, it is probably in the right place.

There are a couple of issues but I mostly agree with your points.

1. When I look at examples of both capitalism and communism/socialism (one in the same, just one is a lighter version of the other), I would never and never have thought to myself that I'd want to live or raise a child in any of the communistic societies I mentioned above. Are there some happy people there? Sure. Would they all be happy here? I'm not so arrogant to think so.

But, at the end of the day both systems have lots of faults and I know where I'd choose to remain living. Call it a gut hunch, call it a smell test, call it whatever. When I compare the lifestyles, quality of health care systems, and national security, I'm choosing capitalism. Of course there are tradeoffs.

2. I agree with your statement about negotiation between the two sides. However, just because there's a possibility of that happening, doesn't mean it's realistic. People talk about the disfunction of our two-party system and I cou;ldn't agree more. But communism or socialism isn't the answer to that problem.

Look at any countries who've tried communism and/or socialism. One of the main tenets is that there is no ruling class. No different classes at all. The president is as equal as the lowliest peasant. He or she will have the same amount of money, same access to education, same access to healthcare, and will work as hard. No mansions and Ferraris while the farm workers live in ghettos and walk everywhere barefoot. It's quite literally never worked in any form. No matter what they say, Let's compare Gorbachev/Medvedev/Putin/Yeltsin/Hitler/Chavez/Zedong/Jinping/Il Sung/Jong Il/Castro's lifestyles with their citizenry. How many Mercedes Benzes and mansions and personal servants and personal teams of doctors and airplanes and gourmet food has been consumed by that group? You could make a good argument about Castro in that regard, but I'd then direct you to the violence he oversaw against anyone he didn't like. And on the topic of violence, none of the other people in that group are any different. How about the oppression of the billions and billions of people under their respective rules? Are you really "free" under communism? It's just a different kind if rule under a different ruling class.

So, fix the system, right? It's just bad "execution" of communism and socialism that goes against the principles of those systems, right? Welp...I'd agree with the theory (kind of), but it's literally never worked. Ever. And it's never worked because Marx and Engels and Lenin and Trotsky weren't aware enough of one small little issue. At the end of the day...when the rubber meets the proverbial road, human beings are animals with two instincts that can't (at least currently) be bred out of us...self-interest and self- preservation. Lock two people in a room with a gallon of water and a loaf of bread, and they might share at first. They'll probably share for a really long time. But when it starts running out and the stomach starts to hurt and they don't know if anyone's coming to let them out, there's going to be a fight to the death if it goes on long enough. It's nature. Same thing happens on a macro level. The reason that long list of leaders turned what were supposed to be equal, loving, idyllic communes where everyone is equal into disasters is because in the real world bread and water are the same as money and power and humans all have an innate need for those things as much as they can get. Maybe not at a micro, personal level, but you don't have to get too far into the macro level for that to be true.

So is capitalism the perfect solution? Absolutely not. But it's a better one. People are allowed to have money and power, and even those who really don't have it are allowed to think they do. Letting someone own a Pinto and go to a job hopefully to be able to afford a Benz if they work harder than the next guy is an illusion of money and power and it works. It's just fancier bread and water. It has a side effect that benefits quality of life for the greatest amount of people too, and that's innovation. People design comfortable and convenient and innovative things because you have a chance to make a lot of money (and power) doing so. You think the car would've been invented if there was no money in it? MRI machines? Cancer drugs being worked on? Happy Meals? Nope. All of those things are sold. For profit. They would not exist if there was no opportunity for profit. Generate a list of things that have improved the human condition that weren't intended to be sold for profit, using technology that wasn't developed for profit.

There are a lot of people who fall by the wayside in a bad way in capitalism. I'm not so stupid to not see it. But there are a whole lot less than any other system we've put into practice (regardless of the 'model' form of communism). You have to choose the lesser of all the evils and as bad as things can get here, I'm picking this place 10 times out of 10.

 

[Hawkboys]

I used to think mostly along those lines. I have since been persuaded that while capitalism has allowed us to be exceptional in the ways you have pointed out, it cannot work for providing public goods, and unregulated seeking of profits has all sorts of horrible downsides (e.g. the awful water quality in our state, the state of our food ecosystem, etc.). So, capitalsim yay!, but also let's have the necessary regulations in place so that we are not just making corporations our monarchy. Figuring out where to draw that line has to be a negotiation between the 2 sides, and if neither side ends up happy, it is probably in the right place.

It's this, most want to either put their economy into the hands of the corrupt rich and corporations (capitalism) or into the hands of the corrupt government (communism). The right balance is one where government seeks to maintain a decent playing field for individuals, states and companies, but still allows for higher elements of competition.