Trump presidency

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10250
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Oct 17, 2018 6:23 am UTC

You're right; we should get rid of absentee ballots, and implement some sort of voter ID </snark>

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6544
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Wed Oct 17, 2018 12:38 pm UTC

duodecimus wrote:At what point does the American people ask for outside help to 'drain the swamp'? Think you'd be willing to let the UN do some spring cleaning? Maybe Canada?

Even ignoring trumping, things are messed up. Didn't half of your population get their identities stolen last year? Name, birthday, ssn and place of residence for half your population is up for grabs, what if someone just sat down with that data and filled in 140 million absentee votes? You just had a serious case of election manipulation, shouldn't there be more worry about this?

If you think about it even a little, you'd know that trying to tip an election by physically going through the motions to vote is incredibly inefficient. You going to drive to each location and hope nobody picks up the mail?

User avatar
EdgarJPublius
Official Propagandi.... Nifty Poster Guy
Posts: 3652
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 4:56 am UTC
Location: where the wind takes me

Re: Trump presidency

Postby EdgarJPublius » Wed Oct 17, 2018 12:57 pm UTC

duodecimus wrote:At what point does the American people ask for outside help to 'drain the swamp'? Think you'd be willing to let the UN do some spring cleaning? Maybe Canada?


What do you imagine that would even look like if it were to happen?
Roosevelt wrote:
I wrote:Does Space Teddy Roosevelt wrestle Space Bears and fight the Space Spanish-American War with his band of Space-volunteers the Space Rough Riders?

Yes.

-still unaware of the origin and meaning of his own user-title

User avatar
SDK
Posts: 670
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: Trump presidency

Postby SDK » Wed Oct 17, 2018 1:50 pm UTC

ucim wrote:Obama tried to get things done but was resisted by actual opposing parties... Somebody reluctant to take action is weaker than somebody who is resisted when taking action.

Exactly! This is your perception of Obama's legacy! Makes me wonder now if this is why he pushed, given his opportunity to look strong. Would he have tried to push as much as he did if he was afraid it might actually work?

The executive orders he put through seem to show that he actually did want real change, but the fact that that mindset is pervasive enough for McConnell to state it as a known fact... I mean, I already knew your government was dysfunctional in a lot of ways, this is just a new type of failure for me.
The biggest number (63 quintillion googols in debt)

idonno
Posts: 218
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2015 3:34 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby idonno » Wed Oct 17, 2018 1:59 pm UTC

duodecimus wrote:Didn't half of your population get their identities stolen last year? Name, birthday, ssn and place of residence for half your population is up for grabs, what if someone just sat down with that data and filled in 140 million absentee votes? You just had a serious case of election manipulation, shouldn't there be more worry about this?


I'm pretty sure at least in most states you have to specifically request an absentee ballot which would be sent to your address. This would require requesting ballots, intercepting them, and hoping that no one notices an insane spike in absentee ballot requests and investigates. This all has to happen before the voting happens. After the voting happens, you will have a lot of ballots thrown out because the voter showed up at the polls which will raise suspicion and election results changing at the very end when they count the way higher than normal number of absentee ballots raising suspicions. I don't know how it would be handled if it got that far but it seems hard to believe that it wouldn't be detected.

In short, if there is enough incompetence for that to go undetected, the elections are probably already 100% rigged anyways.

SDK wrote:The reason I say that's fucked up is not just because the people in power are cowards who fear more for their own job than for the country. The reason I say that is this implies Obama's years of getting nothing done were more productive than they would have been otherwise. Doesn't paint the efficiency of the government in a very good light (which, perhaps, was the point).


I think that limitation only occurs if the representatives believe there isn't a good chance something will work or they are worried that results of it working will be unpopular. I'm not sure that limiting action on risky or unpopular changes to situations with bipartisan support is necessarily a bad thing for a democracy.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2994
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: Trump presidency

Postby orthogon » Wed Oct 17, 2018 2:40 pm UTC

ucim wrote:
PFhorrest wrote:I could almost imagine a single-issue Third Party Party, whose only campaign promise is to change the voting system in that way
1: Who'd believe them, and why?
2: If you have an answer to #1, you could use that to run yourself, then break the promise and do whatever you wanted.
3: See #1.

Jose

We in the UK used to have a third party, the Liberal Democrats (we still do, but they've lost a lot of support - see below) who had electoral reform as one of their policies. They managed to hold the balance of power in the 2010 election and entered a coalition with the Conservatives. One of their demands in the coalition agreement was that a referendum on electoral reform would be held. It duly was, but it was campaigned against by both the big parties, was poorly understood and (largely because of this) the "Yes" campaign was fairly minimal (source: poster's own memory). Plus, the proposed change (to AV) wasn't even particularly radical, so was in danger of being unpopular even with supporters of reform. In the end it looked like blatant self-interest on the part of the LibDems: they had the opportunity to use their parliamentary presence to force some concessions out of the Tories and they chose to use most of it in what looked like an attempt to get themselves more seats in future. They might have got away with that, but some of the other policies that they could have used their bargaining position to force - particularly abolishing or reducing university tuition fees - they infamously rolled over on. Their participation in the 2010-2015 coalition has left them in the political wilderness in terms of voter popularity.

Things might be different with a single-issue party, but I'm not convinced, since I suspect most people elected them for their other policies rather than meta-voting out of a desire for a better voting system. I'm just not convinced that electoral reform can be made enough of an issue beyond anoraks like [some of] us. (Just look at the UK EU referendum: all those Remainers insisting now that the "will of the people" must be enacted, when the will of the people as indicated in the referendum is best expressed as "meh". There's almost nobody arguing that, actually, we should try to translate the ambivalent result into policy, rather than treating it like the score in a sportsball match, where all that matters is which team got more points).
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10250
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Oct 17, 2018 3:55 pm UTC

Electoral reform is a big issue for every 3rd party in the US. If the Libertarians, Greens, Reform and all the nutjobs even more insane than those three, could agree to work together a nominate only the same single issue candidate whose only goal is to de-rig the election system, they could ensure that they always get blamed by both parties for letting the other guy win.

elasto
Posts: 3568
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby elasto » Wed Oct 17, 2018 11:18 pm UTC

As I recall, electoral reform was talked about more than just in passing by the Labour Party in the UK prior to the 1997 election (by which time the Labour party had been out of power for 18 years).

Labour won that election by a landslide and the issue of electoral reform quietly got shelved - presumably because what government in power wants to change the system that just went and elected them with a landslide..?

User avatar
SDK
Posts: 670
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: Trump presidency

Postby SDK » Thu Oct 18, 2018 11:02 am UTC

elasto wrote:As I recall, electoral reform was talked about more than just in passing by the Labour Party in the UK prior to the 1997 election (by which time the Labour party had been out of power for 18 years).

Labour won that election by a landslide and the issue of electoral reform quietly got shelved - presumably because what government in power wants to change the system that just went and elected them with a landslide..?

Somewhat similar thing happened in Canada last election. Liberals had election reform as part of their platform, they won handily, did some token work towards that end only to conclude that changing nothing is the course to take since it wasn't immediately clear which of the better options was best. All of them were better than what we've got!
The biggest number (63 quintillion googols in debt)

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Oct 18, 2018 3:06 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Electoral reform is a big issue for every 3rd party in the US. If the Libertarians, Greens, Reform and all the nutjobs even more insane than those three, could agree to work together a nominate only the same single issue candidate whose only goal is to de-rig the election system, they could ensure that they always get blamed by both parties for letting the other guy win.


Yeah. All third parties would like to see reform, the big two won't. All third parties together can't topple either of the big two, though. It's rare that even one of the third parties makes a splash in a "shot at winning" way.

I don't see anyone asking for help from outside. The parties in power are, by nature of how elections work, generally pretty alright with the election system. It'd be nice to get actual reform, but it ain't likely to happen with the balance of power as it is now.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2994
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: Trump presidency

Postby orthogon » Thu Oct 18, 2018 4:22 pm UTC

elasto wrote:As I recall, electoral reform was talked about more than just in passing by the Labour Party in the UK prior to the 1997 election (by which time the Labour party had been out of power for 18 years).

Labour won that election by a landslide and the issue of electoral reform quietly got shelved - presumably because what government in power wants to change the system that just went and elected them with a landslide..?


Thanks - I'd forgotten that, although I do remember feeling, around that time, that the Tories were going to be in power for ever (it didn't help that the day I learned what the Prime Minister was was the day Thatcher was elected - my schoolteacher put the TV on to show her arriving at Downing Street).

Labour's view on electoral reform might change again if Scotland votes for Independence.
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
Plasma_Wolf
Posts: 122
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 8:11 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Plasma_Wolf » Thu Oct 18, 2018 4:44 pm UTC

Labour has already largely lost Scotland. In 2010, they had 41 constituencies (SNP had 6), in 2015, they had just one (SNP had 56), and in 2017, they got six (SNP dropped to 35, Tories went to 13).

Unless the SNP experiences a total collapse, Labour will never get the Scottish heartland back, and currently the Tories are still doing a better job.

This is a bit off-topic, so I'll add that it does show that parties with a more nationalistic theme can make massive gains these days (these years). In the US, it means that a populist first has to become the big man of the Republican or Democrat Party, in other countries you can come in with a different party.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6544
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Thu Oct 18, 2018 5:00 pm UTC

In the aftermath of the nytimes debunking Trump's wealth origin, fresh air had an interview with the authors. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/02/us/p ... trump.html
All County was, in fact, a company only on paper, records and interviews show — a vehicle to siphon cash from Fred Trump’s empire by simply marking up purchases already made by his employees. Those millions in markups, effectively untaxed gifts, then flowed to All County’s owners — Donald Trump


Apparently the trumps created a invoice padding company that inflated expenses for buildings(aka repair of boiler cost Donald 5k, then he bills his dad 10k) as a way to avoid estate taxes or gift taxes. Fred Trump then used the inflated tax evasion numbers to justify why rent controlled tenants have to pay more.
Real estate is so scummy, but Trump goes beyond that. At least we know what skill he had to maintain his business empire. Tax evasion. I remember when zamfir was defending Trump's business acumen. I guess knowing how to game the tax system does count.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Oct 18, 2018 5:44 pm UTC

Expense padding is ridiculously common. In general, I think if the maint companies have ties to the leasing company, one ought to view the resulting bills with a great deal of skepticism.

There is a fine line between tax evasion and tax avoidance. The latter is legal. Ethical, ehhhh. It depends, I guess. I'm comfortable calling these sorts of real estate shenanigans unethical, at least.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6544
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Thu Oct 18, 2018 6:07 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Expense padding is ridiculously common. In general, I think if the maint companies have ties to the leasing company, one ought to view the resulting bills with a great deal of skepticism.

There is a fine line between tax evasion and tax avoidance. The latter is legal. Ethical, ehhhh. It depends, I guess. I'm comfortable calling these sorts of real estate shenanigans unethical, at least.

The thing that's galling is how easily they ignored the rule against selling to your family at a 'loss'. You can't just borrow a million from your dad, pay off that loan with "stock" in a new company and then terminate the stock for $1000. The IRS is seriously underfunded.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Oct 18, 2018 6:14 pm UTC

Yeah, that's freaking sketchy. Legal, I dunno. I'm not a lawyer. But yeah, gift/estate taxes don't really do much to prevent the genuinely rich from shuffling money around if they want to.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7508
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Zamfir » Thu Oct 18, 2018 6:31 pm UTC

At least we know what skill he had to maintain his business empire. Tax evasion. I remember when zamfir was defending Trump's business acumen. I guess knowing how to game the tax system does count.

I'll bite the bullet here and say, yes, aggressive cheating on taxes (and on other things, and other people) is a core business skill.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6544
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Thu Oct 18, 2018 8:19 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Yeah, that's freaking sketchy. Legal, I dunno. I'm not a lawyer. But yeah, gift/estate taxes don't really do much to prevent the genuinely rich from shuffling money around if they want to.

I believe the legal theory is if you lie enough times, the auditor can't catch it all. They'll settle if you pony up a few million bucks extra. Trump, under the basis that the IRS didn't fully punish him equates that with being right/legal.

The captive market or the big money business have very different business models and incentives than the rest of us. The small guy is afraid of an audit, the big company loves it because it legalizes sketchy behavior.
The small company provides better service/product in order to make more money. The big company looks for tax havens instead.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Oct 18, 2018 9:41 pm UTC

I wouldn't care to stake my financial future on such a theory, but then, I ain't a billionare or anywhere close.

I do agree that with size come increasing ability to take advantage of tax laws, loopholes, or whatever else. It's one of the biggest factors in favor of a simpler tax code.

I also have to agree with Zamfir that knowing how to exploit such a system does constitute a skill, and probably not a very common one, but certainly one that appears to be important for large businesses. It's much like acknowledging that there is some skill in scammers who separate folks from their life savings.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7199
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: Trump presidency

Postby The Great Hippo » Thu Oct 18, 2018 11:24 pm UTC

Zamfir wrote:
At least we know what skill he had to maintain his business empire. Tax evasion. I remember when zamfir was defending Trump's business acumen. I guess knowing how to game the tax system does count.

I'll bite the bullet here and say, yes, aggressive cheating on taxes (and on other things, and other people) is a core business skill.
I (reluctantly) agree -- but to be fair, evidence points to Fred Trump being the primary architect behind most of the tax fraud. Either way, I think it's abundantly clear that Donald Trump's wealth has less to do with his business acumen and more to do with his father being a very rich man.

I think this is important to emphasize, because people like Trump cut through the lie behind the American dream, and the promise of capitalism -- that we live in a meritocracy where competence and hard work will net you success and prosperity.

The rich and powerful assert that they acquired their riches through discipline and a strong work ethic; that they deserve their wealth by merit of ability, talent, and persistence. But this is simply not true. People like Rockefeller are exceptions, not the rule. The single most powerful predictor of whether or not you will be wealthy is whether or not your parents were wealthy. America isn't a meritocracy; it's an informal aristocracy.

ijuin
Posts: 910
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 6:02 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby ijuin » Fri Oct 19, 2018 7:24 am UTC

sardia wrote:The captive market or the big money business have very different business models and incentives than the rest of us. The small guy is afraid of an audit, the big company loves it because it legalizes sketchy behavior.
The small company provides better service/product in order to make more money. The big company looks for tax havens instead.


As has often been said, if you owe a million dollars, then the bank owns you, whereas if you owe a billion dollars, then you own the bank.

User avatar
Quercus
Posts: 1756
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2013 12:22 pm UTC
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Quercus » Fri Oct 19, 2018 1:03 pm UTC

Trump endorses assault of US journalist.

Kinda concerning, given that encouraging literal attacks on the press is chapter 1 of "Instituting a Fascist Dictatorship, an Idiot's Guide"...

User avatar
SDK
Posts: 670
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: Trump presidency

Postby SDK » Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:14 pm UTC

Presumably the Montanan's in the crowd would have been familiar with that story, especially given the response to Trump's words. I wonder how they rationalize that in their own minds? Stresses of the job caused Gianforte to overreact? Or are they just the types that actually fight things out physically when they have arguments with others?
The biggest number (63 quintillion googols in debt)

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6544
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:38 pm UTC

SDK wrote:Presumably the Montanan's in the crowd would have been familiar with that story, especially given the response to Trump's words. I wonder how they rationalize that in their own minds? Stresses of the job caused Gianforte to overreact? Or are they just the types that actually fight things out physically when they have arguments with others?

It's not hard. 1. He's a republican. 2. He still won. Partisanship is a hell of a drug.

I'll even give a comparative case. Corrupt Senator menendez. 1. He's a Democrat (more importantly a senator) 2. He'll probably win. Partisanship is a hell of a drug.

User avatar
SDK
Posts: 670
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 7:40 pm UTC
Location: Canada

Re: Trump presidency

Postby SDK » Fri Oct 19, 2018 2:47 pm UTC

I guess I'm just wondering what thought they give to that. I doubt they just flat out ignore it. I think it's very likely they would have some kind of response justifying that violence if I asked them for their thoughts. Now I'm wondering if that passive acceptance in order to justify supporting him makes his supporters more likely to resort to violence themselves - if they can accept that behavior in him, maybe they become more accepting of it in themselves as well. And so we start the slow slide towards accepting atrocities.

... You guys are fucked. Good luck! :?
The biggest number (63 quintillion googols in debt)

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6544
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Fri Oct 19, 2018 3:38 pm UTC

SDK wrote:I guess I'm just wondering what thought they give to that. I doubt they just flat out ignore it. I think it's very likely they would have some kind of response justifying that violence if I asked them for their thoughts. Now I'm wondering if that passive acceptance in order to justify supporting him makes his supporters more likely to resort to violence themselves - if they can accept that behavior in him, maybe they become more accepting of it in themselves as well. And so we start the slow slide towards accepting atrocities.

... You guys are fucked. Good luck! :?

"It was self defense/provoked/revenge after violence from liberals"*. It's a common defense from conservatives. Ignore your violence, claim the other side is bad.

*This one is from Fox news comment section so no clue if this is a sock puppet fake account, a real person echoing a fake accounts, or a real person actual opinion.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 1905
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Sableagle » Fri Oct 19, 2018 6:27 pm UTC

Well, yes, being proven to be incompetent, corrupt, dishonest and/or talking shite and taking your supporters for a ride [u]is[/i] provocation beyond reasonable limits in some people's twisted little minds.
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7199
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: Trump presidency

Postby The Great Hippo » Sat Oct 20, 2018 2:25 am UTC

SDK wrote:And so we start the slow slide towards accepting atrocities.
We've already got a significant portion of the country who thinks it's okay to separate children from their parents and put the children in internment camps -- some of whom will never see their parents again. We also have a significant portion of the country who thinks a history of sexual assault shouldn't be an obstacle to obtaining the highest public offices -- be it Supreme Court or President of the United States.

I think accepting "body-slamming a journalist" as fine is less a slide into atrocities and more a bump inside the frictionless magno-electric vacuum tube that's driving us straight down to hell.

EDIT: What's happening here -- and the reason to be scared -- is that the thing that holds Trump back is the fear of reprisal. He backs down when he thinks he's going to get hit back. But, as an example, let's say the Republicans sweep the elections this November. That tells Trump he has the people's support -- which tells him to stop listening to the "moderates" (see: people who don't think we should murder and/or deport all brown people) and just do whatever he and Gargamel (see: Stephen Miller) want. Internment camps for undocumented immigrants? Sure. If another terrorist attack happens? Throw Muslims in there, too. Also, all these bitches keep trying to attack us, so let's work on legislation that makes it illegal to publicly accuse people in office of sexual assault prior to an investigation.

The one thing holding Trump back is that he's afraid of not having public support. But the more the public supports his valueless indecency, his cruelty and his stupidity, the farther he'll go. The danger of Trump isn't that he'll become a tyrannical brute; he already is one. The danger is that his cowardice will stop interfering with his desire to do awful, horrible things.
Last edited by The Great Hippo on Sat Oct 20, 2018 2:51 am UTC, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6544
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby sardia » Sat Oct 20, 2018 2:36 am UTC

The Great Hippo wrote:
SDK wrote:And so we start the slow slide towards accepting atrocities.
We've already got a significant portion of the country who thinks it's okay to separate children from their parents and put the children in internment camps -- some of whom will never see their parents again. We also have a significant portion of the country who thinks a history of sexual assault shouldn't be an obstacle to obtaining the highest public offices -- be it Supreme Court or President of the United States.

I think accepting "body-slamming a journalist" as fine is less a slide into atrocities and more a bump inside the frictionless magno-electric vacuum tube that's driving us straight down to hell.

Both of those have happened before, and we survived. I'm disappointed that we haven't learned lessons though*. Remember after the Bush torture era, we went with Obama.

*Other than it'll probably happen again with whoever the next outgroup minority is.Damn, it's only been 17 years after 9/11 and we're already back to torturing minorities. Maybe muslims, hispanics and whites will unite around beating up neoIrish Transatheists in the future. Or greek college culture groups.
**It's fascinating to watch conservatives court asians(read Big three China/japan/Korea) as the next group to become white.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7199
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: Trump presidency

Postby The Great Hippo » Sat Oct 20, 2018 2:48 am UTC

sardia wrote:Both of those have happened before, and we survived.
The last time we had internment camps, we were locked in a war with an unimaginably evil enemy (the axis powers) who had just attacked us at Pearl Harbor. FDR was also enjoying unprecedented amounts of popularity leading up to it.

Here, we did it because we didn't like Hispanics coming into our backyard. And we didn't put them in camps; we took their *children* away and put *them* in camps.

Both are horrible things we've done, but at least it took a war and America getting fucking bombed for us to work up the gumption to do it the first time.

WriteBrainedJR
Posts: 122
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 3:08 pm UTC
Location: Right Behind You
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby WriteBrainedJR » Sat Oct 20, 2018 8:55 am UTC

SDK wrote:Presumably the Montanan's in the crowd would have been familiar with that story, especially given the response to Trump's words. I wonder how they rationalize that in their own minds? Stresses of the job caused Gianforte to overreact? Or are they just the types that actually fight things out physically when they have arguments with others?

I'm at least sort of a Montanan, or was, but I don't support Trump or Gianforte so I don't rationalize anything.

As for what kind of people Montanans are, not relevant to the discussion. Gianforte's not a Montanan. He was born in California, which is an automatic disqualifier in my opinion, and he lived on the east coast for the majority of his life.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10250
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Sat Oct 20, 2018 11:23 am UTC

sardia wrote:**It's fascinating to watch conservatives court asians(read Big three China/japan/Korea) as the next group to become white.


Why? They are more likely to have money, and get screwed over by affirmative action. In terms of racism, there's the rare hate crime against them, but nothing like against black people, Jews, and LGBT. Plus, little harassment from the cops.

WriteBrainedJR
Posts: 122
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 3:08 pm UTC
Location: Right Behind You
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby WriteBrainedJR » Sat Oct 20, 2018 3:07 pm UTC

Asians have long been held up as a "model minority" by numerous racists and some groups. I guess making them honorary whites would be the next logical step.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10250
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Sat Oct 20, 2018 8:16 pm UTC

Yeah, no. Sociologists in general have referred to Asians (and Jews) as model minorities. While yes, racists will also hold them up as model minorities (except Jews), it is only to use as a cover, and the racists arent even a particularly sizable minority. Few racists ever spoke up in defense of the Japanese when they were being taken away to camps, and the lone vote of opposition to Plessy v Fergusson only did so because he thought blacks and whites should both be able to avoid sharing a train car with Chinamen.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7199
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: Trump presidency

Postby The Great Hippo » Sat Oct 20, 2018 10:47 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Yeah, no. Sociologists in general have referred to Asians (and Jews) as model minorities. While yes, racists will also hold them up as model minorities (except Jews), it is only to use as a cover, and the racists arent even a particularly sizable minority. Few racists ever spoke up in defense of the Japanese when they were being taken away to camps, and the lone vote of opposition to Plessy v Fergusson only did so because he thought blacks and whites should both be able to avoid sharing a train car with Chinamen.
The term 'honorary whites' was coined during Apartheid in reference to both individuals and several different ethnic groups, most notably several different Asian ethnicities. The Japanese were also declared by Hitler to be "honorary Aryans" -- same premise.

The idea of white supremacists/white racists creating exceptions for Asian ethnicities is pretty old, and is essentially racists making concessions to reality. Turns out it's really hard to exclude all non-white people.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10250
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Sun Oct 21, 2018 1:54 pm UTC

If you want to go older, go back to Sir Francis Galton, who created virtually half of statistics to support his true passion, Eugenics. He even coined the term itself, though surprisingly, he wasnt quite as racist as you'd expect, in that he was actually a pro-semite. Back to the point, he actually opposed European colonization/imperialization of Africa, but supported Chinese colonization of the continent, as Europeans werent adapted to the harsh climate but the Chinese were (but Africans weren't, somehow?), in order to bring "civilization" to the whole globe. Plus, he viewed the British as being as far below the Greeks as Africans were "below" his fellow British, so he wasn't exactly a white supremacist. He also invented the dog whistle, perhaps unironically. Interesting fellow.

His protege, Pearson, was a thorough racist however, not sharing Galton's love of Jews, Greeks and Asians, and hating all the darker skinned peoples.


But anyway, "white supremacists claiming asians are awesome" is only a small subset of "people claiming asians are awesome". I can pull one of my old sociology 101 textbooks (if I have it still) that even refer to asian americans as model minorities, and I didnt get the impression that class was about promoting racism.

User avatar
natraj
Posts: 1848
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:13 pm UTC
Location: away from Omelas

Re: Trump presidency

Postby natraj » Sun Oct 21, 2018 2:23 pm UTC

anyway in today's daily dose of facism the administration is looking to legally defining me out of existence. not that it is new that they hate trans people but this is still getting Tiring.
You want to know the future, love? Then wait:
I'll answer your impatient questions. Still --
They'll call it chance, or luck, or call it Fate,
The cards and stars that tumble as they will.

pronouns: they or he

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10250
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Trump presidency

Postby CorruptUser » Sun Oct 21, 2018 2:54 pm UTC

I read a short story 20 years back, in one of those "years best scifi" anthology books or something, about a future society so advanced where choosing your gender was given as much thought as choosing which pair of socks to wear. Specifically, the short story was about the sex lives of a couple that was engaged, and the ex girlfriend turned swarm'o'nanobots whose return had put a strain on the relationship. The man and woman would often try out all sorts of freaky things, gender swapping so the man knew how it felt, or trying it out as elephants, or other freaky things such a future enabled. It was implied that the man and woman pretty much forgot what gender they originally were, since, you know, it didn't even matter. The story ends with the guy being turned into a swarm'o'nanobots like the ex girlfriend, while the ex had sex with both of them but they stopped having sex with each other. In retrospect, I probably should not have been reading this story at that age.

Anyway, I'm wondering how society will treat trans issues in the scary future where a sex change is about as traumatic as removing an impacted molar, and with vat-grown genitals/ovaries/uteri/other_organs enabling trans to cause/have pregnancies and other medial advances that even a medical professional would not be able to tell the difference between trans and cis without a DNA test. I don't think such a future is all that far away, though obviously only the very rich will have it in our lifetimes. I'm wondering how we would react to it.

I'm guessing virtual reality and hyper-realistic sex robots are going to be the far greater threat to society.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 1905
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Sableagle » Sun Oct 21, 2018 2:59 pm UTC

in today's daily dose of facism the administration is looking to legally defining me out of existence.

That's not how I read the article. Based on this bit:
For the last year, health and human services has privately argued that the term “sex” was never meant to include gender identity or even homosexuality, and that the lack of clarity allowed the Obama administration to wrongfully extend civil rights protections to people who should not have them.

... I think they're trying to define you as a non-human who shouldn't have any rights.

Also they're going to run into trouble with people born intersex, with people born outside medical facilities and not examined inside whatever timescale they define as "at birth" and with anyone who has an XXY, XXYY, XXXY, XXXXY or, possibly, XO genotype. I'd bet money they haven't taken those into account. I'm sure tronald would say: "I don't want to talk about that. It's disgusting. It's disgusting. I don't want to talk about it. It's disgusting."

I just realised that reading about the current US administration may have been a contributing factor to me finding the goblin slaves in the dungeons and foundries under Isengard such sympathetic characters while I was a prisoner there. It's not just the Uruk-Hai that were making those little guys seem charming by comparison.

I'm wondering how society will treat trans issues in the scary future where a sex change is about as traumatic as removing an impacted molar
Probably in much the same way as now: some people will get all stalker-ish and compile lists of known post-op transsexuals and insist on telling the world about it and try to get them abrred from schools and the rest of us'll reply with "So fuckin' what, asshole? Get outta here."
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 3675
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: Trump presidency

Postby Soupspoon » Sun Oct 21, 2018 3:11 pm UTC

I'm considering the NationStates-like* response to an Issue answer of "Birth Certificate is final, unless genetic testing proves otherwise" which results in many liberally-minded patents deliberately declaring 'wrongly' for the certificate, so that when the child grows up they can choose to apply the genetic test proof to revert to their genetic/genitalia gender or not, according to their desire. (Except for the few cases where the parents thought they were 'wrong' but they were wrong, they were right!)


And did I miss anyone saying anything about (potentially, but wheels in motion) withdrawing of the US from the INF Treaty with Russia? Even given Russia's dodginess in that regard, it's a bit brinkmanshiplike. In the hands of anyone other than Trump I'd suspect it was a cunning ploy on behalf of the President. In this case, I'm hoping it's Putin who offered it as a 'winnable' political battle to let him save on the rubles at home and/or quietly scrap that "infinite range cruise missile" program that he announced a while ago to much technical scepticism.


* nationstates.net - been a while since I maintained nations, but every issue (however seemingly clear-cut, in whatever direction you intend to drive your national policies) always has a rebound of some kind.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests