US 2024 Presidential Election

[Phoenixmgs]

Huh, I did not know that. The American system looks even more open to political abuse than I thought.

That's what the law has always been for ICE, not sure about when it was INS.

Initially I was expecting him to get found guilty on the third shooting, right up until the guy he shot testified and said more or less the only thing he could have possibly said for it to count as self defense. Trying him for the other two was entirely about politics (not trying him would have caused riots, possibly not just local ones) - and despite the thoroughly filmed and very public trial you'll still have people make claims directly contradicted by the presented evidence.



If you're hoping to catch illegals, arresting people for looking like they might be Hispanic and based on nothing else is just common fucking sense huh? That is after all how we ended up with ICE detaining Native Americans for not being white.

IIRC, there was video of the 3rd shooting too. The Rittenhouse case and the Pretti shooting as examples how hypocritical both sides are. None of the left talking points from Rittenhouse are used for Pretti and the right is saying you can't have guns at a protest. Both had no reason to be there or reason to have a gun, but it is your right to go wherever and your right to carry a gun.

So, you're saying the following doesn't make common sense?
To be clear, apparent ethnicity alone cannot furnish reasonable suspicion; under this Court's case law regarding immigration stops, however, it can be a "relevant factor" when considered along with other salient factors.

You still haven't provided any proof of that, it's something that you just keep stating when it isn't true.

I said exactly this...

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/11/briefing/us-immigration-surge.html

How don't you expect an equal and opposite reaction to happen in response to that?

 

[tippy2k2]

GET IT!!?!?! SIX SEVEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They're hip and cool with The Kids!!!!! Now Pokemon Go to the Polls

Ha haaaaa...we're all gonna slide right into Fascism cause The Democratic Party is so fucking useless lol lmao

 

[Chimpzy]

Trump has no plans to send ICE to polling sites, White House says

President Trump has not discussed Steve Bannon's idea to dispatch ICE agents to polling sites during the 2026 midterm election, the White House said.

eu.usatoday.com

That's not actually a "No"

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

I said exactly this...
View attachment 14217

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/11/briefing/us-immigration-surge.html

How don't you expect an equal and opposite reaction to happen in response to that?

I have no idea what this has to do with your argument that ICE has always operated the way it is current operating.

 

[Satinavian]

GET IT!!?!?! SIX SEVEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They're hip and cool with The Kids!!!!! Now Pokemon Go to the Polls

Ha haaaaa...we're all gonna slide right into Fascism cause The Democratic Party is so fucking useless lol lmao

Isn't this a Kamala channel trying to push Kamala ?

 

[Hades]

Ha haaaaa...we're all gonna slide right into Fascism cause The Democratic Party is so fucking useless lol lmao

Gonna? You're already there. Complete with brownshirts terrorizing the streets
Though for the most part I think the electorate is useless given the stakes and it being very much their own self preservation that was at play.

 

[Agema]

I can only believe that you are setting me up to spike the ball in your face on purpose.

Yeah, nice try to save face, bud. You're nailed here. Busted.

The point put to you was that Trump's 2025 tariffs were dangerous, poor policy. You then brought up Arthur Laffer... but he said Trump's 2025 tariffs were too. Now you're just retreating into a waffly generalisation, and "Tariffs are not always bad therefore Trump tariffs are good" is just embarrassingly defective logic.

Go take a running jump, you partisan buffoon.

 

[tstorm823]

Yeah, nice try to save face, bud. You're nailed here. Busted.

The point put to you was that Trump's 2025 tariffs were dangerous, poor policy. You then brought up Arthur Laffer... but he said Trump's 2025 tariffs were too. Now you're just retreating into a waffly generalisation, and "Tariffs are not always bad therefore Trump tariffs are good" is just embarrassingly defective logic.

Go take a running jump, you partisan buffoon.

Sigh.

"I am a huge fan of his and the way that he handles this." - Art Laffer 3 weeks ago

Maybe you should stop deferring your understanding of the world to reporting and start looking at things yourself. It's 2026, we are on the internet, government data is all published, interviews are often posted as videos, we have better access to primary sources than ever before in the history of the world. There is no excuse for an intelligent person to let politically motivated reporting manipulate them with half quotes and hidden context.

 

[Chimpzy]

Donald Trump posts AI video depicting Barack and Michelle Obama as monkeys; Democrats condemn post as racist - The Times of India

US News: US President Donald Trump on Thursday posted an election conspiracy video that drew backlash for its portrayal of former President Barack Obama and fo.

timesofindia.indiatimes.com

It is indeed rather racist to equate those things to primates.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Gonna? You're already there. Complete with brownshirts terrorizing the streets
Though for the most part I think the electorate is useless given the stakes and it being very much their own self preservation that was at play.

There's a lot of useless to go around. Usual disclaimer about it not being everyone in the US, and lots of people, just not nearly enough, are trying not to burn everything down, which seems a common trend in US history/politics.

 

[Silvanus]

Sigh.

"I am a huge fan of his and the way that he handles this." - Art Laffer 3 weeks ago

So he says explicitly he'd be against the same tariffs if Biden had done them, and predicates it all on this fawning description of Trump as a person. Says he's as great a President as there's ever been.

So, you've found someone who opposes tariffs, but will support anything Trump does, even if diametrically opposed to his own principles. A partisan hack, in short.

 

[tippy2k2]

Isn't this a Kamala channel trying to push Kamala ?

That is her official campaign Twitter account

 

[Agema]

politically motivated reporting

You are politically motivated. Everything you accuse the media of... that's you, too. You curate all the information and opinion you come across to suit what you want to believe. You're not smarter or more insightful: you just delude yourself into thinking so because you're unable to recognise your own flaws and incompetencies.

That's what that whole "I'm the smartest guy in the room" schtick is really about. It's a psychological defence mechanism to reinforce your self-belief when you encounter disagreement.

Maybe you should stop deferring your understanding of the world to reporting and start looking at things yourself.

Oh you feeble fraudster!

This isn't about gullibility. I did some research so see what Laffer thought. And you didn't actually know much when you first spouted, so after being stung you had to go away and do some research, too. I got my Laffer comments from a news website, and you got yours from a podcast.

That's without even addressing the surrounding context of Laffer's wider comments from the podcast, which make him look biased and foolish and your claim much more tenuous. Of course, as per the first paragraph, Laffer is also politically biased. The tariffs were both incompetent policy per se, and a tool to threaten other countries. Laffer has re-orientated his narrative between the two, to suit his biases and those of his preferred audience.

 

[Satinavian]

That is her official campaign Twitter account

So ... a Kamala channel trying to push Kamala ?



I don't think she is a good candidate but i kinda fail to see the issue here.

 

[tippy2k2]

So ... a Kamala channel trying to push Kamala ?



I don't think she is a good candidate but i kinda fail to see the issue here.

I'm more mocking the incredibly embarrassing 6-7 (which they have since changed because they were getting absolutely dunked on for it).

These dorks are doing "How do you do fellow kids" instead of being useful and standing up to Trump beyond strongly worded letters (and they couldn't even stand by their "How do you do fellow kids" moment as they immediately changed their branding to 68, which now makes no sense).

 

[Chimpzy]

they immediately changed their branding to 68, which now makes no sense).

Maybe if everyone dunks on them for that, they'll change it to 69 smack ... NICE!

 

[Satinavian]

I'm more mocking the incredibly embarrassing 6-7 (which they have since changed because they were getting absolutely dunked on for it).

I am probably either too old or too foreign to have recognized that meme. But sure, polititions in their 60ies trying to coopt teen lingo is generally as common as cringe.

------------

Aside from that, Kamala is not in congress, neither does she hold any state position or, really, any position of power. So, strong words are the most you can expect here.

One might fault e.g. the senate Democrats for not doing enough against Trump, but not Harris.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

I have no idea what this has to do with your argument that ICE has always operated the way it is current operating.

I didn't know what you were referring to as needing proof of from my post.

I don't know why you don't think ICE has always operated in the same way when it's been reported that ICE has and that's always what the law has been.

 

[Silvanus]

I don't know why you don't think ICE has always operated in the same way when it's been reported that ICE has and that's always what the law has been.

Still waiting for examples of ICE killing american citizens in broad daylight and receiving immediate support and immunity from the government, and the imprisonment of people who're in the country legally in foreign torture facilities.

 

[Hades]

Trump promoting posts comparing the Obama's to monkeys is of course a new low even for him. But more importantly it stresses the point that Trump is obsessed with a predecessor that's better than he is in about every conceivable metric. It be like if Buchanan had a seething hatred for Lincoln and kept accidentally proving while one was admired and the other considered a failure.

-Obama was a consecutive two term president. Meanwhile Trump's first term was considered a failure and he got voted out of office. Then as a result Trump started misbehaving to the extreme degree and that's putting it very mildly.
-Obama was admired both abroad and domestically. Abroad Trump is largely reviled and considered a complete freak. Domestically Obama seems to have been more popular than Trump and certainly less divisive. In Trump's favor you can argue that his fanatics admire him more than Obama's admirers ever admired him, but considering its an extremely loony cult that's not entirely a point that reflects well on Trump.
-Obama consistently ranks in the upper brackets of the presidents while Trump will likely be permanently be placed in the absolute lowest brackets, with him arguably being Buchanan's only real competition for the lowest spot.
-Obama won a nobel peace price. Trump did not.
-Obama is a family man. Trump is a divorced rapist with the rape likely involving children considering his ties to Epstein.