Election results discussion thread (and sadly the inevitable aftermath)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Iron

BOI
Sep 6, 2013
1,741
259
88
Country
Occupied Palestine
A lot of these people talk tough but couldn't back it up if you literally held them at gunpoint. We'll probably here of more arrests and thwarted domestic terrorists and Trump will probably incite some violence before Christmas. But a civil war ain't gonna happen.



Trump's supporters are not precisely "accepting" this loss, what with all the conspiracy theories flying around on the right about voter fraud and Chinese election interference and whatever else they've come up with since I started typing this post. Don't get me wrong, I'd still much rather deal with their whining than them gunning down civilians and I hope that pattern holds.
Don't worry there's a disinfo campaign against these guys that will make them sit quite. The whole Qanon bullshit "trust the plan". If you are certain someone higher up or on "the inside" will take care of business, you won't do anything but wait for results.
 

Buyetyen

Elite Member
May 11, 2020
3,129
2,362
118
Country
USA
Don't worry there's a disinfo campaign against these guys that will make them sit quite. The whole Qanon bullshit "trust the plan". If you are certain someone higher up or on "the inside" will take care of business, you won't do anything but wait for results.
Isn't that kind of a lateral move?
 

Agema

Do everything and feel nothing
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
9,201
6,476
118
“When I argued that we should freeze federal spending, I meant Social Security as well,” he told the Senate in 1995. “I meant Medicare and Medicaid. I meant veterans’ benefits. I meant every single solitary thing in the government. And I not only tried it once, I tried it twice, I tried it a third time, and I tried it a fourth time.”
Right. But that article also makes clear that this wasn't an ideological desire to cut for the sake of it.

The issue was that during the Reaganite 1980s, increasing government debt would be used as a bludgeon by the Republicans to dismantle welfare (and they weren't wrong - that's exactly what the Republicans have been trying). Therefore, the best way to protect it from being completely unravelled was to accept cuts.

The context here was that Reagan had won crushing victories over the Demoocrats and was one of the most popular presidents of the postwar era, likewise the USSR was collapsing contributing to the sense that the left meant failure. The feeling was that the left had lost, and lost big. That also informed the Clinton era, and likewise had an effect in other countries too (e.g. UK, Germany): the right had won the economic argument, and the left needed a new approach.
 

Seanchaidh

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 21, 2009
5,769
3,511
118
Country
United States of America

The context here was that Reagan had won crushing victories over the Demoocrats and was one of the most popular presidents of the postwar era, likewise the USSR was collapsing contributing to the sense that the left meant failure. The feeling was that the left had lost, and lost big. That also informed the Clinton era, and likewise had an effect in other countries too (e.g. UK, Germany): the right had won the economic argument, and the left needed a new approach.
Quite the enduring feat of propaganda, really.
 
  • Like
Reactions: crimson5pheonix

Asita

Answer Hazy, Ask Again Later
Legacy
Jun 15, 2011
3,219
1,072
118
Country
USA
Gender
Male
I'm saying

1) You can present a law to address their fears and more
2) ultimate the law would benefit everyone including stopping the easy fear mongering of Sharia Law
3) It literally would align with progressives values to stop Sharia law even being possible
4) It lets you move on to other issues.
5) Plenty of stupid laws exist that likely will never be really used anyway
6) The 1st Amendment again only protects from the actions of government and corporations are becoming far more powerful as of late.
7) The only people the law would really target are the most extreme elements who want Sharia law anyway.

Plenty of laws get pre-emptively passed. It was illegal in the UK to cause a nuclear meltdown. Has there every been a nuclear meltdown in the UK? NO but it was a law put on the books and written into law at one point. Why be reactionary to events when you can be proactive?
And I'm saying:

1) Bullshit. The point of the legislation is not that they're afraid Sharia will be passed. Anyone with even a perfunctory understanding of US law will tell you that barring a Constitutional Amendment, Sharia cannot be codified into US law. The efforts to pass a law banning Sharia are not to address a fear of Sharia, but to stoke it, make it seem closer, and more of a threat than it actually is, and moreover to imply that the threat of the paper tiger they're setting up is not only serious but imminent.

2) Again, bullshit, as such legislation would be as redundant as a law specifying that it's illegal to murder someone with arsenic would be. Murder's already illegal. There is literally no benefit in making an additional law repeating that with greater specificity.

3) SHARIA IS ALREADY NOT POSSIBLE!

4) In all frankness, you're neatly illustrating why that's not true. That Sharia already cannot be put into law doesn't stop the fearmongerers from continuing to claim that we need greater safeguards against Sharia.

5) That stupid laws exist is a mark of shame, not an excuse to put forward more stupid laws.

6) Setting aside that that's blatant and vapid fearmongering on your part...You do realize that you're trying to bullshit a US Citizen on one of the most well known US Constitutional Amendments, do you not? And let's be clear here: this point is pure nonsense unless you're literally assuming the US will give way to a setting like Shadowrun in which the corporations are the government. And if you're assuming that, then you're assuming in effect that the country has been supplanted and its laws no longer apply. There is no interpretation where the logical consequences of the argument fosters the conclusion you're imagining it supports. In all frankness, you need to think long and hard about what it means for your argument that it first requires effectively supplanting the government the States, that the corporation that became the new government is dead set on an Islamic theocracy (despite, as you yourself note, the overwhelming majority of US muslims not wanting it), still doesn't support the conclusion you want it to, and is based entirely on an insipid 'gotcha' technicality that no serious legal mind would entertain. It requires so many additional (often ridiculous) assumptions that it is effectively divorced from reality.

7) Nominally. It would, however, predictably be used as propaganda against Muslims in general. Let me be perfectly clear here: Nobody is trying to implement Sharia in the States. There is no movement calling for it. There are no politicians championing it. There is no petition to have it added to the books. It is not taught in our schools. There are no judges that are making rulings interpreted through Sharia. What we do see, however, are efforts to paint Muslims as overwhelmingly favoring Sharia, expel Muslims on the assumption that they want Sharia (and indeed have been trying to implement it) and that as consequence Islam is incompatible with American values. The people pushing this law are literally using it to push the narrative that Muslims not only want to overthrow America but want to destroy the entirety of Western civilization. It's part of a long pattern of demonizing Muslims and pushing the narrative that Islam is intrinsically at odds with American values, that the identity was - and I quote - "inconsistent with the Constitution", that Islam is a "false religion" that is "completely opposite to what our First Amendment stands for. That one was Senator Roy Moore, just last year. A few years before that, Senator Ted Cruz suggested that - and again I quote - "We need to empower law enforcement to patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods before they become radicalized".

The list goes on and on and on and on...and they aren't going to stop if you give them a wholly redundant, unnecessary, and unprompted ban on Sharia, because banning Sharia is not the end they're working towards, it's a means to an end, something they can use for propaganda purposes, "proving" that Muslims are not only unamerican but an imminent threat that was only just stopped from toppling our way of life. You don't stop that with Appeasement! We've seen this fucking song and dance so many times before! We saw it in the Jim Crow South, we saw it in Nazi Germany, we saw it with the persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire...bigotry and the unfounded fears it fosters do not end when people decide it's not worth fighting their codification into law, they get worse.
 
Last edited:

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
6,014
665
118
And I'm saying:

1) Bullshit. The point of the legislation is not that they're afraid Sharia will be passed. Anyone with even a perfunctory understanding of US law will tell you that barring a Constitutional Amendment, Sharia cannot be codified into US law. The efforts to pass a law banning Sharia are not to address a fear of Sharia, but to stoke it, make it seem closer, and more of a threat than it actually is, and moreover to imply that the threat of the paper tiger they're setting up is not only serious but imminent.

2) Again, bullshit, as such legislation would be as redundant as a law specifying that it's illegal to murder someone with arsenic would be. Murder's already illegal. There is literally no benefit in making an additional law repeating that with greater specificity.

3) SHARIA IS ALREADY NOT POSSIBLE!

4) In all frankness, you're neatly illustrating why that's not true. That Sharia already cannot be put into law doesn't stop the fearmongerers from continuing to claim that we need greater safeguards against Sharia.

5) That stupid laws exist is a mark of shame, not an excuse to put forward more stupid laws.

6) Setting aside that that's blatant and vapid fearmongering on your part...You do realize that you're trying to bullshit a US Citizen on one of the most well known US Constitutional Amendments, do you not? And let's be clear here: this point is pure nonsense unless you're literally assuming the US will give way to a setting like Shadowrun in which the corporations are the government. And if you're assuming that, then you're assuming in effect that the country has been supplanted and its laws no longer apply. There is no interpretation where the logical consequences of the argument fosters the conclusion you're imagining it supports. In all frankness, you need to think long and hard about what it means for your argument that it first requires effectively supplanting the government the States, that the corporation that became the new government is dead set on an Islamic theocracy (despite, as you yourself note, the overwhelming majority of US muslims not wanting it), still doesn't support the conclusion you want it to, and is based entirely on an insipid 'gotcha' technicality that no serious legal mind would entertain. It requires so many additional (often ridiculous) assumptions that it is effectively divorced from reality.

7) Nominally. It would, however, predictably be used as propaganda against Muslims in general. Let me be perfectly clear here: Nobody is trying to implement Sharia in the States. There is no movement calling for it. There are no politicians championing it. There is no petition to have it added to the books. It is not taught in our schools. There are no judges that are making rulings interpreted through Sharia. What we do see, however, are efforts to paint Muslims as overwhelmingly favoring Sharia, expel Muslims on the assumption that they want Sharia (and indeed have been trying to implement it) and that as consequence Islam is incompatible with American values. The people pushing this law are literally using it to push the narrative that Muslims not only want to overthrow America but want to destroy the entirety of Western civilization. It's part of a long pattern of demonizing Muslims and pushing the narrative that Islam is intrinsically at odds with American values, that the identity was - and I quote - "inconsistent with the Constitution", that Islam is a "false religion" that is "completely opposite to what our First Amendment stands for. That one was Senator Roy Moore, just last year. A few years before that, Senator Ted Cruz suggested that - and again I quote - "We need to empower law enforcement to patrol and secure Muslim neighborhoods before they become radicalized".

The list goes on and on and on and on...and they aren't going to stop if you give them a wholly redundant, unnecessary, and unprompted ban on Sharia, because banning Sharia is not the end they're working towards, it's a means to an end, something they can use for propaganda purposes, "proving" that Muslims are not only unamerican but an imminent threat that was only just stopped from toppling our way of life. You don't stop that with Appeasement! We've seen this fucking song and dance so many times before! We saw it in the Jim Crow South, we saw it in Nazi Germany, we saw it with the persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire...bigotry and the unfounded fears it fosters do not end when people decide it's not worth fighting their codification into law, they get worse.

Or you can you know realise Sharia law is a bad thing that would target the people you claim to be on the side of and for once it's an issue Republicans also would like to see a law passed over so take the opportunity to protect people anyway and get the Republicans moving on to dealing with actual issues?

But no more important to dig in and fight over beliefs of what your opponents might do with this even though it's far more powerful and effective to let them keep it on the table and far more damaging to trying to actually get change.
 

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Sep 16, 2014
8,476
7,049
118
Country
United States
Or you can you know realise Sharia law is a bad thing that would target the people you claim to be on the side of and for once it's an issue Republicans also would like to see a law passed over so take the opportunity to protect people anyway and get the Republicans moving on to dealing with actual issues?

But no more important to dig in and fight over beliefs of what your opponents might do with this even though it's far more powerful and effective to let them keep it on the table and far more damaging to trying to actually get change.
Or, you can call it out as the bigoted bullshit it clearly is and run on the republicans pushing clearly bigoted bullshit beyond all sanity.

I said they used it as a talking point in Montana. I never said it was effective
 

Mister Mumbler

Pronounced "Throat-wobbler Mangrove"
Legacy
Jun 17, 2020
1,870
1,733
118
Nowhere
Country
United States

A bit of an update on Arizona if anyone cares but it seems like Biden's lead has finally increased. Shrinking Trump's chance of winning that state
Well, as the other person giving updates on Arizona (and living here), I care. Kind of surprised Trump's momentum slowed down, he can't seem to break through 17-20k votes off Biden. Arizona is now a swing state, man it feels great! I hate the idea of "safe" states for parties.
 

Elijin

Elite Muppet
Legacy
Feb 15, 2009
2,091
1,080
118
Or you can you know realise Sharia law is a bad thing that would target the people you claim to be on the side of and for once it's an issue Republicans also would like to see a law passed over so take the opportunity to protect people anyway and get the Republicans moving on to dealing with actual issues?

But no more important to dig in and fight over beliefs of what your opponents might do with this even though it's far more powerful and effective to let them keep it on the table and far more damaging to trying to actually get change.
It's a xenophobic nothing law, that feeds on creating a fear for how the "others" are coming for the American way of life.

The existing laws already explicitly prevent sharia law from being enacted. This proposition is all about promoting fear and creating a problem to be solved. A problem which doesn't exist.

It's easy to see why you don't see this, as you're the target audience for this type of political action.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Secondhand Revenant

Kwak

Elite Member
Sep 11, 2014
2,325
1,858
118
Country
4
yeah man it's like as if when regular right wingers lose they don't burn down cities and kill people but accept it for the sake of democracy
Neither does anyone else, so what the fuck is your point? Just to spout random irrelevant bullshit with no ulterior motive?
 

Kwak

Elite Member
Sep 11, 2014
2,325
1,858
118
Country
4
I dunno, which group has been rioting for the past several months, causing storefronts to board themselves up in protection?
There been some other American election in the last few months only you and your other right wing apologists know about or something?
 

Houseman

Mad Hatter Meme Machine.
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
3,910
760
118
There been some other American election in the last few months only you and your other right wing apologists know about or something?
Okay, it seems like you didn't get it, so I'll be more direct: storefronts were being boarded up in case the democrats lost, because, as the last months have shown, democrats are ready and willing to riot.
 

Kwak

Elite Member
Sep 11, 2014
2,325
1,858
118
Country
4
Okay, it seems like you didn't get it, so I'll be more direct: storefronts were being boarded up in case the democrats lost, because, as the last months have shown, democrats are ready and willing to riot.
For what reason were they (assuming all rioters were democrats and also represent every other democrat) willing to riot?
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
6,014
665
118
Or, you can call it out as the bigoted bullshit it clearly is and run on the republicans pushing clearly bigoted bullshit beyond all sanity.

I said they used it as a talking point in Montana. I never said it was effective
and keep getting no-where as republicans keep trying to pass it again and again.


Neither does anyone else, so what the fuck is your point? Just to spout random irrelevant bullshit with no ulterior motive?
man did you forget 2017 already?


you need to stop skipping those pills man or get whatever Biden has been using
 
Status
Not open for further replies.