That Thread about US current events

[itsallup]

I think politics as a whole has weakened in the US. Democrat or republican we are all going to see them dance the favors dance and lobby if they want any laws ammendments or bills passed in congress. Its just the way of the world

 

 

[ṼirulenⱦEqừinox]

1 hour ago, Inttelix said:

I think politics as a whole has weakened in the US. Democrat or republican we are all going to see them dance the favors dance and lobby if they want any laws ammendments or bills passed in congress. Its just the way of the world

 

 

This isn't just a U.S thing it's a world wide thing and has been a thing since the dawn of time

[Zello]

Rudy Giuliani has COVID-19 

[ṼirulenⱦEqừinox]

I saw that and that is the funniest thing ever so much for it being a hoax eh?

[ṼirulenⱦEqừinox]

The Supreme Court including Trump newest apointee has  told Trump, all 106 House Republicans and those 12 State Attorney Generals who backed a lawsuit attempting to invalided all the votes in states where Trump lost thrown out that Biden won and to f*ck off....

 

Supreme Court Shuts Door On Trump Election Prospects

 

I would've love to have been a fly on the wall of the Oval Office when news of the ruling came down on  that lawsuit as this more of less puts an end to his legal challenge as there is nowhere else to go from here now.

 

He was probably so sure that his appointees would fall  in line and do what he wanted but just one thing Supreme Court Justices don't have to fear retaliation because Trump can't do anything to them if they don't vote the way he wanted them to it would take an article of impeachment to get rid of a sitting Justice but even if they had toed the line that is only three votes and they would have needed a 5-4 majority which they never would've gotten especially not from Roberts or Thomas

Edited December 12, 2020 by ṼirulenⱦEqừinox

[sivispacem]

The funniest thing is now you have dolts like Alan West talking about sedition. Imagine being such an apocalyptic c*nt that you'd rather collapse your nation than admit Donald Trump lost a free and fair election. 

[Craigsters]

 

[Zello]

 

Can these clowns please stop coming here.

[itsallup]

This new hoax is to blame.

[ṼirulenⱦEqừinox]

8 minutes ago, Inttelix said:

This new hoax is to blame.

Which hoax is that?

 

There are about 123,394,348,583,485,385,489,382,283 of them floating around right now

[ṼirulenⱦEqừinox]

44 minutes ago, Zello said:

Can these clowns please stop coming here.

I don't know what's next 1776 maybe....

 

This just goes to show you how f*cking stupid Trump supporters are, Too bad the reporter didn't ask them a follow up question about what happened in 1776 $10 she would've said The South Rose Up Yee-Haaaw!

Edited December 13, 2020 by ṼirulenⱦEqừinox

[Craigsters]

Monday’s Electoral College vote expected to secure Biden presidency

 

The Electoral College meets Monday in all 50 states for a vote to determine who wins the US presidency.

 

The day has been a long time coming for Democrats, who are looking to lock in President-elect Joe Biden’s victory — even as President Trump continues to file fruitless lawsuits in an attempt to overturn the outcome.

 

With his wins in Georgia, Arizona and the Rust Belt repeatedly recounted and certified, Biden and Vice President-elect Harris will be on track to receive 306 electoral votes while Trump and Vice President Pence tally 232.

 

The electors will meet at locations in their states determined by their legislatures, where they are expected to vote for the winner of their state’s popular vote.

 

source nypost.comsource 

[ṼirulenⱦEqừinox]

Pro-Trump demonstrator shoots left-winger during political clashes in Washington state capital

 

Quote

A pro-Trump protester shot a person Saturday afternoon amid the second straight weekend of intense political confrontations in Washington’s state capital of Olympia.

 

The victim’s condition was not immediately known, the Seattle Times reported.

Washington state police arrested the suspected shooter.

 

Trump supporters and opponents also clashed in Washington, D.C., on Saturday, where at least four people were stabbed, the Washington Post reported.

Across the country, the shooting was the most violent action in a raucous day outside the Washington State Capitol building, the Times reported.

 

Police reported “sporadic confrontations” beginning around 11 a.m. local time, with smoke filling the air and many individuals openly carrying high-powered rifles.

 

Videos showed various people using nonlethal weapons against each other. A second person was arrested unrelated to the shooting for a firearms violation, the Associated Press reported.

 

Last weekend in Olympia, police arrested a 27-year-old Trump supporter for allegedly firing his gun into a crowd. It remains unclear if anyone was hit, the Olympian reported.

 

and they call BLM and Antifa criminals but I don't remember hearing anything about them shooting or stabbing people who opposed their opinions

[itsallup]

People take this politics thing too seriously. Dont they even know it doesnt matter who wins or loses? Economy is the one who makes decisions in the world and not politicians.

[sivispacem]

3 hours ago, Inttelix said:

Economy is the one who makes decisions in the world and not politicians.

Economies don't exist in a vacuum entirely uninfluenced by politics though, do they?

[itsallup]

12 minutes ago, sivispacem said:

Economies don't exist in a vacuum entirely uninfluenced by politics though, do they?

 

No they dont you are absolutely correct. Economy is the reason there is politics in the first place.

 

Take dictatorship as an example: one individual seizes control of the government's power after learning the nation's wealth and the risk of jeopardizing it's volume of wealth with a open trade economy. Its a doublesided knife; affordability for all mainstream would drive the prices up or make them tumble. You never know what would be of the world if there wasnt dictatorship, probably we would be better off due to the scrutinies involved within but on the other side certain commodities would be so cheap they wouldnt generate profit. It is how the world turns I guess.

 

Politicians do speeches about whatever the subject matter is and it is amazing: the stock market react immediately. So yeah economy is influenced by politics but if it wasnt for the economy there wouldnt even be politics. And that brings us to a position which capital interest and greed superseeds civil rights. 

 

If the economy didnt drive the world, presidents would not even attend meetings enter wars or do speeches. Or appear at all for the media because there would be no reason to appear.

Edited December 14, 2020 by Inttelix

[sivispacem]

4 hours ago, Inttelix said:

Economy is the reason there is politics in the first place.

I don't think this is at all true.

 

Firstly, politics predates economics; humans (or more accurately our predecessors) were ordering themselves into social hierarchies and establishing power relationships before the advent of even barter systems, let alone any more complex kind of economic structure.

Secondly, I would argue that economics are often a consequence of political action rather than a driver for it, though the relationship is often cyclical. Regardless of whether you're talking a Western democracy, an authoritarian Fascist state, nepotism within local or regional government, or even at a micro level like how a company is run, influencing economic outcomes are one objective of many (albeit a very important one). In the Western world, where governments' rise and fall is driven substantially by the economic performance they preside over, this seems more heavily codependent than if you look at, say, authoritarian regimes or those where political power is exercised by the military.

[ddarko12]

So happy the Supreme Court tossed out that stupid ass Texas lawsuit. My state? Really. This state is so close to shifting blue and I hope it does, vote these idiots out. How embarrassing!

[itsallup]

8 hours ago, sivispacem said:

I don't think this is at all true.

 

Firstly, politics predates economics; humans (or more accurately our predecessors) were ordering themselves into social hierarchies and establishing power relationships before the advent of even barter systems, let alone any more complex kind of economic structure.

Secondly, I would argue that economics are often a consequence of political action rather than a driver for it, though the relationship is often cyclical. Regardless of whether you're talking a Western democracy, an authoritarian Fascist state, nepotism within local or regional government, or even at a micro level like how a company is run, influencing economic outcomes are one objective of many (albeit a very important one). In the Western world, where governments' rise and fall is driven substantially by the economic performance they preside over, this seems more heavily codependent than if you look at, say, authoritarian regimes or those where political power is exercised by the military.

 

 

Economy is the same as power and wealth. If there wasnt aim for power and wealth hierarchy wouldnt even exist. Yes economics are a consequence or more to say, collateral of political action. But wealth (commodities like gold, silver, copper, etc.) existed before humans existed. And the goal of becoming a figure was to gain control of that wealth. It never meant to be complex, it got complex as time went by and as interests grew and greed grew.

 

They are intertwined so to speak sivispacem. But economy came first, second and last. And politics only exist because there is economy. There is no sense of leadership on politics that is just a front and even when it isnt, by the time the president enters the office or the coup is done, economical interests overpower any kind of sense leadership whatsoever. It becomes a game of how to make it all better, some fail some dont. Make a speech and make it good enough to get support enough to make your country grow. But it is a double-sided knife that sometimes doesnt cut it to the right side.

[sivispacem]

1 hour ago, Inttelix said:

Economy is the same as power and wealth. 

Except it isn't. Wealth can be used to exert power but they're not the same thing, and I don't think you understand the definition of the word "economy" at all.

 

1 hour ago, Inttelix said:

If there wasnt aim for power and wealth hierarchy wouldnt even exist. 

Hierarchies are products of the relationships of power between individuals but wealth is far from the only kind of political power one can wield.

 

1 hour ago, Inttelix said:

But wealth (commodities like gold, silver, copper, etc.) existed before humans existed. 

Two of these have little intrinsic value and are symbols of wealth only because sociopolitical factors have made them such. 

 

1 hour ago, Inttelix said:

And the goal of becoming a figure was to gain control of that wealth. 

Outside of despotic regimes you have to go back literally hundreds of years to find a time when those with the greatest political power also wielded the greatest economic power. I also find the notion that the desire to expand and maintain power for power's sake is nonexistent quite odd.

 

If the sole aim of political power is to excercise control over wealth then very few regimes seem to abide by that mantra.

 

1 hour ago, Inttelix said:

But economy came first, second and last. And politics only exist because there is economy. 

Except, factually speaking, this is wrong.

 

1 hour ago, Inttelix said:

It becomes a game of how to make it all better, some fail some dont. 

Most politicians within representative democracies seeks to increase the prosperity of their citizens (albeit often with limited success) but that's a ploy to maintain their political power, not vice versa. As I've already said, in political systems where economic factors are less relevant in the holding and maintaining of power you don't see the same focus on it.

 

[itsallup]

I agree to disagree with you but really gonna let you win this one because I cant really dive into this subject too much without having a headache to be honest. I've a very clear view on this but to fully explain it I would need to speak rather than write I really dont indulge myself into being an avid writer.

 

Politicians will only seek to increase income of plain-jane middle class if it benefits the economy. The relief checks are a simple example of that. They are not kind-hearted and even if they are the economy will not let them exercise their kindheartedness. It will serve as an economical adjustment, whatever actions they take are in benefit of economy and never civil rights or humanitarian acts. It can seem so, but indepth are businessmen who sell trade and buy stocks after each presidential announcement, closely watching each move from politicians around the globe. It has a direct influence on the market.

 

All I know is politicians are puppets in economy's hands, and will do anything they are told to do in order to benefit economy's best interest. This in a democratic capitalist society. In a military coup or a dictatorship it is totally different, whatever the ruler or chief in command says, goes. And it is skeptical and unpredictable because it is unilateral. And politicians in democratic societies are all but unilateral when it comes to make any type of decision. It may appear so due to one's image in the media or general public but they all dance the money dance.

Edited December 14, 2020 by Inttelix

[ṼirulenⱦEqừinox]

So who had William Barr resigning by the end of the month? I did

 

 

Forgive the bad cut and paste job please

[Craigsters]

Congratulations USA on Joe Biden's  Electoral College win

[ṼirulenⱦEqừinox]

Now let see if Trump will finally concede...................Probably not

[Craigsters]

 

watch for the movers

Edited December 15, 2020 by Craigsters

[sivispacem]

16 hours ago, Inttelix said:

Politicians will only seek to increase income of plain-jane middle class if it benefits the economy.

Eh? Politicians seek to increase the income of citizens in some political systems precisely because it makes them more likely to maintain power.

As a side note, it does almost always benefit the economy.

 

16 hours ago, Inttelix said:

whatever actions they take are in benefit of economy

...Not really

[Craigsters]

 

I miss you Chris

[Creed Bratton]

So how about that Hunter Biden?

 

Oh, we aren't talking about that anymore.

 

I guess he's gone to Benghazi with those Mexican migrant caravans. Probably in a pizza van filled with deleted private e-mails.

[ṼirulenⱦEqừinox]

If everything that's being reported is true than Hunter Biden should face the criminal justice system with no interfering from his father and it shouldn't have been kept under wraps from the American people regardless and I'm honestly surprised that Barr did do that and that it wasn't leaked long before the election but I have little doubts even if this news had come how back in the spring when the investigations were launched it would have had little effect on the outcome of the election even if it did sway away votes from Biden I doubt it still would've been enough to secure a Trump victory as enough people have had enough of Trump on both the Right, Left and Center. 

 

People on all three fronts aren't stupid can clearly see Trump and his Family are extremely corrupt and how Trump treated the White House and Office of the President as a TV Show to help boost his "ratings" and used the Office to fill their, their friends and anyone who allied with them pockets and fulfilled favors based on who and who didn't support him during the 2016 and 2020 election.

 

As far as i'm concern the two of lesser evils will in office soon and that's what people said about Trump and Clinton and look at where we are now over 350,000 people dead, over 1,5 million infection 150,000 people in the hospital fighting for their lives, while others are loosing their jobs because the economy is in the dumps because of Trump treated the Coronavirus like a TV movie he so desperately wants to star in where at the end of it the virus would just magically poof go away but instead the infection and death rate kept steadily climbing day by day but where was he out playing golf instead of attending meetings and actively helping create a plan and then he wonders why he lost the election?

 

He's an almost 80 year old man acting like a toddler who won't admit they ate the last cupcake even though they have icing all over their face because he thinks he if denies it lost enough it just might come true and the icing will have magically been wiped away from his face boo-ooh because he lost a free and fair election and just can't accept the fact nobody really likes him as much as he thinks he do.

 

It's time his supporters got over it, Biden won, Isn't that what they told Clinton supports back in 2016?

Edited December 20, 2020 by ṼirulenⱦEqừinox

[Zello]

Still ain't no guarantee that Hillary would have handled the coronavirus better. Just about the entire world is dealing with it. Though Trump's decision to cut the pandemic response team when he took office was a bad idea. Hillary would have at least listened to the scientists and not her ego like Trump has.

Edited December 20, 2020 by Zello