'Murica! (407 Viewers)

[swag]

@Seven Pppfftt.

She doesn’t know what the hell she is doing, last minute shove in. Yet you guys still see her as the only option? SMH. She’s already been in office 3 1/2 years behind all the inflation and crazy home interesting rates. She’s in the White House right now, and she wants to “fix” things, she can do it right now, she’s already the vice president. You guys have some crazy lenses, you guys are wildin’ lol.

Speaking of which, what happened to the co-architect of Make America Great Again, Mike Pence?

https://x.com/endwokeness/status/1829216739537949063?s=46

I know that end wokeness isn’t the best news source, best isn’t it crazy that people are against voter ID laws or find them racist.

Its impossible to vote here without ID, not a chance and nobody (literally nobody) finds it racist or strange.

Also for Italian elections I can’t vote without my ID.

There's a slippery slope here too though. It just feeds the mistaken belief that election systems are rigged and there is mass fraud. Why else would you have Brian Kemp defending his turf against Trump?

Or this insane idea that criminals are pouring in over the U.S. borders with the explicit intentions of voting in U.S. elections, because that's why they survived the trek over the Darién Gap for: all to risk blowing their covers with law enforcement because of their blind allegiance to Kamala or whomever.

Because the problem is that when you start legitimizing questions like whether Obama was born in the U.S., the next thing you know people want to see birth certificates. And then birth certificates are surfaced (a total invasion of privacy, mind you), people will say Hawaii wasn't in the U.S. when he was born or that the doc was fake, etc. There is no placating conspiracy theorists because it doesn't end.

Which isn't to say there's isn't fraud in the system. But nothing that works at coordinated scale. It's actually one of the miracles of voting that attempts to do two conflicting goals at once: ensuring that only one legit person gets one legit vote, and ensuring that the privacy of what that vote is can be preserved for the benefit of the voter.

Maybe and just maybe, hear me out, instead of spamming with this anti Kamala bs, you post something constructive.

How about these videos instead?

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Wings]

Honest Gil
There should be an international honest Gil meter to measure all politicians.

 

[Seven]

Because the problem is that when you start legitimizing questions like whether Obama was born in the U.S., the next thing you know people want to see birth certificates. And then birth certificates are surfaced (a total invasion of privacy, mind you), people will say Hawaii wasn't in the U.S. when he was born or that the doc was fake, etc. There is no placating conspiracy theorists because it doesn't end.

Without diving deeper into the question of whether or not it is a good idea to ask for birth certificates, I do want to point out that in my opinion there would be no privacy issues if showing this to (some members of) the public was a requirement. If you're running for office, it is only natural that you give up some parts of your personal information. In the same way I think there is far too much attention for the privacy of politicians in Europe in the sense that it is often entirely unclear what their personal assets are and the question isn't even asked. I think it should be normalized to ask for transparancy on behalf of the people who make policy decisions.

This is different from people procuring that information themselves though. It is not up to the public to pry into personal information and documents when trying to recover a birth certificate.

 

[Nomuken]

She’s copying Trump so bad now, it’s terrible.

 

[Wings]

She’s copying Trump so bad now, it’s terrible.

Can you give examples of this copying?

 

[Seven]

Can you give examples of this copying?

She wears make up now too.

Verstuurd vanaf mijn ONEPLUS A6003 met Tapatalk

 

[Nomuken]

Can you give examples of this copying?

No tax on tips, she’s down with Fracking now, her team waits on the side lines.

- - - Updated - - -

She wears make up now too.

Verstuurd vanaf mijn ONEPLUS A6003 met Tapatalk

That too.

- - - Updated - - -

 

[Bianconero_Aus]

We have bad inflation and high house prices (amongst the highest in the world) in Australia

Fuck you Biden and you DemonRATS!

 

[swag]

Without diving deeper into the question of whether or not it is a good idea to ask for birth certificates, I do want to point out that in my opinion there would be no privacy issues if showing this to (some members of) the public was a requirement. If you're running for office, it is only natural that you give up some parts of your personal information. In the same way I think there is far too much attention for the privacy of politicians in Europe in the sense that it is often entirely unclear what their personal assets are and the question isn't even asked. I think it should be normalized to ask for transparancy on behalf of the people who make policy decisions.

This is different from people procuring that information themselves though. It is not up to the public to pry into personal information and documents when trying to recover a birth certificate.

Well I don't think that running for office should mean every candidate has to be fully pre-doxxed as a prerequisite. In private, yes, there should be vetting and checks. But not publicly.

At some level you have to trust that my driver's licenses is proof of my legal right to drive a motor vehicle without also having to pull my birth certificate out for every officer who asks for it.

Because being a birther isn't just about feeling you have a right to someone's birth certificate. It's about running around like an AI-powered algorithm seeking anything you can insinuate to invalidate a person.

Regardless of whether you like Tim Walz or not or don't give a crap, there are now armies of dirt diggers who are trying to find every reason to believe that Minnesota voters were clueless idiots who voted for an unqualified and unvetted candidate in both 2018 and again in 2022. Most of these people didn't even know Walz existed until last month, and they're out to prove they know much more about him than anybody in Minnesota who lived with him as governor for the past six years. Going after policy and track record is one thing, but the dirt-digging gotcha tactics are something else.

Yes, candidates should be challenged and screened. And as the stakes get higher, more scrutiny should be the norm.

But the birther thing is an example of an insane story that had multiple points of refutation ... only for it to conveniently continue where Republicans believed it in 2011 as per a NY Times poll then: https://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/22/us/politics/22birthers.html

I mean, read this progression... it's a sadly hilarous story of wishful stupidity:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_citizenship_conspiracy_theories

That is the sort of nonsense path that results when you both-sides invalidated conspiracy theories that are politically useful. It just makes the whole voting population and the voted-on dumber on all sides.

No tax on tips, she’s down with Fracking now, her team waits on the side lines.

- - - Updated - - -



That too.

- - - Updated - - -

The flip-flop argument always struck me as a weird choice of weapon with little merit. For one, if they're good ideas, why shouldn't someone support them? (For the record, I think bribing the public with their own money when the federal deficit is over $35 trillion is a bad idea.)

For another, as John Maynard Keynes famously said: "When I find new information I change my mind; What do you do?" Are we supposed to reward learning or making policy a suicide pact?

The only beef I see that makes it legitimate is the suggestion that a candidate who hasn't changed positions might be less likely to lie about it. In the absence of real evidence, but just a hunch about fidelity. But if we're already saying that all politicians are liars anyway and none of them will fulfill their campaign promises, that doesn't exactly hold a lot of water either.

 

[s4tch]

We have bad inflation and high house prices (amongst the highest in the world) in Australia

Fuck you Biden and you DemonRATS!

we have had the highest inflation within the eu after putin attacked ukraine, still the highest food inflation. we have a nationalist populist government since 2010. guess what they say: fuck soros, fuck brussels, fuck demonrats

 

[icemaη]

we have had the highest inflation within the eu after putin attacked ukraine, still the highest food inflation. we have a nationalist populist government since 2010. guess what they say: fuck soros, fuck brussels, fuck demonrats

It’s always somebody else who’s the problem.

 

[Ronn]

No tax on tips, she’s down with Fracking now, her team waits on the side lines.

- - - Updated - - -



That too.

- - - Updated - - -

You hate CNN but post Newsmax videos?

 

[Nomuken]

We have bad inflation and high house prices (amongst the highest in the world) in Australia

Fuck you Biden and you DemonRATS!

How much is a PS5 is Aussie land?

 

[AFL_ITALIA]

we have had the highest inflation within the eu after putin attacked ukraine, still the highest food inflation. we have a nationalist populist government since 2010. guess what they say: fuck soros, fuck brussels, fuck demonrats

It's the Democrat's fault. HILDABEAST is behind this for sure.

 

[swag]

You hate CNN but post Newsmax videos?

Today I’m in a nice marisqueira (a shellfish restaurant) for lunch in the small-bullfighting-town-with-a-neorealist-museum called Vila Franca da Xira.

On the TV is CNN Portugal, reporting about the end of socialist summer school.

I’ll just let that one sink in…

 

[Nomuken]

You hate CNN but post Newsmax videos?

When did I say I hate CNN?

You hate Newsmax but only listen to CNN?

You may suffer from TDS…seen this many times, get some more independent centralized news outlets.

Great Video


Don’t suffer from TDS anymore.

 

[Seven]

Well I don't think that running for office should mean every candidate has to be fully pre-doxxed as a prerequisite. In private, yes, there should be vetting and checks. But not publicly.

At some level you have to trust that my driver's licenses is proof of my legal right to drive a motor vehicle without also having to pull my birth certificate out for every officer who asks for it.

Because being a birther isn't just about feeling you have a right to someone's birth certificate. It's about running around like an AI-powered algorithm seeking anything you can insinuate to invalidate a person.

Regardless of whether you like Tim Walz or not or don't give a crap, there are now armies of dirt diggers who are trying to find every reason to believe that Minnesota voters were clueless idiots who voted for an unqualified and unvetted candidate in both 2018 and again in 2022. Most of these people didn't even know Walz existed until last month, and they're out to prove they know much more about him than anybody in Minnesota who lived with him as governor for the past six years. Going after policy and track record is one thing, but the dirt-digging gotcha tactics are something else.

Yes, candidates should be challenged and screened. And as the stakes get higher, more scrutiny should be the norm.

But the birther thing is an example of an insane story that had multiple points of refutation ... only for it to conveniently continue where Republicans believed it in 2011 as per a NY Times poll then: https://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/22/us/politics/22birthers.html

I mean, read this progression... it's a sadly hilarous story of wishful stupidity:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_citizenship_conspiracy_theories

That is the sort of nonsense path that results when you both-sides invalidated conspiracy theories that are politically useful. It just makes the whole voting population and the voted-on dumber on all sides.

I completely agree that there is malice behind the debate. The birther argument is false, designed to spread misinformation and is based on nothing but sheer racism.

But I do believe running for public office, especially for president of the USA, comes with the responsibility to favor clarity over privacy. To me that's not so much about documents proving identity, honestly I'm pretty sure parties will not nominate a candidate born outside the US. But Trump's criminal record, his tax returns, his ownership of companies, his bankruptcies, his outstanding debts? Yes, I think you can make the case the public is entitled to know. And not just in Trump's case, but for any candidate.

I mean, I don't know what Kamala Harris owns. What if she has lots of Shell or BP stock? Surely that would be relevant to many of her potential voters, who may base their vote on the candidate's willigness to fight global warming?

 

[swag]

I completely agree that there is malice behind the debate. The birther argument is false, designed to spread misinformation and is based on nothing but sheer racism.

But I do believe running for public office, especially for president of the USA, comes with the responsibility to favor clarity over privacy. To me that's not so much about documents proving identity, honestly I'm pretty sure parties will not nominate a candidate born outside the US. But Trump's criminal record, his tax returns, his ownership of companies, his bankruptcies, his outstanding debts? Yes, I think you can make the case the public is entitled to know. And not just in Trump's case, but for any candidate.

I mean, I don't know what Kamala Harris owns. What if she has lots of Shell or BP stock? Surely that would be relevant to many of her potential voters, who may base their vote on the candidate's willigness to fight global warming?

That's why any candidate has to come clean with their operatives before taking the stage. Nobody wants to invest money and resources and time into electing a candidate who is a convicted pedo. Everybody has a bad day or makes a wrong decision at some point, and that will be ammunition for the opposition.

You could say that Obama as a U.S. Senator was no required to be a U.S. citizen, and so the scrutiny for that should only really happen at the point he'd consider running for the presidency. There aren't a lot of checkboxes to vet from senator to president, so to your point that should be fairly simple for legality. If the next level questions are about intentions, investments, etc., then it's up to the candidate how much they're willing to share and whether not sharing reduces their votes. (See: Trump's tax returns.)

But we live in a world today where QAnon was legitimized. When people can no longer see a birth certificate and still presume there's a Manchurian Candidate with billions of dollars of a campaign being wasted by his own party for an illegitimate run, then any form of reality is a question and we have no basis to answer anything.

 

[swag]

When did I say I hate CNN?

You hate Newsmax but only listen to CNN?

You may suffer from TDS…seen this many times, get some more independent centralized news outlets.

Great Video


Don’t suffer from TDS anymore.

TDS is a funny thing and it exists. Trouble is our world operates on "reactions to the thing are more important than the thing itself" now. Which is why there are far more YouTube reaction videos and views than the originals. Which is why a lot of people hate Fauci not so much because of Fauci, but because his fanboys are even more annoying.

We are in the era of stan competitions. The Beyhive vs the Swifties.

You cannot talk TDS anymore without talking about supporters. For a lot of voters, TDS isn't so much about Trump as it is people who dress in costume, buy the flags and the bible, and make him their entire identity on their social media profiles ... as if they have no other interests or purpose in life.

That's where the battlefield is now. Some people are juventini and the club is more than any player. That would be like stanning the GOP. Weird, but I'd get that.

Then there are the Del Piero worshippers. Getting weirder, though he is a club legend. But when it gets to the point when they wanted him on the pitch even for long stretches where he played very poorly when other forwards were more dominant... then I start to question.

And then there are the Ronaldo and Messi stans. They're the worst. It's not about the jersey at all but the name on it. I don't trust those fans and their mercenary ways creep me out. And a lot of that stanning has come to dominate Trump support.

 

[Seven]

If the next level questions are about intentions, investments, etc., then it's up to the candidate how much they're willing to share and whether not sharing reduces their votes. (See: Trump's tax returns.)

Right now there are fairly few legal requirements in most countries regarding these aspects. But I think the case could be made to codify this into law.

The situation now isn't ideal. Because these things are relevant, journalists will go on and investigate. Whether they're technically allowed to do so is questionable. But they're going to regardless. And because this information is relevant to the public, we kind of accept that the journalist in question was doing his or her job. Only, because it borders on illegality, the information received isn't always corret.