Jump to content

The Politics Thread 2019


David

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 12.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, Highgate said:

That's what you said in case there is any confusion.  'Seemingly' to you presumably.  To support your claim you mentioned their 'Un-American socialist' policies.  Why wouldn't their policies be motivated by hatred if they hate America as you say? 

So let's not pretend you haven't said they hate America. In doing so you've stepped way across the line from reasonable criticism of elected politicians into nonsensical Trumpian trash talking.

I replied previously to that, you can either take my answer or continue to put words in my mouth.

 

1 hour ago, Highgate said:

I agree the Democratic Party is in danger of a split, it seems to be at something of a crossroads with two different factions pulling it in two opposite directions.  But when you look at 2016, Sanders was seen as an anomaly by many, a dangerous outlier with radical policies.  In 2020 many Democratic Presidential candidates have been emulating his policy proposals. So I don't necessarily assume that the conservative wing of the Democratic Party is in the ascendancy. 

AOC's popularity seems to have taken a hit in her own constituency, largely thanks to her part in Amazon canceling plans of it's proposed second headquarters in New York.  Amazon looked for huge tax breaks, she opposed it.  Personally I'd love to see all cities and countries stand up to the multi-nationals like this instead of trying to enrich them further. Currently everyone is playing into their hands by competing against one another for their jobs.  The big picture nobody benefits from this pattern apart from the multi-nationals themselves.  She stuck up for her stated principles but yeah it will surely cost her votes at the next election.  Nationwide however I still think she is popular among the progressive wing of the party. 

As for the Green New Deal, it's just a proposal.  Sure it has flaws, but it's the start of the discussion.  A discussion that needs to take place in the US and every country so future generations can actually have a decent future.  Well done her for proposing it.  Incidentally your $1 trillion dollar price tag is the same price tag that the Congressional Budget Office puts on 5-6 years of Trump tax cuts for the super wealthy in lost revenue, or less than the price of one Iraq War.  I know which one of those 3 makes the most sense to me.

Numerous studies recently have shown the Democrats lurching to the left, the progressives spurred on by social media are the minority and they are moving further away from the majority of voters.  I don't have a crystal ball but I think the 2020 election could well be a watershed moment, if they lose heavily they could purge the progressives or 'the squad'  could leave to start their own party.

 

1 hour ago, Highgate said:

Omar is certainly and advocate of the 'blowback' theory of American foriegn policy.  Her 'some people did something' was ill-advised in my opinion but it should be heard in the context of her entire speech which was in no way pro Al Qaeda.  Despite this Trump shamefully and dangerously suggests she is proud of Al Qaeda, clearly putting her life in danger.  Her request for leniency for Somalian ISIS prisoners was due to the fact that she felt they were young, impressionable and not really aware of what they were doing.  A long sentence would create hardened terrorists whereas some leniency could change their path away from terrorism.  A very debatable and risky strategy, but not one motivated by a support for terrorism.  By 'anti-semitic language'  do you simply mean critical of the state of Israel?  Surely you are not confusing the two ?

Ilhan Omar has a long history of questionable comments;

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ilhan-omars-israel-comments

https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/ilhan-omar-tweets-u-s-politicians-support-for-israel-is-all-about-the-benjamins-1.6920117

She also has a history of questionable 'no comment' as well such as refusing to condemn Antifa, refusing to condemn Al Qaeda, refusing to  condemn gays being stoned to death under sharia law, refusing to condemn violence against Israel from Hamas etc.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/45277/omar-refuses-condemn-gays-being-stoned-death-under-ryan-saavedra

Imagine the outcry if it was Boris Johnson or Trump...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, maxjam said:

I replied previously to that, you can either take my answer or continue to put words in my mouth.

 

Numerous studies recently have shown the Democrats lurching to the left, the progressives spurred on by social media are the minority and they are moving further away from the majority of voters.  I don't have a crystal ball but I think the 2020 election could well be a watershed moment, if they lose heavily they could purge the progressives or 'the squad'  could leave to start their own party.

 

As for Ilhan Omar she has a long history of questionable comments;

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ilhan-omars-israel-comments

https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/ilhan-omar-tweets-u-s-politicians-support-for-israel-is-all-about-the-benjamins-1.6920117

She also has a history of questionable 'no comment' as well such as refusing to condemn Antifa, refusing to condemn Al Qaeda, refusing to  condemn gays being stoned to death under sharia law, refusing to condemn violence against Israel from Hamas etc.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/45277/omar-refuses-condemn-gays-being-stoned-death-under-ryan-saavedra

Imagine the outcry if it was Boris Johnson or Trump...

There is no need for me to put words into your mouth, you've written clearly on this thread that you think those congresswomen hate the US.  Ridiculous allegation. Enough said.

I agree that 2020 could be a watershed moment for the Democratic Party, I can't see them losing heavily though. They certainly didn't lose heavily in 2018 mid-terms. 

Why is Omar being asked to condemn everything?  Is that expected of all members of congress? Does she actually support or tolerate terrorism that's what we should be asking?  If she does in fact support or tolerate them (in the way Trump tolerates neo-nazis for example) then she should be condemned.  But since we clearly don't know anything like that to be true, we should withhold judgement.

Incidentally why are you reading the DailyWire ?   I won't even comment on the foxnews link.   This is how Media Bias/Fact Checker rate the DailyWire;

 

right02.png.af9b062b23441dc67b38e21371fd3fba.png

 

The link you sent just reports that the DailyWire tried to contact Omar for a comment on the Hamas attacks and the proposed policy of stoning homosexuals in Brunei.  She simply didn't reply to their e-mails and phone-calls, why would she?  But they chose to report that as 

'Omar Refuses To Condemn Gays Being Stoned To Death Under Sharia Law, Violence Against Israel From Hamas'

Then you come along and repeat their claims.

What are you doing?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Highgate said:

Incidentally why are you reading the DailyWire ? 

I get my news from a variety of sources.  I'm just as likely to read (and post links from ) The Guardian as I am to read The Times, to watch Fox News as  I am to watch CNN.

Of course the Daily Wire/Fox News are right wing. US media is massively biased to either the right or the left, far more so even than here - if you want to see criticism of The Democrats go to Fox News/ Daily Wire etc, if you want to see criticism of The Republicans, go virtually anywhere else.

For example Fox New and CNN are virtual mirror images of each other on mediabiasfactcheck.com.  The difference is that recently Fox News has been scoring higher than left wing media outlets for accuracy of reporting and whilst their viewing figures are growing, CNN, MSNBC etc have plummeted.

As for why Ilhan Omar repeatedly gets asked similar questions maybe its because she continues to give evasive answers or makes questionable comments.  A bit like asking Boris Johnson about Islamophobia or Jeremy Corbyn about anti-Semitism and not the other way around or asking Gerrard Batten about Tommy Robinson at every interview during the Euro elections rather than UKIPs policies.  Generic partisan journalism ?

 

 

2 hours ago, Highgate said:

That's what you said in case there is any confusion.  'Seemingly' to you presumably.  To support your claim you mentioned their 'Un-American socialist' policies.  Why wouldn't their policies be motivated by hatred if they hate America as you say?

 

40 minutes ago, Highgate said:

There is no need for me to put words into your mouth, you've written clearly on this thread that you think those congresswomen hate the US.  Ridiculous allegation. Enough said.

Now who is moving the goalposts?

To begin with you change 'seemingly' to 'presumably'  - putting words in my mouth and changing the context of what I said then you state that I think those congresswomen hate the US despite when asked to clarify an earlier comment I said words to the effect of their comments will lead some people to believe that they hate America.

I am happy with what I've written and the best judges of how un-American their policies are or whether their speech has been interpreted as hating America will be the electorate next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've given up to be honest. I don't think we're capable as a society of having a serious discussion, and I'm certain that the problems facing us globally are so far beyond our reach to solve even if the UK could organise it's ass into a coherent position that it's pointless talking about them. (Climate change, gangster states, economic disparity...)

I will say though, that the old terminology is no use. Left? Right? Meaningless. The debate against unfettered socialism was won 40 years ago,  terms it's now more a case of how much interference the state makes into the free flow of capital.

 In social terms the debate is so narrow as to be pointless, unless we include religious idiots, and we really shouldn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you @maxjam repeat the Dailywire's deliberately and transparently misleading headlines on Omar, what was it that you were trying to do?  It seems you were actually attempting to use that link as evidence to support a point you were making.  Still can't quite get my head around that. 

You've repeated Trump's egregious and unsubstantiated claims about 4 members of the US congress hating the US.  If you are happy with that, then fine, suit yourself.

I haven't changed seemingly to presumably at all.   I was not ascribing the word 'presumably' to you.  You've just misread that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Highgate said:

When you @maxjam repeat the Dailywire's deliberately and transparently misleading headlines on Omar, what was it that you were trying to do?  It seems you were actually attempting to use that link as evidence to support a point you were making.  Still can't quite get my head around that. 

You've repeated Trump's egregious and unsubstantiated claims about 4 members of the US congress hating the US.  If you are happy with that, then fine, suit yourself.

I haven't changed seemingly to presumably at all.   I was not ascribing the word 'presumably' to you.  You've just misread that.

Hmm, re-read the 'presumably' bit and agree that I misread. Apologies.

As for the Daily Wire article, it was easier to link one article summarising the broad spectrum of things she's been accused of than posting numerous articles.  The final half dozen paragraphs of the Daily Wire article are interesting however as they show the controversy she is causing in her own party.

If you still can't get over the fact its a Daily Wire article, take one from Politico its basically the same thing;

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/11/house-democrats-ilhan-omar-antisemitism-1163728

Re. Trumps 'egregious and unsubstantiated claims' given that the majority of the media has tried non-stop to bring him down or ensure he doesn't win the next election for the past few years why is it now looking increasingly likely he will win?  Why are AOCs and Omar polling at around 20% and 9% respectively.  Are their policies and insensitive comments playing into Trumps hands?  I guess we'll find out next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, maxjam said:

Hmm, re-read the 'presumably' bit and agree that I misread. Apologies.

As for the Daily Wire article, it was easier to link one article summarising the broad spectrum of things she's been accused of than posting numerous articles.  The final half dozen paragraphs of the Daily Wire article are interesting however as they show the controversy she is causing in her own party.

If you still can't get over the fact its a Daily Wire article, take one from Politico its basically the same thing;

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/11/house-democrats-ilhan-omar-antisemitism-1163728

Re. Trumps 'egregious and unsubstantiated claims' given that the majority of the media has tried non-stop to bring him down or ensure he doesn't win the next election for the past few years why is it now looking increasingly likely he will win?  Why are AOCs and Omar polling at around 20% and 9% respectively.  Are their policies and insensitive comments playing into Trumps hands?  I guess we'll find out next year.

No worries.

It's what the DailyWire did is the problem.  They tried to contact Omar. She, if she noticed them all, probably deleted their e-mail as she should. They then reported the lack of communication with the headline 'Omar refuses to comdemn........... '. 

You then repeated their nonsense headlines in an attempt to discredit her.  Why would you do that is the point? 

As to your last paragraph, I was only referring to Trumps claim that they hate America.  Which is undoubtedly egregious and unsubstantiated and his further claims about Omar being proud of Al Qaeda are in fact a direct threat to her life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Highgate said:

No worries.

It's what the DailyWire did is the problem.  They tried to contact Omar. She, if she noticed them all, probably deleted their e-mail as she should. They then reported the lack of communication with the headline 'Omar refuses to comdemn........... '. 

You then repeated their nonsense headlines in an attempt to discredit her.  Why would you do that is the point? 

As to your last paragraph, I was only referring to Trumps claim that they hate America.  Which is undoubtedly egregious and unsubstantiated and his further claims about Omar being proud of Al Qaeda are in fact a direct threat to her life.

Okay, sorry for using one Daily Wire article to give a general idea of the controversy surrounding Ilhan Omar.  What I should have done was search Omar on Politico and post a selection of articles regarding the controversies surrounding her....

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/11/house-democrats-ilhan-omar-antisemitism-1163728

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/01/ilhan-omar-anti-semitic-slur-1199495

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/10/ilhan-omar-israel-aipac-money-1163631

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/07/ilhan-omar-nancy-pelosi-democrats-1208842

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/07/house-vote-ilhan-omar-rebuke-1209347

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/09/trump-ilhan-omar-stephen-miller-1263652

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/04/omar-israel-house-democrats-1201881

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/huddle/2019/03/08/dems-eager-to-move-on-from-omar-controversy-trump-scrambles-to-stamp-out-senate-gop-rebellion-gillibrand-struggles-to-secure-ny-endorsements-house-to-vote-on-mueller-resolution-next-week-406349

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/huddle/2019/03/06/house-dems-delay-omar-rebuke-amid-backlash-key-panel-prepares-to-seek-trumps-tax-returns-dem-probes-brace-for-subpoena-showdown-senate-gop-prepares-to-speed-up-trump-judges-404380

https://www.politico.com/states/new-york/albany/story/2019/03/05/ocasio-cortez-balks-at-democrat-leaderships-rebuke-of-omar-889246

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/15/online-donors-ilhan-omar-1277273

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/06/ilhan-omar-israel-democrats-1206740

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/huddle/2019/03/05/house-to-condemn-anti-semitism-after-omar-tweet-dems-deepen-probes-into-trump-world-white-house-not-sweating-wall-showdown-the-gaetz-scott-feud-spills-into-public-view-403924

 

As for me personally trying to discredit her, I am (apparently in a very ham-fisted way) making the point that what they are saying and the policies they are pursuing are playing into Trumps hands - they want him out but they are gifting him the election.  Its reaching the point where Trump can virtually say or do anything and he'll still be viewed upon as the lesser of two evils.

You don't have to like or agree with the fact that I say that their policies are un-American or that some people view various comments as hating America and you can ignore various polls and commentary with regards to how disliked they are, at the end of the day 2020 will give us a definite answer and imho that will mean 4 more years of Trump and probable Democrat implosion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 19/07/2019 at 11:29, G STAR RAM said:

Yep fully aware that he was voted in on the same system that has been used forever and a day. Amazing that it only becomes an issue when the lefties dont get the president that they want.

What statement did I make that was factually incorrect please?

 

You do realise that the Democrats are not really socialist and are more akin to our Tory party on the political spectrum? I mean really, even the most poorly informed would be hardly likely to refer to Hilary Clinton as a 'leftie'!

Is this another topic upon which you intend to trot out pages and pages of made up nonsense masquerading as facts, as, I might add, you have done on numerous other topics recently? I should in fairness say that your gushing and starry-eyed defence of your hero Waxy Lemon, was both hilarious and hugely entertaining, though one doubts this was by intention. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not surprising @maxjam, that criticizing Israel or the powerful Israel lobby in the US can get someone labelled as anti-semitic.  That has been the case in the US for decades and there are people such as Alan Dershowitz who work very hard to keep it that way.  Omar being critical of Israel and US bias towards Israel and against Palestine is guaranteed to result in her being called anti-semitic.  Hardly news.  I'm not interested in the fact that some people think she hates the US or that some people think she is un-American.  Some people think the world is flat or that 9/11 was an inside job, you'll always find people that believe all sorts of crazy things.  What I'm interested in is the actual evidence.  And there is no evidence that Omar or the other 3 hate the US, despite what Trump says.

I do agree that Trump is using 'the squad' to try an scare swing voters away from voting for the Democrats. It might actually work for him to some extent especially if Sanders or Warren win the nomination. There is little doubt that that is his plan and we all know he won't worry about being truthful or rational in his accusations.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was in two minds whether to post this, especially after the grief I got for daring to post a Daily Wire article ?

Sargon of Akkad aka Carl Benjamin video re. Trump, The Squad and those tweets.  Presented on the whole without commentary and does a decent job of keeping it on point with plenty of videos, links and paper articles.  Its 30 mins long and well worth a watch imo, I'm happy to discuss the contents but if you're not gonna watch it or criticise me for not posting a Guardian link then I'll just ignore you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Highgate said:

Why is Omar being asked to condemn everything?  Is that expected of all members of congress? Does she actually support or tolerate terrorism that's what we should be asking?  If she does in fact support or tolerate them (in the way Trump tolerates neo-nazis for example) then she should be condemned.  But since we clearly don't know anything like that to be true, we should withhold judgement.

Absolutely hilarious that you'd chastise someone else for believing sensationalist lies in the media whilst typing the bold text in the very same sentence. Where's the evidence that Trump tolerates neo Nazis? And it had better be 100% unequivocal support, not just a refusal to condemn. And it had better not be from a news source left of centre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Anon said:

Absolutely hilarious that you'd chastise someone else for believing sensationalist lies in the media whilst typing the bold text in the very same sentence. Where's the evidence that Trump tolerates neo Nazis? And it had better be 100% unequivocal support, not just a refusal to condemn. And it had better not be from a news source left of centre.

You aren't making any sense. You seem to be suggesting that 'tolerating' and '100% unequivocal support' are somehow similar. That can't be right surely.  I clearly made the distinction between supporting something and tolerating something. 

There is no evidence as far as I know that Omar supports terrorists.  I also don't know of any evidence that Omar receives open backing or votes from terrorists, which she is happy to accept (and thereby tolerates terrorism). 

Trump on the other hand is clearly hugely popular with Neo-Nazis in the US.  I'm sure you have little doubt that they vote Trump.  He does very little to discourage them.  He has denounced them on occasion, when reading speeches written for him, but when he is ad libbing he seems to have a great reluctance in doing so.  Some of them are very fine people after all.  I see this as a tolerance for Neo Nazis, but I suspect his motivation is to get votes.  There is little doubt that the racist vote is a strong part of his demographic and he doesn't want to rock the boat.  For me this is toleration, if you have evidence that Omar does the same for terrorists, then feel free to present it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the whole debate over politics is broken. I believe the ones running the show don't want us to discuss actual policies. Anyone who puts forward policies supporting public services and workers rights seems to be labelled as communists, socialists, anti-semites or terrorist sympathisers.

I work in a factory of 800 people and important things like Zero hours contracts, workers rights, Health, Education, Public Transport and Housing matter to them, they worry about their kids being able to afford a roof over their heads, a safety net if they fall ill, paying for care for their elderly parents, and job security.

We are not communists, we are not terrorists, we are ordinary working people who care about others who may need a hand occasionally.

To me, Donald Trump, Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage etc represent the top 1% of society, they pursue policies that prevent transparency and allow corruption and manipulation of financial markets, they don't want a light shed on tax havens or illegal money laundering.

My parents were born into a society that didn't provide health care to the masses. My grandchildren's kids might well suffer the same fate if were not careful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, maxjam said:

I was in two minds whether to post this, especially after the grief I got for daring to post a Daily Wire article ?

Sargon of Akkad aka Carl Benjamin video re. Trump, The Squad and those tweets.  Presented on the whole without commentary and does a decent job of keeping it on point with plenty of videos, links and paper articles.  Its 30 mins long and well worth a watch imo, I'm happy to discuss the contents but if you're not gonna watch it or criticise me for not posting a Guardian link then I'll just ignore you.

Sensationalist, hyperbolic garbage. Of course Benjamin would target these women with one of his ill-informed rants and the fact that the 4 people he seeks to target are all women of colour of course has no bearing on the direction in which his little diatribe hastens. WIthin 20 seconds he has completely character-assassinated all four of them labelling them an 'ascendant, radical left wing movement' before he even presents any evidence or substance to back his claim, not that anyone would expect more of this basement dweller.

Other terms such as 'unashamedly socialist' are then bandied about because we should all be ashamed that we want a fairer siciety, one where education and and healthcare are free and big pharma are not allowed to bankrupt anyone unfortunate enough to have diabetes and not the 3 grand a month it costs to pay for insulin in the US. Really, how do you expect anyone to react to his bigoted and misogynistic,  alt-right nonsense? The fact that you pre-empt negative responses tell all that you know exactly how this 'man's' spiel will be received. Perhaps you simply crave attention like Benjamin or do you really buy in to this hopeless inadequae's dogma? Maybe you're just a shill, you rarely post anywhere else in the forum, so perhaps you are just an agitator seeking a reaction? Suffice to say, after the first half dozen lies from Benjamin's smarmy yap I had to stop listening as it was making me feel quite queasy.

I suppose we should be grateful that he doesn't offer an opinion on whether or not he would like to rape any of them, least not in the segment I could stomach. Perhaps that is progress of sorts but like so many of the YouTube excerpts you have posted, it's just so poorly thought out and really just a mealy-mouthed regurgitation of other inadequate, alt-right incel types who are frankly, a dime a dozen these days. Perhaps you might be better placed to discuss AOC if you listened to some of the commentaries she has made in congress rather than relying on a rape fantasist for an 'informed world-view'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Highgate said:

You aren't making any sense. You seem to be suggesting that 'tolerating' and '100% unequivocal support' are somehow similar. That can't be right surely.  I clearly made the distinction between supporting something and tolerating something. 

There is no evidence as far as I know that Omar supports terrorists.  I also don't know of any evidence that Omar receives open backing or votes from terrorists, which she is happy to accept (and thereby tolerates terrorism). 

Trump on the other hand is clearly hugely popular with Neo-Nazis in the US.  I'm sure you have little doubt that they vote Trump.  He does very little to discourage them.  He has denounced them on occasion, when reading speeches written for him, but when he is ad libbing he seems to have a great reluctance in doing so.  Some of them are very fine people after all.  I see this as a tolerance for Neo Nazis, but I suspect his motivation is to get votes.  There is little doubt that the racist vote is a strong part of his demographic and he doesn't want to rock the boat.  For me this is toleration, if you have evidence that Omar does the same for terrorists, then feel free to present it.

I have exactly the same evidence that you've managed to present regarding Trump and neo Nazis.

Omar on the other hand is clearly hugely popular with Antifa in the US.  I'm sure you have little doubt that they vote Omar.  She does very little to discourage them.  She hasn't denounced them. I see this as a tolerance for a far left terror organisation, but I suspect her motivation is to get votes.  There is little doubt that the violent communist vote is a strong part of her demographic and she doesn't want to rock the boat.  For me this is toleration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

Sensationalist, hyperbolic garbage. Of course Benjamin would target these women with one of his ill-informed rants and the fact that the 4 people he seeks to target are all women of colour of course has no bearing on the direction in which his little diatribe hastens. WIthin 20 seconds he has completely character-assassinated all four of them labelling them an 'ascendant, radical left wing movement' before he even presents any evidence or substance to back his claim, not that anyone would expect more of this basement dweller.

Other terms such as 'unashamedly socialist' are then bandied about because we should all be ashamed that we want a fairer siciety, one where education and and healthcare are free and big pharma are not allowed to bankrupt anyone unfortunate enough to have diabetes and not the 3 grand a month it costs to pay for insulin in the US. Really, how do you expect anyone to react to his bigoted and misogynistic,  alt-right nonsense? The fact that you pre-empt negative responses tell all that you know exactly how this 'man's' spiel will be received. Perhaps you simply crave attention like Benjamin or do you really buy in to this hopeless inadequae's dogma? Maybe you're just a shill, you rarely post anywhere else in the forum, so perhaps you are just an agitator seeking a reaction? Suffice to say, after the first half dozen lies from Benjamin's smarmy yap I had to stop listening as it was making me feel quite queasy.

I suppose we should be grateful that he doesn't offer an opinion on whether or not he would like to rape any of them, least not in the segment I could stomach. Perhaps that is progress of sorts but like so many of the YouTube excerpts you have posted, it's just so poorly thought out and really just a mealy-mouthed regurgitation of other inadequate, alt-right incel types who are frankly, a dime a dozen these days. Perhaps you might be better placed to discuss AOC if you listened to some of the commentaries she has made in congress rather than relying on a rape fantasist for an 'informed world-view'.

As I mentioned previously I was in two minds whether to post this video or not because of who was presenting it - yes it fits his agenda but I ultimately felt that he did a pretty good job of keeping any personal commentary to a minimum and put forwards a varied selection of sources (both right and left wing) that gave a fairly rounded briefing of the story.  I felt that it put forwards far more information that I could ever do in a few short paragraphs that people would be bothered to read and therefore the pros outweighed the cons.

Feel free to have preconceived ideas about the content however and just throw generic tropes and insults around.

Its not even up for debate at the moment that The Squad are an 'ascendant, radical left wing movement', even their own party, The Democrats acknowledge and are concerned about the direction they are moving in.  Furthermore if you had watched the video you would find a lot of 'evidence or substance to back his claim'.

If anyone makes it to the end of the video (well almost the end, not sure what the last couple of minutes were lol) and want to discuss it in a civilized manner then I'm happy to chat on the forum - without agitating, point scoring or shilling. 

My underlying point has always been the same over my time posting on here; That the left has gone too far and social media has become to divisive.  Combined with increasing censorship our ability to discuss matters calmly and rationally (see above) is decreasing and its creating the world in which Trump not only got elected but will be re-elected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, uttoxram75 said:

I think the whole debate over politics is broken. I believe the ones running the show don't want us to discuss actual policies. Anyone who puts forward policies supporting public services and workers rights seems to be labelled as communists, socialists, anti-semites or terrorist sympathisers.

I work in a factory of 800 people and important things like Zero hours contracts, workers rights, Health, Education, Public Transport and Housing matter to them, they worry about their kids being able to afford a roof over their heads, a safety net if they fall ill, paying for care for their elderly parents, and job security.

We are not communists, we are not terrorists, we are ordinary working people who care about others who may need a hand occasionally.

To me, Donald Trump, Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage etc represent the top 1% of society, they pursue policies that prevent transparency and allow corruption and manipulation of financial markets, they don't want a light shed on tax havens or illegal money laundering.

My parents were born into a society that didn't provide health care to the masses. My grandchildren's kids might well suffer the same fate if were not careful.

But the reason why people like the 800 co-workers your factory aren't comfortably well off is because of illegal Mexican immigrants, or the EU taking all their money, or anti-Semites like Corbyn, or Muslim areas that are no-go areas for Whites, or zero freedom of speech cos of the PC brigade, or too many women in the boardroom, or black people moaning about been shot, or abortions been legal, or Muslim women looking like letterboxes, or important people been locked up just for supplying young girls to other important people, or freedom fighters heroically reporting outside of court which will never cause trials to collapse, or how the police now get involved if you make some rape threats online, or etc etc etc....

You're spending too much time living life @uttoxram75 and as a result have become ignorant and naive to what is really going on. I suggest taking 2 weeks off this Summer and spending them in a dark room watching videos online made by other white men in dark rooms about what is really going on.

There's a few posters on here who will be able to start you off with some great videos, then just follow the links. Good luck comrade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...