Kamala-Trump Debate

[What Am I]

14 minutes ago, Joshe said:

Yes. I would put a bullet in baby Hitler's brain if given the chance. 100%. And I would likely advocate for the same to someone who did the same to an innocent baby. I'm unapologetically against what I perceive as detrimental to good, aka (evil), and have not yet figured out if it's always or usually best to turn the other cheek. The wise ones say this, but I can't see it yet.

That's an interesting one. So you're saying you'd be in favor of killing baby Hitler, as well as baby Hitler's killer for killing a baby? I do like that lol. A certain poetic justice that completes itself and closes the circle.

Yeah, the wisdom you're talking about is a tricky thing. It seems to involve a doing away of all polarity, including good and evil, and actions just flow from the absolute. I can't claim to grasp it either, and I've only had glimpses. We'll get there, brother!

14 minutes ago, Joshe said:

Springfield Ohio is a Republican town, in a Republican county, in a Republican state. My guess is the Republicans signed off on it.

I think titles like Republican and Democrat can be a little misleading these days. I've seen Leo and Destiny (and others) use the more accurate labels of establishment and anti-establishment. If I were to guess, it'd be an establishment figure who made a call such as this. But I admit, I don't actually know.

And I swear, I wasn't asking as a gotcha lol. I was actually curious if it was known who in particular made it, because it's such a goofy decision.

[What Am I]

6 minutes ago, El Zapato said:

@What Am I Even Jesus metaphorically maintained there is a limit to turning cheeks.  We all realize the butt will turn red after enough slapping.  I think it was Kant who believed that one could watch one kill another without any sense of responsibility to intervene.  I disagree, there is a point of practicality where the rubber hits the road and as human beings, we have to react.

Sure, you're probably not wrong. But it's in that moment where you decide to react that you've now taken on an incredible responsibility. If your discernment wasn't clear, you could wind up discovering that you've actually become the villain in the story.

I'm just stating this as a general concept, not necessarily tied to the scenario involving Trump.

[mattm33]

1 hour ago, Joshe said:

I don't believe each voter is sufficiently informed or developed enough to avoid potential catastrophe. When the stakes are low, sure, let the people fuck around, but when the life of the system is in danger, I'm okay with the people being manipulated for their own benefit. You can call that fucked up but I call it caring about the system they comprise. Ideally, people would be intelligent enough to discern for themselves what is right, but they simply aren't.

This kind of thinking must be how the fox news anchors are able to sleep at night. I heard something similar from JD Vance. He probably thinks he knows what's best for everyone as well.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/jd-vance-haitians-if-i-have-to-create-stories-1235102572/

 

[Joshe]

1 hour ago, What Am I said:

That's an interesting one. So you're saying you'd be in favor of killing baby Hitler, as well as baby Hitler's killer for killing a baby? I do like that lol. A certain poetic justice that completes itself and closes the circle.

That is a really interesting idea, but unfortunately, I'm not that creative. lol. I flubbed my words. It's not important though because it led to this new idea for us. 😆

1 hour ago, What Am I said:

And I swear, I wasn't asking as a gotcha lol. I was actually curious if it was known who in particular made it, because it's such a goofy decision.

I'm not sure. AFAIK, if immigrants come here legally, they can go wherever they want. It makes sense they'd wind up in smallish towns with low rent prices if jobs are there. Manufacturing plants often spring up where land is cheap, so if immigrants find a honey hole of cheap land + lots of jobs, bingo, call the fam. Seems that's what happened. The local politicians had incentive to let them come and once the problems started cropping up, they realized there was no good mechanism in place to curb population growth, so what are they going to do? It's against federal law for states to reject immigrants that are here legally, AFAIK. That's my best guess as to what happened. I don't think there was a single person or a single group who decided to increase the population by adding 1/3 Haitians. 

Edited September 16 by Joshe

[What Am I]

3 minutes ago, Joshe said:

I'm not sure. AFAIK, if immigrants come here legally, they can go wherever they want. It makes sense they'd wind up in smallish towns with low rent prices if jobs are there. Manufacturing plants often spring up where land is cheap, so if immigrants find a honey hole of cheap land + lots of jobs, bingo, call the fam. Seems that's what happened. The local politicians had incentive to let them come and once the problems started cropping up, they realized there was no good mechanism in place to curb population growth, so what are they going to do? It's against federal law for states to reject immigrants that are here legally, AFAIK. That's my best guess as to what happened. I don't think there was a single person or a single group who decided to increase the population by adding 1/3 Haitians. 

Pretty fair guess, that makes sense.

[Joshe]

1 hour ago, mattm33 said:

This kind of thinking must be how the fox news anchors are able to sleep at night. I heard something similar from JD Vance. He probably thinks he knows what's best for everyone as well.

Yes, this problem doesn't escape me. This way of thinking is common on the right. They (the ideological right, not JD) think they are stamping out evil. 

Everyone thinks they know best of how things ought to be ran. The problem is, have you seen how stupid people are? The only way to know what is best is to care about what is best, so much that you devote many years of your life to understanding what is best. If someone does that in earnest and tries to be right, for goodness sake, not their own, and if they have been successful, their ideas of what is good should carry more weight than some power hungry dumbasses who only care about themselves. 

I doubt you would disagree with that position.

BTW, thanks for the article. It gives more weight to my hypothesis. Vance implies he made up stories to get eyeballs on Springfield. Didn't see them admitting it but makes sense. 

Edited September 16 by Joshe

[Joshe]

[Joshe]

He was a bit late but Kyle got there. He thought Trump was shooting from the hip with the Haitian cats but now thinks it was intentional. He believes it was a stupid move, and it might be, but I wouldn’t discount primal fear just yet. There might even be a new viral immigration story on the horizon. 

 

[LoseYourvelf]

I love Trump 

[ted73104]

1 hour ago, LoseYourvelf said:

I love Trump 

Could you explain why you love Trump? Curious about your thoughts and feelings about him.

[LoseYourvelf]

14 minutes ago, ted73104 said:

Could you explain why you love Trump? Curious about your thoughts and feelings about him.

Trustworthy, relatable, loving. Type deal

[LoseYourvelf]

"It's just like a big love fest out here!" 

Also did U see the gold sneakers? Do U think he's really that manipulative or just had a cool creative idea

[Fearey]

2 hours ago, LoseYourvelf said:

I love Trump 

What are you most fearful of, or what bothers you the most about America today?

It seems to me that quite often, sympathy and support for Trump stems from an irrational fear that you believe he'd somehow solve if he became president. Trump knows this, and it's why he keeps saying he'll do all these great things if elected, while never elaborating on how he'd do it.

[El Zapato]

@LoseYourvelf lol!

[ryandesreu]

9 hours ago, LoseYourvelf said:

I love Trump 

Trump loves Trump 

[Joshe]

8 days after debate:

Kamala: +6 (45 to 51)
Trump: -6 (53 to 47)

To my knowledge (which is fallible), betting markets never had Kamala ahead of of Trump until after the debate. 

Ha, Kamala just hit 52 after I posted. 

Edit: Some betting markets did indeed have Harris slightly ahead of Trump at one point before the debate. 

Edited September 20 by Joshe

[Emerald]

6 hours ago, Joshe said:

8 days after debate:

Kamala: +6 (45 to 51)
Trump: -6 (53 to 47)

Betting markets never had Kamala ahead of of Trump until after the debate. 

Ha, Kamala just hit 52 after I posted. 

Back in early August or thereabouts I saw that she was up like 1 point on him for a couple weeks. So, that's not true.

But this is the first time she's pulled way ahead of him.

[BlueOak]

Authoritarian leaders with larger egos listen to yes-men.
Yes-men don't give good advice to strengthen your weaknesses / address your flaws, or let you grow with the natural course of events. Now we have Trump running on conspiracy, which the country is more tired of.

I've said it before, but Kyle sums it up well here.
 

 

Its the biggest flaw of authoritarians deep in egos, they make it about themselves at the expense of running a country. Not every single leader obviously, I'm sure there are authoritarians out there who genuinely listen to people telling them when something isn't working, but we only ever see the leaders that have huge egos because those egos like to get heard or seen.
Equally for balance being a democratic leader doesn't negate this possibility either, it just makes less likely, because how you got to that point usually requires many people, not just a large wad of cash to buy your way in (usually)

Edited September 19 by BlueOak

[BlueOak]

On 18/09/2024 at 7:33 AM, Joshe said:

He was a bit late but Kyle got there. He thought Trump was shooting from the hip with the Haitian cats but now thinks it was intentional. He believes it was a stupid move, and it might be, but I wouldn’t discount primal fear just yet. There might even be a new viral immigration story on the horizon. 

 

Of course there will be, its the only card they can play. That and a war with Iran. (They'd stick to energy prices if they were smart, not sure what your fuel costs are in America?)

They will have to do better than random nazi quoted cat eating though. That was just laziness at its best to pull that one and run with it.

Edited September 19 by BlueOak

[Joshe]

17 hours ago, Emerald said:

Back in early August or thereabouts I saw that she was up like 1 point on him for a couple weeks. So, that's not true.

In the betting markets? I didn't know that.