This Trump interview felt different

[enchanted]

 

Anybody else watch this? 

 

[Hardkill]

Yeah, his brain is really melting and he's looking really moldy. 

Hopefully, he passes away very soon, which is very plausible given his terrible health and age. I wouldn't be surprised if he died of a heart attack by next year.

Edited October 18 by Hardkill

[Leo Gura]

@Hardkill He will continue to live just to spite you.

[Verdesbird]

The idea you guys have about trump is delirant ,you guys just dont know how global politics works

 

But anyways...if trump wins im happy for america ,if kamala wins i will be happy for my semite relatives in the arab world

[lostingenosmaze]

@Hardkill Bro, you can hate people all you want, but bragging how they live rent-free in your head is not healthy. Just stop

[Verdesbird]

2 minutes ago, lostingenosmaze said:

@Hardkill Bro, you can hate people all you want, but bragging how they live rent-free in your head is not healthy. Just stop

Shit

 

The guy spell a fucking curse on trump

 

Take it easy @Hardkill we are all humans we are all the same

[ryandesreu]

On 10/18/2024 at 0:24 AM, Verdesbird said:

The idea you guys have about trump is delirant ,you guys just dont know how global politics works

 

But anyways...if trump wins im happy for america ,if kamala wins i will be happy for my semite relatives in the arab world

What idea about him specifically? Who is you guys?

[Thought Art]

@Verdesbird Tone it a bit please.

[Fearey]

My brain still can't comprehend how this guy has any support, let alone the idea that he might actually become the next US president. A stage Beige president in the most powerful country on Earth is a terrifying thought.

I have to think hard to come up with someone that's a worse presidential candidate than Trump.

Edited October 19 by Fearey

[What Am I]

20 minutes ago, Fearey said:

My brain still can't comprehend how this guy has any support, let alone the idea that he might actually become the next US president. A stage Beige president in the most powerful country on Earth is a terrifying thought.

I have to think hard to come up with someone that's a worse presidential candidate than Trump.

If it's so baffling, isn't it possible there's a significant gap in your own comprehension of how things really work? I'm not necessarily saying that's the case, but maybe it's worth reflecting on the possibility nonetheless.

[Fearey]

12 minutes ago, What Am I said:

If it's so baffling, isn't it possible there's a significant gap in your own comprehension of how things really work? I'm not necessarily saying that's the case, but maybe it's worth reflecting on the possibility nonetheless.

I don't understand what you're trying to say. What do you mean by how things really work?

If such a large portion of people (Trump supporters) are able to get completely brainwashed to the point where they're no longer able to question anything, maybe the best course of action is to implement a system that detects faults in reasoning and ones susceptibility to cult-like behavior, making targeted individuals temporarily unable to vote on anything. Then you'd ideally be left with a system that is secured against this kind of scenario, where you don't accidentally elect the next Hitler due to the populous being highly susceptible to propaganda and fearmongering.

[What Am I]

11 minutes ago, Fearey said:

I don't understand what you're trying to say. What do you mean by how things really work?

I was just pointing out that if something is true (Trump has many supporters), and you can't comprehend how it can be true, perhaps that's due to your own current understanding of things not matching reality. That would logically track as a possibility. But it sounds like you do actually have a theory, as you elaborated below.

11 minutes ago, Fearey said:

If such a large portion of people (Trump supporters) are able to get completely brainwashed to the point where they're no longer able to question anything, maybe the best course of action is to implement a system that detects faults in reasoning and ones susceptibility to cult-like behavior, making targeted individuals temporarily unable to vote on anything. Then you'd ideally be left with a system that is secured against this kind of scenario, where you don't accidentally elect the next Hitler due to the populous being highly susceptible to propaganda and fearmongering.

Jeez lol. What need is there to worry about the next Hitler when whichever leader who has devised this policy is already auditioning for the role? Just kidding. Kind of.

I agree that people are fucking stupid, and the right seems to have this affliction a good deal more often, but what you're proposing can't be the way forward. I'm sure it's just a response to everything in the world rapidly changing in ways we don't like, but authoritarian solutions such as this will probably not bring about the utopia that we'd imagine.

[josemar]

13 hours ago, Fearey said:

My brain still can't comprehend how this guy has any support, let alone the idea that he might actually become the next US president. A stage Beige president in the most powerful country on Earth is a terrifying thought.

I have to think hard to come up with someone that's a worse presidential candidate than Trump.

More than 50% of Americans think Kamala is worse, hence Trump will win these elections, probably.

[Fearey]

7 minutes ago, josemar said:

More than 50% of Americans think Kamala is worse, hence Trump will win these elections, probably.

You might be right. If Trump wins, or even if he gets anywhere close to winning, after all he's said and done, I'm losing all faith in humanity.

And I don't think this problem is limited to the US, but rather human beings in general. I'm convinced this could happen in any country. It's people that are the problem, or rather, people that are very susceptible to treating whatever tgey're thought as truth, without doing any research or questioning.

I would be in favor of revoking voting rights for people found to match that category, on either side. Simply force big tech to comply and implement AI algorithms that monitor peoples level of fetting influenced by misinformation. Big tech already monitors everyone so it shouldn't be any issue in that sense.

[josemar]

7 minutes ago, Fearey said:

I would be in favor of revoking voting rights for people found to match that category, on either side. Simply force big tech to comply and implement AI algorithms that monitor peoples level of fetting influenced by misinformation. Big tech already monitors everyone so it shouldn't be any issue in that sense.

This extremist left attitude is one of the reasons the electorate leans right today... You disagree with the first amendment?

[What Am I]

9 minutes ago, josemar said:

This extremist left attitude is one of the reasons the electorate leans right today... You disagree with the first amendment?

@Fearey this is exactly correct in my opinion, sans the attribution specifically to the left. When you squeeze your fist closed to gain more control, as the establishment has done in many cases around the world, they'll be resented. A plan like yours, to monitor all people and strip away their right to representation through voting at the first sign of dissent, can only breed more of what we're already seeing.

[Fearey]

15 minutes ago, josemar said:

This extremist left attitude is one of the reasons the electorate leans right today... You disagree with the first amendment?

What I'm proposing does not violate the first amendment. In what way is it far left to want to filter out votes you know are made up of misinformation and lies? I think this would strengthen a democracy, not weaken it.

[Fearey]

2 minutes ago, What Am I said:

@Fearey this is exactly correct in my opinion, sans the attribution specifically to the left. When you squeeze your fist closed to gain more control, as the establishment has done in many cases around the world, they'll be resented. A plan like yours, to monitor all people and strip away their right to representation through voting at the first sign of dissent, can only breed more of what we're already seeing.

My point is that all people that use modern technology are already being monitored to this day without these tools. You could think of them as something that runs in the background, checking which sources you're reading and also how you make up your mind and express yourself to others based on this information, and whether or not you take any steps towards verifying what you're reading online.

While it might breed more resentment, something has to be done, there is no question about it in my mind. Even if Trump doesn't win, it's unacceptable that he has come this far. He should have been jailed after his failed coup following Jan. 6 and that should have been the end of Trump. This didn't happen, of course. Instead, he was granted full immunity for his involvement on Jan. 6. Does that seem very democratic to you?

This is not a right vs. left issue, it's about preserving democracy.

[josemar]

And who decides what constitutes disinformation and lies? Past experience shows that supressing alternative views on for example covid vaccines, positive discrimination or gender ideology, didn't work out so well. And this is the backlash.

[What Am I]

4 minutes ago, Fearey said:

My point is that all people that use modern technology are already being monitored to this day without these tools. You could think of them as something that runs in the background, checking which sources you're reading and also how you make up your mind and express yourself to others based on this information, and whether or not you take any steps towards verifying what you're reading online.

While it might breed more resentment, something has to be done, there is no question about it in my mind. Even if Trump doesn't win, it's unacceptable that he has come this far. He should have been jailed after his failed coup following Jan. 6 and that should have been the end of Trump. This didn't happen, of course. Instead, he was granted full immunity for his involvement on Jan. 6. Does that seem very democratic to you?

This is not a right vs. left issue, it's about preserving democracy.

I definitely get your intention, and I don't even disagree with the general goal you're aiming for, which would be a properly informed electorate. It may just be a question of who's saintly enough to implement a lofty goal like that without introducing their own bias. I doubt it can currently be done. And like I said, I believe trying it would only increase the level of division we're seeing now.

Agreed on it not being specifically right vs. left. I look at it as more of an establishment vs. anti-establishment kind of thing.