Jump to content

Donald Trump 2019


Francisco 2.0

Recommended Posts

45 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

Dumb question amnesty:  did "fascism" once refer to a system of government where fascists referred to themselves as fascists?  Or was it always a slur where people would claim another type of government was bad by calling it fascist?

Mussolini was a self proclaimed fascist.  He embraced it fully.  In fact, he invented it.

Fascism has only been around for about 100 years where it’s been referred to as fascism.

Lots of people think Mussolini got his fascist ideas from Hitler but it was actually the other way around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

North Korea is Communist.

I’d argue the original Kim (Kim il-Sung) was more fascist than communist.  He redistributed at least half the land to the common people to win them over at one point. Also communist governments don’t typically transfer leadership through direct descendants.

If fascism has a success story, North Korea under Kim Il-Sung is at the top of my list.  He had it all: the cult of personality, infallibility, the propaganda, the nationalism, the indoctrination.  The Kim family got fascism right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Trump couldn’t even get a bank loan the year he ran for president and it was easier for him to win the presidency than build a Trump Tower in Moscow.

Kind of incredible 

It's kind of incredible that we still have the electoral college, which allows this shit to happen.

I've still yet to hear a good reason for keeping the electoral college. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

It's kind of incredible that we still have the electoral college, which allows this shit to happen.

I've still yet to hear a good reason for keeping the electoral college. 

Let me give it a shot in my best Republican:

  1. It helps makes the US remain a federation of individual states and it disproportionately amplifies the voice of smaller states. STATES RIGHTS, MUTHAFUCKA!
  2. Direct election of the President is too democratic. "We're a republic - not a democracy, gotdammit! Indirect elections rule!!!"
  3. Without it, politicians would only focus their election efforts on where people actually live.
  4. We need it to keep those liberal elite fags in the big coastal cities from running everything!

How'd I do?

Edited by bolverk
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

I've still yet to hear a good reason for keeping the electoral college. 

There are reasons but none of them are really good considering the negatives.

The main reasons you will hear:

1. It’s in the constitution 

2. It pushes candidates to campaign away from the population centers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Let me give it a shot in my best Republican:

  1. It helps makes the US remain a federation of individual states and it disproportionately amplifies the voice of smaller states. STATES RIGHTS, MUTHAFUCKA!
  2. Direct election of the President is too democratic. "We're a republic - not a democracy, gotdammit! Indirect elections rule!!!"
  3. Without it, politicians would only focus their election efforts on where people actually live.
  4. We need it to keep those liberal elite fags in the big coastal cities from running everything!

How'd I do?

 

Nailed it in all of its idiocy 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

Why? Why not have one person, one vote? Is it because it's so simple and makes too much sense? 

I think the primary real argument against it (not the one the Republicans give) is that it would be easier to exploit.  Currently there are 51 different elections.  If there was one giant election and someone hacked in, easier to exploit.  Or picture Florida hanging chad situation but with 120 million votes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hayden_horn said:

Yes, but they dont self-gloss that way. That was my whole point. And they are much more of a dictatorship than a communist state. So were the Soviets. 

Fascism is not a catch-all term for all authoritarian states. Communists and fascists are both dictatorial, and mortal enemies. Stalin was never the patron of a fascist regime. Neither was Mao. 

North Korea is a centrally organized government and, while there have been some modest reforms, there is still technically no such thing as private property and all enterprises are legally state-owned. The term fascism cannot accurately be used to describe their system of government. No two governments are identical so there aren't cookie cutter definitions but North Korea falls under the umbrella of Marxist-Leninist socialism. They're extreme left. Fascism is extreme right. Calling North Korea fascist is like calling AOC a fascist. She's a democratic socialist. Stephen Miller is a fascist. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t see fascism as left or right.  I see it as total control of every aspect of a society implemented through violence and intimidation led by a supreme ruler. 

 The economic system of public vs private property under this type of government is of little consequence because the leader controls all of it anyway either through his elites or through fiat of the state. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Royalfan5 said:

We don’t need any Oklahomas

Oklahoma sure as hell sucks, but it's also very needed.  Unless you think that we can just do away with that game the second Saturday in October.  I'm kind of indifferent with Kansas...not a whole lot there that anyone would miss.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ChiTownDoc said:

Oklahoma sure as hell sucks, but it's also very needed.  Unless you think that we can just do away with that game the second Saturday in October.  I'm kind of indifferent with Kansas...not a whole lot there that anyone would miss.  

Keep the football team, strip them of their voice in govt? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

I think the primary real argument against it (not the one the Republicans give) is that it would be easier to exploit.  Currently there are 51 different elections.  If there was one giant election and someone hacked in, easier to exploit.  Or picture Florida hanging chad situation but with 120 million votes.

Cool, have each state run its own election like they do now, and elect the president on popular vote. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

Cool, have each state run its own election like they do now, and elect the president on popular vote. 

One argument against that is that it also limits the amount of juicing state can do too.  Texas is going to vote R, but there isn't really any motivation for the workers to pretend it is any more of a blowout than it is.

 

Of course, the opposite side of that is that in close states, people will be highly motivated to fraudulently juice votes because the reward is completely flipping the states.

 

I guess when those are the two choice, you go with the former because they know that cheating is more likely to be possible when one party controls everything.  If the state is 50-50, there will always be someone looking over your shoulder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Electoral College hot takes. Must be a slow day. What’s next, complaining about the make up of the Senate?

The Electoral College is the sole reason we're saddled with (and embarrassed of) the burden of teh Donald Effin' Trump as our president. He lost on votes counted but won on the ridiculous, anachronistic, undemocratic, and unrepresentative system that we use to determine who is the most powerful person on the planet. 

Fuck yeah. Anyone with any bit of common sense is going to go back to that well and lament the assinine process we go through to choose who'll occupy the White House.

This "slow" day ended with:

a) Paul Manafort's (the former head of the Trump presidential campaign) situation becoming direr with postponed sentencing.

b) Accusations that teh Donald couldn't get loans from Deutsche Bank (the preferred lender of the Russian mob) to give him money DURING THE CAMPAIGN.

c) Written letter from Super Republican, Chuck Grassely, stating the following (in writing) about one of Putin's buddies who met with one of the sons in NYC: Read between the RED brackets, you dumb shit, in the second paragraph.

 After this, if you're still unconvinced, may I suggest you gargle your own balls in a cabin in the woods? Any preceding president before Trump would've had to deflect/defend the above for weeks if not years. For teh Donald, this is just another Monday.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, High Plains Drifter said:

Seems like I remember somebody claiming that the Nazi's called themselves "Socialists" because socialism was fairly popular in Europe at the time (at least in theory).

Yeah, the Nazi's were definitely not socialists. They did use the label to usurp the worker movement that was sweeping Europe, especially Germany. Considering, they outlawed the actual socialist parties and purged socialists from the Nazi party and were willing to wage war against "Judeo Bolshevism", I think it's safe to say the Nazi's were not socialists. IMO, Nazism and Fascism were reactionary ideologies unique to the early 20th century.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

I just found out this year that what maybe the last Red Green TV show tour ever is not coming anywhere near Texas.  That’s shitty. 

Looked up the tour and see the closest stop is more than six hours from me. 

Plans made to drive six hours two minutes later.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He’s seriously inviting a little kid who was bullied because he shares a last name with Trump.

This lamebrained, narcissist is putting this on par with tragedies such as murdered teenagers and police officers killed in the line of duty and military members who made the ultimate sacrifice and people who are victims of addiction.

Why don’t we add a dude who got trolled on Facebook for having a shitty trumpian hairdo or a Trumpesque spray tan.

I’m not naming names, but SOMEONE needs his ass BEAT.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...