US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians

 

[Glad I couldn't help]

Biden really is a modern day Nero.

As the country burns he plays a song on the violin about "protecting trans youth" or some other retarded shit that doesn't affect 99% of the population.

I don't really that a really good analogy. Biden seems, to me, at least, more avuncular but ineffectual than malicious.

Yes yes, England is the empty husk that America came from, I'm aware. But then everyone else showed up too.

Have you read Albion's Seed? It argues that the migrations in 1600's from the British Isles 'set' the social. cultural and political agendas for the centuries that followed. Subsequent immigration mostly acculturated into those existing folkways. See this article and the podcast for more details.

 

[ForTheHoard]

I would laugh my ass off if another Saint Floyd of Fentanyl happens and the dems try to quash the riots to avoid the bad publicity by saying they can't riot due to monkeypox.

I'm not convinced they would do anything to squash it. They encouraged the SCOTUS protests which are technically more criminal than about 80% of the people that showed up for a lot of the BLM shit. They would either try spinning it or ignoring it outright. Their success/failure totally depends on what the media decides to do. I still run into people regularly that think CHAZ is a Q-anon myth and they live in and around Seattle. If the news refuses to touch it, a huge chunk of the populace will never know about it, and what they do know is usually deformations of the truth or outright lies.

 

[AmHole]

Seriously, holy fuck this is a bad idea. Beto completely lost Texas as even a possibility due to gun grabbing bullshit.

Funny enough O'Rourke is going up against Abbott to become Governor of Texas. All Abbott has to do is play the "hell yeah we're taking your guns" clip ad nauseam and O'Rourke is done for. Is his hubris that massive that he thinks he's more popular than he actually is because of the narrow 2018 senate race? To be fair though there are still a lot of people in Texas who still think he's Hispanic and he's using that to his advantage.

 

[Tinfoil]

Wow, I was wondering if they'd do it. But Democrats in DC are attempting to pass a bill to virtually outlaw Republicans.

 

[The Foldless Brain]

I don't believe its hatred of communists no more when both sides of the aisle has done business and still do business with the communists in China, and still play them down as major rivals like Trump tried to do.

А lot of the (((neocons))) have ancestors from the Ukraine and are perpetually anally ravaged first over the Tsars then about Stalin. The families of Blinken, Applebaum, the Vindmans, Kristol (his grandfather) and a massive amount of your foreign policy apparat are not just any old jews, but rarer hohol jews. Their blood hatred for the vatnik is unsated.

 

[Bakarina]

Funny enough O'Rourke is going up against Abbott to become Governor of Texas. All Abbott has to do is play the "hell yeah we're taking your guns" clip ad nauseam and O'Rourke is done for. Is his hubris that massive that he thinks he's more popular than he actually is because of the narrow 2018 senate race? To be fair though there are still a lot of people in Texas who still think he's Hispanic and he's using that to his advantage.

O'Dork is astroturfed to hell and back. Then again, Abbott was too but the DNC really tried to turn O'Rouke onto the next Obama. Problem is, the only support I know of for him is wine moms/aunts in metro areas.

 

[Swingletonthesimpleton]

View attachment 3300358
Yet another indicator of just how fucking nervous they are about upcoming elections

another gun control law


Did i ever tell you the definition of insanity

 

[Confused Doggo]

Original
View attachment 3300088
tfw no nazi gf

What the hell is that tattoo on her arm? A bug? A beetle?

 

[Tinfoil]

Their women do lot pretty hot in comparison to American nazis.

Are there any American Nazi girls? I've only seen European and Asian.

 

[King Dead]

@Dracula's Spirit Animal (reply bug): I'm a little late on this, but here's a quick crash course in American history around the turn of the 20th century.

Spoiler: murika

So there was a big Progressive movement in the country that cropped up in the late 1800s and early 1900s, mostly in response to the Industrial Revolution, factory work, and robber barons. They had a lot of ideas on how society should be changed to prevent abuses of power, and they lobbied tirelessly to get their reforms passed. This wasn't strictly a Democrat or Republican thing, the movement crossed political lines (Teddy Roosevelt, for example, was a Republican trust-buster, and eventually ran for re-election as the Progressive candidate in 1912, which likely caused Woodrow Wilson to get elected by splitting the Republican vote, sadly).

The Progressives managed to spearhead not one, not two, but four Constitutional amendments, all in the span of a decade. There was a period during the 60's that another four amendments were passed, but those were for a variety of reasons. It's safe to say that the Progressives of the early 20th century had the greatest impact on the Constitution than any group save the Founders. The amendments were:

• 16th: Permitted Congress to levy an income tax (previously they couldn't, so federal income was mostly from tariffs; Progressives argued that this hurt the poor more and wanted the rich to pay their fair share)
• 17th: Direct election of US Senators by popular vote (Senators were previously elected by state legislatures, but Progressives argued that this took power away from the people)
• 18th: Prohibited the sale and manufacture of alcohol (temperance was a major plank of the Progressive platform, and they wanted to ban booze so that society would no longer be plagued by its ills)
• 19th: Women's suffrage (self-explanatory)

These sort of things sounded good on paper, perhaps, but as always, unintended consequences reared their ugly head. The 16th Amendment led to the establishment of the IRS, as well as letting the government double dip on taxing its citizens in both income and purchases; every year you curse the IRS while filing your taxes, remember, it was the Progressives' fault! The 17th Amendment, as mentioned, removed accountability of Senators to their states' governments, and now we have swamp creatures in the Senate for literal decades due to the incumbency boost. The 18th Amendment directly led to the rise of organized crime and bootlegging, and due to its major negative effects, it took little more than a decade for the 21st Amendment to repeal it. And as for the 19th Amendment...well, I'll leave that one as an exercise for the reader.

It was basically a perfect storm that gave the Progressives of the time a huge amount of momentum to carry out sweeping changes to the political landscape. But the pendulum always swings back, and with the prosperity of the Roaring Twenties, the Progressives were seen as old hat. It didn't hurt that the rise of the Communists in Russia led many to view Progressives as potentially dangerous radicals.

With regards to repealing the 17th Amendment (or any for that matter), there is a potential alternative. While every amendment has worked its way through Congress first (two-thirds majority in each chamber) before being passed to the states to be ratified (three-fourths majority of state legislatures/ratifying conventions), the Constitution lays out a second method, through a "Convention of States." If two-thirds of the state legislatures (currently 34) petition Congress for such a convention, it must then call the convention in order to adopt a proposed amendment, which is then sent to the states to be ratified.

The biggest issue is that, because it's never been done before, there really aren't any guidelines on exactly how such a convention should operate. It'd probably get pretty messy figuring that out, whether it can only discuss a single amendment or whether a less limited convention could be called, the specific procedure, and so on. There's also the question of organizing enough states to successfully petition for a convention in the first place; wrangling the votes in 34 state legislatures would be a major hurdle to clear.

However, if either party could get close to it right now, it'd be the Republicans, who currently control both chambers in 31 state legislatures. And if we're truly looking at a Dem blowout in November, we might see them pick up some more. I doubt this will lead to the CoS method getting any traction, but it'd be one less obstacle. The only other alternative would be if both parties could come to an agreement that it was an amendment that needed passing, but good fucking luck there.

 

[Tinfoil]

@Dracula's Spirit Animal (reply bug): I'm a little late on this, but here's a quick crash course in American history around the turn of the 20th century.

Spoiler: murika

So there was a big Progressive movement in the country that cropped up in the late 1800s and early 1900s, mostly in response to the Industrial Revolution, factory work, and robber barons. They had a lot of ideas on how society should be changed to prevent abuses of power, and they lobbied tirelessly to get their reforms passed. This wasn't strictly a Democrat or Republican thing, the movement crossed political lines (Teddy Roosevelt, for example, was a Republican trust-buster, and eventually ran for re-election as the Progressive candidate in 1912, which likely caused Woodrow Wilson to get elected by splitting the Republican vote, sadly).

The Progressives managed to spearhead not one, not two, but four Constitutional amendments, all in the span of a decade. There was a period during the 60's that another four amendments were passed, but those were for a variety of reasons. It's safe to say that the Progressives of the early 20th century had the greatest impact on the Constitution than any group save the Founders. The amendments were:

• 16th: Permitted Congress to levy an income tax (previously they couldn't, so federal income was mostly from tariffs; Progressives argued that this hurt the poor more and wanted the rich to pay their fair share)
• 17th: Direct election of US Senators by popular vote (Senators were previously elected by state legislatures, but Progressives argued that this took power away from the people)
• 18th: Prohibited the sale and manufacture of alcohol (temperance was a major plank of the Progressive platform, and they wanted to ban booze so that society would no longer be plagued by its ills)
• 19th: Women's suffrage (self-explanatory)

These sort of things sounded good on paper, perhaps, but as always, unintended consequences reared their ugly head. The 16th Amendment led to the establishment of the IRS, as well as letting the government double dip on taxing its citizens in both income and purchases; every year you curse the IRS while filing your taxes, remember, it was the Progressives' fault! The 17th Amendment, as mentioned, removed accountability of Senators to their states' governments, and now we have swamp creatures in the Senate for literal decades due to the incumbency boost. The 18th Amendment directly led to the rise of organized crime and bootlegging, and due to its major negative effects, it took little more than a decade for the 21st Amendment to repeal it. And as for the 19th Amendment...well, I'll leave that one as an exercise for the reader.

It was basically a perfect storm that gave the Progressives of the time a huge amount of momentum to carry out sweeping changes to the political landscape. But the pendulum always swings back, and with the prosperity of the Roaring Twenties, the Progressives were seen as old hat. It didn't hurt that the rise of the Communists in Russia led many to view Progressives as potentially dangerous radicals.

With regards to repealing the 17th Amendment (or any for that matter), there is a potential alternative. While every amendment has worked its way through Congress first (two-thirds majority in each chamber) before being passed to the states to be ratified (three-fourths majority of state legislatures/ratifying conventions), the Constitution lays out a second method, through a "Convention of States." If two-thirds of the state legislatures (currently 34) petition Congress for such a convention, it must then call the convention in order to adopt a proposed amendment, which is then sent to the states to be ratified.

The biggest issue is that, because it's never been done before, there really aren't any guidelines on exactly how such a convention should operate. It'd probably get pretty messy figuring that out, whether it can only discuss a single amendment or whether a less limited convention could be called, the specific procedure, and so on. There's also the question of organizing enough states to successfully petition for a convention in the first place; wrangling the votes in 34 state legislatures would be a major hurdle to clear.

However, if either party could get close to it right now, it'd be the Republicans, who currently control both chambers in 31 state legislatures. And if we're truly looking at a Dem blowout in November, we might see them pick up some more. I doubt this will lead to the CoS method getting any traction, but it'd be one less obstacle. The only other alternative would be if both parties could come to an agreement that it was an amendment that needed passing, but good fucking luck there.

You do realize most of these people are not going to do any of this? They literally do not give a fuck. By in large, as long as the money keeps rolling, they are fine. I don't know why people keep bringing up theoretical political scenarios that we all know isn't going to happen in the real world.

 

[Focken Kiwi]

They're trying to lose them even harder?

I've posted the picture before but I'll post it again. They're really scared that someone will look at January 6th and then look at the Buffalo or any other mass shooting and then get the idea to combine the two events:

 

[Ruin]

I've posted the picture before but I'll post it again. They're really scared that someone will look at January 6th and then look at the Buffalo or any other mass shooting and then get the idea to combine the two events:

View attachment 3300886

Are you trying to get this place shut down? Gtfo with that glowshit.

 

[Salubrious]

https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/1527411444035244039?t=z6x-cx0ZVmWxrDa9m-Nong&s=19

View attachment 3299626
Seems like Manchin is getting increasingly frustrated by the Biden admins constant "well, we would be fixing it, if you assholes would just stop noticing how we aren't fixing it!"

LOL. The Secretary of the Interior has no idea what the Department of the Interior is doing.

At this point, I don't know if it's scarier if she's lying or telling the truth.

 

[The Ugly One]

I'm not convinced they would do anything to squash it. They encouraged the SCOTUS protests which are technically more criminal than about 80% of the people that showed up for a lot of the BLM shit. They would either try spinning it or ignoring it outright. Their success/failure totally depends on what the media decides to do. I still run into people regularly that think CHAZ is a Q-anon myth and they live in and around Seattle. If the news refuses to touch it, a huge chunk of the populace will never know about it, and what they do know is usually deformations of the truth or outright lies.

A lot of people still think that Mike Brown was kneeling in the road shouting, "Hands up, don't shoot!" when Darren Wilson drew his pistol and shot him in the head, execution-style.

 

[Salubrious]

A lot of people still think that Mike Brown was kneeling in the road shouting, "Hands up, don't shoot!" when Darren Wilson drew his pistol and shot him in the head, execution-style.

A lot of people still think the three men Kyle Rittenhouse shot were black.

It was scary how many people during the trial came out on Twitter and said "I didn't know the victims were white."

 

[Sithis]

A lot of people still think the three men Kyle Rittenhouse shot were black.

It was scary how many people during the trial came out on Twitter and said "I didn't know the victims were white."

My favorite part about that aspect was watching a lot of the remaining black interest in the case suddenly wither around that point. Suddenly it wasn't a race issue, just some white boy shooting other white boys, so that kinda sucked some oxygen out of the threat of mass riots. Antifa only likes to stick their turkey necks out so far without their own version of Operation Human Shield running around looting and breaking shit.

 

[Focken Kiwi]

Are you trying to get this place shut down? Gtfo with that glowshit.

Calm your tits. I'm not suggesting anyone go out and do something and I'm certainly not planning anything beyond continuing to work, pay taxes and sit on my ass at home playing video games in my downtime. I'm just fucking doompilled right now because the economy is collapsing. I'm personally getting to the point where I can't afford to drive to work each week due to rising gas prices. I might have been making more money than ever this past year but it means fuck all when your money has proportionally less buying power.

I genuinely believe that when the economy gets bad enough later this year or early next year, violence will be inevitable. It may even become organized and targeted. The Summer of Love will look like an innocent campfire by comparison.

 

[mold]

I'm not convinced they would do anything to squash it. They encouraged the SCOTUS protests which are technically more criminal than about 80% of the people that showed up for a lot of the BLM shit. They would either try spinning it or ignoring it outright. Their success/failure totally depends on what the media decides to do. I still run into people regularly that think CHAZ is a Q-anon myth and they live in and around Seattle. If the news refuses to touch it, a huge chunk of the populace will never know about it, and what they do know is usually deformations of the truth or outright lies.

I know people who were at violent antifa/BLM protests all over the PNW and have rewritten their memories. They are completely sure that there was no violence even when there is video of them standing there, looking at people smashing shit up and getting beat down. This was a Great Awakening, people were having primary religious experiences around all the George Floyd stuff, and they're totally irrational about all of it.

 

[Hollywood Hitler]

A lot of people still think the three men Kyle Rittenhouse shot were black.

It was scary how many people during the trial came out on Twitter and said "I didn't know the victims were white."

Joe Scarborough still thinks that King Kyle shot off over 9000 rounds into a crowd of protesters.