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

Status
Not open for further replies.
BidenGIF.gif
 
Last edited:
Softening relations with Mao, leading to the deindustrialisation of US cities could be seen as a negative.
Nixon and Kissinger's goal with opening up China wasn't to make it the source of all our goods, but to remove it as an active belligerent player in the Cold War, and thus remove a potential source of instability. Remember, Mao at the time was trying to spread his own form of revolutionary Communism that clashed with both the West and the Soviets.
 
Softening relations with Mao, leading to the deindustrialisation of US cities could be seen as a negative.
The other choice was to let Russia and China build relations. As we see now in the Russia-Ukraine war, that made the two countries compensate for each other's weaknesses and made both completely sanction-proofed. The USSR and China working together would mean that the USSR never falls apart and their combined population outnumbers the West.
 
Nixon and Kissinger's goal with opening up China wasn't to make it the source of all our goods, but to remove it as an active belligerent player in the Cold War, and thus remove a potential source of instability. Remember, Mao at the time was trying to spread his own form of revolutionary Communism that clashed with both the West and the Soviets.

The other choice was to let Russia and China build relations. As we see now in the Russia-Ukraine war, that made the two countries compensate for each other's weaknesses and made both completely sanction-proofed. The USSR and China working together would mean that the USSR never falls apart and their combined population outnumbers the West.
I'm not saying that it was necessarily the intended outcome, but it was the beginning of the end for American manufacturing.
 
@Åland Island Observer
I think there are a lot more people who just don't know or care than you realize. It seems like every day some new story comes out about another state where they found hundreds or thousands of votes that were cast illegally but the mainstream media never reports on them and most Americans have no idea it is even happening.
While that’s true I wasn’t reffering to the American public. I meant other world leaders mostly. The world at large knows what they did and that is causing enough issues. Publicly admitting to the common man that the whole thing was bs would cause much bigger issues. TPTB are getting by currently on the fact they and a normal person can pretend everything is ok.
 
Which one is Ashleigh Merchant?
Ashleigh Merchant is one of Trump's lawyers in the GA case. If I remember correctly she is also the woman who honey-potted the main witness to the DA and her fuckbudy's relationship.

I'm hoping the judge in that case axes Fani "I wear my dresses backwards" Willis' ass from the case. That means the case dies because the only other people to pick it up would be Republicans. Not that Georgia doesn't have RINOs, but one can hope they would care more about their own careers than doing the establishment's bidding.
 
The other choice was to let Russia and China build relations. As we see now in the Russia-Ukraine war, that made the two countries compensate for each other's weaknesses and made both completely sanction-proofed. The USSR and China working together would mean that the USSR never falls apart and their combined population outnumbers the West.
Yeah, Nixon said as much years later. If the Chinese didn't go to us, they would go to the Soviets. Driving a wedge between the two helped us against out biggest adversary at the time, and he also foresaw the rise of China and knew he'd rather them be more friendly to us than the Soviets.

He was shrewd, and studied Russian and Chinese cultural motivations and used them to great effect when meeting with their leaders.

Much like Trump revealing to Xi that he just took out Suleiman during dinner at Mar-A-Lago, Nixon purposefully bombed the shit out Hanoi before visiting Brehznev as a show of strength.
 
Yeah, Nixon said as much years later. If the Chinese didn't go to us, they would go to the Soviets. Driving a wedge between the two helped us against out biggest adversary at the time, and he also foresaw the rise of China and knew he'd rather them be more friendly to us than the Soviets.

He was shrewd, and studied Russian and Chinese cultural motivations and used them to great effect when meeting with their leaders.

Much like Trump revealing to Xi that he just took out Suleiman during dinner at Mar-A-Lago, Nixon purposefully bombed the shit out Hanoi before visiting Brehznev as a show of strength.
fast forward a few decades later, and China and Russia have a healthy working relationship and combined could do a lot of damage to America
 
Loving the cope and sneed
The thing is they are noooooot entirely wrong. I actually find myself siding with the liberal justices here. The ruling as is, is amazingly overbroad. I have no clue how it passed both Roberts and Kavanugh that this does basically nullify an entire amendment and in turn raises questions about others. That could have been the point, a rather blatant telling of congress to do their damn job, but I doubt that since I cannot see Thomas or Alito passing up the opportunity to spell that out in the decision.
 
The thing is they are noooooot entirely wrong. I actually find myself siding with the liberal justices here. The ruling as is, is amazingly overbroad. I have no clue how it passed both Roberts and Kavanugh that this does basically nullify an entire amendment and in turn raises questions about others. That could have been the point, a rather blatant telling of congress to do their damn job, but I doubt that since I cannot see Thomas or Alito passing up the opportunity to spell that out in the decision.
Does this stray from Roberts' usual approach of keeping his hands clean?

I genuinely love when the left has a fucking meltdown and screams about demolishing every institution. Makes for a great "This you?" moment when they'll be the defenders of democracy again in a month.

Archive everything.
 
Does this stray from Roberts' usual approach of keeping his hands clean?

I genuinely love when the left has a fucking meltdown and screams about demolishing every institution. Makes for a great "This you?" moment when they'll be the defenders of democracy again in a month.

Archive everything.
Rather emphatically yes. Robert's loves down the middle, no real implications, avoiding precedent decisions. Only really breaking from this when the Uniparty up top says they want a specific outcome. This... is a pretty hard break. Whenever it is in support of the Uniparty Roberts has always followed a pattern in his reasoning, arguing specifically for how 'both sides' have come to support X therefore he must make decision Y. Always trying to make it a both-sides issue to cover for it being something that helps the uniparty. There is none of that in this, in fact the decision reads as Alito's handwriting. Roberts can barely be read in it. yet he supported such a massive., sweeping decision with no additional words. I would have expected him to at least sign on to Barret's.
 
I'm not saying that it was necessarily the intended outcome, but it was the beginning of the end for American manufacturing.

The EPA's done far more damage. If there were just a giant sea where China is now, it would still be cost-prohibitive if not downright illegal to manufacture most things in America. We'd just be making them in some other Third World country instead.

Yeah, Nixon said as much years later. If the Chinese didn't go to us, they would go to the Soviets. Driving a wedge between the two helped us against out biggest adversary at the time, and he also foresaw the rise of China and knew he'd rather them be more friendly to us than the Soviets.

And more to the point, in 1968, the default assumption is that if the Cold War went hot, the PRC would join the USSR. Nixon's goal wasn't even to make China an ally, it was just to treat China as an individual country with its own, independent leadership and interests, not as a client state of Moscow, so that, should WW3 happen, it would be a USSR-USA conflict in which China would have every reason to stay out.

The thing is they are noooooot entirely wrong. I actually find myself siding with the liberal justices here. The ruling as is, is amazingly overbroad. I have no clue how it passed both Roberts and Kavanugh that this does basically nullify an entire amendment and in turn raises questions about others. That could have been the point, a rather blatant telling of congress to do their damn job, but I doubt that since I cannot see Thomas or Alito passing up the opportunity to spell that out in the decision.

Nah. They're entirely wrong. It doesn't nullify an entire amendment - it simply states that the federal government is in charge of determining whether or not a candidate is ineligible for federal office under constitutional criteria. It doesn't even make sense for states to be in charge of determining whether or not treason against the federal government has been committed. This is clearly something only the federal government can define.
 
Last edited:
Where can I read more about this?

https://www.amazon.com/Enormous-Crime-Definitive-Abandoned-Southeast/dp/0312371268/ (You can probably get this by ship too)

Unz provides a lot of sources and receipts to back his claims so those should get you up to speed. This also ties back to John "Bomb Iran" McCain and why his Uniparty ass was so celebrated and praised by the other parasites around him when he died. It's why in 2008 no one would run the story about Obama's fag escapades outside of the absolute fringe of media: If the GOP broke the story, the DNC would initiate M.A.D. and reveal the cover up. But if Obama brought it up, the GOP would do the same as expose Obama's gay escapades where he cheated on his wife with college twinks.
 
The thing is they are noooooot entirely wrong. I actually find myself siding with the liberal justices here. The ruling as is, is amazingly overbroad. I have no clue how it passed both Roberts and Kavanugh that this does basically nullify an entire amendment and in turn raises questions about others. That could have been the point, a rather blatant telling of congress to do their damn job, but I doubt that since I cannot see Thomas or Alito passing up the opportunity to spell that out in the decision.
In the thread on this, I shared about all 4 women on the Court saying that stating it is an act of Congress to disqualify a candidate was overstepping the ruling on this case.

I speculated they dissented on that because the plan was to disqualify Trump with the Jan 6 DC case. The rest of the Justices knowing that, or predicting it, punted the entire issue.

When Trump is found guilty in the DC case, my doomerism sees Arizona, Pennsylvania, and Georgia prepared to torch the party with dignity by electorally locking Trump out of a victory. That going to the Supreme Court, with Trump having an appealed conviction in Federal Court, either way they decide is putting a target on their heads for extremism.

So they are setting the precedent now, while stakes are much much lower, if you Niggers are going to tear up the Constitution because you hate Trump that much, you can take the fucking heat for it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back