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

Status
Not open for further replies.
BidenGIF.gif
 
Last edited:
Anyone here really fucking excited for this election cycle? Haven't been this ecstatic since 2016. This is fun as fuck, even if regardless who wins will end half of the country burning to shit.
No matter what happens in November, everybody needs to make sure to stay AWAY from the cities.

And if Kamala wins, then consider moving OUT of the city (unless of course you voted for Kamala, in which case, go ahead a burn in the mess you asked for, dipshit).
 
Her point is that she thinks Trump's economy was terrible and Biden's is great. She seems to have no self awareness of the fact that the pandemic completely slowed Trump's economic progress down. As if no one remembers taxes, gas prices, and groceries bills going down during Trump's administration before China decided to flip the gameboard.
I remember when Trump was president the economy was doing well and many liberals claimed how this was due to Obama's policies finally kicking in even in 2019. So which is it? Was the economy terrible under Trump or it was good but it was due to Obama's policies taking a long time to kick in?
 
Was it? I thought "red flag" laws were a newer concept when applied to non-felons who have a history of substance abuse. I don't know a lot about this area of law so please feel free to educate me if you feel like writing it out.
It has to do with the historical analogue test adopted by Bruen. The only laws prior to 1790 that allowed someone to be disarmed for substance abuse only applied while the person was intoxicated. Red flag laws are somewhat new, but the historical principle of disarming law abiding citizens goes back to the founding in some cases.
 
In all fairness, the cartels would literally start assassinating our politicians if we started drone striking them. That policy is likely out of self-preservation.
The cartels are as powerful as they are in Mexico because they are so entrenched that they can get by with that shit, the police know they outgun them and the government is bought off.

For all their bark and all the trouble they cause, they wouldn't be able to get by with that kind of escalation and survive. The Taliban were hard to defeat because they were fundies who believed they'd go to heaven for fucking blowing themselves up in the middle of a convoy, the cartel soldiers have no such radicalized belief system. They believe in money and profit.

It will sadly never happen on the scale it needs to, because what they honestly need to do is a solid military op where they bomb the shit out of em for a month before they even put boots on the ground. But it's not military feasibility that stops us from stomping their shit as much as it is the unwillingness to create a new vietnam scale event in terms of political unrest.
 
I feel like everyone is having collective amnesia about the world writ-large prior to COVID; especially Democrats, because they seem to want to run away from all their wildly unpopular COVID policies. I forgive Biden to a point - no one knew what the fuck to do - but that point ends when I have to pay $4 for a soda that cost $1.50 half a decade ago.

I will never ever ever ever ever ever ever EVER forgive Biden for the "dark winter" rhetoric and the mandates over the covid jabs.

2021 was undoubtedly a worse year for me than 2020 was.
 
Two quick comments as I catch up from last night;

The Harris/Walz interview, it's not really strange that they are doing the interview together, they always do this "coming out" interview with the potus/vp together, it's just it's a couple weeks late. The optics are funny though, she gotta have a WHITE MALE to make sure her "black" ass doesn't fuck it up too badly.

The cartel thing, why couldnt Trump use some drones to take out a few drug labs? Cheap method to do some real damage, and I would assume the mexican gov't could be made to sign off on it. The thing about the cartels (that reagan/bush/clinton did to great results) we have to pick a cartel and prop them up, and wipe out all the others. most of the strife of the past 30+ years was the US (CIA) turning on pablo and the sinaloa cartel. From what little I remember El Chapo was actually part of that cartel way back when. We can keep the death and destruction down by picking one and propping it up again, and doing this we could have some sway in shutting out the chinks perhaps. I don't know, just seems like those cartels are an evil that can't be completely wiped out.
The Cartels are like the Taliban in that to truly 100% get rid of them for good, you would have to go on a killing spree the likes of which would make the Rawanda genocide look like romper room to purge them forevermore. And no one has the balls let alone the stomach to do the violence needed to get rid of them and their enablers so as to irrevocably wipe them out.
 
Was it? I thought "red flag" laws were a newer concept when applied to non-felons who have a history of substance abuse. I don't know a lot about this area of law so please feel free to educate me if you feel like writing it out.
Red Flag Laws is a procedure where guns are removed from a person based of reports from an ever increasing pool of people that believe a person is dangerous.

While a judge has to authorize seizure, my primary concern is that the target of such a seizure does not get to represent themselves before the seizure order is given.

If a person is a danger to themselves or others, they at least get a hearing before losing their liberty. They get to defend themselves against such claims.

With red flags laws, it's seizure first and full due process later.


Ultimately, the goal isn't safety but control. If it was about safety then these possible homicidal manics would have been institutionalized.
 
It has to do with the historical analogue test adopted by Bruen. The only laws prior to 1790 that allowed someone to be disarmed for substance abuse only applied while the person was intoxicated. Red flag laws are somewhat new, but the historical principle of disarming law abiding citizens goes back to the founding in some cases.
So the bars back then took their gun instead of their keys?
 
Two quick comments as I catch up from last night;

The Harris/Walz interview, it's not really strange that they are doing the interview together, they always do this "coming out" interview with the potus/vp together, it's just it's a couple weeks late. The optics are funny though, she gotta have a WHITE MALE to make sure her "black" ass doesn't fuck it up too badly.

The cartel thing, why couldnt Trump use some drones to take out a few drug labs? Cheap method to do some real damage, and I would assume the mexican gov't could be made to sign off on it. The thing about the cartels (that reagan/bush/clinton did to great results) we have to pick a cartel and prop them up, and wipe out all the others. most of the strife of the past 30+ years was the US (CIA) turning on pablo and the sinaloa cartel. From what little I remember El Chapo was actually part of that cartel way back when. We can keep the death and destruction down by picking one and propping it up again, and doing this we could have some sway in shutting out the chinks perhaps. I don't know, just seems like those cartels are an evil that can't be completely wiped out.
Let this YouTube clip for A Clear and Present Danger explain it for you:
 
It's been conveniently memory-holed how Al Gore not only denied the 2000 election but refused to concede until the Supreme Court ordered him to over a month after the election and George Bush Jr wasn't declared the winner until then.

The same people who claimed 2000 was stolen nowadays either say 2020 was stolen too or they are complete and total nutcases.

2000 was nowhere near as bad as 2020. 2000 had far less problems, far less convenient flips and of course no dozen counties flipping in the middle of the night.
 
Post DNC Slump came out. Bump got cancelled.

Young people have become more liberal over time​


Young people have been more indoctrinated over time than ever before. I like that when Trump was talking about education after saying he'd get the alphabet mafia and CRT out of schools he also specifically said he would get political ideology out of schools in general. He needs to push this more and point out that Democrats (and left-wing parties in general in the rest of the world) are just training children and young adults to vote for them, so they can be in power forever. (As well as making them degenerate.) Think about it. You indoctrinate children at school, from their first day at school, with your political ideology like it's as objective fact as the 2+2=4 that they learned in their first maths class and who do you think they're most likely to vote for when they leave school?
 
What happened to him? I haven't heard about him in almost a decade.
He backed "Remain" and became retarded, burning up all of his "skeptic" cred along with it.

Of course, he backed "Remain" because he's an important science worker who needs to travel all around the EU and the UK leaving made doing that more of a pain in the ass.
 
Whats left's fascination with Vance's view on marriage, kids and childless people? I am fucking childless and I am not offended by anything he says. Who is actually offended by this shit?
I think it's a combo of things. One is they are speaking FOR childless cat ladies trying to get them fired up, and two, I think they feel personally attacked by Vance. It's also just truth, a person with kids has more stake in the future than someone without.
 
Too late Marky Mark, I've already been boycotting the funky bunch.

Fuck social media. Eat shit and die, Marky Mark.

What's Mark Wahlberg done? He supported Trump last I heard. His New Kids On The Block (he was an original member briefly, not just his brother) and Funky Bunch days are long gone. He's a decent enough actor and has made some pretty cool movies and seems to be fairly based these days.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back