US Politics V - now with 20% more echo chamber

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
An example of what?!

Never said it was out of endearment, just not about Bernie or his campaign.



You're subscribing to the idea that here are two types of voters on the left, and that "berniebros" is both an example and a namesake for what one of those types of voters are.

Meanwhile, the other type has no crafty name, oversimplification, or stereotype. They're the normal ones.
 
You're subscribing to the idea that here are two types of voters on the left, and that "berniebros" is both an example and a namesake for what one of those types of voters are.

Meanwhile, the other type has no crafty name, oversimplification, or stereotype. They're the normal ones.
You're overthinking this.

There was nothing rhymey or alliterative that fit Hillary.

Hillary Shrillerys? It's not catchy.

The nickname was not the problem.
 
You're subscribing to the idea that here are two types of voters on the left, and that "berniebros" is both an example and a namesake for what one of those types of voters are.

Meanwhile, the other type has no crafty name, oversimplification, or stereotype. They're the normal ones.



False.

I said they were a certain populace of HIS voters. That doesn’t even define his voters in two groups. So I’m not sure how you’re making such leaps.

I think the term was mostly used to describe the BMPs of his base; can’t answer the most basic of any economic question, describe themselves as progressive while soaked in racism and sexism, and have entitlement issues.
 
I used the ;)

I should have said

Corporate / Establishment against the Progressive branches
 
I think the term was mostly used to describe the BMPs of his base; can’t answer the most basic of any economic question, describe themselves as progressive while soaked in racism and sexism, and have entitlement issues.


!!! You're still doing it. This is exactly the point. You're suggesting that that's a sect of Bernie Sanders supporters. Racism, sexism, ignorance. Brand it. We found them on the internet on Reddit. Let's make sure that the nation hears about it.

Branding of followers in a negative light is a fallacious tactic of targeting that candidate if that candidate obviously doesn't support that. Now, let's back up this conversation. BEAL identified "establishment" versus "Berniebro." Can we make that clear?

We can point out bad apples in any bunch. I, for one, can think of a handful of sexists, rapists, sexual abusers, and child molesters that were prominent folks who supported Clinton - OBVIOUSLY without any doubt that's not the identify of her politics or er supporters. You better bet your ass the right brands it as so, though. Go visit Fox News, you'll see exactly how they do it.
 
!!! You're still doing it. This is exactly the point. You're suggesting that that's a sect of Bernie Sanders supporters. Racism, sexism, ignorance. Brand it. We found them on the internet on Reddit. Let's make sure that the nation hears about it.

Branding of followers in a negative light is a fallacious tactic of targeting that candidate if that candidate obviously doesn't support that.


Why are we denying that this sect of supporters exists? Do you deny that certain sects don’t exist in Trump supporters too?

On your second paragraph here I can start to see your point, and maybe you’re right? I agree he doesn’t support these things, so why does he attract these obvious sects of followers? Maybe it does point out a flaw in the candidate, but I would never say it was fallacious or slandering. He attracted this group, and they spoke, thought, and supported him in a very loud and cohesive voice.

I still don’t personally use that term as a slander to Bernie. I agree with a lot he stands for, but found him to be flawed(especially economically), when used by me it was always towards the uninformed left male.

Now, let's back up this conversation. BEAL identified "establishment" versus "Berniebro." Can we make that clear?
I did not see this, and I disagree with this assessment.
 
I love Bernie Sanders. He is quintessential get off my lawn older Vermont guy. I think he has true integrity. I just never thought his ideas were financially feasable.

But I had a blast watching the guy in debates. I loved when he told Hillary that he didn't care about the damn emails. I still yell get off my lawn every time I see him on tv.
 
Oh my god, I randomly caught Moore's spokesperson on CNN. In the whole two minutes I watched, she:

1. Called Doug Jones "Abortion Jones" multiple times.

2. Threw around the phrase "Sharia Law."

Fuck these garbage people.

A shame that in all this other stuff, it's pretty much been forgotten that Moore was fired TWICE for ethics violations.
 
Oh my god, I randomly caught Moore's spokesperson on CNN. In the whole two minutes I watched, she:

1. Called Doug Jones "Abortion Jones" multiple times.

2. Threw around the phrase "Sharia Law."

Fuck these garbage people.

A shame that in all this other stuff, it's pretty much been forgotten that Moore was fired TWICE for ethics violations.




And what’s super weird is that their version of Christianity has much more in common with Sharia Law than secular democracy.
 
This Jerusalem thing also totally makes no sense. Why give that up when you could get something in return?

I mean truthfully I don't care about who lives where in Israel, I'm sick of people dying over a shit piece of land and holding the rest of the civilized world hostage to their idiotic religious whims. So I have no horse in this race but it seems absolutely obvious to me that there is no actively ongoing peace process and that this move is totally unnecessary and needlessly provocative without moving the process forward at all.

But that is Trump, ignorant to the last cell and proud of it.
 
This Jerusalem thing also totally makes no sense. Why give that up when you could get something in return?

I mean truthfully I don't care about who lives where in Israel, I'm sick of people dying over a shit piece of land and holding the rest of the civilized world hostage to their idiotic religious whims. So I have no horse in this race but it seems absolutely obvious to me that there is no actively ongoing peace process and that this move is totally unnecessary and needlessly provocative without moving the process forward at all.

But that is Trump, ignorant to the last cell and proud of it.

it's something he can do by fiat and say that he fulfilled a campaign promise. it's a check in a box for him so he can feel good. he doesn't give a fuck about the human cost as long as his ego gets a win.
 
but it seems absolutely obvious to me that there is no actively ongoing peace process and that this move is totally unnecessary and needlessly provocative without moving the process forward at all.
.
We are both older. Has ANYTHING really changed in the Middle East? How many talks? How many accords? I remember when Sadat was assassinated - those now seem like gentler times...

I agree with everything else you said. I have no love for Israel and their racist agenda.
 
But Jesus



I'm afraid that does play a part. This sickens me.



[racist comments about the minds of Arabs deleted]


Many Christians are allowing themselves to get played on this whole Israel thing. Think about it - can there be a more racist policy than declaring a homeland for your people? That your racial God chose YOU for this land?



I hope that we (as a civilization) open our eyes to the Israel problem. I'm not saying the other countries in the region are anything spectacular - but Israel is a special kind of hypocrisy. They have found a way to manipulate the American Left and Right to support their invasion - an invasion on a scale the UN usually votes to interfere.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Christianity flourished in the Hellenistic West. It is incompatible with the Near East/Middle East mind

the orthodox church? the assyrian church? the ethiopian church? the indian churches founded by st. thomas? all of those have been around *much* longer than "western" christianity.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Israel's own behaviour is making it increasingly unlikely that a two-state solution can ever work.

I had said here probably a couple of years ago that we are quickly coming to the point where a one-state solution is going to be the only viable option. That is a demographic nightmare for Israel, but their current awful government appears to want to suck and blow at the same time so here they are.

The Palestinians have no leadership to speak of, they are a people without a vision and mostly without hope but demographics are destiny and can in a sense wait things out. There will come a point where they will literally be living in Bantustans like the South African black were before the world could no longer swallow that injustice.
 
A one state solution would mean the death of Israel. Which incidentally is the stated wish of Hamas.

So I think there's a 100% chance Israel will fight any battle they have to in order to keep that from happening. Though I think you're right that if nothing else changes, that may be the defacto result anyway.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom