US Politics

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.
Sure he voted for a shitty human being and party/administration determined to make life worse
for as many people in the name of $$$, by whatever means, up to and including possible treason. But a comedian posted a picture, and that is obviously much worse than blatant racism, taking away healthcare from millions, or dismantling environmental protections.

I mean, guys. This is offensive. It was funny when that one comedian told that lady to get raped, because comedians make jokes by offending people and that's how comedy works. But this is on the other side of the line cos um. librul. snowflake. u retards lost. Or something.

Trump supporters wanted to live in an era where we could get rid of "PC culture", and people could be able to "tell it like it is" and be as honest and blunt and offensive as they wanted to be. That's why they supported him.

And yet they're the first to get upset whenever somebody mocks them or Trump. Gotta love the irony.

As for that photo, obviously I get where the visual in and of itself would be upsetting, but is that meant to be a (joke) threat against him specifically, or is she trying to say something else with that image about how damaging he is to the nation/world, or what?
 
Trump supporters wanted to live in an era where we could get rid of "PC culture", and people could be able to "tell it like it is" and be as honest and blunt and offensive as they wanted to be. That's why they supported him.



And yet they're the first to get upset whenever somebody mocks them or Trump. Gotta love the irony.



As for that photo, obviously I get where the visual in and of itself would be upsetting, but is that meant to be a (joke) threat against him specifically, or is she trying to say something else with that image about how damaging he is to the nation/world, or what?


That's just it, the people who champion their "right" (because freedom of speech! murica!) to be giant dicks always tend to get really upset and offended if anyone gives it back to them, don't they.

Picture is stupid. I don't particularly find it funny, and as a rule I tend to roll my eyes and yawn at the attention-whoring nature of a picture when people do intentionally outrageous things to rally their side by offending the other. But on a scale of things I hate more, the first point irritates me a lot more than a picture.
 
According to the AP, Trump urged Trudeau and others to call him on his mobile phone, rather than using the secure landline.
He could as well have just offered to pass around transcripts to foreign intelligence agencies.
 
Can you believe this morons got the nuclear launch codes?! Sleep well folks!
 
this whole thing is like a reality tv show, live from the White House :crack:

and the whole world is watching and trolling him - did you see the viral piccie of the Scandinavian prime ministers with the football/orb? :lol:
 
also, he's pulling out of the Paris agreement, so we really are all going to die.

yeah, this kind of illustrates what's frustrating about trump in a nutshell.

he's perhaps the most dangerous man on the planet ( considering the tools at his disposal and the intellect that exists between his ears), yet it's bigger news this morning that he completely melted his words in a tweet, rather than the fact that he's about to pull the US out of the Paris agreement.

you can never pin him down on anything because he's speaking bollocks all the fucking time.
 
well, to be fair, you and I most likely won't see the effects. So our deaths will be related to something else.

But the generations after us? They've got their work cut out.

Millennials are gonna have to do more than just travel the world and brag about being the generation that defeated racism.....

In all seriousness, him pulling out of this treaty may be what really sets our species back forever.
 
In all seriousness, him pulling out of this treaty may be what really sets our species back forever.

the only way this won't be true, is if the paris agreement wasn't good enough/strict enough to begin with.

"if the US doesn't have to sign up for this, then why should we hurt our own economy?" will be the rallying cry of right wing politicians in all 190+ countries who've signed up, and this will likely result in more defections.
 
I don't know if it truly does enough, but it was a good start. I looked at it as a framework, and having 99% of the countries included was necessary.

Now with USA pulling out, I do fear what you allude to, will other countries say fuck it?? Or maybe these countries use this moment as a way to show that they are better than us.
 
I don't know if it truly does enough, but it was a good start. I looked at it as a framework, and having 99% of the countries included was necessary.

Now with USA pulling out, I do fear what you allude to, will other countries say fuck it?? Or maybe these countries use this moment as a way to show that they are better than us.

i agree on all counts. i genuinely believe there is a lot of money to be made from green initiatives/technology, which completely escapes trump, bannon, et al.

i mean, rex tillerson, the oil magnate in his own right, is alleged to be persuading trump to stay in the deal. oil companies from a-z acknowledge climate change is real, how the fuck can't this administration?
 
Right, and those companies know their oil resource is limited. There's nothing stopping them, and I'm sure they are pursuing greener technologies.

That is where the investment lies, and these companies would be stupid to just double down on coal.

The GOP want the end of the world. I feel the angle is more religious than anything else. The end of the world, destruction, chaos has to happen in order for JC to return.

The GOP are also incredibly stupid too. So there is that. Maybe that's the bigger angle.

For Trump, this is about fucking over Obama anyway possible. He doesn't care either way about the GOP reasoning.
 
So to sum up:

"I don't want to be here, so fuck you, I'm taking everyone out with me when I covfefe."
 
I think it might be partly true, that in some countries politicians are going to rethink. Australia, of all places, has a government that seems to be taking after Trump and the GOP.
The general trend, however, is the opposite. In many countries, if not most, it is now accepted by both sides, with dissenting voices only from the fringe (like AFD here in Germany), that climate change is real, and that the goals of the Paris Agreement are the least each country can do to try and alleviate the consequences.
Countries like China and India also have real reason to push for it. One, China especially has heavily invested in clean energies over the past couple years. And the other point is, due to current pollution levels, many cities are forced to halt production for certain industries for two months in order for the air to clean.
For example, I recently bought something through a kickstarter campaign and the manufacturer said during the Chinese company that produced the glass component had to delay production by two months because they were just scheduled to shut down their factories.
This, of course, poses a great economic cost, which in turn means it becomes cheaper to move to clean energy.
That's why reactions to the US announcement are also largely mixed, with many experts saying it's of course not good news, but it doesn't necessarily mean the end of anything. In the end, it seems, the only country losing are the US, if the rest of the world is going to go through with pursuing the goals of the Paris Agreement (which, I think, is the bigger issue anyway, the US in or out).
 
And if the EU and China see Trump's nonsense as a chance to forge ahead into global leadership roles on this, contrasting themselves to Trump, well that's a positive I guess
 
Because of Republican opposition, the US never ratified the Kyoto Protocol (Canada withdrew). Still, it's been ratified by almost all nations and has largely been a success.
The truth is, as has been pointed out earlier, more money is to be made by investing in green economies than to continue to exploit fossil fuels and other resources.
 
The thing that baffles me is that people who oppose climate change for whatever reason all have families. This will have no impact on their lives, but it will affect their children, grandchildren and so on. Don't they care about the quality of life future generations of their families will have? It's mind boggling.
 
The thing that baffles me is that people who oppose climate change for whatever reason all have families. This will have no impact on their lives, but it will affect their children, grandchildren and so on. Don't they care about the quality of life future generations of their families will have? It's mind boggling.

Politics is a team sport and climate change runs contrary to their team's dogma. I really think it's as simple as that. They aren't concerned because they've been told it's just the natural climate cycle.
 
The thing that baffles me is that people who oppose climate change for whatever reason all have families. This will have no impact on their lives, but it will affect their children, grandchildren and so on. Don't they care about the quality of life future generations of their families will have? It's mind boggling.
Much the same as them trying to defend Russia taking over the US government.
 
The thing that baffles me is that people who oppose climate change for whatever reason all have families. This will have no impact on their lives, but it will affect their children, grandchildren and so on. Don't they care about the quality of life future generations of their families will have? It's mind boggling.

It comes down to trust, and our society really lacks it when it comes to science and government. We've had one party shitting all over science findings, how government is against the people, etc etc

And here we are. Now, does everything that comes from a scientist or government finding have to be considered 100% the truth? No. But until a method is created that works better than our scientific method, it's the best we've got.

So people hear about these elitist, highly educated (i.e. LIBERAL) science reports about doom and gloom decades from now, and most people cannot fathom it. Will it be as disastrous as al Gore says it will be? Or will it maybe make the climate better???

I think that's where the hang up is for most people with children deny it, because there may be a chance it's wrong.

Why it's a chance worth taking? I have no fucking clue
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom