ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Congressional hearings , donald trump , impeachment , Trump administration , Trump controversies

Reply
Old 12th October 2019, 11:17 AM   #721
WilliamSeger
Philosopher
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,018
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
There are some obvious solutions, if unifying the country is your goal.

Yep, Democrats are dividing the country by refusing to become Republicans, and the solution is obvious to Republicans.
WilliamSeger is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2019, 11:25 AM   #722
WilliamSeger
Philosopher
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,018
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
My position is that by 2009, many progressives had already long abandoned any pretense of benefit of the doubt for the entire set of conservatives, including the family values subset. If I had to guess, I'd say the family values crowd was among the first subsets that progressives crossed off their list, probably at least another decade before that. I doubt very much that if you went back ten years on this forum, and looked at SG's body of work from that period, you'd find any charitable mention of conservatives, let alone "family values" conservatives.

This "I still had some hope in 2009" crap is only plausible if you're sixteen years old and still feel like politics started about the same time you noticed it.

You come up with some of the weirdest rationalizations. In 2009, and indeed decades before, progressives were "whining" about climate change. Now, by your logic apparently, their current concerns about pulling out of the Paris Agreement and rolling back carbon emissions regulations can be dismissed because it's nothing new.
WilliamSeger is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2019, 11:28 AM   #723
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 22,399
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
My position is that by 2009, many progressives had already long abandoned any pretense of benefit of the doubt for the entire set of conservatives, including the family values subset. If I had to guess, I'd say the family values crowd was among the first subsets that progressives crossed off their list, probably at least another decade before that. I doubt very much that if you went back ten years on this forum, and looked at SG's body of work from that period, you'd find any charitable mention of conservatives, let alone "family values" conservatives.

This "I still had some hope in 2009" crap is only plausible if you're sixteen years old and still feel like politics started about the same time you noticed it.
I don't know what all that means. It's the so called fundy Christians that walked away from the Democratic party not the other way around. Their idea of politics was based on biblical values. Now if you think you can square Donald Trump with biblical values, I want to see that dance.
__________________
Try
Science, not superstition.
Reason, not revelation.
Education, not epiphanies
Intellect, not ignorance.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2019, 11:30 AM   #724
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 22,399
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
There are some obvious solutions, if unifying the country is your goal.
What is it? Sticking our nose in the crack of Trump's ass and smelling the perfume?
__________________
Try
Science, not superstition.
Reason, not revelation.
Education, not epiphanies
Intellect, not ignorance.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2019, 11:34 AM   #725
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 38,298
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
Yep, Democrats are dividing the country by refusing to become Republicans, and the solution is obvious to Republicans.
I was actually thinking more about being more tolerant and civil, and not just trying to invalidate or dismiss everything you disagree with. Progressives converting to conservatives didn't strike me as obvious, practical, or necessary. I'm sorry you can only see it in those terms. I hope you find a different viewpoint.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2019, 11:40 AM   #726
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 22,399
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I was actually thinking more about being more tolerant and civil, and not just trying to invalidate or dismiss everything you disagree with. Progressives converting to conservatives didn't strike me as obvious, practical, or necessary. I'm sorry you can only see it in those terms. I hope you find a different viewpoint.
Really? You think being civil, tolerant and not dismissing everything you disagree with is the solution?

Then WTF is the idea behind supporting Donald Trump?
__________________
Try
Science, not superstition.
Reason, not revelation.
Education, not epiphanies
Intellect, not ignorance.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2019, 11:59 AM   #727
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 12,229
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I was actually thinking more about being more tolerant and civil, and not just trying to invalidate or dismiss everything you disagree with.
Yes, it certainly wouldn’t do to be dismissive of what someone else thinks or feels:
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
On the other hand, I can think of plenty of problems that only exist in people's heads, or are serious problems only in people's heads.
Thanks for showing us the way.

Last edited by johnny karate; 12th October 2019 at 12:01 PM.
johnny karate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2019, 12:34 PM   #728
WilliamSeger
Philosopher
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,018
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I was actually thinking more about being more tolerant and civil, and not just trying to invalidate or dismiss everything you disagree with.

Yeah, that's how "conservatives" won their current power, huh -- all that uniting the country with tolerance and civility from right-wing radio, Fox News, websites and email chains. No, that's not intended as a whataboutism. I'll freely admit I've lost a considerable amount of tolerance and civility along the way myself, and in fact I agree with you about what it would take to restore some semblance of civility to our political discourse. But progressives already brought a knife to a gun fight, so I'm not entertaining the "obvious solution" of putting down the knife, thanks.

As for "just trying to invalidate or dismiss everything you disagree with", I certainly have been attempting to make a better substantiation for my opinions than that, but I'll try to be clearer in the future.
WilliamSeger is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2019, 12:41 PM   #729
The Norseman
Meandering fecklessly
 
The Norseman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,310
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
This is the problem with comparing the various impeachments. They are all very different and have very little in common.

That said, when the wall breaks in Donnies's stonewall, the information is likely to come flooding through. The flood for Nixon came fast as the result of the Supreme Court ruling that ordered the release of the White House tapes. Nixon was toast because it proved Nixon and the White House had been lying about it all.
This is a little odd... you first start by saying that it's not a good idea to compare impeachments then you go on saying that you think will happen... based on a previous impeachment?
__________________
A government is a body of people usually - notably - ungoverned.
-Shepard Book
The Norseman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2019, 01:05 PM   #730
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 11,925
Originally Posted by The Norseman View Post
This is a little odd... you first start by saying that it's not a good idea to compare impeachments then you go on saying that you think will happen... based on a previous impeachment?
The first paragraph was an acknowledgment that the second paragraph may have a weakness, though he thinks not. Hence "that said".
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2019, 01:23 PM   #731
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 76,046
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Do those idiots not know that impeachment is laid out in the Constitution?
The target audience is Trump's followers, not necessarily who the letter is addressed to.

Edited to add, on second thought, it's likely Trump is the target market, the result of Trump's lawyers trying to appease him. A temper tantrum is a good description.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 12th October 2019 at 01:30 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2019, 01:28 PM   #732
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 22,399
Originally Posted by The Norseman View Post
This is a little odd... you first start by saying that it's not a good idea to compare impeachments then you go on saying that you think will happen... based on a previous impeachment?

Yea, you're right, I did.

I had grown tired of people using the example of Clinton's impeachment when discussing Trump. Trump is very different from Clinton's or Johnson's impeachments. The aspect of the Nixon comparison which "might" be fair is related to how it progressed.

Everyone knew precisely what the Clinton impeachment was about for years. No big bombshells dropped. The general public never really cared. I don't see the electorate having a backlash against the Democrats like what happened to the GOP over their impeachment of Clinton.

Nixon OTOH like Trump tried to stonewall the investigation. And that worked......until it didn't. And public and political support while a little diminished held for about a year.
And then a flood of damaging evidence became public and support for Nixon disappeared in about 2 weeks, if that.
__________________
Try
Science, not superstition.
Reason, not revelation.
Education, not epiphanies
Intellect, not ignorance.
.

Last edited by acbytesla; 12th October 2019 at 01:30 PM.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2019, 01:38 PM   #733
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,884
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
My position is that by 2009, many progressives had already long abandoned any pretense of benefit of the doubt for the entire set of conservatives, including the family values subset. If I had to guess, I'd say the family values crowd was among the first subsets that progressives crossed off their list, probably at least another decade before that. I doubt very much that if you went back ten years on this forum, and looked at SG's body of work from that period, you'd find any charitable mention of conservatives, let alone "family values" conservatives.

This "I still had some hope in 2009" crap is only plausible if you're sixteen years old and still feel like politics started about the same time you noticed it.
The "Family Values Crowd" is/was mostly comprised of people who are into stuff like this: https://www.focusonthefamily.com/parenting/ Their churches have "family bookstores" with books on Christian parenting which are sold alongside devotionals and cutsie fancy bookmarks for bibles. A lot of them are very "legit" in their convictions.

Republican insiders/elites/operatives have been shamelessly and cynically playing these folks for decades, and progressives knew THAT by the early or mid 2000's. Numerous books on the history of how evangelicals were "tapped" as a voting block had been written by then, and the rumors from republican staffers in Washington about what a con it was were dripping/flooding out.

What Trump proved was just that among a large sub-set of the supposed family values voters, republican brand loyalty was orders of magnitude more important than any sort of traditional family values. These are part of the Trump base who cheer at his rallies. They're just shameless hypocrites. We always suspected there were a lot of them, but but we didn't know there were so many, or that it was so extreme.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2019, 01:39 PM   #734
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 76,046
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
My position is that by 2009, many progressives had already long abandoned any pretense of benefit of the doubt for the entire set of conservatives, including the family values subset. If I had to guess, I'd say the family values crowd was among the first subsets that progressives crossed off their list, probably at least another decade before that. I doubt very much that if you went back ten years on this forum, and looked at SG's body of work from that period, you'd find any charitable mention of conservatives, let alone "family values" conservatives.

This "I still had some hope in 2009" crap is only plausible if you're sixteen years old and still feel like politics started about the same time you noticed it.
Dude, I was talking about the Family Values crowd because they are holding their annual Values Voter's Summit this week.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2019, 01:41 PM   #735
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 76,046
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I was actually thinking more about being more tolerant and civil, and not just trying to invalidate or dismiss everything you disagree with. ...
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2019, 02:46 PM   #736
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
 
a_unique_person's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 41,045
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
I think you're wrong. But I do see why you came to that conclusion.
If they suddenly decide to dump him it won't be for reasons of ethics, it will be because he is no longer a useful idiot but a massive liability.
__________________
Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes
a_unique_person is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2019, 03:31 PM   #737
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 22,399
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
If they suddenly decide to dump him it won't be for reasons of ethics, it will be because he is no longer a useful idiot but a massive liability.
Yes, you're right. But that was the case with Nixon too. At least partially so. When the public support cratered on Nixon so did his support in the Republican party.
__________________
Try
Science, not superstition.
Reason, not revelation.
Education, not epiphanies
Intellect, not ignorance.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2019, 07:31 PM   #738
The Norseman
Meandering fecklessly
 
The Norseman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,310
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Yea, you're right, I did.

I had grown tired of people using the example of Clinton's impeachment when discussing Trump. Trump is very different from Clinton's or Johnson's impeachments. The aspect of the Nixon comparison which "might" be fair is related to how it progressed.

Everyone knew precisely what the Clinton impeachment was about for years. No big bombshells dropped. The general public never really cared. I don't see the electorate having a backlash against the Democrats like what happened to the GOP over their impeachment of Clinton.

Nixon OTOH like Trump tried to stonewall the investigation. And that worked......until it didn't. And public and political support while a little diminished held for about a year.
And then a flood of damaging evidence became public and support for Nixon disappeared in about 2 weeks, if that.
Okay, thanks for taking time to explain more thoroughly. If it matters, I tend to agree with what you're saying here.
__________________
A government is a body of people usually - notably - ungoverned.
-Shepard Book
The Norseman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th October 2019, 11:44 PM   #739
WilliamSeger
Philosopher
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,018
It's interesting that Trump's approval ratings seem to be hanging at about 42% even as the impeachment sentiment has gone up sharply. But unfortunately for the Party of Trump, it appears to me that Trump's approval/disapproval ratings, his impeach/don't impeach polls, and his Trump vs. any Democrat election forecasts are all converging at 10 points or more underwater.

Last edited by WilliamSeger; 12th October 2019 at 11:45 PM.
WilliamSeger is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2019, 02:11 AM   #740
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 25,569
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
The target audience is Trump's followers, not necessarily who the letter is addressed to.

Edited to add, on second thought, it's likely Trump is the target market, the result of Trump's lawyers trying to appease him. A temper tantrum is a good description.
People noted that much of the language sounds like Trump, and then a report came out (from the usual anonymous insiders) saying that Trump basically dictated it.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2019, 06:18 AM   #741
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,718
When I hear these calls for "civility" a picture forms in my head.

I'm having a lovely picnic in the park with my friends when suddenly a 1920's silent movie villain shows up, throws our picnic basket over a cliff and ties my friends to the train tracks.

When I say "What the **** are you doing?" a bunch of people with the villain's face on their t-shirts show up to say "That language really isn't called for".
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON

Last edited by Cavemonster; 13th October 2019 at 07:31 AM.
Cavemonster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2019, 07:07 AM   #742
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA Home to the Deep State.
Posts: 18,816
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I was actually thinking more about being more tolerant and civil, and not just trying to invalidate or dismiss everything you disagree with. Progressives converting to conservatives didn't strike me as obvious, practical, or necessary. I'm sorry you can only see it in those terms. I hope you find a different viewpoint.
Tolerance and civility have no place in confronting treason.
__________________
A MAGA hat = a Swastika arm band.
Craig4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2019, 10:24 AM   #743
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 85,037
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Show me anywhere in the constitution that shows it should be applied to Trump! I think you will find it never even mentions Trump once!
Check and mate.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th October 2019, 11:08 AM   #744
shemp
a flimsy character...perfidious and despised
 
shemp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: People's Democratic Republic of Planet X
Posts: 31,740
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Show me anywhere in the constitution that shows it should be applied to Trump! I think you will find it never even mentions Trump once!
And neither does any other law! Trump and anyone else can do anything they want! I'm going on a crime spree!

BREAKING THE LAW! BREAKING THE LAW!

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
__________________
"Shemp, you are the one fixed point in an ever-changing universe." - Beady
"I don't want to live in a world without shemp." - Quarky
"Real name? Xavier Jorge Gladdius Horatio McShrimp. No wonder he goes by shemp." - wasapi
"...just as a magnet attracts iron filings, Trump shemp attracts, and is attracted to, louts." - George Will
shemp is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:34 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.