The Lounge is rated Safe For Work. If you're about to post something inappropriate for a shared office environment, then don't post it. No ads, no abuse, and no programming questions. Trolling, (political, climate, religious or whatever) will result in your account being removed.
I do not think I broke the rules of the Site.
Speaking the Truth should never be breaking the rules anywhere. That is called Freedom of Expression.
That Right is enshrined in your constitution.
If that breaks the rules, the rules are wrong.
His decisions have been to based solely on what would get him reelected. Not uncommon amongst politicians from either party. Arguably, pleasing their constituency is their job.
What stands out with the primary subject in this case is the way things are spouted out and 'walked back' so continiously that it's become a ridiculous new normal. For those of you who have read "1984", the concept of Double Think has, in fact, become a reality among his supporters. Questioning folly is answered with an insult to the questioner. If reality makes "him" look bad than it's labeled "Fake News" and can thus be dismissed.
The most horrific and sad thing is that, for his supporters, it works. A magic reset button they want pushed for self validation. Still - one can't give him all the blame, even at the government level (2016 elections are OVER): it is the "enablers" in the congress that must now accept the blame - willing to throw the country they claim to love under that proverbial bus for political gains - something enshrined in their behavior since after the 2008 elections.
What's going on now, however, is at such an astounding level that I'd never believe it as even plausible for a movie script.
Remember - if you dare - that "he" even encouraged violent attacks on those who disagreed with him at his per-election rallies. If I recall, even offering to cover any legal expenses they incur. That should disturb anyone.
Sometimes, it's not the event nearly so much as the degree. Like a driver speeding: 40mph in a 30mph zone is not the same as 95mph in a 30mph zone.
We do not yet know what the situation will be like in November. In the worst case scenario, the chance of taking over is probably the greatest. But are we sure that the opponent really wants to take over and take responsibility for cleaning up the mess? If a new, far more intense wave of infection is in the process of building up, the economy is wrecked, and people are close to revolting, I could understand if the opponent rather stays low, and say: Those who let it loose, those who spent trillions on ensuring profits rather that health, let those take the job of getting the country back on its feet again!
I am certainly not saying that is is like that. I don't even think that it is probable. But I see it as possibility, at least in theory.
Trump's November opponent will not lay low. Both sides are power gluttons and think that many of their opponents are seriously misguided if not evil. (They're both right.) And the typical voter is an imbecile who thinks that government is all unicorns and rainbows, and that it can kiss anything and make it better. It's unlikely that Trump would be blamed for problems with the virus, but he could well be blamed for economic problems, whether the virus is an explanation or not. This is pretty much an historical fact when it comes to US elections, recent examples being Bush the First and Carter.
In the most recent economic fiasco, the 'other' part won the presidency and managed, despite a deliberate (and on the record!) plan by the opposition to make sure nothing gets done began the repair of the economy (successfully). The did get people back to work.
The party that has been (and continues) to put the Post Service out of business (so it can be privatized) and wanted (wants?) to do the same for Social Security - their followers are in no mood to think - they weren't before the election and haven't been since. Unfortunately, since their plan is always obstruction (and then blaming their opposition for it), it may be that the national recovery will be slowed - even halted - to attempt to curry political points.
And maybe violence. It's come from the head of state's mouth before. More specifically, he'll declare (Again !!!) that if he doesn't win it's election fraud. Put those two ideas together and we've a recipe for civil war. So much like a spoiled brat trying to make sure if he can't play then no one else can play.
All that's left - if he's given the chance - is for the military retake their oath so that instead of swearing to defend the US/Constitution against its enemies he'll have them take an oath to him. Now, from which ranting monster have we heard that before?
What everyone in Europe is more concerned with is, How could a country like America choose such clown as a president.
I live in Europe and that has never been a question I have asked.
Populations constantly vote for clowns as leaders, largely because clowns are often less dangerous than intellectuals when it comes to idealistic agendas. Most countries led by intellectual idealists usually end up in a very poor state.
Heck the clown archetype is even baked into one of sci-fi's best series of books in Isaac Asimov's Foundation series.
Clowns have their purpose.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
This is politics and it is no longer accepted here.
Not exactly, politics can be discussed in the lounge. It is this kind of lack of respect and trolling which is not allowed. And as politics discussions usually bring this kind of behaviour out and degenerates in such flame wars pretty fast... then it is better to be avoided.
For me is not the same.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.