Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 364: Absolute Proof (Citation Needed)

(+) Yeah! (+)

Corrik7 posted...

So you don't think cops that do illegal things are doing something illegal? Like, Breonna was a sad outcome but acting like cops shouldn't shoot back against people shooting against them is a bit weird? I mean, I get feeling helpless. But, I would feel helpless against any intruder, regardless of their status.

Maybe the Cops wouldn't have been shot at if they didn't break down the door in the middle of the night without announcing their presence. Are you telling me conservatives wouldn't shoot at someone who broke down their door in the middle of the night? Isn't that like the #1 argument they have against gun control. "I need to protect my home from intruders." That's exactly what Breonna Taylor's boyfriend was doing. The police were intruders.

---

TheRock1525 posted...

I don't think it worked on Biden since he actually won and outperformed the Dems as a whole.

Look at where Trump increased his vote. Earners over 100k, and certain hispanic groups mainly in Florida (ie older hispanic voters, Cubans). It worked on the groups it was intended to work on. It just happened that, you know, Trump killed hundreds of thousands of people along with everyone else.

Also, I question how much it was Biden overperforming the Democrats and how much was Trump underperforming the Republicans for the second time in a row. Because the nationwide house results relative to the Presidential results to me suggest the latter.

---

Dancedreamer posted...

Maybe the Cops wouldn't have been shot at if they didn't break down the door in the middle of the night without announcing their presence. Are you telling me conservatives wouldn't shoot at someone who broke down their door in the middle of the night? Isn't that like the #1 argument they have against gun control. "I need to protect my home from intruders." That's exactly what Breonna Taylor's boyfriend was doing. The police were intruders.

I read half of this. And I will admit I am drunk. But, c'mon man. Cops shooting back against someone who shot one of them? C'mon. Yeah.... Maybe the circumstances were weird but they returned gunfire?

---

lmao

---

Corrik7 posted...

I read half of this. And I will admit I am drunk. But, c'mon man. Cops shooting back against someone who shot one of them? C'mon. Yeah.... Maybe the circumstances were weird but they returned gunfire?

The cops were legally justified to fire back at a gunman firing at them. The resident was legally justified to fire his legally-owned firearm at an unidentified intruder. Both sides were legally allowed to take the actions they took with regards to discharging their firearms. The police had a no-knock warrant, which was also legal. Everything was legal, and the end result was an innocent civilian being murdered in her bed with no consequences for anyone involved. That's the problem. The fact that everything involved in Breonna Taylor's murder was legal (and legal in favor of the cops who initiated the situation) is the reason why people want change and want the police to be able to be held accountable for the immense amount of power they are legally allowed to wield, regardless of how sloppy they wield it.

---

Dancedreamer posted...

Maybe the Cops wouldn't have been shot at if they didn't break down the door in the middle of the night without announcing their presence. Are you telling me conservatives wouldn't shoot at someone who broke down their door in the middle of the night? Isn't that like the #1 argument they have against gun control. "I need to protect my home from intruders." That's exactly what Breonna Taylor's boyfriend was doing. The police were intruders.

This doesn't change that the cops should have returned gunfire. As Inviso said, every side was pretty much justified the whole way around.

---

What if I told you that there are countries where cops don't have guns and people don't have guns, almost nobody is ever killed by the police, and crime rates are significantly lower than in the US?

---

Lightning Strikes posted...

Also, I question how much it was Biden overperforming the Democrats and how much was Trump underperforming the Republicans for the second time in a row. Because the nationwide house results relative to the Presidential results to me suggest the latter.

Votals say that both candidates brought in a large contingent of voters that would not otherwise vote. Trump likely had some "likely Republican voters" that would not vote for him, but he also brought in a large chunk of voters that voted straight R that otherwise would not have voted. It is very possible Republicans do not perform as well without Trump on the ballot(See: Georgia).

---

Lightning Strikes posted...

What if I told you that there are countries where cops don't have guns and people don't have guns, almost nobody is ever killed by the police, and crime rates are significantly lower than in the US?

Was that the situation here? I mean, I am pro limiting guns, but this doesn't seem like the situation so not much worth bringing up in regards to it.

---

red13n posted...

Votals say that both candidates brought in a large contingent of voters that would not otherwise vote. Trump likely had some "likely Republican voters" that would not vote for him, but he also brought in a large chunk of voters that voted straight R that otherwise would not have voted. It is very possible Republicans do not perform as well without Trump on the ballot(See: Georgia).

Yeah but isnt it just that Trumps turnout increase was a counter to Bidens, as a natural consequence of such a huge rise in turnout? All those get out the vote campaigns werent only being seen by one side.

Well never really know though. All we can really say for sure is that Trump seriously underperformed the Republicans in 2016, when there wasnt really a huge difference between Hillary and down-ballot democrats. By comparison 2020 was closer, but Trump still did worse than the Republicans on the whole - he still underperformed the party nationally more than any other candidate in the past 20 years. And of course, 2018 only happened because of Trump anyway. At the end of the day the Republicans are doing worse now than they were before Trump became President. He seems to have hurt more than he helped.

Corrik7 posted...

Was that the situation here? I mean, I am pro limiting guns, but this doesn't seem like the situation so not much worth bringing up in regards to it.

Its more that when you address those top level issues stuff like this doesnt happen.

---

https://twitter.com/repronwright/status/1357771651027521548?s=21

RIP to this guy

---

holy

---

He was on his deathbed while sending that.

I can ONLY assume it was an aid tweet and not actually him. It MUSY have been, right?

That's 3 R reps dead from Covid in 3 months.

---

https://twitter.com/frankthorp/status/1358823749861138434?s=19

---

Very unlikely this dude wrote any of his tweets


---

UshiromiyaEva posted...

That 3 R reps dead from Covid in 3 months.

I wonder at what point they stop and self-reflect.

You know whats moronic? Politicising a pandemic response.

That would be like politicising climate change!

---

https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1358821970607964176?s=21

Can it be flipped? Probably not yet
---

Jakyl25 posted...

https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1358821970607964176?s=21

Can it be flipped? Probably not yet

Suburban Texas in a special election. Seems laughable to me, sadly

https://twitter.com/JRosenblattTV/status/1358862786177204232?s=19

*looks at calender*

3 months to certify this result.

---

It's incredible how blatant the Republican policy is to keep Americans good and stupid. They aren't even trying to hide it anymore.

https://twitter.com/19thnews/status/1358845121341644800?s=19

---

What's the 1619 project

---

The project, which was first published in the New York Times Magazine in 2019 and for which its creator, Nikole Hannah-Jones, won the Pulitzer Prize for commentary, marked the 400th anniversary of the arrival of the first known enslaved Africans in the British colonies that became the United States. It includes audio, essays, poems, graphics and visual art pieces that reframe the legacy of slavery in contemporary American life, arguing that Black Americans are the foundation of U.S. democracy.
The Pulitzer Center, in partnership with the 1619 Project, has made available related lesson planning and says more than 4,000 educators from all 50 states have reported using its resources. While some historians have criticized parts of the project, the Times has stood behind it (a more recent editors note further defending the project acknowledges that the newsrooms separate opinion section has published pieces against it), and other historians have praised the projects approach and rigor and treatment of the role of white supremacy in U.S. history.

---

"arguing that Black Americans are the foundation of U.S. democracy."

= /

I don't know what the project entails but that is obviously a loaded and what would be a controversial take. I mean, that doesn't say that African Americans were a Pillar upon which US Democracy was founded or played an integral part or so on. That's definitely. Interesting if that is what the project intends to push to K-12 students. I won't say it's not worthy, but Idk... I can see some controversy if that quoted part is really the intent of its inclusion.


---

Republicans want education to be job training and to teach you to obey authority and love your country unquestionably. They are afraid if people get a proper liberal arts education, you might learn to critically think. I think most of them would be just fine with our history textbooks being completely fictional if it made their children love America.

Corrik7 posted...

"arguing that Black Americans are the foundation of U.S. democracy."

= /

I don't know what the project entails but that is obviously a loaded and what would be a controversial take. I mean, that doesn't say that African Americans were a Pillar upon which US Democracy was founded or played an integral part or so on. That's definitely. Interesting if that is what the project intends to push to K-12 students. I won't say it's not worthy, but Idk... I can see some controversy if that quoted part is really the intent of its inclusion.

Americas foundation was literally built on the backs of African slaves, so tl;dr yeah youre the perfect mark for the shit Republicans want to pull

---

oh my god this quote from a WaPo story about the Biden administration's actions on ICE: https://twitter.com/charliearchy/status/1358484847027650560

"'They've abolished ICE without abolishing ICE,' said one distraught official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because that person was not authorized to speak to the media."

i think it's the "distraught" that does it for me

---

I hope every member if ICE is distraught for a long time to come.

---

xp1337 posted...

'They've abolished ICE without abolishing ICE,'

Damn, might as well finish the job!

---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Americas foundation was literally built on the backs of African slaves, so tl;dr yeah youre the perfect mark for the shit Republicans want to pull

That's a stretch imo. It also has very little to do with what the claim even was. That it was the foundation of American Democracy.

---

Lightning Strikes posted...

Also, I question how much it was Biden overperforming the Democrats and how much was Trump underperforming the Republicans for the second time in a row.

Considering Trump is by far the most popular Republican, I doubt it was "Trump underperformed Republicans."

---

https://www.mediamatters.org/joe-biden/after-years-shrugging-trumps-lack-interest-working-democrats-press-suddenly-cares-about

Just a reminder that the so-called "liberal media" is hot garbage and I laugh every time I hear "the Dems control the media!" from conservatives.

---

TheRock1525 posted...

https://www.mediamatters.org/joe-biden/after-years-shrugging-trumps-lack-interest-working-democrats-press-suddenly-cares-about

Just a reminder that the so-called "liberal media" is hot garbage and I laugh every time I hear "the Dems control the media!" from conservatives.

Trump only cares about Trump and the Media only cares about the Media (i.e. their ratings).

As a country, we deserve better than a press that adjusts its standards based on which party is in office or out of concern for whether or not it appears to favor one side or the other. We deserve honesty and consistency. To wildly swing from caring to not caring about bipartisanship is to tell audiences that the news they consume is just entertainment, just part of a game playing in the background.

---

TheRock1525 posted...

Considering Trump is by far the most popular Republican, I doubt it was "Trump underperformed Republicans."

...I mean of course the Presidential candidate is going to be easily the most popular individual. Im not talking about individuals, Im talking about the party as a whole.

Though you should also consider that Trump got a lower percentage of the vote than Mitt Romney, twice.

---

Lightning Strikes posted...

...I mean of course the Presidential candidate is going to be easily the most popular individual.

Trump polled ridiculously well with Republicans, above and beyond most recent GOP figures. Even at his worst he was routinely polling in the 90% range.

Lightning Strikes posted...

Though you should also consider that Trump got a lower percentage of the vote than Mitt Romney, twice.

He got 14 million more votes than Romney. The fact alone that he led to a 25% increase in voter turnout for his party should give you an idea of how popular he was along conservatives.

---

TheRock1525 posted...

He got 14 million more votes than Romney. The fact alone that he led to a 25% increase in voter turnout for his party should give you an idea of how popular he was along conservatives.

Yes, and Biden had an even bigger increase in votes compared to Obama. Trump is more popular with conservatives than any other Republican, but the increased turnout for his opponents more than cancels that out among the general population.
---

Xeybozn posted...

Yes, and Biden had an even bigger increase in votes compared to Obama. Trump is more popular with conservatives than any other Republican, but the increased turnout for his opponents more than cancels that out among the general population.

Yeah, that's my point. His argument is that "actually, Trump is less popular than Republicans" even though we literally saw how taking Trump off the ballot changed election results in 2018 and the two runoffs. In years where Trump was on the ballot, general GOP overperformed polling. In elections that he wasn't, polling was generally dead-on (remember polling showed Ossoff and Warnock leading heading into the runoffs).

Remember that the Dems had a 75% chance of taking the senate heading into 2020 and they didn't, and needed two runoffs just for a tie, and that Trump himself outperformed in potential flip opportunities (Florida) and even kept things close in states Biden needed to win to win the election (Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin).

So yeah, I don't buy the idea that GOP candidates are stronger than Trump.

---

So to phrase it a different way, you would say that Biden is more popular than Obama?

I have to disagree with this notion that increasing turnout necessitates increasing popularity. The only thing it shows is that there are Republicans who dont vote also. It was always going to be a high turnout election, thats something thats much bigger than Trump (and Biden). Hopefully it will continue for future elections and this was a realignment in terms of democratic participation, not just a referendum on Trump, but we wont know that for years. It is far too soon to start making proclamations based on Trump or Bidens vote totals as it could (and should) be the new normal.

But regardless theres a simple question: if Trump is more popular than the Republican Party, why did they get a significantly greater percentage of the vote than he did, twice? It wasnt like that for his predecessors. Why did Trump do worse than Republicans twice?

Also, 2018 and Georgia were because of Trump!

---

Lightning Strikes posted...

So to phrase it a different way, you would say that Biden is more popular than Obama?

You would have to account for population size changes.

But, while you loosely can correlate popularity to vote totals, there are other reasons to vote for someone besides liking them too. There is likely a large contigent that loathed Trump so voted for Biden as well.

---

Lightning Strikes posted...

Also, 2018 and Georgia were because of Trump!

Trump was off the ballot in 2018 and Georgia and the Democrat perform to expectations. Trump was on the ballot in 2016 and 2020 and Democrats performed below expectations. Why do you think that is?

---

TheRock1525 posted...

Trump was off the ballot in 2018 and Georgia and the Democrat perform to expectations. Trump was on the ballot in 2016 and 2020 and Democrats performed below expectations. Why do you think that is?

Trump being in office increases turnout for voters who don't like him, but Trump has to be on the ballot himself to increase turnout among his supporters? It's not that crazy, is it?
---

Xeybozn posted...

Trump being in office increases turnout for voters who don't like him, but Trump has to be on the ballot himself to increase turnout among his supporters? It's not that crazy, is it?

Once again, this is literally my point. Trump did more to help down-ballot races than hurt them. It's why Iowa was a possible flip for Dems, but Trump's over performance in Iowa (winning by almost 9%) helped Ernst gain a comfortable win, but still less than Trump (roughly 5-6%).

---

A lot of it has to do with his "support" at rallies being "Hey I'm told you should vote for this guy but also who cares so now let's talk about how great I am and what a victim I am!"
---

Yeah thinking of Trump's popularity as linear isn't the way to interpret things. Trump is extremely popular among Republicans and extremely unpopular among Democrats, which leads to an increase in votes among both party lines. He also helps out the rest of the GOP by being on the ticket - Republicans who show up to vote are slightly more likely to vote against Trump than Democrats are to vote for him, but those same Republicans will still vote down ticket GOP for everything else.

---

Thought the House managers did a good job. Trump's lawyer is rambling, misstating facts (Athens did not have a Senate), and I'm not sure what his point is.

---

He's saying we need to protect free speech, but uh..... that's not what Trump is charged with.

---

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1359142126995591176?s=09

---

This Trump lawyer sucks. I'm curious if he is normally this bad or if it's just because Trump is forcing him to argue the indefensible.

Edit: There he goes again. There was no classical Greek Republic. Greece was not unified back then. So there is no way the Greek Republic could have collapsed because they did something like impeaching their leader.

---

I mean....everyone else quit. Probably had to take what he can get, and the only people that would defend him are showman.


---

This next Trump lawyer is better, he's coherent and what he's saying is correct and makes sense. But, all he's saying is that the impeachment trial needs to be fair and Trump deserves due process. I don't think anyone disagreed with that.

Oh, now I see where he's going with this. He argues Trump was entitled to all the due process of a full trial in the House. That's not how it works. Defendants are not entitled to defend themselves before a grand jury. That's what the trial is for....

---

Senate votes 56-44 that it is constitutional to hold an impeachment trial of someone who is no longer in office.

6 Rs joined: Romney, Murkowski, Sasse, Collins, Toomey, and Cassidy. Cassidy is a newcomer to the 55-45 vote they held on this very same question two weeks ago when Rand Paul objected it was unconstitutional. McConnell voted it was unconstitutional after his last act as Majority Leader was to keep from reconvening the Senate to hold the trial while he was still in office.

The actual trial will proceed starting tomorrow.

But we got some very serious jurors out there /s: https://twitter.com/jameshohmann/status/1359248783348035587

When the House impeachment managers showed their video of Trump inciting the insurrection - y'know the very charge leveled against him - Paul, Scott, Cotton, and Rubio all just looked down at their papers (Paul doodling on his) and not the video. And those are just the ones the reporter noticed.

---