Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 159: Just How God Made Us

(+) Yeah! (+)

I see my point is going over your heads because you can't detach the philosophical argument from the human element (ie, blind hatred toward Trump).

My point is calling someone a draft dodger, no matter who they are, cannot be an insult unless you apply it to everyone who has ever had a questionable deferment. Which Democrats do not do.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Ive always wanted a Purple Heart.

I thought that was what the Crestor and aspirin were for.
---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

I see my point is going over your heads because you can't detach the philosophical argument from the human element (ie, blind hatred toward Trump).

My point is calling someone a draft dodger, no matter who they are, cannot be an insult unless you apply it to everyone who has ever had a questionable deferment. Which Democrats do not do.

They're not insulting him for being a draft dodger, they're insulting him for being a chickenhawk
---

wait was sephyg the one who said that hypocrisy wasnt bad?

edit: maybe that was my uncle
---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

I see my point is going over your heads because you can't detach the philosophical argument from the human element (ie, blind hatred toward Trump).

My point is calling someone a draft dodger, no matter who they are, cannot be an insult unless you apply it to everyone who has ever had a questionable deferment. Which Democrats do not do.

They're insulting him as a draft dodger because after years of draft dodger being used as an insult by warhawk conservatives to claim their opponents are pussies, it only seems fair to do use it as such against a similar pussy on the conservative side. If you're gonna use it as an insult for years, don't get pissy when said insult is used against you.
---

I find it very consistent that liberals who voted for and supported Hillary Clinton are making fun of someone for being a draft dodger.
---

I don't get the Hillary Clinton-comparison.
---

Is this one of those anti-male sexism claims by saying "well women weren't even DRAFTED during Vietnam so Hillary is a draft dodger too!"?
---

HaRRicH posted...

I don't get the Hillary Clinton-comparison.

Hillary is a known draft dodger, obviously.

Also, and this is important to remember, Trump is the one who feels the need to insult POWs and gold star families. People who's children actually made the ultimate sacrifice. So maybe, just maybe, draft dodger becomes an insult for him because he brings it upon his fucking self.
---

Nah I'm saying that Hillary was a warhawk and that you guys are being actually consistent.
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

Nah I'm saying that Hillary was a warhawk and that you guys are being actually consistent.

That is...not even CLOSE to what you said.
---

Pretty sure Hillary wouldn't be consistently talking about how big her button is with a nuclear North Korea, but that's just me.
---

I was making a joke about how you guys are anti-war and anti-military but staunchly (militantly LOL) supported Hillary.

That's all.
---

I feel like the "Hillary is a warhawk" thing came as yet another bit of "both sides are the same" propaganda to make Trump seem more palatable (which, by the way, if you have to say "both sides are the same" to justify your candidate being negative...maybe you backed a shitty candidate). The woman is a diplomacy nerd. I think outright war would be the last thing she'd go for unless someone began actively making a show of aggression against us.
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

I was making a joke about how you guys are anti-war and anti-military but staunchly (militantly LOL) supported Hillary.

That's all.

Do you still think Trump was the more pacifist option?

(Also this is one reason I voted Stein)
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

I was making a joke about how you guys are anti-war and anti-military but staunchly (militantly LOL) supported Hillary.

uh tons of us never supported hillary.

maybe you'd have a better time in this topic if you stopped generalizing "us guys" all the time.
---

Are people "anti-military" or more just against not spending an idiotic amount of money on military that's unnecessary?

Not that it matters, because Trump isn't really pro-military himself.
---

Trump is far from a pacifist. And worse, he's a sleazy con artist businessman who's anti LGBT, and pro white supremacy.
---

Dark Young Link posted...

Are people "anti-military" or more just against not spending an idiotic amount of money on military that's unnecessary?

Not that it matters, because Trump isn't really pro-military himself.

Trump is absolutely pro-military for as long as hes in office now that they represent the size of his penis
---

Nah I don't feel like Trump is the better or more pacifist option, but I do feel like there's merit to the idea that at least he's on Twitter doing shit in the open that people can be like "LOL well that's stupid" as opposed to what I feel Hillary would be doing behind the scenes that none of us would know about to destabilize countries or force the hands of our allies.

Yes, I am saying she's a lot smarter than Trump lol
---

He's "pro military" in the sense of stroking his own ego. I'm talking about actually caring about the people in the military. I have my doubts that he does. Especially since he doesn't seem to mind about trying to goad NK into a war.... that he and his family wouldn't have to fight directly.
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

Nah I don't feel like Trump is the better or more pacifist option, but I do feel like there's merit to the idea that at least he's on Twitter doing shit in the open that people can be like "LOL well that's stupid" as opposed to what I feel Hillary would be doing behind the scenes that none of us would know about to destabilize countries or force the hands of our allies.

Yes, I am saying she's a lot smarter than Trump lol

Or she might be doing things behind the scenes to stabilize countries and help our allies. You're automatically painting a worst-case-scenario in a hypothetical to justify Trump support.
---

Inviso posted...

You're automatically painting a worst-case-scenario in a hypothetical to justify Trump support.

Never in my days have I seen a Republican do this so that they can pretend that their decisions are more reasonable.
---

People can be anti-war and still want somebody better for Commander In Chief.

Hillary was calling out Russia for interfering in our election through social media and hacking. Donald was calling for Hillary's emails they hacked to be leaked and defended Putin in practically every opportunity. There were even conversations about having Russia work with our cyber-security as a team, right after these attacks.

Hillary pressed for the timing of the strike that killed Osama bin Laden. Donald didn't understand what the nuclear triad was.

Hillary's had a lifetime of service that has largely been near the military service and the difficult decisions that come with that. Donald, even in his private life as a business owner, was still being resistant and scummy to veteran donations he'd claim to give until he was called out for them.

I got a lot of issues with Hillary including how she voted in times of war, but I trust she knows a ton more than Donald and it's not like Donald's proven to be any more of a pacifist (unless you mean being a muddy welcome mat for Putin to stomp and walk over). I don't want war, but I trust Hillary to say we need to fight more than Donald.
---

Inviso posted...

Or she might be doing things behind the scenes to stabilize countries and help our allies. You're automatically painting a worst-case-scenario in a hypothetical to justify Trump support.

I wasn't justifying anything, just making a hypothetical.

You're automatically painting a worst-case scenario in a hypothetical ABOUT MY REASONING for making a post
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

I was making a joke about how you guys are anti-war and anti-military but staunchly (militantly LOL) supported Hillary.

That's all.

Behold the issues of a two-party system.

You had to be for-Hillary in the general if you were militantly anti-Trump, however poor you consider her to be and are presumed to side with her on all issues. Yay, American politics!
---

Are you saying Twitter is better or worse for foreign relations? Particularly, Donald's use of Twitter?
---

I'd say I agree with about 75% of Hillary's policies and like 10% of Trump's so I was fine with making that decision.
---

HaRRicH posted...

Are you saying Twitter is better or worse for foreign relations? Particularly, Donald's use of Twitter?

Twitter is generally worse for everything.
---

Dark Young Link posted...

Are people "anti-military" or more just against not spending an idiotic amount of money on military that's unnecessary?

This is the part that bothers me.

I feel like it should be possible to simultaneously support the men and women that serve our country, and also say that we don't need to outspend the combined efforts of the next 8 countries combined.

Why can't we have the biggest and best military by merely a wide margin, instead of by an obscene margin?

We could cut our military spending in half (not saying we should!) and still spend the most in the world. So maybe when we have to figure out how to fund important social programs at home we can spend a little less on the military. And we should be able to broach the subject without being painted as ungrateful and unpatriotic.
---

See, there's also the fact that the US is #11 in military spending as a percentage of GDP (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, 2017) and #4 per capita.
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

I was making a joke about how you guys are anti-war and anti-military but staunchly (militantly LOL) supported Hillary.

That's all.

When was the last time a solidly anti-military candidate ran under a major party? Has it ever even happened?

We get wishy-washy anti-war guys sometimes but they still tend to support specific wars, and of course they support the military in general.
---

TheRock1525 posted...

I'd say I agree with about 75% of Hillary's policies and like 10% of Trump's so I was fine with making that decision.

Does that count instances where he has stated multiple, contradictory stances on the same issue? <_<
---

Jakyl25 posted...

TheRock1525 posted...

I'd say I agree with about 75% of Hillary's policies and like 10% of Trump's so I was fine with making that decision.

Does that count instances where he has stated multiple, contradictory stances on the same issue? <_<

If there's nothing firm about a stance then I basically wouldn't count that towards anything.
---

Also i see more alt-right people against the military than any group nowadays.

They're terrified of a coup against Trump from them.
---

TheRock1525 posted...

Also i see more alt-right people against the military than any group nowadays.

They're terrified of a coup against Trump from them.

For an interesting contrast (EDIT: not sure if contrast is the right word, but it colors the bigger picture in an interesting way):

10/23/2017
MILITARY TIMES - One in four troops sees white nationalism in the ranks

Nearly one in four troops polled say they have seen examples of white nationalism among their fellow service members, and troops rate it as a larger national security threat than Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, according to a new Military Times poll.

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2017/10/23/military-times-poll-one-in-four-troops-sees-white-nationalism-in-the-ranks/
---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

I feel like it should be possible to simultaneously support the men and women that serve our country, and also say that we don't need to outspend the combined efforts of the next 8 countries combined.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAfsgM_i8O4
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

I was making a joke about how you guys are anti-war and anti-military but staunchly (militantly LOL) supported Hillary.

That's all.

Good jokes are at least somewhat rooted in reality.
---

HaRRicH posted...

TheRock1525 posted...

Also i see more alt-right people against the military than any group nowadays.

They're terrified of a coup against Trump from them.

For an interesting contrast (EDIT: not sure if contrast is the right word, but it colors the bigger picture in an interesting way):

10/23/2017
MILITARY TIMES - One in four troops sees white nationalism in the ranks

Nearly one in four troops polled say they have seen examples of white nationalism among their fellow service members, and troops rate it as a larger national security threat than Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, according to a new Military Times poll.

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2017/10/23/military-times-poll-one-in-four-troops-sees-white-nationalism-in-the-ranks/

Terrifying
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

I was making a joke about how you guys are anti-war and anti-military but staunchly (militantly LOL) supported Hillary.

That's all.

Excuse you, I'm anti-war and reluctantly supported Hillary.
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

I was making a joke about how you guys are anti-war and anti-military but staunchly (militantly LOL) supported Hillary.

Some of us are Anti-War, but realize that both candidates were pro-war, and there's more important issues. Like LGBT rights, public education, and healthcare.
---

Just because I haven't looked at this in awhile:

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/

True 22 (4%)
Mostly True 58 (12%)
Half True 72 (15%)
Mostly False 105 (21%)
False 164 (33%)
Pants on Fire 74 (15%)

Out of 495 reviewed statements from Donald, 69% are Mostly False or worse. 16% are Mostly True or better, compared to 15% that's strictly Pants On Fire.

With respect to the potential bias that Politico can pick and choose what they review, it's still unbelievable Donald is trusted.
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

I was making a joke about how you guys are anti-war and anti-military but staunchly (militantly LOL) supported Hillary.

That's all.

Hillary was a shitty candidate.

Trump was worse.

This isn't complicated.
---

metroid composite posted...

ExThaNemesis posted...

I was making a joke about how you guys are anti-war and anti-military but staunchly (militantly LOL) supported Hillary.

That's all.

Hillary was a shitty candidate.

Trump was worse.

This isn't complicated.

But the emails
---

metroid composite posted...

Hillary was a shitty candidate.

huh? i thought you liked hillary?
---

Damn, Ben. I thought you only made Trump look cool in your drawings.
---

I found this story amusing and horrifying:
https://www.axios.com/the-decline-and-fall-of-wilbur-ross-1516568275-c795e9b4-f84f-4080-a129-da23cb91ed2a.html

Apparently Commerce Sec. Ross falls asleep in meetings pretty consistently. Best line from a staffer: "Wilbur is good until about 11 a.m."
---

PA congressional maps were ruled to be unconsitutional and have to be redrawn by next month.
---

The Mana Sword posted...

Also the govt isn't shut down anymore so there's that.

The bill passing through the Senate funds CHIP for 6 years and the government for 3 weeks. Far-left portions of the media are portraying this as Democrats surrendering Dreamers but honestly it looks like a pretty shrewd move to me - they have 3 weeks in which to force an immigration bill past the Freedom Caucus or else we're right back at a shutdown, this time with the moral high ground of "McConnell promised we would get an immigration bill moving and he lied".
---

Yeah, I mean I'm not exactly thrilled about how this all went down, but given the circumstances, I think it puts Dems in a better position in 3 weeks, because Rs can't hold CHIP hostage anymore.
---