Moderation Questions
The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic fa
Yeah, that would be one. The other is I didn't do it for ideological reasons.
The proposition of being able to beat on and kidnap brown people and do the same to white libs with absolute immunity from prosecution. They must be ecstatic getting paid to do something they would have done for free or even given up a left nut to do.
Not sure why white "law enforcement" folks want to beat up and/or kill brown people. Brown people are already doing a bang-up job (pardon the pun) of killing and beating up each other as it is.
It is posts like this that convince me that, despite the Christian preacher man of God routine , you appear to be a petty, horrible human being.
Not sure why white "law enforcement" folks want to beat up and/or kill brown people. Brown people are already doing a bang-up job (pardon the pun) of killing and beating up each other as it is.
yikes man
Not sure why white "law enforcement" folks want to beat up and/or kill brown people. Brown people are already doing a bang-up job (pardon the pun) of killing and beating up each other as it is.
Dude, the head of the Proud Boys is not white and he's in ICE (thanks to Trump's pardon of his 22-year prison sentence).
You seem to be misunderstanding what this iteration of ICE is. This is Trump's personal army (think J6 but an army of them that are organized as well has his best misfits from J6). None of this has to do with immigration. The goal is to stoke fear and intimidation for a specific purpose.
Trump has now "joked" twice that we shouldn't have elections and he's ramping up the violence so that he can deploy military in the streets and declare martial law.
After military against US citizens on city streets has been normalized, what do you think will happen when election time rolls around? Even in the best optimistic view of having a midterm and Trump getting impeached, he already has his army of J6tards on the streets.
Like... you didn't actually think he was having a $400 million ballroom enshrined in gold just for him to vacate a few months after it being completed?
Dude, the head of the Proud Boys is not white and he's in ICE (thanks to Trump's pardon of his 22-year prison sentence). You seem to be misunderstanding what this iteration of ICE is. This is Trump's personal army (think J6 but an army of them that are organized as well has his best misfits from J6). None of this has to do with immigration. The goal is to stoke fear and intimid
More or less agree. So what are the libs going to do? Gums are legal. Militias are legal. Or do you think Schumer and AOC are going to save you?
More or less agree. So what are the libs going to do? Gums are legal. Militias are legal. Or do you think Schumer and AOC are going to save you?
No, I think you and your gums are going to save me. Do your gums have teeth?
Will be hilarious if he has ICE all over blue states during the election to "ensure a fair election" and winds up losing because every red state voted blue.
It is posts like this that convince me that, despite the Christian preacher man of God routine , you appear to be a petty, horrible human being.
It's called answering snark with snark.
If I said anything factually incorrect, please let me know.
These ICE agents are horrible and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Dude, the head of the Proud Boys is not white and he's in ICE (thanks to Trump's pardon of his 22-year prison sentence). You seem to be misunderstanding what this iteration of ICE is. This is Trump's personal army (think J6 but an army of them that are organized as well has his best misfits from J6). None of this has to do with immigration. The goal is to stoke fear and intimid
I believe the majority of ICE agents are POC.
It's called answering snark with snark.
If I said anything factually incorrect, please let me know.
These ICE agents are horrible and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Snark, lmao. What in that pinhead of yours did you interpret as snark in my post?
This:
The proposition of being able to beat on and kidnap brown people and do the same to white libs with absolute immunity from prosecution. They must be ecstatic getting paid to do something they would have done for free or even given up a left nut to do.
On a side note, how do you know that my head is shaped much like a bowling pin? You been watching my chess stream on twitch?
This:
On a side note, how do you know that my head is shaped much like a bowling pin? You been watching my chess stream on twitch?
Once again, wtf was snarky in that post? Here's a challenge for you: Try to answer that without letting your racism shine through.
It's called answering snark with snark.
If I said anything factually incorrect, please let me know.
These ICE agents are horrible and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
I don’t think being factually correct or incorrect has any bearing on whether it was petty and reflects horribly on you. This was not an instance that you had to respond because of some moral adherence to the truth.
Once again, wtf was snarky in that post? Here's a challenge for you: Try to answer that without letting your racism shine through.
Not sure I can answer your question without my racism shining through. 😀
I'll try anyway:
I think the kind of folks who join law enforcement agencies like ICE are typically folks who like to exercise control and threaten people with violence. I don't think most really care about the ethnicity of the person they are exercising power over.
Don't know if it's still true, but at one time in the recent past a large majority of ICE agents were POC. These folks are typically equal-opportunity thugs imo whatever their ethnicity.
I don’t think being factually correct or incorrect has any bearing on whether it was petty and reflects horribly on you. This was not an instance that you had to respond because of some moral adherence to the truth.
OH NO!!! Somebody on an inconsequential anonymous politics forum thinks I'm a 'horrible person' because I'm a bit too snarky in a thread in which almost EVERYBODY is being snarky.
How will I sleep at night???
But seriously folks: I've made it clear what I think of these ICE thugs, so your pseudo-moralizing is kinda silly in my opinion. But if that's what you like to do, go for it!
Not sure I can answer your question without my racism shining through. 😀I'll try anyway:I think the kind of folks who join law enforcement agencies like ICE are typically folks who like to exercise control and threaten people with violence. I don't think most really care about the ethnicity of the person they are exercising power over. Don't know if it's still true, but at o
Do you realize that ICE will take anyone and the training is only 47 days? Care to hazard a guess why training has been changed to only 47 days?
The vetting is literally a joke. An no, you're thinking of CBP that is a tad over 50% that are POC and not ICE.
But seriously folks: I've made it clear what I think of these ICE thugs, so your pseudo-moralizing is kinda silly in my opinion. But if that's what you like to do, go for it!
Then why did you vote for it?
Do you realize that ICE will take anyone and the training is only 47 days? Care to hazard a guess why training has been changed to only 47 days?
The vetting is literally a joke. An no, you're thinking of CBP that is a tad over 50% that are POC and not ICE.
I stand corrected on the bolded. I confused ICE with CBP as indicated. Thanks for correcting me on that.
Because it wasn't until recently I learned how thuggish ICE agents are. I also didn't realize what a thug Trump was/is.
Forgetting for a second that this was all known during his first term, does this mean if you had the chance of going back in time and must vote for Harris or Trump while knowing what you know today, would you change your vote to Harris, or are you still standing behind your assertion that nuking Cuba is the only thing that would get you to vote Harris?
Forgetting for a second that this was all known during his first term, does this mean if you had the chance of going back in time and must vote for Harris or Trump while knowing what you know today, would you change your vote to Harris, or are you still standing behind your assertion that nuking Cuba is the only thing that would get you to vote Harris?
Trump nuking Cuba still my standard for voting Harris over Trump in your science fiction scenario.
That said, I see no value in me engaging contrary-to-fact hypotheticals like this any more. I'd be happy to engage RealityLand (TM pending) scenarios if you so desire.
Trump nuking Cuba still my standard for voting Harris over Trump in your science fiction scenario.
That said, I see no value in me engaging contrary-to-fact hypotheticals like this any more. I'd be happy to engage RealityLand (TM pending) scenarios if you so desire.
Not commenting on the ongoing discussion but what exactly is wrong with the question? If you had some kind of pseudo-bayesian evaluation in favor of Trump, is there anything wrong with applying an a posteriori update to your evaluation?
This could be in the form of “with the facts at the time I would vote for Trump, but knowing what his first year looks like I feel Kamala may have had a better first year and rest of presidency going forward”. Doesn’t seem to be anything particularly useless about such an evaluation.
More or less agree. So what are the libs going to do? Gums are legal. Militias are legal. Or do you think Schumer and AOC are going to save you?
Trump could announce a ban on gun sales to registered democrats to save lives and it would get bipartisan support.
No, I think you and your gums are going to save me. Do your gums have teeth?
Will be hilarious if he has ICE all over blue states during the election to "ensure a fair election" and winds up losing because every red state voted blue.
I think its more popcorn eating time right now in red states than people realize for the right wingers. If he starts sending the military into Texas and such then he's going to piss people off but these people aren't changing their votes unless either that happens or the economy completely crashes.
Trump nuking Cuba still my standard for voting Harris over Trump in your science fiction scenario.
That said, I see no value in me engaging contrary-to-fact hypotheticals like this any more. I'd be happy to engage RealityLand (TM pending) scenarios if you so desire.
That's because you're a chickenshit. You just said Trump and ICE are thugs, yet you're too chickenshit to say, "Yeah, but I'd still vote for Trump because they're not personally violating my rights" because you know it's a ridiculous position so now you want to dip out.
I think its more popcorn eating time right now in red states than people realize for the right wingers. If he starts sending the military into Texas and such then he's going to piss people off but these people aren't changing their votes unless either that happens or the economy completely crashes.
For sure. I'm just hoping that if voters see entire states having their rights stomped on (or ICE starts using guns instead of pepper spray) that enough of the other side wouldn't vote to continue it, (if even just out of self-preservation because they realize one day they'll be coming for them), but I realize that's just hopium.
Not commenting on the ongoing discussion but what exactly is wrong with the question? If you had some kind of pseudo-bayesian evaluation in favor of Trump, is there anything wrong with applying an a posteriori update to your evaluation?This could be in the form of “with the facts at the time I would vote for Trump, but knowing what his first year looks like I feel Kamala
The context of the question was that on voting day in 2024 I had full knowledge of what would happen under Trump up until today. Basically, I get a 'do-over', but I HAVE to vote for either Trump or Harris. (I wouldn't vote for either Harris or Trump if not voting at all was an option in the science fiction scenario proposed by LandOLakes.)
