Jump to content

U.S. Politics


maqroll

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, Awol said:

Okay cool, we'll leave out actual Muslim countries because including them isn't fair.

France is about as secular as it gets. How do the actions of Christian and Muslim extremists compare there? 

Or how about Norway? Or Canada in recent days?

The reason for human conflict is not down to what religion you happen to follow. It's down to the tribalism of human nature. 

Rich western countries are bound to have fewer conflicts than poor countries, religion is not the reason. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They confirmed they held a 5 year old child in handcuffs for 4 hours. I don't even care the kid was a US citizen.

And they justified it.

**** words removed. And everyone supporting this shit can go on the words removed list.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Chindie said:

They confirmed they held a 5 year old child in handcuffs for 4 hours. I don't even care the kid was a US citizen.

And they justified it.

**** words removed. And everyone supporting this shit can go on the words removed list.

Sean Spicer's exact words.

Quote

“That’s why we slow it down and make sure that if they are a five year old that maybe they’re with their parents and they don’t pose a threat. . . . To assume that just because of someone’s age or gender or whatever that they don’t pose a threat would be wrong”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Rugeley Villa said:

109 people were detained at airports out of 325.000. Media on both sides of the divide hype up shit.

More Trump alternative facts I'm afraid.

Quote

President Trump and his aides love to cite a small number and a big number in order to minimize the impact of the president's executive order suspending the visas of citizens of seven countries.

But these figures are incredibly misleading, so let's go through the math.

The Facts

First of all, the "325,000" figure is pretty meaningless because the number of people who arrive in the United States on a given day is not the issue. The question is how many people from these countries have been affected.

The "109" number is old, and rather dubious. For instance, it does not reflect how many people were prevented from even boarding a plane. According to the Department of Homeland Security, 348 people were denied boarding from the issuance of the executive order on Friday through 6 p.m. on Sunday.

An additional 392 green-card holders have been processed and admitted to the United States, the agency says. Originally, the White House had said that green-card holders would also be blocked from entering, but it reversed itself on Sunday under political pressure.

Officials have not responded to repeated requests for an updated number on the number of people detained at U.S. airports. However, the Daily Beast reported that an additional 200 to 250 people were denied entry once their flights landed -- and they were part of a larger pool of 735 people at ports of entry who could have been barred from entering the United States.

A Google spreadsheet tracking the experience of Iranian travelers has documented the travails of nearly 300 people, with many describing significant delays or negotiation even if they were allowed into the United States.

But all of these numbers fail to provide the full picture. The real number is about 90,000.

According to State Department statistics, that's how many people received either non-immigrant or immigrant visas from the seven affected countries in fiscal year 2015. That's the most recent data available, and different types of visas are available for different lengths of time, but it serves as a usable proxy for the likely universe of people affected by Trump's travel ban. (Moreover, the data does not include people who are dual-citizens, such as Dutch-Iranians, who also are impacted by the order.)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Awol said:

Perhaps the only valid comparison between Brexit and Trump's win is the lack of planning for the unexpected result. 

While a social movement can have the energy and enthusiasm to overturn a stale status quo, it lacks the institutional capacity and depth to plan and staff up the bureaucracy that is subsequently required.

If you think about UKIP, 5 Star in Italy, NF in France & AfD in Germany, all would face the same challenge, because they are outside of the political mainstream where 95% of professional bureaucrats operate by default.

If there is a practical barrier to governance by populists that is probably it.

You certainly have a point about the practicality of small hastily thrown together political parties being faced with the realities of governance. But the overall tone about lack of planning or unexpected results is just something that annoys me generally when talking to people. Mainly borne out of years of listening to people try and sell me the idea that 'we didn't plan properly for Iraq'.

It is nonsensical to assume in this age of statistical modelling that everything hasn't been pre-planned a million times over with different variables. Whether those examples are one of particular institutions wishes or not is up for debate, but there's a plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had a bet at work that Trump won't last more than 3 months before he's impeached or resigns. Everyone else thinks he'll last at least a whole term. I really hope I'm right, I'll have to buy £30 worth of cakes if not.

Oh and the world will be ****.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, darrenm said:

I've had a bet at work that Trump won't last more than 3 months before he's impeached or resigns. Everyone else thinks he'll last at least a whole term. I really hope I'm right, I'll have to buy £30 worth of cakes if not.

Oh and the world will be ****.

Worth noting he's allegedly already put forward his candidacy for 2020 (as it gives him some political 'armour', allegedly) so if there's something that will remove him he appears to be unaware of it or ignoring it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/29/2017 at 23:33, StefanAVFC said:

re: Bannon, seriously why the **** is the ex-CEO of a conspiracy touting far-right mouthpiece site now the go-to guy on the National Security Council?

Like, how the **** did that happen and why is it fine?

Look, Donald J Trump had a chat with him after he saw some posts on twitter and thought "now there's a great guy" and found out he's a really great guy. Believe me when Donald J Trump says someone's a great guy you better believe it believe me. Great guy anyway, gonna do great things believe me. Anyway what were we talking about? "Here's Tom with the weather."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Chindie said:

Worth noting he's allegedly already put forward his candidacy for 2020 (as it gives him some political 'armour', allegedly) so if there's something that will remove him he appears to be unaware of it or ignoring it...

Not for "armour", for cash. He can now start fundraising which, don't forget, gets funnelled through one of his dodgy companies. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, VILLAMARV said:

Mostly in the back of police vans. And most definitely nowhere near the mainstream media.

There was an item on the news last week showing the Chinese leader's state visit, in the coach with the Queen. They mentioned the human rights issue, but said that protesters "were kept well away". 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Rugeley Villa said:

Protests all over uk. Where are these protests  when the Saudis visit? Where is the outrage from VT when the Saudis arrive  over here. 

Some of us post quite a bit about how we object to our government's attitude with regard to Saudi Arabia (and other countries) and with the actions of those governments.

You've obviously not read Awol's posts, for instance, about them.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MakemineVanilla said:

only those from terror-linked countries on Obama's list.

He points out that Obama imposed similar bans 6 times but that was okay apparently.

It wasn't 'Obama's List'; how 'similar' actually were the things that came in to place under Obama?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Davkaus said:

Straying off topic a little, but I wonder if this is genuinely true the further up you go. Do the guys running the caliphate really think their minions are going to heaven and getting 72 virgins, or do they just care about their own power and think "these **** idiots will believe anything".

I think that once you get to a certain level of power (be that POTUS or CEO of ISIS) you have to believe in the crap you're telling yourself and others if only because it fuels you to go keep going. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Chindie said:

They confirmed they held a 5 year old child in handcuffs for 4 hours. I don't even care the kid was a US citizen.

And they justified it.

**** words removed. And everyone supporting this shit can go on the words removed list.

 

1 hour ago, StefanAVFC said:

Sean Spicer's exact words.

 

mindblown.png

What kind of threat can a 5 year old pose?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Keyblade said:

 

mindblown.png

What kind of threat can a 5 year old pose?

Suicide bomb. Smuggled on the plane with nobody noticing. They're born with bomb chemistry in their DNA, the best people have told me. Made it in his crib. Waiting for this moment. The best intelligence tells us. The best.

words removed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

exclamation-mark-man-user-icon-with-png-and-vector-format-227727.png

Ad Blocker Detected

This site is paid for by ad revenue, please disable your ad blocking software for the site.

Â