The Next President is...

[jazzdude]

A lot to cover, but a very good conversation.

 

GPS. The point stands, it was released in a way that was not exclusionary to certain players or industries. It's a delicate balance. If the government has instead given a bunch of money to Garmin, we'd have something closer to Tesla. If the government decided it liked a certain technology, let's say satellite radio, and started giving tax credits to anyone who buys a satellite radio, knowing damn well that only one satellite radio company stands to benefit, that would be even more like Tesla.

 

Now Tesla is an established giant, and the subsidies are going away… but those subsidies were necessary for the formation of a viable electric car maker, so how will the competition develop?

 

I agree with you in some ways, I love what Tesla is doing and I want that type of innovation supported and encouraged. But it has to be done in a way that doesn't undermine our belief in the fairness of the system. As you said, if the system no longer seems fair, "then the only alternative is a violent overthrowing of those that are controlling the market unfairly by the people oppressed by that market."

 

Even if you take Tesla as a .gov success story, let's look at some examples of the more likely outcome:

 

Affirmative action: Favoring black students provides limited benefit to some black students, but overall creates an even deeper divide in outcomes: https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-sad-irony-of-affirmative-action

 

Get more people into home ownership: Home owners are correlated with all sorts of desirable demographic outcomes, so let's promote it at the government level, right? Along comes 2008: https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2011/05/19/how-the-government-created-a-financial-crisis/?sh=661ac0e821fb

 

Higher education costs: In a comically stupid misreading of cause and effect, the government decided that going to college meant more success later in life. Incorrect. Being smart and joining professions that required additional education meant higher success. But that detail was ignored, so the .gov has been pushing college, which has created a wildly unsustainable student debt crisis, and made college costlier than ever: https://www.mercatus.org/publications/government-spending/government-policy-and-tuition-higher-education

 

Not to mention the laundry list of failed companies that only lasted as long as they did based on infusions of government cheese.

 

These aren't just ideas that fail, they often cause devastating long-term effects that are completely opposed to the original goals. The tolerance and coddling of homelessness, to include building shelters and finding supplies that make the lifestyle possible, is going to suck when we end up paying for the lifetime institutionalization of tens of thousands of people whose brains are irreparably fried from years of drug abuse. The embrace of critical race theory has resulted in the predictable rebirth of white supremacy. The American role of world police has resulted in a Europe without any form of military defense, and thus they are helpless to make even token gestures against the aggressions of Russia and China.

 

Government, as a result of the perpetual change of power, must act quick, so instead of attacking the root causes of a problem, which is a slow process, they attack the manifestations/symptoms of the problem. Feels good, but doesn't help. Liberals are similar, but mostly because they are sensitive to the emotional toll of disparities and not inclined towards solutions that allow the impact to persist. They have almost no consideration for second and third order effects, and even less patience.

 

Sports Arenas: Completely against it. For all the reasons listed above. Business is not stupid, they don't build arenas where there is no profit. All the subsidies in the world will not bring an arena to Columbus, MS. I understand the intent, but how many times must an intent be abused before you see it for what it inevitably is? I think the stadium for the Seattle soccer team was denied government assistance by a very tenacious city council member. Surprise surprise, the stadium went up anyways. Here's something similar, and there are plenty of studies showing the questionable returns of stadiums: https://www.insidesources.com/seattles-tale-of-two-stadiums/

 

Greed and power: Government by a different name. The free market struggles with monopolies in the real world. The government is the ultimate monopoly. Using that extreme monopoly to pick winners is the antithesis to a free market, no matter how much you like the technology. The challenge isn't policing private monopolies, it's using the government to police its own power. The heavy regulation of chosen winners such as utilities is indeed an example. This type of regulation is not present on the new era of chosen winners. 

 

Your power company analogy is flawed. The second power company is restricted not because the first power company won't share their power lines, but because the city won't allow the second company to construct their own. That restriction on the second (and any other) company is why the first has an advantage. Heavily regulated, this arrangement can be made close to fair (including regular rebidding for which company gets the monopoly), but it is onerous, deleterious to innovation, and should be used sparingly. Electric cars do not meet the threshold IMO. Keeping the city free of a million power lines from a dozen competitors crossing every street does. 

 

Meritocracy: you can't argue that socialism benefits from meritocracy; the two concepts are literally opposed. Of course socialism benefits from not being socialistic. In fact, progressivism is even more opposite to meritocracy than socialism. In a theoretical perfect socialism, the most capable/merited are elevated to positions of power (though it never, ever happens that way). From each according to his abilities. With progressivism, positions of authority are selected based on group-identity-based disparities. You'll get no disagreement from me on nepotism. Bad for any system.

 

I think I hit everything. Great convo.

 

I think we're taking a bit last each other with the GPS example, and I'm too lazy to do some more digging (this has been a pleasant distraction from both work and homework). But I think we both agree that there a delicate balance, and it can be hard to draw the line.

I also don't think Tesla meets the threshold to hold a monopoly on EVs or their charging infrastructure either, and wasn't my intent. But they were also not the only ones to receive tax credits: several other car manufacturers also received tax credits, though the other manufacturers elected not to pursue EVs (and associated tax credits available to them) as aggressively as Tesla. A startup would struggle to get those tax credits though, as car manufacturing (even in gas cars) has a pretty high bar for entry (lots of capital up front).

I think your new examples and arguments are valid shots. It's generally easy to fix symptoms, or make changes to make the short term metrics look good (any of this sound familiar in our AF careers?...). It's hard, and can be uncomfortable, to get after the root causes of the bad metrics or symptoms. If you get a chance to take a statistical modeling class, one thing they harp on is be very careful about extrapolating data to make predictions outside the observed data set.

I don't think the government making an investment and it failing is necessarily a bad thing on smaller projects. Cast a wide net on completing ideas, invest in the promising ones, and see what happens (think of it as a public venture capital fund investing in things that benefit society). It's that fear of failure that often paralyzes government, and makes every decision very risk adverse and overly conservative to a fault. Obviously, risks have to be managed appropriately, and not carelessly disregarded.

Meritocracy and socialism or communism aren't opposed, at least in theory. You're right, it often suffers from personal greed or ambition in practice. But at the same time, meritocracy and capitalism are not synonymous. My view of meritocracy is a way to manage *power*, and not products, where capitalism/socialism/communism all manage resources. It's easy in capitalism to say it's the same as a meritocracy, but only because in capitalism, money (proxy for resources) can (and often does) buy power.

There are other ways to manage power besides a meritocracy ("best" person to wield power based on some measure). Democracies (direct votes), republics (representatives), dictatorships/monarchies (consolidation of power in an individual/family), nepotism (I guess this is the same as a monarchy, but without the "divine right to rule"), anarchy (no management of power). All of those types of government also have some way of determining who is "best" to wield power, whether it's popular vote, bloodline, violence, family/friends, and reflect different underlying cause and norms of that society. And any of those could be fine for an individual living under that form of government, so long as your interests align with the government's interests. At least with a form of democracy you get a say in the decision in the event interests don't align, but even that is no guarantee of fairness, and it's near impossible, especially in our current world, to remove yourself from the jurisdiction of any government.

The free market doesn't really exist-it's an ideal that doesn't exist anywhere in practice, at least not at a nation state level. As long as there's an inequality of power between people (or organizations), there will be an influence on the market, whether it's formal or not. So in a sense, government is a monopoly, because the market must adapt and be limited by the rules of the society it operates in, with those rules being enforced by the government. On the other hand, government is not a monopoly because it is how society has agreed/consented/accepted to structure itself, and society also creates the market because people have needs and wants they can not procure/produce on their own, especially if people specialize in their work. So it goes hand in hand, groups of people will organize themselves in some manner, and that same group creates a market for goods/services within itself.

Government won't police it's own power, unless those in power do so based on their values/principles. Democracies in theory allow the citizens to be the check on government authority through their vote, but it can lead to mob rule of the government divides the citizenry to maintain it's power.

I guess I have to take a stance though after being wishy washy for way too long on the post. Democratic republic seems to be the best balance for a large country like ours, balancing direct votes and the time and logistics to do that for every matter. Meritocracy with caveats (ability to do the job based on technical skills and social/leadership skills). Caveat being that sometimes you don't select the best person in order to give that experience to someone else so they can learn. This encourages cross-functional learning, and prevents job stove pipes due to being locked into one career path, especially when the scope of responsibility requires knowledge and skills across multiple domains. The incentive for moving up is not necessarily more money or power, but to do apply your experiences and skills to do the most good, though admittedly there's some amount of money that does make it easier to embrace that position (not going to do it for free and not meet needs or "reasonable" wants).

[M2]

Since we're discussing memes...

Bernie Sanders sitting at the Inauguration takes over internet

Two of my favorites...

[ClearedHot]

6 minutes ago, M2 said:

Since we're discussing memes...

Love these two...classic

 

[Sua Sponte]

[Negatory]

5 hours ago, slackline said:

So here’s my take on it.  If there are people far and above more qualified that would clearly do the job way better than those he has nominated it is incredibly bad and simple pandering.  If the people he’s nominated are close enough in quality/performance to those that are “better” than them, where’s the harm in giving those people that typically haven’t ever even been considered for those types of positions a shot?  

If there will be no discernible difference in how well the job is being done, I think it is beneficial to add some flavor to what is typically incredibly homogeneous.  I’m not married to this idea, and could be talked out of it by sound arguments, but I can see more benefits by going with different over same old, same old when the end product is so close that it doesn’t matter.  That other person is still going to be successful.  Commence spear throwing.

The blunt truth is it hurts non minorities. That’s the harm in affirmative action policies. It’s why white male pilots, for the most part, should go ahead and stop applying to be astronauts.

 

Edit: The sinister end result is the debasing of the meritocracy.

Edited January 22, 2021 by Negatory

[17D_guy]

7 minutes ago, Negatory said:

The blunt truth is it hurts non minorities. That’s the harm in affirmative action policies. It’s why white pilots, for the most part, should go ahead and stop applying to be astronauts.

 

Edit: The sinister end result is the debasing of the meritocracy.

Let me know when we find meritocracy.  Everything I've seen while in, and my brief time out, is who you know.

[Negatory]

2 minutes ago, 17D_guy said:

Let me know when we find meritocracy.  Everything I've seen while in, and my brief time out, is who you know.

Is your point that meritocracy shouldn’t exist or that it doesn’t?

[ClearedHot]

1 hour ago, Sua Sponte said:

Epic

[Lord Ratner]

6 minutes ago, 17D_guy said:

Let me know when we find meritocracy.  Everything I've seen while in, and my brief time out, is who you know.

Go spend some time in Mexico, South America, the Middle East (I'm assuming you have), Africa, or East Asia and tell me America isn't a meritocracy. 

 

I'm sure you're being somewhat hyperbolic, but the difference between the Western meritocracy and real nepotism, which most Americans have not experienced, is vast and shocking.

 

Ivanka Trump was an advisor, not the Secretary of State. Hunter Biden was just milking some spare change from his Dad's name, he wasn't the Secretary of Commerce. We are not nepotistic country.

[slackline]

4 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU for taking the bait.  Of course Biden had nothing to with that decision.  However, for the last four years the left and the mainstream press blamed EVERY single thing that went wrong on Trump.  Have the intellectual honestly to apply the same standard to Biden... Oh I can hear you know...But But But.

Not my meme but it certainly holds true.  I have yet to see the grand reach across the political aisle, instead it has been a slew of executive orders and a complete dodge on the question of impeaching Trump.  He has the opportunity to push the Trump thing aside...appease and calm the GOP faithful and focus on COVID-19 relief, but he doesn't have the backbone to stand up to Pelosi and her requirement for revenge...he doesn't even have the stones to voice an opinion.  #Sad

Ok, I guess you think you got me?  He's been president for what, 2.69 days, I can't believe he hasn't fixed the decades of partisanship already!  I think you may be forgetting the 8 years of blaming Obama for every bad thing that happened.  Stop being a sore loser for long enough to realize that during Trump's presidency Democrats didn't invent blaming the president for crap that went wrong. 

Not much of a fake bait there hoss, the statement you made falls in line with 90% of the statements made by every Trump apologist on this forum.  This was the first election I've ever voted for a democratic candidate of any flavor. Thank the bang up job done by the QAnon savior for driving enough people like me away to lose him the election. 

I feel like you guys all band together at these pseudo zingers and upvote/like each other's posts that slam the supposed liberals.  #notsurewhywearehashtaggingthis

 

Edited January 23, 2021 by slackline

[N730]

There are some key differences in your examples. GPS is peak government. Launch it and let anyone who wants to develop a use do so. But creating subsidies that heavily favor an existing company is easy to do and unfair. If the govt wanted to adopt a EV charging standard and install a network of charging stations across the country for any and all EVs to use, great. But increasingly the government is handing wads of cash to private companies while allowing them to continue the trend of making everything proprietary. 
 
Lets look at State and local governments that offer massive tax breaks to Amazon to open a new warehouse or data center. Sure... they might argue that anyone opening a 100,000 sq/ft+ data center could get the break, but when only one or two companies exist at the time of the tax break that can use it, that's targeted. It's also bullshit. Take a step back and think of the lunacy of providing tax breaks of any kind to a company as wildly successful as Amazon. 
 
It should be illegal for the government at any level to offer tax breaks to specific companies or industries. If you want to incentivize companies to show up, lower taxes for all business. It is absolute insanity that Amazon, one of the biggest corporations in the history of Earth, ran a beauty pageant where every major city in America handed over infrastructure and development plans while bidding for who could offer Bezos the lowest tax burden to open a new HQ. And after literally dozens of local governments prostrated themselves at the altar of Amazon for a chance to enhance their tech presence... who did Amazon pick? New York and DC. ing really? If you think it's just a coincidence that Amazon picked the business and government hubs as their surprise split decision, then I have a bridge to sell you. They knew from day one where they were going to build, but the data-driven company that's building a global distribution network got every city to give them their infrastructure roadmaps in the process. 
 
I'm a big free market advocate, but the theoretical perfect free market does not account for government. So we have to make changes that aren't purely free market. The modern capitalists, largely in tech but not exclusively, have mastered the art of using government to entrench their positions. Remember when Amazon suddenly supported collecting sales tax on all internet purchases because they could offer their payment services to small businesses that couldn't account for hundreds of different tax rates? Apple is pushing hard on right-to-repair laws. This is the modern version of telcoms making monopolistic agreements with city governments to lease telephone poles and prevent any other companies from competing. One electric provider, one gas, one phone, one internet and cable. 
 
Progressives (establishment, not voters) have always despised meritocracy, so their disregard for the miracles provided by the free market is no shock. But conservatives (establishment, not voters) have been blinded by the incredible wealth the new robber-barons have brought to their investment portfolios, and forgot that the free market can only function if it is perceived to be fair by the participants (voters, workers). Globalization brought us cheap clothes and TVs, but 30 years in and the cost turned out to be jobs and upward mobility for a huge swath of the country. The "democratic socialists" on the left were the first to lose faith, but they are few. Now the populists on the right, both of the Trump type, and the Tucker Carlson type are starting to lose faith too. It should scare you, because your kids, and certainly your grandkids will face a very different reality if the disenfranchisement continues to spread. 

I thought the government was offering the subsidies back when the Nissan Leaf was the most advanced EV...with a range of like 80 miles.

As far as I know, the tax credits for EVs started with the Energy Improvement and Extension Act, signed by Bush in 2008, the same year Tesla released the Roadster (a car that had less that 2500 built).

So this was well before the Model S hit the road. And I guarantee that the people buying the $100k Roadster didn't give a shit about the tax credit. It seems like it was a pretty fair subsidy. It's no one's fault besides other car companies that Tesla seems to have been able to utilize it best.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Baseops Network mobile app

[slc]

3 hours ago, slackline said:

Ok, I guess you think you got me?  He's been president for what, 2.69 days, I can't believe he hasn't fixed the decades of partisanship already!  I think you may be forgetting the 8 years of blaming Obama for every bad thing that happened.  Stop being a sore loser for long enough to realize that during Trump's presidency Democrats didn't invent blaming the president for crap that went wrong. 

Not much of a fake bait there hoss, the statement you made falls in line with 90% of the statements made by every Trump apologist on this forum.  This was the first election I've ever voted for a democratic candidate of any flavor. Thank the bang up job done by the QAnon savior for driving enough people like me away to lose him the election. 

I feel like you guys all band together at these pseudo zingers and upvote/like each other's posts that slam the supposed liberals.  #notsurewhywearehashtaggingthis

 

Actually he should fix everything in less than 100 correct?  

[slackline]

1 hour ago, slc said:

Actually he should fix everything in less than 100 correct?  

🤣 Good point, I stand corrected.

[arg]

On 1/21/2021 at 1:15 PM, slackline said:

One side significantly more...  Guess which

I'm guessing the side that yells "TAX THE RICH, THEY DON'T PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE!

[arg]

11 hours ago, slackline said:

How sad that you believe Biden was involved in that call...

You keep coming with those catchy, but baseless memes though.

It's a Biden administration. Right?

[arg]

6 hours ago, slackline said:

  He's been president for what, 2.69 days

 

How many jobs has he killed in those 2.69 days?

[ClearedHot]

11 hours ago, slackline said:

Ok, I guess you think you got me?  He's been president for what, 2.69 days, I can't believe he hasn't fixed the decades of partisanship already!  I think you may be forgetting the 8 years of blaming Obama for every bad thing that happened.  Stop being a sore loser for long enough to realize that during Trump's presidency Democrats didn't invent blaming the president for crap that went wrong. 

Not much of a fake bait there hoss, the statement you made falls in line with 90% of the statements made by every Trump apologist on this forum.  This was the first election I've ever voted for a democratic candidate of any flavor. Thank the bang up job done by the QAnon savior for driving enough people like me away to lose him the election. 

I feel like you guys all band together at these pseudo zingers and upvote/like each other's posts that slam the supposed liberals.  #notsurewhywearehashtaggingthis

 

 

When did I say Biden should fix decades of partisanship in a few days?  I said he ran on a platform of unity...he promised to heal America...his inauguration was again about unity.  His actions so far are 180 of from what he said/promised.  To the winner go the spoils so if he wants to sign 37 executive actions reversing Trump policies so be it, but be HONEST...that is not about unity.  He has not taken a single action in the lead up to taking office or in his first few days of executive orders.  They are in such a rush to wipe Trump off the map they Biden's wonks reversed an executive order that was meant almost solely to keep the price of insulin down.

Trump is gone...he is irrelevant now.  If he tries to start a third party it will simply lock the DNC in power for eternity yet they want to pursue him with impeachment because they want revenge.  Biden could end it right now and start the "healing" but he has no backbone and won't even state an opinion.  Be a freaking leader, stand up to Pelosi and stop the impeachment...calm the Trumpsters and focus on fixing the broken shit TOGETHER, why is that so hard to understand?

The last thing I am is a Trump apologist.  Things he said and did were abhorrent, he actually lost me when he made the comments about John McCain being a POW and he preferred men who were not shot down.  Other statements were equally appalling but sadly in our two party system we are left with choosing the lesser of two evils and when I stacked up the issues four years ago Trump and his policies were the clear choice.  I did not want to vote for him this election, but knowing the history of Biden and even more frightening, Harris...there was no way in hell I was going to vote to put the most liberal person in the sent in the Senate, in a chair that is one heartbeat from the Oval Office, have you ever read her statements and policies?   ESPECIALLY concerning when Biden is in the mental condition I believe him to in...he will not make four years.  He very clearly has the early signs of dementia and it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Here is the thing that bothers me the most.  You said "you guys all band together...and upvote each other's posts."  That has been the problem the last four years with the mainstream press.  No President has ever had so much bad press.  See the graphic below.  From DAY ONE the mainstream press which is mostly liberal went into full attack mode.  Look at the first White House press conference under Trump versus Biden.  Look at the liberal press fawn all over Joe.  NY Times Editor Lauren Wolfe was so blatant they had to fire her (for once the NY Times showed some integrity).  Another NY Times contributor called for the "lynching of Mike Pence"...his account was not disabled. 

Again from day one the press was in full attack mode and Pelosi, Schiff and Schumer followed suit with an impeachment based on a fake dossier paid for by Hillary...do you not find that shocking?  The FBI knew the dossier was fake, they knew the context, yet they allowed it to continue and went after people like Mike Flynn.  How much money was wasted, how much time was wasted, how far could we as a society have pushed the ball further down the field without this partisan political stunt based on a fake dossier paid for by the Clinton's?

The mainstream press is so intellectually dishonest it is actually frightening.  This past year when BLM and Antifa burned American cities they stood by and called them "mostly peaceful protests."  ABC has a transcript of Trump's speech at the rally in DC.  I didn't listen to it (don't listen to any of his rambling speeches), but I did search the transcript and this is waht he said "I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."  This was Trump inciting an insurrection?  Contrast that with the DNC leadership taking a knee as Antifa and BLM burned parts of country?  Seriously?

My rambling point is... Clinton, Bush, and Obama all had negative press but nothing like this and under all previous administrations the press could at least acknowledge the good that was done.  In Trump's case he gets zero credit for the economy, minus COVID he would have coasted to victory on this issue alone.  Standing up the to Chinese was WAY overdue.  On a side note, I have no idea how deep the Chinese ties to Biden are, but I find it very telling that on inauguration day the official Chinese leadership Twitter Account mocked trump and cheered that he was out of office.  Under Trump America became not only energy independent but a net exporter of oil.  While the environmentalist howl reasonable people will do some research and see how this one move changed the entire dynamic...it is actually helping carbon emissions as we are now likely past peak oil and the market was forever changed.  Did you happen to notice that market was so disrupted that the price of oil went NEGATIVE under Trump (yes there were several factors in that pricing), but when compared to other Presidents it is remarkable highest was under Bush at $166.60 a barrel, second highest was Carter at $125.77 and third highest was under Obama at $124.44).

Leaving the Paris Climate Accord was a very smart move, the negotiated American position was horrific.  Do you know that under the terms of the accord that we just rejoined, all American children have to receive education not just on climate change, but how to PROTEST CLIMATE CHANGE!  Come on man.  In my humble opinion leaving the WHO was another very good move for America...before you get upset I would ask if you have done any research on the WHO?  Even though I believe they acted as agents of China, put the COVID thing aside and look at the organization.  Auditors have repeatedly slammed the WHO because they spend more on EXECUTIVE TRAVEL ($800 Million, first class baby), than they do fighting AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria...COMBINED.  Should we have left them forever, of course not, but Trump was a good negotiator and it rocked the WHO when we left.  There are other things that if viewed without bias were actually very good for our country...my favorite being the conversion of Qasem Soleimani into charred hamburger. 

You stated this was the first time you ever voted for a DNC candidate...for me it was a tough choice because I think Trump is an extreme narcissist who says horrible things, but when I took a step back and looked at the policies and the things Biden, Harris and the squad want to do to America...not a chance in hell.  You point out QAnon...I agree horrible organization but the left is saying equally horrible things and they own the press.  Look no further than the chief counsel at PBS who said "children of Trump voters be forcibly send to reduction camps".   That is acceptable to you? 

I get it people hate Trump...As I have said multiple times, I do not like him or what he says.  But the alternative is even worse.

 

 

 

[slackline]

2 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

 

When did I say Biden should fix decades of partisanship in a few days?  I said he ran on a platform of unity...he promised to heal America...his inauguration was again about unity.  His actions so far are 180 of from what he said/promised.  To the winner go the spoils so if he wants to sign 37 executive actions reversing Trump policies so be it, but be HONEST...that is not about unity.  He has not taken a single action in the lead up to taking office or in his first few days of executive orders.  They are in such a rush to wipe Trump off the map they Biden's wonks reversed an executive order that was meant almost solely to keep the price of insulin down.

Trump is gone...he is irrelevant now.  If he tries to start a third party it will simply lock the DNC in power for eternity yet they want to pursue him with impeachment because they want revenge.  Biden could end it right now and start the "healing" but he has no backbone and won't even state an opinion.  Be a freaking leader, stand up to Pelosi and stop the impeachment...calm the Trumpsters and focus on fixing the broken shit TOGETHER, why is that so hard to understand?

The last thing I am is a Trump apologist.  Things he said and did were abhorrent, he actually lost me when he made the comments about John McCain being a POW and he preferred men who were not shot down.  Other statements were equally appalling but sadly in our two party system we are left with choosing the lesser of two evils and when I stacked up the issues four years ago Trump and his policies were the clear choice.  I did not want to vote for him this election, but knowing the history of Biden and even more frightening, Harris...there was no way in hell I was going to vote to put the most liberal person in the sent in the Senate, in a chair that is one heartbeat from the Oval Office, have you ever read her statements and policies?   ESPECIALLY concerning when Biden is in the mental condition I believe him to in...he will not make four years.  He very clearly has the early signs of dementia and it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Here is the thing that bothers me the most.  You said "you guys all band together...and upvote each other's posts."  That has been the problem the last four years with the mainstream press.  No President has ever had so much bad press.  See the graphic below.  From DAY ONE the mainstream press which is mostly liberal went into full attack mode.  Look at the first White House press conference under Trump versus Biden.  Look at the liberal press fawn all over Joe.  NY Times Editor Lauren Wolfe was so blatant they had to fire her (for once the NY Times showed some integrity).  Another NY Times contributor called for the "lynching of Mike Pence"...his account was not disabled. 

Again from day one the press was in full attack mode and Pelosi, Schiff and Schumer followed suit with an impeachment based on a fake dossier paid for by Hillary...do you not find that shocking?  The FBI knew the dossier was fake, they knew the context, yet they allowed it to continue and went after people like Mike Flynn.  How much money was wasted, how much time was wasted, how far could we as a society have pushed the ball further down the field without this partisan political stunt based on a fake dossier paid for by the Clinton's?

The mainstream press is so intellectually dishonest it is actually frightening.  This past year when BLM and Antifa burned American cities they stood by and called them "mostly peaceful protests."  ABC has a transcript of Trump's speech at the rally in DC.  I didn't listen to it (don't listen to any of his rambling speeches), but I did search the transcript and this is waht he said "I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard."  This was Trump inciting an insurrection?  Contrast that with the DNC leadership taking a knee as Antifa and BLM burned parts of country?  Seriously?

My rambling point is... Clinton, Bush, and Obama all had negative press but nothing like this and under all previous administrations the press could at least acknowledge the good that was done.  In Trump's case he gets zero credit for the economy, minus COVID he would have coasted to victory on this issue alone.  Standing up the to Chinese was WAY overdue.  On a side note, I have no idea how deep the Chinese ties to Biden are, but I find it very telling that on inauguration day the official Chinese leadership Twitter Account mocked trump and cheered that he was out of office.  Under Trump America became not only energy independent but a net exporter of oil.  While the environmentalist howl reasonable people will do some research and see how this one move changed the entire dynamic...it is actually helping carbon emissions as we are now likely past peak oil and the market was forever changed.  Did you happen to notice that market was so disrupted that the price of oil went NEGATIVE under Trump (yes there were several factors in that pricing), but when compared to other Presidents it is remarkable highest was under Bush at $166.60 a barrel, second highest was Carter at $125.77 and third highest was under Obama at $124.44).

Leaving the Paris Climate Accord was a very smart move, the negotiated American position was horrific.  Do you know that under the terms of the accord that we just rejoined, all American children have to receive education not just on climate change, but how to PROTEST CLIMATE CHANGE!  Come on man.  In my humble opinion leaving the WHO was another very good move for America...before you get upset I would ask if you have done any research on the WHO?  Even though I believe they acted as agents of China, put the COVID thing aside and look at the organization.  Auditors have repeatedly slammed the WHO because they spend more on EXECUTIVE TRAVEL ($800 Million, first class baby), than they do fighting AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria...COMBINED.  Should we have left them forever, of course not, but Trump was a good negotiator and it rocked the WHO when we left.  There are other things that if viewed without bias were actually very good for our country...my favorite being the conversion of Qasem Soleimani into charred hamburger. 

You stated this was the first time you ever voted for a DNC candidate...for me it was a tough choice because I think Trump is an extreme narcissist who says horrible things, but when I took a step back and looked at the policies and the things Biden, Harris and the squad want to do to America...not a chance in hell.  You point out QAnon...I agree horrible organization but the left is saying equally horrible things and they own the press.  Look no further than the chief counsel at PBS who said "children of Trump voters be forcibly send to reduction camps".   That is acceptable to you? 

I get it people hate Trump...As I have said multiple times, I do not like him or what he says.  But the alternative is even worse.

 

 

 

You’ve got some very good points in there.  I actually agree with you on quite a bit of it.  Some things he did were absolutely good calls, too bad he had to do them in the ways he did...  Having the respect of the world is on an identical footing as doing some of the things he did.  Problem is, he’s lost us so much of that “respect capital” that it will make it hard to be taken seriously going forward.  We’ll be able to get there, but it will be that much harder. China, loved the positions he took with them, hated how he did it.  Paris climate accords, agreed with the action, not his stated reasons for it because it continues to enable those of you in here (don’t know your stance on it, so royal you, not you specifically) who continue to pull out bogus science to deny the overwhelming bulk of scientific evidence that says climate change is real and that we could do something about it.  The accords are not good for America, once again, we end up doing the lion’s share of the work.  The WHO, absolutely agree with you again.  But also, once again, he’s POTUS, act like it.  You didn’t mention holding NATO’s feet to the fire, but I’m sure you’re on the same page.  Good, but again, bedside manner matters.

I also agree that the press, by and large, is garbage, but I also don’t have a ton of heartburn over the way he was treated because he gave worse than he got on the daily.  He can’t complain about unfair treatment when he was goading them, lying to them, and constantly belittling every personality that he didn’t like.  You honestly think that had nothing to do with his treatment?  You honestly think it would have gone down similarly if he had treated them with respect from the get go?  I don’t.  His press secretary started lying from the moment he was in office, which was simply behavior carried over from before he was sworn in.  

I mentioned on here I wasn’t a fan of many of the EOs Biden signed on days one and two.  Let’s see if he keeps up the pace.  He’s gonna need to sign a lot more to catch up to Trump on that face...  At the same time, Biden’s a politician, he has to show his base why they elected him.  If he keeps going, ignoring everything else out there, then yeah, but I’m willing to give the dude more than half a week before saying his pledge to be a president for all of Americans, R or D, is BS...  

I also agree about the Twitter crap, again, I’m no fan of social media.  Call a spade a spade.  Again, though, Twitter’s a business, so they’re gonna do what makes sense for their bottom line.  A US citizen, president or not, is subject to the public opinion of the US population.  A Chinese press release, not so much.  

Not a Trump apologist, fine, I’ll take your word for it.  But you sure did a nice job of cherry-picking the only line out of his speech that one could taken as peaceful.  You’re not being intellectually honest if you think Trump was intending peaceful protest with his delivery of his peace inspiring speech.  MLK struck the same tone in his “I have a dream” speech...  Trump sure didn’t stand up to tone things down when his lackies said other “peaceful things”.  

I’m sorry, but as much as us comfortable white people want it to not be true, there are 100% racial inequalities in this country.  Comparing Trump’s behaving like a sore loser since he lost, and riling up his base until it eventually lost control, and POC’s fight for social justice is just a non-starter.  Forgive most of the world (because almost everyone but us privileged white people in the US sees it, so clearly we must be right) for giving a little slack to people that simple want to not be looked at as criminals when driving their cars, have an equal shot at getting the job, not get life sentences when a white dude gets probation, etc., etc., etc.  Rioting doesn’t help, it won’t make the problems magically go away, and the left definitely owns some of that through tacit approval of the actions.  It isn’t right, but man, it is definitely understandable after centuries of mistreatment that started with slavery and has seen every shade in between.  But again, parade out some twisted statistic to show how I’m wrong, all while ignoring the FACTS that are screaming from literally every corner of the world of history, recent and distant.  

One last point, I love all of the arm-chair mental health experts out there that are convinced of Biden’s mental decline because he’s “showing all the signs of it”.  Actually, no, I won’t address it more than this, it’s just stupid because Trump was the picture of mental health, a rational actor...

 

ETA: Harris is scary for sure, and I hope and pray for Biden’s health for that reason.  I vote for the P though, not the VP.  Safe bet is that this will go down like the overwhelming majority of admins in the past have, the P will be the P and the VP is largely forgotten.  Here’s to hoping I’m not wrong...

Edited January 23, 2021 by slackline

[ClearedHot]

38 minutes ago, slackline said:

You’ve got some very good points in there.  I actually agree with you on quite a bit of it.  Some things he did were absolutely good calls, too bad he had to do them in the ways he did...  Having the respect of the world is on an identical footing as doing some of the things he did.  Problem is, he’s lost us so much of that “respect capital” that it will make it hard to be taken seriously going forward.  We’ll be able to get there, but it will be that much harder. China, loved the positions he took with them, hated how he did it.  Paris climate accords, agreed with the action, not his stated reasons for it because it continues to enable those of you in here (don’t know your stance on it, so royal you, not you specifically) who continue to pull out bogus science to deny the overwhelming bulk of scientific evidence that says climate change is real and that we could do something about it.  The accords are not good for America, once again, we end up doing the lion’s share of the work.  The WHO, absolutely agree with you again.  But also, once again, he’s POTUS, act like it.  You didn’t mention holding NATO’s feet to the fire, but I’m sure you’re on the same page.  Good, but again, bedside manner matters.

I also agree that the press, by and large, is garbage, but I also don’t have a ton of heartburn over the way he was treated because he gave worse than he got on the daily.  He can’t complain about unfair treatment when he was goading them, lying to them, and constantly belittling every personality that he didn’t like.  You honestly think that had nothing to do with his treatment?  You honestly think it would have gone down similarly if he had treated them with respect from the get go?  I don’t.  His press secretary started lying from the moment he was in office, which was simply behavior carried over from before he was sworn in.  

I mentioned on here I wasn’t a fan of many of the EOs Biden signed on days one and two.  Let’s see if he keeps up the pace.  He’s gonna need to sign a lot more to catch up to Trump on that face...  At the same time, Biden’s a politician, he has to show his base why they elected him.  If he keeps going, ignoring everything else out there, then yeah, but I’m willing to give the dude more than half a week before saying his pledge to be a president for all of Americans, R or D, is BS...  

I also agree about the Twitter crap, again, I’m no fan of social media.  Call a spade a spade.  Again, though, Twitter’s a business, so they’re gonna do what makes sense for their bottom line.  A US citizen, president or not, is subject to the public opinion of the US population.  A Chinese press release, not so much.  

Not a Trump apologist, fine, I’ll take your word for it.  But you sure did a nice job of cherry-picking the only line out of his speech that one could taken as peaceful.  You’re not being intellectually honest if you think Trump was intending peaceful protest with his delivery of his peace inspiring speech.  MLK struck the same tone in his “I have a dream” speech...  Trump sure didn’t stand up to tone things down when his lackies said other “peaceful things”.  

I’m sorry, but as much as us comfortable white people want it to not be true, there are 100% racial inequalities in this country.  Comparing Trump’s behaving like a sore loser since he lost, and riling up his base until it eventually lost control, and POC’s fight for social justice is just a non-starter.  Forgive most of the world (because almost everyone but us privileged white people in the US sees it, so clearly we must be right) for giving a little slack to people that simple want to not be looked at as criminals when driving their cars, have an equal shot at getting the job, not get life sentences when a white dude gets probation, etc., etc., etc.  Rioting doesn’t help, it won’t make the problems magically go away, and the left definitely owns some of that through tacit approval of the actions.  It isn’t right, but man, it is definitely understandable after centuries of mistreatment that started with slavery and has seen every shade in between.  But again, parade out some twisted statistic to show how I’m wrong, all while ignoring the FACTS that are screaming from literally every corner of the world of history, recent and distant.  

One last point, I love all of the arm-chair mental health experts out there that are convinced of Biden’s mental decline because he’s “showing all the signs of it”.  Actually, no, I won’t address it more than this, it’s just stupid because Trump was the picture of mental health, a rational actor...

NATO - agreed, goes without saying and long overdue.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree on the press, go watch the first press conference with Spicer...right out of the gate...then watch the first one with Psaki who by the way has a LONG history of lying to the press when she was at the State Department.

As for Twitter and social media...I will agreed with your argument when they lose the protections of 230.  Until then they are not simply a business, they enjoy special protections and treatment under the law that should hold them to a different standard.

I did not cherry pick a line out of his speech.  I skimmed most of it from the transcript posted on ABC and that was the one and only line I saw then mentioned going to the Capital.  There were a lot of references to the election being stolen and cheating with regard to votes, but that was the only mention of going to the Capital.

You lost me on social justice.  I 100% acknowledge we are a country of inequities and we have a lot of work to do.  I hate the "my black friend reply" so let me put it this way, I have many minority friends and have heard countless stories that make my skin crawl.  When one friend told me about having to have the "you are a young black man and here is what you do when the cops pull you over", I was shocked and it truly made me think...again we have a LONG way to go.  Also, I am not talking about protests and rioting over racial inequities, I am talking about BLM and Antifa.  BLM is not about racial inequities, it is a group led by dedicated Marxists with a far different purpose.  Look no further than an a revealing 2015 interview with the founders (Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors and Opal TometiIn), who very clearly stated what they stand for " interview, Cullors said, “Myself and Alicia in particular are trained organizers. We are trained Marxists.” That same year, Tometi was hobnobbing with Venezuela’s Marxist dictator Nicolás Maduro, of whose regime she wrote: “In these last 17 years, we have witnessed the Bolivarian Revolution champion participatory democracy and construct a fair, transparent election system recognized as among the best in the world.”  Antifa is even worse and i can't believe you would associate them with the cause of minorities in this country.  They seek to cause carnage and chaos in order to bring down the American system.  You swore an oath to defeat such organizations.  Again going back to what happened this summer...Seattle and the autonomous zone had zippo to do with racial inequality.  The occupation and near destruction of Portland...again Antifa trying to destroy the system.

As for mental health, one could certainly argue about Trump's mental state as an extreme narcissist.  However, he has been like that for as long as he has been int he spotlight.  With Biden we are talking about real signs of change and decline.  I would invite you to watch this short non-bias clip that is not about Biden, but shows a clear link between his demonstrated symptoms and mental decline. 

Then watch this piece done by an Australian news agency.

 

[Negatory]

Do you ever think that Trump may have gotten more negative press coverage because he’s a worse human being with worse policies?

Just like how I talk more shit about my sisters abusive ex husband than her current husband?

Not everyone is entitled to 50-50 good:bad press.

[slackline]

1 hour ago, ClearedHot said:

NATO - agreed, goes without saying and long overdue.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree on the press, go watch the first press conference with Spicer...right out of the gate...then watch the first one with Psaki who by the way has a LONG history of lying to the press when she was at the State Department.

As for Twitter and social media...I will agreed with your argument when they lose the protections of 230.  Until then they are not simply a business, they enjoy special protections and treatment under the law that should hold them to a different standard.

I did not cherry pick a line out of his speech.  I skimmed most of it from the transcript posted on ABC and that was the one and only line I saw then mentioned going to the Capital.  There were a lot of references to the election being stolen and cheating with regard to votes, but that was the only mention of going to the Capital.

You lost me on social justice.  I 100% acknowledge we are a country of inequities and we have a lot of work to do.  I hate the "my black friend reply" so let me put it this way, I have many minority friends and have heard countless stories that make my skin crawl.  When one friend told me about having to have the "you are a young black man and here is what you do when the cops pull you over", I was shocked and it truly made me think...again we have a LONG way to go.  Also, I am not talking about protests and rioting over racial inequities, I am talking about BLM and Antifa.  BLM is not about racial inequities, it is a group led by dedicated Marxists with a far different purpose.  Look no further than an a revealing 2015 interview with the founders (Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors and Opal TometiIn), who very clearly stated what they stand for " interview, Cullors said, “Myself and Alicia in particular are trained organizers. We are trained Marxists.” That same year, Tometi was hobnobbing with Venezuela’s Marxist dictator Nicolás Maduro, of whose regime she wrote: “In these last 17 years, we have witnessed the Bolivarian Revolution champion participatory democracy and construct a fair, transparent election system recognized as among the best in the world.”  Antifa is even worse and i can't believe you would associate them with the cause of minorities in this country.  They seek to cause carnage and chaos in order to bring down the American system.  You swore an oath to defeat such organizations.  Again going back to what happened this summer...Seattle and the autonomous zone had zippo to do with racial inequality.  The occupation and near destruction of Portland...again Antifa trying to destroy the system.

As for mental health, one could certainly argue about Trump's mental state as an extreme narcissist.  However, he has been like that for as long as he has been int he spotlight.  With Biden we are talking about real signs of change and decline.  I would invite you to watch this short non-bias clip that is not about Biden, but shows a clear link between his demonstrated symptoms and mental decline. 

Then watch this piece done by an Australian news agency.

 

It’s like you haven’t read a word posted by the many smart people in here as to why getting rid of 230 is a bad idea.  Do you honestly not see how that is going to bite everyone in a bad way?  It’s like that bear chasing you.  You’re in the woods, come across a bear which starts to chase you.  As you run from the bear, you pray, “please Lord, let this bear be a Christian!”  When the bear catches you and knocks you down, as it’s standing above you, before it eats you, the bear folds its arms and says, “Dear Lord, please bless this meal I’m about to eat, thank you Jesus.  Amen!”  230 is not what you want.  All the reasons have been laid out, so I’m not going to rehash them.  Careful what you ask for, you just might get it... 

Don’t ignore the press treatment issue.  Trump has always treated them like trash, like everyone.  It doesn’t excuse their clear bias, they should be better/have some journalist integrity, but he was/is a super douche, so he invited their treatment.  He loved it even.  Played very well to his base.   Funny thing, Trump wouldn’t be caught dead hanging with the majority of people that voted for him.  Too “white trash” for him, but he sure knew how to whip em up into a frenzy!  It’s funny too because you even admit to not liking him, but you’re still harping about it.  He’s get you focused on the wrong thing.  Screw how the media treats the president.  Do a good job and the public won’t care because their lives are getting better.  

Go back and read my post.  Please highlight the parts where I linked the racial inequalities we’re (as a nation) struggling with and BLM/Antifa.  This is hilarious, I didn’t say anything of the kind, I even said riots/violence hurt the cause, not help it.    

Let me put it more clearly, it is more easy to understand why POC would feel that it is a last resort after their cries for equality consistently fall on deaf ears.  You acknowledged in this post what many on this forum flat out say isn’t happening, there are no problems, POC just need to pick themselves up by their bootstraps like other successful POC have done, no excuses.  Careful, they’re going to call you a SJW and an extreme leftist for that acknowledgment.  

As for the mental health decline of Biden, dude is old.  Like the majority of old options we were presented with, he’s not as sharp as he used to be, but still, no one has presented anything that can be used as proof.  Yet, people on the right constantly latch on every bit of “evidence” presented by every “expert” who hasn’t actually examined or tested him.  I’d sure love to have a bunch of people watching me from afar comment on my cognitive health, especially people with incentive to say I’m in decline.  Sounds fun.

If we stop voting these dbags into office, people so out of touch with reality it’s not even funny anymore, maybe we’ll get better options.  But no, we tear apart the younger ones, leaving the old as the only options remaining.  No way was Trump the best option back in 2016 just like Biden wasn’t the best option last fall.  In fact, they were both horrible options.  We screwed ourselves!

Edited January 23, 2021 by slackline
Obvious mental decline or early onset dementia...

[Blue]

3 hours ago, slackline said:

One last point, I love all of the arm-chair mental health experts out there that are convinced of Biden’s mental decline because he’s “showing all the signs of it”.  Actually, no, I won’t address it more than this, it’s just stupid because Trump was the picture of mental health, a rational actor...

 

2 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

As for mental health, one could certainly argue about Trump's mental state as an extreme narcissist.  However, he has been like that for as long as he has been int he spotlight.  With Biden we are talking about real signs of change and decline.

 

58 minutes ago, slackline said:

As for the mental health decline of Biden, dude is old.  Like the majority of old options we were presented with, he’s not as sharp as he used to be, but still, no one has presented anything that can be used as proof.  Yet, people on the right constantly latch on every bit of “evidence” presented by every “expert” who hasn’t actually examined or tested him.  I’d sure love to have a bunch of people watching me from afar comment on my cognitive health, especially people with incentive to say I’m in decline.  Sounds fun.

One doesn't need to be a trained mental health expert to know something is wrong with Joe Biden's mental state.

Biden is 78 years old, the oldest person to ever sit in the Oval Office.  The next closest is Reagan, who was 77 at the end of his presidency.

This is a big fucking problem for the country, and I don't know how anyone can brush it off as "he's just old," or "people are just picking on poor Joe."

Age-related mental decline is insidious.  It comes and goes.  Someone can have their mental faculties at 100% at the beginning of the day, but then as the day drags on and they wear mentally and physically, they get worse and worse.  The results manifest themselves in several ways: people end up being excessively argumentative, they get tunnel vision and fixate on things with no rhyme or reason.

Anyone who's had the pleasure of working with those in their late 60s and 70s has seen this play out before. 

It was rumored that Reagan was experiencing the beginning of mental decline during his second term; he even got some raised eyebrows during the 1984 Presidential race when he seemed to falter during the debates.  That was a problem then, but at the very least you had an established team surrounding the president, and a more-or-less stable country and world.

Now you've got Joe Biden, who's starting his presidency in today's chaotic world, and surrounding himself with an eclectic band of unproven staffers and Cabinet picks.

Agree or disagree with Joe Biden's polices and ideals all you want.  That's everyone's right as a red-blooded American.  But the fact that we're starting a Presidential term with a 78 year old is a big fucking problem.

Edited January 23, 2021 by Blue

[slackline]

9 minutes ago, Blue said:

 

 

One doesn't need to be a trained mental health expert to know something is wrong with Joe Biden's mental state.

Biden is 78 years old, the oldest person to ever sit in the Oval Office.  The next closest is Reagan, who was 77 at the end of his presidency.

This is a big fucking problem for the country, and I don't know how anyone can brush it off as "he's just old," or "people are just picking on poor Joe."

Age-related mental decline is insidious.  It comes and goes.  Someone can have their mental faculties at 100% at the beginning of the day, but then as the day drags on and they wear mentally and physically, they get worse and worse.  The results manifest themselves in several ways: people end up being excessively argumentative, they get tunnel vision and fixate on things with no rhyme or reason.

Anyone who's had the pleasure of working with those in their late 60s and 70s has seen this play out before. 

It was rumored that Reagan was experiencing the beginning of mental decline during his second term; he even got some raised eyebrows during the 1984 Presidential race when he seemed to falter during the debates.  That was a problem then, but at the very least you had an established team surrounding the president, and a more-or-less stable country and world.

Now you've got Joe Biden, who's starting his presidency in today's chaotic world, and surrounding himself with an eclectic band of unproven staffers and Cabinet picks.

Agree or disagree with Joe Biden's polices and ideals all you want.  That's everyone's right as a red-blooded American.  But the fact that we're starting a Presidential term with a 78 year old is a big fucking problem.

100% agreed that starting with a 78 yr old president is a problem. 

Totally disagree you don't need to be a mental health expert to see the problems you guys are talking about. 

I'm not saying he doesn't have the issues.  I'm saying no one has proven it, and that you absolutely cannot judge a person's mental health on sound bites, but you obviously are an expert on the possible here, so by all means. 

If Trump hadn't been such an NTAC with regards to his dismissiveness towards the Rona, he'd be the president right now.  He'd be a 74 yr old tool sitting in that office, so not much better.

Stop voting for old people.  They are out of touch. Along with term limits we should have age limits. We recognize a bottom age is important, why is it difficult to do the same on the upper stops?

[Lord Ratner]

1 hour ago, Negatory said:

Do you ever think that Trump may have gotten more negative press coverage because he’s a worse human being with worse policies?

Just like how I talk more shit about my sisters abusive ex husband than her current husband?

Not everyone is entitled to 50-50 good:bad press.

There is definitely an element of Truth to that, and conservatives do their argumentative service to pretend like it's not a factor. But you can go back to George W Bush, Mitt Romney, and Brett Kavanaugh, to see examples of people who were I know rational measure bad people, that treated quite differently than their Democratic counterparts.

 

Just like conservatives who deny the difference you cite with Trump immediately posture their liberal counterparts to ignore the remainder of their argument, liberals and listed the same effect from conservatives and they deny a very obvious and measurable bias immediate coverage between conservatives and liberals.

[Homestar]

If we're going to talk about mental illness, why are we all of a sudden concerned about it when we've had a sociopathic narcissist and compulsive liar in the WH for the past 4 years?  I'd take Uncle Joe over Piece of Shit Trump any day of the week.

No, I don't like Harris.  No, I don't like "government by Executive Order."  Maybe the Biden 1st presser went better because the press sec didn't march into the room, declare an obvious lie, and march out.