• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

The 2019 Trump Presidency Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
you told me a while ago that you don't believe many of my answers anyway so what's the point?

i extend you the simple courtesy of taking your comments at face value and assuming that you believe what you're writing. i'm not sure why you choose to not extend me the same courtesy but that's a discussion notvfor here.

so, sure, i choose to not answer some questions but, when i do, i strive to give a straight answer.

alasdair
 
So Trump is actually doing something by shining light on the situation and bringing it to people's attention - that way the public rallies and pressure results in actual change.
A kick up the backside. Probably well-deserved.
ok. let's look at some numbers?
  • states with the highest poverty rates: kentucky, west virginia, new mexico, louisiana, mississippi
  • states with the highest share of people on food stamps: alabama, mississippi, louisiana, west virginia, new mexico
  • least educated states: alabama, arkansas, louisiana, west virginia and mississippi
  • most dangerous states: alabama, arkansas, mississippi, louisiana, new mexico
  • states most dependent on federal help (socialism!): kentucky, arizona, new mexico, louisiana, mississippi
  • states with highest number of health-uninsured: florida, georgia, alaska, oklahoma, texas
  • most polluted states: alabama, tennessee, kentucky, ohio, indiana
of the 16 states listed here, 15 are states that voted for trump in 2016.

why's trump not "shining light" on states like mississippi and kentucky and giving phil bryant, roger wicker, cindy hyde-smith, trent kelly, bennie thompson, michael guest, steven palazzo, matt bevin, mitch mcconnell, rand paul, james comer, brett guthrie, john yarmouth, thomas massie, hal rogers and andy barr a "kick up the backside"? if trump is so concerned about poverty and such why's he not "actually doing something" there?

hmm. i wonder if it's because, of the 16 governors, senators and representatives in those states, 14 of them are republicans?

alasdair
 
  • most dangerous states: alabama, arkansas, mississippi, louisiana, new mexico
What? That is patently false. AL, MS and AR can't be dangerous whatsofucking ever. Louisiana is rough as shit and NM "might be"? But how the fuck, is that per capita or what??? I've been in all 3 of those enough and it was like, I don't know, the safest place in the world to me, and it certainly felt that way.

Because for sure there's some rougher localities in America. DC, Bmore, Chicago, Richmond come to mind.....
 
What? That is patently false. AL, MS and AR can't be dangerous whatsofucking ever. Louisiana is rough as shit and NM "might be"? But how the fuck, is that per capita or what??? I've been in all 3 of those enough and it was like, I don't know, the safest place in the world to me, and it certainly felt that way.

Because for sure there's some rougher localities in America. DC, Bmore, Chicago, Richmond come to mind.....

It was probably based on crime frequency and the ratio of cops to citizens. Maybe poverty rates as well.
 
It was probably based on crime frequency and the ratio of cops to citizens. Maybe poverty rates as well.
They should have looked at some other statistics. Trust me I've been into enough of the US to tell you I seroiusly doubt AL is "dangerous". VA is dangerous. DC is dangerous. Maryland is dangerous as fuck. Look at their gun laws. But AL? Come on. I've lived there long enough to know it's not. There might be a rough side to Birmingham and that's about it. It's a lot of rural counties.

The rest of alasdair's stats I won't argue with the seem right on, but the "dangerous" was kind of poorly worded (dangerous in what way?) and misleading as fuck.

Like if I had a house in AL I probably wouldn't lock the door at night. You can bet I would if I lived in VA, MD, DC for sure, like without a doubt.

Also I'm not trying to disagree w/ his conclusion either DEAD ON MAN! I just disagree w/ the "dangerous" stats part. Just that tiny part. Very misleading IMO.
 

It rated DC as safer than 30 states... that is DEAD WRONG. I guarantee you those are some bad/misleading statistics.

Hawaii is def. not one of the safer states; they have rampant crime and poverty and a meth epidemic.

LOL MD AS 2ND SAFEST? HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAH

Have you even been to Bmore or the poor counties in MD? Not a place I would leave my door unlocked @ night are you SERIOUS

that is like the worst most made up statistic I've ever seen. VIRGINIA? SAFE? AHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH really? Richmond has intense crime. A lot of people live there, but I wouldn't leave my door unlocked at night. Holy shit. And guns are everywhere *everywhere* in VA. Lots of sex abuse/rape per capita in the state.

I don't know what they were smoking to think MD/VA is safer than most of the nation. Holy fucking shitballs ridiculous lies.
 
What? That is patently false. AL, MS and AR can't be dangerous whatsofucking ever. Louisiana is rough as shit and NM "might be"? But how the fuck, is that per capita or what??? I've been in all 3 of those enough and it was like, I don't know, the safest place in the world to me, and it certainly felt that way.
you're making the mistake of assuming that your own experience is representative of the bigger picture. see: America's Most Dangerous States

trump talks about violence and the "horrible carnage" in chicago. i've spent some time in chicago and have seen no crime whatsoever. mmv.

It rated DC as safer than 30 states... that is DEAD WRONG. I guarantee you those are some bad/misleading statistics.
so post some figures which substantiate your counterpoint?

alasdair
 

sort by murder rate

DC: #1

sort by gun murder rate

DC: #1

sort by gun ownership rates

DC: #39

.............

Do I really need to list that though? I know you are familiar w/ those statistics. Hillary was when she marched into DC and tried to ban handguns there and it failed in the courts. The liberals know it.

It's all fueled by the heroin/crack/cocaine street sales. Quite easy for DC criminals to drive across state lines to buy firearms.

I've been to the *only* needle exchange in DC *before* it shut down. I always felt safe there. But I wouldn't own a home and leave my door unlocked at night. If I was a female I would feel terrified by myself from stories I've heard. And ideally I wouldn't live there. The residents are very friendly and would wave and say "hi" to me, and I didn't even live there. The people who are good that live in DC are amazing. And then there's a huge crime epidemic there too, lots of guns, drugs, violence. This isn't something I'd expect anyone not familiar with copping/using in DC to know (and I wasn't copping there myself).

Also, let's look at HIV rates...



wow, DC has the highest rate! #1!

so post some figures which substantiate your counterpoint?
I thought the anti-gun people were very well-versed on DC being #1 for gun murders, etc.... I am surprised you asked this of me, but ok?
 
Last edited:
You don't consider gun murders or murder per capita in general as dangerous? Ok... I thought you did?

I don't give a fuck about petty crime or some shit like that. Serious crime should be the marker of a "dangerous" society.
 
You don't consider gun murders or murder per capita in general as dangerous? Ok... I thought you did?
of course i do but your comment is irrelevant. the figures i posted talked about safety generally. you choose to focus only on gun crime. hence my comment about moving the goalposts.

my wider point is that, just because you went somewhere and it felt safe, doesn't mean much in the bigger picture...

alasdair
 
Last edited:
I didn't focus on JUST gun crime, re-read my post, please?

I covered HIV rates, murder rates (including all methods)........

When I hear "dangerous" I don't think of DUI, fender benders, or misdermeanors. I'm thinking stuff that is the hallmark of violence/danger in a society like murder.

only on gun crime.
That was one of three different statistics I listed, next to gun ownership rates (to allow you to see less gun ownership doesn't = less gun violence....)

The rest of my post was on other things, like murder rates.

I should look up other types of violent crime - I know people get jumped, mugged, etc. One of my BL friends was attacked while living in DC. It happens. It's not a safe city. SE DC is rough as shit. There's few rich enclaves and a lot of poverty and crime.
 
Yeah if you stick to the mall, the hot spots and cool stuff like Smithsonian museums and stuff, it's safe. Overall there's a reason it's #1 for murder and gun murder (I didn't just cite gun violence; I was trying to highlight several forms of "dangerousness" and I started with extreme examples as that would obviously affect anyone). etc.
 

Thanks for the link. It seemed off, given the basis is for Most Dangerous States in 2017 is "based on a composite score combining variables on crime frequency and related percentage changes, law-enforcement-to-civility ratios, and median state incomes" But let's work with your recommended data set.

CH - you are both kinda right, using his site. Scroll down, you find DC atop the lists per capita for Violent Crimes, Murder, Robbery, and only second for the Aggravated Assault category. Sorry, they didn't make top 5 for Rape. Not a nice place. Checking the top 5 for these categories, according to that site (ref for who won which state):

States%20With%20the%20Most%20and%20Least%20Violent%20Crime.png


VIOLENT CRIMES:
Trump - AK, LA, TN
Hillary - DC, M

MURDER:
Trump - LA, MO
Hillary - DC, NV, MD

RAPE:
Trump - AK, SD, AR
Hillary - MI, CO

ROBBERY:
Trump -
Hillary - DC, MD, NM, NV, CO

AGGRAVATED ASSAULT:
Trump - AK, TN, AR
Hillary - DC, NM

It's weird how Ali refers to the Most Dangerous 15 of 16 states being won by Trump when the crime statistics show a pretty even split between Hillary and Trump except for no Robbery for Trump (irony abounds). I suppose that's owing back to this mysterious formula using "variables on crime frequency and related percentage changes, law-enforcement-to-civility ratios, and median state incomes" whatever that may mean (note, they DO lay out the formula at the bottom of the page)

Bottom line, DC sucks when it comes to violent crime.

If we keep scrolling and see the stats on Property Crimes it generally lays the top 5 out as being 3.0-3.5 Trump states vs 1.5-2.0 Hillary states. Not quite the landslide of 'Trump States Bad' that the first graphic indicates.
 
Thank you for finding more stats to back me up. I know what I'm talking about. I'm surprised anyone would think otherwise.

An exceedingly close #2 for aggravated assault right beneath AK by a factor of like the smallest margin ever
#1 for robbery by a factor of 3x
#1 for murder (like I already said)
#1 for gun murder (the whole post isn't about guns alasdair I promise I know what I'm talking about)
#1 for violent crime by a factor of 20%...

geez. If you think DC is safe you sure aren't reading the stats right. Good to know rape isn't too terrible up there though.
 

This is an interesting piece.


Thanks for the article. What sticks out to me is the article makes the leap to interpret Trump's words based on history of it's use:

Trump’s defenders are saying he was referring to rodents and crime, not people. But the history of how “infestation” has been used politically shows that the distinction is blurrier than they would like to admit. Historically, the verb “infest” has been used to talk not just about literal pests and diseases, but also to compare people—very often minorities and immigrant groups—to pests and diseases.

And yet, the quotes of Trump they use for this basis are:

“We’re looking to get zoning for a piece of land that’s unzoned, that’s employing no people, that’s sitting there rotting. It’s rat-infested.”
“tarnished, second-rate, rodent-infested commercial building.”
“a rat-infested dump.”
“disgusting, rat and rodent infested mess” where “no human being would want to live.”
“the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came.”
whose Atlanta district he called “crime infested,”
“the burning and crime infested inner-cities of the U.S.”
“illegal immigrants, no matter how bad they may be, to pour into and infest our Country.”
“this ridiculous, crime infested & breeding concept,” and that “we have an ‘infestation’ of MS-13 GANGS in certain parts of our country.”
why soldiers were being sent into “Ebola infested areas of Africa.”

He clearly has historically designated what kind of 'infestation' he is referring to, whether it is rodents (usually, AND in this case by the words he actually used), or in reference to crime (again, explicit in the words he used) , or in reference to immigrants (open to be taken as racist or xenophobic). Can anyone argue areas of high occurrence of ebola are not 'infestations'? Technically, I think the argument can be made based on the definition and general interpretation of the word 'infestation', but it still gets his point across - an area with a lot of it.

The article's author does a great job explaining how the word 'infestation' has been used over time to dehumanize groups of people and make them easier to eliminate. I don't think there is much argument against this fact. But ....

If the man said 'rodent-infested', as he did in this case, I'm taking it as referencing rodents not people or race. Not anything other than rodents, because, you know, that's what he said.
 
It's weird how Ali refers to the Most Dangerous 15 of 16 states being won by Trump when the crime statistics show a pretty even split between Hillary and Trump...
the states i listed were (with the general election candidate who won the state in parentheses):

alabama (trump)
alaska (trump)
arizona (trump)
arkansas (trump)
florida (trump)
georgia (trump)
indiana (trump)
kentucky (trump)
louisiana (trump)
mississippi (trump)
new mexico (clinton)
ohio (trump)
oklahoma (trump)
tennessee (trump)
texas (trump)
west virginia (trump)

my mistake. 15 out of the 16.

no answer to the substantive question? if trump is so concerned with poverty and conditions in local geographies why is he only picking on baltimore? obvious conclusion is obvious.

alasdair
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top