US Politics The 2020 Trump Presidency Thread

[Xorkoth]

Meanwhile, BLM was allowed to destroy entire city blocks of private businesses (as opposed to the Capital building, a den of thieves paid for by taxpayer money), injure and kill people, assault police, break curfews, set St. John's church on fire, openly call for political violence and do billions of dollars worth of damage over a period of months and got defended the media. Chris Cuomo said "who says protests have to be peaceful?", the mayor of Seattle called it a "summer of love". Same thing when Kavanaugh protesters enters the senate. But when it is a few Trump supporters in isolated incident that lasted about two hours they are terrorists and insurrectionists.

The media reported extremely dishonestly about the BLM protests, on both sides. The overwhelming majority of protests were peaceful with no incidents. I've been to a couple and the worst that happened was crowds shutting down some streets. There were documented instances of cops in plain clothes instigating violence, and right wing groups doing the same, at otherwise peaceful protests. Of course, some of the protests turned violent. And the police during these protests took every opportunity to use excessive force. That said, yeah a lot of opportunists revelling in destruction took the opportunity to cause carnage when they saw an opportunity, which is shameful.

The trump supporters literally breaking into the capitol building, breaking windows, stealing computers, while senators hid under desks, and cops took selfies with the people who broke in, specifically to disrupt the democratic process on behalf of their demagogue, and then were allowed to leave, is not the same thing. Even the majority of the Republican senators who used to support Trump have changed their tune after this.

 

[alasdairm]

I think there is also a need for neutral platforms

you seem to feel quite strongly about that? why don't you create one?

google basically owns the internet

while their reach is extensive, i think this is a little hyperbolic.

there are many stakeholders - corporations - who own large amounts of the infrastructure. there are big tech companies who host and enable communication and such. there are public players who regulate. but no single entity owns the internet.

a couple of years ago, elizabeth warren claimed that "more than 70% of all internet traffic goes through google or facebook". she wasn't even close. obviously the answer depends on the criteria and terms but sandvine (who release an annual report on internet traffic) can throw some light on the claim. one of their reports subsequent to warren's claim found that the amount of traffic received by google-operated and facebook-operated properties was 12% and ~7.8% respectively. to put that in context for you, visa's market share is about 42%.

What do you consider a monopoly?

to me, a monopoly is a company which provides a product or service and, because they control supply, for which there is no practical alternative.

google is not a monopoly because there are alternatives to their service.

i may be uncool as a result but my personal email address is the same @yahoo.com address i've used since i signed up for web mail about 20 years ago don't like gmail? use yahoo.

Just because you can't argue one specific thing in one specific place at one specific time doesn't mean you don't broadly have the ability already.

amen.

alasdair

 

[JessFR]

Most internet traffic is video steaming. And most of that is hosted by organizations like Amazon or Akamai.

Google is hardly in control over the internet.

 

[burn out]

I believe in free speech but honestly I think we already have that on the internet for all practical purposes.

We are using it right now, ranting about the government, or defending it, arguing politics.

Just because you can't argue one specific thing in one specific place at one specific time doesn't mean you don't broadly have the ability already.

The capacity is there. You just gotta use it and realize you aren't guaranteed an audience. You have to find ways to build one.

Free speech on the internet is there but it has been shrinking at an alarming rate compared to the internet of the early 2000s, which I am nostalgic for. I agree that the capacity is still there and there are alternatives to big tech platforms, but an issue with that is that it tends to create echo chambers. You wind up with a situation where someone who has been consuming mainstream media and someone who spends their time on an alt tech platforms receive such different information on a daily bases that they are pushed further apart until they lose the ability to communicate with each other.

To me, there is something deeply disappointing about how we are using the technology we have today. Young people are either brainwashed by the MSM or if they join alt tech they are often bombarded by every far out conspiracy theory known to man which alt tech platforms naturally become repositories for. It leads to radicalization.

 

[w01fg4ng]

the internet of the early 2000s, which I am nostalgic for.

Sometimes our memories trick us into remembering things better than they actually were.

Give it a try.

Wayback Machine

archive.org

*Disclaimer* I'm not responsible for ruined childhoods.

 

[burn out]

you seem to feel quite strongly about that? why don't you create one?

Because I am brain damaged from years of drug addiction and a long battle with mental illness.

while their reach is extensive, i think this is a little hyperbolic.

there are many stakeholders - corporations - who own large amounts of the infrastructure. there are big tech companies who host and enable communication and such. there are public players who regulate. but no single entity owns the internet.

a couple of years ago, elizabeth warren claimed that "more than 70% of all internet traffic goes through google or facebook". she wasn't even close. obviously the answer depends on the criteria and terms but sandvine (who release an annual report on internet traffic) can throw some light on the claim. one of their reports subsequent to warren's claim found that the amount of traffic received by google-operated and facebook-operated properties was 12% and ~7.8% respectively. to put that in context for you, visa's market share is about 42%.

It was intended to be hyperbolic but thank for you the info.

to me, a monopoly is a company which provides a product or service and, because they control supply, for which there is no practical alternative.

google is not a monopoly because there are alternatives to their service.

i may be uncool as a result but my personal email address is the same @yahoo.com address i've used since i signed up for web mail about 20 years ago don't like gmail? use yahoo.

Some sites will require you to have a google or facebook account to use their services.

 

[burn out]

The media reported extremely dishonestly about the BLM protests, on both sides. The overwhelming majority of protests were peaceful with no incidents. I've been to a couple and the worst that happened was crowds shutting down some streets. There were documented instances of cops in plain clothes instigating violence, and right wing groups doing the same, at otherwise peaceful protests. Of course, some of the protests turned violent. And the police during these protests took every opportunity to use excessive force.

Actually, in many cases the police showed a lot of restraint and were also told to stand down and allow the protesters to take control of their precinct, loot businesses, burn police cars, get pelted with bottles and rocks take over several blocks in Seattle and break curfew and engage in further acts of looting and violence night after night. Of course there were instances where police used excessive force but to say they took every opportunity to use excessive force is an egregious lie.

How many unarmed BLM protesters were shot and killed by police? How many unarmed Trump protesters were killed by police? How many people were killed by BLM protesters? How many by Trump protesters?

The overwhelming majority of protests may have been peaceful but people did not go home even when they knew violence had occurred, was occurring and likely would continue, whereas the Trump protesters left and obeyed the curfew.

The trump supporters literally breaking into the capitol building, breaking windows, stealing computers, while senators hid under desks, and cops took selfies with the people who broke in, specifically to disrupt the democratic process on behalf of their demagogue, and then were allowed to leave, is not the same thing.

It's not the same thing but it caused way less damage to innocent people and property. Neither is acceptable however and in both cases it was a minority of people doing it while the majority of protesters were peaceful. I'm not trying to say all the BLM protests were violent riots, and I agree with them that a lot could be done to improve policing and the criminal justice system in the USA. What I am saying is that there was an astounding amount of tolerance for violence and destruction afforded to BLM.

Even the majority of the Republican senators who used to support Trump have changed their tune after this.

All that means is they decided it was politically expedient get off a sinking ship, just like how politicians started condemning BLM violence once support for BLM began dropping in the polls.

 

[cduggles]

All that means is they decided it was politically expedient get off a sinking ship, just like how politicians started condemning BLM violence once support for BLM began dropping in the polls.

I think the sentiment is a bit more personal than that, considering they were in the Capitol when it was under siege. I think if this had happened to the capitol of California, you wouldn’t see GOP Senators quite so concerned.

 

[JessFR]

I think the sentiment is a bit more personal than that, considering they were in the Capitol when it was under siege. I think if this had happened to the capitol of California, you wouldn’t see GOP Senators quite so concerned.

You would think that most of the less hopelessly brainwashed republican congressman, and perhaps even a few who are, would be thinking to themselves about how this happened, and how these people weren't just out for democrats, some of them were talking about executing Mike pence, a republican, and long time close member of trumps team.

If someone like he can wind up the target of crazy trump fanatics, anyone can. It doesn't matter how loyal you are. It doesn't matter what you want. If you wind up doing or having to do something trump doesn't like, that's the only thing that matters. Trump expects absolute loyalty but he shows none whatsoever himself.

You would think...

 

[w01fg4ng]

Yeah the Pence hanging was slightly shocking to me too, Jess.

The last piece of the puzzle they needed was religion. They didn't get it, THANK GOD

Fucking Nazis.

 

[cduggles]

some of them were talking about executing Mike pence, a republican, and long time close member of trumps team.

The Vice President really took it on the chin. Just for doing his job. He was reportedly quite pissed Trump turned on him.

Pence 'angry' after Trump says he 'didn't have the courage' to overturn election, Inhofe says

Longtime lawmaker Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., said he'd never seen Vice President Pence as "angry" as he was when President Trump pressured him to decertify and return the results of the presidential election back to the states.

www.foxnews.com

 

[ions]

The wheels are in motion @JessFR @cduggles for the fall of society. Well rebuild always do it just may take the better part of our lives

 

[w01fg4ng]

Or generations.

 

[burn out]

You would think that most of the less hopelessly brainwashed republican congressman, and perhaps even a few who are, would be thinking to themselves about how this happened, and how these people weren't just out for democrats, some of them were talking about executing Mike pence, a republican, and long time close member of trumps team.

If someone like he can wind up the target of crazy trump fanatics, anyone can. It doesn't matter how loyal you are. It doesn't matter what you want. If you wind up doing or having to do something trump doesn't like, that's the only thing that matters. Trump expects absolute loyalty but he shows none whatsoever himself.

You would think...

That is the trait of the narcissist that Trump is. All along his supporters would ignore the signs and justify the odd decisions he made as "5 dimensional chess" and while there's no doubt Trump is smart, I think it's now clearer than ever that he just can't get out of his own way.

 

[ions]

sexist af. See, Hitler was on methamphetamine injections for a good part of his rule. Trump is on amphetamines or UK ephedra and it's doing similar things. History is destined to repeat itself as high doses of uppers and power are absolute power corrupting absolutely. You know the line. His doctors prescribe him legal pharmaceuticals but he ignores those that desire drugs of pleasure, especially plant medicines, like pot, opium, coca, cacti. BLeh. When you don't have the drugs, you use sex or food as a drug. Hellsent disses cracker and your country stays the same.

 

[✿Dai₷y✿]

I agree, I also think making private tech companies the public square is a bad idea and it's an unfortunate turn of events that they have become so influential. However, I don't see the government making its own version of twitter because the tech companies have a great deal of sway and influence over the government itself. Politicians who are favored by the tech companies are not going to release a competitor and if certain politicians favored such an idea they would simply be censored by the tech companies.

So, that leaves me with the question of do you believe it would be beneficial to have free and open exchange of ideas and if so how could we make that available to the public in this technological age?

No, not really

I doubt anything would really be neutral.

Besides which its not the technology, its the people who contribute and the people who manage it.

 

[TheInvisibleStoner]

There is no use trying to speak with trump supporters. They just don't get it. TripSitter isn't even american. His exposure to any of this is what is shown on his local news channel. Maybe had he lived through 4 years of trump (especially 2020) he would understand.

 

[Buzz Lightbeer]

Im about a complete free spread of information internet where big tech monopolies do not control the flow of information to suit their social engineering. When it comes down to a media platform different rules apply to that company. If anybody supports censoring political information and silencing voices of those on the other side of political spectrum to themselves then want to talk about hypocrisy on other topics is just funny. And further cements that these commies want to take over everything.

I tend to agree, with pretty much all of our communication means in the hands of corporations, hearing all the approval for letting private billionaire corporations dictate speech rights on the basis of intentionally vague terms of service is scary. There's no consistency either, just trumppppp. Where was Twitter when Trump was essentially threatening to attack North Korea and Iran with likely millions of civilian casualties to follow? Apparently inciting violence against non US citizens is fine goes in line with the decades long imperialistic politics

Has got nothing to do with right, left, or conspiracy theories. I understand that these are ''''allies'''' in the fight against Trump but it's just sheepish behavior imo

 

[dalpat077]

There is no use trying to speak with trump supporters. They just don't get it. TripSitter isn't even american. His exposure to any of this is what is shown on his local news channel. Maybe had he lived through 4 years of trump (especially 2020) he would understand.

Let's not generalize!

Due to unforeseen circumstances this week I'm a bit behind on one of my favorite topics (this one). But I've at least managed to read most of the latest posts. And it's no secret my political stance insofar as America is concerned. But I've seen some posts here by Trump supporters in the last week or so that are embarrassing even to the likes of me. Fuck me gently. Links to fucking Simon Parkes and Lin Wood (the latter's Twitter account also having been suspended thank fuck). Well that did it for me! Trying to influence someone or getting them to see the other side of things is one thing. But insulting their intelligence is a step too far. For me anyway.

Later.

 

[TheInvisibleStoner]

But you aren't a typical trump supporter dalpat. You are one of the few cool ones. You also don't come back with nonsense posts.