-
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
I hope that Biden clip is edited..I really do.
EDIT: It is edited.
Thank fuck...it did seem pretty odd no one was stepping in or they weren't cutting.
-
Shit like this is why social media is a fucking poison. Every fluffybunny on it is going for clicks, shares, or some other fucking scam. But - and here is the thing - my parents, godfather etc. will share this type of shit because "it's better to share it, even if it's untrue, because if it is true, and I didn't share it, I'll feel bad". Or, "the person who shared it to us is pretty on to it, so it might be true, so I shared it just in case".
-
@Bones said in US Politics:
@Victor-Meldrew said in US Politics:
I hope that Biden clip is edited..I really do.
EDIT: It is edited.
Thank fuck...it did seem pretty odd no one was stepping in or they weren't cutting.
Not that the unedited clip was that much better....
-
@gt12 said in US Politics:
Shit like this is why social media is a fucking poison. Every fluffybunny on it is going for clicks, shares, or some other fucking scam. But - and here is the thing - my parents, godfather etc. will share this type of shit because "it's better to share it, even if it's untrue, because if it is true, and I didn't share it, I'll feel bad". Or, "the person who shared it to us is pretty on to it, so it might be true, so I shared it just in case".
Most eventually find out its a fake. (And what % will be fooled by it. Even for Biden it was a bit much)
And its not a great look for Biden that some thought it might be the real deal.
-
-
@No-Quarter assume you mean this. Which again - put anyone else's name to it and I'd be "WTF!!!". See it's Trump..."Oh right".
-
It never occurred to me that anyone would assume that Trump was suggesting shooting (and maybe killing) the protestors. To me it just meant the NG would give a tough and firm response
Now if the looting starts wasn't immediately before this statement then its different. But in this TDS world Trump (maybe) needs to be more careful. But if Trump walked on water and healed the sick he would be criticized for it so maybe he may as well just go for it
-
@Winger said in US Politics:
It never occurred to me that anyone would assume that Trump was suggesting shooting (and maybe killing) the protestors. To me it just meant the NG would give a tough and firm response
Now if the looting starts wasn't immediately before this statement then its different. But in this TDS world Trump (maybe) needs to be more careful. But if Trump walked on water and healed the sick he would be criticized for it so maybe he may as well just go for it
Walk on water and heal the sick? The man can't even string a sentence together or act like a decent human being, let alone Jesus. The derangement is in repeatedly defending the indefensible.
-
@gt12 said in US Politics:
Shit like this is why social media is a fucking poison. Every fluffybunny on it is going for clicks, shares, or some other fucking scam. But - and here is the thing - my parents, godfather etc. will share this type of shit because "it's better to share it, even if it's untrue, because if it is true, and I didn't share it, I'll feel bad". Or, "the person who shared it to us is pretty on to it, so it might be true, so I shared it just in case".
It's like chinese whispers gone wild x 1000
-
@Winger said in US Politics:
It never occurred to me that anyone would assume that Trump was suggesting shooting (and maybe killing) the protestors. To me it just meant the NG would give a tough and firm response
What else can you take from "Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts?
Even if he didn't mean it literally, it isn't exactly a unifying or calming statement is it??
The USA has deep rooted racial problems that have been there forever. The George Floyd video is pretty damning, but I've seen similar stuff many times before.
There is a reason why most black americans seem to have a level of distrust of the Po Po, this is just one of numerous incidents, and nothing ever seems to change
-
@canefan said in US Politics:
What else can you take from "Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts?
Only thing I can think is that he's implying people start shooting when they start looting, rather than the military will shoot looters. If so, he's made a right Cummings of it.
-
It's such a poorly wooded statement it beggars belief. Trump does well in some areas, but he's been found severely wanting with his leadership for Covid, and he's way the fuck out of his depth when it comes to race issues. He's probably the last person you'd want in charge right now.
But honestly if these guys were arrested and charged when they should have been there wouldn't be such a big outcry. The system in the States looks badly broken from the outside in.
-
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
It never occurred to me that anyone would assume that Trump was suggesting shooting (and maybe killing) the protestors. To me it just meant the NG would give a tough and firm response
What else can you take from "Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts?
Even if he didn't mean it literally, it isn't exactly a unifying or calming statement is it??
The USA has deep rooted racial problems that have been there forever. The George Floyd video is pretty damning, but I've seen similar stuff many times before.
There is a reason why most black americans seem to have a level of distrust of the Po Po, this is just one of numerous incidents, and nothing ever seems to change
He's addressing looters and rioters. Not a church group
And your post is confusing. Are you saying the George Floyd death justifies the looting and rioting so Trump should support them. Or let them be. Of course if he did the Trump haters would go even more crazy
-
@Winger said in US Politics:
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
It never occurred to me that anyone would assume that Trump was suggesting shooting (and maybe killing) the protestors. To me it just meant the NG would give a tough and firm response
What else can you take from "Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts?
Even if he didn't mean it literally, it isn't exactly a unifying or calming statement is it??
The USA has deep rooted racial problems that have been there forever. The George Floyd video is pretty damning, but I've seen similar stuff many times before.
There is a reason why most black americans seem to have a level of distrust of the Po Po, this is just one of numerous incidents, and nothing ever seems to change
He's addressing looters and rioters. Not a church group
And your post is confusing. Are you saying the George Floyd death justifies the looting and rioting so Trump should support them. Or let them be. Of course if he did the Trump haters would go even more crazy
Sometimes it's hard to know if you're being deliberately obtuse or if you genuinely believe in the tripe you spout.
Here it is in more simple terms:
The President of the USA should not tweet messages that appear to support the shooting of people who loot, or any other criminal act for that matter.
Is that simple enough for you to understand?
There are a million ways the President could have tried to de-escalate this situation, and instead he went down an inflammatory path. Again.
Just disgraceful behaviour.
-
The bit that confuses me in this Floyd situation is why the cop wasn't arrested 'on suspicion' while they assembled evidence and a case.
Is that not part of the US justice system? It seems to cause a lot of problems and perspectives of inaction when they have to create a whole case with a high level of proof before acting.
I guess that in our system we can prove a prima facie case at a lower burden of proof, then progress from there (I think) -
@voodoo said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
@canefan said in US Politics:
@Winger said in US Politics:
It never occurred to me that anyone would assume that Trump was suggesting shooting (and maybe killing) the protestors. To me it just meant the NG would give a tough and firm response
What else can you take from "Any difficulty and we will assume control but, when the looting starts, the shooting starts?
Even if he didn't mean it literally, it isn't exactly a unifying or calming statement is it??
The USA has deep rooted racial problems that have been there forever. The George Floyd video is pretty damning, but I've seen similar stuff many times before.
There is a reason why most black americans seem to have a level of distrust of the Po Po, this is just one of numerous incidents, and nothing ever seems to change
He's addressing looters and rioters. Not a church group
And your post is confusing. Are you saying the George Floyd death justifies the looting and rioting so Trump should support them. Or let them be. Of course if he did the Trump haters would go even more crazy
Sometimes it's hard to know if you're being deliberately obtuse or if you genuinely believe in the tripe you spout.
Here it is in more simple terms:
The President of the USA should not tweet messages that appear to support the shooting of people who loot, or any other criminal act for that matter.
Is that simple enough for you to understand?
There are a million ways the President could have tried to de-escalate this situation, and instead he went down an inflammatory path. Again.
Just disgraceful behaviour.
Name one mate.
Just for fun give one way to deal with those people stealing and destroying. One piece of communication that doesn't involve a threat of arrest. And yes of course firearms are used by the army, so yes, it's no surprise there'll be shooting. Its an incredibly serious breakdown of social order. That's what happens when you burn and steal from the innocent. What other options to stop that mob?
US Politics