Play Nice Random Chat Thread IV

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Wolverine Watchmen had been planning all of that since the beginning of the year (according to the FBI).

The Wolverine Watchmen hate the police and all government (including Trump). Which is why they were protesting with BLM saying "Kill all cops"

Straight from the horses mouth:




Trump was President at the beginning of the year too, and for a full three years prior to that. In that time he's consistently criticised and threatened multiple State Governors who have disregarded his rhetoric of ignorance, division, and hatred, and have continued to forge their own paths of responsible and level-headed governance. Last week's Trump rally heard the crowd chanting "Lock her up" again, only this time it was in reference to the Michigan State Governor. Stuff like that is surreal, and frankly scary. Trump's response to the crowd? "Lock them all up."

None of these right-wing militia, and yes, white supremacist groups have to like Trump in order to be incentivized by his rhetoric and seize it as a window to act within. He fans the flames almost daily, and that's all they need.


There seems to be a consensus developing here, along the lines of: We don't like Trump, but we're okay with his rhetoric.

I'm the exact opposite. I don't like him or hate him as a person. It's not important. There's no point to that. But his rhetoric is dangerous, and I genuinely wonder about those who think it's okay.
 
As for the white supremacists supporting Trump, I’m sure a bunch of them do. But most politicians have a bunch of extreme fringe supporters. I take with a grain of salt media saying Trump hasn’t condemned white supremacists , because I’ve seen him do it a bunch of times. As I’ve previously posted, there are plenty of legitimate reasons to criticise Trump, but many people (like Funky, that’s why I initially pressed him on calling Trump a fascist) insist on making stuff up. Just focus on the plethora of real stuff!


I wasn't aware that he's condemned white supremacists a bunch of times. Can you post some links to these?
 
Is there anyone here who disagrees that both the republicans & democrats are pathetic choices?

So folks are in agreement that they're both pathetic?

Phew, I was worried there for a second.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Sooooo, remember when Pat Rafter used to give his opponents a "Sorry mate" after he would toss the ball to serve, but then not serve? Well, he also was awarded the Australian of the Year in 2002. So my now go to after something goes wrong at work, is to put up my hand, and give the old "Sorry mate", Pat Rafter style. Won't be long before I get my Australian of the Year award 🙃
 
I wasn't aware that he's condemned white supremacists a bunch of times. Can you post some links to these?

I get that the source is not a reliable one, it’s a satire site, but the footage is clear isn’t it? I’m not going to find “more reputable” sites to collate these quotes when it’s all quoted here :p


Look, I get that you are closer to America, and you are much more passionate about the guy than I am. You hate him much more than I do - I suspect because you’re more left leaning and I would be classified as centre-right (although I’ve never voted for the Libs in my life). But the footage is all there, including the infamous “good people on both sides” line, where he denounced white supremacy literally seconds before the quote, but the media wanted you to believe he said they were all good people. As I’ve said all along, I hate the guy for the reasons that are plain and obvious, not because I need to make up things about him to fuel my hate. I’m not saying you are making them up, I’m just saying “refusing to denounce white supremacy” is not a reason to hate him.
 
Paying $30 million for something that’s worth $3 mil, that’s a lot of goodwill..

wait we better set up an inquiry to figure out exactly what’s happened here... useless fookers.
 
Last edited:
I get that the source is not a reliable one, it’s a satire site, but the footage is clear isn’t it? I’m not going to find “more reputable” sites to collate these quotes when it’s all quoted here :p


Look, I get that you are closer to America, and you are much more passionate about the guy than I am. You hate him much more than I do - I suspect because you’re more left leaning and I would be classified as centre-right (although I’ve never voted for the Libs in my life). But the footage is all there, including the infamous “good people on both sides” line, where he denounced white supremacy literally seconds before the quote, but the media wanted you to believe he said they were all good people. As I’ve said all along, I hate the guy for the reasons that are plain and obvious, not because I need to make up things about him to fuel my hate. I’m not saying you are making them up, I’m just saying “refusing to denounce white supremacy” is not a reason to hate him.
it's obvious why it keeps happening and clearly it is working when sopwiths north has no recollection of him doing it 6+ times.

less than 24 hours after the debate it was brought up and he denounced them again. Then a week later during the NBC interview the interviewer said "will you once and for all..."

I know it was a running joke after the debate, but people were saying he needs to wake up and post a video of him denouncing them every day to please people. At this point it might be the only way to stop that question being asked in every interview.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

it's obvious why it keeps happening and clearly it is working when sopwiths north has no recollection of him doing it 6+ times.

Whenever folks like sopwith's post, it's not what they state that is of significance to me, it's what they don't state.

How can someone who appears to have a critical political eye, also have such a significant blind spot when it comes to the other elephant in the room?

I can only conclude that they have fully bought in to the two party paradigm, which automatically makes their political opinions redundant to me.
 
Last edited:
Yo Timmy, if Coach Scamper retires then I think its only fair your Scamper hangs up the boots for the game day threads too.

TBH, Scamper the cat didn’t bring us a lot of luck, so I reckon roll out your Pup next year and he/she could be part of the rebuild alongside our very own talented young Pups (including one of McDonald/Phillips/Hollands/DGB).

Hopefully your Pup becomes the good luck charm we need to win premiership number 5.

2021 Membership Slogan.. *Pup for the Cup*
 
Cheers for the respectful response, Mr N.

Seems to have sparked some worthy discussion, too.

(Let's see what I can do to turn that around.)



Sure.

I did want to avoid getting bogged down in crapping on about where I personally stand on the 'Is Trump a fascist?' question because it's an involved and nuanced topic and I'll end up being here forever. In short, I personally wouldn't label Trump as a fascist, but at the same time I don't find Funky's call to be a massive leap. The attacks on the free press, undermining democratically-elected State leaders, legitimising (at best)/inciting (at worst) right-wing violence, and invalidating democratic electoral processes (via vague, fabricated accusations of opponent fraud) are the kinds of things that people traditionally associate with fascism. Tear-gassing peaceful protesters to enable a photo op is a straight up despot move. There are numerous other examples. So yeah, it's not as if we're orbiting in a different stratosphere here. While we may argue over to what degree, there is most certainly an element of 'walks like a duck, quacks like a duck' at play. Thankfully, 'the system' provides some checks and balances to mitigate these things. As Sopwiths said, slippery slope and all that.

Anyway, again, no right and wrong per se. I was really just interested in getting a clearer picture on why you thought Funky's views on the subject were worthy of derision.



Respectfully, I disagree with that one. Even factoring in Electoral College shenanigans, I'm of the opinion that Biden will get up.

Yes, Ol' Joe is a douchebag and the Dems are a bunch of lame-duck establishment hacks, etc, etc. Hard for me to get all warm and fuzzy about an entity that for the most part sits further right than the LNP. But of course none of that is of any huge importance with regards to this particular election. The biggest thing that Biden has going for him is that he's not Trump. And fortunately for Joe, I think that'll be enough this time around.

On top of a long grocery list of failings, Trump has overseen arguably the worst covid response on the planet, resulting in over 200,000 deaths, all merrily fueled by his own wildly dangerous misinformation and anti-science rhetoric. From "it's just a flu", to his head-scratching bleach comments, to HCQ ("the game changer!"), to Regeneron ("everyone's getting it for free!"), to second-guessing and insulting Fauci and assorted medical experts, to politicising mask wearing and turning it into some weird alpha male insult thing.....




Fingers crossed, the revelations that came out of the Woodward interviews will be the final nail in his coffin of willful negligence.

If the American people manage to collectively cut him a pass on the Covid stuff alone, then they're beyond all redemption.

Although nothing would really surprise me at this point. I'm still trying to get my head around the fact that Trump is basically running on a campaign of 'Only Trump can save you from Trump's America'. That's some surreal sh*t right there. Inception meets the Ministry Of Truth.



I have to confess, Mr N, this is where the logic gets a bit muddy for me. Particularly around where lines are drawn between invoking the name of actual fascists, simply calling someone a fascist, and this wild card of "catchy insulting names".

And most importantly, where does all that leave one of my favourite Trump nicknames -

'The Mango Mussolini'

(Also rate 'Cheeto Jesus'.)

Anyways, again, cheers for the respectful reply.


Respectfully, you don't need to keep saying "respectfully" :p I get that you're being respectful just in the way you're engaging me, if you disagree you don't need to preface it with "respectfully".

Many of the reasons you state I agree with, and are some of the reasons I can't stand the guy. His Covid response has been a nightmare, he uses deliberately inflammatory language, and his immediate response to the BLM protests was one of the most disgracefully bad displays of "leadership" I've ever witnessed.

I'm not going to respond to all of your examples of what you think are close to fascist behaviour, other than to say that most of those are ingrained in American politics. A few caught my eye though:

- "Undermining democratically elected State leaders" - aren't those very same democratically elected State leaders undermining their democratically elected Country leader? Why is it worse if Trump does it and better if a State Governor does it? Because we all hate Trump so it's ok? I disagree
- "Attacks on free press" - he treats the free press with the same scorn with which they treat him - they both give and take far more than they should and it reflects poorly on both
- "invalidating democratic electoral processes" - isn't that what Hilary and then the Democrats have spent the past 4 years doing?

Again, none of this reflects me supporting Trump, I'm just trying to be a neutral observer and I see poor behaviour on both sides. If you want to get to the crux of what I think: I think Trump is a product of a broken system. Rather than complain about the symptom, get to the heart of the issue and fix the system, and then the Trumps (and Bidens) of the world won't be running for President.

I think it's clear that calling someone an insulting nickname ("Dictator Dan", "The Mango Mussolini") is not the same as actually believing someone is a dictator or Mussolini reincarnate. My problem with Funky is that he actually believes Trump is a fascist, not just that he called Trump an insulting nickname. When I pressed him on it to understand why he actually believed that, he didn't respond. That being said, my personal preference is to not resort to childish name-calling of elected officials. My anecdotal experience is the same people that are crying foul about the title "Dictator Dan" are the same ones that are running with "Scotty From Marketing" and loved calling Abbott "The Mad Monk". Again, as someone that tries (and sometimes fails lol) to stay neutral, that strikes me as hilariously hypocritical.

Anyway, this post is long enough, otherwise people will start calling me Tas. Thanks for the chat, it's really engaging and challenging - and forcing me to think through more clearly what I think about all the s*** going on in America.
 
Yo Timmy, if Coach Scamper retires then I think its only fair your Scamper hangs up the boots for the game day threads too.

TBH, Scamper the cat didn’t bring us a lot of luck, so I reckon roll out your Pup next year and he/she could be part of the rebuild alongside our very own talented young Pups (including one of McDonald/Phillips/Hollands/DGB).

Hopefully your Pup becomes the good luck charm we need to win premiership number 5.

2020 Membership Slogan.. *Pup for the Cup*
Sissy Rose is 3 (up to 5 maybe) so maybe (let me think about it). can Scamper be Coach Emeritus if he does retire.
 

NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian had the second highest approval rating (67 per cent), followed by Queensland’s Annastacia Palaszczuk (62 per cent)

Despite presiding over the hotel quarantine debacle that resulted in hundreds of deaths and a second round of lockdowns, Premier Daniel Andrews enjoyed the support of 54 per cent of Victorians.

South Australian Premier Steven Marshall had the lowest approval rating of 51 per cent.

Nationally, Prime Minister Scott Morrison posted 63 per cent approval rating compared to Labor leader Anthony Albanese’s 44 per cent.

Mr Morrison also led Mr Albanese as preferred Prime Minister by 50 per cent to 25 per cent, with the remainder undecided.
 
Yo Timmy, if Coach Scamper retires then I think its only fair your Scamper hangs up the boots for the game day threads too.



............so I reckon roll out your Pup next year and he/she could be part of the rebuild alongside our very own talented young Pups (including one of McDonald/Phillips/Hollands/DGB).

 
it's obvious why it keeps happening and clearly it is working when sopwiths north has no recollection of him doing it 6+ times.

less than 24 hours after the debate it was brought up and he denounced them again. Then a week later during the NBC interview the interviewer said "will you once and for all..."

I know it was a running joke after the debate, but people were saying he needs to wake up and post a video of him denouncing them every day to please people. At this point it might be the only way to stop that question being asked in every interview.
Given his (pre prez) history and family history it's hard to take his denunciations that seriously.

More kayfabe.
 
I get that the source is not a reliable one, it’s a satire site, but the footage is clear isn’t it? I’m not going to find “more reputable” sites to collate these quotes when it’s all quoted here :p

I don't claim to be a close follower of US politics but what struck me about those grabs was how reactive they were. There was a lot of "disavowal" of David Duke's support when pressed by journalists. Eventually there were some blanket statements of "racism is bad" and even condemnation of White supremacy "... or any type of supremacy".
What I didn't notice was any statements of what he was doing or planning to do to tackle the issue. No bringing in the national guard or declaring them terrorist organisations, or pointing to the steps his administration had taken to undermine them. Not even thundering rhetoric beyond "of course white supremacists are bad (but let's not forget there are lots of other bad people)".
 
I don't claim to be a close follower of US politics but what struck me about those grabs was how reactive they were. There was a lot of "disavowal" of David Duke's support when pressed by journalists. Eventually there were some blanket statements of "racism is bad" and even condemnation of White supremacy "... or any type of supremacy".
What I didn't notice was any statements of what he was doing or planning to do to tackle the issue. No bringing in the national guard or declaring them terrorist organisations, or pointing to the steps his administration had taken to undermine them. Not even thundering rhetoric beyond "of course white supremacists are bad (but let's not forget there are lots of other bad people)".

This is very true, and actions speak louder than words. In fairness, the claim was that Trump has never denounced white supremacy, and it's clear that he has. Now, if you don't take him at his word that's a different matter, and I wouldn't necessarily disagree with you, but any claims that he hasn't denounced white supremacy are just wrong.
 
This is very true, and actions speak louder than words. In fairness, the claim was that Trump has never denounced white supremacy, and it's clear that he has. Now, if you don't take him at his word that's a different matter, and I wouldn't necessarily disagree with you, but any claims that he hasn't denounced white supremacy are just wrong.

It's a stupid statement that really doesn't deserve any reply unless a political leader can be directly connected to such things.

It's kindergarten level politics.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top