Jump to content
LOTROCommunity

Have you voted? ;)


LasraelLarson
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Papi said:

1. Investigating a breach from a adversarial country is never a waste of time.  It's the CIA's job.  Irregardless of what we may or may not have done in the past and will do in the future, investigating how this actually happened will help prevent it from happening in the future.  It's the exact opposite of trivial. I'm not quire sure why that point is getting lost here.

2. The media, for the most part, simply quotes Trump. Or captures what he tweets.  That alone is enough to "discredit" him.  The media doesn't have to reach very far to find something negative about him.  But judging from your opinion of the media (not sure who exactly you are referring to, "media" is quite broad), it doesn't matter at this point. 

3. Well, I do care.  Very much so.  And the fact that this investigation has received bi-partisan support speaks volumes. To me, it seems you're biased against the media so I think you're reading into it.  Again, majority of the news outlets I've seen lead with the fact that regardless of the information that comes about as a result of the investigation, the election results stand.

4. We do?  Enlighten me...

1. It's entirely when it's a breach of a private server, conducted by a separate hacking group and not the actual Russian government. People know how to prevent it, and that's by following the law and not using private servers for government information.

2. They also cherry-pick what they show. In Trump's case, they tried to push everything negative that they could, but it didn't work for them. The fact is there was a clear leftist bias which they were using to influence the election, to a much greater degree than documents on WikiLeaks did. And by media I mean US "news" sources.

3. Great for you. I'm not reading anything into it beyond what's being said, which is that they're trying to further discredit the election results by suggesting a Russian plot to trick the public. It's hypocrisy from the left, once again, and acting like it's a bad thing to reveal corruption.

4. Have a wild guess as to why Russia would favour a candidate that likes Russia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Doro said:

1. It's entirely when it's a breach of a private server, conducted by a separate hacking group and not the actual Russian government. People know how to prevent it, and that's by following the law and not using private servers for government information.

 

I think you may getting Clinton's private email server mixed up with that of the DNC?  The majority of the information that was hacked was private emails and campaign correspondence.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Papi said:

I think you may getting Clinton's private email server mixed up with that of the DNC?  The majority of the information that was hacked was private emails and campaign correspondence.

 

Apparently so. Is this not the whole Podesta thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

16 hours ago, Almagnus1 said:

 

Ok, so which of the following assumptions is there evidence against:

Christianity does not function if you do not make the assumption:

  • That God exists
  • The Trinity exists [as God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit]
  • Jesus was a divine being (ie: not an average dude).

Everything else in Christianity comes from those baseline assumptions.  If any of these assumptions are not true, then the entire thing falls apart.

I believe that;

  • The flying spaghetti monster exists
  • The Holy Dodecahedron exists (Said spaghetti guy, Elves, Dwarves, Unicorns, Iron Man, Thor, The Unseen University, Time Travel, Skynet, Holy Dolphins, King Arthur & the Knights of the Round Table, Cloud from FFVII )
  • All Dolphins are divine (and not just mammals commonly mistaken for fish)

Now if you cannot provide any evidence that I am incorrect then clearly they must be true. That isn't how science works

This is how science works;

  1. Choose what phenomenon it is you want to explain (creation, life, death and everything in between)
  2. Collect as much data as you can about said phenomenon
  3. Propose a hypothesis (the existence of God)
  4. Test the hypothesis by collecting more data through experimentation and observation, including data that contradicts your hypothesis as well as any that supports it
  5. If your hypothesis still stands up once you have tested it open it up to peer review
  6. If you hypothesis continues to stand up to all possible attacks on it then it must be the best existing explanation for the phenomenon and can be promoted to a theory.

All theories are subject to change and modification, no theory, no matter how much we rely on it, is taken as "gospel" if there is enough evidence to demonstrate that it is incorrect.

You however appear to have skipped all of that and are asking people to provide evidence that your hypothesis is false without first going through the rigorous process of demonstrating the data that you believe shows it to be true.

If this were a scientific review you wouldn't be asking us to provide evidence that God doesn't exist, you would be demonstrating the data you have collected to show that God does exist and asking us to show where that data is incorrect or doesn't provide the best possible current explanation.

Quote

The best we can say is that "we have not found evidence to the existence of God, therefore the claim of God's existence is unsubstantiated".

As with the existence of divine dolphins and flying spaghetti monsters

3 hours ago, Almagnus1 said:

 That's much of what can be said with certain theoretical sciences (especially all the screwy stuff in the quantum realm), and also with the theories relating to how the universe and solar system formed because we cannot actually provide tangible proof in the same way we can for physics and chemistry

No, we can't provide tangible proof, however we can provide tangible supporting evidence and data that support them. These are theories based on vast amounts of collected data that best fit the observations we have made so far and provide the best current explanation for those phenomenon. There also isn't actually a general consensuses on all of this, a lot of scientists have different ideas about how this stuff works, that's ok as well. We may be wrong, and as further data is collected those theories will be refined and modified and gradually become closer to the actual truth.

As I said before, science once proposed the world was flat, providing theories that later turn out to be incorrect are still the basis for work on theories that eventually turn out to be true, we have to start somewhere and then work on improving that theory and understanding. Unlike religion and its dogmatic approach to the bible.

Quote

That said, it begs the question of what is beyond the edge of the universe, and how exactly did the universe come into existence?

We don't know or have an answer, it isn't something science can ever collect data for so will probably never attempt to tackle, therefore it must be magic. 

I think the original point of all of this though was that it should be up to parents and religious institutions to bring children up as Christians or Muslims or Jews or whatever, and to do so outside of school. It should not be the responsibility of schools and teachers, who should be focusing on actual education.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Almagnus1 said:

Isn't the point of education to better learn how to work with different viewpoints, and how learn how to determine which to follow?  That is, in addition to learning skills so that a high school graduate doesn't necessarily need additional education to be ready for the workforce.

Yes, sure.

As for the rest of your post, I think you're well off the beaten path by now. Time to shut 'er down and call it a night, imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Almagnus1 said:

And yet... creation vs evolution debates happen...

But this

Quote

That said, it begs the question of what is beyond the edge of the universe, and how exactly did the universe come into existence?

Which is what I was responding to, has nothing to do with evolution. Evolution doesn't attempt to describe the creation of the universe?

As to climate science, some scientists interpret the evidence put before them one way, some another, as we learn more I'm sure we will come closer to the truth. All I know is that winters aren't nearly as cold in the UK as I remember when I was a kid. Also just saying "but climate science" is pretty much a strawman point and not really debating the topic. 

Quote

And that point deserves another "O RLY" owl because that's what I was munging with the math Theorems earlier (I'm surprised you didn't pick up on that point).

I believe you were trying to use the math thing as evidence that science relies on faith

Quote

Very well...

First, go read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_theorem_of_arithmetic

That theory must be true, or the entire number system falls apart.  Without the number system underpinning all of math and science, they fall apart.

This means that you must have faith that the above theory is true.  Note that it's a theory, not a law, because it cannot be proven.

Also Icosahedron has 20 faces, Dodecahedron 12, I listed 12 things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 13.12.2016 at 11:15 PM, Almagnus1 said:

So where did the particle that created the universe, the one that was the big bang come from?  Why did it explode?

First, wording. There was no explosion. The Big Bang Theory states that the universe expanded (and still does).

From what, no one knows. Some idea I read about is that quantum fluctuation might have resulted in a kind of blip that created the whole phantastillion amount of energy that started the process. But the concepts of space, time, and everything lose meaning the close you get to t0. Much the same with other theories, once you reach extreme situations (think Newtonian physics and relativistic speeds).

17 hours ago, Almagnus1 said:

That said, it begs the question of what is beyond the edge of the universe, and how exactly did the universe come into existence?

Again, expansion, not explosion, the theory is that there is nothing outside, or more to the point, there is no outside, as space-time itself is thought to not exist outside of the expanding universe.

The point with respect to faith and beliefs, though, is that scientists are aware of the limitations of our understanding of how the world works and are actively trying to improve on them. That includes throwing a lot of observations at the theories (as has been pointed out before, a scientific theory is way more than most layman are giving credit to the word theory!) to try and find weak spots.

SNy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Type of goverment, policies and world global system we had for last few decades, and especially since 1970s is shaking in it's fundaments. 

That is reason of those changes, why Erdogans in many countries exist and why there is so much "wtf?" things in both domestic and international matters in so many countries last decade, and especially last few years.

 

"It is cause we did not fought with those wanna be dictators sooner" or "It's religion!"  is false and not seeing wider picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Darmokk said:

So at the end of the day all that supposedly conservative rubbish is about religion after all?
 

Can't say I'm surprised.

There are many different reasons motivating many different people to greater or lesser degrees but religion never struck me as even one of the major factors.

Nationalism. Economic and cultural nationalism strikes me as the major force at play in the USA and Europe and tied to that the elite political system that gave aid and comfort to the issues driving that nationalist sentiment.

The EU teeters on the brink and if Trump gets seriously tough on trade... there can be extremely serious consequences when strong nationalist forces take the reins of power. Dangerous times ahead IMO but the farce that is the UN and EU is equally unpalatable and impotent... the pendulum swings...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fittybolger said:

There are many different reasons motivating many different people to greater or lesser degrees but religion never struck me as even one of the major factors.

Really? I suppose Europe is undergoing a massive issue with religion, so we see it all the time. When you have so many Muslims who are so aggressive about their beliefs, it kinda brings it to the forefront, instead of being this unspoken thing nobody really cared about.

I think the only other place where religion is so important is the US. Not just with politicians and southern states being all Bible-bashing, but with the whole support of Israel too (though, that's not surprising, considering how many Jews are in high positions in the US).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/12/2016 at 9:13 PM, Doro said:

Wait, wait, wait, wait... can we go back to this Russia hacking thing? What are they saying happened, that Russia hacked the emails that shone a light on Clinton, meaning Trump was preferable? I might be missing why this is such a problem.

 

On 12/13/2016 at 3:37 AM, Papi said:

If it actually has to be explained how dangerous it is for a foreign government to try and influence the election of another government then people have really lost the plot. I don't care how much you think Hillary didn't deserve to be President (she wasn't my first choice either), something needs to be done about it. I don't care what candidate the hacking favored, it's the hacking itself (and intent) that I'm worried about.

 

On 12/13/2016 at 4:40 AM, Jedy2 said:

Signed. I don't blame Putin for doing this, financing his right-wing proxies and such - these actions are rational. What worries me is their effectiveness and impunity. 

Liberal democracy cannot survive if the only response is the trumplike rejection of unpleasant truth. 

On 12/13/2016 at 9:58 AM, Darmokk said:

From a technical (computer security forensics) perspective the connection to the Russian government is also far from proof. Sure it is a scenario that some might find likely, but you will not find an independent software security researcher out on twitter that agrees that there is definite proof blaming the Russian government.

You will find plenty such people blaming the DNC for their amateurish approach to software security. No problem there. Not that the GOP will have any better security. Any of those naive muppets overriding software security in the name of "getting work done" should be disqualified from high level government jobs.

 

On 12/13/2016 at 10:31 AM, cossieuk said:

THe hacked both sides according to the CIA, but only released stuff that would harm the democrats.  

This is a foreign government trying to influence the outcome of another countries democratic elections.  That is not a good thing

assuming that it was a hack and not a leak.  Julian Assange asserts this was a leak, not a hack; at least with regard to the DNC correspondences.

the John Podesta google account was accessed with a password, via a phishing scam Podesta fell for.  the Podesta google mails lined up nicely with the DNC correspondences however; which could be a large factor that they did not outright deny the veracity of the leaks, but only attempted to suggest they may have been altered.

Assange has also claimed that they were not in fact altered at all.

as for the CIA accusation, it is crossing information from attacks by a "Guccifer 2.0" on Government & US sites, with the above 2 leaks from wikileaks.  they are NOT the same thing.  the "Guccifer 2.0" data is so sloppy (contains Cyrillic text, etc.) that it looks more like a fabrication to frame Russia, than actually something tied directly too.

as for the DNC & Podesta leaks, Assange won't clarify anything that would identify the source other than to say it wasn't the act of  "a State."  notice that isn't "the States" but rather "a State."

i have heard 2 scenarios that are both plausible however:

1.) a disgusted DNC member leaked the emails.  i have mentioned in a previous post of 3 fairly apparent factions forming in the DNC.  and the leaks clearly show how a portion of the DNC decided to back Hillary against Bernie, even colluding against him.

or

2.) from within the FBI.  though this one is scary as it would suggest an internal conflict between agencies.  if this one turns out to be true, the potential for a Cival War...  if you think things have been ugly, you haven't seen anything yet.

regardless, this CIA conclusion of Russian interference is not shared amongst other Government agencies.  & it still lacks any evidence, (only a conclusion, not a certainty.)  given that the Iraq weapons of mass destruction reports came from the CIA and started the Iraq war, turned out to be false...  or the hunt for Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan (who just so happened not to be in Afghanistan) & that conflict & all the other conflicts started at the behest of the CIA (Al Shifa pharmaceuticals anyone?) that later turned out to be false...  there is plenty of reason to be skeptical over this as well!

anyway, it is funny how prior to the election multiple DNC parties stated the election couldn't be hacked, well beyond just the rebuke of Trump in the 3rd debate that he would clearly state & accept the outcome of the election.  & in a recent Trevor Noah interview; Obama even clarified that the election wasn't hacked and only eluded to the external attacks of outside agencies, without naming the Podesta & DNC leaks specifically.

this Monday (19th.) the electoral college votes & if all these efforts to sway that fail...  & they will, then the next phase is confirmation in Congress (January 6th i believe) were no doubt they'll throw everything they can to undermine the legitimacy of Trump before inauguration of Jan 20th. when he officially becomes President of the US.

suck it up lefty buttercups, Donald Trump won the Presidency of the United States.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LasraelLarson said:

 

 

 

suck it up lefty buttercups, Donald Trump won the Presidency of the United States.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/16/obama-retaliation-russia-hacking-us-election

I understand that internet trolls are happy cause a pompous imbecile will the the most powerful man on earth, but I do not call them names, do I? Lefty buttercups indeed... Grrr.  

For the record - I do think Putin did all he could to weaken the West. I don't think the hacking link could ever be proven, and love between psychopaths is a fickle thing, as Erdogan&Putin relationship can testify. So, no one knows if it will end up so sweet for Putin if Trump starts off by shooting down a plane or two. Cutting Trump off from Tweeter and phones might delay China's nuking of Taiwan for a while, but I fully respect the democratic choice of the American People.

You got what you voted for. We in Poland, got what we voted for too.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Doro said:

Really? I suppose Europe is undergoing a massive issue with religion, so we see it all the time. When you have so many Muslims who are so aggressive about their beliefs, it kinda brings it to the forefront, instead of being this unspoken thing nobody really cared about.

I think the only other place where religion is so important is the US. Not just with politicians and southern states being all Bible-bashing, but with the whole support of Israel too (though, that's not surprising, considering how many Jews are in high positions in the US).

There has been much discussion about "Christianity" in this thread but Darmokk used the word "religion" and I followed on that comment from the Christian angle and I didn't find Christianity to be a major factor. To clarify... the Christian right was certainly a major component of Trump's victory but not because Trump appeals directly to their Christian beliefs (he doesn't) but due to crossover values like Patriotism and Nationalism that also resonate with the Christian right voting bloc. 

Now "Religion" as pertains to Moslem terrorism and migrants is certainly a major issue in the USA and EU.

The Jewish contribution to American politics is far more difficult to pin down. Much of the Jewish vote has traditionally been Democratic for reasons of Liberalism but there is also a segment of the Jewish vote that supports the nation of Israel and these Jews will normally gravitate to the Republican party. Sadly whenever the Jewish contribution to political discourse comes up the "Worldwide Jewish Conspiracy" often raises it's ugly head but I just ignore that crap.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 13/12/2016 at 0:13 AM, Doro said:

Reply to Jedy2 but wonky forum won't have it.

I'm no fan of Trump. I think his fondness for Putin is idiotic. But I also think Obama's poopoo-ing Romney in 2012 over his concerns about Russia and the Obama/Clinton reset with Russia was also idiotic.

US should respond to the hacking in some way but I'm not sure what they can really do beyond sanctions of some sort. Also, parties need to re-beef up their security if possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Papi said:

The iron here being Sean Hannity was vehemently anti Assange and his efforts until the leaks started benefiting the political party he favored.  Then, of course, he came to "appreciate" his actions.

i am well aware of Sean Hannity's previous history of opposing Assange back when wikileaks was exposing both John McCain & later Mitt Romney.  all you have to do is listen to the profound communication style differences in the video i linked between Assange & Hanity to see they are each coming at this from a VERY different perspective.

that said whilst Hanity aligns with conservatives, the shifting positions in recent years, he has been on the attack (more so against McCain than Romney) against the conservatives who's agendas have been more globalist in nature.  so whilst he does absolutely have a partisan (conservative) position, it isn't entirely dishonest.

additionally, with recent wikileaks about 6 Republicans receiving money directly from the DNC to oppose Trump (Jeb Bush, Carla Fiorina, John Kasich, Lindsey Graham, John McCain and the final person isn't named, but appears to be Paul Ryan.)  it is no surprise Hannity would vehemently oppose those whom he considered traitors.

9 hours ago, Jedy2 said:

I understand that internet trolls are happy cause a pompous imbecile will the the most powerful man on earth, but I do not call them names, do I? Lefty buttercups indeed... Grrr.  

Donald Trump is pompous in a VERY New York way, i prefer to use the term braggadocios.  i won't cram up this thread with even more videos, but there are many examples of New Yorkers communicating in this exact same style on both the left & the right of the political spectrum (heck even on the authoritarian & Anarchist spectrum.)  it is absolutely a byproduct of the environment he grew up in, worked in.

imbecile however...  on that disparaging accusation, i will have to disagree.  Trump is very talented in influential communication.  he is a brander & a deal maker.  an imbecile would not have survived over 30+ years in the developing of real estate market, as he has, being a complete imbecile.  whilst he has some failures (any risk taker has them) on the whole, he has come out overwhelmingly in the success column.  not an imbecile, not remotely.

9 hours ago, Jedy2 said:

love between psychopaths is a fickle thing, as Erdogan & Putin relationship can testify.

Edrogan, Gaddafi, Hussain, Assad, or the various leaders in Afghanistan prior to 2001...  the middle east has been the battle grounds for proxy wars & regime changes for decades.  BOTH the US & the former Soviet Union (and now Russia) have had their hands in the pie.

whilst Turkey (under Edrogan) shifts ever further from a democracy & closer to a dictatorship & Edrogan has recently shifted alignments slightly away from the west, the strategic position of that country at the base of Europe... lets just say i think it is more likely Edrogan is playing both sides against his middle in hopes of furthering his own ends.

to assume Edrogan is aligned with NATO or Russia is a bad gamble.  propaganda certainly, but accurate...

9 hours ago, Jedy2 said:

So, no one knows if it will end up so sweet for Putin if Trump starts off by shooting down a plane or two.

this is rather hysterical.  Trump needs to do nothing of the kind.  he has stated that all the stupid proxy wars the US has engaged in are something he intends to stop.  the only continuation of combat he intends to do is to wipe out Isil (Isis.)

on that front it may take considerably less military force than you assume.  both Qatar & Saudi Arabia have heavily funded this proxy war & back Isil (among other rebel fighting parties.)  Trump has stated these countries will pay...  do you understand the nuance behind this?  do you know how much support the Saudi Army receives (especially the Saudi air force) from the US?

that is the thing about Saudi Arabia, the training and specialization amoungst its people is so profoundly lacking, the US provides a ton of support in the form of satellite & other intel, that without, would cripple the effectiveness of the Saudi military.

Trump doesn't need to shoot down any planes. & if the rebel (terrorist) forces can be knocked out of Syria, the effort to restore basic structures (electricity, food and water) will allow huge portions of Migrants in the west, (that includes Russia) to return home.

9 hours ago, Jedy2 said:

Cutting Trump off from Tweeter and phones might delay China's nuking of Taiwan for a while

absurd, completely and totally absurd.  China's history with Taiwan is one that involved losses to other Asian countries (Japan) as well as European (Dutch & Spain)  China desires territorial control to prevent Taiwan being used as a satellite of a foreign power and threat to mainland China.

whilst securing China's mainland may be a legitimate desire, i don't think they have any valid claim to Taiwan.


additionally China is a very unique party in all of this.  something i find very interesting in all of this is China's position on Islam.  which isn't ever really talked about.  but given Islams aggressive attitude towards dominance, rest assured China's tolerance for Islam is incredibly low.  on that front China's involvement Globally against Islam isn't much mentioned...  they however are VERY much involved in opposition to its spread.  i wonder how long it will be before they more openly move against Indonesia?

9 hours ago, Jedy2 said:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/16/obama-retaliation-russia-hacking-us-election

For the record - I do think Putin did all he could to weaken the West. I don't think the hacking link could ever be proven...

and yet Obama, who has another 5 weeks left in office is acting like he will still be in power for years to come & calling for retaliations on suspicion of influence...  yet he was completely comfortable to threaten Britain's voting on Brexit with promises of tense relations & sanctions should they opt to leave. 

& then there is the matter of all the CIA ops in coordination with Saudis to train various factions (including Isil.)  it is no surprise to me that currently moderate rebels, Al Queda & Isil (as well as other smaller factions) have all joined up (rather than operating separately) against the Syrian Army & Russia.

& surprise, surprise the Guardian is reporting Obama's latest rhetoric unfiltered... as are all the other usual suspects (NY Times, WaPo, MSNBC, CNN & so forth.)

Obama is ready to retaliate on suspicion...  he needs to be packing up his shit in the White House, so he can promptly fuck directly off come January 20th.

8 hours ago, FundinStrongarm said:
On 12/12/2016 at 9:13 PM, Doro said:

Reply to Jedy2 but wonky forum won't have it.

I'm no fan of Trump. I think his fondness for Putin is idiotic. But I also think Obama's poopoo-ing Romney in 2012 over his concerns about Russia and the Obama/Clinton reset with Russia was also idiotic.

US should respond to the hacking in some way but I'm not sure what they can really do beyond sanctions of some sort. Also, parties need to re-beef up their security if possible.

Trump is absolutely going to beef up the US military.  & he has explicitly stated that he will only cut back if other foreign powers (Russia, China) also cut back as well. 

as for internet security, whilst there are measures that can be taken to reduce risk of exposing data...  what the internet has become, there will always be an element of risk.

one thing Trump could do that would go miles to cleaning up this mess is to turf this Obama appointment to the head (director) of the CIA:

drain the swamp indeed!

also, i do not for one second believe that Donald Trump adores Putin.  rather he has a strategic respect for Putin.  their are opportunities for mutually beneficial deals. that do not put the security of either power at risk.

Putin is also no angel & whilst dealing with Russia has risk factors...  there are common causes to be had. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lars makes many valid points.

The "imbecile" expletive slipped my control button, as Trump's inability to shut the fuck up about things he has no idea about, annoyed me a bit much. (Never mind his pathological lying). 

No, I don't REALLY think China is going to nuke Taiwan, but they sure as hell started talking about it. 

All we can do is just wait and see. There is also the option that Trump is going to be worse than we think. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/15/2016 at 9:07 PM, fittybolger said:

[fucking forum quote brokenness]

On 12/15/2016 at 9:07 PM, fittybolger said:

There are many different reasons motivating many different people to greater or lesser degrees but religion never struck me as even one of the major factors.

Nationalism. Economic and cultural nationalism strikes me as the major force at play in the USA and Europe and tied to that the elite political system that gave aid and comfort to the issues driving that nationalist sentiment.

The EU teeters on the brink and if Trump gets seriously tough on trade... there can be extremely serious consequences when strong nationalist forces take the reins of power. Dangerous times ahead IMO but the farce that is the UN and EU is equally unpalatable and impotent... the pendulum swings...

I was specifically talking about our local upset Trump supporter. Now he comes out of the closet as a Christianity driven hick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Jedy2 said:

All we can do is just wait and see. There is also the option that Trump is going to be worse than we think. 

indeed, time will tell.  Trump isn't officially president until January 20th 2017.  he could be better than everyone expected, he could be worse, or simply a bit of both depending on the issue at hand.  regardless, Trump deserves a chance, he earned it, contrary to the narratives running in opposition to undermine his legitimacy.  currently in hopes of swaying the electoral college this Monday December 19th & again in early January (6th if i am not mistaken) with congress.

ALL current counter narratives are geared to manipulate these check points in the road to inauguration on January 20th.

the reason all these narratives will fail, is they are relying on "moral panic" rather than substantive reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...