[Politics] Donald Trump 2024

[Zeberdi]

Thanks Zeb, but while I accept that the meaning of words can evolve over time, and take on different meanings in certain settings, I don’t believe in allowing politicians who are effectively attempting to smear their opponents to completely redefine words and effectively get away with those smears.

The “when I said socialist, I meant someone with views different to my own” defence shall not stand.

You’ll note a complete absence of me describing @lasvegan as a fascist/nazi on here, and that’s because I don’t believe he’s either of those things. All I’m asking for is that we cut through the hyperbole and deal with the reality.

Yes, I totally see what you are saying and I get that but my point is more of a general one.

I just wanted to highlight that Americans have redefined ‘socialism’ - there simply isn’t an homogeneous understanding of the term and it is more concrete than just ‘settings’ - maybe read the article I posted. Our ‘Clause 4’ understanding of ’socialism’ doesn’t even come into American discourse. Right wing American politicians as British ones, use ‘socialism’ as a general slur against any politician/party espousing left wing politics. The term ‘fascism’ has also been misappropriated as a derogatory term used by left wing ideologists to slur hard right politics. I’m just saying, these terms can be very undefined, redefined and unrefined in modern political debate and often have no relation to the root ideology from which they spring..

I did also note that you were called a ‘socialist’ in a deliberately derogatory manner by @lasvegan (for which he has admitted and qualified). Sorry if I didn’t recognise that insult to you in my response.

I’m merely pointing out that it is much easier to have a dialogue about political ideologies if both sides can at least have a common understanding on the fundamental terms being used - otherwise people simply end up shouting across a canyon and listening to their own echoes.

I think we are probably on the same page tbh.

 

[Zeberdi]

A restrained response (in terms of length) seeing that the question could easily warrant a book sized response!

I could write more if you like - you know I could

 

[BadFish]

The point I was trying to make is that the Democrat Party is leaning towards totalitarianism, one party rule.

This is a huge statement to make with no information to back it up.

Got to say I would need some convincing of this being true.

Everyone can agree that they are are doing their best to imprison their main political opponent.

I think that suggesting 'everyone' can agree is a massive stretch. More like a small percentage of people would agree.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Yes, I totally see what you are saying and I get that but my point is more of a general one.

I just wanted to highlight that Americans have redefined ‘socialism’ - there simply isn’t an homogeneous understanding of the term and it is more concrete than just ‘settings’ - maybe read the article I posted. Our ‘Clause 4’ understanding of ’socialism’ doesn’t even come into American discourse. Right wing American politicians as British ones, use ‘socialism’ as a general slur against any politician/party espousing left wing politics. The term ‘fascism’ has also been misappropriated as a derogatory term used by left wing ideologists to slur hard right politics. I’m just saying, these terms can be very undefined, redefined and unrefined in modern political debate and often have no relation to the root ideology from which they spring..

I did also note that you were called a ‘socialist’ in a deliberately derogatory manner by @lasvegan (for which he has admitted and qualified). Sorry if I didn’t recognise that insult to you in my response.

I’m merely pointing out that it is much easier to have a dialogue about political ideologies if both sides can at least have a common understanding on the fundamental terms being used - otherwise people simply end up shouting across a canyon and listening to their own echoes.

I think we are probably on the same page tbh.

I agree about the slurs. And I find @lasvegan interesting. I can myself construct a defense of voting for Trump based on perceived personal benefit. If that's his position, fine. But I start to sigh when the slurs start to appear. For example, Lasvegan claiming the Democrats want a one party state. What rubbish!

More lovely weather today on the Eastern side of blighty. Time to enjoy it

 

[Stat Brother]

This is a huge statement to make with no information to back it up.

Got to say I would need some convincing of this being true.

Esp from a supporter of the President who incited an attempted coup and who's stated aim is to pardon all those who took part (after he's pardoned himself first, of course)

 

[marlowe]

I visited the website which is hawking the Trump endorsed bible and on the Frequently Asked Questions page one of those frequently asked questions is "What if my bible has sticky pages?".

The only reading material which is usually associated with sticky pages is used pornographic magazines which begs the question what dubious purpose those Trump devotees who are buying His bible are actually using it for?

God Bless The USA Bible

This beautiful, unique, & easy to read Bible (KJV version) contains the chorus to the song on the inside cover, hand-written and signed by Lee Greenwood.

godblesstheusabible.com

 

[US Seagull]

Worth a read:

Our Trump reporting upsets some readers, but there aren’t two sides to facts: Letter from the Editor

This is a tough column to write, because I don’t want to demean or insult those who write me in good faith. I’ve started it a half dozen times since November but turned to other topics each time because this needle hard to thread.

www.cleveland.com

 

[Me Atome]

No it's not what we vote for.
We only vote for it when the Conservative government has shit the bed so badly we all crave a reset but don't have the stones to go all in Socialist.
It's where we are at now, where we were post Major and where we will be in 25 years time.

As someone else noted, we are a bit off topic, but whilst we are here....

I wouldn't argue with you but I suppose it's a question of what we would call a Right of Centre socialist government.

I accept that many won't accept that any Conservative government can ever be considered socialist, whatever it does, but that's a matter of opinion.

 

[Crawley Dingo]

Perhaps a good start would be telling us why you are so vested in a Trump presidency (to the extent that you are) when you are not living in the US or are American - or are you?

You first, why are you so invested in seeing a foreign presidential candidate removed by lawfare(Electoral interference.) when you don't live there?

 

[Bodian]

You first, why are you so invested in seeing a foreign presidential candidate removed when you don't live there?

I think @Zerberdi has answered that in post #2756 a couple of pages back where they listed many reasons why they didn't consider Trump was a good president for America or the World.

You first, why are you so invested in seeing a foreign presidential candidate removed by lawfare(Electoral interference.) when you don't live there?

The highlighted bit is your subjective view, and unfair to include in one question - because if we try an answer the question as edited above, without removing the subjective bit - you could justifiably say that we had 'accepted' the lawfare point of view. Which I certainly haven't - and reading @Zeberdi 's posts - I don't think they have either.

Anyway - onto the football.

 

[Zeberdi]

You first, why are you so invested in seeing a foreign presidential candidate removed …when you don't live there?

Because half my family live in the States - because his Jan 6 attempt at interrupting the peaceful transition of power was a threat to the liberal democratic Country they live in. Because they are Jewish and don’t want to continue living in a Country where the President of that Country dog whistles to neo-Nazis and White Supremacists.

For all the reasons I bullet-pointed over the page as @Bodian says a post that you didn’t read btw because you were more interested in instructing me how to write posts on NSC at the time iir.

Now you - answer my question- why are you so supportive of a foreign ex-President and so vested in him getting back into power?

 

[lasvegan]

I did also note that you were called a ‘socialist’ in a deliberately derogatory manner by @lasvegan (for which he has admitted and qualified).

I didn’t mean it to be derogatory, just calling it as I see it. People ARE socialist, communist, Marxist, authoritarian, totalitarian, or whatever you want to call it. It’s no more of a slur than calling me a capitalist.

 

[lasvegan]

I agree about the slurs. And I find @lasvegan interesting. I can myself construct a defense of voting for Trump based on perceived personal benefit. If that's his position, fine. But I start to sigh when the slurs start to appear. For example, Lasvegan claiming the Democrats want a one party state. What rubbish!

So you find me interesting, yet sigh…a little condescending maybe?

 

[Springal]

Exclusive: Trump Media saved in 2022 by Russian-American under criminal investigation

Trump’s social media company went public relying partly on loans from trust managed by person of interest to prosecutors

www.theguardian.com

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

So you find me interesting, yet sigh…a little condescending maybe?

It's the slurs against Biden.

If you can stand resolutely behind your choice for Trump, using cold rational reasoning, there is no need to underpin it with slurs.

You make a mistake by changing the contest to 'who is the most corrupt' and 'who is the most disgusting'. That one is easy - its Trump

Stick with competence to deliver to you, personally, the greater advantage, or you invite me to question your otherwise perverse affection for the pussy grabber.

 

[Stat Brother]

That's the thing.

I reckon I could be easily talked out of #TeamBiden, the problem being those doing the talking are pro Trump, which is where their entire argument falls down.

 

[Zeberdi]

Exclusive: Trump Media saved in 2022 by Russian-American under criminal investigation

Trump’s social media company went public relying partly on loans from trust managed by person of interest to prosecutors

www.theguardian.com

I think anyone asking the right questions years ago could have concluded the Trump Organization is one large cover for Trump’s money laundering operations with Russia through the Deutsche Bank:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/19/business/deutsche-bank-trump-kushner.html?ugrp=u&unlocked_article_code=1.h00.rJW3.t-YhweqRiib-&smid=url-share

Ever realise how Trump got the money to campaign for President first time round?

“Deutsche Bank loaned Trump some $2 billion — which helped pave the way for his political rise.”

A bank with secret billionaire clients that it fails to investigate properly if there are red flags of money laundering - a bank that Russians use to move money to the West; a bank that Trump and the Kushner family have used to transfer money to ‘interests’ in Russia:

( scroll down the Nrs cookies permission pop up)

Deutsche Bank faces action over $20bn Russian money-laundering scheme | Deutsche Bank | The Guardian

Exclusive: in confidential internal report seen by the Guardian, bank says scandal has hurt global brand

amp.theguardian.com

 

[Triggaaar]

I didn’t mean it to be derogatory, just calling it as I see it.

Could you post a link to your definition of socialist please, because calling people who don't support Trump socialists doesn't make sense.

 

[Zeberdi]

Could you post a link to your definition of socialist please, because calling people who don't support Trump socialists doesn't make sense.

To make it easier, @lasvegan could refer to the table (which I posted earlier) and say which definition of socialism he embraces - because, yes, as you say, it seems to make no ideological sense to us in the UK at all, in calling anyone that doesn’t support Trump/Democrats, a ‘socialist‘. Then perhaps we could start to unpack why Lasvegan thinks the Dems are socialist by looking at what Democrat policies fulfil his criteria to earn such an epithet.

The Meaning of "Socialism" to Americans Today

Asked to define socialism, 24% of Americans mention "equality," while 17% say it is government ownership of the means of production.

news.gallup.com

 

[Triggaaar]

To make it easier, @lasvegan could refer to the table (which I posted earlier) and say which definition of socialism he embraces - because, yes, as you say, it seems to make no ideological sense to us in the UK at all, in calling anyone that doesn’t support Trump/Democrats, a ‘socialist‘.

Correct definitions of socialism aren't limited to the UK. Right wing Americans use the term for anyone not as right wing as them, but it's not accurate either here or in the US.