blackjack21 wrote:You know it's not unreasonable to dislike your political adversary. However, when a guy with no prior political experience beats out 16 seasoned politicians to win a nomination and then beats another seasoned politician the establishment was effectively trying to coronate with an electoral inside straight, you have to consider one thing: he may not be an idiot.
Being smart is not a requisite for winning an election, certainly not in the United States.
Look for instance Hugo Chavez. Populism certainly carries far more weight than intelligence in a political election. I trust that you are bright enough to realize and sincere enough to admit, that there is no doubt that Hillary is far more brilliant than Trump is. I mean, there is no comparison.
Not that intelligence is the most important trait of a leader, nor does it guarantee that the leader will be good for their people. Putin is brilliant, I have no doubt of it, he is ruthless but I don't think anyone can seriously challenge his intelligence. Trump has demonstrated time and again that he is lazy, does not hear or care for intelligence briefs, has a poor vocabulary, has a very poor understanding of world/national and even local politics and economics. Even his own staff have called him a moron
. Look I feel sorry for you trying to defend this poor moron don't insist.
See my above reply to the poster whose name we shall not mention (like Eric Ciaramella). Tom Bradley was mayor of Los Angeles for 20 years straight until 1992, but left office after the LA riots. It was the first time a Republican had won the mayorship of Los Angeles since Norril Poulson left office in 1961. There hasn't been a Republican mayor since. Even the Democrats vote Republican when they get scared. That's why the put Rudy Giuliani in office in New York City. I don't think this is going to help the Democrats at all. I might be wrong, but we'll see soon enough.
Dude... you know that we can google this stuff right? This is incorrect, the last 3 mayors including the current one are Democrat.
And while I am not well versed about the politic demographic of LA, it seems that for the last 120 years there have been 11 democrats and 9 republicans, that's a 55/45% split, hardly some sort of democratic stronghold.
Comey and Ukraine are in Trump's wheelhouse. Covid is not his doing by a long shot, and neither is the Minneapolis PD.
It is not just what Trump caused directly (Comey and Ukraine arguably directly from his doing) but what he does and how he reacts matters as well and in the cases of COVID response and how he is currently dealing with the situation... well let's just say he gets a big fat F(-------------).
These things tend to snowball when you don't address them early. And if you think that there is no some disgruntled staffer somewhere inside his white house just waiting for the right moment to leak key information regarding his mishandling of either situation, probably closer to the election, then well you haven't been paying attention for the last 3 years.
The Republican senators/representatives have adopted the "no comment" wait and see and finally say something when things calm down and they finally know what way to respond. That tactic have served to keep off the wrath of the idiot in chief but it has not really worked out very well to maintain their majority has it?
Martial law.
WOW. Your idea of what would make America great scares the crap out of me.
This is what we need, a pandemic, 30m+ unemployment, cities burning and martial law.
Please, stick to movies. In real life, when that shit happens, people die.
These stories aren't two dimensional. It will be asked and answered why they were arresting Floyd and the circumstances that led up to his death. Pretending that isn't going to happen is just being unprepared for trial. There's no virtue in it.
This is not trial. It does not matter for the purposes of discussion and to objectively evaluate what happened. Technically it shouldn't matter in a trial, that is not to say that a skillful lawyers and/or prosecutor wouldnt use these kinds of shenanigans to influence a jury. They can attempt it, and it is up to the opposing party, the judge and frankly the jury to see if they fall for these sorts of shenanigans. But like I said earlier. IT DOES NOT CHANGE ANYTHING.
At no point has Trump suggested that police treat people in a brutal manner unnecessarily.
LOL
I'm pointing out to you that most of these problems are happening in places controlled almost exclusively by Democrats. In 21 of the 23 cities facing riots, they are run by Democrats and have been for a very long time.
And the vast majority of alligator attacks are in states run by Republicans.
Look at Wellsy's post above. Those events are happening in places where the political control of the police force is in the hands of Democrats almost exclusively. Trump has no control in those places. None.
LOL your deflections are amusing. Too bad everyone can see right through them.
The president has already done what he can do--launch a civil rights investigation.
Not to mention tweeting and saying incendiary comments.
You are going with this "choking" meme too, but you should know better as you are a physician. You know its perfectly possible for Floyd to have suffered cardiac arrest, not asphyxiation.
It is irrelevant the mechanism of death. I have explained this to you many times I won't bother to do it again.
That's why I'm saying you have to be careful what you charge.
I am not a legal expert but I highly doubt that the exact pathophysiological details that unraveled his death is going to have any legal weight what so ever. Furthermore, charges can always be added/dropped as information becomes available. He can very well be charged to 40 crimes and convicted to 3/40. I don't know how you can consider this any sort of excuse...
What are the symptoms of myocardial infarction? Chest pain? Shortness of breath? If the autopsy report comes back with myocardial infarction, and the lawyers say "choked to death," they are going to lose because you need proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
LOL you are cute. I guess the lawyers will say "hey you guys were wrong, he didn't kill the victim with a gun but with a rifle, since you were wrong my guy walks free, cya next time". This is ridiculous.
That's why you need to be careful.
Careful left the building a week ago when the police killed this guy and when they "forgot" to place charges right away.
It's possible for the stress of this event to induce a heart attack.
Yeah, right, the stress of 10mins of being brutalized.
It is relevant if you run into court and say, "the police choked him to death. I rest my case." Then the defense comes in and says, "myocardial infarction," and boom, you're fucked.
Are you watching sesame street trials again?
In big city Atlanta and Fulton County, and even De Kalb county? Do you want to know the last time a Republican was mayor of Atlanta? Nedom Angier who left office in 1879; that is, 141 years ago. And believe me... there's no evidence of voter fraud anywhere in Atlanta. Uh uh. No siree bob! Not a bit of corruption either. Clean as a whistle. Anything you hear to the contrary is lies, lies, lies. They just really, really, really love the Democratic party in Atlanta.
I'd ask what is your point, but... I am sure you just gonna ramble with some other nonsense. I'll pass on this one.
Yeah, but Georgia didn't allow blacks to vote in Democratic party primaries until 1960.
Dude... you talk about the Democratic party as if it has been the same entity.
I don't know if its ignorance or negligence on your part.
If the alligators are wearing police uniforms and carrying guns, that might be some good advice. Indeed, you are a wise man. If those Republicans are making alligators into police officers, well, well, well... I'd say that's a very good reason to consider voting Democrat. Yes sir. Excellent point sir.
Seems that you are having a malfunction. If I were you I'd rest for the rest of the night and cool off a bit. Maybe tomorrow you'd make a little bit more sense.
If the charge is a felony, generally they will use more force if they find it necessary.
You mean necessary as in when a handcuffed guy in the floor is resisting the arrest of 4 policemen? We already went through this, whats wrong with you.
It does appear that Floyd passively resisted by collapsing rather than getting into the police car.
Oh, well, since the guy was having a tantrum I guess the police didn't have any choice but to kill him.
Is that how you deal with your kids? "Daddy I dont want to go to school" -Kid throws themselves into the floor- you grab them by the neck until they cease breathing. Are you an inmate in a state penitentiary with internet access privileges?
Again, that does not justify what Chauvin did.
Why if you agree with the conclusion... do we have to spend 20mins replying idiotic excuses? Why... if you agree that these people are criminal, that the police force acted wrong (perhaps even negligently criminal) do we have to continue banging our heads against the wall.... Seriously why is it hard for you to say, hey I agree with this...
Go ahead, tell me which of the following statements you disagree with and why.
1. - The 4 policemen abused their force
2. - What they did have a very high likelyhood of being immediate cause of this guy's death (aka if they had not done so, there is a high likelyhood that he would have survived_.
3.- The guys that did not put the knee on top of him or perhaps did not even touch the victim failed miserably and are in part responsible (accessory)
4.- The police force should have arrested them all the moment all of this came to light
5.- Peaceful protests are justified
6.- Violence, property damage is not acceptable.
If you agree with all of this shit... then please, PLEASE stop making ridiculous excuses. You are not going to lose your "I support idiot Trump" card for once in a while agree with something reasonable.
It does help explain why they used force,
I'll wait for you to ignore what I said above....
For example, a few months ago about a mile from my house, the police came with code 3s on, sirens blaring and a helicopter overhead to effect a felony arrest per a warrant. They do get a little keyed up if the charge is a felony. They probably didn't need to approach the house with lights or siren, and probably didn't need a helicopter. However, they do get keyed up on felonies.
Look, I already went through you multiple times of why this is not an excuse.
Furthermore, if your idea is that police gets a bit of jitters in certain situations, then these people shouldn't be police to begin with. Imagine if I told you that the excuse for why the general surgeon is botching every appendectomy is because "well he gets a bit jittery when he sees blood and starts cutting more than he needs to". Fuck that, we need to stop pretending that the people that signed out for X cannot do X appropriately because X is dangerous, or X is nerve-wracking or X is physically intensive. Not long ago I was talking to some physicians because they were angry they "didn't sign for this" when talking about coronavirus (ICU physicians) and I got really angry at them because this is EXACTLY what they signed up (the context matters, they were not complaining about lack of PPE, that would have been a legitimate concern).
The point is... police people are expected to deal with criminals. Police's job is to protect the citizen. Criminals are also citizens, sometimes the lines can get a bit blurry of what is fair and not, but as general rule police should behave on the side of caution. Even if this means that sometimes they will be taking more risks than they need to. If they are not OK with that... if they are not OK with letting the criminal take the first punch, the first shot... then probably they shouldn't be police. Firefighters also put their lives on the line, so do soldiers and many others.
Being "keyed up" is not compatible with the job. Having the jitters is not compatible with the job. Being a bully is not compatible with the job.
Conspiracy to commit a misdemeaonor is in fact a felony... ;-) Too bad her line didn't make the clip, but copyright laws you know.
I don't know what to make of that clip. Well other than being sexist
especially considering the 4 criminals that killed this guy are all males. Perhaps a woman would have been more prudent.
Morally? No. You need to be prepared for trial lawyers though. They are snakes.
Let the lawyers sort that out, you don't have to do the heavy lifting
.
Until the early 1970s, it was legal to shoot a fleeing felon.
And in the early 1800's it was also legal to own another human being.
Thank you for the history lesson.
So a lot of this is before your time, and your time is better spent reading medical texts.
WOW. With such attitude, humanity would have never moved out of a cave in some part of Africa...
You don't have to actively remain a dinosaur you know? you can evolve (pun intended
).
Well, since you are telling me what to do... I suggest you go brush your teeth since you have been talking so much shit lately.
Right, and that shoe on the other foot is that the mob does not get to charge people with crimes they didn't commit, because they want the harshest sentence possible because they are really angry.
They don't and they shouldn't. But mismanagement of this shit from the start might very well guarantee that they end up doing so anyway.
"Seem to be the ones" is the phrase you need to spend more time on. 141 years of Democrat mayors in Atlanta. Man do those Democrats care. Um hmm. Caring folks. Never get tired of 'em. No sir.
One of these days... you might end up with a point. Until then I guess I'll patiently wait. Something tells me that I have far more years that I can wait as compared to you, so no rush, whenever you see your point coming to feel free to share it.
I don't agree with Clinton, but I think he was a very consequential president, precisely because the outsourcing to China and the repeal of Glass-Steagal happened under his watch as did the opening of the internet to commerce. I would give Clinton an A, but for doing things I don't want him to do. His Lewinsky scandal and both he and Hillary seeming to relish thwarting the law (like the Rose Law Firm billing records that magically appeared in the White House residence) ended up giving people a bad taste about the Clintons. Obama passed ObamaCare and a major stimulus and bailouts. Other than that, he pretty much floundered after 2010. I'd give Obama an A for delivering a canned speech and being a scratch dresser, but I was unimpressed otherwise.
You are unbelievable.
I don't want competence in my political opponents. They will competently steer the country in a direction I don't like.
Yeah, instead choose someone that pretends to have the same views as yourself and will set the country in fire, for the looks of it, possibly quite literal.
I still think the US wins that prize, but I'm nowhere near as confident betting on the next 100 with the current establishment.
So you are telling me... that for the past 100 years this so-called "establishment" both "classic" republicans and democrats have made one of the greatest countries in history, certainly one that you would be proud of... and because of some tribal feud you are willing to risk everything that has made this country great for an experiment? Furthermore, after 3 years of witnessing this experiment failing, you are still supporting it? Is it that you are about to kick the bucket soon and you just want some entertainment before you go? Is it that you don't want anyone else to enjoy what we have had up to this point? Is it selfishness driving you up?
Because honestly, if you tell me that for the last century you pretty much agree this country has been the greatest (or lets not go over the top, lets just say "one of the greatest") and now you are supporting someone that is quite literally undoing the foundations.... then you must be either crazy or self-sabotaging, either way, this is a serious problem.
I'm pretty much against both of the major parties at this point.
No. You don't fool anyone. You are not against BOTH major parties.
- By Tainari88
- By wat0n
- By FiveofSwords