US Politics Thread |OT| SAD TRUMP

[agrajag]

WTF, Beta is awful.
Charming but intellectually unimpressive and full of hot air with policies that could have passed for moderate Republican before the party went completely insane.
He is nothing like Obama.

so like a typical Bore poster

[team filler]

https://twitter.com/TulsiGabbard/status/1131550346248040448

[james]

The only thing Beto had going for him was "straight white man." With Biden in, he has nothing.

Go join Gillibitch in her treehouse of sadness. 

[Joe Molotov]

omg

[Occam]

After being humiliated like this, shouldn't you be virtually indestructible?

[Cauliflower Of Love]

Bernie is lucky aoc isn't old enough.

Also what's up with tusli? It's like she an asshole

[agrajag]

oh she's old enough

 

[Cauliflower Of Love]

Yikes

[james]

If theres grass on the field....




Run for president.

[Nintex]

https://twitter.com/politico/status/1131656732503969792

 

[Dickie Dee]

https://twitter.com/SpeakerPelosi/status/1131660259959955457

[Occam]

How about impeaching the dotard instead of "pwning" him on twitter?

[agrajag]

fuck "strategy," they are abdicating their constitutional duty. And undermining the Congress' power as a check on the executive branch in the process. If this administration just continues to ignore all their subpoenas and they do not respond, it's over, you can't go back to "normal."

[Kara]

How about impeaching the dotard instead of "pwning" him on twitter?

The U.S. Senate (where he'd be tried if impeached) is controlled by the Republican Party. The result of either choice is the same: nothing.

[Nola]

I kinda think basing your decision-making around whether a lawless party is going to act in good faith during the trial of their lawless leader is probably not the best way to decide whether you should uphold your duty's and pursue justice commensurate to the evidence you have.

[agrajag]

Yep. If your main consideration is "he probably wants us to impeach him, so we won't, that'll show him!"

 

[agrajag]

in other news...

https://twitter.com/willsommer/status/1131708421596696576

 

[Kara]

I kinda think basing your decision-making around whether a lawless party is going to act in good faith during the trial of their lawless leader is probably not the best way to decide whether you should uphold your duty's and pursue justice commensurate to the evidence you have.

Prosecutors regularly consider whether or not charges can be seen to conviction when deciding whether or not to pursue them. (They also consider the electoral implications of their pursuits as well.) I know the justice system is ironically named, would you say the same?

[Tripon]

WTF, Beta is awful.
Charming but intellectually unimpressive and full of hot air with policies that could have passed for moderate Republican before the party went completely insane.
He is nothing like Obama.

So he's a Beto cuck?

[Nola]

I kinda think basing your decision-making around whether a lawless party is going to act in good faith during the trial of their lawless leader is probably not the best way to decide whether you should uphold your duty's and pursue justice commensurate to the evidence you have.

Prosecutors regularly consider whether or not charges can be seen to conviction when deciding whether or not to pursue them. (They also consider the electoral implications of their pursuits as well.) I know the justice system is ironically named, would you say the same?

Nothing wrong with incorporating the implications of a non-conviction into your political calculus, letting it be the overriding factor is where I would and do have concerns.

And that position clearly seems to be where the Democratic leadership is at.

[Tripon]

in other news...

https://twitter.com/willsommer/status/1131708421596696576

 

Twitter is hella jealous at how swole the Krassenstein are.

As heroes of the anti-Trump resistance, the Krassensteins won admiration from liberals and anger from conservatives for their willingness to tweak Trump and his supporters online. The Krassenstein brothers even turned their online fandom into a book—featuring a shirtless, muscular Special Counsel Robert Mueller pursuing Trump.

https://twitter.com/ParkerMolloy/status/1131712385671147523
 

[agrajag]

I had 28 followers on Twitter and one of them was Ed Krassenstein

today I noticed that my count was down to 27 before I received the news.

[Mandark]

fuck "strategy,"

okay benioff

[agrajag]

 

[Tripon]

https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1131719326241656832
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1131738286987173888
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1131598153856225280

[benjipwns]

finding out everything about the Krassensteins was one of my favorite things I've uncovered on the internet in the last couple years, truly amazing American heroes

Twitter's bans are constantly No Fun Allowed

[benjipwns]

https://hillreporter.com/op-ed-krassensteins-respond-to-twitter-suspension-by-the-krassenstein-brothers-37041

Logging into our email accounts we saw matching emails that read as follows:

“Your account has been permanently suspended for violating the Twitter Rules (https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/twitter-rules), specifically:Fake accounts: You may not register or create fake and misleading accounts or use multiple accounts to manipulate Twitter conversations. While you may use Twitter pseudonymously or as a parody, commentary, or fan account, you may not use misleading account information in order to engage in spamming, abusive, or disruptive behavior, including attempts to manipulate the conversations on Twitter.Selling Usernames: You may not buy or sell Twitter usernames.”

The first thing that went through our heads was that ‘this is some sort of mistake,’ so we contacted our main press contact at Twitter to inquire.  All that the friendly woman was able to provide us with was their official press statement that had already been sent to other press outlets such as The Daily Beast and Fox News.  It read as follows:

“The Twitter Rules to apply to everyone. Operating multiple fake accounts and purchasing account interactions are strictly prohibited. Engaging in these behaviors will result in permanent suspension from the service.”
The problem with these statements is that we never did any of this.  We never “purchased account interactions,” nor did we ever “sell usernames” or buy usernames.  We did operate multiple accounts, but there were only a few of them and they were not used to “mislead” or “manipulate Twitter.”  If Twitter investigated this thoroughly they would clearly see this.

This is what we DID do:

We, or immediate family members and/or business partners operated multiple Twitter accounts in a 100% non-manipulative or misleading way.  These, however, ONLY included @EdKrassen, which is Ed Krassenstein’s personal account; @Krassenstein, which is Brian Krassenstein’s personal account; @KrassenCast, which is the official KrassenCasts podcast account; and two additional accounts: @kstein2020 & @FrankKern20, both of which were used specifically to track threatening tweets by others, targeted at us and/or our families (more on this below).

In addition to this, we have run other Twitter accounts in the past for various businesses and projects, which we have not logged into for years.  None of them were misleading or manipulative in any way.  There was one Twitter account used named “Impeach Donald Trump” but we had deactivated it well prior to the suspension, and it was never used to deceive, mislead, or manipulate.

We NEVER, and we want to make this as clear as day, ever bought or sold ANY Twitter accounts or interactions.  We swear on our graves that this is 100% true.

The two Twitter accounts mentioned above (@kstein2020 @FrankKern20) were old accounts.  One was 12 years old and was an account we had used to tweet about an old Android video game system called the OUYA when we ran a news site about the system.  The other account was 2 years old and one of us used it on our phones to track threats that people who had blocked our personal and business accounts were making toward us and our families.  The FBI is aware of these threats.

Over the past 2 1/2 years as our tweets became more and more political in nature, people began posting our phone numbers, our wives phone numbers, our home addresses, and photos of our homes, neighborhoods, and children.  These users had blocked us and the only way to see Tweet-replies that they were making to others was to use another account.  We were in constant communication with a contact at the FBI who we would send the threats that we had receive to.  We had sent the FBI multiple death threats we had received in the mail, from people whom we believe got our address from others on Twitter.  This is the primary reason we used these two additional accounts. On a few other occasions we used them as anonymous contacts for stories we were working on for this very publication regarding social media issues.  Again we never used them to manipulate or mislead anyone.

Note:  People might ask why we didn’t just use “incognito mode” to track threatening tweets.  There is a simple answer.  In incognito mode, you can’t view a user’s tweet replies, rather just their normal tweets.  There would be large Twitter threads about us, and it was virtually impossible to track certain individuals who consistently posted our personal information, without having an account logged in that wasn’t blocked by these users.

We have long defended Twitter’s actions of banning and suspending users, and our stance still remains the same.  Twitter, as a private company, has every right to ban whoever they choose, including us.  We would, however, appreciate that Twitter reviews our suspension and issues a correction in regards to their comments about us buying or selling Twitter accounts or interactions.  This is 100% false, and if Twitter believes they have evidence to prove otherwise, we ask and encourage them to release these details to the media.

There are others who think that Twitter is trying to make an example out of us, after President Trump has accused them of constantly suspending conservative accounts. We don’t buy into this. We simply hope that this was a mistake and believe that Twitter will investigate and hopefully correct it. If not, then we will still be active online.  We have faith in Twitter doing the right thing.

We have both always stayed up to date on Twitter rules and were 100% sure to comply with them. That’s why all of this is so confusing.

Please take a moment to also read our OPEN LETTER TO TWITTER concerning our suspension on false allegations that we can prove are false.

https://hillreporter.com/the-krassenstein-brothers-open-letter-plea-to-twitter-regarding-their-suspension-37075

[agrajag]

wouldn't it be cooler and more Thanos style to delete one of the Krasser brothers?

[benjipwns]

honest journalism

spoiler (click to show/hide)

During the Diamond and Silk segment they mentioned Nancy Pelosi. I was unfamiliar with what they were talking about (I’m looking at FoxNews.com story) …”Manipulated videos of Nancy Pelosi edited to falsely depict her as drunk spread on social media. And according to a report from The Washington Post. Experts believe the original video was slowed down to 75% from the original and that her pitch was manipulated in order to present her under the influence. Not a real video. It’s doctored. All right.

[close]

[benjipwns]

I honestly forgot that Rick Perry still existed.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/24/politics/rick-perry-trump-invisible/

Rick Perry's greatest success in Trump's Washington: invisibility

Washington (CNN) - Energy Secretary Rick Perry has been a near-ghost in Washington, adhering almost too well to the first rule of working for President Donald Trump — never overshadow the boss.

Perry generates so few headlines that it's easy to forget the longest-tenured Texas governor and two-time Presidential candidate is a Cabinet official.

[benjipwns]

the latinx love women candidates but the women don't love the latinx candidates 

[Occam]

the latinx love women candidates 

Nice example of how religion and conservatism fuck everything up.

[agrajag]

wow blacks are selfish!

[Nintex]

This season is getting wild

https://twitter.com/SykesCharlie/status/1131962850828857344

[benjipwns]

wow blacks are selfish!

they're pretty much cheating at voting, this is why we need stronger voter fraud laws

[agrajag]

women hate gays and latinos

men hate gays

whites hate gays and blacks

blacks really hate gays and really love blacks

latinos love women but hate gays and blacks

 

[agrajag]

wow blacks are selfish!

they're pretty much cheating at voting, this is why we need stronger voter fraud laws

why is there no straight white man option, racists? Trump was right they're rigging this thing in plain sight!

[Occam]

Everyone except for the nonreligious (and people of high income) dislikes homosexuals.

[agrajag]

unity!

 

[Joe Molotov]

finding out everything about the Krassensteins was one of my favorite things I've uncovered on the internet in the last couple years, truly amazing American heroes

Twitter's bans are constantly No Fun Allowed

https://kotaku.com/anti-trump-resistance-scammers-who-got-banned-from-twit-1835011953

And this is the same week that Razer announced they were turning off the Ouya servers. How deep down the rabbit hole does this go?

[benjipwns]

But no one envisioned too many candidates to fit on two debate stages. As a result, candidates on the cusp are reduced to begging for donors. (In fact, the New York Post put New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio on its front page this week with a cup and a mock sign, “BROTHER, CAN YOU SPARE A BUCK?”)

In the last 24 hours on my Facebook feed, I have seen paid ads for Sens. Kirsten Gillibrand (NY) and Cory Booker (NJ), Gov. Jay Inslee (WA), and Rep. Seth Moulton (MA), all pleading for contributions as small as $1. As Gillibrand’s ad put it, “The DNC rules may keep me off the national debate stage. Give $1 today to guarantee my voice can be heard in the campaign.”

In case more than 20 candidates qualify based on both surveys and campaign contributions, the polling numbers would prevail. As Geoffrey Skelley explained in FiveThirtyEight, “With so many candidates hovering around 1 percent or so in the polls, a few tenths of a percentage point could make or break a candidate’s chances of qualifying.” And that's well within the margin of error.

Already, there is the danger that a respected senator, Michael Bennet (D-CO), who entered the race late after surgery for prostate cancer, will be at home during the first round of debates while a vanity candidate like spiritual guru Marianne Williamson will be on stage outlining her vision for America.

A better solution would be for the DNC to exclude candidates that it knows have no chance of winning: Williamson, Gravel (who received exactly 404 votes in the 2008 New Hampshire primary after being included in most debates), and Wayne Messam, the little-known mayor of Miramar, Florida. With 21 candidates remaining, the choice then would be to also boot entrepreneur Andrew Yang (who has never been elected to political office) or cram 11 candidates into one of the debates.

But the DNC (still skittish over accusations that it was biased against Bernie Sanders in the 2016 primaries) prefers objective criteria over any exercise of judgment.

The DNC may give in to heavy network pressure and raise the standards in September (maybe requiring 4 percent in national polls) so that no more than 10 candidates qualify for future debates. Serious figures in the Democratic Party (senators like Gillibrand and Bennet, governors like Inslee and Steve Bullock of Montana) would be in jeopardy of being cast into oblivion, dismissed by their own party as fringe candidates.

What makes such a move unconscionable is that a September debate would be roughly five months before the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary. Political history is punctuated with last-minute breakthroughs in these early contests, from Gary Hart in New Hampshire to 1984 to Rick Santorum in Iowa in 2012. None of these surges would have been possible if underdog contenders were arbitrarily excluded for the debates.

Both parties have come a long way in the 60 years since presidential nominees were mostly anointed by party bosses. Voter sovereignty is now the watchword with almost all the 2020 Democratic delegates slated to be chosen in primaries. But this triumph of democracy will be hollow if the ratings-driven demands of the TV networks end up arbitrarily shrinking the presidential field before any voters get a say.

[james]

Serious figures in the Democratic Party (senators like Gillibrand

Who wrote this garbage. Fuck off with your hate spam, benji.

[Nintex]

https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1131963939774795777

In another universe Nancy and Donald and fighting over the bingo numbers as the nursery staff tries to calm them down.
In the United States they have two of the the most important political jobs.

[Cauliflower Of Love]

it's pretty crazy how obvious the protective clothing he wears now is.

[Cauliflower Of Love]

I learnt this from daredevil avocados at law.

[benjipwns]

W's was pretty obvious at times too, don't really recall it on Obama, he might have just had a better body type that hides it though. W was a muscular fellow and Trump's a fatty.

[Cauliflower Of Love]

W's was pretty obvious at times too, don't really recall it on Obama, he might have just had a better body type that hides it though. W was a muscular fellow and Trump's a fatty.

I noticed obeezys once or twice, and then the was like "come at me".

He had laser tech protection though, so I don't think it would have mattered.

[benjipwns]

the Secret Service should try to convince one of the Serious Democratic Candidates™ that they need to wear like a SWAT team helmet

maybe this could be part of the Beto relaunch

he could custom decorate it like a goalie mask

[team filler]

it's pretty crazy how obvious the protective clothing he wears now is.

(Image removed from quote.)

(Image removed from quote.)

[Cauliflower Of Love]

Also, his hair looks even stupider.

[Nintex]

Everyone is here!

https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1131911083801960448

Anyway Trump is reportedly a nightmare for the secret service. Sticking his head out of windows during car rides and randomly wandering about or approaching people when he shouldn't.
Plus his friends at the Mar a Lago putting up pictures of the guy carrying the Nuclear football.

Not so recently it was pretty obvious literally none of the agents was actually protecting Trump when someone threw an object at the podium at the NRA conference and some Chinese lady with a collection of USB sticks with viruses was allowed to enter one of his properties. Strapping on a body armor seems like the 'easiest' solution.

[benjipwns]

I was wondering how they were going to prevent one debate from getting say Bernie-Biden-Buttigieg-Pocahantus-Harris-Yang all in it:

A new rule adopted by the Democratic National Committee and NBC News will evenly divide top-tier candidates across two nights in the first Democratic presidential primary debates in June, a move to maintain viewer interest in both events by making sure well-known contenders are on stage both nights.

Democrats getting at least 2 percent support in the polling average will be randomly and evenly split between the two nights, which will each feature 10 candidates, according to the formula obtained by POLITICO. Candidates below that threshold will also be evenly and randomly divided between the two debate lineups.

"The final list of debate participants (after any tie-breaking procedure is executed, if necessary) will be divided into two groups: candidates with a polling average of 2% or above, and those with a polling average below 2%," the rule reads. "Both groups will be randomly divided between Wednesday night and Thursday night, thus ensuring that both groups are represented fairly on each night."

The rule will not keep any two candidates from appearing onstage together. But it will prevent random chance from loading one night with polling leaders and the other night with less well-known presidential candidates. NBC News is the media partner for the first debates on June 26-27.

Eight candidates have a polling average at or above 2 percent right now: Joe Biden, Cory Booker, Pete Buttigieg, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, Beto O’Rourke, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. With the newly announced rule, four would be guaranteed to appear on the first night, and four would be guaranteed to appear on the second night.

Biden and Sanders, currently occupying first and second place in most polls, will still have a close to 50-50 chance of appearing on the same night — about the same odds they would have under a purely random draw that does not break the field into two groups.

[agrajag]

https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1132070545292484608

[curly]

[benjipwns]

I learned my lesson from voting for a rich fat cat in the 2016 Democratic primaries. I'll only vote for a homeless orphan who has to eat out of the garbage now.

[Tripon]

https://twitter.com/getongab/status/1131745230221447168

 

[Tripon]

https://twitter.com/snarwani/status/1132078661937565696

 

[BisMarckie]

It‘s unbelievably disturbing how many people that self-identify as liberal or even as left-wing use anti-semitic tropes without a care in the world. Sensitive to any perceived dogwhistle against any other group, but they ignore or even endorse this shit when it comes to Jewish people.

[team filler]

 

[Joe Molotov]

https://twitter.com/markmobility/status/1131535708110360576

He does this intentially to own the libs. Beast Mode!
~Nintex