| |
Quote:
Let me assure you that there was never a red pill moment or that I have came out the other side LOL~ Also, I'm sure you understand that being rational or otherwise level-headed doesn't necessarily mean 2 different persons have to see stuff eye to eye, or even agree on any number of issues. It is absolutely OK that both of us are level-headed people, and yet we completely disagree on stuff lol~ I don't think anyone would be surprised if I were to say that I absolutely dislike Communist China, and while the degree of dislike can ebb and flow, it has always been there. Because of this, I see Trump as the more preferrable candidate in the 2020 US presidential election. I can't remember who it was in this thread that mentioned it, but this sentiment is extremely common among the anti-Communist China folks. I am not oblivious to undeniable facts, and I know Trump is deeply flawed as a president. I don't even agree with a lot of his policies. However, I also believe that Communist China is one of the biggest threats around to the entire international community. And while world views towards Communist China are gradually changing (to perceive it under a more negative light), no political leader in the world has been more unfriendly to Communist China and meaningfully enact policies that are effective in derailing China's path to dominance than Trump. The couldn't-be-more-vague description of multi-lateral international effort to pressure China back into following international practices simply does not work. Trump has already successfully put China into a chokehold. If the US tags Biden into the ring now and swap Trump out, China is going to regain its breath. And so what happened in the election? I see a Democratic candidate whose son boarded the Air Force Two with him to fly to Beijing, and inked a major deal with a Chinese equity fund. In China, all big businesses, esp financial businesses work under the direction of the Communist Party. And in the midst of this state-backed "business deal", accusations are rife that Joe Biden stands to take a healthy cut out of the deal. These allegations are confirmed by Bobulinski, a former business associate of Hunter Biden. (Joe) Biden has denied this, but I found his denial to be extremely weak. There was of course also the Ukraine deal, the laptop, the emails, the photos and videos. And there was Joe Biden's weaksauce denial, trying to brush it off as "Russian disinformation" while the US Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe indicated that the purported emails were not Russian disinformation effort. And then I see a one-sided media, both traditional and online, that used every last trick they know to protect their preferred presidential candidate. Other than an extremely small number of media outlets that support Trump, nobody reported on the issues. Social media censored anyone who made this information available on the platform, claiming the censoring is to prevent the spread of disinformation / unverified information when in fact they are proactively violating the fundamental rights guaranteed by the First Amendment. For allegations as serious as this, even if the allegations were baseless, a responsible Fourth Estate owes it to itself to throw some hard questions at Biden in attempt to clear the air, but that did not happen. Why? And then after the election, these very same media came back to report on the very same news that they had previously censored. If they were disinformation, why the change of heart and report on it after the election? If they were real, they were they not reported on prior to the election? https://www.bbc.com/news/world-54553132 Of course, pro-Democrat media took it one step further and started downplaying the seriousness of the allegations. As you can see, I did not prefer Trump because I had taken the red pill. You don't have to agree with the conclusions that I arrived at, but every step along the way, there is a lot of rationale thought process behind it despite my dislike for Communist China. (And even that dislike for Communist China is born out of facts, but I digress.) Quote:
We may or may not agree with the opinions that we have shared here, but I certainly appreciate that difference because it is that difference that brings out a lot of meaningful discussion points. |
Traum I'd never argue with you for being on the conservative side, to a pretty certain extent. I have very conservative friends, and like I said before, I campaigned for Stockwell Day... (hey we all have some embarrassing moments in our past LUL ) Nothing about that is an issue. When it comes to Trump though, we're dealing with something else entirely. He engineered a terrorist attack on the Capitol. The sitting president of the United States engineered a domestic terrorist attack on his own country. That is not hyperbole; he had engineered it from before the election. See my posts about it during that time, with some quotes from Bernie weeks before - this was very much done on purpose. He knew he was going to lose, and set up this pathetic but nonetheless dangerous coup attempt instead. It was pretty obvious when they started going after the USPS and only got more blatant from there. I don't know why it wasn't obvious to some, but I won't argue about it. And who knows where it goes from here? Security is stepped up to post 9/11 levels now, so hopefully nothing too bad happens. But who knows? I think that's why so many people are blown away and have argued with you. |
where's jack bauer when you need him WutFace |
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
I don't know how many times this needs to be said. IT ISN'T A PRIVATE COMPANIES RESPONSIBILITY TO GIVE YOU A PLATFORM FOR YOUR FREE SPEECH |
Republicans have made it abundantly clear with the whole baker's case that private companies do not have to do business with you if they don't want to. Not sure why they're crying foul over this. |
While you are correct about this from a legal perspective, given the massive reach and size of Facebook and Twitter, it is still a morally corrupted dick move for FB & Twitter to censor all news regarding the Hunter Biden laptop and associated allegations at the time when it first came out. By the same token, the press has no legal responsibility to report on any particular issue either. But it is also just as much of a morally corrupted dick move for none of the major news sources (except for NY Post and Fox) to report on Hunter Biden. For all the social responsibilities (and professional ethics in the media's case) that these old and new media claim to have, they have failed to live up to these responsibilities, and that is a far bigger problem than having a garbage government. At a minimum, you need to recognize that this is a problem. If you refuse to acknowledge it is a problem, then it means you have allowed your hatred / dislike / whatever of Trump to blind you to it and cloud your judgement. If you say that media ethics and responsibility is less important than who gets to serve as president, I would be disappointed with that view because I agree with POTUS #3 (Thomas Jefferson)'s belief that “newspapers without government” is vastly better than “government without newspapers”. In my case, I see how Trump is a lot of bad news. I am not denying that. But in the face of and the severity of the Communist China problem, I would still prefer Trump because Trump is the lesser of the two evils (between Trump and Communist China). Quote:
|
Quote:
These rights protects free speech from censorship or criminal prosecution by the government. They have absolutely no influence over private platforms. Nor do they protect social fallout/consequences over things one might say. IE: If you say you love Nazi's and you lose your job, that's your own fault. |
Cops arrest the idiot who was carrying the Confederate flag in the US Capitol building last week. Kevin Seerfried. -local guy from state of Delaware, near Washington DC. Biden's home state. Seerfried? -more like stir fried now that the cops arrested him. :lawl: https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-ne...a82f5c655fa30f |
Quote:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-win-trade-war What exactly do you have against "Communist China" that would blind you so much? And how does Communist China actually affect you, personally. |
Taking a stand vs. Taking a stand https://i.ibb.co/GTvCSnL/FKReZV3A.jpg Which one is more treasonous? |
they censored covid during the first few crucial weeks and we're all paying for it dearly so there's that? |
this is an intersting debate: yes media platforms have agreement/terms when you sign up for an account to use their services, but if they can truly do as they please, why do they have to stand in front of the justice dept for the antitrust hearings? |
Quote:
But don’t censor their right to make up dangerous conspiracies. |
Jared and Ivanka didn't allow their secret service detail to use the bathrooms in their mansion, forcing them to rent a bathroom: https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md...jared-kushner/ The gem in the story is that at one point, they rented the garage of Obama's house run by Obama's protective detail but that ended because one of Ivanka/Jared's team shit up their bathroom and they lost those privileges: Quote:
|
Quote:
Do you not have a problem with that? Quote:
Prior to Trump, if you think the US can all of a sudden cut off all trade ties or dealings with China, you would be absolutely out of your mind. Chimerica is a term because it succinctly describes how intertwined US and China has been, esp in terms of their economies. Trump's US-China trade war is anything but useless. Certainly it is hurting the US economy a bit in the short term, but if the policies are to be kept up, China's competitiveness at the international level, and especially against US, would completely evaporate. Case in point is the tech sector. The semiconductor ban on China right now is wiping out China's tech sector. In short, Trump's China policies is a step-by-step plan to dramatically reduce ties with and dependence on China, and replace those ties and dependences with other more friendly countries (such as Vietnam, India, etc.) I cannot describe in a few sentences how severe the Communist China threat is to the world. I'm sure I have said it before, but I'll say it again -- Communist China is a bully that selectively plays by the (international) rules only when it stands to benefit from it. It is a sophisticated IP thief. It is an ethnic minority oppressor. It is a master at infiltration and subversion, and esp under Xi, its global ambitions represents a major threat to the world. But don't just take my word for it, read it for yourself from Pompeo's State Department here as a summary of sorts. The report is quite recent. https://www.state.gov/wp-content/upl...llenge-508.pdf and I would tell you, even a document like this is only scratching the surface on all the issues it described. It is not me that is blinded by the threat that Communist China represents. Instead, there are far too many people in the world -- including many leaders in government positions -- who are massively underestimating the Communist China threat. Bringing the issue back to Trump vs Biden, I would say Biden's direction in dealing with China (as he has publically described in super vague terms) does not work. To answer your question, I have a soft spot for Hong Kong, and the atrocities that the CCP has done to wreck the city will never be forgiven. But that is not the only reason I am against China. Pay some attention to world and asia news, and you will see how much of a villain China is at the world stage. |
LOL at choosing between Communist China and Trump. Sounds like Bush-era "you're either with us or with the Terrorists". Communist China is stronger than ever now because of Trump. ROFL |
Quote:
Users submit to their terms of service when they sign up. Those terms of services likely state that they can remove content at will. If users don't like it, they don't have to use that platform. Stop projecting something you wish was true versus reality. |
Quote:
You've said that before, and I asked you the following: If Trump is so "hard" on China, can you explain his complete collapse on ZTE? Seems to me his hard "stance" is mere grandstanding to his base. I'd say that's bolstered by the fact that Xi Ping hasn't sent any congratulations to Biden, I truly believe his hard stance is purely a manufactured one, and that China see less of an ally with the Biden administration. https://www.businessinsider.com/trum...project-2018-5 The truth is China is stronger than ever: https://thediplomat.com/2020/11/why-...fter-covid-19/ https://www.bbc.com/news/business-54594877 In relation to the Trump's collapse on ZTE: • A little more than two months into her father’s presidency, Ivanka was awarded three new trademarks for her lifestyle brand in China on the same night she happened to sit next to Chinese President Xi Jinping during an official dinner at Mar-a-Lago. In 2018, she was awarded seven new trademarks that just happened to coincide with her father promising to save a Chinese telecommunications company that had previously been punished for violating trade sanctions with Iran and North Korea. Perhaps I'm missing something here, but can you detail for me what Trump has done as a detriment to China, and how they are affected as of today by anything he has done? |
Quote:
Now, I am all for civil discussions, even if I may not agree with the differing views. What makes you think China is stronger than ever now because of Trump? Under Xi, China has certainly been bolder and more ambitious than ever. Certain aspects are stronger, most notably its use of technology to monitor and control its citizens. But Xi has also royally fxxked up a lot of things, and it is in some very big troubles due to both internal and external factors. |
Quote:
|
huawei extradition case us diplomats can now visit taiwan and congress put through meaningful not just symbolic arms deals tariffs exemptions expired but nah you guys are focused on fashion brands and secret service bathroom use |
Quote:
You mention tariffs, but what have they done exactly? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-win-trade-war https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%...n_U.S._economy Analysis published by The Wall Street Journal in October 2020 found the trade war did not achieve the primary objective of reviving American manufacturing, nor did it result in the reshoring of factory production. Though the trade war led to higher employment in certain industries, tariffs led to a net loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs. The trade war reduced the United States' trade deficit with China in 2019, but this trend reversed itself in 2020, with the trade deficit increasing back to its pre–trade war level, while the United States' overall trade deficit has increased.[246] I truly think your examples and Traum's in relation to China are the same as those hallow sentiments some carried in their support for Trump as he was "good for the economy", another misnomer that carried little fact, an excuse used to not appear as an awful person. |
Edit: nvm |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:05 PM. | |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net