2020 the battle of the septuagenarians - Trump vs Biden, Part 2

Irishman80

duploelabs wrote: »

How is protesting the maiming of an unarmed black man by the police bad for African Americans?

You shouldn't confuse protesting with rioting, looting, and burning businesses.

dwayneshintzy

Irishman80 wrote: »

You shouldn't confuse protesting with rioting, looting, and burning businesses.

I'm not sure he did. Are you saying that the majority of protestors are engaging in rioting, looting and burning businesses?

duploelabs

Irishman80 wrote: »

You shouldn't confuse protesting with rioting, looting, and burning businesses.

Neither should you but unfortunately it seems every protester is a rioter in the eyes of the Republicans

Irishman80

Irishman80 wrote: »

It's the Mayors and Governors who control the police.

If Trump sent the 82th Airbourne into the city to stop the riots, would you point out that the Democrats control the House and must assume responsibility for Trump's decision?

Out of interest, do you think there's a problem when the Police shot a man in the back and paralysed him?

Penn

The BLM protests aren't limited to specific cities due to Dem mayors or governors, it's about systemic mistreatment of a race throughout the country and a lack of support from the people who can enact real changes throughout the country to help fix these issues.

The President pressures governors and mayors by threatening to withhold federal funds when they don't support him or enact his policies. He doesn't pressure them to try help the black communities in this fight. BLM have a constitutional right to peaceful protest. Trump sends in unidentified federal agent groups to arrest them.

Trump could have easily shown some semblence of support and a promise to start trying to see what changes could be implemented to reduce excessive police brutality or targeting of specific groups. So what did Trump say?

Great job last night at the White House by the U.S. @SecretService. They were not only totally professional, but very cool. I was inside, watched every move, and couldn’t have felt more safe. They let the “protesters” scream & rant as much as they wanted, but whenever someone....

....got too frisky or out of line, they would quickly come down on them, hard - didn’t know what hit them. The front line was replaced with fresh agents, like magic. Big crowd, professionally organized, but nobody came close to breaching the fence. If they had they would....

....have been greeted with the most vicious dogs, and most ominous weapons, I have ever seen. That’s when people would have been really badly hurt, at least. Many Secret Service agents just waiting for action. “We put the young ones on the front line, sir, they love it, and....

....good practice.” As you saw last night, they were very cool & very professional. Never let it get out of hand. Thank you! On the bad side, the D.C. Mayor, @MurielBowser, who is always looking for money & help, wouldn’t let the D.C. Police get involved. “Not their job.” Nice!

He also referred to the painting of 'Black Lives Matter' outside Trump Tower in NYC as "a symbol of hate". To say Trump bears no responsibilities for the size and scale of protests is nonsense.

Quin_Dub

Danzy wrote: »

He had a knife ffs, he dived into the car, he had been fighting police officers.

His partner, his kids, women in the locality are safer for his apprehension, pity he escalated it to the point where he had to be shot.

And therein lies the fundamental problem with the Police in the US - "He had to be shot"

The key problem isn't racism (although it plays a major,major role) it is the militarisation of Police departments and the speed and willingness of Officers to resort to lethal force.

Place that exact same scenario in Canada or in any country in Europe (and a whole host of other modern countries) - Armed officers or not.

Would he have been shot 7 times in the back?

Or would the half a dozen or more officers present have subdued him using non-lethal methods??

That is the core problem ,the fact that people of colour are disproportionately on the receiving end of this problem is where the racism element kicks in , but if Police policy wasn't "draw your weapon and shoot at the slightest provocation" it would be an entirely different conversation.

Irishman80

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Out of interest, do you think there's a problem when the Police shot a man in the back and paralysed him?

Yes, shooting someone in the back 7 times is clearly not reasonable force.

But that doesn't mean I'm going to blanket blame all the police in the US. It's a country with 400 million legal guns, 10's of millions of illegal guns, gun sales of over 20 million already in 2020. The police have a thankless job.

I can't understand why anyone would want to be a police officer over there.

Eric Cartman

Penn wrote: »

The BLM protests aren't limited to specific cities due to Dem mayors or governors, it's about systemic mistreatment of a race throughout the country and a lack of support from the people who can enact real changes throughout the country to help fix these issues.

The President pressures governors and mayors by threatening to withhold federal funds when they don't support him or enact his policies. He doesn't pressure them to try help the black communities in this fight. BLM have a constitutional right to peaceful protest. Trump sends in unidentified federal agent groups to arrest them.

Trump could have easily shown some semblence of support and a promise to start trying to see what changes could be implemented to reduce excessive police brutality or targeting of specific groups. So what did Trump say?



He also referred to the painting of 'Black Lives Matter' outside Trump Tower in NYC as "a symbol of hate". To say Trump bears no responsibilities for the size and scale of protests is nonsense.

slow down on that Kool aid there, drinking it way too fast.

dwayneshintzy

Irishman80 wrote: »

Yes, shooting someone in the back 7 times is clearly not reasonable force.

But that doesn't mean I'm going to blanket blame all the police in the US. It's a country with 400 million legal guns, 10's of millions of illegal guns, gun sales of over 20 million already in 2020. The police have a thankless job.

I can't understand why anyone would want to be a police officer over there.

Relatively high salary, overtime pay, great pension and job security. Do you know any American policemen?

ancapailldorcha

Eric Cartman wrote: »

slow down on that Kool aid there, drinking it way too fast.

That attitude right there is why BLM is necessary.

Irishman80

dwayneshintzy wrote: »

Relatively high salary, overtime pay, great pension and job security. Do you know any American policemen?

No. But you couldn't pay me enough to work that job.

What's the average salary of a police officer?

namloc1980

Irishman80 wrote: »

Yes, shooting someone in the back 7 times is clearly not reasonable force.

But that doesn't mean I'm going to blanket blame all the police in the US. It's a country with 400 million legal guns, 10's of millions of illegal guns, gun sales of over 20 million already in 2020. The police have a thankless job.

I can't understand why anyone would want to be a police officer over there.

But you're happy enough to blanket blame all the Democrats for the riots and conflate protesters as rioters.

Irishman80

namloc1980 wrote: »

But you're happy enough to blanket blame all the Democrats for the riots and conflate protesters as rioters.

I didn't conflate protestors and rioters. I clearly said above we shouldnt confuse the two.

Gerry Hatrick

dwayneshintzy wrote: »

Are you American? What are you basing this statement on?


I'd dispute your premise that there is widespread bloodshed and mob rule.

No not American. Watch the news and I don't mean CNN or Fox. Americans are growing tired of the looting and yes widespread violence.

Irishman80

Irishman80 wrote: »

Yes, shooting someone in the back 7 times is clearly not reasonable force.

But that doesn't mean I'm going to blanket blame all the police in the US. It's a country with 400 million legal guns, 10's of millions of illegal guns, gun sales of over 20 million already in 2020. The police have a thankless job.

I can't understand why anyone would want to be a police officer over there.

And can you understand that the regularity of such events inevitably leads to large scale unrest and protests? Meanwhile the President has previously egged the Police on to use undue force.

In addition to that, he's pardoned the likes of Sheriff Joe Arpaio who was infamous for racial profiling and ignored crimes when they were against black people. It's pretty clear that Trump has contributed further to unrest. What has he done to reduce divisions? Has he called for any reforms of police? Nope, he's done nothing outside of making the problem worse...

Eric Cartman wrote: »

slow down on that Kool aid there, drinking it way too fast.

I'm pretty sure nobody is gonna place much value in your opinion on this given the views you've previously expressed on this...

timsey tiger

duploelabs wrote: »

Neither should you but unfortunately it seems every protester is a rioter in the eyes of the Republicans

Hardly surprising, since they think every black man is a criminal and a rapist.

Leroy42

Irishman80 wrote: »

No. But you couldn't pay me enough to work that job.

Its a significant, a multi faceted problem.

There are clearly far too many guns in the general populace. Not only too many actual guns, but even the expectation that any person you meet may well have a gun. That changes peoples perception of risk.

But rather than reduce the prevalence of violence as argued by the gun lobby, it leads to increased violence as people need to act first to avoid being dead.

Police are poorly trained. In particular instance, there were numerous officers present, the shooting officer was a close enough proximity to the man to have been able to subdue him. That lack of training, or ability to do their jobs, means that US police officiers have little option but to fear for themselves in these types of situations and thus that the 'shoot first' and regret later option. Far better to be suspended than dead.

The people, particularly black people, do not trust and even fear the police. I have plenty of issues with the conduct of Garda etc but there are few times that people are in actual fear of them. Certainy not on a daily basis. But that is very much the case in the US.

So you have a fearful public, a scared and fearful police force, inadequate training, a view that guns are the solution to everything and bigger guns if the other guns weren't enough.

Throw in terrible race relations and it is not surprising that instances like this happen, and will continue to happen. But, much like the view of gun rights advocates in the US after each mass shooting, their is apparently nothing that can be done to resolve the issues and it just is what it is.

Penn

Eric Cartman wrote: »

slow down on that Kool aid there, drinking it way too fast.

Not going down the rabbit hole of debating BLM, but let me ask you this:

Do you think Trump's response to the protests helped quell them or inflamed things further?

Kidchameleon

Cody montana wrote: »

So which is it?

I dont see Kamala as an inspiration to women. Kimberly did not sleep her way to a top job. I dont care how promiscuous a person is.

Carfacemandog

Gerry Hatrick wrote: »

No not American. Watch the news and I don't mean CNN or Fox. Americans are growing tired of the looting and yes widespread violence.

Can you provide some reputable polls and surveys for that?

dwayneshintzy

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I dont see Kamala as an inspiration to women. Kimberly did not sleep her way to a top job. I dont care how promiscuous a person is.

Why would you say Harris did, but Guilfoyle didn't?


She was hired as an Assistant DA while her boyfriend (and future husband) was a prominent local politician. How is her situation different from Harris'?

Kidchameleon

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I dont see Kamala as an inspiration to women. Kimberly did not sleep her way to a top job. I dont care how promiscuous a person is.

She did not sleep her way to reaching a vice presidential nomination or to the primaries and frankly, your view stinks of both misogyny and double standards. She was in a publicly known relationship and you've warped it.

ancapailldorcha

Kidchameleon wrote: »

So a strong independent woman comes out in favor of Trump (and we certainly need more strong women) yet straight away the slut shaming and commenting on her appearance starts, shameful.

I never mentioned her appearance or her sex life. I'm referring to her having a partner who extorted money from children with cancer.

For me, that'd be a deal breaker.

Irishman80

[Deleted User] wrote: »

And can you understand that the regularity of such events inevitably leads to large scale unrest and protests? Meanwhile the President has previously egged the Police on to use undue force.

In addition to that, he's pardoned the likes of Sheriff Joe Arpaio who was infamous for racial profiling and ignored crimes when they were against black people. It's pretty clear that Trump has contributed further to unrest. What has he done to reduce divisions? Has he called for any reforms of police? Nope, he's done nothing outside of making the problem worse...



I'm pretty sure nobody is gonna place much value in your opinion on this given the views you've previously expressed on this...

Trump will never be a unifier. But he doesn't have to be to get re-elected. The US is divided and will be for many years to come.

My opinions are pretty moderate too. I don't tie myself to political parties or politicians.

ancapailldorcha

Biker79 wrote: »

Hmm. A party whose values are based on 2000 years of heritage, that prioritise the individual over the collective. Values that the country was built on.

Versus another party who have no regard for personal property, ethics or truth, and who champion collective identity over the individual.

Think its clear which one is the cult.

His inherited wealth certainly helped, but it didn't protect him from harsh lessons learned and valuable experience formed.

Biden on the other hand is a classic ' go along to get along ' character, who never took any risks, who sat in a government dept for 40 years picking up a paycheck.

He's a person who never actually ' did ' anything, under any meaningful definition of the word. Perhaps that's why he appeals to some people?

What values are these? Oppression? Tyranny? Grifting?

Trump's inherited wealth enabled him to run all of his original ventures (or scams if you'd prefer) into the ground without consequence. Anyone else would be in prison or sleeping on the streets.

Irishman80

Irishman80 wrote: »

Trump will never be a unifier. But he doesn't have to be to get re-elected. The US is divided and will be for many years to come.

My opinions are pretty moderate too. I don't tie myself to political parties or politicians.

You've addressed not a single thing from my post...

Biker79

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I I'm referring to her having a partner who extorted money from children with cancer.

.

' Wont someone PLEASE think of the children '

Yeah....sounds like one of the more plausible articles from the NY Times.

ancapailldorcha

Biker79 wrote: »

' Wont someone PLEASE think of the children '

Yeah....sounds like one of the more plausible articles from the NY Times.

The judge did when he banned this grubby little chip off the old block from running charities.

Leroy42

Irishman80 wrote: »

Trump will never be a unifier. But he doesn't have to be to get re-elected. The US is divided and will be for many years to come.

My opinions are pretty moderate too. I don't tie myself to political parties or politicians.

Absolutley, he doesn't have to be to be re-elected.

However, for the US to start to make things better, to start making the changes necessary to stop the slide then they need a unifyer to bring people together.

And that is why this election is important. Regardless on where one stands on individual issues, every American should be aware that things have got noticeable worse in the last four years.

Of course they can pretend that race relations, rich poor gap, employment rights, healthcare etc don't count and that all that matters is the economy, but that is the path they have followed for 40+ years and sees them where they are today.

Irishman80

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You've addressed not a single thing from my post...

Yes I did. I basically agreed with you that Trump is not a unifier. And I disagreed with you on my opinions which you seemed to suggest were radical.

What opinion have I stated in the thread that you seem to think is radical?