The Next US President is....

Status
Not open for further replies.
Eugenics always works out fine, right?

Providing low income people with the same opportunities for birth control already enjoyed by the middle and upper classes is hardly eugenics.

Nobody is advocating forced abrogation of reproductive rights.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RoboReptar
Providing low income people with the same opportunities for birth control already enjoyed by the middle and upper classes is hardly eugenics.

Nobody is advocating forced abrogation of reproductive rights.
Yea but offering shortened prison sentences in exchange for a vasectomy is eugenics.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheScientist
Yea but offering shortened prison sentences in exchange for a vasectomy is eugenics.
I disagree. The aim of eugenics is to improve the genetic makeup of the population.

Offering convicts the opportunity to reduce their sentences in exchange for vasectomies is aimed at removing their social influence on children. Generational transfer of criminal behaviour is a documented phenomenon and takes place regardless of ethnicity, socioeconomic status, family size, teenage parenthood, conflict with parents, level of education, and childhood abuse - a child with a convicted criminal parent is still nearly twice as likely to be a criminal offender as an adult.

That’s from a long term study of more than three million kids. Journal of Aggression and Violence IIRC.

Further, vasectomies are also generally reversible if the convict later finds himself in a better position in life where he is capable of responsibly raising children.
 
I disagree. The aim of eugenics is to improve the genetic makeup of the population.

Offering convicts the opportunity to reduce their sentences in exchange for vasectomies is aimed at removing their social influence on children. Generational transfer of criminal behaviour is a documented phenomenon and takes place regardless of ethnicity, socioeconomic status, family size, teenage parenthood, conflict with parents, level of education, and childhood abuse - a child with a convicted criminal parent is still nearly twice as likely to be a criminal offender as an adult.

That’s from a long term study of more than three million kids. Journal of Aggression and Violence IIRC.

Further, vasectomies are also generally reversible if the convict later finds himself in a better position in life where he is capable of responsibly raising children.

You are a calculated, cold, smooth motherfucker. When I'm president, I'll appoint you as my Secretary of Health and Human Services. And then invest heavily in whatever corporation makes the most popular vasectomy tools.
 
You are a calculated, cold, smooth motherfucker. When I'm president, I'll appoint you as my Secretary of Health and Human Services. And then invest heavily in whatever corporation makes the most popular vasectomy tools.

That is just so wrong in so many levels.

You need to invest in the corporation that makes the most profitable vasectomy tools and then use your legislative powers to make it the preferred one by the health care industry.
 
I disagree. The aim of eugenics is to improve the genetic makeup of the population.

Offering convicts the opportunity to reduce their sentences in exchange for vasectomies is aimed at removing their social influence on children. Generational transfer of criminal behaviour is a documented phenomenon and takes place regardless of ethnicity, socioeconomic status, family size, teenage parenthood, conflict with parents, level of education, and childhood abuse - a child with a convicted criminal parent is still nearly twice as likely to be a criminal offender as an adult.

That’s from a long term study of more than three million kids. Journal of Aggression and Violence IIRC.

Further, vasectomies are also generally reversible if the convict later finds himself in a better position in life where he is capable of responsibly raising children.
Interesting arguement but, I doubt it will fly because even though the stated aim is to remove the social influence, you are also having a eugenic impact. Policy makers dont care about the intent; they care about the impact. And it looks bad. We live in a world where convicts have a right to attend online college.
 
Interesting arguement but, I doubt it will fly because even though the stated aim is to remove the social influence, you are also having a eugenic impact. Policy makers dont care about the intent; they care about the impact. And it looks bad. We live in a world where convicts have a right to attend online college.

Again, that's why I favour reversible methods. You have to allow for people to get their acts together.
 
Providing low income people with the same opportunities for birth control already enjoyed by the middle and upper classes is hardly eugenics.

Condoms are dirt cheap.

I disagree. The aim of eugenics is to improve the genetic makeup of the population.

Offering convicts the opportunity to reduce their sentences in exchange for vasectomies is aimed at removing their social influence on children

Its also been shown by multiple meta studies that non whites are far more likely to end up in prison with harsher sentences for the same crimes. Meaning that kind of program probably results in a 2x side effect of more single parent households since viable men will out compete for breeding opportunities thus increasing crime rates and those sterilized males who are less likely to be able to compete for a mate will in fact have more incentive to simply return to crime.

Oh and Buck v. Bell probably applies here.

Why cant the liberals get him locked up? Ah, who cares? He'll be dead soon anyway.

The liberals will die off faster anyway.He'll outlive em all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Keihan Chikan
Its also been shown by multiple meta studies that non whites are far more likely to end up in prison with harsher sentences for the same crimes.

Yes, non-whites have been unfairly victimised by the system for hundreds of years in the US, and make up a large portion of those living in poverty as well.

Meaning that kind of program probably results in a 2x side effect of more single parent households since viable men will out compete for breeding opportunities thus increasing crime rates and those sterilized males who are less likely to be able to compete for a mate will in fact have more incentive to simply return to crime.

Not sure of your logic here - modern humans don't exactly run around trying to father more children than other men like . Most guys will break into a cold sweat when they hear the words, "I'm late."

Like I said initially - this is something that will show a positive effect in a generation. The average age of a first offense for violent crime is 18, so you won't see a marked change start to happen until at least 18 years in.

Buck v. Bell

Compulsory sterilisation? Nothing compulsory - and nothing permanent. There's a reason I specified vasectomy and made no mention of tubal ligations. Tubal ligations are a much more invasive procedure with a relatively low rate of reversal - and the reversal would require another invasive procedure. Reversal of a vasectomy is possible for decades afterwards and the procedures are relatively minor, usually performed on an outpatient basis.

The objective here isn't to permanently sterilise people, it's to reduce unwanted pregnancies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chaztagster
I'm a dummy, but my guess on the next election is...

Whoever the Democratic nominee is, they'll have to thread the needle very carefully to get enough votes to win. There are a couple issues that will force their hand:

1 - Slavery reparations
2 - The Homelessness/Opioid crisis
3 - Portland-style political violence

I think that if the Democratic candidate that pledges their allegiance to "intersectional" politics they will cause moderates to break for the Republicans. I think a lot of people who vote are homeowners or aspire to own homes, generally want to live in peace with their families, don't want to see shit and needles all over their sidewalks and parks, and are tired of hearing that they're racists. A lot of noisy people on social media and outfits like the NY Times think that far-left politics have much more popular support than they actually do.

There will probably be one or two large, unpredictable events (similar to Hurricane Katrina or the Comey Investigation) which will shift the contours of the race, but I don't see any of the favored Democratic nominees doing a good job in the general election. But hell, who knows!
 
I think that if the Democratic candidate that pledges their allegiance to "intersectional" politics they will cause moderates to break for the Republicans.
Evidently, DJT has had the same thought and is trying to force Democrats to fight this election on their allegiance to intersectionality. Every minute that the news cycle is filled with the latest insult he has hurled, and the protestations that Democrats make in defense of the people he insulted, the better for him because:
1. His base loves to see Democrats getting worked up about the shit Donald says
2. The moderates who are tired of the shit Donald says have become inured to it
3. The liberals who care about the people he insults were never going to vote for him anyway
4. It's another minute that the news cycle is ignoring healthcare, financial security, cronyism, competence etc.

Today I watched a Democratic congressman telling a TV interviewer that while he disagrees with Ilhan Omar on Israel and other issues, it's unacceptable for Trump to call her names or something. It's a triple win for DJT - His base enjoys seeing him vilifying a hate figure, everyone gets to see Democrats tripping over themselves to defend her while dissociating themselves from her, and it sucks the oxygen out of any conversation that the Democrats might prefer to be having.
 
DEMOCRATS:

1st choice: Bernie

2nd choice: Warren

3rd choice: Buttigieg

please no: Beto, Biden

meh: Harris, Booker

worst case scenario: Biden/some random baby boomer white guy as VP

REPUBLICANS:

no
 
I'm a dummy, but my guess on the next election is...

Whoever the Democratic nominee is, they'll have to thread the needle very carefully to get enough votes to win. There are a couple issues that will force their hand:

1 - Slavery reparations
2 - The Homelessness/Opioid crisis
3 - Portland-style political violence

I think that if the Democratic candidate that pledges their allegiance to "intersectional" politics they will cause moderates to break for the Republicans. I think a lot of people who vote are homeowners or aspire to own homes, generally want to live in peace with their families, don't want to see shit and needles all over their sidewalks and parks, and are tired of hearing that they're racists. A lot of noisy people on social media and outfits like the NY Times think that far-left politics have much more popular support than they actually do.

There will probably be one or two large, unpredictable events (similar to Hurricane Katrina or the Comey Investigation) which will shift the contours of the race, but I don't see any of the favored Democratic nominees doing a good job in the general election. But hell, who knows!

On the contrary, I think that's about as astute observation of the general populace as anyone can offer. But as you pointed out, after the election of DJT, "WHO KNOWS?" is really the new standard in electoral politics. And that's coming from a very seasoned political hack.

What I do know for sure is that the Democratic leadership--namely, Nancy Pelosi--has been bending over backwards trying to navigate peacefully between the moderate majority of the party, most of whom are quiet and professional, and the radical wing that has emerged over the last few years, most of whom are batshit fucking crazy and have no idea what the fuck they're doing but make the most noise and now get the spotlight from the major news networks. And this week, that far-left faction probably delivered DJT his second term in the form of those four fucking morons calling themselves "The Squad." Four women who:

1) Are basically communists.

2) Advocate for such brilliant concepts as a 90% tax on the wealthy, free EVERYTHING for EVERYONE (who isn't white), no more borders or border security and reparations for everyone a shade darker than scratch paper.

3) Want the government to control EVERYTHING.

4) Support terrorism, whether that be domestic (ANTIFA) or abroad (Ilhan Omar has expressed support for Al Qaida and ISIS).

5) Hate America.

As a perfect example of how DJT has come out on top ahead of his re-election, in the same 48 hour span, the House voted to both 1) officially say Trump's stupid tweets were naughty and yet 2) the overwhelming majority of Democrats joined with Republicans to shut down the bullshit impeachment movement against him. So sorry, Squad...your stunt amounted to exactly jack fucking shit.

The main issue, as I see it, is that DJT created a new paradigm and standard by which political dialogue progresses: he's turned our political process into reality TV, where whoever can snatch the spotlight wins. The problem is, DJT, like him or not, is a brilliant master showman and a ruthless, cunning manipulator of the media. These idiot fucking kids like "The Squad" know how to scream and whine and wail but have zero experience with manipulating headlines or most anything else in general.

If you want to blame anyone for the current state of politics, you blame two people: Donald J. Trump, for turning the electorate into another episode of The Apprentice, and Bernie Sanders, for making communism nuevo chic and socially acceptable. And you blame the both of them for inspiring the average, low IQ inbred idiot into believing that ANYONE can run for office against all odds and somehow win. Believe me, I have to deal with the fallout from that new phenomenon every...fucking...day...NO JOKE.
 
On the contrary, I think that's about as astute observation of the general populace as anyone can offer. But as you pointed out, after the election of DJT, "WHO KNOWS?" is really the new standard in electoral politics. And that's coming from a very seasoned political hack.

What I do know for sure is that the Democratic leadership--namely, Nancy Pelosi--has been bending over backwards trying to navigate peacefully between the moderate majority of the party, most of whom are quiet and professional, and the radical wing that has emerged over the last few years, most of whom are batshit fucking crazy and have no idea what the fuck they're doing but make the most noise and now get the spotlight from the major news networks. And this week, that far-left faction probably delivered DJT his second term in the form of those four fucking morons calling themselves "The Squad." Four women who:

1) Are basically communists.

2) Advocate for such brilliant concepts as a 90% tax on the wealthy, free EVERYTHING for EVERYONE (who isn't white), no more borders or border security and reparations for everyone a shade darker than scratch paper.

3) Want the government to control EVERYTHING.

4) Support terrorism, whether that be domestic (ANTIFA) or abroad (Ilhan Omar has expressed support for Al Qaida and ISIS).

5) Hate America.

As a perfect example of how DJT has come out on top ahead of his re-election, in the same 48 hour span, the House voted to both 1) officially say Trump's stupid tweets were naughty and yet 2) the overwhelming majority of Democrats joined with Republicans to shut down the bullshit impeachment movement against him. So sorry, Squad...your stunt amounted to exactly jack fucking shit.

The main issue, as I see it, is that DJT created a new paradigm and standard by which political dialogue progresses: he's turned our political process into reality TV, where whoever can snatch the spotlight wins. The problem is, DJT, like him or not, is a brilliant master showman and a ruthless, cunning manipulator of the media. These idiot fucking kids like "The Squad" know how to scream and whine and wail but have zero experience with manipulating headlines or most anything else in general.

If you want to blame anyone for the current state of politics, you blame two people: Donald J. Trump, for turning the electorate into another episode of The Apprentice, and Bernie Sanders, for making communism nuevo chic and socially acceptable. And you blame the both of them for inspiring the average, low IQ inbred idiot into believing that ANYONE can run for office against all odds and somehow win. Believe me, I have to deal with the fallout from that new phenomenon every...fucking...day...NO JOKE.

I must admit , always thought Japanese politics are bland and boring. Now I kinda like that.
 
And this week, that far-left faction probably delivered DJT his second term in the form of those four fucking morons calling themselves "The Squad."

That's funny as I don't follow politics, American politics even less and still I immediately knew who these four were. I was hanging out with someone in a bar and they had the TV on with these four on the screen and text saying they are complaining about Donald.

I turned to my companion and told her "and these people is why he gets re-elected for the second term". Without knowing who they are, what are their background or basically anything else that one picture showed everything that is happening now in the USA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Keihan Chikan
People already thinking Trump will be re-elected due to a weak Democratic field while completely ignoring the pounding Republicans in 2018 took in the states Trump won in 2016. The electorate took a chance on Trump being “Not Hillary” and seems to realize that Trump is the fraud people were warning about.

No wall, tax cuts for the rich, no health care changes other than making it more expensive, inhumane treatment of children at the border, no new coal jobs and stagnant wages while the 1% get richer.

Looking forward to seeing that orange loser pack his shit come January 2021. The only way Dems lose this is by nominating Harris or Booker
 
People already thinking Trump will be re-elected due to a weak Democratic field while completely ignoring the pounding Republicans in 2018 took in the states Trump won in 2016.

That may be true, but also keep in mind that the midterm congressional swing and loss of majority has happened to basically every president in modern history, and unlike Obama, Bush and Bill Clinton, the GOP was able to expand their grip on the Senate in 2018. Also factor in that a lot of those states that Trump won were historically Democrat-leaning states, so gerrymandering or not, just the numbers lining up with traditional voters should have handed individual Congressional Districts back to the Democrats in the next scheduled election no matter how good or bad DJT was doing.

As far as Washington was concerned and with traditional figures in place and by all electoral precedents, it would've taken a miracle for the GOP to have held the House, but the fact that six months out the GOP was planning to lose the House but expand their numbers in the Senate means that Trump has less to worry about than you think. Granted, that was over a year ago and before half of Guatemala and Honduras decided to bring their kids with them as they stormed our borders, but I'll tell you this, and polling on both sides shows it: Outside of the liberal East and West coasts, the vast majority of low-info voters don't give a flying fuck about illegal immigrants (or their kids) being locked up in cages and it probably gets them off when Trump is on TV riling up the midwest with his borderline racist rhetoric.

I said it two years ago and I say it again now: the only chance the Democrats have of taking back the White House is Joe Biden. To fight a bully, you need another bully. But poor Joe is finally showing his age, and not just because the Bernie crowd is ripping him apart. You put Elizabeth "Pocahontas" Warren on the debate stage with The Donald and I'm putting money on him making that loony bitch cry on live television. And yes, that will get him a second term.

The bottom line: Americans vote with their wallets. I didn't vote for Trump, I campaigned against him and I was fucking furious when he got the GOP nomination...but part of growing up is learning to admit when you were wrong. The Dow Jones just passed 27,000, highest in history. My tiny little 401k I started six years ago that made nothing for years is now gaining over $10k/year and I'm putting in the bare minimum. Love him or hate him, the Trump Economy is doing fucking phenomenal. Am I going to vote for a candidate that says I should be paying 40% federal income tax now and 55% if I get the promotion I'm set for? That I should pay 75% capital gains on my investments? That wants to tax my gas vehicle out of existence? Confiscate my firearms? Take away my fucking amazing private insurance?

FUCK. NO.
 
I dont wish death upon Crazy Uncle Bernie but I won't shed a tear when he passes either.

Personally, I like Bernie. I think he's out of his fucking mind and should've stayed in the USSR (where he honeymooned) but I give him credit for at least being honest from the start and declaring his commie politics publicly.

Not that it matters, now. Calling yourself a socialist these days is almost a prerequisite if you're under 35 and want to run as a Democrat. Bernie is like Ellen Degeneres, who was the first celeb brave enough to come out on tv...but that was almost 20 years ago. Nowadays in Hollywood, if you AREN'T coming out as gay people are like, "What the fuck is wrong with that bigot??"
 
Personally, I like Bernie. I think he's out of his fucking mind and should've stayed in the USSR (where he honeymooned) but I give him credit for at least being honest from the start and declaring his commie politics publicly.

Not that it matters, now. Calling yourself a socialist these days is almost a prerequisite if you're under 35 and want to run as a Democrat. Bernie is like Ellen Degeneres, who was the first celeb brave enough to come out on tv...but that was almost 20 years ago. Nowadays in Hollywood, if you AREN'T coming out as gay people are like, "What the fuck is wrong with that bigot??"
Are we to take it that you hate gays, commies and Hollywood? Not that there is any need to ask....
 
  • Like
Reactions: chaztagster
Improving Bernie would be easy. He needs to broaden and deepen his shtick. He just keeps reciting the same shit about universal healthcare, free college and the evils of the 1% and the big corporates - over and over and over. We never get any detail or any ideas about what he would actually do to fix what some people think is an unfair world. Shit, I could be a better Bernie than Bernie.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chaztagster
Improving Bernie would be easy. He needs to broaden and deepen his shtick. He just keeps reciting the same shit about universal healthcare, free college and the evils of the 1% and the big corporates - over and over and over. We never get any detail or any ideas about what he would actually do to fix what some people think is an unfair world. Shit, I could be a better Bernie than Bernie.

I know it sounds incredible for most American people but there are some countries with free colleges and universal healthcare and even the right-leaning citizens are ok with that.
 
I know it sounds incredible for most American people but there are some countries with free colleges and universal healthcare and even the right-leaning citizens are ok with that.

Though you do need to admit that those "right-leaning citizens" of any of those countries would have been put against the wall and shot in the USA as commies decades ago.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.