Flynt offers $10M rewars for Trump's removal

[kenny]

Trump will be re-elected if we see a 3% growth in our economy.

... war is good for an economy.
Hmmmm.

I wouldn't put it past Trump to get us into a war just to get himself reelected.

Edit: I see I'm echoing partgypsy.

 

[Arkteia]

That says nothing about Trump, but a lot about you.

Not necessarily, it might be more about the place where the poster lives.

 

[whitewave]

That says nothing about Trump, but a lot about you.

Sure, Kenny. Think what you want. Deep red state. Deep red of the deep red state. If you want to be a loner, do it.

I am a moderate and have friends from all backgrounds.... I am open minded.

You judge on....

 

[kenny]

Sure, Kenny. Think what you want. Deep red state. Deep red of the deep red state. If you want to be a loner, do it.

I am a moderate and have friends from all backgrounds.... I am open minded.

You judge on....

Sounds like I've touched nerve.
Feeling guilty about having zillions of Trump-loving friends?

"Judge on"?
Everyone judges.

The person who doesn't judge would allow her 14 year old daughter "date" the 48 year old homeless guy who lives under the bridge.

 

[smitcompton]

Hi,

Historically, Norman is right. The European Union was formed to avoid countries from going to war with one another. In order for the union to be successful they developed a single currency and trade agreements. Great Britain kept their own currency. It has kept wars away from the members. Control of many issues was made by the elites of the European Union in Belgium, which is like DC. Brits opposed decisions from a central authority made on their behalf, without consultation.

Smart people are elected to the Presidency. They have another characteristic that is very important in their election. It is warmth and likability. Bill Clinton, and Obama had both these qualities. George Bush was likable while not so smart, but he was elected. Hillary and Gore were similar in that they didn't have the likability factor going for them. So, if Dems want to win, they have to give us a candidate who is likable and smart. They must find a centrist candidate or we will end up as the Republicans are in Congress, and unable to accomplish anything as well.

But, I do agree with Whitewater that misattributing the reasons Trump won to awful people is not a winning strategy. Yes, it was a mistake to vote for him, but "his base" cannot alone win in the next election. There s a good chance someone else could win. Perhaps the Republicans will impeach. He humiliates them every day. They may want their agenda passed, but I think Trumps words are felt by these senators and reps. They might slap him down. 30 % is not so scary.

Annette

 

[Dancing Fire]

So, if Dems want to win, they have to give us a candidate who is likable and smart. They must find a centrist candidate or we will end up as the Republicans are in Congress, and unable to accomplish anything as well.

No such person in the Dem. party today.

 

[Matata]

https://www.newyorker.com/news/amy-...uld-think-about-running-for-president-in-2020

 

[House Cat]

Both of mine would definitely be going even if there is not a draft, and they have both been there already. It is a scary thought but I am not fretting at the moment yet.

I want to point out that we are still fighting in other places. Right after Trump's speech about his "strategy in the Middle East/Afghanistan," thousands upon thousands of people received orders to deploy.

 

[partgypsy]

Matata I disagree. There is still a whole lot of msyogny out there. I'm sorry to say this, but they should put forth a white male candidate. And do it at relatively the last minute, so there is less time to create the horrible toxic mudsliding debacle we have seen for the last few elections.

 

[redwood66]

I want to point out that we are still fighting in other places. Right after Trump's speech about his "strategy in the Middle East/Afghanistan," thousands upon thousands of people received orders to deploy.

I know this and am having internal strife since one of the kids is reenlisting at this moment.

 

[Calliecake]

I'm sincerely sorry @Redwood. I can't imagine how you must be feeling and how hard this must be on you and your family. I know how proud you are of your sons, I hope you know we are too. Hugs, Callie

 

[arkieb1]

I know this and am having internal strife since one of the kids is reenlisting at this moment.

Wow that's tough, terrible for you and all of the people on here that have loved ones currently on deployment. I think it's been heating up in the middle East and in the South China Sea on US warships and submarines currently watching North Korea. Either way I also get the sense Trump wants to go to war with someone to increase his popularity, to help bolster the US economy, to be seen to be a strong leader, and for a host of other geopolitical and political reasons. I sincerely hope that everyone's loved ones stay safe.

 

[normanintheskywithsapphires]

I have to say, I am far from knowledgeable on these things, but I'm not personally convinced - there is still xenophobia in the many different countries within the EU, both inter- and intra-country, and I'm not sure that will ever go away entirely. The different cultures of each country are so different!

Yes, and that is all the more reason to get them together before they start
fighting again.

The added layer of bureaucracy in Brussels could be compensated if countries would ditch their own 19th-century rules protecting national interests and instead get rid of their own bureaucracy.

The only viable path to global peace and prosperity under the rule of law lays in unification. All Trumps, ISIS, Brexit, Catalans, Basques, IRA, and other nationalists are simply on the wrong side of history; unless they'd prefer a medieval lifestyle of course, in which case ISIS would be the only honest party of the lot. While some may have real grievances, any separatist or nationalist movement is backward and leads to more suffering.

 

[OoohShiny]

Yes, and that is all the more reason to get them together before they start fighting again.

The added layer of bureaucracy in Brussels could be compensated if countries would ditch their own 19th-century rules protecting national interests and instead get rid of their own bureaucracy.

The only viable path to global peace and prosperity under the rule of law lays in unification. All Trumps, ISIS, Brexit, Catalans, Basques, IRA, and other nationalists are simply on the wrong side of history; unless they'd prefer a medieval lifestyle of course, in which case ISIS would be the only honest party of the lot. While some may have real grievances, any separatist or nationalist movement is backward and leads to more suffering.

I think the key thing for me is how you 'win hearts and minds' so that people want to be unified. After all, Spain and Catalonia are currently unified but a huge and overwhelming majority of Catalonians voted to break away from Spain in the recent referendum - a referendum which (IIRC) was marked by brutal attempts to suppress the event and the voters by Spanish authorities.

Stern statements of "You will be unified!!" and the threat of a big stick to stop people revolting will not actually make people inclined to unify - if anything it will make them even more keen to break away! (Which is likely to involve the aforementioned fighting if other nations take up arms to prevent them from doing so.) I guess that one could ask that in a world where people are supposed to have free will, why should anyone else prevent a group of people from doing what they want if it can be done with just a few changes on some legal documents and doesn't cause physical harm to anyone else?

I don't know how we reach the Star Trek / Next Generation nirvana of a united world with shared values and vision for the future - perhaps it will never happen until, like in ST, we realise we are all together on just one small planet, we eliminate poverty and the need for money, and we are able to provide / create enough food that no-one goes hungry, so the world becomes a lot more equal and people are free to better themselves and accept each other for who they are, rather than fight over cultural differences / resources.

[/dreaming] lol


With regards to internal/EU bureaucracy, I think the key thing is that the EU has a 'Mother knows best' attitude to things and does not allow nations to tailor things to their own cultures/tastes, so I don't think individual countries will abandon their own national policies and interests until/unless it's proved that the EU vision really is better and really will improve nations!

At the moment the EU seems to be meddling in all aspects of life behind the scenes, rather than creating an overtly-stated vision that people and countries can see in plain sight, so it creates an atmosphere of suspicion and hidden agendas. Perhaps they are worried that the many and varied people of the EU nations won't sign up to their vision, and are therefore sneaking things through until it gets to the point that even if people don't like it, there's nothing they can do about it??

 

[t-c]

I think the key thing for me is how you 'win hearts and minds' so that people want to be unified. After all, Spain and Catalonia are currently unified but a huge and overwhelming majority of Catalonians voted to break away from Spain in the recent referendum - a referendum which (IIRC) was marked by brutal attempts to suppress the event and the voters by Spanish authorities.

Stern statements of "You will be unified!!" and the threat of a big stick to stop people revolting will not actually make people inclined to unify - if anything it will make them even more keen to break away! (Which is likely to involve the aforementioned fighting if other nations take up arms to prevent them from doing so.) I guess that one could ask that in a world where people are supposed to have free will, why should anyone else prevent a group of people from doing what they want if it can be done with just a few changes on some legal documents and doesn't cause physical harm to anyone else?

I don't know how we reach the Star Trek / Next Generation nirvana of a united world with shared values and vision for the future - perhaps it will never happen until, like in ST, we realise we are all together on just one small planet, we eliminate poverty and the need for money, and we are able to provide / create enough food that no-one goes hungry, so the world becomes a lot more equal and people are free to better themselves and accept each other for who they are, rather than fight over cultural differences / resources.

[/dreaming] lol


With regards to internal/EU bureaucracy, I think the key thing is that the EU has a 'Mother knows best' attitude to things and does not allow nations to tailor things to their own cultures/tastes, so I don't think individual countries will abandon their own national policies and interests until/unless it's proved that the EU vision really is better and really will improve nations!

At the moment the EU seems to be meddling in all aspects of life behind the scenes, rather than creating an overtly-stated vision that people and countries can see in plain sight, so it creates an atmosphere of suspicion and hidden agendas. Perhaps they are worried that the many and varied people of the EU nations won't sign up to their vision, and are therefore sneaking things through until it gets to the point that even if people don't like it, there's nothing they can do about it??

One way to keep things “unified” is to demonstrate that people will be better off (economically) in the group than outside. Isn’t the fact that they could lose business headquarters one of the main reasons Catalonia actually hasn’t declared independence? And also why Brexit must be made as painful as possible, economically. If Britain exits the EU and thrives, why wouldn’t other countries think they can do the same?

Correct me if I’m wrong — I don’t live in the EU and my Econ class on the EU was decades ago — but isn’t the primary reason for forming the EU economic? And a lot of the dictates from the EU are based on that (ie open borders facilitate workers’ movements but also affects immigration)?

 

[House Cat]

I know this and am having internal strife since one of the kids is reenlisting at this moment.

I'm so sorry red. My very best friend has orders to go to the Middle East for the 4th time. She flies medevac. My heart is broken over this because each deployment has had it's own set of challenges. Each deployment has rightfully changed her. Things are more active each time she goes. The things they do to save lives are unimaginable. She only tells me about them when she's too drunk..

Having a best friend deploy is nothing compared to having your son out there. Red, I don't know what you must be going through right now. I am genuinely praying for your family and your son's safety.

 

[OoohShiny]

One way to keep things “unified” is to demonstrate that people will be better off (economically) in the group than outside. Isn’t the fact that they could lose business headquarters one of the main reasons Catalonia actually hasn’t declared independence? And also why Brexit must be made as painful as possible, economically. If Britain exits the EU and thrives, why wouldn’t other countries think they can do the same?

IMHO, the part in bold neatly encapsulates why the EU is being so obstructive during Brexit negotiations - the naughty child must be shown to be taught a lesson for daring to not conform, so that the other children don't get any ideas...

Nevermind what may or may not be best for the UK, or that it is a democratic decision that should be respected - the EU must be the only future!!

Correct me if I’m wrong — I don’t live in the EU and my Econ class on the EU was decades ago — but isn’t the primary reason for forming the EU economic? And a lot of the dictates from the EU are based on that (ie open borders facilitate workers’ movements but also affects immigration)?

As I understand it, the European Market was what the UK signed up to in the 70s (or whenever it was) - the EU as it is now, though, seems to have grown and morphed into a giant, faceless body with underlying motives other than trade!

 

[t-c]

IMHO, the part in bold neatly encapsulates why the EU is being so obstructive during Brexit negotiations - the naughty child must be shown to be taught a lesson for daring to not conform, so that the other children don't get any ideas...

Nevermind what may or may not be best for the UK, or that it is a democratic decision that should be respected - the EU must be the only future!!


As I understand it, the European Market was what the UK signed up to in the 70s (or whenever it was) - the EU as it is now, though, seems to have grown and morphed into a giant, faceless body with underlying motives other than trade!

I think it's perfectly reasonable for the EU to disadvantage the UK when they exit the EU. You can't really expect the EU to give the post-Brexit UK the same deal as the EU members do you? To give full access to the EU market to post-Brexit UK as if it never left would be the height of stupidity.

It's also a good way for people in the UK to realize the benefits of being in the EU or realize there was never any benefit (it could go either way). But what regulations dictated by the EU are you against and what motives do you ascribe to the EU for those regulations?

 

[OoohShiny]

But what regulations dictated by the EU are you against and what motives do you ascribe to the EU for those regulations?

My main issues are with regards to privacy, and the assumption that we must all give it up so that we can be part of a 'system'.

In particular, the EU vision for road transport is that all vehicles are 'CAVs' - Connected Autonomous Vehicles - as part of an 'Intelligent Transport System' which allows communication with both roadside infrastructure and also other vehicles, on the pretense that "Such systems allow vehicles to warn each other directly (e.g. in case of emergency breaking) or through the infrastructure (e.g. upcoming road works).", therefore improving safety.

When you look a bit deeper (https://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/its/road_en) it's clear that the subtext is more control of drivers, the ability to implement Big Brother 'Pay as you Drive' charging and restrict the poor from driving in the rush hour ("Congestion can be reduced through better management of demand and capacity"), and in particular, control of the speed of drivers:
https://www.cio.com/article/3051003...s-to-restart-stalled-road-safety-program.html

... Bulc envisions a three-pronged strategy: better law enforcement, particularly of speed restrictions; exchange of knowledge between member states; and the deployment of emerging technologies such as connected or autonomous vehicles.

I think we all know speed restrictions that make zero sense and are near-universally ignored, especially those that are set by local bureaucrats because local residents think that traffic is 'speeding', but when the EU vision becomes live, one will have no choice but to stare vacantly into space while crawling along at mind-numbing speeds, all the while being monitored by 'big brother' and being GPS-tracked at every moment so they can send a monthly bill to your house.

What happened to privacy? What happened to free will? What happened to common sense? What happened to training drivers to drive properly and pay attention? The EU vision is that driving is completely dumbed down and put in the hands of machines because, you know, us humans are such ****ing morons that we couldn't possibly be allowed to learn properly or take responsibility for our own actions.

Meanwhile, why should I or anyone else pay more because we have to get somewhere at a certain time, that's usually outside of our control because our employer sets our working hours, or because shops are only open at certain times?

Control, control, control - this seems to be the EU mantra. Not "we will enable our citizens to grow and be free and think for themselves"!


Anyway, that's just some of the reasons why an all-seeing Big Brother EU state is a bad idea IMHO!

 

[redwood66]

@OoohShiny I have the same concerns in the US. Right before I retired some of the engineers and I at work were reviewing a ton of the autonomous vehicle information as well as advanced network traffic systems for managing congestion. Privacy is a huge concern. All the "good" things you possibly get from the advancements might be great but the people/corporations pushing these don't let on about the privacy issues until you start asking questions. Even then it is like pulling teeth to get a straight answer.

 

[Dancing Fire]

She might claim the $10 mil.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/10/22/rep-maxine-waters-says-wants-to-take-out-trump.html

 

[normanintheskywithsapphires]

What happened to privacy? What happened to free will? What happened to common sense? What happened to training drivers to drive properly and pay attention? The EU vision is that driving is completely dumbed down and put in the hands of machines because, you know, us humans are such ****ing morons that we couldn't possibly be allowed to learn properly or take responsibility for our own actions.

Agreed on protecting our privacy, but if you ever have been in South Europe on holiday and lost a kid to some a...h... who thought it's cool to do 80 on a no-sidewalk-donkey-track you'll value safety way over privacy.

In any case, everybody with a smartphone has already given up his/her privacy (I refuse) to far more intrusive systems. If you think one can switch off those little apps, you need a lesson from IT-Pros.

 

[ksinger]

Agreed on protecting our privacy, but if you ever have been in South Europe on holiday and lost a kid to some a...h... who thought it's cool to do 80 on a no-sidewalk-donkey-track you'll value safety way over privacy.

In any case, everybody with a smartphone has already given up his/her privacy (I refuse) to far more intrusive systems. If you think one can switch off those little apps, you need a lesson from IT-Pros.

Agreed. Heck, worrying about privacy at this late date, is shutting the barn door about a month after the horse made it to another state. I would say that privacy was abandoned way before smart phones, which are merely the latest incarnation. Does anyone seriously feel like their PC is truly safe, or that all that data in "the cloud" (aka - a server you have zero insight into or control over) is not viewable by the right person/software?

 

[OoohShiny]

Agreed on protecting our privacy, but if you ever have been in South Europe on holiday and lost a kid to some a...h... who thought it's cool to do 80 on a no-sidewalk-donkey-track you'll value safety way over privacy.

In any case, everybody with a smartphone has already given up his/her privacy (I refuse) to far more intrusive systems. If you think one can switch off those little apps, you need a lesson from IT-Pros.

If your first comment is referring to a personal loss then I am truly sorry that you have experienced such a terrible situation.

Driver education and improved testing, especially about appropriate speed and attitude to others, should substantially reduce or remove such foolhardy actions, but there will always be a minority who spoil things for the majority (and that's true of pretty much everything in life).

The EU proposition, however, is that everybody must have their choice of speed dictated by someone sitting in a bureaucrats' office somewhere, rather than allowing the vast and sensible majority of people to exercise discretion and apply their experience to choose appropriate speeds.

Rather than improving safety, such a measure is likely to make people 'switch off' and just drive on the limiter all the time - after all, we are told the speed limit is set for our safety, and the car won't let you speed, so you must be safe, right? Some may deliberately do so because they are angered by the removal of the ability to choose a speed that is appropriate but higher than the limit, but many others will fall into this mindset without realising it. They already do it now, even without electronic intervention, as is evidenced by the apparent need for road safety messages that say "The limit is the limit, not a target!!!"

Road conditions change from moment to moment and situations can change instantaneously, at which point the driver needs to be alert and react instantly. Good drivers will be driving on the basis of what they can see, what they can't see, and what they can reasonably expect to see, but if drivers are 'switched off' and staring out the side window at the scenery because the car is making them travel so slowly that nothing seems to be happening and they are bored, they will not be in a position to plan ahead or react and take any appropriate evasive action that may be required. If that happens, rather than avoiding an accident, the accident will still happen, just at a lower speed, which could still have very serious outcomes.

Anyway, I feel I am getting off topic and I do not wish to come across as trying to belittle or minimise such a situation that you may have experienced. I will summarise by saying that (IMHO) the EU proposals for greater 'remote' control of drivers take no account of driver psychology and will lead to less 'ownership' of drivers' own actions, to the detriment of road safety.

Agreed. Heck, worrying about privacy at this late date, is shutting the barn door about a month after the horse made it to another state. I would say that privacy was abandoned way before smart phones, which are merely the latest incarnation. Does anyone seriously feel like their PC is truly safe, or that all that data in "the cloud" (aka - a server you have zero insight into or control over) is not viewable by the right person/software?

I don't believe anyone chose to give up as much personal data as they do, but it's been built in to operating systems of electronic gadgets and there is no option to opt out, at least not without substantial efforts to remove one's electronic footprint. I feel we are now akin to the adage of boiling a frog - do it slowly and incrementally and people will just go along with things, but throw people into an all-seeing Big Brother state and they might actually react to it.

That said, the willingness of the general public to openly share private and personally-identifiable information with giant, faceless, data-harvesting corporations, for little or even no personal benefit, continues to astound me. Facial and fingerprint recognition just to get your phone to unlock? Really??

I don't know at what point people will wake up from their slumber and go "Hang on - why does Company X and the Government know my every move and what I want to buy before I even know it myself??", but I hope it will be soon. I do, however, fear it will be 'never', because people are seemingly willing to give away any privacy they may have left just so they can have the latest iPhone .

 

[ksinger]

I don't believe anyone chose to give up as much personal data as they do, but it's been built in to operating systems of electronic gadgets and there is no option to opt out, at least not without substantial efforts to remove one's electronic footprint. I feel we are now akin to the adage of boiling a frog - do it slowly and incrementally and people will just go along with things, but throw people into an all-seeing Big Brother state and they might actually react to it.

That said, the willingness of the general public to openly share private and personally-identifiable information with giant, faceless, data-harvesting corporations, for little or even no personal benefit, continues to astound me. Facial and fingerprint recognition just to get your phone to unlock? Really??

I don't know at what point people will wake up from their slumber and go "Hang on - why does Company X and the Government know my every move and what I want to buy before I even know it myself??", but I hope it will be soon. I do, however, fear it will be 'never', because people are seemingly willing to give away any privacy they may have left just so they can have the latest iPhone .

The only way you can leave a minimal footprint is to eschew electronic...most anything. Use cash. Never buy over the web. Don't watch Netflix. Don't every search the web for anything. It just goes on an on. And never put your opinions or bits of personal data out on social media. Of which this site is one too. The right algorithms can harvest that data too. But who is willing to walk away from ALL of it? Hardly anyone. The human need to squawk "I'm HERE! I'm HERE! I'm HERE! SEE ME!!!!" is just too strong for most people. (says the person typing that thought on a public site, ha ha!)

Did anyone watch "Battlestar Galactica", and the short but wildly interesting spin-off, "Caprica"? In Caprica, which is set before the events of Battlestar, the cylons have not been created yet. The 12 colonies have not yet eschewed networked technology. Everyone is jacked into really amazing virtual worlds. The scary brilliant young girl who ends up creating the means to put a human consciousness into a mechanical body, at one point describes how she uses the huge electronic footprint left by everyone in the virtual worlds, to create near-perfect virtual simulations of living people - with thought processes and free will, the whole deal. There is one of her too, and when she is killed in the real world in a terrorist attack, she's actually still "alive" in the virtual world.

More info that you wanted or needed, but it was a very interesting take on us, right now. What we are capable of right now, is probably different from that fictional concept, only by a matter of degree, with something similar not that far off in time.

And it's always helpful to remember that those giant, faceless, data-harvesting corporations, are run by flesh and blood humans, who use those corporations as legal protection from the personal consequences of doing things that the humans outside the corporation, deem immoral or nefarious. One of the things we should really agree upon, is that corporations are legal constructs only, that should not be virtually immortal and have the same rights as humans. Perhaps another topic, but still, we created 'em, and we can un-create them if we have the will to do it. And it would not be the same as executing a human, even though corporations are people now.

 

[t-c]

... The EU proposition, however, is that everybody must have their choice of speed dictated by someone sitting in a bureaucrats' office somewhere, rather than allowing the vast and sensible majority of people to exercise discretion and apply their experience to choose appropriate speeds ...

I've been busy with work and haven't had time to read the links you provided, but how will your speed be controlled by someone not on your lap? As far as I know, we don't have self-driving cars yet and the driver still has control of the cars. Is it really true that drivers will not have a choice or are you exaggerating to make a point?

... I don't believe anyone chose to give up as much personal data as they do ...

Have you seen Facebook and other social media? People post so much personal information online. I don't participate in that kind of social media because I just don't want to be exposed like that.

... I don't know at what point people will wake up from their slumber and go "Hang on - why does Company X and the Government know my every move and what I want to buy before I even know it myself??", but I hope it will be soon. I do, however, fear it will be 'never', because people are seemingly willing to give away any privacy they may have left just so they can have the latest iPhone ...

I set my applications to leave me with as much privacy as possible. I won't use any app that requires access to my address book, pictures, etc... I use VPN on my computer and phone for a little more anonymity. I maintain my own email (for personal use) and use freebies only as throw-away accounts. I've gotten to the point that I avoid being in pictures altogether because you never know who will publish what (turned out to be a smart move at one point). But even then, I know my information is still out there (data breaches don't help).