OV9

Posted: **Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:24 pm**

Your house (and shed) is on fire. You could call the fire brigade but you know that their policy is is house-centric and they don't openly support sheds. Do you:

a) Refuse to call the fire brigade because you disagree with their shed policy, while allowing the fire to consume everything you love, and giving yourself a pat on the back for being very clever.

b) Call the the fire brigade, and once they're on site saving the house, have a conversation about saving the shed too. You keep the house and you might even influence shed policy too.

c) Mistake it for your neighbour's house and shovel more fuel into it because you think it doesn't affect you. Until you realise actually the whole street has burned down.

Posted: **Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:25 pm**

ZedLeg wrote: Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:11 pm Remember row v wade rollback happened while the other team were in.

The Supreme court is a bigger problem than the president tbh and the gop sewed that up last time.

The last of Jimmy Carter's judicial appointments was still actively serving in 2021; that's 40 years after Carter left office: https://davidallengreen.com/2024/12/som ... the-bench/

So the direct effects of Trump's presidencies are potentially going to last a couple of generations in the US judicial system. And the indirect effects (general balance of power) may be enshrined for the best part of a century.

Posted: **Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:27 pm**

Sundayjumper wrote: Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:24 pm Your house (and shed) is on fire. You could call the fire brigade but you know that their policy is is house-centric and they don't openly support sheds. Do you:

a) Refuse to call the fire brigade because you disagree with their shed policy, while allowing the fire to consume everything you love, and giving yourself a pat on the back for being very clever.

b) Call the the fire brigade, and once they're on site saving the house, have a conversation about saving the shed too. You keep the house and you might even influence shed policy too.

c) Mistake it for your neighbour's house and shovel more fuel into it because you think it doesn't affect you. Until you realise actually the whole street has burned down.

If that is an attempt to justify compelling people to vote, it's a very bad analogy. You simply can't blame people for not voting when they're not engaged, and it's very easy to see why people aren't engaged in the shit politics we've had for at least the last decade.

Posted: **Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:35 pm**

Would you vote for the person who shovels shit into your mouth while telling you it’s delicious or the person shoveling shit into your mouth and telling you a mexican is doing it?

Posted: **Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:37 pm**

ZedLeg wrote: Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:10 pm Like, what’s the worst thing Trump’s done so far. The ICE raids? Saying that they should level Gaza? Rolling back rights for trans people?

Scrapped all DEIA policy & roles in government and pressured a lot of big companies to follow suit. The "A" is accessibility, btw, disabled folk, a large proportion of whom are veterans. Instructed the DOJ to halt all DEIA prosecutions that were in progress.

Removed price caps on a lot of medications.

Halted government medical research and medical information publishing.

Tried to fire all the Inspector Generals, whose job is to prevent fraud & misconduct. There's only one reason you'd do that. The IGs said no

Appointed grossly, grossly unqualified people to the cabinet.

IN THE FIRST WEEK. He's far from done yet. Don't try to both-sides this.

Posted: **Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:40 pm**

I’m not, I’m just pointing out that the Dems were never a million miles away from the gop.

Posted: **Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:42 pm**

They're a long way from what's happening now, and what's going to happen in the near future.

Posted: **Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:43 pm**

As I said earlier a marginally less shit choice is still a shit choice and voting for shit politicians because they’re there is how you get shit politicians at every election.

Posted: **Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:45 pm**

Honestly, what’s the point of voting at all if you can only vote for 1 of 2 bad choices and you have to vote for them?

That’s not democracy, you might as well toss a coin.

Posted: **Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:46 pm**

I think in general, not voting is a perfectly valid use of your constitutional right but in this particular case, given what what everyone knew Trump was likely to do, I think more people should have voted for the lesser of the 2 evils.

In the last GE, I was sick and tired of the Tories and I also had some fundamental issues with the Labour Manifesto but I did vote for my Labour candidate as a sort of combi lesser evil / better for the country choice.

But that was my choice - it's a shame more Americans didn't do the same

Posted: **Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:46 pm**

ZedLeg wrote: Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:35 pm Would you vote for the person who shovels shit into your mouth while telling you it’s delicious or the person shoveling shit into your mouth and telling you a mexican is doing it?

It's more like a choice between mashed potato, or shit mixed with broken glass, and you're abstaining because the potatoes aren't seasoned to your liking, meaning you end up with the shit regardless.

Posted: **Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:48 pm**

dinny_g wrote: Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:46 pm I think in general, not voting is a perfectly valid use of your constitutional right but in this particular case, given what what everyone knew Trump was likely to do, I think more people should have voted for the lesser of the 2 evils.

In the last GE, I was sick and tired of the Tories and I also had some fundamental issues with the Labour Manifesto but I did vote for my Labour candidate as a sort of combi lesser evil / better for the country choice.

But that was my choice - it's a shame more Americans didn't do the same

I actually had this exact argument when I said I wouldn’t vote labour. I stand by it and I think the people who didn’t vote on principle in both elections were right to (not?) do so.

Posted: **Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:49 pm**

Sundayjumper wrote: Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:46 pm
ZedLeg wrote: Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:35 pm Would you vote for the person who shovels shit into your mouth while telling you it’s delicious or the person shoveling shit into your mouth and telling you a mexican is doing it?
It's more like a choice between mashed potato, or shit mixed with broken glass, and you're abstaining because the potatoes aren't seasoned to your liking, meaning you end up with the shit regardless.

It’s not but this argument is becoming tedious.

You’ll be thrilled to know I haven’t changed my mind

Posted: **Mon Jan 27, 2025 3:56 pm**

OK, maybe mashed potato but you're lactose intolerant and it's going to make you feel slightly ill. How about that ?

Posted: **Mon Jan 27, 2025 5:00 pm**

From where I'm sitting it seems like quite a big difference between Trump and the dems, but I'm certainly no expert. @ZedLeg is it the case that both are so far from your politics that they look the same? If so, that would surely only represent the positioning of a fraction of the non-voting third.

Posted: **Mon Jan 27, 2025 5:05 pm**

Oh for sure, I’m not claiming that the principled non voters are the whole 3rd.

It’s only a small amount of people and they were not voting for specific reasons.

As for the rest there’s no telling what way they may have voted so it feels a bit moot to blame them for anything.

Posted: **Mon Jan 27, 2025 7:24 pm**

ZedLeg wrote: Mon Jan 27, 2025 2:56 pm I think telling people they have to vote for someone is undemocratic tbh.

I wouldn’t want compulsory voting like Australia has.

Technically it's compulsory turning up.
You don't have to vote, you can leave the sheet empty or spoil it.

Posted: **Mon Jan 27, 2025 8:29 pm**

Well that’s a curious turn of events.

: IMG_3522.jpeg (32.82 KiB) Viewed 1421 times

Posted: **Mon Jan 27, 2025 9:18 pm**

Shame.

It’s quite amusing seeing trump voters being told who actually pays the tariff on imported foreign goods. Amazingly most seem to think it means the foreign government is going to pay the US for every item sold there…

Posted: **Mon Jan 27, 2025 9:52 pm**

integrale_evo wrote: Mon Jan 27, 2025 9:18 pm Shame.

It’s quite amusing seeing trump voters being told who actually pays the tariff on imported foreign goods. Amazingly most seem to think it means the foreign government is going to pay the US for every item sold there…

And I wonder where they got that idea from...

OV9

Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump

Re: Trump