Trump booed at World Series

[Goalpost]

(10-30-2019, 06:59 PM)fredtoast Wrote: 2.  Everytime I see the term "mainstream" before "media" I check the source.  Where did you get that number?

https://news.gallup.com/poll/195542/americans-trust-mass-media-sinks-new-low.aspx

So this is Gallup. It comes from 2016.  There are other sources more current that reflect similar.  The reason I'm using them is that they show the trend as it has decelerated from the mid 50's down to it's current level.  They call it 'mass' media, which I think is fair you would question me to post it as 'mainstream'.  Many of the current polls call it mainstream.  The deterioration is mostly significant thru Republicans, although the trend is heading the wrong way also with independents and to less extent Democrats.  The prior election showed a severe drop, not surprising how it went.
I think the chart shows 1997 thru 2016. 

[NATI BENGALS]

(10-30-2019, 06:11 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As a Service Member I was always instructed to respect the position even if you didn't respect the person. It is why my negative comments toward Trump are always framed as "Action(s) beneath the office of POTUS". I have 0 doubt that as a person he is a self-righteous narcissist, but I respect the position he currently holds to think I have any grounds to boo it. 

Honestly. If he came in and acted with any type of dignity. Acknowledged he lost the popular vote and had a lot of work to do for all Americans. And wasnt a daily national embarrassment.. I would be with you.

Its been a one way train wreck since day one when he lied about stupid little petty shit like crowd size. 

Thats when my nationalism kicks in and i dont give someone actively damaging my country a free pass because of a title.

I call it... Common sense.

[NATI BENGALS]

(10-30-2019, 09:03 PM)Goalpost Wrote: https://news.gallup.com/poll/195542/americans-trust-mass-media-sinks-new-low.aspx

So this is Gallup. It comes from 2016.  There are other sources more current that reflect similar.  The reason I'm using them is that they show the trend as it has decelerated from the mid 50's down to it's current level.  They call it 'mass' media, which I think is fair you would question me to post it as 'mainstream'.  Many of the current polls call it mainstream.  The deterioration is mostly significant thru Republicans, although the trend is heading the wrong way also with independents and to less extent Democrats.  The prior election showed a severe drop, not surprising how it went.
I think the chart shows 1997 thru 2016. 

I forget. Which news channel is it that is always bragging about their ratings? 

It would be funny if they were the same ones who spearheaded the push against "mainstream" media. Oh they are? Im told. I bet if i turned them on tonight. I and watched for a couple hours. I would hear the talking heads railing against mainstream media.

Count me in the 65%. Because faux is mainstream and has mentally wrecked many boomers.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-30-2019, 09:03 PM)Goalpost Wrote: https://news.gallup.com/poll/195542/americans-trust-mass-media-sinks-new-low.aspx

So this is Gallup. It comes from 2016.  There are other sources more current that reflect similar.  The reason I'm using them is that they show the trend as it has decelerated from the mid 50's down to it's current level.  They call it 'mass' media, which I think is fair you would question me to post it as 'mainstream'.  Many of the current polls call it mainstream.  The deterioration is mostly significant thru Republicans, although the trend is heading the wrong way also with independents and to less extent Democrats.  The prior election showed a severe drop, not surprising how it went.
I think the chart shows 1997 thru 2016. 

As I wrote earlier, we have entered the age of a second Cold War. Putin has successfully undermined American’s faith in a free press. Putin has successfully waged a misinformation and propaganda campaign using social media platforms. Putin has successfully waged electronic warfare to hack political networks to influence our political system to install his preferred candidate in the highest political office in the land. Putin’s preferred candidate has attacked our media, intelligence agencies, law enforcement agencies, the State Department, our foreign diplomats, and even individual active duty soldiers sworn to defend America, among others. Putin is using women and money to influence lobbyists to influence politicians. Withholding aid to the Ukraine furthers Russia’s foreign policy in the region, not the United States’. Withdrawing American military forces from Syria and abandoning the Kurds furthers Russia’s foreign policy in the region, not the United States’.

People, especially politicians, need to wake the F up to Putin’s game.

[BakertheBeast]

WoW, when I seen that Trump was booed and people started chanting "Lock him up", I laughed my ass off. That orange turd finally got a taste of his own medicine. What is amazing about this is there are posters here saying it was wrong for those people to do that. Go figure.

I pride myself on having an extensive vocabulary

[fredtoast]

(10-30-2019, 06:11 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As a Service Member I was always instructed to respect the position even if you didn't respect the person. 

Being brainwashed to submit to all authority and never question anything is a problem with the military. That is why we have incidents like the Mai Lai massacre.

I understand that type of mindless blind obedience is required for the military to function in war, but it does not translate well to civilian life.

I don't respect anyone who is embarrassing our country.  I love my country more than any person, position, or title.

[hollodero]

(10-30-2019, 07:19 PM)Dill Wrote: If jailing an innocent person is not the moral equivalent of jailing a guilty person (even though charges against them are "the same"), then I don't see how chanting "lock her up" (and meaning it) regarding an innocent person can be the moral equivalent of chanting "lock him up" regarding someone whose behavior is legally defined as criminal--

Now, the same thing is said by those that want to see Hillary in jail. Trump is smeared and she is guilty, they say, and most probably believe it vividly. For various reasons like being heavily biased or uninformed or other reasons that sure are mostly not too flattering for these individuals. And it's very well possible that Trump is indeed guilty and Hillary was just a victim af scandalization gate (she probably was in most instances). But it really is not about that so much. In either case, it is up to the justice system to make a guilty claim, not to the folks at a rally or in a stadium. This is about behaviour - and mainly about the reaction to these two instances. I'm against it in either case and I find it astonishing that this is a controversial stance. You and many seem to say, aaah it depends, when that guy is an ass and really deserves it than it's totally ok, and not just ok but actually hilarious. I'm not on board with that.

And again, I'm not at all saying it's the same thing, Trump rally goers and stadium goers and their chants. It most certainly is not the same thing. That doesn't take away from my stance that a "mob" (I just mean a bunch of people, nothing explicitly derogatory) should not go out there and demand jailtime of any kind. In principle. By the way, I'm not questioning their right to do so - I question if it's a good thing to do so.
But I am afraid I am just repeating myself here. Your claim of still intact moral highground is noted, and I do not wholly disagree by claiming the opposite, that there is none left and all sides are the same now. There sure is still quite a difference. I might find such chants even understandable, I just don't find them endorseable. From a moral standpoint and also because these chants really turn nothing for the better and possibly some things for the worse - see polarization, entrenchment and so on. It sure is about appearance/perception too.

Just 2 quick additional things to address some points made: a) this also is not about democratic leadership and b) to me it really is not so much about the chanters in the stadium as about those that find those chanters brave and funny and whatnot and fully endorse their deed. That is the thing I saw and see as a bit hypocritical. The chanter's motives do not factor into that.

[*bfine32*]

(10-30-2019, 09:08 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Honestly. If he came in and acted with any type of dignity. Acknowledged he lost the popular vote and had a lot of work to do for all Americans. And wasnt a daily national embarrassment.. I would be with you.

Its been a one way train wreck since day one when he lied about stupid little petty shit like crowd size. 

Thats when my nationalism kicks in and i dont give someone actively damaging my country a free pass because of a title.

I call it... Common sense.

(10-31-2019, 08:19 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Being brainwashed to submit to all authority and never question anything is a problem with the military. That is why we have incidents like the Mai Lai massacre.

I understand that type of mindless blind obedience is required for the military to function in war, but it does not translate well to civilian life.

I don't respect anyone who is embarrassing our country.  I love my country more than any person, position, or title.

Oh, I have no doubt that I have a different outlook than both of you and others. We often say our job is to defend freedoms so you can exercise them. We don't always get to exercise them. WTS, you might want to use a little less derogatory term than brainwashed when talking about the brave men and women that often sacrifice their freedoms to defend your right to bytch about your elected officials in your Birkenstocks.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-31-2019, 12:11 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Oh, I have no doubt that I have a different outlook than both of you and others. We often say our job is to defend freedoms so you can exercise them. We don't always get to exercise them. WTS, you might want to use a little less derogatory term than brainwashed when talking about the brave men and women that often sacrifice their freedoms to defend your right to bytch about your elected officials.

You're quoting two people who have never put their personal safety in danger for the benefit of others.  Well, I know we can say that about at least one of them.  They have zero idea of what it means to be in that type of situation or how they benefit from others doing so.

[GMDino]

(10-31-2019, 08:19 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Being brainwashed to submit to all authority and never question anything is a problem with the military. That is why we have incidents like the Mai Lai massacre.

I understand that type of mindless blind obedience is required for the military to function in war, but it does not translate well to civilian life.

I don't respect anyone who is embarrassing our country.  I love my country more than any person, position, or title.

Among the reasons I could never have been in the military is that I question leadership WAY too much.  Knowing many people who did and who currently serve I get why they want unquestioning robots to follow orders during times of battle and war but for me it ends when I see things that need questioned outside of following battle plans.



Your reference to the Mai Lai Massacre is a good example.  That guy was destroyed by the military (and many elected officials) during his life for doing the right thing by not following orders.

I can only wonder how many other times this could have happened.

[NATI BENGALS]

(10-31-2019, 01:19 PM)GMDino Wrote: Among the reasons I could never have been in the military is that I question leadership WAY too much.  Knowing many people who did and who currently serve I get why they want unquestioning robots to follow orders during times of battle and war but for me it ends when I see things that need questioned outside of following battle plans.



Your reference to the Mai Lai Massacre is a good example.  That guy was destroyed by the military (and many elected officials) during his life for doing the right thing by not following orders.

I can only wonder how many other times this could have happened.

Having a shitbag draft dodging un-american president is probably a pretty good contributor to the record high suicide rate going on in the military right now. That and his dirt ball policies like rounding up kids and families and putting them in cages. Probably not what many had in mind when they signed their lives away.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-31-2019, 01:19 PM)GMDino Wrote: Among the reasons I could never have been in the military is that I question leadership WAY too much.

I can only imagine what the others are.

Quote:  Knowing many people who did and who currently serve I get why they want unquestioning robots to follow orders during times of battle and war but for me it ends when I see things that need questioned outside of following battle plans.



Your reference to the Mai Lai Massacre is a good example.  That guy was destroyed by the military (and many elected officials) during his life for doing the right thing by not following orders.

I can only wonder how many other times this could have happened.

It's happened far fewer times than the opposite saved lives.  You cannot have soldiers question orders unless they are obviously immoral, e.g. shoot this group of toddlers.  Individual soldiers do not have the big picture, sometimes sacrificing one company saves two divisions or destroys an enemy division.  But your basic assertion is blatantly untrue, the military does not want robots.  They want soldiers that can think and adapt but are cognizant of their place in the grand scheme of things.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-31-2019, 01:48 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Having a shitbag draft dodging un-american president is probably a pretty good contributor to the record high suicide rate going on in the military right now.

Yeah, it has nothing to do with endless deployments caused by our involvement with infinite conflicts in the Middle East.  You are so damn unhinged when it comes to Trump I'm honestly concerned for your mental health.

Quote:That and his dirt ball policies like rounding up kids and families and putting them in cages. Probably not what many had in mind when they signed their lives away.

Familiarize yourself with posse comitatus.  The military is not used for law enforcement purposes.  Anything else you want to spout off about in a  completely uninformed way?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-31-2019, 09:27 AM)hollodero Wrote: Just 2 quick additional things to address some points made: a) this also is not about democratic leadership and b) to me it really is not so much about the chanters in the stadium as about those that find those chanters brave and funny and whatnot and fully endorse their deed. That is the thing I saw and see as a bit hypocritical. The chanter's motives do not factor into that.

This is the precise thing that has been argued in this thread.  Some people grasp this, others dislike Trump too much to want to try.

[*bfine32*]

(10-31-2019, 01:55 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: 1. Yeah, it has nothing to do with endless deployments caused by our involvement with infinite conflicts in the Middle East.  You are so damn unhinged when it comes to Trump I'm honestly concerned for your mental health.


2. Familiarize yourself with posse comitatus.  The military is not used for law enforcement purposes.  Anything else you want to spout off about in a  completely uninformed way?

1. Surely you're not talking about these conflicts that Trump has vowed to get us out of and begun to do so with redeployment from Syria. I'm pretty sure these deployments have lessened under Trump. But dude was probably right. These folks are killing themselves because Trump had bone spurs

2. I too am lost of the relevance of our border policies and the Military.

[GMDino]

(10-31-2019, 01:51 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I can only imagine what the others are.

Wonder no more! I was short fat and never fired a gun in my life. I had future plans that did not involve me being deployed anywhere. The Military life was not for me.

Glad to clear that up for ya!


I

(10-31-2019, 01:51 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: t's happened far fewer times than the opposite saved lives.  You cannot have soldiers question orders unless they are obviously immoral, e.g. shoot this group of toddlers.  Individual soldiers do not have the big picture, sometimes sacrificing one company saves two divisions or destroys an enemy division.  But your basic assertion is blatantly untrue, the military does not want robots.  They want soldiers that can think and adapt but are cognizant of their place in the grand scheme of things.

Yeah, to the bold, you didn't read what I wrote.

Also you have zero idea (nor do I) how many times it could have happened and saved lives. It's a hypothetical.

They want order followers trained to complete the orders. If that means deviating from the initial plan to finish the mission they still want it finished. The do not want someone who will question the mission.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-31-2019, 02:17 PM)GMDino Wrote: Wonder no more!  I was short fat and never fired a gun in my life.  I had future plans that did not involve me being deployed anywhere.  The Military life was not for me.

Glad to clear that up for ya!

It absolutely does clear it up, thank you.

Quote:Yeah, to the bold, you didn't read what I wrote.

Also you have zero idea (nor do I) how many times it could have happened and saved lives.  It's a hypothetical.

Yeah, I did.  I also have far more than "zero idea".  Simple common sense and a knowledge of military history show that good discipline and faith in the orders of your superiors is among the leading reasons for a military's success, if not the number one reason.  Battles are usually won because the other side retreats/routs first, even if they are in the militarily advantageous position prior to doing so.

They want order followers trained to complete the orders.  If that means deviating from the initial plan to finish the mission they still want it finished.  The do not want someone who will question the mission.[/quote]

[NATI BENGALS]

(10-31-2019, 01:55 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Yeah, it has nothing to do with endless deployments caused by our involvement with infinite conflicts in the Middle East.  You are so damn unhinged when it comes to Trump I'm honestly concerned for your mental health.


Familiarize yourself with posse comitatus.  The military is not used for law enforcement purposes.  Anything else you want to spout off about in a  completely uninformed way?

Im not unhinged. I am aware of the con. While plenty of trumpets are still being suckered.

I didnt say it was definitely the cause. But acting like it could not be a factor is just as dumb as supporting an unAmerican conman president.

Im not making the shit up because im unhinged. Just my normal realist self.

http://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2019/06/28/two-soldiers-died-by-suicide-along-the-mexico-border/

I doubt the 20 and 21 year old in this story had a bunch of deployments. Just so happens they were "securing the border". And some of them are even forced to work at detention facilities. 

Take the orange colored glasses off every one in awhile and comprehend the reality of the situation.

[Dill]

(10-31-2019, 09:27 AM)hollodero Wrote: Now, the same thing is said by those that want to see Hillary in jail. Trump is smeared and she is guilty, they say, and most probably believe it vividly. For various reasons like being heavily biased or uninformed or other reasons that sure are mostly not too flattering for these individuals. And it's very well possible that Trump is indeed guilty and Hillary was just a victim af scandalization gate (she probably was in most instances). But it really is not about that so much. In either case, it is up to the justice system to make a guilty claim, not to the folks at a rally or in a stadium. This is about behaviour - and mainly about the reaction to these two instances. I'm against it in either case and I find it astonishing that this is a controversial stance. You and many seem to say, aaah it depends, when that guy is an ass and really deserves it than it's totally ok, and not just ok but actually hilarious. I'm not on board with that.

Well written, Hollo, as usual.  Nevertheless, a few quick points in return.

1. Nothing I have said so far = it is really ok if the guy is an ass.  You may still be viewing "lock x up" as having the same import under all conditions. Perhaps you suppose I do too, and so I seem to be defending the chant "when WE do it." But I do not view the chant as having the same import under all conditions. I find the meaning of behavior inseparable from intent and context. Mobs who really want to jail their leader's political opponent are not ok. I have not even said its ok when giving a scapegoater a taste of his own medicine. I have just maintained there is not an ethical equivalence between people doing that and people who genuinely want to jail scapegoats.

(10-31-2019, 09:27 AM)hollodero Wrote: And again, I'm not at all saying it's the same thing, Trump rally goers and stadium goers and their chants. It most certainly is not the same thing. That doesn't take away from my stance that a "mob" (I just mean a bunch of people, nothing explicitly derogatory) should not go out there and demand jailtime of any kind. In principle. By the way, I'm not questioning their right to do so - I question if it's a good thing to do so.
But I am afraid I am just repeating myself here. Your claim of still intact moral highground is noted, and I do not wholly disagree by claiming the opposite, that there is none left and all sides are the same now. There sure is still quite a difference. I might find such chants even understandable, I just don't find them endorseable. From a moral standpoint and also because these chants really turn nothing for the better and possibly some things for the worse - see polarization, entrenchment and so on. It sure is about appearance/perception too.

Just 2 quick additional things to address some points made: a) this also is not about democratic leadership and b) to me it really is not so much about the chanters in the stadium as about those that find those chanters brave and funny and whatnot and fully endorse their deed. That is the thing I saw and see as a bit hypocritical. The chanter's motives do not factor into that.

2. I don't think there is a lot of daylight between us on the issue of whether chanting "lock x up" is good.

3. Consequences--here's where the daylight appears. I don't see much potential at all for increased polarization and entrenchment, etc.  (Bels had that worry too, suggesting we concentrate on voting Trump out of office--as if that won't piss off Trumpsters even more.)  I don't see much danger that Biden/Warren/Bernie will lead cheers of "lock him up" at their rallies.  If such cheers break out they and others in the crowd will stop them.  That is because the two sides are not equivalent, despite the fraction of a "mob" at a baseball game.

One person on this thread who has, since my last post, "endorsed the deed" is Baker, himself a one-time Trumper who has seen the light. Not sure if he has ever said the chant was bad when Trumpsters did it; so not sure that makes HIM a hypocrite now. Pretty sure, though, that even if HE endorses that chant, that doesn't make ME a hypocrite any more than it makes you one.

So it is not clear at all that people who in the past decried "lock HER up" are now on some "lock HIM up" bandwagon. Continuing to recognize definable ethical gradations in behavior should not put them there.

The limited consequence of the baseball chant is simply this--more fodder for Trump supporters/defenders, looking desperately for equivalence between mob chants with full crowd participation lead by an authoritarian targeting political scapegoats, on the one hand, and on the other, scattered, spontaneous boos and chants by a fraction of a crowd at a baseball game who have no sanction from their leaders. Hope is that now suddenly a sweeping, general charge of hypocrisy can somehow attach to the whole of Trump resistance--and stick.

So we are led to worry about different things here--You "mob" behavior, and me the continued obfuscation/leveling of standards masquerading as upholding them, which I find a far more serious problem.  The central one, really, of our current conjuncture.

[NATI BENGALS]

(10-31-2019, 02:00 PM)bfine32 Wrote: These folks are killing themselves because Trump had bone spurs

Here is a really big problem. You have already basically stated you will blindly follow. (See posts in this thread.)

And then here you are gleefully getting in line with your party...Disregarding reality and unable to confront a potential problem presented by a combat veteran who holds a different view than your own. So your blind allegiance is going right past country and straight to party. 

And right now your party is led by a... conman believe it or not. It is well documented. Many lawsuits. Fake scam college, fake scam charity, bankrupted casinos, housing discrimination, fraudulently taking money from 9/11 funds... I mean the list is INSANELY LONG. It makes me question if trumpets comprehend reality. I am starting to doubt it. 

Or maybe it isn't that they don't/can't comprehend reality. Its just that they are so broken/brainwashed/blindly following party over county that it doesn't matter.

Kind of exposes the reality of how well the broken corrupt two party system is working. Scarily well