Trump's Plans for the Oil Industry

[GMDino]

(05-14-2024, 01:43 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: ? Everyone has fantasies, so does that mean no one should be alone with anyone? 


To predictable, i knew someone was going to bring up Climate change. 
Really, you think the world as we know it is going to end and humans will become extinct in the next 12 years? 
That's fear mongering if i ever heard it, it's as stupid as saying Trump will turn the US into an Authoritarian state. 

If Trump wins, which do you think is more likely to happen? 
He doesn't live long enough to finish his term or he converts the US into an Authoritarian state? 

Be realistic about it. 


Shutting down the press is exactly what Biden has been doing. OFC you don't see it as a problem.


Killing political opponents? 
Obama led the way to killing USC's with out a fair trial. 

Press under attack?
https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/press/Censorship%20Lawsuit%20Order%20Denying%20Dismissal.pdf

https://ago.mo.gov/wp-content/uploads/212-3-proposed-findings-of-fact.pdf

https://www.reuters.com/legal/judge-blocks-us-officials-communicating-with-social-media-companies-newspaper-2023-07-04/


Well if admiring Kim and Putin keep them from causing troubles on the world stage then maybe it's worth the little ass kissing. But that's not all that happened, Trump has put more sanctions on Russia that Biden has.  You have to admit Trump was more unpredictable than Biden on the world stage.

I really think North Korea just wants to be recognized as a national power. The majority of the things they do seems like a child wanting attention to me. And like a child that only gets negative attention, they will keep acting out. 
I'm not a fan of how we deal with them politically anyways. 

[*Nately120*]

(05-14-2024, 01:47 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Do you honestly believe the US will become an Authoritarian government under Trump? 

Yes, and I think a lot of people who vote for Trump would be disappointed if he doesn't take an unprecedented amount of authoritative control in response to them reelecting him in 2024.  To a lot of folks I'd say Trump being his version of authoritarian is necessary the same way an invasive surgery is needed to remove cancerous tissue and save your life.  Most people don't want to be sedated and cut up, but this is something that needs to be done and needs to be done in the right way by the right person.

So that is how authoritarianism is sold to the common person who simultaneously can't go three seconds without saying how much he loves freedom and small government.

We want to be free and we want the government to answer to us, but nice guys finish last and having doormat nice guys in charge has turned our country into an absolute shithole and it's only going to get worse.  When democracy is what gives you Biden over Trump, aka shithole over golden age, you need to let the government take control for your own good.  A little authoritarianism is what is needed to get this country back to its "America first" roots. 

[hollodero]

(05-14-2024, 01:43 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: ? Everyone has fantasies, so does that mean no one should be alone with anyone? 


To predictable, i knew someone was going to bring up Climate change. 
Really, you think the world as we know it is going to end and humans will become extinct in the next 12 years? 
That's fear mongering if i ever heard it, it's as stupid as saying Trump will turn the US into an Authoritarian state. 

Well, it seems you made no real effort to understand my point, or else you would have given a different kind of answer. I will make one small effort to remedy that - of course I do not believe in the apocalypse happening through climate change starting next Sunday. That is just an unfair argument to make, just using the most extreme exaggeration and claiming this is what climate change is all about. What I was trying to get at is that even these extreme scenarios (and I do not know where you pulled out yours, no serious person ever claimed humans will be extinct in the next 12 years) don't prove climate change is just a hoax. If you believe that based on an apparently absurd example of fearmongering, you're just as ignorant as the people you moan about.

But hey, you believe about climate change as you please, the debate was not about that. Just, the quality of your argument is akin to calling everyone who is for stricter immigration laws a xenophobe who is afraid of brown people. You rightfully would not take kindly to this type of argument. And yet you throw terms like stupid around after willingly misrepresenting the other person's stance. Since the rest of your post is pretty much held in the same confrontational tone I deem a bit unnecessary, I will not really address the other topics.

[Dill]

(05-14-2024, 01:47 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: You are too easily triggered by DTS. 

Do you honestly believe the US will become an Authoritarian government under Trump? 

Seems I'm easily triggered by the mass of information you've just dismissed.

Did you finish reading my post--the one with the map based on global date on Democratic backsliding"?  Last paragraph:

My concern is not necessarily that an authoritarian will "take over" permanently and change our form of government, though that is certainly possible. My more immediate fear is that the US will elect an authoritarian and his behavior will precipitate a constitutional/democratic crisis which could dwarf the turmoil of the '60s. And it's not clear what shape our institutions might have after that. All at a time when an autocratic Russia and China are challenging the liberal world order the US has underwritten since 1945.

So help me understand why you think electing electing a vengeance-minded authoritarian, backed by a party willing to do his bidding on all fronts 
and whose last act as president was an attempted coup, should not be concerning?

[Mike M (the other one)]

(05-14-2024, 01:47 PM)GMDino Wrote:

Counter me? 
Show me where I'm wrong? or have you not created a meme that can do that yet?

[Mike M (the other one)]

(05-14-2024, 02:26 PM)hollodero Wrote: Well, it seems you made no real effort to understand my point, or else you would have given a different kind of answer. I will make one small effort to remedy that - of course I do not believe in the apocalypse happening through climate change starting next Sunday. That is just an unfair argument to make, just using the most extreme exaggeration and claiming this is what climate change is all about. What I was trying to get at is that even these extreme scenarios (and I do not know where you pulled out yours, no serious person ever claimed humans will be extinct in the next 12 years) don't prove climate change is just a hoax. If you believe that based on an apparently absurd example of fearmongering, you're just as ignorant as the people you moan about.

But hey, you believe about climate change as you please, the debate was not about that. Just, the quality of your argument is akin to calling everyone who is for stricter immigration laws a xenophobe who is afraid of brown people. You rightfully would not take kindly to this type of argument. And yet you throw terms like stupid around after willingly misrepresenting the other person's stance. Since the rest of your post is pretty much held in the same confrontational tone I deem a bit unnecessary, I will not really address the other topics.

No we are right on point, with all of  your words, you posted exactly how i feel about the claims of Trump turning the US into an Authoritarian state. It's an extremist stance. 

Now because i believe in stricter immigration laws you want to call that being an xenophobe? Did you see that Biden actually did something there? he wrote a super weak EO that the effect of it will likely not even move the needle. 

I want a society with laws and enforces them. 

You cannot have a sustainable country if you have no control over who comes into your country with out a process that involves a set of standards in order to be allowed into the country. 

[Mike M (the other one)]

(05-14-2024, 04:11 PM)Dill Wrote: Seems I'm easily triggered by the mass of information you've just dismissed.

Did you finish reading my post--the one with the map based on global date on Democratic backsliding"?  Last paragraph:

My concern is not necessarily that an authoritarian will "take over" permanently and change our form of government, though that is certainly possible. My more immediate fear is that the US will elect an authoritarian and his behavior will precipitate a constitutional/democratic crisis which could dwarf the turmoil of the '60s. And it's not clear what shape our institutions might have after that. All at a time when an autocratic Russia and China are challenging the liberal world order the US has underwritten since 1945.

So help me understand why you think electing electing a vengeance-minded authoritarian, backed by a party willing to do his bidding on all fronts 
and whose last act as president was an attempted coup, should not be concerning?

Why should i answer yours when you won't answer mine in 5 words or less? 
I asked if Trump becomes POTUS will he turn us into an Authoritarian state, and the answer is no. Your whole premise is based on What If. 
And we can ask GMDino what he thinks about What if's. 

[GMDino]

(05-14-2024, 08:42 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Why should i answer yours when you won't answer mine in 5 words or less? 
I asked if Trump becomes POTUS will he turn us into an Authoritarian state, and the answer is no. Your whole premise is based on What If. 
And we can ask GMDino what he thinks about What if's. 

[GMDino]

(05-14-2024, 07:24 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Counter me? 
Show me where I'm wrong? or have you not created a meme that can do that yet?

[BigPapaKain]

(05-14-2024, 08:42 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Why should i answer yours when you won't answer mine in 5 words or less? 
I asked if Trump becomes POTUS will he turn us into an Authoritarian state, and the answer is no. Your whole premise is based on What If. 
And we can ask GMDino what he thinks about What if's. 

Except yes, by his own words.

That was 6 words, so I guess you'll write off this response.

[hollodero]

(05-14-2024, 08:29 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: No we are right on point, with all of  your words, you posted exactly how i feel about the claims of Trump turning the US into an Authoritarian state. It's an extremist stance. 

Now because i believe in stricter immigration laws you want to call that being an xenophobe?

No. I don't. That was my point that I don't.

You, however, act like someone who just would. You accuse people with a different take of just falling for dumb media narratives, giving in to fearmongering and whatnot. A reaction pretty uncalled for. As uncalled for as if someone would use the xenophobe line against you. Which, again, I explicitely do not do, I hope that was clear enough now.

Others and me, we have our reasons for our stances, and they are not crazy conspiracies, they are based on things that actually happen and that look alarming to me, in my case from far away admittedly. Doesn't mean I'm right, in this instance I don't even want to be. I like an exchange about it in good faith, but I guess I better wait for another day.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(05-14-2024, 11:13 PM)hollodero Wrote: No. I don't. That was my point that I don't.

You, however, act like someone who just would. You accuse people with a different take of just falling for dumb media narratives, giving in to fearmongering and whatnot. A reaction pretty uncalled for. As uncalled for as if someone would use the xenophobe line against you. Which, again, I explicitely do not do, I hope that was clear enough now.

Others and me, we have our reasons for our stances, and they are not crazy conspiracies, they are based on things that actually happen and that look alarming to me, in my case from far away admittedly. Doesn't mean I'm right, in this instance I don't even want to be. I like an exchange about it in good faith, but I guess I better wait for another day.

I doubt the R's can win a Triple Crown (POTUS, House and Senate) so there will be one area that will refuse to do anything and keep us in the stalemate we are in. If they somehow do? then we can circle back around and discuss it.

I don't think it matters what Trump does anyways. The media will find a way to relate it to Democracy is DOOMED! 
Just like they are doing now with everything he does say and even with what he doesn't say.

[Mike M (the other one)]

I'm just curious why the FEC didn't fine the RNC and Trump campaign and change it from Legal Fees to something more appropriate?
It's what they've done in the past when when a campaign payment was questionable.

The FEC fined both organizations after a pair of now years-old complaints — one from the Campaign Legal Center and another from the conservative Coolidge Reagan Foundation — alleged that the party and campaign reported payments to the powerhouse Democratic law firm Perkins Coie as legal expenses, when in actuality some of the money was earmarked for “paying Fusion GPS through Perkins Coie to conduct opposition research on Donald Trump,” as the Campaign Legal Center’s original complaint read.

[hollodero]

(05-15-2024, 11:04 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I doubt the R's can win a Triple Crown (POTUS, House and Senate) so there will be one area that will refuse to do anything and keep us in the stalemate we are in. If they somehow do? then we can circle back around and discuss it.

Agreed, with a democratic-led senate there's probably little he could do. But imho it is far from impossible to think Trump wins POTUS and has a republican senate where no one's willing to stand up to him. It was pretty close to that at the beginning of his first presidency, he just relied on moderate folks like Priebus et al. back then. There will be no moderate politician in his next admin, only extreme loyalists and stolen election apologists, he promised as much and I believe him on that.

(05-15-2024, 11:04 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: I don't think it matters what Trump does anyways. The media will find a way to relate it to Democracy is DOOMED! 
Just like they are doing now with everything he does say and even with what he doesn't say.

Sure, we always can revert the discussion back to the media, and you can always say how they are sensationalistic, hyperbolic, biased, fearmongering and whatnot, and you'd be correct about that every single time. But imho you can't just make everything about faulty media narratives. There's still a reality outside of the media buzz, thre's still the things Trump actually does say and do and they are the source of my concern, not Wolf Blitzer et al.

But sure. I doubt that Trump actually is able to finish democracy and implement an authoritarian system. I have little doubt that that would be his intention though, and imho that's bad enough. And your constitution is not a foolproof safeguard, no constitution is, and the US one seems to rely particularly heavy on goodwill, interpretation, norms and long-standing practices more than written law, things that can all be shattered. But mostly, every democracy is in danger if a majority of people is not so keen on keeping it, and MAGA world seems to heavily flirt with the idea of a president Trump with more or less absolute power. And the overwhelming rest of conservative voters just swallows that/distracts by pointing to the media/belittles the issue.

I have seen it happening before a few cilometers away in Hungary, sure a different country by all means, but there were some similarities to the US situation. And boy nearly everyone just ridiculed the idea that they could become authoritarian a few years back, it was called hysterical, for they are in the EU, have a constitution and a SC, plus people don't want that, how could that ever be possible? Well, all it took was a populist creating a system where loyalty is more important than duty to the country and the constitution, everyone in disagreement got ousted and that was that, and imho in the end a non-vigilant population is to blame.

Lastly, no problem for me if you disagree with everything, but just don't call me an extremist spouting dumbness.

[Luvnit2]

I just read through this thread. Liberals grasping at straws is amusing. Trump was POTUS for 4 years, he has a record and no he was close to a dictator. Trump was not a threat to Democracy. On the other hand, Biden weaponized the DOJ to interfere with the 2024 election.

Biden is attempting right now, not a maybe to make us a 3rd world country.

Biden just threatened to withhold both weapons and intelligence from Israel unless they followed his war commands. He should be impeached for doing the same exact. thing (worse) than Trump did on a phone call with Zelinski.

Democrats crave power, Democrats are the party of hate, the hate our police, they hate our country.

[hollodero]

(05-15-2024, 12:44 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Biden just threatened to withhold both weapons and intelligence from Israel unless they followed his war commands. He should be impeached for doing the same exact. thing (worse) than Trump did on a phone call with Zelinski.

The same exact impeachable thing according to you, so the Trump impeachment was at least fine as well? Also, it is of course not the same thing. Trump withheld money already approved by Congress for he wanted to pressure Ukraine to announce a fake investigation into his main rival, a personal motive. Biden withholds the shipment of certain offensive weaponries (as far as I know congress did not vote on specific weaponry like artillery shells to be delivered) for he does not want to see them used against civilians in Rafah. Think of that what you will, but it has nothing to do with the Ukraine instance.

(05-15-2024, 12:44 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Democrats crave power, Democrats are the party of hate, the hate our police, they hate our country.

Oh my, this "they hate our country" line is so hyperbolic and overused.

[Dill]

(05-14-2024, 08:42 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Why should i answer yours when you won't answer mine in 5 words or less? 
I asked if Trump becomes POTUS will he turn us into an Authoritarian state, and the answer is no. Your whole premise is based on What If. 
And we can ask GMDino what he thinks about What if's. 

Dino???  "What ifs"? 

You are demaning a sound bite, and making your participation contingent upon that, rather than evidence-based, rational argument?  

Whyever would I assent to that? 

Every voter deciding whom to vote for is basing that decision on a candidate's platform and character.

I.e., every voter is asking "what if" my guy wins? What will follow? How will he behave in office? 

But you think this inevitable voter deliberation inherently flawed?? 

I've never said Trump would turn the US into an Authoritarian state. Seems you, and you alone, are setting that standard,
and then supposing there is nothing at all to worry about if his disruption does not rise to that level. 

What I have argued is that Trump will likely precipitate a constitutional crisis, a crisis of democracy.  AGAIN.

I could not really understand why people denied the signs leading up to the Capitol disaster; now the signs are 
even clearer there will be coming damage. But Trump defenders don't see any big problem ahead.  AGAIN. 

Rather than refute that with counter-evidence, you claim the issue is whether he turns the US into an authoritarian
state, without defining what might count as such, or explaining why we shouldn't worry about a constitutional crisis.

[Dill]

(05-15-2024, 12:44 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Biden just threatened to withhold both weapons and intelligence from Israel unless they followed his war commands. He should be impeached for doing the same exact. thing (worse) than Trump did on a phone call with Zelinski.

Democrats crave power, Democrats are the party of hate, the hate our police, they hate our country.

Biden was exercising his legal capacity as C-in-C to execute the nation's foreign policy. 

The US grants Israel more foreign aid than any country in the world because it expects a return on that investment.
The president was acting legally when Netanyahu would not respond to requests to respect civilian life. 

Trump's phone call to Zelensky was an attempt to use his office and US foreign policy to accomplish a private and illegal end

--to smear a political opponent. 

This comparison suggests that you never really understood what was illegal about Trump's call, 
and that you don't understand foreign policy or the law to tell what is legal from what is illegal.

If it's any consolation, I don't think Trump can either. If you asked him on the spot "What are the foreign policy
powers of Congress and what are the FP powers of the executive?" I don't think he could give a clear answer.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(05-15-2024, 07:56 PM)Dill Wrote: Dino???  "What ifs"? 

You are demaning a sound bite, and making your participation contingent upon that, rather than evidence-based, rational argument?  

Whyever would I assent to that? 

Every voter deciding whom to vote for is basing that decision on a candidate's platform and character.

I.e., every voter is asking "what if" my guy wins? What will follow? How will he behave in office? 

But you think this inevitable voter deliberation inherently flawed?? 

I've never said Trump would turn the US into an Authoritarian state. Seems you, and you alone, are setting that standard,
and then supposing there is nothing at all to worry about if his disruption does not rise to that level. 

What I have argued is that Trump will likely precipitate a constitutional crisis, a crisis of democracy.  AGAIN.

I could not really understand why people denied the signs leading up to the Capitol disaster; now the signs are 
even clearer there will be coming damage. But Trump defenders don't see any big problem ahead.  AGAIN. 

Rather than refute that with counter-evidence, you claim the issue is whether he turns the US into an authoritarian
state, without defining what might count as such, or explaining why we shouldn't worry about a constitutional crisis.

This is not science or math, so you evidence is more like speculation based on your perception of events.

No idea how many times i have to explain it, the only way to beat Trump is to make him irrelevant. Even Romney who hates him understands this.

[Dill]

(05-16-2024, 06:27 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: This is not science or math, so you evidence is more like speculation based on your perception of events.

No. It's not simply my "perception" that Trump called a mob to the WH to disrupt the certification of electors,
while Pence was handed 7 lists of forged electors. 

It's not speculation that he wanted to seize voting machines, and that he DID call the Georgia sec of state to 
pressure him to find more votes. 

It's not speculation that he wants to operate with absolute immunity in the WH, and has declared vengeance
to be an object upon return to office.

It's not simply my perception that democracies erode and implode when they elect and reward leaders for flouting rule of law.

It is SPECULATION to presume installing Trump in office again won't do much damage, won't be worse than last time,
based on no evidence whatsoever.