Jump to content
270soft Forum

Next update thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

If you had never joined this forum, we would still be having political discussions. 

Because that means you're an idiot snowflake who cant take anything even though you brought on a stupid conversation. Ban super, ban anyone, ban me for all I care. Super was commenting on a topic you

Believe it or not, while it may be a minority of people, some would like to see what Patine is talking about be realized, even if it is a small chance. I enjoy K4E and PMI more than I do PI. It's a ma

Posted Images

12 minutes ago, Anthony_270 said:

Pepper, I put it on my plate!

Still no idea what you're talking about.

See, this exact cycle has happened quite a few times before. I bring up issue with some obtuse thing you're doing, and you outright refuse to stop on a simple request, and, in fact, you demand to know what you're even doing that's at all objectionable, you deny things that can actually be seen in past posts, you make evasive answers, only partially (and selectively) quote, and respond to my posts, make diversionary, tangential questions, then declare this "back-and-forth is causing <insert negative quality>" and I have to cease and desist, or oblique threats of bans are made, and the issue is not resolve, and just bubbles under the surface until something brings it up again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Patine said:

See, this exact cycle has happened quite a few times before. I bring up issue with some obtuse thing you're doing, and you outright refuse to stop on a simple request, and, in fact, you demand to know what you're even doing that's at all objectionable, you deny things that can actually be seen in past posts, you make evasive answers, only partially (and selectively) quote, and respond to my posts, make diversionary, tangential questions, then declare this "back-and-forth is causing <insert negative quality>" and I have to cease and desist, or oblique threats of bans are made, and the issue is not resolve, and just bubbles under the surface until something brings it up again.

Still no idea what you're talking about.

Are you talking about people receiving bans for personal attacks? People being asked to stop discussing things when the discussion starts getting off the tracks?

Please be clear and concise.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Anthony_270 said:

No, I haven't. Not sure what you're referring to. I encourage multiple views on these sorts of subjects. Someone want to chime in and say Trump has no chance of winning the Rep nom, and perhaps (say) Haley is actually the frontrunner? I'd be interested in a take like that.

Someone is talking about excluding meaningful discussion? Apparently you have to be in total agreeable that the political system today is in utter shambles and that Trump accomplished nothing in office, otherwise it is not meaningful discussion,. 🤣🤣

We're not even discussing his policy, we're discussing his 2024 election chances. JFC 

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Anthony_270 said:

I think Kamala (despite the fake, overdone laugh) has more 'likability' than H. Clinton. H. Clinton on paper was a strong candidate (Senator, 2008 runner up, SoS), but she lacked strength in some of the soft skills which are often the most important for pols.

They hid her well as VP, but she couldn't even hit 1% in Iowa before wisely dropping out. 

 

I could give you that Kamala is more likable... but she is VERY fake and even from liberals it came across that way many times in clips. 

In some ways, it's better to be seen as unlikable and genuine than slightly more likable but disingenuous. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Anthony_270 said:

Still no idea what you're talking about.

Are you talking about people receiving bans for personal attacks? People being asked to stop discussing things when the discussion starts getting off the tracks?

Please be clear and concise.

Anthony is the only one engaging with the above poster on a daily basis attempting to make sense of their points. And I think the reason they make partial quotes is to avoid showing any personal attacks the above poster may be saying for those of us who have blocked the above postetr (the many). 

And they are most likely referencing the order to stop calling other posters terrorists as the above did recently. Shocking that's somehow a request that some posters don't see the personal nature of. 

 

It seems some posters are just looking to antagonize those in positions of power and are mad at the system on this board. If they don't get banned they complain about the discussion (that they are not involved in). If they get banned they complained of the unfairness of it. Imagine trying to stop discussion on a former President on a political board who happens to be the 2024 frontrunner. It's made by Monday to see such a laughable idea. 

 

Is there no rule for antagonizing the admin? 🤣

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Anthony_270 said:

Still no idea what you're talking about.

Are you talking about people receiving bans for personal attacks? People being asked to stop discussing things when the discussion starts getting off the tracks?

Please be clear and concise.

I think it's very obvious the "laugh," emote put on your post I'm quoting is not laughing at you, but at me, which has been a habit of that poster several times in the last few days, including at posts that are in no way, shape, or form "funny," and highly inappropriate and unacceptable to be laughing at. And since you have asked him to stop directing "laugh," emotes at me, and he has blatantly refused, I'd like you to consider this a formal complaint and deal with it SERIOUSLY.

As for the issue at hand, I will re-address it when my patience has reset.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Patine said:

As for the issue at hand, I will re-address it when my patience has reset.

I'm not sure what you're getting out of general discussion on the forum. You seem not to like to think about or hear discussion of Trump (perhaps unless it's negative). My guess is Trump isn't going away at least for a couple of years, probably not until another kick at the can in 2024, and if he wins of course not for some time after that. Horse race talk for the foreseeable future will probably centre around Trump.

So perhaps avoid these sorts of threads for the time being?

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Anthony_270 said:

I'm not sure what you're getting out of general discussion on the forum. You seem not to like to think about or hear discussion of Trump (perhaps unless it's negative). My guess is Trump isn't going away at least for a couple of years, probably not until another kick at the can in 2024, and if he wins of course not for some time after that. Horse race talk for the foreseeable future will probably centre around Trump.

So perhaps avoid these sorts of threads for the time being?

As unfortunate and depressing, and a bleak sign of the degenerating, vapidly sensationalist, and more-and-more without substance, American political zeitgeist, a likelihood as that may be, I still think my core complaint is the monomania of the main political topic. I think my big suggestion would be to vary political discussion significant, and not focus so monotonously on Trump and those directly in his circle and shadow.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

I think my big suggestion would be to vary political discussion significant, and not focus so monotonously on Trump

Fair enough - right now I'm focusing on PI, though. After that, CI. Trump very well may be leading the Republican charge in trying to take back Congress for the next 1.5 years.

I'd be happy to talk more about Trudeau or Johnson, TBH (and by that, I mean talk about how Trudeau is a buffoon and Johnson is acting like a tyrant!). 😪 But, the focus is on PI!

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Anthony_270 said:

Fair enough - right now I'm focusing on PI, though. After that, CI. Trump very well may be leading the Republican charge in trying to take back Congress for the next 1.5 years.

I'd be happy to talk more about Trudeau or Johnson, TBH (and by that, I mean talk about how Trudeau is a buffoon and Johnson is acting like a tyrant!). 😪 But, the focus is on PI!

Trudeau's far better of an alternative than soulless, snake of cold-hearted, disingenuous technocrat he replaced in 2015 (but perhaps just a friendlier, personal face - even if his facial grooming is not as high a priority), and better than the Harper 2.0 wannabe Scheer or the detached, out-of-touch, elitist, aristocratic plutocrat (sounds kind of like Romney's description) O'Toole, but I'm all for Singh Federally, and Notley Provincially, anyways. And Layton was the greatest PM Canada (sadly) never had. But, hey, at least in Canada, we get a choice other than the, "Partido Conservator," and, "Partido Liberal," (the name of the two beneficiary parties in the hard-rigged two-party electoral systems of the, "Turno Pacifico," in late 19th Century Spain, and the, "Pacto de Caballeros," in late 19th/early 20th Century Argentina and Columbia, which the Republican Party of the United States and the Democratic Party of the United States, respectively, pretty much also fill the role of.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Anthony_270 said:

I'm not sure what you're getting out of general discussion on the forum. You seem not to like to think about or hear discussion of Trump (perhaps unless it's negative). My guess is Trump isn't going away at least for a couple of years, probably not until another kick at the can in 2024, and if he wins of course not for some time after that. Horse race talk for the foreseeable future will probably centre around Trump.

So perhaps avoid these sorts of threads for the time being?

Uh he will stilll probably be threatening to run even after Iowa and NH caucuses happen if he sees an opening and just come in at Super Tuesday. 

 

This is another 4 years, 100%. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Anthony_270 said:

Fair enough - right now I'm focusing on PI, though. After that, CI. Trump very well may be leading the Republican charge in trying to take back Congress for the next 1.5 years.

I'd be happy to talk more about Trudeau or Johnson, TBH (and by that, I mean talk about how Trudeau is a buffoon and Johnson is acting like a tyrant!). 😪 But, the focus is on PI!

So now people are dictating and demanding what the conversation is... in a political forum? 

 

This is like people complaining about too much talk of LeBron James on an NBA forum. I think I've made that reference before but at this point it has to be a troll effort. There is no way someone can legitimately discuss any American politics without referencing the environment Trump left behind. 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Patine said:

Scheer or the detached, out-of-touch, elitist, aristocratic plutocrat (sounds kind of like Romney's description) O'Toole

Wasn't impressed by Scheer, haven't been impressed by O'Toole. In terms of personable-ness, I think Singh was the strongest of the big 5 in the last election. Trudeau just comes across to me as fake. In fact, the most important part of his resume before becoming PM might have been teaching drama class!

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Anthony_270 said:

Wasn't impressed by Scheer, haven't been impressed by O'Toole. In terms of personable-ness, I think Singh was the strongest of the big 5 in the last election. Trudeau just comes across to me as fake. In fact, the most important part of his resume before becoming PM might have been teaching drama class!

Or a very important part of George W. Bush's resume in 2000, unfortunately...

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Anthony_270 said:

Wasn't impressed by Scheer, haven't been impressed by O'Toole. In terms of personable-ness, I think Singh was the strongest of the big 5 in the last election. Trudeau just comes across to me as fake. In fact, the most important part of his resume before becoming PM might have been teaching drama class!

Did you vote PPC? :P

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TheLiberalKitten said:

Did you vote PPC? :P

 

No, but they're an interesting party. Bernier was in the debates, and had some strong moments. We'll see if they can gain some traction between now and the next one. But I think starting another party is a quixotic quest. As happened with Reform, the best outcome it seems to me is eventually it merges with the Conservatives. Much better to influence another party from the inside. Honestly, the NDP might be a better fit for that than the Cons.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Anthony_270 said:

No, but they're an interesting party. Bernier was in the debates, and had some strong moments. We'll see if they can gain some traction between now and the next one. But I think starting another party is a quixotic quest. As happened with Reform, the best outcome it seems to me is eventually it merges with the Conservatives. Much better to influence another party from the inside. Honestly, the NDP might be a better fit for that than the Cons.

Sorry, exactly WHAT you're saying the NDP are a better fit for than the Conservatives isn't quite clear.

 

And, have you read my very pivotal query in the Game Feedback sub-forum?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Patine said:

Sorry, exactly WHAT you're saying the NDP are a better fit for than the Conservatives isn't quite clear.

A national populist movement in Canada.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Anthony_270 said:

A national populist movement in Canada.

The PPC and NDP are like oil and water, ideologically. And since, "nationalism," and, "populism," as I've pointed out several times in earlier threads, are not actually truly ideological, in and of themselves, but more, "frames," for any ideology other than the most moderate, establishment, or uninspired of stances on the political spectrum, and not tied to actual such stances or ideologies on the spectrum - left-to-right - themselves, these two elements wouldn't be enough at all to bond such clashing viewpoints and platforms.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

The PPC and NDP are like oil and water, ideologically. And since, "nationalism," and, "populism," as I've pointed out several times in earlier threads, are not actually truly ideological, in and of themselves, but more, "frames," for any ideology other than the most moderate, establishment, or uninspired of stances on the political spectrum, and not tied to actual such stances or ideologies on the spectrum - left-to-right - themselves, these two elements wouldn't be enough at all to bond such clashing viewpoints and platforms.

Ya, perhaps. Bernier is trying to channel a national populist movement into the PPC, but also adding in his own libertarian style, which just doesn't work that well.

The NDP is already economically populist and has working class roots. It has nationalist strands, although it's not that prominent. Just tone down the cultural Marxism and yer good to go! When Dems are successful in the states, it's usually by emphasizing the economically populist aspects of their policies, and despite their cultural Marxism-identity politics stuff.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Anthony_270 said:

Just tone down the cultural Marxism and yer good to go!

This was already done in the 1956 Winnipeg Declaration. You've long missed the memo. Or perhaps you're defining, "Marxist culture," by the standards of McCarthyist, corporate shill media pundit talking heads in the U.S. and their emulators in Canada, in which case you're almost certainly misusing the term grossly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...