Poll for what is more important to you as a US citizen (US citizens vote only)

Discussion in 'Politics' started by youreyes, Feb 5, 2017.

?

What is more important to you as a US citizen?

  1. US citizens first, refugees second

    5 vote(s)
    38.5%
  2. Refugees first, US citizens second

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. US citizens and Refugees (from all countries) should be handled the same

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. I care more for freedom than for safety

    7 vote(s)
    53.8%
  5. I care more for safety than freedom

    1 vote(s)
    7.7%
  6. Other (If you choose this, than reiterate your point of view)

    4 vote(s)
    30.8%
  7. I am not a US citizen

    1 vote(s)
    7.7%
Multiple votes are allowed.
  1. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    1) The "report" function is not your personal "I disagree with this person" button... your last few reports have been in that same vein.
    2) Political Science is a thing...
    3) DJT won the Electoral College, yet lost the Popular Vote. He is also using the constitution as his own personal toilet paper and seems intent on severing ties with several of our closest allies... I think it is quite understandable why people are pissed with him. The fact that he is already viewed as "unfavorable" by a majority of the population is telling as well.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. karenmansker HSIRI Banned

    Messages:
    638
    Joe, Your current response precisely makes my point! I seldom have to post on the forum because I easily recognize trolls' agendas and choose not to respond to them. Your posts continue to corroborate my findings. Incidentally, and for your enlightenment, I have been following this forum since its inception. Yes, you likely know more than I regarding the history and development of this forum because you are still allowed to post your biased opinions - without backing-up your non-fact-based assertions. BTW: For your further enlightenment, I don't drink or do drugs, but perhaps you do?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    karnmansker -

    1) Reporting my post for "denigrating the US president" is continued misuse of the report function. Get it through your head - the US is not a dictatorship. Criticizing the sitting administration is not against the law, nor the forum rules. The report function is not to be used simply because you disagree with someone.
    2) You obviously have some deep seated issue with Joe and other members of the forum population - my recommendation? Rather than attacking them (especially in such a vapid and impotent manner) simply put them on ignore.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. karenmansker HSIRI Banned

    Messages:
    638
    Kittmaru: I utilized the 'report' button to notify the admin/moderators that Mr. Pistole is not only insulting and impuning MY integrity, but also that of our POTUS. As a reminder, following are examples from his last post:

    1) "are you just being dishonest like your idol Mr. Trump"
    2) "Don't mindlessly repeat right wing memes you picked up on Fox News or other right wing entertainment sources"

    I would appreciate your (Kittmaru) assisting in 'cleaning-up' this forum to trend it once again toward its original science basis. Otherwise I feel that it will end-up in the quagmire of well-intended, but since adultrated fora [adultrate def: to render (something) poorer in quality by adding another substance, typically an inferior one.]
     
  8. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Denial isn't a river in Egypt Karen. I've challenged you to make one single well reasoned argument backed up with facts. Where is it?
     
  9. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,188
    Very sorry to hear that you will be leaving us Karen. Naturally, you aren't expected to put up with such shortcomings from our staff and members.

    I understand on the substantive issues too - sometimes you have to find an environment more conducive to alternative facts.

    Happy trails...
     
    Bells likes this.
  10. karenmansker HSIRI Banned

    Messages:
    638
    Thanks for the 'challenge' that you offered. How's this Joe? One single, well-reasoned argument: Joe Pistole seems (IMO) based on my evaluation, to be a biased, opinionated Sciforums member who finds it difficult to accept others' arguments. Back-up Facts: A qualitative review of his self-effacing attitude toward those who disagree with him!

    BTW: I tire of your nonsense!
     
  11. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,188
    I don't think that word means what you think it means...
     
    Bells likes this.
  12. youreyes amorphous ocean Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,830
    Not "people are pissed at him", but liberal people are pissed at him, because they live in a pink rainbow land and miss the reality going on around them. We, the conservatives, we the electoral majority that chose Trump to be the president of United States put faith in our president and fully support him.
     
  13. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,701
    I don't agree with your agreement. LOL

    At what point does political dialogue become other?

    When USA troops continue to arrive in Poland as a part of the biggest USA deployment since the end of ww2. ......that's when....

    Is the deployment of USA forces in Poland a political statement?
    Is the illegal banning of visa holders from 7 nations a political statement?
     
  14. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    Ironically, enough, even Republican supporters are pissed at him... and some Republican politicians...

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/powe...0e57e57e05d_story.html?utm_term=.c3e340a530b8

    among others...

    Trump did not win the Majority. I cannot fathom why this is so difficult for you to comprehend... and of course you support one of the largest BIGOTS in the country; I am not surprised by this.
     
  15. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,701
    the world has nearly 8 billion people to it and the vast majority would be incredibly pissed off at him.. especially the Chinese, the Japanese, now the Australians and many others and you guessed it after the ongoing Poland deployment you could add Putin's Russia to the list as well...

    And just think on it... Trump is the POTUS as troops and hardware arrive in Poland.... to defend against his best buddy Putin.... so go figure that one out...

    "Ahhh! My brain hurts."... I hear from all the way over here...
     
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2017
  16. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,465
    Mod Note

    Please stop abusing the report function. Continuing to do so will only result in you being moderated for wasting staff time.

    Request from other posters for you to back up your claims is not trolling. Refusing to do so is often considered trolling.

    Nor is it against the rules to criticise a politician, even Trump. If you find the criticism of Trump offensive, then perhaps the politics sub-forum is probably not the best place for you to be posting in.

    If you are incapable of discussing the thread's topic, then please cease and desist in participating in the thread. If you persist in, yes, trolling this thread and the members participating in the thread, you will face further moderation.
     
  17. karenmansker HSIRI Banned

    Messages:
    638
    Nice post, youreyes. You're quite observant!
     
  18. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    LOL....

    Where are your facts Karen? You can make outrageous assertions all day long. But if you venture outside the right wing echo chambers you inhabit, you need facts and reason. Sci-forums isn't a right wing echo chamber where facts and reason are not needed nor wanted and where illogical arguments are the only permitted posts.

    Just because you don't like facts and reason it doesn't make them "nonsense" Karen.
     
  19. rpenner Fully Wired Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,833
    To be clear, the report was a grammatical mishmash: "Kittmaru is denigrating the reputation of our duly elected president!"

    DJT's reputation is the various (some quite disparate) opinions of him held in the hearts of those who have heard of him. Pointing out that some opinions held about him are not fact-based doesn't seem like a unfair criticism. Nor is it especially disparaging since people who hold opinions about DJT which are counterfactual are precisely the group one would expect to not see a failure of an opinion to be fact-based to be pejorative. Respecting facts is a value, an ethos, that can't be communicated like information. However, the benefits of fact-based reasoning are so many, including a lessening of the stress caused by cognitive dissonance when counter-factual beliefs are repeatedly contradicted by events.

    Richard M. Nixon was also a duly elected (twice!) president. The second (1972) election is still the strongest popular majority recorded since and an electoral landslide by any fact-based measure. Opinions formed about him changed rapidly with factual disclosures of events he wanted to keep secret and his violation of norms by firing those who were looking into the matter. So being duly-elected to any office is not insulation from pejorative changed of opinion and communication of opinions.

    Finally, it is possible that Karen meant Kittamaru was defaming DJT when writing that DJT uses "the constitution as his own personal toilet paper" but that is hyperbole (I hope!) and opinion (not fact) protected by the First Amendment, and to the extent that it suggested that DJT seems not to recognize the Constitutional (and statutory) limits on Executive Branch power, seems well-supported by reliable sources, including DJT's expressed intentions.

    Here is an official New York opinion on DJT, saying that DJT is not guilty of defamation since his critical messages are so habitually unreliable as fact, that no one should take them seriously:
    Source: Jacobus v Trump, 2017 NY Slip Op 30028(U) [*17-*18] (citations omitted)
    Judge Barbara Jaffe in Cheryl Jacobus vs DJT et. al., New York Supreme Court, New York County, Docket Number: 153252/16, January 9, 2017
    pages 18-19 of http://cases.justia.com/new-york/other-courts/2017-2017-ny-slip-op-30028-u.pdf

    That's a judge saying the then-president-elect was habitually full of it.

    h/t https://www.popehat.com/2017/01/18/...e-against-donald-trump-and-the-trump-defense/

    And as for the poorly designed poll, I voted "other" since I value the rule of law and continuity of government which provide a stable ground on which to plan the future. I value the rights enshrined in the Constitution and laws which give me some right to act upon my plans for the future. And I value the norms that say facts matter and "security" measures and declarations about refugees that aren't based on a well-rounded consideration of objective facts are nothing more than kabuki theater — lots of scary paint and staged poses, but no effective action. I certainly value freedom over mean-spirited theater which only pays lip service to security. The recent EO seems the second least well thought-out EO of the Trump administration. (The worst was the kill-two-regs-before-implementing-a-reg EO that seems completely unconnected to the law and reality of running a country not subject to the tyranny of unchecked arms of the Administration.)
     
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2017
    joepistole and Quantum Quack like this.
  20. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,701
    I think it is quite clear that DJT's office is underpinned by the very constitution he is attempting to denigrate. With out the constitution his office is meaningless. With out his pledge to honor, protect and defend the constitution his office is meaningless.

    To insult an office which is made meaningless by his own decisions is no crime...


    he has failed to defend, protect the constitution by his insistence on over ruling it. With or with out a mandate given by popular vote.
    A bit like his statement that he would only respect the election results...if he wins...he will only respect the constitution when it suits him to do so...

    If he fails to honor his pledge then he is no POTUS regardless of popular support or apparent mandate.
     
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2017
  21. rpenner Fully Wired Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,833
    Why, that's not any type of "respect" at all...
     
    joepistole likes this.
  22. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,701
    exactly...
     
  23. Quantum Quack Life's a tease... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,701
    It really has nothing to do about party politics as karenmansker and youreyes seem to think. This issue strikes at the very heart of the system that makes politics even possible.
    Which is why the judiciary have the final say and not politicians.
     

Share This Page