ex-President Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at low-info Boomers like my religions aunts. I have two questions:
a) Is anyone here who supports Trump bothered by lies like this?
b) Does anyone know what he's even talking about here? Like is there some grain of truth that he's embellishing on bigly?
Can’t tell if you’re trolling. Are you saying you’re not aware that companies steal billions of dollars from their employees via wage theft?
I don't get this graph. If the FBI knows that companies are doing all this wage theft, shouldn't they be making the companies give it back? And if they do, it's no longer a problem. Or is it just estimated?
I worked briefly a few years ago for Providence Health Care, who at the time had a policy of rounding employee time to the nearest 15 minute period when figuring paychecks. I thought that was pretty stupid but not heinous or illegal.
The next year they lost a lawsuit about this issue and had to pay back wages to employees (or former employees). But the people filing the lawsuit apparently didn't take into account the fact that the time was often rounded up instead of down, and may have not paid less overall than people actually worked.
Since I knew about the policy, I kept track of the times I clocked in and out, gaming the system by almost never working less than 8 minutes into the next 15 minute period, meaning my time was almost always rounded up. I'm quite sure that I was paid more overall than if they had paid to the exact minute. But I still got a check for money it was determined that I was owed.
I'm sure this kind of thing was included in wage theft statistics, even though I don't very much at all had been 'stolen', and the original system may have actually made the company pay more wages not less.
Obviously it isn’t rocket science that people who identify liberal (see: woke snowflakes) are more likely to look into their own mental health than people who lean conservative (see: tough manly men) and that the definition of ‘mental illness’ is so loose that the gross numbers will skew liberal
I actually took it from here
https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2023/...
And the pew poll was needed only for the religious affiliation side of the question (which isn't relevant for our discussion), the data is verified in literature and no, it's not about "looking into their own mental health" more.
Very liberal people are much more mentally ill, not "grossly defined", rather as defined by mental health professionals, than very conservative people.
The only question which is still very complex to answer is : are very leftist people more mentally ill because very leftist ideology attracts people who are more mentally ill, or is the ideology itself actually causing the increase in mental illness? that's still TBD
I have heard rumors Democracy is on the line this election as it was in 2020,2016,2012,2008,2004,2000............
Candidates who have lost these elections and their response:
2000, Gore: the Supreme Court has ruled and I have called Governor Bush to concede
2004, Kerry: I have called President Bush to concede
2008, McCain: I have called Senator Obama to concede
2012, Romney: I have called President Obama to concede
2016, Clinton: I have called Mr. Trump to concede
2020, Trump: this is the greatest crime ever, they stole the election from you. Fight in my name
One of these things is not like the other, one of these things doesn’t belong, can you tell which thing is not like the other by the time I finish this song
I actually took it from here
My dude, I’m not terribly interested where you took it from when the source of what you posted watermarked their name into what you post
Feels to me like the original source of the information is more important than whatever site I’m not going to click on that lifted it
But that’s just me
Not that I take a single word you say seriously, but literally the only time I’ve ever heard ‘democracy being on the line’ if the Republican candidate won was 2020. And the losing candidate of that election is on trial for every subversion attempt he made before during and after when he compelled his followers to storm congress which, checks notes, has never happened til then
But ya dude, every election ever is the same. Every candidate is t
Well that is to bad but how about an influential African American at the 6:30 mark ? Its actually a great interviews that starts at the 2:30 mark
Broken YouTube Link
My dude, I’m not terribly interested where you took it from when the source of what you posted watermarked their name into what you post
Feels to me like the original source of the information is more important than whatever site I’m not going to click on that lifted it
But that’s just me
The source was also named in the article itself.
But the point is the data is validated elsewhere as well, as per article. I just used the pic instead of the data text because it's easier to see the data.
And again, the guy you seem to dislike a lot just worked to disentagle religious affiliation from political leaning, because he presumably cares a lot about claims that religion makes you a better person (i don't, i am an atheist).
The raw political attitude / mental illness data is from the pollster Pew. And it was reported in ultraleftist media as well.
Is Evie leftist enough for you?
/Over 50% Of Liberal, White Women Under 30 Have A Mental Health Issue. Are We Worried Yet?
A 2020 Pew Research study reveals that over half of white, liberal women have been diagnosed with a mental health condition at some point. Does this mean there's a correlation between progressive ideas and mental health?/
I actually took it from here
https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2023/...
And the pew poll was needed only for the religious affiliation side of the question (which isn't relevant for our discussion), the data is verified in literature and no, it's not about "looking into their own mental health" more.
Very liberal people are much more mentally ill, not "grossly defined", r
I'd guess it's mostly because caring about other people is more stressful than selfishness. As is questioning one's beliefs more than following dogma without considering the alternatives.
Candidates who have lost these elections and their response:
2000, Gore: the Supreme Court has ruled and I have called Governor Bush to concede
2004, Kerry: I have called President Bush to concede
2008, McCain: I have called Senator Obama to concede
2012, Romney: I have called President Obama to concede
2016, Clinton: I have called Mr. Trump to concede
2020, Trump: this is the greatest crime ever, they stole the election from you. Fight in my nam
And if I was an American it is one of the many reasons I could not vote for him . I would not have voted for him in 2016 and woulda voted Hilary and 2020 I preferred Bernie. In 2024 I stay home or vote RFK or Cornel
Sure the overwhelmingly proven increase in happiness of being married and having children and grandchildren doesn't exist, and very liberal people marry the same as very conservative people
You are saying conservatives are happier because they are married with chidren and grandchildren?
Why wouldn't liberals do this if it made them happier?
Are you sure you understand the difference between correlation and causation?
Even if there is a causal link here, which you have not demonstrated or even attempted to, you probably have it reversed.
Sure the overwhelmingly proven increase in happiness of being married and having children and grandchildren doesn't exist, and very liberal people marry the same as very conservative people
It is definitely not proven that having children increases one's happiness. Recent studies I have seen lean the opposite way, although it is difficult to say either way is definitive.
I'd guess it's mostly because caring about other people is more stressful than selfishness. As is questioning one's beliefs more than following dogma without considering the alternatives.
It's a really interesting topic and probably very important politically.
I already hold the view that too mcuh of the liberal/left has lost it's sense of meaning. There's tons of belief in how wrong/bad/etc th otehr lot is but the philosophical basis on our won side has been lost. We tedn to vote for people we dont want, we rarely offer solutions other than yelling at the other side orimpm,eemnting the otehr sides polciies.
We correctly imo dispense with religion etc but have also lost too much of the good part of ethics and morality. Sure we have retained the easy social stuff but there's no depth.
As humans seems to need a sense of meaning, it doesn't seem a stretch to view that the lack of it is correlated with mental illness.
It's a really interesting topic and probably very important politically.
I already hold the view that too mcuh of the liberal/left has lost it's sense of meaning. There's tons of belief in how wrong/bad/etc th otehr lot is but the philosophical basis on our won side has been lost. We tedn to vote for people we dont want, we rarely offer solutions other than yelling at the other side orimpm,eemnting the otehr sides polciies.
We correctly imo d
At least in words, the meaning purportedly comes from helping people in difficulty , or from feeling you do your part to achieve that, for leftwing people. Which btw people on the right do as well, except the right often disagrees it's state entities that are to be used for that, the left overwhelmingly thinks that the state is often the best tool to achieve that.
But people from the radical left to the radical right do get meaning in helping others, or in thinking what they do helped others somehow along the chain of events.
Very very unclear why someone "fighting to end the climate crisis" would be lacking sense of meaning... someone "resisting fascism" (trump) as well.
It could be that the left lost a sense of meaning but that would require basically that most people on the left actually don't believe a word of what they tell you inside of them, is that what you are thinking about? because leftwing ideology is nothing but a list of things that purportedly should give meaning, if you believe they are moral (and you do, if you are leftwing)
At least in words, the meaning purportedly comes from helping people in difficulty , or from feeling you do your part to achieve that, for leftwing people. Which btw people on the right do as well, except the right often disagrees it's state entities that are to be used for that, the left overwhelmingly thinks that the state is often the best tool to achieve that.
But people from the radical left to the radical right do get meaning in helpin
I dont doubt the meaning exists. For example, I don't believe religion causes us to care for other people. I believe our caring for other people was one of the cause of religion. Religion bound a lot of morality/ethics together into a somewhat coherent, if deeply flawed imo, sense of meaning. We got rid of religion - nothing has replaced it.
We need a binding movement. Something positive to give us a sense of meaning. We dont need a fictional story but the naked philosophy is hard. We need a new philosophical story (based on reality imo). Something solid to get behind. Something positive to live and fight for. Without it we are in big trouble politically and quite possibly mentally.
This graph is measuring whether a doctor or other healthcare provider has ever told you that you have a mental health condition. That raises two additional questions. First, are liberals more willing to seek mental health treatment than conservatives? Very likely. Second, are liberals more likely to answer this sort of question affirmatively if they have, in fact, been told that they have a mental health condition? That's harder to say
The gap exists primarily because of women of course, and a bigger incidence of mental health issues among adult women than men is in the data of every country.
I am not a conservative at all so i don't see how the second bolded part applies to me. Some of my political preferences / views might overlap with conservativism, even with radical conservativism, but many others clearly don't at all. I don't know where i would be put in that graph tbh, or how i would honestly answer a self-identify question among the liberal-conservatism spectrum.
If i am not told how much weight to give to economic issues vs all the rest, i have no clue.
I am pro legal euthanasia (very radical left on this), centrist on abortion, pro full legalization of all drugs (radical left), pro open borders (radical left) but at no welfare (radical right) and reforming ius soli removing it (radical right), pro 2a (radical rights) but pro homosexual equality (centrist i guess these days? given i consider the trans issue very different from homosexual issues). I am against the existence of public schools (radical right) but in favor of the state paying for minors education and even college for people with good marks (center-left?). I am pro unilaterally dropping all trade tariffs (no idea where this is on the left-right axis , no1 asks for it), very against the concept of intellectual property (radical left), for absolute property rights for land (radical right).
And so on... but calling me a conservative is disingenous.
Btw i do care about democratic principles of government, i just think they aren't what other people think they are. For example no one should have as much power as POTUS. That's a violated democratic principle (checks and balances) right there.
I dont doubt the meaning exists. For example, I don't believe religion causes us to care for other people. I believe our caring for other people was one of the cause of religion. Religion bound a lot of morality/ethics together into a somewhat coherent, if deeply flawed imo, sense of meaning. We got rid of religion - nothing has replaced it.
We need a binding movement. Something positive to give us a sense of meaning. We dont need a fictiona
I really don't understand why "solving poverty once and for all for all human beings, starting domestically" can't be a very powerful source of meaning. That's St. Francis of Assisi level of meaning, but it's actually feasible with current technology (at least in the first world).
My take is that the wishes are somewhat pure, but given the preferred tool to achieve them is absolutely not up to the task and is actually the main source of problems (the state), the left is in constant short-circuit with itself and that ends up making people who believe in leftwing ideals be very miserable.
Like when you increase expenses per pupil in public education to almost 20k per year in some states and grades keep deteriorating and quality of education is the worst it has been in many decades... i get why you snap. You either admit your lifelong commitment to improving education is impossible to achieve , OR that the tool you keep using and claiming will solve it (the state, publci schools in this case) is actually the problem not the solution.
Replicate that for welfare causing poverty traps and so on
why do i care about your opinion about all of these, especially you being "pro 2a" when you do not even have a 2a?
why do i care about your opinion about all of these, especially you being "pro 2a" when you do not even have a 2a?
If you don't care, you don't care, i don't understand the question.
You can't be pro euthanasia in the USA because you don't have it? what's the point of this comment?
You don't give a frick about my opinions that's more than fine but i don't understand your comment lol. We are in a political forum discussing political takes.
Gotemmmmmmm
If you don't care, you don't care, i don't understand the question.
You can't be pro euthanasia in the USA because you don't have it? what's the point of this comment?
You don't give a frick about my opinions that's more than fine but i don't understand your comment lol. We are in a political forum discussing political takes.
actually we are discussing an ex-president of the united states of america.
you have no dog in this fight correct?
