ex-President Trump

Wait wait which norms are you referring to? Courts acted like they did with Biden when he abused executive powers.

To my knowledge courts blocked more attempted violations by Biden than by Trump.

Trump main violation (in terms of courts pointing to it and correctly voiding actions by those people) was using the acting post to fill vacancies in the government above the 120 days threshold. I agree that's kinda bad but I never hear anyone on the left complain too much about it.

While the "Muslim ban" was fully constitutional no matter what the left thinks.

Biden otoh violated the body autonomy (or tried to) of several millions of american citizens by trying to enact a completely unconstitutional mandate stretching the powers congress had delegated to him in such an heinous way (OSHA vaccine mandate). That's exactly literally what violent autocracy is, acting illegally overstepping your constitutional limitations to power to achieve a political goal in complete disregard with the institutions of the Republic.

But we don't hear what is literally unconstitutional government violence (or an attempt to be violent unconstitutionally) toward masses described as such do we?

But even with Biden norms and laws were upheld and the system stayed strong like under Trump.

Blatant violations are quickly stayed, and then overturned.

The idea that trump abused executive orders more than Obama or Biden is simply incredible. That's not what happened and not what the courts said happened.

Let's list Trump actions which subverted the division of power and stretched the power of POTUS beyond it's limits:

Some vacancies filled over 120 days without senate approval;
Steel tariffs without the required legal justifications (democrats tended to agree with the tariffs though)
4 COVID relief EO in August 2020 without congress approval (democrats tended to agree)
Bump-stock ban without congress (democrats definitely agreed with this one)
Bombing Syria without explicit approval from congress (democrats definitely agreed with this one as well)

Muslim ban was constitutional , wall funding without clear congress appropriation is unknown as SCOTUS refused to answer basically (because by the time it was on SCOTUS hands, Biden had already stopped using those funds)

Let's list Biden:

Unprecedented federal attempt to violate the body autonomy and the economic freedom of several million Americans with executive power, in violation of the constitution.

Unprecedented attempt to use EO to give away hundreds of billions of money illegally to his voters (student debt cancellation), attempt in the large part fully unconstitutional and stopped by SCOTUS (nothing of that magnitude had never happened before, how is this about norm breaking?).

Democrats whined about 5 billions for the wall maybe not being properly appropriated (and plausibly they were right), then proceeded to try to give 300 billions to their political cronies without appropriation nor mandate by Congress.

This is the level of the stakes at play and it's truly incredible to read the norm breaking president was Trump.

Banks don't "receive" money from fractional reserve banking. Some of their customers lend them money to invest. These loans are called "deposits". The banks take these "deposits" and invest them in various ventures, including loaning them out to other customers with interest. If those customers then depostit their loans, essentially "lending" them back to the bank, this process creates a situation where the bank could not pay back all these loans, or "deposits" all at once if called. This is called "fractional reserve banking".

If you mean they don't loan money they get from deposits, that doesn't really make a huge amount of sense. All their capital started off as money they got from deposits, but I guess once it's gone through the sausage grinder enough times, it might no longer be considered money from deposits. At the end of the day, money is fungible. If Bob lends me $100 and Alice lends me $100, and I go and spend $100, it doesn't make sense to say I spent Bob's money or Alice's money. I just spent $100.

It is morally wrong to steal from someone you believe owes you money yes, at the very least until you tried to recoup the money with legal means.

I can see it being morally acceptable (even if illegal) to steal after you have exhausted legal options and justice has been denied.

Do you know that they actually studied this stuff and everyone came up with the same conclusion, that liberals are overwhelming more mentally ill than conservatives?

by Luciom P

Do you know that they actually studied this stuff and everyone came up with the same conclusion, that liberals are overwhelming more mentally ill than conservatives?

Since 2016, conservatives in the US have been a totally different animal to conservatives in other civilised countries. I would say that Trumpers and the MAGA brigade are dumb af and/or batshit insane. Regular, run of the mill conservatives who are not MAGA turds are fine by me. I might even be considered a mild one.

The graph is from data from Pew (very well regarded pollster) in 2020, for the USA

Then their definition of "batshit insane" and my definition of "batshit insane" are different. I'm not budging on this, in my view the MAGA "chodes and chodesses", as 27offsuit calls them, are a veritable cancer on society.

Show me your leader and I'll tell you about your people.

They're definition is literally that someone that works in healthcare verbally told them (even potentially as a joke or turn of phrase) they have a mental health condition once ever in their lifetime.

Apparently that qualifies as "is mentally ill" now.

So your maga nana who sweeps the floor in the evenings saying "you think gay people should be able to do what we can do??? You're crazy." qualifies here.

If it's a well known and commonly enforced law, then I doubt this hypothetical would ever occur.

But I know that's not a good enough answer for you, so I'll indulge you. No, you don't steal. That's a slippery slope you're proposing there.

Next you'll be convincing yourself that you should have gotten a raise when you asked or whatever, and you'll start stealing the money you think they should be paying you because they "owe" it to you, but the whole reason why you didn't get the raise is because you keep stealing ****ing money out of the cash register.

which goes some way to answering the question

And what question would that be, o wise one?

I mean you can use many different expressions to say you dislike some group of people a lot, but when you start using medical definitions then it's different and we can check if that's true, and it's false.

Fine.

The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Not all the spark plugs are firing.

Un-medical enough for you?

Yes.

I mean MAGA is a terror organization. First crew to raid the Capitol, they’re out here plotting to kidnap and murder governors, they argue the nebulous ‘they’ need to be put in prison or killed, they subscribe to religious fanaticism, they think they’re freedom fighters, they do **** like murder their parents and decapitate them and broadcast a video showing that as a call to arms for patriots. Their leader will tell them any lie you want to hear to give him unfettered power to enrich himself and punish his enemies

And of course, if you don’t believe me, believe them

by Luciom P

Do you know that they actually studied this stuff and everyone came up with the same conclusion, that liberals are overwhelming more mentally ill than conservatives?

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. Liberals tend to stigmatize mental health problems less than conservatives (which is why they are more prone to seek treatment), so I think it is possible, but my gut tells me that the effect of this second factor would be quite modest and perhaps not statistically significant at all.

If you controlled for willingness to seek mental health treatment, I suspect that a gap would still exist, but it would be narrower. And most of the gap would be attributable to a higher incidence of liberals being told that they have anxiety or some sort of affective disorder. (This graph also lumps all mental health conditions together--anxiety, bulimia, OCD, bipolar, schizophrenia, etc.)

I don't think it is productive or accurate to say that Trumpism has revealed disproportionate levels of mental illness among conservatives. What it has revealed is that a significant percentage of conservatives don't care that much about democratic principles of government. Candidly, I think you are probably one of them. But a relative lack of concern for democratic principles isn't a proxy for mental illness.

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?

It’s disappointing to me the amount of people engaging in a bad faith cherry picked narrative graph that was posted by literally this guy

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

But ya, cool. Graphs and ****

Ah, he's a pastor. I think I could make a pretty compelling argument that believing in an omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent being that listens to our wishes and controls our lives while we are alive and whisks us away to magical faraway land when we die is a form of psychosis (especially for the ones who claim it also talks to them). That would really swing those numbers, and not in the conservatives' favour.

[QUOTE=Google]
Psychosis is when people lose some contact with reality. This might involve seeing or hearing things that other people cannot see or hear (hallucinations) and believing things that are not actually true (delusions).
[/QUOTE]

Wait, these violations are "theft"? I've never heard "theft" used in that context before. Seems like it might be some commie jargon or something?

Right but that doesn't include the word "permanently" which was in the British law quoted above.

Without that word the phrase becomes redundant.

I have heard rumors Democracy is on the line this election as it was in 2020,2016,2012,2008,2004,2000............

Right. You didn't heed the warnings, and you got Trump, who wants to be a dictator, and has widespread support.

That's a bit like saying "I've heard all the warnings about climate change since the 90s". Right, and you didn't listen.

By "you" I mean right wingers in general.

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 the same. Both sides blah blah blah