California Fires - Politics of Blame & Trump water claims

[nycfan]

Actually just renaming this one the political pissing match thread and started an info only thread:

Off-Topic Thread 'California Fires - INFO (not politics)'

Jan 9, 2025

So, I’ve posted a lot of politics stuff on the other thread, so just making it the political pissing match one. This one is just for sharing info on the fires.

Thanks.

• nycfan
• Replies: 90
• Forum: Politics & Other Topics

• 

A lot less work for me this way.

 

[superrific]

Actually just renaming this one the political pissing match thread and stared an info only thread:

Off-Topic Thread 'California Fires - INFO (not politics)'

Jan 9, 2025

So, I’ve posted a lot of politics stuff on the other thread, so just making it the political pissing match one. This one is just for sharing info on the fires.

Thanks.

• nycfan
• Replies: 90
• Forum: Politics & Other Topics

• 

A lot less work for me this way.

This is a politics board. I would think that the default status for a thread would be political. If we want threads for info only, they should be started and labeled as such. Which is to say, the current situation is the best model to use going forward.

 

[nycfan]

I think what we really need is a "Why do you dumb fucks keep responding to obvious trolls?" thread.

We’ve had a few of those. They never take.

 

[SnoopRob]

We’ve had a few of those. They never take.

I know. But they're cathartic for me.

 

[Callatoroy]

So maybe we need a California Fire politics pissing match parallel thread?

I actually considered starting one yesterday.

Whatever it takes to discuss ANY topic that doesn't involve 3/4 of the comments to be "trump bitching" when he is clearly not the intended subject of the story. Not a sarcastic question. Is that even possible?

 

[Enigma94]

Whatever it takes to discuss ANY topic that doesn't involve 3/4 of the comments to be "trump bitching" when he is clearly not the intended subject of the story. Not a sarcastic question. Is that even possible?

Is it possible for him to stop lying about shit? If he would stop lying about everything then people would probably stop pointing out his lies.

 

[superrific]

Whatever it takes to discuss ANY topic that doesn't involve 3/4 of the comments to be "trump bitching" when he is clearly not the intended subject of the story. Not a sarcastic question. Is that even possible?

Care to answer my questions? You keep blaming people who aren't at fault, while ignoring the actual causes. Why is that?

 

[Callatoroy]

I'll stop now. I just can't believe Trump supporters are willing to defend his response to this natural disaster, but at some point I'll stop being surprised by their mendacity. In any event, I'll just watch this thread for actual news about the fires going forward.

LOL, literally nobody defended trump. I haven't read a single post defending him. Please repost where people are defending him. Maybe I missed it.

 

[Bobfripp]

I think what we really need is a "Why do you dumb fucks keep responding to obvious trolls?" thread.

The problem is that all the 'obvious trolls' are Republicans, who have opposing opinions. I typically disagree (often vehemently) with their opinions, as do many others on this board, and this ends up looking like a 'pissing match.' However, if you don't respond to such trolls, you get an echo chamber, which is boring.

 

[superrific]

LOL, literally nobody defended trump. I haven't read a single post defending him. Please repost where people are defending him. Maybe I missed it.

You are regurgitating his bullshit. And your insistence that other people not talk about him in relation to the politics of this event can only be interpreted as an attempt to deflect.

 

[stankeylegjones]

The problem is that all the 'obvious trolls' are Republicans, who have opposing opinions. I typically disagree (often vehemently) with their opinions, as do many others on this board, and this ends up looking like a 'pissing match.' However, if you don't respond to such trolls, you get an echo chamber, which is boring.

That’s why y’all do it? Jeez.

 

[Callatoroy]

Is it possible for him to stop lying about shit? If he would stop lying about everything then people would probably stop pointing out his lies.

You know his game. Why are you so triggered by it. I'm guessing he was talking about when he offered to help CA move some water one time and newsome told him to get lost. Again, after 4 years in office and 4 years running for office you act like you don't know what to expect.

 

[lawtig02]

LOL, literally nobody defended trump. I haven't read a single post defending him. Please repost where people are defending him. Maybe I missed it.

Then what the fuck are you doing on this thread?

Here's the Trump tweet that started this discussion --



And here's what I asked about it this morning --

"Ramrouser? Callatoroy? PandemicBlue? One of you want to weigh in on this? You want to try to defend your president dishonestly attacking the people trying to deal with an active natural disaster just because they happen to be Democrats?

"If you're going to be meaningful contributors to this board, we need to hear your input on things like this."


You responded to that post. What the hell are you doing if you're not defending Trump?

 

[superrific]

Then what the fuck are you doing on this thread?

Here's the Trump tweet that started this discussion --



And here's what I asked about it this morning --

"Ramrouser? Callatoroy? PandemicBlue? One of you want to weigh in on this? You want to try to defend your president dishonestly attacking the people trying to deal with an active natural disaster just because they happen to be Democrats?

"If you're going to be meaningful contributors to this board, we need to hear your input on things like this."


You responded to that post. What the hell are you doing if you're not defending Trump?

He might have me on ignore. Maybe you can ask him if he understands that the primary problem facing LA in fighting this fire is gravity. I'd like to see his take on basic science.

 

[Callatoroy]

The problem is that all the 'obvious trolls' are Republicans, who have opposing opinions. I typically disagree (often vehemently) with their opinions, as do many others on this board, and this ends up looking like a 'pissing match.' However, if you don't respond to such trolls, you get an echo chamber, which is boring.

At least you admit it. I gotta say though that saying anyone who disagrees with me is a troll is pretty shallow and weak. But respect for owning it.

 

[Enigma94]

You know his game. Why are you so triggered by it. I'm guessing he was talking about when he offered to help CA move some water one time and newsome told him to get lost. Again, after 4 years in office and 4 years running for office you act like you don't know what to expect.

He's going to be the POTUS. He sets all kinds of policy and agenda. You are on a primarily political board. He injected himself into yet another natural disaster with lies. How the eff do you think it wouldn't get discussed? Are you ok with him lying about natural disasters (among thousands of other things) for political gain? Obviously rhetorical because you have proven you are.

 

[SnoopRob]

The problem is that all the 'obvious trolls' are Republicans, who have opposing opinions. I typically disagree (often vehemently) with their opinions, as do many others on this board, and this ends up looking like a 'pissing match.' However, if you don't respond to such trolls, you get an echo chamber, which is boring.

So better to argue with idiots, charlatans, and fools for a little excitement than have a reasonably intelligent discussion based in facts that largely contains agreement?

 

[superrific]

At least you admit it. I gotta say though that saying anyone who disagrees with me is a troll is pretty shallow and weak. But respect for owning it.

Calling you a troll is a compliment compared to the only other explanation for your posts.

 

[superrific]

So better to argue with idiots, charlatans, and fools for a little excitement than have a reasonably intelligent discussion based in facts that largely contains agreement?

The problem is that this is a prisoners' dilemma game. It's very hard to get to the ideal outcome without rules pushing in that direction, because for a lot of posters (including me on occasion) the choice to engage strictly dominates the one not to.

Collective action problems are difficult to solve without a central authority making rules. It's why we have zoning. It's why we have eminent domain.

 

[Callatoroy]

Then what the fuck are you doing on this thread?

Here's the Trump tweet that started this discussion --



And here's what I asked about it this morning --

"Ramrouser? Callatoroy? PandemicBlue? One of you want to weigh in on this? You want to try to defend your president dishonestly attacking the people trying to deal with an active natural disaster just because they happen to be Democrats?

"If you're going to be meaningful contributors to this board, we need to hear your input on things like this."


You responded to that post. What the hell are you doing if you're not defending Trump?

My response to you was saying your focus was misplaced and directed at trump when it should be focused on state and local officials. That isn't a defense of trump. That's ignoring trump. I have said repeatedly that this isn't about trump but you want to make it about him. trump inserted himself into the story but the story is 3000 miles away and he isn't the president.