Australian Atheists Forum

nibble wrote: ↑Tue Feb 13, 2024 5:32 pm This is a wake up call for NATO and other EU members. They need to be able to defend themselves without the aid of the U.S.

Indeed, and also a wake up call for other AUKUS members who need to defend themselves without the aid of the US...either that or join Trump's fascist fantasy. Actually, if UK Labour win in a year, and AusLabor win again, maybe the orange pustule will pull out of Aukus!!! That'd be good. Then we'd be left with AUK....as in awkward....! Especially when the Ashes are on. Or when we decide to ditch the parasite family. Oh dear. And Scummo thinks aukus his greatest achievement.

nibble wrote: ↑Tue Feb 13, 2024 5:32 pm This is a wake up call for NATO and other EU members. They need to be able to defend themselves without the aid of the U.S.

Oz should be a whole shitload more wary about signing up for a huuuuuge debt over USS Pig-Inna-Poke class subs, too.

Imagine a Clowny-led kleptocracy shifting the goalposts and claiming he's doing Good Deals.

EDIT: I see I have just been Pipped at the post. I concur with him.

Trump's isolationism and admiration of Putin seem like a reflection of the pro-Hitler "America first" ideas from his father's golden days. The US as "global white knight" is a flimsy construct. Yes, there seems to be lots of rousing enlightenment thought mixed in with the religious claptrap in America's founding. But there was ALWAYS this constantly mutating corona virus of fascism and tyranny in the American biosphere, ready for a new pandemic, be it the civil war or the KKK or the NRA or MAGA. The disease was there at the start, and the founders knew it, which was why they put all those checks and balances in there. Now it's looking like the checks and balances have been an over-prescribed anti-biotic, and American fascism has developed immunity. Or maybe I need to unmix my metaphors, because anti-biotics don't even work on viruses!

The great alliance between the US and Australia is also a flimsy construct. Broadly speaking, , the 70 million Trump voters don't give a shit about Australia. The 70 million and one Biden voters don't either, for that matter (or whatever the numbers are), but Biden would probably let the flimsy construct stand.

pipbarber wrote: ↑Tue Feb 13, 2024 7:52 am https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... epublicans

Trump will advise Putin to attack Nato member states that don't contribute enough money to Nato? That's like advising the mafia to attack any cop from the organised crime unit that doesn't contribute enough to the police union fund. It's so hair-brained and weird i'm finding it difficult to get my head around, but i suspect the point is not to try to get one's head around this, it's simply a case of Trump not liking Nato and preferring Putin.

This article mostly skips over Trump and focuses on GOP reaction, which is typically forgiving, and where there is push back it's pretty mild.

Clowny carrying on about "not paying bills"?

That is a self-cleaning, steam-and-dry irony!

Nine-digit shardy-froydy.

https://www.npr.org/2024/02/16/12262940 ... d-trial-ny

Irrev-Black wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2024 2:32 pm Nine-digit shardy-froydy.

https://www.npr.org/2024/02/16/12262940 ... d-trial-ny

It was less than what was asked for by the prosecution, they also asked for him to be banned from running a business in NY but the judge only put 3 years on that. Some are suggesting he went lighter because it was more likely to be held up under appeal, I'm not sure, I think the judge know they will be before him or another judge before very long for breaking the rules anyway, so they can say, well he was given a chance and demonstrated he can't abide by instructions so he shouldn't be given any leeway, much like the defamation case.

He will be back!

I've read several articles on how Trump is going to come up with 350 million bucks given that his entire liquid assets are estimated to be around the $100 million mark. Then there's the $70 odd million he owes E Jean Carrol and his own legal fees must be eye-watering but he seems to be dipping into the GOP bank account to pay those. Of course, he only needs a fiver from everyone that voted for him in 2020 and he'd have his 350 million straight up, but he's been squeezing that sponge for 8 years now and it might just be running out of juice. He could always issue more NFTs, but maybe that market is flooded. What to do?

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... urt-ruling

So on brand, ya gotta hand it to him.

“I’ve wanted to do this a long time,” the former US president said, as he unveiled what he called the first official Trump footwear at Sneaker Con in Philadelphia, a gathering that bills itself as the “The Greatest Sneaker Show on Earth.”

He was met with loud boos as well as cheers, Associated Press reported, adding that as he spoke, the smell of weed occasionally wafted through the room. Attendees skewed younger and more diverse than Trump’s usual rally crowds, the news wire wrote.

On the other hand, if he has to venture into a stoner market for a grift, things might indeed be getting a bit desperate. I hate to give him ideas, but what about Trump Bud, he could call it the orange mist, and sell his Trump branded weed in California and wherever else it's legal, whilst campaigning for harsher criminal penalties where it isn't legal. That too, would be on brand.

pipbarber wrote: ↑Sun Feb 18, 2024 5:02 pmOf course, he only needs a fiver from everyone that voted for him in 2020 and he'd have his 350 million straight up,

Yeah we can see how well that's going, there's a gofundme to help pay for Trump's fines, it has raised, thus far, a grand total of.....wait for it.....$$US134,014!

https://www.news.com.au/finance/busines ... 93d5fcc5b5

I think his brand is on the nose, aside from a few MAGA chumps.

nibble wrote: ↑Mon Feb 19, 2024 10:25 am I think his brand is on the nose, aside from a few MAGA chumps.

Was watching an interesting youtube video the other day from The Young Turks who were saying the polling that claims Trump and Biden are neck and neck for 2024 is biased hugely by the polling process itself. Polls are conducted by calling "landlines," my mother has a landline, she's 88, nobody I know under 50ish has a landline so the polls are conducted with a huge bias to older populations, the young voters, probably poor voters as well because they tend to move around a lot, simply don't get asked questions in political polls.

Of course it's all speculation until the actual election, but it would explain why they keep losing elections while predicting red waves, the polling is inherently biased by being landline based and I am not sure you can effectively correct for that sort of bias. I mean really, how do you correct for young people not being asked the questions if you don't ask young people the questions?