Scandinavia :)

There's a saying in my country that whatever happens in america will happen here ten years later, so many of us look to america with great concern. I'm afraid I don't know what NOS stands for, sorry.

There's a saying in my country that whatever happens in america will happen here ten years later, so many of us look to america with great concern. — MadWorld1

So you hope for a Trump-like win in your country in ten years? Tax cuts for the rich, a judicial system further skewed to favor the rich and powerful, deregulation and the associated degradation of environment, a severely polarized political body, etc? Good luck with that.

So you hope for a Trump-like win in your country in ten years? Tax cuts for the rich, a judicial system further skewed to favor the rich and powerful, deregulation and the associated degradation of environment, a severely polarized political body, etc? Good luck with that. — praxis

I'm not a big fan of any of those things, actually. You will have to forgive me for having limited knowledge of american politics, but my interpretation is that it boils down to a a question of either or, either Trump or Biden. This is not the case in my country. Anyways, it then becomes a question of better best (or worse worst) and through that perspective I would choose Trump. Not because of anything you mentioned though.

Did I hit a nerve?

You’re contradicting yourself and in that way I can see a Trumpian affinity, but in reasoning, you say that you’re not a fan of that which you would choose to move towards.

Did I hit a nerve?

My nerves were shot years ago.

Igor Danchenko has been identified as the primary source for Christopher Steele. He is a Russian-born analyst living in the US.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/25/us/politics/igor-danchenko-steele-dossier.html

He’s also an author for the Brookings institute and is closely connected to impeachment witness Fiona Hill.

https://www.brookings.edu/author/igor-danchenko/

Deep state gonna deep state.

You’re contradicting yourself and in that way I can see a Trumpian affinity, but in reasoning, you say that you’re not a fan of that which you would choose to move towards. — praxis

That was your assertions, not mine. Do you know what a contradiction is?

Why so hostile? It's not good for your chakra, you know.

That was your assertions, not mine. — MadWorld1

They’re not controversial. You haven’t contested them yourself, in fact, which lead me to believe that you accept them.

Why so hostile? It's not good for your chakra, you know. — MadWorld1

Let’s keep my chakras out of this, shall we?

Do you know what a contradiction is? — MadWorld1

I do believe this is a hostile query, good Sir. Shame on you.

They’re not controversial. You haven’t contested them yourself, in fact, which lead me to believe that you accept them. — praxis

No worries! No, I didn't accept them. I also disagree with the notion that your depiction of Trumps policy is noncontroversial. Some of it, sure, but you're obviously spinning a narrative (that is controversial). There's nothing inherently wrong with narratives, but for a more nuanced discussion it's often not the way to go. Also, I did actually put forth a counterpoint.

Do you want to know why I would vote for Trump if I where an american?

I do believe this is a hostile query, good Sir, shame on you. — praxis

Sorry, my bad :) Gotta keep those chakra pure and open!

Do you want to know why I would vote for Trump if I where an american? — MadWorld1

Oh goody, I'm just dying to figure out why you'd vote for a racist. Oh wait, no, don't care.

you're obviously spinning a narrative (that is controversial). There's nothing inherently wrong with narratives, but for a more nuanced discussion it's often not the way to go. — MadWorld1

If anything I’m parroting a Trumpian narrative. He prides himself on cutting taxes, deregulation, installing conservative Supreme Court judges, and the like. It is a fact that this works against the interests of the working class in many significant respects. It may have helped lead to the recent level of unemployment, but we’ve seen how tenuous an achievement that is, built on a model that’s bound to periodically fail with ever increasing regularity.

I did actually put forth a counterpoint. — MadWorld1

No, you put forth a related point.

Do you want to know why I would vote for Trump if I where an american? — MadWorld1

No, you admitted ignorance of American politics. I would like to know why you would support a “leader” like Trump in your country rather than a leader like Biden.

Sorry, my bad — MadWorld1

No need to apologize. Be as hostile as you like. We’re both adults.

Oh goody, I'm just dying to figure out why you'd vote for a racist. Oh wait, no, don't care. — Benkei

You can't catch them all! ;) Cared enough to write though. Oh well, I'll settle for my good friend praxis over here.

No need to apologize. Be as hostile as you like. We’re both adults. — praxis

Oh, come on praxis! Both r/woosh and projecting at the same time? Must be some kind of record.

If anything I’m parroting a Trumpian narrative. He prides himself on cutting taxes, deregulation, installing conservative Supreme Court judges, and the like. — praxis

You're literally changing the spinn on what you said before, literally proving my point in the process. What did you think I meant by "Some of it, sure, but you're obviously spinning a narrative (that is controversial)"?

No, I would like to know why you would support a “leader” like Trump in your country rather than a leader like Biden. — praxis

Yes, exactly! Now you're getting it! As I said before I would rather have Trump as president than Biden, even in my own country (if I had to choose).

It basically boils down to my moral framework, which dictates a bunch of conservative stuff that I feel Trump would better facilitate; decreasing immigration, consolidating the nuclear family, restricting late-stage abortion and the like. And that's not a soulless NPC narrative, mind you, that's simply what I want to happen. For me it's very much a cultural issue.

Surely Trump is more conductive in these regards?

It is a fact that this works against the interests of the working class in many significant respects. — praxis

That's disputable, although I tend to agree with you. It's my understanding that massimmigration is even worse for the working class, so that plays a role in the decision.


Should I go on? I feel like I should give your shot nerves a break.

No need to apologize. Be as hostile as you like. We’re both adults.
— praxis

Oh, come on praxis! Both r/woosh and projecting at the same time? Must be some kind of record. — MadWorld1

The r/whoosh continues. :yawn:

You're literally changing the spinn on what you said before, literally proving my point in the process. What did you think I meant by "Some of it, sure, but you're obviously spinning a narrative (that is controversial)"? — MadWorld1

My stating that I was parroting a narrative is indeed an admission of narrative recitation and proves your point, such as it is. Your reading comprehension is excellent.

You still haven’t disputed any of my allegedly controversial assertions, by the way.

decreasing immigration — MadWorld1

Just did a quick search and it looks like they’ve managed to reduce legal immigration by about 11%. Good enough? I assume you’re cool with bungling illegal immigration, appropriating billions of tax payers dollars (no pesos :sad: ) via executive order (because a minority support the effort), and the longest government shutdown in American history. I’d mention the issue of separating asylum seeking parents from their children if I thought it might register with your moral framework at all.

consolidating the nuclear family — MadWorld1

Nuclear families in Scandinavia are disintegrating? Do you guys send your old folks to care facilities also?

restricting late-stage abortion — MadWorld1

Why do you think Trump would be more successful at this than Biden? But the more urgent question is why doesn’t Scandinavia have any restrictions on late-stage abortion?

Nuclear families in Scandinavia are disintegrating? Do you guys send your old folks to care facilities also? — praxis

No no, this is one of those manly men whose manliness is threatened by gays and trans people.

Quick sidestep from the thread:

But the more urgent question is why doesn’t Scandinavia have any restrictions on late-stage abortion? — praxis

This is false. (Although it should be mentioned that MadWorld 1 didn't say that there were no restrictions).

For some reason this isn't a hot topic in any Nordic country (I could be wrong, but I haven't heard about abortion clinics set on fire or the thing...)

Sweden:
Women can freely opt for abortion before 18th week. After that they have to have permission from the authorities and after 22nd week it isn't allowed.

Finland:
Abortion requires the signature of at least one physician (and in some cases, two), and in some cases additional permission from Valvira (the National Supervisory Authority for Welfare and Health). One doctor's signature is enough in the case of terminations 0-12 weeks when the applicant is under 17 years old or has passed her 40th birthday. Above 20 weeks, a threat to the physical life of the mother is the only valid reason for terminating a pregnancy.

Denmark:
Women can also freely opt for abortion before 12 weeks. An abortion can be performed after 12 weeks if the woman's life is in danger and even in cases where the woman has mental health problems. A woman may also be granted an authorization to abort after 12 weeks if certain circumstances are proved to be present (such as poor socioeconomic condition of the woman; risk of birth defects to baby; the pregnancy being the result of rape; mental health risk to mother)

Norway:
Women can have abortion on before 12 weeks, by application up to the 18th week, and thereafter only under special circumstances until the fetus is viable, which is usually presumed at 21 weeks and 6 days.
Abortion on request is legal until the end of the 22nd week of pregnancy

Iceland:
Abortion on request is legal until the end of the 22nd week of pregnancy. The request can be done for many reasons. Medically, an abortion is lawful if a pregnancy threatens a woman's physical or mental health, if the fetus has a serious congenital defect, or if the woman is deemed incapable of caring for a child because of her age or mental disability. Social grounds for allowing abortion include: if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest; if the woman has had several children already with only brief periods between pregnancies; if the woman lives in a particularly difficult family situation; or if the woman's or her partner's ill health prevents them from being able to care for a child.

And if people don't know it, abortion laws in the US are actually more lax than in the Nordic countries. Alaska, Colorado, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, and Vermont don’t limit abortion by gestational age at all. I think Roe vs Wade puts the limit to 28 weeks. It can be argued that state by state, a nearly uniform consensus has emerged in America: After roughly two dozen weeks, women should not be able to get an abortion for non-medical reasons.

But back to the subject,

I think the next real issue the Trump administration has is what to do with the unemployment benefits that are ending.

I think over 20 million Americans are recieving unemployment benefits and the 600$ a week has been lucrative as in 2019 the average unemployment benefit was 378$ weekly. GOP wants to go to a model with an unemployment benefit of 70% of the former salary while the Dems argue that this is too complex.

And here we should have again that actual leadership of the President (as in the Corona-virus). Because the future is grim.

Even with the federal boost, many Americans are suffering financially, and its lapse comes days before August rent or mortgage payments are due. Eviction protections included in earlier congressional packages have also lapsed, raising the prospect of homelessness or dislocation for millions.
Losing the weekly $600 benefit would cause an estimated 41% to spend more than half their income on rent, leaving them at greater risk of evictions, according to an analysis released Thursday by Zillow. More than a quarter of adults said they missed these payments last month or who have slight or no confidence that their household can pay next month's rent or mortgage on time, according to a recent Census Bureau survey.

And nearly 11% of adults are in households where there was either sometimes or often not enough to eat in the last seven days, the survey found.

If nothing is done or the response is unsuccessful, maybe later in the fall those protest won't be just about George Floyd.

The r/whoosh continues. :yawn: — praxis

Come on praxis! At least be original!

My stating that I was parroting a narrative is indeed an admission of narrative recitation and proves your point, such as it is. Your reading comprehension is excellent. — praxis

No, that's not it. This is what you originally said:

So you hope for a Trump-like win in your country in ten years? Tax cuts for the rich, a judicial system further skewed to favor the rich and powerful, deregulation and the associated degradation of environment, a severely polarized political body, etc? Good luck with that. — praxis

You later claimed, as a counter to me pointing out that I never said that, that these assertions aren't controversial, and when I called your depiction a simplistic narrativ you said that

If anything I’m parroting a Trumpian narrative. He prides himself on cutting taxes, deregulation, installing conservative Supreme Court judges, and the like. — praxis

Can't you see how you're ad hoc modifying your claims to avoid my original argument? Trump priding himself in "installing conservative Supreme Court judges" is not at all (!) equivalent to him creating "a judicial system further skewed to favor the rich and powerful". It may be true, but you have to argue for it. You weren't parroting a Trumpian narrative, you did afterwords in an attempt to refute my point. If you think it through you'll see that it makes no sense.

You still haven’t disputed any of my allegedly controversial assertions, by the way. — praxis

What is there to even respond to? Your Trump derangement syndrome? If you calm down we can discuss the topic at hand, but you have to at least act like you're doing it in good faith. I made the original claim, and I have defended that claim.

No, you admitted ignorance of American politics. — praxis

I never did that, btw. Why the loaded language? Think of your chakra for crying out loud!

Just did a quick search and it looks like they’ve managed to reduce legal immigration by about 11%. Good enough? I assume you’re cool with bungling illegal immigration, appropriating billions of tax payers dollars (no pesos :sad: ) via executive order (because a minority support the effort), and the longest government shutdown in American history. — praxis

Not good enough, but it's in the right direction. Your assumption is wrong (who would have thought!). When it comes to the billions of tax payers dollars I don't know what the hell you're rambling about, and the last part is totally irrelevant to immigration.

Nuclear families in Scandinavia are disintegrating? Do you guys send your old folks to care facilities also? — praxis

Yes and yes.

Why do you think Trump would be more successful at this than Biden? But the more urgent question is why doesn’t Scandinavia have any restrictions on late-stage abortion? — praxis

I thought that was given, maybe I'm wrong. It's my understanding that republicans are more conservative on the issue of abortion. Of course we have restrictions, once again that's not what I said.

Wait... Are you Cathy Newman?!

No no, this is one of those manly men whose manliness is threatened by gays and trans people. — Benkei

Never said that. Ad hominem aside you're assuming my gender :(


Is this to much for you? I think I'd better stop. Let's do this: you respond, I respond to your respons and you get the last word. I don't want to spend all week "arguing" with you.

Very informative post.

For some reason this isn't a hot topic in any Nordic country (I could be wrong, but I haven't heard about abortion clinics set on fire or the thing...) — ssu

You're right. I don't remember exactly, but the last polls I saw showed that around ten to fifteen percent of the population wanted to restrict abortion more than is. The topic is rarely if ever brought up on national debates and the like. And no, no burning clinics (at least where I'm from).

Detaining someone is making them stay where they are (e.g. stopping them in the street). Forcing someone into a car and driving them somewhere else is an arrest (or a kidnapping). — Michael

I'm not going to say I know what the Federal laws are as opposed to state law but I can only imagine the bar gets lower and the charges stiffer.

Here is what I could find on a quick search of AZ law regarding how to determine the process of narrowing down to make sure citizens rights are being protected.

Never said that. Ad hominem aside you're assuming my gender :( — MadWorld1

No sense of humour. Check. Obviously a girl then.

So you're one of those happily oppressed types that want men to take the lead and can't handle the moral conundrums freedom hands to you so you prefer comfortable repression. Good for you.

No sense of humour. Check. Obviously a girl then. — Benkei

Damn the burn lol

No sense of humour. Check. Obviously a girl then. — Benkei

Oh man, now I feel bad calling praxis unoriginal for saying "The r/whoosh continues. :yawn:", because, you know, the r/whoosh continues.. Unfortunately I'm a cis man, even white at that. Not many intersectionality points there I'm afraid.

So you're one of those happily oppressed types that want men to take the lead and can't handle the moral conundrums freedom hands to you so you prefer comfortable repression. Good for you. — Benkei

Benkei! You had my curiosity, but now you have my attention. Software upgrade or actual dissident?

Come on praxis! At least be original! — MadWorld1

I seriously have no idea of what you’re babbling about with that.

If you think it through you'll see that it makes no sense.

Working class Trump supporters working against their own interests is entirely senseless.

You still haven’t disputed any of my allegedly controversial assertions, by the way.
— praxis

What is there to even respond to?

Exactly.

Not good enough

But you would still vote for a candidate that under performs. Anyone who supports Scanexit, aye?

Unfortunately I'm a cis man — MadWorld1

No reason for self loathing really.

But the more urgent question is why doesn’t Scandinavia have any restrictions on late-stage abortion?
— praxis

This is false. — ssu

So why would Madworld be inclined to vote for a candidate based on the criteria that they support late-stage abortion restrictions?

We need a better class of trolls around here.

No reason for self loathing really. — Benkei

r/whoosh-ception? We're three layers deep!

It's indeed wise to disengage when you know you've lost. To some it might seem petty or squalid, but at least you won't be embarrassed any further. Dito for falling back on quoting me out of context and pitifully weaseling yourself out of your absurd train of thought, aka your response to the actual topic at hand.

This is false.
— ssu

So why would Madworld be inclined to vote for a candidate based on the criteria that they support late-stage abortion restrictions?

We need a better class of trolls around here. — praxis

You are quoting ssu out of context. You are either daft, sophisticated (se sofism)
or both. I'm afraid safe spaces such as this one and the accompanying lack of challenge has made you soft and your nerves fragile :(

You should ask the person in question.

But if a person says the following:

It basically boils down to my moral framework, which dictates a bunch of conservative stuff that I feel Trump would better facilitate; decreasing immigration, consolidating the nuclear family, restricting late-stage abortion and the like. — MadWorld1

That clearly doesn't mean that in Scandinavia there aren't any restriction on late-stage abortion, just as decreasing immigration doesn't mean that there aren't limitations on immigration to Nordic countries (which actually there are).

If your mental gymnastics were more entertaining I might engage with more of them, but I haven’t completely disengaged.

I don’t know what to make of your irrational aversion to narratives. Did your mother only read unpleasant stories to you as a child?

And if you don’t want to dispute my assertion about the Trump administration favoring the rich and powerful over the working class that is your choice.

What makes it an issue is our glorious leader saying things like the following at campaign rallies:

Virtually every Democrat candidate has declared their unlimited support for extreme late-term abortion, ripping babies straight from the mother’s womb, right up until the very moment of birth.

Such comments are designed to appeal to the conservative moral framework, and pathetically, they actually work.