Talk:Main Page/Archive index/178

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

This page is for discussion only of Main Page content and feature items. For discussion of other issues relating to the Conservapedia community please see: Conservapedia:Community Portal

5G and China

China has warned U.S. companies not to comply with the new U.S rules sanctioning Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei. If there is anyone who hasn't heard of 5G yet, it's a cell phone communication standard that is twenty times faster than the current 4G standard. There are three companies that provide the equipment necessary to set up this type of network: China's Huawei, Finland's Nokia, and Sweden's Ericsson. The sanctions against Huawei are justified by the claim that Huawei-supplied 5G networks are a security concern. IMO, this is like worrying that a foreign car manufacturer will install listening devices. If the sanctions are meant as a protectionist measure, what U.S. company is supposed to benefit? Perhaps they are being used as a bargaining chip in the larger trade war.
There is a long list of American companies that have been driven out of China over the years, so it's hard to feel much sympathy for Huawei. Other than some Apple iPhone shops, no major foreign technology or pharmaceutical company has a retail presence in China. The government has censored Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc. off the Chinese Web. As far as operating from inside China goes, the corporate offices of Microsoft, Uber, and other U.S. companies were closed after repeated police raids. China agreed to free trade when it joined the World Trade Organization in 2001. But Beijing's word doesn't seem to be worth much. PeterKa (talk) 06:07, 9 June 2019 (EDT)

The CCP economic planners have commanded their far left Silicon Valley colluders not to abide by U.S. law. They need their Democrat party allies and fellow human rights abusers to overturn Trump's trade sanctions. RobSDeep Six the Deep State!
Despite the "China threat" coverage that has dominated the U.S. press for many years, China was laid back about it until the Huawei sanctions. Now they are trashing around. Last week, the buzz was about sanctioning rare earth exports. That would be like Trump refusing to sell China soybeans. In the trade negotiations, the "Made in China 2025" program to shut American companies out of the Chinese technology market is apparently the sticking point. If China seriously wants to play U.S. politics, they can place a bet on Biden and create a news network equivalent to Russia's RT or Iran's The Young Turks/Al Jazeera. PeterKa (talk) 17:19, 9 June 2019 (EDT)
Regardless of the politics, Huawei was in a little hot water a few months back about their routers, which were found to be very insecure, (allegedly) at least partially by design. I can't speak for their 5G access points, but I wouldn't trust them. --DavidB4 (TALK) 23:44, 9 June 2019 (EDT)
It sounds like Trump has found a vulnerability: "The trade war could leave Huawei smartphones frozen in time without core technology from the US." This is from South China Morning Post, Hong Kong's English-language daily. Huawei is clearly a company near and dear to the Chinese leadership. PeterKa (talk) 10:51, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
Don't forget the Huwai-Iran connection.
As I've said numerous times, whoever the DNC nominates, they will be onboard with Trump's China policy. There is no going back. China's free ride is over. Trump's tearing up trade agreements with China is permanent, even if he were to be a one-term president. The big losers in America are Family Dollar, Dollar General and Dollar Tree store clerks. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 11:00, 12 June 2019 (EDT)

Hong Kongers protest extradition law

A proposed extradition law has sparked the largest protest in Hong Kong's history. The relationship between Hong Kong and China is officially described as "one country, two systems." Five Hong Kong residents dissappeared in 2015 in connection to the book Xi Jinping and His Lovers.[1] One was kidnapped while on vacation in Thailand. Otherwise, the communist/ultracapitalist paradox that is Hong Kong has worked reasonably well up to now. It seems unlikely that the protests can stop the extradition law. If the protest movement is defeated again, this could be its law stand, or so the pundits claim. With the new law in place, China will be able to extradite whoever it likes. Unlike Hong Kong, there is no rule of law in China. Even the lawyers of dissidents often get tortured.
Xi Jinping and His Lovers was finally published this year.[2] The American Library Association promotes various banned books on its Website. None of them have a tale as dramatic as XJAHL, the book that broke a city.
Hong Kong has never been a democracy, but its citizens have a history of standing up for their city. Mainland China, as well as Macau, fell to Mao Zedong's Red Guards in 1967. The Cantonese of Hong Kong rallied behind their British-led police, faced down a water cutoff, and defeated the Maoists. Determined to one up Mao, Deng Xiaoping declared retaking Hong Kong a priority soon after he came to power in 1978. PeterKa (talk) 08:18, 11 June 2019 (EDT)

I saw that. One million protesters in the streets. The CCP's big challenge is keeping it hidden from the rest of the populace. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 11:00, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
I don't think anyone is expecting that. This is more of a sad last stand for Hong Kong's special political and legal status within China. But Hong Kongers haven't given up just yet. Today the protesters have laid siege to the city's legislature, which 50 percent appointed by Beijing. Next they will try a general strike.[3] PeterKa (talk) 23:58, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
The people of Hong Kong have no love for the Peoples Republic of China. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 10:21, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
The family of Chinese President Xi Jinping is said to own seven properties in Hong Kong worth tens of millions of dollars.[4] The protesters need to figure out where they are. PeterKa (talk) 18:49, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
If Hong Kong can beat Xi Jinping, surely Trump can do the same: "Hong Kong's Leader Is Set to Delay Extradition Bill Indefinitely." PeterKa (talk) 04:45, 15 June 2019 (EDT)

China trade and North Korea

China trade deals and North Korean nukes are inextricably linked. Looks like President Trump's strategy is paying off, just in time for the G20 meeting with Chairman Xi where talks can be advanced. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:47, 19 June 2019 (EDT)

Democrat primary

Pete Buttigieg tests new campaign slogans

As a gay man, Trump is a racist #Buttigieg2020.

Instead of shaming our children for their lunch debts, we need to tackle the problem of food insecurity in America #Buttigieg2020.

I don't know, either. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 08:18, 25 May 2019 (EDT)

Pete Buttigieg on the 2020 presidential race: "...I’m going to make a really good president and I’m going to win.”[5]
First Pete Buttigieg convinces himself that it is better to have a sexual relationship with a man rather than a beautiful and demure woman with long locks of flowing hair and now this!!!! The man is truly delusional! Conservative (talk) 13:00, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
Don't over-focus on the man. Keep in mind that he is representative of a large segment of a generation that will come into American leadership someday. Stick to the issues. Beat him on the merits. Don't make his queerness the focus. His homosexuality is only bait to paint critics as bigots. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:12, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
All other Democrat candidates should be torn limb-from-limb with ad hominems. Buttigieg is unique in his queerness. Focus on criticizing his ideology. Read, masticate, and digest THIS ARTICLE (begin at Subverting Christian Faith if it would help). Buttigieg is the living embodiment of Gramsci. Buttigieg should not be treated like the other candidates. Defeat Buttigieg by mastering criticism of Gramsci's ideas (political correctness, cultural Marxism, the Frankfurt School, etc.) and you by default will subvert all the other Democrat candidates and sick ideology driving them. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:38, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
Buttigieg is not "the first" gay Democrat to run for president; Hickenlooper, Harris, Booker, Michelle, Barry and Hillary are all gay. Buttigieg is nothing new. He's a walking timebomb of cultural marxism, moreso than Barry Obama. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:46, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
Character counts in terms of peoples' voting. And the sooner Republicans/conservatives stop cowering in their bunnyholes when people cry racist, homophobia, misogny, etc., the better off they will be. 46% of Americans feel uncomfortable with the idea of a homosexual presidential candidate[6] and if that is not enough of political handicap, Buttigieg says "capitalism has let a lot of people down."[7]
The founding fathers of the USA certainly would not have voted for an openly homosexual political candidate.
The whole idea of an openly homosexual USA president is a joke. About 70 countries have anti-homosexuality laws. How would a homosexual American president deal with the Middle East? Asia and the Middle East are important regions of the world and both areas frown on homosexuality. And evangelical Christianity and Islam are spreading fast in the world and both are very anti-homosexuality (see: Growth of evangelical Christianity). There are 619 evangelical Christians in the world and Pentecostals alone are expected to reach 1 billion people in the world by 2025.Conservative (talk) 14:34, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
The difference between Buttigieg and Obama is, we've already had a gay president and gay First Family, only Buttigieg is "openly gay." Buttigieg has the "courage" to declare himself "openly gay," whereas Obama cowardly remains in the closet. Yet Obama fostered the gay agenda and gay marriage. Meanwhile the homosexual agenda marches on. I don't care to debate this issue, and dance to their tune. Don't put yourself in a position of always reacting. Let's seize the initiative. Defeat Buttigieg as the re-incarnation of Gramsci (there is much more at stake than homosexual issues) and you defeat the entire cultural Marxist agenda of the Left for a generation. Use Buttigieg to educate the American people - particularly young people - as to what cultural Marxism and the cultural Marxist agenda is. It is more than just the homosexual agenda and much more dangerous.
Use Buttigieg to open a debate and discussion on what Cultural Marxism is, and educate a generation on its dangers. Do not over-focus on just their efforts to legitimize homosexuality, you play into cultural Marxist's hands painting yourself as a bigot. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 14:52, 25 May 2019 (EDT)

Defeat Buttigieg? He is already defeated! He has a snowball's chance in hell of ever being the president of the United States.

“Every battle is won before it’s ever fought.” ― Sun Tzu.Conservative (talk) 16:33, 25 May 2019 (EDT)

You're missing the point. Buttigieg should not be debated as a person, but rather as an idea. Buttigieg is the embodiment of what all 23 candidates, the DSA, the Green New Deal, and every other leftist whacko idea or agenda you can imagine. Like Gramsci, if Buttigieg died in a fascist prison tomorrow his ideas would not die, but become even bigger and more of a threat to survival of the planet. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 16:46, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
Buttigieg and his financial backers just want to inch closer to normalizing homosexuality by having him be a declared US presidential candidate (New York Times, April of 2019: As Buttigieg Builds His Campaign, Gay Donors Provide the Foundation).They probably know he doesn't have a chance of winning the presidency. Quinnipiac University National Poll: "Voters say 52 - 36 percent the U.S. is not ready to elect a gay man as president".[8]Conservative (talk) 17:07, 25 May 2019 (EDT)
Buttigieg is not a man, he's an idea. It wasn't Beto who was born and bred to carry the Marxist/Gramsci gospel, but Buttigieg. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 01:10, 26 May 2019 (EDT)

Biden's "limited exposure"

I have been predicting the collapse of the Joe Biden bubble for a while. So far, he has not only defied my predictions, but grown increasingly dominant in terms of 2020 polling. What's his secret? He skips almost all campaign events. Here is WaPo: "Joe Biden’s campaign of limited exposure: How long can he keep it up?." Democrats have fond memories of Biden campaigning for Obama in 2008. He's a lot older now. After campaign events, reporters ask audience members what they think of Biden. They generally say "old." Hey, but Biden does great as long nobody's looking! Maybe the DNC can cancel the debates for him. PeterKa (talk) 10:04, 27 May 2019 (EDT)

C.mon now. Are you telling me you put any stock in polls? It's no different than watching Meet the Press or any so-called MSM "news show" that leads with the Democrat race. Nobody cares what the Democrats think or say, and it's certainly not news. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 16:21, 27 May 2019 (EDT)
If Biden is playing not to lose instead of fearlessly playing to win, it is a sign he is a status quo type candidate.[9] America can't afford a status quo president. It has too many serious problems to address.Conservative (talk) 16:54, 27 May 2019 (EDT)
At this point in the election race, dollar donations are more telling than popularity and name recognition polls. I'd compare it to Jeb Bush in 2015, who sucked up all the money making it impossible for any other candidate to challenge Trump later when the voting began. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 19:28, 27 May 2019 (EDT)
With Bernie fading as well, Fake Indian Elizabeth Warren could be back in the spotlight. The media is certainly eager to lie on her behalf. If you point out point that she gets significantly fewer votes than other Democrats running in Massachusetts, you're a "sexist." The claim that she is an Indian is a so blatantly untrue that it insults the intelligence of the news reading public.
Here is how the Warren character puts it in Our Cartoon President: "Look at me. I was a rising star and then people found out I told one weird lie a thousand times and now no one will look me in the eye."[10] PeterKa (talk) 07:31, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
That may be a little funny, but you are quoting a cartoon produced by Stephen Colbert, who compared Trump to Hitler by giving a Hitler salute on his late night talk show, and, after Kanye West said he was supporting Republicans, called him an adjective that sounded a lot like "uppity". VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 18:18, 28 May 2019 (EDT)

Capt. Obvious adds his 2¢

During Justice Clarence Thomas' confirmation hearings, Senator Biden took the lead in the Committee and enjoyed guiding those giving testimony into clearer ideas of what they were meaning to say with respect to legal and juridicial precedent.
When Biden ran for vice president, and for his whole vice presidential term, he showed no such insight; it was almost as if he had dumbed himself down with the intent of making sure he never upstaged President Obama.
During the 2020 campaign we can probably expect to see the old Biden return who takes care in drawing distinctions in whatever subject about which he is taking part in having discussions. VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 16:35, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
Personally, I think you are seeing the bigotry and racism on full display in the Democrat party. Harris, Klobuchar, Gillibrand, Warren are all much more fit and qualified to be president than Biden. None are even seriously being talked about or considered. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 16:58, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
Klobuchar threw a binder at one of her employees. How is she going to handle the stress of a presidential campaign? VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 17:32, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
Andrew Yang is polling better than Klobuchar, Booker and Gillibrand combined. Yet, no one talks about him, so why should the first and third of those be mentioned? Yang almost has as many Twitter followers as Rick Santorum already. VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 17:53, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
Racism. Democrats don't like Asians, even when they offer you $12,000 a year for your vote. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 21:47, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
Then how come they don't like Beto? VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 22:48, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
White privilege. Hispanics and women don't like him. He's only popular with over 50 college educated males. Face it, Beta doesn't measure up to America's stereotype of a Texan. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 23:22, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
Democrat sweepstakes: Biden 5:17; Sanders 1:6; Harris 3:20; Buttigieg 2:17; Warren 1:14; O'Rourke 1:26; Yang 1:27; Gabbard 1:36. VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 23:51, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
Typically, three candidates survive New Hampshire, and two shortly after that. If it were tomorrow, it would be Biden, Harris and Buttigieg. The lone stalking horse (ala Cruz, Santorum, Romney v. McCain, McCain v. Bush, Edwards v. Kerry 2004, Bradley v. Gore 2000) would be either Harris or Buttigieg. Harris is more likely (based an D.C. experience, gender, and racial identity), with an ultimate Biden/Harris ticket (ala the 2004 Democrat and 1980 Republican scenario where the nominee picked his chief primary rival as running mate). RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:39, 29 May 2019 (EDT)
Addendum: If Biden were to crash and burn, a distinct possibility, a Harris/Buttigieg ticket is a real possibility. No one is taking the other two dozen candidates seriously. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:53, 29 May 2019 (EDT)

If the gaffe prone Joe Biden crashes and burns, Bernie Sanders might muscle himself into winning the Democratic nomination for president. Even if Bernie doesn't manage to do this, he might damn an insufficiently progressive candidate with faint praise - especially if he feels that he was not treated fairly.[11] In short, Sanders could act as a quasi spoiler again.Conservative (talk) 13:34, 29 May 2019 (EDT)

Sanders has several strikes against him: (1) he's lost the younger Millenials who have moved to Buttigieg, Harris, Beto etc.; (2) he has no support among Blacks; (3) he's angered the big money party establishment donors who back Biden and Harris; (4) he's not even a Democrat; (5) he's just another older white guy, which is one of Biden's biggest weaknesses and will be instrumental in causing Biden's fall. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:50, 29 May 2019 (EDT)
There's a simple reality: Millenials (under 35) now are the biggest age group in the US, outnumbering boomers. Gen-X'ers are few in number (35-55), and have to coalesce with either Boomers or Millenials to form a majority. Millenials are highly progressive and socialist, impatient, frustrated, angered, and feel their time has come. They feel even the oldtimers, Pelosi, Sanders, Biden, Hilary, Trump, etc. are standing in the way of progress. (And they're right). This explains Ocasio-Cortez. Placating them backfires, as Pelosi is experiencing right now (Green New Deal fiasco, impeachment, etc). Biden flipped on marijuana the other day, an issue dear to Millenials' heart, after locking up 2.5 million blacks for carrying a joint (it wasn't Trump who coined the phrase "Nasty Woman," he was paraphrasing Louis Farrakhan. I highly recommend viewing this video. These are the issues the Democrat base turns on). Running Biden would be a huge mistake, cause if Millenials want to become the dominant group, they need to force these issues in the 2020 election. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 14:11, 29 May 2019 (EDT)
I already told you. It's more than just a joint and more than just blacks (I bet there was a lot of crack cocaine, too). The marijuana possession jail times were the result of plea bargains when there were problems with the case like when witnesses were shaky, and they got bad guys off the street. Ann Coulter's analysis beat your source hands down. You read the statistics. It's over. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 23:04, 29 May 2019 (EDT)
De Blasio wants to close Rikers Island. Let's hope it doesn't happen before Biden does a stretch. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 01:11, 30 May 2019 (EDT)
AOC is upping the ante. She wants Rikers Island closed and solar panels set up on all the vacant land. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 02:08, 10 June 2019 (EDT)

Milano rules the Dems

It looks like we all need to learn more about the new boss of the Democratic Party: "Report: Alyssa Milano Instrumental in Biden’s Flip-Flop on Hyde Amendment." If I was Biden, I would have said it was Obama, Bill Clinton, or Pelosi. Definitely not Milano. Once upon a time, actresses were supposed to be good looking. The best you can say about Milano is that you appreciate her breast augmentation surgery more when you look away from her face. PeterKa (talk) 08:13, 8 June 2019 (EDT)

Especially when she's speaking about politics, eh? I guess you could say it was the Edict of Milano. Heh-heh! Heh-heh! How did I come up with that? VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 10:20, 8 June 2019 (EDT)
America need to end its idolatrous and Satanic ritual human sacrifice of Hollywood child stars. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:34, 8 June 2019 (EDT)

Democratic field

Can you imagine being a Democrat and looking at this field of socialists, communists, kooks, crazies and nobodies? then realizing Swamp Creature Joe Biden whose been in government for 50 years and lost bids for the Presidency 3 times is your best hope? That's gotta be depressing. — RockPrincess (June 10, 2019) VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 00:52, 11 June 2019 (EDT)

Hillary was "inevitable" in 2007, remember? until the herd got a chance to vote. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 10:52, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
There is a new Iowa poll that shows that Biden is now below where he was was when he announced.[12] Sanders is also petering out. His former supporters are going to Warren. Warren and Buttigieg are the hot flavors now. Harris's support has all but disappeared in the latest polling. She is this year's Scott Walker: She is the candidate with the best-looking qualifications, but somehow no traction in any recent poll. PeterKa (talk) 12:36, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
Bernie can't be taken seriously. Nobody takes him seriously anymore. They like his ideas, but Democrats want a younger candidate. And the party establishment doesn't trust him cause he's not a Democrat. And Warren is still regarded as a joke. Ultimately we'll see Harris, Buttigieg and Warren as the three survivors, with Harris and Buttigieg as the two most electable. Any other scenario is a losing scenario. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:57, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
Biden will win the Democratic presidential nomination. He has greater appeal to midwestern rust belt states than the other candidates and is therefore seen as more electable. Democrats want someone who is electable over all considerations. Second, I doubt that the 1st round of voting in the Democrat convention will yield a winner. And in the second round of voting, the establishment leaning superdelegates will tip the scale and cause Biden to win the nomination.Conservative (talk) 15:53, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
Far left extremists dominate the voter base. They aren't interested in practical things like electability. They are ideologues. He can't survive the primaries (unless they're rigged, deja vu). The Obama card has no more appeal than it did for Hillary as Obama's Secretary of State. And Biden has less appeal among Blacks than Hillary; the 1994 Crime Bill was hung around her neck as a guilt by association smear for her husband signing it. Biden is the true culprit who authored it, along with his pal Strom Thurmond. Don't think (a) Blacks are stupid about knowing the facts, (b) their issues are No. 4 or 5 on the list when to them, this issue is No. 1, and (3) Trump's Prison Reform Initiative, supported by Van Jones, to undo the damage done by Biden and the Clinton's promises to be a major issue. RobSDeep Six the Deep State!17:03, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
Sanders and Clinton Foundation money donors patched up their differences and committed to Harris a year ago. She (and Klobuchar, who has no money or polling numbers) are flying beneath the radar, trying to avoid mistakes, which Biden, Bernie, and Buttigieg are doing daily. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 17:08, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
The contest right now is to get 130,000 individual donors of less than $250 to make it into the September debates, it is not for the nomination. Once a candidate achieves the 130,000 mark, it's a matter of maintaining a media profile without debating issues or provoking controversy. Biden, Bernie, and Buttigieg are failing. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 17:12, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
Superdelegate status has been downgraded, giving more power to the communist front groups. Harris dominates in both. (This is Bernie's legacy, breaking the hold of the establishment elites. We'll see how long his legacy holds). RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 17:21, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
  • Warren has surged to frontrunner status. More precisely, she is now second in the polls after Biden.[13] I don't think overtaking Biden will be a problem. At his latest appearance in Iowa, Biden's energy kept running low like a wind-up toy on its last coil. As for Warren, the Cherokee Nation has already issued a statement disputing her claim to be an American Indian. Yet as far her supporters are concerned, anyone who brings the issue up is a racist. This is almost as obnoxious as Obama claiming that birtherism is racist. The claim that Obama was born in Kenya originated in his publishers' biography. In all likelihood, Obama wrote the bio himself. ("Ha! Ha! Sydney Blumenthal and those other racists were dumb enough to believe me!") Even if he didn't write it, it was his responsibility to check it. PeterKa (talk) 03:19, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
She can never get away from the fact that the reason she's in the position she is today is by stealing affirmative action funds and denying a qualified recipient a place. This issue will never die. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 09:18, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
Biden just promised to cure cancer if he is elected (The Biden administration is going to cure cancer in 8 years!). A lot of other Democratic candidates promise medicare for all and/or the Green New Deal despite the massive US Federal deficit.
It's really hard to predict who is going to win in Democrat la-la land. In short, the Democrats are insane.
"the heart of the sons of men is full of evil, and madness is in their heart while they live, and after that they go to the dead." - King Solomon
Saw that. Need a little more context from Biden before I can paraphrase it into something like, "promises to heal the sick, raise the dead, and cure cancer," or "walks on water and cures cancer" or something along those lines to bring out Biden's Messianic vision. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 10:13, 13 June 2019 (EDT)

Kamala Harris blows out tire; husband doesn’t help

Kamala Harris was ambushed by an animal rights activist who climbed up onto a stage at venue where she was being interviewed. Her husband waited for security to do their job, but was then the last to get up to go make sure the culprit was separated from his wife. It looked bad, even though the only thing the activist seized was a microphone. Her poll numbers plummeted.

Bernie Sanders, for reasons unknown, has been leaking supporters since May at a startlingly constant rate, as if he can do no right. Buttigieg has been treading water since then, and Elizabeth Warren, who hasn’t done anything different, rose 4%.

The standings as such are now suggesting that Democrats have, like what happened to Trump, resolved into two groups: Biden or not-Biden (meaning one of the four I mentioned). VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 08:41, 15 June 2019 (EDT)

Biden will be ambushed by the mob come February, much as the 'inevitable' Hillary was in 2008 and again in 2016. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 11:23, 15 June 2019 (EDT)
I can't see how Biden will survive the first debate. He looks so over the hill, especially when he does anything unscripted. Of course, you can dismiss all the top candidates this way. Warren has yet to accomplish anything in life notable enough to make us think of her as something other than "that fake Indian candidate." As for Buttigieg, going from small town mayor to president would be quite a stretch. I assume that he is in fact running for vice president. In short, they are all implausible. But someone will get the nomination. PeterKa (talk) 23:44, 15 June 2019 (EDT)
That's why Harris looks like a winner. She can galvanize progressives and blacks for the nomination, as Obama did in 2008. Short of a financial collapse in late October, wiping out middle class white people's 401(k)s, it's uphill for her in the general. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 01:25, 16 June 2019 (EDT)
Face facts: Obama won in 2008 because of the financial collapse in October, not because of lurch leftward in America; Obama won 2012 because of political spying, abuse of the intelligence apparatus, and intimidation of journalists who reported the truth about him. The three million votes he lost in 2012 were people who naively voted for him 2008 thinking he was not a communist. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 01:31, 16 June 2019 (EDT)
It's important to note, under the rules if a candidate is attacked by name, the candidate gets rebuttal time. Attacking Biden, whose already slipping, gives him more air time, sucking the oxygen out of the room. Only fools would waste the time allotted to them to make their case by granting Biden more attention. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:29, 16 June 2019 (EDT)
After crunching the Iowa favorability numbers, Nate Silver says Warren and Buttigieg are the candidates to watch.[14] PeterKa (talk) 19:36, 17 June 2019 (EDT)
I don't know. Since Kamala Harris is the best at showing grievance, intersectionality dictates that she be the nominee—or at least the not-Biden. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 03:58, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
I Second the Notion. And she's got the big donors, too. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 09:05, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
On the other hand, she's too much like Obama. People want to move on. VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 17:50, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
Since Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Obama (more than anyone) have proved that no Democrat wins the presidency without Blacks' support. Blacks understand this more than anyone. Harris knows she has the #2 spot locked up; by her logic (and that of most Blacks) if she's qualified for #2, she's qualified for #1. Why should she have to ride the back of the bus for the racist Democrat's #1 pick. Blacks got a taste for power when Obama put racist Democrats in their place in 2008. Harris is Obama's political successor, who carries with her the unpopular notion (among Blacks) that gay rights are civil rights. But Blacks will trade with their white racist liberal coalition allies their opposition to gay rights for power and recognition. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 19:43, 20 June 2019 (EDT)

Don't let them do it

The narrative spin is beginning to counter Biden's segregationist past. The excuses are, "bi-partisanship" and "working across the aisle". No. No. And No. Biden was working with Democrats in his own party. This narrative lie should be countered at every turn. Period. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:36, 21 June 2019 (EDT)

Cure for cancer

You guys have a news entry mocking Biden for promising to cure cancer but Trump has promised the same thing (with the addition of AIDS). Is this not a double standard? JohnSelway (talk) 02:19, 19 June 2019 (EDT)

I would invite Conservapedia readers to look at the context (helpfully provided on Main Page Right) surrounding each candidate's projections and judge for themselves. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 02:51, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
Can you elucidate the difference? JohnSelway (talk) 03:06, 19 June 2019 (EDT)
The Trump Administration has already taken actions to fight HIV and cancer: 1,2,3,4,5 Biden is talk, Trump is action. --1990'sguy (talk) 00:03, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
Then you’re not comparing apples with apples. Biden “we will cure cancer” (not in power) - Conservapedia response is ridicule. Trump “we will cure cancer” (has full control of the economy) “it’s different when he says it”. You see how you are applying a totally different standard? Is no one on Conservapedia capable of being honest? JohnSelway (talk) 01:11, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
Wow, you really get hopeless when you're not spoon-fed the explanation you want. VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 02:19, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
Look, I realize the guy is in mourning for the loss of his son to cancer. But don't let his impaired mental abilities affect his judgement in a position of responsibility to the rest of us. Most objectionable is his translating his personal loss into pandering to cancer victims and families of victims. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 14:04, 20 June 2019 (EDT)

What double-standard applies here? Trump said the word "we", as in the American people, i.e. what has happened so far is that he made sure the conditions were set up to allow a growth in research and development of potential treatments, without government intrusion and / or heavy taxation of the corporations or of the people responsible. Biden said "I" , and his message was clear: "Elect me, and I will cure it!". Trump was involved in politics since 2016; Biden was in politics for over 30 years, including the previous 8 years under Obama, with one of the worst economies and unemployment on record. Sorry, Jonny, but Trump gets the nod. Karajou (talk) 04:25, 20 June 2019 (EDT)

That’s some really fine hair your splitting there. Conservapedia is so dishonest and hypocritical. I came here hoping for proper conservative and Christian values but all I see is dishonesty and hyper-partisanship. If any liberal favoured North Korea dictatorship over their own people you’d be outraged. But not with Trump. There are no standards being held here. Disappointing. JohnSelway (talk) 20:43, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
You're right. We'll concede the point, Al Gore invented the internet, and he did it without being president. Can we presume Joe Biden will share his miracle cure for cancer with humanity in the next four to eights years without being president?
'Hypocrisy' in commie/lib parlance means leftists called out on facts. You should change your vocabulary or find new material. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 21:08, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
Obama mocked Trump about his pledge to help bring back factory jobs to America and snidely asked if Trump was going to wave his magic wand to make it happen.
I think it is very clear now that Trump has a magic wand and that he can use it to cure cancer! :) See: The Trump Manufacturing Jobs Boom: 10 Times Obama's Over 21 Months, Forbes.Conservative (talk) 11:01, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
Seriously, I think politicians often overpromise and underdeliver. In addition, they often have misplaced priorities. For example, the idea of America putting a man on Mars should be abandoned - especially given the USA's current national debt.Conservative (talk) 11:11, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
And who would want to live there, anyway? It's like Antarctica! VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 17:53, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
To be fair, living on Mars is actually a bit more logical than living on the moon, at least Mars has an atmosphere, not to mention its ice caps with the right work would allow us to terraform it to be more hospitable, while the moon lacks any known water resevoirs. And I wouldn't abandon it, more like put it on hold for the time being, at least until the national debt is resolved (of course, then again, the national debt shouldn't be too much of an issue in either case. If we could put a man up on the moon despite the fact that, according to Jonathan Leaf anyways, such was a massive waste of money, I'm pretty sure we can do something with Mars regardless of a national debt). Pokeria1 (talk) 18:00, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
Yah but, How many Democrats endorse spending money on research projects to send a man/woman/person/thing/or any number of 58 genders to Mars in the year 2040 while endorsing the Green New Deal? It is impossible to transport 7 billion people, or even just 320 million Americans, to Mars before 2030 when the planet is scheduled for final destruction. Scrap the Mars program, and focus on saving the planet before 2030. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 18:16, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
Abandoning Mars (or a border wall) won't solve the debt -- reducing/reforming entitlements and significantly cutting unnecessary/wasteful spending, especially for domestic programs and the State Department, will. --1990'sguy (talk) 18:25, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
It's an academic question Congress is wrestling with right now on the budget. How much money do we spend on research scientists (such as those researching the George Bush and Dick Cheney slime mold beetle) for Mars research vs save the world from climate change with the Green New Deal. Now, assuming the Green New Deal is successful (IOWs, forget the national debt), the Mars emergency escape program is of less importance. If the Green New Deal fails, then we definitely need to colonize Mars. So, given all the inherent possibilities, we need a commission to study and write a report on the appropriate level of funding for colleges and universities for Fiscal Year 2020, to recommend the funding level for the Mars contingency. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 18:43, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
Biden's cancer program may threaten the survival of the Mars project. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 18:44, 20 June 2019 (EDT)
You haven't been paying attention. If we've learned anything it's that the best of the public beats a panel of eggheads any day. VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 14:45, 21 June 2019 (EDT)
Pokeria isn't always right, and this is one of those unfortunate occasions. In fact there are deposits of water on the moon—at the bottom of craters, at the poles, in the form of ice. So I would cancel all those plans for living on Mars, build colonies at the poles and burrow underground to avoid the direct heat of the sun. Not that the moon is anymore pleasant than Mars. The lunar surface I hear is covered in dust, rocks and flat crystalline formations of glass strands bunched together that break into sharp pieces when you step on them. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 09:31, 22 June 2019 (EDT)
Okay, I stand corrected there. Guess the moon truly is as viable as Mars in that case. Well, save for the fact that the moon lacks an atmosphere, and all the stuff VargasMilan pointed out. Pokeria1 (talk) 10:52, 22 June 2019 (EDT)
Radiation outside the Van Allen belt is much more intense. Robots are becoming more and more capable. So there needs to be a pretty good reason before we send more humans into deep space. But we do have the prospect of inevitable disaster to spur us on: the Earth's plate tectonics will stall in about 1.5 billion years. Geologically speaking, Mars died long ago while Venus remains hyperactive. The main problem with Venus is that the atmosphere is too thick (92 times the thickness of Earth's atmosphere) due to all the volcanic activity. But this is a problem that can eventually be solved with terraforming. PeterKa (talk) 10:26, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
How do you "terraform" away 90 bars of pressure? JohnZ (talk) 16:28, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
Refined magnesium and calcium can be used to sequester carbon as calcium and magnesium carbonates. The Venusian heat can be turned down by installing a giant umbrella at the Lagrange point. An asteroid impact could be used to speed up the planet's rotation. Somebody's already calculated it all out to the bar. See "How Do We Terraform Venus?." PeterKa (talk) 23:06, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
I like the bit near the end where it turns out the "umbrella" at L1 needs to be four times the diameter of Venus itself. The other suggestions are only slightly less bonkers. JohnZ (talk) 21:50, 26 June 2019 (EDT)

Jesus will probably return before America puts a man on Mars (Israel becoming a nation again was a major prophecy being fulfilled and it seems like it points to Second Coming potentially being in our lifetime). By 2035, a major financial crisis will probably hit the USA and put the kibosh on a manned mission to Mars. And if the USA keeps having ethnic/class disharmony, it may break up.

In the shorter term, the challenges associated with an aging population and increasing economic competition from abroad will damper enthusiasm for a manned Mars mission.Conservative (talk) 10:46, 23 June 2019 (EDT)

But that's the problem. Increasing economic competition leads to more consumption of non-renewable resources, which is why we need the Green New Deal. Sure, when the aging population dies off we can do away with farting cows and feed everybody Michelle Obama's school lunches, but it'll past 2030 when the planet is due to expire. We need to transport at least a remnant (say Hillary Clinton, George Soros, Mark Zuckerberg, etc) to Mars before that to insure survival of the species. Alternatively, we could launch some artificial intelligence and robotics to Mars (funded by a 2% wealth tax). Who needs the human species, anyways? RobSDeep Six the Deep State!

General election match ups

If anyone is worried about Trump being behind in general election polling, this is a good article: "Should We Take These Early General Election Polls Seriously? $#!% No!." In May 2015, Hillary was ahead of Trump 50-32 percent. It is of course way too early for 2020 general election polls to tell us much. Moreover, a generic ballot is generally a better predictor than a matchup. Partisanship is only growing stronger, so that's likely to be even more true in 2020. People are telling the pollsters they want someone who can bring stability as opposed to a radical or a bold reformer. I don't see how that translates into a vote for Warren. PeterKa (talk) 23:40, 21 June 2019 (EDT)

Do you think Trump's cancelling the launch codes to attack Iran will translate into perceptions by liberal voters of Trump's virtues, in this case taking the form of wise restraint? If you project your own thinking processes and sense of patriotism onto them, you'd expect them to say "Hey, Trump is okay after all!" And you'd be just as shocked and disappointed to learn that many aren't grateful, and that it even somehow just reminds them of a different sad complaint about Trump to a level of severity that matches the level of the gratitude you would have expected. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 10:02, 22 June 2019 (EDT)
I think it's safe to say that it won't help Trump with any actual liberals. Trump has apparently decided to go with computer hacking instead of bombs: "With Trump's approval, Pentagon launched cyber strikes against Iran." Meanwhile, the Iranians aren't buying the "proportionate response" idea: "Military: If enemy fires a single bullet at Iran, it will receive 10." Who told Trump that military responses should be proportionate? McMaster, the former national security adviser, is widely admired for his book Dereliction of Duty. The book criticizes Defense Secretary McNamara for doing exactly this kind of thing in Vietnam. PeterKa (talk) 20:58, 22 June 2019 (EDT)
Trump and the Ayatollah will be singing Kumbahyah together sometime between the convention and the election. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 21:08, 22 June 2019 (EDT)
I note that Trump has nothing on Obama in the presidential agonizing department. Obama spent nine months deciding whether or not to kill Bin Laden. In that period, he changed his mind three times. What finally forced a decision was the fear that Wikileaks was about to leak relevant material. So I guess we can thank Wikileaks. PeterKa (talk) 22:06, 22 June 2019 (EDT)

Oh, the humanity... Boot-edge-edge is going down in flames

Buttigieg is done. Imagine, we have another 2 dozen "Howard Dean" meltdown moments to look forward to. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 19:19, 22 June 2019 (EDT)

Buttigieg was always a white liberal's white liberal. Christian bashing was never going work in the black community. Obama tried it only after he was safely reelected. Buttigieg's supporters are former O'Rourke backers. So I guess it's Biden time now. Boy, is it gonna be tough to get anyone excited: "He may be a vegetable, but he's our vegetable!" PeterKa (talk) 03:25, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
The wolf in sheep's clothing Pete Buttigieg claimed to be a Christian. The liberal/left communities are filled with fake Christians, fake news, fake science, etc.
After all is said and done. The bottom line is that Mayor Pete Buttigieg could be doing a better job to represent black voters. Mayor Rudy Giuliani made the police force more closely resemble the populace racially so the whole white cops vs. the black community was not an issue. He also had the police force better tackle crime which disproportionally affects the black population in terms of everyday life (hard to establish businesses in high crime areas, etc.). This is not rocket science. Good mayors learn from the examples of effective mayors. Buttigieg is a smart man. He is either being willfully ignorant or very negligent/lazy when it comes to the black community.
Maybe there is no easy/perfect solution. Maybe Buttigieg is having the best qualified candidates be police officers (education, work history, etc.) and those candidates are disproportionally white. America is still paying the consequences for slavery/Jim Crow/etc. Electing the divisive, community organizer and left leaning Barack Obama obviously was not a great solution in creating societal harmony.
I don't think civic nationalism is going solve racial/ethnic/religious friction in the USA. Maybe a brokered/negotiated peace like Singapore is better solution. Over the long term, maybe intermarriage may ease racial friction. Hawaii and the Philippines don't seem like places where there is a lot of racial friction and there has been a lot of racial intermarriage in those cultures. Civil rights activists wore Hawaiian leis during the Selma to Montgomery civil rights marches.[15] If I am not mistaken, in ancient times, rulers used to intermarry with foreign wives sometimes to cement relations between countries. Maybe that is one of the reasons why Solomon had so many wives. See: Royal intermarriage.
The demography/racial/religion/politics scholar Eric Kaufmann (who was Canadian born and his himself multi-racial), projects there is going to be a lot of racial intermarriage in the 21st century and there is evidence to suggest this (low birth rates in developed countries which can be hard to reverse, immigration, second generation immigrant intermarriage, etc.). See: Racial demographic/political shifts.Conservative (talk) 09:20, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
This 43 sec. clip comes from his own website. Contrary to previous reporting, he's not very bright. This clip serves as Buttigieg's "Sister Soulja" moment - Butttigieg standing up to black radicalism, straight out of the Clinton playbook. I'm still processing how a 37 year old white Millennial who ran for DNC chair and speaks 7 languages can be so naive, stupid, and simple. This racist punk thinks by being rude to black activists in the midst of an emotional crisis is going to win brownie points among white voters. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:01, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
Wikipedia even has an article on a Sister Soula moment; someone needs to insert the above Youtube clip from Buttigieg's own presidential website into that article. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:08, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
The WP article says:
"a key moment when the candidate takes what at least appears to be a bold stand against certain extremes in their party"[2] and as "a calculated denunciation of an extremist position or special interest group."[3] Such an act of repudiation is designed to signal to centrist voters that the politician is not beholden to traditional, and sometimes unpopular, interest groups associated with the party..."
(a) Buttigieg skipped a big South Carolina event with other candidates to rush home and deal with a police shooting of a black man; (b) Buttigieg read from a prepared script and baited the emotional crowd; (c) then posted what he thought would be a winning sound byte on his Presidential campaign website. We have a Sista Soulja and Howard Dean moment combined into one. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:18, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
A Democrat can't win without Blacks. Here's how Pete Buttigieg 2020 will be remembered. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:30, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
Just because Buttigieg won't mollycoddle and grovel before black activists in the midst of their grievance politics, doesn't mean he is a racist. The police officer should be afforded due process. In addition, it is reported that the deceased black man was approaching the officer with a knife. Of course, it is better to let the investigators/courts do their jobs rather than make snap judgments about the whole matter.
At the same time, it is true that a Democrat cannot win the presidential nomination/presidency without the black vote so Buttigieg should have developed good relations with the black community in South Bend before running for the presidency if he truly wanted to win. But I doubt he thought he could win. It is just about advancing the homosexual agenda and getting a SJW participation trophy award for running. Plus, he is now a national figure.Conservative (talk) 19:49, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
I read a lot more into this. The video on Buttigieg campaign site clearly is his Sista Soulja moment, well calculated. It shows what he really thinks of blacks and black issues. And the 37 year old Buttigigeg is the "best and the brightest" of his generation, very simple minded, and thinking that following some textbook prescription of bigoted stereotypes about Blacks the key to White House. Blacks don't see it that way. Blacks have seen through Buttigieg since day one. He's wasting his time going after their vote, and he knows it.
What we may be witnessing is the break-up of the Gay-Black alliance that's decades old. Obama brought it to fruition wirh gay marriage, but Blacks have never been on board with the hijacking of the Civil Rights movement by gays.
Black Democrats always called themselves "Kennedy Democrats". There are no Johnson, Humphrey, McGovern, Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Clinton or Gore Democrats. Today there only remains Obama Democrats, but they see themselves in a leadership role. While loyalty to Obama's legacy is strong, there's an underlying resentment of gays taking over their party and movement. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 20:37, 23 June 2019 (EDT)
More bad news: Hours after hosting a town hall meeting which interrupted his campaign schedule to address police violence toward the black community, six shootings occurred throughout the city leaving one dead and 10 injured. Buttigieg ought to just skip the Thursday nite debate and deal with the tensions in his city. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 22:53, 24 June 2019 (EDT)
Continuing, Buttigieg's race problems are not his own. Buttigieg is symptomatic of a larger disconnect between white, sexually "liberated" Millenials who grew up in the Clinton era. Buttigieg obviously is following the Clinton playbook, pooh pooh Blacks and race relations as of secondary importance cause they can always be counted on as loyal Democrats. Buttigieg ignores the lessons of 2008 and 2016. This reveals a remarkable split in the Democrat party - that educated white, sexually liberated individuals are locked in a time warp and still think they have white privilege entitled to leadership. Even after Buttigieg disappears from the public stage (he'll remain around until the convention to rally gays), there is a tremendous disconnect between these white sexually liberated individuals and Black voters that should not be ignored and can be exploited. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:44, 25 June 2019 (EDT)

Global warming (second) makeover

Honest liberal: "First it was global warming. Then it was climate change. Now it has advanced another level of abstraction so it can assume the form of nearly every meteorological event (in whatever way it should prove useful to carrying out our designs of targeting and assigning blame to the most prominent conservatives somehow connected with energy consumption)—extreme weather!

"I can see two other benefits from the new name 'extreme weather'. Kids since the 1990s have used the adjective 'extreme' to anything fast, fun, exciting and new, and the name would elicit an interest from those now young adults and kids.

"Secondly and related, it would be easier to associate pictures and videos of powerful or scary weather events to a phrase describing the phony CO2 problem as "extreme weather" than as "climate change". Warning placards set up by critics pointing out the cynicism of such a move would be stampeded and then trampled by everybody else as they got caught up in the appeal of those exciting weather docudramas." VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 02:32, 11 June 2019 (EDT)

"Extreme whether," I like it. The possibilities are endless. For example, moderates oppose extremism. And "whether terror" can be held for another day. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 10:56, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
The terminology in this area is already quite bizarre, the product of repeated politicization. If anyone asks, I am a climate realist. PeterKa (talk) 11:21, 11 June 2019 (EDT)

MPR: USA v. Thailand

Thailand might be one of the weaker teams in the tournament, but their current FIFA ranking has them listed as 34th out of 155 countries, so they're definitely not one of the weakest in the world.

As far as "impoverished" goes, Thailand is actually pretty wealthy (in the top 30 by nominal GDP). That takes a fair hit if you go per capita, but they're still comfortably in the top half, even on this measure. We're not talking DR Congo here. JohnZ (talk) 20:43, 11 June 2019 (EDT)

It's rigged; we let anybody beat us in soccer. It makes them feel good and they love us for it. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 20:52, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
What are you on about? Your lasses just gave Thailand a 13-0 howking. JohnZ (talk) 21:22, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
Blood in the water. We're raising women to be like men here in America. They lost their feminine side. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 21:24, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
You been drinking, Smith? [Holds up three fingers] Focus. How many do you see? JohnZ (talk) 21:31, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
We raise our girls to be aggressive, competitive, and independent, and our boys to be soy boys. That's why the country went off the rails. This isn't rocket science. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 22:09, 11 June 2019 (EDT)

I don't think it would have been good if the USA team didn't play to the best of their ability. Thailand needed to raise their game. The USA didn't need to lower their game - leadership is by example. And I would think Thailand players could learn better from American players who are playing at the best of their ability.

In addition, failure teaches lessons in life. And the bigger the failure, the bigger the lesson learned.

The main reason why failures are painful to people is that they let their ego get in the way rather than treat their failure as a learning experience. Many people never fail because they never go beyond their comfort zone and test their abilities. “If you want to increase your success rate, double your failure rate.” - Thomas Watson Jr. Conservative (talk) 21:40, 11 June 2019 (EDT)

Indeed. Could someone fix the headline, though, please? To reiterate: Thailand is not one of the weakest teams in the world, nor is the country notably "impoverished". Thanks. JohnZ (talk) 21:45, 11 June 2019 (EDT)
I removed the word "impoverished".Conservative (talk) 12:53, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
But they are impoverished, as JohnZ cited above. His point was, that to be in the 30 of 180+ competitors doesn't make them among the "weakest." RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:46, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
I haven’t watched soccer in six years, but I saw this game. My brother remarked that the tournament rules were such that the lead by which a team beats its opponents determines that team’s standing in the competition. This may be one of the rare cases where the conservative lesson presented on MPR doesn’t apply to the story that it presents as fully known. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 14:22, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
Okay, let's give participation trophies all around. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 15:00, 12 June 2019 (EDT)

RobS, I think you misread what JohnZ wrote above. For example, JohnZ wrote above "As far as "impoverished" goes, Thailand is actually pretty wealthy (in the top 30 by nominal GDP). That takes a fair hit if you go per capita, but they're still comfortably in the top half, even on this measure. We're not talking DR Congo here."Conservative (talk) 14:30, 12 June 2019 (EDT)

Thailand is much, much poorer than the U.S. Thailand is also 95% Buddhist, which means women's soccer is not a high priority. Some sportsmanship is better than running up the score and then gloating about it afterwards.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 15:25, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
For the record, I don't see any sportsmanship issues in the margin of victory, and Vargas is correct that goal difference, and then goals scored, is used to determine teams' standings if they're level on points at the end of the group stage.
However, I'm not sufficiently invested in this to labour the point further. For the reasons given above, I support the removal of "impoverished", and if someone could amend "weakest in the world" to "weakest in the tournament", then I'm done. Thanks. JohnZ (talk) 16:13, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
Here Here! eliminate the word "weakest" and they can be seen as equals. May the Best Women Win! RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 16:21, 12 June 2019 (EDT)

Thailand law requires its king to be an adherent of the Theravada school of Buddhism which is a nontheistic type of Buddhism.

The American women's soccer team overwhelming victory over the Thai team might be further confirmation that theists tend to be more athletic than nontheists (see: Sports performance: Religious faith vs. atheism).

Consider the essay Christianity and its margin of victory over atheism.

Christendom kept racking up victory after victory over militant atheists until the atheist movement died in the Western World (see: Decline of the atheist movement).

And now Donald Trump is about to bring the Chinese atheists who engage in unfair trade practices to their knees via his trade war with China. Furthermore, Christianity is seeing explosive growth in China (see: Growth of Christianity in China and East Asia and global desecularization).

The margin victory of Christendom over militant atheists will widen and widen and desecularization will accelerate in the 21st century.

Keep it up American women's soccer team! USA! USA! USA!

Deus vault!Conservative (talk) 16:42, 12 June 2019 (EDT)

Weakest in the tournament edit made.Conservative (talk) 16:55, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
Cheers. JohnZ (talk) 17:06, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
You have no evidence the US Women's Soccer Team is Christian. How do we know there are no Muslim converts, secularists, yoga flakes, or Progressive atheist daughters of Clinton era soccer moms? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 17:14, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
In fact, one of these Trump-hating psycho commies refused to participate in the national anthem. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 17:18, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
In the USA, atheists/agnostics are a minority (see: American atheism). In the United States, numerous studies report athletes to be more religious than nonathletes (Fischer, 1997; Storch, Kolsky, Silvestri, & Storch, 2001; Storch et al., 2004). See: Strength of Religious Faith of Athletes and Nonathletes at Two NCAA Division III Institutions
Muslims are theists. As far as yoga, Hindus are theists too. The article is titled Sports performance: Religious faith vs. atheism. It is not titled Sports performance: Christianity vs. atheism.Conservative (talk) 17:19, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
We're speaking specifically of the US Women's Soccer Team, as representative of the United States. What evidence do you have that they are not majority Trump-hating progressive commie lib atheists? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 17:52, 12 June 2019 (EDT)
Comments by other soccer stars are rolling in, in agreement with our criticism. The US Women's soccer team should adopt some sportsmanship for a change, by apologizing, instead of acting like a bunch of self-centered liberals.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 12:33, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
If this were Canada, and specifically the Canadian Parliament, you'd be ostracized for not using the correct term, 'sportspersonship'. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 14:00, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
We need a Gender mainstreaming article. [16] RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 14:12, 13 June 2019 (EDT)

I agree that sportmanship does not include gloating. But it does not include a team playing more poorly when facing a weaker team - especially when a team's ranking includes its margin of victories. And sports fans go to soccer games to see goals being made. They don't go to see goals not being made.Conservative (talk) 16:58, 13 June 2019 (EDT)

Unsportsmanlike conduct includes running up the score. If the tournament rules encourage it beyond reason, that should be corrected and is not a justification. At any rate, the gloating showed it was done for self-aggrandizement. One player even selfishly held up fingers for each goal she had personally scored.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 12:55, 14 June 2019 (EDT)
Exactly. Blowouts and shut outs used to be fairly common in the NFL, scores like 35-0. It was the sort of thing that could get a coach fired. It created vendettas, with players being severely injured who had nothing to do with the game that caused his coach getting fired years earlier and had to struggle to keep his career and be re-hired elsewhere. IOWs, in a rematch between coaches, one coach would be looking for revenge and willing to risk and abuse the health and safety of players on both teams to make a statement. With free-agency, your opponent today is your team mate tomorrow. Coaches belong to a fraternity whose job is to teach players it's sport and entertainment, not cut-throat competition. In the NFL today, coaches go out of their way to avoid a shutout. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 15:46, 14 June 2019 (EDT)
When the 1980 USA Olympic hockey team was facing the Soviet team they decided to quickly adopt a new hybrid style of play combining the Soviet/Canadian styles which required the height of training/excellence. Of course, the coach/team was taking a risk - namely that his team could not develop a whole new style and would face another big loss like they did in the previous Olympics. In the prior Olympics, the USA Olympic team had a 15 to 1 loss against a weak team - namely the Czech team.
Of course, taking the aforementioned risk required/developed character in the 1980 USA Olympic hockey coach/team. Under the "no run up" way of doing things that character development and risk would have never occurred.
Here is another example: The NFL quarterback Frank Reich "had the distinction of having led his team to the biggest comeback victory ever in both the college and NFL ranks, including a 32-point comeback for the Bills in 1993."[17] Under the "no run up" rule, Reich would have never achieved this tremendous victory. Furthermore, it would deny someone to achieve an even greater comeback victory than Reich.
The no run up way of doing things teaches people that: big risks are not to be taken and great comebacks in the face of big adversity is not possible. Also, it pampers players egos and teaches them that big losses are not learning experiences. Conservative (talk) 16:46, 14 June 2019 (EDT)
When I was demonstrating the immorality of the atheist population via my various articles, I was accused by the atheist Trent Toulouse at a certain atheist/agnostic website of being "cutthroat" despite the fact that my articles were factual and well-sourced. That was his way of indirectly saying that I running up the score.
From the period of 2003 to 2014 Americans sharpened their negative views towards atheists according to a large university survey (see: Distrust of atheists). Was that a bad thing? Should I and other Christians have been less critical of atheism after the launch of the now dead movement New Atheism (New Atheism was a militant form of atheism in terms of its rhetoric)? Did we run up the score too much? Conservative (talk) 17:13, 14 June 2019 (EDT)

Losses are feedback. And big losses in sports are feedback that you have to train much, much harder. Depriving teams of that feedback is not a good practice.Conservative (talk) 17:27, 14 June 2019 (EDT)

"Some states, such as Georgia, have implemented a “mercy rule” in designated sports at the high school level, where if certain point differentials occur, the length of the game is reduced."[18]
While I think this can be a suboptimal solution in some cases (see my examples of the 1980 USA Olympic team and Frank Reich), at least the winning team isn't asked to lower their level of excellence. And you could argue that it causes teams to play hard throughout the game and not count on some spectacular comeback.Conservative (talk) 18:07, 14 June 2019 (EDT)
The reason I took a run up the score philosophy is I am tired of the stupid participation trophies and other liberal, wimpy claptrap related to competition/hard work/achievement.
If you are not going to work hard and prepare in life, you shouldn't be surprised when you fail or fail spectacularly. And if you did work hard and still failed (or even failed in a big way), then learn from the experience and don't easily quit or become discouraged because of it.Conservative (talk) 00:12, 15 June 2019 (EDT)
It's the combination of running up the score against the weakest team and the over-the-top self-aggrandizement as though something was accomplished and the favoritism by the liberal media. If they seek competitive achievement against world-class athletes, they should run in a marathon or compete in Olympic skiing, gymnastics or figure skating. But I doubt they'd get very far.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 19:04, 15 June 2019 (EDT)

Wendy's news topic (or more accurately, Burger King).

Hi. Good work promoting Wendy's support for adoption. However, shouldn't we change Burger King's support for at least gays to "supported" instead of "supports"? Technically, Burger King only seemed to support gay marriage in 2014, and it's not clear if they still do, so it's technically dishonest to claim it continues to support it when evidence hasn't emerged that they still do. Now, if you've got a source dated 2019, then we could continue using the present tense for "support" regarding that. Pokeria1 (talk) 11:44, 13 June 2019 (EDT)

Maybe BK smartened up and decided to be a "neutral Switzerland" in the culture wars. There is no sense alienating a sizable portion of the public when you are engaging in mass marketing on a global scale (Burger King is in some Middle East countries, etc.). My guess is that they didn't smarten up, but that is merely speculation. Most big companies in the USA are run by straight, white men and so I am guessing that some would prefer to avoid the culture wars, if possible. The SJWs generally try to infiltrate the HR/marketing departments of big companies.Conservative (talk) 15:33, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
"Human Rights Campaign recently released its guide to the businesses with the best work environments for gay employees. The Gap, Johnson & Johnson and Apple come out on top, while John Deere and Loews score near the bottom."[19]
I did a search on "John Deere and LGBT" at a search engine and sure enough the white, straight male executives at John Deere corporation whose company sells to people in rural areas could care less about LGBT issues. Shocking! :)Conservative (talk) 15:42, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
I predict that as right-wing nationalist gain in power in Europe/world and as evangelicals/Muslims grow in Europe/world, many corporations will stop pushing the homosexual agenda. I think this will start happening in about 5 to 30 years (see also: Desecularization and European desecularization in the 21st century).
Consider: Attacks on homosexuals in the UK rose 147% in three months after Brexit vote.[20] Part of it is no doubt due to Muslims increasing in numbers/influence, but there are nonreligious or nominally religious right-wingers who no doubt engage in beating up homosexuals and they see the secular left is losing power. The nonreligious right can definitely be violent (see: Essay: Anders Breivik is the canary in the mine showing that right-wing politics could become much more violent).
In addition, SJWs make corporations less profitable because they are more concerned about engaging in politics rather than making their companies more profitable. In addition, they can alienate a sizable amount of the public (ESPN, CNN, etc.). So this will eventually thin out the herd of SJW companies. Also, secular leftists are well-known for infighting and this is never good for a company (see: Atheist factions and Atheism and social/interpersonal intelligence).Conservative (talk) 16:22, 13 June 2019 (EDT)
The Guardian: "David Isaac, chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission said: “Currently, the law and sentencing policy create a ‘hierarchy of hate crime’ and send the message that some groups are more worthy of protection than others."[21]
Apparently, the Muslims have more voters than the homosexuals.Conservative (talk) 16:38, 13 June 2019 (EDT)

High-speed Democratic cliché collision

"If no one is above the law, then why are Democrats so opposed to President Trump ordering the deportation of millions of illegal aliens?" — Charlie Kirk, June 18, 2019. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 03:19, 19 June 2019 (EDT)

"Cocked and loaded"

Trump is getting a lot of guff for using the expression "cocked and loaded."[22] According to this ngram, the traditional expression was "loaded and cocked," i.e. a six shooter with bullets inserted and the hammer then pulled back. The "locked and loaded" variation became popular in the 1980s. So Trump's version is both more accurate and makes more sense than the Hollywood version that has become prevalent. PeterKa (talk) 20:15, 25 June 2019 (EDT)

To be fair, "locked and loaded" could refer to other armaments, like bazooka, torpedo, tank or missile. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 21:12, 26 June 2019 (EDT)
Retrieved from "https://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page/Archive_index/178&oldid=1538842"