# Wednesday



## jargey3000 (Jan 25, 2011)

I know as a Canadian (eh?) I shouldn't get too excited about it, but I'm somehow looking forward to hearing "Hail To The Chief" and the US Anthem this Wednesday...


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I am more interested in watching how Trump exits the scene. A military parade.....21 gun salute......a lineup of military generals......tanks, missile carriers ?


----------



## jargey3000 (Jan 25, 2011)

hahaha..yes! ..i saw that...i thought: the only thing missing is Sinatra ( or Anka) singing "My Way" as he s-l-o-w-l-y skulks off....


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

sags said:


> I am more interested in watching how Trump exits the scene. A military parade.....21 gun salute......a lineup of military generals......tanks, missile carriers ?


 ... likely with more pompous fare than Biden's incoming inauguration, filmed and saved for a twisted new reality show. Hey, why not milk it for all he can.

All I can see is an invisible bootmark on a boor's derrière with the exit.


----------



## Tostig (Nov 18, 2020)

When I retired, I had a picture taken of some close colleagues pick me in the butt under the office's exit sign.

I doubt Trump would have so much class.


----------



## jargey3000 (Jan 25, 2011)

classy tostig! ...kicking you in the butt would've been even classier IMHO !


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Canadians _should_ be paying attention to this. If the USA becomes an unstable disaster, we are definitely going to suffer -- probably in ways we can't even imagine right now.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

What are you worried about? With Trump gone and the Democrats in charge, what could possibly go wrong?


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> What are you worried about? With Trump gone and the Democrats in charge, what could possibly go wrong?


Trump and the alt-right radicalized huge numbers of Americans, and far right extremism blossomed during Trump's years. The groups which have gained strength, and membership, don't just disappear when Trump leaves.

What used to just be a fringe movement has become more mainstream. Today, the right wing extremists are more powerful and more lively than ever before. These terrorists will continue to be a major problem for years to come. Sadly I think there could be murders of government people. There will also be many more terrorist attacks against black Americans, Jews, Muslims, and liberal cities. I expect the US is in for _years_ of domestic terrorism, mainly white extremists.

Trump and the Republicans helped strengthen these movements over the last 4 years and with the momentum they have today, they won't just disappear all of a sudden.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> What are you worried about? With Trump gone and the Democrats in charge, what could possibly go wrong?


Well they could implement their agenda, that would be bad.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

Don't worry, Biden is already taking steps to stamp them out starting with calling out the National Guard for the inauguration, in case the 4 people they shot the other day is not enough warning. Anyone who opposes the Democrat agenda is being marginalized, denied service by major social media platforms, airlines, etc. Dissent and protests of any kind will soon be a thing of the past. Any anti government voices will grow fainter and fainter and disappear. America will be as peaceful as Red China, Russia or Cuba


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> Don't worry, Biden is already taking steps to stamp them out starting with calling out the National Guard for the inauguration, in case the 4 people they shot the other day is not enough warning. Anyone who opposes the Democrat agenda is being marginalized, denied service by major social media platforms, airlines, etc. Dissent and protests of any kind will soon be a thing of the past. Any anti government voices will grow fainter and fainter and disappear. America will be as peaceful as Red China, Russia or Cuba


Trump called out the National Guard for Inauguration last week.

It isn't legal for Biden to order anyone in government to do anything. He's not the president.

There will be political bias in which protests are allowed.
Just look to Canada, BLM yes, AntiMask - no. (FWIW I am against both protests, but support their right to protest.)


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Rusty O'Toole said:


> Don't worry, Biden is already taking steps to stamp them out starting with calling out the National Guard for the inauguration, in case the 4 people they shot the other day is not enough warning. Anyone who opposes the Democrat agenda is being marginalized, denied service by major social media platforms, airlines, etc. Dissent and protests of any kind will soon be a thing of the past. Any anti government voices will grow fainter and fainter and disappear. America will be as peaceful as Red China, Russia or Cuba


The melodrama is too much.


----------



## kcowan2000 (Mar 24, 2020)

I am anxiously awaiting a time when Covid and Trump are history. Back to boring without Breaking News!


----------



## jargey3000 (Jan 25, 2011)

(OP here) Well...back on topic... I, for one, think Lady MAGA.....er, GAGA....nailed it!


edit - also nice to see the ex-prezes, esp. Obama, workin' the crowd.


----------



## Retiredguy (Jul 24, 2013)

Conrad Black: Why Donald Trump will win big in 2020


FDR in 1936, Lyndon Johnson in 1964, Richard Nixon in 1972, Ronald Reagan in 1984, all won by over 20 points. Trump will gain a victory on that scale next…




nationalpost.com


----------



## Tostig (Nov 18, 2020)

Well...so glad that Trump didn't push the nuclear button. What we don't know is if he tested if the code really did change.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

Retiredguy said:


> Conrad Black: Why Donald Trump will win big in 2020
> 
> 
> FDR in 1936, Lyndon Johnson in 1964, Richard Nixon in 1972, Ronald Reagan in 1984, all won by over 20 points. Trump will gain a victory on that scale next…
> ...


And here's why Conrad Black isn't worth listening to... his opinion piece is a diatribe about US history and laughingly states: _With only public spiritedness as my motive, and in* total impartiality, for these purposes, about American political events and people*, I remind readers of a few fundamental facts about the politics of our neighbour. _

Meanwhile he seriously states the following: _he achieved more prior to his inauguration than any of the 43 preceding U.S. presidents except Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Grant, Eisenhower, and possibly Hoover. He is the only person elected president of the U.S. who never sought or held a public office or high military command and only the sixth to win the office with fewer votes than his chief opponent. *This wasn’t luck;* it was ambitious calculation and flawless execution._
If anything the past 4 years emphasized the luck part.

But I mean somewhere in the article he'll actually state why Trump would win.... nope. Then again, it was written before COVID, so the outlook was probably good at the time, before he mishandled the file.


----------



## jargey3000 (Jan 25, 2011)

J-Lo was pretty good too...🤓


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

kcowan2000 said:


> I am anxiously awaiting a time when Covid and Trump are history. Back to boring without Breaking News!


I notice that Fox are toning things down and have new anchors for a new morning show (We don't have Fox TV, so haven't actually seen this). But their website is much less confrontational. Nice to see. Now it is time for CNN to change. John King and some others sound like they think the election and transition are still going on. Time to move on and be more positive.


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

jargey3000 said:


> (OP here) Well...back on topic... I, for one, think *Lady MAGA.....er, GAGA....nailed it!*
> 
> edit - also nice to see the ex-prezes, esp. Obama, workin' the crowd.


She really did. Not too sure about her outfit though!


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

agent99 said:


> She really did. Not too sure about her outfit though!


Kind of a Hunger Games vibe from her outfit.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

bgc_fan said:


> Kind of a Hunger Games vibe from her outfit.


Funny you say that. I guarantee that it’s related. When the capitol seige was happening, I immediately thought of the Hunger Games, The Capitol, and Trump as President Snow.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

Money172375 said:


> Funny you say that. I guarantee that it’s related. When the capitol seige was happening, I immediately thought of the Hunger Games, The Capitol, and Trump as President Snow.


Maybe, I mean, the big poofy dress with the large bird pin, which I assume is a dove, but could stand for a mockingjay. Anyway, things went without a hitch as far as I can tell, so things will probably start getting back to "normal".


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Watching the reports I keep hearing "False equivalencies" in the news.

So I guess it will be years of "whataboutism" on every stupid thing the Biden/Harris administration does.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The festivities were such a roaring success, that many Americans are saying to ditch the old boring ballroom circuit and stick with this one in the future.

The 22 year old poet Laureate was amazing and her books of poetry jumped to Number 1 and 2 on Amazon. Sold out.........

All the singers and fireworks.......breathtaking. Americans wept for joy......except on Fox, where they didn't cover much of it and complained bitterly about Hillary Clinton emails.

But....... now begins the hard work.

Biden's aides said the Trump administration left a worse mess than they even could have imagined. There was no plan for distribution of vaccines or much of anything else. The plan to deal with COVID was "herd immunity" from the start, which needlessly caused hundreds of thousands of unnecessary deaths and illnesses.

Fortunately, Biden has filled his administration with people who are very experienced and described as "over qualified" for their jobs, but who are eager to repair the damage left behind by the inept Trump administration.

The "nuclear football" is once again in safe hands.

The storm has passed and there is a new day dawning..........


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> Watching the reports I keep hearing "False equivalencies" in the news.


The false equivalency concern has to do with severity of things.

For example: standard media versus outliers like Fox News and Infowars. They don't do the same things. Fox News became extremely radical for about 3 years of Trump's presidency, and was routinely pushing complete fabrications, conspiracy theories, and was calling angry people to arms. Fox News basically became a right wing extremism mouthpiece... very dangerous, and would be illegal in many countries.

Fox News should have been banned in Canada. We don't allow a Hamas propaganda channel on TV, do we?

Competitors CNN and MSNBC, while obviously biased, were *nothing* like Fox News. They didn't carry round the clock conspiracy theories, nor did they give a platform to dangerous extremists.

It's comparisons like 'CNN and Fox News are all the same' which are false equivalencies.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> The false equivalency concern has to do with severity of things.
> 
> For example: standard media versus outliers like Fox News and Infowars. They don't do the same things. Fox News became extremely radical for about 3 years of Trump's presidency, and was routinely pushing complete fabrications, conspiracy theories, and was calling angry people to arms. Fox News basically became a right wing extremism mouthpiece... very dangerous, and would be illegal in many countries.
> 
> ...


CNN and Fox news are both somewhat biased news organizations with very biased and opinionated "personalities"

It's fun to look at some of the CNN anchors over the years, and how dramatically their politics has changed.

Some people will go and say "false equivalency", when you point out that there are extremists on both sides that have tried to kill politicians etc.

I just hope that all these people saying "unity" actually mean "unity", not "shut up you lost".


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> Some people will go and say "false equivalency", when you point out that there are extremists on both sides that have tried to kill politicians etc.


Yes extremists of many stripes have tried to kill politicians, but that misses the point of severity or threat level.

*Nearly all* of the politically motivated violence in the US, including bombing attempts, mass shootings, and attempts to overthrow government (Michigan & DC), have been by far right extremists. They've repeatedly threatened government, and there have been insurrections in both Oregon and Washington.

It is a 'false equivalency' to claim that radical leftists are a similar threat to radical right wing. They are not the same, and not even close. Nearly all domestic terrorism in the USA is from the radical right. Even law enforcement and the DHS, even under Trump, said the same thing.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> Yes extremists of many stripes have tried to kill politicians, but that misses the point of severity or threat level.
> 
> *Nearly all* of the politically motivated violence in the US, including bombing attempts, mass shootings, and attempts to overthrow government (Michigan & DC), have been by far right extremists. They've repeatedly threatened government, and there have been insurrections in both Oregon and Washington.
> 
> It is a 'false equivalency' to claim that radical leftists are a similar threat to radical right wing. They are not the same, and not even close. Nearly all domestic terrorism in the USA is from the radical right. Even law enforcement and the DHS, even under Trump, said the same thing.


It's simply false to suggest that any one group is "the biggest threat".
There are a variety of threats of varying magnitudes from various groups and individuals.

As far as I know the only domestic terrorists to actually take over government buildings was BLM related protestors.

But don't worry, Biden is in office, he doesn't need BLM to stir up trouble, so he'll shut them down.


Just to be 100% clear.
I'm not saying that there aren't threats from any particular group of extremists, or that they are all equal from all directions.
I'm simply more interested with the issues people aren't talking about and aren't paying attention to.
It's boring to repeat the same crap that's on the nightly news, or the headline of the newspaper. It's in the other news, or the specific details that it's interesting.

I understand that lefty extremists are more fearful of the terrible right wing extremists.
Myself I'm concerned with both, along with all the other groups out there that don't neatly fall into left/right wing camps.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Republican politicians continue to fan the flames of insurrection. One newly elected member of Congress filed impeachment charges against Biden.

It has become quickly apparent the Republicans plan to proceed as they did against Obama, by obstructing the Biden administration at every chance.

It is time for the Democrats to exert their power and abolish the filibuster rule, so they can get legislation passed.

The "unity" approach isn't going to work when only one side is interested in it.

The Republicans view "unity" as a weakness to be exploited.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> It has become quickly apparent the Republicans plan to proceed as they did against Obama, by obstructing the Biden administration at every chance.


Biden did take a number of good actions on his first day.
He also undertook a number of bad actions on his first day.

It is very apparent that Biden intends to move on his agenda, every elected representative (Democrat and Republican) has the responsibility to support the good, and stop/obstruct the bad. That's literally their job.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> It is time for the Democrats to exert their power and abolish the filibuster rule, so they can get legislation passed.


This change would come back to bite them.
You realize that most likely they'll lose their majority at midterms right?

When they gave Obama more power, everyone warned them.
Then Trump had that power.
Now they want to give Biden more power... how do you think this will turn out?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Executive orders won't cut it. 

Biden needs to pass a massive spending bill to get anything done. If the Republicans successfully block that legislation, Biden loses credibility with the Democratic base.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> It's simply false to suggest that any one group is "the biggest threat".
> There are a variety of threats of varying magnitudes from various groups and individuals.
> 
> *As far as I know the only domestic terrorists to actually take over government buildings was BLM related protestors.*
> ...


 ... flip-flop.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

sags said:


> Executive orders won't cut it.
> 
> Biden needs to pass a massive spending bill to get anything done. If the Republicans successfully block that legislation, Biden loses credibility with the Democratic base.


Good, hopefully he backs out the worst stuff and comes up with something a bit more reasonable that the legislature can support.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

MrMatt said:


> It's simply false to suggest that any one group is "the biggest threat".
> There are a variety of threats of varying magnitudes from various groups and individuals.


This is just not true, as much as you want to convince yourself that "dangerous commies" are rampant ... the reality is not the case. In fact the 'far left' hardly registers on the radar.

US law enforcement has identified, for quite some time now, that far right extremists are the most significant terrorist threat in America. There are publications and news releases from the DHS and FBI about this.



MrMatt said:


> As far as I know the only domestic terrorists to actually take over government buildings was BLM related protestors.


You never cease to amaze me with your outlandish posts. You just saw MAGA attacking and taking over the Capitol. They very literally took over the government building by force.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Beaver101 said:


> ... flip-flop.


The way he posts is actually a MAGA & alt-right propaganda technique. What I can't tell is whether MrMatt is himself a propagandist (pushing the nonsense) or just someone who has been brainwashed by them.

The way this particular mirroring technique works (and Trump was very good at it) is that, the alt-right is put on the defensive for something. For example, someone points out Trump acts like an authoritarian.

Then they respond and and say no, "BLM" or "Democrats" are authoritarians.

That's the kind of thing MrMatt does all the time. For example, MAGA violently attacks the capitol and tries to take over government. @MrMatt comes here and says "no, BLM tried to take over government. I don't know about this other thing you're talking about".

Just watch... he always does this. Trump does the same, as do far right web sites like Infowars and that whole ecosystem.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> This is just not true, as much as you want to convince yourself that "dangerous commies" are rampant ... the reality is not the case. In fact the 'far left' hardly registers on the radar.
> 
> US law enforcement has identified, for quite some time now, that far right extremists are the most significant terrorist threat in America. There are publications and news releases from the DHS and FBI about this.
> 
> ...


If you claim that far left hardly registers, (and I agree they're statistically irrelevant), far right also "hardly registers", because their attacks are also statistically insignificant. 
The point is that there are fortunately extremely few people willing to commit violence.
I think if you took the total number of people committing politically motivated violent acts, I think it would be some tiny fraction of the population, most people simply don't agree that violence is the answer.

I don't think the Capital hill insurrectionists ever had complete control of the entire building, and as far as I know law enforcement didn't vacate and surrender it to them.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

james4beach said:


> That's the kind of thing MrMatt does all the time. For example, MAGA violently attacks the capitol and tries to take over government. @MrMatt comes here and says "no, BLM tried to take over government. I don't know about this other thing you're talking about".


BLM related protests did create CHAZ that happened.

As far as the thing you're talking about, sometimes I know what you're talking about, sometimes I don't.
For example, you go on and on about this Qanon thing, I have no idea what that is, seems to be a bunch of crazy conspiracists from what I read.


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

This forum is supposed be about Canadian money and investing.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^ And then there're certain members arguing that US politics (plus globally) do affect the Canadian economy, thereby our investments. And then there is their right to free speech.

Besides, the thread "Wednesday" is open to derail ... like every other thread ... LOL.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

This has already been discussed in the past, and I believe the "General Discussion" section was removed for awhile.

The decision was to return it and members can read it or not. There are many other areas for discussions on finance.

Many of the former strictly financial forums no longer exist. There simply wasn't enough interest to maintain them.


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

Beaver101 said:


> ^ And then there're certain members arguing that US politics (plus globally) do affect the Canadian economy, thereby our investments. And then there is their right to free speech.
> 
> Besides, the thread "Wednesday" is open to derail ... like every other thread ... LOL.


You and Sags are right insofar as this forum's present makeup is concerned. Just too bad some her take aggressive and extremist stands. Often about politics in another country. Maybe we need Twitter or Facebook to take over and sort out Vertiscope/CMF .

Those who enjoy those sort of things could perhaps find a different place to discuss them. Maybe Reddit? Even there, they might get Censored. 

I belong to other Vertiscope forums. One is a large car forum that has a majority of members from USA ( as well as from rest of world including Canada). There we discuss our cars plus some other fun stuff, Politics don't come up at all. Why our mostly Canadian _investing_ forum would have such acrimonious "free speech" about largely US politics is beyond me.


----------



## moderator2 (Sep 20, 2017)

There used to be a Hot Button section at CMF. The idea was that all political/nasty stuff could go into one section, so that people who didn't like it could ignore it. Unfortunately this didn't work, and arguments spillover over into other parts of CMF.

Many forum members have argued about censorship and wanted to be able to continue discussing politics. We thought that the General section would still allow this, within reason, but I'm not sure it's a good idea either. If you look at Reddit for example, it's moderated much more firmly than here.

Would members here support ending all political discussions? Some would, but others already complain about censorship.


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

moderator2 said:


> Would members here support ending all political discussions? Some would, but others already complain about censorship.


I would think political discussions deserve their own place. 

Your problem would be getting members to abide by the rules. Investor Village had (and may still have) a rule about such postings. The moderator at that time kind of overdid things, but was effective. No politics except for at a certain time each day! Hard to administer.

Some Vertiscope forums have an off-topic forum that collects political and other posts. You could use the General Discussion that way and instead of censoring, just move anything that is political or otherwise off-topic to that sub-forum (where it might languish and die, being out-of-context  )

Or you could do nothing. Maybe political season is almost over. I certainly hope so. Unfortunately, CMFers seem just as divided as our neighbors when it comes to politics. Another good reason to eliminate the subject. Both sides of fence have same interest in investments and other money related subjects. Much better to share those interests in an adult manner.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

I wouldn't want to censor political discussion even though I disagree violently with a lot of opinions on here. These discussions are important and seldom degenerate into personal attacks at least, not real bad ones. I find it interesting and valuable to know what others are thinking.


----------



## Rusty O'Toole (Feb 1, 2012)

.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

agent99 said:


> I would think political discussions deserve their own place.
> 
> Your problem would be getting members to abide by the rules. Investor Village had (and may still have) a rule about such postings. The moderator at that time kind of overdid things, but was effective. No politics except for at a certain time each day! Hard to administer.
> 
> *Some Vertiscope forums have an off-topic forum that collects political and other posts.* You could use the General Discussion that way and instead of censoring, just move anything that is political or otherwise off-topic to that sub-forum (where it might languish and die, being out-of-context  )


 ... I think this forum did attempt that in the Hot Button section as moderator2 explained in the above post. But then that didn't work because some people simply like to argue for the sake of arguing (one version, the tame one) in the name of "free speech or no censorship!".



> Or you could do nothing. *Maybe political season is almost over*. I certainly hope so.


 ... LOL! Not even close ... will never be over as long as mankind exists ... I'm sure WW3 is just around the corner. I just hope not to see it in my lifetime. The pandemic is enough.



> Unfortunately, CMFers seem just as divided as our neighbors when it comes to politics. Another good reason to eliminate the subject.


 ... that's why we still have 3 major political parties in this country ... I call them Harry, Larry & Moe.



> *Both sides of fence have same interest in investments and other money related subjects. Much better to share those interests in an adult manner.*


 ... I think we'll be okay at the end of the day. "Respectable" members have their fans on this forum.


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

i think any topic entitled Wednesday should be deleted because of vague subject. The topic itself does not belong here.


----------



## moderator2 (Sep 20, 2017)

kcowan said:


> i think any topic entitled Wednesday should be deleted because of vague subject. The topic itself does not belong here.


Yes, I agree. This thread doesn't have a clear topic. Closing this now.


----------

