urbanSTL

Auggie wrote:

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 15, 2025

Auggie wrote: You've made clear that you don't pay attention whatsoever.

Auggie, Legendrey and I disagree on DOGE and Tariffs. It seems we are having a fairly reasonable discussion on it.

You nor I know how much Legendrey is paying attention. Can you let the adults in the room talk for a little while instead of interrupting with personal critiques?

You've shown you're a Bill Maher style liberal and are totally useless in this conversation.

Literally all you've done is give credibility to tariffs and DOGE and you haven't made the fascism apologist support any of the bullsh*t he's spewed. People who think like you are exactly why Democrats do nothing but lose and exactly why we are losing our country.

Ok. I’m sure a bunch of observers can vouch for the value you add to this and other conversations.

Keep blathering on about the political convictions of internet strangers you know nothing about. I’ll get back to my critique (not endorsement) of Trump’s approach to tariffs and DOGE.

Auggie you crack me up dude

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 15, 2025

The reality is that, with proper negotiation, there are some tariff imbalances with other countries that we could likely balance to our benefit with the proper approach.

This isn't true whatsoever, yet you said it and it gives credibility to tariffs in general. America has been the single biggest benefactor from the global trade regime over the last 80 years.

The issue isn't if you actually "endorse" the destruction or not, the issue is that you're talking to this brainwashed person as if they aren't brain washed and as if you're discussing something like marginal changes to the tax brackets. What you are endorsing though is the idea that the US has been "wronged" somehow and we need to fix that when it's not true at all.

This type of behavior is exactly what allowed a fascist government to take over and I'll be damned if I don't call you out on it.

Auggie wrote:

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 15, 2025

The reality is that, with proper negotiation, there are some tariff imbalances with other countries that we could likely balance to our benefit with the proper approach.

This isn't true whatsoever, yet you said it and it gives credibility to tariffs in general. America has been the single biggest benefactor from the global trade regime over the last 80 years.

The issue isn't if you actually "endorse" the destruction or not, the issue is that you're talking to this brainwashed person as if they aren't brain washed and as if you're discussing something like marginal changes to the tax brackets. What you are endorsing though is the idea that the US has been "wronged" somehow and we need to fix that when it's not true at all.

This type of behavior is exactly what allowed a fascist government to take over and I'll be damned if I don't call you out on it.

Could you explain why what I said isn’t true? I agree that we have been a huge benefactor from global trade. That doesn’t mean there aren’t instances where we could negotiate to lower how much we are being tariffed, to our benefit.

If you read what I’ve posted, it should be clear that I don’t endorse Trump’s approach to global trade at all. I’ve been confident since 2016 he and his administration don’t have the leadership to get this done and we’ll end up worse off.

Personally, I think it’s more beneficial to acknowledge some of the nuances of the tariff discussion with someone like Legendrey that I disagree with.

Your approach is to treat everything like it’s completely black and white and personally insult internet strangers. Everyone can plainly see how far that’s gotten you.

Debaliviere understands that conversations like this are the way out of the issues we face now. And then there are people like Auggie, the ones that got us into this mess to begin with. 

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 15, 2025

Auggie wrote:

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 15, 2025

The reality is that, with proper negotiation, there are some tariff imbalances with other countries that we could likely balance to our benefit with the proper approach.

This isn't true whatsoever, yet you said it and it gives credibility to tariffs in general. America has been the single biggest benefactor from the global trade regime over the last 80 years.

The issue isn't if you actually "endorse" the destruction or not, the issue is that you're talking to this brainwashed person as if they aren't brain washed and as if you're discussing something like marginal changes to the tax brackets. What you are endorsing though is the idea that the US has been "wronged" somehow and we need to fix that when it's not true at all.

This type of behavior is exactly what allowed a fascist government to take over and I'll be damned if I don't call you out on it.

Could you explain why what I said isn’t true? I agree that we have been a huge benefactor from global trade. That doesn’t mean there aren’t instances where we could negotiate to lower how much we are being tariffed, to our benefit.

If you read what I’ve posted, it should be clear that I don’t endorse Trump’s approach to global trade at all. I’ve been confident since 2016 he and his administration don’t have the leadership to get this done and we’ll end up worse off.

Personally, I think it’s more beneficial to acknowledge some of the nuances of the tariff discussion with someone like Legendrey that I disagree with.

Your approach is to treat everything like it’s completely black and white and personally insult internet strangers. Everyone can plainly see how far that’s gotten you.

I haven't personally insulted him unless you think calling him a fascist apologist is a personal insult- which it's not when he's openly defending fascists. You, on the other hand, personally insulted me by implying that I am not an adult. But I don't expect the rules to be enforced fairly.

The idea that we can use tariffs to "our own personal benefit" is not true whatsoever. Even Trump's first tariffs in his first terms, which had the very real benefit of moving manufacturers from China to Vietnam, India, and Mexico, also had the side effects of greatly hurting our already subsidized agricultural industry forcing the government to dumb billions more into their subsidzation and we will continue to do so for years to come since they have never recovered from that trade war followed by the Biden admin keeping on most of the initial tariffs and failing to work with China to remove those barriers. Tariffs will always have a negative side no matter how meticulous you try to be with them, especially if they're not in the context of a broader trade agreement (such as NAFTA or AUSFTA).

Your "approach" has been the exact approach of Democrats for the last 10 years and we see where that got us. So yea I'm kinda done treating Trumpers as if they their brains are not soup.

Auggie wrote:

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 15, 2025

Auggie wrote: This isn't true whatsoever, yet you said it and it gives credibility to tariffs in general. America has been the single biggest benefactor from the global trade regime over the last 80 years.

The issue isn't if you actually "endorse" the destruction or not, the issue is that you're talking to this brainwashed person as if they aren't brain washed and as if you're discussing something like marginal changes to the tax brackets. What you are endorsing though is the idea that the US has been "wronged" somehow and we need to fix that when it's not true at all.

This type of behavior is exactly what allowed a fascist government to take over and I'll be damned if I don't call you out on it.

Could you explain why what I said isn’t true? I agree that we have been a huge benefactor from global trade. That doesn’t mean there aren’t instances where we could negotiate to lower how much we are being tariffed, to our benefit.

If you read what I’ve posted, it should be clear that I don’t endorse Trump’s approach to global trade at all. I’ve been confident since 2016 he and his administration don’t have the leadership to get this done and we’ll end up worse off.

Personally, I think it’s more beneficial to acknowledge some of the nuances of the tariff discussion with someone like Legendrey that I disagree with.

Your approach is to treat everything like it’s completely black and white and personally insult internet strangers. Everyone can plainly see how far that’s gotten you.

I haven't personally insulted him unless you think calling him a fascist apologist is a personal insult- which it's not when he's openly defending fascists. You, on the other hand, personally insulted me by implying that I am not an adult. But I don't expect the rules to be enforced fairly.

The idea that we can use tariffs to "our own personal benefit" is not true whatsoever. Even Trump's first tariffs in his first terms, which had the very real benefit of moving manufacturers from China to Vietnam, India, and Mexico, also had the side effects of greatly hurting our already subsidized agricultural industry forcing the government to dumb billions more into their subsidzation and we will continue to do so for years to come since they have never recovered from that trade war followed by the Biden admin keeping on most of the initial tariffs and failing to work with China to remove those barriers. Tariffs will always have a negative side no matter how meticulous you try to be with them, especially if they're not in the context of a broader trade agreement (such as NAFTA or AUSFTA).

Your "approach" has been the exact approach of Democrats for the last 10 years and we see where that got us. So yea I'm kinda done treating Trumpers as if they their brains are not soup.

I didn’t say anything about using tariffs to our own personal benefit and I don’t endorse further tariffs from us onto other countries. I said we could renegotiate with countries that are tariffing us, to our benefit.

And you do always resort to personal insults. You called the guy brainwashed. If you think that approach is gonna work, take a look back at where your abrasiveness moved the collective sentiment in this forum during the Jones/Spencer debates.

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 15, 2025

Auggie wrote:

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 15, 2025

Could you explain why what I said isn’t true? I agree that we have been a huge benefactor from global trade. That doesn’t mean there aren’t instances where we could negotiate to lower how much we are being tariffed, to our benefit.

If you read what I’ve posted, it should be clear that I don’t endorse Trump’s approach to global trade at all. I’ve been confident since 2016 he and his administration don’t have the leadership to get this done and we’ll end up worse off.

Personally, I think it’s more beneficial to acknowledge some of the nuances of the tariff discussion with someone like Legendrey that I disagree with.

Your approach is to treat everything like it’s completely black and white and personally insult internet strangers. Everyone can plainly see how far that’s gotten you.

I haven't personally insulted him unless you think calling him a fascist apologist is a personal insult- which it's not when he's openly defending fascists. You, on the other hand, personally insulted me by implying that I am not an adult. But I don't expect the rules to be enforced fairly.

The idea that we can use tariffs to "our own personal benefit" is not true whatsoever. Even Trump's first tariffs in his first terms, which had the very real benefit of moving manufacturers from China to Vietnam, India, and Mexico, also had the side effects of greatly hurting our already subsidized agricultural industry forcing the government to dumb billions more into their subsidzation and we will continue to do so for years to come since they have never recovered from that trade war followed by the Biden admin keeping on most of the initial tariffs and failing to work with China to remove those barriers. Tariffs will always have a negative side no matter how meticulous you try to be with them, especially if they're not in the context of a broader trade agreement (such as NAFTA or AUSFTA).

Your "approach" has been the exact approach of Democrats for the last 10 years and we see where that got us. So yea I'm kinda done treating Trumpers as if they their brains are not soup.

I didn’t say anything about using tariffs to our own personal benefit and I don’t endorse further tariffs from us onto other countries. I said we could renegotiate with countries that are tariffing us, to our benefit.

And you do always resort to personal insults. You called the guy brainwashed. If you think that approach is gonna work, take a look back at where your abrasiveness moved the collective sentiment in this forum during the Jones/Spencer debates.

And? Describing how he acts now constitutes.....a personal attack? He has actively done nothing to constitute any of the bullsh*t he spews and to put it in your own words- "has blind faith" in Trump. You're brainwashed if you have blind faith in a person, especially if that person happens to be a grifting fascist.

People like you didn't listen after 2016 or 2020, and now you're refusing to adapt to reality AGAIN. Saying "I'm rooting for" a fascist's take on the fascist government's destruction and then saying "we'll see. Cheers" is beyond abhorrent and utterly useless in combating what's happening in front of our eyes.

You "disagree" with him, but you refuse to provide any evidence to support why he's wrong nor do you make him provide evidence to support why he's right. These types of interactions do nothing but concede ground and will never change anyone's mind because you don't give them a reason to.

At minimum, a combative approach like mine will end with them knowing they can't substantiate their delusions even if it doesn't change their mind.

Your approach (the borader liberal/Democratic approach) has actively sunk the county into fascism, so thank you but I don't think your opinion is very useful when it's been proven to fail on repeat.

Auggie wrote:

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 15, 2025

Auggie wrote: I haven't personally insulted him unless you think calling him a fascist apologist is a personal insult- which it's not when he's openly defending fascists. You, on the other hand, personally insulted me by implying that I am not an adult. But I don't expect the rules to be enforced fairly.

The idea that we can use tariffs to "our own personal benefit" is not true whatsoever. Even Trump's first tariffs in his first terms, which had the very real benefit of moving manufacturers from China to Vietnam, India, and Mexico, also had the side effects of greatly hurting our already subsidized agricultural industry forcing the government to dumb billions more into their subsidzation and we will continue to do so for years to come since they have never recovered from that trade war followed by the Biden admin keeping on most of the initial tariffs and failing to work with China to remove those barriers. Tariffs will always have a negative side no matter how meticulous you try to be with them, especially if they're not in the context of a broader trade agreement (such as NAFTA or AUSFTA).

Your "approach" has been the exact approach of Democrats for the last 10 years and we see where that got us. So yea I'm kinda done treating Trumpers as if they their brains are not soup.

I didn’t say anything about using tariffs to our own personal benefit and I don’t endorse further tariffs from us onto other countries. I said we could renegotiate with countries that are tariffing us, to our benefit.

And you do always resort to personal insults. You called the guy brainwashed. If you think that approach is gonna work, take a look back at where your abrasiveness moved the collective sentiment in this forum during the Jones/Spencer debates.

And? Describing how he acts now constitutes.....a personal attack? Country is ***** if the Democrats keep acting like you.

Democrats engaging in reasonable dialogue with the other side isn’t at all why this country is where it is today. I’m confident your approach hasn’t changed any minds.

Children! Lets get back to the lesson at hand!
St. Louis beer, coffee and whiskey makers prepare for Trump’s tariffs. Your tab may rise.

• Hannah Wyman
• Apr 14, 2025
https://archive.ph/msYXl

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 15, 2025

Auggie wrote:

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 15, 2025

I didn’t say anything about using tariffs to our own personal benefit and I don’t endorse further tariffs from us onto other countries. I said we could renegotiate with countries that are tariffing us, to our benefit.

And you do always resort to personal insults. You called the guy brainwashed. If you think that approach is gonna work, take a look back at where your abrasiveness moved the collective sentiment in this forum during the Jones/Spencer debates.

And? Describing how he acts now constitutes.....a personal attack? Country is ***** if the Democrats keep acting like you.

Democrats engaging in reasonable dialogue with the other side isn’t at all why this country is where it is today. I’m confident your approach hasn’t changed any minds.

"Reasonable discussion" with unreasonable people over unreasonable policies just sounds like definitional insanity.

I also added a large edit that goes in more depth, I know you responded before I added it. Not sure if you'd wanna respond to it.

Two people having a conversation and trying to reason with their opinions is the definition of reasonable. Hijacking a conversation to kick & scream about how only your opinion and experience is the truth is being unreasonable. I try not to engage in these forums very often and you are a big reason why. What is the point of trying to have thoughtful discussions if every time I post I know I'll have to be called names by some random person with too much times on his hands. 

Auggie wrote:

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 15, 2025

Auggie wrote: I haven't personally insulted him unless you think calling him a fascist apologist is a personal insult- which it's not when he's openly defending fascists. You, on the other hand, personally insulted me by implying that I am not an adult. But I don't expect the rules to be enforced fairly.

The idea that we can use tariffs to "our own personal benefit" is not true whatsoever. Even Trump's first tariffs in his first terms, which had the very real benefit of moving manufacturers from China to Vietnam, India, and Mexico, also had the side effects of greatly hurting our already subsidized agricultural industry forcing the government to dumb billions more into their subsidzation and we will continue to do so for years to come since they have never recovered from that trade war followed by the Biden admin keeping on most of the initial tariffs and failing to work with China to remove those barriers. Tariffs will always have a negative side no matter how meticulous you try to be with them, especially if they're not in the context of a broader trade agreement (such as NAFTA or AUSFTA).

Your "approach" has been the exact approach of Democrats for the last 10 years and we see where that got us. So yea I'm kinda done treating Trumpers as if they their brains are not soup.

I didn’t say anything about using tariffs to our own personal benefit and I don’t endorse further tariffs from us onto other countries. I said we could renegotiate with countries that are tariffing us, to our benefit.

And you do always resort to personal insults. You called the guy brainwashed. If you think that approach is gonna work, take a look back at where your abrasiveness moved the collective sentiment in this forum during the Jones/Spencer debates.

And? Describing how he acts now constitutes.....a personal attack? He has actively done nothing to constitute any of the bullsh*t he spews and to put it in your own words- "has blind faith" in Trump. You're brainwashed if you have blind faith in a person, especially if that person happens to be a grifting fascist.

People like you didn't listen after 2016 or 2020, and now you're refusing to adapt to reality AGAIN. Saying "I'm rooting for" a fascist's take on the fascist government's destruction and then saying "we'll see. Cheers" is beyond abhorrent and utterly useless in combating what's happening in front of our eyes.

You "disagree" with him, but you refuse to provide any evidence to support why he's wrong nor do you make him provide evidence to support why he's right. These types of interactions do nothing but concede ground and will never change anyone's mind because you don't give them a reason to.

At minimum, a combative approach like mine will end with them knowing they can't substantiate their delusions even if it doesn't change their mind.

Your approach (the borader liberal/Democratic approach) has actively sunk the county into fascism, so thank you but I don't think your opinion is very useful when it's been proven to fail on repeat.

So engaging in dialogue with the other side isn’t why Trump won in 2016 or 2024 and it’s not what has pushed us towards fascism. You’re making that up. In 2024 I’d say Democrats lost because: 1) They weren’t honest about Bidens cognition, 2) they ran a weak candidate without a primary, 3) and I think a lot of their base was frustrated with their centrist approach to Gaza. There are other reasons. Engaging in dialogue ain’t one of them.

I’m not rooting for fascism. I’m rooting for a better outcome vs a worse one on things like tariffs and DOGE, even though I’m confident that won’t happen. Why would I root for an outcome that would be disastrous to my fellow Americans?Saying “cheers” to someone i disagree with is abhorrent? That’s an insufferable approach to life.

I’ve never refused to provide examples as to why Trumps approach to tariffs or DOGE won’t work either.

There’s plenty of evidence as to why your combative approach won’t work in this forum alone. You are a pariah here for a reason.

While the moderates hesitate, the extremists define things

legendrey wrote: ↑

Apr 15, 2025

Two people having a conversation and trying to reason with their opinions is the definition of reasonable. Hijacking a conversation to kick & scream about how only your opinion and experience is the truth is being unreasonable. I try not to engage in these forums very often and you are a big reason why. What is the point of trying to have thoughtful discussions if every time I post I know I'll have to be called names by some random person with too much times on his hands. 

Dude you've still failed to provide any evidence to support the bullsh*t you're spewing.

There's nothing thoughtful coming from you when it's based on blind faith in dear leader.

The reason you don't engage in these forums is because you're afraid of getting your worldview blown up so you'd rather stay in your bubble.

Auggie is correct. Playing to the center and giving credibility to these moronic arguments is the loser’s way.

We literally just went through this with Liz Cheney. How did that work out?

JaneJacobsGhost wrote:Auggie is correct. Playing to the center and giving credibility to these moronic arguments is the loser’s way.

We literally just went through this with Liz Cheney. How did that work out?

Playing to the center does not equal engaging in dialogue. I agree that centrism has been one of the reasons the Democratic Party is in the position it is in.

But instead of actually debating the merits of Trumps tariff plan or DOGE, like we had started to do, we are now dealing with Auggie blowing up the conversation again.

Haha which one of us is living in their bubble in the certainly left leaning online forum. Be serious. Also you asked me to provide evidence of fraud within the US government.... if you need evidence there you're not thinking logically.

legendrey wrote:Haha which one of us is living in their bubble in the certainly left leaning online forum. Be serious. Also you asked me to provide evidence of fraud within the US government.... if you need evidence there you're not thinking logically.

What you can’t explain though is why you think a man himself convicted of fraud, who fired all the auditors rooting out said fraud, is going to fix it.

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 15, 2025

JaneJacobsGhost wrote:Auggie is correct. Playing to the center and giving credibility to these moronic arguments is the loser’s way.

We literally just went through this with Liz Cheney. How did that work out?

Playing to the center does not equal engaging in dialogue. I agree that centrism has been one of the reasons the Democratic Party is in the position it is in.

But instead of actually debating the merits of Trumps tariff plan or DOGE, like we had started to do, we are now dealing with Auggie blowing up the conversation again.

There are no merits to the tariff plan or DOGE, that’s why both initiatives have been utter failures.

But you don’t ask Legendrey to prove otherwise. You instead make reasonable arguments on his behalf and then debate for him.

JaneJacobsGhost wrote:

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 15, 2025

JaneJacobsGhost wrote:Auggie is correct. Playing to the center and giving credibility to these moronic arguments is the loser’s way.

We literally just went through this with Liz Cheney. How did that work out?

Playing to the center does not equal engaging in dialogue. I agree that centrism has been one of the reasons the Democratic Party is in the position it is in.

But instead of actually debating the merits of Trumps tariff plan or DOGE, like we had started to do, we are now dealing with Auggie blowing up the conversation again.

There are no merits to the tariff plan or DOGE, that’s why both initiatives have been utter failures.

But you don’t ask Legendrey to prove otherwise. You instead make reasonable arguments on his behalf and then debate for him.

Where did I say there are merits to Trumps tariff plan or his DOGE plan?

But I said "Of course it hasn't gone perfectly, were talking about removing inefficiencies and fraud from the US government - that is about as complex as it gets" nothing about that message says they have done what they set out to do or says they will achieve it. But, I differ in the opinion that they are actually trying to do this, the rest of you seem to think there are ulterior motives. Which they may but none of us know for sure.

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 15, 2025

Auggie wrote:

Debaliviere91 wrote: ↑

Apr 15, 2025

I didn’t say anything about using tariffs to our own personal benefit and I don’t endorse further tariffs from us onto other countries. I said we could renegotiate with countries that are tariffing us, to our benefit.

And you do always resort to personal insults. You called the guy brainwashed. If you think that approach is gonna work, take a look back at where your abrasiveness moved the collective sentiment in this forum during the Jones/Spencer debates.

And? Describing how he acts now constitutes.....a personal attack? He has actively done nothing to constitute any of the bullsh*t he spews and to put it in your own words- "has blind faith" in Trump. You're brainwashed if you have blind faith in a person, especially if that person happens to be a grifting fascist.

People like you didn't listen after 2016 or 2020, and now you're refusing to adapt to reality AGAIN. Saying "I'm rooting for" a fascist's take on the fascist government's destruction and then saying "we'll see. Cheers" is beyond abhorrent and utterly useless in combating what's happening in front of our eyes.

You "disagree" with him, but you refuse to provide any evidence to support why he's wrong nor do you make him provide evidence to support why he's right. These types of interactions do nothing but concede ground and will never change anyone's mind because you don't give them a reason to.

At minimum, a combative approach like mine will end with them knowing they can't substantiate their delusions even if it doesn't change their mind.

Your approach (the borader liberal/Democratic approach) has actively sunk the county into fascism, so thank you but I don't think your opinion is very useful when it's been proven to fail on repeat.

So engaging in dialogue with the other side isn’t why Trump won in 2016 or 2024 and it’s not what has pushed us towards fascism. You’re making that up. In 2024 I’d say Democrats lost because: 1) They weren’t honest about Bidens cognition, 2) they ran a weak candidate without a primary, 3) and I think a lot of their base was frustrated with their centrist approach to Gaza. There are other reasons. Engaging in dialogue ain’t one of them.

I’m not rooting for fascism. I’m rooting for a better outcome vs a worse one on things like tariffs and DOGE, even though I’m confident that won’t happen. Why would I root for an outcome that would be disastrous to my fellow Americans?Saying “cheers” to someone i disagree with is abhorrent? That’s an insufferable approach to life.

I’ve never refused to provide examples as to why Trumps approach to tariffs or DOGE won’t work either.

There’s plenty of evidence as to why your combative approach won’t work in this forum alone. You are a pariah here for a reason.

And now you're saying you're rooting that the fascist takeover happens in a "better" way? How in the world is a more competent fascist takeover better than an incompetent fascist takeover? The best hope for this country is that they fail so badly and hurt so many people that they are forced out come 2028.

Just so you know, a combative approach from Democrats would look like doing stuff like calling Trump a "dottering old man who could die at any minute and you're an idiot if you disagree" or "they're sanctioning the genocide of Palestinians as we speak and anyone who supports [Trump/Republicans] is complicit" or "Trump hates you and wants you to die". My combative approach hasn't been used since we'll before the Democrats decided centrism was the way to go. You think FDR got elected 4 times by having "reasonable discussion" with fascists and the Nazi apologists in America?

I'm a pariah here because I'm the only one willing to call out people when they're bullshitting, like you're doing by having "reasonable discussion" with a fascism apologist.