Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

spacenews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 799 posts

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#221

Post by bobxmax »

Retric wrote: post #214
bobxmax wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's naive and you know it. A massive drive for him was electing the first black president. A less, but still not-insignificant drive was for Hillary as the first female president.

I’d be shocked if Hilary had a net benefit being a female candidate. We’ve had 2 chances to elect a female president and they both lost the general election with not that great turnout. John McCain’s VP was female during 08 and he lost by a huge margin.

Hillary and Kamala got boosts from being a woman. They just had a massive drop because of, especially in Hillary's case, being deeply unlikeable.

Kamala probably wins in 2016.

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#222

Post by pessimist »

bobxmax wrote: post #202
pessimist wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It turns out that when elections are fought on the basis of identity (race, religion) etc corruption is actually considered a benefit! This is because the loyalists interpret this as "we" are winning and "they" are losing. I witnessed this up close in India where parties openly exist to benefit certain constituencies based on caste, language, religion and so on. It is horrifying to see this attitude take root in my a…

[flagged]

Yes, both parties do it. In California for example left-wing politics is openly racist and I have sympathy for even the crazy republicans here.

However to defend Obama - he explictly ran on unity and went out of his away to not openly benefit his own race.

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#223

Post by bobxmax »

Daishiman wrote: post #219
bobxmax wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you clarify what Trump's 2016 had to do with race

The resentment of a chunk of white Americans who for some reason did not like having a black president.

You can't claim that while claiming wanting to elect a black president wasn't a big driver in much of the turnout for Obama. There were multiple musicians literally making songs about finally being able to elect a black president.

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#224

Post by nickpsecurity »

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #42

It's wild that a president can say, "I don't like Elon anymore, so out of retaliation, I'm canceling all his government contracts," and ~40% of the country doesn't see that as corruption in any way, shape, or form. Government contracts should not be based on whether or not the president likes the CEO, and the CEO says enough good things about the president. If you can cancel contacts not based on merit, then it shoul…

It's been going on a long time. Democrats and Republicans, especially in the Pentagon, have bought influence of politicians to get billions of tax dollars.

So you should change the comment to say "most Democrat and Republican voters in the primaries apparently wont vote out those who give or take bribes." That would be correct.

Jethro's advice to Moses in God's Word is still good advice for voters today. If a politician ever meets this criteria, then we'll see amazing things happen. That's below with verse 21 highlighted:

"19 Now obey my voice; I will give you advice, and God be with you! You shall represent the people before God and bring their cases to God, 20 and you shall warn them about the statutes and the laws, and make them know the way in which they must walk and what they must do. 21 Moreover, look for able men from all the people, men who fear God, who are trustworthy and hate a bribe, and place such men over the people as chiefs of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties, and of tens. 22 And let them judge the people at all times. Every great matter they shall bring to you, but any small matter they shall decide themselves. So it will be easier for you, and they will bear the burden with you. 23 If you do this, God will direct you, you will be able to endure, and all this people also will go to their place in peace.” (Exodus 18:19-23) (ESV)

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#225

Post by bobxmax »

pessimist wrote: post #222
bobxmax wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Yes, both parties do it. In California for example left-wing politics is openly racist and I have sympathy for even the crazy republicans here. However to defend Obama - he explictly ran on unity and went out of his away to not openly benefit his own race.

Yeah I mean to be clear, I think Obama was a remarkable leader and it's hard to believe he once occupied the same seat DJT does today

He didn't explicitly use his race (the way Hillary often used her gender), but many who campaigned for him and large parts of his caucuses did. For better or for worse.

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#228

Post by Retric »

bobxmax wrote: post #221
Retric wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d be shocked if Hilary had a net benefit being a female candidate. We’ve had 2 chances to elect a female president and they both lost the general election with not that great turnout. John McCain’s VP was female during 08 and he lost by a huge margin.

Hillary and Kamala got boosts from being a woman. They just had a massive drop because of, especially in Hillary's case, being deeply unlikeable. Kamala probably wins in 2016.

> Hillary and Clinton got boosts

It’s Hillary and Kamala Harris.

I’m not saying they don’t get some voters from being women, the point is they also lost votes from being women.

I think a rotting corps might have won in 2016, but 4 years later vs a women and suddenly he’s doing great.

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#229

Post by clumsysmurf »

pessimist wrote: post #153
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #42

It's wild that a president can say, "I don't like Elon anymore, so out of retaliation, I'm canceling all his government contracts," and ~40% of the country doesn't see that as corruption in any way, shape, or form. Government contracts should not be based on whether or not the president likes the CEO, and the CEO says enough good things about the president. If you can cancel contacts not based on merit, then it shoul…

It turns out that when elections are fought on the basis of identity (race, religion) etc corruption is actually considered a benefit! This is because the loyalists interpret this as "we" are winning and "they" are losing. I witnessed this up close in India where parties openly exist to benefit certain constituencies based on caste, language, religion and so on. It is horrifying to see this attitude take root in my a…

> corruption is actually considered a benefit! This is because the loyalists interpret this as "we" are winning and "they" are losing.

I think the end goal is domination. From https://mastodon.social/@JuliusGoat/109551955251655267 :

It’s best to understand that fascists see hypocrisy as a virtue. It’s how they signal that the things they are doing to people were never meant to be equally applied.

It’s not an inconsistency. It’s very consistent to the only true fascist value, which is domination.

It’s very important to understand, fascists don’t just see hypocrisy as a necessary evil or an unintended side-effect.

It’s the purpose. The ability to enjoy yourself the thing you’re able to deny others, because you dominate, is the whole point.

For fascists, hypocrisy is a great virtue — the greatest.

https://hac.bard.edu/amor-mundi/hypocrisy-and-fascism-2018-0...

Re: Musk-Trump dispute includes threats to SpaceX contracts

#230

Post by paulryanrogers »

bobxmax wrote: post #223
Daishiman wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The resentment of a chunk of white Americans who for some reason did not like having a black president.

You can't claim that while claiming wanting to elect a black president wasn't a big driver in much of the turnout for Obama. There were multiple musicians literally making songs about finally being able to elect a black president.

Obama was genuinely qualified to be president. Trump was clearly unfit in 2016 (having never held elected office and run nearly all his businesses into the ground), and constitutionally disqualified after Jan 6 2021.

Trump was also reluctant to denounce or criticize white nationalists. He repeated and reposted neo-Nazi content and phrases. He is the one ordering a zealous yet haphazard dismantling of anything that breathes the words racial equity, and without a hint of pushback from his voters.

Post reply on HN