Lucas Moura

[thfcsteff]

I agree, he must be a great person in the dressing room as well as on the pitch.

He certainly brings a very positive energy with him, which is a great thing.

 

[JerusalemMan]

Can you suggest anything liking about Bolsonaro? I’m all eyes (and ears)…

I don't wish to open this particular can of worms anymore and divert another thread from its main topic!
I'll just assert that a person's support of a mainstream politician in a large country should not be automatic grounds for negatively judging their character or them as a person, especially if we aren't absolutely sure precisely which parts of an agenda they may or may not be behind. We've seen the toxicity that has already come from the labelling of Trump or Biden supporters, Corbyn or Johnson voters, pro or anti-Brexit...etc etc.
I hope that there's more of a move away from tribal judgements and towards understanding and appreciation of the individual...aware as I am that there are those who very much prefer identity politics and the definition of people by their labels and groups rather than who they are as a person.

 

[Rorschach]

I don't wish to open this particular can of worms anymore and divert another thread from its main topic!
I'll just assert that a person's support of a mainstream politician in a large country should not be automatic grounds for negatively judging their character or them as a person, especially if we aren't absolutely sure precisely which parts of an agenda they may or may not be behind. We've seen the toxicity that has already come from the labelling of Trump or Biden supporters, Corbyn or Johnson voters, pro or anti-Brexit...etc etc.
I hope that there's more of a move away from tribal judgements and towards understanding and appreciation of the individual...aware as I am that there are those who very much prefer identity politics and the definition of people by their labels and groups rather than who they are as a person.

Yeah but Bolsonaro is not a nice person either. Maybe he has a nice singing voice.

 

[DeanoAustin]

I don't wish to open this particular can of worms anymore and divert another thread from its main topic!
I'll just assert that a person's support of a mainstream politician in a large country should not be automatic grounds for negatively judging their character or them as a person, especially if we aren't absolutely sure precisely which parts of an agenda they may or may not be behind. We've seen the toxicity that has already come from the labelling of Trump or Biden supporters, Corbyn or Johnson voters, pro or anti-Brexit...etc etc.
I hope that there's more of a move away from tribal judgements and towards understanding and appreciation of the individual...aware as I am that there are those who very much prefer identity politics and the definition of people by their labels and groups rather than who they are as a person.

Absolutely this.

A few years ago Shania Twain (a Canadian who can't even vote in the US) was asked in a Guardian interview who she'd have voted for if she were America. She said she'd have voted for Trump because, while not perfect, he gets stuff done and isn't a typical politician. It was towards the end of the interview so the Guardian didn't make much of it. Now, personally, I don't agree with that view but it is a legitimate stance to take and it's worthy of debate.

There was an outcry to the extent that Shania Twain had to apologise for that view.

Whatever you think of Trump, making Twain apologise for her view is anti-democratic. The fella was the elected President of the USA so he had a mandate - to chastise people for that view and make them ashamed of it beggars belief especially when the folks doing the chastising see themselves as defenders of democracy.

 

[markysimmo]

Absolutely this.

A few years ago Shania Twain (a Canadian who can't even vote in the US) was asked in a Guardian interview who she'd have voted for if she were America. She said she'd have voted for Trump because, while not perfect, he gets stuff done and isn't a typical politician. It was towards the end of the interview so the Guardian didn't make much of it. Now, personally, I don't agree with that view but it is a legitimate stance to take and it's worthy of debate.

There was an outcry to the extent that Shania Twain had to apologise for that view.

Whatever you think of Trump, making Twain apologise for her view is anti-democratic. The fella was the elected President of the USA so he had a mandate - to chastise people for that view and make them ashamed of it beggars belief especially when the folks doing the chastising see themselves as defenders of democracy.

That don't impress me much !!
Damn I feel like a woman

 

[Raziel]

Absolutely this.

A few years ago Shania Twain (a Canadian who can't even vote in the US) was asked in a Guardian interview who she'd have voted for if she were America. She said she'd have voted for Trump because, while not perfect, he gets stuff done and isn't a typical politician. It was towards the end of the interview so the Guardian didn't make much of it. Now, personally, I don't agree with that view but it is a legitimate stance to take and it's worthy of debate.

There was an outcry to the extent that Shania Twain had to apologise for that view.

Whatever you think of Trump, making Twain apologise for her view is anti-democratic. The fella was the elected President of the USA so he had a mandate - to chastise people for that view and make them ashamed of it beggars belief especially when the folks doing the chastising see themselves as defenders of democracy.

I disagree, and this is where all the jokes about woke people come in, but the fact clearly was then, and clearly is now that said individual had a history of legally, morally and ethically unacceptable behavior. As an example you cannot back an outright racist (in the US there have been KKK candidates, e.g. David Duke) and not expect to be called on it.

The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly paradoxical idea that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance.

I do not know the extent of Lucas's beliefs, I can tell he's clearly highly religious (normal in Latin society) and most of these ultra right wings prey on that (e.g. "religious issues" like abortion, homosexuality, etc.), was another reason like in an earlier thread I believe we need to start calling out all religion for what it is ..

 

[DeanoAustin]

I disagree, and this is where all the jokes about woke people come in, but the fact clearly was then, and clearly is now that said individual had a history of legally, morally and ethically unacceptable behavior. As an example you cannot back an outright racist (in the US there have been KKK candidates, e.g. David Duke) and not expect to be called on it.

The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly paradoxical idea that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance.

I do not know the extent of Lucas's beliefs, I can tell he's clearly highly religious (normal in Latin society) and most of these ultra right wings prey on that (e.g. "religious issues" like abortion, homosexuality, etc.), was another reason like in an earlier thread I believe we need to start calling out all religion for what it is ..

Do I think Trump has racist tendencies? Yes although I don't believe he is a card carrying member of the KKK. Is he an outright racist to the extent that it was driving his policies? Not in my view. I have little time for Trump as a politician or as a person but he was the choice of one of the two big parties in America, he had ~50m people vote for him and was democratically elected. Like it or not, he had a mandate that was given to him by the very system that the people trying to delegitimise him hold dear.

For people to have to apologise for supporting him is utterly wrong in a democratic society. Debate why he shouldn't be elected, point out his faults and mistakes by all means. But don't try to delegitimise him and half the country by "cancelling" them because, of those that are hardline, they'll become more hardline and that country is polarised enough as it is.

 

[Raziel]

Do I think Trump has racist tendencies? Yes although I don't believe he is a card carrying member of the KKK. Is he an outright racist to the extent that it was driving his policies? Not in my view. I have little time for Trump as a politician or as a person but he was the choice of one of the two big parties in America, he had ~50m people vote for him and was democratically elected. Like it or not, he had a mandate that was given to him by the very system that the people trying to delegitimise him hold dear.

For people to have to apologise for supporting him is utterly wrong in a democratic society. Debate why he shouldn't be elected, point out his faults and mistakes by all means. But don't try to delegitimise him and half the country by "cancelling" them because, of those that are hardline, they'll become more hardline and that country is polarised enough as it is.

I don't know your background or extent of your knowledge of Trump pre his election.

I lived in New York for the decade pre him going to election and everyone in NYC knows/knew what he is, and card carrying members of the KKK would like to be him when they grow up. Look up Central Park 5, five young black men were accused of a crime (wrongly as it was later proven) and Trump took out full page ads (in 1989) in major newspapers not only condemning them but calling for the death penalty to be re-instated specifically to put them to death. He's a blatant racist and there probably isn't a single person in history with more proof to back it up, from the central park 5, to his slum lord practices to his "Mexico is sending rapists brick"

This is exactly the tolerance paradox, you cannot look at someone who voted for Hitler or Goering and say "oh, you are entitled to your point of view, I can see why this guy appeals to you", there are many politicians that tread a line, others don't, the ones who don't who clearly have proof of their behavior, repeatedly, over years are not excusable. You embrace racist, homophobic, misogynist, bigoted points of view, it kind of says what you are.

 

[Gilzeantoscore]

Moura is a multi millionaire, of course he going to support the right winger. If he lived in England, he would be voting for the Tories.

 

[thfcsteff]

I disagree, and this is where all the jokes about woke people come in, but the fact clearly was then, and clearly is now that said individual had a history of legally, morally and ethically unacceptable behavior. As an example you cannot back an outright racist (in the US there have been KKK candidates, e.g. David Duke) and not expect to be called on it.

The paradox of tolerance states that if a society is tolerant without limit, its ability to be tolerant is eventually seized or destroyed by the intolerant. Karl Popper described it as the seemingly paradoxical idea that in order to maintain a tolerant society, the society must be intolerant of intolerance.

I do not know the extent of Lucas's beliefs, I can tell he's clearly highly religious (normal in Latin society) and most of these ultra right wings prey on that (e.g. "religious issues" like abortion, homosexuality, etc.), was another reason like in an earlier thread I believe we need to start calling out all religion for what it is ..

So so true.
Tolerance of all remains important, but standing up to perps of fascist agendas is non-negotiable.

 

[thfcsteff]

Anyway, Moura/Kane/Gil Saturday if Sonny rests up???

 

[markysimmo]

Anyway, Moura/Kane/Gil Saturday if Sonny rests up???

Would think he would go for Stevie B instead of Bryan

 

[DeanoAustin]

'Half the country'? Mate. Not even close. He never won a popular vote. And then we get into other aspects of the voting system which saw him slither across the line. And now we see the billions spent creating bills to further wreck voting rights for all...

It is close Steff. He got 63m votes in 2016 out of a total of 136m votes cast. Hillary got 65m. So that's 46% of votes cast that he got. You can't assume that everyone who doesn't vote, or even the majority of them, wouldn't vote for Trump. Looking at it based on what we know, Trump has almost 50% support in the US for that election.

In 2020, he got 74m out of 158m total votes. Biden got 81m. That's 47% of the votes. Again, unless I'm missing something, you can't assume that most of the non-voters wouldn't support him. I don't like it but any reasonable person would say Trump had almost 50% of the country behind him.

The US system has massive, massive flaws. But it's not Trump's system. He didn't manipulate it, he didn't construct it. He played by the system that's in place for centuries and got democratically elected through it. You can hate that all you want but they're the facts. And as the democratically elected president, he has a mandate. Race didn't blatantly drive his policies. I disliked a lot of what he said and most of what he did. But, for example, he took a hard line on immigration. That in itself is not racist. Countries have a right to tightly control their borders. He said he'd do it in the campaign and he did it. Lots of people support the tightening of the borders in the US. You can't and shouldn't delegitimise those positions because you don't like them. You shouldn't have people feeling ashamed of their support to the extent that they won't talk about it and they feel they have to apologise for it. That's anti-democratic. And I think it's a stretch to compare Trump to the Nazis as has been done in this thread.

I'd also say that a lot of the above applies to the supporters of Brexit. Again, it's not a position I personally support but the way people were demonised for supporting Brexit was wrong - it's anti-democratic.

 

[JerusalemMan]

I made very clear (on this topic) that not only did Lucas not strike as having the most evolved of political views, but that endorsing a Bolsonaro was against the Christianity he stands for (even though B claims to be one).

I simply said such repeated support makes it harder for me to like him beyond the shirt.

You have taken it to the nth degree. Your last paragraph in particular makes it clear you are either riding a point OR trying to land one on me. It is a can of worms you were all in on it feels like, as though you were waiting...err, you said as much!!!!

Indeed I was waiting. As soon as I saw people following up my praise of Lucas, I expected the punchback. And you didn't disappoint.
Not that I posted my happiness with him to provoke, to present a can of worms.

 

[thfcsteff]

Would think he would go for Stevie B instead of Bryan

Indeed, but I thought he was injured?

 

[JerusalemMan]

Let me ask you a question; are you denigrating my right to express a viewpoint? It most certainly appears that way. It also appears you used Lucas as a screen for some 'agenda' you have, in which case either bring it to PM or a new subject thread in random.

Not at all

 

[Raziel]

Anyway, Moura/Kane/Gil Saturday if Sonny rests up???

I think Lucas is nailed on starter (fresh, been training, no travel, decent form)
Looks like Son & Bergwijn are serious doubt (Bergwijn even more so than Son)
I'd like to see if Gil can play

So, yes, I could see us doing Gil, Kane, Lucas.

 

[Raziel]

It is close Steff. He got 63m votes in 2016 out of a total of 136m votes cast. Hillary got 65m. So that's 46% of votes cast that he got. You can't assume that everyone who doesn't vote, or even the majority of them, wouldn't vote for Trump. Looking at it based on what we know, Trump has almost 50% support in the US for that election.

In 2020, he got 74m out of 158m total votes. Biden got 81m. That's 47% of the votes. Again, unless I'm missing something, you can't assume that most of the non-voters wouldn't support him. I don't like it but any reasonable person would say Trump had almost 50% of the country behind him.

The US system has massive, massive flaws. But it's not Trump's system. He didn't manipulate it, he didn't construct it. He played by the system that's in place for centuries and got democratically elected through it. You can hate that all you want but they're the facts. And as the democratically elected president, he has a mandate. Race didn't blatantly drive his policies. I disliked a lot of what he said and most of what he did. But, for example, he took a hard line on immigration. That in itself is not racist. Countries have a right to tightly control their borders. He said he'd do it in the campaign and he did it. Lots of people support the tightening of the borders in the US. You can't and shouldn't delegitimise those positions because you don't like them. You shouldn't have people feeling ashamed of their support to the extent that they won't talk about it and they feel they have to apologise for it. That's anti-democratic. And I think it's a stretch to compare Trump to the Nazis as has been done in this thread.

I'd also say that a lot of the above applies to the supporters of Brexit. Again, it's not a position I personally support but the way people were demonised for supporting Brexit was wrong - it's anti-democratic.

Mate, I'm really trying to be open here

- An immigration policy is not racist, however "mexicans are rapists and hence that is why we need to close the border" is fudging racist
- And race absolutely drove his policies, and a large percentage of the people who voted for him are racists (the classic not all his supporters are racists, but all the racists are his supporters)
- He tried so many executive orders and actions that even an extremely conservative supreme court repeatedly shot down, because it was fudging racist or discriminatory on a ridiculous level
- He calls for the locking up of his political opponents without due process, has tried to pressure foreign governments to go after his political opponents and uses his AG to pursue his own interests (there isn't a democratic bone in the guys fudging body)
- His fudging supporters fly Nazi flags and Trump flags together, how is it a stretch? oh, he's not a Nazi, how about those swastikas then? how about calling on your supporters to overturn an election result?
- If you think that guy wouldn't have made himself president for life, purged political opponents, expelled people with US passports/green cards and broken US democracy for his own gain, you are extremely naïve.

Having a point of view about immigration or taxes or even abortion (which personally I think is flimflam) is fine, but if you find yourself in a rally with everyone else waves fudging Nazi flags and cheering for the locking up of political opponents without due process, you should be fudging ashamed ..

.. anyway .. back to Lucas ..

 

[thfcsteff]

@JerusalemMan @DeanoAustin

I have deleted any posts I made directly regarding politics in this thread/replies.

 

[spasm]

so...Lucas Moura.. needs to move the ball quicker but a great option to run at Palace