EPTThe Dems are making the GOP obstruction look like childs play with the next level move of making the republicans actually attempt to govern.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 8161
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Slaughter
United States20255 Posts
The Dems are making the GOP obstruction look like childs play with the next level move of making the republicans actually attempt to govern. | ||
|
ChristianS
United States3304 Posts
Juxtaposing the BCRA process with the ACA process the Dems can take that line much more believably, which makes me think the obstructionist criticism is just gonna fall flat. Unless voters have absolutely no memory of how the ACA process went, which is possible. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On July 23 2017 09:25 ChristianS wrote: I mean, I'm pretty young and I'm still old enough to remember what the Republican response to the "obstructionist" criticism: the Dems made no effort to include us or our policies. They wouldn't make a deal with us. Juxtaposing the BCRA process with the ACA process the Dems can take that line much more believably, which makes me think the obstructionist criticism is just gonna fall flat. Unless voters have absolutely no memory of how the ACA process went, which is possible. sadly the voters have no memory (or rather, memories tend to be very heavily colored by partisan associations, so they'll remember it differently, regardless of the actual facts of what happened, and will be resistant to people explaining what really happened; and human memory is pretty unreliable in any case). | ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
Kind of like if the Democrats had tried to push a Medicare-for-all bill as the ACA and it had failed because Lieberman and blue dog Democrats said they wouldn't bring it to the floor while 2/3 of the Democrats privately were against the bill, then Obama said the GOP was obstructionist. | ||
ZeromuS
Canada13420 Posts
On July 23 2017 10:09 zlefin wrote: sadly the voters have no memory (or rather, memories tend to be very heavily colored by partisan associations, so they'll remember it differently, regardless of the actual facts of what happened, and will be resistant to people explaining what really happened; and human memory is pretty unreliable in any case). There are people out there that believe obama was in charge when 9/11 happened and that the DNC is part of a child sex ring in a pizza place. Of course voters are going to forget how the ACA went and accept that the dems are obstructing a republican bill in a republican owned house, senate and white house -_- | ||
|
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
| ||
|
thePunGun
598 Posts
It's kinda scary though, the internet's like an angry mob catalyst, when it comes to opinions over facts witch hunts. On both sides of the political spectrum people tend to ignore the facts or at least construe them to fit their agenda. Maybe it's always been this way and it's simply more obvious these days, because of the internet? I don't know... But it really seems like discrediting "the other side" is more important than reality itself, no matter how ridiculous the allegations may be. :/ | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On July 23 2017 13:55 ZeromuS wrote: There are people out there that believe obama was in charge when 9/11 happened and that the DNC is part of a child sex ring in a pizza place. Of course voters are going to forget how the ACA went and accept that the dems are obstructing a republican bill in a republican owned house, senate and white house -_- Meh, I haven't seen too many people besides the Trump core say as much. For the Gorsuch nomination it was a fair criticism because that's exactly what they were doing. But here? Not so much, they're just voting against a bad bill. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On July 24 2017 01:13 thePunGun wrote: In today's world: Facts < Opinions It's kinda scary though, the internet's like an angry mob catalyst, when it comes to opinions over facts witch hunts. On both sides of the political spectrum people tend to ignore the facts or at least construe them to fit their agenda. Maybe it's always been this way and it's simply more obvious these days, because of the internet? I don't know... But it really seems like discrediting "the other side" is more important than reality itself, no matter how ridiculous the allegations may be. :/ it's kind of always been this way, to an extent it swings back and forth between the extremes; and the 1950s period was anomalously the other way. in part it's more obvious these days cuz it's easier to see the crazies on the other side; whereas in the past you might simply not hear about them or ever encounter them. it's also easier for the crazies to find each other, and they become more vocal when they can concentrate. | ||
|
Slydie
2006 Posts
On July 24 2017 02:23 zlefin wrote: it's kind of always been this way, to an extent it swings back and forth between the extremes; and the 1950s period was anomalously the other way. in part it's more obvious these days cuz it's easier to see the crazies on the other side; whereas in the past you might simply not hear about them or ever encounter them. it's also easier for the crazies to find each other, and they become more vocal when they can concentrate. There is a vocal, visible and active extreme right movement going on in a lot of the free world, but countrary to what rightwingers claim, their leftwing counterpart is basically dead. There was a time when substantial movements called for communist revolutions, but especially in the US, being a normal social-democrat by European terms, is being called extreme, blame the other side for that which you are guilty. I also find it hard to compare the lies and conspiracies from the right to those of the left. Who on Clinton's campaign played the part of Alex Jones? Also, producers of ACTUAL fake news, from bogus sites, found it much easier to go viral in right-wing communities. Liberal-friendly fake-stories were tried as well, but they did not generate enough click-traffic, and were generally debunked very fast. Where are the liberal pizzagates, birthers, truthers and "new world order"? | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On July 24 2017 03:10 Slydie wrote: There is a vocal, visible and active extreme right movement going on in a lot of the free world, but countrary to what rightwingers claim, their leftwing counterpart is basically dead. There was a time when substantial movements called for communist revolutions, but especially in the US, being a normal social-democrat by European terms, is being called extreme, blame the other side for that which you are guilty. I also find it hard to compare the lies and conspiracies from the right to those of the left. Who on Clinton's campaign played the part of Alex Jones? there's certainly not mcuh communist revolution stuff anymore; but there's antifa. i'm sure there's quite a few crazy leftists around of various stripes; though how violent they are I don't know, i'd have to research some. the US is simply more rightward in general than some parts of europe are; though the US is leftward of many other nations. i'm not sure anyone on clinton's campaign played such a part; cuz clinton is sane, but if you looked at Jill Stein's campaign, I'm sure there are some similar lies and conspiracies and misinformations, though not to as great a degree, there's still quite a few of them. and i'm sure there's leftist equivalents of alex jones. | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28892 Posts
| ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On July 24 2017 03:34 Liquid`Drone wrote: Who would that be? I'm not disputing that there are crazy conspiratorial leftists out there, but the crazy part about Alex Jones isn't how crazy he is, it's how he wields any degree of influence. For there to be a leftist equivalent of Alex Jones, he'd have to be sufficiently famous for us to know about him, and I don't know of any. offhand, I do not know. people tend to be more aware of the crazies on the other side than on their own side, so maybe someone who's very right-leaning on here could point out some candidates. from what I do know, they aren't near as influential as alex jones, though probably do have some viewership. certainly the (far) right has a greater disdain for facts and reality than the far left in the current climate in america. and they've been pushing the nonsense for quite awhile. perhaps it takes pushing this stuff for decades to reach alex jones level of crazy while also having influence? | ||
|
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
On July 24 2017 03:34 Liquid`Drone wrote: Who would that be? I'm not disputing that there are crazy conspiratorial leftists out there, but the crazy part about Alex Jones isn't how crazy he is, it's how he wields any degree of influence. For there to be a leftist equivalent of Alex Jones, he'd have to be sufficiently famous for us to know about him, and I don't know of any. The problem isn't Alex Jones pushing nonsense. The problem is the President pushing Uranium One like it hasn't been debunked two years ago. Flip back a few pages and you can see Kwark's longform takedown with something like 10 links to actual facts showing how ridiculous it is. The highest levels of Government (President Trump) and the Conservatainment universe (Hannity) push post-fact narratives that never die, no matter how many times you try to beat the truth into them. To the point about the left, the post-truth left has largely moved on to be an anti-Russian-collusion cheerleading squad. Check out The Young Turks or The Intercept or Jill Stein or Dennis Kucinish. All of them are in unison pushing the idea that somehow Russia didn't intervene in the 2016 election and Trump certainly didn't collude with them (documentary evidence from Don JR is selectively ignored). Something fun to think about, consider who runs/ran the label 'anti-war' and recall who ran that label back in 2006-2008 era. Now think of a ven diagram of the 'anti-war' people and the Russia-2016-interference-deniers. It ends up being the same people. | ||
|
Slydie
2006 Posts
On July 24 2017 04:04 Wulfey_LA wrote: The problem isn't Alex Jones pushing nonsense. The problem is the President pushing Uranium One like it hasn't been debunked two years ago. Flip back a few pages and you can see Kwark's longform takedown with something like 10 links to actual facts showing how ridiculous it is. The highest levels of Government (President Trump) and the Conservatainment universe (Hannity) push post-fact narratives that never die, no matter how many times you try to beat the truth into them. To the point about the left, the post-truth left has largely moved on to be an anti-Russian-collusion cheerleading squad. Check out The Young Turks or The Intercept or Jill Stein or Dennis Kucinish. All of them are in unison pushing the idea that somehow Russia didn't intervene in the 2016 election and Trump certainly didn't collude with them (documentary evidence from Don JR is selectively ignored). Something fun to think about, consider who runs/ran the label 'anti-war' and recall who ran that label back in 2006-2008 era. Now think of a ven diagram of the 'anti-war' people and the Russia-2016-interference-deniers. It ends up being the same people. In 2 minutes, I actually found this guy: https://www.youtube.com/user/MaoistRebelNews2 An actual Canadian left-extremist on youtube. I am not quite sure if he is trolling, but it looks like he is trying very hard to get attention! You guys are right though, the main difference is the right-wing nut-cases having much more influence. He is in fact so fringe that he is not even worth attacking, few of his videos has more than 2k views. | ||
|
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
On July 24 2017 04:14 Slydie wrote: In 2 minutes, I actually found this guy: https://www.youtube.com/user/MaoistRebelNews2 An actual Canadian left-extremist on youtube. I am not quite sure if he is trolling, but it looks like he is trying very hard to get attention! You guys are right though, the main difference is the right-wing nut-cases having much more influence. He is in fact so fringe that he is not even worth attacking, few of his videos has more than 2k views. The guy you cited is a perfect example of my second point. Check out his list of videos. It fits perfectly into the Russia-2016-interference-deniers narratives. He pushes DNC-Ukraine collusion as some kind of alternative. He blames HRC for assassinating people. And he even has some pro-Russia propaganda about the Donbass in there. Can you see how the 'anti-war' left seems to conveniently buy into every Russia/RT pushed storyline? It lines up like clockwork every time. TYT, Intercept, Jill Stein, Kucinich, and even these lesser guys just happen to always push the same thing. | ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
| ||
|
Tachion
Canada8573 Posts
On July 24 2017 04:23 Wulfey_LA wrote: The guy you cited is a perfect example of my second point. Check out his list of videos. It fits perfectly into the Russia-2016-interference-deniers narratives. He pushes DNC-Ukraine collusion as some kind of alternative. He blames HRC for assassinating people. And he even has some pro-Russia propaganda about the Donbass in there. Can you see how the 'anti-war' left seems to conveniently buy into every Russia/RT pushed storyline? It lines up like clockwork every time. TYT, Intercept, Jill Stein, Kucinich, and even these lesser guys just happen to always push the same thing. Jill Stein I can understand given her personal involvement in the matter, but what is the rational behind those other left-wing outlets denying the Russia narrative? | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
mozoku
United States708 Posts
The reason right-wing extremism is more prevalent currently is probably due to a number of factors. The failure of communism worldwide combined with the cultural after-effects of the Red Scare likely dealt a strong blow to left-wing extremism. Conversely, the fact that the US never had a real fascist movement probably resulted in the anti-facist/anti-nationalist sentiment in the US being somewhat suppressed relative to Europe. In addition to the fact that the costs of WW2 (caused by facism/nationalism) were much heavier in Europe than in the US, so the historical scars don't run as deep. As for the conspiracy theories, it's probably due to the makeup of the the two parties in the current time period. The Left is made up primarily of minorities (who tend to be less interested in politics) and educated whites--education tends to lessen belief in/acceptance of conspiracy theories. The moderate establishment Right (who are also usually college educated) is much less interested in conspiracy theories. Again conversely, the largest faction of the right is working class whites, who are both less educated and relatively politically active. These are generalizations but probably explain the trend. | ||
| ||
