EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 156
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
iamthedave
England2814 Posts
| ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
On May 01 2018 04:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: It's 100% spot on. Ivanka has been absolutely useless in supporting women, which was the exact analogy MW was making. She was gifted a position of power and is doing nothing with it. I can't remember if she said something about planning to do exactly that. If so my following statement is void. Just because she's a woman in power doesn't mean she automatically has to focus on supporting women in general. She can just do whatever she likes or her skillset enables her to do with that position. It, in my opinion, can be contrary to the cause to focus on / reduce her to her gender instead of, idk, helping restore world peace through her incredible diplomatic abilities. Or whatever she's know for, I have no idea. There shouldn't be an obligation for women to dedicate their time to enable other women to follow their steps. This should be a consequence of them being there in the first place. Maybe MW alludes to her doing a completely shitty job in whatever she's doing and thus does nothing for women. I could actually understand her reasoning from this point of view. | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
On May 01 2018 05:20 Artisreal wrote: I can't remember if she said something about planning to do exactly that. If so my following statement is void. Just because she's a woman in power doesn't mean she automatically has to focus on supporting women in general. She can just do whatever she likes or her skillset enables her to do with that position. It, in my opinion, can be contrary to the cause to focus on / reduce her to her gender instead of, idk, helping restore world peace through her incredible diplomatic abilities. Or whatever she's know for, I have no idea. There shouldn't be an obligation for women to dedicate their time to enable other women to follow their steps. This should be a consequence of them being there in the first place. Maybe MW alludes to her doing a completely shitty job in whatever she's doing and thus does nothing for women. I could actually understand her reasoning from this point of view. She wrote a book called "Women who Work" and she's stated goals of getting paid parental leave among other woman focused issues. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivanka_Trump#Political_involvement_and_role_in_the_Trump_administration covers other aspects of it. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
 | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On May 01 2018 05:06 Dromar wrote: In retrospect, you're right. It wasn't a personal attack. I think it seemed like a personal attack to me when I heard it because I think Michelle's tone is off (personally I think she's not a very good comedian, but that's neither here nor there). My statement was a bit more general though. I dislike it when comedians make fun of Eric Trump for being stupid or looking like a serial killer, or even stuff like making fun of Chris Christie for being fat. Whether or not those things are true is irrelevant, but those are examples of things I think are tasteless and it happens all the time on Seth Meyers or Colbert's Late Show, etc. But in regards to Ivanka, I'll concede the point. I guess it's easy to forget that she has a position in the white house for which she's doing (presumably) nothing, as opposed to just being part of the royal family, as it were. Ultimately, a lot of things about the state of US politics really disgust me right now, but I find it I think to a degree Michelle does make it personal, like she has some true bad feelings towards her subjects which she allows herself to show in her performance. It gives her performance a little more of a bite than it would have otherwise. I lean toward that being a little unprofessional/ "eh maybe she shouldn't have done that" but I don't think it's ultimately a huge issue. | ||
|
IyMoon
United States1249 Posts
On May 01 2018 05:41 ticklishmusic wrote: I think to a degree Michelle does make it personal, like she has some true bad feelings towards her subjects which she allows herself to show in her performance. It gives her performance a little more of a bite than it would have otherwise. I lean toward that being a little unprofessional/ "eh maybe she shouldn't have done that" but I don't think it's ultimately a huge issue. While I agree you could tell who she did not like, I don't thin that makes her unprofessional. If your job is to go up and tell jokes it isn't bad if some of those jokes sting. She blamed CNN for destroying american news, and I am supposed to be pissed off she commented on someones perfect smoky eye? Come on now | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23957 Posts
On May 01 2018 05:41 ticklishmusic wrote: I think to a degree Michelle does make it personal, like she has some true bad feelings towards her subjects which she allows herself to show in her performance. It gives her performance a little more of a bite than it would have otherwise. I lean toward that being a little unprofessional/ "eh maybe she shouldn't have done that" but I don't think it's ultimately a huge issue. I didn't see anything even remotely objectionable in her act. She was a little nervous about dragging an entire room that didn't even know who she was, but she spoke more truth to power than any of the 'journalists' in that room have for a long time. On May 01 2018 05:55 IyMoon wrote: While I agree you could tell who she did not like, I don't thin that makes her unprofessional. If your job is to go up and tell jokes it isn't bad if some of those jokes sting. She blamed CNN for destroying american news, and I am supposed to be pissed off she commented on someones perfect smoky eye? Come on now Pretty sure the CNN thing is a semi throwback to the reference in Anchorman 2 But they are pretty damn bad. I mean look at this write up from CNN on the WHCD It's so weird to see so many people project their feelings about SHS's looks onto her jokes which weren't at all insulting her looks. | ||
|
A3th3r
United States319 Posts
On May 01 2018 01:01 Mohdoo wrote: I love how conservatives felt like it was a good idea to adopt the whole "We just tell it like it is! Me and muh boy Cletus ain't give no damn if we offend y'all snowflakes!" only to immediately go into the fetal position as soon as a *comedian* starts laying into them. The event specifically calls for below the belt jabs. This is the intended purpose. It's like the entire idea of being made uncomfortable is 100% off the table for these people. Yes. The whole issue is that comedy is offensive and people make jokes to mask their true feelings on controversial subjects. So part of the deal is that if ppl are making jokes about their opponents, other people might also make fun of them, too. Generally what happens is that folks will just avoid the topics that they think are "taboo," such as politics, sex, drugs & alcohol, or perhaps tread carefully. So I guess that Trump doesn't necessarily have much of an agenda of his own, but is cutting deals with people who do have an agenda that they are following & paying attention to, such as gun rights or legal emigration. This is a good thing for a president to do. The Republican party is in a bit of a crisis, it seems, because there is a lot of chaos going on in the world. I continue to think that Trump is spending too much time cutting deals & not enough time managing his policy positions and going about the business of governing. I worry that there will be a backslide of the Democratic party in those upcoming November primaries, such as what Obama dealt with halfway through his 2nd term. Definitely the democrats are primed to win some very, very key victories coming up real soon here & the Republicans may have to deal with some mid-term losses. https://newrepublic.com/article/148142/republican-party-not-trump-real-threat-american-democracy | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On May 01 2018 06:05 A3th3r wrote: Yes. The whole issue is that comedy is offensive and people make jokes to mask their true feelings on controversial subjects. So part of the deal is that if ppl are making jokes about their opponents, other people might also make fun of them, too. Generally what happens is that folks will just avoid the topics that they think are "taboo," such as politics, sex, drugs & alcohol. So I guess that Trump doesn't necessarily have much of an agenda of his own, but is cutting deals with people who do have an agenda that they are following & paying attention to, such as gun rights or legal emigration. This is a good thing for a president to do. The Republican party is in a bit of a crisis, it seems, because there is a lot of chaos going on in the world. I continue to think that Trump is spending too much time cutting deals & not enough time managing his policy positions and going about the business of governing. I worry that there will be a backslide of the Democratic party in those upcoming November primaries, such as what Obama dealt with halfway through his 2nd term. Definitely the democrats are primed to win some very, very key victories coming up real soon here. https://newrepublic.com/article/148142/republican-party-not-trump-real-threat-american-democracy it's very normal and expected for the president's party to lose seats in congress. also trump isn't really "cutting deals" so much as doing stuff people tell him to do (sometimes). that's different from doing the actual work of coming up with a deal and getting people to go along with it. | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9057 Posts
| ||
|
Djabanete
United States2786 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18857 Posts
On May 01 2018 06:24 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: So trump is pushing for congressional term limits. I can get behind that. I'm sure we can all agree that should have been implemented long ago. Absolutely not, legislative term limits are a terrible idea and their effect in states that have implemented them, namely that they guarantee that the only entities with a perpetual seat at the dealmaking tables are lobbyists, bears this out in real time as we speak. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23957 Posts
On May 01 2018 06:05 A3th3r wrote: Yes. The whole issue is that comedy is offensive and people make jokes to mask their true feelings on controversial subjects. So part of the deal is that if ppl are making jokes about their opponents, other people might also make fun of them, too. Generally what happens is that folks will just avoid the topics that they think are "taboo," such as politics, sex, drugs & alcohol. So I guess that Trump doesn't necessarily have much of an agenda of his own, but is cutting deals with people who do have an agenda that they are following & paying attention to, such as gun rights or legal emigration. This is a good thing for a president to do. The Republican party is in a bit of a crisis, it seems, because there is a lot of chaos going on in the world. I continue to think that Trump is spending too much time cutting deals & not enough time managing his policy positions and going about the business of governing. I worry that there will be a backslide of the Democratic party in those upcoming November primaries, such as what Obama dealt with halfway through his 2nd term. Definitely the democrats are primed to win some very, very key victories coming up real soon here. https://newrepublic.com/article/148142/republican-party-not-trump-real-threat-american-democracy I found this part interesting. But some Trump critics lately have argued that he’s not the disease at all. “The problems we face run deeper than the Trump presidency,” Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, the Harvard political scientists and authors of the recent book How Democracies Die, wrote in The New York Times in January. “While Mr. Trump’s autocratic impulses have fueled our political system’s mounting crisis, he is as much a symptom as he is a cause of this crisis.” Leftist have been saying this since before he even won. The crisis, as they see it, is that “the norms that once protected our institutions are coming unmoored.” Or, as Vox’ Dylan Matthews put it in a column earlier this week: “the death loop that American democracy appears to be trapped in.” But American democracy as a whole remains healthy, as seen in the robust resistance to Trump within the government, the courts, and the public at large. The disease is localized within the Republican Party. Which is why, if indeed American democracy is in a death loop, any solution must not focus solely on ousting Trump, but on punishing and reforming the GOP. Then they immediately get it wrong by presuming the Republicans could do this without Democrats being so awful. Anyone who thinks we can fix the sickness that led to Trump, while ignoring Democrats, hasn't been paying attention to how we actually got here. One clear sign is the attempted undermining of democratic primaries and now they are trying their "promote the Republican you want to face" in WV (worked great in 2016 right?) National Democrats launched a campaign Thursday to intervene in the upcoming West Virginia Senate GOP primary — an effort that could be designed to help recently imprisoned coal baron Don Blankenship win the Republican nomination. www.politico.com | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 01 2018 06:25 Djabanete wrote: I read the transcript. The only joke that came close to crossing a line was the joke about Conway. The ones about Huckabee Sanders and Ivanka Trump were fine, unless lying, nepotism, and job performance are things we can't talk about anymore. The whole point of the correspondents' dinner is to roast people. What did they expect? Doesn't this happen every year? Last year they didn’t attend at all and they had only been in office for two months. We had not reach peek lying and nepotism at that point. He wasn’t nominating the first military doctor he saw to be the head of the VA, for instance. We had not experienced the “fine people” comment about dudes holding Nazi flags. It was harsh, but not harsh in a way that was directed at specific people. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On May 01 2018 06:25 Djabanete wrote: I read the transcript. The only joke that came close to crossing a line was the joke about Conway. The ones about Huckabee Sanders and Ivanka Trump were fine, unless lying, nepotism, and job performance are things we can't talk about anymore. The whole point of the correspondents' dinner is to roast people. What did they expect? Doesn't this happen every year? People on the right hold hierarchy and reverence of superiors as really core ideas. When you disrespect the authority, it is seen as a disrespect to the whole. This kind of thinking gets particularly pumped into brains from attending church and other spiritual things that hold certain ideas as infallible and untouchable. When you are raised to not question the church, it is easy to transfer that kind of thinking to the executive branch. Trump is their *leader* and by being their leader, there is a certain switch that gets flipped when dealing with criticism. Especially when it is made personal as is always the case in correspondence dinners. Things end up being "too far" when it becomes an actual scathing criticism of a figure of authority. People would/have responded similarly to criticisms of church pastors and the like. | ||
|
IyMoon
United States1249 Posts
The man has as much courage as the lion in the wizard of oz | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On May 01 2018 06:56 IyMoon wrote: One part I liked from the dinner, and one thing I think the Dems need to do more is call trump a coward. They need to point out how really he is just a sad little man who won't go after things face to face. He likes to sit and tweet and can't stand when someone says anything mean about him. The man has as much courage as the lion in the wizard of oz I don't think this line of attack will work on the people who we are trying to convince. They see him as macho, overly so, as proven by his harsh remarks on NK. By being loud and outspoken, you are going to deeply struggle to convince red hats he is anything but a macho alpha male. As others have said "Trump is the dumb man's impression of what a smart man is". His message is well adapted to the people he is trying to bring into his following. Cambridge did their research and all of the phrases he uses are already shown to be effective on who he is trying to convince. Democrats are better off contrasting their visions with his and trying to show why their policy is good policy. Trying to offer an entirely different perspective on Trump will probably just get you ignored. | ||
|
IyMoon
United States1249 Posts
On May 01 2018 07:18 Mohdoo wrote: I don't think this line of attack will work on the people who we are trying to convince. They see him as macho, overly so, as proven by his harsh remarks on NK. By being loud and outspoken, you are going to deeply struggle to convince red hats he is anything but a macho alpha male. As others have said "Trump is the dumb man's impression of what a smart man is". His message is well adapted to the people he is trying to bring into his following. Cambridge did their research and all of the phrases he uses are already shown to be effective on who he is trying to convince. Democrats are better off contrasting their visions with his and trying to show why their policy is good policy. Trying to offer an entirely different perspective on Trump will probably just get you ignored. I am not saying make it a huge talking point (I agree, that would be bad) But a coward hates being called a coward and even just a small bit of it could cause some missteps that keeps independents away | ||
|
mierin
United States4943 Posts
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dr-gridlock/wp/2018/04/30/american-airlines-passenger-the-cops-were-called-on-me-for-flying-while-fat-black/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.1a11d7e54439 There were the standard people saying "oh she's just playing the black card" and then the counter "you're a racist" etc. I guess I'm honestly fishing for a GH response, but here's my take on this. I'd like some honest discussion. + Show Spoiler + The problem here is, when the system is stacked against you you get trained to take any advantage you can to get by. Here's a "white person" take on why this is the case. I used to be the brightest-eyed, most helpful/skillful IT employee with nothing but the best intentions, but quickly learned that going above and beyond only created an expectation that I would be excellent, but that didn't come with a pay raise or anything like that, so it basically turned into "get overtime for overachieving." Years later, I still get paid my overtime even though I don't actually work it. If my employer thinks I'm busy and providing a service that's needed, they'll pay me for my time. Once upon a time I was really working 12-15 hrs a day and doing my best to help people. Now, because I have a reputation for basically working miracles, my company doesn't say anything when I claim OT even though I haven't recently done a darn thing to deserve it. Is this gaming the system? Of course it is! But the system (in my opinion) was gaming me all along, so it "deserves" it in some right. So this black woman plays "the black card" to get attention and/or money for her issue. For me I totally understand where she's coming from--if there's anything at all you can do to get ahead in life, why not do it? If you feel that the cards are stacked against you, yet you can "count cards" and come up with a winning solution, why not go for it?. Does it maybe undermine a cause for everyone while doing it? Sure, now people have become desensitized to racism and feel that whenever someone points it out, it's "pulling the race card" and immediately discounts it. But personally this woman and other people benefit. How is what I do any different? I guess I could be adversely affecting perception of IT people everywhere. "They laze around and claim OT for things they don't actually do." But if they aren't paid enough / recognized for doing that in the first place, what's the problem here? The IT person, or the system? It's a really complicated issue, and I know that's not the same as institutionalized racism but this is me as a white person thinking I understand a little bit why people are prone to pulling "the race card" even though it isn't necessarily logically "warranted". When you feel like you can't win no matter what cards you play, "cheating" becomes a much more palatable option. | ||
| ||
