|
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 |
Idk everyone's still treating this like a court case when it's a political debate. Trump will be impeached if it convinces a huge chunk of his base that he's guilty (which it obviously won't). It may affect the race if it causes a bunch of swing voters to turn on him.
He's guilty as hell but the charges are technical enough that I suspect the average rural American can be convinced it's the presidential version of a parking ticket, and damn, doesn't everyone hate the guys who hand out parking tickets.
The boomer memes are very likely the most powerful thing in the room.
|
Norway28558 Posts
Falling, do people want to be led because that is the natural state of a certain % of people or because they have grown up accustomed to being subordinate?
I would also argue that there is a strong relation between claiming that something is natural and claiming that we should not aim to change it, although I also see the argument that 'civilization' entails the deliberate creation of social structures that limit our worst 'natural' traits and that awareness of those natural traits is important to accurately design those social structures, that argument hinges on the acceptance of my primary argument - that culture generally supersedes nature.
|
Northern Ireland23825 Posts
On November 14 2019 07:20 Liquid`Drone wrote: Falling, do people want to be led because that is the natural state of a certain % of people or because they have grown up accustomed to being subordinate?
I would also argue that there is a strong relation between claiming that something is natural and claiming that we should not aim to change it, although I also see the argument that 'civilization' entails the deliberate creation of social structures that limit our worst 'natural' traits and that awareness of those natural traits is important to accurately design those social structures, that argument hinges on the acceptance of my primary argument - that culture generally supersedes nature. Humans are ‘naturally’ going to assume roles that they’re suited into for the collective good of the ‘tribe’, which isn’t necessarily top/down power hierarchy either. I have a rather dominant relation with my son for example, but he’s 6 so I rather need that to be the case. But that’s temporary as he grows up, I’m not his boss or his leader, nor do I have any desire to be.
Most other arguments about what human nature is as it pertains to modern societies are rather tenuous to me, given research I’ve read seems to indicate that humans are relatively hard capped at a number of people we can form proper social bonds with and maintain at any particular time.
Huge nation states are something we can only be a part of as some kind of extraction, we’re not actually connected so how hierarchies form and are maintained is divorced from how ‘natural’ humans function.
Threw a few terms I don’t really like using/find a bit vague in quotation marks, but I think you get the general idea.
|
I would hold fairly loosely what humans were like pre-10,000 because it's part of our history we know almost jack-all. We know the diets of people pre-10000 because of the fossil records of what plants and animals were available to them. The development of agriculture is the foundation for our modern civilization simply because it gave humans enough food to support larger populations.
they at least had the decency to write things down Most people point to the game of telephone to imply that oral traditions are extremely unreliable, yet there are numerous modern examples such as the aboriginals of Australia to the bushmen of Africa that tell very consistent and accurate events in the past. Plato even defends the validity of oral traditions against writing in Phaedrus, stating that the pharaoh Thamus criticized the gift of writing from the god Thoth as causing people to become more careless and forgetful.
|
A new 2020 democratic contender has entered the fray. https://www.yahoo.com/news/deval-patrick-former-massachusetts-governor-115229763.html
Deval Patrick, who made history after becoming Massachusetts’ first black governor, threw his name into the 2020 Democratic presidential election Thursday.
In a video released Thursday morning, Patrick, 63, played up his poor upbringing on the South Side of Chicago and traced his journey to the "American Dream," the path to which is "closing off," he said.
"I admire and respect the candidates in the Democratic field, they bring a richness of ideas and experience and a depth of character that makes me proud to be a Democrat," he said. "But if the character of the candidates is an issue in every election, this time is about the character of the country."
Patrick made a passing reference to President Donald Trump, but did not mention him by name. The election, he said, is "about more than removing an unpopular and divisive leader" but about "delivering instead for you."
Election 2020: In California's 2020 primary, Latino voters could help Democrats defeat President Trump
Patrick is a close ally of former President Barack Obama, and previously explored a bid for the presidency before deciding not to run.
In August 2018, allies of Patrick launched a political action committee called Reason to Believe, and Patrick spent time ahead of the 2018 midterms stumping for Democratic candidates.
But in December, Patrick took his name out of the running, citing “the cruelty of our elections process.”
"I’ve been overwhelmed by advice and encouragement from people from all over the country, known and unknown. Humbled, in fact," Patrick said in a statement posted to Facebook at the time. "But knowing that the cruelty of our elections process would ultimately splash back on people whom (my wife) and I love, but who hadn’t signed up for the journey, was more than I could ask."
Patrick's decision reflects uncertainty from some about the direction of the Democratic presidential primary. Former Vice President Joe Biden entered the race as the frontrunner and maintains significant support from black voters, whose backing is critical in a Democratic primary. But he’s facing spirited challenges from Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, progressives whose calls for fundamental economic change have alarmed moderates and wealthy donors.
Young voters: Can young voters again push Democrats to victory in 2020?
Patrick’s candidacy faces a significant hurdle to raise enormous amounts of money quickly and to build an organization in the traditional early voting states that most of his rivals have focused on for the past year. And he’ll have to pivot to the expensive and logistically daunting Super Tuesday contests, when voters in more than a dozen states and territories head to the polls.
Patrick graduated from Harvard Law School and later went on to be part of President Bill Clinton’s administration as chief of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division.
Patrick is not the only moderate Democrat who is seeking a late entry into the 2020 race. Michael Bloomberg is also weighing a bid, billing himself as a more centrist alternative that could beat President Donald Trump.
Due to his late bid in the race, Patrick will likely not make the debate stage in December, where he will need at least 200,000 unique contributors and at least 4% in four national or early state polls, or at least 6% in two early state polls.
The Massachusetts Democrat will likely benefit from his state’s proximity to New Hampshire, the first-in-the-nation primary state.
|
Quinnipac poll on Monday has Biden up 4 points in NH, Monmouth has Pete Buttigeg up by 3 in Iowa with Biden in 2nd.
Not sure if I see any other take that makes sense besides "It's moderately good for Biden" that Buttigeg is surging(in one state). Pete is still polling at 8% nationally so he's not gonna win this, but if he takes away an early victory from Warren that she may desperately need, on paper thats pretty good for Biden.
Warren's still hanging close, trading national polls with Biden, but if she continues to be mediocre in her Iowa, NH, and NV polls things aren't looking great.
|
|
really? we're going to give credit for giving up after a recount?
|
On November 15 2019 04:56 Gorsameth wrote:really? we're going to give credit for giving up after a recount? I should have said "sanity" instead of credit yes maybe. But when you look at what the Reps are doing all around the country, this was actually pretty tame and sane. Any Dem would have also asked for a recount with a 5000 vote difference. There were fears they might actually try to steal it by using some loophole in their congress. They didn't.
|
Yeah, but it is still weird to give credit for basic decency and not trying to game the system in the most disgusting way. I know that that is usually the republican modus operandi, but it still feels as if you shouldn't give rewards for not doing that.
|
|
On November 14 2019 23:45 redlightdistrict wrote:A new 2020 democratic contender has entered the fray. https://www.yahoo.com/news/deval-patrick-former-massachusetts-governor-115229763.htmlShow nested quote +Deval Patrick, who made history after becoming Massachusetts’ first black governor, threw his name into the 2020 Democratic presidential election Thursday.
In a video released Thursday morning, Patrick, 63, played up his poor upbringing on the South Side of Chicago and traced his journey to the "American Dream," the path to which is "closing off," he said.
"I admire and respect the candidates in the Democratic field, they bring a richness of ideas and experience and a depth of character that makes me proud to be a Democrat," he said. "But if the character of the candidates is an issue in every election, this time is about the character of the country."
Patrick made a passing reference to President Donald Trump, but did not mention him by name. The election, he said, is "about more than removing an unpopular and divisive leader" but about "delivering instead for you."
Election 2020: In California's 2020 primary, Latino voters could help Democrats defeat President Trump
Patrick is a close ally of former President Barack Obama, and previously explored a bid for the presidency before deciding not to run.
In August 2018, allies of Patrick launched a political action committee called Reason to Believe, and Patrick spent time ahead of the 2018 midterms stumping for Democratic candidates.
But in December, Patrick took his name out of the running, citing “the cruelty of our elections process.”
"I’ve been overwhelmed by advice and encouragement from people from all over the country, known and unknown. Humbled, in fact," Patrick said in a statement posted to Facebook at the time. "But knowing that the cruelty of our elections process would ultimately splash back on people whom (my wife) and I love, but who hadn’t signed up for the journey, was more than I could ask."
Patrick's decision reflects uncertainty from some about the direction of the Democratic presidential primary. Former Vice President Joe Biden entered the race as the frontrunner and maintains significant support from black voters, whose backing is critical in a Democratic primary. But he’s facing spirited challenges from Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, progressives whose calls for fundamental economic change have alarmed moderates and wealthy donors.
Young voters: Can young voters again push Democrats to victory in 2020?
Patrick’s candidacy faces a significant hurdle to raise enormous amounts of money quickly and to build an organization in the traditional early voting states that most of his rivals have focused on for the past year. And he’ll have to pivot to the expensive and logistically daunting Super Tuesday contests, when voters in more than a dozen states and territories head to the polls.
Patrick graduated from Harvard Law School and later went on to be part of President Bill Clinton’s administration as chief of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division.
Patrick is not the only moderate Democrat who is seeking a late entry into the 2020 race. Michael Bloomberg is also weighing a bid, billing himself as a more centrist alternative that could beat President Donald Trump.
Due to his late bid in the race, Patrick will likely not make the debate stage in December, where he will need at least 200,000 unique contributors and at least 4% in four national or early state polls, or at least 6% in two early state polls.
The Massachusetts Democrat will likely benefit from his state’s proximity to New Hampshire, the first-in-the-nation primary state.
Yup, and he'll be completely irrelevant.
|
On November 15 2019 00:36 Gorgonoth wrote: Quinnipac poll on Monday has Biden up 4 points in NH, Monmouth has Pete Buttigeg up by 3 in Iowa with Biden in 2nd.
Not sure if I see any other take that makes sense besides "It's moderately good for Biden" that Buttigeg is surging(in one state). Pete is still polling at 8% nationally so he's not gonna win this, but if he takes away an early victory from Warren that she may desperately need, on paper thats pretty good for Biden.
Warren's still hanging close, trading national polls with Biden, but if she continues to be mediocre in her Iowa, NH, and NV polls things aren't looking great.
What about the idea that Pete winning in Iowa might make other moderates more interested in him than Biden? I can't imagine too many Warren or Sanders supporters switching to Pete after Iowa, but switching from the main moderate (Biden) to another moderate (Pete) could happen?
|
On November 15 2019 09:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2019 00:36 Gorgonoth wrote: Quinnipac poll on Monday has Biden up 4 points in NH, Monmouth has Pete Buttigeg up by 3 in Iowa with Biden in 2nd.
Not sure if I see any other take that makes sense besides "It's moderately good for Biden" that Buttigeg is surging(in one state). Pete is still polling at 8% nationally so he's not gonna win this, but if he takes away an early victory from Warren that she may desperately need, on paper thats pretty good for Biden.
Warren's still hanging close, trading national polls with Biden, but if she continues to be mediocre in her Iowa, NH, and NV polls things aren't looking great. What about the idea that Pete winning in Iowa might make other moderates more interested in him than Biden? I can't imagine too many Warren or Sanders supporters switching to Pete after Iowa, but switching from the main moderate (Biden) to another moderate (Pete) could happen? Yeah team biden going to team Pete makes a lot of sense. Would probably mean either Warren or Bernie need to drop out for either to have a chance. The Bernie/Warren merger beats a Pete/Biden merger by a long shot IMO.
|
On November 15 2019 09:55 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2019 09:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 15 2019 00:36 Gorgonoth wrote: Quinnipac poll on Monday has Biden up 4 points in NH, Monmouth has Pete Buttigeg up by 3 in Iowa with Biden in 2nd.
Not sure if I see any other take that makes sense besides "It's moderately good for Biden" that Buttigeg is surging(in one state). Pete is still polling at 8% nationally so he's not gonna win this, but if he takes away an early victory from Warren that she may desperately need, on paper thats pretty good for Biden.
Warren's still hanging close, trading national polls with Biden, but if she continues to be mediocre in her Iowa, NH, and NV polls things aren't looking great. What about the idea that Pete winning in Iowa might make other moderates more interested in him than Biden? I can't imagine too many Warren or Sanders supporters switching to Pete after Iowa, but switching from the main moderate (Biden) to another moderate (Pete) could happen? Yeah team biden going to team Pete makes a lot of sense. Would probably mean either Warren or Bernie need to drop out for either to have a chance. The Bernie/Warren merger beats a Pete/Biden merger by a long shot IMO.
If it's Warren that stays in, she'll lose, either in the primary or the general imo.
|
On November 15 2019 09:59 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2019 09:55 Mohdoo wrote:On November 15 2019 09:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 15 2019 00:36 Gorgonoth wrote: Quinnipac poll on Monday has Biden up 4 points in NH, Monmouth has Pete Buttigeg up by 3 in Iowa with Biden in 2nd.
Not sure if I see any other take that makes sense besides "It's moderately good for Biden" that Buttigeg is surging(in one state). Pete is still polling at 8% nationally so he's not gonna win this, but if he takes away an early victory from Warren that she may desperately need, on paper thats pretty good for Biden.
Warren's still hanging close, trading national polls with Biden, but if she continues to be mediocre in her Iowa, NH, and NV polls things aren't looking great. What about the idea that Pete winning in Iowa might make other moderates more interested in him than Biden? I can't imagine too many Warren or Sanders supporters switching to Pete after Iowa, but switching from the main moderate (Biden) to another moderate (Pete) could happen? Yeah team biden going to team Pete makes a lot of sense. Would probably mean either Warren or Bernie need to drop out for either to have a chance. The Bernie/Warren merger beats a Pete/Biden merger by a long shot IMO. If it's Warren that stays in, she'll lose, either in the primary or the general imo.
My ideal situation is Warren dropping out to be Bernie's VP. Warren is a great policy salesperson and would do well to be Bernie's megaphone.
|
Norway28558 Posts
I'd love a bernie/warren ticket but isn't there some merit to using the VP as a way of reaching out to the entire democratic base?
like warren/buttigieg duo?
|
On November 15 2019 10:11 Liquid`Drone wrote: I'd love a bernie/warren ticket but isn't there some merit to using the VP as a way of reaching out to the entire democratic base?
like warren/buttigieg duo? The way I see it, no one is considering Trump that might otherwise vote democrat. We are so polarized that we need to just stop being ashamed of wanting the world to be legitimately better and quickly. Push for big changes that will have big impacts on many people's lives and stop trying to convince people we can also settle for less.
|
On November 15 2019 10:14 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2019 10:11 Liquid`Drone wrote: I'd love a bernie/warren ticket but isn't there some merit to using the VP as a way of reaching out to the entire democratic base?
like warren/buttigieg duo? The way I see it, no one is considering Trump that might otherwise vote democrat. We are so polarized that we need to just stop being ashamed of wanting the world to be legitimately better and quickly. Push for big changes that will have big impacts on many people's lives and stop trying to convince people we can also settle for less.
A Sanders/Warren ticket is my dream combo too, but I think Drone does bring up a good point... We need to energize the young progressives who don't yet have a proven track record of voting *and* we need the older, traditional moderate Democrats and Independents to support the ticket too, especially since, quite frankly, old people vote. I'm less concerned about Democrats voting for Trump; I'm more concerned about them not voting at all. A Sanders/Biden (or, to a lesser extent, Warren/Biden) ticket would have less inherent overlap and potentially greater reach. There are definitely several variables to consider though.
|
Bernie Warren ticket makes little sense outside of the macabre since that they are both old and could die in office. Generally people who want to do something don't choose to be VP as their actual power is next to nothing and it's just left up to the president to decide. There are more important positions in the cabinet that have more power to commit change than VP like secretary of state, the role Clinton took on under Obama, i don't think either of them would want to just be the presidential cheerleader.
|
|
|
|