EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 2516
| 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 | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
But no. We really need to focus on Antifa. That is the existential threat to America here. Not the wannabe despot who literally couldn't give two shits whether everyone around him dies of a disease he could've done anything about, at any point. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On July 25 2020 00:53 NewSunshine wrote: Could we just take a moment in this thread, and envision the outrage from right wing posters in this thread, if literally any of the things Trump is doing were done by Obama instead? I can just imagine XDaunt raging up and down about how un-American we were if Obama had been ordering nameless feds to abduct peaceful protesters exercising their 1st Amendment rights. Ditto for every time Trump has suggested some new non-cure for the pandemic we face, or for every time he punted the issue to the states, in one of the few times we needed to be united as a country. If it were a black Democrat or progressive doing any of the things we've seen in the last 6 months, we would never hear the end of it. But no. We really need to focus on Antifa. That is the existential threat to America here. Not the wannabe despot who literally couldn't give two shits whether everyone around him dies of a disease he could've done anything about, at any point. If everyone already agreed, you’d hear just a post. If Obama was defended because right-wing protesters are just so extra bad, and they’re literally a threat to democracy, and it’s different in this case because you can’t mess around with the far right, and that rubbish, then you’d hear a lot more. Performative outrage on stuff everyone agrees is an outrage is for theatre majors. Or like “become a Democrat now or you don’t believe it” hilarity. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11637 Posts
On July 25 2020 01:06 Danglars wrote: If everyone already agreed, you’d hear just a post. If Obama was defended because right-wing protesters are just so extra bad, and they’re literally a threat to democracy, and it’s different in this case because you can’t mess around with the far right, and that rubbish, then you’d hear a lot more. Performative outrage on stuff everyone agrees is an outrage is for theatre majors. Or like “become a Democrat now or you don’t believe it” hilarity. I think NewSunshine has a point here. Really imagine how you would react if Obama were doing just a single thing out of the stuff Trump is doing. Because i can imagine that very well. There would be a lot of constant outrage, and you would never stop. Imagine your reaction if Obama had sent black vans of federal agents into texas to abduct people. Would you stop talking about that before it stopped happening? I believe that you would keep on talking about it for months if there were even a single instance of that. This isn't about performative outrage. It is about your president shitting onto everything you previously claimed to be your most important principles, and you just not giving a fuck. And yes, i believe that if you vote for Trump in november, you don't really care about any of the stuff he does. You don't need to become a democrat. But you could at least no longer support Trump, who clearly doesn't care about any of the stuff you claimed to care about before he was president. The fact that you don't seem to feel any outrage whatsoever makes it very clear that you do not care about any of the principles you claim to care about. You just care about supporting your dear leader and winning against the evil libs. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On July 25 2020 01:15 Simberto wrote: I think NewSunshine has a point here. Really imagine how you would react if Obama were doing just a single thing out of the stuff Trump is doing. Because i can imagine that very well. There would be a lot of constant outrage, and you would never stop. Imagine your reaction if Obama had sent black vans of federal agents into texas to abduct people. Would you stop talking about that before it stopped happening? I believe that you would keep on talking about it for months if there were even a single instance of that. This isn't about performative outrage. It is about your president shitting onto everything you previously claimed to be your most important principles, and you just not giving a fuck. And yes, i believe that if you vote for Trump in november, you don't really care about any of the stuff he does. You don't need to become a democrat. But you could at least no longer support Trump, who clearly doesn't care about any of the stuff you claimed to care about before he was president. The fact that you don't seem to feel any outrage whatsoever makes it very clear that you do not care about any of the principles you claim to care about. You just care about supporting your dear leader and winning against the evil libs. Would you have been so outraged had Obama done this, that you’d vote Trump over Obama? I’m against performative displays of outrage in general. Since you are no judge, and keep demanding displays of outrage or no outrage exists, your claim that this isn’t a demand for performative outrage is a lie. | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28712 Posts
While there is truth to the idea that proponents of different ideologies have different political preferences, I don't think that's the explanation for the stark differences between the right and left wing we see in the US today (if it were, I'd be inclined to think similar degrees of divide between right and left wing would be present in other countries, too, because the ideological differences exist in say, Norway, too). So we instead have to focus on the narratives. Danglars is no fan of peaceful protesters being snatched up by nameless feds, he already said so much. (xDaunt was much, much more of a Trump-fan than Danglars has ever expressed being, so I dunno about him. ) He's not fond of the nameless/tagless feds doing policing, period. However, from his perspective it's not a question of peaceful protesters being taken, it's a question of violent rioters being hindered from causing real harm. This is because the right and left have entirely different points of focus when describing what is going in portland (and other cities). So rather than designating Danglars and the like with opinions akin to 'you don't care about nameless feds snatching up peaceful protesters', I think it's a lot more prudent to properly showcase how big % of protesters are peaceful compared to the violent looters, and give more first-hand accounts. (I saw Danglars seemed receptive to the resident portlanders' description of events, for one. ) I think the primary way to bridge the gap is for the two sides to stop pushing such extremely different narratives, but for right wingers to be receptive of our narrative (which I believe is significantly more truthful than the one pushed by right wing media, just to be clear), we have to present it without thinly veiled insults or accusations that 'they don't care about police brutality towards peaceful protesters'. While there are certainly exceptions, not every Trump voter is a proud boy member. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On July 25 2020 01:06 Danglars wrote: If everyone already agreed, you’d hear just a post. If Obama was defended because right-wing protesters are just so extra bad, and they’re literally a threat to democracy, and it’s different in this case because you can’t mess around with the far right, and that rubbish, then you’d hear a lot more. Performative outrage on stuff everyone agrees is an outrage is for theatre majors. Or like “become a Democrat now or you don’t believe it” hilarity. Oh, I definitely believe that you're an expert when it comes to performative outrage. How about, instead of trying to deflect from the thread again, you take one of the many invitations you've gotten in the last day to step back, and seriously look at the things you're supporting when you try to argue people down. People aren't asking for a lot, mostly just one honest moment of reflection from one of this threads most frequent posters. I've spent my years in this thread challenging a lot of things I believe, and confronting a number of uncomfortable truths that lie at their hearts. I've taken many, many opportunities to step back, and just think about what I believe, and if I can live with myself continuing to believe that. And I continue to. How about you? | ||
|
Anc13nt
1557 Posts
On July 25 2020 01:22 JimmiC wrote: I'm not sure if we have any Republican posters at this point. Only members of team Trump. Well I agree with everything you have said, the thing that just boggles my mind is how dumb he is here is an actual quote from Trump. It just does not make sense, "free" the opposite of "hot"? It is incoherent rambling. After a week of him multiple times bragging about passing a test that 10 year olds easily pass and it just intended to test if you have dementia. He is not smart, even a little. Most of the time you see world leaders or actually successful businessmen and you are like, oh I get it, I disagree but this is a smart guy with charisma. With Trump it is like, oh I get why so many of businesses have failed. You can truly get way ahead off daddy's money in the US because there is nothing impressive about this man. I always knew Trump lacked in virtue and intellect but I was once under illusion/delusion that Trump had formidable business acumen. That was until I read more about his business career, after which I realized there was almost nothing about Trump that was admirable. It's like a rotten onion so to speak. You keep peeling through the layers of crap and there is just no end to it. It's actually amazing how children's fiction is so accurate, at least with respect to its portrayal of the villains being rotten to the core and essentially irredeemable. | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium4962 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18839 Posts
On July 25 2020 01:38 Uldridge wrote: Trump isn't a villain, unless you can find unending incompetence as a key trait of villainry. His endless self-regard could definitely color him a villain, literally nothing matters past his personal interest. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On July 25 2020 01:29 NewSunshine wrote: Oh, I definitely believe that you're an expert when it comes to performative outrage. How about, instead of trying to deflect from the thread again, you take one of the many invitations you've gotten in the last day to step back, and seriously look at the things you're supporting when you try to argue people down. People aren't asking for a lot, mostly just one honest moment of reflection from one of this threads most frequent posters. I've spent my years in this thread challenging a lot of things I believe, and confronting a number of uncomfortable truths that lie at their hearts. I've taken many, many opportunities to step back, and just think about what I believe, and if I can live with myself continuing to believe that. And I continue to. How about you? You envisioned the response from the right wing in a hypothetical, so I’d refrain from doing that sort of thing if actual right-ring responses are deflection. Secondarily, I’d like to refer back to People aren't asking for a lot, mostly just one honest moment of reflection from one of this threads most frequent posters when you don’t get the response you want. Don’t ask questions where you’ll only accept one answer as being genuine.Can you imagine the left if CHAZ was a alt right proud boys protest, and people were shot and raped without police allowed in! Haha left wingers don’t respond, we all know you’d display so much more performative outrage if that had been the case This thread is a consistent challenge to what I believe, and I miss the posters in years past, since been banned or stopped posting, that no longer add their voices. EVEN if that involves re-evaluating why people think as they do. Any honest person should ask themselves if they’re open to being persuaded that Trump is the best choice in the 2020 election to better understand their limits of altering their own opinions. | ||
|
Nouar
France3270 Posts
On July 25 2020 01:25 Danglars wrote: Would you have been so outraged had Obama done this, that you’d vote Trump over Obama? I’m against performative displays of outrage in general. Since you are no judge, and keep demanding displays of outrage or no outrage exists, your claim that this isn’t a demand for performative outrage is a lie. Not Trump. But a regular Republican candidate, sure. | ||
|
Erasme
Bahamas15899 Posts
On July 25 2020 01:53 Danglars wrote: You envisioned the response from the right wing in a hypothetical, so I’d refrain from doing that sort of thing if actual right-ring responses are deflection. Secondarily, I’d like to refer back to when you don’t get the response you want. Don’t ask questions where you’ll only accept one answer as being genuine. This thread is a consistent challenge to what I believe, and I miss the posters in years past, since been banned or stopped posting, that no longer add their voices. EVEN if that involves re-evaluating why people think as they do. Any honest person should ask themselves if they’re open to being persuaded that Trump is the best choice in the 2020 election to better understand their limits of altering their own opinions. Nope, nothing you could say at this point, after those 4 years, would make me vote Trump over anyone else. But that has nothing to do with being able to alter my opinions. It has to do with the long list of crimes Trump has committed in his time in the office. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On July 25 2020 01:53 Danglars wrote: This thread is a consistent challenge to what I believe, and I miss the posters in years past, since been banned or stopped posting, that no longer add their voices. EVEN if that involves re-evaluating why people think as they do. Any honest person should ask themselves if they’re open to being persuaded that Trump is the best choice in the 2020 election to better understand their limits of altering their own opinions. I didn't ask you if this thread challenges you. That much is plain to see. I asked if you ever challenge yourself. What you believe. When you enter a conversation, are you doing it with a mind open enough to alter your opinions and understandings, or do you do it to win by turning conversations into formal debate? I've seen you do almost exclusively the latter. The thing you don't recognize is that you have burned a lot of good faith over the years. People continue to try to reach out and give you a chance to turn it around. But unfortunately, that's a choice that you make. When you turn every conversation into a battle that you then try to win, people don't respond with the kind of charity you keep asking for. And that's not their fault. It's honestly pretty big of most of the people here to still give you that kind of attention when most arguments you take part in form the same pattern. | ||
|
Broetchenholer
Germany1947 Posts
On July 25 2020 01:53 Danglars wrote: You envisioned the response from the right wing in a hypothetical, so I’d refrain from doing that sort of thing if actual right-ring responses are deflection. Secondarily, I’d like to refer back to when you don’t get the response you want. Don’t ask questions where you’ll only accept one answer as being genuine. This thread is a consistent challenge to what I believe, and I miss the posters in years past, since been banned or stopped posting, that no longer add their voices. EVEN if that involves re-evaluating why people think as they do. Any honest person should ask themselves if they’re open to being persuaded that Trump is the best choice in the 2020 election to better understand their limits of altering their own opinions. So, if I understand you correctly, your point seems to be this. You are against the abducting of citizens because it's unconstitutional. You are also against the platform of Biden. As you are more against the platform of Biden than against the abuse of power of trump, you have no problem with voting for trump and the Republican party not rebelling against him. Is that correct? | ||
|
Starlightsun
United States1405 Posts
On July 25 2020 01:38 Uldridge wrote: Trump isn't a villain, unless you can find unending incompetence as a key trait of villainry. I think he absolutely is a villain for what he's done on environmental regulations. He's undone every thing that he can in regards to emissions reduction, protecting ecosystems and the like. His cartoonish weekly scandals are not what makes him a villain, it's the stuff he's quietly pushing through in the background. Stripping immigrants of any rights and protections they have is another area where he's behaved like an utter villain. There are more too but I don't have time right now. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On July 25 2020 02:46 NewSunshine wrote: I didn't ask you if this thread challenges you. That much is plain to see. I asked if you ever challenge yourself. What you believe. When you enter a conversation, are you doing it with a mind open enough to alter your opinions and understandings, or do you do it to win by turning conversations into formal debate? I've seen you do almost exclusively the latter. The thing you don't recognize is that you have burned a lot of good faith over the years. People continue to try to reach out and give you a chance to turn it around. But unfortunately, that's a choice that you make. When you turn every conversation into a battle that you then try to win, people don't respond with the kind of charity you keep asking for. And that's not their fault. It's honestly pretty big of most of the people here to still give you that kind of attention when most arguments you take part in form the same pattern. You may take my response to answer: I've spent my years in this thread challenging a lot of things I believe, and confronting a number of uncomfortable truths that lie at their hearts. I've taken many, many opportunities to step back, and just think about what I believe, and if I can live with myself continuing to believe that. And I continue to. How about you? In the affirmative, yes. Me too. I couldn’t live with myself if I tried to hold more of the thread-normal positions. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On July 25 2020 02:59 Broetchenholer wrote: So, if I understand you correctly, your point seems to be this. You are against the abducting of citizens because it's unconstitutional. You are also against the platform of Biden. As you are more against the platform of Biden than against the abuse of power of trump, you have no problem with voting for trump and the Republican party not rebelling against him. Is that correct? I am against federal officers using rental vans and camo outfits detaining civilians. Biden’s platform, in both things he’s for/against, and things going unmentioned in his platform, would be far more destructive to this country than is understood here. It includes abuses of power in terms of sending nuns helping the elderly back to court, and forcing religious organizations to obey the whims of the federal government contrary to their first amendment rights. The Biden advisors and campaign appointments add to my stance on this. Knowing that Trump has done a poor job on things like the coronavirus, foreign policy and domestic policy messaging and explanation, and singling out individuals to blast on twitter means it is absolutely false to put it as “have no problem.” It’s been a best of the worst voting test for me for five-ish presidential elections straight, so I’d like to see some acknowledgement of that truth, because your framing is damaging to the discourse. Binary choices are the absolute worst way to hear someone’s political beliefs. Quote and respond to Drone’s post if you really need me to explain that point. | ||
| ||
