|
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 |
On October 26 2020 05:32 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2020 04:58 Danglars wrote:
The NYT had a good column by Ross Douthat recently. He's one of the paper's token moderate Republicans, sometimes centrist, that regularly writes opinion columns for the New York Times. He's up with the internal dialogue between the pro-Trump argument from Republican principles, and the anti-Trump argument from Republican principles. It's useful to hear the push and pull from the Republican/social-con viewpoint, which doesn't get too stuck in the bumper sticker arguments that the left uses against the Republicans.
I humoured you and read a wall of text with no explication from you why I should read it or what I would gleam from it and at the end... I wonder what I learned from it, other then that apparently Republicans will wave away anything and everything just to 'score points'.
What part of "internal dialogue between the pro-Trump argument from Republican principles, and the anti-Trump argument from Republican principles" do you not understand?
Do you think his 'inner voice' makes good points why Trump was good for Republicans?
Immigration is down. Not going to bother verifying if its actually true but lets assume it is. North Korea has very low immigration, pick any hell-hole in south America, or Africa it will have low immigration. Probably don't think imitating them by turning America into a country so bad no one wants to live there is your goal.
Immigrants (wanted) to come to America because it was the greatest nation on earth and anyone could build a good life for themselves, you know "The American dream".
Turning America into the worst first world nation that no one wants to live in doesn't feel like living up the ideals the Founding Fathers fought for.
Citizens telling their government what the acceptable rate of immigration is foundational to Democratic governance. Anything else is letting scolds, yourself for instance, determine that comparisons to North Korea and alleging "ideals" should determine national policy. That's an emotional appeal, and a bad one.
He also manages to defeat his own argument that Trump being tough on Immigrates is helping by pointing out Obama was tougher, without putting children in cages at the border. And yeah Obama build those detention centres. He didn't put children in them on display towards the border like a 3e world dictator.
Putting them "on display" is ambiguous. Tell me, do the following count as putting children on display?
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/Y5PO1Fu.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/bM3KKGs.jpg)
The economy is easy, "thanks Obama". Democrats fix the economy, Republicans ride the coat tails into another disaster, repeat.
Trump simultaneously stopped the right-wing war-hawks from starting more wars but Biden doesn't matter because he brings left-wing war-hawks. Its one or the other mate.
Comparing the US response to being similar to the EU is just strait up crazy.
Democrats fuck up the economy, spin it to mean it would be even worse if they hadn't acted as they did, and blame Bush for everything else. It's an old old story.
The EU conquered this thing, yeah? Through better lockdowns? Let me pull a Biden and go "Come on, man!" (And check link)
handwaving away how Trump would turn any crisis into a disaster as based on his Corona response with 'lol fear mongering'. Is it fear mongering when it is literally happening in front of your eyes at this very moment?
You probably should read it again in context about what he means about the fear. This is way off base and "Huh?"
The usual 'those poor fetuses'. I would maybe start believing you if you gave 2 shits about the person once they are born. Until then, "lol fear mongering"
If you thought this would show us readers how the Republican mind thinks I'm going to say "Yeah, they are as crazy and hypocritical as I thought".
Democrats "you don't care about them after they're born" = Republicans "killing them in the womb shows you don't care about them at all." It's the meme fight of the century.
|
Norway28874 Posts
I thought it was a good, interesting read, just the kind of stuff I'm interested in reading from 'the other side'. (Rather than nettles-style conspiridiocy or depressing trump-cheerleading.)
Would be interested in hearing which of those two sides you identify more with, though.
|
United States44205 Posts
Danglars is using the history book where Obama took office around 2005.
|
I finally looked up what "neoliberal" meant and was surprised that it describes US conservatives. Is there a more proper term for US liberals?
|
On October 26 2020 06:13 Liquid`Drone wrote:
I thought it was a good, interesting read, just the kind of stuff I'm interested in reading from 'the other side'. (Rather than nettles-style conspiridiocy or depressing trump-cheerleading.)
Would be interested in hearing which of those two sides you identify more with, though.
Thanks for enjoying the read! I lean a little towards his pro-Trump inner voice, but I'm split between the two. They're held in constant push-pull. I think the important part is to keep having that struggle.
|
Neoliberal in the context of US politics is usually used to refer to the establishment wing of the democratic party in the 90s and 2000s : "third way democrats" is another way to describe them. US conservatives at the time were mostly neoconservatives.
Currently, there is little to no underlying financial ideology underpinning the republican party. Most of the 2016-2020 term economically is categorized by distinctly not neoliberal actions, like tax breaks with no intention of paying for them, or the 2020 bailout of wall street.
|
On October 26 2020 06:20 Starlightsun wrote:
I finally looked up what "neoliberal" meant and was surprised that it describes US conservatives. Is there a more proper term for US liberals?
The similarities are not so coincidental and play an important role in why some people note the lack of substantive differences between the two parties.
Some folks also draw the distinction of "liberal" as in neoliberal and "left" which is more of the Sanders-type base of support.
|
All right thanks. So much jargon to learn..
|
Norway28874 Posts
To add on it, these adages are a bit fluid and there's no definite line someone crosses that moves them from liberal to neoliberal or liberal to progressive.
A Bill Clinton figure is typically regarded as neoliberal, too. Obama a bit less, but it's not entirely wrong there, either. A Sanders figure definitely is not.
Roughly speaking the right to left goes conservative - neoliberal - liberal - progressive. Republican party used to be split between conservative and more neoliberal groups, but seems to have turned into.. something else as of late. The neoliberal group is the type of republican involved in the lincoln project, basically nevertrumpers.. Democrat party used to have a neoliberal and a liberal group, while nowadays the neoliberals is less dominant and the progressive wing has grown stronger..
|
|
|
Spain18399 Posts
Campaigning in Texas still seems likes a premature victory lap for the democrats to me.
|
While I don't think it'll happen, it really would be hilarious if Trump loses Texas to Biden. That would result in the largest presidential landslide victory in my life... against a man who always brags about how hard he wins.
|
On October 26 2020 09:01 Acrofales wrote:Campaigning in Texas still seems likes a premature victory lap for the democrats to me. If its only 1 visit I don't see the issue.
Texas being even remotely possibly in play for the Democrats is horrible news for Trump, especially if he is strapped for cash as it appears.
Every $ he has to spend in Texas to be safe is a $ he isn't spending in actual battleground states.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would not say it is hubris, he just has to hope Texas can hold. His campaign is broke and he is losing everywhere. If he has to shore up Texas he is pretty much admitting a loss. Good for setting the ground work through. As we have seen with other red states that shift blue Republicans will just about anything to hold onto power and with Texas I am sure nothing is off limits for them once it starts to slide. Going to take a couple of cycles to really make it competitive.
|
On October 26 2020 09:37 plasmidghost wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2020 09:22 JimmiC wrote:On October 26 2020 09:14 plasmidghost wrote:On October 26 2020 09:01 Acrofales wrote:Campaigning in Texas still seems likes a premature victory lap for the democrats to me. I could definitely see that if it was Biden himself, but I think the chance that we offer is good enough for Harris to come for a day She also could be sewing seeds for 4 years from now. True true. Given our major demographic shifts over the last couple decades, this is just the beginning and I wouldn't be surprised if Harris won in 2024Also of note is that our early voting total turnout percentage broke 2016's earlier today. We might be hitting 60% by Friday
If Biden's single term is able to cleanly end - and then start a successful recovery from - Trump's coronavirus failure, I think Harris could have some great momentum going into 2024. I wonder what other candidates - particularly more progressive ones - would step up to challenge her, since Sanders is surely done.
|
On October 26 2020 10:07 plasmidghost wrote:
Question for people here: Why did Trump go to Maine today? I know I can't really put a reason to any of his actions and decisions but I'm still curious to know, since he's going to win like, one electoral vote there at most. If I were him, I would've gone to Pennsylvania to counter Biden's efforts there, but then again, I have never run for office
Trump is a sociopath. The idea of a group of people not liking him ruins his day and he can't understand it. If he has a rally in New England, and thousands of people show up, he can know with 100% certainty that New England absolutely loves him. Simple as that,
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
