|
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 March 15 2021 23:44 Husyelt wrote:
The thing that holds Trump back from any real stranglehold is that he did in fact lose the election. He’s the biggest loser. Perhaps ever. Once a choker, always a choker.
Peoples lives are moving on. The vaccines are here. States are opening up. People will move on from Trump. Even the die hards. It will be even more embarrassing than the months of election fraud spouting. He’ll retreat into fucking radio only bullshit, once people turn on him
I dunno. Crazy doesn't just dissapear. Sure, it's primarily bound to Trump right now, but it's also got the Qanon tie-in, which could very well outlive Trump.
The GOP cannot afford to go against Trump. Doing so will lose the new, freshly energized qanon crazies. Going with Trump, then, is the only strategic choice for them. Will it alienate existing GOP voters? Maybe, but not nearly as many as they'll gain from the Cult of Trump. In fact, I'm pretty sure the GOP voterbase generally is far less likely to punish their politicians for transgressions than democrat voters would, so the potential voter fallout for supporting Trump will be minimal.
There's also probably a great ammount of GOP politicians (and supporters) who are also happy to be able to replace the dog whistle with a megaphone, as the rise of white supremacy has shown them they no longer need to hide their opinions. These are probably very content in allowing the Trump takeover, strategy be damned.
The question, then, becomes if the Democrats are able to keep their voterbase energized to oppose the Qanon GOP.
|
On March 16 2021 04:38 plated.rawr wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2021 23:44 Husyelt wrote:
The thing that holds Trump back from any real stranglehold is that he did in fact lose the election. He’s the biggest loser. Perhaps ever. Once a choker, always a choker.
Peoples lives are moving on. The vaccines are here. States are opening up. People will move on from Trump. Even the die hards. It will be even more embarrassing than the months of election fraud spouting. He’ll retreat into fucking radio only bullshit, once people turn on him I dunno. Crazy doesn't just dissapear. Sure, it's primarily bound to Trump right now, but it's also got the Qanon tie-in, which could very well outlive Trump. The GOP cannot afford to go against Trump. Doing so will lose the new, freshly energized qanon crazies. Going with Trump, then, is the only strategic choice for them. Will it alienate existing GOP voters? Maybe, but not nearly as many as they'll gain from the Cult of Trump. In fact, I'm pretty sure the GOP voterbase generally is far less likely to punish their politicians for transgressions than democrat voters would, so the potential voter fallout for supporting Trump will be minimal. There's also probably a great ammount of GOP politicians (and supporters) who are also happy to be able to replace the dog whistle with a megaphone, as the rise of white supremacy has shown them they no longer need to hide their opinions. These are probably very content in allowing the Trump takeover, strategy be damned. The question, then, becomes if the Democrats are able to keep their voterbase energized to oppose the Qanon GOP.
I don’t imagine Qanon being much of anything in the future. It only grew because the umbrella of conspiracies that have remained popular through the decades took a specific political angle with the “deep state”. There is already a decent push back to the Marjorie Green stuff within the conservative movement. Every post on the conservative subreddit with her that I’ve scene (as a lurker) has 50-1 ratio of “let’s not associate with someone that looney.”
QAnon will be replaced by a new umbrella in the coming years. It’s how conspiracies work, and why specific ones (or in this ridiculous case party ties,) die out if they stay stagnant.
The cult of personality on Trump did get worrisome for me, but in my mind, it’s on a downward spiral, not upswing.
|
On March 15 2021 19:15 Doublemint wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2021 09:54 Husyelt wrote:On March 14 2021 17:41 Doublemint wrote:
funny how no one mentions the pussygrabber in chief, currently failed insurrection leader and QOP hostage taker - and deliverer of CPAC's main speech in the year 2021.
do we really need to look back a couple of years?
I mean, on a certain level you really have to feel for Cuomo. getting shat on for years by the QOP and their leader who has how many actually credible accusers and an avalanche of sexual abuse/assault prosecution coming his way? among them at least one about rape?
"and they want to hang me - for that?!"
No need to compare the two. You can condemn a serial killer and still also find an abusive father abhorrent.
Besides, Trump should have been charged with dereliction of duty, not citing an insurrection. in a sidenote. has anyone seen the public statement he sent out that reads like one of his famously stupid tweets? glorious.
Reading Trump statements again just drives the point home that deplatforming works, and works well. The less people hear from him the better off everyone will be. His lies and ramblings are a net negative to society.
|
Northern Ireland26799 Posts
I’m rather less confident that the Trump phenomenon is going away anytime soon. As to what form I’m unsure it takes.
Unlike the left and especially the far left you’re talking a swathe of people who temperamentally and culturally are unable to criticise a wider system, but who are increasingly angry that both materially and culturally said system isn’t privileging them over others, or at least giving them a fair and neutral shot.
They love the free market except when it operates freely in ways they don’t like, see the continuous moaning about cancel culture etc.
Where do you go with such an incoherent worldview? At the most extreme end it is some variant of ‘my values can’t be wrong, the world must be how it is due to shadowy baby eating cabals.’
For the record I’m referring more specifically to those who were zealots aboard the Trump train and not Conservatives in more general.
|
Talking about Trumps tweets and looking some stuff up, I stumbled upon a Jon Stewart recollection I hadn't seen yet.
+ Show Spoiler +
How quaint those all seemed then.
|
On March 16 2021 07:28 WombaT wrote:
I’m rather less confident that the Trump phenomenon is going away anytime soon. As to what form I’m unsure it takes.
Unlike the left and especially the far left you’re talking a swathe of people who temperamentally and culturally are unable to criticise a wider system, but who are increasingly angry that both materially and culturally said system isn’t privileging them over others, or at least giving them a fair and neutral shot.
They love the free market except when it operates freely in ways they don’t like, see the continuous moaning about cancel culture etc.
I'm on board with your general thrust here, but I don't think cancel culture is the best example of the free market at work. Trump didn't lose his twitter because he ran out of followers. Parler didn't get kicked because nobody wanted to use it. Their "markets" were doing just fine. They were ditched because of a conflict between what they were saying and the rule of law that allowed them to say it.
I know there is an angle where twitter ditched Trump because he started to look bad for their bottom line, but it's more than just that. You're giving unneeded oxygen to that crap about the free market being antithetical to regulation. Every market depends on basic things like property ownership and enforceability of contracts etc. It's not a stretch to consider both protections for free speech and restrictions on incitement of violence as holding a similar position in the marketplace of ideas.
I realise this sounds like nitpicking, but there are enough real conflicts between trumpism and conservatism that we shouldn't need to reach to find more. Bundling genuinely complex issues together with the usual quick-fix demagoguery just pushes people further down the rabbit hole.
|
On March 16 2021 11:08 Husyelt wrote:Talking about Trumps tweets and looking some stuff up, I stumbled upon a Jon Stewart recollection I hadn't seen yet. + Show Spoiler +https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78XRPEyAj3Y&t=277s&ab_channel=Bobzbobz How quaint those all seemed then.
The one positive from the Trump administration was that during most of his presidency as a non-US-citizen I had always something to laugh about. The fact that the self-titled "greatest nation on earth" voted a reality tv star with the common sense and manners of a 14 year old who got hit puberty like a freight train was quite hilarious if you weren't affected. The fact that he started flame wars like a dumb troll and then lost them makes it even better.
Naturally this was less fun for the dreamers and in the end the people who suffered from Corona.
On a side note I do believe that the Trump cult and QAnon are heavily centered around his person and unless there's another person from outside standard politics who's able to channel that it's popularity will probably decline.
|
Northern Ireland26799 Posts
On March 16 2021 21:05 Belisarius wrote:Show nested quote +On March 16 2021 07:28 WombaT wrote:
I’m rather less confident that the Trump phenomenon is going away anytime soon. As to what form I’m unsure it takes.
Unlike the left and especially the far left you’re talking a swathe of people who temperamentally and culturally are unable to criticise a wider system, but who are increasingly angry that both materially and culturally said system isn’t privileging them over others, or at least giving them a fair and neutral shot.
They love the free market except when it operates freely in ways they don’t like, see the continuous moaning about cancel culture etc. I'm on board with your general thrust here, but I don't think cancel culture is the best example of the free market at work. Trump didn't lose his twitter because he ran out of followers. Parler didn't get kicked because nobody wanted to use it. Their "markets" were doing just fine. They were ditched because of a conflict between what they were saying and the rule of law that allowed them to say it. I know there is an angle where twitter ditched Trump because he started to look bad for their bottom line, but it's more than just that. You're giving unneeded oxygen to that crap about the free market being antithetical to regulation. Every market depends on basic things like property ownership and enforceability of contracts etc. It's not a stretch to consider both protections for free speech and restrictions on incitement of violence as holding a similar position in the marketplace of ideas. I realise this sounds like nitpicking, but there are enough real conflicts between trumpism and conservatism that we shouldn't need to reach to find more. Bundling genuinely complex issues together with the usual quick-fix demagoguery just pushes people further down the rabbit hole.
Perhaps not the best example, but the YT algorithm is hammering cancel culture outrage videos at me left right and centre, nitpick away. I was rather broad brushing.
My point to differentiate ‘Trumpians’ from regular auld conservatives and why I don’t think they’re going anywhere is that they’re not particularly ideological, and you cannot (realistically) give them what they want, and they are pretty bloody angry to boot.
What they appear to want is to inhabit some static slice of an idealised time when people like them did well, when culture reflected only them and what they like, and for them to be immune to the churning wheels of international capitalism to boot.
A difference to the regular conservatives I’ve met is it’s not tethered to much of anything outside of that, and will utterly bend and distort all over the shop.
Hence you can get people who claim to view the Constitution as sacred supporting storming the Capitol. Or saying a business can do what it wants but oh no ‘cancel culture’, or all sorts of other contradictory positions I could go on and on about.
I’m unsure how all of this is going to dissipate anytime soon, although I would like to be proven wrong.
|
Calling the newsom recall a Trump thing is stupidity fitting of the California Democratic Party. Newsom is straight garbage. 2nd worst Democrat governor at the moment.
Edit: just watched his disaster interview on CNN. What a complete idiot. Talks about how important a 50th birthday is. Holy smokes.
|
Got my free money check this morning. A little less than I’d like since it was prorated over a smaller range, but money is money. Wouldn’t have qualified based on 2020 income so it was just in the nick of time.
I believe the proper thing to do is to gamble this money in the stock market?
|
On March 17 2021 21:46 LegalLord wrote:
Got my free money check this morning. A little less than I’d like since it was prorated over a smaller range, but money is money. Wouldn’t have qualified based on 2020 income so it was just in the nick of time.
I believe the proper thing to do is to gamble this money in the stock market?
Donate it. To me, specifically.
|
My wife and I are spending the entire thing since that’s the intention of it for people in our financial situation. For people saving it, consider the economic impact on your local community if everyone spent it.
|
On March 17 2021 23:40 Mohdoo wrote:
My wife and I are spending the entire thing since that’s the intention of it for people in our financial situation. For people saving it, consider the economic impact on your local community if everyone spent it. "Don't save, spend it now" is why so many Americans are in debt.
|
I'd wager it got more to do with capitalist propaganda and indoctrination than simple victim blaming, but that's just imo.
|
On March 17 2021 23:46 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2021 23:40 Mohdoo wrote:
My wife and I are spending the entire thing since that’s the intention of it for people in our financial situation. For people saving it, consider the economic impact on your local community if everyone spent it. "Don't save, spend it now" is why so many Americans are in debt.
People in a lot of debt (or any amount of credit card debt) should pay off debt rather than save it. People without debt should spend it because they are in a good financial situation. The people somewhere in between should probably save it. But if you have any debt other than mortgage and student loans, should definitely pay that off first
|
On March 17 2021 23:52 Artisreal wrote:
I'd wager it got more to do with capitalist propaganda and indoctrination than simple victim blaming, but that's just imo. Not trying to victim blame, ofcourse it has a lot to do with outside pressure. But it all combines into the message of "don't save, spend".
On March 17 2021 23:52 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2021 23:46 Gorsameth wrote:On March 17 2021 23:40 Mohdoo wrote:
My wife and I are spending the entire thing since that’s the intention of it for people in our financial situation. For people saving it, consider the economic impact on your local community if everyone spent it. "Don't save, spend it now" is why so many Americans are in debt. People in a lot of debt (or any amount of credit card debt) should pay off debt rather than save it. People without debt should spend it because they are in a good financial situation. The people somewhere in between should probably save it. But if you have any debt other than mortgage and student loans, should definitely pay that off first Totally agree, but I take somewhat offence with the notion of For people saving it, consider the economic impact on your local community if everyone spent it. .
If people don't have saving for a rainy day (which a significant portion doesn't). Then I don't think you should ''pressure" them into spending it with concerns about the local economy.
Ofcourse if your in a financially healthy situation, do whatever you want with it. But these checks aren't really for those people in the first place.
|
On March 17 2021 23:40 Mohdoo wrote:
My wife and I are spending the entire thing since that’s the intention of it for people in our financial situation. For people saving it, consider the economic impact on your local community if everyone spent it.
Saving it isn't necessarily detrimental, so long as your means of saving leads to investment. I dunno if there's something equivalent in the US, but in Brazil there are platforms for companies to get loans directly from the public (essentially crowdfunding, except it's a loan). If you save your money and loan it to a company that will be spending it to expand, you're also having immediate economic impact.
In a broader sense, saving usually turns into investment because otherwise it is wasted, though yes it depends on many factors like the propensity for people put money in matresses and lack of investment opportunities leading companies to hold hoards of cash.
|
On March 18 2021 01:56 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2021 23:52 Artisreal wrote:
I'd wager it got more to do with capitalist propaganda and indoctrination than simple victim blaming, but that's just imo. Not trying to victim blame, ofcourse it has a lot to do with outside pressure. But it all combines into the message of "don't save, spend". Show nested quote +On March 17 2021 23:52 Mohdoo wrote:On March 17 2021 23:46 Gorsameth wrote:On March 17 2021 23:40 Mohdoo wrote:
My wife and I are spending the entire thing since that’s the intention of it for people in our financial situation. For people saving it, consider the economic impact on your local community if everyone spent it. "Don't save, spend it now" is why so many Americans are in debt. People in a lot of debt (or any amount of credit card debt) should pay off debt rather than save it. People without debt should spend it because they are in a good financial situation. The people somewhere in between should probably save it. But if you have any debt other than mortgage and student loans, should definitely pay that off first Totally agree, but I take somewhat offence with the notion of Show nested quote +For people saving it, consider the economic impact on your local community if everyone spent it. . If people don't have saving for a rainy day (which a significant portion doesn't). Then I don't think you should ''pressure" them into spending it with concerns about the local economy. Ofcourse if your in a financially healthy situation, do whatever you want with it. But these checks aren't really for those people in the first place.
The checks are not only beneficial for helping struggling families. For example, if I have new kitchen counters installed, I pay the company doing the installation. The company doing the installation purchases materials from a supplier. That supplier buys from someone actually producing the rock or whatever. There is a cascade of economic impact from people spending, which is why tax cuts for the middle class are generally actually good for the economy, unlike for the rich. Middle class people will spend more if you give them more whereas rich people don't adjust their lifestyle due to tax breaks.
If the economy is doing poorly and people are losing jobs, spending money is a good way to help more jobs become necessary. I completely agree with you that a rainy day fund is a good idea. What I am saying is that when times are tough, people who are doing fine should consider many people are very much not fine. Sure, I could just toss $2800 in my savings account and be more safe for who knows what down the road, but times are tough right now and it is important to me that I help my community.
I think it is ethical to pressure people into spending their stimulus money in responsible ways rather than just decreasing their overall financial risk when their existing financial risk is already low. If they are financially at risk, the situation is different.
|
United States24773 Posts
I don't think it's "ethical" to pressure people into spending their stimulus money any particular way (obviously excluding immoral uses of it entirely). These people did not ask for the stimulus money and did not ask for your opinion. Of course if they do, feel free to offer it.
|
On March 18 2021 03:20 micronesia wrote:
I don't think it's "ethical" to pressure people into spending their stimulus money any particular way (obviously excluding immoral uses of it entirely). These people did not ask for the stimulus money and did not ask for your opinion. Of course if they do, feel free to offer it.
Totally disagree. I think its completely wild to say that I am committing some unethical act by telling people to do something. Feel free to not listen to me, but I'll never keep my mouth shut  I'd say giving perspective on the ethics of how people ought to conduct their lives is a very appropriate thing to say in a political thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
