|
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 |
Northern Ireland27463 Posts
Yeah Biff I’d say that’s pretty on the money.
Being active in retarding change, especially social and cultural change is a huge galvanising thread for huge components of what makes up the modern conservative base.
Hence the rhetoric has shifted in tone from less government or states rights or whatever to non-stop talk of a culture war and elites and yadda yadda.
Wanting to establish some coalition to impede organic social change is anything but wanting the status quo.
Then we see the incoherence and rather haphazard structure above it, when it comes to policy or why trying to analyse a pragmatic response to that from the outside can be so difficult.
If your politics is basically ‘I’m not really a political person’ meshed with a conscious or unconscious feeling that you don’t really like black people, or trans people are weird, and that capitalism owes you a certain status then good luck threading that particular needle in winning back those folks from Trump while not pissing off a lot of your existing base.
|
On June 27 2021 09:58 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2021 09:14 Dromar wrote:On June 27 2021 08:11 GreenHorizons wrote:
DeSantis is the front runner if Trump decides not to run. As to his chances in a general, I think the big issue is whether there's any chance for Biden/Democrats to get the ~half of their votes that were "against Trump" rather than "for Biden" to vote "against DeSantis".
Trump is still by far the leading candidate for the Republican nomination should he choose to run though. I fully expect dems to play something along the lines of "Make no mistake, the Republican party is still the party of Trump!!" Can't they use Trump as a boogeyman for the foreseeable future? Even though Democrats actually run on legitimate platforms and discuss substantive topics, they get raked over the coals incredibly hard any time they occasionally use the "Vote for me because the Republicans are bad" statement, because a lot of voters on the left don't find the "lesser of two evils" argument as attractive as Republicans do. The Republican identity has literally become about how hard their candidate wants to stick it to the Dems, and that seems to work well to rally those constituents. It doesn't work as well with the Dems though; they want progress, not just dodging Trump. Dems want to take steps forwards, not just avoiding taking steps backwards.
Its more than just even having plans to be honest, they have to be loudly communicated plans from someone that feels genuine. Every candidate has plans if you're keen to spend time going to their website and reading through their platform but, 1. Americans definitely aren't going to be doing that on average, 2. the fact that someone's platform is being communicated on their website or wherever instead of being loudly advocated by the candidate themselves feels disingenuous, like its hoping not to be noticed so they can quietly not do it and hope noone notices.
Democrats are good enough at building a platform, crap at communicating it, and I dont see a candidate in the Democrats at the moment that really feels genuine, or actually is genuine frankly, about wanting to enact a lot of progressive policy.
Like, what, maybe Elizabeth Warren? She kind of got taken down a peg in progressive minds after the primary to my knowledge and shes getting too old for comfort for the presidency imo, but at least she seems to have some facet of genuine interest in at least some actual progressive policy.
I honestly can't really think of anyone else though when it comes to frontrunner candidates for the Democrats who are some acceptable combination of progressive, genuine, and willing to communicate their genuine progressive policies loudly to people.
Against a Trump Republican that isn't literally Trump I think they're going to have a harder time than against Trump himself, they really need a galvanized voter base that believes that Democrats in power will accomplish great things, but you have to walk that walk you talk before you're going to generate a lot of enthusiasm in the desensitized cynical American populace imo.
|
On June 27 2021 08:59 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On June 27 2021 07:22 Zambrah wrote:
Being wildly popular with your party is important though, if you’re wildly popular people will turn out to vote, if people don’t like you they won’t be bothered to vote for you. Yes voter turnout is very low in the United States. Something like 50%. So there are as many non-voters as there are Republicans, Democrats, and Independent voters combined. Being able to excite your base is not worthless.
While generally accurate, this has not been the case recently. 2020 was the highest since 1900, being 61 or 66% turnout. Even 2018 was extremely high for a midterm, the highest since 1914 at 49.14%.
The question is if this was a Trump effect only or if it will have some tapering off. I think there'll be some tapering off rather than an instant falloff on the democratic side.
On the GOP side I'm not sure - the main difference between 2018 and 2020 seems to have been the Trump-only voters. DeSantis isn't going to appeal to these voters. He's the best of the 5 front runners for the GOP, but that's because 3 of those are Trump and the other is a Fox News host.
|
That's interesting, Nevuk. I didn't know that. Looks like it jumped a lot in the last election. Maybe the expansion of mail-in voting played a role in that as well.
But I disagree entirely with your statement that DeSantis isn't going to appeal to the Trump-only voters. I think DeSantis is incredibly popular within the MAGA crowd.
|
Desantis is super popular with Trumpers. Florida in general is big for Trumpers.
|
|
|
I think that it’s without Trump DeSantis may be the most popular and or likely choice to run for president
|
Yep, the big enigma is still Trump. Will he run in 2024 ? From what I know about the guy, he won't be able to pass the opportunity as long as he can stand and walk.
|
On June 28 2021 16:08 Mohdoo wrote:
Desantis is super popular with Trumpers. Florida in general is big for Trumpers.
Those aren't the problem for the GOP. The problem for them are his low propensity, rural, lowly educated voters who say they've never done politics in their life. Most of the diehard Trumpers I've read of do not fit that profile.
|
On June 28 2021 22:00 JimmiC wrote:
Just out of curiosity are people talking about Desantis as a better option for the reps than Trump (in regards to winning the next presidential election not whether or not they think he'd do a better job, though it could be related) or are tehy suggesting he is the best option if Trump decides not to run?
I don't know who "they" are but I for one would say DeSantis would be a way better shot at winning. Half the country would never vote for Trump no matter what. That's a pretty bad starting point for a presidential campaign. The big question is whether Trump will step aside in 2024. I think DeSantis might wait til 2028 if Trump wants to run again because he might not want to face Trump in a primary and alienate the MAGA crowd.
|
|
|
United States10569 Posts
Someone want to try to explain to me wtf is happening with the NYC election issues? Do I need to declare a race or something?
|
On July 01 2021 01:41 FlaShFTW wrote:
Someone want to try to explain to me wtf is happening with the NYC election issues? Do I need to declare a race or something?
This article was a decent explainer for the tangled up mess that is New York's electoral system. That state was also remarkably sluggish in counting votes in 2020.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/06/29/politics/nyc-mayoral-race-results/index.html
Also in New York-related news, Trump Org and its CFO Allen Weisselberg are said to have been indicted by a grand jury in Manhattan and the details will be unsealed tomorrow.
Donald Trump’s company and his longtime finance chief have been indicted on charges stemming from a New York investigation into the former president’s business dealings, two people familiar with the matter told The Associated Press. The charges against the Trump Organization and the company’s chief financial officer, Allen Weisselberg, remained sealed Wednesday night, but were expected to involve alleged tax violations related to benefits the company gave to top executives, possibly including use of apartments, cars and school tuition, people familiar with the case said. ... A grand jury was recently empaneled to weigh evidence and New York Attorney General Letitia James said she was assigning two of her lawyers to work with Vance on the criminal probe while she continues a civil investigation of Trump. Messages seeking comment were left with a spokesperson and lawyers for the Trump Organization. Weisselberg’s lawyer, Mary Mulligan, declined to comment. The Manhattan district attorney’s office declined to comment. Trump’s spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment, but Jason Miller, a longtime former senior adviser to the Republican, spun the looming charges as “politically terrible for the Democrats.” “They told their crazies and their supplicants in the mainstream media this was about President Trump. Instead, their Witch Hunt is persecuting an innocent 80 year-old man for maybe taking free parking!” Miller tweeted, apparently referring to Weisselberg, who is 73. Trump, who’s been critical of President Joe Biden’s immigration policies, was in Texas visiting the U.S.-Mexico border on Wednesday. He did not respond to shouted questions about the charges as he participated in a briefing with state officials. Trump had blasted the investigation in a statement Monday, deriding Vance’s office as “rude, nasty, and totally biased” in their treatment of Trump company lawyers, representatives, and long-term employees. Trump, in the statement, said the company’s actions were “things that are standard practice throughout the U.S. business community, and in no way a crime” and that Vance’s probe was an investigation was “in search of a crime.” Trump Organization lawyers met virtually with Manhattan prosecutors last week in a last-ditch attempt to dissuade them from charging the company. Prosecutors gave the lawyers a Monday deadline to make the case that criminal charges shouldn’t be filed. Ron Fischetti, a lawyer for the Trump Organization, told the AP this week that there was no indication Trump himself was included in the first batch of charges. “There is no indictment coming down this week against the former president,” Fischetti said. “I can’t say he’s out of the woods yet completely.” ... https://apnews.com/article/trump-organization-investigation-charges-8b2deb72f74ef13e0d45a69ee7118261
|
I almost feel bad for Cohen being the only one still incarcerated after all the hype. Then I remember he's just as despicable as the people he rolled on and it makes me laugh that he caught the "punishment" for decades of Trump's criminality after cooperating with authorities.
It'd be quite an indictment of the US's system if they don't even convict Weisselberg though.
|
Sting operation by Greenpeace caught an Exxon mobile shit bird going on about how they undermine progress on Climate Change
https://www.npr.org/2021/07/01/1012138741/exxon-lobbyist-caught-on-video-talks-about-undermining-bidens-climate-push?utm_campaign=npr&utm_medium=social&utm_term=nprnews&utm_source=facebook.com&fbclid=IwAR2Gj3P-LierhKdYclaTUsEpfuuEQp-P_YRoa85uDxdg0eN_YzANvS7bvbI
McCoy was tricked by the activists who said they were job recruiters. He talked about working with "shadow groups," supporting a carbon tax that he believes will never happen and influencing senators to weaken climate elements of President Biden's infrastructure plan.
"Joe Manchin, I talk to his office every week," McCoy bragged to the interviewer. He called the Democratic senator from West Virginia a "kingmaker" and discussed how "on the Democrat side we look for the moderates on these issues" in their efforts to stop policies that could hurt the company's business.
Some insight into things that I’m sure everyone already knew were happening, but hey what does a little reminder hurt.
It’s nice we can count on Moderate Democrats to be so flexible on Climate Change, and how things like Carbon Taxes get pushed because they’re so apparently easy to just not have happen.
Love seeing scumbag Joe Manchin name dropped as an Exxon Mobile certified kingmaker.
|
It's hard to imagine being a remotely aware teenager nowadays. Imagine being competent enough to comprehend the overwhelming evidence of impending global ecological catastrophe but literally can't vote against someone like Manchin because you can't vote. Then even if/when you could vote, the generations responsible for your doomed future insist you have to keep voting for the people that doomed you because the alternative is somehow worse.
|
On July 03 2021 10:16 GreenHorizons wrote:
It's hard to imagine being a remotely aware teenager nowadays. Imagine being competent enough to comprehend the overwhelming evidence of impending global ecological catastrophe but literally can't vote against someone like Manchin because you can't vote. Then even if/when you could vote, the generations responsible for your doomed future insist you have to keep voting for the people that doomed you because the alternative is somehow worse.
Part of this is the FPTP system that keeps parties in power with a minority of votes. But even if you had a proportional system, you still have to deal with about 40% of the population being what in Europe you'd consider extreme right wing and about 20%-30% that you call independents or centrists, but I would call plain right wing. No matter how you cut it, American politics are dominated by right wing ideas and currently that includes ignoring climate change. Until the electorate changes their minds, nothing is going to change and good luck doing that in this polarised climate.
|
Without FPTP US political landscape (and history) would very likely look completely different.
|
Northern Ireland27463 Posts
On July 03 2021 16:50 EnDeR_ wrote:Show nested quote +On July 03 2021 10:16 GreenHorizons wrote:
It's hard to imagine being a remotely aware teenager nowadays. Imagine being competent enough to comprehend the overwhelming evidence of impending global ecological catastrophe but literally can't vote against someone like Manchin because you can't vote. Then even if/when you could vote, the generations responsible for your doomed future insist you have to keep voting for the people that doomed you because the alternative is somehow worse. Part of this is the FPTP system that keeps parties in power with a minority of votes. But even if you had a proportional system, you still have to deal with about 40% of the population being what in Europe you'd consider extreme right wing and about 20%-30% that you call independents or centrists, but I would call plain right wing. No matter how you cut it, American politics are dominated by right wing ideas and currently that includes ignoring climate change. Until the electorate changes their minds, nothing is going to change and good luck doing that in this polarised climate.
Yeah I think the voting system is a bit, overstated.
Ultimately you’re just swapping essentially 2 parties vying for 50%+1 of the population for multiple parties trying to form coalitions along the same rationale. Which can have the added problem of being more fragile by being these loose coalitions.
It’s absolutely a better system for my money don’t get me wrong on that, but I don’t see it being all that much better for big existential issues, be it the overall economic system or climate change.
Most comparable nations to the US that use pluralistic methods of electing representatives are in the zone of being better on climate change, but still woefully, woefully deficient compared to actually what needs to be done.
|
Politicians getting money from corporations isn't going away with a FPTP system
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
