| 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 | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11507 Posts
But that is so undemocratic. Why not have a referendum, and then offset time according to the percentage of people who want permanent DST vs those who want permanent standard. So if 60% of people want DST, you shift time so it is at the 60% mark between ST and DST. So 5:36 ST will become the new 6 AM.  | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44317 Posts
On March 16 2022 22:54 Simberto wrote: But that is so undemocratic. Why not have a referendum, and then offset time according to the percentage of people who want permanent DST vs those who want permanent standard. So if 60% of people want DST, you shift time so it is at the 60% mark between ST and DST. So 5:36 ST will become the new 6 AM. The chance to mathematically mess with people appeals to me, too. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
mahrgell
Germany3943 Posts
Proposal would be: Patriot Time: It is always 12:00 noon, as it is unimaginable that the god would ever allow the sun not to be centered above the US. Science Time: Just like a sundial, but magnitudes more expensive. PS: it has this wonderful charming side effectof both sides having troubles to make sense at night | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28665 Posts
On March 16 2022 22:27 EnDeR_ wrote: So, Truth Social has had a bit of a rocky start, www.theguardian.com: so apparently Trump has only made one single post, or 'truth' as they call it. Very few other conservative big names have joined, with Sean Hannity being just about the only one active there. Does anyone on this forum have an account in it? I'm glad it's not working out, one thing we don't need is additionally echo chambers. If 'trolling the libs' is the primary motivation for part-taking in the public discourse, there's not really any point to it if there are no liberals there. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On March 16 2022 23:53 Liquid`Drone wrote: If 'trolling the libs' is the primary motivation for part-taking in the public discourse, there's not really any point to it if there are no liberals there. I remember it trending under "Fart" on Twitter when it launched. I don't know who keyed it in at the time, but it was dead-on. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Doc.Rivers
United States404 Posts
On March 16 2022 22:27 EnDeR_ wrote: So, Truth Social has had a bit of a rocky start, www.theguardian.com: so apparently Trump has only made one single post, or 'truth' as they call it. Very few other conservative big names have joined, with Sean Hannity being just about the only one active there. Does anyone on this forum have an account in it? I'm glad it's not working out, one thing we don't need is additionally echo chambers. I would at least be trying to make an account if I had an iPhone. Strange that trump isn't posting much though. Happy to see a competitor to Twitter although there already are some. | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7297 Posts
| ||
|
lestye
United States4163 Posts
| ||
|
Doc.Rivers
United States404 Posts
On March 16 2022 22:02 WombaT wrote: As per others yeah the accusation doesn’t have significance as people aren’t taking it seriously, it doesn’t mean it doesn’t have legs. ‘Russia isn’t so bad folks’ isn’t to me a particularly seriously held position, it’s been adopted precisely due to collusion accusations. At least to the degree we’ve seen, I don’t think there’s another interpretation to quite the amount of devil’s advocacy we’ve seen in the past few years. Someone like Carlson seems to have two completely different lenses of analysis when it comes to if Russia, or say China has done something. Other folks have made huge judgement errors in taking RT’s shilling and not really questioning if there’s ulterior motives behind them being given a platform to say certain things. Why was Russian state media so happy for Nigel Farage to pop on about the EU being, or anyone with a ‘the left has gone too far!’ view. As has been said elsewhere, and indeed here, Russia has been poking money and effort in accentuating wedge issues in the West to push division that little bit further. And been quite successful in doing so. They’ve just hugely miscalculated quite how far along in that process they are and how easily those divides were shelved the second they invaded Ukraine. There’s a difference in occasionally aligning with someone else’s positions and relentlessly playing Devil’s advocate through an inconsistent application of your own supposed standards. Carlson, unlike others absolutely falls into that second camp, IMO. That said the language of ‘asset’ has certain connotations as per a relationship and intent, ‘useful idiot’ is probably more apt. I agree re asset vs useful idiot. In the interest of thoroughness and fairness though, many liberal pundits were useful idiots for China during the trump years, due to their knee jerk/devil's advocate opposition to every action Trump took against china. | ||
|
lestye
United States4163 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21671 Posts
On March 17 2022 02:00 Doc.Rivers wrote: What I saw from left pundits about Trump vs China wasn't "China is good, stop being mean to them" but a lot more "China is bad and we should do something, but I don't think having a random trade war is the way to go".I agree re asset vs useful idiot. In the interest of thoroughness and fairness though, many liberal pundits were useful idiots for China during the trump years, due to their knee jerk/devil's advocate opposition to every action Trump took against china. And a lot of attacking of the reason why, aka having a trade war because the US has a trade deficit with China, which was a bullshit reason given by someone who has no concept of how trade works. | ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9118 Posts
On March 16 2022 23:53 Liquid`Drone wrote: If 'trolling the libs' is the primary motivation for part-taking in the public discourse, there's not really any point to it if there are no liberals there. That would still work even if the liberal attention to it was external. If it weren't for the war and inflation occupying most of our news time, we might be seeing a lot more "look at this bullshit" type coverage of what's being said there the same way it was done with Parler. And that would have likely been enough to sustain it. But without people having time to be outraged by it right now, it sort of just dies by lack of attention same as the trucker convoy stuff. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18826 Posts
On March 17 2022 02:00 lestye wrote: Honestly I kinda miss Trump tweets. His borderline obsession with Robert Pattinson was iconic. You know he loved the Batman. Covfefe, we shall never forget you. | ||
|
Doc.Rivers
United States404 Posts
On March 17 2022 02:06 lestye wrote: I don’t buy that. Liberal pundits have nuanced opinions on China. They’re not going regurgitating state propaganda. I don’t think being critical of the idea that “trade wars are easy to win” makes you a shill for the PRC You've not provided any examples of Tucker regurgitating Russian propaganda (or any other examples of what Tucker is actually saying), and I suspect you're exaggerating there. The argument boils down to, Tucker is saying some things Russia agrees with. During the trump years, liberal pundits most definitely said things about trumps trade war with China that China agreed with (china wants american pundits to say that no trade war should happen), and China could have easily played clips on state TV (and may well have). And those liberal pundits were just stating knee jerk criticism, another example is criticizing trumps China travel ban. There's no meaningful distinction (other than partisanship) between Tucker as useful idiot and liberal pundits as useful idiots. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
| ||
KwarK
United States42668 Posts
On March 17 2022 05:13 NewSunshine wrote: There's no meaningful distinction if you agree with Trump that trade wars are very good and easy to win. You're burying the lead for the n-th time. The liberal critique of the trade war was that it was an idiotic dumpster fire of a way to get back at China, not that they love China. Troll. Plus the fortune spent in paying farmers for all the stuff they couldn’t sell anymore. $51.2b spent on aid to farmers who didn’t want aid, they wanted him not to get between them and their customers. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
| ||
|
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV European League
PiGosaur Monday
OSC
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
The PondCast
Online Event
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
Online Event
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
