|
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 July 06 2022 11:39 Husyelt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2022 07:15 WombaT wrote:On July 06 2022 06:01 Kyadytim wrote:On July 06 2022 05:49 BlackJack wrote:
Gavin Newsom is running ads in Florida attacking DeSantis and telling people to come to California. DeSantis and Newsom are a couple of smart politicians. This rivalry they have created is mutually beneficial. I suspect it's partly performative. It's like when boxers/fighters call each other out to sell more PPVs and hype up the match. They are helping each other become the face of the culture war and I wouldn't be surprised if this leads to a Newsom v DeSantis showdown in 2024. Even if everything DeSantis is doing is performative because he has presidential ambitions, the harm he's doing is real. This. I rather fear a DeSantis rise, it’s like if Trump had a functioning brain and some actual ideological convictions, most of which are bad. It’s nothing laudable, it’s not even particularly smart. Easy to rile up the mob, what would be actually impressive is calming the mob and building some bridges. If a statesperson emerges who can even vaguely do that they’re getting instant promotion to the GOAT list. Not of Americans but of all peoples of all time. If it makes it easier, DeSantis was sort of luddite before adopting a strongman attitude post Trump. Republicans are going to get stomped at the midterms and presidential if Biden doesnt run again. Killing off abortion is such a dumb move.
Historically having an incombent running has always been an advantage in POTUS elections. They always over perform, no matter how unpopular. So Biden running again might actually be a huge advantage.
|
Austin10833 Posts
Is there a single path here that doesn't make everything worse? I've been thinking about this a lot lately, and it's hard to conceive a resolution that doesn't drag this country down far, far worse than it is now.
|
DeSantis seems the most logical choice for the republicans. He would most likely pull Florida for the republicans which is probably the most important state of all when it comes to presidential elections.
Trump i think wont run again,and if he would i doubt he would win the primarys but maybe.
Incumbents do overperform and have an advantage so i can see the case for Biden again. But he will be very old and overperforming a very poor popularity will not be enough to win an election. I dont really see a good alternative right now though. And if the democrats want to run with someone else then maybe they should start the campaign to bring that person in the spotlight a bit more already.
Its very early but i dont think the republicans will get stomped. Not in the midterms and definitely not in the presidential election. I think they will win both these elections. Overturning roe has been accepted by population and as said before,abortion doesnt really have an impact on the life of most people. I do believe that even many moderate democrats might silently support the courts decission or at the very least they are not strongly opposed to it. It wont be an issue in the elections. The election will most likely be about the economy and when it comes to the economy the tide is strongly against the current president.
|
I don't think it's even remotely true that abortion doesn't affect most people. Not to comment on anything else. I just don't think it's wise to downplay the effect that'll have, or that it's an accurate premise.
|
Indirectly it effects everyone and everything to some degree but it doesnt effect most people directly.
And when it comes to voting people vote mostly based on things that do effect them directly or even worse,feelings alone.
They dont look further and they dont see the big picture. Not only because they can not see it,many people are not even interested in it.
I really do think the republicans will face no backlash at all from overturning roe. You already dont read anything about protests anymore in the media,at least not here in europe. The subject has left the frontpage in like 1 or 2 days. This was remarkable in itself and its a sign on the wall.
|
Should there be more outrage over it? Probably. I think so. I certainly think Democrats in Congress as well as Biden are trying to appeal to that demographic that doesn't care that much, because they're just not fighting. That part's fucked up to me. However, I wouldn't take that, or what the headlines are, as an indication that people don't care, or that it's been accepted. Quite to the contrary, this is a ruling that will directly affect anyone who is pregnant, can get pregnant, is planning to get pregnant, and unless all the sperm donors are deadbeats, they'll be affected too. This is about family planning and feeling whether the state supports your rights or is looking to prosecute you for making the best choice for your family. There's huge movements to support people who have already lost their rights to care, it's far from a done deal.
This is even about basic healthcare, as we've been describing in this thread, there's a whole slate of ordinary healthcare outcomes that are becoming collateral damage, as well. Cancer patients, people with an ectopic pregnancy, even people with a normal pregnancy. Doctors are going to be gunshy about providing even totally normal, legal care if they're worried someone might sue them and destroy their career. Even someone who plans to get pregnant and have a child has to account for greater risk, because despite the exceptions, the rule is going to make it very difficult for doctors to perform even medically necessary abortions. This will have massive ripple effects besides just the obvious. This will affect lots of people, and it's already a bigger deal than most things that have driven people to the polls. It will matter. Maybe not as much as it should, but it will.
|
Northern Ireland27048 Posts
On July 06 2022 20:18 pmh wrote:
Indirectly it effects everyone and everything to some degree but it doesnt effect most people directly.
And when it comes to voting people vote mostly based on things that do effect them directly or even worse,feelings alone.
They dont look further and they dont see the big picture. Not only because they can not see it,many people are not even interested in it.
I really do think the republicans will face no backlash at all from overturning roe. You already dont read anything about protests anymore in the media,at least not here in europe. The subject has left the frontpage in like 1 or 2 days. This was remarkable in itself and its a sign on the wall.
I don’t think a subsiding in media coverage across the pond or protests is all that relevant.
Outside of the type inclined to full time political activism, most regular folk can only get riled up enough to protest for relatively short periods of time.
I’m unsure whether they’ll face a mid-term backlash, I agree there.
But I do think the issue will merely resurface and annoy people again when the elections are looming. Just because people don’t have the inclination to protest in perpetuity doesn’t mean they don’t care enough to be galvanised to go out and vote.
It may, IMO be enough of a lever for the Dems to work around and avoid a massacre in the midterms, although I’m unsure if it’s enough for them to come close to avoiding losing.
There is of course also the presence of those who lean Dem, or are independents who actively support a pro-life position, which will dilute any potential backlash to some degree.
|
As an aside (though maybe not), while Fetterman has been well-positioned to beat Oz for the Senate in Pennsylvania, Republicans are now coming out to endorse Josh Shapiro for governor, rejecting Mastriano and his conspiracy theories. For some reason. Shapiro is currently in favor to win the governorship. PA might get to keep the right to an abortion, among so many other things.
|
On July 06 2022 23:21 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2022 20:18 pmh wrote:
Indirectly it effects everyone and everything to some degree but it doesnt effect most people directly.
And when it comes to voting people vote mostly based on things that do effect them directly or even worse,feelings alone.
They dont look further and they dont see the big picture. Not only because they can not see it,many people are not even interested in it.
I really do think the republicans will face no backlash at all from overturning roe. You already dont read anything about protests anymore in the media,at least not here in europe. The subject has left the frontpage in like 1 or 2 days. This was remarkable in itself and its a sign on the wall. I don’t think a subsiding in media coverage across the pond or protests is all that relevant. Outside of the type inclined to full time political activism, most regular folk can only get riled up enough to protest for relatively short periods of time. I’m unsure whether they’ll face a mid-term backlash, I agree there. But I do think the issue will merely resurface and annoy people again when the elections are looming. Just because people don’t have the inclination to protest in perpetuity doesn’t mean they don’t care enough to be galvanised to go out and vote. It may, IMO be enough of a lever for the Dems to work around and avoid a massacre in the midterms, although I’m unsure if it’s enough for them to come close to avoiding losing. There is of course also the presence of those who lean Dem, or are independents who actively support a pro-life position, which will dilute any potential backlash to some degree.
Yeah I don't believe it will help much in the midterms... it's going to be a long term thing, like how the anti-abortion movement has taken decades to become the incredible political leverage tool that it is now for Republicans. Would love to be wrong though...
|
Feds are doing their regularly scheduled “we’re serious this time! Be afraid! Payments on student loans are COMING FOR YOU” thing again. Here’s to hoping they’re extended again! It’s literally not possible to win midterms with payments restarting and I think they know that. Curious what they’ll do
|
does a majority support student loan forgiveness?
|
I doubt a majority do but that’s not really how elections work. Elections and especially midterms are about doing everything you can to get your maybe voters to become definitely voters. The number of democrats who will stay home if loans are forgiven are likely extremely small. Even if they don’t support it, they’re very unlikely to go vote republicans instead. On the other hand, asking students to resume payments suddenly takes a huge bite out of young voter turnout. It’s inconceivable I would show up to vote if Biden resumes loan repayments while billions are spent elsewhere. Both parties have shown “but the budget” isn’t a real concern and they will spend enormous money on things they deem worthwhile. If they decide young voters aren’t worth it, they’ve made their decision and they will absolutely lose
|
On July 07 2022 04:44 Starlightsun wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2022 23:21 WombaT wrote:On July 06 2022 20:18 pmh wrote:
Indirectly it effects everyone and everything to some degree but it doesnt effect most people directly.
And when it comes to voting people vote mostly based on things that do effect them directly or even worse,feelings alone.
They dont look further and they dont see the big picture. Not only because they can not see it,many people are not even interested in it.
I really do think the republicans will face no backlash at all from overturning roe. You already dont read anything about protests anymore in the media,at least not here in europe. The subject has left the frontpage in like 1 or 2 days. This was remarkable in itself and its a sign on the wall. I don’t think a subsiding in media coverage across the pond or protests is all that relevant. Outside of the type inclined to full time political activism, most regular folk can only get riled up enough to protest for relatively short periods of time. I’m unsure whether they’ll face a mid-term backlash, I agree there. But I do think the issue will merely resurface and annoy people again when the elections are looming. Just because people don’t have the inclination to protest in perpetuity doesn’t mean they don’t care enough to be galvanised to go out and vote. It may, IMO be enough of a lever for the Dems to work around and avoid a massacre in the midterms, although I’m unsure if it’s enough for them to come close to avoiding losing. There is of course also the presence of those who lean Dem, or are independents who actively support a pro-life position, which will dilute any potential backlash to some degree. Yeah I don't believe it will help much in the midterms... it's going to be a long term thing, like how the anti-abortion movement has taken decades to become the incredible political leverage tool that it is now for Republicans. Would love to be wrong though...
Nationally there's not really any indication it is helping in polling, but it could shift a handful of particular state level and below elections.
Part of the problem is that unlike the pro-lifegovernment-forced-birth crowd Democrats don't really have a cohesive or salient plan. Republican's plan was to overturn Roe v. Wade, codifying it is a whole nother ball of wax at this point.
|
On July 07 2022 05:20 Mohdoo wrote:
I doubt a majority do but that’s not really how elections work. Elections and especially midterms are about doing everything you can to get your maybe voters to become definitely voters. The number of democrats who will stay home if loans are forgiven are likely extremely small. Even if they don’t support it, they’re very unlikely to go vote republicans instead. On the other hand, asking students to resume payments suddenly takes a huge bite out of young voter turnout. It’s inconceivable I would show up to vote if Biden resumes loan repayments while billions are spent elsewhere. Both parties have shown “but the budget” isn’t a real concern and they will spend enormous money on things they deem worthwhile. If they decide young voters aren’t worth it, they’ve made their decision and they will absolutely lose
What a disturbing display of egoism.
|
Brandon has been foolish enough to say that gas prices will remain high for a long time - if he were to double down and end the student loan freeze, that’d be more of the same. Deep down, I’m sure he wants to just step off that cliff into disaster.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
You rightwingers are weird. Is the "Brandon" supposed to be funny? Is it supposed to make people mad? I don't get it. The only reaction i get is that you look like a fool.
And yeah, gas prices will remain high for a long time. Because there is a fucking war going on with one of the major oil producers, and everyone is sanctioning them. Also the oil concerns notice that this is a chance to make a lot of money. Saying anything else is idiotic.
Do you want your politicians to lie to you? Would that be better?
I am not a Biden fan at all, but are those really your critiques? Can you not do better?
|
|
|
United States24779 Posts
It is weird to see someone keep using "Brandon" after they were nearly laughed out of the room for it last time.
|
|
|
Northern Ireland27048 Posts
On July 07 2022 05:34 justanothertownie wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2022 05:20 Mohdoo wrote:
I doubt a majority do but that’s not really how elections work. Elections and especially midterms are about doing everything you can to get your maybe voters to become definitely voters. The number of democrats who will stay home if loans are forgiven are likely extremely small. Even if they don’t support it, they’re very unlikely to go vote republicans instead. On the other hand, asking students to resume payments suddenly takes a huge bite out of young voter turnout. It’s inconceivable I would show up to vote if Biden resumes loan repayments while billions are spent elsewhere. Both parties have shown “but the budget” isn’t a real concern and they will spend enormous money on things they deem worthwhile. If they decide young voters aren’t worth it, they’ve made their decision and they will absolutely lose What a disturbing display of egoism.
Where’s the egoism? It’s just politics.
Either find some genuine cultural and political ground with farsighted policy where people come together for the good of society, or just splinter off demographics to vote in a purely self-interested manner.
Those are the options. There is no third option.
Is loan forgiveness necessarily a good policy without further reform? I mean, imo no, but it sure would help my bottom line if I was over the States.
Are ever-increasing house prices for an older generation with little or no student debt who tend to be already be property owners a good idea? Also no
They vote and defend that ground and status quo tooth and claw. Every single election cycle. Without fail. Housing prices dropping are presented as a negative in political discussions in my country at the same time people are struggling to even get on the ladder.
If you’re not going to do anything about that, not even try because it annoys boomers and ‘loses votes’, inflation is driving up prices. If Roe and other social issues have gone by the wayside, and you’re not doing the thing that could benefit me personally, why would I vote for you?
In a crude order of preference I’d prefer a more equal, less cutthroat society and I’d be happy to pay more taxes for that. A distant second is don’t do that, but at least give me something.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
