EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 3726
| 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 | ||
|
Zambrah
United States7393 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27070 Posts
On July 12 2022 04:34 Zambrah wrote: If it’s Putin’s plan wouldn’t it be Muskcow eheheheheheheheheheheheh Arghhhhhhhh | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24059 Posts
On July 12 2022 03:20 plasmidghost wrote: Well this is not surprising but still shocking. I hope Biden doesn't run again The rumblings to push Biden out are starting: Progressive group to press Biden not to run in 2024 The question is whether establishment Democrats and their sycophants will go the "you petulant progressives are going to make him lose, now fall in line!" route like they typically do or abandon him. We already know that either way if Democrats lose they will blame progressives ahead of their own trash policy and resounding impotency. Extremely unlikely that Democrats nominate anyone that's substantially/functionally different from Biden though. People are mostly talking about pushing the same policy turds with less obviously repulsive packaging. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
If they don't course-correct, fast, Biden is going to get absolutely trashed in 2024. He's showing zero awareness of how or why he got elected. | ||
|
Deleted User 173346
16169 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
Everyone who fought to get him elected was doing so not just to get away from Trump, but to try to undo some of the damage and rebuild something in its place. Seeing a year and a half of half-hearted attempts to pass anything at all doesn't signify that any of those things are a priority for Biden. The Supreme Court has taken all the power that Biden's administration refuses to take, removing any counter-ballast that would enact a "checks and balances" situation. We have a Republican administration vicariously through the court, because the Democrats, who have the ability to do just about anything if they really wanted to, only seem to be interested in asking for donations and pretending they have no power to do anything. All of that is to say, the people who voted for him have been watching, and are absolutely underwhelmed. It's not enough to not be Trump, and they should know that better than anyone. And yet they stand by helplessly. Biden and the Democrats are like firefighters standing outside the house as it starts to burn down, acting like they have no power to jump in and help anything. Then the fire gets huge and overwhelms the house. But at least they're not fire themselves! | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27070 Posts
There’s a reason to actually turn out at the midterms if that’s the case. ‘Hey we’ve tried to do x, y and z, and we keep getting blocked, better come out and vote to change that state of affairs’. Instead what the admin could conceivably do, in various domains they haven’t. What they, realistically couldn’t do, they haven’t even tried. Even if it’s purely performative and for optics, it’s still something. If nothing more than incentivising voters to turn out again for the same rigmarole | ||
|
food
United States1951 Posts
If I remember correctly, some progressives voted against key measures to deal with the Russian invasion. If these people are not dead to you after that - I hope you don't vote at all. They have zero understanding of what's at stake. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46143 Posts
On July 12 2022 14:12 food wrote: Lots of complaining about current admin, how much do you think war plays into how things are turning out? Do we agree it's our #1 priority? Biden has been monumental in bringing the west together, I'm very worried about how we continue under whoever the next president is. If I remember correctly, some progressives voted against key measures to deal with the Russian invasion. If these people are not dead to you after that - I hope you don't vote at all. They have zero understanding of what's at stake. Could you please elaborate on what those key measures were? | ||
|
food
United States1951 Posts
On July 12 2022 14:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Could you please elaborate on what those key measures were? This is the one I read about, I haven't paid enough attention to list other instances: https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2022/04/28/democrats-vote-against-ukraine-bill/1691651153110/ | ||
|
food
United States1951 Posts
https://www.newsweek.com/vote-against-russian-oil-ban-republicans-cori-bush-ilhan-omar-1686655 | ||
|
StasisField
United States1086 Posts
And I don't agree with the progressives who voted against those bills but I also don't think their reasoning is as poor as you're making it out to be. | ||
|
FeatherPlanes
45 Posts
Omar's claim that punishing Russia's oil industry is bad because its going to put the screws on Europe is pretty weak IMO since the majority of bellyaching is honestly from Germany's elite and its their own damn fault because the only thing they've cared about is their economy. Yes its going to hurt Europe but most countries appear to be alright with accepting a bit of pain while they detach themselves from being reliant on Russian gas because there truly isn't a lot of love for Russian imperialist ambitions for practically the entirety of Eastern Europe. Now, there's an argument that Germany needs to be careful how they transition from Russian gas, because they're the center of the Common Market and a major string of internal failures can create a domino effect of pushing fascist parties to the forefront but they appear to be aware of this and are trying to lessen the impact in 2022. Despite mind-numbingly bad PR from their government. In all seriousness though, you can both feed Ukraine weapons and fix everything internally. The only problem is that the only appetite for the majority of US politicians are the weapons. Electing more progressives, as much as I'd like that to be true, isn't going to change things really because there just isn't going to be enough to outnumber the more conservative Democrats and Republicans. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14151 Posts
We can help out Ukraine because the stuff we lend lease them is already paid for from our massive military industrial complex. We can't fix anything internally because one party wants everything internally to get worse. Further the sanctions on their oil exports would do and have done nothing. Other nations are happy to pick up more supply for cheap and Russia can't purchase anything with the funds they get from their sales. The only people that lose are the poor in the west that have to pay for western oil company profits. The sanctions on the Russian oil interests are a wealth transfer from the poor to the rich and they're right for rejecting it. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27070 Posts
On July 12 2022 14:12 food wrote: Lots of complaining about current admin, how much do you think war plays into how things are turning out? Do we agree it's our #1 priority? Biden has been monumental in bringing the west together, I'm very worried about how we continue under whoever the next president is. If I remember correctly, some progressives voted against key measures to deal with the Russian invasion. If these people are not dead to you after that - I hope you don't vote at all. They have zero understanding of what's at stake. There is a world outside of Ukraine, although for the record I give credit in this domain and do support those efforts. There’s plenty of still sitting legislators who thought Iraq was a good idea for one. I’ve less truck with the argument against general sanctions, the other argument regarding seizure of oligarch assets wasn’t an argument against doing that but whether due process would be a thing in doing that. Which I think is somewhat reasonable. Especially when nothing was done but court some of these Russians and their money even after Crimea happened. Including individuals who various intelligence agencies across multiple nations found to have close direct ties with Putin. In my country just as in the States. Not to mention the even bigger problem to extricate oneself from which was Germany’s conscious move to Russian natural gas, even at the expense of their own nuclear program. These are long-term foreign policy failures over decades, and largely free of much progressives pulling the levers. This isn’t even touching on progressive positions on other contentious issues of foreign policy, that I tend to agree with much more so than the current direction of travel. I wouldn’t disown the ‘squad’ over the odd thing when I’ve massively disagreed with huge foreign policy decisions made by the people actually in power. | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6288 Posts
On July 12 2022 16:50 Sermokala wrote: That's an inane take. Electing more progressives means that the Democrats become more progressive. That they need more progressive ideas in the party to appeal to the part of the party that is actually on the left. Nothing is going to change unless you change something and having someone on one end pull things like the squad allows the conservative dems to remain conservative while allowing them to move left relatively. We can help out Ukraine because the stuff we lend lease them is already paid for from our massive military industrial complex. We can't fix anything internally because one party wants everything internally to get worse. Further the sanctions on their oil exports would do and have done nothing. Other nations are happy to pick up more supply for cheap and Russia can't purchase anything with the funds they get from their sales. The only people that lose are the poor in the west that have to pay for western oil company profits. The sanctions on the Russian oil interests are a wealth transfer from the poor to the rich and they're right for rejecting it. If Russia has to sell the oil for cheap it means the sanctions work. It reduces their income from oil. It was never going to cut off all their oil sales. Iran is still selling oil with much more sanctions. Hard currency is still very important even if Russia can't buy as many imports as they used to. If they didn't need the sales they wouldn't be selling at a discount. That it hurts European countries is a poor excuse considering European countries are actively reducing their reliance on it and agreed to phase out Russian oil. | ||
|
food
United States1951 Posts
On July 12 2022 15:32 StasisField wrote: Yeah no, Russia isn't our #1 priority, not by a long shot. We have crippling infrastructure, massive wealth inequality, terrible healthcare for the average American, civil unrest, an unchecked police state, far-right militant groups planning coups with one of the major political parties, worsening climate change, attacks on the rights, freedoms, and lives of marginalized groups, a Supreme Court poised to end democracy in this country, and a whole lot more all going on. The far right is slowly dismantling this country and rebuilding it into a Christian Fascist state that will persecute anyone who opposes it. I hope the people of Ukraine fight back the Russian invasion and reclaim their land, but that is not my biggest concern and not by a long shot. And I don't agree with the progressives who voted against those bills but I also don't think their reasoning is as poor as you're making it out to be. Everything you mentioned is bound to get a lot worse if Russia takes Ukraine and China decides it could try the same with Taiwan. I have no doubt Putin discussed his plan to invade with comrade Xi at the start of the olympics. The shockwaves the event of this magnitude would send would obliterate the world economy as we know it. It's hard to imagine where and how the US would source everything if we were to clash with China. Nothing internal that's going on right now is anywhere close to being as important for our immediate future. | ||
|
food
United States1951 Posts
On July 12 2022 16:50 Sermokala wrote: Further the sanctions on their oil exports would do and have done nothing. Other nations are happy to pick up more supply for cheap and Russia can't purchase anything with the funds they get from their sales. The only people that lose are the poor in the west that have to pay for western oil company profits. The sanctions on the Russian oil interests are a wealth transfer from the poor to the rich and they're right for rejecting it. Some nonsense right there. Russia is taking it on the chin, with over 10% gdp contraction this year. These are some very conservative estimates, propped up in part by seemingly "strong" ruble. The reality is they would suffer a hyperinflation the moment they opened up the markets and allowed to freely exchange currencies. Their unemployment rates are going through the roof with no realistic solutions in place. There are reports that the unemployed are being offered to go to war with the promise they'd get paid well there. And of course, lower energy prices and having to divert to India and China while losing volume hurts them like nothing else. Russia is fucked, and we need to keep it that way. This isn't the time to be derailed by petty bullshit. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On July 13 2022 01:19 food wrote: Everything you mentioned is bound to get a lot worse if Russia takes Ukraine and China decides it could try the same with Taiwan. I have no doubt Putin discussed his plan to invade with comrade Xi at the start of the olympics. The shockwaves the event of this magnitude would send would obliterate the world economy as we know it. It's hard to imagine where and how the US would source everything if we were to clash with China. Nothing internal that's going on right now is anywhere close to being as important for our immediate future. I agree with this. I think it is hard to remember the world isn't guaranteed to be a relatively war-free utopia. Comparing the state of the world now to previous points in history, we are in a golden age of development and collaboration. It isn't just that history continued forward so its just always nice and happy forever now. We still need to maintain it and ensure it stays that way. Russia has shown us in entirely certain terms that flat out bad actors still exist in the world and it is important that we are able to defeat them. Keeping the world together and preventing bad actors like Russia and potential bad actors like China at bay is important work. | ||
| ||
