• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 22:01
CEST 04:01
KST 11:01
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
[ASL22] Ro16 Preview: Holy Diver4[ASL22] Ro16 Preview: Rough Waters10[ASL22] Ro24 Preview: Siren's Call8[ASL22] Ro24 Preview: Summer's End9Serral wins HomeStory Cup 2915
Community News
Weekly Cups (Sep 7-12): SHIN, ByuN, MaxPax double down1StarCraft open world shooter announced at BlizzCon98Weekly Cups (Aug 30-Sep 7): herO thrives amid growing schism10Official StarCraft website teases new content ahead of BlizzCon?179Stellar Fest TWO the Moon (Dec 16-20)9
StarCraft 2
General
Weekly Cups (Sep 7-12): SHIN, ByuN, MaxPax double down How do you feel about the StarCraft shooter announcement at BlizzCon 2026? Blizzard Classic Cup @ BlizzCon 2026 - $100k prize pool StarCraft open world shooter announced at BlizzCon Balance hotfix patch 5.0.16b (July 16)
Tourneys
RSL Revival: Season 6 - Qualifiers and Main Event RSL goes to London! 2026 Offline Finals Nov 21-22 SC2 AI Tournament 2026 Fall Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament KSL Week #92
Strategy
[G] Having the right mentality to improve
Custom Maps
Nexus Wars 2021 GUIDE [M] (2) Industrial Park
External Content
Mutation # 543 Enhanced Defenses The PondCast: SC2 News & Results Mutation # 542 The Ascended Mutation # 541 Binary Choice
Brood War
General
BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Why Protoss Struggles on ASL (Ft. Shuttle, Tulbo) Official StarCraft website teases new content ahead of BlizzCon? Remastered crash fix suggestions [D] Brainstorming a balance patch for Brood war
Tourneys
[ASL22] Ro16 Group D [Megathread] Daily Proleagues [ASL22] Ro16 Group C [ASL22] Ro16 Group B
Strategy
Replay Review Process - What do you do? Simple Questions, Simple Answers Odyssey Mineral Stack Saturation Game Theory for Starcraft
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread EVE Corporation Diablo IV
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
[TL LoL EUW IHs] Teemo shall perish
Heroes of the Storm
Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Post your watch! Canadian Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Artificial Intelligence Thread
Fan Clubs
MarineLorD Fan Club The Creator Fan Club The ShoWTimE Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
[Manga] One Piece Movie Discussion! Diablo Animated Series on Netflix
Sports
Football (Soccer) Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 MLB/Baseball 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List Northern Ireland Global Starcraft
Blogs
Virtual Romance, Real-Life C…
TrAiDoS
Regacy Esports:Our Goa…
regacyesports
Dreaming of BW patches (mod…
c3rberUs
LOCKPICKING NOOB
LUCKY_NOOB
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 5060 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 3734

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 3732 3733 3734 3735 3736 5967 Next
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
gobbledydook
Profile Joined October 2012
Australia2605 Posts
July 18 2022 09:23 GMT
#74661
It's a catch 22, because if you hold show votes all day then you get criticized for wasting the taxpayer's money on grandstanding.
I am a dirty Protoss bullshit abuser
Gorsameth
Profile Joined April 2010
Netherlands22576 Posts
July 18 2022 09:25 GMT
#74662
On July 18 2022 18:23 gobbledydook wrote:
It's a catch 22, because if you hold show votes all day then you get criticized for wasting the taxpayer's money on grandstanding.
Doesn't matter if a senator is voting or scratching his ass. He still gets paid the same...

It ignores such insignificant forces as time, entropy, and death
gobbledydook
Profile Joined October 2012
Australia2605 Posts
July 18 2022 09:29 GMT
#74663
On July 18 2022 18:25 Gorsameth wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 18 2022 18:23 gobbledydook wrote:
It's a catch 22, because if you hold show votes all day then you get criticized for wasting the taxpayer's money on grandstanding.
Doesn't matter if a senator is voting or scratching his ass. He still gets paid the same...


You're of course logically correct, but you could say the same for the guy who shows up to work and just surfs the net all day and does nothing useful. Both are wastes of time and money and you could argue they deserve to be fired.
I am a dirty Protoss bullshit abuser
Gorsameth
Profile Joined April 2010
Netherlands22576 Posts
July 18 2022 09:33 GMT
#74664
On July 18 2022 18:29 gobbledydook wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 18 2022 18:25 Gorsameth wrote:
On July 18 2022 18:23 gobbledydook wrote:
It's a catch 22, because if you hold show votes all day then you get criticized for wasting the taxpayer's money on grandstanding.
Doesn't matter if a senator is voting or scratching his ass. He still gets paid the same...


You're of course logically correct, but you could say the same for the guy who shows up to work and just surfs the net all day and does nothing useful. Both are wastes of time and money and you could argue they deserve to be fired.
And when given the option Americans overwhelmingly vote to not fire them. Which goes back to where the problem lies, an 80% disapproval rate yet an 85+% re-election rate.

Everyone is garbage, except my guy.
It ignores such insignificant forces as time, entropy, and death
Blitzkrieg0
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
United States13132 Posts
July 18 2022 11:58 GMT
#74665
On July 18 2022 15:54 Djabanete wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 18 2022 13:22 Severedevil wrote:
On July 18 2022 12:06 WombaT wrote:
In terms of raw numbers Manchin does rather tow the party line, I looked as per your mention, but there’s a notable enough series of instances where he doesn’t play ball, and that’s frequently impactful to boot. And often the optics are awful.

Raw numbers can also mislead, because AFAIK the majority leader rarely schedules a vote unless they already know it'll pass.

Schumer seems to think it would be bad optics to say, “Okay, we’re going to vote once a week on simple, basic economic issues, starting with extending the Expanded Child Tax Credit indefinitely. In the coming weeks we’ll vote to peg the federal minimum wage to inflation / make capital gains regular income / make your rent tax deductible / etc. We’ll probably lose most of these votes, but at least you’ll all see what you’re missing by having all these Republicans in the Senate.” IMO they could easily keep up that pace from now until the midterms, and it would be great optics, but what do I know.


Is Schumer not wanting to vote on those things or would the Republicans obstruct all of those votes with the filibuster and they'd never get voted on? Even if Schumer wanted to do what you're saying he couldn't force votes on anything.
I'll always be your shadow and veil your eyes from states of ain soph aur.
Zambrah
Profile Blog Joined June 2011
United States7393 Posts
Last Edited: 2022-07-18 12:18:11
July 18 2022 12:15 GMT
#74666
If Democrats ousted Manchin and won every senate election in 2022 they wouldn't have 70 seats. Even an optimistic Democrat gain is something like 54. This is the strawmen that Jimmy is pointing out.


The fucking point is that optimistic gains are made even more optimistic by Joe Manchin’s bull shit. Democrats can’t get the gains people keep asserting they absolutely need because Joe Manchin exists to deflate any enthusiasm Democrats might be able to generate by like, doing their fucking jobs.

People can’t even begin to consider that maybe, just maybe, Democrats looking so weak and worthless is bad for their electoral prospects and that maybe, just maybe, trying to to bolster their future prospects in half a dozen or more states in the future might be worth losing that one senate seat that won’t even be blue in a decade, regardless of how much power gets ceded to Manchin?

When Republicans take the Senate and the House there will be no excuses to keep Manchin, toss his bitch ass aside and fight for states that can actually be meaningfully blue without having to do aggressive work (because Democrats at their best can only ever do mediocre work anyways)

Clinging to Manchins extremely temporary seat is shit long term strategy, not that the US has much of a long term given how Republicans are, so you know what sure keep him on board, stick with the Democrat orthodoxy and enjoy the hot water as the pot boils.

Is Schumer not wanting to vote on those things or would the Republicans obstruct all of those votes with the filibuster and they'd never get voted on? Even if Schumer wanted to do what you're saying he couldn't force votes on anything.


“Republicans block vote on [Good Thing] over and over” is easier messaging than “Democrats can’t get their own party on board for [Good Thing] so they gave up,” doubly so when the president is fuckin Joe “Bipartisan Deal Maker” Biden.

These are enormous failures of optics.
Incremental change is the Democrat version of Trickle Down economics.
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
July 18 2022 13:41 GMT
#74667
--- Nuked ---
WombaT
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
Northern Ireland27353 Posts
July 18 2022 14:31 GMT
#74668
On July 18 2022 16:13 Velr wrote:
Or it would just paint the democrats as weak losers that can't get anything done. I feel like you understimate how much people like "winning".


On July 18 2022 18:07 Silvanel wrote:
Not as much as they despise "not even trying".

There’s some kind of ‘happy’ medium between making continual stands of ineffective principle, and not trying at all.

And there’s a huge divergence in how much people attention to politics on the daily, or how much they know about various structures etc. Or what their value systems are.

It would be a tad arrogant of me to say what a shift in tack would actually look like across such a varied populace, I can only speak personally in finding the lack of ambition profoundly dispiriting

'You'll always be the cuddly marsupial of my heart, despite the inherent flaws of your ancestry' - Squat
NewSunshine
Profile Joined July 2011
United States5938 Posts
Last Edited: 2022-07-18 16:22:40
July 18 2022 16:16 GMT
#74669
I think it certainly doesn't help move the needle for folks to get deeply involved in politics, when the prospect for Democratic voters is basically you get a better understanding of just how little they're accomplishing, and that's about it. Contrast that with the Right-wing crowd, their whole schtick has been that everything they do is keeping it non-political. They've literally convinced their voters that issues of healthcare and identity are "just politics", and that "politics" is some dirty word that denotes a whole host of things that are basically just frivolous, as opposed to the reality of many people navigating their very real lives together.

For the Right, keeping people disaffected and recalcitrant towards government is the whole point. For Democrats, it's the product of a process where people could be reached, but the people who would reach them see that the Democrats just aren't delivering anything to write home about. Why go to someone's door to try to sell them a product that you're not even sure works properly?

So I think there is a persistent issue the Democrats face, entirely of their own making, where their turnout is constantly depressed by some degree. Nearly every instance in my memory where a more active and progressive Democrat actually fights to get things done drives out support and turnout like fucking nobody's business, it's why Fetterman is gonna trash Oz for the Senate. But still they hang in there with their bullshit metrics like "electability", where they sabotage any chances of winning because they're afraid of losing. They're afraid of taking any risks or leaving any impression. They just don't get it yet.
"If you find yourself feeling lost, take pride in the accuracy of your feelings." - Night Vale
Kyadytim
Profile Joined March 2009
United States886 Posts
July 18 2022 20:35 GMT
#74670
On July 19 2022 01:16 NewSunshine wrote:
I think it certainly doesn't help move the needle for folks to get deeply involved in politics, when the prospect for Democratic voters is basically you get a better understanding of just how little they're accomplishing, and that's about it. Contrast that with the Right-wing crowd, their whole schtick has been that everything they do is keeping it non-political. They've literally convinced their voters that issues of healthcare and identity are "just politics", and that "politics" is some dirty word that denotes a whole host of things that are basically just frivolous, as opposed to the reality of many people navigating their very real lives together.

For the Right, keeping people disaffected and recalcitrant towards government is the whole point. For Democrats, it's the product of a process where people could be reached, but the people who would reach them see that the Democrats just aren't delivering anything to write home about. Why go to someone's door to try to sell them a product that you're not even sure works properly?

So I think there is a persistent issue the Democrats face, entirely of their own making, where their turnout is constantly depressed by some degree. Nearly every instance in my memory where a more active and progressive Democrat actually fights to get things done drives out support and turnout like fucking nobody's business, it's why Fetterman is gonna trash Oz for the Senate. But still they hang in there with their bullshit metrics like "electability", where they sabotage any chances of winning because they're afraid of losing. They're afraid of taking any risks or leaving any impression. They just don't get it yet.
I want to emphasize this point. If I were to attempt to go door to door canvassing for a Democratic party candidate for the Senate, I have no idea what positive ideas I could use to persuade people. There are no accomplishments - which is definitely part of the Republican strategy - but there are also no attempts at accomplishments. I can't even point to votes for bills containing things that would be popular, because Manchin or Sinema says "no" and they don't even bother with a cloture vote. All I can bring up to persuade people is how terrible the Republicans are, which doesn't motivate people as well unless you can make it personal somehow.
mounteast0
Profile Joined January 2020
59 Posts
July 19 2022 03:21 GMT
#74671
I think it might "worth considering" that what actually Biden administration want, not just what he said, may be they just want to be seen as doing something while not really interested in doing anything, especially regarding "progressive" issues.

I have hard time believing that the whole administration is completely idiotic / incompetent in pushing anything through. After all, those people are all "seasoned" / long time / experienced participant in the field, they don't rise to the top because they are totally incompetent. It is not like some kind of rookie that somehow overthrow the government but have no idea how governing works.

The conspiracy theorist in me think that Biden is not really want to push for "progressive" agenda, and he bank on the fact that voters on the left have no choice other than voting for Dem, even if the Dem don't do anything for them, "because" otherwise the life of those minority will be even shitter under Rep rule. May be this is the rationale behind leaning toward "centre" / "moderate"?

From my experience of observing my local election (not US election if anyone actually interested), the above strategy works for a while, after that, there will be enough voters get fed up that they will turn away, not voting or voting anyone else but them. I don't know enough of the US politics to determine if the same would happen, or if that would significantly affect the chance of Dem in election.

Predicting if not trying is a better strategy than not winning is a hard one. Since we don't have parallel universe / controlled experiment, the definite answer may not be known / concluded....
Kyadytim
Profile Joined March 2009
United States886 Posts
July 19 2022 03:36 GMT
#74672
On July 19 2022 12:21 mounteast0 wrote:
I think it might "worth considering" that what actually Biden administration want, not just what he said, may be they just want to be seen as doing something while not really interested in doing anything, especially regarding "progressive" issues.

I have hard time believing that the whole administration is completely idiotic / incompetent in pushing anything through. After all, those people are all "seasoned" / long time / experienced participant in the field, they don't rise to the top because they are totally incompetent. It is not like some kind of rookie that somehow overthrow the government but have no idea how governing works.

The conspiracy theorist in me think that Biden is not really want to push for "progressive" agenda, and he bank on the fact that voters on the left have no choice other than voting for Dem, even if the Dem don't do anything for them, "because" otherwise the life of those minority will be even shitter under Rep rule. May be this is the rationale behind leaning toward "centre" / "moderate"?

From my experience of observing my local election (not US election if anyone actually interested), the above strategy works for a while, after that, there will be enough voters get fed up that they will turn away, not voting or voting anyone else but them. I don't know enough of the US politics to determine if the same would happen, or if that would significantly affect the chance of Dem in election.

Predicting if not trying is a better strategy than not winning is a hard one. Since we don't have parallel universe / controlled experiment, the definite answer may not be known / concluded....

The line of thinking I find most compelling is that the current Democratic party leadership, including most of its elected officials, lived through Reagan and the fundamental change in American politics from "the government exists to help the weak," to "the government is a problem getting in the way of the strong," that led to Clinton cutting welfare programs and calling it a win.

As a result they're traumatized, afraid of getting destroyed like that again and incapable of believing that progressive action will win instead of leading to another Reagan.
WombaT
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
Northern Ireland27353 Posts
July 19 2022 11:21 GMT
#74673
On July 19 2022 12:36 Kyadytim wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 19 2022 12:21 mounteast0 wrote:
I think it might "worth considering" that what actually Biden administration want, not just what he said, may be they just want to be seen as doing something while not really interested in doing anything, especially regarding "progressive" issues.

I have hard time believing that the whole administration is completely idiotic / incompetent in pushing anything through. After all, those people are all "seasoned" / long time / experienced participant in the field, they don't rise to the top because they are totally incompetent. It is not like some kind of rookie that somehow overthrow the government but have no idea how governing works.

The conspiracy theorist in me think that Biden is not really want to push for "progressive" agenda, and he bank on the fact that voters on the left have no choice other than voting for Dem, even if the Dem don't do anything for them, "because" otherwise the life of those minority will be even shitter under Rep rule. May be this is the rationale behind leaning toward "centre" / "moderate"?

From my experience of observing my local election (not US election if anyone actually interested), the above strategy works for a while, after that, there will be enough voters get fed up that they will turn away, not voting or voting anyone else but them. I don't know enough of the US politics to determine if the same would happen, or if that would significantly affect the chance of Dem in election.

Predicting if not trying is a better strategy than not winning is a hard one. Since we don't have parallel universe / controlled experiment, the definite answer may not be known / concluded....

The line of thinking I find most compelling is that the current Democratic party leadership, including most of its elected officials, lived through Reagan and the fundamental change in American politics from "the government exists to help the weak," to "the government is a problem getting in the way of the strong," that led to Clinton cutting welfare programs and calling it a win.

As a result they're traumatized, afraid of getting destroyed like that again and incapable of believing that progressive action will win instead of leading to another Reagan.

I could see that dwelling in the psyche to degrees, for sure.

I think part of the issue is, they were also forged in temperament in a time where average Americans were much more closely aligned around various unifying pillars, be they institutions, or in ideology.

Of course, let’s not exaggerate there have been huge conflicts politically going back, the country wasn’t all linking hands and singing songs together.

If you come from a time where the centre of the country is relatively reasonable, open to the odd compromise, generally trusts mainstream news, well that keeps the door open to compromise and bipartisanship.

That’s patently not the case, but some seem to be approaching politics as if it is. Being able and willing to make deals is baked into Biden’s core, and indeed would be a strength if the political ground was primed for it. It’s like he and the Dems are bringing out their best WoL builds and wondering why they’re not working in LoTV. They may have been excellent for their time, but anyone more versed in the current game knows exactly why they’re not working

Speaking of people being unreasonable, here’s an interesting snapshot of perception on the Watergate scandal and Richard Nixon through time.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/09/25/how-the-watergate-crisis-eroded-public-support-for-richard-nixon/

As more information came to light, those thinking he should face censure and general disapproval climbed. Which is basically the opposite of the trend we’re seeing with the Jan 6th hearings.

People’s response to the pandemic would also indicate the growth of these schisms.

In terms of viable responses, if I could wave a magic wand and rebuild trust in mainstream centralist media that would be great. But I’ve no idea how one would do that, so I don’t blame the Dems for not knowing.

I think that realistically leaves pushing for the rough status quo but fighting considerably dirtier, or go ambitious and aspirational and hope to punch through and make gains.
'You'll always be the cuddly marsupial of my heart, despite the inherent flaws of your ancestry' - Squat
Kyadytim
Profile Joined March 2009
United States886 Posts
July 19 2022 14:27 GMT
#74674
On July 19 2022 20:21 WombaT wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 19 2022 12:36 Kyadytim wrote:
On July 19 2022 12:21 mounteast0 wrote:
I think it might "worth considering" that what actually Biden administration want, not just what he said, may be they just want to be seen as doing something while not really interested in doing anything, especially regarding "progressive" issues.

I have hard time believing that the whole administration is completely idiotic / incompetent in pushing anything through. After all, those people are all "seasoned" / long time / experienced participant in the field, they don't rise to the top because they are totally incompetent. It is not like some kind of rookie that somehow overthrow the government but have no idea how governing works.

The conspiracy theorist in me think that Biden is not really want to push for "progressive" agenda, and he bank on the fact that voters on the left have no choice other than voting for Dem, even if the Dem don't do anything for them, "because" otherwise the life of those minority will be even shitter under Rep rule. May be this is the rationale behind leaning toward "centre" / "moderate"?

From my experience of observing my local election (not US election if anyone actually interested), the above strategy works for a while, after that, there will be enough voters get fed up that they will turn away, not voting or voting anyone else but them. I don't know enough of the US politics to determine if the same would happen, or if that would significantly affect the chance of Dem in election.

Predicting if not trying is a better strategy than not winning is a hard one. Since we don't have parallel universe / controlled experiment, the definite answer may not be known / concluded....

The line of thinking I find most compelling is that the current Democratic party leadership, including most of its elected officials, lived through Reagan and the fundamental change in American politics from "the government exists to help the weak," to "the government is a problem getting in the way of the strong," that led to Clinton cutting welfare programs and calling it a win.

As a result they're traumatized, afraid of getting destroyed like that again and incapable of believing that progressive action will win instead of leading to another Reagan.

I could see that dwelling in the psyche to degrees, for sure.

I think part of the issue is, they were also forged in temperament in a time where average Americans were much more closely aligned around various unifying pillars, be they institutions, or in ideology.

Of course, let’s not exaggerate there have been huge conflicts politically going back, the country wasn’t all linking hands and singing songs together.

If you come from a time where the centre of the country is relatively reasonable, open to the odd compromise, generally trusts mainstream news, well that keeps the door open to compromise and bipartisanship.

That’s patently not the case, but some seem to be approaching politics as if it is. Being able and willing to make deals is baked into Biden’s core, and indeed would be a strength if the political ground was primed for it. It’s like he and the Dems are bringing out their best WoL builds and wondering why they’re not working in LoTV. They may have been excellent for their time, but anyone more versed in the current game knows exactly why they’re not working

Speaking of people being unreasonable, here’s an interesting snapshot of perception on the Watergate scandal and Richard Nixon through time.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/09/25/how-the-watergate-crisis-eroded-public-support-for-richard-nixon/

As more information came to light, those thinking he should face censure and general disapproval climbed. Which is basically the opposite of the trend we’re seeing with the Jan 6th hearings.

People’s response to the pandemic would also indicate the growth of these schisms.

In terms of viable responses, if I could wave a magic wand and rebuild trust in mainstream centralist media that would be great. But I’ve no idea how one would do that, so I don’t blame the Dems for not knowing.

I think that realistically leaves pushing for the rough status quo but fighting considerably dirtier, or go ambitious and aspirational and hope to punch through and make gains.
I think fighting considerably dirtier is also necessary for the second option. "They go low, we go high" ends up with Merrick Garland as attorney general instead of on the Supreme Court. Losing honorably is still losing.
Simberto
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
Germany11981 Posts
July 19 2022 14:38 GMT
#74675
On July 19 2022 23:27 Kyadytim wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 19 2022 20:21 WombaT wrote:
On July 19 2022 12:36 Kyadytim wrote:
On July 19 2022 12:21 mounteast0 wrote:
I think it might "worth considering" that what actually Biden administration want, not just what he said, may be they just want to be seen as doing something while not really interested in doing anything, especially regarding "progressive" issues.

I have hard time believing that the whole administration is completely idiotic / incompetent in pushing anything through. After all, those people are all "seasoned" / long time / experienced participant in the field, they don't rise to the top because they are totally incompetent. It is not like some kind of rookie that somehow overthrow the government but have no idea how governing works.

The conspiracy theorist in me think that Biden is not really want to push for "progressive" agenda, and he bank on the fact that voters on the left have no choice other than voting for Dem, even if the Dem don't do anything for them, "because" otherwise the life of those minority will be even shitter under Rep rule. May be this is the rationale behind leaning toward "centre" / "moderate"?

From my experience of observing my local election (not US election if anyone actually interested), the above strategy works for a while, after that, there will be enough voters get fed up that they will turn away, not voting or voting anyone else but them. I don't know enough of the US politics to determine if the same would happen, or if that would significantly affect the chance of Dem in election.

Predicting if not trying is a better strategy than not winning is a hard one. Since we don't have parallel universe / controlled experiment, the definite answer may not be known / concluded....

The line of thinking I find most compelling is that the current Democratic party leadership, including most of its elected officials, lived through Reagan and the fundamental change in American politics from "the government exists to help the weak," to "the government is a problem getting in the way of the strong," that led to Clinton cutting welfare programs and calling it a win.

As a result they're traumatized, afraid of getting destroyed like that again and incapable of believing that progressive action will win instead of leading to another Reagan.

I could see that dwelling in the psyche to degrees, for sure.

I think part of the issue is, they were also forged in temperament in a time where average Americans were much more closely aligned around various unifying pillars, be they institutions, or in ideology.

Of course, let’s not exaggerate there have been huge conflicts politically going back, the country wasn’t all linking hands and singing songs together.

If you come from a time where the centre of the country is relatively reasonable, open to the odd compromise, generally trusts mainstream news, well that keeps the door open to compromise and bipartisanship.

That’s patently not the case, but some seem to be approaching politics as if it is. Being able and willing to make deals is baked into Biden’s core, and indeed would be a strength if the political ground was primed for it. It’s like he and the Dems are bringing out their best WoL builds and wondering why they’re not working in LoTV. They may have been excellent for their time, but anyone more versed in the current game knows exactly why they’re not working

Speaking of people being unreasonable, here’s an interesting snapshot of perception on the Watergate scandal and Richard Nixon through time.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/09/25/how-the-watergate-crisis-eroded-public-support-for-richard-nixon/

As more information came to light, those thinking he should face censure and general disapproval climbed. Which is basically the opposite of the trend we’re seeing with the Jan 6th hearings.

People’s response to the pandemic would also indicate the growth of these schisms.

In terms of viable responses, if I could wave a magic wand and rebuild trust in mainstream centralist media that would be great. But I’ve no idea how one would do that, so I don’t blame the Dems for not knowing.

I think that realistically leaves pushing for the rough status quo but fighting considerably dirtier, or go ambitious and aspirational and hope to punch through and make gains.
I think fighting considerably dirtier is also necessary for the second option. "They go low, we go high" ends up with Merrick Garland as attorney general instead of on the Supreme Court. Losing honorably is still losing.


Yeah, "they go low, we go high" only works with a population which values basic decency. If most of the population just says "lol suckers", then it doesn't work.
Gahlo
Profile Joined February 2010
United States35174 Posts
July 19 2022 16:03 GMT
#74676
Which is why I prefer a pivot of "They go low, we knee them in the face."
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15743 Posts
July 19 2022 16:07 GMT
#74677
On July 19 2022 23:27 Kyadytim wrote:
Show nested quote +
On July 19 2022 20:21 WombaT wrote:
On July 19 2022 12:36 Kyadytim wrote:
On July 19 2022 12:21 mounteast0 wrote:
I think it might "worth considering" that what actually Biden administration want, not just what he said, may be they just want to be seen as doing something while not really interested in doing anything, especially regarding "progressive" issues.

I have hard time believing that the whole administration is completely idiotic / incompetent in pushing anything through. After all, those people are all "seasoned" / long time / experienced participant in the field, they don't rise to the top because they are totally incompetent. It is not like some kind of rookie that somehow overthrow the government but have no idea how governing works.

The conspiracy theorist in me think that Biden is not really want to push for "progressive" agenda, and he bank on the fact that voters on the left have no choice other than voting for Dem, even if the Dem don't do anything for them, "because" otherwise the life of those minority will be even shitter under Rep rule. May be this is the rationale behind leaning toward "centre" / "moderate"?

From my experience of observing my local election (not US election if anyone actually interested), the above strategy works for a while, after that, there will be enough voters get fed up that they will turn away, not voting or voting anyone else but them. I don't know enough of the US politics to determine if the same would happen, or if that would significantly affect the chance of Dem in election.

Predicting if not trying is a better strategy than not winning is a hard one. Since we don't have parallel universe / controlled experiment, the definite answer may not be known / concluded....

The line of thinking I find most compelling is that the current Democratic party leadership, including most of its elected officials, lived through Reagan and the fundamental change in American politics from "the government exists to help the weak," to "the government is a problem getting in the way of the strong," that led to Clinton cutting welfare programs and calling it a win.

As a result they're traumatized, afraid of getting destroyed like that again and incapable of believing that progressive action will win instead of leading to another Reagan.

I could see that dwelling in the psyche to degrees, for sure.

I think part of the issue is, they were also forged in temperament in a time where average Americans were much more closely aligned around various unifying pillars, be they institutions, or in ideology.

Of course, let’s not exaggerate there have been huge conflicts politically going back, the country wasn’t all linking hands and singing songs together.

If you come from a time where the centre of the country is relatively reasonable, open to the odd compromise, generally trusts mainstream news, well that keeps the door open to compromise and bipartisanship.

That’s patently not the case, but some seem to be approaching politics as if it is. Being able and willing to make deals is baked into Biden’s core, and indeed would be a strength if the political ground was primed for it. It’s like he and the Dems are bringing out their best WoL builds and wondering why they’re not working in LoTV. They may have been excellent for their time, but anyone more versed in the current game knows exactly why they’re not working

Speaking of people being unreasonable, here’s an interesting snapshot of perception on the Watergate scandal and Richard Nixon through time.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/09/25/how-the-watergate-crisis-eroded-public-support-for-richard-nixon/

As more information came to light, those thinking he should face censure and general disapproval climbed. Which is basically the opposite of the trend we’re seeing with the Jan 6th hearings.

People’s response to the pandemic would also indicate the growth of these schisms.

In terms of viable responses, if I could wave a magic wand and rebuild trust in mainstream centralist media that would be great. But I’ve no idea how one would do that, so I don’t blame the Dems for not knowing.

I think that realistically leaves pushing for the rough status quo but fighting considerably dirtier, or go ambitious and aspirational and hope to punch through and make gains.
I think fighting considerably dirtier is also necessary for the second option. "They go low, we go high" ends up with Merrick Garland as attorney general instead of on the Supreme Court. Losing honorably is still losing.


100% agreed. Biden's outdated perspective on political discourse is hurting the country. Farvacola did a good job at explaining that in this thread previously.
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
July 19 2022 20:44 GMT
#74678
--- Nuked ---
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
July 19 2022 23:04 GMT
#74679
--- Nuked ---
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States44286 Posts
July 19 2022 23:49 GMT
#74680
On July 20 2022 05:44 JimmiC wrote:
What is the logic in being against Finland and Sweden joining NATO? Its 18 Reps, so I instantly assume its hur dur everyone says this is good so itd bad hurdur QAnon.

Every additional member of the alliance represents additional obligations and entanglement. Ukraine joining massively increases the risk of a NATO Russia war, for example.
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
Prev 1 3732 3733 3734 3735 3736 5967 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
PiGosaur Cup
00:00
#99
PiGStarcraft546
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
PiGStarcraft546
ByuN 199
RuFF_SC2 144
StarCraft: Brood War
GuemChi 1965
910 39
ajuk12(nOOB) 14
Moletrap 5
Dota 2
monkeys_forever907
League of Legends
JimRising 607
Counter-Strike
taco 315
Super Smash Bros
hungrybox676
Other Games
summit1g11649
C9.Mang0414
WinterStarcraft349
XaKoH 280
ViBE123
Maynarde120
Mew2King27
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick2060
[ Show 11 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH139
• Hupsaiya 92
• EnkiAlexander 68
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• Migwel
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Upcoming Events
The PondCast
7h 59m
Kung Fu Cup
8h 59m
Replay Cast
21h 59m
KCM Race Survival
1d 7h
IntoTheTV X SOOP
1d 8h
Cure vs SHIN
herO vs Solar
Percival vs Classic
ByuN vs Rogue
OSC
1d 19h
Replay Cast
1d 21h
IntoTheTV X SOOP
2 days
Replay Cast
2 days
GSL
3 days
[ Show More ]
Replay Cast
3 days
GSL
4 days
Shopify Rebellion Sundays
4 days
Spirit vs Mixu
Replay Cast
4 days
WardiTV Weekly
5 days
Monday Night Weeklies
5 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
6 days
PiGosaur Cup
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Acropolis #5 - TRS
Blizzard Classic Cup 2026
Big Dog Cup 2026 Div 1

Ongoing

KCM Race Survival 2026 Season 3
K-JUNGMAN
ASL Season 22
Super Anchor Qualifying S3
CSL 2026 AUTUMN (S22)
Acropolis #5
Calamity Invitational
FISSURE Playground #3
BLAST Open Fall 2026
Esports World Cup 2026
BLAST Bounty Summer 2026
BLAST Bounty Summer Qual
Stake Ranked Episode 3
XSE Pro League 2026

Upcoming

Acropolis #5 - GSA
Acropolis #5 - GSB
Acropolis #5 - GSC
SC4ALL II: Brood War
HSC XXX
Stellar Fest 2: Lunar Cup
SC4ALL II: StarCraft II
Kung Fu Cup 2026 Grand Finals
RSL Offline Finals
Copium Cup
PGL Major Singapore 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 6
BLAST Rivals Fall 2026
IEM Beijing 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 5
PGL Masters Bucharest 2026
1win Private Club #2
Thunderpick World Champ. '26
ESL Pro League Season 24
Stake Ranked Episode 4
1win Private Club #1
Logitech G Play Connect 2026
SL StarSeries Fall 2026
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2026 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.