EPTAh.. ok..
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4102
| 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 | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10637 Posts
Ah.. ok.. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22983 Posts
On December 09 2023 19:59 Velr wrote: What do you imagine a republican led USA will do? Ah.. ok.. Biden doesn't have to get my vote, and I don't expect him to try. He does need to get *enough* votes. Right now, the outlook for that isn't good. Vote shaming might be self-soothing, but I don't think it's going to be as effective as its users expect. Especially since it's been deployed months before the primary. The reality is that for anyone that believes Democrats are willing and able to stop Trump and Republicans at large, they have to convince a winning portion of the country they are, and that voters need them to do it. I can't tell you how/if they're going to do that, but I can tell you that I'm confident they will need to do better than vote-shaming (and so far they aren't). | ||
|
ChristianS
United States3187 Posts
The obvious cause would be the conflict in Gaza, which is obviously horrific. Normally it’s unusual for foreign policy to weigh that heavily on US voters’ minds, but this one has almost an Iraq-War-by-proxy feeling to it. On the one side the atrocities of the Oct 7th attacks whipped people into a war fever; on the other, stopping the devastation of Israel’s bombing campaign is such an obvious moral imperative that it’s kind of impossible to be calm about it. Everyone’s just at each other’s throats in a way I haven’t really seen in a while. For Palestinian supporters, it’s simultaneously clear that stopping the bombing is a more important moral cause than almost any liberal reform the Biden administration could plausibly accomplish, and yet it seems even less plausible than, say, universal healthcare or UBI. This is a worst-case scenario wedge issue for Biden’s coalition, which I think has always been about starting from the mainstream centrist wing of the party, but leaning as far towards progressive as he plausibly can. Given the constraints of our system I think it’s been pretty easy to make the argument that Biden’s been about as successful as you could hope for at achieving progressive policy goals; would a Sanders presidency really have been able to go any further on fighting climate change or protecting abortion rights or creating a fairer economy? He’d still have to get stuff past Joe Manchin just as much as Biden has. That makes it pretty easy for progressives to settle into a coalition of convenience, and figure whatever more progressive changes they wanted just weren’t in the cards this time around. But when you think that best-case-scenario coalition still means enthusiastically supporting and enabling mass murder of innocents, that’s a pretty good recipe for getting black-pilled. I don’t know if Israel-Palestine is the only reason that’s happening, but I think it’s pretty clear it’s happening to a lot of people that previously tolerated Biden, maybe even voted for him. Clearly his polls are bad right now, and I don’t really think there’s another Democrat that could plausibly change that, even if the party wasn’t already pretty committed to Biden at the top of the ticket. Maybe someone could, but we’re not likely to find out. Meanwhile the Republicans haven’t really taken any of their electoral failures as an indication to moderate at all. In fact the Trump campaign is pretty openly promising a reign of terror as soon as he retakes office. Even in the outlandish world of Trump rhetoric it’s a decidedly dark turn. I’m not totally sure why, but I think part of it is that it seems increasingly likely that he’s going to be tried and maybe convicted of multiple felonies by the November election, with more charges pending, and he needs to keep his people in a state where they’d still vote for him in that scenario. Rhetorically that requires pretty explicit support for lawlessness. So it can’t just be “we’re gonna build a wall” or “we’re gonna deport a bunch of people.” It has to be “we’re gonna seize power, and then go on a sweeping revenge campaign against everyone who’s ever wronged us.” A democratic system like this simply isn’t sustainable when one party continuously advocates violent overthrow of the system without really facing electoral penalties. Eventually they’ll take power, and when someone promising violent overthrow of the democratic system gets democratically elected, it’s not really clear what the system is supposed to do. There’s only two ways I can really imagine this stabilizing – either voters give a clear and consistent enough rebuke to Republicans for them to change course, or a constitutional crisis happens, runs its course, and we see what’s left on the other side of it. Considering the apocalyptic mood I’m genuinely worried what role violence will play in the next year. Maybe everybody will settle down a little over time, but it’s not really the norm to trend toward *less* crazy in an election year. On the one side it’s hard to imagine Trump supporters who have been standing back and standing by, getting hyped for the coming reign of terror, are going to feel the need to wait until after the election to start the fun. On the other a generation of black-pilled progressives are not necessarily going to maintain a steadfast commitment to nonviolent means of action. And generally speaking, when everyone feels the stakes are apocalyptic and there’s virtually no hope the activation energy for violence is just a lot lower. I dunno, maybe failing to see the hopeful angle is just a lack of imagination on my part, but considering a lot of the more long-term threats (e.g. climate change) haven’t really even started causing the problems they eventually will, it’s hard for me to imagine the system continuing to look like this in, say, 20 years, even if we manage to scrape by this next election. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States13812 Posts
One thing you can count on is that fascists are incompetent and communists hate each other. Trump is not running with serious people and has 96 indictments he needs to fund a defense against, The one constant in America is that the side with more money almost always wins. The middle east sucks for everyone and there is still a land war in Europe but when push comes to shove campaigns run on cash, and Republicans don't have it. Their big donors are scared to shit about the crazies running the place and they're spending money on things that do not matter while they spend their political capital being insane losers who can't keep their shit together. Things may look bleak on the domestic violence part but a constant in America is that the only thing Americans hate more than losers is political violence. Dems have a massive popular vote advantage and there is only so much gerrymandering you can do before the system breaks. GH may say that dems are going to rely on vote shaming all they want but you're never going to convince me that Muslims will vote for the guy who wants to deport them. The war in gaza won't last for another year and dems will have billions of dollars to spend coming up with reasons to not end the republic. There are a lot bigger issues in the world that are coming up in the next 20 years that you should be scared about. Demographic collapses for Japan, Korea, China, Russia will cause the global economy some serious pain and these nations can't just open the tap for immigration to solve problems like western countries have been preparing for. Wide reaching debt crisis will require increased taxes which will slow growth which is the only real solution capitalism brings to the table. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22983 Posts
Dems have a massive popular vote advantage and there is only so much gerrymandering you can do before the system breaks. GH may say that dems are going to rely on vote shaming all they want but you're never going to convince me that Muslims will vote for the guy who wants to deport them. The war in gaza won't last for another year and dems will have billions of dollars to spend coming up with reasons to not end the republic. While gerrymandering favors Republicans there's a deeper problem of Democrats concentrating in cities with Republicans dominating rural areas as well as the electoral college. Also basically the entire popular vote adv is in CA and NY. No one is trying to convince anyone that Muslims will vote for Trump? Democrats problem is that even if refusing to vote for someone that is aiding and abetting Israel's ongoing ethnic cleansing campaign was limited just to Muslims in Michigan (it isn't), Biden's margin of victory was so slim, that could be enough to lose him a key state in the aforementioned electoral college. Gaza/Palestine isn't going to go away as an issue for Biden just because the bombing stops (assuming it does). As has been pointed out in that thread, Israel has made Gaza practically unlivable, destroying entire blocks of housing, civil infrastructure, hospitals, schools, Mosques, markets, bakeries, and the list goes on. He backed Israel's actions, he'll share ownership of how it pans out over the next year and no one is very optimistic about that. It'll be extremely problematic for Biden the longer Israel continues and even more if/when it's time to see what comes after Israel stops. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States13812 Posts
He will have to own his foreign policy choices, and he will have billion of dollars with a full campaign to do it. Meanwhile he will have things that actually effect peoples lives to campaign on. Republicans have nothing to campaign on and have to explain things like abortion rights and weed legalization. Even Ohio is blue on abortion and that's far far over the line for the electoral college. Who's going to convince people they're not crazy and can be trusted for republicans and with what money? These are the questions of the day that will make the difference. | ||
|
ChristianS
United States3187 Posts
There’s plenty similar things that remain to be seen. What will happen in Ukraine? What will the economy look like? On both fronts I’m not very optimistic, but I’m also not remotely qualified to make any confident predictions. But in both cases my read on how Biden has done so far has been “as good as can be expected,” so I’m not really expecting any huge positive developments in the next year that will get people excited about Joe. | ||
KwarK
United States42249 Posts
As an American your choices are between the people who think we should nuke the place and Biden. Not because Biden is awful but because America is awful. Biden is considerably more moderate than the American public. The complaints levied against Biden for not implementing fully automated luxury gas space communism continuously miss this point. The problem is not, and has never been, the leaders. Not even Trump. The problem is, and has always been, America. Trump declared in 2016 that he would only accept the results of the election if he won. It was never a secret that he would try to overthrow democracy. His voters like that about him. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22983 Posts
On December 12 2023 00:36 KwarK wrote: America’s support for Israel and prejudice against Arabs is an America thing. This isn’t some policy Biden has championed and talked America into, quite the opposite. Biden has continuously called for and achieved restraint. As an American your choices are between the people who think we should nuke the place and Biden. Not because Biden is awful but because America is awful. Biden is considerably more moderate than the American public. The complaints levied against Biden for not implementing fully automated luxury gas space communism continuously miss this point. The problem is not, and has never been, the leaders. Not even Trump. The problem is, and has always been, America. Trump declared in 2016 that he would only accept the results of the election if he won. It was never a secret that he would try to overthrow democracy. His voters like that about him. Biden has been uniquely present and influential on how people alive now got that way, and most people don't go around saying they would invent Israel if it didn't exist already and/or call themselves Zionists. Biden's calls for restraint clearly haven't been to prevent Israel's ongoing ethnic cleansing campaign, but to make it palatable enough to the public that both the US and Israel get away with it imo. Strawmanning not aiding and abetting an ongoing ethnic cleansing campaign with "not implementing fully automated luxury gas space communism" is just sad and embarrassing. That said, the US does have a problem where it might "democratically" choose white supremacist fascism (it's winning at the moment), which is certainly a problem that precedes Biden regardless of how he may exacerbate it. | ||
|
KwarK
United States42249 Posts
He was not elected to meet your specific niche demands which are very out of line with that of the voting public. It would be undemocratic to meet your specific demands rather than those of the American people. He also does not have the power to meet your specific niche demands. The voting public would vote him out and vote in someone more extreme if he were to attempt your weird desire for an authoritarian GH rule. Your bleating continues to be superficial and meaningless. “Why does Biden not simply serve my preferred agenda”? when you have been given the reasons countless times and you don’t even participate in the democratic process because you’ve decided that you’re somehow above it. Not above whining about how you have no power though. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22983 Posts
On December 12 2023 02:26 KwarK wrote: It’s not a straw man, it’s an exaggerated parody of your demands to make a specific point. Your expectations of Biden are unrealistic and unreasonable because he operates within a democratic system in which he is required to work for and collaborate with a group of people who are ultimately not very nice. You continuously miss this and demand that we explain why he doesn’t simply achieve the impossible, despite having neither the power nor the mandate to do so. He was not elected to meet your specific niche demands which are very out of line with that of the voting public. It would be undemocratic to meet your specific demands rather than those of the American people. He also does not have the power to meet your specific niche demands. The voting public would vote him out and vote in someone more extreme if he were to attempt your weird desire for an authoritarian GH rule. Your bleating continues to be superficial and meaningless. “Why does Biden not simply serve my preferred agenda”? when you have been given the reasons countless times and you don’t even participate in the democratic process because you’ve decided that you’re somehow above it. Not above whining about how you have no power though. That's a rationalization for a strawman. Followed by your actual argument. It's not about me or what I want. My point is that no one is safe from their life ending up being "your specific niche demands" that need to be discarded to accommodate other US voters (EDIT: I suspect something similar will happen to Ukrainians). Much like Kwark and Democrats will do/are doing with thousands of innocent Palestinian children killed by Israel in an ongoing ethnic cleansing campaign. Relatively affluent straight white cis-males (and/or people in proximity to "whiteclub") that lean left probably feel pretty safe for now (despite polling that suggests otherwise), but that's sorta the point of the Martin Niemöller quote everyone seems familiar with, but no one seems to internalize. Just to be clear, abandoning electoralism doesn't mean abandoning democracy. I think what is bubbling beneath the surface is the realization that even if Trump does win and start implementing his worst fascist fantasies, Democrats response plan is to beat him in a future election regardless of how absurd that might be. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
KwarK
United States42249 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22983 Posts
On December 12 2023 05:14 KwarK wrote: Biden works for the American people. All of your objections to his failure to specifically serve your desires above theirs can be dismissed. Your problems with what he is doing are problems with America. He’s doing his job capably. If Trump wins (it's increasingly looking like it will come down to Michigan and that's not looking good) that's 100% going to be thrown in your face (by others than myself). But what your reasoning begs to wonder is: Where is the line? If the US decides within the structure of its ostensible democracy that it is going to be an unabashed genocidal white supremacist fascist global hegemony with a fully unleashed megalomaniacal bloodthirsty Trump at the helm, will you still insist "Your problems with what he is doing are problems with America"? As if folks haven't long established that they are aware the problems with Biden, Trump, Democrats, Republicans, and the US system generally, aren't exclusively products of those currently in power and in some very troubling ways do in fact reflect the majority (and/or substantial percentages of) preferences/opinions of the country. | ||
|
KwarK
United States42249 Posts
On December 12 2023 05:46 GreenHorizons wrote: If Trump wins (it's increasingly looking like it will come down to Michigan and that's not looking good) that's 100% going to be thrown in your face (by others than myself). But what your reasoning begs to wonder is: Where is the line? If the US decides within the structure of its ostensible democracy that it is going to be an unabashed genocidal white supremacist fascist global hegemony with a fully unleashed megalomaniacal bloodthirsty Trump at the helm, will you still insist "Your problems with what he is doing are problems with America"? As if folks haven't long established that they are aware the problems with Biden, Trump, Democrats, Republicans, and the US system generally, aren't exclusively products of those currently in power and in some very troubling ways do in fact reflect the majority (and/or substantial percentages of) preferences/opinions of the country. Why would it be thrown in my face? I’m not responsible for the American voting public. I genuinely don’t get why you think America is my fault. I also don’t get this line talk. It’s incomprehensible to me what you think your point is. If America elects a theocratic fascist then it elects a theocratic fascist. I don’t have a line. I don’t need to have a line because I’m not in charge here. I’m not responsible for what America does. In what world would I ever say "you really crossed the line this time America?" and what would it mean for me to say that? What are you talking about? | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10335 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22983 Posts
On December 12 2023 08:08 KwarK wrote: + Show Spoiler + Why would it be thrown in my face? I’m not responsible for the American voting public. I genuinely don’t get why you think America is my fault. I also don’t get this line talk. It’s incomprehensible to me what you think your point is. If America elects a theocratic fascist then it elects a theocratic fascist. I don’t have a line. I don’t need to have a line because I’m not in charge here. I’m not responsible for what America does. It would mean that you recognize US democracy as broken beyond repair within it's own parameters. Unless you accept the whole "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." thing, not that I'm particularly endorsing that framing) as part of those parameters. Biden and his support for the ongoing ethnic cleansing of Palestinians by Israel clearly doesn't cross that line for many people here and otherwise (obviously does for me and lots of others elsewhere). What I was asking was whether the worst manifestation of a tyrannical Trump would cross that line for you. There has to be some line for each individual person where they would say to their government regardless of it's particular inner workings "Too far! Retreat or I'll be ungovernable" when it comes to the rights of their fellow humans or else no one's rights are safe. | ||
|
KwarK
United States42249 Posts
On December 12 2023 08:53 GreenHorizons wrote: There has to be some line for each individual person where they would say to their government regardless of its particular inner workings "Too far! Retreat or I'll be ungovernable" when it comes to the rights of their fellow humans or else no one's rights are safe. This has strong Michael Scott “I declare bankruptcy” vibes. “I declare ungovernable!” Okay buddy. You gonna start taking 12 items through the 10 items or less line if they don’t change their course on Palestine? Go full domestic terrorist or shut the fuck up. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22983 Posts
On December 12 2023 09:16 KwarK wrote: This has strong Michael Scott “I declare bankruptcy” vibes. “I declare ungovernable!” Okay buddy. You gonna start taking 12 items through the 10 items or less line if they don’t change their course on Palestine? Go full domestic terrorist or shut the fuck up. I personally advocate and do my best (and fall short constantly imo) to adhere to revolutionary socialist prescriptions of what that looks like. Frankly, my bar for Democrats is pretty low, so just not belittling and telling the people whose lines have been crossed to stfu would be a healthy step in the right direction from my perspective. Instead of embracing the fact that people are rejecting some the most heinous and cruel bipartisan policies of the US in unprecedented numbers (namely US policy regarding Israel and Palestine), you can stick with the dismissive, abrasive, and threatening combo, if you really think that's effective. | ||
|
Fleetfeet
Canada2521 Posts
The truth is, you're stuck playing this video game. You're not playing a different game, and people point to your tacit refusal to play the video game as part of the reason 'your team' is losing. While I'd find this hypothetical Kwark wholly unpleasant to play with, I do recognize that he's ultimately 'on my team' and doing what he can to achieve some of our shared goals. I recognize how shallow this analogy is, and how GH's motivations are certainly more complex than 'we lost the game go next', but hopefully it serves to demonstrate how frustrating GH's position is from someone 'on the same team' | ||
| ||
