|
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 August 05 2024 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2024 02:18 Slydie wrote:On August 05 2024 01:19 Gorsameth wrote:
Trump has nothing to gain by having another debate, and I question if he has anything to lose either. With how little the polls moved after the first debate, nor the assassination attempt you can question if there are any actual swing voters left.
This election will be decided by turnout and I doubt Republicans will stay home because Trump is a coward, all they will hear in the Fox bubble is how Harris is refusing to debate Trump on Fox. Most politicians would love a debate if they have any faith in what they stand for. Trump is no politician, but still! Not showing up is a sign of weakness, and it is used against him a lot already. I don't think it is a given that he has more to lose than to gain from a debate, but after seeing Biden pull out after seeming old, I can understand it. Worth remembering the plan for Democrats was not to have debates (like they didn't for their pseudo-primary) and Biden only called for Trump to have them out of desperation. It makes sense for Democrats to rip on Trump if he doesn't debate, it's just insincere as shit and anyone even considering voting for Trump recognizes that. The only way Trump takes a hit for skipping debating Harris, is if she agrees to do it on Fox (maybe paired with a commitment for an MSNBC debate or something), and he bails out of the Fox debate he's proposing.
There's nothing sincere about this election, and anything that says otherwise is just spin.
This is a cut throat, mud throwing, dirty, political as it gets presidential election. There's no point trying to argue about semantics and moral high ground anymore. Just do what it takes to win, and get it over with already.
|
On August 05 2024 02:52 Vindicare605 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2024 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 05 2024 02:18 Slydie wrote:On August 05 2024 01:19 Gorsameth wrote:
Trump has nothing to gain by having another debate, and I question if he has anything to lose either. With how little the polls moved after the first debate, nor the assassination attempt you can question if there are any actual swing voters left.
This election will be decided by turnout and I doubt Republicans will stay home because Trump is a coward, all they will hear in the Fox bubble is how Harris is refusing to debate Trump on Fox. Most politicians would love a debate if they have any faith in what they stand for. Trump is no politician, but still! Not showing up is a sign of weakness, and it is used against him a lot already. I don't think it is a given that he has more to lose than to gain from a debate, but after seeing Biden pull out after seeming old, I can understand it. Worth remembering the plan for Democrats was not to have debates (like they didn't for their pseudo-primary) and Biden only called for Trump to have them out of desperation. It makes sense for Democrats to rip on Trump if he doesn't debate, it's just insincere as shit and anyone even considering voting for Trump recognizes that. The only way Trump takes a hit for skipping debating Harris, is if she agrees to do it on Fox (maybe paired with a commitment for an MSNBC debate or something), and he bails out of the Fox debate he's proposing. There's nothing sincere about this election, and anything that says otherwise is just spin. This is a cut throat mud throwing dirty political as it gets presidential election. There's no point trying to argue about semantics and moral high ground anymore. Just do what it takes to win, and get it over with already. Yeah, there's just also not a clear path out of this race to the bottom either.
Despite this being a turnout election Harris is already running to the right of herself in 2020, while poised to pick a pro-police, anti-corporate tax, Zionist for VP.
People fixate on Trump, but the parties are positioned so that there is no Republican-Democrat contest where the same "I'd vote for anything with a D next to its name over the Republican" doesn't apply or won't apply going forward. Democrats are already overlooking what they themselves identify as genocide, so it seems there is nothing preventing the US from descending to rock bottom.
|
Another unpatriotic and unfavorable take by JD Vance is being circulated, due to the Olympics... He ridiculed Simone Biles for being weak and society for supporting her, a few years ago:
"Senator JD Vance of Ohio, the Republican vice-presidential nominee, is drawing renewed scrutiny over his past remarks that the American gymnast Simone Biles, who won another Olympic all-around gold medal on Thursday, showed weakness when she withdrew from the previous Games because of a mental health issue.
Mr. Vance, during an appearance on Fox News in 2021, questioned why Ms. Biles was receiving acclaim for stepping away from the competition at the Tokyo games.
“I think it reflects pretty poorly on our sort of therapeutic society that we try to praise people, not for moments of strength, not for moments of heroism, but for their weakest moments,” Mr. Vance, who was running for the Senate, said at the time."
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/01/us/politics/jd-vance-simone-biles.html?fbclid=IwY2xjawEcsxNleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHTKTlNHdbaSrwsEa0uPL2SsrDTz1EwuQyFO9B2LDw0IjplKVjWC9Raninw_aem_Pm-_uiIIwNvWNXhhgv8vjA
|
United States44355 Posts
On August 05 2024 03:08 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2024 02:52 Vindicare605 wrote:On August 05 2024 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 05 2024 02:18 Slydie wrote:On August 05 2024 01:19 Gorsameth wrote:
Trump has nothing to gain by having another debate, and I question if he has anything to lose either. With how little the polls moved after the first debate, nor the assassination attempt you can question if there are any actual swing voters left.
This election will be decided by turnout and I doubt Republicans will stay home because Trump is a coward, all they will hear in the Fox bubble is how Harris is refusing to debate Trump on Fox. Most politicians would love a debate if they have any faith in what they stand for. Trump is no politician, but still! Not showing up is a sign of weakness, and it is used against him a lot already. I don't think it is a given that he has more to lose than to gain from a debate, but after seeing Biden pull out after seeming old, I can understand it. Worth remembering the plan for Democrats was not to have debates (like they didn't for their pseudo-primary) and Biden only called for Trump to have them out of desperation. It makes sense for Democrats to rip on Trump if he doesn't debate, it's just insincere as shit and anyone even considering voting for Trump recognizes that. The only way Trump takes a hit for skipping debating Harris, is if she agrees to do it on Fox (maybe paired with a commitment for an MSNBC debate or something), and he bails out of the Fox debate he's proposing. There's nothing sincere about this election, and anything that says otherwise is just spin. This is a cut throat mud throwing dirty political as it gets presidential election. There's no point trying to argue about semantics and moral high ground anymore. Just do what it takes to win, and get it over with already. Yeah, there's just also not a clear path out of this race to the bottom either. Despite this being a turnout election Harris is already running to the right of herself in 2020, while poised to pick a pro-police, anti-corporate tax, Zionist for VP. People fixate on Trump, but the parties are positioned so that there is no Republican-Democrat contest where the same "I'd vote for anything with a D next to its name over the Republican" doesn't apply or won't apply going forward. Democrats are already overlooking what they themselves identify as genocide, so it seems there is nothing preventing the US from descending to rock bottom.
Hence the need for the imaginary revolution. We’re all on board with the imaginary revolution.
|
On August 05 2024 05:09 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2024 03:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 05 2024 02:52 Vindicare605 wrote:On August 05 2024 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 05 2024 02:18 Slydie wrote:On August 05 2024 01:19 Gorsameth wrote:
Trump has nothing to gain by having another debate, and I question if he has anything to lose either. With how little the polls moved after the first debate, nor the assassination attempt you can question if there are any actual swing voters left.
This election will be decided by turnout and I doubt Republicans will stay home because Trump is a coward, all they will hear in the Fox bubble is how Harris is refusing to debate Trump on Fox. Most politicians would love a debate if they have any faith in what they stand for. Trump is no politician, but still! Not showing up is a sign of weakness, and it is used against him a lot already. I don't think it is a given that he has more to lose than to gain from a debate, but after seeing Biden pull out after seeming old, I can understand it. Worth remembering the plan for Democrats was not to have debates (like they didn't for their pseudo-primary) and Biden only called for Trump to have them out of desperation. It makes sense for Democrats to rip on Trump if he doesn't debate, it's just insincere as shit and anyone even considering voting for Trump recognizes that. The only way Trump takes a hit for skipping debating Harris, is if she agrees to do it on Fox (maybe paired with a commitment for an MSNBC debate or something), and he bails out of the Fox debate he's proposing. There's nothing sincere about this election, and anything that says otherwise is just spin. This is a cut throat mud throwing dirty political as it gets presidential election. There's no point trying to argue about semantics and moral high ground anymore. Just do what it takes to win, and get it over with already. Yeah, there's just also not a clear path out of this race to the bottom either. Despite this being a turnout election Harris is already running to the right of herself in 2020, while poised to pick a pro-police, anti-corporate tax, Zionist for VP. People fixate on Trump, but the parties are positioned so that there is no Republican-Democrat contest where the same "I'd vote for anything with a D next to its name over the Republican" doesn't apply or won't apply going forward. Democrats are already overlooking what they themselves identify as genocide, so it seems there is nothing preventing the US from descending to rock bottom. Hence the need for the imaginary revolution. We’re all on board with the imaginary revolution. It's not imaginary, it's developing. You're not on board, you're in opposition to it, baton in hand.
|
United States44355 Posts
On August 05 2024 05:23 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2024 05:09 KwarK wrote:On August 05 2024 03:08 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 05 2024 02:52 Vindicare605 wrote:On August 05 2024 02:35 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 05 2024 02:18 Slydie wrote:On August 05 2024 01:19 Gorsameth wrote:
Trump has nothing to gain by having another debate, and I question if he has anything to lose either. With how little the polls moved after the first debate, nor the assassination attempt you can question if there are any actual swing voters left.
This election will be decided by turnout and I doubt Republicans will stay home because Trump is a coward, all they will hear in the Fox bubble is how Harris is refusing to debate Trump on Fox. Most politicians would love a debate if they have any faith in what they stand for. Trump is no politician, but still! Not showing up is a sign of weakness, and it is used against him a lot already. I don't think it is a given that he has more to lose than to gain from a debate, but after seeing Biden pull out after seeming old, I can understand it. Worth remembering the plan for Democrats was not to have debates (like they didn't for their pseudo-primary) and Biden only called for Trump to have them out of desperation. It makes sense for Democrats to rip on Trump if he doesn't debate, it's just insincere as shit and anyone even considering voting for Trump recognizes that. The only way Trump takes a hit for skipping debating Harris, is if she agrees to do it on Fox (maybe paired with a commitment for an MSNBC debate or something), and he bails out of the Fox debate he's proposing. There's nothing sincere about this election, and anything that says otherwise is just spin. This is a cut throat mud throwing dirty political as it gets presidential election. There's no point trying to argue about semantics and moral high ground anymore. Just do what it takes to win, and get it over with already. Yeah, there's just also not a clear path out of this race to the bottom either. Despite this being a turnout election Harris is already running to the right of herself in 2020, while poised to pick a pro-police, anti-corporate tax, Zionist for VP. People fixate on Trump, but the parties are positioned so that there is no Republican-Democrat contest where the same "I'd vote for anything with a D next to its name over the Republican" doesn't apply or won't apply going forward. Democrats are already overlooking what they themselves identify as genocide, so it seems there is nothing preventing the US from descending to rock bottom. Hence the need for the imaginary revolution. We’re all on board with the imaginary revolution. It's not imaginary, it's developing. You're not on board, you're in opposition to it, baton in hand.
That’s no way to speak to a comrade and brother in arms. Be careful lest you fall into the trap of factionalism. Only through unity can we prevail.
|
Northern Ireland27460 Posts
Are we really going down this rabbit hole again?
|
Personally I deeply enjoy that hole.
|
On August 05 2024 05:57 Velr wrote:
Personally I deeply enjoy that hole.
You gotta enjoy it or else what are you doing?
|
On August 05 2024 05:59 NewSunshine wrote:You gotta enjoy it or else what are you doing?
Certainly not righteously seizing the means of production, nor preventing genocide, that's for sure. /GH
|
On August 05 2024 06:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2024 05:59 NewSunshine wrote:On August 05 2024 05:57 Velr wrote:
Personally I deeply enjoy that hole. You gotta enjoy it or else what are you doing? Certainly not righteously seizing the means of production, nor preventing genocide, that's for sure. /GH
I'll give you the first one, but preventing genocide (or at least not materially supporting it) used to be something Democrats wouldn't consider a laugh line.
Now they feel compelled to rationalize what they themselves identify as supporting genocide on their path to being the "lesser evil" face for a pseudo-libertarian fascist oligopoly.
|
On August 05 2024 07:01 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2024 06:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 05 2024 05:59 NewSunshine wrote:On August 05 2024 05:57 Velr wrote:
Personally I deeply enjoy that hole. You gotta enjoy it or else what are you doing? Certainly not righteously seizing the means of production, nor preventing genocide, that's for sure. /GH I'll give you the first one, but preventing genocide (or at least not materially supporting it) used to be something Democrats wouldn't consider a laugh line. Now they feel compelled to rationalize what they themselves identify as supporting genocide on their path to being the "lesser evil" face for a pseudo-libertarian fascist oligopoly. Really? When was the last time Democrats stopped Israel from committing genocide against Palestinians?
Because from where I am sitting the US's (both Republican and Democrat) stance on Israel has remained the same for as long as I can remember.
|
On August 05 2024 07:11 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2024 07:01 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 05 2024 06:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 05 2024 05:59 NewSunshine wrote:On August 05 2024 05:57 Velr wrote:
Personally I deeply enjoy that hole. You gotta enjoy it or else what are you doing? Certainly not righteously seizing the means of production, nor preventing genocide, that's for sure. /GH I'll give you the first one, but preventing genocide (or at least not materially supporting it) used to be something Democrats wouldn't consider a laugh line. Now they feel compelled to rationalize what they themselves identify as supporting genocide on their path to being the "lesser evil" face for a pseudo-libertarian fascist oligopoly. Really? When was the last time Democrats stopped Israel from committing genocide against Palestinians? Because from where I am sitting the US's (both Republican and Democrat) stance on Israel has remained the same for as long as I can remember.
Before the US relied on (and Democrats widely accepted) the pretense that Israel was simply defending itself and the gaslighting saying that people weren't witnessing an apartheid state engaged in an ethnic cleansing campaign.
It wasn't true, but they ostensibly believed it, and it was a huge part of the foundation of their rationalizations that even they can't maintain anymore. Now it's just a cynical electoral rationalization without an escape plan for it leading them to just being the baddies themselves (presuming they don't recognize voting for people arming and supporting genocide as that in the first place).
|
On August 05 2024 07:01 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2024 06:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 05 2024 05:59 NewSunshine wrote:On August 05 2024 05:57 Velr wrote:
Personally I deeply enjoy that hole. You gotta enjoy it or else what are you doing? Certainly not righteously seizing the means of production, nor preventing genocide, that's for sure. /GH I'll give you the first one, but preventing genocide (or at least not materially supporting it) used to be something Democrats wouldn't consider a laugh line. Now they feel compelled to rationalize what they themselves identify as supporting genocide on their path to being the "lesser evil" face for a pseudo-libertarian fascist oligopoly.
I don't think either are laugh lines. I think both are topics that you frequently mention, hence the "/GH" at the end of my post. I was signifying what I think you'd bring up in a post, not what I think is necessarily good or bad.
|
On August 05 2024 07:26 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2024 07:11 Gorsameth wrote:On August 05 2024 07:01 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 05 2024 06:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 05 2024 05:59 NewSunshine wrote:On August 05 2024 05:57 Velr wrote:
Personally I deeply enjoy that hole. You gotta enjoy it or else what are you doing? Certainly not righteously seizing the means of production, nor preventing genocide, that's for sure. /GH I'll give you the first one, but preventing genocide (or at least not materially supporting it) used to be something Democrats wouldn't consider a laugh line. Now they feel compelled to rationalize what they themselves identify as supporting genocide on their path to being the "lesser evil" face for a pseudo-libertarian fascist oligopoly. Really? When was the last time Democrats stopped Israel from committing genocide against Palestinians? Because from where I am sitting the US's (both Republican and Democrat) stance on Israel has remained the same for as long as I can remember. Before the US relied on (and Democrats widely accepted) the pretense that Israel was simply defending itself and the gaslighting saying that people weren't witnessing an apartheid state engaged in an ethnic cleansing campaign. It wasn't true, but they ostensibly believed it, and it was a huge part of the foundation of their rationalizations that even they can't maintain anymore. Now it's just a cynical electoral rationalization without an escape plan for it leading them to just being the baddies themselves (presuming they don't recognize voting for people arming and supporting genocide as that in the first place). So that would be a no then. The Democrats position hasn't changed.
And the people that were against the treatment of Palestinians before are still against but just as before the powers that be do support Israel unequivocal.
|
On August 05 2024 07:59 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2024 07:26 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 05 2024 07:11 Gorsameth wrote:On August 05 2024 07:01 GreenHorizons wrote:On August 05 2024 06:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On August 05 2024 05:59 NewSunshine wrote:On August 05 2024 05:57 Velr wrote:
Personally I deeply enjoy that hole. You gotta enjoy it or else what are you doing? Certainly not righteously seizing the means of production, nor preventing genocide, that's for sure. /GH I'll give you the first one, but preventing genocide (or at least not materially supporting it) used to be something Democrats wouldn't consider a laugh line. Now they feel compelled to rationalize what they themselves identify as supporting genocide on their path to being the "lesser evil" face for a pseudo-libertarian fascist oligopoly. Really? When was the last time Democrats stopped Israel from committing genocide against Palestinians? Because from where I am sitting the US's (both Republican and Democrat) stance on Israel has remained the same for as long as I can remember. Before the US relied on (and Democrats widely accepted) the pretense that Israel was simply defending itself and the gaslighting saying that people weren't witnessing an apartheid state engaged in an ethnic cleansing campaign. It wasn't true, but they ostensibly believed it, and it was a huge part of the foundation of their rationalizations that even they can't maintain anymore. Now it's just a cynical electoral rationalization without an escape plan for it leading them to just being the baddies themselves (presuming they don't recognize voting for people arming and supporting genocide as that in the first place). So that would be a no then. The Democrats position hasn't changed. + Show Spoiler +And the people that were against the treatment of Palestinians before are still against but just as before the powers that be do support Israel unequivocal.
Yes and no. If you asked Democrats in 2008 if they supported Israel's genocide of Palestinians they would have said "No, there isn't one". Now they would say "No, I'm just voting for people that do".
Today it's genocide, but one of the points I'm raising is that they don't have an escape plan for when it's something worse than genocide they're empowering. Or even what could actually be bad enough to trigger such a plan. When genocide doesn't trigger it, it's hard to imagine what could.
|
On August 05 2024 01:00 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2024 00:50 Vindicare605 wrote:
I don't blame him for ducking this last debate. It seems cowardly and it is, but it's also the smart thing for his campaign to do. If Harris had been the candidate from the start he probably would have never agreed to the debates in the first place. There's nothing to be gained for him from them.
Do you not think the American people generally deserve chances to see what the candidates' policy positions are, straight from their own mouths (without someone else writing the teleprompter speech so to speak)?
Why do American people need to see what candidates' policy positions are, if they don't even get a say in who the candidates will be? It's an election between two populist factions, one screaming 'vote for me, I will fix our country!' and the other screaming, 'vote for me, or the other guy will destroy our country!' That's literally the only thing they're campaigning on, every 'policy decision' they might talk about is just there to try and get whatever's left of undecided voters in some Important Battleground State (TM) they might hope to scrounge up to help them get the election win. I mean, just look at the conversation about Harris' VP decision over the last few pages.
Yes and no. If you asked Democrats in 2008 if they supported Israel's genocide of Palestinians they would have said "No, there isn't one". Now they would say "No, I'm just voting for people that do".
Yeah, but they're only doing it to save the country from a fascist takeover that would help Israel genocide Palestinians even harder, you see. Ain't got no choice.
|
If Israel wanted to "genocide" the palestinians... they could have done much better. They bombed almost all of Gaza.
If they had done it without warning, they much likely would have killed all of them..which would have been a genocide.
So just don't use the word.
|
On August 05 2024 15:17 KT_Elwood wrote:
If Israel wanted to "genocide" the palestinians... they could have done much better. They bombed almost all of Gaza.
If they had done it without warning, they much likely would have killed all of them..which would have been a genocide.
So just don't use the word.
Yeah, and the Russians could have just nuked Ukraine, but they didn't, how very considerate of them.
|
On August 05 2024 15:41 Salazarz wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2024 15:17 KT_Elwood wrote:
If Israel wanted to "genocide" the palestinians... they could have done much better. They bombed almost all of Gaza.
If they had done it without warning, they much likely would have killed all of them..which would have been a genocide.
So just don't use the word.
Yeah, and the Russians could have just nuked Ukraine, but they didn't, how very considerate of them.
Missing the point.
Russia wants to exert influence over ukraine and it's people. Putin failed politicly when his puppets got driven out by maidan protests, that's when he decided to destabilize attack the donbas region
Followed up by the invasion of crimea by unmarked forces, and the eventual annexiation. Same with heavy weapons deployments in donbass to "freedom fighters" that totally not affiliated with russia /s.
Moscow doesn't give a crap about people, never has, and that's why they target civilian infrastructure once they ran out of military targets.
Nuking Ukraine wouldn't have make much sense, since the kremlin was led on to believe that a show of force (mass Tanks from belarus) would basicly win kiyv over night.
At this stage the war needs to go on forever, which is a conclusion putin hopes gets into people's heads. He can't win, but he knows that western partners can't let ukraine win as well, since nukes can be an option of conventional warfare fails for putin.
Ukraine can only be won in moscow. My believe is, that western policy has to be winning india and china over, to cut all support for Russia - or put every country that doesn't sanction russia.. on the same sanction lists as russia.
Russia is gigantic - yet everything is decided in moscow. Tsars, communists or putin. Russians got rid of tsars, russians got rid of communism.. but it always took enormous misery and weakness in the regime to get them started.
Edit BTT:
https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-electric-vehicles-elon-musk-endorsement-2024-8
Trump says because he was sponsored so generously by Elon Musk, he has no choice but to support electric vehicles.
"Magats" surely are weird. Why the heck do you dislike a vehicle that's about 2 times more efficient, runs even smoother than a V12 and costs less to run than a toyota prius... doesn't even need oil changed, can be fueld at home...?
Once you bought a recent BEV - you don't really need another vehicle ever again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
