|
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 |
I think the made up numbers and selective hightlights will be awesome.
The real numbers though might look like his first term. All the pettiness with tariffs has cost the US production jobs, while bringing prices up and hurting the GDP overall.
Nothing the wealthy or career specialits couldn't suffer through though.
But, be reminded, Trump is a disappointment machine.. if you expect deportations and tariffs.. he will let you down. He will fuck up in a completely unexpected new way.
Make Elon transfer the nuclear codes into the worlds funniest russian roullette arcade game for example. Push a button and win a million 1:6 , or nuke your own home town 1:6, or 4:6 get another try!
|
On November 11 2024 22:05 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2024 21:55 Magic Powers wrote:
Also, Forbes is not a credible source of information. You need to always verify with a credible source like Reuters, AP, etc. I think Alison Durkee's track record indicates we can trust her #s. AP has changed stealth edited their stuff on occasion.
If she's the one who came up with these numbers, she's completely off. Not just off, but pants-on-fire level of liar.
Here are actual numbers. They look far more even. Swing states were targeted the most by Dems and even there the difference isn't unreasonable. You're spreading right-wing propaganda as you always do.
https://www.npr.org/2024/11/01/nx-s1-5173712/2024-election-ad-spending-trump-harris
|
On November 11 2024 22:40 KT_Elwood wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I think the made up numbers and selective hightlights will be awesome.
The real numbers though might look like his first term. All the pettiness with tariffs has cost the US production jobs, while bringing prices up and hurting the GDP overall.
Nothing the wealthy or career specialits couldn't suffer through though. But, be reminded, Trump is a disappointment machine. . if you expect deportations and tariffs.. he will let you down. He will fuck up in a completely unexpected new way. + Show Spoiler +
Make Elon transfer the nuclear codes into the worlds funniest russian roullette arcade game for example. Push a button and win a million 1:6 , or nuke your own home town 1:6, or 4:6 get another try!
I hope I'm wrong about Trump's admin pushing through a bipartisan mass deportation bill, but I'm not entirely convinced MAGA supporters won't just start trying to enact some mass "deportation" "plan" on their own anyway.
Within the first 6 months or so I expect some sort of event (probably a zealous Governor doing something heinous, or giving a pass to citizens that did something heinous) to set the tone of where we're heading based on how the country responds.
|
On November 11 2024 22:05 Gorsameth wrote:
Imagine thinking Trump would actually pay Harris's campaign bills. No wonder you think Trump will be good for the US when your this gullible.
Trump doesn't even pay the lawyers working to keep him out of prison, but sure he is going to pay for his political opponents...
Are you for real? I think he is just mocking Harris campaign and showing off his superiority, which is totally on brand for the buffoon he is. That being said I wouldn't be surprised, if he actually did it, to mock and show off even more. (also come on, that would be such a gigantic troll)
Would you prefer him to be checking with lawyers (usually spending money you don't have is a fraud, although I have no idea how it works with campaign finances) if any charges can brought about it? That would be on brand with a Nazi dictator.
|
On November 11 2024 22:35 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Here is a starting point. https://tl.net/forum/general/480705-canadian-politics-mega-thread?page=97#1936Why Canada Declined+ Show Spoiler +Trudeau has destroyed Canada's energy sector. Under Trudeau and the Ontario liberals Hydro//electricity became super expensive and this is crippling the Canadian economy. In 2007 you could rent an apartment and they did not bother to measure your electricity consumption. It was not worth the expense because electricity was so dirt cheap. These days electricity is $200/month for a tiny apartment. The average, middle-class working Canadian is getting absolutely crushed.
Those are two posts about Canada. Why do you think Trump will be better for the USA than Harris?
|
On November 11 2024 22:50 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2024 22:05 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On November 11 2024 21:55 Magic Powers wrote:
Also, Forbes is not a credible source of information. You need to always verify with a credible source like Reuters, AP, etc. I think Alison Durkee's track record indicates we can trust her #s. AP has changed stealth edited their stuff on occasion. If she's the one who came up with these numbers, she's completely off. Not just off, but pants-on-fire level of liar. Here are actual numbers. They look far more even. Swing states were targeted the most by Dems and even there the difference isn't unreasonable. You're spreading right-wing propaganda as you always do. https://www.npr.org/2024/11/01/nx-s1-5173712/2024-election-ad-spending-trump-harris
nah, I think the #s presented are reasonable. the #s you present are not Trump campaign budget v. Harris/Biden campaign budget.
|
On November 11 2024 23:00 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2024 22:50 Magic Powers wrote:On November 11 2024 22:05 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On November 11 2024 21:55 Magic Powers wrote:
Also, Forbes is not a credible source of information. You need to always verify with a credible source like Reuters, AP, etc. I think Alison Durkee's track record indicates we can trust her #s. AP has changed stealth edited their stuff on occasion. If she's the one who came up with these numbers, she's completely off. Not just off, but pants-on-fire level of liar. Here are actual numbers. They look far more even. Swing states were targeted the most by Dems and even there the difference isn't unreasonable. You're spreading right-wing propaganda as you always do. https://www.npr.org/2024/11/01/nx-s1-5173712/2024-election-ad-spending-trump-harris nah, I think the #s presented are reasonable. the #s you present are not Trump campaign budget v. Harris/Biden campaign budget.
"That 90% is fine, yeah. But I'm talking about that 10% which looks kinda off if you zoom in very closely on that 1% of it all."
Classic right-wing tactic.
|
Many internet people are angry and eager to see things turn to violence (to proof themselves having been right) and also bad things happening to people who voted for trump, because you "told them so"... but I guess he will disappoint at that too.
Right now he has to stick to his explanation for inflation, which is Joe Biden letting in illegals.
Deporting 11,000,000 people will cost hundreds of billions of dollars, good thing he plans on taking on another 8 thousand billion dollars in debt.
|
On November 11 2024 22:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2024 22:35 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Here is a starting point. https://tl.net/forum/general/480705-canadian-politics-mega-thread?page=97#1936Why Canada Declined+ Show Spoiler +Trudeau has destroyed Canada's energy sector. Under Trudeau and the Ontario liberals Hydro//electricity became super expensive and this is crippling the Canadian economy. In 2007 you could rent an apartment and they did not bother to measure your electricity consumption. It was not worth the expense because electricity was so dirt cheap. These days electricity is $200/month for a tiny apartment. The average, middle-class working Canadian is getting absolutely crushed. Those are two posts about Canada. Why do you think Trump will be better for the USA than Harris?
you gave a single word "why" at the bottom of my post. I discussed several things during my post. My post ended with a statement that not many will move to Canada. Thus, i responded to that. If you have a specific question about a specific statement a 1 word reply is a low effort move. I am not a mind reader.
The team around Trump is better and smarter than the team around Harris.
|
On November 11 2024 23:23 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2024 22:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 11 2024 22:35 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Here is a starting point. https://tl.net/forum/general/480705-canadian-politics-mega-thread?page=97#1936Why Canada Declined+ Show Spoiler +Trudeau has destroyed Canada's energy sector. Under Trudeau and the Ontario liberals Hydro//electricity became super expensive and this is crippling the Canadian economy. In 2007 you could rent an apartment and they did not bother to measure your electricity consumption. It was not worth the expense because electricity was so dirt cheap. These days electricity is $200/month for a tiny apartment. The average, middle-class working Canadian is getting absolutely crushed. Those are two posts about Canada. Why do you think Trump will be better for the USA than Harris? you gave a single word "why" at the bottom of my post. I discussed several things during my post. My post ended with a statement that not many will move to Canada. Thus, i responded to that. If you have a specific question about a specific statement a 1 word reply is a low effort move. I am not a mind reader.
What are you talking about? What does Canada have to do with this? I don't think you read what I responded to. I bolded your question of "I think the USA will do better under Trump than it woulda done under Harris and I am optimistic for the future." You stated that, and I asked why you think that. USA. Trump. Harris. Not Canada and Trudeau. (You know that many of us bold/highlight parts of a post that we wish to respond to; I think you just rushed your reply to me without noticing what I was addressing, which would explain why your answer isn't applicable to what my question was referring to.)
The team around Trump is better and smarter than the team around Harris.
The team around Trump is Trump. If that's the best reason, then we're screwed.
|
On November 11 2024 23:23 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2024 22:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 11 2024 22:35 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Here is a starting point. https://tl.net/forum/general/480705-canadian-politics-mega-thread?page=97#1936Why Canada Declined+ Show Spoiler +Trudeau has destroyed Canada's energy sector. Under Trudeau and the Ontario liberals Hydro//electricity became super expensive and this is crippling the Canadian economy. In 2007 you could rent an apartment and they did not bother to measure your electricity consumption. It was not worth the expense because electricity was so dirt cheap. These days electricity is $200/month for a tiny apartment. The average, middle-class working Canadian is getting absolutely crushed. Those are two posts about Canada. Why do you think Trump will be better for the USA than Harris? you gave a single word "why" at the bottom of my post. I discussed several things during my post. My post ended with a statement that not many will move to Canada. Thus, i responded to that. If you have a specific question about a specific statement a 1 word reply is a low effort move. I am not a mind reader. The team around Trump is better and smarter than the team around Harris.
And DPB highlighted the part he meant with the "why" in fat.
|
not sure why we’re even having this conversation still after this post. seems we should agree that it’s obviously bullshit right?
On November 11 2024 22:23 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2024 22:05 Gorsameth wrote:
Imagine thinking Trump would actually pay Harris's campaign bills. No wonder you think Trump will be good for the US when your this gullible.
Gullible is expecting honesty from world leaders. World Leaders lie all the time. Many years ago Justin Trudeau promised Canada 2 billion trees to suck up megatonnes of carbon. Almost none have been planted.
or at a minimum why bother arguing a point where the person you’re arguing with can just throw up ‘yes but why bother trusting any of this?’ in the end there’s no expectation of meaning/standing by what he says.
‘we’re all fools for believe Trump will do what hes saying, but also here’s why it’s right.’
|
On November 12 2024 00:22 brian wrote:not sure why we’re even having this conversation still after this post. seems we should agree that it’s obviously bullshit right? Show nested quote +On November 11 2024 22:23 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On November 11 2024 22:05 Gorsameth wrote:
Imagine thinking Trump would actually pay Harris's campaign bills. No wonder you think Trump will be good for the US when your this gullible.
Gullible is expecting honesty from world leaders. World Leaders lie all the time. Many years ago Justin Trudeau promised Canada 2 billion trees to suck up megatonnes of carbon. Almost none have been planted. I think the USA will do better under Trump than it woulda done under Harris and I am optimistic for the future. Many are figuring out how to leave the USA though. I'd love it if a bunch of software engineers left. More open market for me. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/after-trumps-win-many-despondent-americans-research-moving-abroad-2024-11-08/"move to Canada" was a big one. Moving to Canada was a pretty solid option until about 2015. I'd argue living in Canada was better than living the in USA from 1970 to 2010. Basically, the start of the Vietnam draft is when Canada>USA. This is not the case today though.. there is no draft. Any how, I do not think we are going to see many Americans moving to Canada.
I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt. I don't know much about Canada, but I was curious about why he thought that "the USA will do better under Trump than it woulda done under Harris". Either way, we'll have to see what happens over the next 4 years.
(I take more issue with JJR's earlier post about how women can't possibly be getting harassed more frequently because he hasn't personally noticed it.)
|
On November 12 2024 00:22 brian wrote:not sure why we’re even having this conversation still after this post. seems we should agree that it’s obviously bullshit right? Show nested quote +On November 11 2024 22:23 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On November 11 2024 22:05 Gorsameth wrote:
Imagine thinking Trump would actually pay Harris's campaign bills. No wonder you think Trump will be good for the US when your this gullible.
Gullible is expecting honesty from world leaders. World Leaders lie all the time. Many years ago Justin Trudeau promised Canada 2 billion trees to suck up megatonnes of carbon. Almost none have been planted. or at a minimum why bother arguing a point where the person you’re arguing with can just throw up ‘yes but why bother trusting any of this?’ in the end. there’s no expectation of meaning what he says.
Good thing you caught that comment, I completely missed it.
90 million trees were promised after two years, not 2 billion (2 billion is the ultimate goal, not the first two years). 110 million trees were in fact planted, exceeding the initial goal by 22%. In other words that's 5.5% of the 2 billion goal, while the expected pace was 4.5%
Conclusion: JJR is once again spreading misinformation. What a surprise.
https://www.canada.ca/en/natural-resources-canada/news/2023/08/government-of-canada-confirms-2-billion-trees-program-is-exceeding-planting-goals-announces-new-agreements-to-plant-56-million-additional-trees.html
|
On November 12 2024 00:28 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 12 2024 00:22 brian wrote:not sure why we’re even having this conversation still after this post. seems we should agree that it’s obviously bullshit right? On November 11 2024 22:23 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On November 11 2024 22:05 Gorsameth wrote:
Imagine thinking Trump would actually pay Harris's campaign bills. No wonder you think Trump will be good for the US when your this gullible.
Gullible is expecting honesty from world leaders. World Leaders lie all the time. Many years ago Justin Trudeau promised Canada 2 billion trees to suck up megatonnes of carbon. Almost none have been planted. I think the USA will do better under Trump than it woulda done under Harris and I am optimistic for the future. Many are figuring out how to leave the USA though. I'd love it if a bunch of software engineers left. More open market for me. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/after-trumps-win-many-despondent-americans-research-moving-abroad-2024-11-08/"move to Canada" was a big one. Moving to Canada was a pretty solid option until about 2015. I'd argue living in Canada was better than living the in USA from 1970 to 2010. Basically, the start of the Vietnam draft is when Canada>USA. This is not the case today though.. there is no draft. Any how, I do not think we are going to see many Americans moving to Canada. I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt. I don't know much about Canada, but I was curious about why he thought that "the USA will do better under Trump than it woulda done under Harris". Either way, we'll have to see what happens over the next 4 years. (I take more issue with JJR's earlier post about how women can't possibly be getting harassed more frequently because he hasn't personally noticed it.)
i think there’s definitely something to be found in that conversation, but the ‘dems outspent and Mexico Trumps going to pay for it!’ is obvious bait 🤷🏻♂️. We’re all gullible for believing it (i don’t think anyone familiar with Trumps track record of paying bills believes it, but that’s aside from the point) but discussing its merits is meant to be worthwhile?
|
Northern Ireland27206 Posts
On November 11 2024 13:38 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2024 12:39 WombaT wrote:On November 11 2024 12:07 Introvert wrote:On November 11 2024 11:23 WombaT wrote:On November 11 2024 10:45 Introvert wrote:On November 11 2024 10:23 WombaT wrote:On November 11 2024 10:06 Introvert wrote:On November 11 2024 09:51 WombaT wrote:On November 11 2024 09:39 Introvert wrote:On November 11 2024 09:19 WombaT wrote:
[quote]
It wasn’t intended as such no
Historically, conservatives I’ve had the most productive discussions with have been either strict constitutionalists, various stripes of libertarians or highly religious. I may not agree with conclusions, but there’s a recognisable framework that I can throw my mind into parsing. And if they stick to what they claim, I can predict their positions pretty well.
Hence my examples were sorta drawn from there, but weren’t intended to be personally directed at you, so apologies if that impression was conveyed.
There’s criticism and there’s criticism. Perceptually anyway. ‘Yeah that’s kinda bad, anyway here’s 17 points about how the other lot are bad’ doesn’t quite feel that way.
Part of why I used to quite regularly listen to say, Ben Shapiro was that I wanted some insight into that kinda segment of society. Which in ways I did get. He used to criticise Donald Trump while not really giving a single inch to the Democrats, until he stopped doing so because wider Conservatism lost any kind of bollocks.
I asked for an example, you gave me one re outreach, I actually agree with you on immigration, I think broadly Dems have serious issues here, not just with actual policy but on messaging too. The latter is less on the party itself, but in totality in terms of wider cultural discourse.
We’re admittedly coming at it from very different angles. My position is the relatively rare left wing anti-immigration one. Which isn’t innately anti-immigration incidentally, but more that we should be trying to equalise global conditions rather than relying on ‘move to a richer country’ as an outlet valve. There’s also some concession for cultural clashes, I also believe the working class tend to have to suck up what negative externalities there are, the wealthier tend to see most of the benefits.
I also, if you recall somewhat agree with you on religious exemptions. I’m a bit of an arch-secularist rather than anti-religious, despite being a godless heathen myself.
When folks are talking ideas and policy, actually some accommodation can be found. The second Donald Trump is involved this just evaporates. In your other post after this I agree with you that Trump was right about shooting people on 5th avenue. But I am equally convinced that Trump could singlehandedly cure cancer and people on the left would find something to criticize. I consider myself a small-government constitutionalist. But here's the thing. I'm not anywhere close to a majority in my own party, let alone the country. I have to make do, and having a Dem party gone off the rails is bad, just as is having a GOP that has lost its way. There's plenty to criticize on the right and when I'm in a space like that I do so. Conservative media was so afraid of Trump, and always has been, that many of them avoided saying anything negative. But this is a team sport, and it's not like only the GOP has "rally around the flag" instincts. Look at all the criticism GH gets for not voting for Biden/Harris in his deep blue state. It's just a reverse of the other side, Trump is *so bad* you should swallow your misgivings and support the less bad option. I get that people on the left hate Trump (like I hate Democrats, apparently) but I'm tying to provide an alternative view. If you are someone like Ben Shapiro you have two goals 1) succeed in your business, 2) advance your cause. Being thrown out of the tent is bad for both. Trust me, I wish Trump was gone. Although given the way this election has gone I'm very interested to see the future of the country. The way this election went could indicate some very interesting things for the future. GH gets a lot of criticism, but he still says it. Zambrah also. Others also I’m not American so it’s different as I have no direct skin in the game, I’ll also slam the Dems frequently. I’ve slammed Labour. I’ve slammed Tony Blair and his lapdogging on Iraq. Labour cabinet ministers literally resigned over that issue in protest at the time. One may think the left are wrong on many an issue, but they sure as fuck hold their own to some kind of account. Not like this well, effective cult around Trump Ben Shapiro stands to lose a lot if he takes a stand and his audience abandons him, I absolutely understand that. But this isn’t an impediment random conservative on the internet really has. Still not clear if this is mostly about other people you see, but... There's no one in this thread on the right for me to hold to account lol, but even so the nature of the criticism would be different, as it would be coming from a right-leaning perspective. No one watching from the outside would get any insight from it, merely satisfaction at watching a fight among opponents. I get it, but it seems like people only want bad things said about Trump and only good things about dems. Any "bad" things about Dems are just criticisms of strategy or purity. In the meantime, in a similar manner none of the criticisms I have for dems is considered legitimate or earnest. This is not a "woe is me" it's saying that at some point criticizing people on "my side" all time is useless. If I am being very uncharitable I think that people forget my (or others) criticism of Trump because they get so upset at my criticism of Biden or Harris. But I still stand behind my belief that issues Democrats have are worse for the country long term than Trump, and s o that's what I'm going to focus on. Nevermind that they are the current president and vice president. I guess I just think there are a lot of logs in eyes here. Everyone is looking for the "principled Republican willing to sacrfice it all against Trump" without recognizing people on the left make the exact same compromises. None of these are my expectations whatsoever. I’ve given a million and fucking one caveats, it’s literally as simple as ‘if Donald Trump does stuff obviously against what I claim to believe I should criticise it’ Also to clarify, I’m talking more generally, you have at times done this, although never really forcefully enough for my tastes. Perhaps my tastes are unreasonable, but I will concede you have done so, but it’s always packaged with a ton of ‘but the Dems’ caveats that completely dilute it. the "principled Republican willing to sacrfice it all against Trump" without recognizing people on the left make the exact same compromises. Who’s asking anyone to sacrifice it all? Half the thread ascends to their ostensible moral high ground and shits on the Democrats from a great height, myself included. Has GH really put his neck on the line with his posting on a primarily StarCraft forum? Am I just counting the days til I get beaten to death by Trump supporters over here in the UK? I mean no Conservatives just refuse to do so and then complain with how they’re characterised as cultists, despite demonstrably continually following that exact pattern. Ok, I don't mean to drag out this conversation but just a few thoughts. A lot depends on where you are and who you are with. To some members of my family I'm known as a Trump hater who will never say anything nice about him and they don't like that. Even when there were more conservatives here, the ratio was still way off. I just don't think crapping on Trump all the time is nearly as useful or interesting as trying to present a different viewpoint and challenge some of the assumptions of the majority here. If this were a right-wing forum it would be different. Second, like you said back when you offered your three options, I really do find myself mostly with position 2. And we are talking about politics here in the real world, not the abstract. All of these concerns are real for voters and people everywhere. It really does matter that one thinks Democrats or Republicans are so much worse the other. This can't help but influence our thinking because it's not a straight line from where we are to where we want to be. Conservatives just refuse to do so and then complain with how they’re characterised as cultists, despite demonstrably continually following that exact pattern. I just don't think this is a uniquely righty problem and having it characterized that way while watching how the entire left-wing apparatus in the country can turn on a dime (like "Joe Biden is fit to be president" to "he can't run again") is frustrating. The difference is that in many places today the right gets called out for these problems (whether they listen is another story) but meanwhile it's possible to be a moderate Dem and have almost no exposure to people who disagree with you. I find this very problematic. So what good is the 15th Trump denunciation? Maybe because I live in California I have a particular view on this, but conservatives here feel to me way more in tune with what the left here thinks than the other way around. And I suspect this is country wide, given the dominance of the progressive left in the academy, the arts, and the bureaucracy. Maybe these are all excuses, but it doesn't seem like saying Trump is bad is really doing anything, or again, very interesting. Fair enough but within this very thread there were plenty who also articulated that they didn’t think Biden was up to another term. There’s no real analogue for that on the right, currently. There just isn’t. The average conservative is not remotely as well tuned into what people on the left believe, as I am to what conservatives believe and value. They just aren’t. Most conservatives didn’t spent a decade deliberately going to liberal forums and earnestly engaging with people, as I did in the inverse. Thus I don’t judge conservatives on my own values, I judge them on theirs. I find them lacking in that regard. To put it kindly Hey I went down many a rabbithole, I found genuine open Fascists more agreeable and earnest if I’m being honest. Obviously don’t agree with their prescriptions. But when I’d ingratiated myself sufficiently to have them think I was a potential convert, they were pretty open about their beliefs. Trump cultists are completely opaque and full of bullshit rationales and literally the only way you can rationalise dealing with them is that they don’t care about much ideologically so long as their guy wins. Well I disagree with much of this, but I could believe you are an exception to what I said about who understands who more. But I'm talking about in general. There are Trump cultists, but I don't think they are unique, just more obvious and obnoxious about it, especially to people who already disagree with them. Idk, I am a very "human nature is fallen" type person imo all these problems manifest on all sides but not always in the same way. I could go nutpicking for days. Add in that most people don't put that much time into their political beliefs and...I guess it would be against my values if I came in here and didn't spend most of my time disagreeing with the prevailing viewpoints  and ultimately it's just more interesting, I said years ago in the feedback thread that I find this fun more than anything else, though it has its other uses. Edit: I'm struggling to respond appropriately without saying simply that I disagree, but I guess I do. Even if I accepted that the left is more consistent, what am I supposed to do if I think they are more wrong? Continue to make the argument that they’re more wrong. I don’t have an innate issue with that. I still may disagree. Disagreement is fine. Well, for me anyway. I don’t expect say a small government, free market person to support a Democratic platform that increases government involvement, and is less free market. Because said person has laid out their values, and the Democrats are effectively the diametric opposite. They’re not my values, but there’s a clear link between stated values and positions that I can’t possibly deny is coherent. Thus, fair enough. I do expect someone who claims to have issues on the increasing power of the Presidency, state rights and the rule of law etc to have an issue if a candidate tries to fuck with an election by pressuring state electors. To take one example. And call me crazy, I don’t think it’s an unreasonable expectation. Indeed it’s basically bare minimum. If one can’t do that, one is basically ceding the ground that principles don’t matter and it’s just about winning. Which one can do, but I’m not going to believe one on any claim of principle. Which then, somehow I’ll be blamed for taking on face value, based on years of observable behaviour. I’ll be elitist, out of touch or whatever the charge is. Where the alternative is clearly there, I’ve said what’s fair for my personal perceptions. I think Ron Paul’s policy prescriptions are almost universally terrible ideas. However, he’s someone I’ve always genuinely respected as something of a conviction politician, as well as someone I can predict because he has decades of consistent values The only Matrix through which I can predict modern wider Conservatism is will it be palatable to Donald Trump Again, it's about what could happened and has happened. The presidency has been growing for a long time, and really accelerated with FDR. Nevermind all the other policies. those who don't believe the stolen election bs are still making rational judgements even if you disagree with the way it ends up balancing out. That's why I have no beef with anyone who voted for Trump to stop Harris. handing control of the federal government to dems is not a principled thing to do either. Trump can be a least bad decision. That being said, I wish fewer people didn't believe Trump about 2020. But that's a discussion for me and people on my side, not here. As I said to ChristianS, few will give a lefty time of day on that
Why not both?
Things are so split that convincing people to flip in either direction is a rather tricky proposition. Or finding too much common ground on many an issue.
However, if the charge on top is that Trump leads an effective cult of personality, even on a purely individual level, or by compounding aggregation people can at least mitigate or dissipate that charge.
If one doesn’t have misgivings at all, I mean they don’t. But if they do, but won’t discuss them to folks outside of their own political tribe, one can’t really blame that other tribe if they conclude they don’t exist.
|
United States44190 Posts
On November 11 2024 20:18 Slydie wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2024 20:07 KT_Elwood wrote:Bernie shoudl have this printed out to hold into the cameras: ![[image loading]](https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2020/01/PSDT_01.10.20_economic-inequality_1-4.png) Gigantic taxes on the fewer people in the wealth-aristorcracy would be fair, because they now earn and own what was earned and owned by millions in the middle class before on lower taxes. Right, but there is a catch: the mega rich are not obliged to live in the US, and if the taxes are too high, there are plenty of countries which would welcome them with open arms. States also compete amongst themselves. In Switzerland, there are now own villages full of rich Norwegians fleeing Norwegian taxes, especially the one on owning shares and property. I would also like to see how much money there really is to get from taxing the rich only. If there was an easy solution to this, someone would have come up with it.
Americans have to pay taxes to the US no matter where they live. Including Americans by birth who have never been to America.
|
On November 12 2024 01:59 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2024 20:18 Slydie wrote:On November 11 2024 20:07 KT_Elwood wrote:Bernie shoudl have this printed out to hold into the cameras: Gigantic taxes on the fewer people in the wealth-aristorcracy would be fair, because they now earn and own what was earned and owned by millions in the middle class before on lower taxes. Right, but there is a catch: the mega rich are not obliged to live in the US, and if the taxes are too high, there are plenty of countries which would welcome them with open arms. States also compete amongst themselves. In Switzerland, there are now own villages full of rich Norwegians fleeing Norwegian taxes, especially the one on owning shares and property. I would also like to see how much money there really is to get from taxing the rich only. If there was an easy solution to this, someone would have come up with it. Americans have to pay taxes to the US no matter where they live. Including Americans by birth who have never been to America.
IRS Fuck yeah, getting all the kindergartens funded, and you might see some daycare!
IRS Fuck yeah!
|
On November 12 2024 01:59 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2024 20:18 Slydie wrote:On November 11 2024 20:07 KT_Elwood wrote:Bernie shoudl have this printed out to hold into the cameras: Gigantic taxes on the fewer people in the wealth-aristorcracy would be fair, because they now earn and own what was earned and owned by millions in the middle class before on lower taxes. Right, but there is a catch: the mega rich are not obliged to live in the US, and if the taxes are too high, there are plenty of countries which would welcome them with open arms. States also compete amongst themselves. In Switzerland, there are now own villages full of rich Norwegians fleeing Norwegian taxes, especially the one on owning shares and property. I would also like to see how much money there really is to get from taxing the rich only. If there was an easy solution to this, someone would have come up with it. Americans have to pay taxes to the US no matter where they live. Including Americans by birth who have never been to America.
O I didnt know that. Do Americans have the option to change tax residency, or do they have to change nationality for that (if that even works)?
|
I guess if you are rich enough Hans Blix ghost will find some WOMD in your garage and you need to be brought back for questioning.
Also if you are rich enough, you can just fucking dodge taxes.. look at trump. He is a walking talking businessfailure that inherited mere millions 60 years ago, and now he can sell nukes to a real billionaire.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
