EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 4823
| 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 | ||
|
KT_Elwood
708 Posts
| ||
|
Simberto
Germany11334 Posts
On March 04 2025 17:42 JimmyJRaynor wrote: https://apnews.com/article/trump-tariffs-canada-mexico-china-643086a6dc7ff716d876b3c83e3255b0 Mexico has not announced any retaliation. Canada retaliated immediately. I think Canada is making a mistake. I think the Premier of Ontario is making the biggest mistakes. Canada has not been the USA's "best friend" for a very long time. nah, my views are as valid as any other racist person's views in South Carolina or Georgia. a person being racist doesn't make their views more important than mine. Canada is more of a sub sovereign state than a country. Mexico is a real country. It has nothing to do with "brown people"... .whatever that is. Your views are generally as valid as those of other people, yes. But they are not as valid for the decisionmaking of the current president of the US. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16407 Posts
On March 04 2025 17:59 Simberto wrote: Your views are generally as valid as those of other people, yes. But they are not as valid for the decisionmaking of the current president of the US. The president's #1 concern regarding Canada isn't the colour brown. its the black gold in Alberta that he wants. Prior to March 3 Trump's tariff talk lowered investment in Canada and increased it in the USA. Trump has already won. | ||
|
Turbovolver
Australia2378 Posts
On March 04 2025 15:57 GreenHorizons wrote: LibHorizons: Beyond what I've already provided + Show Spoiler + primary Democrats that aren't showing sufficient will to fight/oppose the Trump admin's agenda a bit: Not every Democrat needs to be primaried. Those of us in safe blue states with Democrats unlikely to not clear the bar for not being primaried can direct resources toward places where the Democrats do need to be primaried. But we need a reasonably objective way to determine which is which. Thus far Democrats and their supporters have failed to provide that. I'm open to hearing their ideas, but lacking that, I feel obligated as a progressive to present something that is better than nothing. Sooo... Having a deliberate and executable plan (with a simple name like "project 2025" or "The New Deal" or whatever) and making support for it be the litmus test. You support it, no primary. You don't support it, you get primaried, and the party doesn't bail you out. The party should let Bernie, AOC, and The Squad lead the way in setting the terms, but they've all shown they can be very reasonable and show deference to the party generally. So it's not as if they would ignore the needs/preferences of the more centrist parts of the party entirely, or even to the degree they've been pushed to the periphery by said centrists. 1. Medicare for all 2. Green New Deal 3. You can pick Basically, although I was more curious about like, what would be the dream rather than limiting the choice to only those who retain some power in the current political system. Of course the latter is probably more actionable. I enjoyed reading those issues, though. The "how will this be paid for" section is great. The local socialists here talk explicitly about not fixing, but smashing the capitalist state, whereas Bernie's proposals feel more like the Nordic approach, a sort of "fairer capitalism" which feels more palatable to people living currently under capitalism. Of course, maybe realistically you have to do some smashing when media moguls that would be getting hit by things like a wealth tax on assets over $32million are working to supress or deflate the message of a Bernie. Winning such a primary also requires spending every possible second developing the opposition campaigns to any of these entrenched Democrats that are collaborating with or appeasing Trump/Musk. Is this occurring in any significant extent, though? I thought the criticism was more that the Republicans and Democrats are essentially factions, both firmly at war with each other and putting that battle (and their interests as a faction more generally) ahead of the common people. That's certainly how things feel here, anyway. Also makes me think and is what makes me leery about the leftists that spend most of their breath on criticising the Dems (and also Republicans, but usually less breath is spent there lol). Starts to feel like just another faction, and this is also seen playing out when you go on, say, your local leftism reddit and see the various organisations all at war with one another. Based on how aggressively the libs/Dems/ilk here are refusing to even try to work on how to improve the candidates Democrat voters have to choose from and/or ensure they have legitimate elections to engage in, I can't believe their rhetoric about wanting Democrats to be any better/more than they are being right now. Their inattentiveness is enabling the worst aspects of Democrats (and also the most fascist Republicans). Well, people have never been good at suffering in the short term for the long-term good. Me included. | ||
|
KT_Elwood
708 Posts
Might be Canada, might be Mexico.. or Greenland.. or Gaza. Why? Fascist playbook 101. If you can't turn them to your side, make the whole world their enemy (you are here), if they still don't play along, start atrocities and make them complicit (Invasion of _____, removing the US from NATO, and threatening former Partners with Nukes, if their bases get touched). Being complicit in a crime is a great domestic tool of tying your political opposition's fate to your own wellbeing. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10181 Posts
On March 04 2025 16:02 baal wrote: So you think the US army will start blowing up civilians to force the Mexican government into declaring war so that they can annex like Sonora and Chihuahua or something? LMAO I wish I could open some polymarket style geopolitics betting market with only ppl from here, there are very unserious people in this thread, I guess if you really think Trump is the embodiment of the 4th reich these absurd scenarios don't sound as crazy to you but just think it through. If Trump were to wage an all out war against Mexico he would be immediately impeached and would for sure end up in prison, but lets go crazy and say he doesnt, ok now with 20% mexicans in the army you would see a split of insurrectionism within the army not to count the 40 million Mexicans living within the US borders that would make a 9/11 style attack every couple of days and then what, death camps for the 40 million lol. All this because they want to take a desert dryer than Arizona? and you think this is less risky than Iran because the might have WMD (they dont). Ok crazy scenarios aside, the US has already deployed troops to fight cartels before multiple times in latinamerica, and no they haven't taken any land nor killed civilians to start a war lol, so yeah if the US goes into Mexico (I hope they do), they can easily just do that, attack the cartels and defeat them with ease, they are disorganized militias and the only reason the Mexican army hasn't defeated them is because they are closely tied with the government so they don't want to, which is the main hurdle the US has always had and will continue to do so in trying to stop cartels, the government will do anything in its power to protect them, with intel, legally and politically. It’s hard to tell how serious they are sometimes but if there were a betting market for the things they say I don’t think you would find anyone here to risk their money on it. So that leads me to believe that sharing their left-wing fan-fiction is more of a fun hobby as opposed to any serious beliefs. | ||
|
KT_Elwood
708 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland23826 Posts
On March 04 2025 19:25 BlackJack wrote: It’s hard to tell how serious they are sometimes but if there were a betting market for the things they say I don’t think you would find anyone here to risk their money on it. So that leads me to believe that sharing their left-wing fan-fiction is more of a fun hobby as opposed to any serious beliefs. I dunno, I’d probably be up for once unless the bookies screwed me on technicalities. A pretty fair chunk of ‘Trump derangement syndrome’ is stuff that ultimately came to pass. That said I can’t see some all-out war against Mexico. I don’t think it would go down well, rather a lot of Americans with Mexican heritage and whatnot. Also though he’s going about it in a manner I disagree with, Trump is really pushing the ‘peacemaker’ angle, this would be a complete reverse there as well. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21364 Posts
On March 04 2025 20:57 WombaT wrote: Which part is the peacemaker, the part that wants to turn Canada into the 51st state or the part that wants to annex Greenland?I dunno, I’d probably be up for once unless the bookies screwed me on technicalities. A pretty fair chunk of ‘Trump derangement syndrome’ is stuff that ultimately came to pass. That said I can’t see some all-out war against Mexico. I don’t think it would go down well, rather a lot of Americans with Mexican heritage and whatnot. Also though he’s going about it in a manner I disagree with, Trump is really pushing the ‘peacemaker’ angle, this would be a complete reverse there as well. | ||
| ||
