| 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 | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44743 Posts
On September 28 2025 20:17 maybenexttime wrote: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/115279524184169598 Trump is now promoting a literal scam. lol Yikes. Added to his long list of other scams (e.g., Trump University). | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23338 Posts
On September 28 2025 09:47 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Magically effective socialist revolution, because if it's not that, then it's nothing but mocking and gawking. Not magic, science  + Show Spoiler + Scientific socialism is a method for understanding and predicting social, economic and material phenomena by examining their historical trends through the use of the scientific method in order to derive probable outcomes and probable future developments. It is in contrast to what later socialists referred to as utopian socialism—a method based on establishing seemingly rational propositions for organizing society and convincing others of their rationality and/or desirability. It also contrasts with classical liberal notions of natural law, which are grounded in metaphysical notions of morality rather than a dynamic materialist or physicalist conception of the world While every post there was pointing to/surrounded by another instance of mocking and gawking that's nowhere near a comprehensive list of how frequently you all do it (you're doing it now, again). Rather than lash out emotionally and slap together a straw man you could have just went with discussing the discussion questions I mentioned (with others if you all want to mean girl me). On September 28 2025 07:34 GreenHorizons wrote: Should there be protests? What kind should there be? Should elected Democrats be promoting them, opposing them, neither? What goals/demands should they have? What would success look like? How could people be working toward that success? Anyone/everyone is free to opine Those questions were in the context of Trump talking about sending troops to Portland, but I think they're worth discussing about any/many of his actions thus far and pending (scamming and corruption are just a couple). Far more worth discussing than the incessant mocking and gocking and/or anything bad faith right-wingers are going to gaslight/distract you all with next. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4398 Posts
On September 28 2025 19:57 oBlade wrote: You didn't pay close enough attention to what Gorka said. Either you didn't see/internalize the word rhetoric, or you did and think assassinations are a form of rhetoric. He said "nobody has said we distance ourselves from the violent rhetoric." (This by itself is probably hyperbole as I'm sure the number isn't 0.) He did not say "nobody has said we distance ourselves from the violence." You disproved a ghost. Your counterexamples are for something other than what he said. What you'd want is statements like Fetterman's. Gorka goes on to say "[Nobody has said]...We jettison the voices such as Maxine Waters or Joe Biden who talked about using violence against their political opponents. We totally excoriate them and we remove them from our political environment. They haven't done anything, and Charlie's dead, and Erika's a widow, and those children will grow up without a father. The left refuses to rid themselves of the justification for violence, and as such President Trump is taking measures to protect us from the violent rhetoric that becomes snipers and bullets." He's making a similar point I made which was if you give a token "oops killing is bad" after every act of violence, it gives you plausibility deniability even if you immediately go back to the same old routine of riling up millions (at most) for stochastic terrorism. Oh no, they didn't say the very specific sentence that Gorka invented so he can make them look bad with his stupid accusation. Yeah right, then why did he omit the fact that Democrat leaders did condemn the violence? Why did he leave that part out? Why did he also omit that Trump himself overtly promotes hate against his enemies? Eh? He's clearly arguing in bad faith and you're playing defense for him. Nice job, really nice job. Keep defending the fascists. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States44743 Posts
On September 28 2025 20:55 GreenHorizons wrote: Not magic, science + Show Spoiler + Scientific socialism is a method for understanding and predicting social, economic and material phenomena by examining their historical trends through the use of the scientific method in order to derive probable outcomes and probable future developments. It is in contrast to what later socialists referred to as utopian socialism—a method based on establishing seemingly rational propositions for organizing society and convincing others of their rationality and/or desirability. It also contrasts with classical liberal notions of natural law, which are grounded in metaphysical notions of morality rather than a dynamic materialist or physicalist conception of the world When I said that the socialist revolution would need to be magically effective, I didn't mean that socialism couldn't be effective or scientifically justified. I meant that it would be unrealistic for socialism to gain sufficient support in the United States, where it becomes our country's new economic and political philosophy; Americans are unwilling to reject our current forms of capitalism, corporatism, and oligarchy. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23338 Posts
On September 28 2025 21:23 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: When I said that the socialist revolution would need to be magically effective, I didn't mean that socialism couldn't be effective or scientifically justified. I meant that it would be unrealistic for socialism to gain sufficient support in the United States, where it becomes our country's new economic and political philosophy; Americans are unwilling to reject our current forms of capitalism, corporatism, and oligarchy. It was pretty unrealistic for someone like Trump to win after his birtherism, even more unrealistic after his failed insurrection, but here we are. Turns out trying can change what is realistic. Nazis were pretty unwilling to reject their Führer's plans, they got convinced (more or less). But sure, you don't think socialism should guide the path out of this mess, that's your prerogative. Talk about your alternative (and/or address the discussion questions from your perspective) then. If it's just "vote blue no matter who if/when Trump lets you" that's fine, but not immune to critique. | ||
|
Magic Powers
Austria4398 Posts
So Trump's campaign thought making anti-trans issues one of the biggest concerns in their ads was a winning strategy. And it's hard to argue with that, apparently it was a winning strategy. So I'm left to wonder, is it possible that Trump has been appealing to the far-right to win another election? Is it possible? Did the far-right make him win? Is Trump a fascist? No? Definitely not? Twenty-one MILLION dollars says otherwise. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-anti-trans-ads-spending/ https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-spends-millions-anti-trans-ads-despite-polls/story?id=115001816 | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States1805 Posts
On September 28 2025 22:14 Magic Powers wrote: So apparently in 2024 Trump's administration heavily focused their ad campaign on anti-trans issues. How heavily? About one third of their total TV ads budget. Yes indeed, one third. $21 million out of $66 million. That's for an issue that concerns 1% of the population or less. Despite economy and immigration being the top two concerns of Trump voters. So Trump's campaign thought making anti-trans issues one of the biggest concerns in their ads was a winning strategy. And it's hard to argue with that, apparently it was a winning strategy. So I'm left to wonder, is it possible that Trump has been appealing to the far-right to win another election? Is it possible? Did the far-right make him win? Is Trump a fascist? No? Definitely not? Twenty-one MILLION dollars says otherwise. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-anti-trans-ads-spending/ https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-spends-millions-anti-trans-ads-despite-polls/story?id=115001816 https://www.politifact.com/article/2023/jul/13/how-many-trans-people-are-there-in-the-us-and-why/ Trans people are about 1% of Americans but people surveyed estimated they were about 21%. Same is true of Muslim people: 1% of Americans, but people think it's 27%. Hate media is rotting peoples' brains in real time and it's frustrating that there's nothing we can do to stop it. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Britney Dota 2  41309GuemChi 5545Rain 4614JYJ1647 Shuttle 647Barracks  458Flash 432Light 394Killer  378EffOrt 323[ Show more ] Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games gofns36125 tarik_tv24928 singsing2727 B2W.Neo1085 XaKoH  160ArmadaUGS119 Sick109 RotterdaM89 NeuroSwarm61 |
|
BSL Team Wars
Team Bonyth vs Team Sziky
BSL
Artosis vs Sziky
Afreeca Starleague
Soma vs BeSt
Wardi Open
OSC
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Afreeca Starleague
Bisu vs Larva
LiuLi Cup
OSC
The PondCast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
