|
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 October 01 2025 04:59 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2025 04:36 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 01 2025 01:55 LightSpectra wrote:On October 01 2025 00:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 01 2025 00:15 KwarK wrote:On October 01 2025 00:03 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 30 2025 23:55 KwarK wrote:On September 30 2025 23:42 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 30 2025 23:36 LightSpectra wrote:
You're so proud of that attempted dunk on me that you're linking back to it, without ever checking that there were in fact quite a lot of documented cases of Germans verbally regretting not voting for the SPD to keep the Nazis out of power.
It was eye opening a few pages back when you were calling for an American equivalent to EuroMaidan, cited the Italian strike as inspiration, someone who was actually there said "yeah this is just like the 50501 protests" and you recoiled in disgust because that's a lib/dem/ilk-organized protest. You like to not quote me and then make stuff up. That's not conducive to a reasonable discussion. Fucking lol I know you have some specific examples in mind, go ahead and link them. + Show Spoiler +Well there's that time that I argued that the workers hate you and your revolution and would beat you with sticks if it came to that and you spent three years insisting that I was a brownshirt who was planning to attack you.
Or there's the time that I argued that if we charted US President awfulness with awfulness on the Y and time on the X then the trendline would show awfulness declining over time, even with Trump on there. Not because I liked Trump, I was very clear on that issue, but because the level of historical awfulness is just so high. You spent years insisting that I celebrated the result of the 2016 election because of that. Basically you can go fuck yourself. Now and forever. Cool links. Any luck on those citations for quite a lot of documented cases of Germans verbally regretting not voting for the SPD to keep the Nazis out of power ? Anyone familiar with those citations? I'm not going to go trudging through archives to win an Internet argument, but one of the main examples I was thinking of was Friedrich Kellner's diary. If you've ever heard the "Who carries the blame? The people without a brain! To trample democracy with one’s feet and give power to a single man..." quote, it's from that. He was an activist for the SPD. Surely this purported " fact" I should have known, that there are " quite a lot of documented cases of Germans verbally regretting not voting for the SPD to keep the Nazis out of power", wouldn't be limited to this singular example (from someone that voted SPD?) that you find too bulwarked to actually support your statement. I'm sure anyone doing something as simple as googling any variation of "a lot of documented cases of Germans verbally regretting not voting for the SPD to keep the Nazis out of power" (which I presume includes you) has noticed that the results don't support your assertion of fact. That Kwark didn't come up with something doesn't bode well either. Only if you presume that I’m invested in arguing with you. “You stopped first making me the victor” is the logic of a sealion.
I was actually hoping that your WWII history buffness/passion for accuracy would make you want to confirm Light's claim was some factual/historically supported widely documented fact with some citations (for all of our benefit) more than you wanted to get one more dig in (or even be clever enough to do both). My mistake.
|
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/09/29/bls-wont-be-releasing-data-including-fridays-key-jobs-report-in-case-of-a-shutdown.html
The Labor Department is preparing for what would amount to a news and data blackout should the U.S. government suspend operations.
The department has several key reports upcoming that will provide important clues about the direction of the economy and inform Fed policymakers ahead of their next meeting in October.
i'm surprised these people wouldn't be deemed essential workers. I know a half dozen US government workers deemed as essential... who really ... aren't.
this same kind of info blackout occurred during the 2019 shutdown.
|
Northern Ireland26094 Posts
Maybe ya got it wrong GH, maybe there’s that?
I know you’re incapable of considering that but, try?
|
Northern Ireland26094 Posts
Also @Oblade, I have noticed you gurning about stochastic terrorism recently.
Which hey cool except you previously denied the concept had any validity.
You’re a compete fucking joke. To say you argue in bad faith iis inaccurate. There has to be some kind of faith to begin with
|
Looks like we're officially shutting down.
"A shutdown falls on the President's lack of leadership. He can't even control his own party and get people together in a room. A shutdown means the president is weak." -- Donald Trump in 2013
|
On October 01 2025 09:35 WombaT wrote:
Maybe ya got it wrong GH, maybe there’s that?
I know you’re incapable of considering that but, try?
My last post literally ended with "My mistake"? But sure, what are you thinking?
LightSpectra claimed something I hadn't heard here or otherwise as a documented fact so I expected someone to be able to provide supporting citations (I've found no corroborating evidence/reports personally, but still don't rule it out) and/or say the "quite a lot of documented cases" seemingly came from their imagination.
Kwark, being the resident WWII/European history buff with a penchant for telling people they're wrong about stuff, I thought it seemed right up his alley (either confirming it as a fact or identifying it as something LightSpectra made up).
There either are "quite a lot of documented cases" or there aren't. My inclination/cursory research indicates there are not. If anyone has citations that demonstrate otherwise, they're welcome provide them. Otherwise, it's reasonable to recognize that LightSpectra just pulled that "fact" out their ass.
|
On October 01 2025 10:32 LightSpectra wrote:
Looks like we're officially shutting down.
"A shutdown falls on the President's lack of leadership. He can't even control his own party and get people together in a room. A shutdown means the president is weak." -- Donald Trump in 2013
I wonder how long it'll last and if Trump/Republicans will really start mass firings?
I also wonder whether people think Democrats should hold out on passing a "clean CR", for how long, and what the minimum they should accept is?
|
On October 01 2025 10:37 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2025 09:35 WombaT wrote:
Maybe ya got it wrong GH, maybe there’s that?
I know you’re incapable of considering that but, try? My last post literally ended with "My mistake"? But sure, what are you thinking? LightSpectra claimed something I hadn't heard here or otherwise as a documented fact so I expected someone to be able to provide supporting citations (I've found no corroborating evidence/reports personally, but still don't rule it out) and/or say the "quite a lot of documented cases" seemingly came from their imagination. Kwark, being the resident WWII/European history buff with a penchant for telling people they're wrong about stuff, I thought it seemed right up his alley (either confirming it as a fact or identifying it as something LightSpectra made up). There either are "quite a lot of documented cases" or there aren't. My inclination/cursory research indicates there are not. If anyone has citations that demonstrate otherwise, they're welcome provide them. Otherwise, it's reasonable to recognize that LightSpectra just pulled that "fact" out their ass.
I gave you one example to start with and you indicated you had zero intention of acting in good faith, so why would I put in any effort after that?
|
On October 01 2025 10:54 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2025 10:37 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 01 2025 09:35 WombaT wrote:
Maybe ya got it wrong GH, maybe there’s that?
I know you’re incapable of considering that but, try? My last post literally ended with "My mistake"? But sure, what are you thinking? LightSpectra claimed something I hadn't heard here or otherwise as a documented fact so I expected someone to be able to provide supporting citations (I've found no corroborating evidence/reports personally, but still don't rule it out) and/or say the "quite a lot of documented cases" seemingly came from their imagination. Kwark, being the resident WWII/European history buff with a penchant for telling people they're wrong about stuff, I thought it seemed right up his alley (either confirming it as a fact or identifying it as something LightSpectra made up). There either are "quite a lot of documented cases" or there aren't. My inclination/cursory research indicates there are not. If anyone has citations that demonstrate otherwise, they're welcome provide them. Otherwise, it's reasonable to recognize that LightSpectra just pulled that "fact" out their ass. I gave you one example to start with and you indicated you had zero intention of acting in good faith, so why would I put in any effort after that? You mentioned one quote seemingly talking about Hitler voters from an ~900pg book/diary of an SPD voter. That's not even an example, let alone evidence of "quite a lot of documented cases". You also preemptively prefaced it by saying you weren't going to put in the effort to provide supporting evidence for your unsupported assertion of fact with "I'm not going to go trudging through archives to win an Internet argument".
Maybe ya got it wrong Light, try considering that?
|
United States24741 Posts
Yeah so how long will this shutdown be? I still remember the 5 week one when I was on active duty and couldn't legally quit the job that wasn't paying me. Now, I still don't get paid but at least I have the legal option of quitting... so direction of goodness I guess?
|
On October 01 2025 09:44 WombaT wrote:
Also @Oblade, I have noticed you gurning about stochastic terrorism recently.
Which hey cool except you previously denied the concept had any validity.
You’re a compete fucking joke. To say you argue in bad faith iis inaccurate. There has to be some kind of faith to begin with
First of all, calm down.
I was convinced.
|
On October 01 2025 08:28 JimmyJRaynor wrote:https://www.cnbc.com/2025/09/29/bls-wont-be-releasing-data-including-fridays-key-jobs-report-in-case-of-a-shutdown.htmlShow nested quote + The Labor Department is preparing for what would amount to a news and data blackout should the U.S. government suspend operations.
The department has several key reports upcoming that will provide important clues about the direction of the economy and inform Fed policymakers ahead of their next meeting in October. i'm surprised these people wouldn't be deemed essential workers. I know a half dozen US government workers deemed as essential... who really ... aren't. this same kind of info blackout occurred during the 2019 shutdown.
Seems par for the course here. If you expect bad stats, fire the people who would make those stats, then find someone who is willing to put his name under good stats, or just claim the stats are incredibly awesome.
On October 01 2025 10:40 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2025 10:32 LightSpectra wrote:
Looks like we're officially shutting down.
"A shutdown falls on the President's lack of leadership. He can't even control his own party and get people together in a room. A shutdown means the president is weak." -- Donald Trump in 2013 I wonder how long it'll last and if Trump/Republicans will really start mass firings? I also wonder whether people think Democrats should hold out on passing a "clean CR", for how long, and what the minimum they should accept is?
Wait, can they use a shutdown to purge the government?
|
On October 01 2025 13:50 Simberto wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On October 01 2025 08:28 JimmyJRaynor wrote:https://www.cnbc.com/2025/09/29/bls-wont-be-releasing-data-including-fridays-key-jobs-report-in-case-of-a-shutdown.htmlShow nested quote + The Labor Department is preparing for what would amount to a news and data blackout should the U.S. government suspend operations.
The department has several key reports upcoming that will provide important clues about the direction of the economy and inform Fed policymakers ahead of their next meeting in October. i'm surprised these people wouldn't be deemed essential workers. I know a half dozen US government workers deemed as essential... who really ... aren't. this same kind of info blackout occurred during the 2019 shutdown. Seems par for the course here. If you expect bad stats, fire the people who would make those stats, then find someone who is willing to put his name under good stats, or just claim the stats are incredibly awesome. Show nested quote +On October 01 2025 10:40 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 01 2025 10:32 LightSpectra wrote:
Looks like we're officially shutting down.
"A shutdown falls on the President's lack of leadership. He can't even control his own party and get people together in a room. A shutdown means the president is weak." -- Donald Trump in 2013 I wonder how long it'll last and if Trump/Republicans will really start mass firings? I also wonder whether people think Democrats should hold out on passing a "clean CR", for how long, and what the minimum they should accept is? Wait, can they use a shutdown to purge the government? "Can" and "purge" are a bit nebulous, but yeah. They'll probably break some laws in the process, but whether that prevents them is anyone's guess at this point.
The Congressional Budget Office estimates about 750,000 federal employees may be furloughed daily.
President Donald Trump has also indicated he may take additional action to reshape the government. On Tuesday afternoon, he alluded to possibly carrying out mass firings of federal workers and eliminating programs in the event of a shutdown.
"We can do things during the shutdown that are irreversible, that are bad for them," Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Tuesday. "We can cut large numbers of people. We don't want to do that, but we don't want fraud, waste and abuse."
Some impacts will be immediate, while others will only kick in if a shutdown drags on.
Hundreds of thousands of federal workers and active-duty service members may miss paychecks starting in mid-October.
Air traffic controllers and Transportation Security Administration employees are considered essential employees, but some have called off sick during past shutdowns when they were asked to work without pay.
The Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children commonly known as WIC may soon run out of money.
It is unclear whether National Parks will remain open. During the last shutdown, parks remained open even though they went unstaffed. www.npr.org
The gist of it is that Trump intends/is threatening to turn some/many/all of the furloughs into firings basically.
It further makes whether people think Democrats: should hold out on passing a "clean CR"? for how long? and what the minimum they should accept? important questions for their supporters to consider/discuss.
|
Trump had been purging the government since he got into office, he doesn't need a shutdown to keep doing what he has been doing.
|
On October 01 2025 11:17 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2025 10:54 LightSpectra wrote:On October 01 2025 10:37 GreenHorizons wrote:On October 01 2025 09:35 WombaT wrote:
Maybe ya got it wrong GH, maybe there’s that?
I know you’re incapable of considering that but, try? My last post literally ended with "My mistake"? But sure, what are you thinking? LightSpectra claimed something I hadn't heard here or otherwise as a documented fact so I expected someone to be able to provide supporting citations (I've found no corroborating evidence/reports personally, but still don't rule it out) and/or say the "quite a lot of documented cases" seemingly came from their imagination. Kwark, being the resident WWII/European history buff with a penchant for telling people they're wrong about stuff, I thought it seemed right up his alley (either confirming it as a fact or identifying it as something LightSpectra made up). There either are "quite a lot of documented cases" or there aren't. My inclination/cursory research indicates there are not. If anyone has citations that demonstrate otherwise, they're welcome provide them. Otherwise, it's reasonable to recognize that LightSpectra just pulled that "fact" out their ass. I gave you one example to start with and you indicated you had zero intention of acting in good faith, so why would I put in any effort after that? You mentioned one quote seemingly talking about Hitler voters from an ~900pg book/diary of an SPD voter. That's not even an example, let alone evidence of "quite a lot of documented cases". You also preemptively prefaced it by saying you weren't going to put in the effort to provide supporting evidence for your unsupported assertion of fact with "I'm not going to go trudging through archives to win an Internet argument". Maybe ya got it wrong Light, try considering that?
This is a very wild tangent with absolutely nothing to do with US politics, but I agree with you that I don't think there are many NSDAP voters who at some point between 1933 and 1939 recognised their mistake.
Documentation is obviously patchy, but everything indicates the NSDAP's popularity increased immensely from when they barely scraped a plurality in 1933 to when the army blitzed into Paris. It is obviously influenced by propaganda, which never stopped proclaiming how wonderful the Nazis were, and the flip side of, initially, the SA beating/murdering dissenters, and later the Gestapo vanishing "enemies of the state". No doubt there's plenty of people with dissenting political opinion who regretted immediately what had happened to their country in 1933. Communists, for obvious reasons, among the most vocal. But if there's cases of people regretting their vote for NSDAP, it isn't well documented. Obviously helps that the opinions of people in Dachau weren't documented, so if there's some Jews, homosexuals, socialists, Slavs, mothers who refused to enroll their children in the Hitler Jugend, or other "enemies of the state" who initially voted for the NSDAP but ended up in a camp later, their voices got quashed and all that survived is an ever increasing number of people expressing how wonderful the Nazis were. At least, until 1945, when everyone had always hated the Nazis, of course.
Anyway, as I said, wildly offtopic, so I won't follow up on it, but TLDR, I don't agree with lightspectra and fully agree that that statement comes with a [citation needed].
|
This should be exactly what you want gh. Does the system not first have to break down completely in your pov.
The democrats will make a compromise. My guess its going to take a while somewhere between 1 and 2 months. It will probably be solved just before christmass and then next year shutdown again.
edit:The republicans will probably give in a bit as well.
|
On October 01 2025 15:35 Gorsameth wrote:
Trump had been purging the government since he got into office, he doesn't need a shutdown to keep doing what he has been doing.
I think that leads to a key question, since Trump has been dismantling departments and/or hiring incompetent MAGA loyalists regardless of a shutdown: What jobs/communities would be newly jeopardized by a government shutdown that aren't already jeopardized by Trump's presidency and idiocy? If there does end up being a substantial difference, I could see a potential government shutdown causing hesitation for those who would be uniquely affected by it.
|
What‘s jeopardized ? Everything tbh. Trump is a monster and he doesn‘t hide it.
He got other people hiding things for him and his cult of followers.
|
On October 01 2025 18:53 Vivax wrote:
What‘s jeopardized ? Everything tbh. Trump is a monster and he doesn‘t hide it.
He got other people hiding things for him and his cult of followers. DarkPlasmaBall's question is what is at risk with the shutdown that isn't otherwise at risk.
Everything is always at risk with Trump, what does the shutdown allow him to that he couldn't do otherwise.
|
On October 01 2025 19:01 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2025 18:53 Vivax wrote:
What‘s jeopardized ? Everything tbh. Trump is a monster and he doesn‘t hide it.
He got other people hiding things for him and his cult of followers. DarkPlasmaBall's question is what is at risk with the shutdown that isn't otherwise at risk. Everything is always at risk with Trump, what does the shutdown allow him to that he couldn't do otherwise.
Meh I‘ll believe it when I see it. The shutdowns have always been a fluke so far.
He doesn‘t need them to do awful things anyway, like slapping a terrorist definition on anything he doesn‘t like at the given moment.
Or compromise European countries…
The scariest part is definitely limiting the scope of criticism of him you are allowed to express or read by keeping his social media dogs on a tight leash.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
