EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 5340
| 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 | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium5070 Posts
| ||
|
Simberto
Germany11787 Posts
On November 04 2025 22:28 Billyboy wrote: @introvert You OK with him just blatantly lying? And do you think Republicans will not notice that prices are up because Trump said so? What a crazy world. The strategy seems to be to go full-on 1984 doublethink. | ||
|
Introvert
United States4921 Posts
On November 04 2025 22:28 Billyboy wrote: @introvert You OK with him just blatantly lying? And do you think Republicans will not notice that prices are up because Trump said so? What a crazy world. Huh? Why are you asking me about this? No, I don't like lying but people are inured to Trump's... mis-statements. Besides, dems are too busy shutting down the government and arguing about their various issues of concern to talk much about prices. It's no wonder their image is still in the toilet. We'll have to see if they improve on 2024 margins in elections tonight, if they don't... that's yikes. Maybe then they will learn something. But winning will probably hide their problems. Might even elect as AG the guy who wished his opponent's children were shot and killed, so everyone is off their rocker atm | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium5070 Posts
| ||
|
Jankisa
Croatia1292 Posts
There is no limit to the amount of ground this covers for this guy, I've never seen him concede anything wrong being done by Trump and his regime without explaining how much worse Democrats are. It's a fascinating study of victim complex, even this last post of his is a microcosm of his whole approach. | ||
|
Introvert
United States4921 Posts
| ||
|
Jankisa
Croatia1292 Posts
That's the problem, you keep saying this "there's nothing I could say" without ever offering even mild criticism on things that are objectively insane and go against your purported conservative viewpoints. People's rights being trampled, getting disappeared from the streets, their faces dragged on concrete, shoot in the head with pepper spray, all to American citizens, you don't care. People being arrested for posting memes, completely nonthreatening memes, you don't care. Trump deciding he'll pay himself a quarter of a billion in damages that are non-existing, not a peep. Him getting his goons to pull comedians off the air because of him not liking a joke, nope, not worth thinking about. As long as your republicans buddies hurt the people you hate, it's all good. That's not ideology, that is vindictiveness and heartlessness, but I guess that is the Republican ideology of 2025. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18856 Posts
| ||
|
oBlade
United States5964 Posts
On November 04 2025 13:49 ChristianS wrote: Sure, all of which to say when they wanted that stuff they were happy to find the votes, or maybe just schmooze up to their rich buddies and get it done that way. But food stamps? Fuck em. Health care premiums more than doubling? Oh we think that’s good actually. They require different numbers of votes. You can only do budget reconciliation without a cloture vote once a year. There are parliamentary limits to what this can apply to. You can't for example use that to set fiscal policy and budgets for the next 20 years. On November 04 2025 13:49 ChristianS wrote: By their own admission they’re so determined to *ensuring* that people’s healthcare premiums go up that they’re willing to accept all the other consequences of the shutdown. I have no doubt Democrats would happily help them pass something that funded SNAP in the interim, but clearly Republicans have no interest in that either. The CR the Senate blocked 12+ times funded SNAP in the interim. If Republicans didn't want it to pass, Democrats should have called their bluff by allowing a vote on it, which would then force Republicans in the Senate to vote no on their own bill. Since it already passed the House. Or make them double bluff forcing Trump to veto it. On November 04 2025 13:49 ChristianS wrote: And the procedural argument you’re making feels pretty hollow when they’re so happy to ignore procedure the rest of the time. Last shutdown ended when Trump decided to sidestep the appropriations process entirely and fund his wall with “emergency funds.” What you think I'm saying: Trump both can't and shouldn't deplete USDA contingency fund on partial SNAP benefits. Why you think I can't: You fancy that I ignored something else 6-7 years ago? Firstly, I'm not Trump. If he had used the USDA contingency fund to build the wall, that would be a clear problem. The money he used to address the border at the end of his first term was taken from a few sources, including drug task force funds. Drug interdiction is a key part of border security and that sounds 100% on the money. On November 04 2025 13:49 ChristianS wrote: But 40 million Americans losing the money they depend on for food? Pff, that’s not an *emergency.* They can’t even make up their minds whether that’s *bad* or not. Legally because it's called "contingency fund" that doesn't necessarily mean it's "carte blanche use this money on whatever you think is good." Like USAID wasn't about "aid," but the agency for international development. Names are different than things. Now it may be permitted, or not, or a gray area. In this case it's probably a good idea, but there's a reason not to take that for granted: Imagine a town has a 911 emergency fund for services like police, hospitals, ambulance, fire, rescue. The fund is half the monthly budget of any of those departments. Now imagine the government was so busy doing nothing that they forgot to fund ambulances. The ambulance program just stopped. Some people would be inconvenienced, some suffer, some even die. Seems clear we should just fund the ambulance program for half a month and also hope the government will notice and officially support it again. But this time it's wildfire season. There's a significant chance of an event that without the fire department and other access to that money, many times more people will die than those who just couldn't get the ambulance. It's not so clear now and that's why there are rules. Idea: But can't you just fund the ambulance and then get the people who control funding to make a new emergency fund when there's a wildfire? Possibly, except if they can't figure out how to fund ambulances they're not likely to be particularly on the ball for the wildfire either. In our USDA case the unforeseen disasters don't seem likely or that risky, and so even if were technically not legal it's not likely to be challenged, or stopped before it happens anyway. But in either case after a max of one more month benefits it's still back to the same problem: Now what? Despite the fraud and unnecessary use, feeding people is good. But incentivizing the people whose job is to fund the government to not fund it because you can pull rabbits out of hats occasionally is not a smart habit to be falling into. | ||
|
Billyboy
1590 Posts
On November 04 2025 22:51 Simberto wrote: The strategy seems to be to go full-on 1984 doublethink. It is insane to watch from the outside. On November 04 2025 23:05 Introvert wrote: Huh? Why are you asking me about this? No, I don't like lying but people are inured to Trump's... mis-statements. Besides, dems are too busy shutting down the government and arguing about their various issues of concern to talk much about prices. It's no wonder their image is still in the toilet. We'll have to see if they improve on 2024 margins in elections tonight, if they don't... that's yikes. Maybe then they will learn something. But winning will probably hide their problems. Might even elect as AG the guy who wished his opponent's children were shot and killed, so everyone is off their rocker atm On November 04 2025 23:44 Introvert wrote: Breaking news: conservative thinks Democrats a worse party than Republicans. More at 11. What people want is endless "Republican bad" to the point where they tie themselves into logical knots repeatedly. Thr shutdown is just the latest example. The only "acceptable" answer is that it's the GOP's fault even though it only happened because of senate Democrats. There is nothing I could even say at this point that would be accepted. The hope is that at some point the not stupid Republicans will go "Holy shit it is an embarrassment and absolutely terrible for our country that we have a compulsive lying, dumb, narcissistic, nepo baby who openly takes bribes leading out party, this is bad thing." Hell you do not even need to vote Dem, you could just join the Republicans and against Trump and try to pry your party out of the stupidest era. I can not understand how you Americans treat politics like team sports and support your parties guy no matter how clearly incompetent he is. It is also incredibly stupid that what is "winning" to people seems to be beating the other party and not making the country better. Your country is on the fast track to becoming a shit hole and you are there cheering for it because you get to beat the dems. It is so painful to watch. | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium5070 Posts
Democrats are boring, institutional loving, donor classed losers. But at least they seem to want to hold up the constitution. Fucking Trump is bulldozing the White House to signal to everyone that the old days of your country are over and it's about to get a whole lot wilder. Wilder in the sense that all the people in high positions are set for life and the culture wars can begin for real this time. But hey, the Dems would've fasttracked the exact same scenario, or worse, am I right? | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23773 Posts
On November 04 2025 19:15 KT_Elwood wrote: Cuomo is endorsed by Trump himself and this mayoral race basicly shows what is fucking wrong with Old-Dems and Maga being your only choices. Cuomo and Adams changed labels from Democrat, but they didn't really have to change their politics for Trump (who also used to identify as a Democrat) to be aligned with them. There's clearly something important going on there that the Democrat party and their supporters are failing to reckon with at the national scale. That failure will likely (continue to) have catastrophic consequences. | ||
|
Vivax
22251 Posts
| ||
|
Simberto
Germany11787 Posts
On November 05 2025 00:37 Billyboy wrote: It is insane to watch from the outside. The hope is that at some point the not stupid Republicans will go "Holy shit it is an embarrassment and absolutely terrible for our country that we have a compulsive lying, dumb, narcissistic, nepo baby who openly takes bribes leading out party, this is bad thing." Hell you do not even need to vote Dem, you could just join the Republicans and against Trump and try to pry your party out of the stupidest era. I can not understand how you Americans treat politics like team sports and support your parties guy no matter how clearly incompetent he is. It is also incredibly stupid that what is "winning" to people seems to be beating the other party and not making the country better. Your country is on the fast track to becoming a shit hole and you are there cheering for it because you get to beat the dems. It is so painful to watch. Exactly this. It is not about getting republicans to suddenly become progressive leftists. But you guys cannot not see just how bad this insane shit is. Full on "alternative facts", post-truth, post-sanity idiocy. With just the most shameless maximum grift imaginable in there. If Trump were a comic book villain, he would be too stupid and shameless to be believable. Return to being sane conservatives that want the best for the country. Instead of whatever the fuck this is. It makes zero sense, and it is bad for literally everybody excluding maybe 20 of Trumps closest allies. | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium5070 Posts
You've got these insane revenue streams that are concentrated into a structure that is almost impossible to comtrol. If you're too harsh they just set up shop anywhere else and if you're too lenient they siphon off capital and other resources. We're basically living in the age of extractionism, where a predatory/toxic opportunism goes in favor of social cohesion. Work and immediate surrounding are most important because all the services that you need can be delivered to your doorstep and work provides the means to get that done. Never mind cities that change their urban designs for the better or reorganize parks or events or infrastructure that needs to be maintained. I'll only open my mouth when life becomes inconvenient for me. Loosening anti-trust will become one of our biggest tragedies to date, together with the selling of analytics and free datasets LLMs train on. We have no more power as a citizen, because now we fight and government and corporations, who might - collectively - actually wield more power. So what option do the Dems actually have? They need to play ball, and basically have to go through the motions, seemingly eroding their ideological framework year over year because every quarter the capitalist elite are wringing the economy that much harder. I see the end of democracy happening quite soon honestly if this keeps up with the introduction of the corpo/technofeudalist system. Basically a Weyland-Yutani style hierarchy, or whatever dystopian corpo ruled future you can envision, they,'re all the same anyway. You see the early signs already with all these billionaires talking about how they would see their idea of society play out. One of these days there,'s going to be a dude who actually starts one. We already have ghost cities to populate so it's not even a difficult logistical task to pull off, only a few serfs - the uber nerd techno slave who wants to hang on daddy Elon's teet all day are very willing if je'd propose this kind of idea - are enough to kickstart this new era we don't need and don't want, but will get because they have all the money anyway. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26468 Posts
On November 04 2025 23:44 Introvert wrote: Breaking news: conservative thinks Democrats a worse party than Republicans. More at 11. What people want is endless "Republican bad" to the point where they tie themselves into logical knots repeatedly. Thr shutdown is just the latest example. The only "acceptable" answer is that it's the GOP's fault even though it only happened because of senate Democrats. There is nothing I could even say at this point that would be accepted. I mean, trying might help? In a more generalised sense. Many people want their ‘team’ to win, of course. If one is losing though, so long as the game is played in the right spirit, as it were that goes a distance. Outside these particular walls, sure it might be different. Within them, I would wager that getting Republicans to go ‘GOP’ bad isn’t a particular aspiration. It would be conservatives having their own red lines, and acting accordingly. Something like that anyway, some self-regulation. I mean I must have made similar posts on this theme at least 10 times prior. So expanding much is a bit redundant. You can collectively do that, and have a slightly more civil wider discourse, or not. Wider conservatism can’t have civil discourse with those who disagree with that creed if it reflexively defends everything the God King does, even the stuff that contravenes their ostensible principles. The natural conclusion becomes that conservatives don’t care about stated principles when it suits, so why should I care when they’re invoked against something I want? Or indeed just want to be ruled by a belligerent Orange King (us Norn Irish can understand the appeal) It’s not necessarily about building bridges across the aisle, it’s that self-policing exists internally. The wider left aren’t exactly great at the former either. But they do tend to criticise their own more. | ||
KwarK
United States43758 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26468 Posts
On November 05 2025 03:02 KwarK wrote: It’s the same as footballers diving and acting to try to cheat their way into getting free kicks. You can want your team to win but the integrity of the game matters too, you should want them to win the right way. If you win the wrong way then it doesn’t make your team any stronger, it just harms the legitimacy of the league. Oddly enough I was initially going to include that exact analogy in my last post haha | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium5070 Posts
In theory. Sadly. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11787 Posts
On November 05 2025 02:42 WombaT wrote: I mean, trying might help? In a more generalised sense. Many people want their ‘team’ to win, of course. If one is losing though, so long as the game is played in the right spirit, as it were that goes a distance. Outside these particular walls, sure it might be different. Within them, I would wager that getting Republicans to go ‘GOP’ bad isn’t a particular aspiration. It would be conservatives having their own red lines, and acting accordingly. Something like that anyway, some self-regulation. I mean I must have made similar posts on this theme at least 10 times prior. So expanding much is a bit redundant. You can collectively do that, and have a slightly more civil wider discourse, or not. Wider conservatism can’t have civil discourse with those who disagree with that creed if it reflexively defends everything the God King does, even the stuff that contravenes their ostensible principles. The natural conclusion becomes that conservatives don’t care about stated principles when it suits, so why should I care when they’re invoked against something I want? Or indeed just want to be ruled by a belligerent Orange King (us Norn Irish can understand the appeal) It’s not necessarily about building bridges across the aisle, it’s that self-policing exists internally. The wider left aren’t exactly great at the former either. But they do tend to criticise their own more. I want to just write "this", but i also want to write a bit more. Principles would be nice, and even acting in your rational self-interest would be amazing. Not brainless defending of "your team". Make "your team" the team that is closest to your basic principles and your rational self-interest at any given moment, instead of just choosing one and then sticking with them forever, no matter what they do. I like to think that my political opinions are based on my ethical principles, on what i think is right, and my beliefs about how an ideal human society should look like. And it is those principles that are the core, not the political opinions. I am willing to change opinions if it turns out what i believed before does not actually fit my principles. This seems to be something that republicans just don't do. None of their stated principles are held deeply enough that they would follow those principles over what Trump says or does at any given moment. So i guess the only actual core principle that they seem to strictly follow seems to be total obedience to the leader? But that is a pretty shitty principle. | ||
| ||
