US Politics Mega-thread - Page 5363

On November 20 2025 10:56 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
Now, at the beginning of the year i had Real GDP growing at 2% in 2025. Let's see how this projection has played out so far. It is late November so 2025 projections by reasonable authors should be damn close.
https://www.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/topics/economy/us-economic-forecast/united-states-outlook-analysis.html

the official Deloitte projection as of September 30th is:
1.8% real GDP growth in 2025
1.4% real GDP growth in 2026

i am talking about assessing my support level in relation to a flag. you do not know what i support. you do not know what the confederate flag wavers support or not support. i do not know either. if i were waving a confederate flag you would not know.. if i were burning a Canadian flag you would not know anything either.

you know i'm stirring up trouble... that's about it.

On November 20 2025 04:48 LightSpectra wrote:


Please remind me which states voted for Democrats when slavery was still legal, and how many of them are solid Republican states now. I'll wait patiently.

To say nothing of the stupidity of comparing something Trump did this decade with something that happened a century and a half ago.

On November 20 2025 10:04 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
You don't know who is supporting what.

I can show up at the next Parti Quebecois rally and burn a Canadian flag while screaming a bunch of national quebec slogans and celebrating the death of Pierre Laporte. Does this have the support of the average PQ voter? i doubt it. Should a PQ member back down from forging a better relation with the Federal Government because some random clowns who want to make them look bad showed up burning a flag. Nah.

it is a great way for me to discredit their movement though.

On November 20 2025 10:56 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
i am talking about assessing my support level in relation to a flag. you do not know what i support. you do not know what the confederate flag wavers support or not support. i do not know either. if i were waving a confederate flag you would not know.. if i were burning a Canadian flag you would not know anything either.

you know i'm stirring up trouble... that's about it.

On November 21 2025 01:31 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
When explaining where all the bazillions of new auto assembly jobs were coming from ... the first country Trump said they were coming from was Canada. Trump continues to curb-stomp poor little Governor Justin Trudeau.

On November 21 2025 03:28 Jockmcplop wrote:
I'm very surprised our peace loving, 'keep violence out of our politics' republicans haven't said anything about Trump calling for the deaths of 6 Democratic veterans in congress, for urging members of the military to refuse unlawful orders.

The post in question reads "SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!" and followed a string of reposts from Trump of deranged remarks from MAGA social media users. One of the posts that Trump shared read "HANG THEM GEORGE WASHINGTON WOULD !!"

Is it okay for the President to call for the deaths of of his political opponents?

On November 20 2025 23:41 MJG wrote:

You didn't answer the question.

"Please remind me which states voted for Democrats when slavery was still legal, and how many of them are solid Republican states now. I'll wait patiently."

Try again.

On November 21 2025 04:20 oBlade wrote:

When slavery was legal, most states period voted for Democrats. New York, California, and Illinois voted for Democrats.

The South was significantly Democrat for 100 years after as well, and the life of free blacks in the North didn't become suddenly paradise in 1865. They had a hard time everywhere. There was more racism in the South because there's more racism in all directions when there's more opportunities for it, which simply occurs where there's more racial diversity. Almost all blacks lived in the South and a tiny fraction of the North's population wasn't white. The population distribution didn't change much until migrations happened decades later.

It's not that in 1860 all the good people in the country lived in one half of it, and were in one party, and all the bad people lived in the other half and were in a different party, and they magically all reversed and switched parties over 100 years while still living in the same places. When Strom Thurmond won ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTES! with 2.5% of the national vote, the takeaway is that a small swing constituency motivated largely by voting against integration was part of swinging the party alignment of a region. At one time. Clearly people are not voting Republican today because they are protesting the 1948 integration of the armed forces. The reason the Confederacy was bad is not something like they were mean to black people so everything their region does in perpetuity must be opposed because it's a manifestation of hating black people. There is and always has been racism in both parties. The reason the Confederacy was bad is because you can't start civil wars and try to leave the country when you don't like the federal government because you think it doesn't apply to you if you don't get your way. And the Civil War decided that in blood. That's the problem with the direction of Democrat politics, that is shared in common with the Democrats who seceded originally, trending towards sundering the Union when they don't get what they want.

The Civil War is over. The truth is neither modern party would support the Confederacy in the 1860s. Probably neither would support the Union either. And it's not the 1860s so hypothetical right-side-of-history opposition can't excuse racism or sedition in the here and now from the left. The analogy to show why such theorizing anyway doesn't carry any moral weight is easy: Would Netanyahu's government be more likely to be on the side of the Axis or Allies in 1944? They must be doing things right then?

On November 21 2025 04:22 LightSpectra wrote:
To follow up on what oBlade just said, the U.S. Coast Guard will no longer classify swastikas, nooses as hate symbols: https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2025/11/20/coast-guard-swastika-noose/

On November 20 2025 17:07 Hat Trick of Today wrote:
Yes. And that election was after when clear cracks were forming in the Democratic heartland in the South. Those cracks were not a result of amazing economic growth in the South, it is clear that the primary animus were the increasing amount of civil liberties given to black Americans.

Strom Thurmond, a Democrat in the South, entered an election to specifically spite Truman, specifically his goal to eliminate segregation in the US army. Him and his Dixiecrats managed to win four southern states and gain one faithless elector during an election prior to Eisenhower like you mentioned.

It goes without saying that these Dixiecrats, who broke ranks for openly racist political motivations, would influence how southern Democratic politicians and supporters would move. You can only look at the number of faithless electors during that period that specifically threw their vote towards Dixiecrats promoting segregation.

Like I said, the Civil Rights Act voting split was not of party lines like you might expect in 2025. It’s was solely geographical. You can very well argue that both major parties more or less flipped their geographical and demographic base over time. Which is what makes the thesis from Johnston and Shafer an interesting, very likely correct to a degree but also mind numbering used all the time to downplay the nasty parts of post-war US election history and the context of the Dixiecrats breaking from the rest of the party.

What they did was kinda like the countless Napoleon biographies that talk up his skill as a general while hand waving away just how important the French Revolution was at generating a culture that could allow the development of competent officers. Those biographies are potentially an interesting read but they always get tunnel vision because the authors have a claim they want to make (Napoleon is the greatest European general) and can’t do anything that might diminish that claim.