EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 5657
| 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 | ||
|
Doublemint
Austria8739 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45525 Posts
| ||
|
Vivax
22297 Posts
Can you really be friends with spies ? (No) | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26604 Posts
On April 13 2026 03:15 LightSpectra wrote: I appreciate that you're still updating this. I hadn’t realised! Cheers for drawing my attention to this. Although perusing Kwark’s semi-archive will make me viscerally angry, it’s a rather succinct summation of an utter clusterfuck. How conservatives or ‘centrists’ can be on board here is beyond me. Even if your position is that Iran is a threat that needs to be dealt with, or Israel is the Greatest AllyTM so we go where they go it’s so incompetent it’s unreal. I might desire some home improvements done, but if the bloke or blokette I hire effectively renders my house temporarily uninhabitable I think it’s somewhat natural that I’ll be pissed with the execution, even if I consider the goal of some home improvements entirely reasonable. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45525 Posts
"They coyly acknowledged interest in running for president ... Nearly a dozen Democrats weighing 2028 presidential campaigns descended on Manhattan this week, appearing at an annual convention hosted by the Rev. Al Sharpton’s civil rights group, the National Action Network. ... None of the Democrats said outright that they would run. But in appearances onstage with Mr. Sharpton, some appeared to be inching closer, including former Vice President Kamala Harris, who received a raucous response from the crowd." https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/11/us/politics/democrats-president-2028-sharpton-convention-takeaways.html The convention included Harris, Shapiro, Pritzker, Beshear, Buttigieg, Booker, Moore, and others. I wonder who will be the most progressive Democratic primary candidate, and who will be the most charismatic / successful at galvanizing supporters. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland26604 Posts
On April 13 2026 09:56 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: The recent National Action Network convention featured some possible Democratic presidential hopefuls - they were putting out some very early feelers, in case they decide to run in 2028: "They coyly acknowledged interest in running for president ... Nearly a dozen Democrats weighing 2028 presidential campaigns descended on Manhattan this week, appearing at an annual convention hosted by the Rev. Al Sharpton’s civil rights group, the National Action Network. ... None of the Democrats said outright that they would run. But in appearances onstage with Mr. Sharpton, some appeared to be inching closer, including former Vice President Kamala Harris, who received a raucous response from the crowd." https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/11/us/politics/democrats-president-2028-sharpton-convention-takeaways.html The convention included Harris, Shapiro, Pritzker, Beshear, Buttigieg, Booker, Moore, and others. I wonder who will be the most progressive Democratic primary candidate, and who will be the most charismatic / successful at galvanizing supporters. I dunno if they’ll have to be at this rate Trump Term 2.0 is such a mess the Dems/primary voters will probably think they can get away with the most milquetoast, uninspiring candidate possible, and they may well be right there. I may well be entirely wrong, I feel a generally competent ‘regular’ Republican admin may necessitate a bit of boldness to beat and you might see something interesting, be it a progressive pivot or a candidate emerging very rapidly à la Obama. If Trump is going to continue going scorched Earth, the Dems could probably run Biden again and win it, so I think we’ll see someone very safe and centrist unless some incredibly outstanding progressive emerges from almost nowhere and carries the primaries | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45525 Posts
On April 13 2026 10:35 WombaT wrote: I dunno if they’ll have to be at this rate Trump Term 2.0 is such a mess the Dems/primary voters will probably think they can get away with the most milquetoast, uninspiring candidate possible, and they may well be right there. I may well be entirely wrong, I feel a generally competent ‘regular’ Republican admin may necessitate a bit of boldness to beat and you might see something interesting, be it a progressive pivot or a candidate emerging very rapidly à la Obama. If Trump is going to continue going scorched Earth, the Dems could probably run Biden again and win it, so I think we’ll see someone very safe and centrist unless some incredibly outstanding progressive emerges from almost nowhere and carries the primaries I wouldn't be that surprised if we indeed see someone win the Democratic primary who is considered "safe and centrist", though I don't actually know if that would be the best (safest) choice in the general election - being boring and moderate might not energize support the same way that someone with charisma and a progressive vision might. Compared to Trump, the next Republican nominee will probably be seen as boring and moderate too lol. | ||
KwarK
United States43902 Posts
On April 13 2026 09:49 WombaT wrote: I hadn’t realised! Cheers for drawing my attention to this. Although perusing Kwark’s semi-archive will make me viscerally angry, it’s a rather succinct summation of an utter clusterfuck. How conservatives or ‘centrists’ can be on board here is beyond me. Even if your position is that Iran is a threat that needs to be dealt with, or Israel is the Greatest AllyTM so we go where they go it’s so incompetent it’s unreal. I might desire some home improvements done, but if the bloke or blokette I hire effectively renders my house temporarily uninhabitable I think it’s somewhat natural that I’ll be pissed with the execution, even if I consider the goal of some home improvements entirely reasonable. Updated with excerpts from his Monday address, full transcript here, and events of today. April 6: To take the oil [asked whether he'd seize Iran's oil] Yeah. Because I'm a businessman first. With Venezuela, as you know, the war was over in about 45 minutes. And we have great people running Venezuela, very good people. I mean, the relationship is good, and we are a partner with Venezuela. And we've taken hundreds of millions of barrels, hundreds of millions. Over a hundred million barrels already is in Houston, refined and out, and paid for that war many, many times over, many times. You know the old days to the victim... Okay. You know that. To the winner belonged the spoils, go the spoils. And I've said, "Why don't we use it?" To the victor, go the spoils. April 6: I gave them 10. 10 is up? 11 I guess I said, "Steve, give them 10 days." 10 days is up actually today. So I gave them 11, I guess April 6: We'll charge tolls Why shouldn't we? We're the winner. We won. They are militarily defeated. The only thing they have is the psychology of, oh, we're going to drop a couple of mines in the water. All right. No, I mean, we have a concept where we'll charge tolls. April 6: When we needed them we didn't when we needed them... We didn't need them, by the way. We didn't need them, obviously April 6: Kuwait has been a good ally, I mean they did shoot down 3 of our planes Now, countries that have been good, now you could also say they're got to be a little bit more involved because they're in the territory, but Saudi Arabia has been excellent. Qatar has been excellent. UAE has been excellent. Bahrain, Kuwait. I mean, Kuwait did shoot down three of our planes. April 6: North Korea = best Korea You know who else didn't help us? South Korea didn't help us. You know who else didn't help us? Australia didn't help us. You know who else didn't help us? Japan. We've got 50,000 soldiers in Japan to protect them from North Korea. We have 45,000 soldiers in South Korea to protect us from Kim Jong Un, who I get along with very well, as you know. Do you notice he said very nice things about me? He used to call Joe Biden a mentally retarded person. So don't tell me about your stuff. Joe Biden, he said, "He's a mentally retarded person." He was so nasty to Joe Biden. It was terrible. But to me, he likes Trump April 12: Unspecified countries will help Other Countries will be involved with this Blockade April 12: UK will help the UK and a couple of other countries are sending mine sweepers April 12: UK will not help (an hour is a long time in geopolitics apparently) He [Starmer] made a public statement that ‘we will send equipment after the war is over’ There's some non Iran stuff in there too that I'm skipping over like this Now with Venezuela, and just so you understand, the people of Venezuela, they say if I ran for president of Venezuela, I'm polling higher than anybody has ever polled in Venezuela. So after I'm finished with this, I can go to Venezuela. I will quickly learn Spanish. It won't take too long. I'm good at language. And I will go to Venezuela. I'm going to run for president. | ||
|
doubleupgradeobbies!
Australia1281 Posts
On April 13 2026 10:41 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I wouldn't be that surprised if we indeed see someone win the Democratic primary who is considered "safe and centrist", though I don't actually know if that would be the best (safest) choice in the general election - being boring and moderate might not energize support the same way that someone with charisma and a progressive vision might. Compared to Trump, the next Republican nominee will probably be seen as boring and moderate too lol. Heh, I think it's almost assured that the Dems will run someone centrist. With this at least I agree with GH on. Dems are the deeply unserious party that never fails to snatch a 'barely better than a draw' from the jaws of almost-certain victory. | ||
|
EnDeR_
Spain2862 Posts
On April 13 2026 11:23 doubleupgradeobbies! wrote: Heh, I think it's almost assured that the Dems will run someone centrist. With this at least I agree with GH on. Dems are the deeply unserious party that never fails to snatch a 'barely better than a draw' from the jaws of almost-certain victory. I just hope they are not dumb enough to run Harris again. | ||
|
RenSC2
United States1085 Posts
So when you say that the "Dems will run someone centrist." What you're saying is that the voters will pick a centrist over a progressive during the primaries. We'll see. The centrists will say that we need some safe return to normalcy. The progressives will say we need radical change. The voters will decide and while they usually pick the centrist, there's a lot of pissed off people this time around that don't just want a reversion to the mean. And when you say "I just hope they are not dumb enough to run Harris again." You're saying that you hope Harris is not dumb enough to waste more donors' money or that the primary voters won't vote for her. Don't worry. She's welcome to run, but I seriously doubt she'll win the primary. Lots of governors and other prominent figures eyeing the 2028 presidency and quite a few that will do better than her. Having negative charisma will kill her chances again. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45525 Posts
| ||
|
doubleupgradeobbies!
Australia1281 Posts
On April 13 2026 15:43 RenSC2 wrote: Last two posts misunderstand US elections. The party doesn't pick the candidates. The candidates choose to run. Then the voters pick the final candidate out of the possibilities. The party didn't want Bernie to run in 2016/2020, he did anyways, but got dominated by the centrist both times due to the voters. In 2016, there was some party support for Clinton over him, but these days, the party doesn't even officially support one candidate over another. So when you say that the "Dems will run someone centrist." What you're saying is that the voters will pick a centrist over a progressive during the primaries. We'll see. The centrists will say that we need some safe return to normalcy. The progressives will say we need radical change. The voters will decide and while they usually pick the centrist, there's a lot of pissed off people this time around that don't just want a reversion to the mean. And when you say "I just hope they are not dumb enough to run Harris again." You're saying that you hope Harris is not dumb enough to waste more donors' money or that the primary voters won't vote for her. Don't worry. She's welcome to run, but I seriously doubt she'll win the primary. Lots of governors and other prominent figures eyeing the 2028 presidency and quite a few that will do better than her. Having negative charisma will kill her chances again. The DNC has a massive influence over who wins the primary. The endorsements of candidates who drop out matter a lot to primaries that are yet to happen, endorsements of former presidents matter. You say it like the establishment has no power over who wins a primary. But the voter-base just don't think as independent as you make them out to. Party insiders have a lot of influence over legacy media, and the general narrative around potential candidates. Yes ultimately, the voters choose who wins in the end, but the average voter just isn't doing that much independent research, and it takes a lot of anger/dissatisfaction to overcome the inertia of the establishment. Is it the Dem voter base that's ultimately responsible? Sure. But they don't seem that satisfied with their own choices lately, given the approval ratings of congress, and their last president. So whether it's the voterbase or the establishment, or a problematic primary system, something is causing them to elect candidates that they themselves are not happy with in the end. | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States2478 Posts
https://www.irishstar.com/news/us-news/deeply-sick-trump-posts-blasphemous-37003056 | ||
|
KT_Elwood
Germany1146 Posts
But the Lego-Movies from iran are 🔥🔥🔥🔥 | ||
|
doubleupgradeobbies!
Australia1281 Posts
AI images are weird. (or maybe just my facial recognition) | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9296 Posts
| ||
|
EnDeR_
Spain2862 Posts
On April 13 2026 15:59 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: I assume that Double and Ender are accurately implying Dem voters choosing to run a certain candidate in the general election (based on the outcome of the primary), in the same way that you've just elaborated on, Ren. The combination, yes. The DNC choosing to pull their weight behind Kamala and the voters just going for it. I honestly hope they are not that dumb. | ||
|
Vivax
22297 Posts
On April 13 2026 16:30 LightSpectra wrote: As part of his beef with Pope Leo, Trump posts an AI generated picture of himself as Jesus Christ miraculously healing what appears to be an aged Jeffrey Epstein (?). https://www.irishstar.com/news/us-news/deeply-sick-trump-posts-blasphemous-37003056 Yeah throwing the guy under the bus before he could be properly questioned might have been a tad little sus. Makes you wonder who‘s a fan of his methods elsewhere. Cops in the mafia probably. I mean, it‘s already a mafia of sorts but some of them run an extra one on the side. At least in this country. Then they start internal wars over it cause they can‘t decide who to fuck over. Interesting times. Where‘s the opt-out ? | ||
|
Jankisa
Croatia1348 Posts
![[image loading]](https://i2-prod.irishstar.com/article37003053.ece/ALTERNATES/s1200e/0_12b95395fef480e3.jpg) The worse part is that this is so fucking lazy. AI can absolutely get details better, it can have correct text on hats, you can, with just a few more iterations make the airplanes look like F35s and I guess the "soldiers in heaven" look like human beings not demons, but these stupid fucks are so fucking lazy they can't even bother to spend more then 15 minutes, and the absolute imbecile of their boss will say yes to anything that he thinks will rile people up, plus, it has gold details and they made him look younger, so, you know, good enough. Speaking of presidents and presidential candidates, yes, Trump's "I'll learn Spanish and become Venezuelan president too" quote is insane, but it did make me think, is this motherfucker the first modern US president that is monolingual. To me, as an European, knowing only one language seems weird, especially for a person who is supposed to represent your country in the world plus, you know, represents one of the most diverse countries in the world. But, as it's often the case, I came away from this disappointing, yes, of course Trump knows no other languages, not even close, but, Obama, who I'd have guessed knew at least a few, knows just some Indonesian because that's where he grew up, Biden, nothing, some French in school as a kid, nothing, Bush some Spanish, Clinton some German. I guess the nice thing about being the hegemon is that you don't have to learn any other languages and everyone needs to adjust to you, but hell, man, knowing a language is so important, for the brain, for the wordview, it's incredibly telling and disappointing that USA has basically gone into a direction where even the "most impressive" people who get to be presidents don't have to know anything other then English. With that in mind, my top qualifying quality for the Democratic nominee will be proficiency in at least 2 languages beside English. | ||
| ||
