|
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 |
United States24779 Posts
|
Apparently somebody who couldn’t get his weapon past the magnetometers. Taken out by the counter assault team. Shooter shot dead. (Multiple sources, CNN, etc)
|
Northern Ireland27013 Posts
Man America really don’t make assassins like they used to do they?
|
On April 26 2026 04:35 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2026 04:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 26 2026 01:00 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
Weirdly, I'm with GH on this. Stop feeding the stupid. There's no progress being made in this cesspool. You win no points. You've gained nothing. Stop. I want to participate in the thread, but what you've all been doing...fucking yuck. "Feeding the stupid" is what makes them feel superior/enjoyment/what they gain. They aren't going to stop. I'm not even trying to get them to. I'm mostly just pointing out their demonstrable incapacity/refusal to do pretty much anything else. Since I'm objectively right, and they're marginally embarrassed by that, they just lash out at me and rationalize their behavior instead of taking the obviously valid criticism and simply discussing US politics topics they value among themselves instead of this petulant shitposting (or worse yet, treating the Sartres like serious interlocutors) LightSpectra and others are always rationalizing. This is part of why they are desperate to rehabilitate/normalize/engage Intro, despite knowing doing so ever so slightly helps Intro in shifting the Overton Window rightward On April 26 2026 01:46 WombaT wrote:On April 26 2026 00:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 26 2026 00:28 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 26 2026 00:12 LightSpectra wrote:On April 25 2026 23:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 25 2026 22:23 LightSpectra wrote:
New page in this thread about the same discussion, Republicans here have still offered zero evidence. On April 25 2026 23:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
We now have baal calling people retarded and autistic, and oBlade calling people trolls. Wow. The turn of phrase "Duh!" comes to mind. You all know better, just can't help yourselves though. If you just link back to your own post a few dozen more times, we will have achieved socialism. Well played. How so? Here's where the "advancing socialism" (so to speak) discussion was left before the mock and gawk spam you guys prefer. On April 14 2026 06:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 14 2026 05:50 EnDeR_ wrote:On April 14 2026 00:57 GreenHorizons wrote:I'll come back to this later if you'd like (or if you and Ender would prefer to take it to my Blog I suppose that'd be fine). You guys are just on the verge of having something resembling a real discussion about the future of the opposition to Trump/Republicans and I'd like to see that develop. Do you not re-read your posts before hitting the button? How did you not clock how condescending this last paragraph is? In all honesty, the biggest problem in communicating with you, besides the shitty attitude, is the sheer quantity of references to different concepts that you never bother to explain in your posts. Which concepts are you struggling with? (note: "struggling" isn't pejorative, it's complimentary) That's not condescension, that was observation. For a moment the discussion between each of you seemed to look like it was going to turn to disagreements about how best to get from where we are here, today, to a future where AOC (or another preferred candidate) is a front runner, and/or the policies (ideally non-reformist reforms) we all mutually like are at the forefront of the platform for the Democrat nominee. That rapidly devolved back into some variations of "vote blue no matter who or else!" (except Swalwell, which I suppose might be worth discussing) before the first candidate has even declared for the primary. EDIT: Also I realize now I forgot Kwark has been quite clear he thinks Democrats should nominate the oldest whitest guy they can, not an AOC or Harris or whatever. EDIT2: On April 14 2026 06:17 KwarK wrote:On April 14 2026 05:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 14 2026 05:21 KwarK wrote:On April 14 2026 03:53 GreenHorizons wrote:
Seems like everyone that's opined (except maybe RenSC2) would prefer AOC over the other candidates, but not so much that they'd actually want to start making an effort to convince the people (and that's a lot more people than Newsom or Harris will need to convince) they'll need to agree with us and work to help make AOC the nominee and eventually president. GH: Dems only offer token resistance to Republicans while basically losing on purpose to help Republicans with their agenda Also GH: Why aren’t people working harder to make a woman of colour outsider the Democratic nominee Are you trying to point out that I'm right or that the posters here aren't "Dems" so much as "independents" and/or "socialists" that believe Democrats are the only viable political body/strategy to even potentially move their interests forward? + Show Spoiler +Neither. You seem not to have noticed that the American population are deeply racist and sexist. That’s something that needs to be incorporated into your strategy. If you plan on doing a revolution before the next election then fine, voter prejudice is not an issue. But if you don’t then we need to find us an old white male reality tv star or we’ll have another 4 years of Trump. Yeah, I remembered. and On April 22 2026 03:49 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 22 2026 03:23 WombaT wrote:On April 22 2026 02:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 22 2026 01:10 WombaT wrote:On April 21 2026 20:10 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 21 2026 18:44 WombaT wrote:[quote] The thing is, being enfranchised into the voting process and things like legalistic rights is a huge driver of quite a few of those kind of movements in the first place. You’re almost framing it as some carrot dangled to placate these movements, rather than it being a key demand that’s being met. + Show Spoiler +And they tend to dissipate when momentum stalls as the kinda main goals that glue the broad coalition together, and we get into various stretch goals that are more niche.
Or to put it another way, a big driver of mass disruptive/revolutionary movements often isn’t to overturn a system, merely to be enfranchised within it. Plenty are more structurally transformative too of course but I think broadly in either instance you’ve got a handful of quite clear grievances that are sufficiently shared for some kind of critical mass of people to garner enough momentum to move the needle.
Not to downplay the importance of such movements, my position is rather the opposite. I just don’t see the appetite from Americans for radical transformation, nor am I sure what the ‘civil rights issue of our time’ is that could rally sufficient people to that banner. Sort of? Those aren't mutually exclusive. I'm pretty familiar with the history, so you know you're not bringing new information to my attention. What exactly in the quoted post are you trying to dispute? Your previous narrative almost presents these approaches as parallel if not directly oppositional. I may be misunderstanding you on certain points, fair enough that may be on me. + Show Spoiler +I assume we agree that public sentiment and electoral politics don’t enjoy a mutually beneficial symbiotic relationship, the leverage is required but what is the pivot?
I think your characterisation of historic political movements is either incorrect, or alternatively I’m just reading you wrong. Which makes adoption into modern contexts strategically flawed, assuming I’m not reading you wrong.
It’s very frequently ‘I want to be in the club too’, and not ‘let’s destroy the club’, a movement pushes the Overton Window sufficiently that political, legal or cultural norms become broadly acceptable to the movement and it somewhat dissipates.
I think a minority in this thread would disagree with you on the importance of movements shifting the political ground, but a lot of your rhetoric seems to suggest just bypassing codified political structures because they’re broken. Or bypassing other things that characterise successful movements more generally.
If I’m misinterpreting I mean that’s somewhat on me but I don’t think I’m the only one somewhat confused as to what your vision of action encompasses Let's start there. I meant: " [being enfranchised into the voting process and things like legalistic rights being] some carrot dangled to placate these movements, rather than it being a key demand that’s being met." aren't mutually exclusive. Are we understanding each other that far? They’re not mutually exclusive, they are just different framings. If person A’s goal is simply to be enfranchised in the electoralism machine, and that’s granted, it’s not some carrot or pseudo-bribe being dangled, it’s simply their ambitions being met. + Show Spoiler +If person B’s goal is huge systemic change and their pressure gets the same concessions, it doesn’t meet their goals.
Certainly in the Northern Irish example, our Civil Right’s movement was mostly person As, with person Bs helping to push that along.
Your rhetoric seems to shit on boring old electoralism, and your evidence frequently invokes past movements whose actual goal was merely to be a meaningful part of that process.
If my read is off well, my bad Okay. Let's put/take "person A" from a real historical moment of "significant progress" in the US of your choice? Either of them could pick that back up or anyone else could really. But you've all got important shitposting about the latest far-right nonsense to do and I understand you find that much more satisfying. You could forget about Socialism for the moment if you will, I'm also talking about discussing plain lib/Dem/ilk ideas among yourselves. Or, alternatively people couldn’t be arsed engaging with you based off your long posting history and aren’t especially interested in indulging you and what you think should be being discussed Sure, that could be plausible. Except, setting aside the whole engaging with people calling others "retarded" and "autistic" thing, I'm again talking about the lib/Dem/ilk thread participants inability to/disinterest in discussing US politics among yourselves, while ignoring me/whoever else if you insist/must/choose. We're approaching the fiftieth "just pointing out their demonstrable incapacity/refusal to do pretty much anything else" but maybe one more time and it'll finally change something. Don't give up now!
The idea being maybe you guys aren't as shameless, oblivious, bad faith, etc... as the people you prefer to engage with at excruciating length. You try very hard to prove otherwise. I suppose I can commend you for that?
You say things like: On April 26 2026 01:51 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2026 01:00 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
Weirdly, I'm with GH on this. Stop feeding the stupid. There's no progress being made in this cesspool. You win no points. You've gained nothing. Stop. I want to participate in the thread, but what you've all been doing...fucking yuck. I've said this several times already but I don't participate in this thread because I think three time rapist voters will have a change of heart about literally anything, but so those same people don't have free rein to spread lies and radicalize anyone impressionable who happens to click on this thread. + Show Spoiler +
If you have something you wanna discuss, go ahead and start the discussion, nobody who wants to participate in that is going to be afraid of interrupting the bad faith brigade.
But your guys' inability to/disinterest in discussing anything else means that all people see is them looking reasonable by comparison. Because remember, these imaginary lurkers are already unable to discern the absurdity of supporting Trump without you calling him a rapist a few times a day...
You guys almost exclusively having these 10 page+ back and forths with Sartres does more to "radicalize anyone impressionable who happens to click on this thread" than briefly laughing in their faces and/or ignoring the "three time rapist voters" posts while disappearing them among discussions of your own politics among yourselves ever could.
I referenced the time you guys started to sorta have this kind of discussion and you'll notice that during that the thread was actually much better at preventing the pages from being filled with the far right nonsense than your spamming about rapists, their supporters, and the rest of the last ~10+ pages
|
On April 26 2026 08:36 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2026 04:42 Gorsameth wrote:On April 26 2026 04:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 26 2026 01:00 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
Weirdly, I'm with GH on this. Stop feeding the stupid. There's no progress being made in this cesspool. You win no points. You've gained nothing. Stop. I want to participate in the thread, but what you've all been doing...fucking yuck. "Feeding the stupid" is what makes them feel superior/enjoyment/what they gain. They aren't going to stop. I'm not even trying to get them to. I'm mostly just pointing out their demonstrable incapacity/refusal to do pretty much anything else. Since I'm objectively right, and they're marginally embarrassed by that, they just lash out at me and rationalize their behavior instead of taking the obviously valid criticism and simply discussing US politics topics they value among themselves instead of this petulant shitposting (or worse yet, treating the Sartres like serious interlocutors) LightSpectra and others are always rationalizing. This is part of why they are desperate to rehabilitate/normalize/engage Intro, despite knowing doing so ever so slightly helps Intro in shifting the Overton Window rightward On April 26 2026 01:46 WombaT wrote:On April 26 2026 00:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 26 2026 00:28 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 26 2026 00:12 LightSpectra wrote:On April 25 2026 23:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 25 2026 22:23 LightSpectra wrote:
New page in this thread about the same discussion, Republicans here have still offered zero evidence. On April 25 2026 23:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
We now have baal calling people retarded and autistic, and oBlade calling people trolls. Wow. The turn of phrase "Duh!" comes to mind. You all know better, just can't help yourselves though. If you just link back to your own post a few dozen more times, we will have achieved socialism. Well played. How so? Here's where the "advancing socialism" (so to speak) discussion was left before the mock and gawk spam you guys prefer. On April 14 2026 06:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 14 2026 05:50 EnDeR_ wrote:On April 14 2026 00:57 GreenHorizons wrote:I'll come back to this later if you'd like (or if you and Ender would prefer to take it to my Blog I suppose that'd be fine). You guys are just on the verge of having something resembling a real discussion about the future of the opposition to Trump/Republicans and I'd like to see that develop. Do you not re-read your posts before hitting the button? How did you not clock how condescending this last paragraph is? In all honesty, the biggest problem in communicating with you, besides the shitty attitude, is the sheer quantity of references to different concepts that you never bother to explain in your posts. Which concepts are you struggling with? (note: "struggling" isn't pejorative, it's complimentary) That's not condescension, that was observation. For a moment the discussion between each of you seemed to look like it was going to turn to disagreements about how best to get from where we are here, today, to a future where AOC (or another preferred candidate) is a front runner, and/or the policies (ideally non-reformist reforms) we all mutually like are at the forefront of the platform for the Democrat nominee. That rapidly devolved back into some variations of "vote blue no matter who or else!" (except Swalwell, which I suppose might be worth discussing) before the first candidate has even declared for the primary. EDIT: Also I realize now I forgot Kwark has been quite clear he thinks Democrats should nominate the oldest whitest guy they can, not an AOC or Harris or whatever. EDIT2: On April 14 2026 06:17 KwarK wrote:On April 14 2026 05:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 14 2026 05:21 KwarK wrote:On April 14 2026 03:53 GreenHorizons wrote:
Seems like everyone that's opined (except maybe RenSC2) would prefer AOC over the other candidates, but not so much that they'd actually want to start making an effort to convince the people (and that's a lot more people than Newsom or Harris will need to convince) they'll need to agree with us and work to help make AOC the nominee and eventually president. GH: Dems only offer token resistance to Republicans while basically losing on purpose to help Republicans with their agenda Also GH: Why aren’t people working harder to make a woman of colour outsider the Democratic nominee Are you trying to point out that I'm right or that the posters here aren't "Dems" so much as "independents" and/or "socialists" that believe Democrats are the only viable political body/strategy to even potentially move their interests forward? + Show Spoiler +Neither. You seem not to have noticed that the American population are deeply racist and sexist. That’s something that needs to be incorporated into your strategy. If you plan on doing a revolution before the next election then fine, voter prejudice is not an issue. But if you don’t then we need to find us an old white male reality tv star or we’ll have another 4 years of Trump. Yeah, I remembered. and On April 22 2026 03:49 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 22 2026 03:23 WombaT wrote:On April 22 2026 02:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 22 2026 01:10 WombaT wrote:On April 21 2026 20:10 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
Sort of?
Those aren't mutually exclusive. I'm pretty familiar with the history, so you know you're not bringing new information to my attention.
What exactly in the quoted post are you trying to dispute?
Your previous narrative almost presents these approaches as parallel if not directly oppositional. I may be misunderstanding you on certain points, fair enough that may be on me. + Show Spoiler +I assume we agree that public sentiment and electoral politics don’t enjoy a mutually beneficial symbiotic relationship, the leverage is required but what is the pivot?
I think your characterisation of historic political movements is either incorrect, or alternatively I’m just reading you wrong. Which makes adoption into modern contexts strategically flawed, assuming I’m not reading you wrong.
It’s very frequently ‘I want to be in the club too’, and not ‘let’s destroy the club’, a movement pushes the Overton Window sufficiently that political, legal or cultural norms become broadly acceptable to the movement and it somewhat dissipates.
I think a minority in this thread would disagree with you on the importance of movements shifting the political ground, but a lot of your rhetoric seems to suggest just bypassing codified political structures because they’re broken. Or bypassing other things that characterise successful movements more generally.
If I’m misinterpreting I mean that’s somewhat on me but I don’t think I’m the only one somewhat confused as to what your vision of action encompasses Let's start there. I meant: " [being enfranchised into the voting process and things like legalistic rights being] some carrot dangled to placate these movements, rather than it being a key demand that’s being met." aren't mutually exclusive. Are we understanding each other that far? They’re not mutually exclusive, they are just different framings. If person A’s goal is simply to be enfranchised in the electoralism machine, and that’s granted, it’s not some carrot or pseudo-bribe being dangled, it’s simply their ambitions being met. + Show Spoiler +If person B’s goal is huge systemic change and their pressure gets the same concessions, it doesn’t meet their goals.
Certainly in the Northern Irish example, our Civil Right’s movement was mostly person As, with person Bs helping to push that along.
Your rhetoric seems to shit on boring old electoralism, and your evidence frequently invokes past movements whose actual goal was merely to be a meaningful part of that process.
If my read is off well, my bad Okay. Let's put/take "person A" from a real historical moment of "significant progress" in the US of your choice? Either of them could pick that back up or anyone else could really. But you've all got important shitposting about the latest far-right nonsense to do and I understand you find that much more satisfying. You could forget about Socialism for the moment if you will, I'm also talking about discussing plain lib/Dem/ilk ideas among yourselves. Or, alternatively people couldn’t be arsed engaging with you based off your long posting history and aren’t especially interested in indulging you and what you think should be being discussed Sure, that could be plausible. Except, setting aside the whole engaging with people calling others "retarded" and "autistic" thing, I'm again talking about the lib/Dem/ilk thread participants inability to/disinterest in discussing US politics among yourselves, while ignoring me/whoever else if you insist/must/choose. Really? because the few times we've had without you or the latest right wing nut case have seen calm discussions among ourselves about whatever interesting topic happened to be brought up. As for 'feeding the stupid' I will always point out how wrong they are simply because to do otherwise is to invite page upon page of misinformation without counter, anyone peeking in sees this misinformation without the followup pointing out how its just plain wrong and wonders if its actually true. Thats how your grandma got to believing in jewish space lasers causing cancer. The lies don't stop if you stop engaging them, they just spread. I agree calling out the misinformation and deliberate bullshit helpful. The first couple of pages. But I think then, with all that's going on, we should ignore them. If someone has already called out the stupid, then we don't need to pile on, unless you're offering new information that the previous person left out. I guess my disappointment, so to speak, is that this is all we can do. Everything we could possibly talk about is just "How incompetent can this administration be?!?!" And every day it's like they have to one up themselves. US sends envoy to Pakistan for talks, Iran guffaws and sends no one. Envoy stays home. Dept of Labor head is out for abuse. 4-5 House reps resigned in what...3 months? Marijuana easements from the DOJ happened as well. Guess that last one isn't too bad.
One of the most sensible things I've read here in quite a bit. I expect it to be treated as such.
|
United States44112 Posts
Presumably the latest in a series of time travelers trying to kill Trump. Secret Service never reveal any details on the shooters because of the implication.
|
On April 26 2026 10:46 WombaT wrote:
Man America really don’t make assassins like they used to do they? Mentalist stock is way down …
|
Northern Ireland27013 Posts
On April 26 2026 10:57 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2026 10:46 WombaT wrote:
Man America really don’t make assassins like they used to do they? Mentalist stock is way down …
Make mentalists great again
|
Why don't all the time traveling assassins go for him at the same time instead of one-by-one like the mooks in martial arts movies/super sentai shows?
|
On April 26 2026 11:10 LightSpectra wrote:
Why don't all the time traveling assassins go for him at the same time instead of one-by-one like the mooks in martial arts movies/super sentai shows?
I can promise those imaginary lurkers that need your posts to prevent them from slipping into right-wing extremism don't think pining about more effective presidential assassination attempts is funny.
I do though, lol.
|
Northern Ireland27013 Posts
On April 26 2026 08:36 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2026 04:42 Gorsameth wrote:On April 26 2026 04:21 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 26 2026 01:00 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
Weirdly, I'm with GH on this. Stop feeding the stupid. There's no progress being made in this cesspool. You win no points. You've gained nothing. Stop. I want to participate in the thread, but what you've all been doing...fucking yuck. "Feeding the stupid" is what makes them feel superior/enjoyment/what they gain. They aren't going to stop. I'm not even trying to get them to. I'm mostly just pointing out their demonstrable incapacity/refusal to do pretty much anything else. Since I'm objectively right, and they're marginally embarrassed by that, they just lash out at me and rationalize their behavior instead of taking the obviously valid criticism and simply discussing US politics topics they value among themselves instead of this petulant shitposting (or worse yet, treating the Sartres like serious interlocutors) LightSpectra and others are always rationalizing. This is part of why they are desperate to rehabilitate/normalize/engage Intro, despite knowing doing so ever so slightly helps Intro in shifting the Overton Window rightward On April 26 2026 01:46 WombaT wrote:On April 26 2026 00:39 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 26 2026 00:28 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 26 2026 00:12 LightSpectra wrote:On April 25 2026 23:51 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 25 2026 22:23 LightSpectra wrote:
New page in this thread about the same discussion, Republicans here have still offered zero evidence. On April 25 2026 23:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
We now have baal calling people retarded and autistic, and oBlade calling people trolls. Wow. The turn of phrase "Duh!" comes to mind. You all know better, just can't help yourselves though. If you just link back to your own post a few dozen more times, we will have achieved socialism. Well played. How so? Here's where the "advancing socialism" (so to speak) discussion was left before the mock and gawk spam you guys prefer. On April 14 2026 06:05 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 14 2026 05:50 EnDeR_ wrote:On April 14 2026 00:57 GreenHorizons wrote:I'll come back to this later if you'd like (or if you and Ender would prefer to take it to my Blog I suppose that'd be fine). You guys are just on the verge of having something resembling a real discussion about the future of the opposition to Trump/Republicans and I'd like to see that develop. Do you not re-read your posts before hitting the button? How did you not clock how condescending this last paragraph is? In all honesty, the biggest problem in communicating with you, besides the shitty attitude, is the sheer quantity of references to different concepts that you never bother to explain in your posts. Which concepts are you struggling with? (note: "struggling" isn't pejorative, it's complimentary) That's not condescension, that was observation. For a moment the discussion between each of you seemed to look like it was going to turn to disagreements about how best to get from where we are here, today, to a future where AOC (or another preferred candidate) is a front runner, and/or the policies (ideally non-reformist reforms) we all mutually like are at the forefront of the platform for the Democrat nominee. That rapidly devolved back into some variations of "vote blue no matter who or else!" (except Swalwell, which I suppose might be worth discussing) before the first candidate has even declared for the primary. EDIT: Also I realize now I forgot Kwark has been quite clear he thinks Democrats should nominate the oldest whitest guy they can, not an AOC or Harris or whatever. EDIT2: On April 14 2026 06:17 KwarK wrote:On April 14 2026 05:41 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 14 2026 05:21 KwarK wrote:On April 14 2026 03:53 GreenHorizons wrote:
Seems like everyone that's opined (except maybe RenSC2) would prefer AOC over the other candidates, but not so much that they'd actually want to start making an effort to convince the people (and that's a lot more people than Newsom or Harris will need to convince) they'll need to agree with us and work to help make AOC the nominee and eventually president. GH: Dems only offer token resistance to Republicans while basically losing on purpose to help Republicans with their agenda Also GH: Why aren’t people working harder to make a woman of colour outsider the Democratic nominee Are you trying to point out that I'm right or that the posters here aren't "Dems" so much as "independents" and/or "socialists" that believe Democrats are the only viable political body/strategy to even potentially move their interests forward? + Show Spoiler +Neither. You seem not to have noticed that the American population are deeply racist and sexist. That’s something that needs to be incorporated into your strategy. If you plan on doing a revolution before the next election then fine, voter prejudice is not an issue. But if you don’t then we need to find us an old white male reality tv star or we’ll have another 4 years of Trump. Yeah, I remembered. and On April 22 2026 03:49 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 22 2026 03:23 WombaT wrote:On April 22 2026 02:18 GreenHorizons wrote:On April 22 2026 01:10 WombaT wrote:On April 21 2026 20:10 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]
Sort of?
Those aren't mutually exclusive. I'm pretty familiar with the history, so you know you're not bringing new information to my attention.
What exactly in the quoted post are you trying to dispute?
Your previous narrative almost presents these approaches as parallel if not directly oppositional. I may be misunderstanding you on certain points, fair enough that may be on me. + Show Spoiler +I assume we agree that public sentiment and electoral politics don’t enjoy a mutually beneficial symbiotic relationship, the leverage is required but what is the pivot?
I think your characterisation of historic political movements is either incorrect, or alternatively I’m just reading you wrong. Which makes adoption into modern contexts strategically flawed, assuming I’m not reading you wrong.
It’s very frequently ‘I want to be in the club too’, and not ‘let’s destroy the club’, a movement pushes the Overton Window sufficiently that political, legal or cultural norms become broadly acceptable to the movement and it somewhat dissipates.
I think a minority in this thread would disagree with you on the importance of movements shifting the political ground, but a lot of your rhetoric seems to suggest just bypassing codified political structures because they’re broken. Or bypassing other things that characterise successful movements more generally.
If I’m misinterpreting I mean that’s somewhat on me but I don’t think I’m the only one somewhat confused as to what your vision of action encompasses Let's start there. I meant: " [being enfranchised into the voting process and things like legalistic rights being] some carrot dangled to placate these movements, rather than it being a key demand that’s being met." aren't mutually exclusive. Are we understanding each other that far? They’re not mutually exclusive, they are just different framings. If person A’s goal is simply to be enfranchised in the electoralism machine, and that’s granted, it’s not some carrot or pseudo-bribe being dangled, it’s simply their ambitions being met. + Show Spoiler +If person B’s goal is huge systemic change and their pressure gets the same concessions, it doesn’t meet their goals.
Certainly in the Northern Irish example, our Civil Right’s movement was mostly person As, with person Bs helping to push that along.
Your rhetoric seems to shit on boring old electoralism, and your evidence frequently invokes past movements whose actual goal was merely to be a meaningful part of that process.
If my read is off well, my bad Okay. Let's put/take "person A" from a real historical moment of "significant progress" in the US of your choice? Either of them could pick that back up or anyone else could really. But you've all got important shitposting about the latest far-right nonsense to do and I understand you find that much more satisfying. You could forget about Socialism for the moment if you will, I'm also talking about discussing plain lib/Dem/ilk ideas among yourselves. Or, alternatively people couldn’t be arsed engaging with you based off your long posting history and aren’t especially interested in indulging you and what you think should be being discussed Sure, that could be plausible. Except, setting aside the whole engaging with people calling others "retarded" and "autistic" thing, I'm again talking about the lib/Dem/ilk thread participants inability to/disinterest in discussing US politics among yourselves, while ignoring me/whoever else if you insist/must/choose. Really? because the few times we've had without you or the latest right wing nut case have seen calm discussions among ourselves about whatever interesting topic happened to be brought up. As for 'feeding the stupid' I will always point out how wrong they are simply because to do otherwise is to invite page upon page of misinformation without counter, anyone peeking in sees this misinformation without the followup pointing out how its just plain wrong and wonders if its actually true. Thats how your grandma got to believing in jewish space lasers causing cancer. The lies don't stop if you stop engaging them, they just spread. I agree calling out the misinformation and deliberate bullshit helpful. The first couple of pages. But I think then, with all that's going on, we should ignore them. If someone has already called out the stupid, then we don't need to pile on, unless you're offering new information that the previous person left out. I guess my disappointment, so to speak, is that this is all we can do. Everything we could possibly talk about is just "How incompetent can this administration be?!?!" And every day it's like they have to one up themselves. US sends envoy to Pakistan for talks, Iran guffaws and sends no one. Envoy stays home. Dept of Labor head is out for abuse. 4-5 House reps resigned in what...3 months? Marijuana easements from the DOJ happened as well. Guess that last one isn't too bad.
Ah it’s just how the thread goes really. Usually some other topic pops up to drag us away from circular hell, but if there’s a lull we be trapped there.
Way I see it, it’s worth arguing to a perhaps excessive degree merely for the benefit of third party observers or lurkers. Fucking tedious though it may be. And involving much repetition with only slight iteration that it may take.
Or to frame it another way, if you can’t win the easiest of battles, what hope the tough ones?
In an ideal world, or indeed merely a slightly less shite world I’d 100% agree with you
|
Northern Ireland27013 Posts
I’ve seen multiple references to time travel from different posters, is there something I’m missing here?
|
On April 26 2026 11:19 WombaT wrote:
I’ve seen multiple references to time travel from different posters, is there something I’m missing here?
I think it's a reference to the idea of how a time traveler might want to go back in time and kill Hitler before he did all his Nazi things... except Hitler is replaced with Trump, and is referencing the people who have tried to shoot him during his presidencies.
|
Northern Ireland27013 Posts
On April 26 2026 11:35 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2026 11:19 WombaT wrote:
I’ve seen multiple references to time travel from different posters, is there something I’m missing here? I think it's a reference to the idea of how a time traveler might want to go back in time and kill Hitler before he did all his Nazi things... except Hitler is replaced with Trump, and is referencing the people who have tried to shoot him during his presidencies.
I hope so. It had genuinely crossed my mind that the MAGA crew had some conspiracy theory involving time-travelling assassins or something
That I can earnestly say such a thing crossed my mind, not a good sign…
I mean obviously not the actual time-travelling assassins part, that’s beyond idiotic.
|
On April 26 2026 11:39 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2026 11:35 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 26 2026 11:19 WombaT wrote:
I’ve seen multiple references to time travel from different posters, is there something I’m missing here? I think it's a reference to the idea of how a time traveler might want to go back in time and kill Hitler before he did all his Nazi things... except Hitler is replaced with Trump, and is referencing the people who have tried to shoot him during his presidencies. I hope so. It had genuinely crossed my mind that the MAGA crew had some conspiracy theory involving time-travelling assassins or something That I can earnestly say such a thing crossed my mind, not a good sign…
Well I just Googled "MAGA time traveler conspiracy" and I did not get zero results lol.
|
Chem trails are left behind by time travel ships, which Jewish space lasers try to shoot down but fail because of Democratic weather-controlling machines.
|
Northern Ireland27013 Posts
On April 26 2026 11:41 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2026 11:39 WombaT wrote:On April 26 2026 11:35 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On April 26 2026 11:19 WombaT wrote:
I’ve seen multiple references to time travel from different posters, is there something I’m missing here? I think it's a reference to the idea of how a time traveler might want to go back in time and kill Hitler before he did all his Nazi things... except Hitler is replaced with Trump, and is referencing the people who have tried to shoot him during his presidencies. I hope so. It had genuinely crossed my mind that the MAGA crew had some conspiracy theory involving time-travelling assassins or something That I can earnestly say such a thing crossed my mind, not a good sign… Well I just Googled "MAGA time traveler conspiracy" and I did not get zero results lol.
Having replicated your results, oh dear…
|
Northern Ireland27013 Posts
On April 26 2026 11:44 LightSpectra wrote:
Chem trails are left behind by time travel ships, which Jewish space lasers try to shoot down but fail because of Democratic weather-controlling machines.
How does Obama fit into all of this?
|
He keeps the beacon calling the time travelers lit, in the basement of a pizza restaurant with no basement.
|
Canada11555 Posts
That's HUSSEIN Obama to you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
