• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EST 21:18
CET 03:18
KST 11:18
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
HomeStory Cup 28 - Info & Preview0Rongyi Cup S3 - Preview & Info3herO wins SC2 All-Star Invitational14SC2 All-Star Invitational: Tournament Preview5RSL Revival - 2025 Season Finals Preview8
Community News
Weekly Cups (Jan 19-25): Bunny, Trigger, MaxPax win3Weekly Cups (Jan 12-18): herO, MaxPax, Solar win0BSL Season 2025 - Full Overview and Conclusion8Weekly Cups (Jan 5-11): Clem wins big offline, Trigger upsets4$21,000 Rongyi Cup Season 3 announced (Jan 22-Feb 7)38
StarCraft 2
General
HomeStory Cup 28 - Info & Preview StarCraft 2 not at the Esports World Cup 2026 Weekly Cups (Jan 19-25): Bunny, Trigger, MaxPax win Oliveira Would Have Returned If EWC Continued herO wins SC2 All-Star Invitational
Tourneys
KSL Week 85 HomeStory Cup 28 $21,000 Rongyi Cup Season 3 announced (Jan 22-Feb 7) OSC Season 13 World Championship $70 Prize Pool Ladder Legends Academy Weekly Open!
Strategy
Simple Questions Simple Answers
Custom Maps
[A] Starcraft Sound Mod
External Content
Mutation # 510 Safety Violation Mutation # 509 Doomsday Report Mutation # 508 Violent Night Mutation # 507 Well Trained
Brood War
General
Bleak Future After Failed ProGaming Career Potential ASL qualifier breakthroughs? BW General Discussion BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ [ASL21] Potential Map Candidates
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues Small VOD Thread 2.0 Azhi's Colosseum - Season 2 [BSL21] Non-Korean Championship - Starts Jan 10
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Zealot bombing is no longer popular? Current Meta Soma's 9 hatch build from ASL Game 2
Other Games
General Games
Battle Aces/David Kim RTS Megathread Path of Exile Nintendo Switch Thread Mobile Legends: Bang Bang Beyond All Reason
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
Vanilla Mini Mafia Mafia Game Mode Feedback/Ideas
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread YouTube Thread Canadian Politics Mega-thread European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
The herO Fan Club! The IdrA Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread [Manga] One Piece
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
How Esports Advertising Shap…
TrAiDoS
My 2025 Magic: The Gathering…
DARKING
Life Update and thoughts.
FuDDx
How do archons sleep?
8882
James Bond movies ranking - pa…
Topin
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 1633 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 571

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 569 570 571 572 573 5476 Next
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
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23613 Posts
Last Edited: 2018-08-02 15:59:39
August 02 2018 15:54 GMT
#11401
On August 02 2018 23:14 Plansix wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 02 2018 22:59 farvacola wrote:
One of the takeaways from this discussion is that comparative history is really tough and oftentimes a practically impossible undertaking. This inherent difficulty ought be remembered whenever someone wants to make a hand-wavey reference to a nation's history as a reason for this or that.

Agreed. If people are looking for a reason why specific nations are more “successful”, the commonality is relatively temperate climates and large amounts arable land. It does not seem like a huge factor in modern life, given the advances of technology for transporting food. Large surpluses in food not only helps create economies, but helped those areas recover from shocks like natural disasters or wars. The exploitation of other humans is a commonality throughout all of human history and is not solely responsible for the success of any given region across human history.



None of the arguments along these lines address the point being made whatsoever. It's completely removed the question at hand and substituted it for "why specific nations are more successful" which isn't at all what was being discussed.

I don't know if you guys even realize you do this all the time or not. It's a piss-poor way to argue though.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
Last Edited: 2018-08-02 16:03:01
August 02 2018 15:58 GMT
#11402
On August 03 2018 00:36 Plansix wrote:
When historians talks about the evolution of warfare, the US civil war is seen is the prelude to World War 1. It was one of the first wars were a nation was able to turn a large portion of its economy to a sustained war effort. And the first war where we started to see the lethality of the industrial war machine could achieve. The causality counts were shocking and some European news papers had some real color language to justify how blood thirsty American were. They are a fun read if people can find them.

It was sort of the first industrial war in the sense that it was the first major war using industrial era technologies such as railroads and what not. However, it didn't quite reach the levels of full industrial mobilization that we saw in the World Wars. Yeah, the South fully mobilized because it had to. But the North didn't, because it really didn't have to. Its industrial output was so much greater than the South's that it kinda fought that war with one hand tied behind its back. Northern citizens didn't experience the same kind of wartime privations that the Southerners did. If the North had fully mobilized and put someone like Grant in command at the outset of the war, it would have been over within two years. The North would have simply rolled over the Confederacy. The South didn't really stand a chance of winning on those terms.

The high casualties of the Civil War was mostly a function of modern rifling technology being introduced to armies that were trained to fight Napoleonic-style warfare. Formations and stand-up firing lines make little sense when a rifle has an accurate, lethal range of hundreds of yards. The only thing that is surprising to me is why it took most commanders so long to figure this out. It wasn't until 1864 that trench warfare finally became a real staple of the war.
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
August 02 2018 16:10 GMT
#11403
On August 03 2018 00:58 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 03 2018 00:36 Plansix wrote:
When historians talks about the evolution of warfare, the US civil war is seen is the prelude to World War 1. It was one of the first wars were a nation was able to turn a large portion of its economy to a sustained war effort. And the first war where we started to see the lethality of the industrial war machine could achieve. The causality counts were shocking and some European news papers had some real color language to justify how blood thirsty American were. They are a fun read if people can find them.

It was sort of the first industrial war in the sense that it was the first major war using industrial era technologies such as railroads and what not. However, it didn't quite reach the levels of full industrial mobilization that we saw in the World Wars. Yeah, the South fully mobilized because it had to. But the North didn't, because it really didn't have to. Its industrial output was so much greater than the South's that it kinda fought that war with one hand tied behind its back. Northern citizens didn't experience the same kind of wartime privations that the Southerners did. If the North had fully mobilized and put someone like Grant in command at the outset of the war, it would have been over within two years. The North would have simply rolled over the Confederacy. The South didn't really stand a chance of winning on those terms.

The high casualties of the Civil War was mostly a function of modern rifling technology being introduced to armies that were trained to fight Napoleonic-style warfare. Formations and stand-up firing lines make little sense when a rifle has an accurate, lethal range of hundreds of yards. The only thing that is surprising to me is why it took most commanders so long to figure this out. It wasn't until 1864 that trench warfare finally became a real staple of the war.

History is littered with generals and military commanders who fail to realize the flaws the tactics of the era. Most are not known for being creative thinkers. Even trench warfare was likely the wrong solution to the problems created by more accurate, more lethal weapons. But that style persisted until World War 1, well after the machine gun became a reality. But not everywhere, because trench warfare was not used in every campaign in World War 1.

From my study of wars throughout history, I always get the feeling that no one really has a firm grasp on the war or how to win it. But they write about how they did after the war is won.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
Gorsameth
Profile Joined April 2010
Netherlands22072 Posts
August 02 2018 16:14 GMT
#11404
On August 03 2018 01:10 Plansix wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 03 2018 00:58 xDaunt wrote:
On August 03 2018 00:36 Plansix wrote:
When historians talks about the evolution of warfare, the US civil war is seen is the prelude to World War 1. It was one of the first wars were a nation was able to turn a large portion of its economy to a sustained war effort. And the first war where we started to see the lethality of the industrial war machine could achieve. The causality counts were shocking and some European news papers had some real color language to justify how blood thirsty American were. They are a fun read if people can find them.

It was sort of the first industrial war in the sense that it was the first major war using industrial era technologies such as railroads and what not. However, it didn't quite reach the levels of full industrial mobilization that we saw in the World Wars. Yeah, the South fully mobilized because it had to. But the North didn't, because it really didn't have to. Its industrial output was so much greater than the South's that it kinda fought that war with one hand tied behind its back. Northern citizens didn't experience the same kind of wartime privations that the Southerners did. If the North had fully mobilized and put someone like Grant in command at the outset of the war, it would have been over within two years. The North would have simply rolled over the Confederacy. The South didn't really stand a chance of winning on those terms.

The high casualties of the Civil War was mostly a function of modern rifling technology being introduced to armies that were trained to fight Napoleonic-style warfare. Formations and stand-up firing lines make little sense when a rifle has an accurate, lethal range of hundreds of yards. The only thing that is surprising to me is why it took most commanders so long to figure this out. It wasn't until 1864 that trench warfare finally became a real staple of the war.

History is littered with generals and military commanders who fail to realize the flaws the tactics of the era. Most are not known for being creative thinkers. Even trench warfare was likely the wrong solution to the problems created by more accurate, more lethal weapons. But that style persisted until World War 1, well after the machine gun became a reality. But not everywhere, because trench warfare was not used in every campaign in World War 1.

From my study of wars throughout history, I always get the feeling that no one really has a firm grasp on the war or how to win it. But they write about how they did after the war is won.
I imagine there is a certain reluctance to experiment and try new things when being wrong gets you killed.
It ignores such insignificant forces as time, entropy, and death
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23613 Posts
Last Edited: 2018-08-02 16:20:12
August 02 2018 16:15 GMT
#11405
On August 03 2018 01:14 Gorsameth wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 03 2018 01:10 Plansix wrote:
On August 03 2018 00:58 xDaunt wrote:
On August 03 2018 00:36 Plansix wrote:
When historians talks about the evolution of warfare, the US civil war is seen is the prelude to World War 1. It was one of the first wars were a nation was able to turn a large portion of its economy to a sustained war effort. And the first war where we started to see the lethality of the industrial war machine could achieve. The causality counts were shocking and some European news papers had some real color language to justify how blood thirsty American were. They are a fun read if people can find them.

It was sort of the first industrial war in the sense that it was the first major war using industrial era technologies such as railroads and what not. However, it didn't quite reach the levels of full industrial mobilization that we saw in the World Wars. Yeah, the South fully mobilized because it had to. But the North didn't, because it really didn't have to. Its industrial output was so much greater than the South's that it kinda fought that war with one hand tied behind its back. Northern citizens didn't experience the same kind of wartime privations that the Southerners did. If the North had fully mobilized and put someone like Grant in command at the outset of the war, it would have been over within two years. The North would have simply rolled over the Confederacy. The South didn't really stand a chance of winning on those terms.

The high casualties of the Civil War was mostly a function of modern rifling technology being introduced to armies that were trained to fight Napoleonic-style warfare. Formations and stand-up firing lines make little sense when a rifle has an accurate, lethal range of hundreds of yards. The only thing that is surprising to me is why it took most commanders so long to figure this out. It wasn't until 1864 that trench warfare finally became a real staple of the war.

History is littered with generals and military commanders who fail to realize the flaws the tactics of the era. Most are not known for being creative thinkers. Even trench warfare was likely the wrong solution to the problems created by more accurate, more lethal weapons. But that style persisted until World War 1, well after the machine gun became a reality. But not everywhere, because trench warfare was not used in every campaign in World War 1.

From my study of wars throughout history, I always get the feeling that no one really has a firm grasp on the war or how to win it. But they write about how they did after the war is won.
I imagine there is a certain reluctance to experiment and try new things when being wrong gets you killed.

tbf the people making those strategic decisions have a pretty long life expectancy in war regardless of their decisions.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
Broetchenholer
Profile Joined March 2011
Germany1950 Posts
August 02 2018 16:32 GMT
#11406
My goto explanation for "why the fuck did no one see how stupid this plan was" is quite simple. Being a professionel doesn't mean you are good at your job. I am a professionel it consultant and i am certainly not the best. My coworkers are varying degrees of mediocre. Generals are not different. The military might have attracted more of the elite back then but even they were mostly the social elite and not the intellectual elite.
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
Last Edited: 2018-08-02 16:35:18
August 02 2018 16:33 GMT
#11407
On August 03 2018 01:14 Gorsameth wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 03 2018 01:10 Plansix wrote:
On August 03 2018 00:58 xDaunt wrote:
On August 03 2018 00:36 Plansix wrote:
When historians talks about the evolution of warfare, the US civil war is seen is the prelude to World War 1. It was one of the first wars were a nation was able to turn a large portion of its economy to a sustained war effort. And the first war where we started to see the lethality of the industrial war machine could achieve. The causality counts were shocking and some European news papers had some real color language to justify how blood thirsty American were. They are a fun read if people can find them.

It was sort of the first industrial war in the sense that it was the first major war using industrial era technologies such as railroads and what not. However, it didn't quite reach the levels of full industrial mobilization that we saw in the World Wars. Yeah, the South fully mobilized because it had to. But the North didn't, because it really didn't have to. Its industrial output was so much greater than the South's that it kinda fought that war with one hand tied behind its back. Northern citizens didn't experience the same kind of wartime privations that the Southerners did. If the North had fully mobilized and put someone like Grant in command at the outset of the war, it would have been over within two years. The North would have simply rolled over the Confederacy. The South didn't really stand a chance of winning on those terms.

The high casualties of the Civil War was mostly a function of modern rifling technology being introduced to armies that were trained to fight Napoleonic-style warfare. Formations and stand-up firing lines make little sense when a rifle has an accurate, lethal range of hundreds of yards. The only thing that is surprising to me is why it took most commanders so long to figure this out. It wasn't until 1864 that trench warfare finally became a real staple of the war.

History is littered with generals and military commanders who fail to realize the flaws the tactics of the era. Most are not known for being creative thinkers. Even trench warfare was likely the wrong solution to the problems created by more accurate, more lethal weapons. But that style persisted until World War 1, well after the machine gun became a reality. But not everywhere, because trench warfare was not used in every campaign in World War 1.

From my study of wars throughout history, I always get the feeling that no one really has a firm grasp on the war or how to win it. But they write about how they did after the war is won.
I imagine there is a certain reluctance to experiment and try new things when being wrong gets you killed.

Or that trying new things gets people killed, so they stick to what is known unless forced. Terrain and environmental conditions are more likely to cause a shift in tactics that the nature of enemy weapons, IMO. Even in the history of dueling swords(fencing, not medieval warfare), it takes a hundred years before you see primary source documents advocating for standing sideways to present a smaller target. And even then, we don't know how prevalent the style was.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15736 Posts
August 02 2018 16:45 GMT
#11408
I've noticed an interesting phenomena in political discussion.

When I look back at 2015 and think about all of the republicans I have discussed politics with, there are a few alt-righters, the jeb lovers, rand paul guys, mccain guys...etc

Among all of these, the ones who have hopped on the Trump train with the most commitment are the ones who started out extremely skeptical of Trump. The ones who told me how "he's just an idiot looking for publicity, we need a real leader like ____" are the ones who have completely surrendered to Trump and are able to see every single thing he does as calculated and proper. It is interesting, but not entirely surprising. Conservatives hold hierarchy as a somewhat supreme ideal. Fear of god, surrendering to the church, unconditional protection of elders or "community figures" are all typical behaviors of conservatives.

You know Mad Max? It's kind of like that. When the main characters bring the dead body of their former leader to their city at the end of the movie, everyone cheers for their new leader. I feel like the same thing happened with Trump for many of these people. There is some psychological mechanism at play where once someone becomes their leader, they are suddenly significantly less fallible than they were only moments before. Because this person is their leader, he is great.

Anyone else noticed anything like this?
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
August 02 2018 16:49 GMT
#11409
--- Nuked ---
screamingpalm
Profile Joined October 2011
United States1527 Posts
Last Edited: 2018-08-02 17:00:21
August 02 2018 16:50 GMT
#11410
On August 03 2018 01:45 Mohdoo wrote:
I've noticed an interesting phenomena in political discussion.

When I look back at 2015 and think about all of the republicans I have discussed politics with, there are a few alt-righters, the jeb lovers, rand paul guys, mccain guys...etc

Among all of these, the ones who have hopped on the Trump train with the most commitment are the ones who started out extremely skeptical of Trump. The ones who told me how "he's just an idiot looking for publicity, we need a real leader like ____" are the ones who have completely surrendered to Trump and are able to see every single thing he does as calculated and proper. It is interesting, but not entirely surprising. Conservatives hold hierarchy as a somewhat supreme ideal. Fear of god, surrendering to the church, unconditional protection of elders or "community figures" are all typical behaviors of conservatives.

You know Mad Max? It's kind of like that. When the main characters bring the dead body of their former leader to their city at the end of the movie, everyone cheers for their new leader. I feel like the same thing happened with Trump for many of these people. There is some psychological mechanism at play where once someone becomes their leader, they are suddenly significantly less fallible than they were only moments before. Because this person is their leader, he is great.

Anyone else noticed anything like this?


Yeah absolutely. I think the grid shows this somewhat accurately. It's not just the right with this representation though- the entire top half of the grid is 'authoritarian', while the bottom half is 'libertarian'. Overall though, I think right wing ideology has generally more authoritarian themes (religion, support of military and policing, etc). And additionally, seemingly obsessed with masculinity... sky daddy, patriarchy, the "fatherland", good ol' boys networks, etc :D
MMT University is coming! http://www.mmtuniversity.org/
Dangermousecatdog
Profile Joined December 2010
United Kingdom7084 Posts
Last Edited: 2018-08-02 17:00:12
August 02 2018 16:51 GMT
#11411
Wow, I just got spoilered on Mad Max.

Anyways, to be fair the the absolute slaughter of WW1, both sides were trying to cause a breakthrough as per standard military theory, except that they simply had no real idea of just how many machine guns the otherside actually have as both sides were mass producing them at a massive rate. Also that artillery caused massive amounts of casulaties and it was thought that massive artillery could effect a breakthrough. (As it turns out it was simply a case of not enough artillery. 25 years later, there was enough artillery, and plane and bomb technology had caught up). The Germans basically invented modern infantry tactics to deal with trench warfare and were quite successful with them till the Spanish flu hit them, and the "winner" basically invented tanks. And both sides used gas warfare. Though it didn't look like it WW1, is a tale of rapid technological and military theory advancements.
Emnjay808
Profile Blog Joined September 2011
United States10665 Posts
August 02 2018 16:54 GMT
#11412
I just walked into Mad Max spoilers without realizing it fuck
Skol
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
Last Edited: 2018-08-02 16:56:57
August 02 2018 16:56 GMT
#11413
On August 03 2018 01:45 Mohdoo wrote:
I've noticed an interesting phenomena in political discussion.

When I look back at 2015 and think about all of the republicans I have discussed politics with, there are a few alt-righters, the jeb lovers, rand paul guys, mccain guys...etc

Among all of these, the ones who have hopped on the Trump train with the most commitment are the ones who started out extremely skeptical of Trump. The ones who told me how "he's just an idiot looking for publicity, we need a real leader like ____" are the ones who have completely surrendered to Trump and are able to see every single thing he does as calculated and proper. It is interesting, but not entirely surprising. Conservatives hold hierarchy as a somewhat supreme ideal. Fear of god, surrendering to the church, unconditional protection of elders or "community figures" are all typical behaviors of conservatives.

You know Mad Max? It's kind of like that. When the main characters bring the dead body of their former leader to their city at the end of the movie, everyone cheers for their new leader. I feel like the same thing happened with Trump for many of these people. There is some psychological mechanism at play where once someone becomes their leader, they are suddenly significantly less fallible than they were only moments before. Because this person is their leader, he is great.

Anyone else noticed anything like this?

haven't noticed that; but I don't know enough people it could potentially apply to to really say one way or the other.
I wish I could remember the proper names for the psychological mechanisms that cause what you describe.

I wonder if there's some studies which would support your observation. be interesting to read if anyone knows some good ones.
Great read: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/ great book on democracy: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10671.html zlefin is grumpier due to long term illness. Ignoring some users.
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
Last Edited: 2018-08-02 17:00:01
August 02 2018 16:59 GMT
#11414
On August 03 2018 01:51 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Wow, I just got spoilered on Mad Max.

Mad Max wins and is also maybe the vengeful spirit of lost civilization? Because if not, shit got real weird real quick because he used to be a cop in the normal people world.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
August 02 2018 17:07 GMT
#11415
On August 03 2018 01:45 Mohdoo wrote:
I've noticed an interesting phenomena in political discussion.

When I look back at 2015 and think about all of the republicans I have discussed politics with, there are a few alt-righters, the jeb lovers, rand paul guys, mccain guys...etc

Among all of these, the ones who have hopped on the Trump train with the most commitment are the ones who started out extremely skeptical of Trump. The ones who told me how "he's just an idiot looking for publicity, we need a real leader like ____" are the ones who have completely surrendered to Trump and are able to see every single thing he does as calculated and proper. It is interesting, but not entirely surprising. Conservatives hold hierarchy as a somewhat supreme ideal. Fear of god, surrendering to the church, unconditional protection of elders or "community figures" are all typical behaviors of conservatives.

You know Mad Max? It's kind of like that. When the main characters bring the dead body of their former leader to their city at the end of the movie, everyone cheers for their new leader. I feel like the same thing happened with Trump for many of these people. There is some psychological mechanism at play where once someone becomes their leader, they are suddenly significantly less fallible than they were only moments before. Because this person is their leader, he is great.

Anyone else noticed anything like this?

Or maybe instead of all that baseless psychobabble, we simply see that Trump is delivering what we want?
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15736 Posts
August 02 2018 17:18 GMT
#11416
On August 03 2018 02:07 xDaunt wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 03 2018 01:45 Mohdoo wrote:
I've noticed an interesting phenomena in political discussion.

When I look back at 2015 and think about all of the republicans I have discussed politics with, there are a few alt-righters, the jeb lovers, rand paul guys, mccain guys...etc

Among all of these, the ones who have hopped on the Trump train with the most commitment are the ones who started out extremely skeptical of Trump. The ones who told me how "he's just an idiot looking for publicity, we need a real leader like ____" are the ones who have completely surrendered to Trump and are able to see every single thing he does as calculated and proper. It is interesting, but not entirely surprising. Conservatives hold hierarchy as a somewhat supreme ideal. Fear of god, surrendering to the church, unconditional protection of elders or "community figures" are all typical behaviors of conservatives.

You know Mad Max? It's kind of like that. When the main characters bring the dead body of their former leader to their city at the end of the movie, everyone cheers for their new leader. I feel like the same thing happened with Trump for many of these people. There is some psychological mechanism at play where once someone becomes their leader, they are suddenly significantly less fallible than they were only moments before. Because this person is their leader, he is great.

Anyone else noticed anything like this?

Or maybe instead of all that baseless psychobabble, we simply see that Trump is delivering what we want?


Are you saying that populations surrendering to hierarchy in rural and religious communities isn't a well characterized phenomena?
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
August 02 2018 17:19 GMT
#11417
As the cameras rolled on President Trump's campaign rally for GOP Rep. Ron DeSantis in Florida on Tuesday night, a peculiar sign appeared in view.

"We are Q."

Journalists at the event noted multiple attendees carrying signs and wearing T-shirts emblazoned with the name "QAnon."

The shirts and signs are references to a conspiracy theory growing increasingly popular among those on the far-right — and a conspiracy theory about which the White House fielded a question from the media on Wednesday.

Oh look, QAnon sign at the Trump rally pic.twitter.com/2BwYWMJtWS

— Salvador Hernandez (@SalHernandez) July 31, 2018
What is QAnon?

The conspiracy theory centers on a mysterious and anonymous online figure — "Q." According to The Daily Beast, "Q" began posting on anonymous Internet message boards in October 2017. The person or persons behind the "Q" persona claim to possess a top-level security clearance and evidence of a worldwide criminal conspiracy.

What's the conspiracy theory?

It goes like this: Special counsel Robert Mueller isn't actually investigating Trump and his 2016 campaign for their possible ties to Russia, and he's not really looking into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

Rather, Mueller was appointed by Trump to investigate Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and other top Democrats, like former Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta. According to posts written by "Q" — dubbed "breadcrumbs" by the theory's followers — even Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., is a target of Mueller's so-called investigation.

What are these foes of Trump being "investigated" for? There are numerous accusations floating around the QAnon world. Some suggest Clinton and Obama are in cahoots with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Others suggest they, along with Hollywood figures and other world leaders, are participants in a global pedophile ring.

"Q" suggests all these figures are secretly wearing location-tracking ankle monitors, so their whereabouts can be monitored at all times, and that they'll all be sent to prison very soon in an event the theory's followers call "the storm."

That's a reference to Trump's remarks last year, where he warned of "the calm before the storm" during a meeting with military leaders. (The military is also involved in the QAnon theory — according to "Q," the military persuaded Trump to run for president in order to clean up the vast criminal network.)

"Q" has dropped "breadcrumbs" about coming events in the supposed investigation on a regular basis. The hints reference current political events, including the release of the Justice Department's Office of the Inspector General report in June.

It should be noted that no part of the QAnon conspiracy theory has proved to be true, and multiple media outlets have debunked the theory's allegations.

Who believes in the conspiracy theory?

For a while, QAnon posts were mostly limited to anonymous Internet message boards, like 4chan and 8chan. But over the past year, "Q" has gained a host of new believers and followers. A popular YouTube video explaining QAnon has racked up nearly 200,000 views, and according to NBC News, a mobile phone application related to the conspiracy theory climbed near the top of the Apple App Store rankings earlier this year.

"Q" also counts several celebrities as followers and fans. Roseanne Barr has frequently tweeted about QAnon and has expressed a desire to meet "Q." And in June, the sitcom star took to Twitter to share a phrase common among QAnon supporters — "wwg1wga," short for "where we go one, we go all."

we r the army of truth-wwg1wga

— Roseanne Barr (@therealroseanne) June 20, 2018
Former Boston Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling has also tweeted about the conspiracy theory and has shared QAnon videos on his Facebook page, according to The Daily Beast.

Also we open up a discussion about “Q” and why the anger and vitriol by liberals at the mere mention if it really is the fake conspiracy they claim?

— Curt Schilling (@gehrig38) June 28, 2018
@MediaMattersZA I think it's fantastic that your only attack is "baseless" without ever actually pointing to a 'lie'. It has to suck to know the Q has reported more accurate news in the past 14 days than your rag in its entire existence! https://t.co/T6KT0AEs3a

— Curt Schilling (@gehrig38) July 16, 2018

Why does it matter?

QAnon may seem on its face like a fringe Internet conspiracy theory, but its explosion in popularity has led to several real-world incidents.

In April, a group of QAnon believers took to the streets in Washington, D.C., in support of "Q" and demanding answers from the Justice Department.

And in June, a man driving an armored vehicle and carrying two firearms shut down a highway near the Hoover Dam while holding a sign reading "Release the OIG report."

That appeared to be a reference to the Justice Department's Office of the Inspector General report that criticized the actions of former FBI Director James Comey for his handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation. "Q" has hinted to followers on multiple occasions that Trump possesses a second IG report that would detail the criminal activities undertaken by Democrats.

The man, Matthew Wright, was arrested after the incident and now faces terrorism charges. Last month, it was revealed that Wright penned letters to Trump and other government officials from jail bearing the "where we go one, we go all" slogan.

Even Michael Avenatti, the lawyer representing adult film actress Stormy Daniels, made an appearance in a series of QAnon posts earlier this week, which included images of his office building followed by an image of a man reportedly standing outside Avenatti's office. "Q" later posted that a "message" had been sent to Avenatti.

In a tweet Wednesday, Avenatti appeared to respond, writing: "The more conspiracy theorists attack me, the more confident I become. It shows they see me as a significant threat to Mr. Trump and his continuation in office."


Source

The QAnon is a pretty terrifying look into our media future under the cooperate rules of Youtube, Facebook and other social media. What very clearly started as a joke of 4Chan has grown into a large enough following where people show up at trump rallies carrying signs and shirts in a number that caused NPR to take notice. This entire conspiracy is non-sense on the level of Pizzagate and is gaining followers. People who believe it are showing up at Stormy Daniels’ attorney’s office and are caught armed at the hover dam.

But the terrifying part of the QAnon conspiracy is how siloed off it is. If I didn’t listen to Reply All, I wouldn’t know about it. There is a huge section of the country that are consuming is conspiracy theories while the rest of the country is completely unaware. The current media landscape is ripe for abuse and the companies profiting from it have no idea how to get a handle on it.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
screamingpalm
Profile Joined October 2011
United States1527 Posts
August 02 2018 17:20 GMT
#11418
I saw that article on Qanon lol. Almost posted it as I pondered how the hell we will ever make progress in this country.
MMT University is coming! http://www.mmtuniversity.org/
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
August 02 2018 17:24 GMT
#11419
On August 03 2018 02:18 Mohdoo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 03 2018 02:07 xDaunt wrote:
On August 03 2018 01:45 Mohdoo wrote:
I've noticed an interesting phenomena in political discussion.

When I look back at 2015 and think about all of the republicans I have discussed politics with, there are a few alt-righters, the jeb lovers, rand paul guys, mccain guys...etc

Among all of these, the ones who have hopped on the Trump train with the most commitment are the ones who started out extremely skeptical of Trump. The ones who told me how "he's just an idiot looking for publicity, we need a real leader like ____" are the ones who have completely surrendered to Trump and are able to see every single thing he does as calculated and proper. It is interesting, but not entirely surprising. Conservatives hold hierarchy as a somewhat supreme ideal. Fear of god, surrendering to the church, unconditional protection of elders or "community figures" are all typical behaviors of conservatives.

You know Mad Max? It's kind of like that. When the main characters bring the dead body of their former leader to their city at the end of the movie, everyone cheers for their new leader. I feel like the same thing happened with Trump for many of these people. There is some psychological mechanism at play where once someone becomes their leader, they are suddenly significantly less fallible than they were only moments before. Because this person is their leader, he is great.

Anyone else noticed anything like this?

Or maybe instead of all that baseless psychobabble, we simply see that Trump is delivering what we want?


Are you saying that populations surrendering to hierarchy in rural and religious communities isn't a well characterized phenomena?

I don't recall these same rural voters surrendering to Obama, but you tell me.

Regardless, your post is an incoherent mess. Are we talking about conservatives? If so, which ones? I certainly don't fall into the "rural voter" category. Nor do most conservatives demographically.
xDaunt
Profile Joined March 2010
United States17988 Posts
August 02 2018 17:29 GMT
#11420
I personally like the globalist pedophile cabal Q stuff. It's like Season 1 of True Detective, except it applies globally instead of just in Louisiana bayous.
Prev 1 569 570 571 572 573 5476 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 9h 42m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
RuFF_SC2 197
NeuroSwarm 128
SpeCial 124
StarCraft: Brood War
Artosis 745
Shuttle 112
Terrorterran 11
League of Legends
C9.Mang0404
Counter-Strike
taco 546
Other Games
tarik_tv6428
JimRising 170
ViBE143
Mew2King35
minikerr21
Organizations
Other Games
BasetradeTV36
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 16 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH153
• Hupsaiya 55
• Sammyuel 26
• HeavenSC 23
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Doublelift5450
• Scarra2026
Upcoming Events
HomeStory Cup
9h 42m
Korean StarCraft League
1d
HomeStory Cup
1d 9h
Replay Cast
1d 21h
HomeStory Cup
2 days
Replay Cast
2 days
Replay Cast
3 days
Wardi Open
4 days
WardiTV Invitational
5 days
The PondCast
6 days
[ Show More ]
WardiTV Invitational
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2026-01-29
OSC Championship Season 13
Underdog Cup #3

Ongoing

CSL 2025 WINTER (S19)
KCM Race Survival 2026 Season 1
Acropolis #4 - TS4
Escore Tournament S1: W6
Rongyi Cup S3
HSC XXVIII
IEM Kraków 2026
BLAST Bounty Winter 2026
BLAST Bounty Winter Qual
eXTREMESLAND 2025
SL Budapest Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 8

Upcoming

Escore Tournament S1: W7
Acropolis #4
IPSL Spring 2026
uThermal 2v2 2026 Main Event
Bellum Gens Elite Stara Zagora 2026
LiuLi Cup: 2025 Grand Finals
Nations Cup 2026
IEM Rio 2026
PGL Bucharest 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 1
BLAST Open Spring 2026
ESL Pro League Season 23
ESL Pro League Season 23
PGL Cluj-Napoca 2026
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2026 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.