| 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 | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27465 Posts
On August 21 2026 02:30 Gorsameth wrote: So is this the latest angle to fight the electoral successes from the left? 'centralists' purity testing left candidates. Latest? They’ve been doing that for forever | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24427 Posts
Probably worth revisiting if anyone has any policies/points that they believe the dyhb/corporate/establishment/moderate/thirdway/whatever Democrats need to stop purity testing/infighting about and concede to those LightSpectra/progressive/DSA factions to their left in order to not self-sabotage? | ||
|
dyhb
United States832 Posts
On August 21 2026 02:23 LightSpectra wrote: Hasan Piker with the $200k Porsche Taycan Turbo S and the $2.7 million dollar west hollywood home and the $5,000 Cartier glasses and rings are his millionaire's conspicuous displays of wealth as the yachts are to billionaires. If he does something blatantly hypocritical then I'll be happy to condemn him for his hypocrisy. On a personal level I think any rich person who blows it on stupid stuff like giga-yachts when they could be giving to charity are assholes, sure. Since Elon Musk is literally like 100,000x richer than Hasan it's 100,000x as true for him. But I'm not advocating for more taxes on them because they're assholes, I'm advocating more taxes because of a politically-engineered structural inequality. Literally every post of yours that goes "I think any rich person who blows it on stupid stuff like ..." makes me think the next sentence out of you will be "and obviously Hasan Piker fits that mold to a T." Is that the next sentence out of you? If not, why not? How many people in this country have $8m or more? Something like three or four million people last I checked. Do you want me to personally stalk each and every one of them until I find something to be outraged about? Would that be a good use of my time? If Hasan were running for office you'd be well within your rights to not vote for him because you hate millionaires or hypocrites. But letting Mike Rogers win the Michigan election for U.S. Senate even after he said he was going to protect a sieg heiling CSAM-mass-producing centibillionaire because you don't like that El-Sayed hangs out with a hypocritical Internet streamer seems pretty absurd to me. Seems more like something a strawman of socialists would do rather than the "moderate Democrat" you've self-identified as. I'm still not entirely clear why you don't seem to be outraged at rich people who want to cut their own taxes (essentially making life worse for the 99% just so they can buy more frivolous bullshit or more elections), but rich people who advocate raising taxes on themselves is a line too far. Although I do understand that you'll find some excuse to complain (whether it's envy or hypocrisy) whenever anyone does. Just check if actions match rhetoric? It's not hard, particularly if you have millions of dollars. I can't rectify your objections to billionaire conspicuous consumption if millionaires are inexplicably exempted by you. On August 21 2026 02:30 Gorsameth wrote: Hasan Piker is a candidate for some office?So is this the latest angle to fight the electoral successes from the left? 'centralists' purity testing left candidates. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27465 Posts
On August 21 2026 02:58 GreenHorizons wrote: Probably worth revisiting if anyone has any policies/points that they believe the dyhb/corporate/establishment/moderate/thirdway/whatever Democrats need to stop purity testing/infighting about and concede to those LightSpectra/progressive/DSA factions to their left in order to not self-sabotage? Does this record never get boring? You’re spun it enough times the vinyl is probably fucked at this point. It’s abundantly clear that the Dems are a coalition encompassing folks that are right of the centre of many European nations to folks who are pretty genuinely left wing, in a country that’s not especially left wing to start with The Dems should absolutely go hard in for something like universal healthcare which is pretty bloody popular as polling shows, but more broadly they’re kinda limited in how left they can go and still maintain electoral support | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24427 Posts
On August 21 2026 03:05 WombaT wrote: + Show Spoiler + Does this record never get boring? You’re spun it enough times the vinyl is probably fucked at this point. It’s abundantly clear that the Dems are a coalition encompassing folks that are right of the centre of many European nations to folks who are pretty genuinely left wing, in a country that’s not especially left wing to start with The Dems should absolutely go hard in for something like universal healthcare which is pretty bloody popular as polling shows, + Show Spoiler + but more broadly they’re kinda limited in how left they can go and still maintain electoral support Can you say "dyhb/corp/thirdway/ect Dems absolutely need to concede on and go hard in for something like universal healthcare which is pretty bloody popular as polling shows. Otherwise their infighting and purity testing is self-sabotage that could lead to them losing"? Do you recognize the difference between that and what you're currently saying and why it matters? | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States3423 Posts
On August 21 2026 02:58 dyhb wrote: Literally every post of yours that goes "I think any rich person who blows it on stupid stuff like ..." makes me think the next sentence out of you will be "and obviously Hasan Piker fits that mold to a T." Is that the next sentence out of you? If not, why not? Again, yeah I personally think he is an asshole. But unlike conservatives I don't base my entire personality around trying to use the government to punish people I personally dislike. You act like I have to be big mad about "letting Mike Rogers win," like the hypothetical is I vote in both the Democratic primary against El-Sayed and the Republican primary for Mike Rogers. The question was repeatedly asked if you're going to (or would if you lived in MI) vote for El-Sayed, Rogers, or neither when the general election comes. You still haven't given a clear answer. Also moving the goalposts to "hanging out with" from "refused to denounce during the primary" is a nice touch. Take what I said, not a strawman that I didn't say. Objection noted, albeit since we're talking about an Internet streamer it still seems pretty absurd. Just check if actions match rhetoric? It's not hard, particularly if you have millions of dollars. I can't rectify your objections to billionaire conspicuous consumption if millionaires are inexplicably exempted by you. What exemption? I think Hasan should pay more taxes too. Hasan Piker is a candidate for some office? That's why I find this whole conversation perplexing. Not only is he not a candidate, but the people Republicans campaign with or associate with are generally orders of magnitude worse. I already pointed out Mike Rogers is still proudly attending a church that is basically a sexual assault factory, but that's apparently not as big a deal as what Hasan said and apologized for last decade. | ||
|
Billyboy
2620 Posts
On August 21 2026 03:14 GreenHorizons wrote: Can you say "dyhb/corp/thirdway/ect Dems absolutely need to concede on and go hard in for something like universal healthcare which is pretty bloody popular as polling shows. Otherwise their infighting and purity testing is self-sabotage that could lead to them losing"? Do you recognize the difference between that and what you're currently saying and why it matters? It’s strange how you just believe dyhb is a dem, given his posting. | ||
|
dyhb
United States832 Posts
On August 21 2026 03:19 LightSpectra wrote: I don’t care if you think he’s an asshole for that or not. I care about whether his conspicuous spending should be grouped under the same principle as billionaires buying yachts. Again, yeah I personally think he is an asshole. But unlike conservatives I don't base my entire personality around trying to use the government to punish people I personally dislike. The question was repeatedly asked if you're going to (or would if you lived in MI) vote for El-Sayed, Rogers, or neither when the general election comes. You still haven't given a clear answer. Have yet to explain clearly if his conspicuous consumption is a problem for you, much like you dislike billionaire buying yachts. There’s many unrelated ways to conclude that he’s an asshole. That's why I find this whole conversation perplexing. Not only is he not a candidate, but the people Republicans campaign with or associate with are generally orders of magnitude worse. I already pointed out Mike Rogers is still proudly attending a church that is basically a sexual assault factory, but that's apparently not as big a deal as what Hasan said and apologized for last decade. | ||
|
Jankisa
Croatia1853 Posts
The guy is not anywhere close to as big of a deal as the fake centrists like dyhb try to portray him, and it's not only him, the whole "let's try to make Hasan a big deal for Democrats" seems like the most obvious right wing psyop ever, and of course, the least original thinkers in the history, the fake Centrists can't help but be all over that. I mean, or boy here openly said that since AES did not burn Hasan's picture on camera he'd vote Republican and give the senate away to Republicans. Oh, sorry, I forgot, it's not "only" because of Hasan, it's also because the guy said that US shouldn't be sending billions to Israel. Or, you know, we can just call it what it is, blatant Islamophobia which is rampant among the "Centrist" crowd. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27465 Posts
On August 21 2026 03:14 GreenHorizons wrote: Can you say "dyhb/corp/thirdway/ect Dems absolutely need to concede on and go hard in for something like universal healthcare which is pretty bloody popular as polling shows. Otherwise their infighting and purity testing is self-sabotage that could lead to them losing"? Do you recognize the difference between that and what you're currently saying and why it matters? What do you mean ‘can I say?’ The Dems should absolutely go hard in for something like universal healthcare which is pretty bloody popular as polling shows I literally already said it, I dunno how more unequivocal I can be there. I think the Dems are grossly deficient in actualising the kind of society I’d want to see, but a vote for Dems isn’t a vote for Fascism either. You seem to want to blame the Dems for the latter | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States3423 Posts
Speaking on Fox News’s Sean Hannity Show Wednesday, [South Carolina Senator Darline] Graham explained the shocking moment she admitted she was “not informed on national security,” when asked whether Taiwan and the South China Sea were national security issues for the United States. “You know, I tripped up on one question last night regarding Taiwan. But you know I’ve said many times, I’m not a politician, certainly not a career politician, I don’t speak politician,” she said. “You know I was just honest, and I think that’s kind of a foreign concept.” It’s true that a wise woman knows herself to be a fool—but Graham’s foolishness wasn’t finished. “Of course Taiwan is our friend, but I think people in South Carolina are more worried about making ends meet, they’re concerned about boys in girls’ sports,” she added. It would be surprising if people in South Carolina really felt that way—considering the state passed a law banning transgender students from playing on girls’ or women’s sports teams four years ago. The conservative-majority Supreme Court recently upheld similar rules in two other states, cementing the status of South Carolina’s transgender athlete ban. https://newrepublic.com/post/214557/darline-graham-foreign-policy-trans-south-carolina | ||
|
dyhb
United States832 Posts
On August 21 2026 04:19 Jankisa wrote: Example #3 on incapacity to portray “just disavow his comments” as anything less than “AES did not burn Hasan's picture on camera he'd vote Republican.”I personally think that talking about that chud is completely irrelevant, boring and stupid. The guy is not anywhere close to as big of a deal as the fake centrists like dyhb try to portray him, and it's not only him, the whole "let's try to make Hasan a big deal for Democrats" seems like the most obvious right wing psyop ever, and of course, the least original thinkers in the history, the fake Centrists can't help but be all over that. I mean, or boy here openly said that since AES did not burn Hasan's picture on camera he'd vote Republican and give the senate away to Republicans. Oh, sorry, I forgot, it's not "only" because of Hasan, it's also because the guy said that US shouldn't be sending billions to Israel. Or, you know, we can just call it what it is, blatant Islamophobia which is rampant among the "Centrist" crowd. Catastrophizing and the bad faith it represents is the exact heart of the “fake centrists” dialogue. It must hurt to admit moderate democrats want to pull the party to the center in the same way left wingers want to pull the party leftward. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24427 Posts
On August 21 2026 04:20 WombaT wrote: What do you mean ‘can I say?’ I literally already said it, I dunno how more unequivocal I can be there. + Show Spoiler + I think the Dems are grossly deficient in actualising the kind of society I’d want to see, but a vote for Dems isn’t a vote for Fascism either. You seem to want to blame the Dems for the latter So no, you don't recognize the difference or why it matters? | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27465 Posts
On August 21 2026 05:24 GreenHorizons wrote: So no, you don't recognize the difference or why it matters? What am I not recognising? | ||
|
Turbovolver
Australia2454 Posts
On August 20 2026 23:01 GreenHorizons wrote: Of course I have [posted about what meaningful activism looks like] I did see that post before, but a bunch of its suggestions just read so vague to me chatGPT could have given me them, honestly. "Don't obey the government, sometimes" Could mean anything. I would suggest the rightist econobros who spend days of their year on minimising their taxes are essentially doing this, too, for example. "Make support systems that are parallel to taxes" Does sound actionable, but if you believe this now you are putting the responsibility on the Hasans of the world to use their small pockets of wealth to actually lift others up. "Non-reformist reforms" As per wiki, these are reforms that "challenge existing power relations and pave the way for more revolutionary changes in the larger society necessary for a more socially just and environmentally sustainable world". Sounds very circular, but if you dig into [the wiki page, lmao] apparently it's things like "don't criminalise domestic violence because police are bad, that's reformist reform". This also doesn't actually say how to meaningfully organise to make such reforms happen. Now, GH, you might say "why on earth should it fall solely upon me to figure out all the details of how to herd a bunch of cats into actually doing these things?" And you would be right about that, it shouldn't, and it wouldn't if you did not spend every other post here insisting that you are the only one doing anything that matters. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27465 Posts
On August 21 2026 05:50 Turbovolver wrote: I did see that post before, but a bunch of its suggestions just read so vague to me chatGPT could have given me them, honestly. "Don't obey the government, sometimes" Could mean anything. I would suggest the rightist econobros who spent days of their year on minimising their taxes are essentially doing this, too, for example. "Make support systems that are parallel to taxes" Does sound actionable, but if you believe this now you are putting the responsibility on the Hasans of the world to use their small pockets of wealth to actually lift others up. "Non-reformist reforms" As per wiki, these are reforms that "challenge existing power relations and pave the way for more revolutionary changes in the larger society necessary for a more socially just and environmentally sustainable world". Sounds very circular, but if you dig into [the wiki page, lmao] apparently it's things like "don't criminalise domestic violence because police are bad, that's reformist reform". This also doesn't actually say how to meaningfully organise to make such reforms happen. Now, GH, you might say "why on earth should it fall solely upon me to figure out all the details of how to herd a bunch of cats into actually doing these things?" And you would be right about that, it shouldn't, and it wouldn't if you did not spend every other post here insisting that you are the only one doing anything that matters. Stop talking shit, GH has all the answers even if they never elaborate fully on about half of them | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States3423 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24427 Posts
Well you chose not to just say the version I showed you and opted to repeat the version you said. If you don't see the differences, or why it matters just sincerely say the version I showed you and we'll go from there. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18481 Posts
On August 21 2026 02:58 dyhb wrote: Hasan Piker with the $200k Porsche Taycan Turbo S and the $2.7 million dollar west hollywood home and the $5,000 Cartier glasses and rings are his millionaire's conspicuous displays of wealth as the yachts are to billionaires. Literally every post of yours that goes "I think any rich person who blows it on stupid stuff like ..." makes me think the next sentence out of you will be "and obviously Hasan Piker fits that mold to a T." Is that the next sentence out of you? If not, why not? If you don't have the time to examine a prominent example, I won't make you make time. You act like I have to be big mad about "letting Mike Rogers win," like the hypothetical is I vote in both the Democratic primary against El-Sayed and the Republican primary for Mike Rogers. Also moving the goalposts to "hanging out with" from "refused to denounce during the primary" is a nice touch. Take what I said, not a strawman that I didn't say. Just check if actions match rhetoric? It's not hard, particularly if you have millions of dollars. I can't rectify your objections to billionaire conspicuous consumption if millionaires are inexplicably exempted by you. Hasan Piker is a candidate for some office? Yadda yadda yadda. You keep telling us about how much of a hypocrite Hasan Piker is and we keep telling you: nobody gives a shit. I tried with a parody to show you how contrite you sounded, but it went whooshing over your head. I've watched some of his videos and a better attack would be that he's a self-important twat who thinks he's the greatest gift to mankind since sliced bread (or at the very least, since Lenin). He's unbearable. And despite all that, socialism is a great idea and the US could use a shitton more of it. If someone running for office is buddies with a socialist who drives a fancy car, I don't give a crap: either he's sincere and accepts that his fancy car is currently on loan from the state. Or he's full of shit, thinks his fancy car is secretly his own property and even so, makes videos that aim to convince other people to take away his fancy car. Either way: the message works just fine for me. And would work for anyone who would vote for El-Sayed in Michigan based on his policies. Now if you doubt El-Sayed's character because he's friends with an insufferable SOB, that's fine, but if we're going of which candidate has the most punchable buddies, Rogers is chums with Trump, winner of the most punchable face award 9 years straight! So even if we ignore message and go purely on who has the least sleazy friends, you have in no way justified any support for a liberal like you to vote republican over democrat in this particular election. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27465 Posts
On August 21 2026 06:32 GreenHorizons wrote: Well you chose not to just say the version I showed you and opted to repeat the version you said. If you don't see the differences, or why it matters just sincerely say the version I showed you and we'll go from there. What differences? | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
IntoTheTV X SOOP
ByuN vs Lambo
MaxPax vs Bunny
PiGosaur Cup
The PondCast
Kung Fu Cup
IntoTheTV X SOOP
SHIN vs GuMiho
Clem vs Classic
OSC
WardiTV Invitational
GSL
Epic.LAN
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
